Battle-Hardened
Conviction
“The Testimony of
Jesus is the Spirit of
Prophecy.” Revelation 19:10.
page l 1 l 2 l
- 1 -
The Power of the
Mediatorial Christ…The Power of
the Testimony of Jesus…The
Non-Conformists…. William
Penn’s Trail Wins Freedom of
Conscience, Speech, the Press, Habeas
Corpus…The High Treason of the
King of England to Turn England Over
to Rome…A Roman Catholic Judge
Must Apply the Laws of His Church
Upon the Citizens of the
State…Rome’s Genocide of
1994-Five Times as Fast as the
Holocaust… America turns over
its Keys to Roman Catholic Judges…
The Imperial Presidency…
Freedom Won and Lost
Britain. 1662. A great
battle over conviction…and
freedom of conscience begins. 2,000
ministers are ejected from their
churches because they refuse to swear
an oath supporting the Book of Common
Prayer. Henry Havers, of Catherine
Hall, Cambridge, is fleeing from
pursuers. Enemies, intent upon his
capture, are hot on his trail. Henry
seeks refuge in a malt house, and
crawled into a kiln, squeezing
himself through the kiln door.
Hidden back in the
darkness of the kiln, as he looked
back toward the light of the opening,
he sees a spider immediately
‘fixing the first line of a
large and beautiful web across the
entrance. The web being placed
directly between him and the light,
he was so much struck with the skill
of the insect weaver, that for a
while he forgot his own imminent
danger, but by the time the network
had crossed and recrossed the mouth
of the kiln in every direction, the
pursuers came to search for him. He
listened as they approached, and
distinctly overheard one of them say:
‘It is of no use to look in
there; the old villain can never be
there. Look at the spider’s web.
He could never have got in there
without breaking it.”
–Baxendale’s Dictionary of
Anecdotes, quoted in W.A. Spicer, The
Hand That Intervenes. Washington
D.C.: Review and Herald, Publishing
Association, 1918, p. 146.
Hand-to-Hand Combat
With Rome’s “Hidden
Hand”
The English Civil War,
a battle for the Rights and
Conscience of Englishmen against the
tyrannical power of Charles I and his
Catholic wife, won by Cromwell and
His Parliamentary Ironsides, was
over. The nation, full of religious
ferment and calls for religious
freedom, had seen Levellers,
Independents, and Russet coated
captains, trained by Cromwell, defeat
King Charles’ royal troops.
Battle Shifts to the
Legal Realm
However, the battle
for real freedom from tyranny would
continue, now in the spiritual and
legal realm. It would be long and
hard-fought. The key to victory lay
in maintaining and building powerful
conviction born of the Holy Spirit
and the Word with bulldog tenacity,
in the face of every threat. After
Cromwell died, Charles II returned
from France to take the throne.
Charles II Determines
to Enforce Religious Uniformity
Charles I had been
executed by the Parliamentary forces
in the Civil War for tyranny. His
son, Charles II, after
Cromwell’s death returned from
exile in France to take the throne.
His mother, the wife of Charles I,
was devoutly Roman Catholic. She had
put her stamp upon her son, and
Charles II was ever a Catholic at
heart, though he promised to maintain
the Protestant religion as required
by law.
One of the early acts
of his reign was to endeavor to stamp
out all the Independence of the
Puritans, Independents, and
Separatists. He appointed a
commission, on October 25, 1660, of
“several bishops and other
divines to review the Book of Common
Prayer.” (Acts of
Uniformity). The result was
the Act of Uniformity.
The Act of
Uniformity: “Universal Agreement
in the Public Worship of Almighty
God”
The Act of Uniformity
was designed to create one uniform
religion in England. It endorsed the
Books of Common Prayer, and the
“Form of Ordination and
Consecration of Bishops, Priest and
Deacons.” The Act called for
‘universal agreement in the
public worship of Almighty God,”
and required “that every person
within this realm many certainly know
the rule to which he is to conform in
public worship and administration of
England, and the manner how and by
whom bishops, priests and deacons are
and ought to be ordained and
consecrated.”
