It was to be expected that the possession of religious liberty, in a degree before unequalled, would occasion the propagation of many opinions previously unknown or concealed through fear. The Baptists, especially, now became a distinct and important denomination. They were the objects of bitter scorn and invective from the Presbyterian party, who had gained the ascendancy, and were treated with less kindness by the Independents than might reasonably have been expected. In 1656, two persons who had been members of the Independent church at Beccles, received adult baptism, and in so doing were considered to have given “offence” to the church, and desired to appear and “give an account of their practices.”
There are some subsequent instances of a similar kind. It was natural that, entertaining peculiar opinions as to the mode and objects ofchristian baptism, they should unite with societies professing the same sentiments. Greatly is it to be lamented that uncharitableness should ever have intruded where intolerance would have been deprecated; that fellow-christians should have allowed these minor differences of sentiment to create even an apparent separation of heart, or
—“Let the basin and the floodDivide the purchase of that blood,Whereallmust plunge or die.”
—“Let the basin and the floodDivide the purchase of that blood,Whereallmust plunge or die.”
The next pastor, and the transactions connected with his ministry will require a more extended notice.
Robert Otteewas a native of Great Yarmouth, where his father carried on the business of a boddice-maker.[121]The son appears to have received such an education as, in some measure, fitted him for the more elevated and responsible situation he was destined to occupy. He was kept at the Latin school till he was old enough to be employed in his father’s trade, at which he worked several years. It does not appear thatat this early period of his life, he had any view to the ministry; but his inclination towards mental pursuits was so decided, that nothing but a deep sense of filial duty would have reconciled him to the manual occupation in which he found himself engaged. He had already imbibed a conviction of the supreme importance of religion, and while he laboured with his hands, his Bible generally lay open before him.
Prompted by his serious impressions he attended the meetings of some Christians in his native town, held for united, earnest prayer, and other religious exercises. On one occasion an individual whose assistance was mainly depended upon, was prevented from being present. Mr. Ottee was induced to pray and expound a passage of Scripture; and he acquitted himself so well, as to call forth the admiration of the most intelligent persons present. Some of them applied to Mr. Bridge, desiring that he would encourage so promising a young man to devote himself to the christian ministry.
But Mr. Ottee evinced the same prudence which distinguished him through life, and a diffidenceas to his qualifications, which is the frequent attendant on intellectual or religious attainments of a superior order. There were some who had previously received encouragement from Mr. Bridge, but who, not having been favoured with similar advantages of education, had not altogether fulfilled the sanguine expectations of their friends. He determined, therefore, not to yield to Mr. Bridge’s suggestions, till he had consulted Mr. Brinsley, the exemplary and persecuted parish minister of Yarmouth.[123a]That grave, but urbane man, had repeated conversations with him on the subject, and was so fully satisfied as to his knowledge of the Scriptures, his gifts, his seriousness of spirit, and holiness of conversation, as to join cordially in recommending him to apply himself to the great duties of a minister of the gospel.[123b]
His sense of the immense responsibility connected with the ministry would not allow him to think of blending with it the pursuits of trade. He had imbibed a settled conviction that, to use his own expression,the work of the gospel wassufficient for one man. “There is nothing,” says he, in one of his sermons, “more plain in Scripture than this, that those whom God hath set [apart] to the work of the ministry are exempted from other worldly trades and callings. It hath been an abuse, in this nation, to think that men may trade, and buy, and sell, and run into all worldly business, and yet undertake the preaching of the gospel: yea, some there are, called the regular clergy, yet give themselves too much to farming, buying, and selling, and secular employments; this doth come short of their calling; for mind what the apostle saith to Timothy, in 1 Tim. iv. 13, ‘Till I come, give thyself to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.’”[124a]
Mr. Ottee appears to have been residing in Beccles when the Independent church was formed. In the year 1656, he accepted the pastoral charge of the people with whom he had long “held sweet counsel.”[124b]The circumstance is thus briefly recorded in the church book.
“12th No. 56.Mr. Otty made paster by yechurch.”
“12th No. 56.
Mr. Otty made paster by yechurch.”
This has been supposed to refer to his ordination, and the memorandum occurring 29th July, 1653, to his election. But a delay of more than three years between the choice and settlement of a pastor scarcely admits of a satisfactory explanation. The expression, “made pastorby the church,” moreover, raises a strong presumption that the occurrence included, if it did not refer solely to, theelectionof a pastor. That expression would scarcely have been used with reference to the mere ordination of an individual, previously elected to the pastoral office.[125]
With Mr. Ottee’s pastorate commenced the appointment of such other officers as are sanctioned by the holy Scriptures, and the regular administration of christian ordinances to his flock. With reference to these subjects, the church book contains some memoranda, which will be perused with interest by those connected with the church or congregation.
