principles of the Brownists, Barrowists, and their successors, had already leavened the public mind.

Due consideration has not been given to the fact now adverted to. The name of puritan has acted too much as a veil in respect to the real character of these men; and hence modern writers have often regarded them in a wrong light, and have been led to erroneous conclusions respecting some matters of importance relating to the history of these times.* The term Independent was not used as the name of a party until some years after this; but the principles of Congregational Independency were advocated from the time of Browne downwards, and by the parties termed "rigid puritans," no less than by the separatists of Holland.

Henry Jacob was at the head of this body of English Independents. According to some he was considered as the father of Independency, rather than Robinson. And, according to Wood, his son Henry spoke of him as "the first Independent in England." Some parts of his history are involved in obscurity. He appears to have been the minister of a congregation at Leyden for some time; to have left Leyden and entered the church of England at the end of Elizabeth's reign, and to have returned afterwards to Holland, but when it is not certain. Governor Bradford, speaking of himself and of the members of Robinson's church, says, "We some of us knew Mr. Parker, Dr. Ames, and Mr. Jacob, in Holland, when

*For example, see Broadmead Records, Historical Introduction, p. lxxviii. &c. Mr. Underhill has not discriminated between Congregational Independency and separatism.

† Cotton's Way, p. 15; Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation, p. 53. It is also said, "Robinson succeeded (though not immediately) Jacob, in his congregation at Leyden."

they sojourned for a time in Leyden; and all three boarded together, and had their victuals dressed by some of our acquaintance." He also adds, "and after Mr. Jacob returned," but does not say when.* The main difference between the rigid puritans as represented by Jacob, and the exiles, related not to the principle of Congregational Independency, but of separation from the church of England. The exiles would not acknowledge the church of England to be a true visible church; † but the rigid puritans made a distinction between the church of England and "the churches of England," and, considering many of the latter to be true visible churches, or that they might be such, were unwilling to separate from the system unless compelled to do so. By bearing this fact in mind, we shall see how it was, that at a later period the Independents, following in the steps of these predecessors, came to occupy so many of the parochial churches of the country.

As early as 1604, Jacob avowed the principles of Independency, in a work already referred to. In 1606, he and his party drew up and published, "A Christian and Modest Offer of a most Indifferent Conference, or Disputation, about the main and principal Controversies betwixt the Prelates and the late silenced and deprived Ministers in England; tendered by some of the said Ministers to the Archbishops and Bishops, and all their adherents." In this, the same principles are advocated. In 1609, the

* Young's Chronicles, p. 439.

† Johnson excepted. See Ainsworth's Counterpoison, in reply to Sprint, Bernard, and Crashaw, for puritan views on the one side, and separatist on the other. Hanbury, i. 170-178.

See vol. ii. p. 239, of the present work.

same party addressed to King James, "An Humble Supplication for Toleration, and Liberty to enjoy and observe the Ordinances of Jesus Christ in the administration of His Churches in lieu of Human Constitutions." The language of this petition is such as Independents of the present day would be willing to use. For example:-" Our Lord Jesus Christ hath given to each particular church, or ordinary congregation, this right and privilege; namely, to elect, ordain, and deprive her own ministers; and to exercise all the other parts of lawful ecclesiastical jurisdiction under Him." And in respect to synodical association they reject it when it becomes a "Ruling" power, although they "in no sort" dislike the "Deliberative and Persuasive Synod;" that is, such a general assembly of the Churches as is to be seen in the Congregational Union of England and Wales of the present day. We shall have occasion to refer to the petition again. We now adduce it to show that the rigid puritans were really Independents. In 1610, Jacob. published another work expressly on the subject of the church's constitution and government, entitled, "The Divine Beginning and Institution of Christ's True, Visible, or Ministerial Church; also, the Unchangeableness of the same by Men; namely, in the Term and Essential Constitution thereof." * In this work Jacob again shows himself an Independent. He defines a true, visible, and ministerial church as follows:"A number of faithful people joined by their willing consent in a spiritual outward society, or body politic, ordinarily coming together into one place; instituted by Christ in his New Testament,

* Jacob was at Leyden at this time, probably, since this work was printed there; and the next at Middleburgh.

and having the power to exercise ecclesiastical government, and all God's other spiritual ordinances, in and for itself, immediately from Christ." In consequence of some misinterpretation of his meaning in certain parts of this treatise, on the part of "divers godly' persons, he published, in 1612, a further statement of his views, in "A. Declaration, and Plainer Opening of Certain Points; with a Sound Confirmation of some other, contained in a Treatise intituled, 'The Divine Beginning, etc.'' In this work there are two things specially worthy of notice. First, the explanation which Jacob gives of the difference between himself and the rigid puritans, on the one hand, and the exiles on the other, in respect to separation from the church of England. "As to the point of separation," he says, "For my part I never was, nor am, separated from all public communion with the congregations of England. I acknowledge, therefore, that in England are true visible churches, and ministers (though accidentally, yet) such as I refuse not to communicate with." From his use of the phrase, "congregations of England," and his reference to the ministers as being "accidentally" true ministers, it is evident that he took the view we have already mentioned. In a later work, he explains himself yet further on this point, but to the same effect, "In respect as those congregations are parts of proper diocesan and provincial churches, so they are true churches of Christ accidentally. For proper diocesan and provincial churches being not in the New Testament, have in them, by accident, the true essential form of Christ's visible churches." This may seem very much like * Page 1.

VOL. III.

† An Attestation, &c., p. 305.

D

special pleading; yet it must be borne in mind, inasmuch as these views spread amongst the Independents of a later period, and had an important influence on their conduct during the period of the Commonwealth.

The other thing worthy of notice relates to the origin of the name Independent. This term, in its modern ecclesiastical sense, was first employed by Jacob in this work. The following is the passage in which it occurs: "Where each ordinary congregation giveth their free consent in their own government, there certainly each congregation is an entire and Independent body-politic, and indued with power immediately under, and from Christ, as every proper church is, and ought to be."* It is somewhat singular that modern writers should question whether Jacob was an Independent or no,† when he was not only one of the best expounders of the principle of Congregational Independency, but also the first to give it that name which has served to distinguish its advocates in every succeeding period. This work, although published in 1612, was written before September 1611. Robinson's "Apology," generally supposed to have been the first work in which the term was used to designate the system, was not published until 1619. With strict truth, therefore, Jacob may be called one of the first of the modern Independents. It is evident, also, from what has been advanced, that he was not alone. The rigid puritans advocated the same principles, and espoused the same cause.

The publications we have noticed above were, in all * Page 13.

† See Broadmead Records, Historical Introduction, pp. lxxviii. -lxxx.