CHAPTER VI.

Policy of the Bishops in the Conference at the Savoy in 1661; and its Exposure by the Nonconformists.

CHAP. VI.

Reply of

the prelates

to the Ex

ceptions of

ters.

HE Savoy conference was restricted to four months. Three of those months had passed before the prelates returned their Answer to the Exceptions which the ministers had submitted the ministo them. The High Church party knew the juncture to be such, that in their case, to gain time was to gain power. On the whole, the answer which came from the prelates now was a faithful repetition of the answer which had come from them the year before. The bishops alleged, that according to their instructions, they were to admit such changes only as should be proved to be 'necessary,' and as should, in consequence, be 'agreed upon.' Their answer was, that none of the changes proposed had been shown to be of that nature, and that none of them accordingly could be allowed. Their paper was described, indeed, as making concessions, but it was seen at a glance that these were few and trivial, verbal rather than material. To many this issue was simply such as had been expected. To many it was the occa

BOOK II. sion of disappointment and sorrow.

Rejoinder from the ministers.

But while this was the drift and substance of their reply, their lordships made some attempt, in this document, to exhibit reasons for their decision, and returned a sort of answer to the 'exceptions' seriatim.

one.

The ministers resolved that the discussion should not terminate at this point. Baxter was requested to prepare a rejoinder. He hastened at once to the house of his good brother, Dr. Spurstowe, in the village of Hackney, and shut himself up to his labour during the next eight days. He then appeared before his brethren with a document, which, printed in ordinary pica type, would extend to some hundred and fifty octavo pages. The sections of the Answer' are transcribed, fully and fairly, in their order, and the 'Rejoinder' deals with them one by Walls, bastions, gates-whatever the bishops have reared in their defence, all are levelled to the ground, or shattered into fragments, by the artillery directed against them. We do not say the shot are never beside the mark, or that there is no waste of ammunition, but the execution done is, upon the whole, masterly and complete. We shall not be expected to attempt even an epitome of this elaborate production. But the substance of portions of it should be given, as serving to show the sort of argument with which the bishops were content to defend their cause; and to show, moreover, the nature of the reasoning which made Nonconformists in that day, and which has sufficed to make men such from that day to the present. With this view we shall pass over the matter which has a personal tinge upon it, and does not bear directly on the great principles which separated the two parties from each other.

The divines ventured to remind the prelates that it

How to

secure peace

to the

Church.

became them, as the professed successors of the apostles, CHAP. VI. to imitate those holy men by showing themselves tender of the peace of the church, and careful to heal her differences. The answer to this appeal was in four lines: For preserving the church's peace, we know no better 'nor more efficacious way than our set liturgy, there being no such way to keep us from schism as to speak all the same thing, according to the apostle.'

unknown

mitive

church.

We submit, say the ministers, that the liturgy would Liturgics not be less conducive to concord if the parts of it which to the priare the cause of our present divisions were revised or removed. Our complaint is, that in its present state it is not adapted to your proposed end. Further, by speaking the same thing,' do you suppose the apostle intended the speaking of your liturgy, or of a liturgy of any kind? If you mean to say the apostles used a liturgy, we demand the proof of that statement. If so precious a relic as an apostolic liturgy really existed, we desire to know by what strange means it fell into disuse, became lost, so that no portion of it can be recovered? The fact that we know nothing of such a composition is proof that the apostolic age knew nothing of it. Had it existed, the apostles, in their endeavours to heal the dissensions in the early churches, would surely have appealed to it. But they make no such appeal. To say, as is sometimes said, that those were the times of miraculous gifts, and that rubrical aids were little needed, is to grant our conclusion, viz., that liturgies were unknown in the primitive church. We must add, that if the time was to come in which an exact liturgy would be indispensable to the security of faith and order, can we suppose that the apostles, in their inspired foresight of the needs of the church, would have failed to supply

BOOK II. such assistance? And if they had done so, is it not clear that the church would have had one liturgy, as certainly as one Bible? If it be said that our liturgy is 'ancient, because the Sursum Corda, the Gloria Patri, etc., are ancient,' we answer, if our modern liturgies shall be restricted to the few sentences of that sort which can be traced to a true antiquity, we are Nonconformists no longer we consent to use them.

Past fruit of the English liturgy.

The Nonconformist

view on

tion.

'

The next answer of the bishops is an appeal to experience. When the liturgy was duly observed,' say their lordships, we lived in peace; since that was laid 'aside, there have been as many modes and fashions of 'worship as fancies.'

your

Pardon us, say the divines, if we interpret such language as betraying a want of charity-an insensithat ques- bility to the suffering of brethren. You "You say you lived in peace. But so did not the many thousands 'who were fain to seek peaceable habitations in Holland, ' and in the deserts of America, nor the many thousands 'who lived in danger of the high commission, or bishops' 'courts at home, and who were so in danger of every 'malicious neighbour that would accuse them of hearing sermons abroad, when they had none at home, or of 'meeting in a neighbour's house to pray, or of not 'kneeling in the receiving of the sacrament.' We should not have reminded you of these things had you not compelled us so, to do. Scotland might also say to you, that before your liturgy came among them they had peace, but that afterwards they had no peace. Who does not know that our own inquietude came largely from the determination of our rulers in those days to enforce such observances? And is this the use which is to be made of all our experiences? Have we all suffered so

much, only that you should return to the old course of CHAP. VI. violence towards men who should be allowed to live in peace? The past has shown how little influence penalties and prisons can exercise over the judgments and consciences of men; and in the face of such a past, can you resolve to return to that policy? Of some you may make hypocrites. Of some you may make exiles. Some may perish under your hand. And what will be the effect of all this upon yourselves? Will this be to show that you are the friends of the people-fathers to the flock? But you say the liberty to dispense with the use of the liturgy bred great divisions in the late times. We say, on the contrary, that it is to us matter of 'admiration to observe how little discord there was in prayer, and other parts of worship, among all the 'churches throughout the three nations, which were 'agreed in doctrine, and forbore the liturgy. It is 'wonderful to us, in the review, to consider with what 'love and peace and concord they all spoke the same 'things, who were tied to no form of words; even 'those who differed in some points of discipline, even 'to a withdrawing from local communion with us, yet 'strangely agreed with us in worship.'

The people humble, say

should be

the bishops.

The fourth answer from the bishops is highly characteristic. It is well, say their lordships, to pray for unity, and not less well to labour to get true humility, which 'would make us think our guides wiser and fitter to 'order us than we ourselves, and Christian charity, which 'would teach us to think no evil of our superiors, but 'to judge them rather careful guides and fathers to us.' But you must hear the other side, say the ministers. We humbly conceive that it would tend greatly towards the peace of the church if our pastors should be content superiors.

Would

humility be

out of place

in their