Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Enthusiasm in England during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Moore, Nathan 1971

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1972_A1 M66.pdf [ 17.8MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101338.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101338-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101338-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101338-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101338-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101338-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101338-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101338-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101338.ris

Full Text

ENTHUSIASM IN ENGLAND DURING THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES by Nathan Moore M . A . , Carleton University, 1965 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of The Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of English We accept this Dissertation as conforming to the required standard The University of British Columbia December, 1971 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference and study . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t pe rmiss ion f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed wi thout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department, of English The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date D e c e m b e r 1 , 1971 Chairman: Professor P. G . Stanwood Religious Enthusiasm in England During the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries Abstract Several studies have been made of -"enthusiasm, " but I have found none which attempts to give a comprehensive account of the subject from the point of view of those who lived with "religious enthusiasts." This dissertation is an attempt to bring together for the first time the varied views on enthusiasm held by seventeenth- and eighteenth-century English-men as found in their sermons, polemical writings, pamphlets, periodicals, and journals, among other works. Using a thematic approach, I have pre-sented the ideas of many writers, allowing one writer to speak, however, when his opinions are characteristic of the general attitude. I have found that the term "enthusiast," originally meaning "an i n -spired individual ," developed during the seventeenth and eighteenth cen-turies into a term of abuse attached to people who claimed that they re-ceived special revelations from the Holy Spirit; that religious enthusiasm reached its highest peak in England during the C i v i l War and Interregnum, when religious toleration led to a proliferation of extreme Puritan sects such as Ranters, Seekers, Muggletonians, Familists, and Quakers, among others; and that the first decade of the eighteenth century saw the rise of new enthusiasts, the French and English prophets, and the seventeen^-thirties introduced the Methodists, led by John and Charles Wesley and George Whitefield. My findings indicate that the religious and political activities of the Puritan sects (especially the Fifth Monarchists, Baptists, Independents, Levellers, and Presbyterians) during the Revolution and Interregnum so a l -ienated anti-Puritans that for more than a hundred years, they associated religious ardour with political and social evils destructive of a l l estab-lished systems of order. Anti-Puritans saw in enthusiasm a disease either arising from or leading to melancholy, which eventually unsettled the victim's senses, leaving him insane. Believing that the Holy Spirit no longer inspired men as He inspired the apostles, prophets, and the writers of the Scriptures, critics of enthusiasm dismissed the enthusiasts' claims to special revelation as mere pretense or as the fancies or imagination of an over-heated brain. In fact, many people firmly believed that enthusi-asts were either madmen possessed by the Devil or hypocrites who manu-factured mechanically what they called "the Spiri t ." Many Anglican clergymen believed that in the church, enthusiasm led to disrespect of authority, to quarrels over vestments, ceremonies, doctrines, and discipline, and ultimately to schism, the destruction of the Church, and the growth of atheism and infidelity. They insisted that the enthusiasts' belief in the sufficiency of the Spirit and their extreme views on faith and assurance of salvation caused them to slight or deny the necessity of good works, the sacraments, set forms of prayer, and academic training for the clergy. In the state, enthusiasm supposedly expressed itself either in active opposition to the duly appointed "magistrates" or in a pacificism which left the country to the mercy of its foreign enemies. Because of its basic irrationality, enthusiasm allegedly unfitted the individual for a balanced and productive l i f e . It was also considered to be destructive of property and the national economy, of morality and virtue, and inimical to the laws and traditions which ensured the safety and authority of rulers, the order of society, and the deference due to the upper-classes. The reaction to enthusiasm contributed to the demand for a plain prose style; enthusiasm also influenced the growth of a large body of literature, including sermons, devotional writings, polemical and satiri-cal works, autobiographies, and journals. But it was in the hymns of the Nonconformists and Methodists that enthusiasm expressed itself most significantly in poetry. Preface The harsh criticisms hurled at "enthusiasts" by Dryden, Butler, and Swift made me curious to discover who were the "enthusiasts" and why they were so hated. But I began working in earnest on "enthusiasm" to explore the possibility that Christopher Smart was declared insane by his contemporaries, not because he was mad (as we understand the term), but perhaps because of his unconventional habits of religious devotion. In obedience to the biblical command to "pray without ceasing, " for ex-ample, Smart frequently fell on his knees in the street and prayed, some-times calling on others nearby to join him. Shortly after beginning my inquiry, it became evident that I had to limit myself to discovering what really was "enthusiasm" and why seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Englishmen hated "religious enthusiasm" so passionately. Although several studies have been made of "enthusiasm," I found none which attempted to give a comprehensive view of the subject from the point of view of those who lived with "religious enthusiasts." This dissertation therefore attempts to bring together for the first time the variety of ideas associated with "enthusiasm" in the minds of those who ardently opposed it. I have tried to give the attitude of as many people as possible, taking a thematic approach, presenting, however, the opin-ions of a select few when they were characteristic of the general attitude. The final chapter differs from the previous ones in that I present in it my comments on the contribution of religious enthusiasm to English literature. i i i This work represents the efforts of many individuals who of neces-sity will remain unnamed. But I must make special mention of Professors P. G. Stanwood and David Macaree, and as well of the staff of the Inter-library Loan Department of the Library of the University of British Colum-bia. I am particularly grateful to my director, Professor Stanwood, for contributing unstintingly of his time towards the reading and criticism of my work. His constant guidance saved me much time and undue worry, and his suggestions were always timely and constructive. During my periods of anxiety he invariably had a reassuring word. Professor Macaree kindly supervised my work when Professor Stanwood was absent on study leave. His knowledge of the eighteenth century protected me against superficiality and stimulated me to work more diligently. Without the support, forbearance, and indulgence of my wife, Mary, I could not have completed this work. She cheerfully endured my moods and complaints, and for seven months gave me exclusive rights . to her precious table which I used as my writing desk. Contents Page Preface i Chapter I. Enthusiasm: Conflicts in Scope and Meaning 1 Poetic Enthusiasm and Literary Style 13 Chapter II. Enthusiasm in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century England 32 Chapter III. The Enthusiast: His Beginnings, Behaviour, and Fate 117 Chapter IV. Enthusiasm Versus Government and Social Order ... 160 Chapter V. Enthusiasm and Ecclesiastical Order 185 Chapter VI. Enthusiasm and the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit .... 229 How the Spirit Dwells in Man 238 How to Discern the Spirit 246 The Duration of the Extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit 260 Infallibility, Perfectionism, Antinomianism and Enthusiasm 267 Enthusiasts and the Sacraments 277 Extemporary Prayer, Academic Learning and Enthusiasm 283 Chapter VII. Enthusiasm and Literature 304 Bibliography 352 C h a p t e r I E n t h u s i a s m : C o n f l i c t s i n Scope and M e a n i n g Dur ing the s e c o n d h a l f of the s even teen th cen tu ry and a l l of the e i g h t e e n t h , most E n g l i s h c l e r g y m e n w o u l d have fe l t i n s u l t e d i f t h e y had been c a l l e d " e n t h u s i a s t s . " John W e s l e y , to name o n l y o n e , spent much t ime and s p i l l e d much ink a t t empt ing to prove that he w a s no e n t h u s i a s t . And many a n A u g u s t a n c h u r c h m a n , proud o f h i s o r thodoxy and r e a s o n a b l e -n e s s , smeared h i s d i s s e n t i n g foe or h i s t o o - z e a l o u s f e l l o w c l e r i c s i m p l y b y cha rg ing h im w i t h " e n t h u s i a s m . " S t r ange ly e n o u g h , h o w e v e r , i t w a s not u n t i l the m idd l e of the s even teen th cen tu ry that the pe jo ra t ive e lements i n the word " e n t h u s i a s m " came in to popula r u s a g e . C o m i n g from the Greek word e n t h e o s , mean ing " p o s s e s s e d b y a g o d , " the word " e n t h u s i a s m " o r i g i n a l l y meant i n s p i r a t i o n by a d i v i n e a f f l a tus or by the p r e s e n c e of a god ; and the G r e e k s u s e d the word to d e s c r i b e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of d i v i n e p o s s e s s i o n by A p o l l o or D i o n y s u s . They used the same word i n a t ransfer red or f i g u r a t i v e s ense to d e s c r i b e the i n s p i r a t i o n of p o e t s . * The i n d i v i d u a l p r o f e s s i n g p o s s e s s i o n b y a god be t rayed s e v e r a l un ique pat terns of behav iour w h i c h i n t ime became a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the term " e n t h u s i a s m . " A c c o r d i n g to the a n t h r o p o l o g i s t Frazer , the i n d i v i d u a l whom the god s u p p o s e d l y entered became v i o l e n t l y a g i t a t e d and worked h i m s e l f up in to what appeared to be a h i g h p i t c h of frenzy, and w i t h m u s c l e s c o n v u l s e d and body s w o l l e n , h i s v i s a g e became " t e r r i f i c , " h i s fea tures d i s t o r t e d , and eyes w i l d and s t r a i n e d . As i f " E n t h u s i a s m , " E n c y c l o p a e d i a B r i t a n n i c a , 11th e d . 1 2 labouring because of the power of the divinity in him, the individual rolled on the earth, foaming at his mouth, and uttering shril l cries, or violent indistinct sounds which contained the communication of the god to him.^ Arendzen reported that members of an heretical sect living in Mesopotamia during the fourth century were called "enthusiasts" because they believed that the Holy Ghost dwelt in them and inspired or possessed them. These individuals claimed that they received the indwelling of the Spirit by their exercise of the spiritual power of prayer, and through their possession by the Spirit achieved a union with God which perfected them to the extent that they were no longer troubled by the passions. English usage of "enthusiasm" and "enthusiast" showed no change from the Greek usage until the Interregnum (1649-1660). In his study of the semantic changes of "enthusiasm" Persky found that no dictionaries prior to Blount's Glossographia (1656) carried an entry for the word.^ Blount restricted the meaning of "enthusiast" to the name of 2 Sir James George Frazer, The Golden Bough, abridged ed. (London, 1963), p. 94. ^ J. P. Arendzen, "Messal ians," The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911. ^ Abraham Phillip Persky, "The Changing Concepts of Enthusiasm in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth centuries," Diss . Stanford University 19 59, p. 19. Al l dictionary definitions cited in this chapter are from Persky's work, unless otherwise indicated. Persky's work attempts to show that "enthusiasm, " once contemptuously denounced as unworthy of a rational being, became fully accepted as in good taste, largely through the influence of Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, Hume, and Gerard. Persky's primary concern, however, was with that enthusiasm that was identified as strong feeling, passion, and delight in nature, not with enthusiasm viewed as a religious phenomenon. 3 an Anabaptistical sect in Europe who thought themselves inspired with a divine spirit and so having "a clear sight of a l l things they believed" (p. 21). "Enthusiasm" he defined in the same way as the Greeks, "an inspiration, a ravishment of the Spirit, divine motion, poetical fury" (p. 21). After Blount's Glossographia lexicographers tended to define "enthusiasm" as "poetical fury" and "inspiration, " while "enthusiast" was defined as a "religious fanatic. " But this pejorative usage of "enthusiast, " though widely used in polemical writings, first appeared in dictionaries in John Kersey's Dictionarium Anglo-Britannium (1708). Kersey's definition recorded what was to be a trend in English usage for most of the eighteenth century. "Fanatic" and "enthusiast" were to be used synonymously. "Fanatic" he defined as "inspired," "possessed," "frantic, " and "a fanatic" was one who pretended to receive revelations and inspirations, while "the fanatics" was a reproachful title commonly given to Quakers and Muggletonians, among others (p. 26). It was the anonymous Glossographia Anglicana Nova, published in 1707, the year before Kersey's Dictionarium, which first defined "enthusiasm" in a manner suggesting that the inspiration which the term represented might be false. That dictionary defined "enthusiasm" as "an inspiration, whether real or imaginary" (p. 25). Bailey's Dictionarium  Britannicum (1730) was the first to define "enthusiasm" in terms of its effect on the mind and the imagination, and not until 1755 when the Johnson and the Scott and Bailey dictionaries were published was 4 "enthusiast" defined to show its relationship with the imagination: "of a hot imagination" or "elevated fancy" (p. 19). No dictionary reflected the acrimony associated with the term "en-thusiasm" as did the Dyche and Parson's New General English Dictionary (1735). That dictionary defined "enthusiastic" in a manner that indicated for the first time that one charged with "enthusiasm" or with being "an en-thusiast" was viewed as a menace to society and fit for the lunatic asy-lum. Perhaps the definitions mirror the widespread feeling of outrage aroused by the presence and practices of the French prophets and their followers in "respectable" London society, practices which raised the spectre of the numerous and extreme religious sects rampant during the Interregnum. Whatever the source of the antipathy, the New General  English Dictionary of 1735 defined "enthusiasm," "enthusiast," and "en-thusiastic" as follows: Enthusiasm . . . A Prophetick or poetic rage, spirit, or fury, which transports the mind, enflames and raises the imagination, and makes it think and express things extraordinary and surpriz-ing, but the word is generally applied to those who pretend to have divine revelation, to support some monstrous, ridiculous, or absurd notion in religious matters, and thereby takes away both reason and revelation, and substitutes in the room thereof the groundless fancies, and obstinate results of self-willedness, by using extravagant gestures and words, pretending to things not only improbable, but also impossible. Enthusiast . . . Commonly means a person poisoned with the notion of being divinely inspired when he is not, and upon that account commits a great number of irregularities both in words and actions. Enthusical or Enthusiastick . . .Wild, irregular, something be-longing to, or acted by the spirit of Enthusiasm, delusion, or madness, (p. 28) 5 When Dr. Johnson published his dictionary in 1755, just as Scott and Bailey had done in their dictionary of the same year, he brought together many of the accepted meanings of the terms up to the middle of the eighteenth century. It was left for Barclay to include another usage which showed the influence of literary critics in the growing acceptance of enthusiasm as a legitimate attribute in creative functions. In part, Barclay defined "enthusiasm" as a "transport of the mind, whereby it is led to imagine things in a sublime, surprising, yet probable manner. This is the Enthusiasm felt in poetry, oratory, music, painting, sculpture, &c. . . . Barclay's definition completes the usages of the three terms, "enthusiasm," "enthusiast," and "enthusiastic," as they were recorded in the dictionaries of the period from Blount's (1656) to Barclay's (1774); but the dictionaries, besides lagging considerably behind current usage, failed to reflect many of the discrepancies and overtones of usage found in various works and sermons against religious enthusiasm during the period. Several writers of the period complained that "enthusiasm" was used so carelessly that it was becoming a matter of concern, especially because the current bandying of the word was causing indifference, even aversion, to important religious matters. John Wesley charged that though the word was frequently used, it was "exceedingly rarely understood, ^ James Barclay, A Complete and Universal English Dictionary (London, 1774). 6 even by those who use it most," different people understanding it differ-ently and often in ways "quite inconsistent with each other. John Byrom (1692-1763) was more outspoken in his complaint against the abuse of the word. Enthusiasm, he protested, was grown into a fashionable term of reproach that usually came uppermost when anything of a deep and serious nature was mentioned. Through indolent custom people ap-plied the word just as readily to sober and considerate assertors of important truths as to wild and extravagant contenders about them. He declared that such indiscriminate use of the word had a bad effect, causing -"the present" general indifference to matters of the highest concern to proceed into downright aversion. Some citations from the general literature of the period w i l l help to explain Byrom's concern by showing some of the inconsistencies and overtones in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century usage of the term "enthusiasm." Meric Casaubon's Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme (1665) was p the first work which discussed at length the subject of enthusiasm. Casaubon's concern was to show that what was popularly called en-thusiasm was a misnomer, that in fact there were two general types of 6 John Wesley, Works, 3rd ed. (London, 1829), V, 468-469. 7 Cited in Sister M . Kevin Whelan, "Enthusiasm in English Poetry of the Eighteenth Century (1700-1774)," Diss . Catholic University of America 1935, pp. 42-43. o ° Robert Burton had discussed religious enthusiasm in his chapter on religious melancholy in Anatomy of Melancholy (1621). 7 the phenomenon, the supernatural and the natural, and that the second was often mistaken for the first. Supernatural enthusiasm, he said, was a true possession by some power outside of the individual, a divine or a diabolical power, which produced such supernatural effects as divination and speaking in strange languages, but natural enthusiasm was an extra-ordinary, transcendent, though natural fervency, or pregnancy of the soul, spirits, or brain, producing strange effects that might be easily mistaken to be of supernatural origin.^ Few people in the century bothered to observe Casaubon's distinctions. As mentioned before, it was not until the first decade of the eighteenth century that the Glossographia Nova noted the possibility of inspiration being real or imaginary. ^ Writing in his Enthusiasmus Triumphatus, which was published in 1656, the year following the publication of Casaubon's Treatise, Henry More, the Cambridge Platonist, did not recognize the possibility of one's being inspired by an evil power. For More, to be inspired "is to be moved in an extraordinary manner by the power or spirit of God to act, speak, or think what is holy, just and true.-"'''''' Accordingly, More defined ^ Meric Casaubon, A Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme, 2nd ed. rev. and enl. (London, 1656), p. 22. 10 See, however, Charles Leslie, Snake in the Grass in The  Theological Works (London, 1721), II, 144, where the author, in the late seventeenth century, acknowledged that "inspiration" might be either real or imaginary, but because of numerous false pretenses to inspiration, "enthusiasm-" was most frequently used in the "worst sense. " H Henry More, Enthusiasmus Triumphatus (London, 1662), p. 2. 8 enthusiasm as a -"full, but false, persuasion in a man that-he is inspired. " But More later proves inconsistent by claiming that a "true and warrant-able Enthusiasm" does exist, that of devout and holy souls who are 12 strangely transported in their love towards God. It was More's former definition and view which exercised greatest influence on most writers in the century following the publication of the Enthusiasmus. The third earl of Shaftesbury complicated the usage of "enthusiasm" when he said that "inspiration is a real feeling of the Divine Presence, and enthusiasm a false one, " though the passion raised by both is very much al ike. * 3 When More spoke of a "warrantable enthusiasm," he was probably thinking of the feelings of the enthusiastic individual and not of the claim to inspiration which was usually associated with the enthusiast. Shaftesbury was, however, primarily concerned with feeling, and so decided that enthusiasm is a false feeling of the divine presence. However, he too contradicts himself by declaring that "inspiration may be justly called divine enthusiasm."-^ The next step in the progress of the definitions takes one from feeling to the imagination or fancy. Thomas Morgan, doubtless writing with the memory of the French prophets and John Locke's essay on 1 2 More, p. 45. ^ Shaftesbury, Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, ed. JohnM. Robertson (New York, 1964), I, 37. 1 4 Shaftesbury, I, 38. 9 enthusiasm in mind, defined enthusiasm in terms of its irrationality. He said that enthusiasm "is a strong perswasion, grounded upon the Conceit of some inward, secret, divine impulse, or Testimony of the Spirit to the Heart and Conscience, without any rational objective Evidence, or clear and sufficient Proofs . . .-"15 gy this definition emphasis moves from i n -spiration to one's force of conviction based on his irrational belief that he is inspired. In an article published in the Gentleman's Magazine, an anonymous writer took enthusiasm out of the merely religious realm by de-claring it "any exorbitant monstrous appetite of the human mind" that hurried "the wi l l in pursuit of an object, without the concurrence, or against the light of Reason and common sense. " ^ John Wesley, himself charged with being an enthusiast, took the final step, which had been hinted at from as far back as 1665, and declared the enthusiast a ver i -table madman, and enthusiasm "a religious madness arising from some falsely imagined influence or inspiration of God; at least, from imputing something to God which ought not to be imputed to him, or expecting 17 something from God which ought not to be expected from him. Much of Wesley's definition was most uncharacteristic of his age; yet that portion of the definition dealing with false imputations served ^ [Thomas Morgan], The Nature and Consequences of Enthusiasm  Considered, 2nd ed. (London, 1720), p. 40. ^"Enthusiasm Catching as the Plague," Gentleman's Magazine, 5 (April 173 5), 203. 1 7 John Wesley, Works, V, 470. 10 Bishop Warburton well in his attempt to discredit Wesley and Methodism. Replying to a query in Wesley's Journal, whether it be enthusiasm to see God in every benefit which we receive (as Wesley's critics seemed to conclude), Warburton said that it is_ enthusiasm to believe that the bene-fits received were miraculously conferred through a change in the normal course of nature .^ In the same year that Bishop Warburton published his Doctrine of Grace (1763), James Duchal published an article on en-thusiasm in which he introduced the new element of J ,fanatical zeal"11 into the usage of the word. In his "Nature of Enthusiasm," Duchal said that "Enthusiasm, in general, may be understood to signify a man's acting under an apprehension of a present divine energy upon his mind, to which a l l his powers are supposed to be subjected, and by which he is carried on, without attention to anything else as his guide. So far, a l l definitions cited have either stated or implied that the enthusiast is the victim of irrationality, or of the imagination or fancy, but Archibald Campbell, in a definition reminiscent of Jonathan Swift's description of the mechanical production of the Spirit, defined an en-thusiast as one who, among other things, mechanically works himself up into such a frenzy that he becomes the dupe of his own fiction. We are here facing the hypocrite who sets out to deceive others and succeeds 18 William Warburton, The Doctrine of Grace . . . (London, 1763), pp. 228-229. 19 James Duchal, "The Nature of Enthusiasm," The Cri t ical Review, 15 (Jan.-June 1763), 143. 11 meanwhile in effectively deceiving himself. -"An Enthusiast,'" Campbell said, "is one, who in the course of his devotion keeps not within the compass of his reason, but having given up himself to the power and i n -fluence of an overheated fancy, is mechanically wrought up into such extraordinary heats and fervours, that he verily believes he is immedi-ately under the benign emanations of Heaven, and has divine revelations made to him; whilst there is nothing really in his case, but pure mechanis and f i c t i o n . " 2 0 Enthusiasm, then, is a phenomenon associated with poets and religionists in particular; it is a feeling resulting in extraordinary trans-ports of the mind, which allow it to imagine things sublimely; in the case of certain deluded people enthusiasm may cause physical violence and irregularity of behaviour. This irregularity may, in fact, be evidence that the individual is insane. The various definitions have shown that there was little agreement on precisely what enthusiasm i s , and that the word developed into an epithet of abuse which tended to increase in virulence until about the middle of the seventeen-sixties, a time when the Methodist movement was at its height and when Moravianism, an in- , fluence on the origins of the Methodist evangelical movement, was be-ginning to recover from a period of scandalous moral turpitude. 20 Archibald Campbell, A. Discourse Proving that the Apostles  Were no Enthusiasts (London, 1730), p. 4. See also Jonathan Swift, Mechanical Operation of the Spirit. 12 Different writers of the period classified enthusiasm variously, Casaubon mentioning two large and several lesser categories, and More discussing only three. Most writers, however, without pretending to dis-cuss all forms of the phenomenon, restricted themselves to a consider-ation of the one form that was endemic in English society, religious en-thusiasm. Both Casaubon and More wrote at a time when the results of enthusiastic behaviour were greatly in evidence in English society. Con-cerned with defending the cause of true religion against all counterfeits, Casaubon decided that there are but two basic groupings of enthusiasm, supernatural and natural, the first being a true possession of the in-dividual by some external power, whether divine or diabolical, producing such supernatural effects as divination and speaking in tongues; and the second, natural enthusiasm, being an elevation and pregnancy of spirits producing strange effects closely resembling those from the supernatural type, but of purely natural origins. 21 Considering religious enthusiasm to be the Christian and proper form of enthusiasm, Casaubon declined discussing it further, focussing solely on natural enthusiasm, which, depending heavily on his classical sources, he divided into eight types: contemplative or philosophical, rhetorical, poetical, supplicatory or precatory, musical, martial, erotical or amatory, and mechanical. The Cambridge Platonist, Henry More, spoke of enthusiasm in general as a A Casaubon, Treatise, p. 22. 13 misconceit of being inspired, but later mentioned the existence of two types of enthusiasm, political and philosophical, which he implied are mere forms which religious enthusiasm sometimes takes. Remembering that both writers set out to deal with enthusiasm as a natural phenomenon which results in an elevation of spirits and some extraordinary effects easily mistaken to be supernatural, one needs little additional informa-tion to appreciate what the various types of enthusiasm just listed entail. Briefly, the names given to the different types indicate the areas from which that extraordinary elevation of spirits comes or in which the i n -fected individual expresses himself with such facility and unusual ef-fectiveness that he thinks himself inspired. Apart from poetic enthusiasm, the other forms never claimed much attention during the period under d i s -22 cussion. Poetic Enthusiasm and Literary Style As mentioned earlier, the ancients used the word "inspiration'" in a figurative sense to describe the lofty flights, heats, and fervours felt by their poets while in the act of composition; but perhaps the true situation was not as simple as the explanation implies it was. Casaubon said that Both Casaubon and More have long sections dealing with philosophical enthusiasm but nothing on musical, martial, erotical, or mechanical enthusiasm. I believe that the last form represents essential-ly what Swift discusses in his Mechanical Operation of the Spirit. This mechanical operation w i l l be discussed in a later chapter. More deals briefly with polit ical enthusiasm. See Enthusiasmus, pp. 22-36. 14 many of the ancients, especially the common people, received their knowledge of divinity and their belief in the gods from the writings of their poets. These writings also provided the people information on how the gods were to be worshipped and appeased. In time the works of the poets achieved such importance in the national religion that they were re-garded as sacred records; accordingly, the poets themselves came to be esteemed as truly inspired, for the people believed that none but he who is divinely inspired could be a poet. This belief in the poet's inspiration, Casaubon imagined, was encouraged by the poets' claims of inspiration and by their published accounts of strange visions, raptures, and appa-23 ritions. There is little evidence suggesting that English poets believed themselves to be literally inspired, but much evidence that their claim to inspiration was a mere gesture in favour of an accepted and flattering poetic tradition. Casaubon's attitude to poetic inspiration reflects what most critics would have readily conceded: " . . . though I allow not any reall inspiration to any Poet (as Poet) more than to an Orator: yet of a l l kinds of naturall Enthusiasme, I allow to Poets that which is the purest, 24 and hath most of heaven in i t . " Shaftesbury expressed the idea in a slightly different fashion. He believed that the imagination of a divine presence was what effectively enabled the great poet to write as well as he did: J 'No poet . . . can do anything great in his own way without the 23 OA ° Casaubon, Treatise, pp. 10-11. • • Ibid. , p. 270. 15 imagination or supposition of a divine presence, which may raise him to some degree of this passion we are speaking of [enthusiasm or inspi-r a t i o n ] T h a t reputable poets of the period did not seriously claim literal supernatural inspiration may be grasped from Dryden's statement ridiculing Settle: Mr . Settle having never studied any sort of learning but poetry, and that but slenderly, as you may find by his writings, and having besides no other advantages, must make very lame work on 't; he himself declares, he neither reads nor cares for conversation so that he would persuade us he is a kind of fanatic in poetry, and has a light within him, and writes by an inspiration; which (like that of the heathen prophets) a man must have no sense of his own when he receives; and no doubt he would be thought inspired, and would be reverenced extremely in the country where Santons are worshipped. 2^ Enthusiasm did, however, attract much attention from poets and critics of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries because of its influ-ence on literary style. Paul Hale and Sister Mary Whelan have described in their doctoral dissertations the ferment of discussion which led from a rejection to an acceptance of enthusiasm in English poetry and criticism 2 7 in this period. And Abraham Persky's dissertation has attempted to show that enthusiasm, once damned and viewed with contempt, came to 2 5 Shaftesbury, Characteristics, I, 36. 26 Works, ed. Walter Scott, rev. George Saintsbury, XV (London, 1892), 406-407, quoted in James R. Sutherland, A Preface to Eighteenth  Century Poetry (Oxford, 1950), p. 14. 2 7 Paul Vincent Hale, -"Enthusiasm Rejected and Espoused in English Poetry and Cri t ic ism, 1660-1740," Diss . New York University 1962; Sister Mary K. Whelan, "Enthusiasm in English Poetry of the Eight-eenth Century (1700-1774), " D i s s . Catholic University of America 193 5. 16 be accepted as in good taste by the middle of the eighteenth century, largely through the influence of Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, Hume, and 2 8 Gerard. But many critics of the period saw enthusiasm, apart from its religious and philosophical implications, as a threat to the language be-cause of the strong connections between enthusiasm, the passions, and the imagination. Various scholars have remarked the eighteenth-century distrust of the imagination and the prosaic quality of Neoclassic literary o q or) style. But it was left to Bond to show the extent of this dis t rus t 0 u and to Williamson to indicate somewhat of the role of enthusiasm in i t . The reaction to enthusiasm came to affect English literary style in a somewhat indirect fashion, stemming from the influence of science and from a suspicion of the flowery rhetoric characteristic of certain 2 8 See Abraham Phillip Persky, "The Changing Concepts of En-thusiasm in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, " Diss . Stanford University 1959. Persky was not primarily concerned with religious en-thusiasm but with enthusiasm as espoused by Shaftesbury, a strong feeling, a passionate delight in nature. ? p, George Saintsbury: "Fancy, provided she knows her place, is tolerated; but Imagination is kept well at a distance; a flight is perdition, a conceit at best danger." A Short History of English Literature (1898), p. 565; Woodhouse spoke of "the reduction of imagination to mere 'imaging' and its function to the adornment of actual fact or of reason's concepts, in strict subordination to judgment." From "Collins and the Creative Imagination," Studies in English by Members of University  College, Toronto (Toronto, 1931), p. 77. Both are quoted in Donald Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination in English Neoclassicism, " Philological  Quarterly, 14(1935), 54. °*0 Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination. " 3* George Williamson, "The Restoration Revolt Against Enthusi-asm," in Seventeenth Century Contexts, rev. ed. (Chicago, 1969), pp. 202-239. 17 class ical rhetoricians whose methods would have influenced university men of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The growing scientific attitude led men to suspect the vagaries of subjectivity and to trust in what is demonstrable and rational, not in the fruits of a fertile imagi-nation. As Williamson puts it: After years of intense introspection, haunted by the chimeras of Enthusiasm, men turned gratefully to science as an extraverting influence upon the mind. Science, which offered them a c r i t i -cism of reality, was the opposite of Enthusiasm; it embodied notions of truth and reality that were objective rather than sub-jective in character. 32 To arrive at truth men needed to use language that attempted to represent exactly what was being spoken about, language that appealed to the reason rather than to the imagination. Croll believed that the growing interest in a bare prose style during the period was the result of the dif-fusion of Cartesian ideas and the progress of the scientific method as well as a reaction to enthusiasm. He said that "the temporary success of Puritanism and Quietism, the rapid progress of the scientific method, and the diffusion of Cartesian ideas, a l l in their different ways helped to create a taste for a bare and level prose style adapted merely to the exact portrayal of things as they are. But Crol l also held that the 3 2 Williamson, "Restoration Revolt, " p. 232. 3 3 Morris W. Cro l l , "'Attic' Prose in the Seventeenth Century," in Style, Rhetoric, and Rhythm: Essays by Morris W. Cro l l , ed. J. Max Patrick, e t a l . (Princeton, New Jersey, 1966), p. 67. 18 drive for exactness stemmed from a revolt against the tyranny of the ora-torical style over literature. ^ 4 Scholars of the seventeenth century who were educated in the classics were aware of a c lass ical oratorical style which was dist in-guished by its use of similarities or repetitions of sound employed as sensuous devices to give pleasure or to aid the attention. These scholars also knew of the essay styles which at times subtly appropriated some of the devices of the oratorical style, adding to them metaphor, aphorism, antithesis, paradox, and figures of wit or thought, known as figurae 35 sententiae. These essay styles were classified as the genus grande or nobile and the genus humile. Seventeenth-century critics frowned upon the genus grande as being too ornate and empty, having too elaborate a form and studded with too many ornamental figures. One studied it merely to be aware of its charm. The genus humile, according to Cro l l , was favoured to replace the genus grande because the former was thought to be a flexible, subtle style, capable of great variation to meet the needs of differing situations. ^ 6 This genus humile was the "Attic" style greatly striven after in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, the style that was associated with philosophy, while the grande was associ -ated with oratory. Because metaphors, paradoxes, and various figures of wit when used in writing or speech tended to appeal to the senses and Cro l l , p. 64. 5 Cro l l , p. 54. 36 Cro l l , pp. 59-60. 37 Cro l l , p. 54. the passions rather than to the intellect of the audience, and because the ability to persuade an audience by flowery speech that possessed more passion than reason was seen to be the forte of enthusiasts, enthusiasm took much blame. To many men of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the passions were not to be cultivated but suppressed because they linked man with the beasts; the fancy or imagination was repressed, at worst, or controlled, at best, because its products stimulated the passions. Elo-quence was greatest and most effective when the speaker was himself under the spell of an over-heated imagination (enthusiasm) which caused him to indulge in language that appealed to the irrational rather than the intellectual powers of his audience. It was thought that when the passion-ate or animal powers of the soul are aroused, reason, the god-like power in man, is dethroned and man is reduced to the beastly, thus becoming a threat to himself and society. Such was the complex of associations that seemed to cluster around fancy in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Following Aristotle, the seventeenth century considered the soul as having three divisions or estates: the vegetal, in which it is much like the plants; the sensitive, characterized by the imagination or fancy, in which it is like the beasts; and the rational, characterized by the under-3 8 standing, in which it approaches the dignity of the angels. Whichcote 38 See Bond, "Neo-classical Psychology of the Imagination," ELH, 4 (Dec. 1937), 252. 20 showed the limitations of the imagination and the great value of the under-standing as follows: I say, a Man is a Compound of different and several things; he hath several sorts of Faculties, which we are wont in our Philo-sophy to ca l l his upper and lower Powers; and by these he doth converse with things of a very different order. By the higher Powers, he is able to converse both with God and things Spiritual and Coelestial; and by the lower Powers, with Terrene and Earthy. As to Instance: By Mind, and Understanding, and W i l l , he hath intercourse and communion with God, and things invisible; and by these he is fitted to the improving a l l the lower Objects to Heavenly Ends and Purposes. But then, by Sense, Imagination and brutish Affection, we can only maintain Acquaintance with this outward and lower World. 39 In his famous Spectator papers on the pleasures of the imagination, Addison removed the imagination from the level of the beasts where it was traditionally placed and put it in a position midway between the sensitive and the rational because, as he said, the pleasures of the imagination are not so gross as those of the senses nor so refined as those of the under-standing, while the pleasures of the imagination are every whit as trans-porting and great as those of the understanding. 