Neal - Houston-Packer Collection BX9333 .N4 1754

Chap. II. ·rrhe HISTORY of t!Je PuRITA'N"S. 43 c-c mine controvedies in matters of faith. They were to enter upon no '!{.Charles l. " bufinefs but what the parliament appointed, and when they had done ~ " they were to offer it to the two houfes only as their humble advice; '' and furely the parliament might choofe their own council, without " being obliged to depend upon the nomination of the clergy. Ob). 3· " But as great an exception as any, was their dillike of the cc company, and of the bufinefs they were to tranfaet ; there was a mix– " ture of laity with the clergy ; the divines were for for the moll: part « of a puritanical fiamp, and enemies to the hierarchy ; and their bu– ,, finefs (they apprehended) was to pull down that which they would "uphold. Af!fw. " This being not defigned for a legal convocation, but for a " council to the parliament in the reformation of the church, they ap– " prehended they had a power to join fome of their own members with " fuch a committee or couucil, without intrenching upon the rights of " convocation.-- The divines, except the fl'ots and french, were in " epifcopal orders, educated in our own univerfities, and moll: of them " graduates; their bufinefs was only to advife about fuch points of doe– ,, trine and c!)urch difcipline as lhould be laid before them, in which " the epifcopal divines might have been of fervice, if they had con– " tinued with the aifembly, to which they were moft earnefl:ly in– « vited." · I believe no fet of clergy fince the beginning of chrifiianity, have fuf– fered fo much in their chareeters and reputations as thefe, for their advices to the two houfes of parliament. In his majefiy's proclamation of Cbaratl,·r if June 22. the far greatell: part of them are faid to be men of no learning ~'tfmbly. or reputation. Lord Clarendon admits, " about twenty of them were p. 0 5 · 3 ; . " reverend and worthy perfons, and epifcopal in their judgments; but as ·<' to the remainder, they were but pretenders to divinity; fame were in· " famous in their lives and converfations, and moll: of them of very <c< mean parts and learning, if not of fcandalous ignorance, and of no " other reputation than of malice to the church of England." His Iord- '·lhip would infinuate, that they underllood not the original text, be- ·caufe the learned Mr. Se/den fometimes corrected the eng!ijh tranllation of their little pocket bibles, and put them into confufion, by his un- ·-common acquaintance with jewijh antiquities; as if that great man would have treated a convocation with more decency or refpect. But archbilhop Laud's account is frill more extravagant; for though 'tis notorious the aifembly would not allow a toleration to thofe whom they called feetari~s, yet his grace fays, " the greateft part of them were brownijls " or mdependents, or New-England minifters, if not worfe, or at beft ~· enemies to . the doctrine and difcipline of the church of England;" G .z whereas

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=