Addresses, biographical and historical

OtarwcU Intoeraitjj ffitbtarg

Jftljaca, JJmh Snrk

OTljite l^tstncital ffiibrara

THE GIFT OF PRESIDENT WHITE

MAINTAINED BY THE UNIVERSITY IN ACCORD-
ANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF THE GIFT

Cornell University Library
BR1703 .G66

bioDraphical..»n!?,,.MSlS.'}S-

olin

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029262206

Addresses
Biographical and Historical

BY

ALEXANDER GORDON, M.A.

Sometime Lecturer in Ecclesiastical History
in the University of Manchester

VETUS PROPTER NOVUM DEPROMETIS

THE LINDSEY PRESS

5 ESSEX STREET, STRANDi LONDON, W.C.2
1922

The portrait prefixed is'af fecsimile, full size, of the first
issue of the original engraving by Christopher Sichem, from
the British Museum copy (698. a. 45(2)) of Grouwelen der
voornaemster Hooft-Ketteren, Leyden, 1607.

'i'rinted in Great Britain by
Elsom & Co. Ltd., Hull

PREFATORY NOTE

With three exceptions the following Addresses were
delivered at the openings of Sessions of the Unitarian
Home Missionary College, in Manchester, where the
author was Principal from 1890. to 191 1.

The fifth Address (Salters' Hall) was dehvered at
the Opening Meeting of the High Pavement Historical
Society, in Nottingham; the seventh (Doddridge) at
Manchester College, in Oxford, in connection with the
Summer Meeting of University Extension students;
the eighth (Lindsey) at the Unitarian Institute, in
Liverpool.

In this volume the Addresses are arranged according
to the chronology of their subjects; the actual date
of delivery is added at the close of each.

Except the first and the fifth, the Addresses were
printed, shortly after deUvery, in the Christian Lije
newspaper; these two (also the third) were printed
separately; all have been revised, with a view as far
as possible to reduce overlapping and to mitigate the
use of the personal pronoun.

Further, in the first Address it has been necessary
to make an important correction in reference to the
parentage of Servetus, Misled by the erroneous
ascription to him of a letter from Louvain in 1538
signed Miguel Villaneuva (see the author's article
on Servetus in the Encyclopadia Britannica, also

PREFACE

vitiated by this error) the author furnished in the
original Address a wrong account of the family of
Servetus. The real parentage of Servetus was first
disclosed in 1903 with documentary proofs by
Dr. Benet Roure Barrios, in Joventut, a magazine in
the Catalan language published at Barcelona; of
this the present author had no knowledge prior to
1911, when he visited the locality for the second time

A. G.

Belfast, October, 1922.

THE PERSONALITY

OF

MICHAEL SERVETUS

Miguel Serveto. — Born, 1511; Toulouse,
1528; Bologna, 1530; Lyons, 1530-36; Paris,
1536-38; Chariieu, 1540-41; Vienne, 1541-53;
Died, 1553-

MICHAEL SERVETUS

N a lively passage of his most popular work,
Michael Servetus inveighs against the folly
lUeging two causes when one suffices to account
the effect, and is especially insistent in his
)roof of a laborious investigator who must
ids furnish forth a triad of causal activities, as
jven with two he could not rest satisfied. It
ms, then, only too likely that, were he here, I
ght fall under the lash of my present study
en I put forward three reasons for my choice of
s topic.

Yet each of these reasons has had some weight
th me. Through the generosity of our Pre-
ent our store of books has been enriched, this
ir, with copies of the earliest publications of
rvetus, in their rare and costly first editions,
is natural to take this as a call for some en-
ivour to renew an interest in their author,
ain; next year (1911), if our calculations are
:rect, will bring round the four hundredth
aiversary of the birth of Servetus; and the
;asion is to be celebrated in that city in which
spent his happiest years, till influences from

4 MICHAEL SERVETUS

without brought on him the premonition of the
catastrophe of his fate. So it may be well to
ask, What was there in him to make him deemed
worthy, after all these years, that such celebra-
tion should be accorded to his memory ? Further,
and as a third reason : it is to be feared that many
of us are apt to think far more of the fate of
Servetus than of him on whom it fell. The fire
that consumed his body kindles imagination
much more readily than the flame that burned
in his soul, the radiance that illumined his spirit.
Nay, there are those who even value his story for
the most part, as a damaging episode in the giant
career of Calvin.

I am not anxious to treat my topic from that
point of view; into the circumstances which cut
short the days of Servetus, though elsewhere I
have not shrunk from that enquiry, for the pur-
poses of this sketch I shall not go. With the
verdict of history on that matter I am well con-
tent. This only will I now say. His modern
apologists are ill-advised when they essay,
abandoning their defences, to make excuse for
Calvin's share in the tragedy of Servetus. For
the excuse is shabby. It was the error of the
age, say they — ^a sorry shift. Even in matters
of tolerance, as in many other matters, Calvin,
greatest of the Reformers, could on occasion rise
above the level reached by most of his contem-
poraries. In the affair of Servetus he fell below

MICHAEL SERVETUS 5

his own mark, and while partisans approved or
acquiesced, nobler spirits shuddered and con-
demned. Putting all this away from sight, I
want to rouse your curiosity and enlist, if I may,
your appreciation, while I make an effort to
recover the vivid impression of a gifted, almost a
unique, personality, full of life and force, strenu-
ous in purpose, and with a heart as warm as his
intellect was keen.

It is not easy to accomplish a task for which the
ordinary means of information fail us. Con-
temporary notices are valuable, but extremely
rare; and in a life of surprises many points
remain dark and mysterious. While there is
much of romance in this life, there are no love-
passages. When I sit down to biographize a man,
I always want to know what kind of woman was
his wife. Servetus did once contemplate matri-
mony, only to stifle the thought for an imperative
reason. Of his correspondence, if we except the
few missives of miserable appeal penned in the
Geneva dungeon, no vestige survives. Of his
person as it appeared to his contemporaries we
have but a single glimpse, and this at second
hand. Certain spectators not named, who had
seen him at his trial and witnessed his execution,
described him long after to Faustus Socinus as'
quite an old man. His years were only forty-two ;
the impression made by his appearance tells how
effiectually ten weeks' ^ incarceration under the

6 MICHAEL SERVETUS

foulest conditions had wasted his health and
strength.

A small Dutch copperplate of 1607, the only-
possible portrait of him, presents us with no
ignoble visage ; but it occurs in a series of effigies
of heretics, some of which have no claim to
authenticity, and we are without means of
assuring ourselves that a genuine likeness was in
the hands of Christopher Sichem, the engraver —
not a very scrupulous person, for he manufactured
an effigy of Arius by the simple expedient of
scraping out the mitre from the portrait of a
Swabian bishop, thus leaving a bald patch on the
imaginary head of the Alexandrian arch-heretic.

From this Dutch engraving, however, numerous
copies, more or less close, have been derived ; and
the sculptor's art has transferred the features,
more or less varied, to several statues. Of these,
by far the most impressive is the earliest, erected
in 1876 at Madrid by the pious care of a leading
anthropologist, the late Dr. Pedro Gonzales de
Velasco. Inferior to this, judging from a photo-
graph, is the statue at Annemasse in Haute
Savoie, which was refused erection at Champel.
The statue in the Place Beaumont at Paris is a
figure of horror, representing its subject near the
last stage of his destitution and agony. The
Paris statue, in the Place Maubert, of Etienne
Dolet, martyr of the Renaissance — ^immortalized
in the late Chancellor Christie's learned and light-

MICHAEL SERVETUS 7

ne pages — is a figure inspired by a right taste
i a true reverence, qualities in which some of
! tributes to Servetus seem to be lacking. This
true even of the memorial figure erected at
;nne in 191 1, though certainly this is more
asing than the Paris atrocity. These harrowing
;ctacles of the victim give little satisfaction
her to the eye or the mind ; on the Spaniard's
inumental tribute to the Spaniard one may
ell with admiration, for at any rate it embodies
vorthy conception of the man.
The birthplace of Servetus was probably at
dela, in Navarre, now a gloomy and not too
an city, reminding one of Galway by its.
lancholy ancient mansions, testifying in sculp-
ed shields of arms to a long-past splendour,
>laced to-day by squalor and decadence. This,
parently at Paris and certainly at Vienne, he
3wed as his birthplace, and there seems no
)d reason to challenge the statement, though
:s true that in a solitary passage of his Geneva
timony — if the minutes of the trial, which
en blunder about names, are here correct —
described himself not simply as de Villeneufve
t as de Villeneufve natifz. We may account for
; birth at Tudela, if we suppose this to have
;n his mother's old home, and the birth to have
cen place while she was there on a visit.
:hard Baxter's birth under his grandfather's
)f came about in this way.

8 MICHAEL SERVETUS

The father of Servetus was Antonio Serveto
alias Rev^s, a notary at Villanueva de Sigena,
whose signatures to legal documents in the
archives of the convent of Sigena extend from
19 November 1511 to 3 April 1553 — the years,
curiously enough, being those of the birth and
death of his most famous son. The mother of
Servetus was Catalina Conesa ; both parents were
of good family {vivants noblement). There was
another son, Juan Serveto de Reves, a beneficed
priest, rector of Polinino.

As to the date of birth of Servetus, it is true
again that an isolated passage of his Geneva
testimony may (as reported) be cited in favour of
the year 1509; and the date is tempting as a
coincidence, being that of Calvin's birth at Noyon.
All his other and oft-repeated testimony, during
both judicial examinations (at Vienne as well as
at Geneva) and in his writings, points to 1511 as
the true date; and this was the date ultimately
accepted by Calvin. The " expiatory " stone
placed at Champel (1903) by thrifty Calvinists —
after getting amused Unitarians to lighten the
burden of their inexpensive penance — ^particu-
larizes the birth date as 29 September, 1511.
This perpetuates a mere fancy of the patient and
erudite scholar to whom students of Servetus owe
more than to any other, my late most valued and
lamented friend Dr. Henri W. N. ToUin (1833-
1902), Huguenot pastor of Magdeburg, Dr.

MICHAEL SERVETUS g

ToUin threw out the suggestion that Servetus was
named Michael, because born on Michaelmas Day.
There seems no usage to this effect. Miguel
Cervantes was not born on Michaelmas Day; or,
if so, his baptism was long deferred. Miguel de
Molinos, the great Spanish mystic, was born on
Christmas Day. If, by any chance, 29 September
were a lucky guess, then 15 11 would have to be
amended to 1510, since the date 1511 involves the
supposition that, when Servetus under examina-
tion in 1553 stated his age, he had passed his
birthday. In short, we know the exact date of
his death, 27 October 1553, but not that of his
birth.

Whenever and wherever Servetus was born,
Villanueva was undoubtedly the seat of his
family and the place of his early upbringing. Its
situation was unknown to Dr. ToUin ; I believe I
was the first (beyond the immediate locality) to
identify it among the Villanuevas and Vilanovas
in that part of Spain. It is not a place of mark.
Servetus rightly locates it "in the diocese of
Lerida." His biographers have vainly sought for
it in the province of Lerida. Actually it is in the
province of Huesca, though in the diocese of
Lerida. Its origin is due to the great and famous
convent of.Sigena, founded in 1188 by Queen
Sancha of Aragon, and renowned in after ages as
containing the stately burial place of the royal
house of Aragon. V^en Sigena, on the bank of

10 MICHAEL SERVETUS

the river Alcanadre, was chosen as site for the
ample buildings of the royal convent, a new town,
Villanueva de Sigena, to give its distinctive
designation, was placed on higher ground above.
This new town, now no longer new, is a tiny
stone-built place, little more than a compact
village, though it would be highly incensed if so
called; not boasting when I first visited it (1888)
an inn, even of the humblest description, and as
regards its civic being, centering in the post office.
The postmaster, the physician (both freethinkers)
and the courteous Cura, who took no interest in
heresies, were then the magnates of the place. A
large and gloomy structure, shorn then of its top-
most story was pointed out as the traditional,
mansion of the Serveto race. This building,,
known also as Casa Reves, on my second visit
(1911) was much brightened up, and converted
into a comfortable inn, whose hostess was proud
of the connection of the house with Miguel Serveto.
The parish church, dedicated to San Salvador,,
is ancient, but has no good points of architecture
saving a respectable Gothic porch. As in the
majority of Spanish churches, no ancient
baptismal register is preserved. The retablo to
the high altar was (1888) comparatively modern,,
bearing date 1774; by 1911 it had been sold,,
apparently to defray the expense of a renovation
of the interior of the church. To the right of the
high altar, attached to the south wall, is a side

MICHAEL SERVETUS ir

altar dedicated to Santa Lucia — one of the saints
still commemorated in the Anglican calendar
under date 13 December — and this was the family-
altar of the house of Serveto. An inscription
states that its retablo, having paintings in ten
compartments, was completed on 27 August 1558
by the care of the widowed Catalina Conesa
and her son, Rector Juan. It had in 1888 an
outer frame of later workmanship, not older than
the seventeenth century; this bore, in three
places, namely, at top and sides, a shield of arms
emblazoned in colours, with the name serveto
conspicuous to the right and left of each shield.
In 1911, the outer frame was new and less
elaborate; not reproducing the Serveto name,'
it bore, in two places, the Serveto arms more
handsomely blazoned than before.

Just as the name Colombo appears also as
Colon, so may the name Serveto drop the filial
vowel and appear as Servet; but neither does
Servetus, nor his father, nor his brother, use this
curtailed form — those who employ it do so in
defiance of the usage of the family. On his
earliest title pages Servetus owns his authorship
in these words: Per Michaelem Serueto, alias
Reues ab Aragonia Hisfanum. Later, he Latin-
ised Serveto into Servetus, and this (never
Servet) is the form he employs even when he is
writing French. In years past I followed Dr.
Tollin not only in treating the double surname

12 MICHAEL SERVETUS

as equivalent to Serveto-y-Reves — where Reves,
in accordance with Spanish custom, would be the
mother's name, but also in thinking the name
looked as if the mother were French. The truth
is that the combination was not unique, and pro-
bably appertained to a considerable branch of the
Serveto race. Among natives of Villanueva de
Sigena I find one Marco Antonio Serveto de Reves,
born about the date of Michael's death, and dying
in 1598. He was Abbot of Montaragon, near
Huesca (an abbacy once held by Michael's patron,
^uintana) and a kinsman of Pedro Antonio
de Reves, Bishop of Albarracin. Reves is cer-
tainly not French; Dr. Pompeyo Gener, tracing
it to the Catalan rebec, in the sense of stubborn,
treats it as denoting one who sticks to his con-
victions against everything and everybody; yet
it seems a place-name, not a personal one.

Of the early training of Servetus no record
remains. To fill the blank. Dr. ToUin has again
offered a conjecture which lesser writers, the
present penman included, have accepted even as
solid fact. He thinks Servetus, when grounded
in the elements, may have gone first to the
University of Zaragoza for his higher education.
Were I now to hazard a guess, I should place my
guess nearer hand, at the College of Huesca, which
Marco Antonio, his namesake aforesaid, entered
in 1575. Somehow he acquired, in addition to a
competent stock of learning, a certain deftness of

MICHAEL SERVETUS 15

hand, contributing to his notable skill as a dis-
sector. Deftness of delicate manipulation was
characteristic also of Priestley, who resembled
Servetus in his combination of the man of science
with the pioneer in theology. Priestley indeed
was an explorer in the field of science at an earlier
age than Servetus in all probability ; for Priestley
as a youngster of eleven began his experiments on
gases by bottling-up spiders to see how long they
would live without air. Apparently Servetus was
not, as a boy, alive to the scientific value of the
dying agonies of spiders; any more than Calvin
was, as a man, alive to the polemic value of the
dying agonies of Servetus.

The notary Antonio Serveto, apparently a man.
of means, had planned his own profession as the
destined career of his son Michael. For legal
training the lad was sent to the University of
Toulouse in his seventeenth year. He never saw
Spaia again. To the law he did not take, though
evidently he acquired some knowledge of it,
Fausto Paulo Sozzini (Socinus) was in like manner
put to the law, the hereditary profession in which
his ancestors had acquired both fame and wealth _
Socinus hated the law, and in his young days read
Dante, wrote sonnets (still in print, though not
reprinted in his works) and sighed forth his soul-
in amorous verses instead of giving his mind to
jurists and canonists. There is no evidence that
Servetus forsook legal study out of any special-

X4 MICHAEL SERVETUS

iove for the poets, and it is doubtful if he ever
wrote a line of verse in his life. From that dis-
temper he seems clear. A crabbed Greek couplet
adorns the title-page of his chief medical treatise ;
to him it is addressed, not by him composed. He
does in his final publication quote (without
naming them) Vergil twice and Ennius once ; but
the brief passages, incorporated in his text, are so
familiar and so loosely recollected that they
might have come to him by mere hearsay. No
other poetical citations will be found in his pages
except, for controversial purposes, a few lines
from the Sibylline verses and a phrase from an
Orphic hymn. A totally different class of study
proved irresistible in its attraction for him.

In choosing Toulouse as the place of his son's
professional education, Antonio Serveto doubtless
had in mind, as Dr. ToUin well conjectures, not
merely the prominent repute of its University as a
school of learned jurists, but also its fame in
divinity as a hot-bed of Roman Catholic ortho-
doxy, intolerant of any of those newer ideas
which, in various parts of Spain and France, had
been fermenting for years, provoked by Luther's
■outburst in 15 17, wherewith not Germany alone
but all Europe rang. The German or Lutheran
type of reformed doctrine, it may be said, never
•enlisted the sympathies of Servetus. It was not
radical enough on the sacraments; while its
exaltation of mere faith appeared to him inimical

MICHAEL SERVETUS 15

to the sound doctrine of good works. Perhaps
the teaching of Toulouse might have definitely
confirmed him in his father's faith, but for an
incident which suddenly turned his thoughts from
law to the Gospel. Up to the year 1528, it would
appear that he had never seen a Bible. He says
he had never read any of the Bible, and we may be
sure that, had one fallen in his way, he would
certainly have had the curiosity to examine it.
At Toulouse, he, with certain other scholars,
began to read " the Holy Scriptures and the
Evangel." Here indeed we have a coincidence
with the life of Calvin; for it was in this same
year, 1528, that the future Reformer, at Orleans
and as a law student, began his study of the
Bible in the Vulgate version. Usually it is
assumed that the Bible on which Servetus lighted
was also simply the Vulgate. This there is
reason for doubting. He is never in the habit of
quoting the Vulgate; his acquaintance with the
original texts must have been made very early.
It is in the highest degree probable that a copy of
the Complutensian Polyglot (published 1522) in
which the Vulgate version is flanked by the
Hebrew and the Greek, was la saincte escripture et
evangile of which Servetus speaks. This. finest
fruit of the Alcala press, a splendid contribution
to sacred letters under the auspices of a Spanish
Cardinal devoted to the interests of the Holy See,
could hardly have missed its way to the University

I6 MICHAEL SERVETUS

of Toulouse, and would be sure to attract the
curiosity of its Spanish students.

Not long after his initial acquaintance with the
Bible, Servetus left Toulouse to enter the service
of an influential patron, Juan de Quintana, an
Aragonese by birth, a Franciscan by religious
training, a theologian who in the bitter con-
troversies of that age endeavoured a line of con-
ciliation; and on this account had been selected
by Charles V — ^for the moment desirous of an
accommodating policy — as his confessor, replacing
an uncompromising Dominican.

Thus it happened that Servetus, in attend-
ance upon Father Quintana, was present at
Bologna in February 1530 ; there witnessing the
twofold event of Charles V's coronation, first as
King of Lombardy, then as Emperor of Rome and
of the world. Of these ceremonies we have a full
contemporary account from the pen of Cornelius
Agrippa, the Emperor's historiographer, whose
graphic sentences enable us to realise the scene,
almost as if we had been present. From every
window in proud Bologna costly tapestries were
hung forth. On every wall golden and silver
gewgaws reflected the cheery radiance of the
Italian sun. The very streets and arcades — the
mighty arcades of Bologna which lift our imagina-
tion till those of Chester shrink to a decrepit in-
significance — were carpeted with fresh flowers.
Wine ran in the fountains from eagles', beaks and

MICHAEL SERVETUS 17

lions' gaping throats. Every nation from Britain
in the West to the isles of the Levant sent high
dignitaries of Church and State, princes and peers,
cardinals and canons, in robes and badges of
every imagined description, to swell the pomp
and multiply the paraphernalia.

In all this blaze of magnificent splendour the
eyes of Servetus, to whom pomp was always
repulsive— =-though he had a nice taste in jewelry;
an unprinted catalogue of his personal effects left
behind on his escape from Vienne proves this —
rested mainly on one figure ; and the vision of this
ever after haunted and burdened his memory.
The Pope who was to do the crowning was borne
aloft, says Agrippa, upon men's shoulders in his
chair of state, and as they carried him through
the gilded throng that lined the streets, bearing
him in grand procession to the high altar of San
Petronio, the people knelt in the ways. Those
fortunate enough to be near, pressed forward to^
kiss the slippers of Giulio de' Medici, known now
as the seventh Clement, Vicar of God; and they
received his benediction as if it were the visible
assurance of the favour of the Most High. Three
and twenty years after this, in the latest of his
works, Servetus printed his reminiscence of a
spectacle which had made on his young mind an
indelible impression. "With these very eyes,"
he exclaims in accents of quivering indignation,
" with these very eyes did I behold him, carried in

c

i8 MICHAEL SERVETUS

pomp upon the necks of princes, adored in the
open squares by the whole populace on bended
knee. Those who could kiss his shoes deemed
themselves possessors of indulgence for their sins,
and dreaded no more the pains of infernal fire.
O beast of all beasts most execrable ! Well hath
Isaiah painted thee — ." Then follows a terrible
passage, adapted rather than translated from the
prophet.

An unsparing vehemence of denunciation is a
feature of Servetus' latest language when he
touches on the Papacy, language which one can-
not but wish that he had been able to keep in
restraint. What makes it the more startling and,
in a sense, the more impressive is that there was
nothing of it in any of his earlier works. It is the
discharge of a long pent- up fury, to which he
must needs at length give vent. It should be said,
however, that he never assails the Catholic
Church as such. In his first publication, while
frankly submitting his own views, he affirms:
" the Church shall judge." In a later one, he
claims to write pro ecclesia, ut pro matre filius. It
was not merely from fear of consequences that he
habitually conformed. In many respects the
Catholic ideal was consonant with the breadth of
his religious mind. For that very reason it came
about that with the Roman travesty of Catholic-
ism he entirely lost patience. The Pope to him
was essentially a usurping Antichrist. Valued

MICHAEL SERVETUS 19

friends he had among Catholic dignitaries, close
intimates among the priesthood — one of these
intimates, Jacques Charmier, got into trouble on
this score, and suffered imprisonment at Vienne
after his friend's trial — yet the rank and file of the
sacerdotal class constituted in his judgment an
unclean, unwholesome crew. In the scornful
section of his latest work, quoted above, he does
not measure terms in his fierce reprobation of
their morals and their hypocrisy, though he lays
the ultimate blame of this unworthiness upon the
Pope, their evil master, their unscrupulous
t5nrant. We must recollect what too many Popes
were, in his day. At the time when he printed
his denunciation, the Papal throne was occupied
by Julius III — of fame so unsavoury that
particulars are not desirable . We may hasten from
them with the Catholic Encyclopedia as " very
disagreeable rumours." He it was who kindly
absolved this country from heresy and schism
when Mary Tudor drew it back to the Roman
obedience. His end is thus sketched by a mild
writer : " He died from the consequences of his
own folly, and no tomb was erected to his
memory."

The Bible made Servetus a theological student,
compelling him as it did to investigate the
grounds of his ancestral religion, and especially
convincing him that to-day, as at first. Christian
doctrine must start from a realizing knowledge of

20 MICHAEL SERVETUS

the Man Christ Jesus. Ab homine exordiendum is
his pregnant phrase. The spectacle of Bologna
turned the theological student into the would-be
missionary of a better theology. In the year fol-
lowing the Bologna pageant, Servetus, having
quitted the service of Quintana, issued his first
little theological work. One would like to know
how he managed to obtain the services of his
printer, Johann Setzer of Hagenau in Alsace.
Setzer was a Protestant of discrimination, who
seems to have chosen the books he printed as
carefully as he printed them. In neat little
volumes nicely got up he brought out numerous
reprints of reforming tracts, favouring especially
' those by Melanchthon. Uniform with these and
in the same type he produced in 1531 the seven-
fold tract by Servetus on Trinity Errors (De
Trinitatis Erroribus), withholding however, his
name as printer. The second work of Servetus
{Dialogorum de Trinitate libri duo) consisting of
six short chapters, the first two being in dialogue
form, was brought out in 1532 by the same
printing firm, though meanwhile Setzer had died..
That first little book, on Trinity Errors, found
its way to the Diet at Ratisbon (17 April, 1532),.
where Quintana was in attendance on Charles V..
It seems that Servetus had secured its coming^
under the notice of the Diet by sending a copy to-
one of its members, Christopher von Stadion,
Bishop of Augsburg. Servetus had gone to Augs-

MICHAEL SERVETUS 21

burg with Quintana in 1530. Perhaps he hoped
that in this prelate he might find a friend. Stadion
was not an irreconcilable. As Lord Acton notes,
he thought his own people blind, not to coalesce
with Protestants on the basis of the Augsburg
Confession.

A contemporary letter (in Italian) from Ratis-
bon to Rome by the Italian Nuncio, Jerome
Aleander, soon to be made a Cardinal, begins
with the exclamation : " I do really believe we are
very near the end of the world ! " Having
delivered himself of this terrified foj-ecast, he pro-
ceeds to say that a young Spaniard, one " Mihel
Serveto, alias Dereves " has written a book against
the Trinity, cram-full of misused Scripture, inter-
spersed with shreds of Greek and Hebrew, a very
distasteful piece, but clearly by a very shrewd
fellow. Quintana, he goes on to say, knows the
writer, says he is a young man of very great talent
and a great sophist, but cannot imagine that a
book so replete with Scripture knowledge and so
polished in style, can really be the production of
one of his years; and this, though he over-
estimated those years by five. Aleander means
to get together some of the theologians attending
the Diet, especially those connected with Spain,
to have the book condeinned, and instructions
sent which would procure the burning of the book
with the effigy of its author, al modo di Spagna.
This laudable project was not carried out, so far

22 MICHAEL SERVETUS

as we know, though Aleander assures his Roman
correspondent that the most reverend Legate, in
the belief that Serveto belonged to his diocese
(Huesca) will write instructing his Vicar-general
to see about it. The Vicar-general was the
bishop's brother, who administered the diocese
for him, since this bishop had graver occupations
on hand, being no less a personage than the
Bolognese Cardinal Legate, Lorenzo Campeggio,
who already had appeared in our own history as
Papal Commissioner in the first of Henry VIII's
conscience-stricken suits of nullity.

The polish of style here signalized as pertaining
to the first work of Servetus is an imaginary
quantity. The Latin, though clear, is crude;
yet very likely it impressed Quintana by its
superiority to the ordinary dog-Latin of the
friars with whom he was most familiar. On the
other hand, every reader must share Quintana's
amazement at the proofs of learning and reading
(not in Scripture alone) which the little book
presents, especially in the first of its seven sub-
divisions. How, we want to know, did a lad not
yet fully of age acquire this breadth of attain-
ment ? Where did he find all the books he
quotes, and quotes moreover with point and fair-
ness ? Let us make a list of them in alphabetical
order: Aristotle, Augustine, Basil, the Chaldee
Paraphrase, Rab Chimhi, Clement of Rome,
Clement of Alexandria, the Clementines, Corpus

MICHAEL SERVETUS 23

Juris, Cyprian, the Decretals, Dionysius of
Alexandria, Erasmus, Glossa Ordinaria, Gregory
of Nazianzum, Henricus de Gaudano, Hilary,
Robert Holcot, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Joachim of
Flores, John of Damascus, Lactantius, Maxentius
Constantinopolitanus, Mahomet in his Alcoran
(not printed till a dozen years later), Rab Moyses,
Occam, Paulus Burgensis, Peter de Aliaco, Peter
Lombard, Ricardus de Media Villa, TertuUian.
Of these, Irenaeus and TertuUian were through-
out his life, especial favourites with him. His
reference to the Qoran of Muhammad is ushered
in with the wholesome reminder: "Hearken to
what saith Mahomet, and remember that one
truth confessed by an enemy is better worth cred-
ence than a hundred lies though authorised by
our own men." He must have ransacked the
libraries at Tonlouse and elsewhere to come upon
all these writers. Even if he found some of them
in extracts (as is evident in the case of Joachim
of Flores) the industry and research are obvious.
Nor had he, as Andrew Kippis is said to have
done, crammed so many books into his head that
his brains refused to move. Who taught him
Hebrew ? Not the ordinary Hebrew only, for he
introduces a cryptic Hebrew abbreviation when
he wishes to administer a sly slap at the theo-
logians of his day. It puzzled Dr. ToUin, till I
suggested to him. Try Buxtorf De Abhreviaturisy
and you shall see what you shall see. This little

24 MICHAEL SERVETUS

trick on our Michael's part is prize-worthy, for it
is one of the very few instances in him of a sub-
rident humour. Where he got his Hebrew to
begin with, he does not say; only that he never
had any communication with the Jews. This
question, however, we can perhaps answer. His
master in Hebrew, at a later date, was certainly
the venerable Sanctes Pagnino, whose translation
of the Bible he subsequently (1542) re-edited and
annotated. Now Servetus tells us that when he
left Quintana he went to Lyons, and Pagnino was
settled in Lyons from 1525 tUl his death in 1541.
If this is the answer, it necessarily follows that
his command of Hebrew was gained in much less
than a year. Throughout life his rapidity of
attainment was truly marvellous.

His little book made a great stir. Luther, as
we might expect, would none of it. Luther in his
big-hearted way (reminding us of Dr. Johnson)
liked what he liked and scoffed at what he dis-
liked. He scoffed at Servetus in his Table Talk,
just as he scoffed at the Epistle of St. James in
print. The cautious Erasmus wrote that the
Spaniard had tried in vain to gain his ear, so
Alearider tells us. Melanchthon read the little
voliime and read it again. It frightened him ; and
it was some time before he tried to rebut its
positions. The Roman Catholics held aloof from
the controversy over the book, but scarcely any
Protestant theologian of repute abstained from

MICHAEL SERVETUS 25

having his say about it, and usually his flitig at it.

The Swiss Reformers — Oecolampadius in par-
ticular, who to the disgust oi Alearider received
Servetus into his house — entered into friendly dis-
putation with him as with no mean adversary.

It was to meet their objections that he wrote
his supplementary booklet, with a modest fore-
word admitting the imperfections of his boyish
essky, tanquam a paruulo paruuUs scripta. This
description is something more than a humble
apology for acknowledged defects. It throws a
clear light on the nature of his early work, and the
method of its composition. He had begun the
study of Scripture, so he declared at Geneva, in
company with certain of his fellow students. The
curious and sometimes puzzling personal appeals
characteristic of his first publication are unintel-
ligible till we realize that we have before us again
and again what amounts to a record of actual dis-
putation carried on at the University of Toulouse
between the young enthusiast and his youthful
compeers, who for their parts were not slow to
put forward objections which they deemed fatal
to his novel views, while for his part these were
met by his eager and skilful defences. Lad as he
was, debating with lads, he evidently felt himself
to be a man with a mission. In the original pre-
face, to his Christianismi Restitutio, which exists
only in a manuscript copy, he speaks of himself as
moved by a divine impulse in his twentieth year to

26 MICHAEL SERVETUS

treat of matters pertaining to the salvation of
Christ's people, matters respecting which he had
learned nothing from any human source. This
purpose he had ever kept before him, though con-
scious of the many dangers to which it exposed
him. At times, like Jonah, he felt impelled
to flee from duty, and betake himself to some
distant and solitary isle. The voice of Christ
came to him as an irresistible mandate bidding
him be true to the Master's cause.

Nothing is more characteristic in the religious
development of Servetus than the growth of a
vivid sense of the personal relation in which he
stood to his Divine Master. From his earlier
works this is absent ; in these he is bent on the
recovery of the historical Christ. In his latest
work, so full is his mind of the presence and
stimulus of the ever living Lord and Leader, that
to Christ his heart leaps forth in the spontaneous
approach of personal address.

In regard to such address, we may mark some
notable contrasts of thought and feeling, dis-
tinguishing Servetus from Faustus Socinus on the
one hand, and from Thomas Emlyn on the other.
Emlyn who in 1704 wrote his " Vindication of the
Worship of the Lord Jesus Christ on Unitarian
Principles," rests the claim to worship on the fact
of dominion — ^his own word. Worship, in short,
is with him purely an act of homage; an idea
which we find reflected in many of our older

MICHAEL SERVETUS 27

hymns: " To Thee, O God, we homage pay," as
the gentle Doddridge has it. To our Lord also,
in Emlyn's view, like though not equal homage is
due ; he would have been ready to use the words
of one of Dr. Martineau's own rather stiff and
stilted hymns, in which our Lord is apostrophized
with the address: " O King of earth."

Turning to Socinus, we find him, in his critical
manner, distinguishing between adoration of
Christ — and by this he means that feeling of the
heart which constitutes the Christian attitude —
and invocation of Christ, direct verbal address and
petition, and this by no means necessarily accom-
panies the Christian emotion. It is lawful but
not imperative. We have evidence of its em-
ployment by his English disciples, but it has not
been possible to detect Socinus himself in the
actual use of it, though he will make no terms
with those who deny its legitimacy. To the
temperament of Servetus the distinction thus
critically drawn between emotion and utterance
would have been a practical impossibility. Just
as, in his denunciations, the flow of feeling and
the rush of language constitute one act, and he
could no more be reticent in word than quiet in
mind before any evil which pressed upon him as
a dire reality to be repelled with the whole force
of his being, so in his religion the cry of the heart
and the appeal of the lips come surging up in
unison from the same sense of a gracious presence

28 MICHAEL SERVETUS

very near to his spirit. Break forth then in
supplication he needs must : " O Christ Jesu, Son
•of God, liberator most clement, who hast so often
delivered thy people from their straits, pity and
•deliver us now ! "

The introduction of Servetus to a scientific
career took place at Lyons, where he was earn-
ing' his bread as editor for the press. Dropping
his patronymic, he borrowed a place-name from
Villanueva, appearing in Latin as VUlanovanus,
in French as de Villeneufve. This dissociated
him from his theological speculations, which
would hardly have ingratiated him with the Lyons
booksellers. The excellence of his literary work
was conspicuous in his edition of Ptolemy's
■Geography, published in 1535, and reissued,
further improved, in 1541. His additions to
Ptolemy are copious and curious, showing a good
■deal of enquiry, an original grasp of the future
science of comparative geography, and a keen
study of the manners and characteristics of various
peoples. It may be of some interest to extract,
irom the folio page of his observations on the
British Isles, the main things which struck him in
regard to our country and people. There is the
more reason for doing this, inasmuch as Dr.
Willis has given an attempt at a version, with
extraordinary blunder's. It will be observed
that he sets down his points, just as they occur to
him, like joltings transcribed from a note-book.

MICHAEL SERVETUS 29.

not worked up into any systematic arrangement.
Taking as basis the first edition of the Geography,
the omissions in the second are here indicated by
italics, while the additions are enclosed in square-
brackets.

" Among Scots," he says, " there are few differ-
ences of customs, language or manners. Their
temper is hasty, prone to revenge, and fierce .-
They are brave in war, very patient under fasting,,
watching and cold, shapely in mien, careless in
dress. Unfriendly in disposition, they look down
on all other mortals. They are vain of their noble
blood ; even in the depth of poverty tracing their
pedigree to a line of kings. They flatter them-
selves on their argumentative skill ; in lying they
delight, and do not study peace, like the English. ^
[The northern parts of Scotland are tenanted by
wild men, bearing the name of foresters; their
speech and dress are as in Ireland; they wear a.
rug over a tunic of saffron dye, and go with bare-
shanks and a shaggy kind of footwear; they live-
on garne and fish, though with plenty of cattle,
milk and cheese; their weapons are bows and
arrows, and broadswords ; hunting is their chief
pursuit; they have a provincial code, different
from the civil law. The rest of the Scots are
similar to the English in language and civilization -
Almost throughout the island] the use of coal for
firing is so common that beggars meeting charit-
able persons ask for coal."

30 MICHAEL SERVETUS

Speaking of England, he says " the climate is
more temperate than in France, with less extremes
of cold and heat. The land is well wooded, rich
in produce, suitable for feeding cattle and horses,
of which there are great numbers, especially of
sheep, for there are no wolves. Formerly the
country produced no wine, but now there are
vineyards in some localities ; it yields gold, silver,
iron, lead, tin, and coal in abundance [and exports
hides and excellent hounds for the chase]. It
has large fisheries in tidal rivers, salt springs and
hot springs, precious stones, pearls, and the finest
jet in large quantities. The population is enor-
mous, and, according to Plutarch, long-lived. The
English language, a composite speech arising from
diversity of races, is very difficult both to understand
and to pronounce. In war they are intrepid, and
the best of archers. They are a wealthy people,
and for the most part given to, commercial pur-
suits; they are celebrated for the finest cloth,
owing to the abundance of good wool. On their
music and their banquets they especially pride
themselves. They are of blue eyes and tall
stature." Here he tells the story of Beatus
Gregorius and the fair young Angles, inserting in
his second edition [" Recently, however, they
have separated from the Roman Church, like a
good part of Germany "].

"Another island," he says, "near to this,
called Hyrland, is [for the most part] subject to

MICHAEL SERVETUS 31

the King of England; it is situated to the West,
and is half the size of Britain. So rich is it in
fodder that unless in summer the cattle are kept
off the pastures, they are in danger of overeating.
This island produces no noxious animal, no
spider or frog, nor will it maintain them if im-
ported ; it kills all noxious animals brought from
another soil, smothering them in dust. Bees are
not found here. The climate is marvellously
temperate, the fertility remarkable. Yet the
population is inhospitable, uncultivated and cruel,
given to hunting and sports more than to agri-
cultural labour. They are called Hybernians
from one Hybernus, a Spaniard, who reached the
island in a three days' sail." Finally, with a two-
edged compliment he remarks in the second
edition [" Whence it happens that in most
respects they resemble in characteristics those
Spaniards who are their nearest neighbours,
namely, the Basques "]. Elsewhere in this Geo-
graphy Servetus speaks some home truths about
the characteristics of his own nation, a people
"restless in mind, vast in endeavour, quick of
genius, impatient of discipline." Here, with an
unsparing candour, he drew his own portrait.

More important than his geographical work in
its influence on his future career was his employ-
ment as corrector of the press for sundry publica-
tions of Dr. Symphorien Champier (1472-1539),
herbalist, physician, Platonist, and astrologer

32 MICHAEL SERVETUS

at Lyons. Champier is embalmed for ever in the
great work of a brother physician; for a book
"per § C," with an odd title, finds a place in the
immortal library of St. Victor. Francis Rabelais,
who rendered his neighbour this service, was not
merely a physician, but one of the first anatomists
to conduct a dissection in public at the Lyons
hospitaL Servetus may have been present. A
singular poem by Etienne Dolet, published in
1538, introduces the corpse of a malefactor,
priding itself on having been the honoured subject
of this dissection. This poem Servetus had cer-
tainly seen or heard, for he owes to it a turn of
expression which he subsequently reproduced on
the wonderful " artifice " of the human body.
He must either have personally known Rabelais,
or, what is perhaps less likely have been a reader
of Pantagruel ; for he follows Rabelais in locating
the faculty of memory in what was then known
as the posterior ventricle of the brain.

Servetus reckons Champier as his second
patron, and owns his considerable debt to him as
teacher. It was with Champier's backing that
he repaired in 1536 to Paris, there to study
medicine. Again we stand amazed at the rapid-
ity of his advance. He was little more than a
couple of years in Paris. During that time he
graduated in arts; was licensed in medicine; as
assistant to the anatomy professor, in succession
to. Andre Vesale, gained - repute as a dissector;

MICHAEL SERVETUS 33

virldicated Champier in print (1536) against the
attack of a German critic, Leonhard Fuchs;
lectured on geography, and on astronomy or
astrology (the terms were then used indis-
criminately) with an archbishop as one of his
hearers; published his rationale of digestion in
the shape of six lectures on Syrups (1537) which
ran through five editions in eleven years; was
prosecuted by the medical faculty for alleged
libels in his astronomical lectures (1538) and
inhibited from meddling with that branch of the
science of the stars which we now set aside as
astrology. This is pretty well for two years'
work, and largely original work. His penetra-
tion was equally remarkable for its quickness and
its depth. Well does his contemporary, Sebastian
Miinster, a rival editor of Ptolemy, characterise
him by the epithet oculatissimus. His eyes were
eyes of mind, his observation was instant and sure.
As for the connection between medicine and
astronomy in some of its practical applications,
we shall not forget that Chaucer tells us, of his
Doctour of Phisik, that

In all this world ne was ther noon him lik.
To speke of phisik and of surgerye ;
For he was grounded in astronomye.

The astronomy of Servetus, like that of Ptolemy,
was strictly geocentric. He held, indeed, that
the earth was created first, before the heavens,
to serve as the centre about which the whole

34 MICHAEL SERVETUS

organic system of the universe was in suGcessibii
arranged. In his capacity of astrologer, Servetus
was inter alia a meteorologist and a weather
prophet. His weather forecasts, not being ran-
dom guesses, but founded on observations really
scientific in their character and in the principle of
their interpretation, had a perverse habit of
coming true. Hence some of that jealousy which
led to his prosecution. Furthermore, he was in
advance of his age in his detection of the influence
of climatic conditions on certain forms of disease.
It is noticeable, too, that in his treatise on Syrups
he deprecates the use of drugs as aids to digestion
in ordinary cases, prescribing rest, sleep, massage
(friciiones), baths, attention to diet, and use of
warm drinks.

This treatise (Syruporum Universa Ratio) is the
only one of all his publications into which he intro-
duces no theology. It is also the best written, so
far as classic Latin goes, of all his works ; and in
controversy the most temperate. One could
wish that all his medical pamphlets had been in
equally good taste ; but no doubt he had his pro-
vocations. No doubt also it was sufi&ciently
galling to grave and learned members of the
faculty, addicted to the Arab school of physic
with its multifold theory of digestion, to be
taught the elements of true science by a young
beginner in his twenty-sixth year, who knew his
Galen, and made skilful use of that great name as

MICHAEL. SERVETUS ^5

of paramount authority. Unpoliteness' in ^rebuke
and in retort were perhaps natural in the circum-
stances. In the Sjnrups treatise Servetus is care-
ful to attack no Jiving person directly or indirectly
and even apologizes for his references to John
■Manardus, then recently dead, the inventor while
living of three digestions in the same human
frame. It gives me pleasure to note his com-
mendation of my namesake, Bernard Gordonius
(who died, I believe, in 1305, at any rate he is not
living now) for frankly owning that physicians,
of whom he was one, sometimes do make mis-
takes. The dominant anxiety of Servetus is that
the science of medicine, of which he speaks
enthusiastically, as coming to a new birth, should
be as free from error as possible.

Soon he took to medical practice as his means
of livelihood, exercising his profession at Avignon
and for a longer period at Charlieu. Two ro-
mantic episodes mark his sojourn, of a couple of
years or so, at the quaint old town of Charlieu,
.with its ancient castle, and its venerable inn,
which yielded once upoii a time, to a traveller in
search of traces of Servetus, a welcome supper of
milk and grapes. Here it was that Servetus
.would, had he been competent to "do so, have
•married une fille dudict lieu: Here too, one night,
on his .way to visit a patient, he was set upon by
.friends of a rival physician.- Swords were drawn,
wounds given, and Servetus was-put under arrest

36 MICHAEL SERVETUS

for two or three days. He says he never got inta
such a scrape before; nor did he again, till the
Inquisition was hounded on to him by hints froni
Geneva.

Finally, after some further study in the medical
school at Montpellier, he found a permanent settle-
ment (1541-53) at Vienne, on the invitation of its
Archbishop, Pierre Paulmier, the same who had
been his hearer in Paris ; who now attached him
to his person as confidential physician. In
addition to this he had a considerable practice^
and made money. He still continued to do some
work for the Lyons publishers, bringing out the
revised edition of his Ptolemy, and his noble
annotated edition of Pagnino's Bible (1542).
This contains his remarkable theory of prophecy,
perhaps the only theory which preserves the
element of Christ-predicting vision, while admit-
ting the immediacy of the prophet's historic out-
look. He certainly also pursued his anatomical
researches, for his discovery of the pulmonary
circulation of the blood, not made in Paris, had
been reached by him before 1546.

Being now in easy circumstances, and the
master of some leisure, his main business from his-
own point of view was the revision and completion.
of his theological work. For this task he had pre-
pared himself by larger learning and more
searching study. So . subsidiary did he reckon
everything else to this, that he made no immedi-

MICHAEL SERVETUS 37

^ate publication of his great physiological dis-
covery, reserving for incidental exposition in his
Christianismi Restitutio, "a truth which Galen
himself had not perceived." This exposition is
but a stage in the process by which he endeavours
to pass from physiology to psychology, and to
determine how and where the Spirit of God
operates upon the soul of man. As we are not
now dealing with his scheme of doctrine, but
touching only on points which illustrate the man
and his characteristics, it will suffice to say that
of the contents of the Christianismi Restitutio
(1553) the portion which will best repay the
general student is its final piece, the Apologia.
This is the only piece which has been separately
reprinted (1896) and is easily accessible, though
marred by errata, some of which belong to the
original text, others to the reprint of 1790. It
takes its title from the circumstance that its
primary raison d'itre was the writer's desire to
defend himself in the face of criticism by Melanch-
thon, to whom the Apologia is addressed, as he had
attacked Servetus by name in his Loci Communes
{1536). From a mere reply, the Apologia pro-
ceeds to a general and lucid outline of the writer's
scheme, both of Christian doctrine and of Church
polity, at once temperate in tone and glowing
with anticipation of its ultimate acceptance.

The earlier sections of the volume give many
more evidences of the writer's scientific curiosity

38 MICHAEL SERVETUS

than thiat pfesented by his account of the pul-
monary circulation. Whether he. had definitely
grasped the larger truth of the general circulation
of the blood may be left in doubt, for while there
are indications which fit in with this, they need
not be pressed too far. This wider truth was not
of service to the psychological argument; and
this alone deternjined the introduction and proof
of the discovery which he signalized. Hints for
many of his scientific positions — we can hardly
call them discoveries, some of them being merely
unverified convictions — he finds in the letter of
the Bible. Thus, for example, he has an inkling
of the fact that water is composite — a truth which
Priestley, strange to say, repudiated with vigour
to his dying day— and he is guided to it by the
circumstance that the Hebrew terms for water and
for sky are in the dual number. His mind is
moving away from the older theory of four fixed
elements. Air is a gas (as we should say) which
escapes from water ; flame is enkiiidled air or gas.
On the other hand his experience as a physician
proinpted some of his interpretations of Biblical
phenoniena and Biblical data._ "Contraction of
the tieryes," he ;says,. "is. called by Christ the
chain of Satan, just as. St. Paul calls his own
infirnjity.a messenger. of Satan." . In regard to the
retributive facts of the hereaft.e.1;, he -observes
that,, just as to those whose senses are diseased,
swfiefi thing's seeni bitter and .iragrant things

MICHAEL SERVETUS 39

fetid, Iso in the future life the conditions which
make the bliss of the good, will be torture to the
depraved. His glimpses of universal restoration
are suggested by the thought that as Nature has
remedies for all her diseases, could we only dis-
cover and apply them, so there may be ultimate
modes of treatment for the depravities of the
moral and spiritual being.

The Biblicism of Servetus, it must be owned, is
of the most thoroughgoing order. He does not
indeed with the Hutchinsonians (now, presum-
ably, extinct or nearly so) find all science in the
books of Moses, designedly there taught, though
veiled in symbols; but the discoveries of science,
so far as he had made them, tally with the
language of Scripture, as he understands it. The
absolute inerrancy of the Bible was evidently
with him an axiom so patent that it never occurs
to him even to state it. Here he differs from the
earlier Reformers, for Luther was a Biblical critic
in his slap-dash way, and the commentaries of
Calvin on both Testaments are pervaded by a
scientific acumen. Milton escapes the pressure
. of his Biblicism,. at least as regards the New Testa-
ment, by pleading the presence of irreducible-
variations in the existing text, providentially
designed to compel a resort io the guidance of the
Spirit... Servetus knows nothing of textual uncer--
tainties. In bis earliest .and again in his ktest
work,, he cites and expounds the Three Heavenly

40 MICHAEL SERVETUS

Witnesses verse, without a suspicion that it has
no place in the true text. His one selective
criticism — and this does not call in question the
text but is founded upon it — is in his strong
assertion of the superiority of St. Paul to St.
Peter as an exponent of Christianity. St. Peter,
he maintains, could never have transmitted to the
Papacy a supremacy in the Apostolate which he
did not himself possess. The more excellent
organ of apostolicity was St. Paul " who from the
beginning of his vocation knew perfectly the
mysteries of Christ, namely, that the Gentiles
were to be called, and that all Judaisms were to
be done away; things which none other of the
Apostles knew."

In spite of all this, while holding that the Bible
is absolutely true, he claims, and on Biblical
authority, that the true Christian is, for the
essentials of his religion, independent of the
Bible. " Christ," he exclaims, " is my only
Evangelist." He means that for the knowledge
of Christ he need not go to the records of the
historic past, and must not be content with these.
Firm faith in a living Leader is the primary
requisite of discipleship, the very quality which
constitutes the Christian, for nemo Christianus
nisi discipulus. Hence it is not enough to tell a
man that the Evangelists wrote so and so. The
Gospel was in being before they wrote. It is not
the Gospel because they wrote it, they wrote it

MICHAEL SERVETUS 41

because it was and is the Gospel. " The law of
■Christ is the law of the heart. This law of Christ
needs no outward writing. Yea, even had the
Apostles and Evangelists written nothing, still,
providing that the knowledge and the faith of
•Christ endured in us, this new law of Christ would
•stand, ■written with inward ink by the ef&cacy of
the Divine Spirit, which imprints that law on
tablets of the heart."

