soul of our dear brother here departed," was qualified by a rubric of exclusion, directing that that service should not be read over persons unbaptized, excommunicated, or dying by their own hands. Other changes on this occasion introduced into the Liturgy are recorded under a different section. Let it suffice to remark, that the two anniversaries of the martyred and the restored Charles are worthy of being sacredly observed so long as it shall continue expedient to blend religion with loyalty, or to call to mind with horror the outrages of rebellion, and with gratitude the blessings of the English mixed government *..

IX. 1662. High church principles, now obtaining the ascendant, gave rise to the Act of Uniformity, prefixed to the Common Prayer Book. By this act (13 and 14 Charles II.) ministers, on taking possession of a benefice or lectureship, were enjoined to read the Thirtynine Articles, with the morning and evening prayers; and to subscribe the declaration of con

In the new prayer for the Parliament, the epithet of most religious king," as applied to Charles II. was, to say the least, injudicious; and gave occasion, says Bishop Burnet, to much indecent raillery. Yet, perhaps, in the Church prayers, by "the king," is only to be understood "the supreme magistrafe in these realms," without reference to the private character of the reigning individual at the time.

formity to the Liturgy; as well as that condemning transubstantiation and popery *. In consequence of this bill, a large number of the clergy, though by no means two thousand, as was pretended, voluntarily suffered ejectment for their conscientious scruples t. Bishop Burnet takes occasion to deplore the severity, which drove these individuals to the necessity of forming separate congregations, and diverting men from the public worship offered in the church. This cant has been re-echoed by the pretenders to religious liberality; in other words, by the equally indifferent to all religions, or by the professors of a designing one, down to the present time. But allowing full praise to the disinterestedness of the ejected ministers (for those who quit their possessions are certainly in earnest), an answer has already been given to all such expressions of sentimental compassion and indignation; namely, it is far more conducive to the tranquillity of the church, that dissentients should be in open schism than in secret hostility. The cross, and ring, and surplice,

* Priests' orders were here declared to be a necessary qualification for holding a benefice or donative.

Some, says Neale, persuaded their brethren to dissent: and having succeeded, complied themselves, and obtained the vacant livings. Vol. ii. This is probably one of his unfounded aspersions. About this time the name of Puritans was changed into that of Protestant Nonconformists, who were subdivided into Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, and Quakers.

were nothing in themselves; but assumed much seriousness as the badges of an opposition in doctrinal sentiment. And however highly the ejected ministers may merit our esteem, for the sacrifice they made to conscience; the evil might not be shunned by the sanction of a mottled worship, incompatible with the preservation of charity. The Act of Uniformity was instigated or encouraged by the Independents and other sectaries, through jealousy of the indulgences manifested towards their Presbyterian brethren; and by the Catholics, with the view of disuniting the Protestants, not less than through hatred to the Presbyterians, their former oppressors. Still further to widen the breach, while the Presbyterian ministers refused subscription, these latter encouraged them in their obstinacy. Charles, it is said, was averse from this measure; but suffered himself to yield to the importunities of Lord Clarendon, and of the church party in the House of Com

mons

* Some of the ejected ministers made a distinction between lay and ministerial conformity; repairing sometimes to the parish churches, before or after the exercise of their ministry in private houses. This was the origin of occasional conformity, the example of which was set by Baxter, Bates, and Calamy.

Mr. Wilberforce has asserted that this ejectment was contrary to the King's declaration at Breda. But it has been ably replied by Archdeacon Daubeny, that the clear principles of

Under the Commonwealth, one fifth part of the revenues of each vacated benefice had been

justice require, that the parties who have suffered injury, should receive the earliest possible redress. Had these principles prevailed at the Restoration, the ejection of nonconformist ministers from the patrimony of the church, in favour of the episcopal clergy to whom the rightful possession belonged, must have been the immediate consequence of the reestablishment of the constitution. But so far was this from being the case, that two years were suffered to elapse, before any legal methods were taken to dispossess them. To the credit of the government, such respect was entertained for the spiritual characters and abilities of many of the then ministers, that all the means of argument and persuasion were employed to retain them in the church. And it was not till a determined perseverance in their prejudices against the form and government of the church, as it was then re-established, rendered hopeless all accommodation upon the subject, that their rejection was suffered finally to take place. So that, instead of saying "they were shamefully ejected from the church in 1666, in violation of the clear principles of justice," it should be said that these ministers ejected themselves, because they would not continue in the church upon any other condition, than that of its being fashioned after their own model.

Nor does the charge respecting the violation of the royal word, upon this occasion, appear to be strictly justified by facts. When a person does every thing that possibly can be done in his situation, towards the fulfilment of any promise, he ought not, in charity, to be made chargeable with its violation.

The King, in his declaration at Breda, promised liberty to tender consciences; and that no man should be disquieted or called in question for difference of opinion in matters of religion which did not disturb the peace of the kingdom: and

allowed to the ejected incumbent but such indulgence was now refused to the Noncon

that he would consent to such an act of parliament, as upon mature deliberation should be offered to him for the full granting of that indulgence. When the nonconformist divines afterwards waited on the King at the Hague, he told them that he referred the settling of all differences respecting religion, to the wisdom of Parliament; that the two Houses were the best judges what indulgence or toleration was necessary for the repose of the kingdom. The King, therefore, by concurring with his Parliament in this business, acted up to the full meaning of his declaration. But he did more than this. So disposed was he to do every thing to gratify the Nonconformists, that could be done consistent with the re-establishment of the episcopal church, that he even acted without his Parliament upon this occasion, by publishing, with the advice of his privy council only, a declaration of indulgence in their favour; which the pressing and repeated remonstrances of the Commons obliged him afterwards to recall. Though the King did, therefore, immediately on his restoration, promise, that nonconformist ministers should not be ejected from sequestered livings, where the episcopal incumbents were dead; in consequence of which many remained in quiet possession of preferments; yet this promise cannot be said to have been violated, because the Act of Uniformity, which passed two years afterwards, obliged those who still retained their prejudices against the form and government of the church, to retire out of it. And when it is considered upon what ground the act was brought forward; that it was judged necessary, in consequence of the nonconformist divines returning to their old seditious practice of inveighing against government, and taking advantage of their public office, to bring the minds of the people back to those fatal errors, which had already proved so destructive; the passing it may be considered, not so much