rather than the former." This, indeed, is a charge of a very high nature, and ought to have been well substantiated. Dr. Walker, notwithstanding his extreme bigotry and enmity against the puritans, seems not to give full credit to the noble historian. "It is probable," says he, "that Mr. Marshall was deeply enough concerned in this affair;" but he appears unwilling to affirm it as a matter of fact.t If, however, the above account had been true, why did not the ministers complain to the committee appointed by the house of commons to inquire into their regular methods of procuring hands to petitions? The learned historian answers, that they were prevailed upon to sit still and pass it by; for the truth of which we have only his lordship's word, as nothing of the kind appears in Rushworth, Whitlocke, or any other impartial writer of those times. The whole affair has, therefore, the appearance of a mere forgery, designed to blacken the memory of Mr. Marshall and the rest of the puritans. Few persons have censured our divine with greater severity than the anonymous author of "A Letter of Spiritual Advice, written to Mr. Stephen Marshall in his Sickness," 1643. "When I heard of your sickness," says this writer, "I assure you I found in myself such a different apprehension of your state, from that of other ordinary sick men, that I think you will not wonder if all the king's subjects, who wish good success to his majesty in this war, cannot impute your visitation to any thing but the just severity and revenge of Almighty God, for having had so strong an influence upon the ruin of this kingdom and church. For, sir, is it not apparent that your eminent gifts of preaching have been made use of for the kindling of those flames of rebellion and civil war, and most unchristian bloodshed? Have not you, with all the earnestness and zeal imaginable, persuaded your hearers to a liberal contribution for the maintaining of this unnatural war? Have not you forsaken your own charge, to accompany and strengthen the general of your army in his resolutions and attempts against the just power and life of his and your anointed sovereign? Does not the whole kingdom impute almost all the distractions and combustions therein as much to the seditious sermons of the preachers of your faction, as to the contrivances of those persons who set you on work? Let your own conscience be your own judge * Clarendon's Hist. vol. i. p. 161, 162. + Walker's Attempt, part i. p. 15. in this matter, and it will tell you, that if all these new designs should succeed to your wish, and there should happen to be a change of government, you would think yourselves wronged if you should not be acknowledged very effectual instruments in that change. These things therefore being so, you cannot accuse of uncharitableness those who think these designs not only unjust, but ruinous both to justice and religion, if they attribute it to God's mercy to them, and vengeance on you, if he take such a fire-brand as you out of the world.". While this anonymous calumniator thus reproaches Mr. Marshall for his zeal in the cause of the parliament, he is extremely lavish in the dignified compliments conferred upon his majesty, styling him "God's anointed, and a most righteous christian king." Wood says, "that, upon the approach of the troublesome times in 1640, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Calamy, Dr. Burgess, and some others, first whispered in their conventicles, then openly preached, that for the cause of religion it was lawful for subjects to take up arms against the king."+"As to Mr. Marshall," says Dr. Calamy," he was an active man, and encouraged taking up arms for securing the constitution, when it appeared not only to him and his brethren, but to a number of as worthy gentlemen as ever sat in St. Stephen's chapel, to be in no small danger; yet I am not aware that he can be justly charged with any concurrence in those things which afterwards overthrew the constitution, and tended to confusion. He wrote a defence of the side which he took in our civil broils, and I cannot hear that it was ever answered."+ 66 Mr. Marshall, at the same time, took an active part in the controversy concerning church government. The cele brated Bishop Hall having published his work in defence of episcopacy and the liturgy, called, " An Humble Remonstrance to the high Court of Parliament," 1640, he united with several of his brethren in writing the famous book, entitled, "An Answer to a Book, entituled, An Humble Remonstrance;' in which the Original of Liturgy and Episcopacy is discussed, and Queries propounded concerning both. The Parity of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture demonstrated; the Occasion of their Imparities in Antiquity discovered; the Disparity of the ancient and our modern Bishops manifested; the Antiquity of Ruling * Letter of Advice, p. 1, 2. + Wood's Athenæ Oxon, vol. ii. p. 235, 236. Calamy's Contin. vol. ii. p. 737. Elders in the Church vindicated: the Prelatical Church bounded. Written by SMECTYMNUUS," 1641. The word smectymnuus is composed of the initials of its authors' n mes, who were Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstowe. "The work," it is said, "is certainly written with great fierceness of spirit and much asperity in language, containing eighteen sections, in the last of which the differences between the prelatists and puritans are aggravated with great bitterness." The same author, on the same page, says, "it was, indeed, a very well written piece, therefore we find frequent reference to it in all the defences and apologies for nonconformity, which have been since published." Mr. Calamy affirms, that it "gave the first deadly blow to episcopacy." The learned Dr. Kippis says, "it was a production of no small importance in its day: and was drawn up in a style of composition superior to that of the puritans in general, and, indeed, of many other writers at that period." The learned Bishop Wilkins represents it as "a capital work against episcopacy." The book is concluded by a postscript, in which is contained an historical narrative of the bitter effects of episcopacy, as, pride, luxury, bribery, extortion, rebellion, treason, &c.; and the whole is closed thus:-"The inhuman