The History of the Christian People Called Quakers

1696

Well had others done, if they had taken example by it; but it was not in vain that our Saviour in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, made Abraham say to the rich man, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead.” But other persecutors took no caution by this penitent John Batt; for yet not long after some others in Barbadoes most furiously showed their malice and rage against the Quakers, and among these one Alexander Ruddock, a Scotchman, who was not only a colonel of a regiment of foot, but also judge of a court, and one of the council. He caused one of the society of the Quakers to be rated four hundred pounds of sugar, for payment of the priest’s wages, who was his son-in-law; whereas upon complaint of the said person, and upon inquiry, it appeared that the pretended due was but ten pounds of sugar: and it was well known that he and his friends duly paid for maintaining the poor, and for mending highways: but all this could not avail him; for a cow was taken from him worth ten pounds sterling. And though some of the magistrates, seeing the unreasonableness of these proceedings, would have had the cow returned to the right owner, yet such was the power of the said Ruddock, that they were not able to withstand it. And because the aforesaid man had complained of the wrong and oppression he suffered, that so incensed Ruddock, that he caused him to be fined five pounds sterling, for having refused to take the oath as constable, though he was willing to have served the office. For this fine Ruddock issued out a warrant against him, upon which was taken from him a negro woman, that by the management of Ruddock was valued at about two thousand three hundred pounds of sugar, which as the price of sugar then went, might amount to eleven pounds ten shillings: and yet the negro was sold for six and twenty pounds sterling, and all kept for the fine of five pounds. From this same man was taken the value of above seven thousand pounds of sugar in one year, by the direction of Ruddock; which the sufferer laying before him in the presence of his daughter, the priest’s wife, and telling him he had suffered all that for complaining of the wrong he had done him about his cow, he, as rejoicing at it, said it should be so yearly, so long as he was magistrate. But he did not live a year after.

He was of a fierce temper, and very ready to put negroes to death for example, saying, ‘What is it for Barbadoes to put twenty or thirty negroes to death yearly for example sake?’ And as he vexed the Quakers many ways, so he showed his grudge also by taking the meat they bought and paid for; nay, so malicious he was, that meeting once a butcher carrying meat to the house of him that bought it, he commanded him to carry it back, saying the Quakers shall not eat fresh meat. But at length the measure of his iniquity was full: he came from the council, where an order was issued from the governor to break up the Quakers’ meetings, and he promised the governor diligently to obey all his commands. But in his very way home he was taken ill, and being come to his house, he called for some cream of tartar, which he used to take in his broth; but by his own mistake he took arsenic instead thereof, and so wretchedly ended his days. And how wicked soever he was, yet the priest Kennedy, his countryman, did not stick when he was to preach his funeral sermon, to take his text from these words of the apostle, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.” And in this sermon it was declared of him, that he had attained to the prudence of a judge, the dignity of a colonel, and the honour of a counsellor; and that he had served his king and country faithfully, and died a saint. This last expression seemed to regard some repentance he had showed; but whatever it was, we must commit that to God; and in the meanwhile not rely too much on such a repentance: since Judas also repented of his wickedness. If I did not study brevity, I could relate more remarkable cases concerning the persecutors in Barbadoes; but I break off.

Now I return to England, where the parliament sitting the latter end of this year, had effectually taken in hand the making an act to ease the people called Quakers from that heavy burden of swearing; but this work met with great opposition: for though many good-natured members were inclined to it in good earnest, yet their enemies were so active in altering and clipping the bill, that it looked almost as if the whole project would have come to nought. But the king himself forwarded the work, and to his praise be it said, he was the principal promoter of it: insomuch that in the beginning of the year 1696, it was enacted by the king and parliament, that the solemn affirmation and declaration of the people called Quakers shall be accepted instead of an oath in the usual form, as appears by the act, which was as followeth:

An Act that the solemn Affirmation and Declaration of the people called Quakers, shall be accepted instead of an Oath in the usual form.