All ministers were
required to use the Book of Prayer.
“All and singular ministers in
any cathedral, collegiate or parish
church, or chapel, or other place of
public worship within the realm of
England, dominion of Wales and town
of Berwick upon Tweed shall be bound
to say and use the morning prayer,
evening prayer, celebration and
administration of both the
sacraments, and all other the public
and common prayer…”
Every Minister
Required to Swear Unfeigned Assent
Every minister was
required to “openly and publicly
before the congregation there
assembled declare his unfeigned
assent and consent to use of all the
things in the said book…”
The minister was
required to swear before his
congregation:
“I, A.B., do here
declare my unfeigned assent and
consent to all and everything
contained and prescribed in and by
the book entitled, “The Book of
Common Prayer…”
“All and every
such person, who shall (without some
lawful impediment to be allowed and
approved of by the ordinary of the
place) neglect or refuse to do the
same within the time aforesaid (or in
the case of such impediment within
one month after such impediment
removed) shall, ipso facto, be
deprived of all his spiritual
promotions; and that from
thenceforth it shall be lawful to and
for all patrons and donors of all and
singular the said spiritual
promotions or of any of them,
according to their respective rights
and titles, to present or collate to
the same, as though the
person or persons so offending or
neglecting were dead.”
This Last Act of
Uniformity was passed on May 19,
1662, demanding unfeigned assent to
everything in the Book of Common
Prayer adopted by Parliament for the
Church of England.
Two Thousand Ministers
Refuse to Swear
Two Thousand ministers
refused to subscribe to the Book of
Common Prayer.
The poet Wordsworth
wrote of them in “Ecclesiastes
Sketches:”
“Nor shall the
eternal roll of praise reject
Those
nonconforming; whom one rigorous day
Drives from their
cures, a voluntary prey
To poverty and
grief, and disrespect,
And some to want-as
if by tempests wrecked
On a wild
coast…
Their altars they
forgo, their homes they quit,
Field which they
love, and paths they daily trod,
And cast the future
upon Providence;
As men the dictates
of whose inward sense
Outweighs the world;
whom self-deceiving wit
Lures not from what
they deem the cause of God.”
The Conventicle Act to
Exterminate Independents and Home
Churches
To prevent independent
congregations from springing up and
supporting the outcast thousands of
ministers who were true to their
consciences, the Conventicle Act was
quickly passed on May 17, 1664. This
Act forbade that more than five
persons be at a religious meeting
where the state church standard was
not followed.
The First Conventicle
Act was designed to enact “more
speedy remedies against the growing
and dangerous practices of seditious
sectaries and other disloyal persons,
who, under pretense of tender
conscience, do at their meetings,
contrive insurrections as later
experience hath showed.” (First
Conventicle Act)
Jail, Fines,
Exile
Under the Conventicle
Act any person 16 years old or older
who attended a ‘conventicle,
meeting or assembly [where] there
shall be five persons or more
assembled, together over and above
those of the same household,”
the said justices and chief
magistrate respectively shall commit every
such offender to the gaol [older
English for “jail”], or
house of correction…” unless
the person paid a fine of up to five
pounds.
A second offense meant
that the person attending the meeting
was to be committed ‘to the gaol
or house of correction, there to
remain without bail or
mainprise, until the next
general quarter sessions,” when
they would be indicted and arraigned
before the court. If the person was
found guilty, or if the offender
refused to plead the general issue or
confess the indictment, then that
“offender shall be
transported beyond the seas to any of
His Majesty’s foreign
plantations (Virginia and New England
only excepted), there to remain for
seven years.”
Thus, the second
offense meant exile beyond the sea,
and the person could not go to
Virginia or New England.
This legislation
caused a great non-conformist or Free
Church movement to spring up.
Ministers and congregations met at
midnight in the forest. Often they
were detected and led away in chains.