butcheries, blood-sheddings, and cruelties or Gardiner, Bonner, and the rest of the bishops in Queen Mary's days, are so fresh in every man's memory, as that we conceive it a thing altogether unnecessary to make mention of them. Only we fear lest the guilt of the blood then shed should yet remain to be required at the hands of this nation, because it hath not quickly endeavoured to appease the wrath of God, by a general and solemn humiliation for it. What the practices of the prelates have been ever since, from the beginning of Queen Eliz b. th to this present day, would fill a volume, like Ezekiel's roll, with lamentation, mourning, and woe to record. For it hath been their great design to hinder all further reformation; to bring in doctrines of popery, arminianism, and libertinism; to maintain, propagate, and much increase the burden of human ceremonies; to keep out, and beat down the preaching of the word, to silence the faithful ministers of it, to oppose and persecute the most zealous professors, and to turn all religion to a pompous outside; and to tread down the power of godliness. Insomuch, as • Biog. Britan. vol. iii. p. 132, 136. Edit. 1778. it is come to an ordinary proverb, that when any thing is spoiled, we use to say, The bishop's foot hath been in it. And in this, and much more which might be said, fulfilling Bishop Bonner's prophecy, which, when he saw that in King Edward's reformation there was a reservation of ceremonies and hierarchy, is credibly reported to have used these words, Since they have begun to taste our broth, they will not be long ere they will eat our beef.' pon the publication of the above work, Bishop Hall wrote his "Defence of the Humble Remonstrance against the frivolous and false Exceptions of Smectymnuus," 1641. To this, Smectymnuus published a reply, entitied, "A Vindication of the Answer to the Humble Remonstrance, from the unjust Imputations of Frivolousness and Falsehood: wherein the cause of the Liturgy and Episcopacy is further debated," 1641. The learned prelate concluded the dispute by publishing his piece entitled, "A short Answer to a tedious Vindication of Smectymnuus," 1641.+ In this year, Mr. Marshall was appointed chaplain to the Earl of Essex's regiment in the parliament's army. Dr. Grey, in contempt, denominates him and Dr. Downing "the two famed casuistical divines, and most eminent campchaplains ;" and charges them, on the authority of Clarendon and Echard, with publicly avowing," that the soldiers lately taken prisoners at Brentford, and released by the king upon their oaths, that they would never again bear arms against him, were not obliged by that oath; but by their power they absolved them, and so engaged those miserable wretches in a second rebellion." This, as well as the foregoing account, has all the appearance of forgery, with a view to calumniate the two excellent divines. Priestly absolution was as remote as possible from the practice of the puritans; and they rejected all claims to the power of it with the utmost abhorrence. The parliament's army, at the same time, stood in so little need of these prisoners, which were only 150 men, that there is good reason to suspect the whole account to be a falsehood.§ In the year 1643, Mr. Marshall was chosen one of the assembly of divines, and was a most active and valuable member. In this public office it was impossible for him to escape the bitter censures of the opposite party. One of *Smectymnuus, p. 77, 78. Edit. 1654. Grey's Examination, vol. ii. p. 10. them, speaking of him as a member of the assembly, says, "He quickly grows to be master, and is so called by all. They sit, not to consult for the reformation of religion in things that are amiss, but to receive the parliament's commands to undo and innovate religion. In which work, or rather drudgery of the devil, our active Stephen needs neither whip nor spur: tooth and nail he bends himself to the overthrow of the hierarchy, root and branch."* Dr. Heylin, with his usual modesty, calls him "the great bellwether of the presbyterians;"+" and aflirms, that though he had the chief hand in compiling the directory, he married his own daughter by the form prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer; which he had no sooner done than he paid down five pounds to the churchwardens of the parish, as a fine for using any other form of marriage than that contained in the directory. The truth of this representation of so excellent a person as Mr. Marshall, especially from the pen of Dr. Heylin, is extremely doubtful, if not unworthy of the smallest credit. Mr. Marshall frequently united with his brethren in the observance of public fasts, when the services were usually protracted to a very great length. On one of these occasions, it is said, "that Dr. Twisse having commenced the public service with a short prayer, Mr. Marshall prayed in a wonderful, pathetic, and prudent manner for two hours. Mr. Arrowsmith then preached an hour, then they sung a psalm; after which Mr. Vines prayed nearly two hours, Mr. Palmer preached an hour, and Mr. Seaman prayed nearly two hours. Mr. Henderson then spoke of the evils of the time, and how they were to be remedied, and Dr. Twisse closed the service with a short prayer." *Life of Marshall, p. 11. Dr. Peter Heylin, preaching at Westminster abbey, before Bishop Williams, and endeavouring to justify the church in the imposition of doctrine and ceremonies, and to censure the nonconformists, he said, "Instead of hearkening to the voice of the church, every man hearkens to hinself, and cares not if the whole miscarry so that he himself may carry his own devices. Upon which stubborn height of pride, what quarrels have been raised? what schisms in every corner of the church-To inquire no further, some put all into open tumult rather than conform to the lawful government derived from Christ and his apostles." On expressing these words, the bishop, sitting in the great pew, knocked aloud with his staff upon the pulpit, saying, "No more of that point, no more of that point, Peter," To whom Heylin immediately answered, “I have a little more to say, my lord, and then I have done; when he proceeded to finish his subject. Biog. Britan, vol. iv. p. 2597. Edit. 1747. Heylin's Examen Historicum, p. 264. |