‘Whereas divers dissenters, commonly called Quakers, refusing to take an oath in courts of justice, and other places, are frequently imprisoned, and their estates sequestered by process of contempt issuing out of such courts, to the ruin of themselves and families; for remedy thereof, be it enacted by the king’s most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords, spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that from and after the fourth day of May, which shall be in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and ninety-six, every Quaker within this kingdom of England, dominion of Wales, or town of Berwick-upon-Tweed, who shall be required upon any lawful occasion to take an oath in any case, where by law an oath is required, shall, instead of the usual form, be permitted to make his or her solemn affirmation or declaration, in these words following, viz.

‘I. ‘A. B. do declare in the presence of Almighty God, the witness of the truth of what I say.’

‘II. Which said solemn affirmation or declaration, shall be adjudged and taken, and is hereby enacted and declared to be of the same force and effect, to all intents and purposes in all courts of justice, and other places, where by law an oath is required, within this kingdom of England, dominion of Wales, or town of Berwick-upon-Tweed, as if such Quaker had taken an oath in the usual form.

‘III. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any Quaker, making such solemn affirmation or declaration, shall be lawfully convicted, wilfully, falsely, and corruptly, to have affirmed or declared any matter or thing, which if the same had been in the usual form, would have amounted to wilful and corrupt perjury, every such Quaker so offending shall incur the same penalties and forfeitures as by the laws and statutes of this realm are enacted against persons convicted of wilful and corrupt perjury.

‘IV. And whereas by reason of a pretended scruple of conscience, Quakers do refuse to pay tithes and church rates, be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that where any Quaker shall refuse to pay, or compound for his great or small tithes, or to pay any church rates, it shall and may be lawful, to and for the next two justices of the peace of the same county, other than such justice of the peace as is patron of the church or chapel, where the said tithes do or shall arise, or any ways interested in the said tithes, upon the complaint of any parson, vicar, farmer, or proprietor of tithes, churchwarden or churchwardens, who ought to have, receive, or collect the same, by warrant under their hands and seals, to convene before them such Quaker or Quakers neglecting or refusing to pay or compound for the same, and to examine upon oath, which oath the said justices are hereby empowered to administer, or in such manner as by this act is provided, the truth and justice of the said complaint, and to ascertain and state what is due and payable by such Quaker or Quakers to the party or parties complaining, and by order under their hands and seals to direct and appoint the payment thereof, so as the sum ordered as aforesaid, do not exceed ten pounds; and upon refusal by such Quaker or Quakers to pay according to such order, it shall and may be lawful to and for any one of the said justices by warrant under his hand and seal, to levy the money thereby ordered to be paid, by distress and sale of goods of such offender, his executors or administrators, rendering only the overplus to him, her, or them, necessary charges of distraining being thereout first deducted and allowed by the said justice: and any person finding him, her, or themselves aggrieved by any judgment given by two such justices of the peace, shall and may appeal to the next general quarter sessions to be held for the county, riding, city, liberty, or town corporate: and the justices of the peace there present, or the major part of them, shall proceed finally to hear and determine the matter, and to reverse the said judgment, if they shall see cause: and if the justices then present, or the major part of them, shall find cause to continue the judgment given by the first two justices of the peace, they shall then decree the same by order of sessions, and shall also proceed to give such costs against the appellant, to be levied by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the said appellant as to them shall seem just and reasonable: and no proceedings or judgment had or to be had by virtue of this act shall be removed or superseded by any writ of certiorari or other writ out of his majesty’s courts at Westminster, or any other court whatsoever, unless the title of such tithes shall be in question.

‘V. Provided always, that in case any such appeal be made as aforesaid, no warrant of distress shall be granted until after such appeal be determined.

‘VI. Provided, and be it enacted, that no Quaker, or reputed Quaker shall by virtue of this act be qualified or permitted to give evidence in any criminal causes, or serve on any juries, or bear any office or place of profit in the government; any thing in this act contained to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding.

‘VII. Provided, that this act shall continue in force for the space of seven years, and from thence to the end of the next session of parliament, and no longer.’

Thus the Quakers became discharged and free from that grievous burden by which they had been oppressed so many years. This parliament made also an act for enforcing the laws which restrain marriages without licenses or bands; and for the better registering marriages, births, and burials; and for keeping a distinct register of all persons born; for which no more was to be paid than sixpence.