“December 29th, 1656. Deacons chosen.Wm. Cutlove & Edmond Artis, were sett ap’te to attend yeoffice of Deacons: & from yeLord’s day next ther is to be a weekely collec’ion putt into ther hands for yesupply of yeLord’s table, & the table of ye(godly) poore of yechurch.“December 29th, 1656It was then agreed that yeLord’s Supper be administred upon ye18th day of January next, & ytyeThursday before be kept by yechurch by fastinge &prayer, in order to a p’paration unto ytordinance: wchwas accordingely observed. The p’paration day kept at orbrother Artises, Jan. 15th, and yesupper celebrated at Mr. Clearke’s house, upon the Lord’s day, Jan. 18th, 1656, wchwas yefirst tyme of administration of ytordinance amongst us.“Baptisme first administred amongst us.At our monthly meetinge, being 28th of January, 1656,[127a]kept at orpastour’s house, the sacrament of baptisme was first administred amongst us by orpastour, Mr. Ottye.”[127b]
“December 29th, 1656. Deacons chosen.
Wm. Cutlove & Edmond Artis, were sett ap’te to attend yeoffice of Deacons: & from yeLord’s day next ther is to be a weekely collec’ion putt into ther hands for yesupply of yeLord’s table, & the table of ye(godly) poore of yechurch.
“December 29th, 1656
It was then agreed that yeLord’s Supper be administred upon ye18th day of January next, & ytyeThursday before be kept by yechurch by fastinge &prayer, in order to a p’paration unto ytordinance: wchwas accordingely observed. The p’paration day kept at orbrother Artises, Jan. 15th, and yesupper celebrated at Mr. Clearke’s house, upon the Lord’s day, Jan. 18th, 1656, wchwas yefirst tyme of administration of ytordinance amongst us.
“Baptisme first administred amongst us.
At our monthly meetinge, being 28th of January, 1656,[127a]kept at orpastour’s house, the sacrament of baptisme was first administred amongst us by orpastour, Mr. Ottye.”[127b]
The deacons were evidently, according to the examples recorded in the New Testament, “men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,” chosen by the brethren, and set apartto serve the table of the Lord, and that of the poor members; to take charge, in a word, of the secular affairs of the church, while the pastor gave himself “continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.”[128a]They found no description of the deacon’s office, as a gradation in the christian ministry, or as preliminary to it; or as continuing “for the space of a whole year;” or as including the administration of baptism and the duty of preaching, subject to the approbation of a bishop. They discarded these human inventions, and found their highest satisfaction in an adherence to the precedents of the New Testament.
The mode of administering the Lord’s supper was that which had been, long before, adopted by the Brownists[128b]—that which the apostolic account,[128c]and the nature and design of the institution,alike indicated as the most appropriate. They who had openly professed their love and allegiance to Jesus Christ, commemorated his death in obedience to his command, enjoyed communion with Him and with one another in the sacred feast and, with grateful joy, found themselves delivered from the imposition of a posture, which had been the natural accompaniment and indication of a belief in transubstantiation, which was unsuited to the ordinance, and had no warrant in the word of God.
Baptism was administered to the children of believers, as a sign of the gracious covenant God had made with the parents, and as an occasion for parental dedication and the solemn promise of christian instruction. But the use of sponsors was discarded, as alike unscriptural and unnatural; the sign of the cross was omitted, as a departure from the simplicity of the gospel, implying a proportionate approach to superstition; and the doctrine of baptismal regeneration was rejected, as calculated to produce and nourish a fatal delusion.
It is essential to the efficient existence ofevery society, whether secular or religious, that some regulations should be adopted with regard to the admission of its members. But the distinction cannot be too carefully noticed, between arrangements of this nature assented to by persons voluntarily associated for religious purposes, and terms of church fellowship enforced by authority, under civil penalties, directly or indirectly attaching to nonconformity. The former are consistent with unlimited toleration; the latter involve the very essence of intolerance.
Mr. Ottee appears to have exercised a very commendable prudence in the admission of members into his church. Some of the brethren were usually appointed to confer with the candidates, “in order to the church’s satisfaction.” And repeated instances are recorded in which the society suspended its decision, until they could “give further satisfaction,” and should again apply for admission.
At a church meeting, held 25th February, 1656, the following resolution was recorded, apparently referring to Mr. Ottee’s recent settlement.
