action that another age should believe too little. Such are the imperfections of our nature, that we are compelled, by the very laws of its progress, to pass through those crises of scepticism and of mental distress, which to a vulgar eye are states of national decline and national shame; but which are only as the fire by which the gold must be purged before it can leave its dross in the pot of the refiner. To apply the imagery of the great allegorist, it is necessary that the poor pilgrim, laden with the weight of accumulated superstitions, should struggle through the Slough of Despond and the Valley of Death, before he can reach that glorious city, glittering with gold and with jewels, of which the first sight is sufficient recompense for his toils and his fears.

During the whole of the seventeenth century, this double movement of scepticism and of toleration continued to advance; though its progress was constantly checked by the two successors of Elizabeth, who in every thing reversed the enlightened policy of the great queen. These princes exhausted their strength in struggling against the tendencies of an age they were unable to understand; but, happily, the spirit which they wished to quench had reached a height that mocked their control. At the same time, the march of the English mind was still further aided by the nature of those disputes which, during half a century, divided the country. In the reign of Elizabeth, the great contest had been between the church and its opponents; between those who were orthodox, and those who were heretical. But, in the reigns of James and Charles, theology was for the first time merged in politics. It was no longer a struggle of creeds and dogmas; but it was a struggle between those who favored the crown, and those who supported the parliament. The minds of men, thus fixed upon matters of real importance, neglected those inferior pursuits which had engrossed the attention of their fathers. 12 When,

machen kann, wo sie sich befindet, um ihren Weg fernerhin mit mehrerer Sicherheit wählen zu können, aber nicht ein Wohnplatz zum beständigen Aufenthalte. . . .. So ist das skeptische Verfahren zwar an sich selbst für die Vernunftfragen nicht befriedigend, aber doch vorübend, um ihre Vorsichtigkeit zu erwecken und auf gründliche Mittel zu weisen, die sie in ihren rechtmässigen Besitzen sichern können."

42 Dr. Arnold, whose keen eye noted this change, says (Lectures on Modern History, p. 232), “What strikes us predominantly, is, that what, in Elizabeth's time, was a controversy between divines, was now a great political contest between the crown and the parliament." The ordinary compilers, such as Sir A. Alison (Hist. of Europe, vol. i. p. 51), and others, have entirely misrepresented this movement; an error the more singular, because the eminently-political character of the struggle was recognised by several contemporaries. Even Cromwell, notwithstanding the difficult game he had to play, distinctly stated, in 1655, that the origin of the war was not religious. See Carlyle's Cromwell, vol. iii. p. 103; and corroborative evidence in Walker's History of Independency, part i. p. 132. James I. also saw that the Puritans were more dangerous to the state than to the church: "do not so far differ from us in points of religion, as in their confused form of policy and parity; being ever discontented with the present government, and impatient to suffer any superiority; which

at length, public affairs had reached their crisis, the hard fate of the king, which eventually advanced the interests of the throne, was most injurious to those of the church. There can, indeed, be no doubt that the circumstances connected with the execution of Charles, inflicted a blow upon the whole system of ecclesiastical authority, from which, in this country, it has never been able to recover. The violent death of the king excited the sympathies of the people; and by thus strengthening the hands of the royalists, hastened the restoration of the monarchy.43 But the mere name of that great party which had risen to power, was suggestive of the change that, in a religious point of view, was taking place in the national mind. It was, indeed, no light thing, that England should be ruled by men who called themselves Independents; and who, under that title, not only beat back the pretensions of the clergy, but professed an unbounded contempt for all those rites and dogmas which the clergy had, during many centuries, continued to amass." True it is, that the Independents did not always push to their full extent the consequences of their own doctrines. Still, it was a great matter to have those doc

45

maketh their sects insufferable in any well-governed commonwealth." Speech of James I., in Parl. Hist. vol. i. p. 982. See also the observations ascribed to De Foe, in Somers Tracts, vol. ix. p. 572: "The king and parliament fell out about matters of civil right; . . . the first difference between the King and the English parliament did not respect religion, but civil property."