40 Nevertheless, Addison continued to insist , as Locke did earlier, on the ease with which one's assent is gained by an appeal through the imagination. In effect, by ap-pealing to his imagination, one is duped into accepting ideas which reason would reject. Warning the reader that he was using "fancy" interchange-ably with "imagination, " Addison wrote: 39 From "The work of reason" (1660), quoted in Bond, "Neo-class ical Psychology," p. 252. 4 0 Spectator No. 411. 21 It is but opening the Eye, and the Scene enters. The Colours paint themselves on the Fancy, with very little Attention or Thought or Application of Mind in the Beholder. We are struck, we know not how, with the Symmetry of anything we see, and immediately assent to the Beauty of an Object, without enquiring into the particular Causes and Occasions of i t . ^ l Much earlier in the seventeenth century Walter Charleton had remarked the reason for the imagination's gaining the individual's assent so readily. By imagination, Charleton said, we conceive resemblances in objects which are really unlike and "pleasantly confound them in discourse: Which by its unexpected Fineness and al lusion, surprising the Hearer, renders him less curious of the truth of what is s a i d . " ^ 2 Partly because of the ability of the imagination to anesthetize the reason, writers and orators were advised to suppress i t , but the matter which benumbed reason was itself produced by the active (enthusiastic) imagination, hence another reason to keep it controlled. Among the pro-ductions of the imaginations are figurative language, a florid, elevated style, fables, and forced phrases. In his preface to "Religio La ic i " Dryden noted the power of the productions of the imagination on the passions, implying that when the writer intends to instruct, he should ^ l Spectator No. 411. Addison is here clearly remembering Locke: "Its beauty appears at first sight, and there is required no labour of thought to examine what truth or reason there is in i t . The mind without looking any further, rests satisfied with the agreeableness of the picture and gaiety of the fancy. And it is a kind of affront to go about to examine i t , by the severe rules of truth and good reason." Quoted in Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination," p. 58. 4 ^ From Two Discourses (1669), quoted in George Will iamson, "The Restoration Revolt Against Enthusiasm, " p. 235. use a style that appeals to the reason rather than to the passions, a style that shows things exactly as they are: The florid, elevated, and figurative way is for the passions; for love and hatred, fear and anger, are begotten in the soul by showing their objects out of their true proportion, either greater than the life or less; but instruction is to be given by showing them what they naturally are. A man is to be cheated into passion, but to be reasoned into truth. 4 0" William Pemble, a seventeenth-century clergyman, expressed the pre-vailing distrust of a florid style when he declared that good speech is the "garment of truth, 1 ' who is so "glorious within" that she needs no further ornamentation. Yet should she "appeare in a rayment of needle-work, it 's but for a more majestick comelinesse, not gawdy gaynesse. Truth is like our first Parents, most beautifull when n a k e d . " 4 4 The strictures of the age against metaphors and allegories, besides showing a distrust of the productions of the imagination, reflected the onward march of science towards a greater exactness and objectivity in the use of language intended to inform or instruct, as opposed to language used primarily to delight. Censuring the manner in which some philoso-phers used language inexactly, Samuel Parker showed the limitations of metaphors in situations where exactness or accuracy of representation is necessary: 4 ^ John Dryden, Poetical Works, ed. W. D. Christie (London, 1897), p. 191. 4 4 From Vindiciae gratias: a plea for grace, quoted in Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination," p. 57. 23 Now to the Discourse of the Natures of Things in Metaphors and Allegories is nothing else but to sport and trifle with empty words, because these Schems do not express the Natures of Things but only their Similitudes and Resemblances, for Metaphors are only words, which properly signifying one thing, are apply'd to s igni-fie another by reason of some Resemblance between them. When therefore any thing is express'd by a Metaphor or Allegory, the thing it self is not expressed, but only some similitude observ'd or made by Fancy . . . A l l those Theories in Philosophie which are expressed only in metaphorical Termes, are not real Truths, but the meer Products of Imagination, dress'd up (like Childrens babies) in a few spangled empty words. . . . Thus their wanton & luxuriant fancies climbing up into the Bed of Reason, do not only defile it by unchaste and illegitimate Embraces, but instead of real conceptions and notices of Things, impregnate the mind with nothing but Ayerie and Subventaneous Phantasmes. 4 $ In trying to accomplish its design to "make faithful Records of a l l Works of Nature, or Art, " the Royal Society found that it had to "separate the knowledge of Nature, from the colours of Rhetorick, the devices of Fancy, or the delightful deceit of Fables. Rhetoric employed orna-ments of speaking which in the hands of wise men, when used to describe goodness, honesty, and obedience in "larger, fairer, and more moving Images," were well used as admirable instruments. But those ornaments of speaking were often i l l -used and thus hurt the cause of learning, as Sprat said: But now they [the ornaments of speaking] are generally chang'd to worse uses: They make the Fancy disgust the best things, if they come sound, and unadorn'd: they are in open defiance From Censvre of the Platonic Philosophie, quoted in Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination, " p. 57. 46 Thomas Sprat, History of the Royal Society, ed. Jackson I. Cope and Harold W . Jones, Washington University Studies (St. Louis, 1959), p. 62. 24 a g a i n s t Reason ; p r o f e s s i n g , not to h o l d much co r r e spondence w i t h that; but w i t h i t s S l a v e s , the P a s s i o n s ; t hey g i v e the mind a mo t ion too c h a n g e a b l e , and b e w i t c h i n g , to c o n s i s t w i t h r igh t  p r a c t i c e . W h o c a n b e h o l d , w i thou t i n d i g n a t i o n , how many m i s t s a n d u n c e r t a i n t i e s , t hese s p e c i o u s Tropes and F i g u r e s have brought on our K n o w l e d g ? 4 7 In the in t e re s t of e x a c t n e s s and t ru th the R o y a l S o c i e t y d e c i d e d to combat the spread of the use of me taphor s , t r o p e s , and other ornaments of s p e e c h w h i c h d e s t r o y e d the i n t e g r i t y of the l anguage b y d e c i d i n g r e s o l u t e l y to •"reject a l l the a m p l i f i c a t i o n s , d i g r e s s i o n s , and s w e l l i n g s of s t y l e : to re turn back, to the p r i m i t i v e p u r i t y , and s h o r t n e s s , when men d e l i v e r ' d so 4 8 many t h i n g s , a l m o s t i n an e q u a l number of w o r d s . J A c c o r d i n g to T u v e s o n , L o c k e ' s new e p i s t e m o l o g y gave the e igh t een th cen tu ry added r e a s o n for d e p r e c i a t i n g metaphor . L o c k e had s h o w n that metaphor may be c o n f u s i n g and i s , i n f a c t , u n n e c e s s a r y for a c c u r a t e though t . W h e r e a s i t i s true that the i m a g i n a t i o n ( e x c i t e d by en thus iasm) w a s s u s p e c t i n the s even teen th and e igh teen th c e n t u r i e s b e c a u s e of the e x -c e s s e s to w h i c h i t l e d , dur ing the en t i re pe r iod poets and c r i t i c s a l i k e v i e w e d the f ancy or the i m a g i n a t i o n as p e r f e c t l y i n p l a c e i n w o r k s 4 7 Spra t , p p . 1 1 1 - 1 1 2 . 4 8 Sprat , p . 1 1 3 . 4 ^ -"Metaphor w o u l d be r educed i n i m p o r t a n c e , b e c a u s e , i n L o c k i a n e p i s t e m o l o g y , i t i s u n n e c e s s a r y for a c c u r a t e thought and may be c o n f u s i n g . L o c k e had e l i m i n a t e d the c o n c e p t of the ' i n t e l l i g i b l e ' - - a p p r e -h e n s i b l e by the mind o n l y , ' m i n d - s t u f f in to w h i c h p h y s i c a l i m p r e s s i o n s are t r a n s m u t e d . M e t a p h o r had seemed u s e f u l b e c a u s e i t w a s one w a y of s o l v i n g a p r a c t i c a l p rob lem: i t enab l ed the mind to app rehend , i n a l i m i t e d w a y at l e a s t , pure t r u th , w i t h the a i d of s e n s o r y e q u i p m e n t . " Ernes t L e e T u v e s o n , The Imag ina t ion as a M e a n s of G r a c e (Be rke l ey , 1960) , p p . 7 3 -7 4 . 25 intended to delight or please an audience, providing the poet was careful to use judgment to curb the excesses to which fancy was l iable. Indeed, by the time we get to the last quarter of the eighteenth century, reason, once enthroned as the God-like element in man, w i l l take second place to imagination, which wi l l then be viewed, in Tuveson's phrase, "as a means of grace, " a means of reconciling man and God. Bond has shown that Neoclassic strictures against the free play of the imagination were aimed primarily at intellectual literature: eloquence, philosophy, and science, not against imaginative literature, for the im-agination was always given a place in tragedy, epic, and lyric poetry. ^ While the poet was expected to employ his imagination to provide the poem with life and spirit, he was also expected to exercise his judgment in the selection and use of materials in his poem. Thus a writer in the Weekly  Miscel lany criticized some poets for allowing the imagination great free-dom "at the Expense" of judgment and truth: When the Imagination and Invention are so busy, Reason and judgment are seldom allowed Time enough to examine the Justness of a Sentiment, and the Conclusiveness of an Argument. Many of our own Poets, the most celebrated for their Ingenuity, have been very incorrect and injudicious, as well as irreligious and immoral, in their Sentiments. They seem to have studied rather to say fine things than just ones, and have often shewn their Fancy at the Expense of their Understanding, which is buy-ing Reputation at a very extravagant Price. 51 ^ "Distrust of the Imagination, " pp. 54-55. 5 1 (Sept. 28, 1734), quoted in Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination," p. 65 . As in many other areas of concern, so in poetry, the eighteenth century counselled moderation and balance. The fancy may be allowed to range like a spaniel to bring home the ornaments that would beautify a poem, but judgment must be duly exercised to put a l l the parts of the S 7 poem and the ornaments in their true order. Or as Henry Felton said in his Dissertation on reading the c lass ics , and forming a just style (1713), "Our thoughts must be conformable to the Matter and Subject that lye be-fore us, but we have full Liberty to range, provided we can command our 53 Fancy and bring it home to the Purpose. " Although the poet was, within certain l imits , allowed the exercise of his imagination, the crusade for reason and against imagination was so far successful that by the last decades of the seventeenth century, ac-cording to Sutherland, everything that could comprehensively be called 54 "the supernatural" had disappeared from English poetry. Within the first quarter of the eighteenth century Addison noted the disappearance of "the faery way of writing" (a term he got from Dryden. See Spectator No. 419), a way of writing which gives existence to many characters ^2 Dryden said that the imagination, "like a nimble spaniel, beats over and ranges through the field of memory, t i l l it springs the quarry it hunted after . . . " Preface to "Annus Mirabi l i s , " in Literary Criticism in  England, 1660-1800, ed. G . W. Chapman (New York, 1966), p. 169. And Hobbes in "The Answer of Mr . Hobbes to Sir William Davenant's Preface Before Gondibert" said that "judgment begets the strength and structure, and fancy begets the ornaments of a poem. " Chapman, p. 24. ^ Quoted in Bond, "Distrust of the Imagination, " p. 69. °^ Sutherland, Preface, p. 2. 27 and things which do not really exist except in imagination and legend. As Addison's papers on ballads led to a renewed interest in ballads and folk poetry, so his articles calling for more of "the faery way of writing" may have reinforced his efforts towards the rehabilitation of that aspect of the imagination which created poetry dealing with the supernatural. Addison fully recognized the falseness of representations of spirits in poetry, though he believed that there are other beings and spirits in the world, which are subject to different laws from mankind; yet Addison de-clared of fairies and such spirits: "We have a l l heard so many pleasing Relations in favour of them, that we do not care for seeing through the Falsehood, and will ingly give our selves up to so agreeable an Im-posture ."^ Later in the century Richard Hurd reopened the same question of the supernatural in English poetry. As late as the 1760's Hurd found that the interests of philosophy and reason had rid English poetry of some of its desirable creatures of fancy. He agreed with the philosophers' com-plaint that poets through their use of the fanciful succeeded in having men believe what in fact revolts their reason, but in praise of the poet of fancy he declared: "A legend, a tale, a tradition, a rumour, a 5 5 Spectator No. 419. Note that Addison underscores here the general belief that the representations which appeal primarily to the imagination gain acceptance by anesthetizing reason. For a discussion of the relationship between the use of the "Supernatural" and "Wit" in Restoration poetry, see George Williamson, The Proper Wit of Poetry (Chicago, 1961), pp. 84-96. 28 superstition; in short, anything is enough to be the basis of their air-form'd vis ions. " And reminiscent of Addison, he asked "Does any reader trouble himself about the truth, or even the credibility of their fancies?" His reply: "Alas, no; he is best pleased when he is made to conceive (he minds not by what magic) the existence of such things as r c his reason tells him did not and were never l ikely to, exist. " Speak-ing of the success of the drive against fancy, Hurd conceded: "What we have gotten by this revolution . . . is a great deal of good sense. What 5 7 we have lost, is a world of fine fabling." Even while Hurd was lamenting the loss of the creatures of fancy, the silent process towards their reinstatement was going on. Though in his age identified with the cold "Attic" style, Addison, perhaps more than any other critic of the time, in his subtly incisive Spectator papers on poetry, taste, and the imagination, had undermined the hallowed Neo-class ical virtues, giving occasion for fresh sallies into the realm of the primitive, the supernatural, and the strange. Strongly supporting Addison's influence was that of Shaftesbury, the philosopher of enthusi-5 8 asm. Shaftesbury took a detested concept, enthusiasm, and by dint of constant repetition and refurbishing succeeded in enthroning it as a ^ Richard Hurd, Letters on Chivalry and Romance with the Third  Elizabethan Dialogue, ed. Edith J . Morley (London, 1 9 1 1 ) , p. 1 3 6 . 5 7 Hurd, p. 1 5 4 . 5 8 F. H . Heinemann, "The Philosopher of Enthusiasm . . . " Revue Internationale De Philosophie, 6 (1952) , 2 9 8 . 29 vital means of strengthening the human spirits. He looked upon Nature as a picture of her Creator and professed to find in her ample scope for a devotion which ultimately was focussed on God: "O glorious Nature! supremely fair and sovereignly good! a l l -loving and a l l lovely, a l l -divine! whose looks are so becoming and of such infinite grace, whose study brings such wisdom and whose contemplation such delight, whose every single work af-fords an ampler scene and is a nobler spectacle than a l l 'which ever art presented! O mighty Nature! wise substitute of Provi-dence! impowered creatress!' Or thou impowering Deity, supreme creator! Thee I invoke and thee alone adore. To thee this s o l i -tude, this place, these rural meditations are sacred; whilst thus inspired with harmony of thought, though unconfined by words, and in loose numbers, I sing of Nature's order in created beings and celebrate the beauties which resolve in thee, the source and principle of a l l beauty and perfection. . . . "59 This rapturous ecstasy in his response to Nature is what Shaftesbury called enthusiasm; the ecstatic expression arose from his love and admi-ration for Nature, and from his devotion to her. That enthusiasm which was characterized by a single-hearted devotion, zeal , and rapture akin to madness and feared as being ruinous to society, Shaftesbury transformed into something less detestable, to many, admirable, and thus provided an innocent outlet for the starved emotions of a people schooled in emotional repression. And to underscore the validity of his response he showed that the same passions which his devotion was indulging were the very ones allowed to poets, musicians, heroes, adventurers, and such ad-mired people: "The transports of poets, the sublime of orators, the 5 3 Shaftesbury, "The Moral is t , a Philosophical Rhapsody," in Literary Criticism in England, 1660-1800, ed. G . W . Chapman, p. 218. 30 rapture of musicians, the high strains of the vir tuosi- -a l l mere enthusi-asm! Even learning itself, the love of arts and curiosities, the spirit of travelers and adventurers, gallantry, war, heroism—all, a l l enthusi-a s m ! " 6 0 Shaftesbury's influence lived on, and his work was continued by critics like Francis Hutcheson and Thomas Blackwell, and through them by later Scottish cr i t ics , besides numerous European philosophers and c r i t i c s . ^ But it was the influence on English poets such as the Wartons which leavened the new poetry, gaining expression in literature of the c 9 sublime landscape and aesthetic idealism. By the second half of the eighteenth century the learned Elizabeth Carter was able to declare to a friend that "it is true, that the philosopher who examines the wonderful internal construction of natural objects, must discern the power and wisdom of the Supreme Being; but the superficial Spectator who, with a refined imagination, and sensible heart, surveys the external beauties of the universe, feels his goodness. " The Shaftesbury enthusiasm had borne fruit. Men agreed that it was possible to use the imagination and the sensibili t ies, not only the reason, to gain from Nature a knowledge 6 0 Chapman, p. 220. 6 1 See Chapman, pp. 206-207; Abraham Persky, "The Changing Concepts of Enthusiasm in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, " Diss . Stanford University 19 59. 6 2 Chapman, p. 207. 6 3 Quoted from a letter of Mrs . Carter's, in Tuveson, p. 158. 31 of the Creator; and the imagination was no longer viewed as inferior to the understanding, capable only of maintaining acquaintance with this outward and lower world. The new attitude to the imagination would find its finest literary expression in the works of the Romantic poets. Unlike poetic or philosophic enthusiasm of the Shaftesbury type, religious enthusiasm never found a champion to make it popularly accepted by the respectable in society. It is ironic that the form of enthusiasm which came to be fully accepted sprang in part from the work of one who CA had written against religious enthusiasm. But, as the following chapter w i l l show, popular censure never succeeded altogether in suppressing religious enthusiasm. 64 Shaftesbury's "Letter Concerning Enthusiasm" was written be-cause of the strong feelings aroused in London by the activities of the French Prophets and their followers (1708). Chapter II Enthusiasm in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century England Enthusiastic groups in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England invariably sought to justify their existence and practices by an appeal to the Bible, especially to the life and teachings of Christ and to the record of the Christian Church in the New Testament. 1 Most en-thusiasts saw the early Church as the ideal, the finest example of what Christ 's Church was meant to be. It does not matter that they tended always to see the primitive Church through rose-tinted glasses; what matters is what they thought they saw. When the enthusiasts looked around them, they saw an established Church controlled by the temporal, power, whose wishes often determined the course of religious life for a l l ; they saw what they considered worldliness or, at best, morality void of the true religion of the heart; they saw practices for which they could find no scriptural authority; they saw everywhere a Christian religion so so-phisticated and cold that it bore little resemblance to the simplicity and warmth of the primitive Church they read about in the New Testament. These seventeenth- and eighteenth-century enthusiasts declared the Bible and the Bible only to be their guide to worship, belief, and practice. Accordingly, they refused to identify themselves with doctrines In this and succeeding chapters I use the term "Enthusiasts" in its widest signification, in keeping with the practice of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Al l Protestant groups who separated or dissent-ed from the established Church were unceremoniously termed enthusiasts. which they believed owed their existence to tradition rather than the Word. Remembering that Christ promised the Holy Spirit to His disciples and that this Spirit was to guide them into a l l truth (St. John 16.7-15), and recalling what power attended the Apostles when they received the gift of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, these enthusiasts believed that as Christians they too were included in the promises of the Spirit, and so they might expect to be guided into a l l truth and to receive the special gifts that came with the fulfilment of the promise of the Spirit. The history of the early Church as recorded in the book of Acts and in the writings of St. Paul showed the enthusiasts what they should ordinarily expect if they lived as devoutly as the early Christians d id . They might expect gifts of tongues, interpretations of tongues, discern-ment of spirits, prophecy, and healing, among others. Their reading of chapters twelve to fourteen of the first epistle to the Corinthians showed them that the early Church ordinarily received many gifts which the Angl i -can Church lacked. Many of these enthusiasts believed that Christ 's promise of the Spirit meant that individuals would have the Spirit dwelling in them bodily, and having such a divine presence abiding within, none would need to depend on any human supports, like academic learning and set forms of prayer, in their performance of the duties of the Church— preaching and praying, for example. Christ promised that the Spirit w i l l guide each individual into a l l truth; having this divine light of the Spirit, then, one would need no other light or assistance, and one could be 34 certain that a l l his actions would be acceptable to God. In Church organization the enthusiasts frequently adhered strictly to the pattern of the primitive Church, having no hierarchy among the leaders, who might be called elders, bishops, or presbyters; the deacons (and widows, in some cases) were the only other group of officers recog-nized as b ib l ica l . Some enthusiasts (for example, the Quakers) refused to have a clergy, considering each individual, man and woman al ike, as of equal rank in the assembly of the saved. Continuing in the pattern of the early Church, many of the groups of enthusiasts who formed separate congregations allowed each congregation to be autonomous. And some enthusiasts sought to establish the Kingdom of Christ on this earth, ap-pealing to the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation of St. John for their warrant and to the books of the Pentateuch for their laws. Because these enthusiasts characteristically desired to return to the supposed purity of the primitive Church, they always posed a threat to the unity of the Church to which they belonged; it is therefore almost a truism that enthusiasts are schismatic. Indeed, most enthusiasts of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries desired a charismatic rather than an institutional church. The initiative for the founding, control, and discipline of the church should come from the Spirit, they believed, not from man. What follows in this chapter w i l l be an attempt to give in barest outline only an indication of the more important enthusiastic groups in England of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; however, reference w i l l first be made to earlier examples of enthusiasm in the Christian Church simply to suggest that enthusiasm was not restricted to England of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries but was, in fact, an old and frequent, though often unwelcome, presence in the Christian Church. Father Knox has shown that those elements which later became associated with enthusiastic groups were present to some extent in the Church at Corinth to which St. Paul sent two epistles, those elements being antinomianism, sectarianism, perfectionism (or, in Knox's phrase, •"indefectibility of grace"), violent emotional experiences accompanying conversion of individuals formerly living in degradation, trusting in private feelings over the authority of tradition, and greediness over the gifts of the Spirit. At its very beginnings the Church, s t i l l blessed with extraordinary evidences of divine guidance, was nevertheless reflecting its human composition by the weaknesses its leaders were called upon to rectify or reprove. Later, during the middle of the second century, the Church was faced with the challenge of the Montanists. Their leader, Montanus, a convert to Christianity, declared that he was the Paraclete, and that he was initiating a new era. He is reported as having seizures, during which he would fall in a trance and then start raving in his speech, would speak in strange tongues at some times and at other times prophesy, though not in the traditional manner of the prophets. Associated with 2 R . A. Knox, Enthusiasm (Oxford, 1950), pp. 9-24. 36 Montanus were two of his female converts, Priscil la and Maximil la , who seemed to have shared his prophetic abilities; in addition, Maximilla said that she was "the word, and the spirit, and the power." Like Joachim of Fiore later, they taught that there were three separate dispensations, corresponding with the persons of the Trinity. The Montanists called for a very strict way of l i fe, a life demanding much more moral rigour than was found in the Church of their day. As Knox put it: The history of Montanism is not to be read as that of a great spiritual revival, maligned by its enemies. It is that of a naked fanaticism, which tried to stampede the Church into greater severity, when she had not forgotten how to be severe. 3 Lee believed, however, that the Montanists were reacting to spiritual laxity in the Church, protesting its growing organization, and its spirit of accommodation towards pagan practices. 4 The Montanists eventually became a schismatical group, having Tertullian as their greatest and most influential apologist.^ Following the eruption of Montanism, several other enthusiastical groups appeared in the Church right down to the seventeenth century. 3 Knox, pp. 30, 49. For a more comprehensive account of the Montanists, see Knox, chapter III, and Umphrey Lee, The Historical  Backgrounds of Early Methodist Enthusiasm (New York, 1931). 4 Lee, Backgrounds, p. 23. ^ Believing that Tertullian became a Montanist because he thought Montanus genuinely endowed with the Holy Spirit, Casaubon said, "Tertullian had never been a Heretick, had he been a better Naturalist." Treatise, p. 13. Casaubon believed that the case of the Montanists was one involving what he called "natural" enthusiasm. The Donatists of the fourth century were moral rigorists reacting to what they termed laxity among ordinary Catholics and to the Catholics' loss of zeal for martyrdom. The Donatists, like the Montanists, became schis-matic, and so were the Albigensians, Waldensians, and the Cathari, en-thusiasts of the Middle Ages who advocated a return to the simplicity and purity of the Apostolic Church. Rigorous in their moral standards, they were anti-sacerdotal and charismatic in outlook. Joachimism, an enthusi-astic movement started by Abbot Joachim of Fiore (d. 1 2 0 1 ) , taught that there were three dispensations, corresponding to the three persons of the Trinity. Another enthusiast, Wilhelmina of Bohemia (d. 1 2 8 2 ) , claimed to be the Holy Spirit incarnated to inaugurate a new era in which a new gospel would be preached, with women being in positions of leadership. The fourteenth century contributed the Lollards and Hussites, the Jansen-ists and the Quietists. In the sixteenth century with the coming of the Protestant Reformation, thanks to the printing press and the translators of the Bible, individuals claimed their liberty to study and interpret the Scriptures for themselves. A new day had dawned for the Christian Church; and to the dismay and chagrin of its spiritual and temporal leaders, the Church in England, busy with purifying itself into the Church of England, was to be dismembered by the zeal of those clamouring for yet greater simplicity and purity of discipline, ceremony, and government than the On the Donatists and the others following, see Knox, pp. 5 0 - 7 0 , and on '"Religious Enthusiasm, " see New Catholic Encyclopedia, 19 6 7 . 38 sovereigns and bishops allowed. The main developments of enthusiasm in England can be divided into three periods: the years of Puritan ascendancy in government (1641-1660), the early years of the eighteenth century which saw the activities of the French prophets in London, and the period of the Methodist revival (from 1738 and on to the end of the century). But the elements which led to the fury of the Puritan revolution were long present in the English Church. If the Puritans of the C i v i l War period and the Commonwealth must be re-membered as enthusiasts, as many of the clergy of the Restoration period declared they were, the Puritans of the preceding three quarters of the century should also be classified as enthusiasts, because what Puritans of the Elizabethan years demanded was precisely what those of the Stuart period were asking for. They were a l l acting by the same principles. The hallmark of the enthusiasm of the Puritans of the Commonwealth, in the eyes of the Restoration Anglican clergy, was their studied attempt, under the guise of extraordinary zeal and spiritual insight, to stay in the Church and reform it out of existence by destroying its episcopal system of govern-ment, or to separate from the Church, setting up rival meetinghouses of their own, and by their defections and constant extemporary prayers and sermons cause many to be disaffected, thus weakening and eventually destroying the Church from without. The very nickname, Puritan, was a derisive reminder of the Puritan's desire to have the Church purified ac-cording to his wishes. Various historians and critics hold that the fragmentation of the English Church began during the reign of Mary Tudor. Frere and Douglas 7 declare that the Puritan faction in the Church began as a result of the Marian persecution of clergy favourable to the reforms initiated during the reign of Edward VI. The persecution, they claim, forced English re-formers into exile in various European ci t ies, to Zurich, Basle, Frankfurt, Geneva, and Strassbourg. There the exiles found other reformers who had broken away completely from the "ancient continuity of church organi-zation" and who were violently opposing a l l externals in church worship. Differences arose among the English churchmen when many of the more conservative found themselves unable to accept the levelling attitudes of the advanced European reformers. When the exiles returned to England at the accession of Eli2abeth, the more extreme party remained in sympathy with the attitude of the foreign reformers, while the others became a part of the main body of English reformers, thus beginning that cleavage which developed into conformist and sectarian Puritanism. Lewis Berens, in more general terms, says that in the reign of Elizabeth the Church of England occupied somewhat of a middle ground between the Roman Catholic, on the one hand, and the Reformed Churches of the Continent, on the other hand. The attempt of the Church and Sovereign to enforce conformity to the religious settlement forced the extremists on both sides to separate, 7 W . H . Frere and C . E. Douglas, ed. Puritan Manifestoes: A  Study of the Origin of the Puritan Revolt (London, 1954), p. x i i ; M . M . Knappen, Tudor Puritanism (Chicago, 1939), sections II-IV. 40 the Roman Catholics a persecuted body on one side, and on the other side the extreme Protestants, who formed various independent and separatist groups, agreeing only in their hatred of outside ecclesiastical control. According to Berens, "Within the Church the Catholic sentiment crystal-lized into the Episcopalian, the Protestant sentiment into the Presbyterian section of the Church of England." 8 In an attempt to differentiate clearly among Puritan, Presbyterian, and Independent, Clark, while agreeing that a l l Nonconformity was Puritan, s t i l l divides Nonconformity within the Church into Presbyterian and Puritan, and a l l Nonconformity, without the Church he calls Independent. Clark shows that Puritans, that i s , one group of Nonconformists within the Church, accepted in its main outlines the reformed settlement of the English Church, granting that the "existing episcopal doctrine and method of Church government with its adjuncts was right and wise and v a l i d , " 3 but desired that certain unreformed elements be removed because they hindered the spiritual ministry of the Church to its members and the spiritual impression the Church made on the world. The Puritan interest in further reform was therefore particularly concerned with the spiritual ministry of the Church. The Presbyterians, on the other hand, did not accept the reformed settlement, holding that it was no refor-mation at a l l ; they clamoured above a l l else for a particular form of Church order. The Presbyterians were so dissatisfied with the condition of the Q Lewis H . Berens, The Digger Movement (London, 1906), p. 14. Henry W . Clark, History of English Nonconformity, I (New York, 1913), 208-212. 41 Church that they wished and worked, in Clark's words, -"with a passion that was fiery and bigoted indeed—to substitute for the national Church as it existed a national Church wherein government by the presbytery should have superseded government by the episcopal bench. " 1 ( ^ The Puritan, for his part, was constantly seeking to attain that ideal state he termed "godliness." Richard Rogers expressed this ideal in his diary: "And this is mine harty desire that I may make godliness . . . to be my delight through my whole life . . . 1 1 , 1 1 And Knappen de-scribed the Puritan character as "an attitude predominately [sic] ethical, involving the individual in a methodical struggle for the Pietistic delight in a correct state of mind resulting in the fulfillment of a l l duties, both contemplative and act ive ." Particularly concerned with the quality of spiritual or religious l i fe , the Puritan sought further reforms in the Angli -can Church which would remove practices having no Scriptural warrant for their existence, that i s , a l l practices originating with the Roman Catholic Church. At first the objections were to ecclesiastical vest-ments: surplices, tippets, copes, and gowns. One may question the relationship between spiritual ideals and the wearing of certain ecc les i -astical vestments, but Laurence Humphrey and Thomas Sampson (both Elizabethan clergymen) felt that the vestments were a real danger to 1 0 Clark, I, 210. 1 1 Two Elizabethan Puritan Diaries , ed. M . M . Knappen (London, 1933), p. 65. 1 o -Knappen, Diaries, p. 16 true piety. The robes were too closely connected with the religion of Rome to be completely innocuous if adopted by the Church of England. As Clark. put i t , the vestments had "become the settled symbols of a settled system, and could not be separated from the thing they had symbolised for so long; and the fear was lest the mass of the people . . . should fail to realise that although the garments of Rome were retained, the doctrines of Rome 13 were banned." These Puritan leaders also complained that the ministers and priests who were appointed were so "dumb" that they could do no more than read out of a printed book to their congregations. Sampson declared that the Church needed pastors who could feed the people "with knowledge and understanding. " Such were the teachers that St. Paul and the Apostles sent out (note the appeal to the primitive Church), men who were able to teach, "rightly dividing the word of truth. Besides showing concern for the quality of the clergy, the Puritan leaders desired a stronger spirit-ual tone among the parishioners. They accordingly asked for reforms by which the ministers would be expected to ensure that prior to the Com-munion Service, members wishing to communicate were spiritually fit; and members who absented themselves from the Service were to give good reasons for their neglect. The Puritans also wanted special services for the exposition of the Scriptures and more opportunities than they formerly had had for preaching. They therefore began holding weekly or fortnightly 1 3 C l a r k , I, 222. 1 4 C l a r k , I, 222. 43 "prophesyings, " as these special services were cal led. Though some-times used for disputes on matters of church discipline and government, these "prophesyings" were primarily religious rather than polemical, for the benefit of both clergy and laity. ^ Though it is clear that on occasions there was a community of interests and ideals among Puritans and Presbyterians within the Church, especially before 1571 (the date of the final Church settlement), after that date Presbyterians and Puritans tended to part, each developing along sepa-rate l ines. 16 The "Admonition to Parliament" (1572), whether the work of Puritan or Presbyterian, shows what reforms men in the Church desired even after the Elizabethan Church settlement had been complete, at least, according to the wishes of the sovereign. The "Admonition" constantly contrasted current practice in the Church of England with the practice of what the writers, John Field and Thomas Wilcox , called "the olde church," obviously the early Christian Church. The "Admonition" was a clear ap-peal to take the Anglican Church back to the practice of the biblical Church and away from Romish practices which had no scriptural basis . The writers divided their work into three sections dealing with reforms needed in the 1 5 Clark, I, 228 . 1 6 Clark views the "Northern Model" (1571) and the "Admonition . to Parliament" (1572) as documents showing the true goals of Puritans and Presbyterians, respectively. See Clark, History of English Non-conformity, I, 216-234. 44 ministry, in the ministration of the sacraments, and in ecclesiastical discipline. ^ 7 Concerning the ministry of the word, the writers said that the substance of the doctrine of the Church of England was good, but the ministers were not elected, called, or ordained, nor their work observed as closely as the Scriptures outlined they should be. Ministers should be elected by the common consent of the whole Church and should not be placed in any congregation without the cal l and consent of that congre-gation; ministers should be admitted to the ministry only after they proved their ability to function effectively and received the laying on of hands from the elders only; they were to be preachers, not merely readers: "Then ministers were not tyed to any forme of prayers invented by man, but as the spirit moved them, so they powred forth hartie supplications to the Lorde. Now they are bound of necessitie to a prescript order of service, and booke of common prayer in which a great number of things contrary to Gods word are contained . . . patched . . . out of the Popes Portuis" (pp. 9-12). To reform the situation, among other things implied in what is given above, the leaders requested that authorities appoint a learned and diligent preacher to every congregation and see that godly ministers preach the word continually, not merely quarterly or monthly. 17 The enumeration of some of the contents of the "Admonition1' which follows is from Puritan Manifestoes, ed. W. H . Frere and C . E. Douglas (London, 1954); a l l page numbers given within the text w i l l be to this work, unless otherwise indicated. 45 In the matter of the ministration of the sacraments, the complaints were largely against what the writers called Popish practices. Among other demands, they called for Communion of both kinds, for the use of common bread at the Communion table, for a sitting, not a kneeling, posture when receiving the Communion. Kneeling has somewhat of a superstition in it and the outward show of ev i l , they said; sitting "according to the example of Chryst . . . signifye rest, that is a full finishing thorow Chryst of a l l the ceremonial law, and perfect worke of redemption wroght that geveth rest for ever" (p. 24). The reformers wanted nothing to be done at the sacraments of the Lord's Supper and Baptism for which the Scriptures did not give "expresse warrant. " To restore the Church to its ancient practice in ecclesiastical discipline, a l l ministers must be made equal, having no Lord Bishop or Archbishop, and instead of Chancellors, Archdeacons, Summoners, Church-wardens, and such, each congregation should have a "lawful and godly seignorie. " Deacons and ministers should not usurp each other's offices, nor should there be any more officers of the Church than the Ministers, Deacons, and Seniors. The reformers also insisted that the discipline of excommunication should not be exercised for trifles but for "notorious crimes, " as it was in the early Church; and this final punishment of the offender should be by the consent of the congregation and in the hands of many, not of one man. As if intimating that what was already done in the Church as a settlement was no reformation, the writers appealed: You may not do as heretofore you have done patch and peece, nay rather goe backeward, and never labour or contend to perfection. But altogether remove whole Antichrist, both head body and branch, and perfectly plant that puritie of the word, that simplicitie of the sacraments, and severitie of discipline, which Christ hath com-manded, and commended to his church, (p. 19) Such in bare outline were the contents of the "Admonition, " a docu-ment "singularly free, " say the editors, "from the distortion and reckless-1R ness which has often characterized puritan polemic. " The reforms in the system of worship demanded in the document were to be standard for many years to come. In the words of Douglas and Frere, "The whole of the en-suing century of liturgical controversy added little or nothing of importance to this enumeration. " I s Hence, if Puritans under Charles I were enthusi-asts, so had been Puritans under the later Tudors, especially Elizabeth. It was only that the later Puritans were more powerful, being more numer-ous and in positions of greater influence than were Tudor Puritans; yet both groups were schismatical. Schism has ever been the nightmare of church leaders. The leaders of the Anglican Church from Elizabeth to the Georges saw a l l sectaries as potential revolutionaries, opposers of both Church and State. Any attempt to set up a separate communion from that of the established Church was, from the point of view of authorities in Church and State, an attempt to 2 n destroy the Government. Such a conclusion was easily deducible from 1 8 Frere and Douglas, Puritan Manifestoes, p. xxv. l y Frere and Douglas, p. x x v i . 