“It was likewise agreed upon, that this day fortnett, being the eleventh day of March, begininge at eleven of the clocke, be spent by the church in thanksgivinge unto God, for his gracious returneinge unto us in a way of mercye, for orsettlement after those many shakeinges we have bene under, in refference to orpresent church state, & ytthe Lord hath bene pleased both to give us to have the priviledges of his people administred unto us, & to oure children; & alsoe that we then seeke unto him by ernest supplication, for further grace, wisdome, & assistance, to walke in his house, as those who are priviledged wthsuch mercye—this meetinge to be at orbrother Edmond Artis his house.”
“It was likewise agreed upon, that this day fortnett, being the eleventh day of March, begininge at eleven of the clocke, be spent by the church in thanksgivinge unto God, for his gracious returneinge unto us in a way of mercye, for orsettlement after those many shakeinges we have bene under, in refference to orpresent church state, & ytthe Lord hath bene pleased both to give us to have the priviledges of his people administred unto us, & to oure children; & alsoe that we then seeke unto him by ernest supplication, for further grace, wisdome, & assistance, to walke in his house, as those who are priviledged wthsuch mercye—this meetinge to be at orbrother Edmond Artis his house.”
Hearts thus attuned to praise, sought its expression in “psalms and hymns, and spiritual songs.” Singing would have exposed the puritans to considerable peril, while they were obliged to meet in secret that they might evade the fang of persecution. But now “had the churches rest;” and they joyfully availed themselves of a privilege, at once permitted and prompted by their improved circumstances. At the nextmeeting the subject was brought under consideration.
“Att the monthly meeting of the church, upon the 25th day of the first month, called March, [1657].“It was agreed by the church, that they doe put in practice the ordinance of singinge, in the publiq upon the forenoone and afternoone on the Lord’s daies, and that it be betweene praier and sermon; and also it was agreed that the New England translation of the Psallmes be made use of by the church, at their times of breaking of bread: and it was agreed that the next Lord’s day seventh-night be the day to enter upon the work of singinge in publiq.”
“Att the monthly meeting of the church, upon the 25th day of the first month, called March, [1657].
“It was agreed by the church, that they doe put in practice the ordinance of singinge, in the publiq upon the forenoone and afternoone on the Lord’s daies, and that it be betweene praier and sermon; and also it was agreed that the New England translation of the Psallmes be made use of by the church, at their times of breaking of bread: and it was agreed that the next Lord’s day seventh-night be the day to enter upon the work of singinge in publiq.”
The metrical version of the Psalms, alluded to in the above extract, was published in 1640. The pilgrim fathers, “though they blessed God for the religious endeavours of those who translated the Psalms into the metre usually annexed at the end of the Bible,” yet observed in that translation so many variations, not only from the text, but from the very sense of the Psalmist, that “it was an offence unto them.”Each of their chief divines took a portion to translate, and the whole was afterwards revised by Mr. Henry Dunster, President of Harvard College. They claimed the merit of a close adherence to the Hebrew, but were conscious that their versification was, by no means, free from imperfections. “We have respected,” said they, “rather a plain translation, than to smooth our verses with the sweetness of any paraphrase. We have attended conscience rather than elegance, fidelity rather than ingenuity; that so we may sing in Zion the Lord’s songs of praise, according unto his own will, until he bid us enter into our Master’s joy, to sing eternal hallelujahs.”[133]
Whatever might be the comparative claims of a version of the Psalms composed two hundred years ago, it would grate upon ears accustomed to the more majestic flow of modern poetry. It has been the privilege—the almost exclusive privilege of nonconformity, to have derived the benefit of progressing refinement, and to have retained poetry as the permanent handmaid of devotion, while in the national churches the uncouthdoggerel of the sixteenth century is still cherished as a thing which it were sacrilege to touch.
The Independents never introduced into their assemblies that unbounded liberty of teaching, which had been the mark and the bane of the Brownist churches.[134]But they desired, under the prudent, constant, and salutary superintendence of a ministry invested, if not with more extensive powers, with a more commanding moral influence, to retain the advantages of an open discussion of topics connected with their religious system and spiritual prosperity. The following extracts from the church book, show that something of this kind was attempted at Beccles. The reader will regret, that no account of the questions discussed, or of the manner in which they were treated, has been preserved.
“It was likewise” (at the meeting, held 25th March, 1657) further “agreed, that upon the next monthly meeting, the church doetake in considerac’on yebretherens’ prophesying,[135]or speaking to a question.”“At a meetinge of the church upon the 3rd day of the month, com’only called June, 1657, it was agreed upon and condesended unto, that two of these bretheren hereunder written be appoynted in ther order to speake unto the questions wchshall be hereafter p’pounded, to be answered in our publiq church meeteinges; and our pastour or Mr. Clearke, one of them, be desired constantly to conclude the meetinge:
“It was likewise” (at the meeting, held 25th March, 1657) further “agreed, that upon the next monthly meeting, the church doetake in considerac’on yebretherens’ prophesying,[135]or speaking to a question.”
