Page images
PDF
EPUB

that such a prosecution should have been set on foot under the government of Cromwell; but Dr. Southey remarks with truth, that "there was much more persecution during the Protectorate, than Cromwell would have allowed, if he could have prevented it." The lawfulness of public preaching by men not ordained was, indeed, at this time a point warmly debated, the Presbyterians in general maintaining the negative with as lofty pretensions to divine right as had been asserted by the champions of Prelacy; so as to draw forth Milton's biting sarcasm, that

[ocr errors][merged small]

He "

It is probable, however, that personal enmity occasioned this attempt to check Bunyan's usefulness. His " great desire in fulfilling his ministry," he tells us, "was to get into the darkest places of the country," and to preach the gospel where Christ was not named. never cared to meddle with things controverted." "It pleased me much," he says, "to contend with great earnestness for the word of faith, and the remission of sins by the death and sufferings of Jesus; but, as to other things, I would let them alone, because I saw they engendered strife." This wise and modest course could not, however, screen him either from being regarded as an intruder by the intolerant, or from being grossly calumniated by the ignorant and malicious, who sought, by aspersing his moral character, to cause his ministry to be abandoned. It was rumoured, that he was "a witch, a Jesuit, a highwayman," and a libertine. These "lies and slanders," says Bunyan, "I

"Nothing will satisfy them," said Cromwell, speaking of the Presbyterian party, "unless they can put their finger upon their brethren's conscience, and pinch them there."

:

+ In this same year (1658) was published a work entitled, "The Preacher Sent; or, a Vindication of the Liberty of Public Preaching by some men not ordained in answer to two books, 1. Jus Divinum Evangelici, by the Provincial Assembly of London; 2. Vindicia Ministerii Evangelici, by Mr. John Collings, Norwich. Published by John Martin, Minister of the Gospel at Edgefield, Norfolk; Sam. Petto, Minister of the Gospel at Sandcroft, Suffolk; and Frederick Woodals, Minister of the Gospel at Woodbridge, Suffolk."

bind to me as an ornament; it belongs to my Christian profession to be vilified, slandered, reproached, and reviled; and since all this is nothing else, as my God and my conscience do bear me witness, I rejoice in reproaches for Christ's sake."

But he was destined to have his constancy and fortitude put to a severer test: "bonds and imprisonment awaited him." He had "for five or six years, without any interruption, freely preached the gospel," when, in November, 1660, he was taken up by a warrant from a justice named Wingate, at a place called Samsell in Bedfordshire, at which he had been invited to preach; the justice having resolved, as he said, to "break the neck of such meetings." The mittimus ran to this effect: "That he went about to several conventicles in the county, to the great disparagement of the government of the church of England," &c. Such was one of the first-fruits of the Restoration! Dr. Southey, willing to palliate the conduct of his persecutors, insinuates, that "he was known to be hostile to the restored church, and that probably it might be remembered that he had served in the Parliament army." Of the former, there is no evidence; and the latter is a gratuitous conjecture, which, if admitted, would only give a more despicably vindictive character to the proceedings. The fact appears to be, that his old enemies took advantage of the change in the Government, to execute their long-cherished purpose in putting a stop to his preaching; and that, had the state of the law admitted of it, he would have met with the same treatment under Cromwell, from the same parties, that he did under Charles. One of the party concerned in these proceedings, a Dr. Lindale, is described by Bunyan as "an old enemy to the truth," who, on hearing of the Tinker's apprehension, came in, and fell to taunting of him "with many reviling terms." Bunyan, however, was a match for his accusers, as well in ready wit as in scriptural argument. And when this Dr. Lindale, alluding to his calling, said, that "he remembered reading of one Alexander, a coppersmith, who did much oppose and disturb

the apostles;" Bunyan replied, that he also had read of many priests and pharisees that had their hands in the blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." "Aye," rejoined Lindale, "and you are one of those scribes and pharisees; for you, with a pretence, make long prayers, to devour widows' houses." He received for answer, that if he (Dr. L.) had got no more by preaching and praying than Bunyan had, he would not be so rich as he was. Bunyan had notice of the intention to arrest him, and might have eluded the writ; and after being taken before the magistrate, he might have obtained his discharge, if he would have promised to leave off preaching, and keep to his calling. But his conscience would not allow him to make any such engagement. He was accordingly committed to gaol. After he had lain there five or six days, some of his friends offered bail for his appearance at the sessions; but the magistrate to whom they applied, refused to take it.