2 0 See M . M . Knappen, Tudor Puritanism (Chicago, 1939), p. 310. the position held by a Sovereign who ruled as head of both Church and State. To rebel against religious laws enacted by a ruler who combined supreme authority in the political and religious realms is indeed to rebel against that ruler in his capacity as temporal head, and thus to subvert the entire system, political and religious. The sectaries, however, steadfastly expressed their loyalty to the Crown, and just as firmly indi -cated repeatedly that they wanted no separation of Church and State; they recognized the right of the magistrate to enforce obedience to the laws, but in recognizing this right they also enunciated their right to disobey the magistrate and suffer the consequences when his demands were contrary to the Word of God. 2 1 In the interest of fidelity to Scripture, as they saw it , many Puri-tans chose to separate from the established Church and set up congre-gations of their own where they could worship according to their wishes. In the view of the orthodox, it is in this willingness of the sectaries to separate for worship according to their understanding of the Bible that their enthusiasm resides. Those sectaries were at once declaring that they had a right as individuals to read and interpret the Scriptures and to disagree with their rulers in this interpretation; such a view, of course, 2 1 See William P. Holden, Anti-Puritan Satire, JL572-1642 (New Haven, 1954), p. 34: "A Clergyman's refusal to follow instructions on vestments or the manner of administering Communion began in qualms of conscience; a persistent refusal to obey instructions from his superiors simply applied the pre-Calvinist principle that the Crown, when it per-sisted in violating God's instructions, ought to be defied." 48 implied that the sectaries had greater light and more accurate spiritual guidance than their rulers, a claim that would appear preposterous, con-sidering that many of the separatists were often allegedly uneducated. A l l sectaries did not contemplate making a complete and perpetual sepa-ration from the Church. For some, separation was an act of faith repre-senting their belief that one day those of the established Church would see the light and join them, thus once more making one great reformed body. As Knappen puts it , "Though an occasional congregation is equipped with a fully developed constitution, on the whole the movement was merely a fleeting release for reforming zeal , designed, if there was any plan at a l l , to give way to the thoroughly purged state church when the long-awaited O 9 day of victory should come. " The separatist movement began somewhat in earnest during the reigns of Edward VI and Mary Tudor. Sectaries were found holding meetings in the home of one Upchard of Booking in Essex and at Faversham in Kent. Some of these people were opposed to the doctrine of predestination and had qualms about communicating with sinners, and some had questions about the proper attitude one should adopt in prayer, about children and original s in , some of them objecting to infant baptism by the Roman Catho-9 o lie clergy. ° According to Clark, most of these sectaries were "unlearned and ignorant men, " cowherds and clothiers; but many of them had no 2 2 Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 305 . 2 3 Ib id . , pp. 149-150. complaints on matters of doctrine, nor did they neglect the regular Church services or ordinances; they simply met for worship on times not legally 9 A appointed. Undoubtedly, separatism during the reign of Mary was for the most part a reaction to the re-establishment of Roman Catholicism as the state religion after the important reforms initiated under Edward. Certainly the great incidence of separatism under Elizabeth was in reaction to that monarch's insistence on uniformity of practice and worship in the Church, but especially because that uniformity was to be based on models which reformers claimed were unscriptural and Romish in many respects. Knappen indicates that the rebirth of independency under Elizabeth was a by-product of the vestiarian controversy. 2^ It was an extreme measure made necessary when petitioning and tract-writing were proving unfruitful in wringing either reform or compromise from the authorities. In June of 1567 most of the one hundred people who met for worship in a conventicle at Plumber's Hall were arrested. 2^ These sectaries indicated in their testimony that they wanted a simple ad-ministration of the Sacraments, free preaching, and firm discipline for 2 4 Clark, English Nonconformity, I, 141. 2 5 Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 211. 2 6 See William Pierce, An Historical Introduction to the Marprelate  Tracts (New York, 1908), p. 23; Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 212; Clark, I, 174-175. 50 those deserving i t . It was the contention of many Puritans that d i s c i -pline in the Church was lax, unfair, or unbiblical. A letter of Archbishop Grindal's indicated the existence of another group of separatists: Some London citizens of the lowest order, together with four or five ministers, remarkable neither for their judgment nor learning, have openly separated from us; and sometimes in private, some-times in the fields, and occasionally even in ships, they have held their meetings and administered the Sacraments. Besides this, they have ordained ministers, elders, and deacons after their own way, and have even excommunicated some who had seceded from their church. 2 ^ Almost a thousand people were involved in this movement of independency. The practice of referring to enthusiasts as "of the lowest order" and lacking in learning and proper judgment was a favourite design of anti-enthusiasts used to discredit their opponents. The man who is usually credited with being the father of Congre-gationalism or independency, Robert Browne (1550 7-1633), was no un-educated man of the rabble. Browne, a relative of Lord Burghley, received z / The writers of the "Admonition" described prevailing d i s c i -plinary practices in the Elizabethan Church and compared them with those of the early Church as follows: "In the primitive church it [excommuni-cation] was in many mennes handes: now one alone excommunicateth. In those days it was the last censure of the church, and never went forth but for notorious crimes; Now it is pronounced for every light trifle. . . . Then for great sinnes, severe punishment, and for smal offences, little censures: Now great sinnes either not at a l l punished, as blasphemy, usury, etc. or else sleightly passed over with pricking in a blanket, or pinning in a sheet, as adulterie, whoredome, drunkennes, etc. Againe, such as are no sinnes . . . are grevously punished, not only by excom-munication, suspention, deprivation and other . . . spiritual coertion, but also by banishying, imprisonyng, revyling, taunting, and what not?" Frere and Douglas, p. 17. Quoted in Clark, I, 176. 51 29 his B. A . from Cambridge in 1572. After losing his job as a school-master because of the extreme Puritan ideas which he held, Browne re-turned to Cambridge to study divinity. There he came under the influence of Richard Greenham, a very earnest Puritan clergyman of conspicuous abi l i ty . Browne began preaching without a license from the bishops be-cause he thought it hateful to be licensed, authorized, or ordained by any-human being. In fact he believed that ordination, whether Episcopalian or Presbyterian, was an abomination; that the whole system of ecc les i -astical government was in need of radical reform; and that the whole parochial structure of the Church was so bad as to be harmful to religion, and was a form of bondage from which one needed to be freed. "The Kingdom of God," he said, "was not to be begun by whole parishes, but rather by the worthiest, were they ever so few, " and the Church should be, not a comprehensive body to which a l l may belong, but a society for 30 the privileged and miraculously gifted few. When Browne's brother got him a license for preaching, Browne threw the document into the fire. Prohibited to preach by the Council, he nevertheless linked up with Robert Harrison (d. 1594) and began preaching at Norwich, where they organized a separatist church, whose members were called Brownists. Browne had such a large following that Edmund Freake, Bishop of Norwich, charged him before Lord Burghley with teaching 2 9 See DNB, "Robert Browne." 3 n Ibid. See also Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, pp. 303-310; Clark, I, 177-181. corrupt doctrine and with being contentious, seducing the vulgar sort of people, assembling a hundred at a time in private houses and conventicles. Browne's zeal made him the object of great harrassment; he was imprisoned several times and even emigrated to Middleburg. Though he eventually con-formed, the principles he enunciated in his published works lived on and were taken up by others, some suffering execution for propagating them. The Brownists continued increasing beyond the reign of Elizabeth, and in London other sectarian groups numbering several hundreds grew up. Other important separatist leaders like John Greenwood, Henry Barrow and Francis Johnson (all of Elizabethan times) continued guiding their own little flocks until the authorities silenced them by imprisonment and execution or banish-31 ment. 1 Desiring heartily to be rid of the rash of separatist activity, the Elizabethan government passed the Conventicle Act in 1593, condemning separatists to banishment (and death for those who returned). Sir Walter Raleigh, speaking in favour of the b i l l , claimed that England had up to twenty thousand Brownists, a figure that historians agree was an exag-geration; but it indicates the flurry of activity involving sectaries at this time. After the passing of the b i l l , many separatists emigrated, but enough remained in England to be the nucleus of other groups. Though different groups organized separatist movements for differing reasons, 3 1 See Clark, I, 181-200; Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, pp. 309-316. 53 they all expressed the need for further reform towards purity of doctrine or church government. Clark summarized the ideals of the sectaries as follows: . . . i t was not, in fact, on distinctively doctrinal questions that the Independents struck out their own particular l ine. The principal concern with them was the question of the Church, its constitution and order; and on this topic their primary contention was that the appointment of constitution and order by human au-thority, by the State, was an essentially un-religious thing, and a practical denial of the Lordship of Christ. The true order of things was that Christ Himself should, through the individual members of His Church, bring about whatever system was required: every association of Christians was, in immediate contact with Christ, to receive its instruction directly from His l ips . 3 2 The attitude of the sectaries as expressed here by Clark was, of course, entirely characteristic of those who would later be dubbed enthusiasts. One should note, however, that in spite of the extreme Puritans' separation from the established Church, they invariably expressed their loyalty to the Crown and their submission to the magistrates or rulers, be-cause they believed that it was the office of the secular rulers to protect 3 3 the true religion and suppress the false. The fact is that the Puritans hoped that one day they would be strong enough in Parliament to have a decisive voice in the matter of Church reform. Haller notes: J ,The main body of the Puritan preachers, it is important to remember, never sur-rendered the hope of taking over the establishment and running it according 3 2 Clark, I, 196-197. 3 3 See Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 307; A. F. Scott Pearson, Church and State: Political Aspects of Sixteenth-Century Puritanism (Cambridge, 1928), pp. 6-40. 54 to the scheme of the Book of Discipl ine. These men became known in time as the presbyterians and composed the majority of the Westminster Assembly . " 3 4 As an alternative the reformers hoped that a ruler would come who would be favourable to the reformed religion and so lead them to victory against those who were either too conservative or too timid to root out from the Church the remnants of Romish practices and what they saw as the corrupt system of Episcopal government. The hope for a Christian monarch favourable to the wishes of the reformers were dashed, because neither James I, who prided himself in his learning and knew Presbyterianism firsthand, nor Charles I, who favoured Catholics over Puritans and had Laud as his advisor, shewed any sympathy with men whose policies seemed destined to undermine a l l authority. The policies of both monarchs involved a firm suppression of a l l Nonconformity. But far from destroying Nonconformity, those pol i -cies bred dissent and united with the religious dissenters those informed men in the nation and in Parliament who were contending for c iv i l l iberties. Nonconformist Puritan clergymen within the Anglican Church were frequently suspended and deprived, though many of them made their peace with the Church later. But many others refused to come to terms with the Church, seeking refuge, rather, among separatists, as Haller indicates: 3 4 William Haller, The Rise of Puritanism (New York, 1938) p. 16. 3 S Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 328. "Independency and separatism in a l l their organized forms developed only as the authorities at successive stages placed more and more serious im-pediments in the way of the reformers' efforts. " 3 6 Though hounded by the Bishops' "pursuivants, " separatist groups multiplied apace, biding the time when they could operate freely. The reigns of the first two Stuarts saw the formation of distinct separatist bodies like General and Particular Baptists, Anabaptists, and Independents; while Brownists and Barrowists q y were increasing rapidly. In the hope of purifying the Church from within, those reformers who remained as Anglican clergymen silently worked to build up a force of preachers fully committed to a programme of reform. Isabel Calder's Activities of the Puritan Faction of the Church of England, 1625-1633, notes that twelve London Puritans formed themselves into an unincorpo-rated self-supporting group of trustees to raise money "with which to ac-quire ecclesiastical revenue in the hands of laymen to be used for the OO maintenance and relief of a godly, faithful, and painstaking ministry." At their trial these men insisted that they had no plans to change the government of the Church of England, but it is clear that they hoped to 3 6 Haller, p. 53. 3 7 See Champlin Burrage, The Early English Dissenters, 1550-1641 (New York, 1912), I; Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, pp. 317-336; Clark, I, 186-200. 3 ^ Ed., Isabel M . Calder (London, 1957), p. v i i ; see also Samuel R. Gardiner, History of England from the Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the C i v i l War (London, 1884), VII, 258-260. reform it along their lines when they became strong enough. Seeing no hope for a reformation from within the Church, and noting the clear Roman Catholic sympathies of King Charles I (who had a Catholic Queen with her priests at Court) and that conversions to Rome were increasing, many of the Puritan clergy departed during 1629 and 1630 for friendlier shores, joining separatists who had earlier fled to the Continent and North A m e r i c a . 4 0 Laud's religious tyranny from the last years of Archbishop Abbot's rule and during his own period of office drove more of the Puritan clergy to join the emigrants of 1630 or to join the ranks of Independency. What was more, Laud even tried to stop the emigration. 4 ^  Laud's religious policy and the emigration are important factors in the study of the enthusiasts because it was the Archbishop's attempts to carry out in Scotland those policies that he thought were successful in England which led to the political debacle of the 1640's, and the emi-gration of Puritan and Independent clergymen left the increasing numbers 3 9 See Haller, p. 81: J ,If Gouge, Sibbes and their associates had been permitted to continue their work uninterrupted, it is possible, if not highly probable, that the English church, which had so long successfully resisted Puritan reform, would have been reformed by the spiritual brother-hood from within, bishops or no bishops." 4 0 Clark, I, 256-257. 4 ^ "So strongly did he [Laud] object to emigration, that there were edicts in at least four different years prohibiting it to a l l except soldiers and sailors unless the King's permission or that of six members of the Privy Council had been obtained. The edicts were evaded, nevertheless, and the emigration went on . " Clark, I, 283; see also Gardiner, History of England, VII, 317-318. of Puritans and sectarians in the country without learned and effective 42 pastoral control. Lacking adequate pastoral care, many of the more ar-ticulate lay Puritans were forced to become preachers and teachers, natu-rally appealing-to the doctrine of the sufficiency of the Spirit's teaching as warrant for their practices. Of course, it was from their ministers that the lay Puritans first heard that the Spirit could "lead them into a l l truth" and J'teach them a l l things. " The humble preachers simply carried the AO teaching to its logical extreme. The titles of their tracts and pamphlets te l l the story clearly: Samuel How published The Sufficiencie of the  Spirits Teaching Without Human Learning: or, a_ treatise tending to prove  humane learning to be_ no help to the spirituall understanding of the Word of God (1639); and John Spencer, A Short Treatise Concerning the l a w f u l -ness of every mans exercising his gift as God shall ca l l him thereunto (1641). In these works and in the lack of clergy to serve the people one finds in part the cause for the proliferation of sects during the period of Puritan ascendancy. 4 2 See Gardiner, History of England, VIII, 304-391, DC. 4 3 • ° See Haller, pp. 262, 267. "The older and more respectable preachers, many of them silenced or banished after 1632, had repeatedly assured the people that common folk possessed a l l the wit and knowledge necessary to understand and believe the gospel. They had insisted that academic learning, though indispensable for the preacher, should never be obtruded in sermons. . . . If the spirit could directly teach the soul of a child [like the child Jesus in the temple] or of any simple man, and if that teaching were a l l that was needed for the soul's good, what need any other, what need the teaching of schools?" (p. 267) 58 Other causes for the increase of sectarian activity included the temporary removal of restraints from the press during the early 1640's and the relative freedom to express religious opinions that prevailed during most of the period 1641-1659. Charles I and Laud had followed a policy, at times impartial, of repressing the publication or expression from the pulpit of ideas on controversial religious and political topics, but at the meeting of the Long Parliament and the lessening of the influ-ence of both Charles I and Laud, those restraints were removed, and a flood of literature poured from the p r e s s . 4 4 Freer speech and a less bridled press helped men to get a truer picture of the state of religious and political thinking in England. It was not the Commonwealth regime that created these dissident voices. They already existed, nurtured by the repressive policies in Church and State; the arrest of the strong hand of repression allowed the floodgates to be removed, and the flood poured over the l and . 4 ^ The titles of the pamphlets of the times indicate con-ditions existing in the religious underworld of the Laudian period: A  Discoverie of Six women preachers, in Middlesex, Kent, Cambridgeshire, and Salisbury; A Nest of Serpents Discovered or, a_ Knot of old Heretigues  revived, Called the Adamites; Religions Enemies, With a brief and i n -genious Relation, as by Anabaptists, Brownists, Papists, Familists, 4 4 See Gardiner, History of England, VII, 130-134. 4 ^ For Laud's attempts to enforce uniformity in England, see Gardiner, History of England, VIII, 106-130, 224-268. 59 Atheists, and Foolists, sawcily presuming to tosse Religion up in a Blanquet; and from the pen of John Taylor the water-poet, A Swarme  of Sectaries, and Schismatiques: Wherein is discovered the strange  preaching (or prating) of such as are by their trades Coblers, Tinkers, Pedlers, Weavers, Sow-gelders, and Chymney-Sweepers . 4 6 A l l these pamphlets were from opponents of the sectaries, supporters of the ortho-dox establishment. The fact that tradesmen and women are included among the preachers is significant because it indicates the widespread acceptance of the belief that with the Spirit's assistance the unlearned may qualify as teachers and preachers of the Scriptures. As already noted, this unusual claim of guidance and control by the Holy Spirit was what was looked upon by the orthodox as the badge of the enthusiast. Given the uncertain state of affairs in religion and politics ex-isting in England during the decade following the meeting of the Long Parliament, and given a mass of humble people, Bible in hand, believing that they are possessed of the Holy Spirit, add to these a lack of clergy-men to temper and control the enthusiasm of these new and zealous students of Daniel and the Apocalypse, one can conceive of a flurry of apocalyptic prophecies hitherto unknown in England. Referring to the years of Puritan ascendancy, Lee says that during the periods when there was a temporary lack of restraint and when the country was in turmoil, 4 6 See Haller, pp. 262-264. 60 4 7 many claimed prophetic powers and the ability to work miracles. And Williamson claims, furthermore, that •"the religious effort to attain sta-bi l i ty , to reach a truth outside of man, arrived at an unprecedented chaos during the Commonwealth, when men found themselves more than 48 ever tumbled up and down in their own speculations and conceits. " Theophilus Evans, the anti-enthusiast, declared that the entire period of the Interregnum (1649-1660) seemed "to be one continued Scene of Enthusiasm, of pretended Sanctity and open Wickedness. " 4 9 In the eyes of the Restoration clergy of the Anglican Church one of the strongest arguments that the enemies of the Church were enthusi-asts was the repression and near destruction of the Church of England during the period from 1644-1659. They believed, as King Charles I is reported to have said, that the Anglican Church was the best of the re-formed Churches; therefore those who deliberately set about to alter any-thing in it must certainly be in league with ev i l , or must be enthusiasts. Of course, whatever befell the Anglican Church was predictable, conside ing the political and religious alignments during the C i v i l War and the programme of reform frequently sought by Puritan and Presbyterian 4 7 Umphrey Lee, Backgrounds of Methodist Enthusiasm, p. 46. 4 8 George Williamson, "The Restoration Revolt Against Enthusi-asm," in Seventeenth-Century Contexts, Rev. ed. (Chicago, 1969), p. 234. 4 9 Theophilus Evans, The History of Modern Enthusiasm . . . from the Reformation to the Present Times, 2nd ed. (London, 1757), p. 64 61 reformers from the days of Elizabeth. Presbyterians desired the removal of Episcopacy and the substitution of a new system resembling that de-veloped and maintained successfully in Geneva by Calvin; Puritans within the Church and Independents without desired further revisions in the Prayer Book and changes in vestments and ceremonies to remove a l l re-semblance in practice and usage between the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. The question of political loyalties complicated matters further, a l l conspiring against the peace of the Anglican Church. Simply put, the Anglican clergy, understandably, supported the King's cause against Parliament's (grounds enough for Parliament's suspicion and retaliation), while the sectaries, Presbyterians, and Puritans largely supported Parliament against the King. This pattern of loyalties and de-sires largely dictated the fate of the Anglican Church during the period of Puritan control. Al l clergymen supporting the King's cause within areas controlled by Parliament were ejected systematically, and those who failed to con-form to ordinances passed by Parliament had their properties sequestrated. According to Hardacre, about thirty per-cent of the ministers were ejected, a l l told, the remainder conforming or finding some way to avoid seques-trat ion.^ 0 The dignitaries of the Anglican Church suffered more than the 5° Critics differ on the number actually ejected. Paul Hardacre, The Royalists During the Puritan Revolution (The Hague, 195 6), p. 40 says between 3,000 and 3,600; Clark says under 2,000, in vo l . I,, 389; and Robert Whittaker, editor of John Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, says up to 7,000, in Sufferings, pp. ccx iv -ccxxv i . 62 ordinary clergymen; nearly a l l were reduced to poverty. Al l the titles and offices of the Anglican Church (Archbishop, Bishop, Dean, Chapter, etc.) were abolished and their properties sequestrated. ^ * The Book of Common  Prayer was banned and the Directory for Public Worship, prescribed by Parliament, was ordered to be used in a l l churches. In practice, how-ever, many of the conforming clergy continued to use the Prayer Book undisturbed, though it was known that they were breaking the law; and many of those who were ejected later regained their churches. Many of the bishops lived quietly in the country, some of them ordaining new clergymen and conducting private services .^ 4 Thus although it was true that the policy of religious toleration adopted by the Commonwealth did not extend to Roman Catholics and Anglicans, in practice the Anglicans enjoyed toleration so long as they did not engage in Royalist activities .55 5 1 See Hardacre, pp. 40, 44; Clark, I, 321, 340, 355. 5 2 Hardacre, p. 43; Clark, I, 338. 5 3 See Hardacre, p. 48; Geoffrey F. Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in-Puritan Faith and Experience (Oxford, 1946), pp. 128, 130; Clark, I, 383. 54 "Even in the heart of reformed Oxford John Owen, the v ice -chancellor, permitted three hundred Episcopalians to meet every Sunday and follow Anglican rituals: and although he was often urged, he never disturbed them." Hardacre, p. 89. 55 "in response to popular demand . . . Anglican ministers, conformist and ejected al ike, continued to be active under Cromwell's rule. . . . Anglican tradition was strong in the nation at large, and Cromwell himself favoured liberty of worship for a l l peaceable persons." Hardacre, p. 116. See also Nuttall, p. 128, and Ir^ne Simon, Three  Restoration Divines, I (Paris, 1967), 13. These matters concerning the fate of the Anglican Church and its clergy during the revolutionary period are important in this study of enthusiasm because they largely account for the bitterness of Anglicans towards those they dubbed enthusiasts and for the Anglican policy of repression of a l l sectarian activity after the Restoration. To take the place of Episcopacy, the Presbyterians, then in the ascendant, secured agreement that a Presbyterian form of Church govern-ment should prevail. But the Independent idea of separate, autonomous congregations prevailed in areas where Independency was strongest. The policy of religious freedom for most religionists followed by authorities during the revolutionary period caused a rash of religious sects to come to the surface and caused others already strong to multiply profusely. Independency, represented by Baptists and Congregationalists, strongest in the New Model Army, had large congregations in Yarmouth, Norwich, Worcester, Bishopsgate Street, and Fleet Street, to mention only a few concentrations. But the sectaries were legion. John Bastwick reported that John Lilburne, on returning to London from the wars of the Rebellion, "met forty new Sects, and many of them dangerous ones; and some so pernicious, that howsoever, as he said, he was in his judgment for 56 Clark, I, 340; the system never got fully organized throughout England, though London and Lancashire, Presbyterian strongholds, were divided into Presbyteries. See Clark, I, 346. S 7 For further indications of the growth of religious groups, see Clark, I, 329, 344-346, 384-387. 64 toleration of a l l Religions; yet he profest, he could scarce keep his hands off them, and had no patience to hear them; so blasphemous they were in their opinions. " 5 8 One Thomas Edwards (1599-1647),. a Presbyterian controversialist, claimed that there were 176 sects in England during the 1640's. These, he found, could be put into sixteen categories, as follows: 1. Independents. 2. Brownists. 3. Chil iasts , or Millenaries. 4. Antinomians. 5. Anabaptists. 6. Manifestarians or Arminians. 7. Libertines. 8. Familists. 9. Enthusiasts. 10. Seekers and Waiters. 11. Perfectists. 12. Socinians. 13. Arians. 14. Antitrinitarians. 15. Antiscripturists. 16. Sceptics and Questionists, who question everything in matters of Religion; namely a l l the Articles of Faith, and first Principles of Christian Religion, holding nothing positively nor certainly, saving the doctrine of pretended liberty of conscience for a l l , and liberty of Prophesying. ^9 But the groups most active on the political and social scene during the revolutionary period were the Levellers, the Diggers, the Fifth Mon-archists, and the Quakers. Though the Levellers are remembered chiefly as a political party, the basis of the political activities of the party was primarily religious. Speaking of the Leveller party, D. B. Robertson said that it "was not a religious movement, strictly speaking, but the movement got its impetus and much of its sustained strength from the Christian f a i t h . " 6 0 Having no special theology of its own, the Leveller movement, 0 0 Quoted in Umphrey Lee, Backgrounds of Early Methodist Enthusi-asm , p. 44. 59 Quoted in Lee, p. 45. D. B. Robertson, The Religious Foundations of Leveller  Democracy (New York, 1951), p. 122. in so far as it was religious, shared the left-wing beliefs of the extreme Puritan party in respect to the Church and its government, and the im-portance of the Bible and the Holy Spirit in men's l i fe . In his Answer to  Nine Arguments, Lilburne, the chief voice of the Leveller party, declared concerning the form of the Church: The forme of a true Church is for a company of beleevers who are washed in the blood of Christ by a free and voluntary Consent or willingnesse to enter into that heavenly and holy State, City or Kingdome, which is plentiously described, and by the power of Christ to become a constituted or Polytique Body or Corporation, . . . and then by virtue of their combination uniting & joyning themselves together each to other & so unto the Lord . . . ^ This statement enunciates the characteristically charismatic view of the Church usually held by enthusiasts; and the enthusiast's ideal of a Church governed by officers chosen according to the Scriptural pattern was also the goal of the Levellers. They held that the officers of the Church were to be only those sanctioned by the Bible, namely: Pastor, teacher, elder, deacon, and widow; and, of course, the Bible only was the guidebook for Leveller religious life and the basis for their chief political doctrines. It was John Lilburne who enunciated the Leveller political doctrines. As he stood in the stocks before the public gaze, being punished for publishing what the authorities called controversial material, Lilburne felt the Holy Spirit fal l on him, confirming, at least for him, that the gift of the Spirit is J ,not based on merit, learning, or position. " 61 From Answer to Nine Arguments (1645), quoted in Robertson, p. 24. 66 Lilburne was no educated minister or gentleman but a mere apprentice. So he concluded that to get the Spirit a man needed only to desire it truly and fervently: "The Lord hath promised his enlightening Spirit unto a l l his people that are laborious and studious to know him aright. "62 jf t n e Spirit makes no distinction among men, concluded Lilburne, then a l l men are of equal importance, levelled. Lilburne carried over this idea of equality into poli t ics, consistently demanding government with the con-sent of the people. Devoted to the establishment of constitutional de-mocracy in England, Lilburne and the Levellers constantly opposed tyranny whenever and wherever it appeared from the later years of Charles I to the end of the Interregnum. They opposed the bishops of the Church, the King, Parliament, a l l undemocratic institutions, and leaders who forgot that absolute sovereignty resided in God only. Speaking for a l l Levellers, Lilburne declared his reason for opposing those in authority: Not because they were Powers, but because they left and forsooke that declared and knowne Rule, by which they themselves were to bee ruled and guided, in the exercise of that power, for . . . I say no Power on earth is absolute but God alone, and a l l other Powers are dependents upon him, and those Principles of Reason and Righteousnesse that hee hath endowed man with, upon the true Basis of which a l l earthly Majestracy ought to be founded, and when the power or Majestracy degenerates from that Rule, by which it is to be Ruled, and betakes it selfe to its crooked and innovating w i l l ; it is to be no more a Power or Majestracy, but an obnoxious Tyranny to be resisted by a l l those that would not wil l ingly have man to usurp the Soveraigntie of God to Rule by his w i l l and pleasure. 63 62 From A Worke of the Beast (1638), quoted in Robertson, pp. 14, 15. 63 From Strength out of Weaknesse (1649), quoted in Robertson, pp. 10-11. The chief representatives of the level ler party, John Lilburne, Richard Overton, and William Walwyn, worked unrelentingly amidst great obstacles at a time when any suggestion of democratic rule was seen as levelling and an invitation to anarchy and disrespect of private property; yet, preaching their basic belief in the equality of a l l men, they formed a party that in its brief existence (from 1646-1649) was an important influ-ence on English political l i fe . In the words of Robertson, the Levellers "spoke the need and interest of their own social and economic group, and this interest comprehended not only religious freedom . . . but free trade, freedom of the press, freedom from political power exercised contrary to the 'spirit of the law' as well as the letter. And they sought not only 'freedom from' various things, but they sought 'birthrights,' rights which God Himself bestowed upon man.""64 Like the Levellers, the Diggers, another short-lived religio-economic group, based their teaching chiefly on Scripture. Gerard Winstanley, the chief Digger voice, claimed that God gave him a vis ion, filling his heart with beautiful thoughts, and revealing to him things of which he had never before heard or read. Among the revelations he re-ceived was one indicating that the earth should be the "common treasury for a l l men without distinction of person. "65 i n the thinking of most 6 4 Robertson, p. 70. 6 5 From A Watchword to the City of London and the Army (1649), quoted in Henry Holorenshaw, The Levellers and the English Revolution (London, 1939), p. 32. 68 Restoration Anglican divines both Winstanley's claim to visions and the substance of the visions were enough evidence of his enthusiasm, for he was claiming a special relationship with God and at the same time under-mining one of the accepted bases of order in his society: individual owner-ship of private property. Nevertheless, fully believing his visions were va l id , Winstanley and about fifty of his followers began digging and cu l t i -vating the common land on St. George's H i l l . 6 6 The cultivation of the common land was not permitted to continue, but the goals of the Diggers were constantly publicized in numerous pamphlets. Firmly denouncing the idea of private property, Winstanley spoke out against buying and selling and against hiring out oneself. Society's i l l s — poverty, theft, social rank, etc. ,—can a l l be traced back to private ownership or property, he said. To remedy these i l l s , Winstanley declared that the original spirit of un-righteousness, covetousness or Adam, must be subdued, and this is pos-sible only when man allows the King of Righteousness to rule in a l l hearts; when He rules, the earth wi l l be a common treasury for a l l : A man shall have meat and drink and clothes by his labour in freedom, . . . Pride and Envy likewise are killed thereby; for everyone shall look upon each other as equal in the Creation, every man, indeed, being a perfect Creation of himself. And so this second Adam, Christ the Restorer, stops or dams up the running of those stinking waters of self-interest, and causes the waters of life and liberty to run plentifully in and through 6 6 See Gardiner, History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate, newed. (London, 1903), I, 42-44; Holorenshaw, p. 20. the Creation, making the Earth one Store House, and every man and woman to live in the Law of Righteousness and Peace, members of one household. 67 The unusual application of biblical material, characteristic of the economic thought of Winstanley, curiously resembles later Quaker usage of Scripture. And like the Quakers later, Winstanley refused to take his hat off in the presence of dignitaries, and Diggers refused to defend themselves by a resort to arms. Great idealists as they were, they looked forward to the day when there would be a community of mankind and a community of the earth; then men would a l l work voluntarily and wil l ingly and would give up a l l lands, submitting to the community, which would provide a l l with food, 6 8 clothing, and the necessities of l i fe . But Englishmen were not ready to live in the Utopia of the Diggers; the Digger socialistic movement, born hundreds of years before its time, quickly died in the withering blast of popular censure. Of the politico-religious movements to which the Puritan revolution gave birth, the Fifth Monarchists were among the most formidable. This largely militant band of "saints" (as they were derisively termed by their detractors) were mostly members of the Baptist and independent groups, the largest contingent in the Model Army. But Fifth Monarchists never formed a Church of their own, proudly boasting that one did not have to belong to From New Law of Righteousness (1649), quoted in Lewis H . Berens, The Digger Movement (London, 1906), pp. 71-72. 6 8 Holorenshaw, pp. 20, 31. 70 a special church to become a member of their party. ^ From their study of the prophecy of Daniel 2, these men agreed with the traditional inter-pretation that the four kingdoms represented by the various segments of the image were Assyria, Persia, Greece, and Rome; and the fifth kingdom, represented by the stone that was to destroy the kingdoms before it , was a kingdom which God himself was to set up on earth to be ruled by His 70 saints forever. But going boldly beyond traditional interpretation of the fifth kingdom, the Fifth Monarchy men taught that the time had come for the setting up of the fifth monarchy in England. Their refusal to be content with the traditional interpretation of Scripture, their tacit claim to special spiritual insight, and their zeal in a destructive and bloody cause that led to the death of the King and the destruction of the national Church were enough to identify Fifth Monarchists as enthusiasts. These Fifth Monarchy men were most active in the fearful New Model Army. L . F . Brown has shown that many of the leaders of the Parliamentary forces along with the ordinary soldiers in the C i v i l War felt that they were actually fighting the 7 ] wars of Christ in preparation for the setting up of His Kingdom. Henry 69 Louis Fargo Brown, The Political Activities of the Baptists and  Fifth Monarchy Men in England During the Interregnum (London, 1912), pp. 27, 59. 7 0 "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but shall break in pieces and consume a l l these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." Daniel 2.44. 7 1 See Brown, pp. 13-19. 