Here Servetus reaches the highest mark of his
mystic faith, and here we leave him. Cut off at
forty-two, his ever-growing mind had not yet
■shown the full extent of its insight and its powers.
His last and ripest work is after all but a bundle
•of tracts theological, sewn up together, some
rewritten (not, it may perhaps be thought, in-
variably mended) and some new, many of them
bristling with speculations strange to the modern
mind, all of them instinct with the writer's
.genius. They show us what he was ; they point
further on to what he might have become. For,
•of all human achievement, of all human aspira-
■ tion, of all human progress in religion, thank God,
" the end is not yet."

6 October, 1910.

THE TERCENTENNIAL
OF A NAME

II

THE TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

THE nineteenth century of the Christian Era
did not reach its proper termination before
24 March, 1901. The reason is, that this Era
begins its years on 25 March, the date of our
Lord's conception by his Virgin Mother, as cal-
culated in A.D. 527 by the Scytho-Roman monk
Dionysius Exiguus (Denis the Insignificant) by
himself thus designated. To his modest labours-
in the chronological field we owe the introduction
of the Annus Domini. The inconvenience of
beginning the Christian year at Lady Day, while
the historical year began on the first of January^
was recognized at length by the English Parlia-
ment to whose legislation we owe the Era now ia
use, according to which the year, and consequently
the century of years, terminates on 31 December..
It follows as a matter of course that somewhere or
other there has been a shortened year; the
century in which this has occurred, though it
consist. of the full number of years, will neverthe-
less be of necessity a shortened century.

Amateur chronologists seem inclined to play
tricks on their own account with the first of all the

46 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

Christian centuries. Some of them go so far as
to reckon a year a.d. o, which yet is to count as
one before one; thus they make up a century
closing with the year a.d. 99. Others would
reckon as the first Christian year a period of nine
calendar months and six days, so as to begin the
second Christian year with the first of January.
The really short year in our English chronology
is the year a.d. 1752. This began, like all its
Christian predecessors on 25 March, but came to
an end by law on 31 December, having been
meanwhile, in the previous September, compelled
to make restitution of borrowed moments, the
overdraft of previous years from the days of
Julius Czesar. This reform of the calendar, in-
troduced by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, had
been adopted in Scotland in 1600 ; in Ireland it
was not legalised till 1782. Thus the English
year 1752 consisted of eight calendar months and
twenty-five days. The eighteenth therefore is
our short century ; and it is in virtue of its short-
ness that the following century, the one imme-
diately behind us, whose first year began by law
on I January 1801 accomplished its full tale of
years on 31 December 1900.

It is impossible to bring to mind this passage
from one century to another without some
salutary and even solemn thoughts on the flight
of time, -the procession of the ages, and the
turning-points of human story. Though it be

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 47

quite true that there is no real pause or break or
change when a century closes, yet the process by
which we engraft upon our imagination this idea
of parallels of longitude, as intersecting the un-
broken flow of years, is by no means artificial.
It may be called instinctive or perhaps con-
stitutional. Our habit of marking off a decade of
decades arises from our physical structure. We
count by tens because we have that number of
fingers, and the step to tens of tens is not arbitrary.
The space of time thus measured is naturally im-
pressive from its relation to the utmost span oi
human life. When, further, we contemplate the
centuries past, we cannot fail to see that each, to
the eye of posterity appears with an individual
character, and bears a distinctive repute of
its own.

What special stamp the judgment of the coming
•time may fix upon the century now [in Oct. 1900]
•near its close, we cannot safely anticipate. It is
not likely to be a flattering one ; for the next age
wUl have, and rightly have, a keen eye for faults
and defects, supposed or real, in its predecessor,
and means of course to remedy them. The
century last completed is always severely judged
by its successor. It gains neither the indulgeiice
nor the admiration bestowed upon earlier ages,
which compete less closely with the present time
arid are seen in an historic perspective, invisible to
those who stand too near. Witness the blind and

48 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

persistent disparagement, on the religious side,
which our nineteenth century flung upon the
eighteenth, the century of Christian hymns, the
century of the rise of Christian missions, the
century which shone with the catholicity of
Doddridge, which thrilled with the fervour of
Whitefield and, unable to resist the appeal of the
consecrated philanthropy of Wesley, opened its
heart to the truth of God's free grace, its mind to
the fact of a human world improvable. Little
Laud, little Wesley — do we doubt which of these
irrepressible spirits made religion more real in
his own time and for all time ? Does religion,
again, owe no debt to the men who put Christian-
ity avowedly on its trial, brought its assumptions
to the bar of reason, searched out its facts by the
methods of history, checked its preachers into a
wise caution and, unsatisfied with the appeal of
mere sentiment, demanded of them the qualities
of solidity and sense ? That surely was no stag-
nant century in which Butler with new reverence
traced the springs of virtue in human nature, and
Hume probing the metaphysics of Deity set the
witness of the firmament and the tides above the
hearsay tales of men ; in which Lardner awoke a
living interest in the literature of the first Christian
ages, and Priestley compelled the fruitful study of
the mind of Christ and the process of doctrinal
development. We may console ourselves with
the consideration that, if those who come after us

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAM£ 49

treat the nineteenth century as the eighteenth
has been treated, dwell complacently on our weak-
nesses, and rank even some of our virtues as the
freaks or faults or foibles of our age, nevertheless
time will do us justice; and at any rate the
twenty-first century will avenge us, scourging our
detractors, and perhaps transfiguring our poor
endeavours in a fashion which our modesty for-
bids us to anticipate.

While then this address is retrospective in its
design, the retrospect of the immediate past is a
task left free to the Principal of this College a
hundred years hence. Let us look further back,
and extend our gaze beyond our vaunted bi-cen-
tennials, all of them, strictly speaking, bi-centen-
nials of the old Calvinistic Dissent. The history
of the Unitarian religion— not indeed under that
name — ^has lasted long enough to permit of its
Tercentennials, even in this country, did we
choose to celebrate them. The year of grace
1900 happens to be the Tercentennial of the first
known appearance of the Unitarian name, and
the very month coincides. It were inexcusable to-
pass this anniversary in silence.

How the term Unitarian originated, we may
perhaps conjecture, but we cannot say that we
certainly know. People are apt to rub their eyes
when they read that, in the sixteenth century,
those who now are called Unitarians were deno-
minated Trinitarians, and that in the Papal bull

50 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

Coena Domini, as issued on Maundy Thursday by
successive Popes, from Gregory XIII. in 1583 to
Clement XIII. in 1768, Trinitarians are associated
with Anabaptists and Apostates as outcasts from
the Faith. The explanation is this : the heretics
so designated, holding the threeness of Father,
Son and Holy Spirit as distinct persons, denied
their unity of being and nature. It was Servetus
who first in 153 1 and again in 1553 employed the
term Trinitarian in its present theological sense.
So novel and so repulsive was his use of it, that
his judges at Geneva were more than scandalized
at his temerity. It was even included among the
capital charges against him that to ceux qui
croyent en la TriniU he had given the name
Trinitaires. His nomenclature has endured,- and
the term has now the force of a compliment.

As its theological correlative we might have
expected to find the term Unitarian earlier in use
than in point of fact we do. In vain do we search
for it till we come upon a decree of the Transyl-
vanian Diet at Lecsfalva in October, 1600, when
Unitaria Religio, the Unitarian Religion, was
first recognized as such. In old statutes of the
same country such titles as Antitrinitarian and
Arian had been frequently used ; the one a com-
bative, the other an antiquarian term, and both
bestowed upon the new movement by its enemies.
Nor does it appear that the Unitarian name was
devised by its friends; they certainly did not

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 51

readily or rapidly adopt it. There are grounds
lor supposing that it was deliberately intended by
this name to associate the would-be reformers of
Christendom with the followers of Muhammad
under a comimon term of reproach. Certainly at
a later date we find it in customary use as the
received translation of the Arabic Muahid; and
as such it crops up in our own literature as
synonym for Moslem, e.g., in Gibbon's pages, in
Wesley's well-known intercessory hymn, and
more recently in one of Pusey's treatises. Be all
this as it may, there came a time when the
Unitarian name was first tentatively, then
formally adopted by the Antitrinitarians of
Hungary — ^not by those of Poland — as their
official style and title. It is first to be found upon
the official records of their mother-church at
Kolozsvar, in August 1637. Next year (1638) it
took the public and authorized position among
them which it has ever since retained.

Several reasons combine to stamp upon our
memories this date of 1638. In our own insular
history it is memorable as being the date of the
Scottish National Covenant — ^not the Solemn
League and Covenant in which the Puritans of
the three kingdoms joined, that was in 1643, and
was the religious sanction of a political alliance.
The Covenant of 1638 was the religious sanction of
an ecclesiastical reform, it meant that Presby-
lerianism was in earnest. There is perhaps no

52 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

picture in the religious history of Scotland more
profoundly moving than the vision of that day in
1638 when the broad parchment scroll was spread
out upon a tombstone in the Old Greyfriars'
churchyard, the Westminster Abbey of Edin-
burgh, and nobles and magnates followed by the
whole population swore to their Covenant with
uplifted hand and affixed their signatures, filling
the blank space, crowding the margin, covering
the back, and, when meaner ink failed, dipping
their quills in their blood.

Take this date with you, and travel to the far
East of Europe, for it is a memorable date in the
history of two Churches of the freer faith — the
Church in Poland and the Church in Hungary.
It carries very different associations in the two
cases. In Poland 1638 was virtually the year of
doom ; in Hungary 1638 was practically the year
of establishment. This contrast, fully realized,
may aid the English mind to surmount the
difficulty of drawing a clear distinction between
the two Churches. It is true that they had many
points of contact, yet they never were in close
touch with each other. Like the contiguous.
Churches of England and Scotland they differed
in spirit and in constitution ; the Antitrinitarians
of Hungary retained a modified Episcopacy, those
of Poland were purely Presbyterian; and the
Churches were further kept apart by the barrier
of language.

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 53

The key to the rise as well as to the fall of the
Church in Poland is to be found in the fact that
its history is the record of one long-continued
struggle with the emissaries of the Society of
Jesus. But for intrigues which began with the
incursion of Jesuit Fathers into Poland in 1558,
the Antitrinitarian section of Protestants might
never have been forced into separation as the
Minor Church in 1565 . To reaction against Jesuit
influence must be ascribed the remarkable series
of converts to the Minor Church from the Roman
Catholic aristocracy of Poland. The Minor
Church was undogmatic in spirit, and fond of the
undefined use of such terms as Catholic and
Christian. This avoidance of limiting appella-
tions was, as is well known, the policy of Socinus,
but it was not original to him. He did not bring
it to Poland, he found it there. The Polish
Church, even when most Socinian, in fact never
adopted a party term as its designation. Along
with a firm adhesion to the Supremacy of the
Father, it cherished the adoration of our Lord, on
grounds not very dissimilar to those on which
Roman Catholics defend the adoration of our
Lady. The recoil of its members from any
magisterial office or patriotic service involving
them in complicity with the taking of human life,
while fatal to the social and political influence of
their community, constituted it a refuge for
religious minds, weary of bloodshed as an engine

54 TERCENTENNIAL OF A. NAME

of reformation and anxious for a haven of rest
whence moral regeneration might proceed.

In 1569 a Polish noble, John Siennynski, for the
improvement of his estate and the encourage-
ment of trade, laid out the plan of a new town
seated on a sandy reach beside a pleasant river,
with mountain views to delight the eye and con-
tiguous forest to furnish building material. In
honour of his wife, whose maiden name was
Rak [i.e. Crab] he called the projected settle-
ment Rakow [pronounced Rackuff]. Siennynski
had become a Calvinist, but (not availing himself
of the decree of 1566 by which every Polish noble
might prescribe the worship within his domain)
he invited settlers of every sect to the free exer-
cise of their own religion. We may take this as
due to the fact that his wife was already in strong
sympathy with the attitude of the Minor Church.
Among the first to seize the proffered opportunity
was a little band of Non-trinitarians, led by one
of the most remarkable men of that day. Gregory
Pauli, originally a Calvinist, had been ejected
from the pastorate of Trinity Church, Cracow, for
advancing opinions in that building utterly in-
compatible with the doctrine to which its dedica-
tion pointed. His ideas of reform were social and
economic as well as theological. He believed in
an approaching millennial reign of Christ, and in
the duty of Christians to prepare themselves for
it . His followers, increased by small contingents

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 55

of Anabaptists, fleeing for their lives from
Bohemia and Moravia, held a community of
property, and every member had to contribute by
his labour to the common stock. How long this
experiment lasted is not clear, but in its early
stages it contributed materially to the rise of
Rakow, where Pauli ministered as the first in the
succession of its liberal pastors. Pauli died in
1591 after ten years' enfeeblement by failing
eyesight, and leaving a name of past greatness.
The oldest monument in Rakow stands in an
ancient walled graveyard on a sand-bank outside
the town. It is a lofty pedestal, surmounted by
a rudely carved but very touching figure of our
Saviour crowned with thorns, seated and bending
forward, with pensive eyes surveying the town
below. It is dated 1591 and inscribed " Erexit
L.E." Local tradition makes this the resting
place of Pauli, and interprets L.E. — rather fanci-
fully — as Lugens Ecclesia, the Church in Mourning.
Eight years later, a strong effort was made in
public conference to win the heretics of Rakow
from the error of their ways. The discussion had
an unexpected result. James Sienn3Tiski, son of
the founder, was convinced that the heretics had
the best of the argument. In 1600 he openly
joined the Minor Church, whose synods from i6or
met annually in Rakow. To the zeal of a convert
the younger Siennynski added the schemes of a
patron animated by broad and wise educational

56 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

views. In 1602 he made Rakow — ^already famous
for a printing-press which issued works of science
as well as of theology — ^more famous still as the
seat of a College for the promotion of learning
in every department. Teachers of eminence and
of liberality were brought together from various
parts of Europe, scholars rapidly poured in, and
for thirty-six years it was no uncommon thing
for the College roll to include a thousand names,
three hundred of them representing the flower of
the Polish aristocracy. Catholics and Calvinists
readily sent their sons to share its advantages,
and Rakow gained abroad the proud title of the
Sarmatian Athens. Its own authorities, still more
proudly, delighted to call it Verona, the Home
of Truth.

Needless to say, the Jesuit gaze wa;s fixed upon
it with sleepless enmity, and with lynx-eyed
longing for some means of compassing its down-
fall. The Primate of Poland condemned to the
flames a reprint of the Polish Bible translated by
members of the Minor Church. There was in it
a terrible misprint, do for od, which made our
Saviour tempted to the Devil instead of tempted
by him. This reprint however was not executed
at Rakow, which could not therefore be made to
suffer. At length, in 1638, two thoughtless lads,
Falibowski and Babinecki by name, furnished the
first occasion of complaint against Rakow, and
the Jesuit wire-pullers determined that it should

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 57

be the last. The youths in question had flung
pebbles at a wayside crucifix of wood, doing
it some damage. Their parents had soundly
chastised them. The authorities of Rakow,
thinking the culprits sufficiently punished, had
taken no further action. The matter then was
brought before the Diet at Warsaw, and urged
as involving the whole community of Rakow in a
heinous crime. On the roof of the great hall at
Kielce in what is — or was in pre-War days — the
ofiicial residence of the Governor, a contemporary
painting by Dolabella, the court painter, repre-
sents the sitting of this Diet. King Wladyslaw
IV., himself a man of easy and tolerant dis-
position, but overborne by strenuous bigots,
occupies the throne. On the dais beneath his
feet appears the inscription: Arianismus Pro-
scriptus. At his right sits Wezyk, the Bible-
burning Primate, while on his left rises Zadzik,
Bishop of Cracow and diocesan of Rakow,
pleading for summary dealing with that hotbed
of heresy. The leaders of the Minor Church stand
at the bar ; their best friends, the third order of
nobility, have been excluded from the sitting.
On May Day 1638 the decree was passed pro-
scribing the teachers of Rakow, confiscating their
church and their printing-press, and dooming
their College buildings to demolition.

This was the first act of a tragedy destined to
be developed and completed in the course of some

58 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

score of years. When at length the throne of
Poland was filled by John Casimir, who had beea
a Cardmal ; and when the Jesuit Severin Karwath
held the office of Court preacher, it is no wonder
that a decree was issued for the extermination of
the Minor Church. Accordingly in 1660 (a date
memorable in our own ecclesiastical annals for
its tale of blighted hopes) our Polish ccr-religionists-
were compelled either to renounce their religioa
or to become exiles from their homes. Their ex-
pulsion was the natural sequel to the suppression
of Rakow. Pope Alexander VII (whose portrait
might be mistaken for that of Richard Baxter) de-
corated John Casimir with the title Rex Ortho-
doxus, and the churches of the Arians (so called)'
were devoted henceforth to Roman Catholic
worship.

Obscure enough is Rakow to-day; yet those
who, with Count Krasinski speak of it as a miser-
able village, can never have heard the sound of
its bells, or filled their shoes with the sand of its.
suburbs, or bowed the head within its synagogue,
or, guided by the parish priest, stepped over-
prostrate worshippers on the pavement of its-
graceful church, to view the mural portrait of
Zadzik. Like all old Polish towns, its main
feature is a vast open square, eastward of which
is a desecrated church of the proscribed com-
munity, or what remains of it patched up into a
dwelling-house. A network of narrow streets.

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 59

encloses a smaller square. Neither in street or
square is there (1900) any sign of freedom or of
literature to remind the traveller that this was
once the Sarmatian Athens. The decree of 1638-
did not work by halves.

Look now, by way of contrast, to what was
effected by the kindred Church in Hungary in
that same year. It cannot be doubted that the
course which things were taking in Poland had
made a strong impression on those of the like
faith across the Carpathians, warning them of a
common danger. The Hungarian Church had
wavered more than once between the alternatives
of framing a policy of its own, or following in the
wake of its Polish sister, which certainly took the
lead in learning and culture, perhaps also in
wealth. It had received teachers and pastors
from the College and Church of Rak6w, and had
even elected one of them, Valentine Radecki, as
its bishop. Radecki, as was natural enough,
proved a warm adherent to Polish ideas. The ill
success of his advocacy of them was in part due
to the circumstance that, confining himself to
Latin, he never learned the Magyar tongue, thus
never getting into accurate touch with the com-
munity over which he presided. So strongly was
this felt that, on his death in 1632, a law of the
Hungarian Church was enacted, excluding from
the episcopal office all but native-born Hun-
garians.

6o TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

Radecki's death was followed by internal dis-
sensions in the Church; questions of policy
became questions of party and of personal rivalry.
After the election of Daniel Beke as bishop, at the
end of 1636, the divisive action of a disappointed
candidate very seriously endangered the position
of the Antitrinitarians as one of the Four
Religions of the country recognized and pro-
tected by the State — a position never attained by
their co-religionists in Poland.

The fall of the thunderbolt on Rakow was
convincing proof that the need, of internal unity
was imperative and that the work of consolida-
tion could not safely be delayed. Beke, a strong
man, convened a Synod synchronously with the
Transylvanian Diet, which was meeting at Dees.
Gaining the co-operation of both Synod and Diet,
Beke on 7 July, 1638, effected the famous
Complanatio Deesiana, at which the Unitarians —
jointly taking that name for the first time-
achieved a united front, presented a common
Confession, and obtained from the Diet, assembled
under a Calvinistic Prince, the ratification of their
place among the Received Religions of their
country. Never since has this position been
questioned, even in the bitterest times of perse-
cution. That it should have been established at
such a moment was no srnall attainment, and com-
pels us to admiration of the. statesmanship of
Beke, the sagacity with which he grasped the

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 6r

situation, the skill with which he treated it.
As the symbol of this Complanatio appears for
the first time in history a document with the
heading Confessio Fidei secundum Unitarios — a
Confession of the Faith according to Unitarians,
If we say that the statesmanship of Beke is no-
where more conspicuous than in the ofi&cial
adoption of the term which first emerged in 1600,
it is not meant that the choice of this distinctive
Name did the work of preserving the Unitarian
Church of Hungary. The adoption of a common
name was a symptom rather than a cause. It
was the symptom and outcome of a spirit which
had become alive to the necessity of standing"
closely together, not merely for self-preservation^
but for the health and strength of a cause greater
than any self-interest, greater than any private-
preference.

Yet it was not from Hungary that the bequest
of the year 1600 came to Western Europe and
reached our own shores. By a strange irony of
fate the Unitarian name has been derived from
the exiled Poles, who never, even in exile, adopted-
it as their own. Next to Gregory Pauli the most
remarkable ^champion of the liberal faith that
Poland ever produced was Andrew Wiszowaty,
grandson of Socinus. He it was who rallied th&
fugitives from Rakow in 1638, and again who,,
later on, piloted to Holland the main body of the
exiles of 1660. Obtaining the willing services of a.

62 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

learned printer at ' Amsterdam, he projected in
1665 the series of Latin folios designed to secure
for his faith through the press a hearing denied
to it from the pulpit. On the general title-page
the series is described as the Library of the Polish
Brethren. Then come the words, added in con-
cert with Stanislaus Lubieniecki, quos Unitarios
vacant, called by others Unitarians.

As their writings show, Wiszowaty and
Lubieniecki would have preferred phrases such as
" simple Christians," " mere Christians," " Catho-
lic Christians." In this they were in accord with
the tenacious sentiment of the body to which
they belonged. Within the limits of that body,
these phrases were perfectly intelligible; they
meant not many things, but one thing. Whereas
in Holland the exiles had taken in hand the task
■of introducing the views of their representative
men to an outside public. From that public
they sought the justice of which at home they had
been ruthlessly deprived. They must therefore
make their position plain and intelligible to those
to whom they appealed. Hence they yielded so
far to the schooling of events as, for literary pur-
poses at any rate, to pay some heed t,o the lesson
of Hungary. Precisely similar in its motive was
the adoption of the term in England ; first, so far
as is known, by Henry Hedworth in obscure
pamphlets of 1672, and further (1687) in a
publication which speedily became widely known.

TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME 63

" A Brief History of the Unitarians, called also
Socinians " — the work of Stephen Nye, with a
short addition by Hedworth. It was to furnish
a rallying point for existing adherents and present
a standard for anticipated accessions that the
Name was adopted in England, %vhich in Hungary
had stood since 1600 for a Religion, since 1638 for
a Church.

In the march of the world three centuries cover
no great stretch of time, yet in the history of a
movement they mean much, and may not un-
reasonably be interpreted as an augury of endur-
ance. It was indeed a great thing to go into exile
for conscience and for truth. It was something
greater to stand so firm in the tenacity of purpose
and the comradeship of faith as to impress even
unfriendly powers with the conviction that here
was a people whose mind was clearly made up to
stay, to speak, to live and grow.

Gregory Pauli may have been justified in his
millennial vision, though overhasty in his chrono-
logical surmise and fanciful in his colouring of the
spiritual prospect. The millennium may in truth
be on its way, and in its advent be expected to
eclipse, and by eclipsing sweep into oblivion, our
tentative endeavours for the establishment of the
true kingdom of the One True God. Meanwhile
Pauli was certainly right in holding that this
expectation should not damp but should rather
stimulate the determination to be found, when

64 TERCENTENNIAL OF A NAME

the triumph of our ideal brightens the sky,
robustly active in its behoof, ready to welcome
it with girded loins and with the responsive glow
of our lighted lamps.

3 October, 1900.

EARLY NONCONFORMITY

AND

EDUCATION

Ill

EARLY NONCONFORMITY
AND EDUCATION

FRANCIS Hutcheson, the future philosopher,
when on the threshold of his career as an
ethical writer and teacher, had a friendly dis-
cussion in 1726 with his neighbour — and almost
namesake — Francis Hutchinson, Bishop of Down
and Connor, the subject being the question of
conformity. The Bishop thus laconically stated
this question from his own point of view: — " We
would not sweep the house clean, and you
stumbled at straws." While the candour of the
former half of this pronouncement has not always
been imitated by episcopal advocates of Anglican
claims, its latter half very well expresses the
estimate of the Nonconformist conscience enter-
tained by bishops, and by other persons, in the
most modern times. Indeed something may be
said for it; if we remember that, by Noncon-
formists themselves, the obstacles in the way of
their conformity are often and characteristically
described as " scruples." A scruple, when we go
back to its original and literal meaning, is indeed
a tiny matter, less bulky even than a straw.

68 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

Now it is the privilege and almost the pre-
rogative of minutiae, that to them belongs much
and momentous significance. The analogy of the
grain of sand that blinds the eye, the spark that
fires the mine, the pinprick that entails death and
destruction, forbids us — in spite of Alexander
Pope — ^to think of any causes which breed real
events as trifling. To dismiss niceties as petty,
is to fail to understand life. Only by securing
exactitude in minimis can the stern persistent
resolve, nay, the uncompromising inappeasable
strife, with which wise men toil after truth, reach
and attain any kind of permanent satisfaction.
If, then, the starting-point of Nonconformity be
scruple, it must be added that the aim of Non-
conformity is the complete adjustment of thoughts
to things, of words to thoughts, of deeds to words.
Are we not saying the same thing when we affirm,
with emphasis, that the very life-blood of Non-
conformity is Education ?

This was well understood by the authorities in
Church and State, when from the passing of the
Uniformity Act in 1662, they employed every
effort in their power to debar Nonconformists-
from the exercise of the teaching profession, and
to break up their schools. A bishop's licence was
required in the case of every Teacher ; the Teacher
not so licensed was prosecuted, and subjected on.
conviction to fine and imprisonment. Had these
prosecutions succeeded in their object, Noncon-

AND EDUCATION (m.)

formity would have been strangled in its cradle.
By hurried moves from place to place, Teachers
sometimes managed to evade arrest, at least for a
time. The prosecutions continued, even after the
passing of the Toleration . Act ; and were not
finally abandoned till (in 1734) proceedings against
Doddridge were stopped by the personal order of
George II.

In the earliest days of Ejected Nonconformity,
the scope of its Teachers went no higher in secular
learning than the curriculum of the grammar
school. Of set purpose they abstained from
trespass upon those branches in which the
Universities then held a close monopoly. This
self-restriction was due to conscientious scruples,
raised in the minds of ejected graduates, by the
terms of their graduation oath. As far back as
the reign of Edward III, disputes in the older
Universities had led to migrations of tutors and
students, till at Stamford the attempt was made
to establish a rival University. Hence the oath ;
which bound graduates not to lecture tamquam in
universitate elsewhere than in Oxford or Cam-
bridge. Many of the Ejected felt this oath as a
conscientious bar to the exercise of their gifts in
the higher learning. Calamy has preserved for
us the elaborate arguments by which, after a time,
Charles Morton, of Wadham College, Oxford, and
Samuel Cradock, ex-fellow of Emmanuel, con-
vinced themselves that the oath prohibited, and

70 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

was designed to prohibit, merely prelections in
order to a degree ; and that, since Nonconformists
did not pretend to give degrees, or to qualify for
them, the oath did not close their lips as teachers
of university learning. They cited examples of
conformists, including even a bishop, who had
lectured in philosophy and divinity at their own
abodes. These precedents, however, did not
satisfy the consciences of all their brethren.

In the North of England the need for some
further provision for the higher learning was
acutely pressing. To supply a long-felt want
Cromwell had founded a college at Durham in
1657; but at the Restoration Cromwell's patent
was reckoned void, the endowments went back
to the Church, the college collapsed. Among its
tutors had been William Pell, eminent as an
orientalist. His friends, after his ejection, re-
peatedly urged him to take up, as a volunteer, the
tutorial work from which he had been excluded.
Pell was one of those whose scruples could not be
overcome. At length the work was begun in
Yorkshire by Richard Frankland, of Christ's
College, Cambridge, who, it seems, had been
designed for some post at Durham College, had
it continued. Him we must ever revere as the
Founder in this country of the Nonconformist
Academy.

Why Academy ? The answer is interesting.
In 1559 Calvin established at Geneva the first

AND EDUCATION 71

European university not fortified by powers
conveyed under a Papal Bull. For this reason,
in all probability, the name Universiias was not
adopted as its official description. Calvin gave it
the style and title of Academia. Universiias and
Collegium, though we distinguish between them
in modern usage, are, in Latin, practically
synonymous terms ; they simply mean a corpora-
tion. Accademia was, and is, in use in Italy, as
the designation of a literary club, perhaps because
Cicero had employed it in a somewhat similar
sense. There can, however, be no doubt that
Calvin went back to the original associations of
the term, recalling the scene where Plato taught
in the suburbs of Athens, at " the olive grove of
Academe " the Attic hero. There may be some-
thing in the suggestion that, in thus invoking
Plato, as the ruling spirit of his new foundation,
Calvin as a humanist intended to emphasize his
breach with the Schoolmen and with Aristotle,
their idol, though not, it must be confessed,,
their model.

Four years later the town council of the Scot-
tish capital projected a seat of the higher learning
on Calvin's lines. I am somewhat proud to think
that my Alma Mater was the earliest University
within the British Isles in whose establishment no
Pope ever had a finger. Naturally, the Scottish
hierarchy of that day put obstacles in the way,
and the University did not obtain a royal charter

72 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

till 1582. Its oificial title still runs Academia
Jacohi VI Scotorum Regis Edinensis.

Thus for our Nonconformist predecessors the
name of Academy (or as they called it, and as
John James Tayler always continued to call it,
academy) was suggestive of reminiscences con-
genial with their object and their spirit. They
desired to keep alive in their land the solid sub-
stance of the best university learning. They did
not profess to grant degrees; though, had they
done so, one may suspect that a degree at Rath-
mell in the seventeenth century, or one at
Daventry in the eighteenth, would have meant a
good deal more than a contemporary degree
either at Oxford or at Cambridge, if measured,
not by its value for merely social purposes, but
by its worth as an index of the intellectual
stimulus promoted by careful and enlightened
study.

Frankland set about his work at a time and
in a spirit which may entitle him to be viewed as
the rescuer of Nonconformity from destruction at
the hands of the oppressor. He chose the mo-
ment when, by the provisions of the second Con-
venticle Act (the Act of 1670), the persistent
Nonconformist preacher was laid under penalties
meant to be ruinous — ^unless, indeed, he were a
peer of the realm, as the Act set forth, with subtle
and cruel irony. This Act it was which, so far
from inclining Frankland to feel himself crushed.

AND EDUCATION 73

roused him to action, drew him from the com-
fortable quiet of his private estate, and made him
join for the first time the persecuted ranks of the
" conventicle " preachers. He journeyed to Lon-
don, gained audience of Charles II, and, with a
faithfulness as severe as its utterance was dignified
and impressive, went straight to the mark, calling
upon the pleasure-loving king, in the name of the
King of kings, lo reform his life, his family, his
kingdom, and the Church. Charles was well
aware that he was listening to no Court-preacher ;
not only did the transparent earnestness and
sincerity of the appeal' succeed for the moment in
touching him; he recognized in his reprover the
man of culture and the gentleman, and his
response was more marked than usual : " ' I
thank you, sir,' and twice looking back before he
went into the Council Chamber, said, ' I thank
you, sir; I thank you.' " Then Frankland re-
turned, to Rathmell, and the Northern Academy
was opened. Partly in remembrance of its
Tutor's ancient place of learning, it was also
known as Christ's College, Rathmell. It was no
•clerical seminary, either in design or in fact. Its
first student was a baronet's son, a young lay-
man, bred an Episcopalian, though of the Puritan
type, who went to Rathmell just as he would have
gone to Oxford, to receive a learned education.
For observe, while the Academy was Noncon-
iormist, its alumni were not asked to commit

74 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

themselves, either actually or implicitly, to the
Nonconformist position. Its raison d'etre lay in
the fact that the older Universities were not
open to Conformists and to Nonconformists alike.
It would have been contradictory to its very
principle of existence had it been closed to either
party. " This securing of the key of knowledge,"
wrote Charles Morton in words which seem to
have a very modern significance, " and tying it
fast to some men's girdles, or making it too hot
and heavy for others to touch on any terms, might
well enough comport with popish designs, to
keep people in the dark, that they may lead them
the more quietly by the nose." To maintain an
open door was vital to the very being of the old
Nonconformist Academy. Some of Frankland's
students were intended for the legal, others for
the medical profession. Though Frankland him-
self was a Presbyterian, his early divinity students
belonged to the Independent denomination. Not
till the Academy had been conducted for two
years did it receive any divinity students from
Presbyterian families. For, until the Indulgence
of 1672, the Presbyterians (with only a rare
exception here and there) were not satisfied to fall
in with the separating ways of the Independents.
It is from 1672 (not from 1662) that Stillingfleet
quite correctly dates " the Presbyterian Separa-
tion."

Frankland was never imprisoned; but prose-

AND EDUCATION 75

cutions and excommunications (which then were
no mere brutum fulmen) dogged him all his re-
maining days, and it was only by constant re-
movals from corner to corner of Yorkshire and
Lancashire that he was able to keep his Academy
going during the whole of the eight-and-twenty
years which intervened between its origination
and his death. One hardly knows which most to
admire — the unflinching tenacity of the middle-
aged Teacher, or the brave young courage of the
Students who followed him in his wanderings. In
every year but one, the bitter year of 1685 (the
year when Jeffreys tormented Baxter from the
bench), new pupils came eagerly forward to
freshen and increase the list of Frankland's
scholars.

It was much against the grain with Frank-
land's diocesan, Sharp, Archbishop of York, that
he felt driven to countenance proceedings against
Frankland; for Sharp had close family con-
nections with Nonconformists. His clergy be-
sieged him with petitions to suppress the
Academy. He resorted to Archbishop Tillotson
for advice; and, with Tillotson, severity toward
Nonconformists was still more against the grain,
for he had been a Nonconformist himself. Tell
him, he wrote, that it is not as a Nonconformist
you proceed against him ; that a bishop is bound
by his oath not to license anybody to give public
instruction in university learning; that will be

76 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

" the fairest and softest way of ridding your
hands of this business." Sharp, however, found
what he thought a fairer and softer way. He
invited Frankland to Bishopthorpe, and in the
library there they talked matters over, not
without the soothing aid of a pipe of tobacco, and
the gentle stimulus of a glass of good wine.
Henceforth Sharp and Frankland understood one
another. But prosecutions from other quarters
did not cease.

Quickly was Frankland's example followed;
and in a very few years Academies sprang up in
all parts of the country. It is far from my
intention to go into the history of these Non-
conformist Academies ; but I desire to direct your
attention to some features of the earlier ones,
those before Doddridge. I draw the line here
for a very good reason. Doddridge initiated an
important change in the Nonconformist Academy,
amounting to a revolution. Before his time,
following the practice of the older Universities,
all lectures were in Latin, prayers were in Latin,
and Latin was the customary speech during
business hours within the Academy walls. Eng-
lish was only permitted on stated occasions,
e.g., always on Sunday evenings, when sermons
were repeated. Indeed, the amount of linguistic
facility which was exacted from ingenuous
youth in those days may well surprise, if not
shame, our modern backwardness. Thomas Hill,

AND EDUCATION 77

of Findern Academy — who died in 1720 — ex-
pected his students to sing their' Psalms, not
merely as rendered into Latin, but in Greek verse
too. A Tutor of a yet severer stamp, made his-
pupils sing them in the original Hebrew. The
day for such heroic exercise is long gone.

Whether or no it was entirely for good, Dod-
dridge changed all that; lecturing in English, a&
the appropriate vesture of a more modern Science,
a more modern Philosophy, a more modera
Theology. The three branches just enumerated
were the main items of the curriculum, and
formed the staple of the old Academy courses of
instruction. Prominence was given to Philo-
sophy; which constituted, indeed, the chief
intellectual interest of an age when the older
forms of thought were being supplanted by the
influence of Descartes, and again of Locke. In
none of these old Academies was Science neg-
lected ; and though it was the nascent Science of
that age, it was pursued with a keen curiosity,
and often with an apparatus as efficient as was-
then procurable. The weak point was the treat-
ment — or non-treatment — of History, which rare-
ly appears in the schemes of lectures, except under
the denomination of Chronology, and this was-
largely Biblical. Sacred history was to some
extent dealt with incidentally under the head of
Jewish Antiquities, but ecclesiastical history was
not touched, nor history of doctrine.

78 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

Another department, much cultivated in some
of the later Academies, under the name of Belles-
Lettres, was unrepresented in the earlier ones.
At Oxford, it is true, the professor of Poetry used
within living memory to lecture on English poets
in the Latin tongue; but we can quite under-
stand that, with Latin as the sole medium of
class instruction, English literature would come
off badly. At Rathmell, however, as we are told
by one of the students — James Clegge, in his
excellent gossiping Diary — " Mr. Frankland's
•daughters " supplied to some extent their father's
•deficiencies in this respect. They " led me," he
says, " to read poetry and novels; and such like
trash," he somewhat ungratefully adds.

It may perhaps be thought that, when the
burden of the Academy work fell upon an indi-
vidual, with the assistance of one (rarely two)
of his senior pupils, the multitude of subjects was
felt to be quite as much as could be reasonably
accomplished, without .taking in the additional
•departments above specified as not represented.
This criticism would hardly be appropriate. For
the topics treated in the Academy actually covered
the whole range of needful knowledge as then
realized. From the course, which extended over
five years, nothing deemed desirable was deliber-
ately omitted. The defects were partly the
defects of the educational ideas of the time ; but
largely also due to the fact that a later time has

AND EDUCATION 79

witnessed the rise of new knowledges. What real
grasp of history, or of ecclesiastical history for
that matter, had men's minds before Gibbon ?
As for not teaching history of doctrine, we might
as well blame the old Academies for not teaching
Geology.

This further we must remember, lest we sup-
pose that the alumni were necessarily subjected
to the disadvantages of a one-man system in all
departments. As the Academies multiplied, it
soon became apparent to stud.ents of quick parts,
eager for the best instruction, that each had its
specialty or specialties. One Tutor had a reputa-
tion for philosophy; another for science, and
so on. The student bent on reaping in all
the most profitable fields would migrate from
Academy to Academy, to his own advantage, and
also to that of his new associates. For he would
bring with him something, as well as learn some-
thing that to him was fresh. To finish their
studies abroad, or at a Scottish University, was
no uncommon thing with Nonconformist students,
whether lay or clerical.

There was another ground of choice, deciding
the reputation of Academy and Academy, apart
from the special qualifications and accomplish-
ments of Tutors. That was the question of
books. There were no Academy libraries in those
days. Doddridge, I think, was the first to
establish one. The pupils, however, had the free

8o EARLY NONCONFORMITY

run of their Tutor's often scanty shelves. A new
arrival would tell of a better store under the roof
of some other Tutor, and so tempt to a migration
on this ground alone.

Thus, Thomas Emlyn left John Shuttlewood's
Academy at Sulby, simply because Shuttlewood
"had very few books, and them chiefly of one
sort." It was, indeed, hardly likely that he
should have many, or rejoice in a rich variety;
for he was one of the hunted Tutors. He had
seen the inside of a gaol at least four times ; and
Sulby was an obscure hamlet, in Northampton-
shire, extra-parochial, where he kept his Academy
in hiding, and held himself ready for a further
flitting at a moment's notice. Eventually, Em-
lyn went back to Shuttlewood; for though he
found more books at the Bodleian, he did not find
what he felt he could gain from Shuttlewood
himself.

John Chorlton, of the first Manchester Academy,
had many books, yet, as Emlyn puts it, " chiefly
of one sort." On the other hand in Manchester
there was — and is, though few people seem to be
fully aware of the fact — Chetham's Library.
James Clegge, who became Chorlton's pupil after
Frankland's death, tells us that he placed himself
in Manchester for the benefit of this " library,
and the conversation of other young scholars,"
who had previously benefited by it. Chorlton's
students listened in the mornings to the exposition

AND EDUCATION 8i

of a sound Galvinistic theology. In the after-
noons they helped themselves to the quartos of
Episeopius, and the folios of Socinus and Crellius,
with the result of broadening their outlook.
Clegge, who was always what is called " moder-
ately orthodox," very significantly remarks:
" The writings of Socinus and his followers made
little impression on me ; only I could never after
be entirely reconciled to the common doctrine of
the Trinity." He became a Clarkean in this
respect. Then he goes on : "I admired the clear
and strong reasoning of Episeopius; and, after
that, could never well relish the doctrines of rigid
Calvinism." It is safe to say, that among the
liberalising influences which have acted upon Lan-
cashire Nonconformity, the Chetham's Library,
during the thirteen years of the life of the first
Manchester Academy (1699-1712), is entitled to
no mean place.

It is not to be supposed that the teaching of the
old Academies was in all cases consciously one-
sided. This is true of some of them, but (if we
except Atterdiffe, where Mathematics was ta-
booed as "tending to scepticism") it was not
true of the best. Choice of systems was freely
allowed, perhaps more freely in Philosophy than
in Theology. In Frankland's Academy, we read
"one Tutor was a Ramist," but Aristotle and
Ramus were permitted to rival each other in their
attractions for the studious mind. At Taunton.

82 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

Frankland's contemporary, Matthew Warren (as
one of his students, who was afterwards a Tutor,
tells us), " though bred himself in the old philo-
sophy, and little acquainted with the improve-
ments of the new, yet encouraged his pupils in a
freedom of inquiry, and in reading those books
which would better gratify a love of truth and
knowledge, even when they differed widely from
those writers on whom he had formed his own
sentiments." When we recollect how deeply the
theology of that age was rooted in its philosophy,
we can appreciate the necessarily liberalising
effect of this procedure. Of Warren, too, we
read (and this is true of all the best of the earlier
Tutors) that he " encouraged the free and critical
study of the Scriptures, as the best system of
theology." Perhaps to-day we should be in-
clined to add: best, because least systematic.

One other and kindred feature of the old
Academies must not be passed over; that is to
say, the fostering of freedom of discussion among
the students themselves. Of course, the most
conspicuous example of this is to be found at
Daventry, at a later date, but, in truth, the
freedom of the students' discussions began with
Frankland. Every evening, after supper, their
English toiagues were loosed; the day's work was
passed in review ; they were invited to canvass it
freely among themselves, not hampered by any
Tutor's presence.

AND EDUCATION 83

It may be said, and has been said, that this
large liberty of discussing topics, forming opinions,
and speaking them out, led to a sort of un-
restraint, injurious to the Nonconformist temper
and training. This was the burden of the
frequent attacks upon the Academies in the early
part of the eighteenth century. They were repre-
sented as hotbeds of faction and revolution,
political and religious. Especially was this
charge brought against the London Academies,
and made an argument, even in Parliament, for
their suppression. So far as it is based on any
truth, it applies to London only. I think I have
studied all the evidence on the subject; and it is
true that behind their Tutors' backs the alumni of
rival Academies lampooned each other; that
those of Independent Academies held calves'
head feasts under the rose on January 30th, and
■were not too respectful to the memory of the
Royal Martyr and his anointed offspring; and
that religious opponents, whose weapon had been
persecution, were made the subject of disparaging
Temarks, more pointed than polished, after the
xough humour of those days. It is equally true
that, had these dangerous youths not been Non-
conformists, no charge of really serious import
would or could have been founded on such un-
authorized effervescences of boyish spleen and
displays of rude juvenile wit. The discipline
within the Academies was surprisingly good ; the

84 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

charges here mentioned would not be worth
referring to, save as an indication of the atmos-
phere of the time, and of the eagerness with which
the enemies of Nonconformity sought an excuse
for ignoring and suppressing its invaluable
services.

The immediate work of the Nonconformist
Academies was to fit and equip men for public
duty, not in the ministry alone, but in all the
professions; it was to make them thinkers — not
closing their minds with fixed opinions, but open-
ing their intelligences, and giving them an im-
petus towards the acquirement of further know-
ledge ; it was to make them workers for the good
of their kind, to train them for the application of
knowledge in all the departments of life. Far
more was this their aim than to make Noncon-
formists. They had to deal primarily with a
class of people. Nonconformist already, expelled
from the unity of the nation into Nonconformity ;
and they made it their task to develop in that
class the powers of thought and powers of life
which would qualify them to fill their places in the
work of their country ; to do their part in forming
its future, to take their share in building up on
sound principles its prosperity, to advance its-
culture, and to ensure its progress. Small wonder
that many who were not Nonconformists were
ready to avail themselves of an education thus-
conceived and thus pursued. Nor need we grudge

AND EDUCATION 85

that infusion of new blood into the older institu-
tion of religion, for which the Anglican Church
stands indebted to able and conspicuous men,
made what they were, in the obscurity of the
Nonconformist Academy. It was not Oxford, it
was Tewkesbury, that nurtured the mind of
Butler.

In addition to its immediate work, the Non-
conformist Academy rendered a service of the
first importance to the education of England.
The founders of the old Academies were (to quote
Charles Morton again) " willing to have know-
ledge increased, and not confined to the clergy or
learned professions, but extended or diffused, as
much as might be, to the people in general."
They taught the teachers. The ministers of the
old Nonconformity, not merely in some cases, but
as a general rule — almost as a part of their
recognized duty — ^were the educators in their
several neighbourhoods. To their schools, simply
because they were good schools, where real
teaching was done, came pupils from outside their
own flocks. They did not increase their con-
gregations by their school-keeping, it is said.
Quite so; but that is not the point. The point
is that, up and down the country, they were the
great spreaders of an education, serviceable to
the people, and not otherwise supplied. Up to
a time which many of us can remember, this
function of the liberal Nonconformist minister.

86 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

the cultured alumnus of the Nonconformist
Academy, was not merely a tradition, but a
reality. Your own recollection will furnish many
an instance of men, never in any sense associated
with Nonconformity by religious connection, but
owing to Nonconformist scholarship an initial
education, conducted for education's sake, and
not for a sect's sake.

We cannot easily over-estimate either the
actual good thus done, or the force and value of
its example. The conditions of our public
education are now entirely changed, and changed,
on the whole, doubtless, for the better. Let not
the pioneers be forgotten. With an admirable
modesty, Morton expressed the hope that the
work done by him, and his like, might move " a
noble emulation. A poor hackney," says he^
" may put a racehorse upon his brisker career."
The good work of the despised and shackled Non-
conformist " may stir up to greater diligence and
industry in the Universities." With the advent
of greater diligence and industry, he thought that
Nonconformists might be readmitted, at least to
" some of the meaner Colleges and Halls." Then
the goal of his desires would be in sight.

All this does but touch the fringe of a great
subject: What Nonconformity has done for
Education. Had that been the theme of this
Address, its readers would reasonably have com-
plained that whole sections of the answer to this

AND EDUCATION 87

question had been left unnoticed. It has been
treated simply at the upper end ; and for a good
reason. Later developments of the zeal of Non-
conformists for the instruction of the people—
their activity, for example, in their Sunday
schools, indispensable nurseries of all useful
knowledge, freely opened to the uninstructed
masses during the major part of the century past
— these and the like are familiar in most men's
minds. The memory of man is short and fitful;
and it is desirable to have refreshed in our im-
aginations the clear and patent fact that, in the
art of Education and the love of Education, Non-
conformists are no novices. From the very be-
ginning of their history they have striven man-
fully in the sacred cause of the educational wel-
fare of all classes in the land. For on their
hearts was inscribed indelibly the motto which of
old the Franklands bore: Libera terra, liberque
animus ; and thus they understood it : " 'Tis no
free country till the mind be free." On their
work might fittingly be written that which was
Cradock's chosen motto: Nee ingrdtus nee
inutilis videar vixisse. By rendering services to
their own generation, they have sought to approve
themselves grateful to their teachers in the past.

In concluding, it may be allowable to quote
Morton once more. I suppose this eminent Cor-
nishman is better known in America than in
England, though here he educated Defoe and the

88 EARLY NONCONFORMITY

father of the Wesleys. He became the first Vice-
President of Harvard, and is honoured as one of
its benefactors. Among his writings is an
" Advice to Candidates for the Ministry," from
which it may be worth whUe to cull a couple of
brief sentences. His advice is often quaint
enough, and even a little sarcastic, especially
when it is of a negative character, setting forth
what not to do. Thus, in giving some sermon
hints, he deprecates what he is pleased to call " an
impertinent filling up some interstitial time with
an ill-favoured heap of superfluous words " — a
practice which we must presume that Morton
had encountered in America.

This, however, is the quotation from his
" Advice," and it is both a wise and a kindly word
of counsel from a Tutor of an older time. " I
would not," says he, "have young men so per-
sonate Fathers, as to put on an affected gravity,
or conceit to themselves greater authority than
indeed they have; this would render them and
their discourse more ridiculous than reverend.
But yet they should, with a modest and humble
seriousness and boldness, so address themselves
to the consciences of men, that there may be
perceived in them a hearty desire to do real ser-
vice to God, and real good to men's souls." So
speaks to-day, out of the past, one who made it
his aim, both in the Old World and in the New,
to imbue those whom he was training with a

AND EDUCATION 89

high and true sense of their spiritual calling.
In the legal phraseology of ancient Rome, duo
Jaciunt collegium. The sentiment is expanded in
the wise saying of the old Book : " Two are
better than one, because they have a good reward
ior their labour; for, if they fall, the one will lift
up his fellow. But woe unto him that is alone
when he falleth, for he hath not another to help
Mm up." By earnest and conscientious co-
operation. Teachers and their Pupils, alike learners
together, may expect from the Divine Hand a good
reward for their labour, granted to their efforts
and their prayers. If the Tutor droop or tremble,
may the brighter hearts of those among whom and
with whom he conducts the common studies, com-
bine to help him up ; it being the joint resolve of
•each and all, not merely to " prove his own work,"
but, in comradeship, in the spirit of united
■endeavour, to learn that great lesson of human
■service and sympathy, which teaches how, in
•every relation of life, to bear one another's
burdens, " and so fulfil the law of Christ."

S October, 1902.

THOMAS FIRMIN
UNITARIAN PHILANTHROPIST

Thomas Firmin. — Born (Ipswich) June, 1632;
Befriended Bidle, 1655; First provision of em-
ployment for the destitute, 1665; Governor of
•Christ's Hospital, 1673 ; Started factories for the
poor, 1676; Issued the first Unitarian tract,
J.68y; Died (London) 20th December, 1697.