“At a meetinge of the church upon the 3rd day of the month, com’only called June, 1657, it was agreed upon and condesended unto, that two of these bretheren hereunder written be appoynted in ther order to speake unto the questions wchshall be hereafter p’pounded, to be answered in our publiq church meeteinges; and our pastour or Mr. Clearke, one of them, be desired constantly to conclude the meetinge:
Edmond Artis & John Morse.
Francis Haylocke & Richard Heasell.
Edmond Nevill & Robert Horne.
Wm. Cutlove & Richard Shildrake.”
Then follows:
“The order of bretheren to find ther questions wchthey are desired to acquaynt eyther our present pastor with, or orbrother Mr. Clearke, to this end ytupon the conclusion of eyther days of these exercises, the questionnext to be spoken unto may be p’pounded unto the bretheren, who are desired to stay a little space, every meetinge, after the rest of the company who attend these meeteinges beside the church have withdrawen themselves, to the end ytthey may know wt& whose question is next in order to be considered; and that one of them be desired to give out the question.“Brother Thomas Onge,” &c. &c. [eleven other names.]“It was likewise further agreed upon ytafter the next meeteinge of this nature be p’formed upon the second day of the weeke, publiq notyse be given at ytmeeting that from thenceforth it is intended ytthe exercise of this nature shall be kept in the usual place, upon the 3rd day of the week, to begin at the houres of two of the clocke in the afternoone in sum’er tyme, & at one in the winter.”
“The order of bretheren to find ther questions wchthey are desired to acquaynt eyther our present pastor with, or orbrother Mr. Clearke, to this end ytupon the conclusion of eyther days of these exercises, the questionnext to be spoken unto may be p’pounded unto the bretheren, who are desired to stay a little space, every meetinge, after the rest of the company who attend these meeteinges beside the church have withdrawen themselves, to the end ytthey may know wt& whose question is next in order to be considered; and that one of them be desired to give out the question.
“Brother Thomas Onge,” &c. &c. [eleven other names.]
“It was likewise further agreed upon ytafter the next meeteinge of this nature be p’formed upon the second day of the weeke, publiq notyse be given at ytmeeting that from thenceforth it is intended ytthe exercise of this nature shall be kept in the usual place, upon the 3rd day of the week, to begin at the houres of two of the clocke in the afternoone in sum’er tyme, & at one in the winter.”
Sept. 20th, 1658, occurs the following:
“At a meetinge then of the church, beinge occasioned by a letter sent from diverse churches touchinge a generall meetinge of the severall Congregationallchurches at London, by ther pastors or others, bretheren, at the Savoye, upon the 29th of September next, it was agreed by the church that our pastour, Mr. Ottie, should goe to that meeteinge on the behalf of this church, and ytyecharge of the jorneye should be mutually borne by the bretheren of the socyetye.”
“At a meetinge then of the church, beinge occasioned by a letter sent from diverse churches touchinge a generall meetinge of the severall Congregationallchurches at London, by ther pastors or others, bretheren, at the Savoye, upon the 29th of September next, it was agreed by the church that our pastour, Mr. Ottie, should goe to that meeteinge on the behalf of this church, and ytyecharge of the jorneye should be mutually borne by the bretheren of the socyetye.”
Previously to the death of Oliver Cromwell the Independents had petitioned for liberty to hold this synod. They had acquired, especially in Suffolk and Norfolk, considerable importance by their numbers, and by the accession of many opulent persons. But they had been (to use their own expressions) like so many ships launched singly, and sailing apart and alone in the vast ocean of those tumultuous times, exposed to every wind of doctrine, under no other conduct than the word and Spirit, and their particular elders and principal brethren, without associations among themselves, or so much as holding out a common light to others whereby to know where they were.[137]It is a circumstance which strikingly distinguishes the Independents from the Brownists, that whilethey strenuously contended against the exercise of any spiritual authority, even by the gravest and wisest assemblies of men, they desired “that there might be a correspondence between their churches, in city and country, for counsel and mutual edification,” and that the world might know to what extent they, “being many,” were “one body.”
