The Political Activities of the Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men in England During the Interregnum cz30ps676

Citation preview

BURT FRANKLIN RESEARCH & SOURCE WORKS SERIES #97

The Political Activities of the

Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men In England During the Interregnum

PRIZE ESSAYS OF THE

AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION

The Political Activities of the

Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men In England During the Interregnum

BY

LOUISE FARGO BROWN, PH.D.

BURT FRANKLIN RESEARCH & SOURCE WORKS SERIES #97

ye

adi aR he > (tli

BURT FRANKLIN NEW YORK

PUBLISHED BY BURT FRANKLIN

935 EAST 44TH ST. NEW YORK, N. Y. 10017

FIRST PUBLISHED: LONDON

1911

PRINTED IN U.S.A.

TO MY MOTHER

PREFACE. THE purpose of this study is to set forth the attitude

toward the English government, in one of the most troubled periods of its history, of two religious bodies which by a large number of their contemporaries were considered enemies of all government, and sworn foes of peace and order. Twice in a period of six years the men belonging to these two parties were actually in a

position to affect the policy of the government; for part of the period one of them practically controlled Ireland, and throughout the Protectorate they were a serious problem to Cromwell. I have endeavored to ascertain as far as possible to what extent the political programs of the two parties furnished justification of the popular opinion concerning them. and, in consequence, what was their real importance in the history of their time. I have used throughout the term Baptist, which in the period under consideration had begun to be employed by the Baptists themselves, in place of the less convenient terms “ baptized believer” and “ baptized

brother”. The name Anabaptist, never accepted by the Baptists themselves, was practically the only one applied to them by outsiders. There was, however, great confusion as to its use: Independents and other sectaries usually applied it to the Baptists alone; Royalists, foreigners, and sometimes Presbyterians, made it include the. Fifth Monarchy men and all other extreme (vil)

Vill PREFACE sectaries, and sometimes it was used yet more loosely as a mere term of reproach. Of the materials used, the most important have been such collections of contemporary correspondence as the Thurloe Papers, both printed and manuscript, the letters of Henry Cromwell and those of the French am-

bassador Bordeaux; and contemporary pamphlets, especially the great Thomason Collection in the British Museum. A good deal of information has been pieced together from scattered references in the Calendars of State Papers, the Reports of the Historical MSS. Com-

mission, the Clarke Papers, and in the Tanner, Carte, and Clarendon MSS. Records of individual churches are unfortunately scarce. Some few are available in manuscript, and several of these have been made accessible in print by the Hanserd Knollys Society and, more recently, by the Baptist and Congregational his-

torical societies of London. The two societies last named are making commendable efforts to publish all existing material for the early history of the Separatist churches. Doubtless the forthcoming volumes of Mr. Champlin Burrage will also contain valuable material. I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to Professor

C. H. Firth, to Dr. William A. Shaw, to Mrs. S. C. Lomas, and to Dr. Frances G. Davenport, for advice and assistance most kindly given me when I was gathering my material. Grateful acknowledgments are also due to Mr. Frank H. Robinson of the Baptist College

of Bristol, and to Dr. W. T. Whitley of Preston, for their courteous answers to letters of inquiry; to Mr. Hubert Hall of the Public Record Office, and to the librarians of the British Museum, the Bodleian Library,

the Dr. Williams Library, the Friends’ Reference

PREFACE 1X Library at Devonshire House, the Congregational Library in London, and the Guildhall Library; to the custodians of records at Somerset House, and to the provost of Worcester College. Oxford. I am under a special debt of gratitude to Professor R. C. H. Cat-

terall, who has been my untiring guide and helpful critic from the inception of this work until its completion. I wish also to express my appreciation of the kindness of those who have helped the book through its final stages, especially that of Miss Grace L. Filer, who has aided me in innumerable ways, for which all words of thanks must be inadequate. L. F. B. WELLESLEY, MASSACHUSETTS,

September, IQ1t.

CONTENTS.

PREFACE. , , , . , . . Vil PAGE

CHAPTER I.

Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men . . . I CHAPTER IT.

Government by the Saints , . , . 28 CHAPTER III.

The Protector and the Saints. . . . 44 CHAPTER [V.

Saints in Prison and out of Prison. , . 76 CHAPTER V.

Kingdom Building . , , . . . 103 CHAPTER VT.

Ireland and the Protectorate , , . . 136 CHAPTER VII.

Overturning, Overturning, Overturning . 71

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES . . , . . 207

BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . , , . . 215 (x1)

CHAPTER I. BAPTISTS AND FirrH MonarcHy MEN.

Ir is evident to students of the Protectorate period that the religious views of the men who were directing

public affairs, and the attitude of the various sects toward the government, were very important elements in the fortunes of England during those difficult years. The problems of Cromwell, in adjusting to political exigencies his own ideas on the subject of religion and of church organization ; his real perplexity and sorrow in

dealing with conscientious men whose scruples he understood, and with whose pleas for liberty of conscience he sympathized: these were factors of considerable weight in shaping the destinies of the Protectorate. The curious attempt at government by a body of-men chosen for their godliness, and the alternation of governments which gave the country over to confusion in the period which followed Richard Cromwell’s abdication: these, as well as the days of the Protector-

ate, can be better understood after a study of the activities of two bodies of mén, frequently confused even by contemporaries—the politico-religious party known as Fifth Monarchy men, and the members of the Baptist denomination. It will be necessary, before

2I

beginning such a study, to have a clear idea of the policy and characteristics of each of these bodies.

Of all the forms of Protestantism to which the Reformation gave birth there was one which, more nearly

2 BAPTISTS AND FIFTH MONARCHY MEN

than any other, carried to its logical conclusion the great principle that it is the right of every man to seek

God’s truth in the Scriptures, and mould his life in accordance with that truth as he sees it. When the great heroes of the Reformation found it expedient to put limitations on that principle, the men called Anabaptists clung to it still, and, harried from land to land,

beset with reproachful names, forced to shoulder all the crimes of misguided fanatics attached to the skirts

of their movement, carried their faith into all the corners of Europe. The salient feature of that faith was the principle that a church, according to Scripture,

is a voluntary association of believers, with whose organization and support the state has nothing to do, and over whose belief and worship no civil power has jurisdiction. The name Anabaptist, applied as a term

of reproach, arose out of their contention that, in Scripture, baptism was the sign of admission into the community of believers, and that consequently infant

baptism was without validity. All the great leaders of the Anabaptists were apostles of religious tolerance, and many held that no Christian should be a magistrate, engage in warfare, take an oath, or go to law. A small number developed pronounced millenarian views, re-

fused to acknowledge the existing magistracy, and advocated the establishment of Christ’s kingdom by force. It was the attempt of this faction to carry out its views in the city of Mtinster that brought more discredit on the Anabaptists than any other event in their history, and the excesses there indulged in were thenceforth very generally ascribed to all opponents of infant baptism. The term Anabaptism, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, represented to the average man

BAPTISTS AND FIFTH MONARCHY MEN 3

not the doctrines taught by Hans Denck, Balthasar Hubmaier, Caspar Schwenckfeld, or Menno Simons, but those upheld by Knipperdoling and John of Leyden

in their short-lived Westphalian kingdom. Yet the credit of these latter had collapsed with their dream of power, while the disciples of the former carried their faith down the centuries.’ The Anabaptists of Holland were the spiritual fore-

fathers of the English Baptists. Although scattered persons in England, from Reformation days on, held the distinctive tenets of the Continental Anabaptists, there is no record of any permanent congregation before the early years of the seventeenth century.’ The first group of English Baptists were dissenters from the English Separatist church in Amsterdam. They had fallen under the influence of the Mennonites there,

and from their adoption of the belief in universal re-

demption came to be known as General Baptists. Members of this group, settling in London, formed the

first permanent Baptist church in England in 1611. Their ideas spread, and by 1626 there were at least three General Baptist churches in London, and others in Lincoln, Sarum, Coventry, and Tiverton.* The second group of Baptists, who held Calvinistic views and were consequently known as Particular Bap1The subject is fully treated in Keller, Geschichte der Wiedertaufer. See also Lindsay, Reformation, II, 430 ff., and the last edition of Herzog’s Realencyclopiadie.

