PURITAN FRIENDS OF THE JEWS
Newes from Rome――Rev. Dr. William Gouge――Sir Henry Finch,
Sergeant-at-law――King James I.――Archbishop Laud――Archbishop
Abbot――Roger Williams――Johanna Cartwright and her son Ebenezer
――John Harrison――Rev. John Dury――Rev. Henry Jessey――Rev.
Thomas Fuller――Re-admission and Restoration――Manasseh and the
Puritans.
THE publication of a tract in 1607, entitled:――
“_Newes from Rome ... of an Hebrew people ... who pretend
their warre is to recouer the land of Promise...._”
(Appendix xxv)
is remarkable for the interest evinced at a time when the presence of
a Jew in England was deemed unlawful. It purports to be a translation
from the Italian of a letter dated 1 June, 1606, sent by _Signior_
Valesco to _Don_ Mathias _de_ Rensie of Venice. In it he is informed
of the perturbed state of the world, and that Hungary, Bohemia and
Muscovia are to declare war, seize Constantinople, and drive the
Turk out of Europe. Tunis, Morocco, with the Arabians, and others,
are to expel the Turk entirely out of Africa. The Soffie, the Medes,
the people of Melibar on the border of India are in revolt. The
most alarming news is to the effect than an unknown people, strong,
mighty and swift, from beyond the Caspian mountains, claiming to be
descendants of the lost Ten Tribes, are coming to recover the Land of
Promise from the Turk. This is followed by a detailed account of the
leaders of each tribe, the strength of each army, with the particulars
of its equipment. The letter concludes by a promise of more news in a
few days.
It was, however, a Puritan England that welcomed back the Jews as an
ancient nation and as the “People of the Book.” In 1621 the Rev. Dr.
William Gouge (1578‒1653) published the anonymous work:――
_The World’s Great Restauration. Or, The Calling of the Iewes_
(Appendix xxvi).
In the preliminary leaf, “To the Reader,” signed “Thine in the Lord,
William Gouge. Church-Court in Black-fryers, London 8. Ianuary. 1621.”
he states:――
“_... I haue bin moued to publish this Treatise ... and to
commend it to thy reading. And this is all that I haue done.
The worke it selfe is the worke of one who hath dived deeper
into that mysterie then I can doe. His great understanding of
the Hebrew tongue hath bin a great helpe to him therein. How
great his paines haue beene, not in this onely but also in
other poynts of Diuinitie, his |Sacred doctrine of Diuinitie|,
first published in a little Manuel, after set forth in a
larger volume, his |Old Testament|, or |Promise|, Therein the
mysteries of the Iewish types and ceremonies are opened, his
|Exposition of the song of Salomon|,¹ and this, |The World’s
great restauration|, or |Calling of the Iewes| (workes of his
heretofore and now published) doe witnesse_.”
¹ _The Sacred Doctrine of Divinity_, 1589, 1613; and
_Exposition of the Song of Salomon_, 1615, issued
anonymously, are in the Bodleian Library. Neither Wood’s
_Athenæ_, Bohn’s _Lowndes_, _The Dictionary of National
Biography_, nor The British Museum catalogue mention them.
The writer, Sir Henry Finch (1558‒1625), Serjeant-at-Law (1616), was
a distinguished author of many legal works. Mr. J. M. Rigg, in the
_Dictionary of National Biography_, vol. xix., 1889, tells us, that
in this treatise “he seems to have predicted in the near future the
restoration of temporal dominion to the Jews and the establishment
by them of a world-wide empire.” This caused James I. to treat the
work as a libel, and accordingly Finch was arrested in April, 1621.
He obtained his liberty by disavowing all such portions of the work as
might be construed as derogatory to the sovereign and by apologizing
for having written unadvisedly. William Laud (1573‒1645), Bishop of
St. David’s, 1621,¹ in a sermon preached in July of that year, took
occasion to animadvert on the book. It was suppressed, and is now
extremely rare.
¹ Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1626; Bishop of London, 1628;
Archbishop of Canterbury, 1633.
