The Life of John Bunyan [40]
ascribed to Bunyan's twelve years' imprisonment - and
its sequel, "The Holy War," and the "Life and Death of Mr. Badman,"
and a host of more strictly theological works, followed one another
in rapid succession.
Bunyan's second term of imprisonment was certainly less severe than
that which preceded it. At its commencement we learn that, like
Joseph in Egypt, he found favour in his jailer's eyes, who "took
such pity of his rigorous suffering, that he put all care and trust
into his hands." Towards the close of his imprisonment its rigour
was still further relaxed. The Bedford church book begins its
record again in 1688, after an interval of ominous silence of five
years, when the persecution was at the hottest. In its earliest
entries we find Bunyan's name, which occurs repeatedly up to the
date of his final release in 1672. Not one of these notices gives
the slightest allusion of his being a prisoner. He is deputed with
others to visit and remonstrate with backsliding brethren, and
fulfil other commissions on behalf of the congregation, as if he
were in the full enjoyment of his liberty. This was in the two
years' interval between the expiration of the Conventicle Act,
March 2, 1667-8, and the passing of the new Act, styled by Marvell,
"the quintessence of arbitrary malice," April 11, 1670. After a
few months of hot persecution, when a disgraceful system of
espionage was set on foot and the vilest wretches drove a lucrative
trade as spies on "meetingers," the severity greatly lessened.
Charles II. was already meditating the issuing of a Declaration of
Indulgence, and signified his disapprobation of the "forceable
courses" in which, "the sad experience of twelve years" showed,
there was "very little fruit." One of the first and most notable
consequences of this change of policy was Bunyan's release.
Mr. Offor's patient researches in the State Paper Office have
proved that the Quakers, than whom no class of sectaries had
suffered more severely from the persecuting edicts of the Crown,
were mainly instrumental in throwing open the prison doors to those
who, like Bunyan, were in bonds for the sake of their religion.
Gratitude to John Groves, the Quaker mate of Tattersall's fishing
boat, in which Charles had escaped to France after the battle of
Worcester, had something, and the untiring advocacy of George
Whitehead, the Quaker, had still more, to do with this act of royal
clemency. We can readily believe that the good-natured Charles was
not sorry to have an opportunity of evidencing his sense of former
services rendered at a time of his greatest extremity. But the
main cause lay much deeper, and is connected with what Lord
Macaulay justly styles "one of the worst acts of one of the worst
governments that England has ever seen" - that of the Cabal. Our
national honour was at its lowest ebb. Charles had just concluded
the profligate Treaty of Dover, by which, in return for the
"protection" he sought from the French king, he declared himself a
Roman Catholic at heart, and bound himself to take the first
opportunity of "changing the present state of religion in England
for a better," and restoring the authority of the Pope. The
announcement of his conversion Charles found it convenient to
postpone. Nor could the other part of his engagement be safely
carried into effect at once. It called for secret and cautious
preparation. But to pave the way for it, by an unconstitutional
exercise of his prerogative he issued a Declaration of Indulgence
which suspended all penal laws against "whatever sort of
Nonconformists or Recusants." The latter were evidently the real
object of the indulgence; the former class were only introduced the
better to cloke his infamous design. Toleration, however, was thus
at last secured, and the long-oppressed Nonconformists hastened to
profit by it. "Ministers returned," writes Mr. J. R. Green, "after
its sequel, "The Holy War," and the "Life and Death of Mr. Badman,"
and a host of more strictly theological works, followed one another
in rapid succession.
Bunyan's second term of imprisonment was certainly less severe than
that which preceded it. At its commencement we learn that, like
Joseph in Egypt, he found favour in his jailer's eyes, who "took
such pity of his rigorous suffering, that he put all care and trust
into his hands." Towards the close of his imprisonment its rigour
was still further relaxed. The Bedford church book begins its
record again in 1688, after an interval of ominous silence of five
years, when the persecution was at the hottest. In its earliest
entries we find Bunyan's name, which occurs repeatedly up to the
date of his final release in 1672. Not one of these notices gives
the slightest allusion of his being a prisoner. He is deputed with
others to visit and remonstrate with backsliding brethren, and
fulfil other commissions on behalf of the congregation, as if he
were in the full enjoyment of his liberty. This was in the two
years' interval between the expiration of the Conventicle Act,
March 2, 1667-8, and the passing of the new Act, styled by Marvell,
"the quintessence of arbitrary malice," April 11, 1670. After a
few months of hot persecution, when a disgraceful system of
espionage was set on foot and the vilest wretches drove a lucrative
trade as spies on "meetingers," the severity greatly lessened.
Charles II. was already meditating the issuing of a Declaration of
Indulgence, and signified his disapprobation of the "forceable
courses" in which, "the sad experience of twelve years" showed,
there was "very little fruit." One of the first and most notable
consequences of this change of policy was Bunyan's release.
Mr. Offor's patient researches in the State Paper Office have
proved that the Quakers, than whom no class of sectaries had
suffered more severely from the persecuting edicts of the Crown,
were mainly instrumental in throwing open the prison doors to those
who, like Bunyan, were in bonds for the sake of their religion.
Gratitude to John Groves, the Quaker mate of Tattersall's fishing
boat, in which Charles had escaped to France after the battle of
Worcester, had something, and the untiring advocacy of George
Whitehead, the Quaker, had still more, to do with this act of royal
clemency. We can readily believe that the good-natured Charles was
not sorry to have an opportunity of evidencing his sense of former
services rendered at a time of his greatest extremity. But the
main cause lay much deeper, and is connected with what Lord
Macaulay justly styles "one of the worst acts of one of the worst
governments that England has ever seen" - that of the Cabal. Our
national honour was at its lowest ebb. Charles had just concluded
the profligate Treaty of Dover, by which, in return for the
"protection" he sought from the French king, he declared himself a
Roman Catholic at heart, and bound himself to take the first
opportunity of "changing the present state of religion in England
for a better," and restoring the authority of the Pope. The
announcement of his conversion Charles found it convenient to
postpone. Nor could the other part of his engagement be safely
carried into effect at once. It called for secret and cautious
preparation. But to pave the way for it, by an unconstitutional
exercise of his prerogative he issued a Declaration of Indulgence
which suspended all penal laws against "whatever sort of
Nonconformists or Recusants." The latter were evidently the real
object of the indulgence; the former class were only introduced the
better to cloke his infamous design. Toleration, however, was thus
at last secured, and the long-oppressed Nonconformists hastened to
profit by it. "Ministers returned," writes Mr. J. R. Green, "after