Some seven weeks after his apprehension, the quarter sessions were held at Bedford, and Bunyan was brought up for examination before the justices. The bill of indictment preferred against him, was under the act of the 35th Elizabeth, and ran to this effect: "That John Bunyan, of the town of Bedford, labourer, being a person of such and such conditions, hath devilishly and perniciously abstained from coming to church to hear divine service, and is a common upholder of several unlawful meetings and conventicles, to the great disturbance and distraction of the good subjects of this kingdom, contrary to the laws of our sovereign lord the king," and so forth. Upon this being read, he was asked by the justices what he had to say to it. Not aware that he had been indicted, Bunyan readily admitted that he did not attend the parish church, and that he did attend private meetings at which he preached: he also entered into a defence of his conduct upon scriptural grounds, by which he only drew down upon himself the coarse invectives of his judges. "Who is your God, Beelzebub?" said one of the justices; and they repeatedly said, that he was possessed of the devil. At the close of

this memorable examination, his answers being taken down as a confession of guilt, without any other trial, without the verdict of a jury, he was sentenced in the following terms: "You must be had back again to prison, and there. lie for three months following; and at the three months' end, if you do not submit to go to church to hear divine service, and leave your preaching, you must be banished the realm; and if you be found to come over again without special licence from the king, you must be stretched by the neck for it, I tell you plainly," said the judge: and so he bade the jailor remove his prisoner. Bunyan resolutely answered, that if he were out of prison to-day, he would preach the gospel again to-morrow, by the help of God.

Of the propriety of Bunyan's conduct in refusing to desist from preaching, differing opinions will be formed. Dr. Southey, as might be anticipated, takes a decided part with his judges; giving it as his opinion, that in none of Bunyan's writings "does he appear so little reasonable, or so little tolerant, as upon these examinations." In what his intolerance consisted, is not very apparent; but the learned Biographer possibly refers to honest John's objection to using the common- prayer-book, as not being of divine authority. In proof that he was unreasonable, it is urged, that he was neither called upon to renounce any thing that he did believe, nor to profess any thing that he did not; that the congregation to which he belonged, held at this time their meetings unmolested; that he might have worshipped when he pleased, where he pleased, and how he pleased; and that he was only required not to go about the country holding conventicles."* The extreme disingenuousness of this statement will be evident when it

* Dr. Southey adds: "The cause for that interdiction was, not that persons were admonished in such conventicles to labour for salvation, but that they were exhorted there to regard with abhorrence that Protestant church which is essentially part of the constitution of this kingdom." An assertion imbodying an historical misrepresentation and a calumny, and which would serve just as well to justify the persecution of Dissenters in the present day. If the conventicle act was right, the toleration act was wrong.

is recollected, that the statute under which he was indicted, rendered his nonconformity itself a crime; that his abstaining from coming to church was placed in the front of his offence; and that he was not only required to profess what, in him, would have been hypocrisy, but to renounce what he believed to be his sacred duty. "Sir," said Bunyan, in a subsequent examination, to the clerk of the peace, who tried to persuade him to forbear awhile,-" Wicliff saith, that he who leaveth off preaching and hearing of the word of God for fear of excommunication of men, he is already excommunicated of God, and shall in the day of judgment be counted a traitor to Christ." When reminded that the Scripture enjoined obedience to the powers that be, his answer was: "That Paul did own the powers that were in his day to be of God; and yet he was often in prison under them, for all that; and also, though Jesus Christ told Pilate that he had no power against him, but of God, yet he died under the same Pilate. And yet," (he added,) "I hope you will not say that either Paul or Christ were such as did deny magistracy, and so sinned against God in slighting the ordinance. Sir, the law hath provided two ways of obeying the one, to do that which I in my conscience do believe I am bound to do actively; and where I cannot obey actively, there I am willing to lie down, and to suffer what they shall do unto me." Such was the "unreasonable" character of his defence; and because it was, in the opinion of the Apologist for Laud,* unreasonable, Bunyan, we have been told, "is most wrongfully represented as having been the victim of intolerant laws and prelatical oppression." Yet, it is admitted, that he evinced at least the strength of will and strength of heart, the fortitude and the patience of a martyr. Nor was it without a painful conflict of emotions that he made up his mind to the consequences of his firmness, as we learn from the touching expression of his feelings during

And Biographer of Wesley, whom, but for the Toleration-act, the same statute would have condemned to incarceration and exile.

« PreviousContinue »