In spite of the official proceedings, in consequence of which he was
forced to sign his recantation and acknowledge his loyalty to the
sovereign, Finch clearly never renounced the principal idea of his
book. A letter from the pen of a celebrity of the day gives a fair
idea not only of the sensation which Finch’s _Apocryphal Apocalypse_
created at the time, but also of the personal and somewhat strange
motives underlying King James’s indignation (Appendix xxvii).
Dr. Gouge was considered equally culpable. He was imprisoned for
nine weeks, and only released on giving certain explanations, which
[George Abbot (1562‒1633)] the Archbishop of Canterbury (1611) deemed
satisfactory. He was a fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, where
he taught _Hebrew_, having been the only steadfast pupil of a Jew
(Appendix xxviii) who came to Cambridge to give instruction in that
language.
Roger Williams (1604(5)‒1683), the son of James (_ob._ 1621) and Alice
Williams, was a native of London. He was one of the great pioneers of
Religious liberty, his prime contention being that the civil powers
should have no authority over the consciences of men. Ecclesiastical
tyranny induced him to emigrate in 1631 to America. In 1635 he
was banished from the state of Massachusetts for his heretical and
political opinions. The following year he and a few other malcontents,
after many hardships and trials arrived at Rhode Island, and in
gratitude to God’s mercy he named the first settlement “Providence.”
In 1638 he purchased land from the aborigines, and the state of Rhode
Island was founded. In June, 1643, he set sail for his native land to
obtain a charter, which was granted, dated 14 March, 1644, giving the
“Providence Plantations” full power to rule themselves by any form of
government they preferred. During his stay here of but a few months,
he published two tracts advocating religious and political freedom.
In one he writes: “For who knowes not but many ... of the ... Jewish
Religion, may be clear and free from _scandalous offences_ in their
life, and also from _disobedience_ to the Civill Lawes of a State?”¹
¹ The | Blovdy tenent, | of Persecution, for cause of |
Conscience, discussed, in | A Conference _betweene_ | Trvth
and Peace. | Who, In all tender Affection, present to the
High | Court of _Parliament_, (as the _Result_ of | their
_Discourse_) these, (amongst other | Passages) of _highest
consideration_. | Printed in the Year 1644. (_4to_. 12 _ll._
+ 247 _pp._ [B. M.]) Chap. lvi., _p._ 171.
In July, 1644, he left the English shores, and in the following month,
the tract containing this plea for the Jews, was by the order of the
Commons publicly burnt by the common hangman. The author arrived at
Boston on the seventeenth of December following. In 1651 he again
embarked for England, in connection with matters concerning the State
he had founded and remained for two and a half years.
Ecclesiastical affairs here were in an unsettled condition, so a
“Parliamentary Committee,” known as “The Committee for the Propagation
of the Gospel,” was formed, of which Cromwell himself was a member,
to consider certain proposals of some twenty leading divines. Among
the papers, one presented by Major Butler and others, contained the
following clause:――
4. “Whether it be not the duty of the Magistrates to permit
the Jews, ... to live freely and peaceably among us.”
This was accompanied by a comment, signed R.W.,¹ in which he argues at
length under seven different heads why “this wrong”――their exclusion
should not be continued:――
¹ Roger Williams.
“I humbly conceive it to be the _Duty_ of the _Civil
Magistrate_ to break down that superstitious _wall_ of
_separation_ (as to Civil things) between us Gentiles and the
Jews, and freely (without this asking) to make way for their
free and peaceable Habitation amongst us.”
“As other _Nations_, so this especially, and the _Kings_
thereof have had just cause to fear, that the _unchristian
oppressions_, _incivilities_ and _inhumanities_ of this Nation
against the Jews have cried to Heaven against this _Nation_
and the _Kings_ and _Princes_ of it.”
“What horrible _oppressions_ and horrible _slaughters_
have the _Jews_ suffered from the _Kings_ and peoples of
this Nation, in the Reigns of _Henry 2_ (1133‒1189), K.
_John_ (1167‒1216), Richard I. (1157‒1199) and _Edward I._
(1239‒1307), concerning which not only we, but the _Jews_
themselves keep _Chronicles_.”¹
¹ The fourth paper presented by Major Butler to the honourable
Committee of Parliament for the propagating the Gospel....