The meeting at the Savoy consisted of ministers and messengers from above a hundred Congregational churches, and was graced by the presence of Howe, then chaplain to the young Protector, and of other eminent divines. The synod was opened by a day of fasting and prayer; and a committee of six divines, including Mr. Bridge of Yarmouth, was appointed to draw up a confession. On the 12th of October, the assembly agreed upon “a declaration of the faith and order owned and practised in the Congregational churches in England.” As its basis they adopted the confession drawn up in 1643, by the Westminster assembly of divines, omitting, however, all that related to thepowerof synods and councils, and of the civil magistrate in religiousmatters. They added a chapter on the proper magnitude of sacred societies, as properly congregational, though not so isolated as to preclude mutual counsel; the proper subjects of church-membership, namely, those who in the judgment of charity are sanctified persons; the commencement of the church relationship by the free choice of the individuals, and not by accidental dwelling in a particular civil district; the requisiteness, however, of the associating of believers who reside in the same city, town, or neighbourhood; the right of the members at large to be consulted, and the necessity of the concurrence of a majority of them, in all important transactions of the society; and the propriety of receiving into their communion those of different sentiments, so far as consistent with their own principles.[139a]They concluded with an expression of gratitude to their governors for the liberty of conscience they enjoyed, and that this liberty was established by law, so long as they disturbed not the public peace.[139b]
On the 2nd of March, 1658, a meeting of the church was held at Flixton, (seven miles from Beccles,) for the purpose of administering the ordinance of baptism to several children.
Another church meeting was held 3rd March, 1659. The detailed account of the proceedings of the society then abruptly terminates.
The death of Cromwell, and the resignation of his upright but unaspiring son, involved the national affairs in new difficulty. The hour of comparative sunshine which religion had enjoyed had well nigh passed away. The restoration of the monarchy was indeed spoken of as an event calculated to unite all the jarring elements of the state;—a glowing hope, resembling the intense fervour of sunshine which precedes and foretells the renewal of the storm.
In 1662, was passed the Act of Uniformity, than which no chapter of the Statute Book has obtained, in the estimation of just and liberal men, a more ignominious notoriety. It demanded a perfect conformity to the Book of Common Prayer, and the rites and ceremonies of the establishedchurch. The 5th September (O. S.) 1662, on which day it came into operation, was properly denominated theblackBartholomew-day. “That Bartholomew-day” (says Locke) “was fatal to our church and religion, by throwing out a very great number of worthy, learned, pious, and orthodox divines.” By this statute nearly two thousand five hundred ministers were silenced. And it is affirmed that, upon a moderate calculation, it procured the untimely death of three thousand nonconformists, and the ruin of sixty thousand families.[141]
This proceeding, however, was witnessed by the dissenting body more in sorrow than in anger. One of the leading Independents in Suffolk thus expressed himself. “About this time was the breaking up of the ministry; which sad dispensation I was very sensible of, and much bewailedin my own spirit, and in secret mourning for the sin and misery of England that had undone itself and declared itself unworthy of the gospel: writingIchabodupon all my enjoyments, whilst the glory was departed; calling to mind my own iniquity that helped on this sad judgment.”[142]
The Act of Uniformity had, according to Dr. Calamy, the immediate effect of silencing bothMr. John Clark and Mr. Ottee. Of the former, no further account has been handed down. The latter appears to have been soon enabled, by his own prudence, and through the respect which a holy and benevolent character often receives even from the worldly and narrow-minded, to continue the more private exercise of his ministry.
Notwithstanding the passing of the Conventicle Act and the Five Mile Act, designed more effectually to crush the dissenting congregations and separate their pastors from them, he appears to have gone on, through the remaining years of the Stuart dynasty, preaching the gospel to his people in Beccles. “And God continued” (says Dr. Calamy) “to bless his labours among them to the end of his days.” He presided over his church with remarkable prudence and fidelity. His preaching was as solid and useful as it was plain, and “met with approbation, both from ministers and private Christians of all denominations.” The following testimony by Mr. Bidbanck of Denton, is equally strong. “He was, as is well known, an interpreter one of a thousand, Job xxxiii. 23; an Apollos, mighty in theScriptures, Acts xviii. 24.”[144a]If he preached five or six sermons without hearing of any good effect, he was greatly dejected and very fervent in prayer for more abundant success.
Towards the close of his life, he had, as he told Mr. Bidbanck, “many warnings of putting off his tabernacle.” With a view to his own consolation under those circumstances, and to the edification of his flock, he preached, in the mornings of the Lord’s days, a course of sermons upon the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. These were amongst his last discourses. They were heard with deep and affectionate interest, and having been taken down in shorthand from the lips of the preacher, were published soon after his decease.[144b]
This little book was introduced to the christian world, by a short preface from the pen of Mr. Martin Finch, the minister of the Independent church at Norwich,[145]and dedicated to the deceased pastor’s bereaved flock, by Mr. Bidbanck. In these discourses, Mr. Ottee enlarged upon the parallel drawn by the apostle between the priesthood of Melchisedec and that of Jesus Christ, in an expository style, discovering much energy of thought combined with deep piety and an ardent desire for usefulness.