43 See Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion, p. 716. Sir W. Temple, in his Memoirs, observes, that the throne of Charles II. was strengthened by "what had passed in the last reign." Temple's Works, vol. ii. p. 344. This may be illustrated by the remarks of M. Lamartine on the execution of Louis XVI., Hist. des Girondins, vol. v. pp. 86-7: "Sa mort, au contraire, aliénait de la cause française cette partie immense des populations qui ne juge les événements humains que par le cœur. La nature humaine est pathétique; la république l'oublia, elle donna à la royauté quelque chose du martyre, la liberté quelque chose de la vengeance. Elle prépara ainsi une réaction contre la cause républicaine, et mit du côté de la royauté la sensibilité, l'intérêt, les larmes d'une partie des peuples.'

"The energy with which the House of Commons, in 1646, repelled the pretensions of "the Assembly of Divines," is one of the many proofs of the determination of the predominant party not to allow ecclesiastical encroachments. See the remarkable details in Parl. Hist. vol. iii. pp. 459-463; see also p. 1305. As a natural consequence, the Independents were the first sect which, when possessed of power, advocated toleration. Compare Orme's Life of Owen, pp. 63-75, 102-111; Somers Tracts, vol. xii. p. 542; Walker's Hist. of Independency, part ii. pp. 50, 157, part iii. p. 22; Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion, pp. 610, 640. Some writers ascribe great merit to Jeremy Taylor for his advocacy of toleration (Heber's Life of Taylor, p. xxvii.; and Parr's Works, vol. iv. p. 417); but the truth is, that when he wrote the famous Liberty of Prophesying, his enemies were in power; so that he was pleading for his own interests. When, however, the Church of England again obtained the upper hand, Taylor withdrew the concessions which he had made in the season of adversity. See the indignant remarks of Coleridge (Lit. Remains, vol. iii. p. 250), who, though a great admirer of Taylor, expresses himself strongly on this dereliction: see also a recently published Letter to Percy Bishop of Dromore, in Nichols's Illustrations of Lit. History, vol. vii. p. 464.

46 However, Bishop Short (History of the Church of England, 8vo, 1847, pp. 452, 458) says, what is undoubtedly true, that the hostility of Cromwell to the church was not theological, but political. The same remark is made by Bishop Ken

47

46

trines recognized by the constituted authorities of the state. Besides this, it is important to remark, that the Puritans were more fanatical than superstitious. They were so ignorant of the real principles of government, as to direct penal laws against private vices; and to suppose that immorality could be stemmed by legislation. But, notwithstanding this serious error, they always resisted the aggressions even of their own clergy; and the destruction of the old episcopal hierarchy, though perhaps too hastily effected, must have produced many beneficial results. When the great party by whom these things were accomplished, was at length overthrown, the progress of events still continued to tend in the same direction. After the Restoration, the church, though reinstated in her ancient pomp, had evidently lost her ancient power.48 At the same time, the new king, from levity, rather than from reason, despised the disputes of theologians, and treated questions of religion with what he considered a philosophical indifference.19 The courtiers followed his example, and

net. Note in Burton's Diary, vol. ii. p. 479. See also Vaughan's Cromwell, vol. i. p. xcvii.; and on the generally tolerant spirit of this great man, see Hallam's Const. Hist. vol. ii. p. 14; and the evidence in Harris's Lives of the Stuarts, vol. iii. pp. 37-47. But the most distinct recognition of the principle, is in a Letter from Cromwell to Major-General Crawford, recently printed in Carlyle's Cromwell, vol. i. pp. 201, 202, 8vo, 1846. In it Cromwell writes, "Sir, the state, in choosing men to serve it, takes no notice of their opinions; if they be willing faithfully to serve it, —that satisfies." See additional proof in Carwithen's Hist. of the Church of England, vol. ii. pp. 245, 249.