---

Mention hath been made already that George Keith had at London got a place called Turner’s-hall to preach in; and as his auditory consisted chiefly of persons envious against the Quakers, so there were among these also many of the vulgar sort, who generally are fickle and unsteady, and often inclined to novelties: though Keith would as yet in some respect be looked upon as an adherent of the Quakers, he also had published some papers, wherein he endeavoured to make it appear that they held several heterodox sentiments.

The books which he had published concerning this matter were so fully answered by the Quakers, that he being at a loss to make a reply to their answers, pretended that he was not in a condition to set the press at work, and bear the charges of the impression. But that this was a frivolous evasion was well known. Yet he, to do something, fell upon another project, and published an advertisement, that on the 11th of the month called June, he would defend his charge against the Quakers, and therefore he summoned some of them to appear there at the time, to answer for themselves. Beginning now to comply with the Episcopalians, he had, as he said afterwards, given notice of his intention to the lord mayor of London, who not having forbidden it, he grew the more bold. But the Quakers did not think it meet to appear there to enter into a dispute with him, the rather because the king at that time was beyond sea, and many of the vulgar were idle for want of work and trade, occasioned by the scarcity of money, which then was very great, by reason of the recoining it, insomuch that it could not be foreseen whether some disaffected persons might not have got together, and caused a dangerous disturbance. And therefore, they declined to appear there, and gave the following reasons of their refusal, which were read in the appointed meeting, and afterwards published in print:

‘Whereas, G. Keith hath, after his wonted irregular and unruly manner, challenged divers of us to defend ourselves against such charges as he has to exhibit against us at Turner’s-hall: these are to certify all whom it may concern, that the reasons why we decline any such meeting are as follow:

First. ‘Because the said G. Keith hath given us such frequent proofs of his very passionate and abusive behaviour, at the many more select meetings we have had with him, in all manner of sweetness, long-suffering and patience, on our side, to satisfy and preserve him from these extremes: that we cannot assure ourselves now of any better entertainment, or that the meeting can have any desirable success, for a thorough information.

Secondly. ‘We decline to meet, because it is not an agreed meeting on both sides, which it ought to have been, and where that is not, or cannot be adjusted, the press is the next fair way and expedient, which he has begun with, and now seems to decline; nor hath he sent us a copy of his charge or indictment against us, which also he ought to have done.

Thirdly. ‘That he has two of our books which lie hard at his door, in vindication of us and our doctrines from his exceptions, and which he has not yet answered; so that he is not upon equal terms with us; and therefore we think his challenge, appointment, and summons, unfair; and that all that are not partial will be of the same mind with us.

Fourthly. ‘Such public and unlimited meetings, are too often attended, with heats, levity, and confusion, and answer not the end desired by sober and inquiring men. Besides, that it sets up a practice that authority may judge to be an abuse to our liberty, and so draw that under reflection, as no friend to the civil peace.

Fifthly. ‘We know not what religion or persuasion this wavering man is of, or what church or people he adheres to, or will receive him, with his vain speculations, that have led him to desert us; nor who are accountable to us for him and his irregularities and abuses; the generality of such assemblies usually making ill auditors, worse judges, and no good security for our satisfaction. And we must therefore take leave to say, it seems to us an indirect way of disquieting and invading our present liberty, that so irreligious a meeting should be held, whose end is to abuse other men for their religion. If this should be imitated by all the several sorts of different persuasions in this city, what heats and confusions must necessarily ensue.

Sixthly, and lastly. ‘Wherefore be it known unto all, that for the sake of religion, the liberty granted us, and the civil peace, we decline to meet him; and not from any apprehension we have of his abilities, or our own consciousness of error, or injustice to the said G. Keith; whose weak and unbridled temper we know is such, that what learning and parts he hath, have not been able to balance and support him on less occasions, so that we may say they are in ill hands: and if he proceeds as he begins, they will be employed to an ill end, which his, poor man! cannot but be, unless he change his course; which we heartily pray for, that a place of repentance he may find; and through a true contrition, the remission of his great sin of envy, and evilly intreating the Lord’s people, and way, which we profess, and which he the said G. Keith, hath long and lately both professed, and zealously vindicated as such.’