71 7? Archer expectantly looked forward to the conversion of the Jews be-tween 1650 and 1656 and for the coming of Christ in 1700, while John Owen, in his sermon before the.House of Commons in 1649 confidently spoke of the destruction of monarchy as a sign that the Kingdom of Christ was about to be set up. Owen was seconded by Thomas Goodwin; but the most explicit enunciation of the role of Englishmen in this new kingdom came from John Eliot in New England. Eliot saw the wars in England as the blow to the clayey feet and toes of the image in Daniel 2. The next King on the English throne should be Christ, he said: "Christ is the only right Heir of the Crown . . . and he is now come to take possession of his Kingdom, making England first in that blessed work of setting up the 7 3 Kingdom of the Lord Jesus." In preparation for the establishing of this kingdom, Englishmen were admonished to be careful to arrange their government so that its working agreed as closely as possible with the divine original; only righteous men were to be admitted to offices, and existing laws were to be replaced by the law of God; citizens should goad the government into the right path, consistently calling attention to a l l failures to follow the divine order. With the kingdom established, men could expect a time of peace and plenty; oppression, complaint, and taxes would cease, 7 2 Haller says John Archer. See Rise of Puritanism, p. 270. 7 3 From Collections, quoted in Brown, pp. 16-17. and Trade and industry should abound. . . . The poor should have bread, and the Army no more in Arrears. Prison doors should be open and Debtors satisfied without arrests . . . then peace and 74 safety, plenty and prosperity, should overflow the land. 4 1 From their petition to the Council of Officers in 1649 to Venner's second plot in 1660, the Fifth Monarchists, under the leadership of men like Christopher Feake, John Rogers, John Simpson, and Thomas Harrison, were a thorn in the side of those in authority. Though some of their goals were directly contrary to the ideals of the Levellers (the Fifth Monarchists were for government by the saints, while Levellers desired a completely democratic government), both groups at times united in demanding com-plete liberty of worship, the reform of the legal system, and the abro-gation of laws making tithe-paying mandatory on a l l (all being demands which struck at the roots of c i v i l and religious government as established up to that t i m e ) . 7 5 Beginning with their entrance in matters of state in 1652, the Fifth Monarchists constantly agitated for various reforms. Their particular interests were in having godly men at the helm of government. But when they had an opportunity to influence national policy through their band of twenty-eight or thirty men in the Little Parliament (or Barebone's Parlia-ment, after Praise-God Barbone, a notable Baptist member), they destroyed 7 4 From Peter Chamberlen, Legislative Power in Problems, quoted in Brown, p. 25. 7 5 See Brown, pp. 37-38 and Gardiner, Commonwealth, II, 314-315. 73 their usefulness by their obduracy. As Brown put it: "The attempt to rule England by means of a body of men chosen for their godliness was a failure because those men were unwilling to temporize, to accept half measures when the complete attainment of their ideals was plainly im-possible, to agree upon what was expedient instead of insisting upon 7 fi what they believed to be right." Because of their uncompromising tempers in Parliament, the Fifth Monarchy men never again succeeded in being an important positive force in national affairs. Angry at Cromwell for ejecting the "saints" from Parliament and for assuming the title of Pro-7 7 tector, the Monarchy men dubbed him the Little Horn of Daniel 7. But Cromwell expressed his view of the politics of the Fifth Monarchy men in his speech to the first Protectorate Parliament. Speaking of the Fifth Monarchists, Cromwell said: But for men to entitle themselves on this principle, that they are the only men to rule kingdoms, govern nations, and give laws to people . . . truly, they had need give clear manifestations of God's presence with them, before wise men w i l l receive or sub-mit to their conclusions . . . when they come to such practices, —as to tel l us, that liberty and property are not the badges of the kingdom of Christ, and tel l us that instead of regulating laws, 7 6 Brown, pp. 42-43. 7 7 "I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. . . . And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High . . . But the judgment shall sit and they shall take away his dominion . . . And the kingdom and dominion . . . shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High . . . " Daniel 7.21-27. laws are to be abrogated, indeed subverted, and perhaps would bring in the Judaical law instead of our known laws settled amongst us,—this is worthy every magistrate's consideration. 7 ^ Trying diligently but failing always to attain their coveted goals, these men of the sword inexorably hastened their own doom and destroyed a l l hopes of the founding of the kingdom of the saints in England by ac-tively taking part in a l l the political wranglings and changes of govern-ment that hastened the return of the Stuart monarchy. "Refusing to barter with e v i l / ' says Brown, "they stood for the ideal of a perfect state, and in the struggle to realize that ideal they succeeded only in contributing to the failure of the compromise represented by the Protectorate, and in aiding 7 9. the re-establishment of the absolutism of the Stuarts. J Venner's abor-tive rising was the death gasp of Fifth Monarchy men's attempts to set up a kingdom to be ruled by the saints, but the passing of the violent Fifth Monarchists left the field clear for the witnessing of the passive yet potent Quakers. Among the enthusiastic sects which mushroomed during the period of political and religious unrest which historians ca l l the Interregnum, the Quakers easily stand out as the most significant because of the singular-ity and longevity of their witness. When other Nonconformists concerned themselves with doctrines and institutions, the Quakers were crusading 78 From Speeches of Cromwell, quoted in Brown, p. 62. 7 9 Brown, p. 205. 75 for a richer spiritual witness to the Light within them; and when others blenched in the face of opposition, the "children of light" meekly endured beatings, raillery, imprisonment, and deportations, defiantly continuing their witness under a l l conditions, even to death. The Quakers stood starkly apart from a l l other religious groups of the time by the radical nature of their witness. In religion their claim to be guided by an indwell-ing inner light, which many interpreted as being the Holy Spirit, left them open to the charge of enthusiasm, because if each Quaker possessed the Spirit dwelling within, technically he could do no s in , and in fact, could be viewed as literally sharing the divine nature. At least, this was how opponents of Quakers interpreted the Quaker claim to the light within. When James Nayler allowed himself to be hailed as the Son of God by women accompanying him through the streets of Bristol , he was taking the claim to possession of the Spirit to a logical extreme, though, as Nayler R D did, one can explain away the action as a sign. One can easily grasp the theological and social significance and the daring of. the Quaker claim to the inner light. Misapprehended or abused by unscrupulous people, it could be made to appear as blasphemy and as leading to moral l icense. Fortunately, the Quakers had strong moral men to guide and anchor the growing movement. On the social level the Quaker testimonies, based on R f) o u At his trial Nayler sa id / in reference to his "triumphal entry" into Bristol: "The Lord hath made me a sign of His coming, and that honour that belongeth to Christ Jesus in whom I am revealed may be given to Him, as when on earth at Jerusalem, according to the measure." W . C . Brath-waite, Beginnings of Quakerism, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1955), p. 253; see also pp. 256, 258 . 76 the revelations or "openings" to George Fox, were just as shattering and apparently fanatical as their religious witness. Men and women posses-sing such unheard-of ideas and reacting to oppression and abuse in such unusual ways had to be classified as enthusiasts by men as firmly com-mitted to custom and traditional forms of religion as were many Puritans and Anglicans. The guiding human instrument behind the Quaker movement was George Fox, a man respected from early youth for his "honesty and i n -nocency." 0 In his wanderings through England in search of spiritual certainty and peace of mind, George Fox, according to his own claim, heard the voice of God speaking to his soul and sending him on a mission to save England and the world: Then, some time after, the Lord commanded me to go abroad into the world, which was like a briery, thorny wilderness . . . Now I was sent to turn people from darkness to the light that they might receive Christ Jesus . . . And I was to direct people to the Spirit that gave forth the Scriptures, by which they might be led into a l l Truth, and so up to Christ and God, as they had been who gave them forth. . . . And I was to bring people off from a l l the world's religions, which are vain, that they might know the pure religion, and might visit the fatherless, the widows, and the strangers, and keep themselves from spots of the world. . . . And I was to bring them off from a l l the world's fellowships, and prayings, and singings, which stood in forms without power, that their fellowships might be in the Holy Ghost, and in the eternal Spirit of God . . . (pp. 33-35) The Journal of George Fox, ed. John L . Nickalls (Cambridge, 1952), p. 2. A l l page references within this section dealing with Fox and the Quakers are to this work unless otherwise indicated. Though Fox received his special ca l l in 1648, he had already been test i -fying and receiving particular directions from God. Many of the charac-teristic Quaker testimonies developed from the revelations delivered to George Fox. Some of those testimonies made Quakers unpopular in the esteem of c i v i l authorities, nominal Christians (professors), and those accustomed to receiving honour from their "social inferiors." Sometime during 1646 on a "First-day morning" Fox received the revelation that "being bred at Oxford or Cambridge was not enough to fit and qualify men to be ministers of Christ" (p. 7). This "opening," which Fox thought quite strange "because it was the common belief of the people, led him to give up church attendance, defending his action by quoting the Scriptures and indicating that "there was an anointing within man to teach him, and that the Lord would teach his people himself" (p. 8). By other revelations concerning "hat-honour," social greetings, and forms of ad-dress, Fox was forbidden to take off his hat to any man and was required to "thee" and "thou" a l l "men and women without any respect to rich or poor, great or small"; he was not to bid anyone "good morrow" or "good evening" or "bow or scrape with my leg to any one" (pp. 3 6-37). These forms of witness brought on Quakers the full ire of society because by flouting those common courtesies, the Quakers were striking at some of the foundations of social order as conceived in that age. On recalling the sufferings of the Friends for their refusal to grant hat-honour, Fox ex-claimed: "Oh, the rage and scorn, the heat and fury that arose! Oh, the 78 blows, punchings, beatings, and imprisonments that we underwent for not putting off our hats to men! " (p. 37) Yet these devout people were not primarily aiming, like the Levellers, at social reform but were test i -fying against pride and hypocrisy, pride on the part of those demanding honour and hypocrisy on the part of those who meant nothing of the sup-posed honour they gave. Speaking of the importance of hat-honour in the seventeenth century, Braithwaite said: "To be uncovered before any one was . . . a distinctive mark of deference, " and to use "thou" to inferiors and "you" to equals was the normal custom. 82 Other early Quaker testimonies included their refusal to take oaths and their very common practice of deliberately interrupting church services when the Spirit impelled them to speak. The Quaker refusal to take oaths and bear arms made them suspect in the eyes of authorities; such refusals were interpreted as indicative of a desire to undermine the basis of trust and defense on which governments rely for their protection; but, of course, Quakers appealed to Scripture as their authority. In the matter of interrup-tions of church services, although it was permissible for one to speak to a church gathering when the minister completed his sermon, the Quakers did not often wait for that opportunity but boldly interrupted services when clergymen said anything contrary to what the Quaker felt was the truth. For example, when a minister told his congregation that the Scriptures 82 Brathwaite, The Beginnings of Quakerism, p. 493; see also Hugh Barbour, The Quakers in Puritan England (New Haven, 1964), p. 165. constituted a touchstone by which a l l opinions, doctrines, and religions were to be tested, George Fox, as he mentioned in his Journal, was im-mediately -"made to cry out" that it was not the Scriptures but the Spirit by which holy men gave forth the Scriptures that should be the test of a l l opinions, doctrines, and religions, for the Spirit "led into a l l Truth, and so gave the knowledge of a l l Truth" (p. 40). The testimony of the Quaker was so direct in language and action that it invariably gave offence. On occasions, for example, they would burst into a congregation and begin shouting at the presiding clergyman, "Come down, thou deceiver, thou hireling , thou dog ! "^3 Like the Levellers and Fifth Monarchists, Baptists and Independ-ents, the Quakers made the task of the Commonwealth leaders difficult by demanding that tithes be abolished. Priests (all professional clergy-men or preachers) who insisted on being paid for their preaching, accord-ing to the Quakers, were preaching for hire although the Scriptures teach that Christ had made an end of tithing (pp. 150, 184). By thus insisting on being paid tithes, priests showed that they were really instruments of oppression, said Fox, serving their own bellies and not Christ, for Christ commanded that the gospel should be given freely (pp. 53, 80). Fox's confrontation with a "great high priest" provides a compelling view of a 83 Gardiner quotes Baxter in Commonwealth, III, 259. The govern-ment forbade such interruptions by law in 1655. See Gardiner, Common-wealth, III, 261 80 Quaker testimony on tithing. The minister was preaching on the text from Isaiah which urges a l l who thirst to "come freely, without money and with-out price, " as Fox put i t . On hearing the text, Fox records in his Journal, "I was moved of the Lord God to say unto him, 'Come down, thou deceiver and hireling, for dost thou bid people come freely and take of the water of life freely, and yet thou takest three hundred pounds off them for preach-ing the Scriptures to them. Mayest thou not blush for shame?'" (p. 76). The Quakers believed that the state should not maintain the ministry, but ministers should be paid without compulsion by those whom they serve: "If any minister of Jesus Christ . . . comes to our houses and minister unto us spiritual things, we w i l l set before him our carnal things: and he that soweth unto us spiritual things, it is the least that we minister unto Q A him of our carnal things . 1 , 0 4 Besides their stand on tithing, the Quaker belief and testimony concerning the place and importance of Christ and the Scriptures in the individual life stirred the anger of Puritan and Anglican churchmen. Charles Leslie (fl. late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries), an inveterate enemy of the Quakers, declared them the inheritors of the "hy-pocrisy as well as Heresy of the Arians and Socinians. " 8 5 Leslie may have been thinking of the claim of some Quakers that "Christ 's soul was CM 0 Brathwaite, Beginnings, p. 13 6. ^5 Charles Lesl ie , Snake in the Grass, in Theological Works (London, 1721), II, 18. 81 not human, and that his human body was not in heaven. " Some Quakers also held that Christ 's earthly nature did not share in the Resurrection. 8 6 Clergymen were not very anxious to come to terms with the simple, un-learned Quaker, who depended fully on his inner light, denying the value of academic learning towards a true appreciation and understanding of Scripture. And though the Quaker could quote text after text to substan-tiate his position, such quotations meant nothing to people who firmly believed that the illiterate Quakers were either needlessly mystifying the Scriptures or taking them too li terally. When the Quaker read that Christ abides within the individual, he took the text li terally and based much of his religion on his interpretation; but the orthodox clergyman saw in the same text only a figurative expression, for anyone who had Christ dwell-ing in him literally and personally must be equal with God--clearly a blasphemous assertion. 8 7 Such a conception of God's relationship with man, critics would say, was the obvious basis for the extravagant behav-iour of James Nayler and the distracted women who accompanied him through the streets of Bristol crying, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord of Sabaoth."^ 8 6 Barbour, p. 146. p 7 One frequently debated text on the subject of the indwelling Christ was the following from Colossians 1.26-27: "Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you the hope of glory . . . " 88 See Brathwaite, Beginnings, pp. 241-278 for further material on Nayler's ministry among the Quakers. 82 And the fact that Quakers were never known to use the doctrine of the inner light to justify any form of evil would account for nothing. Writing of the Quakers' use and test of the doctrine of the inner light, Brathwaite said: They refused to admit that unrighteous or immoral conduct could proceed from the light, and . . . they tested, in doubtful cases, the reality of spiritual guidance by asking whether it pointed to action which crossed the carnal nature. Righteousness and self-sacrifice were their marks of heavenly-mindedness. 8 9 Though the Quakers were ardent and diligent students of the Scrip-tures, their emphasis on the reality of Christ abiding within the individual led them to utter statements which appeared to discredit the Scriptures. Samuel Fisher, a university graduate and a one-time Baptist preacher, ex-pressed the learned Quaker estimate of the Scriptures and the reaction of other divines to the Quaker stand: And because we do not with the misty ministers of the mere letter own the bare external text of scripture entire in every tittle, but say it hath suffered much loss of more than vowels, single letters, and single lines also, yea, even of whole epistles and prophecies of inspired men, the copies of which are not by the clergy canon-ized nor by Bible-sellers bound up, and specially because we own not the said alterable and much altered outward text, but the holy truth and inward light and spirit to be the Word of God, which is living (and) the true touchstone, therefore they cry out against us. 9 u It was not that the Quaker repudiated the Scriptures but that he put the testimony of the Spirit first and the witness of Scriptures after. Barclay Q Q Brathwaite, Beginnings, p. 2 78, 9° p r 0 m Rusticos ad Academicos (1660), quoted in Brathwaite, Beginnings, pp. 289-290. 83 later said that Scriptures are but "a declaration of the fountain, and not the fountain itself"; hence they are not to be considered the groundwork or basis of a l l knowledge and truth nor the "primary rule of faith and manners." Because the Scriptures give a "true and faithful testimony" of the Spirit and God, they may be treated as the "secondary rule, sub-ordinate to the Spirit, from which they have a l l their excellency and cer-tainty. "91 Thus the Quaker bore his testimony to the primacy of the inner light in his experience; but to the so-called "orthodox, " the simple un-learned Quaker was no more than a rank enthusiast who boasted of an intimate relationship with Christ while quaking, disturbing church ser-vices , or even going naked through the streets. From the small beginnings made by Fox in the 1640's, the Quaker ministry spread like wild-fire throughout many parts of England, espe-cia l ly in areas where other forms of Puritanism were weakest; the Quaker movement appealed most to the oppressed and suffering, to farmers and shepherds in the rural areas, and to the working-class groups in towns like London and Bristol. 9 2 gut because the Quakers had a vision of a world kingdom ruled by God, they quite early launched their missionary activities into Ireland, Scotland, and lands beyond the seas. Brathwaite quotes a Quaker document indicating that by 1660 the indefatigable 91 Robert Barclay, An Apology for the True Christian Divinity: Being an Explanation and Vindication of the Principles and Doctrines of  the People called Quakers, 9th ed. (Philadelphia, 1775), p. 67. 9 2 See Barbour, pp. 72-93. 84 witnesses had travelled with their messages to "Germany, America, and many other islands and places, as Florence, Mantua, Palatine, Tuscany, Italy, Rome, Turkey, Jerusalem, France, Geneva, Norway, Barbados, Antigua, Jamaica, Surinam, [and] Newfoundland," defying a l l language barriers.93 Unlike the Fifth Monarchists, the Quakers saw themselves as soldiers fighting the Lamb's War, aggressively but without carnal weapons, for the setting up of the spiritual kingdom of the Lamb in the hearts of men everywhere. And although the diligent efforts of men like Fox, Nayler, Edward Burrough, Francis Howgill , Richard Farnworth, John Gamm, among others, met with inevitable failure, their zeal and courage infected many others, impelling them to continue where the leaders left off. Not even the oppressive measures of the Clarendon Code succeeded in dampening the zeal of the indomitable warriors; it took the passing of the years to soften their prophetic ardour and thus restrain many of their violent attacks on society. In time their attention turned primarily to quiet worship in the Spirit, as Barbour says: As Friends restrained themselves from foolish attacks upon the outside world, most of them turned their attention inward. The discovery of the power of worship was most rich in the gatherings during the persecution years, which were intervals of pure joy to those who had long since passed through their time of inward judgment. The serenity which has ever since been present in the silent meeting, the security and sweetness, as distinct from strug-gle and exaltation, grew up in England mainly in this time of out-ward misfortune. 94 9 3 From Extracts from State Papers, quoted in Brathwaite, Be- ginnings , p. 337. 9 4 Barbour, p. 236. 85 At a time when the disturbing public witness of the Quakers was a mere memory and the erstwhile disturbers of the peace had become calm and mostly respectable and productive members of their communities, an-other group whose behaviour was reminiscent of the tremblings and quakings of the early Friends startled the English public. Members of this new group, the French prophets, were not, like the Quakers, protesting against social inequities, church tithes, or spiritual laxity as such, nor were they par-ticularly attempting to found a new church or religious society more closely modelled after the New Testament ideal; they were merely prophets, mouth-pieces of God, as they claimed, sent to proclaim the beginning of a "new prophetic dispensation" that was to originate in England and spread to a l l 95 the earth within three years. In this claim of being God's mouthpieces lay their enthusiasm, according to the thinking of eighteenth-century men. 9 6 The French prophets, called Camisars or Camisards, were from the militant wing of the Huguenot party in France which had been in con-stant conflict with the Catholic forces in France since the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. According to Knox, these visionaries were the spiritual children of Pierre Jurieu, a Protestant pastor and scholar turned 95 Edmund Calamy, _A Historical Account of My Own Life, ed. John T. Rutt, 2nd ed. (London, 1830), II, 73. 9 6 From the camise or shirt which these people of the Cevennes wore to identify themselves to avoid being mistaken for the soldiers of Louis XIII. See Calamy, Life, II, 72n. 86 prophet after his study of the Apoca lypse . 9 7 Thoroughly dispirited after their repeated defeats on the battlefield, in spite of Jurieu's prophecies to the contrary, the prophets scattered to numerous friendly countries in Europe. One of these prophets, Elias Marion, made his way to England in obedience to a cal l from God, not knowing the reason for his coming, as he claimed; but the other two, John Cavalier and Durand Fage, went to England while attempting to join military forces to fight against the French King's a r m y . 9 8 Theophilus Evans, an unsympathetic critic of the Camisars, said that the three prophets associated with the Huguenot Church at the Savoy, pretending that they were refugees, and on finding themselves we l -comed, they began their prophetic a c t i v i t i e s . 9 9 But the prophets soon aroused enough protest to warrant an investigation. While England was engaged against France in the War of the Spanish Succession, these French citizens were in England branding the "ministers of the Established Church with the most odious names and characters," and uttering "the heaviest judgments against the city of London and the whole British nat ion." ' ' ' 0 0 Genuine refugees in London thought that such activities q 7 3 Knox, Enthusiasm, p. 357. 9 8 [Richard Kingston], Enthusiastick Impostors no Divinely Inspired  Prophets (London, 1707), pp. 5, 9, 13. 9 9 Theophilus Evans, The History of Modern Enthusiasm, 2nd ed. (London, 1757), p. 99. 1°° M . Aikin , "The French Prophets" in Memoirs of Religious Im-postors (London, 1821), p. 2. endangered their stay; accordingly, encouraged by the Bishop of London and by their own concern for safety, the Huguenot Church in London in -vestigated the prophets and extracted a promise from them that they would cease further prophetic activities; but their prophetic performances had attracted so much attention that the prophets found it more profitable to continue their prophesyings with unabated zeal. The investigations by the French Church at the Savoy indicated that the famous agitations of the prophets were "the effects of a voluntary habit, of which they are entirely masters, " and were unworthy of the wisdom of the Holy Spirit; and, said the investigators, the "way in which they make the Spirit speak is s t i l l more unworthy of him, " that i s , by "perpetual hesitations, childish Repe-titions, unintelligible Stuff, gross Contradictions, manifest Lies, Con-jectures turned into Predictions already convicted of Falsehood by the Event. " l u- '- The English courts made their own investigation and sen-tenced Elias Marion for "pretending to be an inspired prophet, and print-ing and uttering many things as immediately dictated and revealed by the 102 Holy Spirit. " John Aude and Nicolas Facio, two scribes of the prophets, were also sentenced for "assisting and publishing" Marion's "blasphe-mies. " 1 0 3 1 0 1 Evans, p. 101. 1 0 2 Calamy, Life, II, 75. 103 They w e r e to pay a fine and stand on a scaffold twice, having a paper stuck to their hats signifying their crimes. See Aikin, "French Prophets," p. 16; Calamy, Life, II, 75. 88 What caused Churchmen and c i v i l authorities greatest alarm was the success of the prophets in winning to their side two very respectable Englishmen, John Lacey, and Sir Richard Bulkeley. Authorities had long claimed that only ignorant and unlearned people succumbed to enthusi-astic impulses and ecstasies; thus the adherence of these two men of learning and property to the cause of the ignorant Frenchmen caused con-sternation. The eminent Dr. Calamy, a dissenting clergyman, was moved to preach several sermons against the prophets, which he later published as A Caveat Against New Prophets (1708); an anonymous writer published in 1707 Fanaticism Revived; or the Enthusiasm of the Camisars; Richard Kingston published anonymously his Enthusiastick Impostors no Divinely  Inspir'd Prophets (1707); and the Earl of Shaftesbury wrote the most note-worthy work against the prophets, his Letter Concerning Enthusiasm (1711). The prophets, for their part, were not silent but marshalled the resources of the press to their a id, publishing numerous volumes of prophecies and warnings, which provoked rejoinders from various Anglican clergymen, among them Hoadley and Spinckes. Kingston's remarks in his dedication to the Bishop of London indicates the seriousness of the defection and i n -fluence of Lacey and Bulkeley: One of the chief Arguments, my Lord, that's constantly staged in favour of these Notorious Impostors, i s , that the two English Gentlemen afore-mention'd, who have some time had the Reputa-tion of Men of Learning and Integrity, and consequently could . not be easily impos'd on, are fallen in with the Camizars, and seem to exceed them also in their pretended Extasies and Inspira-tions , which was no small inducement to employ my Pen against them; that their Characters might not influence unsteady Readers 89 of their Prophetical Warnings; for the Ignorant and Unthinking ought not to be trusted with these two Gentlemens Failings . . . l u 4 In spite of the fulminations of their detractors, the French prophets attracted many followers and continued their daily exhibitions of the spirit that was in them. By the laying on of hands, these prophets bestowed on others the spirit that moved them. One report indicates that many men, women, and even children, joined them, especially from the ranks of Anglicans, Presbyterians, Independents, and B a p t i s t s . S a m u e l Keimer, who had intimate knowledge of happenings among the prophets, having as-sociated with them, but especially because his entire family were proph-ets,-- this Keimer said that when moved by the spirit, the devotee became very violent, having "strange agitations and shaking of the body, loud and terrifying hiccups and throbs, with many odd and very surprising pos-tures. "106 spij-it i n these prophets seemed to have specialized in woes and denunciations and startling prophecies which frequently mis-carried. On one occasion the spirit warned that every family among the prophets should store enough food for six months because in a few days such a sore famine would be in the land that people would drop dead in the streets from hunger. Al l were commanded to go to an old French woman to be marked (she marked them by dipping her hand in water and 1 0 4 Richard Kingston, Dedication in Enthusiastick Impostors. 1 0 5 Aikin, "French Prophets," pp. 18-19. From Keimer's "A Brand Snatched from the Burning, " quoted in Aikin , "French Prophets , " p. 18. 90 making a cross on their foreheads) and to meet by sevens, having seven candles l i t . * 0 7 Apart from the prophecy that London was to be destroyed by fire and one concerning the resurrection of Dr. Ernes, perhaps the boldest prophecy was that by John Potter declaring that Queen Anne would become a prophetess. The whole prophetic business was thoroughly d is -credited when the spirit failed to keep his word in the matter of the resur-rection of Dr. Ernes. By the mouths of John Lacey and John Potter, the spirit had promised to resurrect Dr. Thomas Ernes, a Socinian and a proph-et, who it was claimed, had died of a severe migraine on December 22, 1707. When May 25, 1708, arrived, none of the prophets were among the throngs assembled to witness the raising. The prophets absented them-selves, afraid, they said, that a tumult would be caused. Dr. Emes re-] OR mained in his grave. Jonathan Swift had correctly forecast the fate of the prophetic movement in 1708. Among his predictions for that year, Swift noted: This Month w i l l be distinguished at home, by the utter dispersing of those ridiculous deluded enthusiasts, commonly called the Prophets; occasioned chiefly by seeing the Time come, when many of their Prophecies were to be fulfilled and then finding themselves deceived by contrary Events. 1 0 7 Aikin , "French Prophets," pp. 41-43, 45. 1 0 8 See Knox, p. 370; Aikin , p. 19; Calamy, Life, II, 104-105. 109 Jonathan Swift, Bickerstaff Papers and Pamphlets on the  Church, ed. Herbert Davis (Oxford, 1966), p. 146. 91 The tumult occasioned by the prophecy and expectations of the resurrection of Dr. Ernes roused the English government to action against the prophets, especially against the influential Sir Richard Bulkeley. It was only the timely and sage counsel of Edmund Calamy which averted direct government intervention. Left alone, according to Calamy's advice, the prophets soon ceased to inspire wonder, and "by degrees dwindled away, and came to nothing."^ 1 0 The French prophets had staked their reputation on the fulfillment of their predictions, and time and the event took their t o l l . Queen Anne never became a prophetess; London was not burnt, nor did disastrous famines devastate the city streets, and, thanks to Dr. Calamy, the prophets were not persecuted as witches and con-jurors. One may fervently wish, however, that the following prophecy by Sir Richard Bulkeley had been fulfilled: . . .the whole Creation shalt appear in its primitive Beauty, and Man regain the Perfection of Adam in his immediate Communion with God; and that in this glorious State, the Ministry should cease, for the Lord himself would be the Light thereof, and his Law writ in every Man's Heart, so that he should have no more need to enquire of his Neighbours, but that every man should be Priest unto himself. ^ * * Failing in most things, the prophets succeeded in inflaming the smouldering resentments against the schismatic dissenters from the Church of England. Whereas most English critics saw English enthusiasts as 1 1 0 See Calamy, Life, II, 105-110. 1 1 1 Quoted in Evans, pp. 100-101. disturbers of the public order, sectaries, threats to c i v i l and religious government, the case was generally different in the English cr i t ics ' re-sponse to the French prophets and their followers. English critics i n -veighed against the prophets merely as impostors, mechanical purveyors of the spirit, deceivers who do a disservice to true religion by making it evil-spoken of. Critics took pains to dissect the prophecies of the group to show that they were contradictory, unworthy of the majesty of heaven, unrepresentative of the character of God and the spirit of the gospel, and disorderly, though ostensibly sent from a God of order and good govern-ment. The prophets themselves were represented as evi l men, intent on drawing praise to themselves and making a good living in England at the expense of a credulous and ignorant people. Though many of the critics hoped to expose the supposed imposture of the prophets, some few charged the prophets with being in league with the Jesuits or in the pay of the French King. These last charges were almost stock responses of many Englishmen in the face of a threat from enthusiasts. Critics were far more violent in their response to the Methodist movement than they were to the French prophets. Doubtless, memories of the prophets s t i l l rankled in the minds of many churchmen, and the large following gained by the Methodist preachers roused professional jealousy and certainly raised the spectre of schism and of the excesses H 2 See Calamy, Life, II, 103; An Impartial Account of the  Prophets (London, 1708), p. 9; Aikin , "French Prophets," p. 16; Evans, History of Modern Enthusiasm, p. 101; Kingston, Enthusiastick Im-postors , pp. 12-18. 93 of enthusiasts of the previous century. People who knew of Wesley's connections with the Moravians fully expected repetitions in England of the eccentricities of Count Zinzendorf, the leader of the Moravians; and the fits, swoons, and shoutings in the Methodist meetings must have been irresistible reminders of the early Quaker movement and of the more recent ecstasies of the French prophets, who were s t i l l somewhat active in some parts of England. Far more telling than those reminders of the past, however, were the unorthodox practices of the Methodist leaders, who invaded other clergymen's parishes and preached in the open air or in make-shift shacks. 3 Wesley engaged in his strange crusade because he felt that many in England lacked true religion of the heart, "an inward, vital religion, even 'righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost'" (II, 68). And numerous writers testify to the religious lukewarmness of the age. Lecky characterized the theology of the early eighteenth century as "cold, passionless, and prudential," one which "regarded Christianity as an ad-mirable auxiliary to the police force, and a principle of decorum and of cohesion in society, but which carefully banished from it a l l enthusiasm, veiled or attenuated a l l its mysteries, and virtually reduced it to an See Knox, Enthusiasm, pp. 371, 505; "Observations on the Conduct of the Rev. Whitefield, " The Gentleman's Magazine, 9 (Jan.-June 1739), 240-241; John Wesley, Journal, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, Standard ed. (London, 1910), II, 136. Al l page numbers given within the text from this point are to this edition of the Journal unless otherwise indicated. 94 authoritarian system of moral philosophy. i q During the reign of Queen Anne, says Crofts, Englishmen, "generally speaking, had no real Chr i s -tianity." ' ' ' '^ And Jonathan Swift, avowing that he was writing without exaggeration or satire, said: Hardly One in a Hundred among our People of Quality, or Gentry, appears to act by any Principle of Religion. . . . Nor is the case much better among the vulgar, especially in great Towns; where the Prophaneness and Ignorance of Handicraftsmen, small Traders, Servants, and the Like, are to a Degree very hard to be imagined greater. Then, it is observed abroad, that no Race of Mortals 116 hath so little Sense of Religion as the English Soldiers . . . Even the Dissenters, with few exceptions, shared in the pervading dread of spiritual daring. The security from persecution brought by toleration drew the sting from nonconformity, some Dissenters being almost capable of passing as "half Churchmen," as one critic put i t . The moral de-terioration of the age increased apace in spite of the earnest moral d i s -courses of the divines of the established Church. Men understood that their evi l course of living would inevitably lead to ruin. Their preachers 1 1 4 W . E . H . Lecky, The Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe (New York, 1955), p. 167. 1 1 5 J . E . V . Crofts, "Enthusiasm, " in Eighteenth Century  Literature: An Oxford Miscellany (Oxford, 1909), pp. 129-130. 116 Fairchild said that putting aside Doddridge and Watts and those disciples who were like Watts, Nonconformity was "hardly less smug and sleepy than Anglicanism." Religious Trends in English Poetry, II (New York, 1942), 51. H 7 "Nonconformity had decreased alike in power and in hostility to a quite extraordinary degree. As for Presbyterians, . . . they might almost be considered as half Churchmen." Charles J . Abbey, The English  Church and its Bishops, 1700-1800 (London, 1887), I, 93. told them so. But they found that a change from the old habits required more than understanding, and their religion did not provide them further assistance. With abundant evidence that the traditional methods of the Church failed to move men to an effective change of l i fe-style, Wesley thought it time to try a new method. Though brought up in a very godly clerical family, educated for the clergy, and ordained to minister to the spiritual needs of others, at a crucial moment in .his l i fe, John Wesley found that the emphasis in his spiritual experience was wrongly placed. He had once fully expected to be saved because he did his duty as any Christian should do it; he had expected to be justified because of his rigorist principles in eating, in the use of time, money and material goods, and in his moral inclinations. But his fear of death when caught in an Atlantic storm while on his way to America and the calm assurance of some uneducated Moravians in the same situation awoke him to his need. He needed a personal assurance of salvation by faith alone. Peter Boehler's counsels, Luther's Preface to the Epistle to the Romans, and Wesley's personal perseverance in his search for evidences of assurance and salvation, a l l worked together to bring Wesley the warming of the heart, the calmness, and the joy he felt I I P were unfailing signs of personal salvation. ° This change in his view of the means of obtaining salvation marked the turning point in his entire 1 1 8 See C . E. Vulliamy, John Wesley, 3rd ed. (London, 1954), pp. 66-69, 81-86. 96 ministry, which from this time (173 8) on was beset by a progressive de-terioration of relations between him and the clergy of the established Church. The new emphasis in Wesley's preaching alarmed his friends and fellow clergymen and began that gradual process which led him and his followers to be branded as enthusiasts and schismatics. Following Peter Boehler's advice, John Wesley preached justification by faith and salva-tion by grace alone; he also counselled his auditors to seek assurance of salvation. When, after years of preaching and other forms of clerical activity in England and America, Wesley, in his characteristically forth-right manner, announced to his friends that prior to his Aldersgate ex-perience on May 24, 1738 (the date when he received the assurance of salvation), he was no Christian, they promptly rebuked him and declared such notions to be "madness"; his brother Samuel added: "Falling into enthusiasm, is being lost with a witness. . . . What Jack means by 'not being a Christian t i l l last month' I understand not. . . . I heartily pray  God to stop the progress of this lunacy. " 1 1 9 Wesley's visi t in 1738 to the Moravian centre in Europe worsened his relations with the Anglican clergy, for the Moravians were becoming notorious for their strange prac-tices and notions, and it was from them that Wesley had learnt the doctrine of assurance and justification by faith alone. l 2 u On his return to England 1 1 9 Cited in Vulliamy, Tohn Wesley, pp. 887-88. 120 see Marjorie Bowen, Wrestling Jacob (London, 1937), pp. 210-216; John Wesley, Journal, II, 3-63; W. H . Fitchett, Wesley and His  Century (Toronto, 1908), pp. 152-155. 