IV

THOMAS FIRMIN
UNITARIAN PHILANTHROPIST

IT is five o'clock on a Sunday evening in the-
latter half of King Charles the Second's reign^
and the boys of Christ's Hospital, arrayed ia
their picturesque costume of long blue coat and.
bands, are filing in for their evening service and
evening meal. They say their prayers, recite
their catechism, sing an anthem, and then comes-
supper. Conspicuous in the scene is a little man,
nimble and dapper, of complexion fair and bright ,_
bustling about with an eager face, easily moved
to smile or to frown. His pocket is filled with
Scripture catechisms, in case any lad has lost his
book, or any new boy needs one ; in the corner of
his fob lurks a silver sixpence, for the urchin who-
knows his lesson well. When the pudding-pies,^
one for each young man, are set upon the long
tables, he scans them with a critical, eye. Woe-
be to the cook if these appetising delicacies are
not up to the mark in size and quality. He has
been known to rush off to the kitchen with a,
diminutive specimen, expostulating on its defects^

94 THOMAS FIRMIN

and hardly to have been appeased when the
scales proved that the viand, though small, was
heavy.

This indomitable little personage, quick-witted
and indefatigable, a boy among boys, a leader
among men, friend everywhere of the friendless,
is Thomas Firmin, known in one aspect of him as
" almoner-general for the poor "; in another, as
" curator of the Unitarian religion "; and, more-
over, if I may quote the character given him by
the biographer of a nonjuring saint, " a gentleman
of universal goodwill." Pepys the diarist, in a
remarkable letter to the Lord Mayor, declares
that Firmin's " good works have been too many
and too conspicuous not to have covered errors of
a much greater magnitude than any I hear him
charged with." " I am satisfied," writes a con-
temporary, " that he might, perhaps, have been a
better believer; but he could not have been a
better man." Till he had become an old man
(eighty-three) John Wesley does not appear to
have read any account of Firmin's life. When he
had done so, "I was exceedingly struck," says
he, " having long settled it in my mind that the
entertaining wrong notions of the Trinity was
inconsistent with true piety. But I cannot argue
against matter of fact ; I dare not deny that Mr.
Firmin was a pious man, although his notions of
the Trinity were quite erroneous."

It is the object of this Address to induce some

THOMAS FIRMIN 95

contemplation of the spirit which was character-
istic of the pioneers in the seventeenth century
of the naovement known as English Unitarianism,
with the specific purpose of exhibiting the in-
timate connection of two closely associated lines
of their activity. These men of the past, of
whose worth we are content to form, perhaps, a
rather vague estimate, were interested in theology,
and were equally interested in philanthropy.
Their work lay in both directions. They were
interested in clearing and improving the ideas of
men on two great subjects, and I believe that
they were in no small degree successful in purify-
ing and enlightening public opinion on these
topics. They themselves would have reckoned
lightly of any success won simply in the world of
thought and the realm of speculation. They
were practical men. Their aim was, while
rendering all homage to theology as a science, to
go further than this: to find in it elements of
life, as well as materials for thought ; in short, to
apply its data to the suggestion and the mainten-
ance of a better kind of religion. Not less, but
more religious were they than others around
them; and this, on the confession of their con-
temporaries, who marvelled at the paradox,
while recognizing, and endeavouring to dis-
charge, the universally admitted duty of minis-
tering to human needs, it was their further aim
to discover right methods of helpful service*

96 THOMAS FIRMIN

methods tending to improve the conditions of
human life, and lift society on to a higher level.
Above all, they sought to introduce into the
sphere of religion, as into the sphere of common
life, a broadened and a softened spirit; being
convinced that the word and the example of the
Founder of Christianity were not meant to be
buried in the Bible, but were really worth trying
in the England of the seventeenth century, and
would reward the trial. So much by way of
preamble. Now to disinter some of the facts.

In the year 1635 a Puritan divine of Ipswich,
Samuel Ward, was in the clutches of the High
Commission Court for reviling the Book of
Sports, and for affirming (with a suspected refer-
ence to the designs of Archbishop Laud) that
" the Church of England was ready to bring
changes in religion." It was possibly in a hope
of mending his own position with the authorities
that, in the same year. Ward placed two of his
parishioners within the tender mercies of the same
court, for certain " erroneous tenetts by them
held and divulged." Though not specified, I con-
ceive there can be little doubt that the incrimin-
ated tenets were those of " the queasie stomacked
Brownists " (as Ward styles them), the pre-
cursors of Independency. One of these erring
Ipswich parishioners was Henry Firmin, who,
after suffering imprisonment, making renuncia-
tion, and paying costs, was set free to return

THOMAS FIRMIN 97

home to his wife Prudence, and his little son
Thomas, then but three years old.

Henry and Prudence reared their boy in a
good stiff type of Calvinism, the Calvinism of
Dort, with its five bristling points of Dutch
orthodoxy, directed against the inroads of
Arminian novelty. In due time they sent him
to London to get his living, apprenticing him to a
mercer, who in religion was a member of the Inde-
pendent Church, organized by John Goodwin, at
St. Stephen's, Coleman Street. Young Firmin's
education was slight ; but, like nearly every good
Puritan, he could write shorthand; and perhaps
this influenced his ordinary spelling, which, to the
end of his days, was as original as Sir Isaac
Pitman's, though not so uniform. In his auto-
graph will he adopts the spelling " leagesies," an
original orthography which suggests an original
pronunciation. Pen in hand, inkhorn at his.
breast, our prentice took down John Goodwin's
sermons.

Now Goodwin, a republican in politics, was in
religion one of the broadest minded men of his
time. Anticipating George Fox, he maintains
that the Word of God " was extant in the world,
nay, in the hearts and consciences of men, before
there was any copy of the Word extant in writ-
ing." Without the letter of the Gospel, he
argues, heathens may be saved. Discarding the
distinction of Jeremy Taylor, who pleaded for the

H

98 THOMAS FIRMIN

toleration only of those whose errors were not
fundamental, he affirms that error even on funda-
mental points may be innocent. Toleration he
bases on the difficulty of arriving at truth; and
bids men " call more for light, and less for fire,
from heaven." Even a denial of the Trinity he
will not treat as a " damnable heresy," for
orthodoxy is a doctrine of inference. One who
is fond of Goodwin will often open one of his
dusky brown quartos, simply for the pleasure of
gazing upon his luminous old sagacious face ; his
clear-cut features, delicate and manly; his high
forehead, and higher skullcap; and the fingers
of his right hand, seizing a fine point and pinching
it firmly. A wrathful contemporary (George
Walker) does not hesitate to call him " Socinian
John "; which simply means that he could not
answer him. Goodwin himself claimed to be a
Calvinist ; but his Calvinism was of the immature
type, before Holland had improved upon Geneva.
Unhandsome critics have been known to put the
difference thus. Calvin, they say, devised a way
by which no more than ten in a hundred would
be saved ; the Dutch divines, by patient industry,
discovered a method of damning nine of these ten.
Most people thought that between Goodwin and
Arminianism there was only very thin ice.
Firmin, on the strength of the shorthand sermons,
dropped into Arminianism directly. He adopted
Goodwin's republicanism; simply, however, in

THOMAS FIRMIN 99

theory. Goodwin's width of heart, and breadth
of spirit, took full possession of him ; his attitude
towards the whole question of religion was
formed by Goodwin.

Meanwhile, in his master's shop he was learning
his business . Customers called him "the sprite . ' '
He showed tact as well as quickness. His
apprenticeship over, he set up for himself as a
mercer, having a patrimony of £100 as capital.
The date was apparently 1655 : the place. Three
Kings Court, Lombard Street. Of his purely
business life it may suffice to say that, after
twenty years' trade, he was worth ;f9,ooo odd.
Twenty years later he died worth about ;^3,300.
According to the calculation of his nephew and
partner, Jonathan James, his philanthropies had
cost him upwards of £16,000.

Soon after setting up in business, Firmin made
the acquaintance of a real "Socinian John,"
namely, John Bidle, who in 1652 had started in
London an Independent Church, closed in 1654
in consequence of his antitrinitarian opinions.
It is assumed that Firmin had attended this
church ; of this there is no evidence, and the idea
seems improbable. It is stated also, on the
authority of a relative, John Mapletoft, M.D.
<i63i-i72i), but not at first hand, that, while yet
an apprentice, he had interceded with Cromwellfor
Bidle's release from Newgate (prior to 1652), and
had been met with this answer: " You curl-pate

100 THOMAS FIRMIN

boy, you, do you think I'll show favour to a man
that denies his Saviour — and disturbs the Govern-
ment ? " Very neat; but this vein of humour
is obviously not in the Cromwell strain. " Curl-
pate boy " may be a true fragment of Crom-
wellian speech, and doubtless the description
would fit Firmin's looks even in his twenty-
fourth year (1655). It was then, as his bio-
grapher distinctly tells us, that Firmin " hap-
pened on " Bidle, gave him hospitality, and on
his banishment to Scilly, obtained from Cromwell,
with the help of a friend, a yearly allowance for
the banished man. For a short time, during that
year, Bidle lived under Firmin's roof. It was
long enough for his influence to tell decisively
upon Firmin in two paramount directions.

First, then, Bidle taught Firmin " that the
unity of God is a unity of Person as well as of
Nature." This remained with Firmin a central
point of conviction, through all the subsequent,
developments of his belief.

Secondly, from Bidle he learned to distrust the-
efficacy of mere almsgiving for the relief of the
necessitous ; but rather to make it his business to
fathom the condition of the poor by personal
investigation, and to reduce the causes of social,
distress by economic effort. Of this guiding,
principle, also, he laid firm hold, and shaped the
main lines of his philanthropic course with full
intelligence of its truth ; though it must be con-

THOMAS FIRMIN loi

f essed that, whenever he came close to individual
cases, his heart insisted on having its own way,
in triumphant rebellion against the dry logic of
the situation. His critics sometimes found his
charity as heretical as his theology. They
counselled him to leave to their own punishment
the undeserving poor, and the improvident
debtors, who had rightly earned the straits and
miseries of their conditions. " It would be a
miserable world, indeed," replied Firmin, " if
Divine Providence should act by that rule . . .
should grant no help ... to us, in those calamities
that are the effects of our sins. ... Do we dare to
argue against the example set by Him, and . . .
without which no man living may ask anything
of God ? " It is not' every philanthropist that
has a heart ; and one would hardly have expected
that a London tradesman, twice married, and
with two families to provide for, would have
spoken and acted thus directly as a knight-
errant imbued with the compassions of the
Most High.

Firmin's, religious home was the parish church
of St. Mary Woolnoth. The parish minister
{1655-9) ■^^.s Samuel Jacombe ; and with Jacombe
began that succession of intimacies with London
clergy which formed so remarkable an element,
both in his private life and his public influence.
From the very beginning of his housekeeping, he
rarely dined without ministers at his table. The

102 THOMAS FIRMIN

conversation of the dinner-hour was Firmin's
opportunity for informing his mind on the current
topics of the theological world of his time, for he
was no reader. The learned divines, whom he
welcomed to his board, attacked his theological
opinions without mercy. They found him im-
movable, but always willing to listen, always
ready with a reply; and the battle of argument
did but make them better friends, for Firmin was,
as the redoubtable Daniel Burgess observes,
" complaisant and sweet even to such as detest
and oppose his heresy." Queen Mary at one
time took an interest in his conversion, and bade
Tillotson " Set Mr. Firmin right." " I have often
endeavoured it," was all the Archbishop could say.
There was scarcely a divine of note whom he did
not know. His closer intimacies, as we should
expect, were with the men of latitude, the broad
churchmen of the day, men of the Cambridge
school, such as Whichcote, Worthington, Wilkins,
Fowler.

When the Restoration came, Firmin was on the
side of conformity, perhaps naturally. I do not
doubt that he would have wished the terms of
conformity to have been made easier. Noncon-
formity, broadly speaking (there were, of course,
exceptions among the Baptists, and a few among
the Independents), was not prepared to tolerate
Arminianism, much less Socinianism. In the
Establishment no questions were asked of the

THOMAS FIRMIN 103

laity ; neither at the font nor in the sick-room was
the parishioner asked to pledge himself to any-
thing beyond the Apostles' Creed, which Firmin
always endorsed. That Fowler, after refusing
conformity, ultimately conformed, was probably
due to Firmin. That TUlotson, originally a
Nonconformist, took the same course, was not
improbably a result of the same influence. These
surmises may be drawn from the exceedingly con-
fidential relations which Firmin maintained with
Tillotson, and scarcely less with Fowler, in spite
of their differences of opinion. When Tillotson
became Dean of Canterbury (1672), he frequently
needed substitutes to take his place as Tuesday
Lecturer at St. Lawrence Jewry. He " gener-
ally left it to Mr. Firmin to provide them,"
knowing that he would send acceptable preachers
and that his freedom of opinion did not bias his
judgment of men. As his friends rose to positions
of dignity in the Establishment, it was a re-
cognised thing that, by their means, he helped
young clergymen to preferment. It was not
their theology that recommended them to his
good of&ces, but their religion and their personal
worth.

There was, indeed, a species of Nonconformity
in which Arminianism found a home, while much
of the technical language of Trinitarianism was
discarded. For a moment it seemed as though
Firmin might have been drawn toward the Society

104 THOMAS FIRMIN

of Friends. This was in 1668, the year of the
publication of William Penn's " Sandy Founda-
tion Shaken." With this book Firmin, it seems
was " wonderfully taken," and " fell into great
intimacy " with its author. In the following
year he " broke all bonds of friendship " with him.
He thought Penn had not stood to his colours;
his " apology " of 1669 was indistinguishable from
a retractation. Such, at least, was Firmin's
opinion ; nor did he hesitate to express it ; a fact
which accounts for the disparaging terms in which
Penn (in 1672) alludes to Firmin as a " little
great " man and a " pragmatical " person, " all
tongue and no ear."

Among the ejected of 1662 was one who found
his way to Firmin's hospitable board, with good
results both to host and guest. To look at the
portrait of Thomas Gouge, the ejected vicar of
St. Sepiilchre's, is to be always reminded of John
Hamilton Thom. Not that there is much facial
resemblance, but there is the same unmistakable
stamp of serene benignity, joined with a majesty
of bearing, which marks a nature that seems to
have come among men from a loftier height.
Gouge was shy of Firmin at first, till he found
that, in matters of practical Christianity, the
lieretical mercer was willing both to learn from
liim and to aid him. Having a large and poor
parish, and alive to the evils of indiscriminate
almsgiving, Gouge had maintained, up to the date

THOMAS FIRMIN 105

of his ejection, a local industry of flax and hemp
spinning. This had furnished employment,
though it had involved him in loss. The scheme
supplied to Firmin a model for the larger indus-
trial enterprises to which he ultimately devoted
the largest share of his energies and his resources.
Thus Gouge completed for Firmin the education
in philanthropy which Bidle had begun; giving
him a clue to the working method by which he
was to attempt to realize the ideal which Bidle
had raised before his mind. Firmin did some-
thing to discharge the debt. When Gouge,
silenced in England, turned his thoughts to the
•evangelization of Wales, and to the circulation of
Bibles and religious books in the Welsh tongue,
Firmin found money for the project; interested
Tillotson and Whichcote in the plan (which was,
we may say, the first public platform of united
religious and educational work in which Anglicans
and Nonconformists found it possible to co-
operate); acted as treasurer for the book fund;
and, after Gouge's death, continued zealously to
■discharge the trust bequeathed to him. Nor
must the point be omitted that from Gouge, a
lover of children, Firmin derived his warm interest
in Christ's Hospital, which, indeed, he remodelled,
and did much to rebuild.

Gouge was Firmin's senior by twenty-three
years. It was to a younger clergyman that
Firmin owed the development of his theological

io6 THOMAS FIRMIN

ideas and the materials for his theological pro-
paganda. Stephen Nye was Firmin's junior by
sixteen years. By his father's side he was
grandson of Philip Nye, the well-known Inde-
pendent leader, Philip of the " thanksgiving
beard," the same who, dispatched into Scotland
as a commissioner for framing a Covenant for
the three kingdoms, astounded the elect of Auld
Reekie by preaching in the Tron Kirk "from a
paper book " and, taking for his topic " a spiritual
life," based it on " a knowledge of God as God,
without the Scripture, without grace, without
Christ." By his mother's side Stephen Nye was
grandson of Stephen Marshall, the greatest pulpit
orator of the Commonwealth Presbyterianism ;
whose rolling eyes and " shackling " gait made
him but an uncouth figure in private, but whose
fervid eloquence constituted him a political force
of the first magnitude from the opening of the
Long Parliament to the close of the Civil War.
Thus mixed in blood, Stephen Nye found his
vocation in a heretical conformity. He was
rector of a Hertfordshire parish (Little Hormead)
having fewer than a hundred inhabitants, and
possessing one of the tiniest churches in England.
In what year he became acquainted with Firmin
has not been disclosed, but it was some time after
our friend had been fairly launched on his career
of public philanthropy.

Nye approached Firmin with thorough sym-

THOMAS FIRMIN 107

pathy as regards the central doctrine of the Uni-
personality of God. He found, however, that
Firmin held with Bidle (and with John Milton) a
doctrine of the Divine Personality curiously rigid
in its adherence to the letter of that picture speech
which is familiar to us in the older Scripture.
According to this reading of symbol, the Almighty
exists in an organized body corresponding to the
human frame. Hence there is no literal omnipres-
ence of the Divine Being, who views the world
from afar, and rules the universe by delegated
agencies, carrying out his will. This theory the
two friends discussed, both by discourse and by
letter. Firmin had an able coadjutor (Henry
Hedworth) a Bidellian like himself. Nye con-
vinced both of them that the spirituality of the
Divine Being is absolute, bringing them to confess
the actual omnipresence of the all-pervading
Spirit. There followed a total change in Firmin's
adjustment of the theological problem of Christ's
relation to God. Hitherto he had held a Trinity
which was a triad of unequals; there was the
Father, the Most High God, the only true God,
God by inherent right ; there were our Lord and
the Holy Ghost, minor Gods by delegation. Now
he embraced under Nye's tuition the doctrine of
indwelling. The Father and the Holy Spirit
became to him synonymous expressions. He
still thought it right, because Scriptural, to apply
to Christ the title of God, as the Man in whom

io8 THOMAS FIRMIN

pre-eminently the Godhead dwells, and in whom
the divinity, discoverable throughout the uni-
verse by those who have eyes to see, is exhibited
in an unmistakable manifestation.

Moulded in his ideas, as we have seen, by the
impress communicated to him by a few influential
minds (Goodwin, Bidle, Gouge, Nye), Firmin was
drawn into action by the salient events of his
time. His philanthropy first took large shape in
1665, on occasion of the trade disorganization
induced by the Great Plague. He provided em-
ployment in making up clothing, for hands
thrown out of work. It was the only one of his
enterprises by which he suffered no pecuniary
loss. Next year his premises were burned in the
Great Fire. He at once got temporary accom-
modation ; drove a great trade while others were
bemoaning their losses, and soon rebuilt.

Ten years later (1676) he gave the sole manage-
ment of his private business into the hands of his
nephew and partner, Jonathan James, and opened
premises in Little Britain for the employment of
the poor in the linen manufacture. He had 1,700
spinners, with flax dressers, weavers, etc., in pro-
portion. In the matter of actual wage, he would
never go above the current rate; but at normal
wage it took sixteen hours' work to earn sixpence.
Philip II, had long before established in Catholic
Spain the eight hours day, but it had not yet
reached Protestant England. Firmin, therefore,

THOMAS FIRMIN 109

gave all sorts of bonuses, in coal or in coin, to good
workers; and sometimes to indifferent ones. His
arrangements for the comfort and cleanliness of
his hands, and for the industrial training of
children rescued from the streets, were admirable.
The scheme never paid its way, and the annual
loss tended to increase. He invoked the aid of
the Press, in the vain hope of getting the Corpora-
tion of London to take up the matter as a civic
enterprise. In 1690 the patentees of the Linen
Company took over the scheme ; Firmin was to be
managing director at £100 a year, but he was
never paid, and soon the whole burden was again
transferred to his shoulders. Sooner than dismiss
any of his hands, he put down his coach, the
coach which conveyed him to his beloved garden
out at Hoxton. So the work went on till he died.
Similarly he started a woollen factory in
Artillery Lane ; but this description of handicraft
proved too di£&cult for his waifs and strays.
Meanwhile he was visiting prisons, on the track,
not unfrequently, of his missing hands. The
release of debtors, the amelioration of the bar-
barous conditions of prison life, the prosecution
of inhuman officials, occupied much of his time.
No call of distress from any quarter reached him
unheeded. He did not employ exclusively his
own money. He was a most admirable and per-
tinacious beggar. Likely people he would assess
at so much, say, ;fioo at a time. It was not bis

no THOMAS FIRMIl^

plan to tease them, but to watch the right
moment, when his victim was in fit humour, and
then strike home. Many thousands of pounds,
to be reckoned in hundreds rather than tens,
passed through his hands. Scarcely was there a
public work of charity whose projectors did not
look to Firmin as collector, treasurer, distributor
of the funds. According to his methodical plan,
to every donor he sent a minute account, copied
out of his books, detailing the application of each
man's bounty, with names, addresses, and
particulars . His contributors, tired of the details,
said they could trust him absolutely, and wanted
no vouchers. It is characteristic of the society of
his time that he raised little sums for relieving the
poor by insisting on the statutable fines for pro-
fane swearing. An ordinary person he charged
five shillings, according to the Act ; but if a noble-
man swore, or if a clergyman swore, he charged
a double and a treble penalty. They sometimes
kicked. "Very well," quoth Firmin, "I shall
put your name in my list of ' Incorrigible Swear-
ers,' and I shall not speak to you again." That
bled them.

A glance must suffice at a few of his more con-
spicuous beneficences, leaving untold the multi-
tude of details, and the touching narratives of
his personal kindness to individuals. In 1662
he had raised money, partly by collections
in churches, for the exiled antitrinitarians of

THOMAS FIRMIN iii

Poland. When, in 1681, the Polish Calvinists
met the same fate which they had rejoiced to see
inflicted on their heretical countrymen, Firmin
was foremost in efforts for their relief. He was a
good patriot, as regards English manufactures,
strenuously opposing the importation of French
silks. Yet when, in 1680, the Protestant refugees
came over from France, he was the first to assist
them to set up their trade in Spitalfiields, and in
his native Ipswich.

When the conservative Anglicans refused the
oaths to William of Orange, Firmin remon-
strated with one of them, Robert Frampton,
Bishop of Gloucester. " My lord," said he, "I
hope you will not be a Nonconformist now in
your old age." Frampton was nettled by the
term Nonconformist. It made him wince, as
modern Anglicans winced when Leo XIII, in his
prayer to the Virgin, called them his " dissenting
brethren . " He gruffly replied that he was getting
old, no doubt, but not old enough " to be up-
braided with Nonconformity by you, that are a
Nonconformist to all Christendom, besides a few
lousy sectaries in Poland." Firmin administered
the retort Christian by starting a fund for the
relief of the deprived Nonjurors. It was the
only one of his plans which the Government
interfered with and stopped.

His exertions for the relief of the Irish Pro-
testants, rendered destitute by the miseries of

112 THOMAS FIRMIN

the civil war of 1688-91, were acknowledged in a
manner which is probably without parallel. In
October, 1692, John Vesey, Archbishop of Tuam,
and seven other Irish bishops (one of them,
Wetenhall, a liberal in theology), sent him a letter
of thanks under their hands. They just allude
to his opinions, with some episcopal unction :
" We doubt not that you and they [the other con-
tributors] have the earnest of your reward in the
peace of your minds, which we pray God to fill
with His comforts and illuminate with His truths ;
making His grace to abound in them who have
abounded in their charity to others." An Irish
dean addressed to " this God-like man " a long
string of grateful verses, of which the sentiment
is much more melodious than the refrain. He
exclaims :

Who'll then call that faith bad, that does so well ?
Without works to believe, belongs to hell.
*****

Goodness attempers all, in man and Maker,
And may, for aught I know, e'en save a Quaker.

The occasion of Firmin's first resort to the
Press in behalf of his theological convictions, was
furnished by the arbitrary dispensations of
James II. Our friend was far too good a lover
of his country to fall in with the pretensions of a
Stuart to dispense with the constitutional safe-
guard of English freedom. Indeed, for the first
time in his life, he came out as a politician, against

THOMAS FIRMIN 113

the measures of the court, and was deprived for a
time of his governorship of Christ's Hospital in
consequence. Liberty is liberty, however fleeting
its foundation ; and when James's Declaration for
unrestricted liberty of conscience came out in
1687, Firmin saw his chance, and availed himself
of the immediate opportunity. For the first time
in English history, heretics of all kinds were pro-
mised free play. Up to this date, no anti-
trinitarian book had ever been published with
impunity; now, for the moment, the Press lay
open. Again, I think, Firmin took a hint from
Gouge. Might not the Gospel be recommended
through the Press, as well in a Unitarian garb as
in a Welsh one ? At any rate it seemed worth
while to make the experiment. Firmin resolved
upon the circulation of Unitarian literature. It
was part of his philanthropy to do so. He
thought it would be good for men. He got Nye
to write " A Brief History of the Unitarians, called
also Socinians," which, in fact, is little of a history,,
but clear and powerful as an argument. He
printed it in 1687, in a tiny octavo.

The name Unitarian, which Bidle had pro-
bably never heard, certainly had never used, and
which first appears in an obscure pamphlet of
1672, was introduced by this little book as a
generous term, of a very broad and most un-
grudging hospitality; a term of union and of
comprehension. It was recommended as a roomy

I

114 THOMAS FIRMIN

naxae. There was room in it for the votaries of
Bidle, room in it for the disciples of Nye, room in
it for the Arians, room for the Sabellians. All
these, and others (who with whatever differences,
and with whatever peculiarities, concurred in the
one great central conviction that Almighty God
is in Person, as in Nature, one and undivided)
were invited to make common cause for this para-
mount truth, and to take the Unitarian name as
the symbol of their religious fellowship. Firmin
did not expect to reconcile Christians with non-
Christians by the magic of a name. What he did
anticipate was, that by relieving Christianity of
the encroachments of Trinitarian dogma, a way
would be opened which would facilitate the
entrance of the Jew, the Muhammadan, and the
"wise heathen," into the pure faith of Christ.

In 1689 came the Toleration Act, excluding a
Nonconformist from toleration if he preached or
wrote against the Trinity. Neither Firmin nor
Nye was a Nonconformist, and though, doubtless,
there was the c6mmon law as well as the canon
law, yet till .1698 there w:as no statute, enabling
you to deal with an Anglican utterance against
the Trinity. So Nye Went on writing, anony-
inously, I grant; and Firmin went on printing,
and niade no secret of it. A graceless antagonist,
.Luke Milbourne, one -of the only two men who
vented calumnies about Firmin (Daniel Burgess
being the other), speaks of him as." the Socinians'

THOMAS FIRMIN 115

hawker to disperse their newfangled divinity."
Between 1691 and 1697 were issued, chiefly at
his expense, a uniform series of Unitarian tracts,
already filling by 1695 three squat quarto
volumes, printed closely in rather small type,
with double columns, not particularly comfort-
able to read, but worth reading, well worth
reading, to this day. Subsequent volumes in-
clude tracts, some collected, others issued, after
Firmin's death.

These " double columned tracts," as the wits
styled them, were by no means all of them ex-
pressive of Firmin's own opinions. He reprinted
in them the works of Bidle, and did not refuse
place to an Arian tract, if it were well done, and
seemed to be a valuable contribution to the
theological discussions of the time. "I don't
remember ever to have met with any person,"
writes John Toland, the Irish Deist, " who spoke
with such disinterestedness and impartiality of
our various sects in religion, except Thomas
Firmin, whose charity was as much extended to
men of different opinions as it was to the poor of
all sorts in good works."

The immunity enjoyed by these anonymous
prints was certainly remarkable, and perhaps
(though, of course, they were not licensed) there
is something in. the suggestion of William Penn,
that Firmin's dinner-table helped him to stand
well with "the licensary chaplains." WhUe

ii6 THOMAS FIRMIN

Firmin's tracts were " openly sold by the book-
sellers," there were two prosecutions for issuingr
pamphlets of similar matter and appearance >
That of William Freke (1693) was provoked by
the temerity of the pamphleteer. Freke had
posted one of his pieces to every member of both
Houses of the Legislature. Parliament voted the
tract an " infamous libel," burned it by the
hangman, and brought its author to trial and
punishment. That of John Smith (1695) was a
prosecution in the Spiritual Court, due appar-
ently to the " unusual confidence " with which
the worthy clockmaker had put his name upon
one of his tracts. When Freke and Smith wrote
for Firmin, as they both did (anonymously),
nobody touched them.

Towards the end of his life, Firmin began to
have qualms about the practical effect of con-
formity oh the part of Unitarians. He did not
doubt that it was right in principle, but it was not
working well. His working rule had been to take
the Scriptural parts of the prayers and formularies,
and interpret them as they are meant in Scripture,
however they may have been understood by
liturgical compilers. As for the non-Scriptural
parts, the worshipper must put a good construc-
tion upon them, and read them in a Unitarian or
Sabellian sense. Nye confirmed Firmin in the
persuasion that this Unitarian sense was the true
original meaning, and expressed the real mind and

THOMAS FIRMIN 117

intention of the Church, any other interpretation
being a merely vulgar misconception. Hence he
published (1697) a clever tract of Nye's com-
position, called " The Agreement of the Unit-
arians with the Catholick Church." There is no
reason to doubt the perfect sincerity of the plea
made in this tract ; and its argument is certainly
ingenious, if short of convincing. Moreover, it was
incumbent on those who reprobated Firmin's plea
for a Unitarian sense of the formularies, to tell
him what their true sense was; here his critics
were hopelessly at issue among themselves. This
struck shrewd men like Pepys, who hinted pretty
plainly that the real scandal was not Firmin's
heterodoxy, but the inability of " our own
doctors " to arrive at any accofrd in their pro-
nouncements of the Church's doctrine.

Clear as he was that his own reading of the
formularies was the just one, Firmin had come to
perceive that the continual use of phrases in
worship which, in their ordinary acceptation,
were taken to imply a plurality in the Godhead,
was, to say the least, a dangerous habit. The
ritual language of Christendom, being every-
where associated with corrupt ideas, was but too
likely to " paganize " the minds of men. He pro-
posed, therefore, to form what he termed " Unit-
arian congregations "; in a different sense, how-
ever,* from that which we now understand by the
expression. They were to be societies of Unitar-

ii8 THOMAS FIRMIN

ian believers, whose business it should be to
maintain the faith, and hold meetings for a wor-
ship couched in unambiguous forms; yet not as
separatists from the Church, but as " Fraternities
in the Church." The plan was never tried.
Firmin's death intervened. Nor was any en-
deavour to establish a distinctively Unitarian
worship permanently successful, till the secession
of Lindsey from the Establishment in 1773
induced a fresh conviction at once of Unitarian
duty and of Unitarian possibilities.

The question may arise. To what purpose this
rattling of the bones of dead men ? A valid
answer may be found in the suggestion that they
are not entirely dead. Among real and living
forces may be counted the impulse and the
vitality of their example. They shine as a glori-
ous group of men ; even to those who are by no
means blind to their limitations, or unaware of
their defects. Some things, indeed, they have
done, and well done ; others they have made more
possible to be done by their successors. They
have kft plenty of work behind them, labour of
thought, and toil of life. It may be that, in some
moments of slack resolve and self-distrust and
weakening purpose and flagging endeavour, their
memories may confront us with the steady, if
silent, plea: "Quit you like men, be strong."
It may be that the thought of forerunner^ may
make us glad to gird our loins with a closer

THOMAS FIRMIN ii^

faithfulness for our own race. It may be that,
when our course is ended, those whose images
have encouraged us, may prove the angels to wel-
come us. So may we echo the last words of
Firmin, when he took affectionate leave of his old
friend Fowler, then Bishop of Gloucester, who
" did not doubt but his works would follow him."
" I trust," said the dying man, " that God will
not condemn me to worse company in the other
world than I have loved, and delighted in,
in this."

6 October, 1896.

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

V
THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

LET us go back to the year 1719, four years
after the first of the rebellions which were
intended to replace the Stuarts in the stead of the
Hanoverians upon the throne of this country. In
the year 1719 two things happened which have
had results. One was the publication of " Robin-
son Crusoe," by Daniel Defoe. If you have read
" Robinson Crusoe," in full, you will perhaps
remember that the book contains one of the most
remarkable endeavours to present Christianity
to the heathen, with a full perception of the
difficulties which Christianity would offer to the
heathen and untaught mind; and, also, that it
contains — ^wonderful to say, in that age, and from
such a writer as Defoe, himself a strong Calvinist
in his religious views^one of the most sym-
pathetic presentations of the possibility of a
modus Vivendi in matters of religion between the
Roman Catholic and the Protestant.- It is
presented in. the person of a Roman Catholic
clergyman of the Order of St. Benedict, who
explains his own views as regards the relation of
his own Church and the Protestant Church, to the

124 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

•conversion of the heathen. Observe that Defoe's
writings were always didactic; he did not write
^' Robinson Crusoe " as a mere story of adventure ;
he meant it to point a moral, to have an ethical
value, and intended it also to have a religious
meaning.

Now while Defoe was thus preaching the value
of Christianity in itself, whatever its special form,
in contradistinction to a wild, untrained, un-
taught, savage state of mind outside the Christian
pale ; at this very time Dissenters, alike in London
and in the West of England, were accentuating
-their differences, bringing these to the front rather
than their points of agreement, and leading the
way to a rift in their body. So far they had been
included together in the body of Protestant Dis-
senters. That was their legal name, and that
was their common standing. At Salters' Hall
they came to a split. Our subject is the story of
that split, with a view to estimate, if possible, its
causes — its consequences may be left to speak for
themselves. It is a somewhat complicated story,
and some points of it may lead, perhaps, to
tedium in narration.

To begin with, let us try to set clearly before
our minds, and before our imaginations, if possible,
three prominent figures. There is James Peirce,
there is Thomas Bradbury, and there is John
Shute, afterwards John Barrington Shute, and
finally Viscount Barrington. All these three had

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 125

belonged to the same section of the Protestant
Dissenting body; they were all Independents in
the first instance. James Peirce and Thomas-
Bradbury were both of them members, in Lon-
don, of Stepney Meeting. Still to be seen are the
entries of their admissions. James Peirce was a
ward of Matthew Mead, the Minister of Stepney
Meeting; Bradbury was admitted somewhat
later. Peirce was a Londoner, and Bradbury was^
a Yorkshireman.

James Peirce was, at that time, perhaps the
most' learned of the Dissenters, on several lines.-
He had gained for himself the position of being the
champion of the Nonconformist cause against
Conformity, by his " Vindication of the Dis-
senters " in reply to William NichoUs, the cham-
pion of the Anglican position. He had been
minister at Cambridge, then at Newbury, and was-
now minister at Exeter.

Thomas Bradbury came to London from the
North, and had filled some positions there; but
in the North he had never met that recognition?
which he considered, and rightly considered, to-
be due to his remarkable talents. He was not a
man of learning; he was, however, a man of
humour, and of great popular ability. It had.
been his ambition to become the minister of the-
old Dissenting congregation in Newcastle-on-
Tyne. He had been proposed as minister of the
old congregation at Cross Street, Manchester. But

126 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

it was not until he came to London that he really
found a sphere which was consonant with his own
very just estimate of his striking abilities.

John Shute, of Hertfordshire birth, came of a
family which had connexions with Exeter, and
represented the political side of " the Dissenting
interest." He was, of course, a Whig politician;
and I am not sure that he was quite free from
some of the peculiarities which attached to the
Whig politician, both in his century, and in the
century through part of which we all have passed.
He was looked upon as the leading Parliamentary
representative of Dissent; and, in such part as
he took in the Salters' Hall matter, you must
observe that he was actuated by political con-
siderations. He desired to keep Dissenters at
one, as a political force, as a force on behalf of the
Hanoverian regime.

Now, in Peirce's " Vindication of the Dis-
senters " there is a chapter — in the original
edition, 1710 — in which he vindicates the absolute
orthodoxy of Protestant Dissenters; and says
that, whereas in the Established Church it was
well known that there were Socinians, in the
Protestant Dissenting body there were none. He
pledges himself to the fact; and no doubt he is
right, unless we except possibly some obscure
Independent and some few Baptist Congregations.
■Certainly some of the latter could not even at
that date, 1710, be regarded as strictly Trinitarian

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 127

in their orthodoxy, as we shall see later on. The
second edition of his " Vijndication " — the Original
was in Latin — ^was published in English in 1717 ;
and in the second edition; he omitted this chapter.
Why did he do So ? What had happened in the
meantime ?

A very important development had taken
place in the meantime. In the year 1712 Dr.
Samuel Clarke, who was the rector of St. James's,
Piccadilly, otherwise St. James's, Westminster,
published a work to which he gave the title, " The
Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity." Many of
those who read it said : Well, it may be Scripture,
or it may not ; it certainly is not the doctrine of
the Trinity. That book exercised an extremely
important influence. It created in the Church of
England what we might call a school of theo-
logians, who were known as " Clarkeans." They
did not admit that " they Were unorthodox.
Clarke himself was sometimes described as a
semi-Arian ; but at any rate he endeavoured, on
Scripture ground and in Scripture terms, so to
state the doctrine of the Trinity that, though it
might not agree with the ancient creeds, it should
nevertheless be seen to agree with the Word of
God. His work, while thus it created an Anglican
school, which lasted on until quite the end of the
eighteenth century, was even more operative
upon and among Dissenters. It was eagerly read
by them.- It was read. .by the young men in the

128 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

Dissenting Academies, who were going to form
the ministry of the future. It made them pause
and think. It turned their attention away from
the old. scholastic definitions of the Trinity, to the
Biblical data on which the doctrine of the Trinity
was founded. So it was that, in the intervening
period between the publication of this book in
1712, and the publication of Peirce's second
edition in 1717, it had become no longer possible
for him to say that there were, among the Pro-
testant Dissenters, no symptoms of unorthodoxy.

He might perhaps have repeated literatim what
he had actually said; because the tendency was
not to Socinianism at all. It was not to what we
call, restricting the term to its most modern
acceptation, Unitarianism. It was rather to-
wards that which is usually referred to under the
denomination of Arianism. That tendency had
exhibited itself in 1717 in London, and it had
earlier exhibited itself in Exeter. It had exhibited
itself at Exeter in an Academy there; and I
grieve to say (as there is a Baptist minister
present) that the students found that, while they
were not allowed to talk their heresies in the
Academy, they were welcomed at the house of the
Baptist minister in Exeter, and they might talk
there as much heresy as they pleased. This was
a safety valve for these young spirits.

Things in Exeter were becoming uneasy. There
was one of the students — Hubert Stogdon by

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 129

name — who, as early as 1716 was let into the
ministry on easier terms than had hitherto been
possible. He was not so much questioned about
the Shorter Catechism — then an invariable stand-
ard of Protestant Dissenting orthodoxy — as about
the Bible itself; and he managed, by confining
himself to Scripture terms, to satisfy his licensers,
and so got his licence. By the year 1718 things
had come almost to a crisis in Exeter. The Judge
of Assize, whose name was Sir Robert Price, in
charging the Jury, had referred to the spread of
crime in the city. He had said that there was
also a spirit of Arianism, and he thought there was
some connexion between the two. Moreover, in
Peirce's own pulpit a neighbouring divine, who
thought the Atonement was in danger, had
created impressions unfavourable to the ortho-
doxy of Peirce himself.

Before going further, we must try to lay before
our minds the condition of things as regards
Church government among Dissenters in Exeter.
The situation was very peculiar, and very com-
plicated. The first Dissenting congregation in
Exeter was a French Huguenot Church, and one
cannot help thinking that some French manners
and customs had influenced the special state of
affairs which prevailed in Exeter at that date. It
is well known that, in France, Presbyterianism is
so organized that, in any given city, however
many congregations there may be, there is but

K

130 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

one Church Session (consistoire). That is to say,
each congregation has not its own separate and
independent eldership, but there is a joint
.eldership for the whole city. Recent discussions
between persons of different views of theology in
Paris, have shown how this arrangement gives
to the general majority an absolute power over
every single congregation.

Well now, in Exeter there were three meeting-
houses, called Presbyterian — due stress is in-
tended upon the word " called." Two of these
had congregations duly organized, with two
pastors apiece. In each of these two meeting-
houses the two pastors preached alternately ; one
in the morning, the other in the evening. The
four took in rotation the preaching iir the third
meeting-house, which had no pastor of its own-
Then there was a self-elected body of thirteen.
They are always called " the Thirteen," though
in the lists of them I have never seen more than
twelve names. The Thirteen acted very much as
a finance committee. They had control of the
financial administration; they collected stipends
from all three meeting-houses, and apportioned
them amongst the four ministers. They assumed,
too, some of the powers which ordinarily belonged
to the Eldership or Church Session. Then there
were three smaller bodies, known as Proprietors,
who owned the buildings; four Proprietors for
each. They seem to have been more than

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 131

trustees; they are always spoken of as Pro-
prietors; and it may be true that the buildings
were, as used not infrequently to be the case in
the older history of Dissent, proprietary chapels,
not put in trust at all (partly for fear of the inse-
curity of Toleration) but belonging to certain
persons who might devote them to such purposes
.as they pleased.

Further, the four ministers were members of
what was known as the Exeter Assembly. It was
in point of fact a Devon and Cornwall Assembly,
but the Cornish element at this time was no more
than a minimum. This Assembly was not a
Presbyterian body, it was a council of ministers
which contained Presbyterians and Independents ;
the only section of the Three Denominations
which was absolutely non-represented, and practi-
cally excluded, was the Baptist section. Baptist
principles were not in high favour in that part
of the world at that time ; indeed, they were not
in high favour in Dissenting circles generally at
that time . This clerical body had no j urisdiction ;
but this it could do. If any member were dis-
pleasing to the majority of the members, on any
matter, it could say, " You had better not come
here any more." It certainly did administer cer-
tain funds ; but at that date this was a very minor
matter. There were larger funds then adminis-
tered by the Thirteen, than were administered by
the Assembly.

132 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

In 1718, early in the year, a deputation of the
Thirteen called upon Peirce and his colleagues, and
asked them to preach on the Eternity of the Son
of God. They did so; and the result was satis-
factory. Later on in the same year, though
Peirce's preaching was satisfactory at the time to-
his own people, the Assembly of Ministers wanted
— I do not know whether it was satisfaction from
Peirce — but at any rate they did want a more
general satisfaction on this subject of the Trinity.
Therefore, in the Assembly, in the month of
September, it was proposed by one of the Exeter
ministers, the youngest of them, John Lavington
by name, who was supposed to be the most
orthodox of the four, that each member of this
Assembly should then and there make a declara-
tion in regard to his views respecting the Trinity.
They all did this except three : and Peirce was not
one of the three, nor was any other Exeter min-
ister. All the declarations but one — that of John
Parr — were accepted; then Lavington moved
that it be recorded, as " the general sense " of the
Assembly, " that there is but one' living and true
God, and that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are
the one God." This was accepted,, as " the
general sense " of the Assembly.

The fact that the matter had been canvassed
in the Assembly, and that the declarations had
very considerably varied — Parr had merely'
quoted a Scripture text without comment —

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 133

xe-excited the suspicion of the Thirteen. Lav-
ington, they knew, was all right; so. they did riot
go to him. They went to the other three minis-
tersj and said, " We are not satisfied with a
' general sense,' we want to know what your
sense is." Not getting what they wanted, the
Thirteen wrote up to London, addressing them-
selves to five ministers, including the four lecturers
at Salters' Hall. To be a lecturer in London was,
among Dissenters, something like beiiag an Arch-
deacon, or a Dean, or it might almost be a Bishop,
in the Anglican communion. There were two of
these lectureships. The Merchants' Lecture had
been started as far back as 1672, and there was a
split from it at Salters' Hall. The feeling was
that the general tone of the Merchants' Lecture
was in favour of Independency, whereas the
general tone of the Salters' Hall lecture was in
favour of the Presbyterian form of government.
So the Thirteen sent to the Salters' Hall lecturers,
among whom was Calamy, who had visited Exeter,
and was probably then the most distinguished
Nonconformist in London. These five London
ministers, thus appealed to, put their heads
together and decided not to touch the Exeter
bother. They said, " You had better apply to
ministers in your own neighbourhood, who know
your own particular circumstances better than we
can be expected to do." The Thirteen took the
advice. They picked out seven West of England

134 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

divines, and sent to ask them what was the proper
thing to do in the situation above described. They
got an answer from these seven divines on the
4th of March, and the answer deserves to be
remembered. It was to the effect that denial of
the " true and proper divinity " of Christ is a
disqualifying error, and therefore warrants con-
gregations in withdrawing from their ministers.
That was their position ; they did not go further.
This was on the 4th of March. On the next
day the Thirteen, armed with this opinion,
approached the four ministers. Lavington satis-
fied them at once. John Withers, the senior
minister, after some hesitation, said he would
subscribe the Nicene Creed. John Hallett, the
next in seniority, declined to give an answer.
Peirce parried the question. The matter of the
elements and conditions of Dissenting orthodoxy,
he told them, was now under coiisideration in
London; and therefore he did not wish to give
any answer in this individual case until it was
known what the general body, meeting at Salters'
Hall, had to say about the matter at large. The
Thirteen were not satisfied. " Salters' Hall ! "
said they, " why, we understand that into that
conference Baptists are admitted. We are not
going to listen to the advice or decision of any
body of ministers including Baptists." Peirce by
this time had got his back up, and he said he
would not subscribe or make answer to anything

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 135

that was hot in Scripture. " If you ask me whet-
her three and two make five," said he, " I will
give you no answer, because it is not in the
Bible " — a rather foolish utterance, but that was
the ground on which he took his stand. Next day
the four Proprietors of James's Meeting stepped
in and shut him out of his pulpit, and Hallett
with him. They were allowed on the following
Sunday to preach at the third, the Little Meeting,
by the Proprietors thereof; but on the loth of
March the three groups of Proprietors had a
meeting together, and, "without consulting the
people," refused to allow either of the recalcitrant
divines to preach again in any of the three
meeting-houses. Accordingly on the 15th of
March they started a new (Mint) meeting-house of
their own; and that was the Exeter split.

Meanwhile many things had been going on in
London, as Peirce was very well aware. The
real man who, as early as January, had appealed
to a general conference in London, was undoubt-
edly Peirce himself. He was in close relations
with Barrington Shute. Peirce had been in the
habit of going up to London periodically for
literary purposes. Barrington Shute and he were
friends, and worked together both in politics and
religion; though, in religion, Shute ultimately
went a good deal further than Peirce ever did.
As regards Peirce, I should say that he was
one of those men who, orthodox to a fault, or

136 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

obstinate to a fault, as you like to put it, are so
determined to be punctiliously exact that, in
point of fact, they satisfy nobody. He was well
able to draw extremely fine distinctions; but in
his own mind he was from first to last unquestion-
ably a man who kept tight and firm to the rigid
limits of nicely formulated and precisely definite
doctrine. He was not an emotional man; al-
though they say that, in his prayers, he exhibited
a fervour which rarely came out in his preaching.

Shute was a member of Bradbury's congre-
gation. It is unfortunately true, and not of
Dissent alone, that the big man and the minister
do not always get on as they should do. It turned
out that, in the Salters' Hall dispute, Bradbury
was the visible head of one side, and Barrington
Shute the invisible head of the other. Shute was
anxious to secure the repeal of the Schism Act,
passed under Queen Anne, and designed to pro-
duce the collapse of Dissent by shutting up all the
Dissenting Schools and Academies. The inten-
tion, presumably, had been to follow it by an Act
which should also shut their meeting-houses ; and
in some places the prospective legislation was
actively anticipated. In Ireland, particularly,
persons full of faith and — ^no, not the other
qualification — had gone about nailing up Dis-
senting meeting-houses.

Shute was anxious about the repeal of this
unworthy Act. He wanted its unconditional

THE STORY OF SALTERS" HALL 137

repeal, like the good Independent that he then
was ; whereas there was a party among the Pres-
byterian members of the House of Commons,
against repealing it without a test in regard to the
Trinity. Shute defeated their amendment, and
in order to facilitate the repeal, he was extremely
anxious that there should be no appearance of any
rift, doctrinal or otherwise, among the forces of
Dissent. He therefore called together a body of
laymen, who were in the habit of meeting as a
committee to protect the civil rights of Dis-
senters. He put the matter before them. It was
essential, in his view, that ministers whose
opinions would carry weight, should be got to
issue a joint manifesto, calculated to compose the
Exeter difference.

The draft of such a manifesto, under the name
of Advices for Peace, was drawn up by him, and
passed by the select committee of laymen. These
laymen were in fact the cream of the Dissenting
magnates in London, including several members
of Parliament. The Advices, if we strip them of
their setting — the opening, exhortations, details
of procedure, and so forth — really consisted in the
statement of two points of principle. The First
was this: There are doctrinal errors which
warrant congregations in withdrawing from their
ministers. Of course, we know what that
meant. It meant stopping the supplies; and
therefore, the ministers must go. The position

138: THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

of the minister was saved, by putting it the other
way' and allowing the congregation to go. The
Second was this: The people are to determine
what these errors are. These were the two
points of principle.

How would it have been if these two principles,
had been adopted and applied at Exeter ? The
people there had no opportunity of expressing,
their voice in the matter, in any constitutional
way. It was the Thirteen first, and the Pro-
prietors next, who had acted on their own respons-
ibility. The congregations, as such, had never
been consulted. No one can say that the main
result would have been entirely different. Yet it
is certain that Hallett and Peirce carried away
with them, from the three meeting-houses, enough
people to fill a fourth. Had therefore the Advices,
been tendered in time to be put into action at
Exeter, it is quite possible that there might have
been a different issue. The people when called
upon, might have said : " No, we are not prepared
to withdraw either from Hallett or from Peirce."'

The next step in Shute's programme was to get
the Advices accepted by the most representative
and influential body of ministers that could be
got together. For this purpose the Baptists were
convened to Salters' Hall, as well as the Presby-
terians, so called, and the Independents; both
those in London and those in the neighbourhood
of London, were convened; and we may fairly

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 139

say that the total number of those who attended
was one hundred and ten.