A Warning From the
Lord
The authorities often
sought Matthew Warren, a scholar of
Oxford, one of the nonconforming
ministers. Silenced from being a
regular minister, he educated youth
for the ministry. “At one time
he was very remarkably and
providentially preserved. His wife
had a strange impression upon her
mind, that if he did not remove till
such a time from the house to which
he had retired [he being away from
home], he would certainly be taken
prisoner. Accordingly, she sent a
messenger with a letter, earnestly
begging him to be at home by such a
time, or else he might never see her
more. “He imagining it was her
indisposition, and not the fear of
his danger, that was the cause of her
urgency, immediately took leave of
his friends, and went homeward.
However, he was not far from the
house before, looking back from the
ascent, he saw it surrounded
by persons that were sent to search
there for him.”
–Edward Calamy,
Nonconformists’ Memorial,
[himself one of the ejected
ministers], Vol. II, p. 359, quoted
in Spicer, p. 69.
Sabbatarian
Nonconformists
Some of the
nonconformist ministers were
Sabbatarians, among which was Joseph
Stennett, who wrote the hymn,
“Another six
days’ work is done,
Another Sabbath is
begun;
Return my soul enjoy
the rest,
Improve the day God
has blessed.”
-Joseph Stennett
quoted in Spicer, 75.
The Five Mile Act
October 31, 1665. In
an effort to stamp out the spreading
fire of the gospel, the Five Mile Act
was enacted. It would be a great
national struggle over home
churching. No unauthorized minister,
“all such person and persons as
shall take upon them to preach in any
unlawful assembly, conventicle or
meeting under colour or pretence of
any exercise of religion, contrary to
the laws and statutes of this
kingdom, shall not at any time….
unless only in passing upon the road,
come or be within five miles of any
city or town…” Furthermore,
any such person was forbidden
‘to teach any public or private
school, or take any boarders or
tablers that are taught or instructed
by him or herself, or any
other…” The fine was forty
pounds.
King Charles II’s
Plot to Give the Nation to Rome
Meanwhile, May 22,
1670, King Charles II sold out to
Louis XIV of France in the secret
treaty of Dover, the stipulations of
which were like to turn England into
a French appendage. Charles agreed to
declare himself for Rome when
expedient, promised England would
join France to attack the United
Netherlands, would receive two
million livres and six thousand
French troops to suppress rebellion
at home, and receive a morsel of
Zealand if the war was successful.
It was complete high treason by the
king.
While the Church of
England bore savagely on all
non-conformists, King Charles, the
official head of the Church, plotted
treason, and unleashed his troopers
to attack his political enemies.
According to Knight’s History
of England, it was all a plot to
create such disorder in the kingdom
that “the nation would accept
stable authority from any quarter
rather than risk continued
disorder,” and thus steal the
kingdom for Louis and Rome.
William Penn
Disregards the Conventicle Act
August 14, 1670.
William Penn, son of the General of
the Seas, the Admiral of the fleet of
Britain, wholly disregarded the
Conventical Act. Going to the
meetinghouse for Quakers in
Grace-church Street, he and the
congregation found the door closed
and guarded. Penn addressed the
people outside, in the street. It was
a conventicle. He was arrested. His
trial would change world history.
The Trial of William
Penn
Penn in the Tower:
“I will weary out their
malice”
On September 1, 1670,
Penn and as associate were indicted
at the Old Bailey for preaching and
speaking to “the great
disturbance of the King’s
peace.” Penn was thrown into the
Tower. It was not the first time he
had been in the Tower for conviction.
In a previous imprisonment in the
Tower, the Bishop of London
threatened to keep him there until he
died. Penn responded: “They are
mistaken in me; I value not their
threats: I will weary out their
malice.” In that eight month,
sixteen day, imprisonment, forced to
receive worldly ecclesiastics who
advised him to submit, Penn produced
an extraordinary treatise, No
Cross, No Crown.
September 3, 1670,
Penn was brought to trial for
violation of the Conventicle Act.