97 from his visi t with the Moravians, Wesley found, to his keen disappoint-ment that church pulpit after church pulpit was closed to him. Having tasted of a love which he felt was unknown to many in England, and possessed of a message which the regular clergy did not preach, if they knew i t , Wesley yearned to reach as many as possible with the news of salvation by faith alone, with the doctrine of assurance, and of peace and joy and perfection in God. But in the eyes of most of the Anglican clergy these doctrines smacked of enthusiasm. Thomas Green, vicar of Wymeswould, expressing what was almost a consensus among the established clergy, said that "as to that absolute assurance of salvation, which some pretend to, . . . i t seems to be a sufficient motive and encouragement to a holy life . . . But when persons affirm, that they are absolutely sure of their own salvation in particular, and look on others, who fall short of their confidence, as in a dangerous way; --this is a mark of spiritual pride; a persuasion rather proceeding from T O ] the spirit of delusion than the infallible Spirit of God. " Further, Green believed that this matter of absolute assurance was usually as-sociated with other extreme and dangerous views such as "absolute per-fection or living without s in . " People having such notions (like the Quakers) usually refused to fast, pray, or receive the sacraments, de-pending only on the internal grace of the Spirit, neglecting a l l external actions. What was more, Green found that some Methodists threw away I O 1 1 Thomas Green, A Dissertation on Enthusiasm (London, 175 5), pp. 137-138. 98 their Bibles, claiming themselves good enough, and others refused to be • 1 7 7 taught by men further because they had God as their teacher. a a But Wesley was careful to point out to his detractors that he did not preach absolute assurance. He wrote in his Journal: "We speak of an assurance of our present pardon; not . . . of our final perseverance" (II, 82-83). And when he and Charles-met with Dr. Gibson, Bishop of London, and answered the charge that they taught absolute assurance of salvation, the Bishop admonished them: "If by 'assurance1 you mean an inward per-suasion, whereby a man is conscious.in himself, after examining his life by the law of God, and weighing his own sincerity, that he is in a state of salvation, and acceptable to God, I don't see how any good Christian can be without such an assurance." The Wesleys replied that such was their persuasion and teaching (II, 93n). Churchmen were especially afraid of perfectionism and antino-mianism, doctrines they usually associated with enthusiasts. These doctrines, some of the clergy believed, were usually held by those who emphasize justification by faith alone. Accordingly, John Wesley had constantly to clarify his teachings on justification and perfection. In a sermon preached at Oxford in June of 1738, Wesley declared that the "salvation which is through faith" is salvation from sin and from the con-sequences of s in, which, he said, is justification. This justification, Wesley continued, "taken in the largest sense, implies a deliverance 1 2 2 Green, pp. 141-142. 99 from guilt and punishment, by the atonement of Christ actually applied to the soul of the sinner now believing in him, and a deliverance from the " power of sin, through Christ formed in the heart. " And to clarify further that the matter of Christian perfection involves a process of growth, he added that the one who is thus justified "is born again of the Spirit, " feeds on the word of God, and keeps on growing "from faith to faith> from grace to grace, until , at length, he comes unto 'a perfect man . . . ' " Such individuals who have been saved by faith do not "make void the law" but in fact "use a l l the ordinances" which God outlined. They are not antinomians but keepers of the law, he said, though it is not their keeping of the law that saves them: "Neither is salvation of the works we do when T O O we believe: For it is then God that worketh in us. "• L ' : , 0 Wesley admitted that some individuals presume upon this grace of God and become true antinomians; some may even despair of salvation, but their despair should be "of being saved by their own works, their own merits, or righteous-n e s s . " 1 2 4 In spite of Wesley's frequent affirmations to the contrary, many critics charged that he taught antinomianism and perfectionism. Green, for instance, in obvious reference to Wesley and his followers, spoke of "many who seem to have a mind to get to heaven by an easier way than 1 2 3 Sermon I: "Salvation by Fa i th ," Works, V, 11-12, 13. 1 2 4 Works, V, 14; see also "Thoughts on Salvation by Faith" (1779), in Works, XI, 486-489. 100 that of obedience; for which reason they cry up faith, and run down works . . . not considering that obedience is one necessary part of the Christian l ? s faith. "J-^-J Since a l l of the Methodist preachers did not agree on the doc-trine of perfection, Wesley was forced eventually to discuss the subject with his helpers in one of their yearly conferences and to publish a pam-phlet for the benefit of his teachers and the public. In his thirty-page pamphlet he said that Christian perfection is "the loving God with a l l our heart, mind, soul, and strength," which implies that a l l one's "thoughts, words, and actions, are governed by pure love ," but does not exclude the possibility of mistakes of ignorance and of infirmities. Wesley did not sub-scribe to the view that a saved man could never fall from grace into s i n . 6 In substantiation of the charge of enthusiasm brought against Wesley and his work, the emotional manifestations which occurred in many of his meetings were more important than the doctrines Wesley preached. Beginning sometime during 1738, some of the people attending his meetings would suddenly fall as though dead or would scream as if in the throes of death. Day by day Wesley carefully recorded in his Journal the new and fascinating occurrences in his meetings. These swoonings and fits, tremblings, screams and quakings, however, were not peculiar 1 2 5 Green, pp. 149-150. 126 ii^ p i a i n Account of Christian Perfection as believed and taught by the Rev. Mr . John Wesley from the year 1725-1777" in Works, XI, 366-446; this tract was revised and enlarged several times, the final date being appropriately changed with each revision. See also L . Tyer-man, The Life and Times of Wesley (London, 1870-1871), II, 346-347. 101 to the Methodist revival . To some degree they were earlier found among the Quakers and the French prophets, but the circumstances were some-what different. The Quakers tended to see these quakings as clashes be-tween rival spirits striving for the mastery of the individual. Speaking of the Quaker experiences, Barclay said: . . . sometimes the power of God w i l l break forth into a whole meeting, and there wi l l be such an inward travail, while each is seeking to overcome the evil in themselves, that by the strong contrary workings of these opposite powers . . . every individual w i l l be strongly exercised as in a day of battle, and thereby trembling and motion of body w i l l be upon most, if not upon a l l , which as the power of truth prevails, wi l l from pangs and groans end with a sweet sound of thanksgiving and praise. 2 7 The phenomena were absolutely important for the French prophets because such quakings signalled the coming of the power of the spirit on the indi-vidual, indicating the prophet's readiness to deliver his message. Among the Methodists, however, the preachers themselves never seemed to have got the convulsions, and auditors of few of the ministers had the fits. John Wesley's meetings were disturbed much more than Whitefield's, and the scenes occurred in Wesley's meetings for only a comparatively short l o o time in his many years of preaching. ° It appears that on occasions the manifestations began after the preacher gave a cue. But this does not mean that the fits were pre-arranged. John Wesley described the scene in one meeting on Baldwin Street. After preaching from the fourth chapter 1 2 7 Robert Barclay, An Apology for the True Christian Divinity, p. 359. 1 2 8 See John Wesley, Journal, II, 189n. 102 of Acts, Wesley said, "We called on God to confirm His word.-" Immediately one that stood by (to our no small surprise) cried out aloud, with the utmost vehemence, even as in the agonies of death. But we continued in prayer t i l l 'a new song was put in her mouth, a thanksgiving unto our God. ' Soon after, two other per-sons (well known in this place, as labouring to live in a l l good conscience towards a l l men) were seized with strong pain, and constrained to 'roar for the disquietness of their heart.' But it was not long before they likewise burst forth into praise to God their Saviour. The last who called upon God, as out of the belly of hel l , was J(ohn) E(l l is) , a stranger in Bristol. And in a short space he also was overwhelmed with joy and love, knowing that God had healed his backslidings. (II, 180) Not a l l cases of paroxysms involved penitents or individuals favourable to the work of the Methodists. On some occasions it appears that the seizures were a form of judgment against the individual in v indi -cation of the work of the preachers. At least, so they appeared to Wesley, who recorded such cases as evidence of God's judgment on men; such con-clusions, of course, drew cries of "enthusiasm!" from his cr i t ics . The famous case of John Haydon is an outstanding example of what to Wesley was a judgment. Haydon, a weaver, was a zealous Anglican and against a l l Dissenters, according to Wesley's report. Hearing of the "strange fits" at the Methodist meetings, Haydon attended the Baldwin Street meet-ing and then left, going from home to home until one o'clock in the morning attempting to convince his acquaintances that the fits were "a delusion of the d e v i l . " While on his way home, Wesley was told that John Haydon was "raving mad. " The record in Wesley's Journal continues: It seems he had sat down to dinner, but had a mind first to end a sermon he had borrowed on 'Salvation by Faith. ' In reading the last page he changed colour, fell off his chair, and began 103 screaming terribly, and beating himself against the ground. The neighbours were alarmed, and flocked together to the house. Be-tween one and two I came in , and found him on the floor, the room being full of people, whom his wife would have kept without; but he cried aloud, 'No; let them a l l come; let a l l the world see the just judgement of God. ' Two or three men were holding him as well as they could. He immediately fixed his eyes upon me, and, stretching out his hand, cried, 'Aye, this is he who I said was a deceiver of the people; but God has overtaken me. I said it was a l l delusion; but this is no delusion. ' He then roared out, 'O thou devil! thou cursed devil! : yea, thou legion of devils! thou canst not stay. Christ w i l l cast thee out. I know His work is begun. Tear me to pieces, if thou wilt; but thou canst not hurt me.' He then beat himself against the ground again, his breast heaving at the same time, as in the pangs of death, and great drops of sweat trickling down his face. We a l l betook ourselves to prayer. His pangs ceased, and both his body and soul were set at liberty. (II, 189-191) Though never caught up in the emotional manifestations himself, Wesley generally equated their occurrence with success in reaching men's hearts, and he missed them when they did not occur. Knox claims that Wesley never regretted or discouraged the manifestations in his meet-129 ings. A random selection from Wesley's Journal shows his general attitude to the strange occurrences: Bristol 1739-- J ,At Weavers' Hall a young man was suddenly seized with a trembling a l l over . . . but he ceased not calling upon God, t i l l He raised him up full of 'peace and joy in the Holy Ghost'" (II, 181-182). "In the evening, at Baldwin Street, a young man, after a sharp (though short) agony, both of body and mind, found his soul filled with peace, knowing in whom he had believed" (II, 183). 1740—While Wesley was preaching on Acts 11 in the Foundery, a 1 2 9 Knox, p. 53 5. 104 group of men entered and began drowning out his voice, "but, " wrote Wesley, "immediately after, the hammer of the word brake the rocks in pieces; a l l quietly heard the glad tidings of salvation" (II, 386). 1741 — At a lovefeast in Bristol, "A cry was heard from one end of the congrega-tion to the other; not of grief, but of overflowing joy and love. 'O con-tinue forth Thy loving-kindness unto them that know Thee . . . ' " (II, 512) At a watchnight service "many cried after God with a loud and bitter cry" (II, 519). 1742--I preached at Weavers' Hal l : it was a glorious time. Several dropped to the ground as if struck by lightning. Some cried out in bitterness of soul. I knew not where to end, being constrained to begin anew again and again. In this acceptable time we begged of God to restore our brethren who are departed from us for a sea-son. (II, 528) 1743—This selection presents a contrast which possibly underscores Wesley's disappointment when no demonstrations punctuated his preach-ing: "I preached to two or three hundred people at Zennor . . . and found much goodwill in them, but no l i fe . It was much the same on Thursday . . . while I preached at Kenneggy Downs . . . on the resurrection of the dry bones. There is not so much as a shaking among them; much less is there any breath in them" (III, 89-90). 1748—While preaching in a Welsh town (Llanfihengel), Wesley recorded: "I have not seen a people so deeply affected since we came into Anglesey; their cries and tears con-tinued a long time without any intermission" (III, 337). 1759—And con-cerning the revival at Everton, he wrote: The church was quite f i l led, and hundreds were without. And now the arrows of God flew abroad. The inexpressible groans, 105 the lamenting, praying, roaring, were so loud, almost without intermission, that we who stood without could scarce help thinking a l l in the church were cut to the heart . . . (IV, 342) Wesley was in the habit of remaining aloof, observing with a c l in ica l detachment the scenes occurring before his eyes. He had got accustomed to the cries and paroxysms and had generally declared them extraordinary evidences of the Spirit of God at work, but he also con-cluded that at times individuals and even the devil manufactured the re-sponses. On November 25, 1759, noting that people no longer convulsed or fell down, he summed up the meaning and significance of the convul-sions as follows: (1) God suddenly and strongly convinced many that they were lost sinners, the natural consequence whereof were sudden outcries and strong bodily convulsions; (2) to strengthen and encourage them that believed, and to make His work more apparent, He favoured several of them with divine dreams . . . (3) in some of these i n -stances, after a time, nature mixed with grace; (4) Satan likewise mimicked this work of God, in order to discredit the whole work. And yet it is not wise to give up this part, any more than to give up the whole. (IV, 359) Wesley was therefore fully persuaded that the phenomena was a desirable part of his ministry, so unlike his brother Charles, he took no measures to suppress them. Wesley's failure to curb the emotional manifestations caused many to criticize his work as being wholly enthusiastic and unscriptural. Green wondered why similar manifestations did not occur in other congregations where the Scriptures were being preached in purity by preachers as quali-fied as the Methodist preachers were. "Unless,-" he continued, "they can 106 give us a more clear proof than they have yet produced, that such opera-tions are of God, we must look upon them only as the effects of enthusi-asm, or natural disorders and indispositions of the body . . . "130 Q r e e n went on to instance the cases of Quakers and French prophets involved in similar convulsions and shakings. Since everyone knew, Green implied, that neither Quaker nor French prophet was moved by the Spirit of God, those "quakings and agitations of body are by no means any sure signs that persons are moved by the Spirit of G o d . " He added: By the divine assistance or influence on the soul, sinners are generally brought to a true conviction of mind and hearty sorrow for s in, without those strange and usual effects upon their bodies. God can indeed easily produce such, if he sees proper; but this does not seem to be the usual method of bringing sinners to repentance. 131 Thus Thomas Green wrote off the entire Methodist revival as sheer en-thusiasm . Among the strange practices in which the leaders of the Methodist movement engaged and thus brought against themselves the charge of en-thusiasm was what one has called bibliomancy, the practice of opening the Bible randomly and accepting the first text at which the finger points or on which the eye alights as a providential direction for the moment. Critics tended to see the practice as a confession by Methodists that they were the special objects of God's regard, so special as to be provided Green, Dissertation, p. 112. i 3 l Green, pp. 102, 107. 107 direction whenever they required i t . Wesley and his companions, how-ever, firmly believed and trusted in Bible opening as a sure means of guid-ance, though they did not always take the results as f inal . On occasions Wesley opened the Bible to satisfy doubts concerning some subject on his mind. For example, he recorded in his Journal: In the evening, being troubled at what some said of "the kingdom of God within u s , " and doubtful of my own state, I called upon God, and received this answer from His word: "He himself also waited for the kingdom of G o d . " "But should not I wait in silence and retirement?" was the thought that immediately struck into my mind. I opened my Testament again on those words, "Seest thou not how faith wrought together with his works? And by works was faith made perfect. " (11,97) On other occasions he opened at random to decide on which text to preach. Such was the case at Bristol when it was reported that a mob was planning to disturb his meetings. Said Wesley: "The scripture to which, not my choice, but the providence of God, directed me, was, 'Fear not thou, for I am with the: be not dismayed, for I am thy God . . . ' " The mob came, but no one disturbed the meeting (II, 208). How-ever, this method of guidance did not support John Wesley's vital deci-sion to go to Bristol at Whitefield's c a l l . Whitefield was soon to leave for America and needed a capable individual to carry on his Bristol minis-try. Called by Whitefield, John Wesley felt it was not best for him to go, because on turning the Bible, he found that the texts distinctly implied that suffering and death awaited him at Bristol. Nevertheless, he decided 132professor Richard Bevis has kindly pointed out to me the case of Daniel Defoe as an example of Puritans who practised bibliomancy. 108 to go. When Charles Wesley remonstrated against John's decision to proceed to Bristol though it meant death, John again resorted to Bible opening for guidance; again the texts distinctly implied martyrdom. The same implications followed when the case was submitted to J ,the brethren" and they once more opened the Bible. John Wesley went in spite of the omens. The decision was so momentous for a l l , especially for the Wesley brothers, that Charles recorded the feelings of those present at the vital meeting: We dissuaded my brother from going to Bristol, from an unac-countable fear that it would prove fatal to him. A great power was among us. He offered himself wil l ingly to whatsoever the Lord should appoint. The next day he set out, commended by us to the grace of God. He left a blessing behind. I desired to die with him. i 3 3 It is interesting to speculate on what might have been the effect on the Methodist movement if Wesley had not gone to Bristol, for that place be-came one of the important centres of the movement and was the place at which the emotional manifestations first appeared in John Wesley's meet-ings . Among the greatest fears of the leaders of the Anglican Church in the face of what they called enthusiastic groups was the fear of schism. They saw enthusiasm as leading directly to schism and the destruction of 134 the Church. Of course, they had many precedents to point to, among 1 3 3 Wesley, Journal, II, 156-158 and note on p. 158. 134 Bishop Lavington, The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists  Considered, ed. R. Polwhele (London, 1820), pp. x i - x i i , 134; Charles Lesl ie , Snake in the Grass, in Works, II, 12. 109 them the Protestant Reformation and the dismemberment of the Church of England during the Puritan Revolution. Wesley, for his part, always con-sidered himself a faithful Anglican clergyman and never intended his move-ment to be separatist. Over and over again he cautioned his followers against being anything other than Anglican, and he repeatedly reiterated his determination to keep his followers and his movement within the pale of the Church. B u t p i a n a n c ] determine as John Wesley might, the i n -exorable logic of circumstances forced him step by step closer to the perilous fact of separation. And back of a l l Wesley's daring actions which threatened separation from the mother church was the intransigence and i l l - w i l l of the Anglican clergy; so that it can be shown that Wesley was forced into taking steps which eventually culminated in what the Church always feared but which it in fact encouraged by its policy of ostracism. Some of the actions which progressively threatened separa-tion included the practice of holding special Methodist meetings in chapels and licensing such chapels, the calling of laymen to assist in preaching, and the ordination of clergymen to serve Methodists in North America. Refused permission to use the pulpits of various churches, Wesley and his men were forced to use buildings other than churches to preach to those who wanted to hear them, and eventually they took to the fields, an unpopular but appropriate site to accommodate the hundreds and thousands who came to see and hear the famous but irregular clergymen. Whitefield 1 3 5 See Wesley, Works, VIII, 35-36, 280-281, 321, 350, 354; Tyerman, II, 244-258. 110 was the first to preach in the fields under pressure of circumstances. In February of 1739, when refused permission to use a church, he preached I O C his first open-air sermon to a group of about two hundred people. 0 0 John Wesley soon followed Whitefield's example, though under protest against his strong feelings for the decencies of form. He said of this first attempt: "I could scarce reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in the fields, . . . having been a l l my life (till very lately) so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order, that I should have thought the saving of souls almost a sin if it had not been done in a church" (II, 167). Comforting himself with the thought that Christ set the precedent by preaching on a mountain, Wesley went on to be one of the greatest field-preachers, but each new departure from ac-cepted good form was a challenge to his keen sense of propriety, as the following entry in his Journal indicates: "At four . . . I submitted to be more v i l e , and proclaimed in the highways the glad tidings of salvation . . . " (II, 172) George Lavington, a clergyman, later took note of a l l these irregularities and cited them as evidence of the enthusiasm of the Methodist leaders, but laymen took sterner measures to curb what they were told were the extravagances of the Wesleys. One Goter, a land-owner, secured a judgment to the extent of ten pounds against Charles Wesley for trespassing. Charles had passed through Goter1 s fields on his way to address a crowd of 10,000 in Moorfields. 0 ' 1 3 6 See Fitchett, p. 161. 1 3 7 See Fitchett, pp. 164-165.. I l l Though Wesley organized societies and built chapels for meeting with his followers, he did not intend that meetings with his societies and in his chapels should be otherwise than complementary to the services of the Church of England. In one of his "Conversations" with his helpers, Wesley affirmed that the Methodist services were public worship "but not 1 op such as supersedes the Church Service." Indeed, Wesley confessed that he did not at first form Societies or acquire meeting-houses or chapels on his own initiative, though he fully approved of the idea later. The first Society was formed when some members desired to meet together to confirm each other's faith and to counsel and pray with Wesley. And the Foundery, the first piece of property in London owned by Methodists in which meet-ings were held, was acquired when Wesley reluctantly followed the advice l on of two strangers. J J After meeting for many years in various structures for services, to avoid harrassment by the c i v i l authorities Methodists were forced in 1 7 8 7 to license their meeting-houses under the Toleration Act, thus tacitly acknowledging themselves D i s s e n t e r s . 1 4 0 13 8 Speaking of the Methodist meeting, Wesley said: "If it were designed to be instead of the Church Service, it would be essentially de-fective; for it seldom has the four grand parts of public prayer, deprecia-tion, petition, intercession, and thanksgiving. " Works, VIII, 3 2 1 - 3 2 2 . 1 3 9 See Wesley, Works, VIII, 3 7 , 2 5 0 ; see also Tournal, n , 3 6 . 1 4 0 See Tyerman, III, 5 1 1 - 5 1 3 . Wesley had always resisted licensing, claiming that it savoured of separation from the established Church. However, such licensing as described here did not immunize Methodists from persecution, so Wesley had to appeal to a member of Parliament to look into the matter. 112 Just as Methodists were forced to worship in places other than Anglican churches and to tacitly acknowledge themselves Dissenters by licensing their chapels under the Toleration Act, so they were driven by circumstances into appointing lay preachers and ordaining clergymen, acts which some claimed to be schismatic. Wesley's first lay preacher, Thomas Maxfield, actually began preaching before receiving sanction from his minister. Sensing the irregularity of the procedure, Wesley hurried to London from Bristol to silence Maxfield but was himself d is -suaded from such a course by his mother's caution: "I charge you before God, beware what you do; for Thomas Maxfield is as much called to preach the Gospel as ever you were ! "1 4 1 Wesley later claimed that Maxfield, Richards, and Westel l , the first three Methodist lay preachers, a l l re-quested permission to be his assistants. But it appears that Wesley con-descended to appoint lay helpers only when the press of duties was too much for himself, Charles, and Whitefield to perform satisfactorily. In "A Farther Appeal" (1745) he asserted that he was obliged to enlist the assistance of laymen because few of the regular clergy were willing to aid him in meeting the spiritual needs of those who joined the Societ ies .1 4 i And when anyone charged that the men were uneducated, Wesley agreed but added: "Indeed, in the one thing which they profess to know, they are not ignorant men. I trust there is not one of them who is not able to 141 Quoted in Vulliamy, p. 106. 1 4 2 John Wesley, Works, VIII, 224-311 . 113 go through such an examination, in substantial, practical, experimental 143 Divinity, as few of our candidates for holy orders . . . are able to do. Criticized that appointing lay preachers was irregular and tending to sepa-ration, Wesley would ca l l attention to the new converts' need for spiritual guidance and, characteristically, to the success of the laymen's efforts in meeting that n e e d . 1 4 4 The layman problem solved, the problem of providing ordained leaders for the American and Scottish Methodist work arose. Amidst grave pressure from his lay preachers to provide enough clergymen to administer Holy Communion to the quickly growing Methodist work in England, Wesley had to beat down continually the wishes of his helpers to separate from the Church of England. Numerous Anglican clergymen had refused to give Com-munion to Methodists, so that many had gone for months without the sacra-ment. Yet Wesley, convinced though he was that the arguments for sepa-ration from the established Church were unanswerable, refused to sanction separation. An attempt to provide the needed helpers by having them or-dained by Bishop Erasmus, the bishop of a Greek Church, proved abortive when the sensitive Charles Wesley refused to countenance such irregular procedures. Exasperated by English bishops who consistently refused to ordain qualified Methodist preachers, and long persuaded that he was 1 4 3 John Wesley, Works, VIII, 221. 1 4 4 See John Wesley, Works, VIII, 220-226; Tyerman, II, 244-258. Wesley wrote: "In several places, by means of these plain men, not only those who had already begun to run well were hindered from drawing back to perdition; but other sinners also . . . were converted . . . " Works, VIII, 224. 114 qualified to perform the rite himself, John Wesley decided to ordain men to administer baptism and Communion. 1 4 ^ The place to benefit was America, which had recently become independent of Britain. Wesley concluded that since England and the Anglican Church no longer had jurisdiction in America, he had perfect right to ordain men to serve a people sorely in need of ministers to give them Communion and to baptize their children. He persuaded himself that his action was not schismatic because of the peculiar political developments which made America i n -dependent of England. Wesley's performance of the act of ordination, of course, drew knowing cries of "separation!" Even Charles Wesley, always sensitive to any action bearing a semblance of separation, de-clared: I never lost my dread of separation, or ceased to guard our societies against i t . . . . I can scarcely yet believe i t , that, in his eighty-second year, my brother . . . should have assumed the episcopal character, ordained elders, consecrated a bishop, and sent him to ordain our lay preachers in America ! . . . Lord Mansfield told me last year [1784] , that ordination was separation. This my brother does not and wi l l not see; or that he has renounced the principles and practice of his whole life; that he has acted contrary to a l l his declarations, protestations and writings . . . l 4 ^ Moved by a similar need for ordained clergymen in Scotland, John Wesley again performed the rite of ordination; and when it became apparent that the Societies in Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and the West Indies lacked 1 4 5 See Tyerman, II, 200-211, 485-489, 430; III, 331-333, 432-440. 1 4 6 Quoted in Tyerman, III, 439-440. 115 adequate pastoral guidance, Wesley ordained men to f i l l the need. Thus without once admitting i t , John Wesley had eventually separated himself from the Church of England. As Tyerman put it: "There can be no doubt that, as a minister of Christ, Wesley had as much right to ordain as any bishop, priest, or presbytery in existence; but he had no right to this [sic] as a clergyman of the Church of England; and, by acting as he did, he became, what he was unwilling to acknowledge, a Dissenter, a separatist from that Church. 4 7 Even if the act of ordain-ing ministers did not in effect constitute separation from the Church of England, the Methodist Societies could not have remained long within the framework of the Anglican Church without formally seceding. Time has at least shown that. Wesley's organization of the Societies had step by step constituted Methodists a church within a church, and, moreover, a church within an institution which refused to acknowledge or assist the evangel-icals in any way. Such a vibrant body as the Methodists could not long remain contented with its status. Without wishing or willing i t , John Wesley had been forced into fulfilling the predictions of his detractors that his enthusiasm would lead to schism. But was the cool-headed unimpulsive John Wesley an enthusiast? 14 R Father Knox thinks not. ° However, in the estimate of many of his con-temporaries he was. At least, Wesley had given his critics frequent 1 4 7 Tyerman, III, 448-449. 1 4 8 Knox, pp. 450-451. 116 occasions to suspect him. Did he not priase Montanus warmly? And did he not write approvingly of many another individual popularly viewed as an enthusiast, fraternize with the enthusiastic Moravians, and take as one of his spiritual mentors, William Law, an avowed admirer of Behmen the German enthusiast? He calmly looked on and even appeared to sanc-tion the excesses of those who indulged in ecstasies, fainting spells, and paroxysms; indeed, he claimed such excesses to be the hand of God on penitents; and what was more, he resorted to bibliomancy for guidance in the most trifling situations and attributed ordinary incidents to the extra-ordinary workings of Providence on his behalf, confessing by such actions that he bore a special and intimate relationship with God; furthermore, when he indulged in irregularities like preaching in other men's parishes and in the fields and streets, he justified such behaviour by claiming that Christ and the Apostles did the same, thereby making himself egual to those who received the extraordinary gifts of God. Wesley might argue and disclaim as much as he could, but in the eyes of many of his contemporaries, he was an enthusiast. It might be true that he attempted to curb violent en-thusiasts like George Bell and warned his Societies against the practices of the French prophets and Quakers, but, a critic would say, an autocratic leader such as Wesley had to take measures to protect his Societies that they might preserve the peculiar Methodist spirit. But what could make enthusiasts of talented and educated men like John Wesley, George Whitefield, and many others? This question, and others relating to i t , the following chapter w i l l attempt to answer. Chapter III The Enthusiast: His Beginnings, Behaviour, and Fate Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century writers found great difficulty in saying anything pleasant about religious enthusiasm, so overwhelmed were they by enthusiasm's baneful effects on English society in general and on the Church and monarchy in particular. Writing before the Puritan Revolution, Robert Burton criticized enthusiasts, but very infrequently were they his prime targets; the "Superstitious Roman Catholics" were. Almost invariably, Burton lumped enthusiasts with numerous other religionists that were to him suspect; for example: "idolaters, ethnics, Mahometans, Jews, heretics, enthusiasts, divinators, prophets, sectaries, and schis-matics." After the Revolution, however, enthusiasts claimed first place in the attentions of many, whether divines like Robert South or scholars like Casaubon or Henry More, and they were more feared than the Roman Catholics, for whom enthusiasts were often considered a mask. Critics might concede that there was "a true and warrantable enthusiasm, " but they were so engrossed by the false and unwarrantable twin that the good sister suffered from inattention. To many writers there seemed to have been few evils of which the enthusiast was incapable. However, critics had little that was new to say about the source or causes of enthusiasm; a l l that was new was an increased virulence in references to enthusiasts. Following Greek and Latin authors, they generally claimed that enthusiasm was the result of possession by a supernatural power; but almost invariably they found that 117 118 it was caused by certain physical or mental ailments which ultimately had their bases in melancholy. Prompted by a desire to discredit enthusiasts, critics claimed that women and children, as also the ignorant and the poor, were most prone to enthusiasm. Casaubon and Henry More, writing in the 1650's, and Jonathan Swift and Charles Leslie, writing nearly fifty years later, agreed that a form of enthusiasm had its source in God. Casaubon briefly called such enthusiasm possession by God; he said little more of it since his chief concern was with natural enthusiasm, but it is clear that, like Swift later, he had in mind that supernatural power which apostles and prophets of the Bible possessed. Swift listed this extraordinary endowment among the ways of "ejaculating the Soul, or transporting it beyond the Sphere of Matter, " and named it the "immediate act of God called Prophecy or In-spiration. Charles Leslie agreed, but like most other opponents of the suspected forms of enthusiasm, he implied that this extraordinary inspira-tion was no longer present or necessary in the Christian Church. For Leslie this extraordinary inspiration, which was usually attended with the gifts of tongues and prophecy, and miraculous cures, was not to be ardently desired nor prayed for; one should simply wait passively on the wise God to bestow such a gift when, where, and how He thinks best. 1 Jonathan Swift, A Tale of a Tub to which Is Added "The Battle of the Books" and the "Mechanical Operation of the Spirit, " ed. A. C . Guthkelch and D. Nicol Smith (Oxford, 1920), p. 269. See also John Wesley, "The Nature of Enthusiasm, " Works, V, 469. 2 Charles Leslie, The Snake in the Grass, in The Theological Works (London, 1721), II, 147. 119 But Leslie insisted that the Anglican Church did, in fact, recognize an-other desirable form of enthusiasm or inspiration, that of the sanctifying and saving graces with which a l l are imbued by the Holy Ghost to enable them to do good. He said: "of ourselves we are not able so much as to think a good Thought . . . this Inspiration is as necessary to our fructi-fying, or bringing forth good Works, as the influence of the Sun is to the Earth's bringing forth of her Fruits. " Of course, Leslie was not alone in seeing man's ability to do or think anything good as the result of the work of the Holy Spirit on man's heart. However, he was daring in calling this operation enthusiasm. When Henry More spoke of "a true and warrantable enthusiasm, " unlike Swift or Leslie, he was not thinking of the graces of the Spirit but of an emotion, a surge of strong feeling occasioned by one's love to God. He said that some "devout and holy souls . . . are strangely transported in that vehement Love they bear towards God, and that inex-pressible Joy they find in him, " but those transports are not reserved for a chosen few, and people who experience them are not moved to make themselves equal with God as other enthusiasts frequently do. Far from claiming the Holy Spirit as the source of such enthusiasm, More declared that it "is but the triumph of the Soul of man inebriated, as it were, with the delicious sense of the divine l i fe . " 4 3 Leslie, II, 144. 4 Henry More, Enthusiasmus Triumphatus (London, 1656), p. 45. 120 Opposed to the enthusiasm that originates in God is that which has its origin in the devi l . Swift said that such enthusiasm "is the im-mediate Act of the Devi l , and is termed Possession. Robert Burton, writing earlier, believed that "those prophesies, and Monks' revelations, Nuns' dreams, which they suppose come from God, do proceed wholly by the Devil 's means: and so those Enthusiasts, Anabaptists, pseudo-Prophets from the same cause. " 6 And Robert South, in his usually i nc i -sive and witty manner, expressed his firm belief that enthusiasts pos-sessed a spirit, but he refused to allow that it was the Spirit of God. "Since we a l l know that there are spirits good and bad, " he said, "it cannot be denied, but that in some sense they might have the spirit, such a spirit as it was, and that in a very large measure. The avowed enemy of Quakerism, Charles Leslie, was certain that many of the early Quakers were largely possessed by the Devi l , "and a visible effect of this was that extraordinary shaking and quaking, like fits of Convulsions, which these Quakers . . . either acted, or like the Heathen Priests of old, were posses'd w i t h . " 8 Unfortunately for his argument, Leslie was unable to marshall convincing evidence to substantiate his charge, although he 5 Swift, p. 269 . • 6 Robert Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, ed. Dell and Jordan Smith (New York, 1955), p. 894. 7 Robert South, Sermons Preached upon Several Occasions, new ed. (Oxford, 1842), II, 307. 8 Leslie, II, 134. 121 called witnesses from among many former Quakers. Like Leslie, Richard Kingston, the critic of the French prophets, appealed to the physical phe-nomena of the prophets as evidence of their demonic possession, though he strengthened his case when he compared the behaviour of the prophets to that of demoniacs in the Scriptures. "What can be said less, " wrote Kingston, "than that Men are possess'd with a Devi l , when they rave, fight, tear their own Flesh, beat their Heads against a W a l l , dash them-selves against the Ground, foam at the Mouth, and are seized with a l l the frightful Symptoms of the Demoniack in the G o s p e l . " 9 N 0 o n e doubted the possibility of demonic possession, but the difficulty was in proving an i n -dividual to be so possessed. Leslie indicated this problem when he as-serted that the diabolical and the divine enthusiasm "appear sometimes so very like one another, that even the sober and learned Men do mistake the one for the other; and cannot discover Satan through his disguise of Light ." ' ' ' 0 However, Leslie and several other writers were certain that it was possible to differentiate the true from the false enthusiasm by an ap-peal both to reason and to "the Law and the Testimony. " The most important single cause of enthusiasm on which almost a l l critics agreed was melancholy, but just how melancholy worked to affect the entire physical and mental being, few took pains to demonstrate. 9 [Richard Kingston], Enthusiastick Impostors no Divinely In- spired Prophets (London, 1707), p. 26. 1 0 Leslie, II, 12. 122 Burton was certain that some form of melancholy was responsible for the behaviour of those who claimed to be prophets or who were disposed to blind zeal, intense religious devotion, and enthusiasms, among other religious disorders; but whereas some earlier authors saw "love melan-choly 1 1 as the cause of these abnormal conditions, Burton preferred to ca l l it "religious melancholy," because love to God was at its root. Explain-ing the pattern which led to enthusiasm, Burton said that because of man's basic inclination to ev i l , he fails to love God supremely, setting his af-fections on God's creatures instead; prompted by pride, fear of punish-ment, praise of men, vain-glory, and such weaknesses, man misses the mark: Some of us again are too dear [he wrote], as we think, more divine and sanctified than others, of a better metal, greater gifts, and with that proud Pharisee, contemn others in respect of ourselves, we are better Christians, better learned, choice spirits, inspired, know more, have special revelation, perceive God's secrets . . . Of this number are a l l superstitious Idolaters, Ethnicks, Mahome-tans, Jews, Hereticks, Enthusiasts, Divinators, Prophets, Sec-taries, and Schismaticks. 