Reference was made above to " Presbyterians
so called " — and why ? As soon as the Toleration
Act was passed, when the year 1689/90 was young,
there was raised in London a common Fund for
Protestant Dissenters, who with the exclusion of
Baptists, and of course Quakers, at that time
formed a common body. Their ministers called
themselves United Brethren. They formally
agreed to drop the dividing names, Presbyterian
and Congregational, and, if they called themselves
anything, simply to call themselves United
Brethren. This was a ministerial compact, and
nothing more ; and ministerial compacts are not
always carried out or backed up by congre-
gations. The Union in London was followed else-
where. In London it soon came to a rupture;
elsewhere it was taken up when London dropped
it, and it managed to endure for a very long period.
In London it came to a rupture owing to the
suspicions of the section formerly known as Pres-
byterians, in regard to Independent doctrine.
The Independents were more free in doctrinal
matters than the Presbyterians, or, to put it in
another way, they went to further extremes. You
could find at that time, among the Independents,
men whose orthodoxy was suspected. You
could find also men whose Calvinistic orthodoxy
was so high that it was spoken of as Antinomian.

T40 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

It was this last manifestation which had excited
the suspicions of those who had formerly been
counted as Presbyterians. They were very
-anxious to sharpen their controversial swords
against the rise of what they deemed to be .
Antinomianism. Daniel Williams was put out of
his lectureship by the Merchants because he
had attacked Independents, on the ground of
their alleged leaning to Antinomianism. Richard
Baxter was living at the time when the fray
began, and he had been eager to do what Williams
■did; but John Howe kept him from publishing.
Williams was a younger man, and a Welshman
at that ; and Williams was not to be kept down.
The end was that Williams was put out of the
lectureship. The common Fund ceased to be the
common Fund. The Congregationalists raised
{Dec. 1695) a separate Fund of their own; and
from that time the old Fund, originally a Fund
for both forms of Protestant Dissent, came to be
■called the Presbyterian Fund, though it was not
fully recognized officially as such till 1784. This
rupture in London exhibited itself mainly in
ecclesiastical matters. When it was a question
■oi pleading before Kings, in the general interests
■of Dissent, the two sections came together. Pro-
bably that was why the Baptists were at length
brought in, to go with them on deputations to the
throne. For sometimes, when you quarrel with
an old friend, you find it eases your feelings to

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 141

have a third party in, at the subsequent meeting.
So it happened, at any rate, that the Baptists
found themselves in what was to them the un-
usual position of being recognized as part and
parcel of London Protestant Dissent. The Dis-
senters would even take their addresses to their
Sovereign with a Baptist at their head, perhaps-
as a compromise. " Better have a Baptist than
a Presbyterian," some might say. " Anything
is better than an Independent," some might
rejoin.

The inclusion of the Baptists in the Salters' Hall'
conference was important. In the year 1700,
an event occurred which is very often forgotten.-
It is sometimes forgotten by Baptists, as well as by
those who are not Baptists. The General Baptist
Assembly passed, in that year, the very first
formal resolution of tolerance for heterodox-
opinions on the subject of the Trinity, that was
ever passed by any Nonconformist union of con-
gregations, in other words, by any co-operating
religious body in this country. That was in the
case of Matthew Caffyn. The General Baptist
Assembly did not endorse Caffyn's views, but
they tolerated them. They tolerated the man,
opinions and all (and some of his opinions were-
queer enough) because he was a good, sound,
and Christian man, who was doing good, sound
Christian work. Consequently, there was among
the Baptists a habit of tolerance, of some standings-

142 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

which would incline them to go for conciliation,
looking, perhaps, rather more at character and
■conduct, than at peculiarities of opinion, when
giving advice as to what congregations had better
do when ministers were suspected of heresy.

This threefold body came together, then, at
Salters' Hall, and first met the very day following
that on which the royal assent had ratified the
repeal of the Schism Act. It was thus repealed
on the i8th February, 1719, and they met on the
19th. Bradbury was at once to the front. He
knew about the Advices, and he did not quite like
the look of them. He therefore proposed that,
instead of sending any Advices to Exeter, the
ministers should pause, and fast, and pray, and
■then go to Exeter by deputation, and try to settle
matters on the spot. This proposition was not
well received. Whether the suggestion of fasting
was not satisfactory, we cannot say; whether it
was thought the selecting of a deputation would
be an invidious procedure, we are not told At
.any rate Bradbury was defeated, and the Advices
were discussed. Though, as above said, there
were but two fundamental propositions embodied
in these Advices, there was of course a good deal
•of subsidiary matter, tending to smooth their
way, and the document was discussed clause by
clause.

Bradbury saw clearly that the Advices were
^oing to be carried. Consequently at the next

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 143

meeting, which was on the 24th February, he
proposed that to them should be prefixed a pre-
amble. This, preamble was to set forth the
doctrine of the Trinity, and Bradbury drew up a
formulary with this view. Now it is rather
singular that, when Bradbury was ordained, he
made his confession, which was strongly Cal-
yinistic, and strongly Trinitarian, in words of
Scripture only. The confession is in print, and is
a very remarkable effort. He managed — and for
the most part legitimately, from his point of view
— ^by the aid of Scripture terms alone, to construct
a very strongly Trinitarian and very strongly
Caivinistic confession of faith. Now in drafting
the preamble he departed from this former usage
of his; the defining terms were taken from the
Shorter Catechism; and why ? Clearly because
now the question was how best to satisfy out-
siders; and outsiders would say, "Oh! Bible,
yes; but everybody takes the Bible in his own
sense. We want something which is pat and
plain, the language of which is indisputable."

On the production of this preamble came the
first, and in point of fact the most memorable
division; the division which has been described,
and indeed satirized, by Sir Joseph Jekyll, who
was present as a spectator on the occasion, when
he said, " The Bible has it by four." Those who
were against the preamble were asked to go up
into the gallery, while the others remained on the

144 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

floor of the house — the old way of making a
division. Fifty-seven went up into the gallery
to divide against Thomas Bradbury. Fifty-three
remained on the floor with him. Consequently
his preamble was lost by four votes. A good
many stories are told about the amenities of the
occasion. When some of the (let us hope,
younger) divines, as they went up to the gallery,
hissed Thomas Bradbury while he sat in his seat,
he replied, " The seed of the serpent ! " Very
apt at retort was Tom Bradbury. When the
Dissenting clergy went to their German King in
their black cloaks, " Pray, gentlemen," sneered
a courtier, " is this a funeral ? " " Ay, my lord,"
replied brave Tom, " 'tis the funeral of the
Schism Act, and soon you will see the resurrection
of Liberty." However on this occasion, in re-
gard to the preamble, he was beaten; and then
they adjourned.

In the meantime both parties sent out whips.
These do not seem to have had much effect ; for
the numbers were pretty much the same in the
next division as in the first, though both sides
tried to increase their strength. Nothing would
induce Calamy to attend the conference. Watts
also stayed away, and so did some other men of
mark. On Bradbury's side, four Presbyterian
divines whipped up their men in defence of the
doctrine of the Trinity, which was thought to be
at stake; and others whipped up their men on

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 145

behalf of the liberty of private expression. Both
parties took the line of saving the Dissenting
interest from division. The underlying interest,
with the leaders, was politics on one side and
orthodoxy, or presumed orthodoxy, on the other.
When they met again, Bradbury proposed that
the preamble be put once more; the Moderator
ruled this out of order. Then he proposed that
they should do as the Exeter ministers had done
^-call upon each minister present to make his own
declaration. The Moderator, Joshua Oldfield,
ruled this out of order also. Then Bradbury said
he would call upon all those who were of his mind
to follow him up into the gallery, and then and
there subscribe the Anglican article in reference
to the Trinity, and two answers of the Shorter
Catechism. Sixty are said to have gone up with
him,, while fifty remained below. Among the
sixty, there were no General Baptists, but of the
Particular Baptists more favoured Bradbury than
went against him.

While Bradbury, you observe, thus got a
majority to subscribe the recognized formularies,
this majority, you also observe, was quite out of
order. Going up into the gallery was, in the cir-
cumstances, much the same as going out of the
house. The Moderator had ruled that no business
could be taken except what we may call the com-
mittee stage of the Advices, which were now under
discussion. Out of the house, when the sub-

146 THE StORY OF SALTERS' HALL

scription was accomplished, Bradbury went with
his sixty ; they betook themselves to another hall,
elected a Presbyterian as their moderator, con-
tinued their meetings, and adopted the two
principles governing the Advices, just as the
others had passed them; varying, it is true, the
mode in which these principles were to be carried
into effect, and taking care to prefix Bradbury's
preamble.

So far, we may say that those who remained
behind, and had refused to subscribe in the gallery,
were taking a consistent position. When it came
to the finish, and they were to send their Advices
to Exeter, what did they do ? They had declined
individually to make their declaration of belief in
the Trinity. They had declined to approve the
preamble setting forth their belief in the Trinity.
They had not gone up to subscribe. Yet now
they drew up a letter to be signed and sent by
their Moderator, in the name of all present, in
which they declared their adhesion to the doctrine
of the Trinity. More than that, in this letter they
departed further from Scriptural terms than the
rejected preamble had done. In addition, they
expressly denounced Arianism. Finally, they
added that nevertheless they were not prepared
to quarrel with anyone, supposing that he held
the true doctrine, if he were not prepared to adopt
their terms, or even if he preferred to limit him-
self to Scripture terms only. Thus both parties,

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 147

it is important to notice, put themselves before
the world as genuine Trinitarians; and both par-
ties absolutely agreed on the cardinal principles of
the Advices which they sent to Exeter.

Obviously, the Advices came to Exeter too late
to be of any effect whatever. They first reached
Exeter as forwarded by the non-subscribers on
the 17th of March; the meeting-houses having
been closed on the loth of March against Hallett
and Peirce, who set up their separate tabernacle
on the 15th. The Advices were not dispatched
by the subscribers until the 7th of April. The
subscribers were, however, the only Advisers to
whom any attention was paid in Exeter. The
Thirteen wrote (nth April) stating that, having
got nothing from London in reply to their own
application but a put-off, they had hardly ex-
pected to hear further ; and having already taken
their own action, there was no more to be said.

Now there is one thing which it is well to under-
stand as clearly as possible. It must be pretty
■obvious to anyone following the course of things,
that this Salters' Hall split was not a split between
Independents and Presbyterians. The most pro-
minent men on both sides were, or had been,
Independents. The political mover was an Inde-
pendent, the orthodox mover was an Independ-
ent. If Peirce himself had ceased to be a genuinfe
Independent, he certainly had never become a
Presbyterian in any sense of the word known

148 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

before his time. Personally, he declined the
name, and called himself merely a Christian. He
hg,d got out of Independency and on towards
Presbyterianism to a certain extent. It is a
curious point which he had reached. He pub-
lished a couple of sermons on Ordination. In the
one published later of the two, he gave his own
idea as to what a regular Ordination was. He
claimed it as the privilege of ministers to make
ministers; the people cannot make them. How
they were originally made he does not say, for he
does not expressly claim Apostolic continuity for
the Dissenting clergy. Ministers, and they only^
have the power of licensing a man to preach.
When the ministers have done this, the congre-
gations may take their choice among those whom
the ministers present to them. If they select one,
again it is the ministers, and they only, who are
to say whether they will or will not ordain him
as pastor. That is as far as he got in a Presby-
terian direction; but anyone who knows any-
thing about Presbyterianism, knows that this is-
not Presbyterianism at all. The Presbyteriaa
polity is not a clerical aristocracy of this kind, but
an organized democracy, in which laymen sit side
by side with clergy in every court.

The split, then, was not one in which the Pres-
byterians, as such, took one side, and the Inde-
pendents the other. Both bodies were divided.
Doubtless among the Independents there were

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 149

more in number who went with Bradbury than
went against him; but, if you pass from number
to quality, among the Independents who went
against Bradbury, there were Hunt, and Lowman,
and Jennings ; and Lardner, the best acquainted
with early Christian history of any man in his
century; to say nothing of Watts, and Daniel
Neal, the Nonconformist historian, who kept aloof
from both parties. On the other hand, among the
Presbyterians, the old stagers were mostly with
Bradbury, and actively with him, as we have seen.
Seven out of the twelve Presbyterian trustees of
Dr. Williams' foundations who voted at Salters'
Hall, were subscribers with Bradbury. The
younger Presbyterians, no doubt, did make up
the majorities against Bradbury; though even
here, there were exceptions. Daniel WilcoX,
Bradbury's henchman at the conference, was a
Presbyterian.

What became of the younger non-subscribing
Presbyterians ? A considerable number of them
did not remain in the Dissenting interest at all,
but shortly after conformed. One sees instances
of the same proclivity, or something like it, at the
present day. A man may say in effect : " I am
not going to pledge myself to this opinion or that
— ^but I will sign, the Anglican articles ; because
that does not pledge anybody to anything, beyond
keeping the peace of the Church." That seems
to have been something like the position which

150 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

some of these younger Presbyterian divines took.
They were pressed into conformity by Hoadly,
the great Whig Bishop, who let men in on easy
terms of examination, satisfied with their mo-
mentary use of the goose-quill.

Again, it is clear that the split was by no means
a decisive rupture between Trinitarianism and
Unitarianism. Both parties stoutly and staunch-
ly affirmed that, ta the best of their knowledge
and belief, they held as clearly as they could the
doctrine of the Trinity. What then was it on
which the division really turned ? It was a con-
flict precipitating a, cleavage between the spirit
of uniformity, and the spirit of liberty. We may
fairly claim that the Salters' Hall rift worked out
— perhaps not altogether well — but worked out
so as to sever two tendencies, and let each do its
best in making English history. Pass a few
decades, reach the middle of the eighteenth
century, and from that point, no doubt, those who
were for doctrinal uniformity got the name of
Independents, and those who were not for uni-
formity, but for tolerance and liberty, got the
name of Presbyterians. If you ask why this
distinctive nomenclature, the answer must be
that in this, as in sundry other cases, there was
a close connexion between ecclesiasticism and
finance. The old Fund, the Fund instituted for
Dissenters in common, came, as we have seen, to
be called the Presbyterian Fund. Thus the Press-

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 151

byterian name attached itself to that position
which, in theory at any rate, was of broader scope.

Yet the important thing to remember is that,
whatever distinguishing name they then bore or
afterwards acquired, both parties registered them-
selves at Salters' Hall as Independents, pure and
simple. The Advices, to which all agreed, em-
body a charter of Independency in its most un-
restricted form. Of doctrinal truth and error,
the people are to be judges. Each congregation
is to say whether in their judgment the doctrine
preached from the pulpit is, or is not, right and
good. This judgment is to be subject to no
exterior jurisdiction whatever. There is to be no
constitutional appeal to any deliberative body
outside. Each congregation is to be responsible
to itself, under its Divine Head, for its own ortho-
doxy, or non-orthodoxy, as other men may choose
to deem it.

For the moment, as it proved, these Advices
made strongly for the Trinitarian cause. Con-
gregations in the West of England followed the
example of the Thirteen at Exeter, stranding all
rninisters whose orthodoxy was questioned. This
was the effect at first; but of course when the
tiffle came for Unitarian notions, be they true or
be,; they false, to gain ground in congregations,
these congregations were authorized to take pre-
cisely the same action that had been taken by
Trinitarians before them. They found their

152 THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL

warrant in the Salters' Hall Advices, and made
appeal to them as the charter of their liberties.
So that, in a very real sense, the Salters' Hall rift
issued in what proved to be an all-round charter
of the liberties of congregations, whether Unitar-
ian or Trinitarian.

It must, in estimating the full result of the
break at Salters' Hall, be added that the general
prosperity of Dissent from that time began very
considerably to decline. Its unanimity was lost.
People became suspicious of each other. In in-
dividual congregations a critical spirit was en-
gendered. In the clerical unions — the only
pledged tokens of the corporate unity of Dissent
— the old bonds of common association were
relaxed. Old men looked anxiously at the
future, as did Calamy. Young men, unless they
had the enthusiasm of a Doddridge, began by
writing tracts lamenting the decay of Dissent, and
ended by slipping into the Establishment. We
know what caused the revival of Dissent; but
that is neither here nor there. We must remem-
ber that every gain in this world iiavolves a loss,
and in the order of Providence gain is compensa-
tion for loss.

Barrington Shute saw clearly that, as a political
iorce, Dissent was no longer what it had been.
The Viscount Barrington, of 1720, soon slackened
in his hopes of the political future of the Dissent-
ing interest; and in -religion left Bradbury for

THE STORY OF SALTERS' HALL 153

Hunt, and Hunt for parish Church; still, as
"" Papinian," corresponding with Lardner on the
latest developments of theological criticism.
Many others saw that, as a religious force. Dissent
"was no longer what it once was, and what it had
been hoped it might continue to be, in increasing
measure — a spiritual power, battling with united
■strength against the common enemies of all
morals and all religion. This, its true mission,
was for a time impeded ; this, its best work, was
for a time delayed. Not for naught. The re-
larding check was the condition of the assimilation
•of a permanent boon. The rift at Salters' Hall
will be for ever memorable; for then and there
the future of the liberties of English Dissent was
at high cost secured.

31 October, 1902.

PETER BAYLE

OF THE

DICTIONARY

Pierre Bayle. — Born, 1647; Professor of
Philosophy at Sedan, 1675-81, and at Rotterdam,
1682-93; Author of Dictionnaire Historique et
Critique, 1696-7; Died, 1706.

VI
PETEli BAYLE OF THE DICTIONAKY

IT is too probable that for centennials, bi-
centennials, tercentennials, and quatercen-
tennials we have by this time not much appetite
left. The present offer to attempt another resur-
rection of this kind may be received with a yawn,.
or even with the ejaculatory interruption ascribed
to the Scottish bailie, who, at a public ceremony,
when the length of the dedicatory prayer had
proved visibly trying to the patience and to the
nerves of her late Majesty, twitched the official
robe of the Moderator of the General Assembly,
and muttered the hoarse whisper, " Dash it, man t
Can ye not hand your gab ? " Still, an impulse of
gratitude is upon me, urging me to call forth
before your imaginations, if I can, the figure,
remarkable and even picturesque, of one who first
saw this world's daylight in 1647, and passed into>
the light beyond in 1706.

It has not, I think, ieen observed in any of our
public prints or literary organs that the bi-

158 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

centennial of the death of Peter Bayle falls in the
last month of this year (1906). Alexander Chal-
mers, in his General Biographical Dictionary, which,
published as long ago as 1812-17, is still the only
English work of the kind on the same generous and
inclusive scale, opens his account of Bayle with the
description of him as " a French writer who once
made a great figure in the literary world." The
Abb6 Glaire, whose Dictionnaire Universelle des
Sciences Ecclesiasiiques (1868) is as terse, compre-
hensive, and irnpartial as any I know, begins his
article on Bayle by affirming that " he made him-
self celebrated particularly by the deplorable
scepticism which led him into incredulity." With
more appreciation of the true basis of his renown,
the tenth edition of the Encyclopcedia Britannica
introduces him as " author of the famous Histori-
cal and Critical Dictionary."

Certainly it is as the greatest, and perhaps the
wickedest, of dictionary makers that Bayle is
remembered and known, where he is remembered
and known at all. In fact, when you speak of
Bayle, it is the book you mean, not the man.
This was in the mind of the^ law student, after-
wards a distinguished judge, who, lamenting his
lack of books, exclaimed " I wish some damned
fool would give me a Bayle."

My possession of a Bayle is due to the munific-
ence of the Trustees of the Hibbert Fund. A
worthy divine, on withdrawing from the ministry

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 159

to agricultural pursuits in a remote locality,
reduced his library to little other than a collection
of dictionaries. He more than once asserted in
my hearing that experience had amply vindicated
the wisdom of his preference. Accordingly, when
my Hibbert Fellowship was followed at an inter-
val by a grant of books, I went in largely for
•dictionaries, and Bayle headed the list. Nor have
I repented of my choice, for though one of them
has lost value, and one been quite superseded,
Bayle in his way is perennial. We shall see that
Bayle the book was the alter ego of Bayle the man.
Peter, the second of three sons of John Bayle,
a stiff and stern Huguenot divine, was born on
November i8th, 1647, at Carlat, a little place in
the South of France, within the domain of the
Counts of Foix, and in the diocese of Rieux. Till
his nineteenth year he was educated by his father,
who then sent him to a Protestant Academy at
Puylaurens. His studies there were seriously
interrupted by successive illnesses, due to over-
application. Dissatisfied with his opportunities
at this academy — where, however, . he acquired
his lifelong predilection for Plutarch and for
Montaigne — he betook himself, when just twenty-
two, to the University of Toulouse, going for his
philosophy to the Jesuits' College. In this, says
his biographer (Des Maizeaux), there was nothing
remarkable. Not infrequently did the Protest-
ants of France send their sons to receive the

i6o PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

benefit of the excellent instruction provided by
the Jesuits, though to do so was prohibited by
their Synodical regulations.

Now, it seems that at Puylaurens young Bayle
had dipped into books of Catholic controversy,
had held talks with the Catholic cure, and been
shaken in his hereditary faith. At Toulouse a
priest was his fellow lodger. Bayle became his
convert within a month. This shows him to have
been of an easily sympathetic nature. The exact
line of his divergence from Calvinistic orthodoxy
is not clear. It may be inferred from a letter in
which he endeavoured to convert his elder br jther,
now his father's colleague, that the modernity and
schism of Protestantism, with its innovations of
doctrine, had made a strong impression upon him.
Being a young man of parts and promise, his
conversion was regarded as a catch. The Bishop
of Rieux, who belonged to one of the great
families of Toulouse, became his patron, under-
taking the cost and direction of his studies. His
family intervened. A cousin, repairing to Tou-
louse, took rooms in the same lodging, and the
cousin's influence proved stronger than that of the
priest. The advantage was followed up by an
able friend of his father; and, when the elder
brother arrived on the scene, the convert was
ready to avow, with tears, that reason and
Scripture were adverse to the claims of Rome, the
innovator. Bayle's Catholicism, in short, had

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY i6r

melted away after no more than seventeen
months' trial. He specifies the cultus of Saints
and the dogma of Transubstantiation as the deter-
mining factors of his return.

Slipping quietly out of Toulouse, Bayle made
his formal recantation, before his brother and
three other Huguenot divines, at a country house
on the way from Toulouse to Carlat. He was at
once packed off to Geneva. Introduced at its
University to the system of Des Cartes, he
abandoned in its favour the Aristotelian philo-
sophy which he had learned from the Jesuits. For
several years he acted as tutor in families of dis-
tinction, thus gaining some few of the advantages
of travel. In particular he was able to make a
stay in Paris, where the fine libraries, and the
facilities for learned intercourse, made him some
amends for the ill paid drudgery of the despised
position of a tutor.

It was now that, through the good offices of
his friend Basnage, he was invited to compete
for a chair of philosophy in the Protestant
Academy at Sedan, at the head of which was
Peter Jurieu (1637-1713), a famous theologian in
his day. For a time he held back, alleging that
his philosophy had got rusty ; he had been obliged
to forsake Des Cartes for Homer and Virgil; he
had even forgotten his logic. The secret of his
reluctance was this. At present, no one in that
part of the world suspected that he had flirted

M

i62 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

with Catholicism; should he take a public posi-
tion, the decree against the Relapsed might be
put in force to his injury and that of Sedan.
Jurieu, who was anxious to have him, and knew
nothing of the relapse, wormed this secret out of
Basnage, and decided that, as nobody else knew
about it, there would be no risk. Hastening then
to Sedan, Bayle triumphed in disputation over
three local competitors, and was appointed pro-
fessor in 1675, being then just under twenty-nine
years of age.

The striking ability with which he fulfilled the
duties of his chair, the charm of his personal
qualities, and the blameless excellence of his
private life won him favour with all. We can
hardly recognize in the Bayle of Sedan, noted for
his sweetness, his modesty, and his straight-
forwardness, the impious sceptic of his later
reputation. Jurieu himself, who had fine capa-
cities, though adding an irritable temperament
and a turbulent disposition to a dogged and con-
tentious orthodoxy, wrote of Bayle, even after
their bitter estrangement, that the beauty of his
genius and the nobility of his principles had
attached him to the young professor with a
warmer regard than he had felt for anyone else.

In July of 1681 the Sedan Academy was sud-
denly suppressed by Louis XIV. Bayle, how-
ever, was not long without similar employment.
At Sedan he had entertained, as boarder and

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 163

pupil, young Van Zoelen, a near relative of the
burgomaster of Rotterdam of that name. Van
Zoelen had interest enough with his friends to
procure for Bayle an invitation to Rotterdam.
Simultaneously, efforts were being made to bring
him over to the Catholic Church, in utter ignor-
ance of his previous conversion and lapse.
Naturally Bayle preferred Rotterdam, though
unseen, to Rome whose acquaintance through its
emissaries he had already made. He stipulated,
however, that a post should be made for Jurieu as
well; and managed to smooth over some diffi-
culties created by the demeanour of Jurieu, whose
temper had not been improved by the mortifica-
tion consequent on the suppression of his
Academy. The civic authorities of Rotterdam
established them, in December, 1681, as pro-
fessors of philosophy and theology respectively;
but the popularity of Bayle as philosopher was
greater than that of Jurieu as theologian. Hence
the beginning of a rankling jealousy, which
ripened into a persistent antagonism.

To Rotterdam, Bayle had brought with him a
manuscript of which he had vainly sought to
procure the printing in Paris. In December of
1680 the superstitious fears of men had been
aroused by the apparition of a great comet.
Halley viewed it in Paris ; but it was not what is
known as Halley's Comet, made familiar to many
of us who are not astronomers by Dr. Martineau's

i64 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

noble sermoiij " Views of the World from Halley's
Comet " — this was the comet of 1682, and the
sermon is reprinted in a volume of Martineau's
" Essays."

Bayle was beset by anxious inquirers, who
insisted on regarding the 1680 comet as a super-
natural phenomenon, a presage of coming woe,.
a warning to return to religion. Early in 1681
he embodied his own views on the matter in a
Letter, which grew to a treatise. No Paris
printer would touch it. At Rotterdam he found,,
in 1682, a printer who was willing to print but
not to own it. It was still entitled " A Letter,""
addressed to a doctor of the Sorbonne; it was
anonymous; it was written as from a Catholic;
it professed on the title-page to be printed at
Cologne. Very soon it became known that Bayle
was the author, and the treatise was loudly-
applauded. Ultimately — but not till after the
quarrel with Jurieu, who at first joined the
applause — it led to charges of pernicious teaching,
amounting even to secret Atheism. It became
the cause, at any rate the nominal cause, of Bayle 's
subsequent dismissal from his chair.

Let us see what ground there was for the
accusation. Bayle maintained that a comet was-
a purely natural phenomenon, and urged that no-
merely natural effect could possibly be the
presage of a contingent event. Assuming it,
however, to be supernatural, then he reminded

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 165

his readers that the pagans of old had been visited
by comets, had likewise taken them as announcing
celestial displeasure, and had actually been driven
by them to renewed and increased practice of
their own religion, naniely, idolatry. Is it likely,
he asked, that the Divine Being would work a
miracle, knowing that it would reinstate idolatry ;
and with that result as the very object of the
miracle ? This seems at first sight a harmless query ;
but there was more in it than at once appeared.
For it may be shrewdly suspected that Bayle, to
whose mind the Catholic religion,by allowing crea-
ture-worship, promoted idolatry, meant to insinu-
ate that God would never work a miracle in sup-
port of the Catholic Faith. Even so, the treatise,
when this point had been perceived, would not
thereby offend Protestants. Bayle had still
another question to ask. It was this: Which
would the Divine Being prefer, that men should
be in entire ignorance of the existence of God, or
that they should practise the vile worship of false
gods ? The question is a searching one. Not all
serious minds would give the same answer to it.
Bayle's answer was readily surmised. The term
Agnostic was not then coined ; so Bayle was con-
strued as implying that blank Atheism was better
than idol-worship; better, that is to say, than
Catholicism, which included idol-worship. On
reflection, the charitable inference was drawn —
Bayle is an Atheist at heart.

i66 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

His critical pen once allowed free exercise,
Bayle engaged in many of the religious and
philosophical controversies of his day, measur-
ing himself against such men as Leibnitz and
Le Clerc, and gainiflg no small renown in this
country, to which, at a later period, Shaftesbury
and others vainly tried to induce him to remove.
He wrote always anonymously, and his publica-
tions appeared with false imprints. The disguise
was easily penetrated ; it was adopted, partly as a
protection to the printer, partly, too, because
anonymity whets curiosity, and curiosity aids a
sale. In the same year (1682) in which his dis-
sertation on comets appeared, he brought out a
trenchant critique of Maimbourg's " History of
Calvinism," in which, with great effect, he exposed
the blunders and the bad faith of that able and
even brilliant, but most unfair writer; whose
" History of Arianism " exhibits the same type of
shining but slipshod unscrupulousness. Bayle's
work won the admiration even of Catholic writers.
M6nage speaks of it as a fine book, the work of an
honourable man, contrasting it with another and
very inferior effort against Maimbourg, by Jurieu.
We cannot, in this slight sketch, follow Bayle into,
his controversies, interesting as they are. This
may be said. The air of Holland seems to have
had a decisive influence on the spirit of Bayle.
For the first time he lived in a land of Tolerance.
Nor is it without significance that for the first

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 167

time he came into personal contact with exiled
Socinians from Poland. Their position, it is
evident, he had studied with close and appreci-
ative attention.

A word must be added about that mysterious
publication which brought about his estrange-
ment from Jurieu. It was issued anonymously
in April, 1690, and bore the title " Important
Advice to the Refugees on their Approaching
Return to France." Written in the person of a
Catholic, it criticized severely the general attitude
and temper of the French Protestants in exile;
dwelling on the virulence of their pens, the de-
famatory spirit of their polemics and lampoons;
accusing them of seditious tendencies; contrast-
ing the violence of their intemperate pamphlets
with the moderation of English Catholic refugees
in France, and with the general tone of French
writers on religion; and somewhat peremptorily
counselling an amendment of their courses.
Jurieu took this advice as meant for himself (as
probably it was, among others), accused Bayle of
its authorship, and attacked him furiously. The
question of authorship is stUl a problem. Bayle
expressed great indignation at the charge, and
disclaimed many of the views put forth by the
alleged Catholic, as well he might. Yet it would
be hard to say that he ever directly and cate-
gorically denied the authorship. It is true that
he wrote a critique of the pamphlet ; but he had

i68 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

already displayed his powers in this respect, by
vs?riting a ludicrous Defence, in the name of a
French marshal accused of witchcraft, and then
an equally ludicrous demolition of the Defence.
It is certain, in any case, that Bayle was equally
sensible of the dangers of intolerance, whether
practised by Protestants or by Catholics, whether
exercised in word or in deed. Entering the lists
against Jurieu, he did not spare his adversary,
though he employed keener and more polished
weapons than those he had to encounter. The
quarrels of literary men are not altogether plea-
sant reading. They are too common, and they
tend to detraction. Dr. Johnson once said:
" The Irish are a fair people, they never speak well
of one another." Something of this exaggeration
might be applied to literary men, when they form
parties and fall out.

It was during his occupancy of the Rotterdam
chair that Bayle, dissatisfied with a kindred
venture in which he had taken some part, founded
and conducted a literary journal, the first con-
siderable effort of the sort, and, indeed, unique
in its kind. Its aim was, under the title of
News of the Republic of Letters, to furnish a
monthly guide to the European Press. It lasted
from March, 1684, to February, 1687, its discon-
tinuance being due to Bayle's iU health. In this
magazine he first developed his remarkable power
of interesting and entertaining his readers, while

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 169

■epitomizing aiid criticizing, with a fine mixture of
shrewdness and tact, a wide range of current
literature. A keen remark in the number for
April, 1686, led to his famous correspondence with
•Queen Christina of Sweden. In response to an
-appeal by a zealous Catholic, this royal lady (who
had renounced Protestantism to embrace the
•Catholic Faith) had published her sentiments in
regard to the extirpation of heresy in France.
In a strain at once vigorous and wise she declared
that she would have nothing to do with a mission
-of persecution. " Dragoons are strange Apostles,"
she affirmed. " Our Lord made no use of that
method of converting the world." " Do you really
believe in the good faith of such converts ? "
Bayle reprinted the piece in his magazine, and,
briefly commenting on it, made this observation :
— " This is a remnant {un reste) of Protestantism."
Deeply hurt by the phrase, the good Christina
remonstrated with Bayle through an agent.
After a little correspondence Bayle, who assured-
ly, as he explained, had never meant to throw
-suspicion on her Catholic allegiance, wrote to the
Queen herself, offering an apology at once com-
plete and dignified. She replied in handsome
terms, imposing on Bayle, as penance, that he
rshould henceforth make it his business to supply
her with any books of note that might be pub-
lished, whether in Latin, French, Spanish, or
Italian, and on any subject, provided they were

170 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

worth reading. She made room in her order
even for romances, satires, " and, above all^
chemistry." " And don't forget to send me your
magazine, and the bill for all expenses. God
prosper you." Truly a royal lady of catholic
tastes. One thinks that, perhaps, there may
really have been a little " remnant of Protest-
antism."

In November, 1693, Bayle was summarily
dismissed from his chair by the magistrates of
Rotterdam, and even prohibited from private
teaching. Nominally, as already said, this was^
on the ground of the pernicious tendency of his-
Comet publication eleven years before; in
reality, as he maintained, the injury and affront
were due to local faction. Bayle's personal
friends belonged to the party which was losing
ground in general politics, consequently in
municipal management. Every efEort was being
made by their opponents to humiliate them in
gaining the upper hand. It was to show their
power, and to spite the other side, that they
found a shabby excuse for striking at Bayle,
Such things, of course, never occur in our own
municipalities. Hence, perhaps, we may find it
difficult to credit the true explanation of the case.

Advantageous offers were made to Bayle fromi
our own country and froim France; but he had
work in hand which induced him to stay where he
was. Already had he conceived the idea of his-

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 171

Dictionary; to its cdrapilation and perfection he
devoted the' thirteen years which remained to
him of life. He would have issued this great
work anonymously, but could not obtain a licence
for the printing, without his name. Its first
edition appeared in two volumes, 1696-7. The
second edition, in which, out of deference to pre-
judice, the article " David " was modified by
evisceration, was issued in 1702. The author
left improvements, incorporated in subsequent
editions, the best being that of 1740, four volumes.
All these were in folio. There is a modern edition,
in octavo, i8'2b-4, sixteen volumes, with additions
not by Bayle, and some serviceable criticisms.
There is also an anonymous English version, 171G,
four volumes folio; and an expanded edition,
1734-41, ten volumes folio, by Birch and several
coadjutors, including Sale, the Orientalist. I
have seen the 1710 translation ascribed to Birch.
This would be a somewhat remarkable feat for a
little Quaker boy in his fifth year, so perhaps the
translator was some one else.

This work is called an "•Historical and Critical
Dictionary." Yet there is nothing in it of
history, in the modern understanding of that
science ; no grasp, or even vision, of the chain of
events. On the other hand, there is none of that
magnificent waste of power which makes Sir
Walter Raleigh's "History of the World " (1614),
an eloquent and monumental torso of sage and

172 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

learned nescience. Bayle guessed, if he did not
know, that the view which took primeval history
as simply controlled by the Bible must yield to
the view which places the very Bible itself in the
control of historical science. His work is
biographical, sometimes geographical, always
critical, yet never free from learned gossip.

Voltaire has said of Bayle's Dictionary that it
is the first work of the kind in which a man may
learn to think. He had even better have said,
which compels a man to think. For Bayle does
not help a man through the problems that he
starts. He forces you perpetually to say : What
does he mean ? What does this lead to ? What
does he not mean ? He leaves you no option. In
Bayle's pliant and pleasant hands you find your-
self, without a word of warning, flung easily and
suddenly into deep and sometimes dirty water;
you don't know where you are, or where he is;
but there is no mistake about it, you must begin
to learn to swim or, faith, you'll sink. Such is
the mystery and the magic of Bayle.

How his Dictionary 'began to be, and achieved
its growth, he tells us in his inimitable preface.
He had originally intended a " Dictionary of
Errors," and had issued the prospectus of one,
after compiling it to the first three letters of the
alphabet. There is such a dictionary, bearing the
too proud sub-title " Errata and Supplement to
All Historical Dictionaries," by Augustin Jal

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 173.

(1867) a useful book, though apparently little
known. For when you refer to Jal, people look
as if they had never heard of him. Bayle found
his first project did not take. He says people
don't mind about errors; one thing will do as
well as another if they " like the spirit of it,"
as John James Tayler used to say. He quotes
ludicrous examples from sermons . Here is one : —
" How now, Christians, you are not touched by
the spectacle of our Saviour Christ nailed to the
wood of the cross ! Why, the Emperor Pompey
was moved to pity, when he beheld the elephants
of Pyrrhus pierced with arrows ! " The effect of
this, says Bayle, was just as good as if it had been,
true. The resources of present day students are
quite equal to efforts of this kind — especially in
Examination papers — ^but the effect is sometimes
disappointing.

What put Bayle on the correction of errors ?
It was the appearance in 1688 of the posthumous
fifth edition of the " Great Historical Dictionary,"
originally published in 1674 by Louis Moreri, D.D..
(1643-1680). It must not be supposed that
Moreri's was an exceptionally bad book. On the
contrary, it was, as Bayle fully allows, an ex-
ceptionally good one, and that was just why he
thought it worth while to show how it could be
bettered. In many respects Moreri's is a much
more generally useful compendium than Bayle's..
Under successive editors (greatest among them.

174 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

Le Clerc) it has swelled from a single folio to the
ten huge folios which have an honoured place
among my books, as a really indispensable work
of reference.

Perceiving that Moreri was especially weak in
mythological and classic articles, Bayle had de-
voted himself to the correction of these. He
found that people did npt care for exact informa-
tion, either about heathen gods or Raman heroes.
So he discarded all the gods, and most of the
heroes, from his plan. It then occurred to him to
compile a Dictionary, which, as far as possible,
should contain nothing that was to be found in
other dictionaries. Popes, emperors, kings, car-
dinals, Fathers of the Church, and so on, were
common property; he resolved to let most of
them severely alone. , Hardly had he begun, when
he heard of an English version (1694) of Moreri,
with national additions; this stopped him from
including the illustrious men of Great Britain. A
similar publication cut off from him the illustrious
men of the United Provinces. A new Biblical
Dictionary checked his design of including most of
the persons mentioned in the Bible. D'Herbe-
lot's Bibliotheque- Orientals came out, and inter-
fered with him in that department. Church
History, too, was otherwise provided for. Think
of the erudition of the man who would wUlingly
have undertaken any or all of these special
branches, and robbed of them all, still had

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 175

matter in abundance on which to fall back.
Yet here it is well to interpose a caveat. Bayle,
a man of extraordinary erudition, was not (as Jal,
for example, was) a man of research, as we under-
stand that term. He probably knew by heart
more books, of all sorts, than any man before or
since his day. He did not, as we try to do, go
beyond books in quest of things knowable. Par-
don the egotism of a small illustration of the
difference. Some time ago I was in company
with certain scholarly friends, who know much
more about books than I can pretend to do. One
day they benevolently informed me that I had
given in the Dictionary of National Biography a
wrong year-date for the birth of, John Cotton, who
came from Boston No. i, and was the means of
giving its name to Boston No. 2. " It is very
likely," said I, " for the Pope of Rome is the only
infallible person, and he wisely avoids the exer-
cise of his prerogative in regard to dates." They
brought me five books, all placing Cotton's birth
a year later than I had ventured to put it. I
demurred. " These are few and modern, and all
American." Well, by dint of their labour and my
insistence, they found above eighty printed
authorities for their date, and wondered what I
had to say. " Only this, gentlemen: I took the
trouble personally to visit St. Alkmund's, Derby,
where Cotton was baptized, and here is the record
of that event, copied by me on the spot, and

176 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

certified by the custodian. As a child is not
usually born a year after his baptism, I think you
will admit that research sometimes beats eru-
dition." Let me add that the whole honour of the
discovery is due to Mr. B. Tacchella, who in a
small and unnoticed publication had put me on the
right line of search. So, to all students I would
say: Never feel quite sure, before you have got
at the original sources for yourself. Till then,
don't say, " It is so," but, with Bayle, be content
to say, " So-and-so says it is so." For Bayle
knew the limits of his erudition, and was careful
always to distinguish between things his authori-
ties personally vouched for, and what they merely
cited from others. Indeed, one express purpose
of his toil was to induce rising scholars, and youth
generally, to form an idea of, and taste for " the
most scrupulous exactitude."

How had he gained this vast range of reading,
amid the frequent interruptions of failing health ?
" Little use do I make," says he, " of Cato's
motto : Interpone tuis interdum gaudia curis.
Diversions, parties of pleasure, games, treats,
excursions to the country, visits and such-like
recreations, necessary (so they say) to many
studious persons, are not in my line. I waste no
time in them. Nor waste I any in domestic cares,
in seeking favours, courting patrons, or anything
of that sort. Happily freed from many dis-
tractions not much to my taste, I have enjoyed

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 177

the most complete, the most delightful leisure
that a literary man could possibly long for."
There was a time when Madame Basnage had
tried hard to yoke him to a wife she had picked
out for him. The lady, whose name is not given,
had, we are assured, youth, beauty, sense, sweet-
ness, modesty, self-command — and fifteen thou-
sand crowns. Bayle persistently shook his head,
disinclined to be drawn from solitary study by
his married friend's encouraging example.

It must be owned that the arrangement of his
Dictionary is of the most inconvenient kind.
Opening just now a volume at random one finds,
divided between three successive folio pages, only
four lines of text, all the rest being notes. Un-
luckily, he has had imitators in this, who have
followed him as following a fashion, without his
reason or excuse. Kippis, in his Biogra-phict
Britannica, is a tiresome sinner in this respect.
He tells you half a thing, and must needs put the
other half into a note or notes. He reminds one
of George IV's saying about Sir Robert Peel:
" Peel is not a gentleman; he always parts hi&
coat tails before he sits down." Bayle, however,
has a purpose in his system. As he truly says,
his text is complete in itself. Read it, and you
get a plain story. No one need trouble himself
with the notes, unless he has a mind to do so. Yet
the notes are Bayle : Bayle at his best and Bayle
at his worst. He pours into them without stint

N

178 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

the many-coloured, recondite, and appetizing con-
tents of his commonplace books and memoranda,
with chapter and verse for every statement.

There is one element in them which stains his
workmanship. Lord Acton said, oddly enough,
of Charles Dickens: " His great merit is that in
all his books there is no indecency." From' the
negative eulogy of this faint praise Bayle is
undesirably exempt. His elaborate excursus in
defence of his fault is rather an aggravation of
it, being little more than an impudent tu quoque.
Plenty of other writers, some of them general
favourites, he says, deal in improprieties — " as I
will proceed to show you." His offence is delib-
erate, and its motive is frankly propounded. In
his preface he affirms that the booksellers and
their friends had assured him that a dull folio,
appealing only to the learned, scarcely ever pays
the printer, and that he must brighten up his
book. Lord Acton, to quote him again, alleges
that the future Cardinal Newman, anxious about
the Rambler (the liberal Catholic organ), wishing
it to be clever and amusing as well as instructive,
" wants us to have rather more levity and pro-
faneness, less theology and learning." In the
course of his reading, Bayle had dived into all
sorts of holes and corners, whence he brought out
scandalous anecdote, in unheard-of variety.
Something of this seasoning had already spiced
his literary magazine. He sprinkled it about,

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY 179

■especially when it concerned grave persons, with
an impish malice — ^perhaps more often found, in
combination with a native sweetness of temper,
in the ladies of creation than in the lords thereof.
Yet Bayle, who knew more than most men,
actually makes a point of his reticence. " Of
the two inviolable laws of history," says he, " I
have religiously observed the one which enjoins
upon us to say nothing that is false. As for the
other, which enjoins on us to dare to say all that
is true, I cannot boast of having invariably fol-
lowed it. I think it sometimes opposed, not
merely to prudence, but to reason as well." One
would wish that oftener he had thus thought, and
when dealing with the seamy side of human
nature, bestowed a little drapery upon his nuda
Veritas. Without question Bayle is a cure for
optimism, if such be needed; though optimism,
it may be observed, commonly cures itself.

This last remark about our author gives
occasion to say, in drawing to a close, all that I
have either ability or inclination to say respecting
Bayle's philosophy, so called. I know not wheth-
er I have read or dreamed that some one once
averred, " The real philosopher is the man who
has no philosophy." Bayle is ranked as a sceptic ;
and if we take the literal sense of the word, Bayle
was that, and something more. For the sceptic
is the man who stops to look at a thing ; and Bayle
was prone not only to look things in the face, but

i8o PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

to see them all round, if he could. Vulgarly,
however, a sceptic is taken to mean a person of
superficial views, who doubts if there is anything
beyond surfaces. Montaigne, in a well-known
essay by Emerson, is taken as the type of a
sceptic; yet Montaigne's motto was not, "What is
there to know ? " but "What do I know ? " which
is a very different thing, I opine. We have seen
that Bayle was early a disciple of Montaigne, as
also of the anecdotical and sententious Plutarch,
both of them men of insatiable curiosity. Now,
it would appear that Bayle had discovered, both
by the experience of his personal history and by
his study of all the literature accessible to him,
this staring and disturbing fact, that there is
much to be said on both sides of many more
questions than is either convenient or agreeable
to our complacency. This is what is meant by
saying that Bayle is a cure for optimism. Per-
sons fundamentally in the wrong may have some-
thing to say which we should do well to hear . The
system of the Manichseans, said Bayle, is to me
absurd; yet Christians cannot answer the
Manichaean objections to their own theology,
committed as that is to the doctrine of eternal
torments. There seems no reason to doubt that
Bayle's affirmations of his own beliefs are genuine
and honest. He claimed to hold, on the authority
of revelation, what he could not maintain by the
force of reason ; but Bayle was not the man to say

PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY i8i

that every genuine and honest thinker must needs
hold with him.

Evidently we have, as a rule, advanced beyond
the view-point of Bayle's century. Occasionally,
it is true, we may encounter people ready to
repeat, in all seriousness, the old jibe that every
Cardinal is necessarily an Atheist. There still
may be those who think the same of every
Unitarian, though too polite to tell us so. Yet,
on the whole, we have come very near to per-
ceiving that it is possible, on the one hand, to hold
strong views of one's own ; on the other hand, to
feel not condescension, nor compassion, nor
tolerance, but deep and true respect for the
opposite views of others. That we have got so
far, or nearly so far, is largely owing to the courage
of those men who braved obloquy and misunder-
standing in the determination that, in defiance of
every prejudice to the contrary, the most un-
popular opinions, should be pressed, in their
integrity, upon the reluctant attention of the
public. Great, in this respect, were the services
of Bayle.

For this reason it has seemed not unbefitting to
conjure up the memory of the man who passed
suddenly away on the morning of 28th December,
1706, with the questioning words on his lips:
" Is my fire lighted ? " Sundry among the bigots
might then have been inclined to answer "Yes,"
with a stolid accent of gloomy exultation. Some

i82 PETER BAYLE OF THE DICTIONARY

among us may now feel satisfied to echo the
affirmative, in another spirit and sense. For, if
the heart must be purified by the cleansing fires
of love, no less does the mind demand for its
clarification the searching, sometimes the scorch-
ing, it may even be the blasting, flame enkindled
by the critic's art, that it may pass " ex umbris et
imaginihus in veritatem," from the spectres and
shadows of its own thought, into the reception of
the realities of the Most High.

4 October, 1906.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE

AND THE CATHOLICITY

OF THE OLD DISSENT

Philip Doddridge. — Born in London, June
26th, 1702; Minister at Kibworth, 1723-29;
Began Academy at Market Harborough, 1729;
Minister and Tutor at Northampton, 1729-51;
•Ordained, March 19th, 1730; Married, December
22nd, 1730; D.D., Aberdeen, 1736; Died at
Lisbon, October 26th, 1751.

VII

PHILIP DODDRIDGE AND THE
CATHOLICITY OF THE OLD DISSENT

THE eighteenth century was in its eighteenth
year when Philip Doddridge, desiring to
enter the Dissenting nxinistry, sought to open the
way by addressing himself to Edmund Calamy,
D.D. (1671-1732). The interview is known only
by its unpromising result, yet the historic imagina-
tion may be forgiven if it pause to picture the
momentary contact between these two great
liberal unionists in English Nonconformist polity.
Calamy was now in the prime of his life, and
at the height of his public influence. He had
added lustre to the eminent inheritance of his
name, by his services as biographer of the Ejected,
and as custodian of the fame of Baxter. A genial,
full bodied divine, he walked before God in the
healthy enjoyment of human life and human
liberty. When his Scottish friends made him a
doctor in divinity, he rallied them on the pertina-
city of their church courts, which reminded him
of the thumbscrews of the Inquisition; but he
found no fault with the theology of their claret or
the orthodoxy of their salmon. An absolute

i86 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

stranger to enthusiasms, he rode past Winder-
mere, and recollected that this was the lake " so
famous for the fish called charrs, which come
potted- to London, and are reckoned so very
delicious." Seated in full view of one of the
finest of Lancashire landscapes, he charmed a
Tory lady by suggesting that the spot seemed
specially adapted by boon Nature for the pleasant
use of " a pipe of tobacco and a glass of October."
Perhaps in Oxford, where he spent some studious
months, and preached his first sermon, these finer
tastes may have been cultivated. His devotion
to Nonconformity was genuine and virile. He
had espoused its principles with the full strength
of reasoned conviction, and believed them
essential to the maintenance of English liberties-
and English religion. He served his cause with
a diplomatic prudence; no rash ventures were
his, and few mistakes; his strong mundane
sagacity told him what was timely, what was
practicable, and then with courtly ease he man-
aged men and made obstacles melt. If any
ambition to go too far menaced a breach of accord
in the forces of Nonconformity, he made his bow
and stood aside, a mere cool-headed spectator of
parties; he never mixed up in a quarrel, and
would touch nothing quixotic.

Such was the man who turned his eyes upon,
young Doddridge, with keen yet kindly glance^
He saw before him a slight and sickly orphan boy,.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 187

too tall for his sixteen years, too near-sighted to
bear his height erect, the hectic flush of a con-
sumptive habit showing through his olive cheek
and seeming to explain the feverish and pre-
mature anxiety to encounter, with sanguine lack
of prescience, the hardships of a calling full of
trials for the robust. He learned that the
resolve, vaguely formed at the ripe age of four-
teen, had started into definite shape on the sudden
disclosure of a reverse of fortune, which had
stripped the schoolboy of his means and left hini
penniless. To overstock the ministerial market
by training up a superfluous host of poor lads on
small bursaries, Calamy had condemned as a cruel
policy in the Presbyterians of Scotland. What
wonder that he gave Doddridge " no encourage-
ment, but advised " him " to turn " his " thoughts
to something else." The counsel, though a bitter
disappointment, seemed beneficently wise; and
for the moment Philip felt that to gainsay it
would be a forcing of Providence.

