Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the RevolutionStoughton, John
History
Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the Revolution
Stoughton, John
Great Britain -- Church history
Yet Dodwell wrote from Shottesbrook, August 29th, 1700, to Archbishop
Tenison, requesting him to use his influence in providing Bishops
for the colonies. “The occasion of this present address,” he says,
“is not to beg any favour for myself, nor for our dear fathers and
brethren whom I follow in this excellent cause; it is for that very
body which is headed by you against us, which, we hope, will at length
unite with us on the old terms, when worldly concerns are removed.
You have an opportunity put into your hands of doing God service in
the plantations, and of entitling yourself thereby to greater rewards
from God than you can expect from any of your worldly designs.” And
in November of the same year I discover him corresponding with the
same distinguished person as to healing the Church’s wound. First,
he despatched a _feeler_ on the subject, which was civilly
received, with a request for further communication, and then he
propounded certain terms of recommunion. He thought the Clergy who had
taken the oaths might agree with the Nonjurors so far as to maintain,
in opposition to all Commonwealth’s-men, the doctrine of passive
obedience “to the lawful Prince for the time being,” each party being
left to apply the principle in his own way. As to the doctrine of the
Church’s independency, he proposed there should be “expressions as
full as possible disowning the validity of the Lay Act with regard to
conscience, and protesting against what had been done in this matter
as unfit to pass into a precedent.” As to prayers for the reigning
family, so strongly objected to by Kettlewell, he did not regard
them as obliging a separation. He took, he says in obscure language,
the right of public offices to belong to governors who might _bona
fide_ differ in opinion from their subjects, and, notwithstanding,
be included by them in their intercessions. He did not mean that men
might own those opinions as true which they believed false, yet they
might let them pass as the sense of the community of which they were
members. At the beginning Dodwell suggested, if the reconciliation
could be effected, that the remaining deprived Bishops should “hold
their places, with a third part of the profits, without taking the
oaths;” and in the end, “If you will do nothing on your part to qualify
you for union with us, our fathers will have performed their part, and
you alone must be answerable for the consequences of it.”[466]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account