11 According to Burton, then, religious melancholy was at the root of the enthusiast's behaviour; that disease seemed to incline the sufferer, to love God more intensely than normally, but for various reasons this love was often misdirected, providing a special mark by which the enthusiast, among others, was to be identified. On occasions, however, Burton seemed to think of enthusiasm both as a symptom and a cause of religious melancholy. 1 1 Burton, p. 873. 123 Casaubon, writing about forty years after Burton (1655), simply declared that his studies indicated that some people sick of melancholy, epilepsy, and mania, among other diseases, had been known to foretell happenings correctly and to speak in foreign tongues—Greek, Latin, Hebrew--but when healed of their maladies, such people lost their d iv in-12 ing and linguistic abi l i t ies . It was Henry More, in a work that i n -fluenced most later writers on enthusiasm, who in almost c l in ica l terms delineated the relationship between melancholy and enthusiasm. Though not the only cause, melancholy, as More saw it , was the principal source of religious enthusiasm. When it reached the proportions of a disease, melancholy had the peculiar ability of fixing -"some particular absurd im-agination upon the Mind so fast, that a l l the evidence of Reason to the contrary cannot remove it , the parties thus affected in other things being 13 as sober and rationall as other men." Under the influence of this mel-ancholy, men often imagined themselves to be what they were not. Thus the power of enthusiasm derived from the unholy alliance of melancholy and the imagination. In his study More had at first declared the enormous strength of the imagination to be the cause of enthusiasm; this imagination, he found to be affected by the changes in the '"Blood and.Spirits, " which were in 12 Meric Casaubon, A Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme, 2nd ed. rev. (London, 1656), pp. 36-37. 1 3 More, Enthusiasmus, p. 8. 124 turn altered by changes in air and weather, by wine, food, certain potions, and diseases. But seeing that melancholy was the most important factor in affecting the imagination, More quickly switched sides, declaring that melancholy itself led to enthusiasm, especially to that form that caused an individual to imagine himself to be what he is not; for example, a bird, beast, or even God. More found that melancholy naturally inclined one to a religious temper, leading him to tamper with divine matters and ren-dering him capable of imitating closely, sometimes apparently outdoing, the true spiritual graces. Further, as men are ordinarily inclined to claim supernatural causes for things -"great or vehement," so it is with the mel-ancholic, More said: When he feels a storm of devotion or zeal come upon him like a mighty wind, his heart being full of affection, his head pregnant with clear and sensible representations, and his mouth flowing and streaming with fit and powerful expressions, such as would astonish an ordinary Auditorie to hear, it i s , I say, a shrewd temptation to him to think that it is the very Spirit of God that then moves supernaturally in him; whenas a l l the excess of zeal and affection and fluency of words is most palpably to be resolved into the power of Melancholy, which is a kind of naturall inebri-ation. 1 4 For More, then, this false enthusiasm was something essentially natural (as Casaubon had said) and the result of a disease; further, this union of disease and imagination led to the individual's being deceived; the enthusiast was, therefore, the dupe of a malady. Several later writers echoed More's analysis of enthusiasm as being something in the very More, Enthusiasmus, pp. 11-12. 125 constitution of the individual, but often the emphasis of these writers was on the role of the imagination or fancy in the matter. Hume came closest to More's blending of both causes in his brief essay "Of Superstition and Enthusiasm." Describing the conditions that led to enthusiasm, he wrote: But the mind of man is also subject to an unaccountable elevation and presumption, arising from prosperous success, from luxuriant health, from strong spirits, or from a bold and confident disposi-t ion. In such a state of mind, the imagination swells with great, but confused conceptions, to which no sublunary beauties or en-joyments can correspond. Every thing mortal and perishable van-ishes as unworthy of attention; and a full range is given to the fancy in the invisible regions, or world of Spirits, where the soul is at liberty to indulge itself in every imagination, which may best suit its present taste and disposition. Hence arise raptures, trans-ports, and surprising flights of fancy; and, confidence and presump-tion s t i l l increasing, these raptures, being altogether unaccount-able, and seeming quite beyond the reach of our ordinary faculties, are attributed to the immediate inspiration of that Divine Being who is the object of devotion. In a little time, the inspired person comes to regard himself as a distinguished favourite of the Divinity; and when this phrensy once takes place, which is the summit of enthusiasm, every whimsey is consecrated . . Speaking of the power of fancy or imagination in deceiving the i n -dividual, More said that the fancy represents images so forcibly on the consciousness that not even the power of reality could force those images into the background; they claim such precedence that the individual is led to consider the images of fancy real, thus believing a l i e . More then asked: "And if it be so strong as to assure us of the presence of some external object which yet is not there, why may it not be as effectual in the begetting of the belief of some more internal apprehensions, such as 15 David Hume, Essays Moral , Pol i t ical , and Literary, ed. T. H . Green and T. H . Grose (London, 1912), I, 145. 126 have been reported of mad and fanatical men, who so firmly and immutably fancied themselves to be God the Father, the Messias , the Holy Ghost, the Angel Gabriel-, the last and chiefest prophet that God would send in the world, and the l i k e ? " Unlike More, Glanvil l did not think the imagina-tion by itself a source of deception, but it was the means of deception when the mind produced ideas from the images provided by the imagina-tion. Glanvi l l expressed the idea thus: The imagination, which is of simple perception, doth never of it self directly mislead us; . . . Yet is it the almost fatal means of our deception, through the unwarrantable compositions, divisions, and applications, which it occasions the second Act to make of the simple Images. Hence we may derive the Visions, Voyces, Revelations of the Enthusiast: the strong Idea's of which, being conjur'd up into the Imagination by the heat of the melancholized brain, are judged exterior Realities; whenas they are but motions within the Cranium. * 7 Archibald Campbell, writing in 1730, emphasized the role of the imagination and what he called the "animal spirit" but recognized the part that atmosphere and subject matter played in the making of the enthusiast. Campbell said that two things were essential to the character of the en-thusiast: first, "some inward fervours and commotions in the mind arising from too high a tide of the animal spirits"; by these animal spirits, ac-cording to Campbell, the "imagination is greatly chafed and heated," until the mind comes to be filled with a "gloomy awe and reverence" from a 16 More, Enthusiasmus, p. 4. 17 Joseph Glanv i l l , The Vanity of Dogmatizing . . . (London, 1661), p. 99. 127 sense of what the individual construes to be the divine presence; this sense of the divine presence causes him to feel warmed and strangely moved; he then interprets the warmth and strange movings as "divine emanations" coming directly from God himself. The second essential, said Campbell, is the matter on which the mind exercises its devotion. This matter causes some impressions on the mind which warms and agi-tates it and the mind in so melting a frame as it is now under, being very soft and tender; and the things themselves about which it is devoutly employ'd, being such as fall in with its prevailing temper, or some other of its favourite notions, the impressions it receives must necessarily prove deep and strong; and these being accom-panied with what is fondly thought to be supernatural joys and raptures, 'tis confidently believed they are immediately derived from heaven 8 In his analysis of the process by which one became an enthusiast, Edmund Calamy, more innovative and practical than many other writers on the subject, cited the power of admiration and imitation, though the basis of the whole process remained the animal or "natural spir i ts ." Calamy was evidently remembering the case of John Lacy, one of his parishioners who left his congregation to join the French prophets, when he declared that those who became enthusiasts first resorted to certain strangers and believ'd them to be Divinely Inspir'd. Hereupon they admir'd them as the Peculiar Favourites of Heaven; and . . . admiring them, they wisht they might be like them; wish'd they might be favour'd of Heaven as much as they . . . From wishing they i a Archibald Campbell, A Discourse Proving that the Apostles  Were no Enthusiasts (London, 1730), p. 5. 128 came to praying to GOD that it might be so: and by Degrees, the Fancy being elevated, and the Natural Spirits strangely Agitated, they first try'd to imitate them, and then fancy'd they were like them, and as much inspir'd as t h e y . 1 9 Back of what Calamy called "admiration" was personal pride; indeed, many writers, while agreeing that melancholy and the imagination played important parts in the make-up of the enthusiast, also added pride as the key'source. Such cr i t ics , of course, robbed the enthusiast of his i n -nocence; he was no longer merely a deceived individual but one whose evi l desires precipitated gross ev i l s . I have already cited Burton's view that, moved by pride, some people thought themselves better Christians, better learned, or more choice spirits than others and eventually believed that they were inspired, received special revelations, or perceived God's secrets. Charles Leslie, agreeing with Burton, claimed that without pride there could be no enthusiasm, 2 0 and John Wesley, himself the target of charges of enthusiasm, declared that enthusiasts were misled by pride and a warm imaginat ion. 2 1 An anonymous writer for the London Magazine (1738) saw the enthusiast as averse to a l l authority outside himself; to this enthusiast even God is arbitrary, cruel and fantastical, ruling by mere caprice. Enthusiasm, said that writer, came from "pride of heart, 1 9 Edmund Calamy, A Caveat Against New Prophets (London, 1708), p. 30. 2 0 Lesl ie , The Snake in the Grass, Works, II, 15. 2 1 Wesley, "Nature of Enthusiasm," Works, V, 473. 129 ? 9 and an excess of imagination. But Hume held that the true sources of enthusiasm were a "presumptuous pride" coupled with hope, a warm im-agination, and ignorance; the presumptuous pride of the enthusiast was evident in his confidence that, unlike the superstitious Roman Catholic, he was qualified to approach God without a human mediator. 2 3 Addison, unlike most other writers on the subject, claimed that enthusiasm arose from a devotional craze, resulting from the individual's failure to be guided by "right reason" in applying his mind to "its mis-taken duties. " During his intense devotions, the individual discovers a feeling which he imagines to be heaven-sent and is thus led away into enthusiasm. Addison described the process thus: When the Mind finds her self very much inflamed with her Devo-tions, she is too much inclined to think they are not of her own kindling, but blown up by something Divine within her. If she indulges this Thought too far, and humours the growing Passion, she at last flings her self into imaginary Raptures and Extasies . . . 2 4 Basic to Addison's view of the process as given here was the common as-sociation of zeal and warmth in any cause with enthusiasm and irration-al i ty . A similar association led Joseph Trapp, in 1739, to write of the folly, s in, and danger of being righteous overmuch, and it later led to Dr. Johnson's commending the disenchanted hermit in Rasselas with giving 2 2 "A Parallel Between Superstition and Enthusiasm," London  Magazine (March 1738), p. 120. 2 3 Hume, Essays, I, 145, 148. 2 4 Joseph Addison, Spectator, No. 201. 130 a discourse that was "cheerful without levity, and pious without enthu-s iasm. ' "^ This fear of immoderation or excess led Addison to caution that "there is not a more Melancholy Object than a Man who has his Head turned with Religious Enthusiasm. We may however learn this lesson from i t , " he continued, "that since Devotion it self (which one would be apt to think could not be too warm) may disorder the Mind, unless its Heats are tempered with Caution and Prudence, we should be particularly careful to keep our Reason as cool as possible, and to guard our selves in a l l Parts of Life against the Influence of Passion, Imagination, and Constitution." Whereas most cri t ics ' analysis of the origins of enthusiasm u l t i -mately made the enthusiast a diseased and deceived individual, Swift's analysis indicated that the enthusiast was an arrant knave, a hypocrite who deliberately set out to manufacture an imitation of inspiration; in time this artificer grew so adept at manufacturing the spirit that the whole pro-cess became natural to him. As Swift confessed, he was not the first to mention the art of manufacturing the spirit . More had earlier declared the Quaker tremblings and quakings partly the result of artifice, though not indulged in with intent to deceive. 2 7 However, Swift was the first to at-tempt a thorough description of the process. With the Dissenters' 2 5 Samuel Johnson, History of Rasselas Prince of Abyssinia, ed. G . Birkbeck H i l l (Oxford, 1967), p. 88. 2 6 Addison, Spectator, No. 201. 2 7 More, Enthusiasmus, p. 20. 131 conventicles always in mind, Swift emphasized that the production of the spirit was a cooperative venture between the preacher and his assembly: "They violently strain their Eye balls inward, half closing the Lids; Then, as they sit , they are in a perpetual Motion of See-saw, making long Hums at proper Periods, and continuing the Sound at equal Height, chusing their time in those Intermissions, while the Preacher is,at Ebb." Continuing his description, Swift added that with the eyes of assembly and preacher prop-erly disposed, the practitioners eventually see the spirit approach as a glimmering light, dancing before the eyes; each one then moves the body up and down in concert until "Vapours" quickly ascend, perfectly dosing everyone; "meanwhile the Preacher is also at work; He begins a loud Hum, which pierces, you quite thro1; This is immediately returned by the Audience, and you find your self prompted to imitate them, by a meer spontaneous 2 8 Impulse, without knowing what you do." While admitting that Swift was satirizing Dissenters, one ought to be aware of the accuracy of his general description of the behaviour of preacher and audience in some Puritan conventicles; at least, contemporary 29 writers of notes to Swift's Tale admitted its accuracy. The accounts of critics of the French prophets corroborate Swift's basic claim that some i n -dividuals deliberately set out to manufacture the spirit and eventually de-velop the art into a natural s k i l l . Richard Kingston claimed that the 2 8 Swift, A Tale of a Tub, pp. 273, 2 75 . 2 9 See "A Complete Key to A Tale of a Tub, " in Swift, A Tale of a Tub, ed. Guthkelch and Nichol Smith, p. 338 . 132 Camisards practised their quakings for several years abroad before per-forming them in London , 3 0 and the findings of the Huguenot church at the Savoy suggested that the motions of the prophets, as Calamy reported, •"were only the effect of a voluntary habit, of which they had got the per-31 feet mastery"; but Theophilus Evans, besides claiming artifice as the origin of the stunts of the French prophets, also described the process by which the spirit was invoked. "Before they were under the Operation of the Spiri t ," he wrote, "they put themselves into several Postures and Agitations, by shaking the Head, and whirling in a violent Manner, ' t i l l a Vertigo seized them, throwing the Hands, and tossing to and fro beyond the wild Pranks of any Mad-man, . . . sometimes whistling, and then singing, laughing, piping, drumming, screaming, & c . " Evans added that the prophets performed their contortions "in concert" and put themselves into the frenzied state at w i l l . They practised privately at Montpelier "by Way of Exercise, " he charged, ' " t i l l they had a better Opportunity of shew-3 2 ing publickly; and by long Use, they came to do surprizing Feats. Despite the widely held belief that the enthusiast was the victim of a disease and Fancy and so a deceived person, individuals and even official government policy, consistently implied that he was responsible 3 0 [Kingston] , Enthusiastick Impostors, p. 1. 3 1 Calamy, Life, II, 74. 3 2 Theophilus Evans, The History of Modern Enthusiasm, 2nd ed. (London, 1757), p. 100. 133 for his condition. Accordingly, governments made oppressive laws, like the Clarendon Code, designed to disable Dissenters from the Church of England (and a l l Dissenters were enthusiasts, some thought) so that they could not hold religious services of their own, educate their children in their own beliefs, or hold government positions in certain towns. The fact is that the enthusiast, though generally believed to be a sick man, was treated as though he were in perfect health but an arrant knave who deliberately worked against the public good for his personal gain. The claim that the enthusiast was sick seemed to have been a clever ruse perhaps deliberately used to discredit the cause of Dissenters as a whole; the facts imply this, and one critic agrees: . . . to regard enthusiasm as a physical or mental disorder was a simple means by which the adherents of established order tried to discredit enthusiasm in the eyes of reasonable men. The at-tempt to reduce enthusiasm to a "hypochondriacal distemper," that put reason to flight and gave wing to chaotic imagination, was a natural weapon of the rational, scientific mind distrustful of abnormality and disorder. 33 When asked who was most l ikely to suffer from enthusiasm, the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century critic gave replies that were just as discrediting as his claim that a l l enthusiasts were deceived and i l l . Burton's catalogue describing the people most prone to become schisma-t ics , heretics, and enthusiasts seems calculated to dissuade one from identifying with such unprepossessing characters. Speaking particularly 33 Truman Guy Steffan, "The Social Argument Against Enthusiasm (1650-1660), " Studies in English, The University of Texas Publication No. 4126 (July 8, 1941), p. 46. 134 of "Papists" but certainly including enthusiasts, Burton declared that in seeking followers they began with . . . collapsed Ladies, some few tradesmen, superstitious old folks, illiterate persons, weak women, discontent, rude, s i l ly companions . . . [and he continued] What are a l l our Anabaptists, Brownists, Barrowists, Familists, but a company of rude, i l l i t -erate, capricious, base fellows? What are most of our Papists, but stupid, ignorant and blind Bayards? 3 4 The common people are first affected, said Burton, because they are "a flock of sheep, a rude illiterate rout," often void of common sense, like beasts wil l ingly following anywhere they are led; such people are gulled because they do not examine what they are accepting but take religion on trust. Corroborating claims like Burton's, Lee indicated that detractors of enthusiasts usually scoffed at Puritans, claiming that many of their preachers were unlearned and were, in fact, tailors, shoemakers, pedlars, and weavers. "Is it a miracle or a wonder," one detractor wrote, "to see saucie boys, bold botching taylors, and other most audacious, illiterate mechanicks to run out of their shops into a Pulpit?"35 w a s ironic that critics of enthusiasts should charge that Puritan preachers were ignorant, because during the reign of Eli2abeth the Puritans had charged that many of the Anglican clergy were illiterate, and Lord Burghley substantiated the charge in an address to a group of Elizabethan bishops. "You make in this 3 4 Burton, Anatomy, p. 890. Quoted in Umphrey Lee, The Historical Backgrounds of Early  Methodist Enthusiasm (New York, 1931), pp. 102-103. 135 time of light so many lewd and unlearned Minis ters ," he said. "It is the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry that I mean, who made lxx Ministers in one day, for Money; some Taylors, some shoemakers and other Craftsmen, I am sure the greater part of them are not worthy to keep horses, " he con-c l u d e d . 3 6 Nevertheless, it was both true and understandable that many of the preachers among the sectaries were not graduates of the Universities and were, in fact, tradesmen. As was already pointed out in chapter two, the enthusiast's belief that the Holy Spirit, as Christ had promised in St. John 16, was able to supply a l l his needs, even guiding him into a l l truth and teaching him a l l things, gave him enough confidence to mount the pulpit and J ,hold forthJ1 to any willing audience. It was true, too, that many of the followers of these sectaries were just ordinary tradesmen. Barbour has shown in his study of the beginnings of Quakerism that the early Friends generally came from among the poor, from farm people, town craftsmen, weavers, tailors, and leather workers; but he has also shown 3 7 that some Friends came from among the "gentry." In his cumbersome diatribe, called by Knox "laborious imbecil i t ies," George Lavington i n -sisted that the followers of the Methodists were injudicious, ignorant, and unlearned people; this conclusion was expected of that cri t ic , for he 3 6 Quoted in William Pierce, An Historical Introduction to the  Marprelate Tracts (New York, 1908), p. 110. 3 7 Hugh Barbour, The Quakers in Puritan England (New Haven, Conn. , 1964), p. 92 . was persuaded that Methodists were enthusiasts and that no thoughtful or informed person would sanction Methodism. Lavington claimed that boys and girls were particularly susceptible to enthusiasm because they were easily moved by hopes and fears; women were liable to it because they were the weaker vessel , vain, full of curiosity, loving novelty, and easily deceived by shows of piety. Among others he found l ikely to be-come enthusiasts were six groups of people: (1) those of a "fickle and inconsistent humour," who act by fits and starts and are fond of innova-tions; (2) people who are piously inclined but are of a weak judgment and nerves, easily caught by fine promises and fair speeches, and subject to bodily agitations and convulsions; (3) those disordered by the fumes of hypochondria and vapours of melancholy, among other distempers; (4) those in perfect health but of "l ively parts and brisk fancy, " lacking in "solid and settled judgment"; (5) those of an amorous complexion; and finally (6) people of bad principles, who w i l l mingle with enthusiasts from hopes of being considered devout so that they may the more easily deceive others.38 In his analysis of the backgrounds of Methodists, Lee studied the autobiographies of thirty-five of Wesley's helpers from volumes called Wesley's Veterans and found much to substantiate the charge that trades-men performed in the role of clergymen. Of the thirty-five helpers studied, 38 Bishop Lavington, The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists  Considered, ed. R. Polwhele (London, 1820), pp. 294; 296, 298, 301. 137 Lee found that twenty-three represented the following occupations which either they or their fathers followed: miner, clothier, farmer, soldier, carpenter, mason, apprentice in worsted trade, tanner, gardener, cutler, apprentice in china trade, and labourer. Of the remaining twelve, the father of one was manager of a woolen factory; another preacher was a bookseller, one a schoolmaster, another a builder, and another a justice of the peace; none of the remaining seven indicated his occupation. 3 9 The case of Sir Richard Bulkeley and John Lacy was singular enough to cause great trepidation among critics of enthusiasm. Confirmed in their belief that educated and respectable people were not susceptible to enthusiasm, critics were astounded when the two gentlemen of learning, quality, and property succumbed to the lure of the French prophets. But reasons for their fall were quickly forthcoming. Bulkeley was suffering from a physical deformity for which, some claimed, he hoped to find heal-ing among the prophets. Richard Kingston insinuated that vanity, ambition, and madness were at the root of Lacy's defection. He wrote: But that which I think comes nearest Mr . Lacy's Case, is a more than ordinary Vanity and Ambition of being thought wiser and better than the rest of the World, which, join'd with an Affectation of Singularity, and having the Glory of starting something that's odd and out of the way, and being the Originals of his own Opinion, which he thinks is an infallible Proof, that the reach of his own Understanding is above the common Standard. 4 0 3 9 UmphreyLee, p. 128. 4 0 [Kingston], Enthusiastick Impostors, p. 39. 138 But to discredit Lacy further, Kingston added that Lacy's -"nearest Rela-tions and best Friends were apprehensive, that his Brain was somewhat touch'd a little before his closing with the pretended French prophets"; Lacy's former church friends prayed that his sanity might be restored, said Kingston, and concluded: "I am of their Opinion, though he may have had some lucid Intervals, his every days Demeanour confirms that Opinion; for no Man would act as he does, that is Master of his own Understand-ing. " 4 1 The singular and often extravagant patterns of behaviour charac-teristic of many enthusiasts reinforced the cri t ics ' suspicion that enthu-siasm was something abnormal, the result of a sickness that might prove fatal to the sufferer. The feats of strength exhibited by many of the French prophets and their followers amazed several people; but many of their per-formances, like those of the Quakers earlier, were presented as signs, or so the prophets claimed. Keimer reported that his sister, when agitated by the spirit, flung another prophetess on the floor, "and under the agita-tions tread upon her breast, belly, legs, . . . walking several times back-wards and forwards over her, and stamping upon her with violence." This performance, said Keimer, was given as a sign of the fall of the whore of Baby lon . 4 2 Another startling exhibition given for a sign was the Quakers' 4 * [Kingston], Enthusiastick Impostors, p. 39. 4 2 Cited in M . Aikin, "The French and English Prophets, " in Memoirs of Religious Impostors (London, 1821), p. 62. 139 going naked through the streets. Leslie reported that one Solomon Eccles, a Quaker preacher and prophet, went naked through Bartholomew Fair the year before the great fire of London (1666). Eccles carried a pan of fire on his head, while he cried -"Repent! repent! " According to Leslie, such sights were not uncommon or extraordinary in London, because hardly a month passed when some Quaker did not walk through the streets "either naked, or in some exotick figure, denouncing Woes, Judgments, Plagues, 43 Fire, Sword and Famine." And Pepys noted in his diary for 1677: "One thing extraordinary was, this day a man, a Quaker, came naked through the Hall Westminster only very c iv i l ly tied about the loins to avoid scan-dal , and with a chafing-dish of fire and brimstone burning about his head, did pass through the Ha l l , crying 'Repent! Repent!."'"4 4 Particularly exasperating to many orthodox Christians were some of the peculiar claims made by enthusiasts; out of such claims arose some of the charges of enthusiasm, blasphemy, and madness levelled against enthusiasts. Gerard Winstanley, for example, announced that he received his levelling doctrines by direct revelation from God: As I was in trance not long since [he wrote], divers matters were present to my sight . . . I heard these words—Work together: Eat bread together: Declare this a l l abroad. . . . Whosoever it is that labors in the earth—for any person or persons that lift up themselves as Lords and Rulers over others, and that doth not Leslie, II, 149. Quoted in UmphreyLee, Backgrounds, p. 102. 140 look upon themselves as equal to others in the Creation, the hand of the Lord shall be upon that laborer. I the Lord have spoke it and I wi l l do i t . Declare this a l l abroad. 45 George Fox, among others, claimed to have received direct reve-lations from God. One celebrated instance was the occasion of a strange visit to Lichfield. Fox was walking with other Friends when he saw three spires in the distance. When told that they were in Lichfield, he started across the fields towards the town. On the way he met some shepherds. The story continues in Fox's own words: I was commanded by the Lord, of a sudden, to untie my shoes and put them off. I stood s t i l l for it was winter, and the word of the Lord was like a fire in me, so I put off my shoes and was com-manded to give them to the shepherds, and was to charge them to let no one have them except they paid for them. . . . Then I walked on about a mile t i l l I came into the town, and as soon as I was got within the town the word of the Lord came to me again, to cry, "Woe unto the bloody city of Lichf ie ld!" So I went up and down the streets, crying with a loud voice, "Woe to the bloody city of Lichf ie ld!" . . . And no one laid hands on me; but as I went thus crying through the streets, there seemed to me to be a channel of blood running down the streets, and the market place appeared like a pool of blood. . . 46 Fox completed his mission and returned for his boots. To many critics such testimonies were purposeless and trifling and unworthy of the majesty of heaven, and certainly the result of an over-heated fancy. At any rate, Fox's mission to Lichfield was not l ikely to hurt anyone but himself. The same could not be said, however, of the claims of some other enthusiasts. 45 From The New Law of Righteousness (1649), quoted in Lewis H. Berens, The Digger Movement (London, 1906), p. 73. 46 Fox, Journal, p. 71; see also Lee, Backgrounds, p. 101. 141 Lee reported that some Ranters taught that the Bible was "a dead Letter," full of contradictions, and J ,the cause of a l l the blood that has been shed in the world." One Ranter claimed that he possessed the Spirit just as Paul, so that what he wrote was just as infallible as St. Paul's writings; another, John Robins, called "the Ranters' God, " claimed that he was A l -mighty God and that he had resurrected Cain , Judas, and Jeremiah. Two of Robins' followers, Lodowick Muggleton (1609-1698) and John Reeves, claimed to have received visions which revealed to them that they were the two prophets of Revelation 11 who were to stand and prophesy before the L o r d . 4 7 Such were a few of the extreme claims which led many to question the sanity of enthusiasts, but the case of James Nayler, already cited, seemed to many to climax the absurdity or blasphemy of a l l others. It is clear, however, that many deliberately misunderstood or misconstrued 4 8 Nayler's testimony at his trial to stick on him the charge of blasphemy. In his cross-examination at his t r ia l , Nayler did not claim to be the h is -torical Jesus but Jesus in terms of Quaker thought; that i s , as Fox said: "The saints are Temples of God, and God dwels in them, and walks in them. 1 " 4 9 It appears that the early Quakers accepted these ideas as 4 7 Cited in Lee, Backgrounds, p. 55. 4 ft See Knox's analysis and discussion of the trial in his Enthu-siasm (Oxford, 1950), p. 166; see also Brathwaite, Beginnings of  Quakerism, pp. 241-278. 49 Great Mistery (1659), quoted in Barbour, Quakers in Puritan  England, p. 147. 142 literally true in their experience, though most other Christians saw the teaching of Christ within as a figurative expression. Such differences of views easily gave rise to misunderstanding, especially in a public will ing to believe the worst of a group they thought to be ignorant and misguided. Fully convinced that Christ lived within them bodily and that they pos-sessed the Spirit, which made them a l l one, Quakers were easily capable of addressing one another in terms so endearing and suggestive of divinity that to outsiders they appeared blasphemous or even insane. For example, Thomas Stubbs, writing to William Dewsbury, began his letter: "Deare brother: In the eternall unchangeable love of the Liveing God our heavenly Father in Jesus Christ, with you I have unitie which bonds in body cannot Separate.1" And Thomas Curtis addressed Fox: "Deare Geo. ff. who art the father of a l l the faithfull . . . I know thee whome thou art, who was ded and is alive & forever lives . . ."50 The last portion of Curtis's address to George Fox introduced an-other element which was abhorrent to critics of enthusiasts. Any individual who dared to justify any supposedly extravagant action of his by appealing to the practice of the Apostles or Christ or to certain biblical characters ran the risk of being charged with enthusiasm, since by such an appeal he was intimating his equality with the character with whom he compared him-self. Critics held that the Apostles were in a privileged position with God, 5° Great Mistery (1659), quoted in Barbour, Quakers in Puritan England, p. 147. 143 receiving extraordinary revelations from Him and had such privileges as warrant for their writings and claims. No later Christian could reasonably claim a similar authority, critics said, because God no longer dealt with men as He dealt with the Apostles, the need for such extraordinary treat-ment having been made unnecessary by the completion of the canon of Scripture. ^ Curtis 's address to George Fox treated Fox as though he were 52 God. Bishop Lavington, for example , excoriated Whitefield, charging him with enthusiasm, pride and vain-glory, because Whitefield appropri-ated certain Scriptural expressions originally used in reference to Christ and other biblical characters. Whitefield had written in his Journal: •"Though Satan for some weeks had been biting my heel, God was pleased to show me, that I should soon bruise his head." Citing the quotation, Lavington said that it was an example of Whitefield's presuming "to rob S 3 our Saviour of his very office of Redeemer." On reading a lesson about the occasion of some people's opposition to Aaron's priesthood, when God determined who was right by causing Aaron's rod to blossom, the other rods remaining bare, Whitefield.had said: "So let it happen, O Lord, to me, thine unworthy servant." Bishop Lavington thought that Whitefield, 5 1 See Thomas Green, A Dissertation on Enthusiasm (London, 1755), pp. 10-11. 5 2 See Rev. 1.13, 18. 5 3 Lavington, Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists, p. 76. 144 54 in remarking thus, was making himself equal to Aaron. In 1745, writing in his "Farther Appeal ," John Wesley had replied to criticisms like Bishop Lavington's in a fashion which must have incensed his critics further. Wesley declared that the "same God who was always ready to help their [the Apostles'] infirmities, is ready to help ours also. . . . In this re-spect l ikewise, in respect of his 'having help from God, ' for the work whereunto he is called, every Preacher of the Gospel is like the Apostles: Otherwise he is of a l l men most miserable. "5° Lavington's charging the Methodists with making themselves equal with the Apostles subsequent to Wesley's clear and cogent reply to a similar charge indicates that he was dissatisfied with the earlier defense. As offensive as the enthusiast's making himself equal with the Apostles was what the critics called his "familiarity with G o d . " This charge comprehended such practices as using amorous language in speak-ing of one's relationships with God, appropriating such language from the Bible, or seeing the hand of God in matters relating solely to the individ-ual . Campbell was disturbed that enthusiasts should see themselves always as receiving special tokens of God's love and favour, so that they come to view themselves as holding positions of particular honour with God from which a l l others are excluded. Swift said it was vanity and 54 Lavington, p. 73. 5 5 John Wesley, "Farther Appeal, " pt. I l l , Works, VIII, 220. Archibald Campbell, Discourse, p. 9. 145 pride for the enthusiast to see God's hand in every trifling affair in his daily l i fe . "It is a Sketch of Human Vani ty / ' he said, "for every Individ-ual , to imagine the whole Universe is interest'd in his meanest Concern. If he hath got cleanly over a Kennel," Swift continued, "some Angel, un-5 7 seen, descended on purpose to help him by the Hand . . . "° Bishop Lavington saw gross enthusiasm in Wesley's paraphrase of a portion of Scripture in describing the state of his soul in the presence of divine love. Lavington called the following Wesley's "seraphic rhapsody of divine love ": The love of God was shed abroad in my heart, and a flame kindled there, with pains so violent, and yet so very ravishing, that my body was almost torn asunder. I loved. The spirit cried strong in my heart. I sweated. I trembled. I fainted. I sung—My soul was got up into the Holy Mount. I had no thoughts of coming down again into the body. —Oh! I thought my head was a fountain of water. I was dissolved in love. My beloved is mine, and I am his . He has a l l charms. He has raised my heart. —He is now CO in the garden feeding among the l i l i e s . Oh! I am sick of love. Bishop Lavington's censure of Wesley's language may be cited as evidence of that lack of spiritual daring of which one critic spoke in ref-erence to the eighteenth century.^ 9 As Addison and Thomas Green cau-tioned, it was bad to get too caught up in devotion, but it was worse to express in public one's intense religious feelings, and unforgivable to 5 7 Jonathan Swift, A Tale of a Tub, pp. 277-278. 58 Quoted in Lavington, p. 38; see also Songs of Solomon 2.16. 59 see Gerald R. Cragg, Reason and Authority in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1964), p. 6. ^ u See Addison, Spectator, No. 201 and Thomas Green, p. 67. 146 express those rapturous feelings in amorous language of the type charac-teristically used in describing nuptial love even though such language might be borrowed from Scripture. Bishop Lavington was outraged, for instance, when he found passages in the published Journal of Whitefield which he could characterize only as -"familiar communications and con-versations with the Deity; full of the most sweet, tender, amorous senti-ments and expressions. 3 ' He cited the following selections as examples of undue familiarity: Oh! what sweet communion . . . had I daily vouchsafed from God! I cannot te l l how tenderly I am carried by our dear Saviour from day to day:-- I lean on Jesus's bosom from morning to night; yea, a l l the day long. - - I sweetly leaned on my Saviour's bosom, and sucked out of the breasts of his consolation. Early in the morning, at noon-day, evening, and midnight, nay a l l the day long, did the blessed Saviour visi t and refresh my heart. Could the trees of a certain wood near Stonehouse speak, they would tel l what sweet communion I and some more dear souls en-joyed with the ever blessed God there, 61 Quoted in Lavington, p. 36. Although Lavington alludes to the writings of several Catholic saints (among them Ignatius, Theresa, Catherine, and Francis) as stylistic parallels to the Methodist writings, he gives no indication that he sees in these the characteristic literary style of some mystical writings. However, even if Lavington had recog-nized that Whitefield's and Wesley's style in those passages were typical of certain mystical writers, possibly he would have made no concessions; rather, the recognition would have reinforced his contention that an un-usually close resemblance existed between certain practices of Methodists and Roman Catholics. Since Lavington, like many of his contemporaries, saw Roman Catholicism as a mass of superstition and enthusiasm (and therefore a threat to the English nation and Church), such a close resem-blance between Catholics and Methodists augured i l l . Note the title of Lavington's book: The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compared. Lavington makes no mention of English poets and divines like Donne and Crashaw, for instance, who frequently used the -"amorous" or -"nuptial" language to which he objected. 147 If one is surprised that a bishop and a student of Scripture should object to such figurative language descriptive of religious devotion, he should recall that such language as used by Wesley and Whitefield, besides showing great familiarity with God, deliberately imitated King Solomon's; and who were men like Whitefield and Wesley to make themselves equal with Solomon, who, according to Scripture, received a very special gift of wisdom with the promise that none before or after him would surpass his wisdom?^ 2 Thomas Green objected to the use of a similar style, "the nuptial style, " in "godly subjects" on the ground that material written in such a style might give "offense to some persons.-"63 doctor John Scott, sometime Rector of St. Giles in the Fields, declared that the enthusiast who addresses Christ in such familiar amorous language was first led by melancholy vapours to imagine himself in love with Christ, but grieved because of the affronts and unkindnesses he offered Christ, he seeks to conquer his Beloved with his passionate endearments; fancying Christ to be a "transported Lover smiling upon him, weeping over him, spreading out his Arms to embrace him, " the lover-enthusiast completes the rapture by fancying himself to be "leaping into [Christ's] Arms, and rolling in his 6 2 See I Kings 3.6-13. 