Doddridge was a year older than John Wesley,
and, like Wesley, he came of Nonconformist
ancestry on both sides of the house. His grand-
father, on the one side, was an Ejected minister,
nephew of a famous judge. His other grand-
father was a Bohemian exile, who, after sojourning
in Germany as a Lutheran divine, settled in Eng-
land as a schoolmaster. The twentieth child of
his parents, Philip at his birth showed no sign of

i88 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

life. In point of fact, he and a sister were the
■only ones reared out of this abnormal family. The
story is well known of his learning Bible history
from his mother with the aid of " blue Dutch tiles
in the chimney-place." Losing both parents
before he had well entered his fourteenth year, he
fell into the hands of a well-meaning but incom-
petent guardian, who sacrificed his property in
foolish speculations. In Samuel Clark (or Clarke)
of St. Albans, compiler of the " Scripture Pro-
mises," he found a second father.

His uncle Philip had been steward in the
Bedford family, and the dowager duchess offered
to provide handsomely for his education, with a
view to the Anglican ministry. It was on his
conscientious rejection of this tempting provision
that the boy had carried his young hopes to
Calamy. Following the sage advice he got, he
now thought of the law ; but before he had closed
with an advantageous prospect of study for the
bar, a letter from Clark, offering him facilities for
a ministerial training, decided his vocation. With
Clark he made his first communion ; through the
influence of Clark he got a little bursary from the
Presbyterian Fund.

He did not resort to a Presbyterian tutor,
though Clark ranked with that denomination;
nor to a London Academy, though there were
several close at hand. Reasons of health may
explain the preference for an Academy in the

PHILIP DODDRIDGE iSg-

country; the choice of an Independent Academy-
will be accounted for later on . I simply note here
that Doddridge's student life began in October,
1719. In March of that year the ghost of the
parliamentary Presbyterianism had been finally
laid at Salters' Hall. There and then the so-
called Presbyterians, whether subscribing or non-
subscribing, joined with the other denominations
in issuing a formal ratification of the absolute in-
dependency of all Dissenting congregations. Such
vestiges of Presbyterianism as they retained were
retained as peculiarities of individual congre-
gations. Even Calamy had admitted, as early as-
1704, that his Presbyterianism might be fairly
described as " a meer Independent scheme."

The picture of Doddridge as a student is-
drawn by his own hand in his most engaging
correspondence. We see him robed in his dark
blue gown of cheap calimanco, carefully saved and
often turned, seated at Kibworth in a study so
spacious that, if the lower shelves were but re-
moved, the greater part of a hoop-petticoat might
at a crush be accommodated within it. We find
him describing himself as "an animal that locks-
himself up in his closet for ten hours in the day,
and romps away the rest of his time in blind-
man's buff, or such-like elegant entertainments."
There is some truth veiled in the poetry of this
overdrawn delineation. He pursued the studies
of his vocation with high purpose and a willing:

igo PHILIP DODDRIDGE

heart. Most young men of devout intent have
formed some guiding rules for the apportionment
of their time and the discipline of their conduct.
Those of young Doddridge, written on the fly-
leaf of his New Testament, are simple and
straightforward, the self-reminders of a frank and
genuine nature. Promising himself to prove
" agreeable and useful to all about " him " by a
tender, compassionate, and friendly behaviour,"
he struck the keynote of his life.

It is characteristic that a chief recreation of his
student days was found in playful and quasi-
confidential correspondence with ladies : with his
" mamma," his " aunt," and other and younger
recipients of imaginative titles. Of Doddridge's
part in this correspondence, one may say (bor-
rowing his own description of the letters of his
" dear, sedate, methodical Clio ") that he writes
^' with such unaffected wit, pleasantry, and good
nature, that it must be a gloomy animal indeed
that can lay them down with a grave face, and
ask for something more inspiring." The ease and
polish of his address, and Jiis knowledge of
human nature, are amazing in a lad under age.
His sister's " kind advice " he meets with the
expostulation: "Did you ever know me marry
foolishly in my life ? " A little later, his first
serious passion produces a series of letters to
Catherine Freeman, anticipating in the analysis
■of female motive the best efforts of Richardson.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE i,ji

At some of his overtures we may smile, but his
gentlemanly feeling was perfect, and his purpose
sincere. " If a lady could have called me a faith-
less lover," he declares, " I should be ashamed
to call myself a Christian or a man." When at
length he wedded Mercy Maris, his marriage proved
a continued romance. He never lost the feelings
of a lover, still writing in middle life with all the
intensity and fluctuating anxieties of a courtship.
His wife was not only fair to see, but, if we view
her with her husband's eyes, was " the dearest
of all dears, the wisest of all my earthly coun-
sellors, and of all my governors the most potent,
yet the most gentle and moderate." The im-
pression, however, conveyed by her own few
letters is that of a well-bred, well-mannered, com-
monplace personage, to whom transports were
foreign, indeed without very acute feelings, who
better knew the meaning of " honour and obey "
than that of the preceding vocable.

Perhaps the depth and tenderness of Dod-
dridge's affectionate heart were nowhere more
apparent than in the upheaval of his whole
nature on the death of his first child, a tiny girl.
Some foolish fellow preached at the funeral on
" Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd ? "
" I hope God knows," wrote Doddridge in his
diary, "that I am not angry; but sorrowful He
surely allows me to be." The preface to his own
sermon on this occasion, while calm and free from

192 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

solicitude, is a singularly honest avowal of pain
still snaarting, grief unappeased, the plain dealing
of a man who could not but be true to his own
feelings. " Formed in such a correspondence to
my own relish and temper as to be able to give
me a degree of delight, and consequently of dis-
tress, which I did not before think it possible I
could have received from a little creature who

had not quite completed her fifth year

It is comparatively easy ... to speak in the out-
ward language of resignation. But it is not so
easy to get rid of every repining thought, and to
forbear taking it, in some degree at least, un-
kindly, that the God whom we love and serve, in
whose friendship we have long trusted and
rejoiced, should act what, to sense, seems so un-
friendly a part; that He should take away a
child ; and if a child, that child ; and if that child,
at that age ; and if at that age, with this or that
particular circumstance; which seems the very
contrivance of providence to add double anguish
to the wound. In these circumstances . . .
cheerfully to subscribe to His will, cordially to
approve it as merciful and gracious. . . . This,
this is a difficult lesson indeed; a triumph of
Christian faith and love, which I fear many of us
are yet to learn."

It is this strength of human emotion that gives
health and animation to the religious genius of
Doddridge. There was never anything very

PHILIP DODDRIDGE

193

puritanical about his tone of mind, or his ideal of
life ; nor any abrupt severance of his professional
character from his wholesome and genial human-
ity. The cleric and the man were, in him, not
two but one. Why should we not speak of
clerical men (I mean, if we can find any) as we
speak of medical men ? Doddridge allowed him-
self in relaxations proper to his age, and could
write gaily of his social amusements, even in-
cluding among these, in his early days, a hand of
cards ("a chapter or two in the History of the
Four Kings ") after a dish of afternoon tea. But
his diaries and his letters prove that he wasted no
time, that his calling was ever in his thoughts,
that his religion was no conventional department
of his life. His piety was a devotion of the whole
human being to an ideal of consecrated service,
perpetually renewed in filial communing with the
Lord whom he truly loved, and served with a
continually deepening attachment.

His religious genius is seen at its height in the
powerful addresses which make up his volume on
the " Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul,"
published (1745) in his forty-third year, and since
translated into almost as many languages as the
" Pilgrim's Progress." Watts had suggested this
work, had framed its plan, and had revised, its
earlier sections. But Watts could not have
written it. The verve of its language; the
pressure and piquancy of its appeal; the power

o

194 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

of making conscience speak, in piercing tones,
the secrets of the heart; the naturalness, the
appositeness, the fervour, the pathos with which
exhortation soars constantly into the domain of
prayer; the prophetic faculty that betimes can
even chant the plea of the awakening voice of
God; these make the work unique. It is not a
treatise to be calmly read; those whom it does
not find will quickly drop it from their hands;
those whom it captivates will follow it upon their
knees. Its aim is to rouse religious feeling into
a regenerative force. The practical pith of Dod-
dridge's faithful appeal is summed up in these
words: — "This must be the language of your
very heart before the Lord. But then remember
that in consequence thereof it must be the langu-
age of your life too . . . the most affectionate
transport of the passions, should it be transient
and ineffectual, would be but like a blaze of
straw, presented instead of incense at His altar."
In an earlier publication (1736) he had asked,
" What is true religion ? Is it to repeat a creed,
or subscribe a confession, or perform a ceremony ?
If it be, I am sure religion is much changed from
what it was, when the Scriptures were writ ; and
the nature of God must be entirely changed too,
before such a religion can be acceptable to Him,
or before it can have the least value in His sight."
While speaking of his religious genius one
thinks of Doddridge's hymns. On these I make

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 195

but one remark. The hymns of Doddridge,
which never rise so high nor fall so low as those
of Watts, have sometimes, what Watts never
achieves, a rare quality of sustained joyousness,
as in " Hark ! the glad sound," which sings itself
through every verse, through every line, in every
tone. It is worth noting, in this connection, that
Orton speaks of Doddridge as " a man who had
no ear for music."

In theology Doddridge classed himself at the •
outset of his career (1724) as " in all the most
important points, a moderate Calvinist " ; and
such he remained to the last. He attentively
read John Taylor on " Original Sin " (1740), and
was by no means shaken by it. He speaks of
it as "a vain attempt to prove that impossible,
which, in fact, evidently is."

Calvinism is compatible with \>-arious views of
the doctrine of the Trinity ; Calvin himself has
not escaped the censure of purists; and it is on
this doctrine that Doddridge's theological sound-
ness has been chiefly called in question. The
period of his student life was one of keen dis-
cussion of this topic, following the rupture of
Salters' Hall. Many adopted the semi-Arian
position of Samuel Clarke, the metaphysician; a
few went beyond it. Doddridge admits that he
was " wavering . ' ' Some of the proof -texts against
Arianism never seemed to him in point. The
recollection of his hesitancy always disposed him

196 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

to respect the difficulties, and deal dispassionately
with the conclusions, of other minds. His own
doctrine tended towards heresy in a direction the
opposite of the Arian. It was essentially Sabel-
lian, a Trinity of divine aspects; "persons"
{frosopa, vizors) as they were called by Sabellius,
who introduced this term, into Christian theology.
A cruder, pre-Sabellian form of the doctrine,
identified historically with the name of Praxeas,
and polemically disparaged as Patripassianism,
was, according to Peirce, the common creed of
the unlearned among Dissenters. There is plenty
of footing for it in the hymns of Watts. Dod-
dridge held the Sabellian doctrine in its later or
post-Sabellian form. This mode of thought,
while admitting eternal distinctions in the God-
head, denies that they amount to co-ordinate
personalities. Its advocates claim to be in good
accord with the teaching of St. Hilary and St.
Augustine. Wallis's exposition of the Trinity on
these lines was left unchallenged by the Oxford
decree (5 Nov., 1695) which condemned as " im-
pious " the alleged Tritheism of Bingham and
Sherlock.

A Sabellianism of this kind is often accom-
panied by a Socinian view of the nature of the
Mediator. Doddridge escaped this by borrowing,
from Watts a doctrine of the pre-existence of
Christ's human soul, which has ever been insepar-
ably united to the Godhead. Barling treats this

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 197

doctrine as a " graft of Arianism "; but its an-
cestry is not referable to the Arian school, being
of older date and of different complexion. Watts
got it from Henry More, the Platonist. In the
estimation of Doddridge, this scheme guarded, on
the one hand, against the error of reducing Christ,
to a mere creature, and on the other, against that
of conceiving him as another God, either inferior
to or co-ordinate with the Father. Except in his
theological lectures, this rationale of his Trini-
tarian confession makes no show. In his practical
writing, as in his hymns, the mediatorial work of
Christ occupies the field. To all who are one with
him in embracing this central and cardinal idea,
his religious teaching will be acceptable, and will
fall into harmony with theological systems
diverging from his own on either hand.

In truth, the details of a technical theology
were brought home to Doddridge by no necessity
of his own mind; and, perhaps, had it not
become part of his duty to act as an exponent of
systematic theology to others, he would have
himself lost interest in this department of study.
Practically the theological text-book which was
always in his hands, which formed his habitual
phraseology and inspired his living thought, was
the Bible. The Bible to him was the New Testa-
ment. I do not mean that he discarded the Old
Testament, but that he read it as a part of the
New. To him its theme from end to end was the

198 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

Christian salvation. There is no evidence that
he anywhere detected in it a failure of the
evangelical spirit, though, of course, there were
degrees in the completeness with which that spirit
was apprehended by those whom the Biblical
writers from time to time addressed. Watts, in
his paraphrases of the Psalms, thought it neces-
sary, as he says, to make David " speak like a
Christian." I do not know where there is in
Doddridge any similar confession of the discovery
of a jarring note, a felt discord between successive
strata of revelation. He brought the harmonizing
element with him in the evangelical fullness of his
own spirit.

We are using the language of very thoughtless
ingratitude when we permit ourselves to speak of
the eighteenth century as a period of religious
stagnation. It was not an age which readily
responded to an enthusiasm, or suffered itself to
be led by. a sentiment ; it was an age of strong and
resolute thinking. It was not an age of fluent
preachers ; but why ? Because the preachers were
not allowed to take anything for granted.
Christianity was put upon its trial; everything
was brought to the test of fact ; everything was
examined with full use of all the resources of
reason. Bishop Butler told Wesley (1739) it was
" a horrid thing, a very horrid thing " to pretend
to " gifts of the Holy Ghost " ; and advised him,
" You have no business here, you are not €om-

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 199

missioned to preach in this diocese." Anglicans '
were not alone in failing to comprehend Wesley,
or to estimate the value of those religious forces
of which Methodism was the instrument in the
hand of God. Doddridge was an exception, but
his goodwUl to the Methodists brought down upon
him the indignant remonstrances of his London
friends. These good people honestly held that
to encourage Whitefield was to play into the
hands of infidelity, that the enthusiasts were
simply making fresh ground for the deists. They
pointed triumphantly to the fact that Henry
Dodwell's anonymous brochure, " Christianity
not founded on Argument " (1742) was so well
calculated to serve the interests either of enthusi-
asm or of deism indifferently, that men did not
know to which school it should be assigned, and
remained in doubt as to the quarter from which
it had been launched.

An age of religious stagnation is an age when
religion ceases to provide matter for the exercise
of independent thought, when tradition and
superstition send the mind to sleep. In the
eighteenth century, all who thought at all,
applied a keen and alert intelligence to religious
matters, with the robust mtention of distinguish-
ing realities from shams. Certainly it was an
age of controversy within Christianity, rather
than of conquests by Christianity, though these
also were not wanting. Yet we must not forget

200 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

that we owe to it, through Watts, the modem
Christian hymn, and through Doddridge, as we
shall see, the forecast of the modern Christian
mission.

Near the close of the seventeenth century (1689)
the Nonconformists had accepted the Anglican
articles as their authorized doctrinal standard of
public toleration. Hence upon Dissent there
lay, till 1779, the dead-weight of a Toleration Act
which was practically another Act of Uniformity.
This was a serious bar to the bolder enterprises of
religious thinking within the recognised bounds
of Nonconformity. To mark the progress of
ideas by the proclamation of new results was
penal. It is said that the example of the early
Quakers might have been followed, in defying the
law, and extorting privilege by persistent and
invincible efforts of self-assertion. I have often
thought that it might ; I have sometimes wonder-
ed that it was not. The truth is, that this course
would have been impossible to the ordinary
Dissenter. He looked to Parliamentary law as
to a divine institution. It was the very founda-
tion of the State, the only basis of the throne.
He believed in its omnipotence. Already it had
done much for him, and could do more. A
martyrdom of restriction and repression, mean-
while, he was prepared to endure; but to come
into open and avowed conflict with the safeguard
of society would have appeared to him suicidal,

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 201

and a flying in the face of Providence. So he
bided his time and guarded his course; but his
mind was wakeful and his thought progressive.

The stream of learning and the currents of
thinking were kept in movement within his
borders by the action of the Dissenting Academies ;
institutions, to the history and scope of which a
very insufficient attention has been directed,
considering their national and permanent im-
portance. The Dissenting Academy was the
Nonconformist University, the university of
private enterprise. Richard Frankland has the
honour of being the first to set on foot (1670) in
the North an institution for "university learn-
ing." The succession of Academies descending
from Frankland has its lineal heir in Manchester
College. Frankland's, however, was not a school
for theology alone, nor were his first pupils either
designed for the ministry, or drawn only from the
ranks of Dissent. He represented the Crom-
wellian tradition of a Durham University, and he
pursued in his northern refuges the methods of
his Cambridge training. Frankland's institution
set the model for all the older Academies whose
Tutors ranged themselves under the Presbyterian
name. Philosophy and theology formed the
solid nucleus of study; philology, science.
Biblical apparatus were added in varying pro-
portions, according to the aptitudes and particular
.tastes of individual Tutors. It was not uncom-

202 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

mon for a studious youth to keep terms in
succession at two or three of these Academies,
selecting those whose departmental advantages
promised to reward his curiosity on specific topics.
Seeker, for example, was at three Academies, one
in the North, one in the West, and one in London.
He was also at Paris, and at Leiden to boot,,
before he went to Oxford. Perhaps all this was-
overdoing it a little . For Tom Seeker in his young
days had a merry wit. He was not born to be the
block for a bishop's wig, and to crown a Lord's
anointed such as George the Third-rate.

The first of Seeker's many alma matres was the
Academy of Timothy JoUie at Attercliffe. Now
JoUie's Academy, though an offshoot from Frank-
land's, was an example of the Independent
Academy, as contrasted with those of the Pres-
byterian type. How did these types differ ? To
fancy that the Independents cared less for learn-
ing than the Presbyterians did, or were excelled
by them in point of attainment, is to fall into a
ludicrous mistake. The pursuit of learning was
equal in these bodies ; but the Independents,
numerically the smaller of the two, can claim a
larger proportion of scholars distinguished by
great achievements. . In illustration of this point,
it may suffice to recall the " Vindiciae Fratrum
Dissidentium " (1710), by James Peirce; the
" Credibility of the Gospel History " (1727-57), by
Nathaniel Lardner; the "History of the Puri-

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 203

tans " (1732-38), by Daniel Neal. Again, there
was no denominational difference in the matter
of an entrance subscription to the Academies, so
long as these institutions were regulated by pri-
vate enterprise. Subscription on entrance was
later introduced into some Academies founded
and managed by societies. The Presbyterian
Academies had their origin in private enterprise
till 1754, when Warrington Academy was pro-
jected (opened 1757). The London Independents
had founded the King's Head Society, for
establishing an Academy, in 1730. When sub-
scription began in it I do not know, perhaps in
1730, certainly not later than 1744- This was the
Academy which Priestley would not enter because
of its subscription. Its Divinity tutor, Zephaniah
Marryatt, was a Presbyterian, while the Academy
to which Priestley repaired on account of its non-
gubscription had an Independent divinity tutor,
Caleb Ashworth, and was managed by Inde-
pendent trustees.

Not less learned than the Presbyterians, the
Independents were, however, less conventional;
hence, perhaps, sometimes more free. They were
readier for extremes on either hand than was con-
sonant with the steadfast Presbyterian middle
way. They showed this in their Church admin-
istration, and they showed it in their Academies.

Thus, among teachers of philosophy, Thomas
Rowe, the London Independent, was the first

204 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

to desert the traditional text-books, introducing
his pupils, about 1680, to what was known as
^'free philosophy." Rowe was a Cartesian at a
time when the Aristotelic philosophy was domin-
ant in the older schools of learning ; and while in
physics he adhered to Descartes against the rising
influence of Newton, in mental science he became
one of the earliest exponents of Locke. Watts,
Neal, Hunt, Grove were among his pupils. None
were sent to him from the Presbyterian Fund.

On the other hand, at Attercliffe, JoUie, in
1689, put under a ban " the mathematics," a
term of wide significance then, on the supposition
that this class of acquirement tended to make
sceptics. The prohibition acted as usual : " Don't
read this." There was much private study of the
mathematics among JoUie's young men, one of
whom ultiniately held a mathematical chair at
Cambridge. Whether from this spur of revolt,
or from whatever reason, I believe it may be ad-
mitted that JoUie turned out men more prominent
in the gifts of leadership than Frankland, his
master, had done. Among Frankland's pupils, I
suppose the best known name is that of William
Tong, the biographer of Matthew Henry. JoUie's
much shorter list includes such types as Thomas
Bradbury, the zealot of orthodoxy, leader of the
subscribers at Salters' Hall, and Benjamin
Grosvenor, equally a zealot, though a Calvinist,
for freedom in religious opinion.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 205.

Again, Jeremiah Jones, of Nailsworth, was an
Independent tutor; and Jones' posthumous
" Method of settling the Canonical Authority of
the New Testament " (1726), a work of original
plan, and, for its day, exhaustive research, was
certainly the most valuable outcome of the tutorial
work of the old Academies, or, indeed, of English
contemporary scholarship. It was several times
reprinted at the Clarendon Press. Next to it in
permanent importance among the fruits of the
erudition of the old Dissenting lecture-room may
be ranked the posthumous " Jewish Antiquities "
(1766) of David Jennings, a London Independ-
ent tutor.

Moreover, it was a London Independent
Academy which furnished the solitary instance of
a theological chair filled by a layman, John
Eames, F.R.S., whom Watts considered the most
learned man he knew, and whose reputation was
made in natural science, Sir Isaac Newton being^
his patron and friend. The appointment (made
by the Congregational Fund in 1734) was as-
successful as it was unprecedented; but the
Presbyterian Fund sent no bursars to this Acad-
emy while Eames filled the Divinity chair.

I mention these facts, in order to bring out,
what I think some have missed, the character of
variety, fresh force and unconventionality, which
distinguished the Independent Academies from
their more staid competitors in the Presbyteriara

2o6 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

Dissent. Doddridge, you remember, entered as
a pupil in the Independent Academy at Kibworth.
His tutor was John Jennings (d. 1723), son of an
Ejected minister, elder brother of David Jennings
above mentioned, and grandfather of Mrs. Bar-
bauld. In theology Jennings was an eclectic.
" He encourages," writes Doddridge, while at his
Academy, " the greatest freedom of inquiry, and
always inculcates it, as a law, that the Scriptures
are the only genuine standard of faith." How
did this work out ? Doddridge writes again : "I
have almost finished Mr. Jennings' system of
divinity, and the better I am acquainted with it,
the more I admire it. He does not entirely accord
with the system of any particular body of men,
but is sometimes a Calvinist, sometimes a Re-
monstrant, sometimes a Baxterian, sometimes a
Socinian, as truth and evidence determine him.
He furnishes us with all kinds of authors upon
every subject, without advising us to skip over
the heretical passages for fear of infection. It is
evidently his main care to inspire us with senti-
ments of Catholicism."

The four years' plan of studies under Jennings
was very comprehensive. Mathematics suffered
no exclusion; Jennings was himself an .elegant
mathematician. His pupils learned French, this
being somewhat of a rarity; and they learned it
" without regarding the pronunciation, with
which Mr. Jennings " was " not acquainted."

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 207

They learned anatomy, a subject which Eames, I
think, had been the first to add to his curriculum.
They learned architecture; probably that they
might be able to plan additions to their meeting-
houses. For some occult reason they also learned
heraldry, an accomplishment cultivated in other
Independent Academies. These were some of the
ornaments of a solid course of philology, philo-
sophy, physical science and divinity. There is a
very curious little manual, published (1721) by
Jennings as a conspectus of lectures in certain
departments. It begins with vocal music, and
winds up with a philosophical alphabet. Jen-
nings compiled his own logic, which, though
written in Latin, is founded on Locke. His meta-
physical compend is scholastic to a fault. It
still contains (it is true, in a recreative appendix)
such refreshing problems as the following: "Si
bucephaleitas separaretur ab equinitate, , utri
istorum adhaerebit hinnibilitas ? " One exceed-
ingly important branch of study came off badly in
all the old Academies. While general history, and
especially chronology, received some attention, it
is not a little surprising that both constitutional
history and ecclesiastical history were ignored.
Priestley was the first to call attention to these
serious defects, and to introduce the study of
constitutional history, on his own motion, at
Warrington in 1761 . His lectures when published
(1788) were recommended at Cambridge by John

2o8 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

S5anonds, professor of modern history. It does
not appear that the curriculum included any
special provision for the teaching of ecclesiastical
history till the appointment of John James Tayler
at Manchester in 1840; nor was there any
attention paid to the history of doctrine.

It had been felt for some time that the sudden
and early death (1723) of Jennings had created a
serious void in the list of Dissenting institutions
for theological training. The need existed for an
Academy in the Midlands, at once liberal in tone
and evangelical in spirit. There was a Presby-
terian Academy in the Midlands, that of Ebenezer
Latham, at Findern, and this at first was left to
supply the vacancy; but in the opinion of
Doddridge's London correspondents Latham, who
practised also as doctor of medicine, was not an
ef&cient tutor. Doddridge's detailed account of
Jennings' plan of studies brought him overtures
which led to his becoming Jennings' successor
after an interval of six years. Isaac Watts de-
clared that the reopening of the Academy might
well be undertaken by one who had " so admir-
ably described "it. The suggestion was followed
up by the unanimous approval of a meeting of
ministers at Lutterworth. At this time Dod-
dridge, whose residence was at Market Har-
borough, had been for six years minister at Kib-
worth, on a stipend of £36, piled up to that
enormous sum by help from eleemosynary funds.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 209

since the Kibworth Independents were unable to
reach the modest figure of £30. His Academy had
hardly been begun (July, 1729), when he removed
(December, 1729) to the more important congre-
gation at Northampton, where for twenty-one
years he discharged the duties of Pastor and
Tutor.

To Doddridge's Academy some reference has
already been made above, in the section on Early
Nonconformity and Education. Here it may be
well to pursue the topic in more detail. His first
idea was to take only divinity students into his
Academy. It was David Jennings, younger
brother of John, who strongly advised him to
admit lay pupils also. This he did in the fourth
year of his enterprise. Almost immediately he
was called upon by the ecclesiastical authorities
to take out a licence in the bishop's court. He
refused to do this, and carried the case to West-
minster Hall. It went in his favour, but an
appeal would probably have been decided against
him on a technicality, had not George II in-
timated his displeasure at the revival of such
prosecutions.

Perhaps it may be interesting to learn the cost
of an education at Doddridge's Academy. The
figures cannot be compared with modern estimates
without an appreciable allowance for subsequent
decrease in the value of money. Doddridge's
charges were somewhat above the average. Every

210 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

student had to pay, on entrance, a guinea for his
rooiii, another towards the naaintenance of the
library, a third for the wear and tear of scientific
apparatus. His tuition cost him four pounds a
year, his board sixteen. He had to find his own
candles, settle his laundry bill, and provide a pair
of sheets. What he did while this pair was in
washing, is not stated. The fixed charges, then,
were : entry money, three guineas ; annual dues,
twenty pounds for four years. If he were
a bursar on any of the denominational Funds,
Presbyterian or Congregational, his board was
reduced to fourteen pounds, and the library and
laboratory charges were halved, bringing his en-
trance money to two guineas, and his annual
dues to eighteen pounds. We may then gather
this that Doddridge expected to make a profit of
six pounds a year on ordinary students, four poimds
on bursars. His actual gains were less, for he
kept a generous table, being a hospitable enter-
tainer of frequent visitors, often of high station.
The prudent Orton was of opinion that his
students lived too well.

A copy exists of the unpublished rules and
regulations of Doddridge's Academy, with the
signatures appended of students, who promised
faithfully to obey them. They are very minute ;
and again citing Orton's cahdid criticism, the
testimony is that they were largely a dead letter
in practice. Doddridge's numerous engagements

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 211

threw the work of tuition somewhat out of gear as
regards times. It now and then occurred (though
the Tutor rose at five) that what should have been
the Academy work of the morning did not come on
till late in the day. It is right to specify these
drawbacks; on the other hand, the atmosphere
of the house must have been thoroughly good and
wholesome. Its tone was high. Doddridge's
personal influence with his pupils was individually
felt. They all loved him. Few tutors had so
little occasion to lament the failure of moral pro-
mise in their students. He kept them closely
under his eye, and never allowed them to forget
their vocation. David Jennings was, though a
non-subscriber, a stickler for certain points of doc-
trine, and expelled from his London Academy
students of whose theological turn he did not
approve. It is not recorded that Doddridge ever
did this; but if, as happened once or twice, he
found reason to think the religious spirit was
wanting, then he did not hesitate to tell such
student that the Academy was no place for him.
In regard to methods of teaching, Doddridge,
as might be expected, took John Jennings as his
model. He avowedly made Jennings' lectures
in philosophy and theology the basis of his own.
For the choice of topics, the structural arrange-
ment, the geometrical plan (axioms, problems,
theorems, corollaries, and so forth), the style of
treatment, he was indebted in the first instance

212 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

to Jennings. In using and adapting Jennings'
outlines he introduced several new features.

Up to the time of Doddridge, the lectures on
divinity, philosophy, science, in all Dissenting
Academies had been delivered in Latin. In
many cases Latin, except during certain privi-
leged hours, was the current language of all
academical business. Such customs, retained
from the older universities, had outlived their
usefulness. Doddridge began by abolishing what
remained of them. He was the first of theological
Tutors to lecture in English. It was a great
innovation. It meant much more than a wel-
come relief from a tiresome linguistic strain.
Perhaps we can hardly estimate how much it
signified, both in the way of renouncing ancient
prejudice and in opening new views of theological
study, under the guidance of fresh text-books.
Consequent on the dropping of Latin as the teach-
ing medium would follow the comparative neglect
of the older books of reference, venerable treatises
of foreign divinity, framed in the ancient tongue >
Lectures in English would naturally be illustrated,
from English sources, at once more easily and.
rapidly consulted, and more modern in then-
range of thought, in their reach of sentiment..
Theology, released from the trammels of unvary-
ing technical terms, could take on new forms of
expression; a living language is the only right
vehicle for living thoughts. I think I love the

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 213

Latin language as much as any man can. For
many important purposes I prefer it to any other,
and deeply regret its disuse as the common
tongue of European learning. I fully recognize
that in certain departments it is, as it has been
called, the sacred speech of Christendom. These
are departments in which it has been sponta-
neously used by men to whom it was the fit dis-
covery of their thoughts, the natural utterance of
their hearts. In theological terminology it does
not shine at its best. To make it the vehicle of
a native English theology is a strangely artificial
process; it is to subject the thinking mind to an
unnatural restraint. Richard Baxter produced a
system of theology in a Latin quarto (1681);
"whatever else this tour de force may be, it is not
Baxter.

Therefore, I greatly honour Doddridge as the
author of that salutary revolution, which for the
first time invited the learners in theology to thinlc
out its problems during their student years, in
their own tongue. Looking at his theological
lectures, I am struck with the vast wealth of
illustration, poured upon all topics, from the
living literature of his own timei True that his
authorities are ancient now; cramped, crusted,
and mouldy, we may deem some of them to be.
They were fresh then; a new modern world of
varied and animated thinking, presented for the
scrutiny and the stimulus of young and eager

214 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

souls. It was from a stray reference to Hartley,
in Doddridge's published lectures, that Priestley
gained his introduction to the writer who formed
his mind in principles of philosophic analysis.

This is not all. Doddridge was the founder of
what may be called, though not in quite the
modern sense, a science of comparative theology.
What was the old method of teaching any given
doctrine of divinity ? The lecturer began by
defining the yiew of his church, or his school, mak-
ing it his own. This, he would say, is the right
doctrine. Then came some account of other
opinions on the topic. These, he would say, are
the heresies and aberrations that prevail in out-
side circles. He would arrange them according
to. the degree of their approach to, or divergence
from, the doctrine already propounded .as the
truth. His arguments would all be directed to
prove this, to disprove those. Such is the manner
of the vast majority of text-books. Doddridge
took another plan. He began by laying before
his pupils, with all the fairness of which he was
master, the various views which had been enter-
tained upon the point, and the arguments ad-
duced in their favour. These he proceeded to
compare, measuring them one against another,
weighing their merits, trying them by Scripture,
by reason, by each other, with the object, if
possible, of eliciting the truth; which might at
last be thought to coincide exactly with no one

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 215

of the systems thus brought into competitive
examination. What the master attempted, the
pupils were urged in like manner to endeavour
for themselves; the Tutor's business being to
see that they were in possession, as far as might
be, of the materials for a judgment; among the
most important of those materials being an
intelligent knowledge and appreciation of the
thoughts of others.

Another new feature of Doddridge's lecture-
room was the insistence upon the employment
of shorthand. Every student had to learn
shorthand, and had to copy out every lecture
in shorthand. The point was not that he was to
try to take a lecture down while listening to it, an
impossible feat. He listened to it, and thus took
it in. He then transcribed it from the Tutor's
manuscript (itself in shorthand), and so had it by
him for reference and for preservation. Not only
did he carry away a complete set of manuals of
his studies, vastly superior in fullness of treat-
ment to Jennings' breviate, but he possessed, to
boot, a rich magazine of references to books, as a
guide for his future reading. Should any un-
lucky layman, intent upon penetrating to his
minister's sources, chance to pick up a volume of
the series of note-books, his inquisitiveness would
be stopped by the hieroglyphics.

Doddridge was one of the first to perceive the
full advantages of shorthand to the student in the

2i6 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

saving of time and economy of writing material.
The old Puritans had made a plentiful use of it
for taking abstracts of sermons; they had few
other applications for it, and though, of course, it
found its way into earlier Academies, there was
no systematic employment of it. Doddridge, as
his basis, took Jeremy Rich's shorthand, invented
or rather adapted in 1659. It may have been
the best available to him in his schoolboy days,
but it was a cumbrous and arbitrary system,
much inferior to Byrom's (1720), which Wesley
and Hartley adopted. Priestley, by the way,
used Annet's. Doddridge made improvements
on Rich, not so much in the direction of speed as
in saving of space and increase of legibility. His
shorthand found its way into other Academies
as his pupils advanced to the dignity of Tutors.
It is not yet obsolete. The days are not forgotten
when it was recommended and taught by Dr.
Martineau, who used it for all his lectures and
sermons.

Doddridge made a practice of exercising his
students in village preaching. As a system this
was somewhat new. It was so pursued as to
constitute Northampton a centre of missionary
and evangelizing effort, quietly but effectively
pursued, under the Tutor's inspection and with
his active aid and co-operation.

A considerable proportion of his students
found their first settlements in the Midland dis-

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 217

trict ; thus the productive value of the Academy
was locally felt. By no means did he thus
render service to the Independent denomination
only. A letter (1750) from John Barker, of
Hackney, thus expresses the obligation under
which Doddridge laid the Dissenting cause
generally: "Had not you supplied our Presby-
terian churches for many years, what would have
become of us ? Nay, it is certain that what is
■called the Presbyterian interest in England has
been supported by Independent Tutors." This
statement is fully confirmed by inspection of the
list of ministers in congregations of Presbyterian
name, especially in the Midlands and the North.
Many of the most trusted leaders of the old
Liberal Dissent were men whose minds were
moulded by Doddridge. Their character was
not that of controversial preachers; their tone
was evangelical, their influence suasive; their
Liberalism was undemonstrative, but steady and
sure. They did much to build a bridge of practical
■Christianity over which the transit from an older
to a newer type of doctrinal ideas was effected
with a minimum of agitation. For their sym-
pathies were broad enough to keep them in touch
with the generation that was passing away, and
at the same time to give them the confidence of
the younger generation.

Of such men. Job Orton (1717-1783) was a pro-
minent example. Orton retired from pulpit

2i8 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

work with the ailments of a valetudinarian, at an
age which (but for an early addiction to an opium
habit) should have been his prime. Yet in his
seclusion at Kidderminster he held an advisory-
correspondence with Dissenters of every class
except, perhaps, the irregulars of Methodism, for
whom he had no love. His favourite reading lay
in the works of the elder Puritans, his tastes were
tame, his ideas of ministerial deportment were,
perhaps, timid and strait-laced. In religion he
was for the old-fashioned Gospel, and all novelties
were unpleasing to him. Yet his own orthodoxy
was of a carefully attenuated sort. It is charac-
teristic of his generous welcome for the consci-
entious convictions of others, that (as we shall
see) he could write with unstinted admiration of
Lindsey's sacrifices on behalf of principle, ex-
pressing nothing but good wishes for the success
of a chapel opened to promote doctrines in many
respects alien to his most cherished positions in
philosophy and theology.

Among Doddridge's pupils some few were from
the first intended for the Anglican ministry, and
one, Thomas Gillespie, became the founder of a
secession from the Scottish kirk in the interests
of ecclesiastical freedom. An unusual number
of his students became Tutors themselves; one
was promoted to an Edinburgh chair. One of
his pupils, never a tutor (yet a maker of tutors,
being a Coward trustee), exercised a decisive

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 219

influence on theological progress. This was
Hugh Farmer (1714-1787), the Independent.
Farmer's preaching is curiously described by
Kippis as having a kind of " swell " in it, which
seemed the prelude to the enunciation of very
high doctrine, but it never reached that point.
Farmer's " Dissertation on Miracles " (1771), to
which those on the Temptation (1761) and the
Demoniacs (1775) are subsidiary, is an epoch-
making book. Its aim is to vindicate the un-
shared sovranty of God. He disallows the
agency in the physical universe of any invisible
power save One, dismissing as superstition the
alleged physical operations either of evil spirits
at war with God, or of angelic beings his dele-
gates. Those of his readers who were convinced
by his premises were not slow to advance beyond
his conclusions ; soon denying the very existence
of invisible beings who had no work to do in the
visible world. In the long run his jealous rever-
ence for the unbroken course of nature was more
effective than his arguments for the production of
" new phsenomena," designed to reduce the para-
lysing impression of the conception of fixed law.
Farmer's treatise at once became a text-book
with the Rational Dissenters; its leading prin-
ciples had an enduring effect in clearing up, to
those who accepted them, the full meaning of the
Unity of God, and the far-reaching significance of
the undivided nature of his sway.

220 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

The successor to Doddridge's Academy was
that at Daventry, of which, in its early days,
Priestley has given us a most graphic and in-
structive account, drawn from the memories of
his own experience. At Northampton Doddridge
always kept an absolutely free hand. At Dav-
entry the appointments were made and the man-
agement was regulated under the supervision of
the Coward Trustees, a small body of Independent
ministers and la5maen. Still, the spirit of Dod-
dridge remained the real regulating influence.
The tutors were two, of whom Caleb Ashworth,
the head, took on all questions a conservative
position, while Samuel Clark, the junior, held the
opposite side. And these two worked quite
harmoniously together. Nay, they did what is,
perhaps, a difficult thing for Tutors to do. They
encouraged, in free intercourse with their pupils,
the canvassing of the very points on which the
Tutors differed; "a discipline," says Huxley,
" which, admirable as it may be from a purely
scientific point of view, would seem to be calcu-
lated to make acute rather than sound divines."

Now it is instructive to note that both these
men were pupils of Doddridge, by him selected
for tutorial office. Clark was his assistant.
Ashworth was nominated, in Doddridge's will, as
his own successor. These, then, were the chosen
trustees of Doddridge's academic methods. It is
clear that he made provision, for a future ot

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 22 r

libieral management and progressive teaching. Sa
indeed it proved. The history of Daventry
Academy culminated in the divinity tutorship of
Thomas Belsham, who, by following Doddridge's
comparative method of studying the problems of
theology, was brought to the point of identifying
himself (1789) with the rising movement of Unit-
arianism under Lindsey. Removing to Hackney
College he had a pupil there in Charles Well-
beloved, the first divinity Tutor at Manchester
College who advanced beyond Arian lines. It is-
worth remembering that as at Warrington
Academy, in the person of Aikin, so at Man-
chester College, York, in the person of Well-
beloved, the lineage of Frankland and the lineage
of Doddridge blend.

The principles on which Doddridge based his
academic work were those which guided his whole
interpretation of the function of English Dissent.
To him, the establishment and maintenance of
an Academy was not an end in itself ; it was part
of his larger purpose as a religious leader. Very;
early in his career as a tutor, Doddridge felt called
upon to vindicate the cause of Dissent, and to-
define his own position towards it. The occasion
was an " Enquiry into the Causes of the Decay of
the Dissenting Interest," issued anonymously
(1730) in the character of a candid friend among
the Dissenting laity by Strickland Gough the
younger. This son of a Presbyterian minister,.

222 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

had himself been educated for the Presbyterian
ministry, but had not got beyond a licence to
preach. Gough's pamphlet was well written and
able. His quarrel is chiefly with the ministers of
Dissent. He brings against them the not very
consistent charges that they humour the pre-
judices of their people, and that they " worship
God for twenty minutes " and " dictate to men
for sixty." In ignorance of their own true
principles, they set their faces against free in-
quiry, which the Established clergy, in defiance
of the terms of their subscription, do much to
encourage. The pamphlet was the prelude to its
author's conformity, Hoadly admitting him to
holy orders. Doddridge published anonymously
(1730) his " Free Thoughts " in reply. He agreed
with many of Gough's observations, but called
attention to a much more important class of
causes, and was quite at issue with Gough as
regards the remedy.

Calamy read both pamphlets, in ignorance
apparently of their authorship. He deprecates
the whole controversy. " If there were any real
decays, this way of proceediag was rather likely
to increase than abate them." Nevertheless, he
does admit that " a real decay of serious religion,
both in the 'Church and out of it, was very
visible." Calamy's anxiety for the maintenance
of the Dissenting cause was predominantly that
of the politician. As a political force the Dis-

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 223

senters were a mainstay of the Hanoverian inter-
est, a bulwark against the encroachments of
popery and the pretensions of absolutism. To
detract from "the considerableness of their body,"
by representing them as declining in numbers,
was, to say the least, " grossly imprudent." He
questioned whether there were any such decline
on the whole, for if decrease was noticeable in
some quarters, advance was manifest in others.
This was Doddridge's opinion too. In his neigh-
bourhood the number of Dissenters had been
greatly augmented within twenty years. The
interest of Doddridge in the Dissenting cause was
not political. He refers, indeed, to the political
influence of Dissent as that which gained con-
sideration for it from those who had " no regard
at all " for its true principles. His main point is
that " there is generally more practical religion
to be found " among Dissenters than in the
Establishment. He makes the remarkable sug-
gestion that " if the Established clergy and the
Dissenting ministers . . . were mutually to ex-
change their strain of preaching and their manner
of living but for one year, it would be the ruin of
our cause." With Calamy, he is for maintaining
a united phalanx of Nonconformity, not, how-
ever, as a political engine, but for the welfare of
" practical religion."

. Gough had noticed the lapse from Dissent of
men of social position, polite culture, and lati-

224 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

tudinarian views; and had advised the attempt
to cater for this class, and neglect the vulgar.
Here Doddridge joins issue with him. He is
firm in the conviction that the ministry of Dis-
sent, while liberal in its temper, must be evan-
gelical in aim ; and must speak with an effective
voice to the common people, who form the solid
strength of Dissenting congregations. He main-
tains that a man of good taste may be a plain and
moving preacher, and will then satisfy all those
whose interest in his ministrations is a religious
one. On the difficult question of a contrariety of
sentiment, he holds that division into congre-
gations of opposite principles is suicidal. " Bi-
gotry," he observes, " may be attacked by sap
more successfully than by storm "; and, again,
there is such a thing as being "a bigot in de-
fence of Catholicism," or, as we say, catholicity.
Religion and prudence must go hand in hand.

Warburton complimented Doddridge's pam-
phlet as " a masterpiece, both for the matter and
composition." It may certainly be said to ex-
hibit high qualities of ecclesiastical statesmanship.
To the ideal it sets forth, Doddridge, throughout
an influential career, was consistently true. It
should be added that, while he was a Dissenter on
principle, it was not on a principle of objection
to an Establishment. He was a Dissenter simply
for the sake of freedom to serve the cause of
evangelical religion. Hence he claimed that Dis-

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 225

sent should not be viewed or treated as schismati-
cal; and he urged upon Archbishop Herring, that
Dissent ought to be relieved of this stigma, by an
authorised interchange of pulpits between the
Established and the Tolerated clergy.

In contending, as he does, for the exercise of
all possible forbearance and respect in relations
with men of dogmatic temper, Doddridge gives
the best proof of the essential catholicity of his
own mind; for he had no sympathy with their
attitude. He was the first, at any rate among
divines, to use the terms " orthodox " and
" orthodoxy " ("a certain equivocal word be-
ginning with an O ") as labels for a theological
spirit which he was far from sharing. On enter-
ing the ministry he had qualified under the
Toleration Act. To the phrases of the West-
minster standards he " was resolved never to
subscribe," either actually or virtually; and he
sacrificed many tempting opportunities of pro-
motion by adhering tenaciously to this resolve.
Yet of those whom he styles " the rigidly ortho-
dox," while he unfeignedly laments their "un-
happy attachment to human phrases, and nicety
in controversial points," he nevertheless admires
their good qualities, and pardons an " excess of
zeal," " artificially . . . infused," yet " innocently
. . . retained," and " from a real principle of con-
science to God." If he could " put a tolerably
good sense on any of their favourite phrases," it

Q

226 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

would surely, he reasons, argue a " perverseness
of temper " to avoid such " merely because they
admire " them. It is at least possible to lay
aside phrases " offensive to them." " Our hu-
man forms are no more necessary than theirs."

Thus Doddridge made friends with Bradbury,
the redoubtable champion of Dissenting sub-
scription, and admitted Whitefield to his pulpit,
to the disgust (as we have seen) of London sup-
porters of his Academy. Thus, too, especially as
a young man, and while he was forming his
opinions, he used a playful caution in declining
to be drawn out prematurely, and committed to
a side. In an early letter (1724) to John Mason,
he remarks : " You very expressly tell me that
orthodoxy requires you to deny the salvability of
the heathen ; and then you desire me to send you
an abstract of the best arguments I can meet with
for the defence of the contrary opinion. What
if such a dissertation should fall into the hands of
some durus pater or durior frater ? Then am I
caught in the very act of Baxterianism ; and by
consequence am an Arminian, and therefore an
Arian, and therefore, perhaps, a Deist. . . . My
good sir, haereticus esse nolo." On the other hand,
he recognized the evangelical character of Peirce,
whose alleged heresies had given to Bradbury his
opportunity of standing forth as the leader of
Trinitarian orthodoxy. In the case of a member
of his own congregation, admittedly of Arian

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 227

proclivities, he acknowledged him as "a real
Christian" notwithstanding; and declared that
he would lose " his place and even his life " rather
than exclude such a man from communion. He
wrote of Deists without severity, except as their
principles or their conduct appeared to him
tending to laxness of morals. " Every bene-
volent and useful man in society," he says, " I
love and honour as such, whether he be or be not
a Christian."

His daughter said of him, " The orthodoxy my
father taught his children was charity." He says
■of himself, " I have lately . . . the character of a
very orthodox divine ; but to my great mortifica-
tion, I hear from another quarter that my ser-
mons are all Do ! Do ! Do ! To speak my senti-
ments without reserve, I think the one too favour-
able and the other too severe." This was when he
had got the decalogue painted on the wall of his
chapel at Kib worth. His position was not very
intelligible to Rational Dissenters, as the Arians
then styled themselves. They thought he trim-
med. Samuel Bourn, of Birmingham, did not
hesitate to tell him so. They mistook his courage-
ous liberality for a crypto-heterodoxy. They
considered that his true place was with them.
To his breadth of view, his perception of a
•common evangelical aim underlying differences
■of doctrinal expression and divergences of doc-
trinal vision, they were strangers. They very

228 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

much overrated his accord with their distinctive
opinions.

In ecclesiastical polity Doddridge expresses
himself (1723) as " moderately inclined " to the
Congregational form. Four elders were appointed
(1740) in his Northampton church. They were
not elders in the Presbyterian sense, having no
conduct of affairs. They relieved him of some of
his pastoral work, and were, in short, a species of
curates, two of them being, indeed, young;
ministers. So far as Church government went, he
was a Congregational pure and simple, locating
all ecclesiastical authority in the assembly of the
individual Church. He felt, however, the diffi-
culty of the purely Congregational position, in
face of the obvious need of securing some good-
provision for filling the ranks of the ministry.

In the view of every evangelical Christian a
minister is made a minister by Jesus Christ whose
minister he is, and by him only. The differences
of Church order arise with the question of vouch-
ing for a man's ministerial character and fixing
his sphere. Theoretically, in Congregationalism a.
man is authenticated and declared to be a
minister by the sole act of a congregation, choosing:
him as such. Theoretically, he is in consequence
authorised as minister in and for that congre-
gation alone. Practically, a congregation expects
its minister to be regarded not merely as its own
particular officer, like its secretary or its treasurer,.

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 229

but as holding ministerial status in the general
■denomination, and as far as its communion ex-
tends. Hence the authentication of ministers is
a matter for a wider consensus than that of a
particular congregation.

Peirce of Exeter, who was a Congregational,
nevertheless came over to what he termed Presby-
terian ordination ; a mistaken term, for he did not
propose that ordination should be committed to a
presb3rtery, a mixed body of clergy and lay de-
puties. He developed into a definite theory
the practice pursued by the Baxterian clerical
associations, and recognized in the terms of the
Happy Union of 1691. He reserved it as the
right and privilege of ministers to authenticate
the standing of ministers; a right and privilege
which any company of ministers might exercise
by mutual agreement. He left to congregations
the right and privilege of making their own
selection out of the number of ministers thus
approved. Such, in Peirce's view, was the only
regular course, though he admitted that any
ministry of proved usefulness was thereby shown-
to be valid, however irregular.

This theory was advanced by Peirce in 1715.
The way for its acceptance had been opened by
Calamy's treatise of 1704. It replaced the pro-
per Presbyterian view among many so-called
Presbyterians of the last century. In the judg-
ment alike of Presbyterians and of Congregationals

230 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

proper, it placed in the hands of the ministerial
class an irresponsible and somewhat dangerous-
power. There came a time when it was at any
rate imagined that the exercise of this power
placed arbitrary restrictions on doctrinal expan-
sion; when it was thought that the line was
drawn at Arianism by the " Presbyterian hier-
archy " ; a contradiction in terms, yet a common
phrase, the meaning of " Presbyterian " being
lost. The consequence was that ordination, if
retained at all, was reduced to a purely congre-
gational arrangement.