These reasons the Quakers, as hath been said, published in print, to show the world, that it was not without a weighty cause, that they did not accept G. Keith’s summons. Now though G. Whitehead, and W. Penn, for the abovesaid reasons did not appear in Turner’s-hall, yet some of their friends were there as spectators, to see what would be the issue of the business. G. Keith seeing himself thus disappointed in his intention, took upon him for all that to defend his charge in the absence of his adversaries, which now he could do easily, since none contradicted him; and he was applauded by the frequent shoutings of the mob that was there in great numbers. After the reasons of non-appearance were read, Keith signified that they were not satisfactory, by calling them slender, weak, and frivolous. ‘What,’ said he, ‘may a malefactor make this excuse; You shall not call me before a justice without my consent? If a man robs me, I may complain of him as a robber, and without his consent call him to account. But here is a strange thing: if injuring men may not be called to account without their consent, it will trespass against the law, and intrenches upon liberty of conscience.’ This reason he published in print, in his narrative of that day’s work: but who would formerly ever have thought, that such a little man as he was, would have been so big. It looked just as if the Quakers were obliged to appear as malefactors before the pretended judge Keith, accompanied with his assistants, the mob, and I do not know who. And to keep to G. Keith’s comparison, though a malefactor may not say, you shall not call me before a justice without my consent, yet with some good reason he might say, you shall not make yourself a justice, as Keith now did. It is probable that he was supported by some great churchmen, otherwise such a bold action might easily have turned to his disadvantage.

My limits do not admit of a circumstantial relation of what was transacted at that time in Turner’s-hall; yet to show briefly how he treated matters, I will produce one or two instances, by which my reader may know, ut ex ungue leonem,104 and so judge of the rest. He said he would charge the Quakers with nothing but what he would prove from their own writings, and he went on thus: ‘I offer to prove that G. Whitehead hath denied Christ both to be God and man.’ A strange thing indeed, since it was very well known that G. Whitehead had published a book of above twenty sheets, under this title, ‘The Divinity of Christ, and Unity of the Three that bear record in Heaven, with the blessed end and effect of Christ’s appearance, coming in the flesh, sufferings, and sacrifice for sinners, confessed and vindicated by his followers called Quakers.’ This book G. Keith could not pretend ignorance of, for he picked somewhat out of it in his narrative: but to maintain his charge, he appealed to a book of G. Whitehead’s, called, ‘The Light and Life of Christ within.’ This book G. Whitehead had written in answer to W. Burnet, a Baptist preacher, who writing of Christ, said, As he was God, he was Co-Creator with the Father, and so was before Abraham, and had Glory with God before the world was, and in this sense came down from heaven. To which G. Whitehead answered, ‘What nonsense and unscripture-like language is this, to tell of God being Co-Creator with the Father? Or that God had glory with God? Doth not this imply two gods, and that God had a father? Let the reader judge.’ Certainly it appears from this plainly, that G. Whitehead did not intend any thing else, but to censure the unscriptural expressions of his antagonist, as Co-Creator, and implying two gods: for not only the apostle saith, God is One, but Christ himself saith I and the Father are One. Yet G. Keith did not stick to say, G. Whitehead denieth the divinity of Christ, and he deceives the nation and the parliament by telling them the Quakers own Christ to be both God and man, and believe all that is recorded of him in the holy scripture. This he strove to prove from a passage taken out of the aforementioned book, which in sense agreed with the former; and speaking in another page of the same matter, viz. The Baptists calling God the Word, Co-Creator with the Father, G. Whitehead answers thus to it: ‘To tell of the Word God Co-Creator with the Father, is all one as to tell of God being Co-Creator with God, if the Father be God; and this is to make two gods and two creators: for God Co-Creator with the Father plainly implies two. Was this showing of others their absurd expressions, a denial that Christ was God, as Keith would have it? Might it not be asked here, whether the acute wit of Keith was now altogether flown away? But a great part of his auditory consisted of an ignorant crew, and one or other of them was continually heard to cry out, It is sufficient.