6 3 Thomas Green, Dissertation, pp. 89-90. 148 Bosom, and resting, and leaning, and relying upon him. 1 , 6 4 Another consequence of enthusiasm which critics frequently re-marked and greatly feared was zeal. This zeal was seen as the parent of numerous excesses which often boded i l l for a l l within the ambit of the enthusiast's influence; it led to a moral rigour which made no distinctions between expediency and morality. Influenced by this belief, Bishop Lavington censured the enthusiastic Methodists' rejection of fine clothing and rich furniture; he found that Methodists from religious convictions loved "to go dirty, ragged, and slovenly, " condemned a l l recreation and diversion, had a hearty contempt of money and a l l dangers, pains, and sufferings, mortified the body by fastings and other corporeal severities, and practised a whimsical strictness, making "loud exclamations against some trifling and indifferent things; which are matters of mere discretion; things innocent, and perhaps sometimes useful; and only sinful when car-ried into excess." Burton found little that the enthusiast would not undergo in his zeal. He wi l l "endure any misery, any trouble, suffer and do that which the Sunbeams w i l l not endure to see, driven on by religious fury, a l l extremities, losses and dangers, take any pains, fast, pray, vow chastity, wilful poverty, forsake a l l and follow their Idols, die a thousand deaths . . . 1 , 6 6 And in the tale of the three brothers in A Tale of a Tub, 6 4 John Scott, A Fine Picture of Enthusiasm (London, 1744), pp. 11-12. 6 5 Lavington, pp. 12, 16, 17, 21. 6 6 Robert Burton, Anatomy, p. 900. 149 Swift pictured Jack as the arch-zealot. Jack and Martin have just sepa-rated from their brother Peter, and Martin has repaired his coat as best he might without hurting the valuable original; but Jack, in a great dudg-eon because of his ill-treatment at Peter's hands, sets to work to remove from his coat every vestige that reminds him of Peter. In language charac-teristic of a critic of enthusiasm, Swift described Jack's destructive zeal in his task of renovation: Zeal is never so highly obliged, as when you set it a Tearing; and Jack, who doated on that Quality in himself, allowed it at this Time its full Swinge. Thus it happened, that stripping down a Parcel of Gold Lace, a little too hastily, he rent the main Body of his Coat from top to Bottom; and whereas his Talent was not of the happiest in taking up a Stitch, he knew no better way than to dern it again with Packthread and a Scewer, But the Matter was yet infinitely worse . . . when he proceeded to the Embroi- dery: for, being Clumsy by Nature and of Temper, Impatient; withal, beholding Mil l ions of Stitches, that required the nicest Hand, and sedatest Constitution, to extricate; in a great Rage, he tore off the whole Piece, Cloth and a l l , and flung it into the Kennel . . , 6 7 The enormity of Jack's behaviour is evident when one realizes that the coat on which he was working (frills excepted) represented the true re-ligion of Christ. Crit ics saw the zeal of the enthusiast as particularly dangerous because it had its origin in the enthusiast's conviction that he was doing the w i l l of God. Campbell claimed that the enthusiast's zeal came from his absolute certainty that a l l his actions are either dictated or sanctioned from heaven; the individual, accordingly, feels himself compelled to do 6 7 Swift, A Tale of a Tub, pp. 138-139. 150 his utmost to see that heaven's w i l l be done. As if stunned, Campbell exclaimed: "'And how amazingly headstrong and vigorous must a man necessarily be, when his favourite opinions, and commanding passions, r p are a l l strongly supported by supernatural light, and a divine impulse!" Henry More, however, believed that the enthusiast's so-called zeal came from his melancholic complexion and was not really zeal but a disease. J ,The Spirit that wings the Enthusiast in such a wonderful manner," More said is nothing else but that Flatulency which is in the Melancholy complexion, and rises out of the hypochondriacal humour upon some occasional heat, as Winde out of an Aeolipila applied to the fire. Which fume mounting into the Head, being first actuated and spirited and somewhat refined by the warmth of the Heart, f i l l s the Mind with a variety of Imaginations, and so quickens and i n -larges Invention, that it makes the Enthusiast to admiration fluent and eloguent, he being as it were drunk with new wine drawn from that Cellar of his own that lies in the lowest region of his Body, though he be not aware of i t , but takes it to be pure Nectar, and those waters of life that spring from above.69 Aware of the potential for destruction in religious zeal, Green cautioned that a. firm persuasion that one was divinely sent was not enough warrant for action, because "religious and good men may have been sometimes imposed upon, or led into mistakes, by taking their own private fancies for divine admonitions or instructions." One should see, said Green, that his persuasion is founded on "a fair and strict examination, rational 70 grounds, and good evidence." 6 8 Campbell, Discourse, p. 14. 69 More, Enthusiasmus Triumphatus, p. 12. 7 f | Green, Dissertation, p. 4. Because the enthusiast was deluded by fancy, as many believed, he was capable of becoming enthusiastic about anything; no scale of values dictated or controlled his dedication. He could go into raptures over anything to which he took a fancy, and would wil l ingly give his life for things in themselves indifferent; even when indulging in the grossest 71 vices , he would s t i l l consider himself doing the w i l l of heaven. Enthu-siasm, by its very nature, made him fickle and inconsistent; he was rest-less , changing as the humours changed within him, now cold and careless, now animated and punctilious; zealous today but hopeless and faithless tomorrow. 7 2 Bishop Warburton, however, saw the enthusiast as a rigor-ous and obstinate fellow whose spirit, heated by a fiery nature, "retains the property of his congenial Earth, which grows harder and more intrac-73 table as it burns." And Sterne saw hypocrisy in the enthusiast's incon-sistency. Ostentatiously clothed with an outward garb of sanctity, said Sterne, the enthusiast seeks to attract the eyes of the vulgar; his face is clouded with despondence and melancholy gloom because he studiously avoids cheerfulness as something criminal; he incessantly pours forth Pharisaical ejaculations as he journeys or walks the streets, and boasts of his extraordinary communications with the God of a l l knowledge in 7 * See Campbell, Discourse, pp. 7, 8. 7 2 See Lavington, Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists, pp. 119-120; John Scott, Fine Picture of Enthusiasm, pp. 6-7. 7 3 William Warburton, The Doctrine of Grace (London, 1763), p. 197. 152 language indicative of his ignorance of the common rules of grammar and usage; he lacks commonsense, is proud of his own sanctity, and sees him-74 self as the elect and a l l others as lost souls. It is not surprising that most cr i t ics , after appraising the demean-our of the enthusiast decided either that he was mad or that he would end his career in madness. Some saw the madness as something very mild, characterized by slight deviations from the behaviour patterns of the mass of mankind; others considered the enthusiast as fitter for Bedlam than for anywhere else. /As was true in the study of the origins of enthusiasm, so it is here; the critics were strongly dependent on the authority of the an-cients, though they sometimes attempted to show independence in delin-eating the process which led ultimately to the enthusiast's madness. Writing in the eighteenth century, James Duchal called enthusiasm "a dangerous distemper of the mind; Joseph Addison said that "enthusiasm has something in it of madness"; but Langhorne declared that since enthu-siasm "precluded the use of reason, " it is a '"species" of madness; and John Wesley was certain that "every enthusiast is properly a madman" who is plagued by a religious madness; that i s , his madness has religion as 7 5 its object. 7 4 Laurence Sterne, "On Enthusiasm," The Sermons of M r . Yorick (New York, 1904), II, 282-283. 7 ^ James Duchal, "The Nature of Enthusiasm, " The Cri t ical Review, 15 (Jan.-June 1763), 142; Addison, Spectator, No. 201; John Langhorne, Letters on Religious Retirement, Melancholy, and Enthusiasm, 2nded. (London, 1772), p. 10; John Wesley, "Nature of Enthusiasm," Works, V, 470. 153 Claiming the authority of the ancients, Casaubon said that the ecstasy of the enthusiast involved a violent though temporary alienation of the mind, as is common with one in a fit of anger; but he went further, claiming that every man is mad or possessed in some degree when he sins: •"No man doth s in, but he is possessed in some degree; it is good Divinity: and best Philosophers have maintained, that there was no vice, but was 7 R the fruit of madnesse; and I believe that too to be good philosophy. " For Burton, the insanity of the enthusiast was evidenced in his extreme claims: '"What greater madness can there be, than for a man to take upon him to be God, as some do? to be the Holy Ghost, El ias , and what not?" He continued, delineating further evidence of madness and the causes of We are never l ikely seven years together without some such new Prophets, that have several inspirations, some to convert the Jews, some fast forty days, go with Daniel to the Lion's den; some foretell strange things, some for one thing, some for an-other. Great Precisians of mean conditions and very illiterate, most part by a preposterous zeal, fasting, meditation, melancholy, are brought into these gross errors and inconveniences. Of these men I may conclude generally, that howsoever they may seem dis -creet, and men of understanding in other matters, discourse we l l , they have a diseased imagination, they are like comets, round in a l l places but only where they blaze, otherwise sane, they have impreg-nable wits many of them, and discreet otherwise, but in this their madness and folly breaks out beyond measure. They are certainly far gone with melancholy, if not quite mad., . and have more need of physick than many a man that keep his bed, more need of Hellebore than those that are in Bed lam. 7 7 Meric Casaubon, Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme, p. 81. Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, pp. 918-919. 154 Laurence Sterne agreed with Burton that the enthusiast suffered from a disorder of the head rather than the heart, thus needing the assistance of a physician "'who can cure the distempered state of the body, rather 7 Pi than one who may soothe the anxieties of the mind. ° Characteristically, the enthusiast's madness was traced either to a diseased imagination preyed on by religious excesses or to the domi-nance of the passions. Henry More blamed the "enormous strength and vigour" of the imagination, which, though controllable by a man's power, w i l l work nevertheless without his leave, so that the unfortunate victim 7 Q w i l l become mad and fanatical whether he wil ls or not. Hobbes, how-ever, saw strong passions as the cause of the enthusiast's madness. For him there are as many kinds of madness as there are passions; and that man is mad who has stronger and more vehement passions than are ordi-narily seen in other men; though the madness or vehement passions might not be evident in one man's behaviour, should several people suffering from identical passions come in a group, their madness would be very ev i -dent. To illustrate his idea, Hobbes cited the case of enthusiasts with whose behaviour he was familiar during Commonwealth times. He said: Though the effect of folly, in them that are possessed of an opinion of being inspired, be not visible alwayes in one man, by any very extravagant action, that proceedeth from such Passion; yet when many of them conspire together, the Rage of the whole multitude 7 8 Sterne, Sermons, II, 285. 79 More, Enthusiasmus, p. 5. 155 is visible enough. . . . And if there were nothing else that be-wrayed their madnesse; yet that very arrogating such inspiration to themselves, is argument enough. Discussing the case of the learned astronomer in his Rasselas, Dr. Johnson declared that "a l l power of fancy over reason is a degree of insanity," but one who allows his fancy too much freedom is not declared insane until his behaviour is affected by his imaginations; when fancy becomes so despotic that the individual treats its phantasms as realities, "false opinions fas-Pi 1 ten upon the mind, and life passes in dreams of rapture or of anguish." Johnson's learned astronomer was the madman of Rasselas; he had so long imagined himself in control of the seasons and the weather that he eventually came to believe that he actually did control them; but the mad-man of Swift's Tale of a Tub was Jack, who, Swift said, was "a Person whose Intellectuals were overturned, and his Brain shaken out of its Nat-ural Posit ion." According to Swift, when the brain is in its natural posi-tion and in a state of serenity, a man remains sober and orthodox, "But when a Man's Fancy gets astride of his Reason, when Imagination is at Cuffs with the Senses and common Understanding, as well as common Sense, is kickt out of Doors," that man is mad and first deceives himself and then goes on to deceive and make proselytes of o thers . 8 2 Such was 8 0 Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Everyman ed. (London, 1962), pp. 36-37. 8 1 Johnson, Rasselas, pp. 140-141. 8 2 Swift, Digression on Madness, A Tale of a Tub, pp. 162, 171. 156 Jack's case; but individual expressions of enthusiastic madness differed as critics differed. Charles Lesl ie , the arch-critic of the Quakers, was certain that George Fox and other enthusiastic Quakers were mad and so better suited for the asylum than the prison. The example of insane be-haviour which Leslie gave provides an insight into one eighteenth-century norm of sanity. While visiting at Oliver's Court, Leslie saw the porter, a Quaker, preaching to a number of women, his followers; the women were busy leafing through their Bibles, trying to locate the texts of Scripture which the porter alluded to in his harangue; as the women turned the pages, said Lesl ie , they sighed and groaned and "shew'd as strong emotions of Devotion as could be seen at any Quaker-Meeting.-" This picture led Leslie to reflect that "there were several sorts of Madness; and what i l l luck some mad Folks had to be clos 'd up, while others went about the s t ree t s . 1 , 8 3 Joseph Trapp and George Lavington, critics of the Methodists, thought the Methodists were mad and made others mad by their doctrines. Trapp, with his eyes on Wesley and Whitefield, declared that pride and folly akin to madness infects one who undertakes tasks too great for him, pretends that he possesses great knowledge in things that he really knows nothing of, or criticizes those better than himself and undertakes to teach his teachers. Apart from the practices of the Methodist preachers, 8 3 Lesl ie , Snake in the Grass, Works, II, 153-154. 8 4 Joseph Trapp, The Nature, Folly, Sin and Danger of Being  Righteous Overmuch, 4th ed. (London, 1739), p. 32. 157 Methodist doctrine was capable of driving men into madness, according to Trapp. He felt there was a real danger that one who attempted to do extraordinary works of righteousness as demanded by the Methodists would despair and eventually go stark mad when he found himself unable to perform those extraordinary deeds. In fact, Trapp claimed that some 8 5 enthusiasts had already despaired, gone mad, and been put into Bedlam. Bishop Lavington cited the testimony of Dr. Mead, an authority on mad-ness, as corroborating the charge that some Methodists were mad. Dr. Mead had said that some madmen, because of their great physical strength, were able to endure inconceivable hardships, whether in fasting, or in en-during the cold, and inclement weather. A.s an example of the truth of the Doctor's statement, Bishop Lavington described the case of one Periam, who was sent to Bedlam because he fasted for nearly two weeks, prayed so loud as to be heard "four stories high," and sold a l l his clothing and gave the money to the poor. In Bedlam, Periam stripped himself to his shirt and prayed to get his body accustomed to the cold of the place. Such behaviour, said the bishop, betrayed "sufficient symptoms of madness."^^ Earlier, in 1744, (Lavington wrote around 1748-1749), alluding to the Periam case as evidence, John Wesley declared that people were often hurried to Bedlam when they were not at a l l insane. He added, s ignif i -cantly, that some people may have been sent to Bedlam simply because 8 5 Trapp, pp. 36-37. 8 ^ Lavington, Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists, p. 178. 158 they followed the Methodists; that is to say, only madmen would follow p 7 the Methodists. The experience of Christopher Smart reflects the anti-pathy of some eighteenth-century Englishmen to demonstrations of exces-sive religious devotion. Smart was declared insane and committed to an insane asylum because he was in the habit of kneeling and praying "in the streets, or in any other unusual place"; but Dr. Johnson, believing one's refusal to pray to be greater madness and not persuaded that Smart deserved such treatment, declared: I did not think that he ought to be shut up. His infirmities were not noxious to society. He insisted on people praying with him; and I'd as lief pray with Kit Smart as any one else. 88 One might recall here that although Dr. Johnson's contemporaries did not question his mental health, believing him to be of a sound mind, Johnson constantly feared, and suspected, that he was touched by insanity. In summary, then, critics of enthusiasm in England of the seven-teenth and eighteenth centuries followed the ancients in declaring the en-thusiast a deceived victim of melancholy and an over-heated fancy or imagination; because of his peculiar i l lness , the enthusiast was subject to unpremeditated changes of behaviour which in the judgment of some people rendered him guilty of hypocrisy and uncharitable zeal; but he was just as capable of moral rigour and transports of religious ecstasy which 8 7 John Wesley, "Farther Appeal, " pt.II., Works , VIII, 133. 8 8 Cited in James Boswell, Life of Johnson, ed. George Birkbeck H i l l , rev. and enl. L . F. Powell (London, 1934), I, 397. 159 showed him able to endure incredible physical hardships or to indulge in excesses of divine love. Duped by his imagination, the enthusiast saw himself in an intimate relationship with the Deity, sometimes receiving special visions and particular guidance in trifling matters, sometimes identifying himself with prophets or even with the Almighty or the Paraclete. In the view of many writers, the enthusiast, seldom identified with any-thing good, might even be demon-possessed, or he might be an evil ind i -vidual who deliberately set out to deceive others by mechanically manu-facturing symptoms characteristic of those truly inspired. In the final analysis, many believed that, no matter how innocent in the beginning, the enthusiast succeeded not only in deceiving others but also in deceiv-ing himself; his end was commonly thought to be insanity, and an insanity most insidious because evident only in religious affairs, a l l things else remaining normal. Although the enthusiast was, in fact, a threat to his own social well-being, most people feared him because, as the following chapters w i l l show, they considered him a grave menace to peace and order in Church and state. Chapter IV Enthusiasm Versus Government and Social Order In one of his sermons Robert South affirmed that the safety of government is founded upon the religion of the state (it mattered not whether that religion was true or false), and anything or anyone who as-saulted the state religion was in fact destroying the state; indeed, he asserted that the most effective and surest way to destroy the c i v i l power is to destroy the worship of God as rightly established in the state. 1 South's sermon was, of course, primarily directed against enthusiasts, who, without intending any e v i l , had begun that process which culminated in the C i v i l War and the Interregnum by agitating for more thorough reform in the state religion than had been made by the authorities in Church and state. Many critics of enthusiasm before and after South agreed that en-thusiasm was a threat to a l l government. But whereas some saw the threat in the enthusiasts' great stress on individualism, others saw it either in some enthusiasts' willingness to take up arms against their lawful rulers or in others' reluctance to engage in war to protect the threatened state; yet other critics suspected enthusiasts of engaging in treasonable ac t iv i -ties under the guise of religion, and others saw in enthusiasm an economic threat because thousands of workers presumably absented themselves from work to listen to Methodist preachers; and finally, many viewed the . . . . . . . . . See Sermon 4, Sermons Preached Upon Several Occasions (Ox-ford, 1842), I, 68-93. 160 161 enthusiasts' claim to be above a l l earthly laws as the ultimate threat to law and order and the very existence of government. Even in the social realm, critics saw enthusiasm as a pernicious influence. They charged enthusiasts with being profligate and destructive of those traditional practices which ensured proper subordination in the social order. Jeremy Taylor believed that if enthusiasts were not checked, they 9 would lead to a "direct overthrow of order and government/ and Charles Leslie accused enthusiasts of being unprincipled and "inconstant as the Wind," and so "as dangerous in any Government as Elephants in an Army," 3 while a correspondent for the Gentleman's Magazine, inveighing against George Whitefield, cited the c i v i l disorders of the previous century as -"melancholy proof" of the true nature of enthusiasm. 4 However, it was an anonymous author of an article published in 1738 who detailed the dire threat which enthusiasm posed in a society. Enthusiasm, he said, destroys its victim's fear of death, renders him contemptuous of danger, and d is -poses him to be cruel in prosecuting his designs and tyrannical in control-ling those under his power. And when the intoxication of enthusiasm From a Sermon, "Of Christian Prudence,-" cited in Truman Guy Steffan, "The Social Argument Against Enthusiasm (16 50-1660)," Studies  in English, The University of Texas Publication No. 412 6 (July 8, 1941), p. 39. 3 '"Who if they turn their heads, fall foul upon their Leaders." Snake in the Grass, in Works, (London, 1721), II, 56. 4 "Conduct of the Rev. Whitefield, " Gentleman's Magazine, 9 (May 1739), 241 . 162 actuates a multitude, like a raging river, it carries everything before i t , opposition serving only to increase its fury; but what is worse, according to that author, even when enthusiasm fails to achieve its goals, the mis-eries, confusion, and devastation occasioned by its attempt are enough to make "sober men" afraid of the consequences of what even an abortive attempt can produce. ^ Another writer declared that though enthusiasm "intoxicates" only a few, to those it imparts such irresistible power that they influence and triumph over many. The ultimate basis of a l l the foregoing statements concerning the threat enthusiasm poses in the state was the belief that the individual who felt certain that he was controlled directly by the Spirit of God d is -regarded a l l direction and control from lesser authority and decided for himself what to do or not to do. Critics felt that abundant evidence had shown that individuals are no longer guided directly by God, and people who claimed to be led by the Spirit often deliberately disregarded c i v i l laws, thus threatening chaos to society. Thomas Hobbes, for example, listed "pretence of supernatural Inspiration" as one of the things that weaken a commonwealth, because such a claim, justified or not, left one free to ignore the laws of his country in favour of his inspiration. Hobbes also disallowed the plea to conscience as justification for one's obeying 5 "Of Enthusiasm," Gentleman's Magazine, 8(Feb. 1738), 90. 6 "Superstition and Enthusiasm," London Magazine (March 173 8), p. 120. 163 or disobeying a law, because such a plea makes the individual the judge of good or ev i l , whereas the law truly is that judge. "Otherwise in such a diversity, as there is of private Consciences, which are but private opinions," Hobbes said, "the Commonwealth must needs be distracted, and no man dare to obey the Soveraign Power, farther than it shall seem good in his own eyes . " 7 And the declaration of certain of the French prophets many years later indicated the general accuracy of Hobbes' as-sumption that enthusiasts would ignore a l l laws and obey what they be-lieve to be inspiration. During the height of the activities of the French prophets in London, authorities were aghast because the prophet Durand Fage, whom they dubbed "a compleat v i l l a in , " declared that if the Spirit commanded him to k i l l his own father, he would obey. A.nd other French prophets agreed with Fage, insisting that they were bound to obey what the Spirit bade, and that "'a Crime ceases to be a Crime when once he [the Spirit] commands . . . The role played by enthusiasts in the C i v i l War of the 1640's earned them a name which more than one hundred years did not erase, for numerous critics frequently alluded to the events of that c i v i l war to justify their ac-cusations against enthusiasts. But even before the C i v i l War Burton had 7 Leviathan, Everyman ed. (London, 1962), p. 172. p Theophilus Evans, History of Modern Enthusiasm . . . 2nd ed. (London, 1757), pp. 97-99. 164 declared that enthusiasts would stop at nothing but "wi l l set a l l in a 9 Combustion," and Dryden, in "The M e d a l , " declared that whether it was the Jesuit or the French Puritan who laid the plan to destroy the King, Our sacrilegious sects their guides outgo, And kings and kingly pow'r would murder too. (II. 201-204) And as late as 1682, writing in the preface of "Religio L a i c i , " Dryden complained that the "sectaries" used the Scriptures, "the greatest secu-rity of governors, as commanding express obedience to them," to justify rebellion. He noted, further, "that the doctrines of king-kil l ing and de-posing," originally espoused only by the most radical "Papists," were taken up, "defended, and are s t i l l maintained by the whole body of Non-conformists and Republicans. " The Presbyterians frequently took greatest blame for the events which culminated in the death of the king. Samuel Butler gave his view of Presbyterians in his description of the religion of the knight in Hudibras: For his Religion it was fit To match his Learning and his wit: 'Twas Presbyterian true blew, For he was of that stubborn Crew Of Errant Saints, whom a l l men grant To be the true Church Militant: Such as do build their Faith upon The- holy Text of Pike and Gun; Decide a l l Controversies by Infallible Artillery; Anatomy of Melancholy, ed. Floyd Dell, and Paul Jordan-Smith (New York, 1955), p. 892. 165 And prove their Doctrine Orthodox By Apostolick Blows and Knocks; Ca l l Fire and Sword and Desolation, A godly-thorough-Reformation . . . (I.L. 187-200) But the Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men were particularly notorious for their bloodthirstiness, though some of the odium attached to the former came with the name, because of the remembrances it brought of the mas-sacre perpetrated by Anabaptists led by John of Leyden in M.unster. Though the extreme militants under John of Leyden represented only a small number of Anabaptists, a l l who bore the name shared the taint. Reporting on Baptists in England in A Short History of the Anabaptists of  High and Low Germany, the anonymous author commented: I am afraid that Anabaptisme is very rife in England, though not perhaps in one entire body, but scattered . . . here one tenet . . . and there another: yet not so scattered but they meet in one head, which is the hatred of a l l ru l e .^ 0 To allay public fears and give the lie to reproachful statements made con-cerning Baptists, General Baptists in England published a confession of their faith, which declared, among other things, that magistracy was or-dained of God, and that it was a fearful thing to despise government and to speak evil of those in positions of authority. Particular Baptists pub-lished their Confession in 1644, declaring magistracy an ordinance of God and adding that it was lawful for churchmembers to take oaths and hold c i v i l office, but they added that it was the duty of the magistrate to allow 1 0 Quoted in L . F. Brown, Political Activities of the Baptists (London, 1912), p. 6n. 166 liberty of conscience; however, obedience to the magistrate should not include things contrary to conscience.'''''' Nevertheless, as Brown has shown, during the C i v i l War and Interregnum the Baptists constituted the largest segment of the Fifth Monarchy Men; Baptist ministers were often implicated in treasonable speeches and publications; and Baptists were, in fact, in the centre of much of the difficulty authorities had to encounter in ruling the country effectively. And central to the troubles they caused was their belief that Christ was about to set up His visible kingdom in England, and they were obliged to prepare for this kingdom, even by force of arms. A section of the Baptist community did disavow the use of force, however, preferring to depend on prayers to assist in bringing in the kingdom. Nevertheless, according to Brown, when Cromwell was offered the Crown, "it would not be far from the truth to say that in every Baptist soldier there was an op-ponent of monarchy." And many soldiers were Baptists. I 2 The attitude of the Fifth Monarchists to governments has already been described, but one might add here that apart from the militant element, which felt called upon to resist earthly governments by force to set up Christ 's kingdom, another more pacific group existed, which believed in the importance of supporting earthly kingdoms, submitting peaceably, while testifying H Brown, pp. 6-7. I 2 Brown, p. 124. See also pp. 195-198. 167 against evils and awaiting the day when such kingdoms would be incor-13 porated into the kingdom of the saints. Al l religious groups, apart from the Anglicans, which flourished during the Interregnum were implicated in or blamed for the disestablish-ment and spoliation of the Anglican church and for the political evils perpetrated during the period. Hence, speaking of the religious groups of C i v i l War times, South was able to say: There is no sort of men breathing who taste blood with so good a rel ish, and who, having the power of the sword to second the power of godliness, who would wade deeper in the slaughter of their brethren, and with the most savage, implacable violence, tumble a l l into confusion, ruin and deso la t ion . 1 4 And the activities of the religionists during the C i v i l War and Interregnum so far impressed opponents of enthusiasm that almost one hundred years later, a writer for the Gentleman's Magazine, seeing in Methodism a s in-ister threat, cautioned his readers to recall the happenings of the previous century: Whoever w i l l be at the trouble of comparing the first rise of those troubles which at last overturn'd the constitution, and ruin'd the nation, w i l l see too great a similitude between them and the present risings of enthusiastick rant, not to apprehend great danger that, unless proper precautions be taken in time, the remote consequences of them may be as fatal. ^ 1 3 See Brown, pp. 103-104. 1 4 South, Sermons, IV, 52. 1 5 "Conduct of the Rev. Whitefield," Gentleman's Magazine, 9 (May 1739), 241; see also "Of Enthusiasm," Gentleman's Magazine, 8 (Feb. 1738), 89-90. 168 If detractors of enthusiasts did not blame enthusiasts for actively engaging in c i v i l strife to destroy their own nation, they charged them with a lack of patriotism, evidenced by their refusal to defend their coun-try by force of arms. But one critic saw the basic religious rigorism of one so-called enthusiastic group inimical to "c iv i l freedom." Of course, the charge concerning a lack of patriotism based on the refusal to bear arms was aimed primarily against Quakers, though some other enthusi-astic groups shared similar ideas on war. Even before the Quakers began their public witnessing, Gerard Winstanley, a leader of the Diggers, had counselled his followers into non-violence and pacifism. Faced with public disfavour and violence because of their taking over common land for their agricultural pursuits, Diggers needed some means of fighting or a hope for the future. Winstanley counselled patience, justice, and love. "Wait patiently upon the Lord, " he said; "for it is not revenge, prisons, fines, fightings, that w i l l subdue a tumultuous spirit; but a soft answer, love and meakness, tenderness and justice, to do as we would be done unto: this w i l l appease wrath." And Winstanley looked forward to the time when "the Sun of Righteousness and Love" should arise in both rulers l ft and people to put an end to "tumultuous national storms. " He wrote boldly: "Victory that is gotten by the sword is a victory slaves get one over another; but victory obtained by Love is a victory for a king. The Breaking of the Day of the Lord, quoted in Lewis H . Berens, The Digger Movement (London, 1906), p. 56. 1 7 Ibid. , p. 140. 169 The Quaker contribution to non-violence was anticipated by Winstanley's Diggers. Some Baptists (as indicated earlier) were averse to bearing arms, though numerous others filled the ranks of the Parliament's armies. The General Baptists were the ones who most frequently refused to take part in war. In the troubled years just prior to the Restoration, the General Bap-tists decided at a quarterly meeting that though in some cases it might be lawful for a Christian to fight, "as the affaires of the nation now standeth and is like to continue t i l l the appearing of the Lord Jesus we account it exceeding dangerous." They considered it "altogether unlawfull ," how-ever, for officers of the churches to enlist either as private soldiers or 1 p commissioned officers. ° That such conclusions were not made binding on individual members appears evident from the facts of Baptist involve-ment in wars during the period. Though many who later became Quakers fought in the armies of the period, when soldiers became Quakers, many frequently refused to con-tinue ki l l ing others, some leaving the armies immediately; some Quakers, however, seemed to have had no qualms and so continued to fight. It was not until the Restoration that Quakers enunciated clearly their official pol -icy , renouncing violence and the use of "carnal weapons." In hope of re-ceiving toleration from Charles II, Quakers gave the following testimony against war and fighting: 1 8 Brown, p. 9n. 170 We know that wars and fightings proceed from the lusts of men . . . out of which lusts the Lord hath redeemed us. . . . We do utterly deny . . . a l l outward way & strife. . . . That Spirit of Christ by which we are guided is not changeable, so as to command us from a thing as ev i l , and again to move to do i t . . . . The Spirit of Christ w i l l never move us to fight and war against any man with outward weapons, neither for the Kingdom of Christ nor for the Kingdoms of this W o r l d . l y Charles Lesl ie , attacking the Quaker refusal to engage in warfare, charged Quakers with duplicity. He argued that Friends were not truly averse to fighting, because they stoutly supported and fought for Parlia-ment during the C i v i l War, but they refuse to fight when they do not like the quarrel. From his perusal of numerous Quaker writings, Leslie c o l -lected evidence that statements which showed Quaker approval of war during the Commonwealth period were assiduously edited after the Resto-ration, portions being omitted to give a new and false image of Quakers. Leslie felt that Quakers were simply biding their time, waiting for the propitious moment to strike again to set up the kingdom of the saints: They w i l l not yet take Arms, not for the present, not t i l l they see their time. But they have enter'd a Caveat to secure their Right and Title to i t , t i l l they think fit to set up their Claim for their Heirship to the uttermost parts of the E a r t h . 2 0 Theophilus Evans, in combatting what he considered Methodist Enthusi-asm, discussed Quaker non-violence and found Quakerism to be the brain-child of Roman Catholics. Evans claimed that the Quaker doctrine of y Fox's declaration (1684 edition), quoted in Barbour, The Quakers  in Puritan England (New Haven, 1964), pp. 205-206. 2 0 Lesl ie , Snake in the Grass, in Works, II, 101-117, especially p. 104. 171 non-resistance and their refusal to take oaths were especially thought out to ensure that any foreign Catholic power (France or Spain, for ex-ample) could invade and take England without having to strike a single blow. So that once Englishmen embraced Quaker views the conquest of 9 I their country by a Catholic power was a foregone conclusion./ 1 In an attack on Presbyterians in 1733, over their agitation for the repealing of the Test Act, Jonathan Swift argued that Presbyterians, the chief Dissenters, were unpatriotic in that they had decided that in the event of an invasion, if the Pretender should enter those parts of the king-dom where the greatest number of Dissenters and their estates lay, "they would sit s t i l l , and let us fight our own Battles; since they were to reap no Advantage, whichever Side should be the Victors." Swift felt certain that Presbyterians were only able to decide on such a plan in connivance with the Pretender himself: "I desire to know, how they could contrive safely to stand Neuters, otherwise than by a Compact with the Pretender and his Army, to support their Neutrality, and protect them against the Forces of the C r o w n ? " 2 2 One should note the significant difference 21 See Theophilus Evans, p. 80. 22 . r T h e Presbyterian's Plea of Mer i t , " in Irish Tracts, 1728-1733 , ed. Herbert Davis (Oxford, 1964), p. 272. See also "Queries Relating to the Sacramental Test," Ibid. , pp. 259-260: "When an artificial Report was raised here many Years ago, of an intended Invasion by the Pretender, . . . the Dissenters argued in their Talk . . . after this Manner, applying them-selves to those of the Church. Gentlemen, if the Pretender had landed, as the Law. now stands, we durst not assist you; and therefore, unless you take off the Test, whenever you shall happen to be invaded in earnest, if we are desired to take up Arms in your Defence, our Answer shall be, Pray Gentle-men fight your own Battles . . . " 172 between the basic pacificism of the Quakers and the Presbyterian's refusal to fight against the forces of the Pretender. The Quakers refused to en-gage in any warfare that called for the destruction of human l ife, but the Presbyterians were not prepared to fight in a cause from which they had nothing to gain. Whereas the stand of the Presbyterians was based on their opposition to the penal laws which discriminated against Dissent-ers, the decision of the Quakers originated from their conviction that the Spirit which led them wanted them to save l ife, not to destroy i t . One critic of enthusiasm charged that the very teachings of some enthusiasts predisposed a believer to slavery and unpatriotic behaviour. Referring to the Methodists, this writer charged that the doctrines they taught could lead the country into slavery, because they rob one of his love for his country and of a spirit of liberty. The anonymous writer found that the "odd notions" of the Methodist leaders would inevitably lead to "ruin and loss to the publick" of a l l the young people who fall into their clutches. "For can'there remain any love for one's country, and true spirit of liberty, " he queried, "when such abject doctrines have once possessed the mind? Slavish principles in religion, " he added, "wi l l carry along with them the principles of c i v i l slavery. " ° Unfortunately, the writer failed to indicate exactly what were the "slavish principles in religion" to which he was objecting. 23 "The Pernicious Nature and Tendency of Methodism, " Gentle-man's Magazine, 9 (May 1739), 257. 173 Some critics saw in the schools Dissenters maintained a danger to the state, and others recognized a treasonable intent in the Quakers' refusal to take oaths. Robert South, for instance, considered schools run by Dissenters to be the breeding grounds of traitors to the government, and so he urged that those '"lurking subterraneous nests of disloyalty and schism be utterly broken up and dismantled" to "secure the government" 24 against those who once destroyed i t . And one judge revealed that the Conventicle Act was one means used to forestall conspiracies against the government, because in their religious gatherings Quakers "met to con-sult to know their Numbers, and to hold Correspondency, that they may 9 c in short time be up in Arms. Judge Keeling, appealing to a grand jury for the indictment of Quakers, urged that the Quakers be not pitied be-cause they were a "stubborn Sect" who taught dangerous principles, that it is unlawful to take an oath, for example. The judge warned that Quakers refused to swear subjection to the government because "they have an In-terest to carry on against the Government . . . their end is Rebellion and Blood. "26 Illustrating the extent to which English society depended on oaths, the judge demonstrated the enormity of the Quaker refusal to swear. Failure to swear tends to subvert the government, said the judge, in that 24 South, Sermon 49, Sermons, III, 95. 25 p r o m Joseph Besse, Sufferings of the Quakers, in The Quaker  Reader, ed. J. West (New York, 1962), p. 120. 2 6 In J. West, The Quaker Reader, pp. 119-120. 174 it denies the '"King the Security he ought to have of his subjects for their Allegiance." Furthermore, it subverts the government, because without swearing "we can have no justice done, no law executed, you may be robbed, your Houses broke open, your Goods taken away, and be injured in your Persons, and no Justice or Recompense can be had, because the Fact cannot be proved. The Truth i s , " the judge added, "no Government can stand without Swear ing ." 