Doddridge, without adopting Peirce's high view
of the rights of the ministry, nevertheless
approved the practice to which it pointed. Dis-
claiming any notion of making this practice
imperative, he outlined, in 1745, his idea of the
wisest course to be pursued.

Persons intended for the ministry, should,
before they begin to preach, be examined as to
character and qualification, by three or four
ministers. If fit, they are then licensed to act
as candidates.

On being chosen as preacher to a congregation,
a minister is not at once ordained; during the
interim he fulfils all ministerial duties, short of
administration of the sacraments. Arrangement
for these is made with neighbouring pastors.

A minister is not ordained till he has been
formally called to be pastor; of this call he

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 23r

notifies neighbouring pastors, asking their con-
currence in his ordination.

Prior to ordination, he exhibits, if required, his
licence and credentials; and gives the ordainers
" satisfaction as to his principles," the ordinary
way being a written confession of his faith,
drawn up by himself. This, ia the opinion of
Doddridge, avoids " the indolence of acquiescing,
in a general declaration of believing the Christian
religion," and " the severity of demanding a
subscription to any set of articles."

At the ordination, he recites this confession, as
approved by his ordainers ; and answers questions
relating to his sense of the obligations of the
pastoral of&ce.

The actual ordination is by prayer and im-
position of hands, and is followed by charge to
minister and congregation.

When his pastoral relation has been thus
ratified, it is understood that he has permanently
dedicated himself to the ministerial character.
In the practice of that age, he is now for the first
time distinguished by the appellation of " Rever-
end Mr." though of this Doddridge says nothing.

Such is his plan for the institution of a minister.
The removal of a minister rests with the congre-
gation alone, in terms of the Salters' Hall
agreement.

There is nothing new in the plan. It is avow-
edly a selection from existing usages, and Dod-

232 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

dridge presents it as a sort of harmony of general
practice. So long as it prevailed, the old dis-
tinctions of a denominational style, Presbyterian
and Congregational, were little more than
nugatory. Where they had any real meaning
they referred, as already hinted, to differences of
internal management; the Independents main-
taining among themselves the cohesion of auto-
nomous church association, while the Presbyter-
ians were rather in the position of subscribers to a
lectureship, leaving matters of business in the
hands of a self-elected body of trustees, or a lay
committee of management. The denominational
names were revived at a later date, and without
much reference to the history of congregations, in
the interest of that redistribution into doctrinal
parties which Doddridge, we have seen, depre-
cated as a suicidal policy. Walter Wilson, the
historian of London Dissent, expresses himself in
1808 as if the division had already issued in
destruction. He writes like the shade of Dod-
dridge, seeking in vain to find the old Liberal Dis-
sent. " The Presbyterians have either deserted
to the world, or sunk under the influence of a luke-
warm ministry ; and the Independents have gone
over in a body to the Methodists." These, doubt-
less, were the very dangers against which the
mind of Doddridge was forewarned. Hence it
was that he dedicated the continuous aim of his
faithful zeal to the work of realizing, as far as

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 233

possible, the happy dream of the Union of 1691.
In some respects Doddridge's public position of
influence was unique. It has been said that he
■occupied a mOre distinguished place in the eyes of
his countrymen than has been attained by any
■other Nonconformist divine. He did not seek
any such prominence, and never came forward as
a representative man. All the same, he re-
sponded to every call upon his time. His corres-
pondence was enormous; he employed no
amanuensis ; and he made shorthand copies of all
ihe letters he wrote. He speaks of afiswering
letters incessantly for a fortnight, and still having
106 to deal with. He met on equal terms the
leaders of English religion and many of the leaders
■of English society. On all hands his services to
religion were acknowledged with genuine admira-
tion and gratitude. His diploma in divinity
■(1736) came from the two universities at Aber-
•deen. The English universities did not thus
honour themselves, but he was welcomed as a
visitor, and consulted as a correspondent, by the
highest representatives of learning, both at Oxford
and Cambridge. The extent to which he was in
•confidential communication with Anglican clergy-
men of various schools is very remarkable.
Wesley sought his advice in the formation of a
library for the use of young preachers. Probably
no man was more widely read in every depart-
ment of religious literature . He furnished Wesley

234 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

with a very detailed list, a sort of catalogue
raisonne, drawn up in a very catholic spirit.
" You wiU not," he adds, " by any means imagine
that I intend to recommend the particular notions
of all the writers I here mention; which may,
indeed, sufficiently appear from their absolute
contrariety to each other in a multitude of
instances. But I think that, in order to defend
the truth, it is very proper that a young minister
should know the chief strength of error." He
specially includes works beariag on the critical
study of the Scriptures. Evidently he thought
that such would be useful reading for Methodists.
" For, perhaps," says he, " when young people
are accustomed to that attention of thought which
sacred criticism requires ... it may prevent those
extravagant reveries which have filled the minds
of so many, and brought so great dishonour on the
work of God."

His instinct of philanthropy was as strongly
marked as his spirit of evangelization. It will
not be said of him as has been said, not very
justly, of the Quakers that in the eighteenth
century they turned from religious to phil-
anthropic labours. He developed, as they also
did, the philanthropic side of religion, and ex-
hibited Christianity as a beneficent spring of
endeavours for social amelioration, and for the
relief of suffering. He showed this temper in
individual cases; at the risk of being called a

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 235

Jesuit, when he took up the cause of an Irish
Catholic. He clothed it in projects, successful in
themselves, and influential as leading the way to
kindred efforts. From his foster-father, Clark, of
St. Albans, he took the idea of a charity school,
for teaching and clothing poor boys and girls ; his
foundation of this kind at Northampton was the
model for others elsewhere. At Northampton,
too, he had a main hand in the establishment of a
county infirmary. Bishop Maddox at Worcester
followed suit, writing to Doddridge for plans and
advice. Bishop Seeker wrote from Cuddesdon
to Doddridge, congratulating him on the success
of the infirmary, expressing his sense of the
advantage it would be to have one at Oxford, and
the hope he entertained that the Radcliffe trustees
when they had finished their library, might em-
ploy some part of the residuary funds in this
excellent work. Long after Doddridge's death
this was done.

Doddridge's philanthropy engaged itself also
in the formation of the first project of foreign
missions originated by Dissenters. It ranks as
the first, for though it would be wrong to forget
that the high theme of missions to the heathen
had enlisted the thoughts and stirred the hearts
of individual Nonconformists from the time of
Baxter, yet there had been no suggestion of con-
certed action on the part of Dissenters until Dod-
dridge's preface (February ist, 1742) to a sermon

236 PHILIP DODDRIDGE

on the general revival of religious effort. In this
he informed his brethren that at Northampton a
regular society had been formed, both for holding
religious exercises with a view to excite the
missionary spirit, and for collecting contributions
in aid of the work.

It must be owned that this whole project was
in advance of the ideas of Doddridge's day. Mis-
sions to the heathen were regairded as quixotic,
chimerical, almost out of place. The missionary
spirit was as yet practically unfelt in dissenting
•circles. Doddridge, whose enthusiasm had been
kindled by Zinzendorf, was here a pioneer, de-
serving all praise for his true perception of the
need, and his prompt and wise endeavour. The
distinctive thing about his presentation of the
missionary idea was that he connected it with the
healthy activity of church life. He did not leave
it to take its chance as an extraneous luxury of
superfluous enthusiasm, but put it in its place as
an integral part of that enterprise which is at
once the outcome and the stay of Christian zeal.
His measure of immediate success amounted, on
his own confession, to "a feeble essay." The
interest slumbered after his time, to be awakened
by louder appeals at a later date. Then his pro-
ject was recollected, then his example fired the
hearts and strengthened the hands of subsequent
workers.

We must not forget that the comparative

PHILIP DODDRIDGE 237

shortness of his life (he died at forty-nine) con-
spired with the multiplicity of his engagements to-
fracture his efforts. True, that in part his was a
career of achievements reached and registered.
Still more, however, was it a record of great ideas
arrested in their course. His family motto suited
him well, Dum vivimus, vivamus. He illustrated
it in an epigram, pronounced by Dr. Johnson to be-
one of the finest in the language: —

Live, while you live, the epicure would say.
And seize the pleasures of the passing day :
Live, while you live, the sacred preacher cries,
And give to God each moment as it flies.
Lord, in my views let both united be,
I live in pleasure while I live to Thee.

7 and 8 August, 1895.

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY
AND HIS CHAPEL

Theophilus Lindsey. — Born, 1723 ; Curate at
Spital Square Chapel, 1746-51; Rector of Kirby
Wiske, 1753-56; Vicar of Piddletown, 1756-63;
Vicar of Catterick, 1763-73; Minister of Essex
Street Chapel, 1774-93 ; Died, 1808.

VIII

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY
AND HIS CHAPEL

IN the latter part of the last century there was
living, in retirement at Kidderminster, a sage
divine of the Doddridge school, in sentiment
evangelical, in cast of thought puritanically dis-
creet rather than severely orthodox, with none
of Doddridge's buoyancy of heart or breadth of
endeavour, but gifted by nature with a cautious
sagacity, rendering hitn the oracle of the more
steady-going section of Liberal Dissent. To
prudent Job Orton, the opinions put forward by
Priestley and his friends were daring novelties,
alike distasteful and distressful for one whose
spirit clung to the demure Nonconformity of a
staid generation, moderate in all things. Yet
when Lindsey, with whom he had corresponded,
quitted the Establishment, to give effect to con-
victions with which Orton had no sympathy, the
pious recluse hailed the new confessor as a " glori-
ous character," was delighted to hear that his
" chapel was so well filled," and declared to the
editor of Calamy that, were he to publish an
account of Ejected Ministers, he should be

242 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

*' strongly tempted to insert Mr. Lindsey in the
list," though he "brought him in by head and
shoulders." Such was the impression, made by a
supreme act of conscience, upon a man not easily
moved to an enthusiasm. Our task is to trace the
steps by which Lindsey was led to the surrender
of his preferment, and to define the aims which
actuated him in his subsequent career.

Let it not be imagined that the story of this
" most excellent Theophilus " of the modern age
will present anything in the nature of what is
called " an intellectual treat." When Lord Cran-
worth went to receive the Great Seal, in succession
to Lord Westbury, her Majesty is said to have
welcomed him with the words, " You see, my
Lord, how much better it is to be very good than
to be very clever." A glance at the portrait of
Lindsey, whether we take the front face with the
clustering wig, or the profile silhouette, with the
protruding underlip and the silk night-cap, is
sufficient to moderate our expectations either of
genius or of vivacity in the original. It is the
visage of a mild man, of rather wooden exterior,
who looks as if he had never been in a hurry.
" Not stout but calm," so his plain-speaking wife
described him, " contented with all things, and
fit either to live or die." As a surface estimate
of him this is admirable, and there lay beneath the
surface a vein of true gold.

Lindsey was a Cheshire man, of Scottish

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 243

extract. His mother, a gentlewoman of no
iortune, had been brought up in the household of
a dowager Countess of Huntingdon; the Earl,
her son, whose name was TheophUus, stood god-
father to Robert Lindsey's youngest child. This
peer is best known in history as the husband of
Lady Huntingdon, foundress of the religious con-
nexion which perpetuates heir name. It is inter-
esting to note, in passing, that not only was
Lindsey on intimate terms with that remarkable
woman while he remained in the Establishment,
but much later, in her old age and his, she wel-
comed him at Trevecca, gave him her blessing,
and expressed her hope of a meeting with this
heretic in a better world. Her son Francis,
successor to the earldom, was a libertine and an
unbeliever ; yet he too (as we shall see) showed his
regard for Lindsey.

By other members of this family he was pro-
vided with an education, and with preferment in
the church. His first school was at Rostheme, a
name dear to Nonconformists as being the parish
of Adam Martindale ; his next at Leeds ; his
ooUege was St. John's, Cambridge, where he
came out wrangler, and ultimately obtained a
fellowship.

As his university was Cambridge, he was not
called upon to subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles
until his ordination. He then did so, as a matter
of course, though some things in them he dis-

244 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

approved, and the requirement of so compre-
hensive a subscription from young men, as the
condition of ordination, he deemed " a strange
unnecessary entanglement." His theological
position was orthodox, if a moderate Calvinism
deserve that name. In the theology of the
Articles he had been brought up, and he did not
question that it was substantially the true
Christian doctrine, " just as Christ left it at the
first, and Calvin found it about 1500 years after-
wards," according to the tart remark of Benjamin
Hoadly.

Unquestionably his heart was thoroughly set
on the work of the ministry. He took orders at
the earliest possible dates, becoming curate-in-
charge of the Wheler Chapel (now St. Mary's
parish church) in Spital Square. Then for a time
he mixed among great people. The Duke of
Somerset made him his chaplain, and died in his
arms. He gained the acquaintance of Butler,
then bishop of Bristol, and furnished him with
lives of Romish saints, probably from the
Somerset library. The Duke's grandson, the
little Lord Warkworth (afterwards Duke ot
Northumberland), was his pupil for two years in
France, and on his return to England' the North-
umberland family gave him a Yorkshire living.
He at once betook himself to parochial duty,,
though his patrons had intended him to go oa
with Warkworth's education as his private tutor

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 245

at Eton. Yet he certainly did not neglect his
own studies, for it was while rector at Kirby
Wiske that he became a subscriber to Taylor's
Hebrew Concordance. It is in the subscription
list to this monumental work that the names of
Priestley and Lindsey are first brought into con-
junction, the one a pinched Dissenting scholar,
struggling on his way to an incorrupt theology in
an obscure village of Suffolk, the other a comfort-
able Yorkshire clergyman, undisturbed by doubts,
and devoting all his powers to the service of a
Gospel ministry.

It was now that he became an intimate friend
of Francis Blackburne, rector of Richmond,
archdeacon of Cleveland, and prebendary of
Bilton. His connection with Blackburne is an
important fact in his life, but his first Yorkshire
incumbency had a duration of only three years ;
and while contact with Blackburne must have
been fruitful in stimulus to his mind, it is plain
that he did not become imbued with Blackburne's
characteristic ideas. It may be as well to say
here, as the matter has been misconceived, that
he had nothing whatever to do with Blackburne's
attack (1752) upon the supposed non-Protestant
tone of Butler's primary charge at Durham (1751).
This occurred while Lindsey was abroad, and be-
fore he knew Blackburne. A year after the
voiding of his fellowship, he resigned the rectory
of Kirby Wiske to take the vicarage of Piddletown,

246. THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

Dorsetshire, a valuable living in the patronage of
the Earl of Huntingdon, who was anxious ta
provide for him.

Now it was in the first years of his Dorsetshire
settlement that his mind underwent a theological
revolution, the history of which is as obscure as
its development was speedy and decisive. He
has left us entirely in the dark as to any process
of growth in his opinions. Apparently he passed
very rapidly, and without intermediate stages,
from the belief in the Trinity, which he brought
with him out of Yorkshire in 1756, to the tenet
of the simple humanity of Jesus Christ, which he
had reached by 1758, and from which thereafter
he never swerved. He speaks, indeed, of " many
doubts " concerning the Trinity having sprung
up in his mind " at different times and from
various causes"; but he regarded these doubts
neither with friendliness nor with apprehension.
He felt sure the doctrine must be all right; and
till he found himself thrown upon his own
resources in the solitude of the Dorsetshire vicar-
age, he had not examined his ground. His
examination was directed primarily, and almost
exclusively, to the Scriptures. He enumerates
no books of divinity, orthodox or heterodox, as
.having biased his judgment, though he tells us
that he found confirmation of his results in state-
ments of some of the early Fathers. The writings
of Socinus, he distinctly tells us that he had not

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 247

seen. We may find a clue to a proximate agency
of his conversion. When accounting for his con-
tinuance in the Church, he quotes an argument of
John Wallis, the Oxford mathematician and
divine. With characteristic honesty he tells us
whence he got the quotation; not directly from
Wallis, but from an anonymous tract of which he
gives the title. The tract was written by
Stephen Nye, and is included in the second
volume of the collection of Unitarian Tracts,
belonging to the period 1687-97. We may fairly
draw the inference that this volume at any rate
was in Lindsey's possession at Piddletown, and
materially contributed to the process of his change .
His main conclusion was one which, as he
shaped it, ceased to be a mere point of speculative
theology, and bore directly upon the very life of
the devotional sentiment. He reached the un-
compromising position that religious worship
must be rendered to the Father alone. Here is
his originality. Almost without an effort he
took. a step that landed him in a position which
others had approached by slow degrees and had
hesitated to occupy. The liberal theology of his
day drew its suggestion from Samuel Clarke's
" Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity " (1712). Its
main character was a latent Arianism, only in
comparatively rare instances achieving the dis-
tinctness of positive teaching. Two successive
archbishops of York, Herring and Hutton, each of

248 THEOPHILUS. LINDSEY

them raised in turn to the see of Canterbury, held
this type of opinion. The Countess of North-
umberland writes to Lindsey in 1758 that York-
shire is "in an uproar, as they say their former
archbishop, the late metropolitan, Hutton, died
an Arian. They own they do not know what that
is, but are sure it is something that is not the right
. religion." To Arianism Lindsey was never
drawn; hence he anticipated the movements of
contemporary thought in a way which for a man
of his uneager temperament is surprising. If we
may trust his autobiographical retrospect, and
it seems trustworthy, he was a confirmed believer
in the pure humanity of our Lord a year before
the publication of Lardner on the Logos; three
years before the delivery of the famous sermons
by John Seddon of Manchester ; nine years before
the publication of Paul Cardale's " True
Doctrine"; and ten years before Priestley
reached his " Socinian " stage. He was ten
years older than Priestley; thus they arrived at
the same point at the same age, thirty-five. It
is true that Lardner had preached the same
doctrine in 1747; and Caleb Fleming as early as
1740. Their utterances, addressed to tiny con-
gregations in obscure London meeting-houses,
could hardly have reached the ears of Lindsey,
who had hitherto come into no close relations
with any class of Nonconformists. There is every
reason to believe that he had not then met with

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 249

the posthumous tract (1750) of Hopton Haynes.
It is further to be observed that in his controver-
sial writing Lindsey originated among Unitarian
thinkers the denial that in Scripture the term
God is in any sense applied to Christ. This
exegesis, in which at first he stood alone, and in
which Belsham, for example, never saw his way
to follow him, marks a distinct cleavage of
opinion, removing the last bridge between his
position and that of the older theologies.

The primary effect of this complete recasting
of his religious attitude was to lead him to con-
template withdrawal from the active ministry.
He made some overtures for another situation,
and received some assurance in accord with his
wishes, probably from the Earl of Huntingdon.
He found he could not bring himself to the sur-
render of the vocation of his life. He excuses
himself in a touching picture of his lonely and
isolated condition " having no intimate friend to
consult or converse with." The " strangeness
and singularity " of his proposed course staggered
his imagination. He saw no precedent to guide
him, and felt what Blackburne had expressed in a
letter about this time, an obligation to his calling
" prior to all engagements to church modes, and
church nonsense in support of them." In an
after review of his procedure he reproaches him-
self with having yielded to these second thoughts.
" The first dictates of conscience, which are

250 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

generally the tightest, are to be attended tO'
. . . the plain road of duty and uprightness will
always be found," he says, " to lead to the truest
good in the end."

How was he then to make an attempt to square
his convictions with his practice ? Two modes of
quieting conscience were in vogue with clergymea
who felt the increasing pressure of liberal ideas.
A considerable section found it impossible to-
repeat their subscriptions; thus they debarred
themselves from future preferment. Warbur-
ton's " Case of Arian Subscription " (1721) had
made a deep impression on Clarke and his dis-
ciples, who resolved never to subscribe again -
This was Blackburne's position; he had long
determined that he would not renew his sub-
scription " to gain the wealth of the Indies, or the
honour and power of a Popedom." A smaller
number boldly laid hands on the Prayer Book;.
omitting passages of which they disapproved, or
altering the phraseology. Clarke had led the
way by introducing a modified doxology at the
close of the metrical psalms ; but Clarke, though
he would have liked to have gone much further,,
and actually did revise the Prayer Book in
manuscript, yet never ventured to tamper in
practice with the text of the services, save by
neglecting the Athanasian Creed. Such mani-
pulation was only possible in some country
churches, where the parishioners left their clergy-

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 251

man to do as he pleased, and the bishop was
willing to shut his eyes to innovations.

Neither course commended itself to Lindsey,
His maia difficulty was not about subscription.
Nor did he see how a mere refusal to subscribe
again could satisfy the conscience, since each act
of officiating was to him a virtual reaffirming of
the subscription which gave the right- to officiate.
Hence he was ready to renew the subscription in
form, when circumstances called for it. His
great difficulty was with the Prayer Book. In
this respect nothing could have put him completely
at his ease, short of an entire recasting. Yet at
institution to each of his livings he had taken the
solemn engagement: "I do, declare that I will
conform to the liturgy of the Church of England
as it is now by law established." This personal
pledge he felt himself bound to keep.

A third course was possible to him, and to this
he was guided by Nye's tract. The Unitarian
Tracts, as already mentioned, were promoted but
not written by Thomas Firmin. In part they are
reprints of the pamphlets of Bidle, who taught
Firmin his philanthropy as well as his faith.
Now Bidle was a Socinian and an Independent,
desirous of gathering his fellow believers into
Separatist congregations under the title of " meer
Christians." Some time after Bidle's death,
Firmin came under the influence of Stephen Nye,
a beneficed clergyman of Sabellian views, who

2S2 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

wrote the most important of the later tracts.
Nye (as we have seen) weaned Firmin from the
crude anthropomorphism which marred the
theology of Bidle ; suggested to him the use of the
Unitarian name ; and taught him not only to
interpret the forms of the Prayer Book in a
Sabellian sense, but to believe that this is the
sense " intended by the Church." The invoca-
tions in the litany, for example, were to be taken
as a threefold address to the Father, viewed
under different aspects of His providence and
grace. Lindsey adopted this esoteric construc-
tion of the liturgy from Nye's criticism of Wallis,
and remained fairly satisfied with it for about ten
years of quiescence. The subsequent return of
his self-reproaches cost him five anxious years of
painful conflict, issuing at length, after vain efforts
for legislative relief, in the heroic initiative of a
new departure.

About the time of his settling down to read
Sabellianism into the formularies of the Estab-
lishment, he became engaged to Blackburne's
stepdaughter, young Hannah Elsworth, whom he
married after a betrothal of more than two
years. " How often," says her old friend Mrs.
Cappe, " have I heard it regretted that Mr.
Lindsey had not married a person whose dis-
position and temper would have assimilated more
completely with his own." She however goes on
to say that Mrs. Lindsey had the very qualities

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 253:

essential to her husband's work; qualities com-
plementary to his, qualities of toughness and
bluntness, which sometimes pushed and some-
times pulled him through. " She regarded very-
little what others might say or think." Hence,
while Lindsey was by all beloved, his wife's-
capacity and virtues made her a very appreciable
force, but failed to render her generally attractive.
It is certain that she became an enthusiast for her
husband's creed; and at every turn of their
married life her shrewd intelligence and prompt,
decisive energy were in readiness to second his
aims and to guard his interests. To her really
sterling character the best testimony is that of
Priestley; though I am bound to admit that,
when Priestley wrote of the assurance of his-
friend's eternal reunion with his wife in another
world, a malignant critic remarked : "A very in-
different prospect for poor Lindsey." Alas, good
lady, in whom the miracle of motherhood had not
been wrought, what wonder if life's wine of duty
carried for her some spice of gall.

They had been married a couple of years when-
the Duke of Northumberland, father of his
pupil, was appointed to the Irish viceroyalty,
and at once proposed to take Lindsey with him as^
chaplain. This meant a bishopric; but Lindsey
declined the post. Given to the clergyman who
had taken his place as tutor at Eton, it secured his
promotion, first to Ossory, then to Elphin.

254 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

Why did he put away from himself a prospect
.of this kind ? Clarke, we know, would have
accepted a mitre, for the orthodoxy of bishops is
not protected by subscription ; they are the only
non-subscribers among the clergy of the Establish-
ment. Belsham sets it down to humility and
lack of ambition. Yet surely bishops have been
humble, and very unworldly men hav& felt a
personal vocation for the episcopal office. The
secret is that to Lindsey the cure of souls in a
country parish was simply the ideal life, the life
most rich in openings of usefulness and goodness ;
and it was the life he loved best. Blackburne had
written to him five years before, contrasting their
situations, and saying how gladly he, too, would
exchange his public province (the archdeaconry)
for mere parochial work, " if I had talents such
as yours."

In the year following his rejection of the Irish
chaplaincy, Lindsey exchanged his Dorsetshire
vicarage for a Yorkshire one. It was said that
this was Mrs. Lindsey's doing. The object, in
any case, was to be nearer to Blackburne, her
stepfather. Catterick was a much larger parish
than Piddletown, though a living of smaller value.
As there were three subordinate chapels in the
parish, there was a good deal more work as well
as less pay. A field was open for parochial
organization, and of this Lindsey availed himself
with vigour and zeal. Jn particular he began

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 255

(1764) what may properly be called a Sunday-
school, as distinct from the conventional practice
of Sunday afternoon catechizing, which he pur-
sued on alternate Sundays. Every other Sunday
afternoon he had a class of a hundred boys from
the vUlage school for Bible lessons, and every
Sunday evening a class for young men and young
women alternately; while his wife had Sunday
evening classes for boys and girls. This was six-
teen years before Raikes, who began in November
1780; and it was more modern in its conception
than Raikes' plan, based as that was on the
impartation of elementary instruction by paid
teachers. What did his parishioners think of
him ? It is very curious, but he was so different
from the country clergyman of the mill-wheel
type, so much alive, so assiduous, and so human,
that they could find but one appellation that
seemed to fit him; accordingly they called him
a Methodist.

Now occurred two events which, taken to-
gether, produced a crisis in Lindsey's life. The
first was the resignation of William Robertson;
the second was Priestley's removal to Yorkshire,
and consequent introduction to Lindsey. With
Priestley we do not here deal, but of William
Robertson it seems proper to furnish a brief
sketch. Lindsey has constantly referred to him
as "the Father of Unitarian nonconformity";
and if this is, perhaps, a somewhat misleading

256 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

estimate of his position and claims, none the less
does the powerful character of this brave and able
man deserve a reverent study.

William Robertson, the Irish son of a Scottish
father and a Yorkshire mother, was educated at
Glasgow for the Presbyterian Church. Expelled
from Glasgow University in his twentieth year
as a ringleader of revolt against the Principal,
he hurried up to London, and there succeeded in
obtaining the appointment of a Royal Com-
mission, which visited the University, rescinded
the act of expulsion, established the right of the
students to choose their own Rector, and restored
the exhibitions admitting Glasgow men to Balliol
College, Oxford.

His London errand introduced him to the Lord
Chancellor, Sir Peter King (a renegade Dissenter),
and to sundry Whig bishops. One of these,
John Hoadly, brother of a famous man, took him
off to Ireland, ordained him deacon and priest
(not a sacrificing priest, according to Papal
decree, though a sacrificing priest in another
sense he proved himself to be), and provided him
with half a dozen livings, yielding a total annual
stipend of £300 a year. To double this income
it was only necessary to compel graziers to pay
tithe. The Irish House of Commons, sym-
pathizing with the owners of black cattle, passed
a strong resolution on the subject of clerical
extortion. Dean Swift satirized the action of

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 257

the Commons; the graziers applauded it and
stopped payment. Robertson, after vainly pro-
posing a plan of tithe commutation, put a curate
in charge of his country livings, and himself took
a Dublin curacy. While there, he founded in
conjunction with another curate a clerical widows'
and orphans' fund for the Dublin diocese.

He had returned to the country and was
fifty-four years of age, when chance threw in his
way a book called " Free and Candid Con-
siderations " (1749) compiled anonymously by
John Jones of Alconbury. Jones was a strong
advocate for Prayer Book revision, especially to
meet the case of Arians. Robertson read Jones'
book, and at once decided that it was impossible
for him to subscribe the Articles again. No
sooner had he come to this resolution, than fresh
and valuable preferment was offered to him. He
declined it in a very frank letter to his bishop
(15 Jan. 1760). From this time he omitted the
Athanasian Creed, and some other parts of the
church service; finding that his ecclesiastical
patrons were dissatisfied he resigned his livings.
He had twenty-one children; yet he threw up
all his preferments, save and except only an
honorary private chaplaincy of merely casual
value. This was in 1764.

In 1766 Robertson printed anonymously a
singularly able little book, bearing the modest
title of an " Attempt," which must have been

258 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

written two or three years previously. He
describes himself as " a presbyter of the Church
of England," says nothing of his resignation, but
only of his refusal of further preferment, and
expressly denies that he belongs either to the
Arian or the Socinian party.

He propounds the plan of a comprehensive
Church. Subscription is to be strictly limited
to the Bible. The Prayer Book is to be so revised
as to reduce it to an impartial echo of Scripture.
This, he thinks, will be sufficient to reunite all
Protestant Christians, and heresy will cease ; for
heresy is an artificial crime, it simply means that
a man does not belong to the Establishment.
Let us listen to his own plea : " Methinks I hear a
voice come out of the crowd : Heyday, what an
Utopian scheme is here. Shall we set the gates
of the Church wide open to let in all sorts of
heretics, Arians, Eunomians, Macedonians, Sabel-
lians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Socinians, and all
the motley crew which have been condemned
by so many Councils, Popes, Fathers, and Acts
of Convocation and Parliament ? . . . Shall we
open the gates to these people? I say, Yes. And
for this reason; that as soon as we let them in,
they lose their names, and become one with us by
joining in the public worship, to which they can
no longer have any objection; and, moreover,
employ all their power in defending the Establish-
ment which would so generously support them.

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 259

What their particular speculative opinions may
be, as long as they remain quiet in the State,
concerns not thee or me to know; no more than
it does at present to know the private sentiments
of every clergyman of the Established Church,
who have, I believe, as different notions of religion
as they have faces; and yet all is peace among
them, by agreeing in the great practical duties,
and by joining in the worship that is established
by law." This is a fair specimen of Robertson's
trenchant style. He quotes (from Voltaire) the
caustic epigram : " The difference between the
Church of Rome and the Church of England is
this: that the former cannot err, and the latter
is always in the right." A copy of the third issue
of his book was presented by its author to his
alma mater, the University of Glasgow. The
Senate immediately made him D.D.

When the news of Robertson's resignation
reached Lindsey (probably in 1768), it struck home
to his conscience, as a mandate for his own exodus.
Here was the precedent for which he had vainly
sought ten years before. On the other hand, he
n,ow had friends to consult ; and his main friend,
Blackburne, was strongly averse to secession from
the Church. Blackburne had lately brought out
his contra-subscription treatise, bearing the quaint
title of " The Confessional " (1766). His hope
was to create a body of public opinion favourable
to a parliamentary measure for clerical relief.

26o THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

Blackburne unhesitatingly refused an invitatioa
to settle with a congregation of Dissenters in
London, though it would have doubled his
income. All this would influence Lindsey and
hold him back.

He was impelled forward by his associations
with Priestley. The advice of Priestley coincided
with Blackburne's : " Stay where you are ; rather
take liberties with your Prayer Book than give-
up your church, unless they drive you out." The
position of Priestley, with its happy immunity
from pledges, spoke to him in another sense, with
the voice of an irresistible appeal. Returning one
day from Wakefield, where he had met Priestley
and Turner, he thus expressed the contrast which
he felt between his situation and theirs: " They
are at ease." His resolve was taken during
recovery from a dangerous attack of rheumatic
fever, brought on (as I conjecture) by his exertions
in behalf of the clerical Petition for Relief (1772).
Should the petition fail, he would resign his livings
To this he definitely, though silently, made up
his mind.

The petition, known as the Feathers Petition,,
from the tavern in the Strand where its promoters-
met, was indeed a forlorn hope. It proved a
failure in every respect. As drafted by Black-
burne, it proposed to free the clergy of the Estab-
lishment from any requirement " to acknowledge
by subscription or declaration the truth of any

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 261

iormulary of religious faith or doctrine whatso-
ever, beside Holy Scripture itself." Well might
Burke satirise the idea of making legislative use
•of so intangible a commonplace of Protestant
piety, taking as its formulary "the multifarious
strange compound . . . called the Scriptures," and
■defining neither the principle of its interpretation,
nor the scope of its authority. This language of
the great orator was resented by Lindsey as the
speech of a Jesuit, full of popish ideas; but it
rudely expressed the politician's appreciation of
an illusory settlement, which would settle nothing.
The petitioners, according to the printed list of
their names, numbered only 197, drawn from
twenty-six counties, by far the larger number
from the eastern counties, Essex alone contribut-
ing thirty-one naines. None came from Cheshire,
Warwickshire, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire ;
only two from Lancashire. There was one pre-
sident of a Cambridge college; but of church
dignitaries, Blackburne himself was the single
specimen. It is not too much to say, after a close
scrutiny of the list, that, in theology most, if not
all, were heterodox. Among them were a couple
of quondam Arian Dissenters, who had con-
formed, and found their new shoes pinch worse
than their old ones.

The House of Commons debated the petition
from three o'clock till eleven on 6th February,
X772, and rejected it by 217 votes to 71. The

262 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

petitioners were satisfied with the debate, which
they thought gave them a moral victory. The
speech they especially admired was by Sir George
Savile, whose theme was that " the Church of
God can protect itself " ; an admirable truth, but
one which seems even more at variance with the
principle of an Establishment than with that of a
subscription. One important issue of the debate
demands remembrance. In the course of it, Lord
North " with his usual good humour observed
that he saw no ground to complain of intolerance,
in times when every one was permitted to go to
heaven in his own way "; and added that if the
Dissenters had made a similar application, for
relief from their subscription to the Articles, he
could see no reasonable objection to it. The
hint was taken by two Dissenting divines, who
listened to the debate from the gallery. A Bill
for a modification of the Toleration Act was intro-
duced that same year, and at once passed the
Commons. After having been twice rejected by
the Lords, it finally became law in 1779.

Baffled in his hopes of relief, with now no
course left for him but to resign his living, Lindsey
took his place in the Yorkshire coach, feeling that
he was returning to Catterick only to sing his
Nunc dimittis as a minister in the Church of Eng-
land. There was a most winsome incident of
this return. In the morning, before he started
on his homeward journey, he bethought him of

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 263

his Sunday scholars. He had persuaded some of
them to endure inoculation for the smallpox, and
he wanted to persuade the rest. So he trotted
down to the Tower, and there he got at the
Mint a bag of new halfpence, prizes for the
little folk, that none might flinch from the pre-
ventive measure. This childless man had a
heart, whereby he understood something of the
great God.

For yet another year he postponed his resigna-
tion, since the Feathers petitioners had agreed to
apply again to Parliament ; a purpose which was
at length abandoned as hopeless. Meantime
Lindsey devoted himself to a study of Calamy's
lives of the Ejected Divines of 1662, and prepared
his own apologia. In reading Calamy, he was
particularly touched by a striking passage from
the soliloquy of John Oldfield, of Carsington, a
passage which has since been quoted with great
effect by Mrs. Gaskell, in her novel of '"North
and South."

The first person to whom he definitely an-
nounced his intention of resigning was Mason, the
poet; who thought it "visionary and absurd"
to make a fuss about " the usage of forms, by
which no one was injured." Blackburne, when
he heard what was coming, grew vehement in his
remonstrances. In losing Lindsey he felt, and
said, that he was losing his right hand. His
own theological liberalism did not run in the

264 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

Socinian direction; and though he dissevered
himself, as far as he could, from the taint of
Socinianism, by immediately publishing against
it, yet he foresaw that the defection of Lindsey,
avowedly on these lines, must be fatal to all
chance of reviving the petition for relief. Not a
single one of Lindsey's friends backed him up in
his resolve, or seemed to credit its reality. Even
HoUis was silent.

When he had actually taken the step, almost
the first word of genuine appreciation came from
Grey Cooper, the Whig politician, who thus wrote :
" I have read your letter, which filled my heart
with grief, and made my eyes glisten with tears.
I have not a word to say, or an argument to offer,
against your resolution to quit your prefer-
ment." His farewell sermon (Nov. 28, 1773) was
delivered to a crowded congregation, and was
broken by their sobs.

What' now was to be his course ? Mention has
been made of the character of Francis, the Earl of
Huntingdon. He was fond of posing his clerical
guests with the awkward problem: "What be-
came of the universe, when its great Creator hung
lifeless upon a tree in Judea ? " Lindsey had
replied that the question did not concern him,
as the doctrine ridiculed formed no part of his
creed. " But," said Huntingdon, " it is part of
the creed of the Church in which you officiate
jsvery week as a minister." Hearing of Lindsey's

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 265

resignation, he at once wrote to him, saying that
while he cared nothing for theology, he neverthe-
less honoured integrity, and wished Lindsey to
accept an appointment as his librarian ; the salary
would be handsome, and his time would be his own .
Again, there was just now a vacancy at the Liver-
pool Octagon (by the resignation of Hezekiah
Kirkpatrick), and Turner hoped that Lindsey
might be induced to fill it. There was a vacancy,
loo, at the Norwich Octagon; Lindsey was
pressed to settle there. By this time he had
made up his mind to strike out a path for him-
self, to set the example of a new churchmanship.
His only doubt was in regard to the proper
locality for the experiment. He thought of Lon-
don and he thought of Bristol, but decided for
London. As he wrote to Turner: "My design
... is to try to gather a church of Unitarian
•Christians out of the Established Church."

Stress is due to this definite and important
•statement, because the graphic pen of Mrs. Cappe,
writing after Lindsey's death, chooses other terms
±0 describe his project. She represents him as
iounding a chapel " on such a basis as should
admit of the communion of Christians of what-
ever denomination:" This language is rather apt
to mislead. Lindsey held, it is true, that the
forms of public worship he approved, being
Scriptural, must be satisfactory to all true Chris-
tians. He believed that a purely Scriptural

266 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

liturgy might form a common bond between
different churches; and hoped that in time men
would see this, and come so far into agreement.
He went no further than this in his ideas of
Christian communion. In his first sermon at
Essex Street he maintains that God never meant
all Christians to be of one sentiment, but that
there should be different sects of Christians and
different churches. He wished to increase largely
the number of Unitarians; but he certainly did
not expect to convert everybody. Nor did he
reckon his mission to be to the outside sects, from
the Catholic to the Quaker. He left, Priestley to
deal with Dissenters. Of any mission to the un-
churched, not a syllable does he let fall. His
mission was to members of the Church of Eng-
land, to whom he hoped to show a better way.
" The peculiar reason," he says, " for forming a
separate congregation, distinct from the National
Church, is that we may be at liberty to worship
God alone, after the command and example of our
Saviour Christ." In Scottish phraseology his
was essentially a Relief Church.

With this understanding, we may accept Mrs.
Cappe's further description of his plan, as "a
specimen of a reformed Church of England."
He had renounced the phantom-project of an
Establishment with an open door, which had
been the ideal of Robertson, and the object of the
Feathers Petition. A Unitarian secession had

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 267

become, in his opinion, the only practical course.
Thus, while Firmin's idea had been to keep
Unitarians in the Church, where they were to
act as a leaven, Lindsey's idea was to draw them
out of the Church, and his chapel was to be a
magnet for that purpose. He wanted, as he says,
to " awaken others to come out of Babylon," out
of " her witchcraft and idolatries."

When he got to London, Lindsey was fifty years
of age, and very poor. His father's property had
been equally divided between himself and a
spendthrift brother, but Lindsey had given the
whole of his own share to his married sister. He
had laid out his income on his parish. His wife's
fortune yielded little more than £20 a year. To
provide for immediate necessities he had sold
most of his books; he now sold his plate. He
took a lodging in Holborn, having a little closet
off the bedroom, which did as coal-cellar, store-
room, and study. Sitting on one pile of books,
he made another pile serve him as writing table.
The man was happy; he had put himself in the
right. When Joseph Johnson, his bookseller (son
of an Evert on Baptist) had found him an auction
room in Essex Street, he was ready for the start
of his Unitarian Chapel, opened 17th April, 1774-

Priestley ran up for the opening, Benjamin
Franklin was there, with a lord, and a posse of
beneficed clergy. Lindsey wore no surplice, but
in other respects the model of the Established

268 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

worship was adhered to. On his way to London
he had fallen in with a transcript of Clarke's pro-
posed revision of the Prayer Book, in the posses-
sion of Disney, Blackburne's son-in-law. His
friends suggested that he should adopt this as his
own service-book, thus sheltering himself under
the sanction of an historic name. While he took
Clarke's revision as his basis, he made many
further changes; retaining, however, the use of
the Apostles' Creed, and beginning the litany with
a threefold invocation. Priestley defended the
creed usage in his plan (1783) for " formation of
Unitarian churches," saying, " I used to have
much objection to the recitation of the Apostles'
Creed, or any creed, in public worship. But when
I consider that the object of Christian assemblies
is not merely devotion, but likewise general
instruction, and that the great principles of
Christianity, and especially the outlines of the
Gospel history, cannot be too firmly impressed
on the minds of all, I now think that the short
time that is taken up in the recital of that
creed, as corrected by Mr. Lindsey, is very well
employed." A few years later, the creed was
deemed in need of further corrections, not merely
verbal. Lindsey dropped its use some little time
before his resignation in 1793. Not many persons
can recollect the recital of the Apostles' Creed as an
integral part of the service in a Unitarian Chapel.
It was maintained at Alcester during the whole

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 269

of the thirty years' ministry of Thomas Warren,,
ending in 1864, and memory retains the im-
pression of the hearty way in which it was recited
by the congregation.

Three years in the auction room secured the
prospects of Lindsey's experiment. The pre-
mises were bought, and the present building with
its modest dome was erected (opened 29 March,
1778). Having taken me to London for the
Great Exhibition of 1851, my father asked me
what next I would like to see; I told him I
wanted to see Essex Street Chapel. So thither he
took me, and afterwards took me to Westminster
Abbey. "Well," said he, "what do you think,
of this ? " " It's a fine building," answered I,,
"but it hasn't got a dome like Essex Street
Chapel." When my father's friend. Dr. Russell,,
of Birmingham, heard of this, he remarked:
" That boy'U come to a bad end; he's taken early
piety in a morbid form."

It cannot be affirmed that the success of
Lindsey's experiment was the success he had been,
sanguine enough to contemplate. A few persons
of distinction joined him from the Establishment ;.
but adhesions to his movement from this quarter
were neither very numerous nor very permanent..
The bulk of his support came from Dissenters..
A remarkable and important secession of Cam-
bridge divines threw into the Unitarian ranks such
men as Jebb, Evanson, Tyrwhitt, Wakefield and

270 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

others. Unless we count household worship,
none of these seceders except Disney became
ministers of Unitarian congregations; nor did
any of them attempt to form new causes, ex-
cepting the heroic and ill-fated Fyshe Palmer.
Disney became Lindsey's colleague in 1783, after
applications had been made in vain to Robertson,
J ebb and Lambert. When Disney resigned in
1805 it was not by an Anglican convert that he
was succeeded, but by Belsham, who came from
the Independents. This appointment of Belsham
was with Lindsey's full approval, and was fully
justified by the event. At the same time it was
yielding to the inevitable; it marked in a signal
manner the reversal of Lindsey's hopes of an
increasing stream of Anglican coadjutors; and
by a section of his friends it was ill received, and
treated as a new departure, at variance with the
original purpose of his chapel.

Nor were the efforts to plant other Unitarian
chapels, on the Essex Street model, attended with
much continuous success. Under Lindsey's own
auspices, chapels were opened at Highbury and
at Plymouth Dock, but they were manned by
Dissenters, and were soon closed. In 1791 the
Essex Street Prayer Book was reprinted at Dun-
kirk, and used for a time in the English chapel
supported by the merchants there. Of all the
numerous ventures of this sort, that in Mosley
Street, Manchester, transferred in 1839 to the

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 271

building in Upper Brook Street of Barry's design,
(the first Dissenting chapel erected in Gothic
architecture) is the sole, though long a distin-
guished, survival to our own times.

The abiding effect of the Lindsey movement
was realized in the gradual transformation of the
older type of Liberal Dissent; issuing in the
practical separation of a distinct religious com-
munity, diminished in numbers, but imbued with
a fresh force of vigorous conviction.

The process was not rapid. Belsham reports
that in 1789, when he resigned his post at Dav-
entry, he " knew but of two congregations (Essex
Street, and New Meeting, Birmingham) the
ministers of which were avowed Unitarians." By
1810 he was able to add some twenty to the list.
From that date the pace was quickened, and by
various causes;, the passing away of the older
generation of divines ; the coming over of men in
middle age, as the influence of their former leaders
was withdrawn; the literary and controversial
strength of the Unitarian cohort; the supply of
the ministry from the college at York, where
Wellbeloved, though a pupil of Belsham, did his
best to teach a theology without bias, with the
result, however, of sending out a succession of
ardent Unitarians ; the passing of the Trinity Act
of 1813, which redeemed Unitarian opinion from
outlawry, and fortified its advocates with a wel-
come sense of equal rights with other Dissenters,

272 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

Reverting to Belsham's remark about " avowed
Unitarians " it is to be noted that he means Uni-
tarians in the Lindsey definition of the term.
Lindsey was the first to impress upon the Unit-
arian name a special stamp of meaning, to him of
prime importance. It was Lindsey who taught
Priestley to use the name Unitarian in place of
Socinian. Do not suppose that Lindsey was one
of those sensitive spirits to whom the name
Socinian is a species of torture. On the contrary,
he af&rms for himself and his friends, that "though
they would not wHUngly be called by the name of
Socinus, or of anyone but of Christ himself, yet
they refuse not the. appellation, but think it
honourable." Still, it would not have lent itself
to the special purpose for which he wanted a
denominational name.

He got the term Unitarian, no doubt, from the
writers at the end of the seventeenth century, who
introduced it into the English language. It was
introduced at that time, as a term of catholic
spirit and wide comprehensiveness, covering all
those who, with whatever other differences, main-
tain the Unipersonality of the Divine Being.
Sabellians, Arians, Socinians, all were equally
entitled to a name which linked them in allegiance
to a common tenet. Its hospitality was not
limited to its Christian adherents; Israel and
Islam (Wesley's " Unitarian fiend ") were ex-
pressly recognized as belonging to the brotherhood

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 273

of the Unitarian name. Thus the function of the
name was to define a common point of theological
speculation . Those to whom it was applied were
viewed .as in accord on a matter of divine know-
ledge. God is a Being who may be known. It is
a conclusion of reason, based on the data of His
self -revelation, that in person, as well as in essence,
God is strictly and simply One. Of the existence,
or non-existence, of subordinate powers; of our
respective duties to Him and to them: the
doctrine primarily expressed by the Unitarian
name is silent. This is the sense in which Unit-
arian is defined by the consensus of a catena of our
accredited theologians; e.g., by Lant Carpenter,
by Aspland, by Yates, by Tayler, and by Mar-
tineau. Again, it is the sense in which the term
is used by those who speak broadly of the
Unitarian Church, an expression employed by
William Taylor as early as 1810. It was a
favourite expression with Henry Arthur Bright
(" Lay of the Unitarian Church "). It was taken
up in America by Sylvester Judd (1813-1853),
and familiarized among us, by Dr. J. R. Beard
(about 1857) and employed as a collective
designation, to cover retrospectively the whole
succession of antitrinitarian movements in the
history of Christendom.

Lindsey, who adopted the term with little
reference to its historical origin, gave it a new
turn in accordance with his idea of worship.

274 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

already adverted to. "The Unitarian doctrine,"
says Lindsey, " is this: that religious worship is
to be addressed only to the One True God, the
Father." His common point is not one of
theological speculation, but of religious practice.
God is a Being who is to be worshipped ; and there
is but One Being who is to be worshipped. The
unqualified condemnation of all worship of Christ,
no better in Lindsey's view than a species of real
even if unconscious idolatry, was a novel feature
of the antitrinitarian protest in this country.
Neither our Arians nor our Socinians had hitherto
taken this ground. Bartholomew Legate fur-
nishes an exception, and one may be found in
Hopton Haynes; these, however, were not in-
fluential cases. Doubtless the earlier English
Unitarians had set themselves to reduce the wor-
ship of Christ to what they deemed its proper
proportions. Some of them had thought it best
reserved for special phases of devotion ; none had
reckoned it wrong, when kept in its due place.
Most had defended it as subordinate worship,
rendered to the Son of God, to the glory of God
the Father ; some had rested it on express divine
command. Emlyn's treatise in " Vindication of
the Worship of Jesus Christ on Unitarian Prin-
ciples " (1706), is a specimen of endeavours to
rectify rather than to abolish a universal practice
of Christendom. It was their adversaries who
had deduced from antitrinitarian premises the

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 275

inference that Christ-worship was an impiety.
Lindsey not only admitted the inference, but laid
the greatest possible stress upon it.

Hence Lindsey but seldom speaks of the Divine
Unipersonality. His constant phrase is the
Divine Unity; and by this he always means,
somewhat in disregard of the usual force of the
term, that the Father is the solitary object of
■Christian worship. Thus he refuses to admit
that Trinitarians hold the Divine Unity, that is,
in his sense ; for he does not mean either to deny
them to be Christians, or to strike Christianity
irom the list of monotheistic religions. Similarly
he refuses to Arians the use of the Unitarian
name, in spite of their historic title to it, unless
they join him in his restriction of worship to the
Father only. How he contrived to include the
Muhammadans, who deny that to God belongs the
-attribute of Fatherhood, I cannot say; Lindsey
certainly classes them as Unitarians; but other
writers of this type were very touchy on this
topic, and disputed the evidence of the earlier
recognition of the Unitarianism of the Moslem.

This restriction led to another, imposed upon
the Unitarian book societies (with one exception).
Their rules were prefaced by a preamble, intended
formally to warn off Arians, and inviting the co-
operation of those only who believed in the mere
.humanity of our Lord.

The justification, or the excuse, for this policy

276 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

was the purpose of consolidating the movement.
Against this advantage must be set the alienation
of friends of an inclusive spirit, and the grievance
experienced by Unitarians of an older type ; who
felt very much as some later Unitarians felt, when
the founders of the Milton Club excluded anti-
trinitarians from membership.