48 No one can understand the real history of the Puritans, who does not take this into consideration. In the present Introduction, it is impossible to discuss so large a subject; and I must reserve it for the future part of this work, in which the history of England will be specially treated. In the mean time, I may mention, that the distinction between fanaticism and superstition is clearly indicated, but not analyzed, by Archbishop Whately, in his Errors of Romanism traced to their Origin in Human Nature, p. 49. This should be compared with Hume's Philosophical Works, vol. iii. pp. 81-89, Edinb. 1826, on the difference between enthusiasm and superstition; a difference which is noticed, but, as it appears to me, misunderstood, by Maclaine, in his Additions to Mosheim's Ecclesiast. Hist. vol. ii. p. 38.

47 Compare Barrington's Observations on the Statutes, p. 143, with Burton's Diary of the Parliaments of Cromwell, vol. i. pp. xcviii. 145, 392, vol. ii. pp. 35, 229. In 1650, a second conviction of fornication was made felony, without benefit of clergy; but, after the Restoration, Charles II. and his friends found this law rather inconvenient; so it was repealed. See Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. iv. p. 65.

48 See Life of Ken, by a Layman, edit. 1854, vol. i. p. 51. At p. 129, the same writer says, with sorrow, "the church recovered much of her temporal possessions, but not her spiritual rule." The power of the bishops was abridged "by the destruction of the court of high-commission." Short's Hist. of the Church of England, p. 595. See also, on the diminished influence of the Church of England clergy after the Restoration, Southey's Life of Wesley, vol. i. pp. 278, 279; and Watson's Observations on the Life of Wesley, pp. 129-131.

49

Buckingham and Halifax, the two men who were perhaps best acquainted with Charles II., both declared that he was a deist. Compare Lingard's Hist. of Engl. vol. viii. p. 127, with Harris's Lives of the Stuarts, vol. v. p. 55. His subsequent conversion to Catholicism is exactly analogous to the increased devotion of Louis XIV. during the latter days of his life. In both cases, superstition was the

thought they could not err in imitating him, whom they regarded as the Lord's anointed. The results were such as must be familiar even to the most superficial readers of English literature. That grave and measured scepticism, by which the Independents had been characterized, lost all its decorum when it was transplanted into the ungenial atmosphere of a court. The men by whom the king was surrounded, were unequal to the difficulties of suspense; and they attempted to fortify their doubts by the blasphemous expression of a wild and desperate infidelity. With scarcely an exception, all those writers who were most favoured by Charles, exhausted the devices of their ribald spirit, in mocking a religion, of the nature of which they were profoundly ignorant. These impious buffooneries would, by themselves, have left no permanent impression on the age; but they deserve attention, because they were the corrupt and exaggerated representatives of a more general tendency. They were the unwholesome offspring of that spirit of disbelief, and of that daring revolt against authority, which characterized the most eminent Englishmen during the seventeenth century. It was this which caused Locke to be an innovator in his philosophy, and an Unitarian in his creed. It was this which made Newton a Socinian; which forced Milton to be the great enemy of the church, and which not only turned the poet into a rebel, but tainted with Arianism the Paradise Lost. In a word, it was the same contempt for tradition, and the same resolution to spurn the yoke, which, being first carried into philosophy by Bacon, was afterwards carried into politics by Cromwell; and which, during that very generation, was enforced in theology by Chillingworth, Owen, and Hales; in metaphysics by Hobbes and Glanvil; and in the theory of government by Harrington, Sydney, and Locke.

The progress which the English intellect was now making towards shaking off ancient superstitions,50 was still further aided

natural refuge of a worn-out and discontented libertine, who had exhausted all the resources of the lowest and most grovelling pleasures.

