# Non-Conformity and the Great Ejection



## Prufrock (May 25, 2010)

I would be interested in reading discussion on this matter.

Following the ejection of 1662, there were ministers who refused to conform, but who nevertheless, after being ejected from their pulpits, continued to worship in official churches for the purpose of displaying unity. An example is Edmund Calamy. Were such courses of action commendable and in keeping with Presbyterian principle? Were they overly irenic actions which, while the spirit behind them can be appreciated, represented too much compromise? Should they have gone all the way and left the worship of these churches? &c.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 25, 2010)

Was Calamy sinning in remaining? Was there somewhere he could have gone otherwise?


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 25, 2010)

FYI. Calamy didn't have a lot of time after the fire of London (1666); he went home and died I believe after seeing the devastation.


----------



## MW (May 25, 2010)

I think the history and the issues involved are important because they bear on the question of what a minister should do when he may find it impossible to continue with an ecclesiastical body as a result of important principles he maintains.

There are a number of works which discuss the question, the most notable being Joseph Alleine's (1634-1668) "A call to Archippus, or, An humble and earnest motion to some ejected ministers (by way of letter) to take heed to their ministry that they fulfil it" 1664.

He makes it clear that he does not underestimate the sacrifice made in non-conformity:



> "We would not be so understood in any thing, as if we did undervalue the Sufferings of our most deserving Brethren, or were unthankful to God, or them, that they have so manfully stood for the TRUTH, and resisted the strong Temptations to sinful compliance, even to the peril of their Families, the loss of Goods and Livelihood, and their beloved Imployment amongst their dear People. We must, we do, and shall while we live, bless the Lord for this their Courage and Constancy; that they have kept the Word of His Patience, and have not denied His Name: And have born their publick Testimony against the Corruptions of the times; though we are forced (with submission) to mind them, what pity it is, that they that did run so well, should not reach to the end of their race.
> 
> We would not be understood, as if we did lay the blame of silence upon all our Fathers and Brethren, that have been thrust out for Conscience towards God. We know there are of them, and that not a few, (Glory be to God) that are harder at work than ever; labouring in season, and out of season, by night and by day; whose Reward is with the Lord, yea, a great Reward, and their praise throughout all the Churches.



One argument for carrying on a nonconformist ministry is provided in the fact that the power of godliness cannot be expected as a fruit from a conformist ministry:



> Whether you think in your hearts, that the Ministry that now is, will ever keep up the Power of Godliness? O that we could but charitably believe it! But who can deny his senses! Alas! how should Christ's Kingdom and Interest, and the Power of Holiness be supported by these hands?



Another argument is the bad reflection it will give to the principles for which the nonconformists suffered if the men who refused to conform would not openly profess and teach those principles:



> Whether it will not impair the honour of our Glorious Profession, if the Followers should be of more courage and resolution than their Leaders, and leave their Spiritual Commanders behind? To be plain, the People are willing and forward to venture with you; and to run the risk of it, and shall their Leaders be more backward than they?



Yet another argument is the unguarded state in which the flock of God will be left if the pastors do not tend to them:



> Whether a great part of your Flocks will not be in extreemest danger to run wild to Seducers, and despisers of Government, if you do not step in... Experience writes a sad Probatum est [it is proved] to what we say in this; of which how mischievous the issue may be, we leave you to consider. Yea, judge your own selves, we beseech you, whether false Teachers will not have a fairer advantage than ever, to get in with our People, and glory over our Ministry and Churches, if they be ready and forward in hazarding themselves among their parties, when ours onely shall decline their Flocks and Labours, as soon as times grow perilous?



There are various other arguments of this kind, and all convincing. It is an excellent little piece, and well worthy of consideration as it provides biblical arguments for carrying on a nonconformist ministry.


----------



## Cato (May 26, 2010)

My ancestors left the contensious climate of the UK & moved to the States where they started congregations known as Calvinistic Methodists. One was a open air preacher who's congregation was grave yards, fields & town centers......."Adapt & Overcome"


----------



## py3ak (May 26, 2010)

What kind of unity can you show with people who just kicked out almost every godly minister in the church? While no doubt people who either conformed or continued to attend while not conforming had their reasons, I don't think the "display of unity" reason carries much weight. Is it not Scripture's injunction to mark and avoid those who cause divisions and offenses? The Great Ejection seems like a pretty clear instance of that!


----------



## rbcbob (May 26, 2010)

Was William Gurnall culpable in staying when so many did not? I appreciate his writing but have wondered about his decision.


----------