Lindsey's construction of the name marks the
beginning of the modern Unitarian religious body
(" the Unitarian connexion," as some style it) in
contradistinction to the older efforts of Unitarian
speculation. In that body it is still the popular
sense; and popular on account of its practical!
bearing. It is capable of being made mandatory,
at least on its negative side; the jussives of
religion, as distinct from its advices, being, indeed,,
chiefly negative . None but an unreflecting person
would dream, for example, of attempting tO'
utilise the formulary, " Thou shalt love the Lord
thy God." That this is in the Law, and is, in
fact, the highest thought the Law contains, simply
shows that the Law bears witness to things beyond!
its sphere; since religious emotion is not elicited
at the call of an imperative injunction. Whereas,
" Thou shalt not say in my hearing any prayer to
the Virgin Mary " is quite within the scope and
competence of practical religious regulation.

Reduction of worship to a strict Patrolatry was
then with Lindsey made central and distinguish-
ing. Few of any creed will dispute that a divided

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 277

homage is incompatible with a right attitude of
the heart towards God. So far Lindsey's position
was impi:egnable ; his principle was sound and
salutary. In applying this principle he allowed
nothing for the different experiences of men in
regard to what impedes, and what assists, a whole-
hearted devotion to God. Belsham seems to have
discovered that a good Unitarian of the Lindsey
type, and of Lindsey's own making, might yet
turn to Christ quite naturally, as a man turns to
his friend. The Duke of Grafton, agreeing with
Belsham that Jesus would himself resent the
tribute of " that divine worship " which is " due
only to the Almighty Father," nevei:theless held
that " Jesus Christ, in his present state, can hear
and help us." This Lindsey had categorically
■denied. Belsham, however, makes the remark-
able admission that he " would be far from pre-
suming to limit the extent of " Christ's " know-
ledge or his power, in his present exalted state."
He thus allows that there may be supplication,
without worship, in the theological sense. What
would he have made of an address of this kind ?
" Come, Friend and Saviour of the race, who
didst shed thy blood on the cross, to reconcile
man to man, and earth to Heaven. . . . X^om-
passionate Saviour ! We welcome thee to our
world. We welcome thee to our hearts. We
bless thee for the Divine Goodness thou hast
brought from Heaven; for the Souls thou hast

278 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

warmed with love to man, and lifted up in love to
God ; for the efforts of Divine Philanthropy which
thou hast inspired; and for that hope of a pure
Celestial Life, through which thy disciples triumph
over death. Benevolent Saviour ! Inspirer of
goodness ! We offer thee this tribute of affection-
ate and reverential gratitude on earth; and we
hope to know, to love, to resemble, and to
approach thee, more nearly and more worthily in
Heaven."

Now, I do not know whether these sentences of
Channing, the first drawn from the last of his
pamphlets, the rest from one of his posthumous
sermons, would gain from Belsham the indul-
gence extended without difficulty to a coroneted
convert. There is little doubt that Lindsey would
deem them wholly inadmissible, being unintel-
ligible save as apostrophe, and a dangerous abuse
of that figure. In this estimate he would be
followed by all who take Unitarian to mean what
he made it to mean ; and who, consequently, by a
Unitarian Chapel understand a chapel in whose
services there is no legitimate room for personal
address to Christ, or for sympathy with the
attitude of mind which prompts it.

In full accord with the special emphasis which
he ' laid upon his chapel for Unitarian worship,
Lindsey did not propose to make it a chapel
for Unitarian preaching. On the contrary, he
pledged himself never to treat on controverted

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 279

points of theology in his sermons from the Essex
Street pulpit . It is true that he broke this pledge ,
at least on one occasion, in order to expound his
foundation principle. As a rule he observed it
very closely, and, I think, without an effort. He
claims in his farewell sermon (1793) to have
"never knowingly deviated " from the principle
" never to arraign or condemn other churches or
Christian societies for their different worship or
opinions, who have a right to judge for themselves
as much as you have." Didactic exposition
was always more to his taste than polemical
debate. People who went to hear him out of
curiosity were sometimes astonished to find
nothing in the sermon except pure religious
teaching and high morale. This was his idea of
the function of the pulpit; for polemics the fit
agency was the press. Even in his publications
for the good of his cause, he took, where possible,
the line of history; and when, because no one else
would, he set himself to reply to Robert Robin-
son's polemic, he wrote anonymously, in order to
reduce the personal element in the controversy to
its lowest terms. His reply had the rare merit of
converting his adversary.

His " Historical View " (1783) of Unitarian-
ism since the Reformation, though swelled by
tedious argumentative digressions, is not only a
book of good research for its time, but has the
honour of being the first in its kind. Later writers

28o THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

would have done well had they taken the trouble
to follow up its method of investigation, in place
of satisfying themselves with merely quoting
from its pages.

His apologetic and other writings have that
command which earnestness, pains, singleness of
purpose, and genuine conviction will always give ;
but they are not striking. His style lacks vital
force, for his mind lacks imagination and humour.
His matter, often excellent, is never rich. His
doctrines are diligently culled from Scripture,
interpreted as though Scripture were a product of
the eighteenth century. He speaks of Isaiah as
an " illustrious prophet," and thinks of him as
the Rev. Dr. Isaiah, in a bob-wig, with a bland
manner, and a curious habit of being merely
" figurative," whenever he might otherwise seem
to dissent from Mr. Lindsey. Substitute apostle
for prophet, and the same account will equally
serve to delineate his vision of the author of the
Pauline epistles. Lindsey's conspicuous piety is
serene, but unimpassioned. With good reason he
insists on telling you that his Christ is indeed a
human being; and that he still lives. Never did
a heresiarch show less fertility in religious con-
ception, or keep himself at a safer distance from
enthusiasm.

On the other hand, his mind was open, to the
last, for the reception of further suggestions in
his own line of thought. Priestley's rejection

THEOPHILUS LINDSEY 281

(1787) of the narratives of the birth of our Lord
as unhistoric, staggered, and even shocked him at
first ; yet before long he found himself in harmony
with Priestley. In his last publication (1802) he
treats the question of the supernatural in a way
which, in Belsham's opinion, " destroys the very
existence of miracles, and subverts the argument
founded upon them." He had adopted the view
of his favourite author, Abraham Tucker, and was
prepared to admit that " those operations called
miraculous are as much the result of general laws
as the most ordinary events." Lindsey, in short,
was concerned with the historical facts, and valued
them as such. Belsham was intent on making
good use of them as theological credentials.

I mention these indications, not that I think
Lindsey's intellectuar calibre was such as to give
special weight to his conclusions on particular
points, but because, among those unversed in the
writings of our Unitarian fathers, there is an
impression that their minds were somewhat rigidly
fixed in a uniform system of ideas ; and that they
had paid no attention to problems which have
since been much under debate. On the contrary,
the more I study them, the fuller do I find the
evidence of the extent to which they carried their
independent researches, and of the fearlessness
which informed their judgments. Whether we
take the trouble to know them or not, the men
who made the Unitarian movement are worth

282 THEOPHILUS LINDSEY

knowing. Whether we endorse their creed or not,
their opinions will reward scrutiny. Whether we
wish well to their cause or not, there is much to be
learned from the story of their aims, their
achievements, their failures.

Among all those who assisted in the Unitarian
rebirth of the last century, we may set Lindsey
first, as in time, so likewise in prestige. This is
not to claim for him the penetrating genius of
Priestley, or to match him with the robust power
of Belsham. There is none whose life, from first
to last, conveys a finer lesson. Lindsey, as a
writer, was a model of sober diligence in and for
his generation. He will be neglected to-day by
all but the few who have leisure and curiosity, and
are led into sympathy with the past by a desire to
understand the present. Lindsey, as an example,
is for all time; a fresh, nervous protest against
the supineness of conformity, the peril of tamper-
ing with conscience, the unworthiness of half
measures in religious conviction ; a protest all the
more signal and decisive from its deliberation, its
unobtrusiveness, its self-denial, its characteristic
union of high resolve with modest service, and
with patient strength.

7 March, 1895.

THOMAS BELSHAM

HIS PLACE IN THE

UNITARIAN MOVEMENT

Thoma Belsham. — Born, 1750 ; Assistants
Tutor at Daventry, 1771-78; Minister at Wor-
cester, 1778-81; Minister and Divinity Tutor at
Daventry, 1781-89; Divinity Tutor at Hackney,
1789-96; Minister at Hackney, 1794-1805; Minis-
ter at Essex Street Chapel, 1805-29 ; Retired from
active duty, 1825 ; Died 1829.

IX

THOMAS BELSHAM, HIS PLACE IN THE
UNITARIAN MOVEMENT

JUST as the year 1779 was begun, a country-
minister, but lately ordained, paid a brief
visit to London. Ministers on their travels have
nearly as much curiosity as other people. The
visitor, accepting the invitation of a friend, went
to evening service at a chapel erected in the
previous year, and rather in the fashion, having
the combined attractions of heresy and novelty.
One of its strongest supporters had been drawn to-
the place by the eager report of a lady's maid,
that " a gentleman was going to open a room to
preach a new religion." " A gentleman told his-
friend at Tunbridge Wells it was the only ' genteel'
place in town." Now the Worcester divine, in
the course of his studies, had read something of
Dr. Priestley, and had gone so far as to entertain.
' the idea of the bare possibility of a Socinian being,
a good man. In this opinion he felt himself con-
firmed, as he listened to the quiet strain of the
evening preacher's grave and earnest discourse-
There was no theology to vex him, for the topic ,-
" a good conscience," is common to most theo-

286 THOMAS BELSHAM

logies. So the listener reasoned, it is just because
these men neglect theology that they remain con-
tent with views " so grossly erroneous " as theirs.
He left the building, with heightened respect it is
true, yet touched all the more deeply with " a very
sincere concern " for the pioneers of the new
movement. Recording these impressions, after
the lapse of a generation, he adds this striking
•confession, " Little did he then suspect, that
further and more diligent and impartial inquiry
would induce him to embrace a system from
which his mind, at that time, shrank with
horror. And, had it been foretold to him that,
in the course of years and the revolution of events,
lie should himself become the disciple, the friend,
the successor, and the biographer of the person
who was then speaking . . ^ he would have
regarded it as an event almost without the wide
circle of possibilities, and as incredible as the
incidents of an Arabian tale."

It can hardly be needful to explain that, on that
memorable January night, the preacher was
Theophilus Lindsey and the hearer was Thomas
Belsham. I wish we could see them, as they then
faced each other. Lindsey we can indeed see, per- '
f ectly well. His picture exhibits him to us to-day,
exactly as he looked to Belsham. The only
portrait of Belsham we have, thirty years later
in date, by no means suggests a man whose chief
recreation was horsemanship ; nor does it in any

THOMAS BELSHAM 287

way enable us to conjecture back the fresh image
of his vigorous prime. An irreverent jester once
proposed to relabel it " Cardinal Hippopotamus."
A mischievous sceptic put the question, " Is it
possible that man really believed in the resur-
rection of that body ? " There are men who are
not much to look at ; and there are men who are
too much to look at. Oliver Heywood is one of
these (his latest biographer calls him " the Great
Oliver"); so is Matthew Henry. The picture of
Belsham afflicts one with the spectacle of an
exaggerated bulk. Let us pass from the effigy,
and try to discover the man.

The father of Thomas Belsham, an Independent
minister and the author of some Latin poems,
was, it is believed, the original hero of a story
which has been retailed of later and less poetical
divines. Preaching as a candidate for a Scottish
charge, where the leading elders were a laird and
a physician, James Belsham, who professed him-
self a moderate Calvinist, dined with the physi-
cian and supped with the laird. " Sir," said the
physician at dinner, "I like your moderation, but
God forgie your Calvinism." " Man," exclaimed
the laird, after a hearty supper, " your Cal-
vinism's vera weel, but de'il tak your moderation."
Belsham's mother was the daughter of a brewer,
the granddaughter of a knight, the great-grand-
daughter of an earl ; we will go no further. This
earl, we may observe, was not merely a statesman

288 THOMAS BELSHAM

of distinction, but is said to have been the first
peer of the realm who collected a great library —
collected and paid for it ; there have been peers
who have collected libraries by a simpler process.
From his mother, Belsham received, at the outset
of life, a characteristic injunction, neither to take
his politics from Junius, nor his theology from
Priestley. One of Belsham's sisters was married
to an Irish dean; hence his visits to Ireland;
hence, too, perhaps, the easy tone he took in his
relations with ecclesiastical dignitaries.

Till he went to Daventry Academy in his seven-
teenth year, his theology was purely that of
the Assembly's catechism. He soon became a
Clarkean, and remained unshaken in this persua-
sion until he was seven-and-thirty. That is to
say, he ascribed to our Lord every divine attribute,
saving only self -existence. Whether this is
orthodox or not has been disputed. Clarke main-
tained that it was. Belsham never did. He
thought it Biblical, and therefore true. He was a
Trinitarian on these terms. Nevertheless, he had
the distinct conviction that he was beginning life,
strongly evangelical in religion, but in theology
a Nonconformist.

Not reckoning the episode of a three years'
ministry at Worcester, of the usual Independent
type, Belsham was connected with Daventry
Academy as student and tutor, for a period of
twenty years. He never liked the locality.

THOMAS BELSHAM 289

which he describes as a " mean and dirty place."
Could he have had his way, the Academy would
have been transferred to Worcester, to North-
ampton, or to Warwick. To the Daventry ideal
of theological education he remained constant
through life. The genius of Daventry, inherited
from Jennings and Doddridge, was inherently
eclectic. Truth was sought by a method of
comparative theology. The teacher placed com-
peting systems before his class ; the learners were
to be not mere pupils but students. The aids of
friendly debate between teachers and learners
were not disdained ; we have seen that, in
Priestley's time, the teachers themselves took
different sides on fundamental questions.

In the last year of his studentship, Belsham had
supplied the place of a classical tutor. On the
completion of his course, he was appointed Tutor,
not in classics as he desired, but in mathematics,
logic, and metaphysics; and in this post he re-
mained for seven years. Meanwhile he had
plenty of overtures from congregations. He had
made up his mind on two points : not to be a com-
peting candidate; nor to listen to any but a
unanimous call. Only the precarious nature of
an assistant tutorship drew him at length from
Daventry; he returned to it in his thirty-second
year, as to the work of his life. For eight years
he combined the headship of the Academy with
the pastorate of the congregation. On his settle-

290 THOMAS BELSHAM

ment, his friend Radclifie Scholefield sent him a
recipe for polishing tables, accompan5dng it with
a lament over the fatal fact that there was no
formula by which he could, " with the same ease
and certainty," polish the minds of his pupils.

As Divinity Tutor, Belsham innovated, in an
important respect, upon established methods.
Doddridge's lectures had hitherto been the text-
book; lectures which built up a system by con-
fronting, comparing and Biblically testing rival
views. Belsham took Doddridge's order of
topics, but in regard to some of those most con-
troverted, he made his treatment directly Biblical.
A strong reason with him for adopting this treat-
ment was the failure of the text-book method to
counteract the current of Unitarianism. Under
each head he collected the passages of Scripture
bearing, or supposed to bear, upon it. On every
passage he furnished a catena of interpretations
and comments, so selected as fairly to exhibit the
various schools of thought, in direct contact with
that which all assumed as their foundation. His
own critique concluded the survey. Four years'
pursuit of this method had consequences which
disturbed him. Though still a Clarkean, he could
no longer, with Clarke, consider himself to be a
Trinitarian. He wrote frankly to the Academy
Trustees, and they were satisfied with his position.
Two years later he was alarmed by the progress of
Socinian views among his best pupils. To settle

THOMAS BELSHAM 291

their minds, he had nothing better to offer than a
reconsideration of the BibHcal data. With each
annual revision of his lectures, the anti-Socinian
proof passages kept diminishing in number; yet
he could appeal with justified confidence to the
residuary texts, which had stood the test of
scrutiny. Before the close of 1788 the residuum
had been reduced to zero in this purifying process.
Belsham's eyes were almost suddenly opened.
He had taken what he thought the only sound and
certain course for staying the Unitarian move-
ment ; he found himself cornered by the Unitarian
argument. Nay more, the very doctrine from
which, up to the last moment, he had recoiled,
now dropped into his mind like the keystone of an
arch, giving permanent .stability and consistence
alike to his theology and his religion.

He did not hesitate to resign his post (25th
January, 1789), and the resignation was accepted
by the four Trustees, three of whom, it may be
interesting to know, were also Trustees of Dr.
Williams' foundations. It has been said that
the terms of the Trust left no option. On the
contrary, it was admitted that a Unitarian might
fulfil every condition of the Trust with literal
fidelity, but then the Founder's purpose would
be ignored. There were some who blamed Bel-
sham for not doing this. One of the Trustees
writes thus for the rest, in words which Belsham
endorses: — " Rigid interpretations are the acts of

292 THOMAS BELSHAM

weak minds, but a regard to general intention
marks the mind that wishes to act right." The
strangest part of the whole business was the action
of his Daventry flock, showing that congregations^
are not always as unsympathetic as ministers-
sometimes think them. At the outset, while
avowing that he had " not the least fault to find
with " them personally, he had affirmed that their
" temper and spirit " were " enough to strike any
minister with terror." Later, he described them
as " chiefly of the lower classes of people," and for
the most part " steady Trinitarians," adding that
they were nevertheless "very affectionate.'"
They proved the truth of this last remark, when,,
knowing that their minister had resigned the
Academy as a Unitarian,, they still wished him to
remain their pastor.

Twice, while he was at Daventry, had an effort
been made (1785 and 1786) to transfer Belsham to
Warrington. The Academy there had been
closed (1783), but not dissolved, and its friends
were sanguine of Belsham's power to revive it.
He had fancied for a moment (1785) that this
might lead to an amalgamation of the two-
institutions; but, though he wavered a little, it
is clear that the Warrington overtures were not to-
his mind; nor did he estimate the Warrington
tradition at the rate to which its admirers are
accustomed. As late as 1814 he contrasts " the
theological discussions of Daventry " with " War-

THOMAS BELSHAM 293

rington cold morality, and thfeological ignorance
and indifference." This, doubtless, refers to
Warrington's declining days, for he speaks with
veneration of Aikin (who had been his first school-
master), and to Dr. John Taylor he pays (i8og) a
noble tribute: "He thought much himself, and
he taught others to think; and though he did not
advance so far as others have since done, yet the
most enlightened of modern divines would pro-
bably not have known so much, or understood the
Scriptures so well, if Dr. Taylor had not gone
before them to clear the road."

No sooner was his resignation made known than
he received an invitation, through Dr. Price, to
become resident Tutor in the New College at
Hackney. At first he declined; pressure from
Lindsey and Priestley produced his acceptance.
Here he had a hard task in hand. Hackney Col-
lege was a Liberty Hall. Its alumni met the dis-
ciplinary regulations of the committee with
" resolutions to resist their tjranny, couched in
terms as energetic as if all liberty, civil and
religious, were endangered." One Sunday a
leading spirit suggested that it would be a good
thing " to have a republican supper, and invite
Paine." This was before the " Age of Reason "
<i794), and was a tribute to the " Rights of Man "
(1791). Paine " was much pleased," and there
was " the most glorious republican party that the
walls of the College ever contained." Paine told

294 THOMAS BELSHAM

them of " a club at Sheffield of 1,500 republicans,
chiefly manufacturers " ; they thought it " the
bud of a revolution." One of these promising
politicians, in the gaiety of his heart, inflicted a
cruel mischief on his country. The Birmingham
riots of 1791 found their excuse, and perhaps
their proximate cause, in an inflammatory hand-
bill, circulated a few days before the outbreak.
This spark upon powder was the work of a student
from Hackney College.

Belsham's appointment was welcomed by the
students, and his influence was not without a
sedative effect; but still he was no head of the
College, until he received fresh powers, four years
after his appointment; and then it was too late.
Further, the admirers of Paine's republicanism
followed Paine into Deism. Belsham found that
his " studious " and " virtuous " pupils had lost
faith in Christianity; and " this," he writes, " is
an evil to which no remedy can be applied ; actions
may be restrained, but thoughts must be left
free." Owing to the double difficulty, the in-
stitution was closed in 1796. Next year Belsham
was again invited to a divinity chair, • as the
successor of Barnes in Manchester College. He
declined, doubting the permanence of Manchester
College, and feeling sure that he could not give
satisfaction to the Lancashire Arians. Though
he entered into no direct connection with Man-
chester College, he had some share in forming the

THOMAS BELSHAM 295

mind of one who was long at its head; Charles
Wellbeloved was for two years his pupil at
Hackney.

Disappointed in the hope of a colleagueship
with Priestley at Hackney, in 1792, he was elected
Priestley's successor two years later. Of his
eleven years' ministry at the Gravel Pit, he says,
"It is not in imagination to conceive a con-
nection . . . more happy. What freedom of
speech, what encouragement . . . what kind
affection ! " Strong motives were needed to
draw him away to Essex Street. His settlement
there in 1805 marks the close of an era in the
Unitarian movement. His twenty years of
active service at Essex Street, closing syn-
chronously with the foundation of the British and
Foreign Unitarian Association, constitute a period
of transition.

It will be remembered that when Lindsey
resigned Catterick (1773), he put aside oppor-
tunities of Nonconformist service in favour of a
project of his own, namely, " to try to gather a
Church of Unitarian Christians out of the Estab-
lished Church." He hoped for a considerable
Unitarian secession from this quarter, and for a
sufficient number of seceding clergy to minister
to the movement. The motive for the secession
was to maintain a purified worship, with a
revised Prayer Book, containing a version of the
Apostles' Creed. He did not wish " ever to

296 THOMAS BELSHAM

treat of controversial matters " from the pulpit.
The worship must be Unitarian ; the preaching
might well be limited to the common ground of
Christian religion. Lindsey from the first had
wanted a colleague at Essex Street, and was in
despair of a coadjutor, when at length, after nine
years' solitary labour, the timely secession of
Disney gave him a colleague, and ultimately a
successor. Even Disney can hardly be said to
have kept firmly on Lindsey's lines. During the
last three years of his ministry the Prayer Book in
use was of his own composition, and bore no
relation to the Anglican service. On his resigna-
tion " every- possible inquiry was made after
some seceding clergyman " as his successor, " but
to no purpose."

Some modification of Lindsey's scheme was
therefore imperative. That Lindsey worked hard
to secure the appointment of Belsham, as Disney's
successor, is proof that he himself saw this, more
clearly than some others did. The Prayer Book
of Anglican pattern, minus the creed, was brought
back (Belsham says, " at the express desire of the
Duke of Grafton "), but there was no endeavour
to avoid doctrinal preaching, always a feature,
though not a predominant feature, of Belsham's
ministrations. Far more significant was the
tacit .surrender of the aim to lead an Anglican
exodus, and the frank acceptance of the call to a
progressive work within the confines of Dissent.

THOMAS BELSHAM 297

We are so accustomed to think of Belsham as
above all things a Unitarian, that we ignore the
limits within which ^lone he thought it right to
■describe himself as such. In 1791 he had drawn
the preamble of the Unitarian Society, in terms
meant, as he explained, to have the effect of
:shutting out Arians. Ignoring this intention,
Richard Price, not being formally excluded,
joined the society. To Price, as to Lindsey
■originally, Unitarianism was a term of religion;
it meant the worship of the Father only. Belsham
argued that there was no security for this worship,
•apart from the acknowledgment of the simple
humanity of Christ. A consistent Arian, he
maintained, ought to worship Christ. Hence, if
he could have done so, he would have restricted
the application of the term Unitarian to the
holders of a purely humanitarian Christology.
Accordingly he proposed to attach it simply to
individuals, and to propagandist societies, not to
•ecclesiastical bodies. This policy he pursued
with great tenacity in both directions ; drawing a
:sharp line of distinction between temporary
associations to advocate a defined theology, and
permanent religious institutions to be kept open
for progress.

" Some months ago," writes a correspondent
(February, 1814) of the Monthly Repository
'" happening to be in London, and passing along
JEssex Street, it delighted me to see ' Unitarian

298 THOMAS BELSHAM

Chapel ' inscribed on the new portico of that
house, dear to the mind of every friend of truth
from having been consecrated to the worship of
One God by Theophilus Lindsey. But, Sir,
proportioned to my gratification on this occasion,,
was my concern and surprise the other day, in
passing the same spot, to perceive that the
original, honourable, and characteristic inscription
had been erased, and the words ' Essex Street
Chapel ' substituted in its stead."

Though no answer is recorded, we can easily
supply the true one. In the interim had occurred
the passing of the Trinity Act (July 22nd, 1813);,
of which the point was this, that while in title it
seemed a mere Relief Act for Unitarians, both in
form and in effect it was a Relief Act for Dis-
senters generally. Every Anglican was still
bound by law to be a Trinitarian, but the whole
of Dissent was now freed from this statutory
obligation. It was now possible and proper, so
thought Belsham, for Unitarians to act as an
integral part of Protestant Dissent. It was their
business and duty to prove themselves an in-
fluential ingredient in that larger whole.

Four months after the passing of the Act, he
had written thus (28th November, 1813) to
Robert Aspland: — "I think you have borne a
little hard upon Dr. Enfield, Dr. Priestley, and
others of that standing, who, labouring under all
manner of abuse from their orthodox opponents,.

THOMAS BELSHAM 299

took to themselves the name of ' Rational
Christians ' or ' Rational Dissenters,' as a counter-
balance to that of ' orthodox,' ' evangelical,' &c.,
assumed by their opponents. Indeed, I never
quarrel with any party for giving themselves a
good name, as they are sure to be sufficiently
plied by their adversaries with epithets of evil
repute."

Long before the passing of the Trinity Act, he
had objected to the establishing (1806) of the
Unitarian Fund, a society for missionary pur-
poses. This has been ascribed to his " almost
constitutional distaste to popular movements."
To the last " his feelings were against them,"
though his judgment came to be " for them."
The truth is, he was afraid that a great cause
would get into the hands of shallow men, and so
lose its influence. On this point he was converted .
By 1812 he admits that the Unitarian Fund
society " holds the foremost rank," that it has
" demonstrated the fallacy of the commonly
received opinion, that Unitarianism is not a
religion for the common people," and that " after
the success which has attended the efforts of this
Society, no person who is a real friend to the
cause can consistently be hostile to its principle."
Through this " hearty sanction of popular plans,"
whUe himself identified with " the aristocracy of
Unitarianism," he exercised, as has been well said,
a "harmonizing influence," which brought the

300 THOMAS BELSHAM

advocates of opposite methods to a mutual under-
standing and respect.

He was not converted to Aspland's plan of a
Unitarian Academy (1812) with a two years'
course of instruction to cover all branches, yet he
did not withhold a generous pecuniary aid.

Needless to say that Belsham was blind to the
advantages of denominational organization. " I
was brought up an Independent," he says, " and
I am unwilling to bow to any authority beyond
the limit of my own congregation." Writing to
Aspland (14th November, 1818) he thus expresses
himself, " If I wished the Unitarians to become a
powerful political sect, I should be a warm friend
to that grand scheme of federal union, of which I
heard so much in Lancashire. But as a friend to
truth and liberty, which I think much impeded
by such associations, I must dissent from them.
Nor can I approve of any plans for separating
Unitarians from their fellow Christians, more than
is absolutely necessary. We are the salt of the
earth. But a lump of salt, lying by itself, wiU
never fertilize the ground. It must be mixed and
blended with the earth, in order to manure the
soil and produce a copious harvest." The simile
is shrewd. Unhappily, there were already signs,
unmarked by Belsham, that the soil, mistaking
its place, was on the eve of invading the salt-
boxes. The protracted struggle, which began in
1817, and never took breath till the achievement

THOMAS BELSHAM 301

of the Dissenters' Chapels Act in 1844, drew
Unitarians closer together ; on the other hand, it
broke them off from the main body of Dissent.
Hence it seems to me that Belsham's policy,
equally with that of Lindsey, was frustrated by
events. Both schemes were Utopian. The first
failed, because Anglicans declined to follow suit.
The second was wrecked by active hostility of
Dissenters, roused against the internal disorder,
by whatever name designated, which threatened
to benefit them.

It was in accord with this policy that Bel-
sham consistently refused to countenance the
formation (1819) of the Unitarian Association, for
protecting the civil rights of Unitarians. He
wrote strongly against it, on the ground that the
civil rights of Unitarians were simply those of all
Dissenters, and anything which should seem to
detach them from the main body was suicidal.
" I demur," he writes (29th January, 1819) to
Lant Carpenter, " to the prudence and propriety
of the Unitarians separating themselves from the
rest of the Nonconf 01 mists, and establishing
themselves as a distinct sect. This sectarian
spirit, however it may tend to strengthen a party,,
appears to me to be unfriendly to the spirit of
religion and the investigation of truth. Every
sect must have its shibboleth. You must be
tender to the errors of those who belong to your
party, however gross or important, lest you.

302 THOMAS BELSHAM

weaken your interest. Whereas, religion is wholly
a personal thing; and the investigation of truth
requires unlimited freedom from restraint. . . .
I sometimes suspect that the cause was advancing
more steadily when it advanced more silently, and
that many are bawlers for a speculative system,
who are strangers to the religion of the heart."

Yet it is perhaps not surprising that Belsham's
posthumous fame should be mainly that of a
controversialist. His powers and his prowess
were great, and the motive for their exercise was
no personal impulse, but the feeling that he stood
for the vigilant defence of a sacred charge. He
took up the cause of Priestley in exile, with none
of Priestley's genius, but with far more caution,
far more deliberateness, far more pungency, far
more present effect. More successful than Priest-
ley in drawing Arians into the arena, he perhaps
bore himself towards them as too keen an
antagonist, at least they thought so. His
grandiose style possessed the kind of dignity
which suited the taste of the age, and admirably
fitted his purpose. He controverted bishops with
a weight and point which could not be ignored,
addressing them as from a secure elevation, and
with exasperating blandness. In a biography
otherwise excellent, he has clothed Lindsey in
purple, when perhaps fine linen would have been
more appropriate to the mah; but the sentiment
of veneration was rightly directed. The epigram

THOMAS BELSHAM 303

which closed his accotint with Horsley, long
rankled in episcopal breasts; Referring to the
controversy with Priestley, he remarked that
" both the contending parties retired from the
field equally w^U satisfied with the result of the
conflict; Dr. Priestley with his victory, and Dr.
Horsley with his mitre."

In theological system, Belsham made no ad-
vance on the position he reached at Daventry.
His " Calm Inquiry " (1811) is substantially a
digest and recast of his lectures of 1789. His
items of doctrine were few, and strongly held;
they formed the basis of his practical religion.
Yet while he felt this ground to be always firm
beneath his feet, he was nevertheless an inquirer
and a critic to the last. It has been said of him
that " he had no conception of dangerous truths
and useful errors." In Biblical criticism his
strides were alarming to conservative Unitarians.
In 1807 he called attention to the composite
character of the Pentateuch. Four years pre-
viously, Priestley had opened his " Notes on the
Bible" with the words: "I see no reason to
entertain a doubt of Moses being the writer of the
first five books of the Old Testament." Priestley
proceeds to treat the account of creation as of
divine authority, though he thinks there were
other creations subsequent to the deluge, which
will account, among other things, for the special
fauna and flora of America. In fact, the Unit-

304 THOMAS BELSHAM

arians stuck fast in Genesis till 1821; it was-
Belsham who pulled them out. In a famous
sermon at Warrington that year (19th August) he
declared and proved that the Hebrew cosmogony
is irreconcilable with the teachings of modern
science. The Monthly Repository teemed with the
indignant reproaches of writers, who deemed it an
impiety to imagine that, after the lucid narrations
of Moses, there was anything to be learned
respecting the original constitution of the globe.

To Belsham, as responsible editor, we owe a
revised, or, as he entitled it, an improved version
(1808) of the New Testament. The admirable
introduction, and most of the notes, are his. The
text is not his, being mainly the translation by
Archbishop Newcome. Belsham would have left
Newcome's version to speak for itself, but was
overruled by a committee, which insisted on
revising Newcome. With this version it used to
be common to reproach Unitarians; it has its
weak points, and is avowedly tentative; but
even after the work of the revisers of 1881 it has
its value. Its endeavour to exhibit typographic-
ally distinct strata in the Gospels, if a crude
initial effort, was nevertheless a suggestive
beginning.

In a letter of 1819, addressed to John Kenrick,
he shows that he did not let his mind sleep in
regard to New Testament problems. "I love
German criticism," he says, "as much as I dis-

THOMAS BELSHAM 305

like German theology. ... I think the origin of
the four evangelists is a very great difficulty. If
the four histories existed in their present form, in
the time of Justin Martyr, it is most unaccount-
able that he should never quote them by name.
... I suspect that the number was never fixed to
four till Irenaeus made the notable discovery that
there must be four Gospels, and no more, because
there are four winds. . . . Still, however, the main
part of the respective Gospels must have been
written by the authors to whom they are attri-
buted, otherwise, how could the whole Christian
world be so unanimous in ascribing them to those
authors ? But before they were universally known
and acknowledged, I am inclined to believe that
those who were in possession of early copies made
additions of narratives, which they believed to be
authentic."

Belsham himself appeared as a translator and
expositor in his edition (1822), of the Pauline
Epistles. In the main he follows Dr. John
Taylor, but with an important development of
principle. " An expositor," he says, " will not
feel himself bound to warp and strain a text from
its plain and obvious meaning because that mean-
ing is erroneous, and to adopt some unusual and
far-fetched interpretation in order to reconcile it
to the truth, because, at all events, the proposition
must be justified; but he will endeavour to find
out the true meaning of the author, according to

3o6 THOMAS BELSHAM

the established and approved rules of interpreta-
tion, leaving the whole responsibility, whether
for the sense, the truth, or the reasoning of the
passage, upon the author himself, without any
pain for the result." That is to say, in his view,
inspiration related only to the essentials of
Christianity; the Apostle's mode of advocating
them was his own.

Thinking thus freely himself, Belsham was not
the man to advocate restraints on thinking, even
when the conclusions reached were most abhor-
rent to his own mind. He lived in an age when
Richard CarlUe was fined ;fi,5oo, and imprisoned
for three years, for publishing the works of Paine.
Even Unitarians wrote in their magaziae approv-
ing the sentence. In the course of a noble reply,
Belsham observes that in dealing with those who
bring charges against Christianity, " the proper,
though not altogether the easiest method would
be, to inquire how far the charges are just; to
separate the gold from the dross, Christianity from
its corruptions, what is defensible from what is
indefensible, and thus to show that true Christian-
ity is a gem of unspeakable value; that it con-
tains nothing unreasonable, nothing mean, no-
thing contemptible; but that it is a doctrine of
great moral importance, which every good man
must at least wish to be true. Had Paine's ' Age
of Reason ' been treated in this manner, I am
fully convinced that it would not have done a

THOMAS BELSHAM 307

tenth part of the mischief, of which it is now said
to have been productive."

I have not dealt with Belsham's philosophy;
and perhaps he was not a philosopher. For he
never could_ see the validity of the distinction
between the views of Priestley and those of Price.
" The simple question between Dr. Priestley and
Dr. Price, was," says Belsham, " whether the
principle of perception was separable or insepar-
able from certain modifications of attraction and
repulsion. Dr. Priestley maintained that they
were inseparable, and Dr. Price that they were
never separated. Just as in the case of the two
Churches of Rome and England, one claims to be
infallible, and the other maintains that it never
•errs. But, for this difference, Dr. Price is
applauded as an immaterialist, and Dr. Priestley
is vilified as a materialist. I certainly go as far
as Dr. Price, and I do not go quite so far as Dr.
Priestley. Because my philosophic friend re-
garded attraction and repulsion as divine energies,
which appeared to me to verge upon pantheism.
... So that in truth I cannot say to which of the
two appellations I am entitled ; whether I am a
poor, despised, degraded materialist, who believe
that perception, attraction, and repulsion are
inseparable, or a sublime and exalted immaterial-
ist, who believe that, though not inseparable,
they are, in fact, never separated." On the
question of the determination of the will, Belsham

3o8 THOMAS BELSHAM

had no doubt whatever that he was with Priestley
and against Price. There are few expositions of
determinism more forcible and lucid than will be
found in his "Elements" (1801) of philosophy,
mental and moral.

Strong elements of pathos are to be found in his
story; on these I will not dwell. A year after his
settlement at Essex Street, he was already in his
feelings an old man, though not yet fifty-seven.
The abiding impression that his days were few,
simply made him more intent on tasks which he
hoped to finish, and did, in fact, accomplish. As
the ablest of his critics has said : " He had little
originality ; he had less imagination ; but he had
unfailing diligence." In his last years, spent as
" an invalid and a cripple," he was still at work.
The key to his life may be found in these words
which he wrote on New Year's Day, 1799, "While
I live, I am desirous of being useful. ... If I
can do little myself, I will endeavour to rejoice if
others are more active, more able, and more
successful. I am not serving a party; I am not
seeking mine own honour and emolument; my
object, my sole ambition, is to promote the know-
ledge of Christ, and his genuine Gospel."

One word about Belsham in the most important
light of all. Williams' life of him has never had a
voice raised in its favour. It is a volume, or
rather a morass, of seven hundred and ninety-one
pages, without chapters, or index, or table ol

THOMAS BELSHAM 309

contents; with nothing to guide you but the
year-dates heading the pages, and the years are
not always consecutive. It is ill-arranged, de-
fective, inaccurate, diffuse. Yet it has its place
among my favourite books. Its value lies in this,
that it permits a very close approach to the inner
life of a man of deep religious experience. The
redeeming element of the book is to be found in
the passages from Belsham's private diary, at all
stages of his career; and this diary is his con-
fessional. Here are his prayers, his sighs, his
doubts, his hopes, his despondences, his frank
addresses to God in sunshine and in gloom. The
phases of his theology have their connecting-link
in the unbroken constancy of his faith in God.
Superficially he was not an emotional man, but
his preaching and his work were the outcome of a
sensitive soul, living continually in the divine
presence. When the end came (he died unmarried
on II November, 1829) they laid him beside
Lindsey, with this inscription, expressing at once
his most cherished feeling and his paramount aim :
" The friend, associate, and successor of Priestley
and Lindsey; with them he devoted his life and
talents to revive and diffuse the knowledge of the
true religion of Jesus."

We look back, that we may look forward. We
scan the past that we may gain lessons for use in
the present, as we strive to build up the future.
Belsham thought that in the eighteenth century

310 THOMAS BELSHAM

the prospects of liberal religion looked brighter
than in the early part of the nineteenth. We
have to try to understand how it was that great
ideals were disappointed ; for then we may conse-
crate ourselves to the cause of truth with more
intelligent aim. Betterness is not in times, but
in men. Other times will come; but merely to
place hopes in better times is to be blind to the
patent and pressing opportunities of our own
living age. The world of to-day needs our work
and needs our presentation of the Gospel. Our
prayer must be that God may so clear our eyes
that we may see our way ; and so strengthen our
hearts that we pursue it with the simplicity of
devotion, the force of purpose, the breadth of
spirit, which we venerate in the best of our
forerunners.

5 October, i8g8.

RICHARD WRIGHT
AND
MISSIONARY ENTERPRISE

Richard Wright. — Born, 1764; Minister at
Wisbech, 1794-1810; Travelling Missionary, 1806-
22; Minister at Trowbridge, 1822-27; Minister at
Kirkstead, 1827-36; Died 1836.

X

RICHARD WRIGHT
AND MISSIONARY ENTERPRISE

WHEN the apprentice was discovered picking
dead flies out of the currants, his master
assured him that he was not born to be a shop-
keeper, and that he had better study for the
ministry. Richard Wright, whose memory seems
worthy to be revived, though early initiated in
the mysteries of shopkeeping, was evidently not
to the manner born; and if we take "study " in a
broad, general, and very practical sense, and not
with any technical limitation of the term, we may
truly say that he studied, and studied hard, for
the ministry which he fulfilled and refreshed.

Richard, son of Richard, first saw the light in a
labourer's cottage at Blakeney, a seafaring place,
once, indeed, a seaport of some moment for
•commerce with Germany, lying on the north
•coast of Norfolk, between Wells and Cromer, but
nearer to the former. His natal day was 7th
February, 1764; and though it has little or no
bearing on his story, it may be said in passing
that 1764 was a year of mark in the literary
annals both of this country and of France and

314 RICHARD WRIGHT

Italy. In 1764 Voltaire produced his Dictionnaire
PMlosophique, an epitome of his glittering genius ;
Rousseau his Emile — with all its eccentricities,
the foundation of modern ideas of education;.
Reid his " Inquiry into the Human Mind on the
Principles of Common Sense," thereby founding
that system of natural realism long known as the
Scottish philosophy, though directed against
Hume; Goldsmith his "History of England,"
the book in which the story of our country was
first made interesting to the young; Walpole his
" Castle of Otranto," pioneer of the romantic
school; while Beccaria, author of the pregnant
phrase, " the greatest happiness of the greatest
number," put forth his epoch-making treatise on
" Crimes and Punishments." In ecclesiastical
annals, 1764 was the year in which WUliam
Robertson, the " Father of Unitarian noncon-
formity," as Lindsey called him, resigned his Irish
preferments, and Lindsey himself set on foot his
Sunday-school at Catterick.

When Richard was five years old, an enter-
prising speculator, known as " the ingenious Mr.
Cobb," projected a company to revive the
Blakeney fisheries, and so restore to the little
place something of its ancient importance. Had
this succeeded, Richard might have found an.
opening for business life in his native place.; but
the scheme came to nothing, and Blakeney's good
harbour sees little trade.

RICHARD WRIGHT 315

Richard's parents were originally of the
Anglican persuasion, and his mother, Anne
Wright (1732-1810) was a woman of superior
class, strong mind, and fair education, claiming
a cousinship with Sir John Fenn (well known as
the first editor of the Paston Letters), and
de"^oting herself to the training and teaching of
her six children, of whom Richard was the eldest
son. The reader may determine whether it was
proof of continued activity of mind, or of senile
decay, that she became a Unitarian at the age of
seventy. Richard, however, was sent to school
by a relative, a prosperous farmer, whose name
does not appear; neither does the place of
Richard's schooling. Blakeney had certainly lost
the educational advantages which it possessed
in the thirteenth century, when John Bacon-
thorpe, Doctor Resolutus and Princeps Aver-
roistarum, began his studies in the Carmelite
monastery, whose ruined arches yet remain. Nor
could his schooling have been long, for this
relative, from whom the family had expectations,
died when Richard was twelve — the age up to
which, according to Emile, the child should be
taught nothing — ^and by this time the family was
out of favour ; for they had dropped into Dissent,
forsaking the ancient parish church whose lofty
tower forms a mariner's landmark on the Norfolk
coast-line. Having toiled as a farmer's boy, and
done duty as a page, Richard went on trial to an

3i6 RICHARD WRIGHT

Anglican shopkeeper at Holt, who did business
on Sundays; and was thereafter apprenticed to
a Dissenting blacksmith — ^presumably at the
inland village of Guestwick, for it was there that,
on attaining the age of sixteen, he was admitted a
member of the Independent Church. This was a
society dating from 1652. It had enjoyed, with-
out undue hilarity, the services of some dis-
tinguished ministers, including one of the Ejected
Nonconformists. Its last pastor had been the
father of William Godwin, succeeding whom
John Sykes had lately begun his pastorate of
iorty-eight years' duration. The ministry was
Calvinistic, of the genuine unadulterated type,
'' not what is now called moderate Calvinism," as
Richard remarks. Sykes had no moderation.
" Still," says Richard, " I thank God that I was
once a Calvinist, that I have known by experience
what Calvinism is. It was one important step
in my progress. However erroneous, its peculiar
doctrines are perverted truths, and some precious
metal may be extracted from the baser materials."
Richard's defection from Calvinism had an
interesting origin.

The lad was not without ambition. " Panting
to emerge from the lowly vale where I was
placed " (as he afterwards expressed it), he be-
thought him of what he could do which would
render him " of some value in society." With
this longing for distinction he conjoined what may

RICHARD WRIGHT 317

be not unworthily described as a love of souls.
Without any outward suggestion or authorisation,
the young church member, when the labour at the
anvil was over for the day, began week evening
preaching in the neighbouring villages. Now, to-
hold Calvinism is one thing ; to make it the basis-
of evangelical appeal is quite another. No doubt,
the proffer of salvation is easy, even should a
conceivable non-election stand in the way of its-
acceptance. If the present of gold spectacles to-
the blind inmates of a workhouse should seem the
indication of a world-wide generosity, there might
still be some little inconsistency in accompanying
the gift -with the assurance that it could be of no-
use to those most in need of vision. It may per-
haps have been noticed that predestination ifr
usually preached to persons whose calling and
election is, by themselves at any rate, regarded as-
already pretty secure. However that may be, it
seems that the youthful missioner's village appeals-
insensibly acquired a slight Arminian taint. The
church-meeting had him up, heard him preach,
bade him abide their sanction; and, as he per-
severed, cast him off. They had not ratified the
exercise of his gifts ; and while the symptoms oi
heresy were but slender, the defiance of church
authority was sufficient ground for excommuni-
cating him on both counts. By this sentence
Richard, like his pastor's predecessor, was ejected.
into freedom, in more respects than one. The:

3i8 RICHARD WRIGHT

Wesleyan Methodists got wind of his zeal and his
leanings, and gave him preaching opportunities,
though he never joined their Society. His
master, " judging that he would make a better
preacher than a smith," handed him back his
indentures in all kindness. His first call to a
regular ministry was from Norwich, where an
eccentric gentleman — surgeon, ornithologist, and
gospeller — named John Hunt, had recently built
a General Baptist chapel. This conjunction did
not last long; neither did the congregation.
Hunt, it may be suspected, was not an easy person
to get on with.

An opening came to Wright in connection with
another Baptist flock. There were Baptists in
Norwich of every variant type. From the leading
Particular Baptist church in 1778, the minister,
Samuel Fisher, had been dismissed for unsound-
ness in a non-doctrinal matter. He took with
him a following, and attached himself to the cause
■of his friend, John Johnson, a native of Eccles,
who had developed peculiar views, and had
founded a distinct Baptist body. From the
perusal of certain of Johnson's pamphlets one
rises in some perplexity as to what precisely the
good man was driving at. His Calvinism was
modified, but not exactly mellowed. Adam's
guilt was not a heritable property, yet Adam's
brood needed as strong remedies as if it were. In
handling the doctrine of the Trinity Johnson

RICHARD WRIGHT 319

managed to confound the persons; hence the
Johnsonians were known also as the Sabellian
Baptists. It was not, indeed, quite unusual to
find Sabellians among Baptists, but Johnson
insisted on making a distinctive feature of this
view, and so took his place as a heresiarch For
Fisher, on these lines, a chapel was erected. Its
minister in my Norwich days was Henry Trevor,
an upholsterer, for in Norfolk it was not then
unknown for a Baptist pastor to be in business ;
one working village pastor was a butcher — ^like
the priests of the old Law.

Wright became a coadjutor to Fisher. In
Norwich he found books, and without other aid
he gained enough of Greek and Hebrew to enable
him to enter with intelligence into the Biblical
criticism of that day, which was mainly of a
textual character. Johnson, who was now over
seventy, had charge of congregations as far apart
as Liverpool and Wisbech j Wright gave occasional
assistance at both these places. His intercourse
with Johnson, whom he found " to a high degree
bigoted and dogmatic," led him to study " first
principles." Eventually a curious arrangement
was made, by which. Fisher and Wright were
associated, each to take six months at Norwich
and six at Wisbech alternately. The Wisbech
flock soon exhibited a preference for Wright.
Fisher, with reluctance, confined himself to Nor-
wich, leaving Wright at Wisbech in sole charge.

320 RICHARD WRIGHT

Here, then, at the age of thirty, began Wright's
career as a missionary of Unitarianism. He had
first to complete his own conversion. From the
Sabellian position, with some hazy remains of
Calvinism, he advanced to Humanitarian doctrine,
without passing through the Arian stage. His
views becoming known, the Johnsonian Baptists
did as the Guestwick Independents had done
before — they excommunicated him. His own
congregation, " most of them," he says, " very
illiberal and bigoted," nevertheless felt they were
in the hands of an honest man, retained his ser-
vices, and were accordingly cut off from the body.

Acquaintance with their old Minute-booJc
assures us that, in the days before Wright they
had not been in all respects a happy family.
Extracts in full would be undesirable. Un-
fortunately, the ladies had voices in the church-
meeting, and their remarks to one another were
both critical and caustic. It is recorded of two
married ladies, that one took upon herself to
reproach the other for an apparel too gaudy to be
consonant either with Baptist principles or with
her own advancing years; the aggrieved one
retorted by pictorially and pointedly designating
her censor a " goggle-eyed " — ^puppy's mother,
in a word. Standing in a mouldy graveyard in
rear of the little edifice in Deadman's Lane, it has
been possible to gaze on the contiguous tomb-
stones of these outspoken heroines.

RICHARD WRIGHT 321

With the arrival of Wright, the Minute-book
becomes much less graphic. The course he took
for the religious instruction of his people is worth
noting. They had been in the habit, he says, " of
laying an undue stress on their own opinions, and
of thinking that those who differed from them
were not Christians, and could not be saved."
So he began by teaching them " the value of
piety, integrity, virtue, and goodness, with what-
ever opinions associated." He was in no hurry
to bring forwaid " doctrines new to them," till
he could make clear their practical value. Ex-
pository preaching, and weekly meetings for the
study of the Scriptures, with free conference
thereon, proved of eminent utility. " It was
absolutely necessary," he observes, " to be blind
and deaf to many uncharitable and censorious
remarks." " By forbearance and kindness those
who opposed me were sometimes softened, and
continued friends." Yet were there " many
severe conflicts of opinion, many hard struggles
against what was called innovation "; and there
were those who affirmed that Wright's self-con-
trol simply made him the more dangerous; for,
aided by the Devil, that wily serpent, " Unitarians
had the art of commanding their temper, and
using soft words, that they might the better
deceive." While some left, and " though there
was a time when the congregation would have
been glad had I voluntarily left them, their attach-

322 RICHARD WRIGHT

ment to me afterwards became stronger than it
had ever been."

