IX. TORATE, London, there was no general toleration of episco- CHAPTER pacy, nor even a licence for the prayer-book. The protector, in a letter of instruction addressed to the PROTECjudges of assize, gave directions, about this time, A.D.1654. that the magistrates should be required to be particularly careful, amongst other nuisances, to suppress ale-houses and the book of common prayer.* On Cromwell's sole authority, and that of his military cabinet, an ordinance was issued in April, 1654, the effect of which was to expose the few episcopalian clergy to intolerable hardships. The committee for scandalous ministers, chiefly composed of presbyterians, had already thrust in the sickle with an unsparing hand; a new commission was now issued to certain triers, who were sent in to glean the field. The triers were chiefly independents. Hugh Peters was one of them; Rouse, the speaker of the convention just dissolved, another; from which the reader will probably infer that lenient measures were not intended. The powers of this commission were absolute. They sat in London at Whitehall, and sent out their sub-commissioners through England and Wales to investigate the character, lives, and doctrine of the clergy, and "to examine, judge, and approve all such persons as should be called to preach the gospel." Compared with this commission the star chamber itself was constitutional. The triers were despotic; their determination was final and absolute; yet they were amenable to no law, and they were bound by no precedents. Their own judgment was their sole guide. Their will was law. The good or evil which they did was regu* Walker, Sufferings, part i. p. 179. IX. PROTEC- CHAPTER lated by the wisdom and integrity they possessed or wanted. One of their duties was the rejection of scandalous and unfit ministers; but of that scandal A,D. 1654. or unfitness they were the sole judges. They were a spiritual court martial, without a military code to guide them. They summoned witnesses from the parishioners of the accused, and upon their depositions, often prejudiced with malice or tinged with violent party spirit, the minister was forthwith suspended or deprived; and he had no redress. The clergy who were presented with vacant benefices (and their proceedings, it may be supposed, created not a few vacancies,) had to pass the fiery ordeal of the triers, whose commission ran in these general terms: They were to satisfy themselves that every person so nominated "was a person, for the grace of God in him, his holy and unblameable conversation, and also for his knowledge and utterance, able and fit to preach the gospel." The requirements themselves are moderate we allow; the demands are reasonable and the standard scriptural; but it was justly objected to the ordinance, that it specified no one particular save that of a holy conversation, leaving all the rest couched in the general terms of grace, knowledge, and utterance. But what measure of grace, knowledge, and utterance was to form the standard? and how was the existence of these virtues to be proved? The first is essential, the second useful, the third important. But may not the abundance of the one compensate in some measure for the want of the other two? And if we grant that the triers were competent, as they probably were, to determinate in many instances that grace was wanting, yet how were they to ascertain its IX. TORATE. presence, unless the discerning of spirits had been CHAPTER imparted a spiritual gift to fit them for their office? This latitude left the accused, in short, at the mercy PROTECof the triers. They might condemn without assign- A.D.1654. ing any cause but general unfitness, or, in their own fatal words, "not approved." Their arbitrary proceedings, their partiality and delay, are said to have exceeded the worst oppressions of the prelates. In their examinations no inquiries, it is said, were made with reference to useful learning. The great points of christian doctrine, the trinity, the incarnation and satisfaction of our blessed Lord, were wholly overlooked no heresies or errors but what they called arminianism were considered; but a few jejune and useless questions were asked, relating chiefly to the then discriminating points of election and reprobation. In short, the indictment against them is concluded thus by the formidable historian of their delinquencies: "The best and most useful divine would, generally speaking, have been rejected, if, instead of believing in Jesus Christ, he did not testify faith towards John Calvin, and repentance or obedience to the lord-protector Oliver Cromwell."* But the whole proceeding was conducted in revolutionary times, and when the spiritual affairs of the nation were yet unsettled. Perhaps this consideration affords some apology. The ecclesiastical courts had been destroyed; they had sunk in the fathomless deep of public hatred. This was an attempt to erect a new spiritaul tribunal; and candour will investigate the intentions of its founders, rather than the success of their first experiment. Was Crom * Walker, part i. p. 178. IX. TORATE, A D. 1654. CHAPTER Well anxious to purify the ministry, or, under that pretext, to detect and punish the royalists? Probably PROTEC the answer would be, that while he sincerely aimed at the former of these objects, he was by no means indifferent to the latter. His puritan education had not lost its influence. He knew that the scriptures were the only source of truth in religion; he knew that the religion which did not produce a holy life was an imposture; and though his moral sense was now perverted, and his conscience somewhat callous, he had not cast aside the restraints of religion: he acknowledged its importance if he did not feel its power; and he probably quieted some of his own misgivings by these efforts to place the blessings of the gospel within the reach of other men. In his methods he was never scrupulous: the work was to be done, and the rudest instrument was the best. Hugh Peters-hard, desperate, fanatical, the mortal enemy of all Laudian superstitions-would naturally appear to him the fittest because the most expeditious agent. Cromwell, too, was deeply impressed with a very simple truth which other politicians have overlooked. Religion should interest the multitude. It should controul their passions and at the same time occupy their hearts. Without it government is always difficult, and freedom impossible; for man is restless, impatient, and dissatisfied. Religion diverts him from his sorrows, and offers him repose. The shows and impostures of popery may for a time suffice, but England had outlived them. The Laudian compromise with popery was a heartless uninteresting affair. There remained the bible, fathomless in the interest it yields, as in the in IX. PROTEC struction it imparts. The exposition of the scrip- CHAPTER tures in every parish by men profoundly jealous for its authority, and in general fairly representing TORATE, something at least of its spirit in their lives, would AD. 1654. supply what Cromwell wanted-a constant occupation for restless and dissatisfied men, solace for the disappointed, and hope for all. Had Cromwell been an atheist he might have reasoned thus, and so far he would have reasoned well. A merely secular policy would have made him sincere in his endeavours to purify the church. The examinations were sometimes conducted in a disgraceful manner: the questions were difficult, captious, and even ridiculous. Several of the rejected clergy preserved minutes of their examinations. Mr. Sadler was examined by Nye, Tombes, and Peters, who were not ashamed, amongst a multitude of similar questions, to demand whether regeneration were a substance or an accident, and in what predicament? Whether motions to sin before consent are sinful? Whether dreams of killing, or other wickedness, are sinful? What is the breath of the soul? The heat of the soul? The action of the soul? And whether God was willing or unwilling that Adam should fall? to which Sadler makes answer thus: "It is a dark question. I conceive, with submission to your judgment, that there was a willing unwillingness." Nye himself was confounded with a distinction which had the merit of equalling the absurdity of his own queries, and of being just as unintelligible. Where, said he, do you find that in scripture? "The question," replied Sadler, "is at least as dark as the answer." It |