Penn Appeals to Magna
Carta and Sir Edward Coke
Penn was
‘friendless in a packed court,
facing as prejudiced a bench of
magistrates as ever assembled for the
prompt sentencing of an
individual.” Penn conducted his
own defense, appealing to Magna Carta
and Sir Edward Coke’s
interpretation of it. Penn won the
jury to his cause, and “made of
himself a public man whom no one
henceforth could disregard…
Edward Bushell, jury foreman and
other jurors, staunchly decided the
famous trial by jury, which soon
resolved itself into a trial of the
jury system”
Penn Argues That
Conventicle Act Was Not Valid Under
Magna Carta
Penn was, of course,
guilty under the Conventicle Act.
Penn’s defense was that
“the Conventicle Act was
not valid law under Magna Carta and
the ancient liberties of England, as
laid down in the Great Charter and
Acts of the reigns of Henry III,
Edward I, and Edward III; in short,
that the Conventicle Act was
unconstitutional.”
Penn
challenges the Indictment and
Definition of Common Law
Penn “began by
challenging the indictment, and threw
the judges into a fury by upsetting
their definition of common law.”
The judges shut Penn up in the
bale-dock, “a well-like place at
the farthest end of the court, in
which he could neither see nor be
seen by the bench, jury or
public.’ However, Penn scrambled
and clawed his way up, hung by his
hands, poked his head over and
shouted his protest to the jury
before the twelve
withdrew…casting dignity
overboard, he fought to the tips of
his fingers and at the top of his
lungs.
The Fighting Spirit of
England: “Not Guilty”
“They [the jury]
refused to find it an unlawful
assembly…they jointly and
separately pronounced William Penn
not guilty.
“Behold the
fighting spirit of England rising in
those twelve humble citizens.”
In actual fact, eight jurors buckled,
but four stood fast. Scolded,
starved, and fined, they refused
to buckle. Bushell said,
“My liberty is not for
sale.” He had great wealth and
commanded an international shipping
enterprise. One of the judges even
declared his desire to have something
like the Spanish Inquisition
established in England to stamp out
such as Penn. The jury, fearless in
their battle-hardened conviction,
returned a “not guilty”
verdict in the teeth of the Court
recorder who declared it no verdict.
Fining and
Imprisoning Juries for Judicial Acts
Comes to an End
They refused to pay
the fines. They were imprisoned. They
were forbidden food, water, or
bathroom privileges. They appealed to
the Court of Common pleas they were
released. The Chief Justice reversed
the decision of the recorder. As the
result ‘the practice of fining
and imprisoning the jury for judicial
acts came to an end.”
Jury Finds Conventicle
Act Illegal
Bushell’s jury
had tried the Conventicle
Act, and found it illegal.
You do not have to go to the Supreme
Court to find a law
“unconstitutional.” Under
the jury system, a jury can find a
law to be illegal.
Penn’s
Trail Gives Birth in Law to Freedom
of Religion, Right to Peaceful
Assembly, Freedom of Speech, Freedom
of the Press, Habeas Corpus
The first writ of
habeas corpus ever issued by the
Court of Common Pleas was used to
free Edward Bushell.
Penn’s trail gave
birth in law to Freedom of
Religion, the Right of Peaceful
Assembly, Freedom of Speech, Habeas
Corpus, and Freedom of the Press.
To this day, as a result of this
trial, jurors have the right and duty
to nullify bad laws by voting
“not guilty.”
Penn Fought Like a
Penn: England Took Courage
Penn had been fined
for contempt of court, had been
returned to prison, but his fine was
paid without his knowledge by his
father, the Admiral, who got him
released just in time to come home
just before the death of his father
on September 17. “The one who
had made a trade of fighting died
happy on September 17 in the thought
that his son, who had no trade at
all, and scorned fighting in its
usual forms, nevertheless could fight
like a Penn when the cause seemed
worthy of rage. England took
courage…Penn’s jury, in
effect, had served notice on
government that the people still had
something vital to do with the
execution of the laws.”
–Arthur Pound, The
Penn’s of Pennsylvania and England.
New York: Macmillan Co., 1932, pp.
128, 133-138.
page l 1 l 2 l
- 1 -