Mr. Ottee was, emphatically, aprotestant nonconformist. With him personal piety was, indeed, the first, the absorbing consideration. But protestantism held scarcely an inferior place in his esteem. On this subject his style, even through the mutilating medium of shorthand,rises to animation. “What prophet, or what apostle,” he exclaims, “said any thing for the worshipping of images? or what apostle, or what prophet, said any thing to warrant the praying in an unknown tongue? What prophet, or apostle, or penman of Scripture, hath said any thing concerning the sacrifice of the mass, for the living and the dead? Oh, filthy trash! What prophet, or apostle, or penman of the Scripture, hath said any thing concerning praying souls out of purgatory, or of having mass read for them? What prophet, or apostle, or Christ himself, said any thing of purgatory, or crossing themselves, or their childish crosses and beads? Of these popish superstitions God hath said nothing in all his word. And therefore the people of God must never meddle with these things; and if you be tempted or solicited to any ceremony, ask the question, Have Moses, or the prophets, or Christ, or his apostles, said any thing to this matter that you are so zealous for? O, search the Scripture; and what you find there, you are to practise in faith and in the fear of God. ‘To the law and to the testimony,if they speak notaccording to this word,it is because there is no light in them.’”[147a]
Nor did he hesitate to avow his objections to a church which retained any traces of the superstitions of popery. “As for us that have the reformed religion, how many amongst us delight to worship God after the law of a carnal commandment! Are there not too many amongst us which are more for old, abrogated ceremonies than they are for a gospel worship? Bewail and lament the apostasy of this generation.”[147b]“If all the Mosaical rites and ceremonies were weak and imperfect, and God, for that reason, abolished them, because they could not reach the main end of man’s happiness; then, here you may see the folly of those men that set up these rites and ceremonies and human inventions, in part of their worship. If God’s own institutions were weak and unprofitable, what are men’s inventions? Are their priestly vestments profitable? their crosses and cringings, profitable? What profit is there in bowing the knee at the word ‘Jesus’? . . . But some will say, these are ornamentsof the church of God. To that I answer, so is a painted glass an ornament to the house, yet it shuts out the light more than a plain glass . . . These painted and carnal ceremonies do shut out the light of the gospel; for the light of the gospel shines out more pure and clear in the plain administration of the gospel; and therefore all those things that carnal men so magnifie, are unprofitable.”[148a]
Mr. Ottee wascongregationalin his judgment; but he held his opinions in combination with so much modesty and moderation, as to win the esteem and affection of those who differed from him. In particular, he enjoyed the intimate friendship of Dr. John Collinges, the learned, pious, and eminent minister of St. Stephen’s church, Norwich.[148b]
The discourses already quoted, contain ample evidence of the orthodox character of Mr. Ottee’sviews. They indicate his belief in the doctrine of original sin;[149a]of the consequent moral inability of man to effect his own salvation;[149b]of the indispensable importance of the change called the new birth;[149c]of the Trinity;[149d]of the union of the divine and human natures in the person of the Son of God;[149e]of the atonement made by him for sin;[149f]of the obligation resting upon all men to apply themselves to the exercise of prayer, and to lead a life of personal holiness;[149g]and the vanity of trusting to the mere mercy of God, irrespectively of the channel through which he has revealed his willingness to bestow it.[149h]
There is another topic to which this excellent man adverted in his published sermons, which must not be passed unnoticed. This was, the duty of believers to provide for the support of a succession of christian ministers. In connexion with the statement of the sacred writer, that Abraham gave Melchisedec a tenth part of the spoil of the four kings, he remarks,—“I know ithath been long a dispute whether tenths or tithes ought to be continued any longer, or any more than altars and sacrifices, in a reformed christian church: I shall not determine that; but this we may all be assured of, that if tithes or tenths be of the ceremonial law, and so are abolished, yet the moral equity is to abide to the end of the world,—that those that minister at God’s altar, should have honourable and comfortable maintenance.”[150]
And referring to the mortality of the priesthood, he says, “We ought to pray that there may never want a succession of men to carry on the work of God. And this ought to be our care also, as far as in us lies, that there may be a generation brought up for the service of God, when another goes away. When Abraham died, his son Isaac succeeded him. When Aaron died, Eleazar succeeded, and took up the work of God that his father had laid down. So it would be the happiness of families, that children would take up the work that their fathers have laid down by reason of death. We live in an age wherein thereis a great decay of godly ministers: the old generation wearing off, and many gone to the dust, and but few come in, that have the same spirit, the same grace, and shine with the same light as their fathers did, who are dead and gone. We ought, all of us, to pray, as our Saviour saith, that, as the harvest is great, the Lord would send forth labourers into his harvest. A good succession speaks a great favour of God, to families, churches, and nations. See how careful Moses was in that. When God had told him that he must die, (in Numb, xxvii. 16,) ‘Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation.’ And truly, so should all godly parents and godly ministers say, Let the God of the spirits of all flesh bring in some to my family that may go out and in before my family; and let the God of the spirits of all flesh bring in some to his church, to guide them and to teach them.”[151]
Mr. Ottee closed his useful career about theend of April, 1689,[152a]a few days before the Toleration Act laid a basis for the gradual attainment of religious liberty.[152b]
In May, 1687, a part of the site of the present meeting-house had been purchased by the deacons,Edmund Artis and Francis Haylouck, probably with a view to the erection of a building for public worship.
