The syllogism of the New England elders was this: all revelation is
contained in the Bible; we alone, from our peculiar education, are capable
of interpreting the meaning of the Scriptures: therefore we only can
declare the will of God. But it was evident that, were the dogma of "the
inner light" once accepted, this reasoning must fall to the ground, and
the authority of the ministry be overthrown. Necessarily those who held so
subversive a doctrine would be pursued with greater hate than less harmful
heretics, and thus contemplating the situation there is no difficulty in
understanding why the Rev. John Wilson, pastor of Boston, should have
vociferated in his pulpit, that "he would carry fire in one hand and
faggots in the other, to burn all the Quakers in the world;" [Footnote:
_New England Judged_, ed. 1703, p. 124.] why the Rev. John Higginson
should have denounced the "inner light" as "a stinking vapour from hell;"
[Footnote: _Truth and Innocency Defended_, ed. 1703, p. 80.] why the
astute Norton should have taught that "the justice of God was the devil's
armour;" [Footnote: _New England Judged_, ed. 1703, p. 9.] and why
Endicott sternly warned the first comers, "Take heed you break not our
ecclesiastical laws, for then ye are sure to stretch by a halter."
[Footnote: _Idem_, p. 9.]
Nevertheless, this view has not commended itself to those learned
clergymen who have been the chief historians of the Puritan commonwealth.
Pages:
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324