Also a letter from Mr. Goad, to Major Butler, upon occasion
of the said paper and proposals.
Together with a testimony to the said fourth paper. By R. W.
Unto which is subjoyned the fifteen proposals of the
Ministers.
London, 1652. _4to_.
He returned to Providence in 1654, and in September, shortly after his
arrival, was elected President or Governor of Rhode Island, one of the
thirteen original states of the Union, and the first to accord Jews
rights and privileges similar to other colonists. He held office until
May, 1658, and it is worthy of note that one who took a significant
part in securing the admission of Jews to England in the Old World,
was the founder of a state in New England in the New World, which
was the first to grant equal rights to Jews at a time when he was its
President. He died at Providence in the early part of April, 1683.¹
¹ Roger Williams, The Pioneer of Religious Liberty. By Oscar
S. Straus.... New York.... 1894.
In 1899 a tablet, with the following inscription:――
In Memory of Roger Williams,
Formerly a Scholar of Charterhouse
Founder of the State of Rhode Island, and the
Pioneer of Religious Liberty in America. Placed here by
Oscar S. Straus, United States Minister to Turkey, 1899.
was presented to the Charterhouse, where Williams was a scholar in the
year 1624.
In 1649 two Baptists of Amsterdam, Johanna Cartwright and her son
Ebenezer, presented a petition to Lord Fairfax (1612‒71) and the
“generall Councell of Officers” in favour of the Jews (Appendix xxix).
Religious fervour had been stirred to a high pitch, and there were few
men whose minds had not been influenced by Messianic beliefs and other
religious and mystical ideas.
John Harrison (_fl_. 1630), a famous traveller and diplomatist, envoy
to Barbary, published _The Messiah already come, etc._ (Appendix
xxx). He took a lively interest in the disputes which arose between
partisans of the new Puritan movement and those who adhered to the old
doctrines, besides dwelling on the question of religious liberty, and
he argued that so long as the Jews were not equal in their rights to
others as a nation, “the heart will be filled with violence.”
John Dury (Durie), the ubiquitous Protestant divine, who travelled
much and endeavoured to bring together all sections of Protestantism,
was a great friend of the Jews. He was one of those who drew up the
“Westminster Confession” and “Catechisms.” In 1649‒50 he wrote _An
Epistolicall Discourse of Mr. Iohn Dury, to Mr. Thorowgood, concerning
his conjecture that the Americans are descended from the Israelites_
(Appendix xxxi), and during his stay at Cassel, in Germany, _A Case
of Conscience, Whether it be lawful to admit Jews into a Christian
Commonwealth?_ (Appendix xxxii).¹
¹ The Rev. Walter Begley, in his issue of _Nova Solyma_, 1902,
vol. i. p. 350, refers to the _Commonwealth of Israel_,
1650, as one of Dury’s works. The catalogues of the British
Museum and the Bodleian Libraries do not record a copy.
The _D.N.B._ does not include it in its list of his works,
but mentions 20. _Epistolary Discourse [on Israelitish
origin]_, 1649, and 27. _Epistolary Discourse [on Americans
being Israelites]_, 1650, both equally unknown. The latter,
however, may be “An Epistolicall Discourse Of Mr. Iohn Dury
... that the Americans are descended from the Israelites,”
printed in the preliminary leaves of _Iewes in America ...
Tho: Thorowgood_ ... 1650.
Another great friend of the Jews was Henry Jessey, or Jacie
(1601‒1663), a Baptist divine. He began his studies in 1618 at
Cambridge, where at St. John’s College in ♦1622 he was admitted
Constable’s scholar. _Hebrew_ and _Rabbinical_ literatures were his
favourite studies. He projected a revised translation of the Bible
and made some progress in it. He collected £300 for the poor Jews
of _Jerusalem_, who in consequence of the war between the Swedes and
Poles in 1657 were reduced to great extremity, as the main source
of income derived from their charitable coreligionists in European
countries was thereby cut off. This is, as far as is known, the
earliest instance of English Christians helping the Jews of Palestine
(Appendix xxxiii).