Now to prove that G. Whitehead had denied Christ to be man, Keith cited from the forementioned book, called ’The Divinity of Christ,‘ &c. these words, ’If the body and soul of the Son of God were both created, doth not this render him a fourth person?’ Here Keith stopped, and broke off with an &c. without adding the following words; ‘For creation was in time, which contradicts the doctrine of three distinct, uncreated, co-eternal, co-essential persons in the Deity, seeing that which was created was not so.’ This G. Whitehead asked and said, to show his opponent, T. Danson, the absurdity of his assertions about the personalities of the Deity. But Keith went on, reading from G. Whitehead’s book thus: ‘Where doth the Scripture say that his soul was created? For was not he the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express image of his divine substance? But supposing the soul of Christ was with the body created in time,’ &c. Here Keith broke off again, omitting the following words: ‘I ask, if from eternity he was a person distinct from God and his holy Spirit, without either soul or body? Where doth the Scripture speak of any person without either soul or body? Let us have plain Scripture.’

Now though G. Whitehead had written this to show, how we often enter into inextricable straits, when we do not keep to the words of the holy Scripture, which no where speaks of three persons in the Deity; yet Keith perverting the passage abusively, said to his auditory, ‘Here ye see he will not own that Christ had a created soul.’ At this rate, and after this manner, Keith reasoned, and treated the other passages. But how smartly would he have carped at others, if they had cited his words thus piecemeal.

But now he had a temporal reward in this view, and seeing for that end, he began more and more to declare himself in favour of the episcopal church; somebody of that persuasion, who did not further make himself known than by these initial letters, W. C. made it his business to show the changeableness of Keith’s opinion and sentiments, from his own writings, which he had published in print; and thereby evidently proved, that in every respect Keith was turned an apostate, though he appeared much offended at the Quakers, because they had called him so. ‘But,’ said this author, ‘if the Presbyterian principles, of which society Keith once was a member, were better than the Quakers, then is Mr. Keith an apostate, in revolting from, and deserting the Presbyterians, and turning his coat Quaker-fashion. But if the Quakers were more in the right than the Presbyterians, then è contrá.’

Now he appeared to fawn on the episcopal clergy, and esteemed lawful what formerly he had zealously oppugned. For he was in hopes that by opposing the Quakers he should be best rewarded among the Episcopalians; and this was not altogether without reason; for it being no more in their power now to persecute the Quakers in manner as formerly, they made use of other means as much as possibly they could, to render them and their doctrine odious; for which Keith seemed to them no unfit tool; for he being both of a witty impetuous temper, was also crafty, subtle, cunning, and violent in his expressions. And to charge the Quakers with inorthodoxy, he himself launched out into an heterodox sentiment. For it was believed, that for maintaining this position, that the historical knowledge of Christ’s sufferings, death, resurrection, &c. was absolutely necessary for salvation, he had no other ground than the twelve pretended transmigrations or transitions of man’s soul from one body into another; and because the ignorant souls from hence seemed to get opportunity of being informed, before the end of the world, concerning the death and resurrection of our Saviour. Who would have imagined before that this same G. Keith should have accused the Quakers of inorthodoxy in point of doctrine, which he had often so effectually defended; and among the rest, in a book against one Cotton Mather, wherein upon the charge of their being guilty of many heresies and blasphemies, he said after this manner; ‘Our principles do mostly agree with the fundamental articles of the Christian Protestant faith. According to my best knowledge of the people called Quakers, and those owned by them as preachers and publishers of their belief, being of an unquestionable esteem among them, and worthy of double honour, as there are many such, I know none of them that are guilty of such heresies and blasphemies as they are charged with. And I think I should know, and do know those called Quakers, having been conversant with them in public meetings as well as in private discourses, with the most noted and esteemed among them, for about twenty years past, and that in many places of the world, both in Europe and America.’ Who would ever have thought then, that one who had conversed so many years with the Quakers, preached their doctrine, and defended it publicly both by writing and by word of mouth, should afterwards have decried them, as deniers of the most essential points of the Christian faith? But to what extravagancies may not temporal gain transport a man, the case of Balaam may serve for an evidence.