2 7 The Quakers refused to swear simply be-cause when they said "Yes" or " N o , " they were being absolutely honest, and because they felt that the Scriptures gave them warrant not to swear, as Barclay stated in his fifteenth proposition: That it is not lawful for Christians to swear at a l l under the gospel, not only not vainly, and in their common discourse, . . . but even not in judgment before the magistrate. 2 8 The records of the imprisonment of Quakers for contempt of court te l l a portion of the story both of the importance the Friends attached to their 2 7 The Quaker Reader, p. 120. o Q Barclay, Apology for the True Christian Divinity, 9th ed. (Philadelphia, 1795), p. 515. See also Fox, Journal, ed. J. L . Nickal l s , rev. H . J. Cadbury (Cambridge, 1952), pp. 244-245. In his satire Hudibras, Butler had Ralpho indicate his reason for refusing to take oaths as follows: Oaths were not purpos'd more then Law, To keep the Good and Just in awe, But confine the Bad and Sinful Like Moral Cattle in Pinfold. A Saint's of th' heavenly Realm a Peer: And as no Peer is bound to swear, But on the Gospel of his Honor Of which he may dispose, as Owner . . . (II. i i . 197-204) 175 testimony against oath-taking and the serious view legal authorities took of the recalcitrance of the Quakers. Among the evils which many critics saw in enthusiasm, one i n -genious writer for the Gentleman's Magazine listed an economic threat. His charge was aimed primarily at the Methodists, whose preaching often attracted hundreds and thousands of workers. "The industry of the inferior people in a society is the great source of its prosperity, " the writer said; but if one preacher, like George Whitefield, "should have it in his power, by his preaching, to detain 5 or 6 Thousands of the Vulgar from their daily Labour, what a Loss, in a little Time, " he exclaimed, "may this bring to the Public! For my Part, " he continued, "I shall ex-pect to hear of a prodigious Rise in the Price of Coals, about the City 3 0 of Bristol, if this Gentleman proceeds, as he has begun . . . " The vast numbers who attended the meetings was not the only source of eco-nomic threat, as the writer saw the situation; the teachings of the Meth-odists also contributed to the problem, for he added that a love of labour and industry "can never be well supported by the pious discipline of a 31 Methodist ." Wesley might speak of men changed from drunkenness and 29 See Barbour, pp. 207-226 for accounts of thousands of Friends who suffered for their witnessing. 3 0 "Pernicious Nature and Tendency of Methodism, " Gentleman's  Magazine, 9 (May 1739), 257. 3 1 Ibid. 176 dishonesty to industriousness and dependability, but his contemporaries were not convinced. It was left to later critics to recognize the contri-32 bution of Methodism to the stability of English society. In the thinking of several critics of enthusiasm, one of the great-est threats enthusiasts posed to English society lay in their claim to be above the laws of the land. The attitude of seventeenth-century Quakers to their country's laws gives the stand of extreme enthusiasts on the sub-ject. According to Barbour, -"Early Quakers conceded nothing to majority agreement, social contract, or the divine right of rulers; the only basis 3 3 for law they recognized was God's righteousness." They were therefore committed to disobey or ignore any law that the Spirit told them was un-godly, and neither imprisonments nor banishments would induce them to do otherwise. Edward Burrough's statement given to clarify the attitude of Quakers to the Restoration government indicates the importance of the leadings of conscience in Quaker response to c i v i l laws: For Conscience sake to God, we are bound . . . to yield obedi-ence . . . in a l l matters actively or passively: that is to say, 3 2 Lecky claimed that "the new and vehement religious enthusi-asm-" represented by Methodism saved England from the -"contagion" which threatened -"the foundations of society and of belief-" and which gained such full expression during the Revolution in France. He believed also that the Methodist revival "opened a new spring of moral and religious energy among the poor, and at the same time gave a powerful impulse to the philanthropy of the r i c h , " thus girding English society against the divisive influences of the industrial revolution. W. E. H . Lecky, History  of England in the Eighteenth Century, Cabinet ed. (London, 1910), III, 145-148. 3 3 Barbour, The Quakers in Puritan England, p. 18. 177 in a l l just and good laws of the land, we must be obedient by doing . . . but . . . if anything be commanded of us by the present Authority, which is not according to equity, justice, and a good conscience towards God . . . we must in such cases obey God only, and deny active obedience . . . and patiently suffer what is inflicted upon us for such our d is -obedience . 3 4 For the devout Quaker it was the inner light which ruled on the justness of particular laws. The Quakers' thus assuming the right to decide on the justness of a law was a constant source of frustration to c i v i l authorities, who saw laws as made to be enforced for the comfort of a l l society. Con-cerning the Quakers and their attitude to the law, Barbour declares: They exasperated puritan judges, who could not believe that any law which convicted Quakers was ipso facto [sic] unjust. Thus, for instance, a law against men who maliciously, or with evil purpose disturbed public preachers obviously could not apply to Quakers, whose intentions were good. 3 ^ Basic to the thinking of the Quaker in respect of laws was the idea that a just man is above a l l laws. Controlled by the Spirit, the just man can and wi l l do nothing inimical to the good of society; he is therefore not really subject to man's laws. According to Barbour, Quaker and puritan ideas emphasized man's thorough conversion to saintly conduct. Even Paul and Luther had said that Christian love w i l l fulfill the law by causing many actions that achieve its purposes: thus, wherever love is present, Christians have no need to be compelled by laws. Friends and radical puritans ex-tended this "Christian liberty" to a l l areas of a Christian's life: J ,If thou art such an one that canst do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth, then mayest thou safely be left to thy Freedom, From Burrough, Works, quoted in Barbour, pp. 222-223. 3 5 Ibid. , p. 220. 178 but if thou pleadest thy freedom against . . . good and whole-some and requisit things, thy Freedom is Nought, Dark, Perverse, out of T ru th . 3 6 It was in the light of such thinking that Friends and Puritans claimed that only righteous men should make laws and rule. Fox had warned Cromwell and his Protectorate Parliament: '"That which invents a Law or an Act which doth oppresse, . . . it is made by that which has transgressed the pure in q 7 his owne particular. . . . Therefore take heed a l l ye Law M a k e r s . " 0 ' Some writers saw property, liberty, and even l i fe , threatened by enthu-siasm. Enthusiasts, these writers said, see themselves only as God's peculiar children and a l l others as reprobates, miscreants, and infidels who truly have no rights in a society ruled by God's children; hence these enthusiasts w i l l invade and usurp the just rights of others and reduce them to misery and ruin. Further, these enthusiasts look forward to the time when they wi l l be the sole rulers in society and wi l l then deal "justly" with the wicked by confiscating a l l their possessions and subjecting a l l to slavery and oppression, or by putting a l l to death. 3 ^ Early in the year 1652 several gentlemen, justices of the peace, clergymen, among other citizens from Lancaster county, petitioned the 3 6 Barbour, pp. 219-220; the quotation is from William Penn's Works. 3 7 To the Protector and Parliament, quoted in Barbour, p. 219. 3 8 Archibald Campbell, A Discourse Proving that the Apostles Were no Enthusiasts (London, 1730), p. 13; see also South, Sermon 3, Sermons, I, 65; Knox, Enthusiasm (Oxford, 1950), p. 3. 179 Council of State against George Fox and James Nayler, claiming that the two Quakers were "disaffected" to the "wholsome [sic] Laws" of the nation and had '"broach'd opinions tending to the destruction of the rela-tion of Subjects to their Magistrates, Wives to their Husbands, Children to their Parents, Servants to their Masters, Congregations to their M i n -isters, and of a People to their God; and have drawn much People after them . . ."39 As was often the case, the "vi l la ins" of the piece were the Quakers (whom Hume later called "the most egregious" and "the most innocent enthusiasts that have yet been known") . 4 0 Critics saw the vari-ous Quaker testimonies as assaults against the social traditions largely responsible for maintaining due order among classes. Refusing to recog-nize distinctions in social standing, the Quakers, according to William Penn, "affirmed it to be sinful to give flattering titles or to use vain ges-tures and compliments of respect, though to virtue and authority they ever made a difference, but after their plain and homely manner, yet sincere and substantial way . . . " 4 1 Quakers, therefore, refused to bow or take their hats off to anyone; they used "thee" and "thou" to address a l l i n -dividuals al ike, and not "you" to persons of distinction and "thou" to the inferior, as was the custom; and when elements of dress implied differ-ences in social rank, Quakers wore simple clothing. For addressing his 3 9 Quoted in Lesl ie , Snake in the Grass, in Works, II, 25. 4 0 David Hume, Essays: Moral , Polit ical and Literary (Oxford, 1963), p. 77. 4 1 The Witness of William Penn, ed. F. B. Toiles and E. G . Alderfer (New York, 1957), p. 23. 180 father with the pronouns "thee" and "thou" instead of "you," young Elwood was often thrashed, and on one occasion threatened, as he re-ported: "he gave me a parting blow, and in a very angry tone said: 'Sirrah, if ever I hear you say 'thou' or 'thee' to me again, I ' l l strike your teeth down your throat. '" 4 2 William Penn reported that some people were so incensed at being addressed with "thee" and "thou" that they would say: "Thou me, thou my dog! If thou thouest me, I ' l l thou thy teeth down thy throat." They were forgetting the language they use to 43 God in their own prayers, Penn said. The testimonies of the Quakers in their practice of simple speech and their refusal of hat-honour and of "bowing and scraping the knee" to anyone indicated their firm belief in the equality of a l l men before God; such testimonies were also calculated to rebuke man's pride, as Barbour said: "Every protest in regard to equality was meant fundamentally as an assault on pride and a means of conversion, not as social re form." 4 4 These testimonies against social inequities contained the seeds of the later Quaker witness against slavery. But in the early days the author-ities saw in these testimonies the spectre of levell ing, for Englishmen of 4 2 Thomas Elwood, History of Thomas Elwood, 2nd ed. (London, 1886), p. 62. 4 3 The Witness of William Penn, p. 24. To teach the English people grammar, Fox, with the help of John Stubbs and Benjamin Furly, compiled and published in 1660 a volume with the expressive title: "A. Battle-Door for Teachers and Professors to learn Singular and Plural, etc." 4 4 Barbour, p. 163 . 181 that age were firmly persuaded that subordination was vital to the order and peace of society. One Quaker, George Whitehead (16367-1723), re-assured authorities that Quakers recognized that by God's "ordinance" some bear rule, such as c i v i l authorities ("for punishment of evil-doers"), husbands over wives, parents over children, and the King over his sub-jects, but he added that the inferiors honour superiors, not by "vain ceremonies" as bowing, uncovering the head, and making vain compli-ments, but in "speedy Obedience to a l l just commands." And he con-cluded: "We design to level nothing but S i n . " 4 ^ Another grave threat that critics saw in enthusiasm concerned sexual immorality. They found that a l l enthusiasts strongly appealed to women, and eventually developed doctrines permitting sexual promiscuity of some type. Henry More found that enthusiasts had a natural tendency to descend into immoral practices with women, either having one woman i l legal ly or demanding freedom to have several wives. He argued that Simon Magus, Montanus, Menander (a Samaritan), and the German Ana-baptists were a l l guilty in this respect. Charles Leslie cited the case of Christopher Atkinson, a Quaker of great Renown in those their early days, an Apostle, Preacher, and Writer for their Cause, and mightily confirmed their Churches: Yet so it fel l out . . . that he, even this same 4 ^ Written Gospel-Labours, quoted in Barbour, p. 167. Enthusiasmus Triumphatus (1662), The Augustan Reprint Society Publication No. 118 (Los Angeles, 1966), pp. 15, 17. 182 bright Lamp, being in prison in Norwich for the new Faith in the infallible Light, prov'd carnally fallible in Darkness with a dear Sister . . , 4 7 Leslie acknowledged, however, that Atkinson's deed was not condoned by the Quakers, who excommunicated the offender and turned him over to the c i v i l authorities after he had submitted a confession of gu i l t . 4 ^ Ranters were often charged with -"moral laxity,-" and at times critics reported the prevalence of gross immoralities among Moravians and Methodists. Tyer-man observed that a Moravian physician who attended to the Moravian community at Leeds and Bedford informed John Wesley "of his own know-ledge of sensual abominations practised by the brethren and sisters at Leeds and Bedford,1" and he indicated that James Wheatley, a Methodist preacher, was dismissed from the ranks of Methodism for moral turpi-t u d e . 4 9 Among the French prophets the famous case of John Lacy's de-serting his wife (by command of the spirit) to marry one of the prophet-esses became a scandal among the genteel in London.50 4 7 Snake in the Grass, in Works, II, 35. 4 ^ See W. C . Brathwaite, Beginnings of Quakerism, 2nd ed. rev. H . J. Cadbury (Cambridge, 1955), pp. 164-165. Leslie hinted that several women preachers among the Quakers also proved morally delin-quent. Ibid. , 36. 4 9 See Brathwaite, Beginnings of Quakerism, p. 22; Tyerman, Wesley (London, 1890), II, 96, 121-126. After his dismissal from among Methodists, Wheatley continued to preach, raising up his own congre-gations, but he was eventually condemned and shamed publicly for his guilt on numerous charges of immorality. 50 See M . Aikin, Memoirs of Religious Impostors (London, 1821), pp. 66-67. 183 Such instances of moral guilt led critics to inveigh against en-thusiasts as morally decadent. Satirizing enthusiasts as being morally depraved Jonathan Swift wrote: "There is one fundamental Point, wherein they [fanatics] are sure to meet, as Lines in a Center, and that is the Community of Women: Great were their Sollicitudes in this Matter, and they never fail 'd of certain Articles in their Schemes of Worship, on pur-pose to establish i t . " o l And directing his barbs against Methodists, Joseph Trapp charged that enthusiasts often move from being righteous overmuch in doctrine and practice to being immoral and profligate in both doctrine and practice. Methodists, he declared, "pretend to extraordi-nary strictness in practice, " but they "teach doctrines utterly subversive of common Morality. Robert South's judgment against enthusiasts represents not only his own bitterness but also the fears of many who saw a dire threat in excesses of religious devotion. Seeing that on occasions enthusiasts proved to be a direct threat to the peace and the very life of the nation and that they were l ikely to continue to be a pernicious influence on soc i -ety and an enemy to the church, South suggested that they should be treated as outlaws and, under certain circumstances, exterminated: He therefore who shall presume to own himself thus led by an inward voice, or instinct of the Spirit, in opposition to the laws 5 1 Tale of a Tub, ed. A. C . Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith (Ox-ford, 1920), p. 288. The Nature, Folly, Sin and Danger of being Righteous Over-much, 4th ed. (London, 1739), pp. 54, 62. 184 enacted by the c i v i l power, has forfeited a l l right to any protec-tion from that power, and has, ipso facto, outlawed himself, and accordingly as an outlaw ought he to be dealt with; and if by these impulses and inspirations he shall dare to offend capitally, the magistrate must assert his rights, and vindicate the prerogative of his abused laws with the gibbet or the halter, the axe or the fagot; and this, if anything, w i l l cure such vil lains of that which they cal l the Spirit. 53 South, Sermon 56, Sermons, III, 263. Chapter V Enthusiasm and Ecclesiastical Order Basic to the enthusiasts' religious life was their firm belief that they were guided by communications from the Spirit of God; and they never doubted their responsibility to be faithful to their heavenly visions. The problem with the Church arose because the Spirit's guidance (as en-thusiasts recognized it) did not always lead in the direction which eccle-siastical leaders indicated. Whereas the enthusiasts tended to see them-selves as the lone lights in a vicinity shrouded in darkness, the orthodox in society, seeing lasting worth only in the traditional, the reasonable, and the generally accepted values, viewed the enthusiasts as eccentrics at best, madmen at worst. And whereas most enthusiasts tended to value most highly a charismatic church in which each member responds to the leading of the Spirit towards a singularly devout l ife, church authorities generally appeared to be content with an institutional religion whose em-phasis was on a form of worship that was orderly and beautiful but which in satisfying the aesthetic sense sometimes failed to meet the needs of the heart. But the enthusiasts' witness contained the seeds of their un-doing. Many people thought that something had to be wrong when scores of enthusiasts claiming guidance and control by the same Spirit differed in significant respects, sometimes even offending commonly accepted standards of moral behaviour. One Spirit that claimed to be the source of a l l goodness and unity could not be the author of dissension, disorder, and inconsistency. It was to these discordant and destructive elements 185 186 in enthusiasm that post-Revolutionary and eighteenth-century England ad-dressed itself in an effort to unmask and discredit the enthusiast. The Restoration clergyman was proud of his Church and outspoken (at times even boastful and cruel) in its defense. Writing in 1661, Joseph Glanvi l l expressed sentiments that were characteristic of clergymen then and of succeeding years. He said: Our religious foundations are fastned at the pillars of the in te l -lectual world, and the grand Articles of our Belief are as demon-strable as Geometry. Nor w i l l ever either the subtile attempts of the resolved Atheist; or the passionate Hurricanoes of the phrentick Enthusiast, any more be able to prevail against the reason our Faith is built on, than the blustering windes to blow out the Sun.1 Clergymen were quick to claim Anglican doctrine and discipline to be the purest when compared with the teachings and discipline of other reformed churches, but in the estimate of many, the height of this excellence re-sided in the solid reasonableness of the Anglican faith. Of course, these clerics called attention to the reasonableness of their faith because they were persuaded of the fancifulness of the enthusiasts' religion. Persuaded of the excellency of the Anglican faith and of its ability to stand any scru-tiny, the leaders of the Royal Society, for instance, had no fear of including among the Society's members men of various religious beliefs. In his de-fense of the inclusion of these non-Anglicans in the Society, Sprat, the Society's historian, expressed his pride in the Anglican faith: But yet this comparison I may modestly make; that there is no one Profession, amidst the several denominations of Christians, 1 Joseph Glanv i l l , The Vanity of Dogmatizing (London, 1661), p. 209. 187 that can be expos'd to the search and scrutiny of its adversaries with so much safety as ours. So equal it i s , above a l l others, to the general Reason of Mankind: such honorable security it pro-vides, both for the liberty of Mens Minds, and for the peace of Government: that if some Mens conceptions were put in practice that a l l wise Men should have two Religions; the one, a publick, for their conformity with the people; the other, a private to be kept to their own Breasts: I am confident, that most considering Men, whatever their first were, would make ours their second, if they were well acquainted with i t . And towards the end of the seventeenth century Jonathan Swift wrote his Tale of a Tub, violently attacking enthusiasts and celebrating "the Church of England as the most perfect of a l l others in Discipline and Doctrine. Being so strongly persuaded that the Anglican Church was the purest, most rational, and best of a l l reformed churches, these Churchmen were unspar-ing in their attacks on enthusiasts and a l l others who in any way posed a threat to the unity, stability, or continuity of the Church. Enthusiasts were viewed as threats to Christianity in general and to the Anglican Church in particular. Men of the seventeenth century 1 Thomas Sprat, History of the Royal Society (1667), ed. Jackson I. Cope and Harold Whitman Jones (St. Louis, 1959), p. 63. 3 Jonathan Swift, A Tale of a Tub, ed. A. C . Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith (Oxford, 1920), p.-5; see also Thomas Green, Dissertation  on Enthusiasm (London, 1755), p. 185, where in writing against the Methodists he eulogized the Anglican Church as follows: "And though the true spirit of primitive Christianity seems indeed very much decayed in the world; yet I am fully persuaded that it might revive in our church, and re-cover its former strength and lustre, if the members of it would be careful, by the divine assistance, to live according to its sound doctrines and the wise and pious directions these given; as it is blessed with as true, full and rational a knowledge of the christian religion, as was ever enjoyed since the times of the Apostles; and in it is taught a l l things pertaining  to life and godliness; . . . and there wants nothing but a suitable practice to make it the glory of the reformation, and the ornament of Christianity." 188 commonly objected to enthusiasm as being an "enemy to truth, contrary to reason, and a disrupter of society, contrary to order. Henry More, for instance, claimed that he attacked enthusiasm because he was thor-oughly persuaded of the truth, solidity, and reasonableness of the Chris-tian religion. Observing also "that the whole business of enthusiasts is to decry reason as an impure and carnal thing, " he felt compelled to "look upon enthusiasm as the only sleight and effectual engine to unhinge Chris-tendom. "^ Glanvi l l saw dogmatizing as the basic evil from which arose the destructive singularity and zeal of enthusiasts. He wrote in his Vanity  of Dogmatizing: Dogmatizing is the great disturber both of our selves and the world without us: for while we wed an opinion, we resolvedly ingage against every one that opposeth i t . Thus every man, being in some of his opinionative apprehensions singular, must be at var i -ance with all men. . . . Besides, this immodest obstinacy in opinions, hath made the world a Babel; and given birth to disorders,' like those of the Chaos. The primitive fight of Elements doth fitly embleme that of opinions, and those proverbial contrarieties may be reconcil 'd, as soon as peremptory Contenders. That hence grow Schisms, Heresies, and anomalies beyond Arithmetick, I could wish were of more difficult probation. 'Twere happy for a distemper'd Church, if evidence were not so near us. 'Tis zeal for opinions that hath f i l l ' d our Hemisphear with smoke and darkness, and by a dear experience we know the fury of those flames it hath kindled. Had not Heaven prevented, they had turn'd our Paradise into a Desert . . . 6 Truman Guy Steffan, "The Social Argument Against Enthusiasm (1650-1660)," Studies in English (July 8, 1941), p. 44. 5 From "Mastix His Letter to a Private Friend, " quoted in the intro-duction to Enthusiasmus Triumphatus (1662), Augustan Reprint Society Pub-lication No. 118 (Los Angeles, 1966), p. v i i i , note 4. Glanv i l l , Vanity of Dogmatizing, pp. 228-229. 189 Charles Leslie, though writing almost forty years after Glanv i l l , agreed with him in seeing the spirit of enthusiasm as inimical to order in Church and state. Leslie said that "enthusiasm has been the Root of the greatest Evils that have befallen the Church"; he claimed that even Dis -senters, once settled into a system of order, recognized the baleful pro-pensity of enthusiasm and so threw it off. Grasping the essential sub-jective and individualistic quality in enthusiasm, Leslie declared that it "is a perfect opposition to a l l Rule and Government; . . . there can be no order where it is admitted. " And a writer for the London Magazine claimed that enthusiasm destroys religion by paying more attention to the sover-eignty of God than to ideas of divine justice, wisdom, and goodness. But a contributor to the Gentleman's Magazine, remembering the revolu-tion of the 1640's and fearful of the outcome of Methodism, declared that both religion and virtue suffer from the bad effects of the enthusiastic spirit. It is a threat to the Church of England and to the "purity of her doctrine, " he said, adding that not even the Libertine is as dangerous as the enthusiast, for the Libertine might be brought to see the evil of his ways and so repent, but not so the enthusiast, because his behaviour is based on the supposed certainty of divine guidance. "He acts upon no-tions, wild as they are, which to him appear as certain as revelations 7 Charles Leslie, Snake in the Grass, Theological Works, (London, 1721), II, 12. 8 "Parallel Between Superstition and Enthusiasm, " London Maga-zine (Jan.-Dec. 1738), p. 120. 190 from the Deity, nay, which he oftentimes is positively persuaded in him-self are revelations. How then, J ' he queried, "can we expect a change in this man, who shelters his errors under the pretext of infal l ibi l i ty, and pre-tends to act by the immediate influence of Heaven?" 9 Robert South, however, saw the enthusiasts' employment of the unlearned as clergymen to be one of the most nefarious plots to destroy the Church. He claimed that to achieve their goal, enthusiasts attempted to show that the Church did not need an educated and prepared ministry, hence their practice of managing affairs so that cobblers, bricklayers, and other tradesmen should harangue J ,the senseless and unthinking rab-ble1" in the streets, churches, or barns, and from pulpits or tubs; their aim was to show that if such humble and uneducated people could preach effectively, there was no need to prepare and maintain a learned ministry at public expense. By thus robbing the Church of its learned clergymen, enthusiasts and their Roman Catholic masters would ensure its destruc-t i o n . 1 0 As noted earlier (in Chapter one), some enthusiasts objected strongly to the episcopal system of church government, while others were violently opposed to certain of the Church's ceremonies and vestments, especially to those which retained resemblances to Roman Catholic •"Of the Pernicious Nature and Tendency of Methodism, " Gentle-man's Magazine, 9 (1739), 255-256. l u Robert South, Sermons Preached upon Several Occasions (Ox-ford, 1842), Sermon 24 in II, 53; Sermon 37, II, 363. 191 practices, and yet others desired further changes in doctrine towards a greater faithfulness to bibl ical teaching. When church authorities refused to bow to the demands of those they considered extreme reformers, some of the latter refused to compromise, choosing rather to separate from the main body; others, however, chose to remain within the Church, hoping in time to grow powerful enough to effect the desired changes from within. Anglican leaders, however, viewed a l l of these dissident elements within and without the Church as threats to its unity and so sought to legislate a l l groups into conformity or out of existence, a measure which simply hardened nonconformity. It was this seemingly ingrained incorrigibility of enthusiasts which frightened Church authorities; and the near destruction of the Anglican Church during the years of Puritan ascendancy gave Angl i -can leaders greater reason to fear dissident elements within and without the Church. The memories of the sufferings of the clergy and the Church were very evident fully one hundred years after the Revolution when Metho-dism betrayed within the Church some of the signs of the hated enthusiasm. Critics of enthusiasm were therefore untiring and unsparing in their denun-ciation of every appearance of the enthusiastic spirit in the Church, and among the objects of their attack was the enthusiasts' attitude to cere-monies and episcopal government. Hume confidently asserted, and quite rightly, that enthusiasts were contemptuous of ceremonies, forms, and traditions, but Robert South saw the enthusiastic spirit as essentially reactionary, opposed to tradition 192 as of equal value to the Scriptures, and going to the extreme of accepting the bare letter of Scripture, disregarding or slighting the judgment of an-tiquity; but what was more, the enthusiast, said South, asserts that the Spirit (that i s , either his own humour or his reason) is the only infallible judge of a l l in Scr ipture . 1 1 But it was Robert Burton who, in passages of exquisite humour, detailed the catalogue of exceptions characteristically taken by enthusiasts, schismatics, or Precisians to the practices of the Church. The Devil w i l l never permit the Church to rest, said Burton; so he planted the tares of schismatics and Precisians in the well- t i l led field of the Church; and these out of too much zeal in opposition to Antichrist, human traditions, those Romish rites and superstitions, w i l l quite demolish a l l , they w i l l admit of no ceremonies at a l l , no fasting days, no Cross in Baptism, no kneeling at Communion, no Church-musick, &c. , no Bishop's-Courts, no Church-government, rail at a l l our Church-discipline, w i l l not hold their tongues, and a l l for the peace of thee, O Sion. No not so much as Degrees wi l l some of them to l -erate, or Universities, a l l human learning ('tis the Devil 's Sewer), hoods, habits, cap and surplice, such as are things indifferent in themselves, and wholly for ornament, decency, or distinction sake, they abhor, hate, and snuff at, as a stone-horse [stallion] when he meets a Bear: they make matters of conscience of them, and w i l l rather forsake their l ivings, than subscribe to them. They wi l l ad-mit of no holy-days, or honest recreations, as of hawking, hunt-ing, &c. , no Churches, no bells some of them, because Papists use them: no discipline, no ceremonies but what they invent them-selves: no interpretations of Scriptures, no Comments of Fathers, no Councils, but such as their own phantastical spirits dictate or right reason . . . Brownists, Barrowists, Familists, and those Amsterdamian sects and sectaries, are led a l l by so many private s p i r i t s . 1 2 1 1 David Hume, Essays Moral , Political, and Literary, ed. T. H . Green and T. H . Grose (London, 1912), I, 148; South, Sermon 51, Sermons, III, 146. -1 2 Robert Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, ed. Floyd Dell and Paul Jordan-Smith (New York, 1955), pp. 917-918. 193 To counter the enthusiasts' argument that they sought reforms sanctioned by Scripture, Anglican clergymen variously affirmed the va l id -ity of tradition, the bibl ical basis of episcopacy, or the right of the state to determine church polity in the absence of specific biblical directives. Always sensible of the sufferings and the dangers of the Church, Robert South repeatedly cautioned Anglicans against making any concessions to Dissenters, amongst whom he made no distinction; for him they were a l l enthusiasts and enemies of the Church. When at the accession of William III moderate Churchmen sought to find ways of including in the Anglican Church those Dissenters who stood firmly against the overtures of James II, South warned against taking steps which by weakening the discipline of the Church would lead to the erosion of its doctrines. In dedicating a number of his sermons to the University of Oxford (November 1693), he cautioned that the rights and constitution of the Church were to be jea l -ously preserved and not treated as "little things," because "I can account nothing little in any church, which has the stamp of undoubted authority, and the practice of primitive antiquity, as well as the reason and decency of the thing itself, to warrant and support i t . " South was certain that the innovative spirit back of attempts to accommodate enemies of the Church was being encouraged by the Pope, whose ultimate goal was the complete destruction of the Church; so he cautioned: . . . new experiments . . . though in philosophy . . . commend-able, yet in religion and religious matters are generally fatal and pernicious. The church is a royal society for settling old things, and not for finding out new. In a word, we serve a wise and 194 unchangeable God, and we desire to do it by a religion and in a church (as like him as may be) without changes or a l tera t ions . 1 3 And in a sermon preached before the University of Oxford in October 1692, South dealt at length with the attitude of "those of the separation" to the ceremonies of the Church. He disallowed the Separa-tists ' appeal to conscience against conforming to the ceremonies, rites, and Liturgy of the Anglican Church on the ground that conscience cannot rightly object to anything unless there is some divine law which enjoins or forbids it , and nobody could find any Scriptural authority forbidding one to pray by a set form, to kneel at sacrament, to hear divine service read by someone in a surplice, or to use the cross in baptism. But South mar-shalled biblical injunctions enjoining "obedience and submission to law-ful governors in a l l not unlawful things" and commanding that God's wor-ship be carried on in decency and order. And he affirmed by authority of Scripture that the Liturgy, rites, and ceremonies of the Church of England were necessary, and "that a l l pretence or pleas of conscience to the con-trary, are nothing but cant and cheat, flam and delusion. In a word," South continued,, "the ceremonies of the church of England are as neces-sary as the injunctions of an undoubtedly lawful authority, the practice of the primitive church, and the general rules of decency, can make 1 3 South, Sermons, I, Epistle Dedicatory, 264, 266; see also Ernest A. Payne, "Toleration and Establishment," in From Uniformity to  Unity, 1662-1962, ed. G . F. Nuttall and Owen Chadwick (London, 1962), pp. 257-262;. also Roger Thomas, "Comprehension and Indulgence," Uniformity to Unity, pp. 234-253. 195 14 them necessary. " Enthusiasts were being self-willed and rebellious, then, when they refused to obey the lawful demands of their governors; and no Restoration Churchman, nor any cleric of the succeeding century, had any doubt concerning the goal and outcome of the intransigence of enthusiasts, if enthusiasts were permitted to run their course. As early as the last decade of the sixteenth century many apologists of the Church of England, spurred by Presbyterian charges that episcopacy as practiced in England was unbiblical, diligently studied the subject and concluded that episcopacy was of apostolical origin and thus was the only-legitimate system of church government. The conclusion seemed to have been so well received, at least among Anglicans, that Joseph Hall de-clared during the early years of the seventeenth century that "to depart from the judgment and practice of the universal church of Christ ever since the apostles' times, and to betake ourselves to a new invention, cannot but be, besides the danger, vehemently scandalous, " since "that Govern-ment whose foundation is laid by Christ, and whose fabric is raised by the Apostles is of Divine institution. "15 Laud, however, though granting that the bishop's calling was unquestionably divine, argued that bishops could be "regulated and limited by human laws, in those things which are but l ft incidents to their cal l ing. The fact is that the attacks on episcopacy 1 4 South, Sermon 24, Sermons, II, 49, 50. 15 From Works, IX, quoted in Anne Whiteman, "The Restoration of the Church of England, " in From Uniformity to Unity, p. 45 16 Works, IX, quoted in Anne Whiteman, p. 45. 196 had led Anglican Churchmen to a clear statement of the validity of the system and to the determination never to surrender or compromise it; hence a l l attacks on episcopacy were to be viewed either as patently reactionary and unbiblical or as downright rebellious. Richard Baxter did not, how-ever, accept the view that Anglican episcopacy conformed to biblical us-age. He declared that he would subscribe only to that form of church discipline and government described in Ignatius and Cyprian because that form was the usage of the early Christian Church; he found the diocesan system in England unacceptable, and he charged that it was responsible for the corruption of the clergy and churches and for the ruin of the true Church discipline. As some Anglican apologists believed episcopacy to be biblical or at least according to the practice of the primitive Church, so Jeremy Taylor claimed the authority of Scripture and tradition for the Liturgy of the Church of England. Taylor, in effect, held that the Anglican Liturgy was in proper succession from apostolic times and thus inspired in the best sense. "When the Holy Ghost came down in a full breath and a mighty wind,'" Taylor said, "He filled the breasts and tongues of men, and furnished the first Christians not only with abilities enough to frame excellent devotions for their present offices, but also to become prece-dents for liturgy to a l l ages of the church, the first being imitated by the 1 7 Richard Baxter, The Autobiography of Richard Baxter, ed. J. M . Lloyd Thomas, Everyman ed. (London, 1931), pp. 19, 293; see also pp. 62, 84, 149-161. 197 second and the second by the third, t i l l the church being settled in peace, and the records transmitted with greater care and preserved with less hazard, the church chose such forms whose copies we retain at this day." Most churchmen were content, however, with defending the liturgy and ceremonies as providing that decency and order requisite in the worship of God. Along with Burton and numerous others, South conceded that the controversial usages of the Church were not vital to salvation but were matters indifferent; they could not even be considered the worship of God; nevertheless, he affirmed that divine worship could not be without such usages at some time or other. I 9 Many opponents of enthusiasts persuaded themselves that the en-thusiasts were not really interested in reform but used reform demands as a disguise for their less attractive goals, namely, personal gain and prop erty. Such conclusions were undoubtedly based on the practice of Parlia-ment during the Revolution. The revenue of the higher clergy of the Angl i -can Church was sequestered, and Royalists and a l l refusing to cooperate with Parliament also suffered sequestration, many losing their properties if they could not compound for them. u The sufferings of opponents of 18 Jeremy Taylor, "An Apology for Authorized and Set Forms of l i turgy, " Works, ed. Reginald Heber, rev. Charles P. Eden (London, 1849), V, 274-275. See also Richard Hooker, Works, ed. John Keble, 5th ed. (Oxford, 1865), II, 121-124. 1 9 South, Sermon 24, Sermons, II, 51-52; see also Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, p. 917; Hooker, Works, II, 3. 20 See Paul H . Hardacre, The Royalists During the Puritan Revo-lution (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1956), pp. 17-63. 198 Parliament were largely occasioned by their political sympathies. Never-theless, critics of enthusiasts were not often given to making allowances for political considerations. In his.satire against enthusiasts in Hudibras, Butler used Ralpho as the mouthpiece for extreme enthusiast views. Ralpho asserts, in effect, that wicked people have no right in a state, and the property they hold really belongs to the saints: Yet as the wicked have no right To th' Creature, though usurp'd by might, The property is in the Saint, From whom th' injuriously detain't; Of him they hold their Luxuries, . . . A l l which the Saints have title to, And ought t' enjoy, if th' had their due. What we take from them is no more Then what was ours by right before. 2 1 And in his "Astrea Redux, " Dryden supported the same view. Of the en-thusiasts of Revolution times, he wrote: Religion's name against itself was made: . . . Like zealous missions, they did care pretend Of souls in show, but made the gold their end. (11. 191, 193-194) Robert South, for his part, repeatedly charged that enthusiasts were pri-marily interested in church property: "So short sighted are some in their polit ics, '" he said, "as not to discern a l l this while, that it is not the service but the revenue of our church which is struck at; and not any pas-sages of our Liturgy, but the property of our lands which these reformers ^ Samuel Butler, Hudibras, ed. John Wilders (Oxford, 1967), I, i i , 1009-1020. 199 would have altered. * And in another sermon, answering the question, "What are we to reform from?" South replied, '"from popery and super-stition. " "But where is this popery and superstition?" he asked, and replied: Why, I w i l l te l l you: there are certain lands and revenues which the church is yet possessed of, and that with as full right as any man does or can hold his temporal estate by, which an old, sur-feited avarice, not well able to gorge any more, either for shame or satiety, thought fit to leave remaining in the church s t i l l . And this is the popery that with men of a large and sanctified swallow we stand guilty of, and ought by a l l means to be reformed from. For with a certain sort of men there can be no such thing as a thorough reformation t i l l the clergy are a l l clothed in prim