♦ “1662” replaced with “1622”
In 1653 he wrote a treatise for the purpose of reconciling the various
religious opinions of Jews and Gentiles, entitled, _The Glory of
Jehudah and Israel_ (Appendix xxxiv).
His liberality to Jews was memorable on other occasions. He claimed
for them the rights of citizenship and admission to this country which
was then under consideration.
He was one of the members of the Assembly convened by Cromwell
to consider Manasseh Ben Israel’s proposals for the return of his
coreligionists to England. He is supposed to be the author of an
anonymous tract, entitled _A Narrative of the late Proceeds at
White-Hall, concerning the Jews_ (Appendix xxxv).
Thomas Fuller (1608‒1661),¹ Prebendary of Salisbury, delivered several
sermons, in which he argued that the Jewish nation was fulfilling an
important office in the world and was, under the order of Providence,
an instrument in giving the victory to good over evil. This nation
ought not, therefore, to content itself with mere existence, but
should throw its elements, or the best of them, into another mould and
constitute out of them a new society which would become a blessing to
the world.
¹ Author of “A Pisgah-Sight of Palestine” ... London ... MDCL.
He was the elder brother of Francis Fuller (1637‒1701),
at whose obsequies the Rev. Jeremiah White (1629‒1707)
said: “... But I will add no more concerning his Learning,
because it was not only a _Personal_, but _hereditary_
Accomplishment: For I think it did belong to his Family to
be learned....” [_p._ 112: “A _Funeral Sermon_ Preached upon
the Death Of the Reverend Mr. Francis Fuller ... By Jeremiah
White, ... London ... 1702.”] (_Sm._ 8º. 4 _ll._ + 119 _pp._
[B. M.])
Illustration:
_Sir_ OLIVER ST. JOHN THOS. BRIGHTMAN
_Rev. Dr._ WILLIAM GOUGE
HUGO GROTIUS _Rev._ HENRY JESSEY
All these Christian pioneers of religious liberty and Zionism were in
close connection with Manasseh, and helped him to prepare the way for
the re-admission of the Jews into England.
The view held by many Christians, especially in England, was that
the Israelitish race, now scattered over the face of the earth, would
eventually be brought back to its own land. To this was generally
added the belief that the Jews would return in a converted, _i.e._
Christian, state.¹ In conformity with the general spirit of the period,
all these ideas had a religious colouring in the minds both of English
theologians and writers and of the Jews themselves.
¹ The final ingathering of the Jews is taught in both the
Jewish and Christian Bibles.
Why were these considerations particularly important with regard to
England? In seeking an answer to this question we are met at once by
the significant fact dealt with in the first chapter of this book: the
attachment of Englishmen to the Bible.
The men and women who live in the pages of the Bible had long ago
become recognized types for the English nation. As early as the
seventeenth century interest in the restoration of _Israel_ had become
deep and general, England providing the earliest stimulus to Zionism.
The connection between this idea, and the idea of the readmission of
the Jews into England after long years of exclusion, following their
final expulsion under Edward I. in the year 1290, and the steady
progress of the latter idea, supported and determined by the former,
is characteristic not only of Manasseh’s writings, efforts and plans,
but of the whole epoch. Facts prove with what steadfastness of aim and
consistency of thought the problem was attacked and conquered by the
Puritan theologians and writers, and to what an extent their defence
of the Jews formed one comprehensive and consistent scheme, of which
the readmission of the Jews (justice applied to _individuals_) was one
part, and the Restoration of _Israel_ (justice applied to _the nation
as a whole_) was another.
Whoever studies Manasseh’s writings and the Puritan literature of that
epoch will have no difficulty in recognizing that the idea of national
justice to the Jews underlies all the discussions and controversies
and is common to all schools of thought. Thus Zionism has but brought
to light and given practical form and a recognized position to a
principle which had long consciously or unconsciously guided English
opinion. The ideas of Readmission and Restoration originally formed
a single stream in England, before they separated to flow in distinct
but parallel channels. Readmission, however, became an immediate
practical result, whilst Restoration was left for the future.