Modern British Heresy

  Rev. Nathan Rouse was a Methodist minister, ordained in 1834. He served in Cambridge from 1836 and in Brigg, near Hull, in 1838 ( Dictionary of Methodism ). He was described as “ a literary man, and an excellent preacher, cultured and lovable.” (George Lester, Grimsby Methodism and the Wesleys in Lincolnshire , Archive.org )  A letter to Rev. George Steward In 1854 the Wesleyan Methodist Penny Magazine (April, p.51, here ) noticed Rouses’ publication A letter to the Rev. George Steward containing an examination of some of the statements and arguments of his recently published work. The author assumed most of its readers did not know who Rouse was and the review was sardonic and unenthusiastic, citing Swift’s maxim “Blessed is the man that expecteth nothing, for he shall never be disappointed.”(p52), and ending “... we feel that the insolence, bigotry, and folly of a Rouse leave all former absurdity floundering far behind.” ( ibid. p54 col.2) Contesting Archbishop Ussher’s date of C

Robert Imrie MA was the second minister of Kinkell in the Secession Church. He had been ordained on the 11th April 1792 and arrived in Kinkell in 1798. McKerrow, in his History of the Secession Church, repeated a comment that “so long as he contented himself with simply preaching the gospel and attending to his pastoral duties, he had around him an attached congregation. But this was not to continue…” (Small, p. 608) . The case is not especially significant for the miscellaneous content of Imrie’s heresy, but it is outstanding for the number of years and sessions of Synod it took to come to a final conclusion. 1801 In 1801 Imrie’s congregation brought 13 charges against him in the Presbytery of Perth. The complaint asserted that Imrie “... was accustomed, in his public ministrations, to employ modes of expression that were novel and unguarded, and calculated to unsettle the minds of his hearers with regard to some of the fundamental articles of the Christian faith.” (McKerrow, p484.)

  This case sits firmly at the trivial end of the scale of heresy accusations. On Friday May 23rd, 1834, at an Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Andrew Johnstone, M.P. ( probably this man ) complained about “the alleged heretical doctrine” in a book by Rev. Dr. David Ritchie, “Lectures on the Epistle of Paul to the Romans ”.  ( Ritchie, D., & Blackwood, W. (1831). Lectures: Explanatory and practical, on the doctrinal part of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans . Edinburgh: William Blackwood.) Johnstone called for a committee of inquiry to discover the author and to ascertain “whether it did not impugn the doctrine of justification by faith.” he had given no prior notice of his complaint. ( Report of the proceedings of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, for the year 1834 , Edinburgh, Wm Whyte and Co., p.10 here .)  Dr Ritchie immediately declared himself the author, and affirmed  “I cordially believe in the doctrine of by faith alone without works, - I tea

William Angus Knight ( wiki ) was Minister of St Enoch’s Church , Dundee in the Free Church of Scotland though he was more an academic than a local minister. In 1872 he offended his presbytery by accepting an invitation from his friend, the Rev James Martineau ( wiki ), and preaching in his Unitarian Church. The invitation to preach did not come out of the blue: the men had known one another for some years and had long corresponded on their theological differences. (Newcastle Daily Chronicle - Friday 12 July 1872 p2 col 6-7) Knight was not accused of heresy itself, but of causing offence by publicly associating with and, at least by implication, endorsing a renowned heretic. Knight is included in this blog mostly because I found his story interesting in itself and in particular because his case comes closer than any other I have so far found to drawing a border in the sands between who was and was not a heretic. (He wasn’t.) The course of events Knight preached in Martineau’s church on

On Saturday 11th April, 1896, the Bishop of Limerick, Edward O’Dwyer, charged the Rev Richard Henry Cotter, incumbent of Kildimo, County Limerick ( wiki ), with having deliberately avowed and maintained that 1) the baptism of infants was not agreeable with Scripture, and should not be retained by the Church;  2) that, following his own logic, Rev Cotter had himself baptised publicly within a service of worship in the Baptist House of Prayer, in Limerick;  3) That he failed to baptise “ the child of Isaac Langrill, a parishioner of Kildino, though requested to do so by its parents.” Cotter had published his views in: Deliberate Steps towards Hell Fire!!! now being made by Freemason sorcerers, Episcopalian idolaters, and Government liars-and inevitable political ruin! (1886) I have not found a copy online.  He had also described the martyred Roman Catholic Archbishop, Plunket, as “as a member of the blaspheming scorpion Freemasons, the Grand Pontiff scorpion president of the Synod.” (Pl

 ( Narrative here ) James Cranbrook Source, unless stated otherwise: Kathleen Chater, The Congregational History Society Magazine, Volume 7, No. 4 Autumn 2014. Here 181      Grandfather: William Gregory Cranbrook, (who worked for Bank of England in 1812) m. Rebecca                    They had three children: 1) John, m. Jane Sprott.   2) William 3) ) James: bap Clapham 1793, m. Jemima Piper 1817. d. 1821 aged 28, F ather to our James & Jemima, baptised 1820 James 1819 Baptised                He was of black Caribbean descent. Chater says “Nowhere in the newspaper reports or other sources that document his career is his ancestry mentioned.” I found a single reference. 1836-1840 Trained for ministry at Highbury College, London, 1840-1842 First post in Wickham Market, Suffolk Mar. Charlotte Frost. They had two boys & girl November 1843 Second post in Soham, Cambridgeshire 1847 to Ireland, where “he was not attached to any particular church. Here he seems to have made