For the sufferings of these early Baptists, see Crosby, English Baptists, I, 33 ff.; Tracts on Liberty of Conscience (Hanserd Knollys Soc.), Introduction; Heath, ‘‘ The Anabaptists and their English Descendants,’’ in Contemporary Review, LIX (1891), 302 ff. 3 Crosby, English Baptists, I, 68 ff.; Barclay, Inner Life of the Religtous Societies of the Commonwealth, 95 ff.; Whitley, ed., Minutes of the General Assembly of the General Baptist Churches, 1654-1728, I, xii-xvi.

4 BAPTISTS AND FIFTH MONARCHY MEN tists, had their origin in a secession from the Independ-

ent church founded in Southwark by Henry Jacob, formerly pastor of an English congregation in Zeeland.

The seceders opposed the recognition of the English parish churches as true churches, because they were not formed in accordance with the voluntary principle, and some of them had come to disbelieve in the baptism

of infants. The new church was organized under the leadership of John Spilsbury in 1633. Five years later William Kiffin and other seceders from Jacob’s church

joined their congregation, which afterward split into two equal parts, one under the leadership of Praise-God

Barbone, the other under that of Henry Jessey. Hanserd Knollys, a Cambridge man who had spent some time in New England, was for a time a member of Jessey’s church, but in 1644 he organized a congregation of his own. In this way the movement spread, until eleven years later there were seven of these Particular Baptist churches in London, and forty-seven in other parts of England.’ On account of their doctrinal differences, there was practically no communication between the Particular and the General Baptists. Their organization and customs were, however, very similar, although the Gen-

eral Baptists seem to have retained more of the distinctive customs of the Continental Anabaptists. The congregations of each group were individually independent in government, but gave one another advice and encouragement by means of messengers, and

held general meetings at stated intervals to discuss “The existing records of the early London churches are to be found in vol. II, Transactions of the Congregational Society, London.

BAPTISTS AND FIFTH MONARCHY MEN 5

matters of common interest.’ The organization of the churches was thoroughly democratic. All male members, and in the case of a large number of churches, female members also, were allowed “ liberty of prophesying ’’, that is, of saying during the services whatever

they believed themselves inspired of God to say. Officers were elected by the votes of the entire congre-

gation. Any member might be chosen as deacon, but only those who were thought to possess special gifts

were elected to eldership, as it was the elders who exercised pastoral duties. The belief that no special education was necessary as a preparation for the work

of the ministry led to actual denunciation of higher education by some preachers, and gave rise to the opin-

ion that the Baptists were opposed to learning and to the universities... Moreover, the fact that the men who

preached on Sundays frequently worked the rest of the week as saddlers, glovers, felt-makers, and the like, brought upon them the scorn of the Church of England

clergy and the Presbyterians.’ Their unpopularity on 5 The Free Will Baptists and the Seventh Day Baptists later developed

separate organizations, but their numbers were inconsiderable. An apostle of church unity wrote in 1653: ‘‘ The baptized Churches are subdivided into three parts, one Church is for free will, a second for universal Redemption, a third count themselves more Orthodox in Doctrine, as the Church of England. Neither of these three baptized Churches doe communicate one with another.’”’ Erbery, The Sword Doubled (Thomason). 6 For Baptist views on education, see below, pp. 36-37. For the position of women in the churches, see Register Book of the Lothbury Church

(Rawlinson MSS., D 828), fol. 28; Barclay, op. ctt., 156; Edwards, Gangraena, 1646, 29. The preaching of women gave rise to much talk and no little ridicule. See Masson, Miiton, III, 149, 189. 7 Edwards, Gangraena, 33 ff An attack on the Baptists published in 1645 has the following: ‘‘Q. ‘Who are your preachers and what are they?’