It will be observed that this was immediately after the first declaration for liberty of conscience was issued by James II.[153]The hollowness of the king’s professions was probably discovered before any further measures had been taken: for there appears to have been some delay in the completion of the building.
The deacons just mentioned survived their excellent pastor. Two of the silver cups still used by the church in the celebration of the Lord’s supper, had been marked, at an earlier date, with a faint, perhaps with a trembling hand,—
“FOR YECH: A. H. E. F R.”
“FOR YECH: A. H. E. F R.”
This somewhat enigmatical inscription was afterwards interpreted by adding in deeply cut letters, upon one of the cups,
“To the use of the Church.Francis Haylock,Deacon, 1690.”[154a]
“To the use of the Church.Francis Haylock,Deacon, 1690.”[154a]
and upon the other,
“To the use of the Church.Edmund Artist,Deacon, 1690.”[154b]
“To the use of the Church.Edmund Artist,Deacon, 1690.”[154b]
Subjection of events to the designs of Providence—Joseph Tate—Death of Augustine Gregory—John Killinghall—“Mr. Green”—Members received—William Nokes—Edmund Spencer—Deacons ordained—Thomas Tingey—William Lincoln—John Hurrion—Nicholas Phené—John Fell—Baxter (?) Cole—Declining state of the interest.
Thewisdom of Providence is often exemplified in the disappointment of hopes, in themselves worthy to be indulged. He who turns the devices of his enemies to the accomplishment of his will, thus teaches his servants the insufficiency of all that they can do, independently of his aid and guidance, for the promotion of his glory. God does not forsake the work of his own hands; but he retains to himself the high prerogative, to choose the period and the instruments of its accomplishment. This consideration should reconcile the Christian to alternations ofprosperity and adversity in the history of the churches, and should cheer the heart, and invigorate the hand, under circumstances the most discouraging.
For a long series of years after Mr. Ottee’s death the church and congregation at Beccles were, from a variety of causes, in a declining state. It will be well, if the contemplation of this period lead to a grateful feeling of mind under present prosperity, and induce, for the future, watchfulness against all departures from the faith and practice of the gospel, by which alone a church of Christ can be really injured.
On the 26th of October, 1691,Mr. Joseph Tate, having previously been received into the church, was solemnly set apart to the office of its pastor.
