The Religious Life of LondonRitchie, J. Ewing (James Ewing)
Religion
The Religious Life of London
Ritchie, J. Ewing (James Ewing)
London (England) -- Religion; Religious thought -- England -- London
a striking proof is here afforded of the wisdom and faithfulness of God!
Surely it well becomes the members of a community which has been so
undeservedly favoured to inquire whether they, as individuals and
collectively, have faithfully improved the privileges bestowed upon
them.”
But about the chapel. Turn to Baxter’s Diary, and we find the place
mentioned there. He writes: “On January the 24th, 1672–3, I began a
Tuesday Lecture at Mr. Turner’s church in New Street, near Fetter Lane,
with great convenience and God’s encouraging blessing.” It is, writes
Mr. Orme, that between Nevill’s Court and New Street, now occupied by the
Moravians. It appears to have existed, though perhaps in a different
form, before the Fire of London. Turner, who was the first minister, was
a very active man during the Plague. He was ejected from Sunbury, in
Middlesex, and continued to preach in Fetter Lane till towards the end of
the reign of Charles II., when he removed to Leather Lane. Baxter
carried on the morning week-day lecture till the 24th of August, 1682.
The church which then met in it was under the care of Mr. Lobb, whose
predecessors had been Dr. Thomas Goodwin and Thankful Owen. This church
still exists, but on the opposite side of the way, under the care of the
Rev. J. Spurgeon. The Moravians came into possession of the building in
1740. They had previously met in Fetter Lane, but in a smaller room.
The present chapel was then known as the Great Meeting-house, or
Bradbury’s Meeting-house. Tradition says that the place was once used as
a saw-pit, and as a place of asylum when the State Church was busy at the
work in which it has ever been untiring, no matter how remiss in other
matters—that of enforcing its rights real or fancied, and disregarding
those of other men. Tradition also says that the place was built, for
the same reason, with two modes of egress, that the good men in the
pulpit might have an additional chance of safety. It was in the meeting
that Emmanuel Swedenborg was for a time accustomed to worship. It was in
the old place that Whitefield and Wesley attended, and where, as Southey
writes, “they encouraged each other in excesses of devotion which, if
they found the mind sane, were not likely long to leave it so,” but of
which Wesley writes in very different language. Let us hear what he
says. “About three in the morning, as we were continuing instant in
prayer, the power of God came mightily upon us, insomuch that many cried
out for exceeding joy, and many fell to the ground. As soon as we were
recovered a little from that awe and amazement we broke out with one
voice, ‘We praise Thee, O God! we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord.’” “It
was a Pentecostal season indeed,” wrote Whitefield. Let me add that it
was there, and not in the present meeting, that Wesley stood up and read
from a written paper such of their doctrines as he contemned, especially
that of there being no degrees of faith short of perfect assurance. He
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