60 One of the most curious instances of this may be seen in the destruction of the old notions respecting witchcraft. This important revolution in our opinions was effected, so far as the educated classes are concerned, between the Restoration and the Revolution: that is to say, in 1660, the majority of educated men still believed in witchcraft; while in 1688, the majority disbelieved it. In 1665, the old orthodox view was stated by Chief-Baron Hale, who, on a trial of two women for witchcraft, said to the jury: "That there are such creatures as witches, I make no doubt at all; for, first, the Scriptures have affirmed so much; secondly, the wisdom of all nations hath provided laws against such persons, which is an argument of their confidence of such a crime." Campbell's Lives of the Chief-Justices, vol. i. pp. 565, 566. This reasoning was irresistible, and the witches were hung; but the change in public opinion began to affect even the judges, and after this melancholy exhibition of the Chief-Baron, such scenes became gradually rarer; though Lord Campbell is mistaken in supposing (p. 563) that this was "the last capital conviction in England for the crime of bewitching." So far from this, three persons were execu

by the extraordinary zeal displayed in the cultivation of the physical sciences. This, like all great social movements, is clearly traceable to the events by which it was preceded. It was partly cause, and partly effect, of the increasing incredulity of the age. The scepticism of the educated classes made them dissatisfied with those long-established opinions, which only rested on unsupported authority; and this gave rise to a desire to ascertain how far such notions might be verified or refuted by the real condition of things. A curious instance of the rapid progress of this spirit may be found in the works of an author who was one of the most eminent among the mere literary men of his time. While the Civil War was barely decided, and three years before the execution of the king, Sir Thomas Browne published his celebrated work, called Inquiries into Vulgar and Common Errors. This able and learned production has the merit of anticipating some of those results which more modern inquirers have obtained;52 but it is chiefly remarkable, as being the first systematic and deliberate onslaught ever made in England upon those superstitious fancies which were then prevalent respecting the external world. And what is still more interesting is, that the circumstances under which it appeared make it evident, that while the learning and genius of the author belong to himself, the

ted at Exeter for witchcraft in 1682. See Hutchinson's Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft, 1720, pp. 56, 57. Hutchinson says: "I suppose these are the last three that have been hanged in England." If, however, one may rely upon a statement made by Dr. Parr, two witches were hung at Northampton in 1705; and in "1712, five other witches suffered the same fate at the same place." Parr's Works, vol. iv. p. 182, 8vo, 1828. This is the more shameful, because, as I shall hereafter prove, from the literature of that time, a disbelief in the existence of witches had become almost universal among educated men; though the old superstition was still defended on the judgment-seat and in the pulpit. As to the opinions of the clergy, compare Cudworth's Intellect. Syst. vol. iii. pp. 345, 348; Vernon Correspond. vol. ii. pp. 302, 303; Burt's Letters from the North of Scotland, vol. i. pp. 220, 221; Wesley's Journals, pp. 602, 713. Wesley, who had more influence than all the bishops put together, says: "It is true, likewise, that the English in general, and, indeed, most of the men of learning in Europe, have given up all accounts of witches and apparitions as mere old wives' fables. I am sorry for it. The giving up witchcraft is, in effect, giving up the Bible. . . . But I cannot give up, to all the Deists in Great Britain, the existence of witchcraft, till I give up the credit of all history, sacred and profane."

However, all was in vain. Every year diminished the old belief; and in 1736, a generation before Wesley had recorded these opinions, the laws against witchcraft were repealed, and another vestige of superstition effaced from the English statutebook. See Barrington on the Statutes, p. 407; Note in Burton's Diary, vol. i. p. 26; Harris's Infe of Hardwicke, vol. i. p. 307.

To this it may be interesting to add, that in Spain a witch was burned so late as 1781. Ticknor's Hist. of Spanish Literature, vol. iii. p. 238.

51 The first edition was published in 1646. Works of Sir Thomas Browne, vol.

ii. p. 163.

52 See the notes in Mr. Wilkin's edition of Browne's Works, Lond. 1836, vol. ii. pp. 284, 360, 361.