His preaching was not confined to Wisbech, and
he had several calls to other charges, with better
pay. He had made up his mind not to leave
Wisbech " till I thought the Unitarian cause
firmly established there." For ten years he eked
out a very narrow income by school-keeping — a
resource then more open than now to the Dis-
senting ministry. One of his scholars became
famous. This was William Ellis, whose name
will ever be associated with the Christian civiliza-
tion of Madagascar. In his early boyhood the
future agent of the London Missionary Society
was under Wright's influence both in school and
chapel ; all the schooling he got, and indeed that
was but little, he received from Wright; his
father, also William Ellis, was a strong Unitarian
and always remained so.

It was during this period of pastoral assiduity,
tempered by school-keeping, that Wright made
the acquaintance of William Vidler (1758-1816)
who, like Wright had been successively Anglican,
Independent and Baptist, and was now the
successor of Elhanan Winchester in the Universal-
ist (but not Unitarian) ministry in London.
Winchester's Universalism meant a remedial Hell.
Hence the familiar tale that Robert Robinson met
him with the exclamation " So you're the man
to preach that God Almighty will burn all the

RICHARD WRIGHT 323

old tobacco-pipes white! " Vidler had started in
1797 the Universalists' Miscellany. To this
monthly publication Wright contributed a series
of letters and these, when collected, formed the
first of his many publications.

Next year Wright visited Vidler in London.
Their meeting must have been a sight for saints.
Wright was a very little man and nobody could
call him handsome. Vidler, his senior by nearly
six years, had a fine physiognomy surmounting a
corporal bulk of wellnigh elephantine propor-
tions. There is a pulpit of straitened dimensions
into which, according to the legend, he had con-
trived to squeeze himself when cool. Swelled by
the fervour of preaching, he found it impossible
to get out, and thought it safer to remain for the
afternoon service ; so they brought him his mid-
day repast as he sat in cathedra. There were
■contrasts of opinion as well as of girth, stature and
comeliness between the two enthusiasts. Hence
they met with some shyness, attempting as
Wright says, " in as delicate a ^ay as possible to
feel out each other's views." Ultimately, but not
till 1802, Vidler's repugnance to so-called So-
cinianism was replaced, under Wright's influence
.by a hearty embrace of the Unitarian position.

In the absence of an exact chronology at this
point, the date is uncertain at which Wright was
enabled to free himself from the labour of keeping
jschool, but by 1804 he was in the full-swing of

324 RICHARD WRIGHT

missionary enterprise. Already had he cultivated
relations with General Baptists of Lutton, Lincoln-
shire, resulting in the accession of this congre-
gation, avowedly Universalist, to the Unitariaa
cause, and further to the incorporation of his own
flock at Wisbech with the General Baptist
Assembly. Next he co-operated with John
Platts (1777-1837) in the establishment of a
Unitarian congregation at Boston. Thereafter he
visited most parts of Lincolnshire; at Lincoln
on his initiative a Unitarian congregation was
formed. Invited by Vidler, he visited Battle,
where Vidler had gathered a Universalist flock.
Thence he extended his travels to most parts of
Sussex and Kent. An appeal from Thorne took
him to Yorkshire on a similar errand.

His efforts had now begun to attract some
attention in London. The project of a Missionary
Fund was started by David Eaton (1771-1829) a
native of Brechin, who had been the leader of a
little knot of General Baptists at York, and was
now settled as a theological bookseller in Holborn
(he is not to be confused with Daniel Isaac Eaton,
also a London bookseller, and publisher of Tom
Paine's works, who died in 1814). It is to be.
noted that the five persons who met in August,.
1805, to frame the plan of a Unitarian Fund, all
were or had been in the Baptist connexion. Of
these the most distinguished was Robert Aspland.
(1782-1845) who in the previous month had

RICHARD WRIGHT 325

entered on his forty years' ministry at Hackney.
The plan was not much welcomed at the outset.
It was met by a loudly expressed dread of
"uneducated preachers." Only nine persons
attended the meeting establishing the Fund
{11 February, 1806). Among them was Daniel
Whittle Harvey (1786-1863) then a lad of twenty,
afterwards projector of the Sunday Times, and
the first (1840) Commissioner of the London City
Police ; he was the last survivor of the band.

The year of grace 1806 is memorable also for
the establishment by Aspland of the Monthly
Repository, that invaluable storehouse of Unitar-
ian history and biography. He had bought up
Vidler's magazine and enlarged its plan. Further-
more, it was in 1806 that the expulsion of Joseph
Cooke from the Wesleyan body led to the forma-
tion of a new group of congregations in Lan-
cashire. In 1806 Wright composed and published
" An Apology for Dr. Michael Servetus," based
on a work of 1724, and distinguished chiefly by
warm reflections, in which Calvin was not ex-
hibited in a flattering light.

The Unitarian Fund was started with Aspland
as secretary and Wright as travelling missionary.
By the end of the year nearly a couple of hundred
subscribers had been enlisted on its- roll. The
first annual sermon in its behalf was preached by
a doctor of divinity of Harvard, Joshua Toulmin
(1740-1815) another Baptist by the way. Bel-

326 RICHARD WRIGHT

sham, at that time by far the most influential of
English Unitarians, held aloof from popular pro-
paganda, though six years later he handsomely
owned that the Unitarian Fund was " the Society
which at present holds the foremost rank," adding
that " after the success which has attended the
efforts of this Society, no person who is a real
friend to the cause can consistently be hostile to
its principle."

Thus was Richard Wright encouraged in the
career which, with unwearied industry, he
pursued,for nearly two decades till, in the course
of his journeyings he had traversed the whole
land, from Aberdeen to Marazion, from Milford
Haven to Yarmouth. His reports of his journeys
form a sort of itinerary of Great Britain, and are
crowded with interesting details. In 1804 Wright
was forty years of age, well seasoned for his work
by a preparation of experience which he had
turned to the best account. Being of great
muscular strength he could sustain the fatigue of
his long tramps — trudging as he did on foot
twenty, thirty or even forty miles in a day— and
still be fit for preaching in the evening. Frugal
and temperate, he was spare in diet, simple in his
requirements, content at night with a rough
shakedown, and allowing himself this one luxury,
an abundant use of the good old " churchwarden."
In the use of this sedative he certainly excelled.
Even Aspland who, like Dr. Parr, would give out

RICHARD WRIGHT 327

a long hymn and enjoy the refreshment of a pipe
before sermon, admitted that his friend's de-
votion to the weed surpassed his own. This
habit he turned to good account in many an inn-
parlour and by many a cottage fire, enlivening a
serene good-fellowship with an apt theological
discussion.

Equipped with an equal knowledge of Holy
Scripture and of human nature, he was master ol
a native force of logical argument, pressed closely
enough, but always applied with level good
humour. His pulpit style was clear and unpre-
tending. In personal intercourse — for which he
utilized the most casual occasions, never obtrud-
ing himself, yet never missing an opportunity —
his strongest powers of influence came out. His
writing was plain and strong, full of cool, clear-
cut reasoning, with ardent purpose behind it, but
no superficial display of emotion. This made
his polemical publications telling and efficient.
Handy in size, direct in statement, they just hit
the needs of his time and his public. They bred
in his readers the habit of thinking. Never was
there a man with less of the mystic. about him,
while few had more of the determination of the
educator than Richard Wright. Here is his table
of fourteen hints for the missionary; texts on
which he dilates in his memoirs. They will be
found to be valuable points, capable of further
expansion.

328 RICHARD WRIGHT

1. He should count the cost before he engages
in the work.

2. His mind should be furnished and prepared
for the work.

3. Should be always ready to preach.

4. Be careful to use proper subjects.

5. The style should be suited to the hearers.

6. Preaching in the open air and other places.

7. A missionary must avoid having anything
to do with differences in congregations.

8. Modes of making the preaching known.

9. Much to be done besides preaching.

10. Tracts should be distributed.

11. A missionary must endure much hard-
ship.

12. He must be punctual to his engagements.

13. He must devote himself entirely to the
work.

14. He should cultivate an habitual sense of
the presence of God.

For five years, during which he had travelled
on an average some two thousand miles each year,
Wright still retained as missionary the charge
of Wisbech. At the end of 1810 he was prevailed
upon to devote himself wholly to the larger field,
on the modest salary of a hundred guineas in-
cluding expenses, which was more than he had
asked for. Manchester had something to ^do
with this move in 1810. In that year the preach-
ing of an evangelical Arianism at Cross Street

RICHARD WRIGHT 329

ceased with the death of Thomas Barnes (1747-
1810). The introduction of a positive type of
Unitarianism by his successor, John Grundy
■^1782-1843) was hailed, or deplored, in many
quarters as marking a new departure. After
1810, the Lancashire Arianism either melted away
very rapidly, or drifted off to other denominational
conditions.

It was in 1810 that George Harris (1794-1859)
then a London apprentice of sixteen, destined
afterwards to devote himself to the spread of
Unitarianism in Scotland with an eloquence
which has never been excelled, first set eyes upon
Richard Wright. The occasion was the Unitarian
Fund annual dinner, a few months after Wright's
first visit to Scotland. Thus writes George to his
father, Abraham Harris, minister at Maidstone : —

" Mr. Wright, you know, is a short man. When
he rose, there was a universal cry of ' On the
chair, on the chair ! ' He got on the chair.
Another cry of ' Mr. Wright on the table ! ' So
he mounted the table, when we gave him three
rounds of applause. I think he made the- best
■speech. He is quite an enthusiast. He said
that, in his opinion, if there was not an Unitarian
south of the Tweed, there would be enough, north
of it, to Unitarianise the world."

We are dealing with the character and example
of an individual, not that he had no coadjutors,
or that his zeal did not prove contagious. Others

330 RICHARD WRIGHT

gave their help, good men too, though scarcely to
be reckoned his equals in blend of pith and tact.
Their names we have not space to mention, but
the brief history of an institution in aid must be
touched upon. The condition of his denomina-
tion in 1811 had suggested to Robert Aspland the
desirability of creating an agency " for the
training up of popular rather than learned
ministers." On 6 June of that year the plan of
such an institution was agreed upon, the following
being its main features. It was to bear the name
of " The Unitarian Academy," "and this " not for
the purpose of pledging either its students or
supporters to any particular system of faith, but
because it expressed the leading opinion of those
who interested themselves in its formation, and
their expectation of its results. They used the
term Unitarian in its broadest sense, including
under it all Christians that agreed in the sole
worship of One God, the Father, whatever might
be their views on minor topics." Hereupon the
critics divided themselves into two groups
whereof one objected to "a sectarian brand,"'
while the other looked askance at " the broad
definition."

Students were to be eligible between the ages
of eighteen and twenty-five, and to be under the
care of a Principal Tutor, who should board and.
lodge them. The period of study was to be two
years; with power of extension vested in the-

RICHARD WRIGHT 33 1

Gommittee. They did subsequently extend it,
by providing for two classes of students, those of
four years and those of two. Subsequently also
a.few lay students were admitted, at ^f 100 a year.
It was expected that within two years the stud-
ents might, in addition to acquiring " a fair
portion of general knowledge," learn to read " the
Scriptures in their original tongues," and be
exercised in " the best methods of commuiiicating
religious instruction." Belsham, who had at
heart the revival of the old Hackney College,
broken up in 1796, was opposed to the scheme.
He suggested a reverse plan, a normal course of
" four, five, or even six years," with power to the
Committee to reduce in particular cases. For a
two years' Academy he thought Wright would be
a competent head. From the first, however, the
projectors of the institution had relied upon
Aspland as its Principal and Theological Tutor;,
and Aspland, now in his thirtieth year, removing
to Durham House, opened the Unitarian Academy
at Hackney on 20th October, 1812. There was
to have been also a Classical Tutor, but John
Bickerton Dewhurst, designed for that post, died
before the opening day. Thomas Biggin Broad-
bent was Classical Tutor from 1814 to 1816.
Jeremiah Joyce, of the "Scientific Dialogues,"
was Mathematical Tutor in 1814 and 1815; he
was succeeded by Dr. John Morell, who conducted
both these departments from 1817,. and was him-

332 RICHARD WRIGHT

self succeeded for a short time by William John-
son Fox.

It is well to know that Belsham, having an
anonymous donation of £ioo to dispose of at his
own discretion, kept it a couple of years, while he
looked about him, and then sent it to the Unitar-
ian. Academy, with two years' interest, as the
best use he could make of the money. The
students seem to have worked hard. From the
Daybook of the Academy for 1813 I find that
they invariably began the duties of the day at
half-past six, grinding at Latin till breakfast
time. I find such entries as " studied Hebrew " ;
" composed a little of our themes." Occasionally
I find the entry, " worked one hour in the gar-
den " ; and, in spite of the early start next day, I
find " went to bed about 12." One of them
writes that Aspland was fertile in expedients for
filling up their leisure time, of which, he adds,
" he seemed to think we had far more than was
really the case." The Tutor's point of view is
not always that of the student.

This Academy lasted for five sessions only,
since, in 1818, Aspland's state of health made it
impossible for him to continue it with his other
engagements, and there was no one found to take
his place; In those five sessions, twelve theo-
logical students were enrolled; three soon gave
up ; the nine who entered the ministry all rendered
good service. The first to pass away was

RICHARD WRIGHT 33^

Benjamin Goodier, the young evangelist to whom
the Oldham congregation owes its existence. He
died in 1818. The last survivor was Thomas
Cooper, employed by the founder of the Hibbert
Trust in the difificult task of Christianising his-
slaves ; he lived till 1880, a cheery little man, and
still a good speaker, at the age of eighty-eight.
During the same period, Carmarthen enrolled
seven Unitarian students, while Manchester Col-
lege, York, enrolled twenty divinity students, of
whom thirteen entered the ministry — the greatest
name among them being that of John James
Tayler. The last survivor of these was Richard
Shawcross, who had conformed; he died in 1886,^
at the age of eighty-four.

The missionary movement in Manchester
College, York, was somewhat later than this-
period. It began in 1823 on the initiative of John
Kelly Beard, and enlisted the zealous co-operation
of James Martineau; who, long afterwards, bore
signal testimony to the value of these early
"missionary excursions," adding that "those-
who were most deeply engaged in them were
certainly the most assiduous and thorough
students in their College work." Wright's memoirs
were published in 1824, ^^^ i"- the preliminary
list of subscribers, will be found the names just,
mentioned, along with those of eleven other
students of the same College. .

Of the dozen entrants at the Unitarian Academy^

334 RICHARD WRIGHT

the one who made most history, though hardly
the kind of history he had intended to make, was
John Smethurst (1793-1859), of Moretonhamp-
stead. In the autumn of 1821 Smethurst went on
.a Unitarian mission to the North of Ireland. At
Killeleagh, Co. Down, the Presbyterian minister
was the redoubtable Henry Cooke. In his flock
the most prominent member was the United
Irishman, Archibald Hamilton Rowan, who had
spent some time (not entirely in study) at the
Warrington Academy, and was a Unitarian.
On Rowan's invitation Smethurst lectured in the
school-house at Killeleagh. This invasion of his
parish had the consequence of arousing Cooke to
tegin the fierce campaign which, after eight years'
hard struggle with Henry Montgomery, issued in
the elimination of the liberal element from the
older Presbyterianism, and the formation of the
Remonstrant Synod. Doubtless, had this occa-
sion not presented itself, Cooke would have found
some other ; yet to those who knew Smethurst in
later years as the gentlest of men, the model of a
•quiet country pastor beloved by all around, the
blameless authority on Anglo-Saxon and on trout
fishing, " the Walton of the moor," as they called
him, it seemed a strange irony of fate that he
should have been the one to pit against each other
the giant powers of the two great orators of
Ulster, and so tofasten on Irish Presbyterianism
ihe bondage of the Westminster Confession.

RICHARD WRIGHT 335

In this excursus we are not really deserting
Richard Wright, for the students of the Unitarian
Academy were, almost to a man, brought into
missionary and then into ministerial work by his
personal influence or that of his reputation.
Several had been his companions in travel and
comrades in toil. Now, however, we must advert
to an event, if I may so call it, which, like Smet-
hurst's mission, also bore consequences little
•expected.

Wright had two brothers settled in Liverpool,
both of them ardent propagators of their brother's
faith, though not with their brother's power.
John Wright, the younger of the two, had opened
a room in Marble Street, and advertised a course
of lectures. It so happened that the Mayor of
Liverpool was also named John Wright. He cast
an indignant eye upon his namesake's advertise-
ment, and dispatched an informer to Marble
Street. On Tuesday, ist April, 1817, John
Wright opened his course of lectures by reading
(though this was not known at the time) one of his
brother Richard's " Evangelical Discourses " —
such was the title of the book— published six
years previously. To his amazement he found
himself brought up on a double charge. The
magistrates summarily convicted him of the
offence of preaching in an unlicensed place,
though the room had, in fact, been licensed
twenty years before, but not in favour of Wright.

336 RICHARD WRIGHT

They further, on the advice of Statham, the Town
Clerk, committed him for trial at Lancaster on
the charge of blasphemy, in denying the Trinity
and the Atonement. This raised the question
whether Unitarians, who in 1813 had been relieved
of the statutory penalties attaching to these
denials, could still, as the Town Clerk believed,
be proceeded against at common law. The Com-
mittee of the Unitarian Fund was appealed to for
aid in the defence. When they met, Aspland,
their Secretary, was absent, and on the advice of
their solicitor, John Wilks, they decided against
interference. The prosecution, as a matter of
fact, was soon dropped, for Aspland called the
attention of Lord Holland to it, and Holland made
some strong remarks in the House of Lords.
Wilks, who was Secretary to the " Protestant
Society for the Protection of Religious Freedom,"
had been consulted as solicitor by local worthies, .
anxious to find means of wresting from Unitarians
the chapel in which they worshipped at Wol-
verhampton. Accordingly, the Wolverhampton
Chapel case was first brought before the Superior
Courts in the following July (1817). The common
law doctrine, started by Statham, was without
hesitation taken up by Wilks, and played a con-
siderable part in the early stages of the case.
During many years the Wolverhampton case pro-
ceeded from court to court, and as it seemed likely
to go against the Unitarians, and orthodoxy had

RICHARD WRIGHT 337

been further inflamed by a speech by George
Harris in 1824, the more important Hewley suit
was begun in 1830. The final and adverse
decision in both suits was not rieached till 1842-
Then followed the remedial legislation effected by
the Dissenters' Chapels Act of 1844. Again we
may say that, had the actual occasion not pre-
sented itself, in all probability another would
have been found; but it is curious to trace the
long history which ended in the Dissenters'
Chapels Act to the reading of one of Richard
Wright's old sermons by a namesake of Liver-
pool's Mayor.

There can be no disputing the fact that this
long history exercised a detrimental influence on
the progress of the Unitarian cause in this
country. Not merely was there, in some quarters,
a temptation to make as little show as possible of
Unitarian opinion, and to raise as much legal
capital as might be accumulated out of a real or
fancied Presbyterian ancestry. There was the
hard fact, ever5rwhere present, that the efforts of
Unitarians had to be very sedulously directed
toward purely defensive measures. There was
further the peril of creating, the futility of im-
proving, properties which might at any moment
be snatched away at the bidding of legal doctrine,
however opposed to common sense or to public
interest. That, notwithstanding all this, much
was actually done, is a tribute to the high spirit

338 RICHARD WRIGHT

and the steadfast loyalty of the men of that
generation. Still, looking back to the middle
of last century, it must be admitted that Unit-
arians emerged from a great struggle, with a sense
of triumph at last, due to energies well spent, but
already somewhat exhausted.

After the closure of the Unitarian Academy
Richard Wright had been called to London by
the Unitarian Fund to superintend the organiza-
tion of local preachers. This he did without re-
mitting his missionary travels, continued until
he was well on in his fifty-ninth year. Then, in
September, 1822, he re-entered the regular
ministry, as pastor of a Baptist congregation at
Trowbridge. He brought this congregation into
union with the General Baptist body. He did
more. Before leaving, he provided a successor
in the person of Samuel Martin (1801-1877), his
pupil, whom he had met at Nantwich, who, after
a time of similar work in Cheshire, had succeeded
Wright as travelling missionary in Cornwall, and
whose fifty years' ministry in Trowbridge was a
shining example of the effective power of the
simplicity of godliness.

Finally in 1827 Wright returned to Lincoln-
shire, ministering to a little congregation at
Kirkstead, a spot made famous as the scene of
the initial labours of John Taylor, the Hebraist.
Not in the ancient shrine, that jewel of Early
English architecture, with its canopied Puritan

RICHARD WRIGHT 339

pulpit of 1620, where Taylor preached, did
Wright minister. This had been filched from
Nonconformists near the close of the previous
century, and since disused. A plain building, of
then very recent date, had risen in its vicinity.
It appears to have been without a minister for
five years until Wright's appointment. In this
retired spot the nine remaining years of his busy
life were employed. Tranquilly he passed the
allotted span. On 16th September, 1836, in his
seventy-third year, the summons came.. Friday
afternoon he spent at his writing-desk. Scarcely
had Saturday morning arrived and he was gone.
The history of missions all over the world, look
where we may, assures us that it is the individual
that tells ; first by achievement, then by sugges-
tion. No apology then is needed for a revival of
the ancient story which forms the topic of this
address, a story which may well strike home with
the potent force of a stimulating example. Ex-
cellent are the words of Robert Brook Aspland,
to be found in his Memoir of Robert Aspland his
father: "How invaluable would the labours of
such a man as Richard Wright now prove ! But
■not of every day's growth is his ardour of feelingj
combined with sobriety of judgment; his con-
troversial skill, combined with piety ; his freedom
of speech and thought, combined with modera-
tion and wisdom."

8 October, 1908.

INDEX

[Every proper name is indexed, with a selection of other
matters; the figures refer to the pages of the text.]

Academies :

Attercliffe...8i, 202, 204
Daventr5'...72, 82, 220,

288-289
Exeter... 1 28
Findem...76, 208
Hackney.. .293-294, 331
Independent — 83, 202-203
Kibworth...i89, 206, 209
London. ..83, 211
Manchester... 80, 81
Northampton... 209, 220
Northern. ..73
Presbyterian . . .202-203
Puylaurens...i59, 160
Rathmell...72, li, 78, 81,82
Sedan.. .161-162
Siilby...8o
Taunton... 8 1
Tewkesbury... 85
Unitarian... 300, 330-335
Warrington... 20 3, 207,292,

334
Acton, Baron. ..21, 178
Advices for Peace ...137, 151-

152
Agrippa, Cornelius... 16
Aikin, John. ..221, 293
Aleander, Jerome...2i, 24, 25
Almsgiving. . . loo
Anabaptists... 50, 55
Anne, Queen... 136
Annet, Peter.. .216
Anthropomorphism... 107, 252
Antichrist...: 8

Antinomianism... 1 39-140
Antitrinitarians.-.jo, 51, 52,

no, 273
Apostates... 50
Arianism... 128-129, 146, 166,

195, 221, 230, 247, 248,

328
Arians...SO, 58, 114, 115, 226,

227, 257, 258, 261, 272,

274, 275, 294, 297, 302
Aristotle... 2 2, 81, 161
Arius...6
Arminianism...97, 98, 102,

_ 103, 226, 317
Articles, Thirty-nine... 14 5,

200
Ashworth, Caleb. ..203, 220
Aspland, Robert. ..273, 298,

300, 324, 32s, 326, 330-

332, 336, 339
Aspland, Robert Brook... 3 39
Atheism. ..164-165, 181
Augustine, St 22, 196

Babinecki...56

Bacon thorpe, John...3i5

Baptists :

General... 102, 126, 128,

131. 134. 138, 139. 141.
145, 318, 324, 338
Johnsonian ...318
Particular... 1 3 8, 139, 145,
31S
Barbauld, Anna Letitia...2o6
Barke?-, John. ..217

INDEX

341

Barling, John... 196
Barnes, Thomas... 294, 329
Barrington, Viscount... 124,

135-137. 152 •
Basil the Great, St.. ..22
Basnage, Jacques(?)..i6i, 162
Basnage, Madame... 177
Basques, the. ..31
Baxter; Richard.../, 75, 140,

185, 213, 235
Baxterians...2o6, 226
Bayle, Jean... 159
Bayle, Pierre... 157-182
Beard, John Relly...273, 333
Beccaria, Cesare...3i4
Bedford, Duchess of... 188
Beke, Daniel... 60, 61
Belsham, James. ..287
Belsham, Thomas. ..221, 249,

254, 270, 271, 272, 277,

281, 282, 285-310, 326,

331. 332
Benedictine... 1 23
BibUcal Criticism... 303-306
Bibliotheca Fratrum Polon-

orum.,.62,
Bidle, John... 99- 1 00, 105,

107, 108, 1 1 3-1 1 5, 251
Bingham, Joseph... 196
Birch, Thomas... 1 71
Blackbume, Francis... 24 5,

249, 250, 252, 254, 259-

261, 263
Blasphemy... 3 36
Book of Sports... 96
Bourn, Samuel... 227
Bradbury, Thomas. ..1-24-125,

136, 142-146, 149, 152,

204, 226
Bright, Henry Arthur... 273
Broadbent, Thomas Biggin

—331 ■•
Brownists...96
Burgess, Daniel. ..162, 114
Burke, Edmund... 261

Butler, Joseph. ..48, 85, 198,

244, 245
Buxtorf, Johann...23
Bjnrom, John...2i6

Caffyn, Matthew... 141
Calamy, Edmund. ..69, 133,

144, 152, 185-188, 189,

222, 229, 241, 263
Calendar, Gregorian. ..46
Calves' head feasts. ..83
Calvin, John... 4, 8, 13, 15, 70,

71, 244, 325
Calvinism... 8 1,' 97-98, 166,

195, 244, 316-317
Calvimst...206, 287
Campeggio, Lorenzo... 22
Cappe, Catherine... 2 52, 265-

266
Cardale, Paul. ..248
Carlile, Richard... 306
Carpenter, Lant...273, 301
Catechism :
Scripture... 93
Shorter... 1 29, 143, 145, 288
Catholic Christians... 62
Catholic Church. . .18.
Cato...i76

Cervantes, Miguel... 9
Chaldee, Paraphrase... 22
Chalmers. Alexander... 158
Champier, Symphorien, 31-33
Channing, William £llery,278
Charles I.... 8 3
Charles II.. ..73, 83, 93
Charles V....16
Cljannier, Jacques... 19
Chaucer, Geoffrey... 3 3
Chimhi, Rab...22
Chorlton, John... 80
Christian Era.. .45
Christina, Queen... 169
Christ's Hospital... ^3
Christie, Richard Copley... 6
Cicero. ..71

342

INDEX

Clark, Samuel. ..iS8, 235
Clark, Samuel (2). ..220
Clarke, Samuel... 127, 195,

247, 250, 254, 268
Clarkeans...8i, 127, 288, 290
Clegge, James... 78, 80, 8r
Clement, St., of Alexandria...

22
Clement, St., of Rome... 2 2
Clementines, the. ..22
Cobb, Mr.. ..314
Colleges :

BalUol...256

Carmarthen ... 3 3 3

Christ's... 70, 73

Durham... 70, 201

Emmanuel... 69

Eton. ..245, 253

Hte.ckney...22i

Huesca...i2

Man Chester... 20 1, 221, 271,
294, 333

Rak6w...s6, 58, 59

St. John's. ..243

Summerville...49

Wadham...69

York.. .271, 333
Columbus, Christopher. ..11
Comets... 164

Complutensian Polyglot... 15J
Conesa, Catalina...8, 11
Confessions :

Augsburg... 2 1

Dort...97

Personal 231

Scriptural... 1 43

Unitarian. . .60-61

Westminster. . .225
Congregationalism. . .228
Conventicle Act... 72
Cooke, Henry.. .334
Cooke, Joseph.. .325
Cooper, Grey... 264
Cooper, Thomas... 333
Corpus Juris. ..22

Cotton, John... 1 75
Covenants, the. ..51, 10&
Cradock, Samuel... 69, 87
Cranworth, Baron... 242
Creeds :

Apostles'. ..103, 26.8, 295
Athanasian...250, 257
Nicene...i34
Crellius, John... 81
Cromwell, Oliver... 70, 99-100
Cyprian, St.. ..23

Dante. ..13
Decretals, the... 2 3
Dees, Complanatio...6o
Defoe, Daniel.. .87, 123
D'Herbelot, Barthelemy..i74
Deists...! 1 5, 226-227, 294
Denominational names. ..232
Descartes, Rene.. .77, 161,

204
Des Maiseaux, Pierre... 159
Determinism. .. 308
Dewhurst, John Bickerton...

331
Dickens, Charles... 178
Dionysius Alexandrinus...23
Dionysius Exiguus...45
Disney, John. ..268, 270
Dissenters :

Liberal... 2 1 7, 232, 241, 271
. Rational.. .219, 227, 299
Dissenters' Chapels Act...

301. 337
Doddridge, Mercy. ..191
Doddridge, Philip. ..27, 48,

69, 76, 77, 79. 152. i8s.

237, 241, 289-290
Doddridge, Philip (2)... 188
Dodwell, Henry... 199
Dolabella, Thomas... 5 7
Dolet, Etienne...6, 32 ,

Eames, John... 20 5, 207
Eaton, Daniel Isaac... 324

INDEX

343

Eaton, David. ..324
Edward III.... 69
Eighteenth Century... 48, 198
Ejected Ministers. ..69, 185,

241
Ellis, William... 322
Ellis, William (2)... 3 22
Els worth, Hannah... (see

Lindsey)
Emerson, Ralph Waldo ... 1 80
Emlyn, Thomas... 26, 80, 274
Enfield, William. ..298
England, characterized 1.. 30
Ennius...i4
Episcopius, Simon. ..81
Erasmus, I)esiderius...23, 24
Eternity of the Son. ..132
Eunon\ians...258
Eutychians...258
Evanson, Edward... 269
Exeter :

Assembly... 1 31
Meeting-houses... 1 30, 135
Proprietors... 1 30, 135, 138
Thirteen... 1 30^134 138,
147. 151

Falibowski...56
Farmer, Hugh...2i9
Feathers Petition. ..260, 266
Fenn, Sir John. ..31 5
Firmin, Henry... 96
Firmin, Prudence... 97
Firmin, Thomas. ..93-1 19,

251, 267
Fisher,. Samuel... 31 8-319
Fleming, Caleb... 248
Fowler, Edward... 102, 103,

119
Fox, George. ..97
Fox, WilUam Johnson... 3 82
Frampton, Robert...iii
Frankland, Richard... 70, 72-

76, 78, .87, 201, 294, 221
Franklin, Benjamin... 267

Freke, William ...116
Freeman, Catherine... 190
Friends, Society of. ..103-4,

112, 139, 200, 234
Fuchs, Leonard... 3 3
Funds :

Common... 140, 150
Congregational... 1 40, 205,

210
Hibbert...i58
Presbyterian ... 1 40, 150,

188, 205, 210
Unitarian... 299, 324-326,
329. 336

Galen, Claudius... 34, 37
Gaskell, Mrs. 263
Gaudano, Henricus de...23
Gener, Pompeyo...i2
George I.... 144
CJeorge II. 69, 209
George III.... 202
George IV. 177
Gibbon, Edmund...Si, 79
Gillespie, Thomas...2i8
Glaire, Jean Baptiste...i5S
Glossa Ordinaria...23
Godwin, William. ..316
Goldsmith, OUver...3i4
Goodier, Benjamin...333
Goodwin, John. ..97-99, 108
Gordonius, Bernard... 3 5
Gouge, Thomas. ..104, 105,

108, 113
Gough, Strickland. ..221-224.
Grafton, Duke of... 277,296
iGregory Nazianzen...23
Grosvenor, Benjamin. ..204
Grove, Henry... 204
Grundy, Jolm...329

Hallett, John... 1 34, 147
Halley, Edmund. ..163
Hapjjy Union. ..229, 233
Harris, Abraham... 3 29

344

INDEX

Harris, George... 3 29, 337
Hartley,- David... 2 14, 216
Harvey, Daniel Whittle ... 3 2 5
Haynes, Hopton...249, 274
Hedworth, Henry. ..62-63,

107
Henry VIII.... 22
Henry, Matthew... 204, 287
Herring, Thomas... 225, 247
Hewley suit ... 3 3 7
Heywood, Oliver... 287
Hibbert, Robert. ..333
High Commission Court... 96
Hilary, St. of Poitiers... 2 3,

196
Hill, Thomas... 76
Hoadly, Ben jamin . . . 1 50, 222,

244
Hoadly, John... 2 56
Holcot, Robert... 23
Holland, Lord. ..336
Hollis, Thomas... 264
Homer... 1 61
Horsley, Samuel... 303
Howe, John... 1 40
Huguenot Refugees . . . 1 1 1 ,

129, 1.67
Humanity of Christ. . .248-249
Hume, David... 48, 314
Hungary.. .51-52, 59, 62
Hunt, Jeremiah... 1 49, 153,

204
Hunt, John...3i8
Huntingdon, Countess of (i)

...243
Huntingdon, Countess of (2)

...243
Huntingdon, Earl of (i)...

243, 246, 249
Huntingdon, Earl of (2)...

243, 264
Hutcheson, Francis... 67
Hutchinson, Francis... 67
Hutchinsonians ...39
Hutton, Matthew... 247-248

Huxley, Thomas... 220

Idolatry... 165

Ignatius, St 23

Improved Version ... 304
Independents... 102, 125, 126,

139, 147, 151, 189. 251,

270, 300
Indulgence. ..74
Industrial enterprises... 108-

109
Indwelling scheme, 108
Inspiration . . . 306
Ireland, character] zed... 30,

168
Irenaeus, St. 23, 305
Irish Meeting-houses. ..136
Irish Protestants...! 1 1-
Isaiah...i8, 280 -
Jacombe, Samuel... 10 1
Jal, Augustin...i72, 175

James II 112-113

James VI. ...72
James, Jonathan... 99, 108
Jebb, John... 269,. 270
Jeffreys, George... 7 5
JekyI, Sir Joseph. ..143
Jennings, David.. .149, 205,

206, 209, 211
Jenning!5, John... 206, 208,

209, 211-212, 215, 289
Jesuits. ..53, 56, i60'i6i
Jews... 24, 114, 272
Joachim of Flores...23
John Casimir...58
John Damascen, St.... 2 3
Johnson, John... 3 18-3 19
Johnson, Joseph. ..267
Johnson, Samuel. ..24, 168,

237
Johnsonians ... 3 1 9
JoUie, Timothy... 202, 204
Jonah. ..26

Jones, Jeremiah... 20 5
Jones, John. ..257

INDEX

345

Joyce, Jeremiah... 33 1
Judd, Sylvester.. .273
Julius Caesar... 46
Jurieu, Pierre... 161 -167
Justin Martyr, St.... 30 5

Karwath, Severin...58
Kenrick, John... 364
JECing, Sir Peter.. .256
King's Head Society. ..203
Kippis, Andrew. ..23, 177,219
ICirkpatrick, Hezekiah...265
Krasinski, Count W. S....58

Xactantius...2.3
Xambert, James... 2 70
Xardner, Nathaniel... 48, 149,

202, 248
Latham, Ebenezer...208
Jjatin...76, 78, 212-213
Laud, William... 48, 96
Lavington, John... 13 2, 134
Le Clerc, Jean... 166, 174
lectures :

Merchants'... 1 3 3, 140

Salters' Hall... 133
X.egate, Bartholomew... 274
Leibnitz, Gottfried W., von...

166
Libraries :

Bishopthorpe ... 76

Bodleian... 80

Chetham's...8o, 81

Northampton ... 79

St. Victor... 3 2

Summerville...3
Xindsey, Hannah... 2 5 2, 254
Lindsey, Robert... 243
Lindsey , Theophilus ...118,
218, 221, 241-282, 286,

- 293, 295, 297, 301, 302,

' 309. 314
Linen Company... 109
JLtScke, John. ..77,204, 207 .
louis XI v.... 1 62

Lowman, Moses.... 149
Lubieniecki, Stanislaus... 62
Luther, Martin. ..14, 24, 39

Macedonians... 258
Maddox, Isaac...235
Maimbourg, Louis ... 1 66
Manardus, John... 3 5
Manichaeans ...180
Mapletbft, John ...99
Maris, Mercy (see Doddridge)
Marryatt, Zephaniah...203
Marshall, Stephen... 106
Martin, Samuel... 3 38
Martindale, Adam. ..243
Martineau, James. ..27, 163,

2i6, 273, 333
Mary L...19
Mary II.... 102
Mason, John. ..226, 263
Maxentius, Johannes. ..23
Mead, Matthew. .,125
Melanchthon, Philip... 20, 24,

37
Menage, Gilles...i66
Mere Christians. ..62, 251
Methodism... 1 99, 218, 232,

234. 2SS, 318
Milboume, Luke . ; . 1 1 4
Milton, John... 39, 107, 276
Minor Church... 5 3-58
Missions, foreign. ..235-236
Missionary hints... 328
Molinos, Miguel dc.g
Montaigne, Michel de...i59,

180
Montgomery, Henry. ..334
More, Henry... 1 97
Morell, John...33i
Moreri, Louis. ..173-174
Morton, Charles... 69, 74, 85,

86, 87-88.,
Moses. ..39,, 302
Moyses, Rab...23
Muhamm ad ... 2 3

346

INDEX

Muhammadans...si, 114,

272, 275
Miinster, Sebastian... 3 3

Neal, Daniel. ..149, 203, 204
Nestorians...258
Newcome, William... 304
Newman, Cardinal... 178
Newton, Isaac... 204, 205
NichoUs, William... 1 25
Nonjurors...! II
Non-trinitarians. . .54
North, Baron. ..262
Northumberland, Countess of

...248
Northumberland, Duke of

...253
Northumberlana, Duke of

(2)... 244
Nye, Philip... 106
Nye, Stephen. ..63, 106-108,

113, 114, 115, 247, 251,

252

Occam, William.. .23
Oecolampadius, Johannes, 25
Oldfield, John. ..263
Oldfield, Joshua. ..145
Ordination... 1 48, 230-231
Orphic hymn... 1 4
Orthodoxy... 225, 299
Orton, Job.. .195, 210, 217,
241

Pagnino, Sanctes...24, 36
Paine, Thomas. ..293-294,

306, 324
Palmer, Thomas Fyshe...270
Papinian...i53
Parr, John. ..132
Parr, Samuel... 326
Patripassianism ...196
Patrolatry...274, 277
Paul, St.... 40, 280

Pauli, Gregory,.,54-5, 61, 63
Paulmier, Pierre... 36
Paulus Burgensis...23
Peel, Sir Robert... 1 77
Peirce, James. ..124-148, 196,

202, 226, 229
Pell, William... 70
Penn, William... 104, 115
Pepys, Samuel... 93, 117
Persecution ...i6g
Peter, St.... 40
Peter de Aliaco...23
Peter, Lombard. ..23
Philip II.... 108
Pitman, Isaac... 97
Plato. ..71
Platts, John. ..324
Plutarch.. .159, 180
Poland... 51 sqq.
Polish Bible... 5 6
Polish exiles. ..61, iio-iii
Pompey...i73
Pope, Alexander... 68
Popes :

Alexander VII.... 5 8

Clement VII.... 17

Clement XIII.... 50

Gregory I.... 30

Gregory XIII.... 46, 50

Julius III.... 1 9

Leo XIII.. ..Ill
Prayer Book.. .250-252, 296
Praxeas...i96

Pre-existence of Christ. ..196
Presbyterian Separation... 74
Presbyterianism :

Exeter. . . 1 30

French... 1 29

Irish... 3 34

Scottish.. .51, 185, 187
Presbyterians, so-called...
130, 139. 148- 217. 229»
337
Price, Richard. ..293, 297, 307
Price, Sir Robert... 129

INDEX

347

Priestley, Joseph... 13, 38,48,
203, 207, 214, 216, 220,
241, 24s, 248, 253, 255-
266, 267, 268, 272, 280,
282, 285, 288, 289, 293,
295. 298, i02, 303, 307,

309

Prison reform. ..109
Protestant Dissenters... 124

126, 298
Ptolemy, Claudius. ..28, 33
Pulmonary circulation... 36
Puritans...5i, 96
Pusey, Edward Bouverie...5i
PyiThus.,.173

Quaker...! 1 2

Quintana, Juan de...i6, 20,

21, 22, 24
Qor4n, the... 2 3

Rabelais, Francois. ..32
Radecki, Valentine... 5 9
Eaikes, Robert. ..255
Rak6w...S4-S9
Raleigh, Sir Walter. ..171
Ramus, Peter.., 81
Reid , Thomas ...314
Relapsed, the... 161
Remonstrant ... 206
Remonstrant Synod... 3 34
Republicans . . . 293-.294
Reves, Casa...io..
Reves, Pedro Antonio de, . . 1 2
Ricardus de Media Villa... 2 3
Rich, Jeremy...2i6
Richardson, Samuel... 190
Robertson, William. ..255-

259, 266, 270
Robinson, Robert... 279, 322
Rousseau, Jean Jacques. ..314
Rowan, Archibald Hamilton

•••334
Rowe, Thomas... 203
Russell, James... 269

Sabellius...i96
Sabellians...ii4,. 116, 251,

252, 258, 272, 319
Saints, cultus of. ..161
Sale, George... 1 71
Salters' Hall.. .123-153, 189,

195, 204, 231.
Sancha, Queen... 9
Savile, Sir George. ..262
Schism Act... 1 36, 142
Scholefield, RadcLiffe.,.290
Schools, Nonconformist... 8 5
Scotland, characterized ... 29
Seeker, Thomas. ..202, 235
Seddon, John... 248
Serveto, Antonio... 8, 13
Serveto, JuAn...8, 11
Serveto, Marco Antonio ... 1 2
Servetus, Michael... 3-41, 50,

32s
Setzer, Johanu...20
Shaftesbury, Earl of ...166
Sharp, John. ..75, ,76
Shawcross, Richard...333
Sherlock, William... 196.
Shortland,.,97, 215-216
Shuto, John (see Barrington).
Shuttle wood, John... 80
Sibylline verses. ..14
Sichem, Christopher... 6
Siennjmski,. James ... 5 5
Siennjoiski, John... 54
Smethurst, John... 3 34
Smith, John. „. 1 16
Socinians...53, 114, 126, 167,

251, 258, ,272, 274
,Socinianism,..i02, 128, 196,

_ - 206, 264, 290
Somerset, Duke of. ..244
Sozzini, Fajisto Paulo ... 5 , 13,

26, 27, 81, 246, 272
Spaniards, characterised... 31
Stadipn, Christopher von . . .20
Statham, Wi lliam ... 3 3 6
Stillingfleet, Edward... 74

348

INDEX

Stogdon, Hubert... 128
Subscription...23i, 243, 251,

257. 258
Sunday Schools. ..255, 263
Swift, Jonathan. ..256
Sykes, John...3i6
Symonds, John... 208

Tachella, Benjamin... 176
Tayler, John James. ..72, 173,

207, 273, 333
Taylor, Jeremy... 97
Taylor, John... 195, 245, 293,

305, 338
Taylor, William. ..273
Tertullian...23

Thom, John Hamilton...! 04
Three Denominations... 131,

141
Tillotson, John...75, 102, 103,

lOS
- Toland, John ...115
Toleration... 98, 141
Toleration Act (1689). ..69,

114, 200, 225
Toleration Act (1779). ..200,

262
ToUin, Henri Wilhelm Nath-

anael...8, 9, 11, 12, 14,23
Tong, William... 204
Toulmin, Joshua... 32 5
Transubstantiation ...161
Transylvania... 50, 60
Trevor, Henry...3i9
Trinitarian. ..49-50, 292
Trinitarianism...i03, 150
Trinity, the... 98, 107, 114,

127, 137, 143, 146, 195,

246
Trinity Act. ..271, 298
Tritheism...i96
Trustees :

Coward. ..218, 220, 290
Hibbert...i58
Radcliffe...235
Wilhams'...i49, 290

Tucker, Abraham. ..281
Turner, William. ..260,265
Tyrwhitt, Robert.. .269 "

I
Uniformity Act... 68
Unipersonality of God... 100,

107, 114, 272, 275
Unitarian Associations. ..295,

301
Unitarian Book Societies...

27.";. 297
Unitarian Chapel... 267, 268,

278, 297
Unitarian Church... 63, 273
Unitarian congregations...: 17
Unitarian name. ..49 sqq, 113

272, 275
Unitarian religion... 50, 63
Unitarian Tracts. ..115, 247,

251
Unitarianism...9S, 128, 150,

221, 271, 290, 2$5
United Brethren... 139
Unity of God. ..219, 275
Universalists ... 3 22
Universities :
Aberdeen...233
Cambridge.. .69, 72, 204,

207, 233, 243
Durham... 70, 201
Edinburgh...7i, 72
Geneva. ..70, 161
Glasgow.. .256, 259
Harvard. ..88, 325
Leiden... 202
Nonconformist. . .20 1
Oxford. ..69, 72, 73, 78,

85, 202, 233
Paris... 3 2, 202
Rotterdam... 1 63
Stamford... 69
Toulouse... 1 3, 16, 25, 159,

160
Zaragoza...i2

■Velasco,Pedro Gonzales tic. .6

INDEX

349

Vergil... 1 4, i6i
Vesale, Andre. ..32
Vesey, John ...112
Victoria, Queen... 157, 242
Vidler, William. ..322-323
Villano vanus ... 28
Villanueva de Sigena...7-ii
Voltaire... 1 7 2, 259, 314

Wakefield, Gilbert. ..269
Walker, George... 98
Wallis, John... 1 96, 247
Walpole, Horace...3i4
Warburton, William... 234,

250
Ward, Samuel. ..96
Warren, Matthew.. .82
Warren, Thomas. ..269
Watts, Isaac. ..144, 193, 195,

196-198, 200, 204, 205,

208'
Wellbeloved, Charles... 221,

271, 295
Welsh Bible... 105
Wesley, John... 48, 51, 94,

187,' 199, 216, 233, 272
Wesley, Samuel... 8 7
Westbury, Baron... 242
Wetenhall, Edward ...112
Wezyk, Jan... 5 7

Whichcote, Benjamin. ..102,

IDS

Whitefield, George... 48, 199,

226
Wilcox, Daniel. ..149
Wilkins, John. ..102
Wilks, John... 3 36
William III....! 11
Williams, Daniel. ..140
Williams, John... 308
Willis, Robert. ..28
Wilson, Walter.. .232
Winchester, Elhanan...322
Wiszowaty, Andrew... 61 ,62
Witchcraft... 1 68
Withers, John... 134
Wladyslaw IV.... 5 7
Wolverhampton suit... 3 36
Worthington, John. ..162
Wright, Anne...3i5
Wright, John. ..335-336
Wright, John (2). ..335,
Wright, Richard...3i3

Yates, James... 27 3

Zadrik, Jacob... 57, 5 8
Zinzendorf, Nicolaus Ludwig

von... 236 *
Zoelen, Van. ..163

CONTENTS

PAGE

Prefatory Note

I. The Personality of Michael

Servetus .... 3

II. The Tercentennial of a Name . 45

III. Early NoNFORMiTY AND Education . 67

IV. Thomas Firmin, the Philanthropist 93
V. The Story of Salters' Hall . 123.

VI. Peter Bayle and His Dictionary . . 157

VII. Philip Doddridge and the Catho-
licity OF THE Old Dissent . 185

VIII. Theophilus LiNDSEY AND His Chapel 241

IX. Thomas Belsham, His Place in the

Unitarian Movement . . 285

X. Richard Wright and Missionary

Enterprise .... 313

Index 340

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

Heresy : its Ancient Wrongs and Modern

Rights in these Kingdoms. By Alexander

Gordon, M.A. 88 pp. Cloth, is. 6d. net. (Lindsey

Press.)

" Though Mr. Gordon's pages are packed almost to overflowing with
facts which he has rescued from obscurity, his narrative is by no means
lacking in personal colour. The appendix of notes, extending to thirty
pages, reveals the range of scholarship in almost forgotten fields which has
gone to the making of the sparkling narrative of his lecture." — Manchester
Guardian.

Freedom after Ejection, a review^ (1690-1692) of

Presbyterian and Congregational Nonconformity in
England and Wales. Edited by Alexander Gordon,
M.A. Fcp. 4to. pp. viii + 400. Cloth, 15s. net.
(Manchester University Press.)

The manuscript upon which the present pubUcation is founded is in the
nature of a review or survey begun in 1690, of the state of the several counties
in England and Wales during the years 1690 to 1692. It enumerates the
Dissenting Ministers, whether settled or itinerant, notes their particular
personal circumstances, states the places at which their meetings were held,
or might reasonably be begun, with the amount of financial support in
each case. It also gives the names of the students who were being educated
in " University learning."

In addition to writing a commentary on the manuscript, Mr. Gordon
has added a copious index to the place-names and the persons mentioned,
supplementing the latter with biographical details of a most elaborate
nature.

LINDSEY PRESS, 5 ESSEX STREET, STRAND, W.C. 2

The Cheshire Glassis. Minutes 1691-1745. Edited

for the Provincial Assembly of Lancashire and Cheshire
by Alexander Gordon, M.A., Si x 6|, vii. + 220 pp.
(Chiswick Press.) Orders to Messrs. Rawson & Co.,
16 New Brown Street, Manchester. los. 6d. post free.

This volume forms a valuable sequel to Mr. Gordon's " Freedom after
Ejection." The earlier volume presented a vivid commentary on the
condition and the activities of the old dissenters in the last decade of the
seventeenth century. In the record of the Cheshire Classics the story is
carried on to well nigh half way through the eighteenth century; it is a
welcome contribution to sound historical knowledge and indispensable to
those who would understand aright the traditions and the ideals which have
been handed on from those days down to our own. The value of the record
is very considerably enhanced by the sympathetic imagination and wide
knowledge which characterizes Mr. Gordon's interpretation of events and
commentary upon them.

Heads of English Unitarian History. By

Alexander Gordon, M.A. 138 pp. is. net. (Lindsey
Press.)

This book contains an outline history of the Unitarian movement, and
includes also essays on " Baxter, as a founder of Liberal Nonconformity,"
and " Priestley, as a Pioneer in Theological Science."

" This very important little book has a value quite beyond its modest
pretensions. Principal Gordon's name has long been known as that of an
authority on all matters of Nonconformist history, and his erudition on the
subject of this volume is unique." — Inquirer.

LINDSEY PRESS, 5 ESSEX STREET, STRAND. W.C. 2

liiiSiiiJiiiiiiliiiiilililiiiiiiliiliill^