In the year 1693, the congregation sustained the loss of a promising, and apparently robust, young man, namedAugustine Gregory, who had been designed for the ministry, but was carried off by consumption in his seventeenth year. An interesting letter has been preserved,which was addressed to him a short time before his death, by his intimate friend, Mr. Josiah Baker, one of the excellent family at Wattisfield, to whom a reference has been already made.[157]
“Wattisfield,Sept.7th, 1693.“Dying friend,“Your present condition directs me to this epithet, which, though in itself it might seem harsh and grating, yet I hope your daily conversing with death will take off whatever of that nature may be in it absolutely considered.“The great probability that there appears to be that we shall never meet again in this world, is an argument with me to trouble you with a few lines as a testimony of my truest affection, and to bid you farewell till we meet in a better world.. . . . . .“It behoves you to see that the foundation of a good work be laid in deep humiliation for sin, both original and actual, that there be not only a partial, but a thorough change wrought in you;that there be an unreserved resignation of yourself to a whole Christ, and a fixed reliance upon him alone for salvation; and all this joined with a filial submission to a Father’s rod, in your present condition.. . . . . .“The sweet in-comes which I hope you find under this rod, may greatly reconcile you to your present condition; and the forethoughts of the glory to come, and uninterrupted communion above, may beget in you a longing after the future state. God in his infinite wisdom, does generally give more fellowship and communion with himself, under affliction, than at other times, both for the comfort and peace of the afflicted, and to show that He is all,withoutall, as well asinall ordinances. And this should reconcile us to the sharpest affliction, even to death itself; if we may have His presence, his rod and his staff, to comfort us. The Lord’s end, in affliction, is to take away sin; and if it be his will that we should not come back into a sinful world, but be removed into a sinless state above, we have no reason to be unwilling to put off our rags ofmortality, that we may put on robes of immortality, and to go to that place, where all tears of conviction, humiliation, and affliction, shall be wiped off, and all sin and sorrow shall flee away.“You are made a singular example to all spectators about you, and especially to all young persons. It is eminently verified in you, that all flesh is grass, and as the flower in the field, so it fades and withers. And when I see so green grass withered, and so fair a flower faded, it teacheth me that the young man is not to glory in his strength. I’m sure there is a peculiar voice to myself in this affliction. The Lord grant I may hear that instruction which he intends by it, and that it may be sealed by his Spirit upon my heart!. . . . . .“Farewell, my dear friend. The Lord bless you, and make his face to shine upon you, and lift up the light of his countenance upon your soul. The Lord give you that assurance of his favour which you wait for, that joy and peace in believing, that may give you an abundant entranceinto the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, where, I hope, at the glorious resurrection, you shall meet withYour most affectionateand sympathizing friend,“Josiah Baker.”[160]
“Wattisfield,Sept.7th, 1693.
“Dying friend,
“Your present condition directs me to this epithet, which, though in itself it might seem harsh and grating, yet I hope your daily conversing with death will take off whatever of that nature may be in it absolutely considered.
“The great probability that there appears to be that we shall never meet again in this world, is an argument with me to trouble you with a few lines as a testimony of my truest affection, and to bid you farewell till we meet in a better world.
. . . . . .
“It behoves you to see that the foundation of a good work be laid in deep humiliation for sin, both original and actual, that there be not only a partial, but a thorough change wrought in you;that there be an unreserved resignation of yourself to a whole Christ, and a fixed reliance upon him alone for salvation; and all this joined with a filial submission to a Father’s rod, in your present condition.
. . . . . .
“The sweet in-comes which I hope you find under this rod, may greatly reconcile you to your present condition; and the forethoughts of the glory to come, and uninterrupted communion above, may beget in you a longing after the future state. God in his infinite wisdom, does generally give more fellowship and communion with himself, under affliction, than at other times, both for the comfort and peace of the afflicted, and to show that He is all,withoutall, as well asinall ordinances. And this should reconcile us to the sharpest affliction, even to death itself; if we may have His presence, his rod and his staff, to comfort us. The Lord’s end, in affliction, is to take away sin; and if it be his will that we should not come back into a sinful world, but be removed into a sinless state above, we have no reason to be unwilling to put off our rags ofmortality, that we may put on robes of immortality, and to go to that place, where all tears of conviction, humiliation, and affliction, shall be wiped off, and all sin and sorrow shall flee away.
“You are made a singular example to all spectators about you, and especially to all young persons. It is eminently verified in you, that all flesh is grass, and as the flower in the field, so it fades and withers. And when I see so green grass withered, and so fair a flower faded, it teacheth me that the young man is not to glory in his strength. I’m sure there is a peculiar voice to myself in this affliction. The Lord grant I may hear that instruction which he intends by it, and that it may be sealed by his Spirit upon my heart!
. . . . . .
“Farewell, my dear friend. The Lord bless you, and make his face to shine upon you, and lift up the light of his countenance upon your soul. The Lord give you that assurance of his favour which you wait for, that joy and peace in believing, that may give you an abundant entranceinto the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, where, I hope, at the glorious resurrection, you shall meet with
Your most affectionateand sympathizing friend,“Josiah Baker.”[160]
During Mr. Tate’s ministry at Beccles, upwards of thirty persons joined the church. But on the 28th November, 1694, he resigned his pastoral office, by a memorandum under his hand, in the church book; and his dismissal was testified by the signatures of “Edmund Artis,” and “Fran. Haylouck,” the deacons.
In the same year Mr. Tate became pastor of the Independent church then assembling at Girdler’s Hall, London, where he succeeded Mr. George Griffith, an eminent preacher during the interregnum, and a principal manager in the synod held by the Independents in 1658. The afternoon service at Girdler’s Hall was conducted by Mr. Tate for twelve or thirteen years, but of his subsequent history there are no traces. Thatchurch afterwards became scattered among other societies. Many of them joined in communion under the celebrated Dr. Isaac Watts.[161a]