INDEPENDENTS 727 /eceptacle for schismatics, " from whence, as from the bowels | of the Trojan horse, so many incendiaries might break out to inflame the nation ; " and so it would be necessary to send them a bishop "for their better government, and back him with some forces to compel, if he were not otherwise able to persuade, obedience. 1 1 But home politics alone were too ; much for Laud ; and on his downfall and the outbreak of the civil war New England Independency became, on account of its influence on the ecclesiastico-political question, still more potent in English affairs. The Independent party in the Westminster Assembly which had been called to advise, parliament was small, but influential. Its ministerial members were Thomas Goodwin, a ponderous but learned | and conscientious man j Philip Nye, a skilful debater and i adroit man of business ; Jeremiah Burroughs, a man of | sweet manners and gentle disposition, but great prudence and firmness ; William Bridge, and Sidrach Simpson. These were all marked by conspicuous moderation of view, but the lay members, like Lord Saye and Sele and Sir Harry Vane, were more advanced, especially on the cardinal question of toleration. The importance of the New England States was at once recognized by the parliamentary Independents, who made an effort to bring over their three most eminent ministers, John Cotton, John Davenport, and Thomas Hooker. The effort failed ; but in place of the men books and pamphlets, expository and defensive of the " New England way," were discharged in quick succession upon the English public. What gave New England its importance was this it was the first realization on a large scale of the principles of Independency. Here they had been tried under most difficult conditions, and had proved thoroughly successful, capable of maintaining order in the churches, religion in the state, purity of doctrine, and efficiency of discipline. What Geneva had been to the Puritans under Elizabeth New England was now to the Independents it was their religious ideal realized, their polity commended by an illustrious example. They were no longer, as in the days of John Robinson or Henry Jacob, the apologists of an unpopular and strange theory, hitherto unr-ealized save on a scale and under corditions that made it ridiculous, charged with all the evils that could be proved logically certain to follow from it. On the contrary, they had now behind them the church-state beyond the ocean, and they could proudly tell how men of English blood, who had fled from the Anglican oppression, had tried Independency and prevailed. So there was the amplest controversy on the points at issue, the Scotch divines beii g specially active on the one side, and American divines, pre faced and introduced and explained by English, on the other. The controversy did something to lessen the distance between Presbyterians and Independents, and did much to strengthen the position of the latter in England. It showed that independence did not mean isolation, that churches that refused to be organized into a political unity still constituted a Christian brotherhood, that societies that were so jealous of their freedom and rights as to deny to every external authority judicial and legislative functions could yet seek arid follow fraternal advice, and meet in common councils to advise and be advised. But the Westminister Assembly and the English Pailiament did not approve the " New England way," and the Independents had to be con tented to plead for toleration. This, indeed, became their great demand the point on which they and the Presby terians differed radically. Here the Presbyterians were inflexible. Toleration was to them the very man of sin. But to the Independents it was the very condition of continued existence. Without it England would be no better for them under Presbytery than it had been under Episcopacy. As to the nature and degree of this toleration, r Heylyn, Life of Laud, p. 369. they were divided into two sections, one moderate, the other more advanced. To the former belonged the ministerial members of the assembly, who wished only a limited toleration. They did not desire all views to be tolerated, but only the views of good men, men of pious, tender consciences, not those of infidels or blasphemers. But the more advanced section courageously advocated absolute toleration, denied that so long as a man was peaceable citizen the magistrate had any right to interfere with his conscience or conscientious beliefs. To this section belonged Harry Vane, Henry Burton, John Goodwin of Coleman Street, ablest and most restless of controversial ists in that controversial age ; Roger Williams, now a Baptist, but still an Independent, home from America, bringing with him the MS. of a great book on this very subject ; finally, above all, John Milton. These were the advanced guard, and theirs was the section that made Independency so immense a political power in the England of the Commonwealth. This is not the place to inquire into the causes of the sudden and extraordinary ascendency of the Independents in the time of the Commonwealth. Enough to say, it was due to causes both political and religious to what may be termed the transmutation of a great religious into a great political question. The men Independency formed and forced to the front were remarkable men, strong of will, clear of eye, mighty through faith in their principles. And their principles were precisely of the kind suited to the emergency, republican and revolutionary, but steeped in the commanding emotions and enthusiasms of religion. They were principles that ennobled man, that asserted the rights of the individual, that made it an easy matter to deal with the divine rights of kings, or kings too assertive of their rights and forgetful of their duties. So the Inde pendents had the incalculable advantage of always seeing clearly before them, knowing their end and never being in any doubt about the way to it. Besides, their theory of the church fell in with the spirit of the Commonwealth. It made but small distinction between clergy and laity, and the man with the gift of speech could easily exercise it in preaching. So the army when new modelled, formed of men of spirit and conviction, became quite a nursery of Independents, and men like Richard Baxter found that in it there were quite as many ready to edify as wishful to be edified. Religion thus became, not a matter for the clergy, but the possession of the people, not simply the concern of the church, but the business of the whole nation. There was considerable diversity in theological opinion. The moderate men were Calvinists, but among the extreme men were Arminians, like John Goodwin, and men as yet | of no recognized school, like John Milton. Independency, I in short, meant the equal concern of every man in religion, j alike in its deepest mysteries and most practical precepts ; and so in a period of religious enthusiasm and ferment it naturally came to the front and took the lead. But the 1 extent of its power under the Commonwealth was the measure of the disfavour that came to it after the Restora- ! tion. The Presbyterians had been mainly instrumental in the bringing back of Charles, and so it had been indecent had no attempt been made to comprehend them within the church. But in the case of the Independents there was not even an abortive attempt at comprehension. And they j did not ask what they knew they would not receive. They ! only wished to be tolerated, to be allowed to live, and no i more. At first they thought that this might be. Philip I Nye had seen the king, and was hopeful. But their illusions ! were soon dispelled. In 1G61 the Corporation Act was passed, which disqualified Nonconformists for municipal offices; in 1662 the Act of Uniformity, which drove
upwards of two thousand ministers out of the church, and