I have in all this relation of Keith’s behaviour, set down nothing but what I believe to be really true; neither have I endeavoured to aggravate his failures; for I never bore him ill-will, but a good esteem when I believed him to be upright, because in that time I perceived in him some good abilities. And I yet wish from my very heart, that it may please God, in his unsearchable mercy, so to touch his heart, before the door of grace be shut, that seeing the greatness of his transgression, he may by true repentance, obtain forgiveness from the Lord, of his evil; which I take to be worse, because by his craftiness he endeavoured to set false colours on things that were really good, thereby to insinuate himself into favour with the episcopal party.105 And since some others suborned thereto did no omit also to render the Quakers odious, as such that held inorthodox sentiments, these did not neglect to show in print, how they were injured and wronged. For now the old tale, that there were Popish emissaries among them, was revived and divulged anew. But it was no hard matter for them to show how ill-grounded this conceit was; and therefore they might say, ‘We are so well known to our neighbours, that if this were true, our adversaries would be very active to find out and discover such emissaries, since the law against them is still in force.’ Three episcopal clergymen in Norfolk, had also drawn up a paper to the king and parliament, to blacken the Quakers from their own writings; but George Whitehead, William Penn, and others, were not backward to show how their words, or the true meaning thereof, were perverted; since at such a rate, even the salutary lessons of the holy Scriptures might be exposed as wicked expressions.

Now the late king James intending an invasion upon England, and great preparations being made in France in order thereto, a plot was discovered in England against king William; this gave occasion to the House of Commons to draw up a kind of declaration, which was called an association, to be signed by all their members, as follows:

‘Whereas, there has been a horrible and detestable conspiracy, formed and carried on by Papists, and other wicked and traitorous persons for assassinating his majesty’s royal person, in order to encourage an invasion from France, to subvert our religion, laws, and liberties, we whose names are hereunto subscribed, do heartily, sincerely, and solemnly promise, testify, and declare, that his present majesty king William, is rightful and lawful king of these realms. And we do mutually promise and engage to stand by and assist each other, to the utmost of our power, in the support and defence of his majesty’s most sacred person and government, against the late king James, and all his adherents. And in case his majesty come to any violent and untimely death, which God forbid, we do hereby further freely and unanimously oblige ourselves to unite, associate, and stand by each other, in revenging the same upon his enemies and their adherents, and in supporting and defending the succession of the crown, according to an act made in the first year of the reign of king William and queen Mary, entitled, ‘An Act declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subjects, and settling the succession of the Crown.’’

An association was also signed by the lords, and both presented to the king, and were followed by all the corporations in England. See Life of king William, vol. III. The dissenters also presented declarations to the king, that had some resemblance with the other. But the Quakers professing non-resistance, and an inoffensive behaviour, could in no wise enter into such a league; yet to show that they were loyal and faithful to the king, they drew up the following declaration, and published it in print:

The ancient testimony and principle of the people called Quakers renewed, with respect to the king and government, and touching the present association:

‘We, the said people, do solemnly and sincerely declare, that it hath been our judgment and principle from the first day we were called to profess the light of Christ Jesus manifested in our consciences unto this day, that the setting up, and putting down kings, and governments, is God’s peculiar prerogative, for causes best known to himself; and that it is not our work or business to have any hand or contrivance therein, nor to be busy-bodies in matters above our station; much less to plot and contrive the ruin or overturn of any of them; but to pray for the king and for the safety of our nation, and good of all men, that we may live a peaceable and quiet life, in all godliness and honesty, under the government which God is pleased to set over us.

’And according to this our ancient and innocent principle, we often have given forth our testimony, and now do, against all plotting, conspiracies, and contriving insurrections against the king or the government, and against all treacherous, barbarous, and murderous designs whatsoever, as works of the devil and darkness: and we sincerely bless God, and are heartily thankful to the king and government, for the liberty and privileges we enjoy under them by law: esteeming it our duty to be true and faithful to them.

’And whereas, we the said people are required to sign the said association, we sincerely declare, that our refusing so to do, is not out of any disaffection to the king or government, nor in opposition to his being declared rightful and lawful king of these realms, but purely because we cannot for conscience-sake, fight, kill, or revenge, either for ourselves or any man else.

’And we believe that the timely discovery and prevention of the late barbarous design and mischievous plot against the king and government, and the sad effects it might have had, is an eminent mercy from Almighty God; for which we, and the whole nation, have great cause to be humbly thankful to him, and to pray for the continuance of his mercies to them and us.

‘From a meeting of the said people in London, the 23d of the first month, called March, 1695-6.’

In this year Roger Haydock died of a fever, at his house in Penketh, in Lancashire, about the age of fifty-three years. He had been in Holland the year before, in which time I had more than once opportunity to speak with him privately, and thereby discovered such Christian qualities in him, that were indeed excellent; therefore the news of his decease did much affect me; and because of his ministry, in which he was eminent, being more than ordinary full of matter in his preaching, his death was much lamented among those churches in England where he had laboured most in the gospel. His wife Eleanor, in her testimony concerning him, said, ‘My spirit hath been, and is bowed under a deep sense of my great loss and exercise, in the removal of my dear husband, whom it hath pleased God in his wisdom to take away from me, who was comfort to my life, and joy to my days in this world, being given me of God, in great mercy and loving kindness; and so he hath been enjoyed by me in thankfulness of heart, to the close of that time God had appointed; and now is taken from the world, with all its troubles and exercises, as also from all his labours and travels, which were great amongst the churches of Christ, which with me have no small loss in his removal. But what shall I say: wise and good is the Lord, who doth what he will in heaven and in earth, and amongst his churches and his chosen. He can break and bind up, wound and heal, kill and make alive again, that the living may see his wonders, and magnify his power in all, through all, and over all, who is God eternal, blessed for ever. Amen.’

Then in her testimony she gives an account of his life, and how in her young years he had been to her a faithful instructor in godliness, and at length became her husband. After a description of his life, and his many travels in the ministry of the gospel, to edify and build up the churches, she saith also, that though his love to her was above all visibles, as the best of enjoyments he had in this world, yet she was not too dear to him to give up to serve the truth of God. ‘I was made,’ said she ‘a blessing to him, more comfortable every day than other: he would often express it; and truly so was he to me every day, every way, and in every respect. No tongue nor pen can relate the full of that comfort and joy we had in God and one in another. Yet we find such hath been the pleasure of God concerning them he hath loved, to try them in the most near and dear enjoyments, that it might be manifest he was loved above all; that no gifts may be preferred above the giver; but that he may be all in all, who is, and is to come, God blessed for ever. And truly there hath been great care and watchfulness one over another, and over our own spirits, to see that our love, though great, was bounded and kept within its compass, the truth being its original, the Alpha and Omega also. Although it hath been the pleasure of God to try me, in the removal of so great a blessing from me, sure it is, that I may be the more inward to him, and have his love always in my remembrance, who gives and takes away, and in all bless his name. My soul travails that I may always follow his foot-steps of self-denial in all things, that I may finish my course in this world to the glory of God, as he did, and have my part in that mansion of glory with him eternal in the heavens; though it may be my lot to stay for a time in this world of troubles, yet I have hope in immortality and eternal blessedness, when time in this world shall be no more.’ Thus she wrote: but to shun prolixity, I break off. She then giving some account of his life and ministry, mentions, that being gone from home, she was not present at his death; but that they having taken leave of each other before, had parted in great love, with mutual breathings to God, for one another’s welfare; and she concludes with these words: ‘Though I saw not his going away, yet I have seen in what he went, and that it was full of zeal and fervency in the love of God, and life of righteousness. So in pure submission to the will of God, I conclude this short and true relation of my worthy dear husband, whose name and memory is blessed, and will live, and be of a sweet savour in the hearts of the righteous through ages.’ With such a testimony it was, that Eleanor transmitted the memorial of her beloved consort to posterity.

Notes

104 As of a lion by his claw.

105 N. B. This was written some years before I heard G. Keith was deceased.