A little help with identification - "Benjamin Hinton"

Status
Not open for further replies.

davejonescue

Puritan Board Junior
Have a question for you guys and gals, I think I know the answer just want to clear up for clarification. I came across this author "Benjamin Hinton; Late Minister of Hendon." There is a listed a collection of 18 of his sermons. The collection has an "Imprimatur, Edm: Calamy. 1650" Since "Imprimatur" can mean sign of approval; would these be appropriate since Calamy is regarded as one of the more well-known Puritans, that this should be regarded as either a notable Puritan or Non-Conformist work? Any help would be great, thank you everybody.

 
Calamy was still serving the Westminster Assembly which was at this point transitioning to simply a minister approving board for the government, but still apparently in charge of reviewing books for publication, which they'd been doing the prior 7 years when fully functioning (a form of censorship to make sure heresy was not being published). It doesn't mean anything beyond he got government approval, as to whether the guy was otherwise a puritan or conformist or how he is seen in historical hindsight.
 
Fascinating. I don't recall ever seeing Imprimatur on a non-Catholic publication. But maybe I just haven't examined some title pages closely enough. The Assembly's "censorship" must have been limited to granting official sanction, because hundreds and hundreds of heterodox and crazy books were certainly still published throughout the 1640's.

As for Hinton, a quick search confirms he was an episcopal minister, and a perusal of his sermons suggests he was evangelical. He entered Cambridge in 1593, but as a matriculate pensioner paying his own way he didn't receive his B.D. until 1607. Beginning in 1615 he served in various Anglican parishes, Sedbergh, Little Stanmore, and Hendon. He died in 1643, and his 18 published sermons were later put forth by his son William. I also came across a record where as an officiating minister in 1643 he certified that a certain London physician was "conformist" in his church attendance.
 
Last edited:
But maybe I just haven't examined some title pages closely enough. The Assembly's "censorship" must have been limited to granting official sanction, because hundreds and hundreds of heterodox and crazy books were certainly still published throughout the 1640's.
Correct. The good guys (mostly) played by the rules. Publications of the era of the Westminster Assembly are filled with the imprimatur of folks like Calamy, Caryl, etc. Whoever was on that committee of the assembly; not sure if the chair did this or maybe they divided up books in committee. It was a presbyterian of the WA that actually approved the Independents' Apologetical Narration which did an end run going to the public because they were a minority in the WA (thanks a lot!).
 
Of course that depends on one's ecclesial perspective... lol
Actually, no, because it is clear both the congregationalists and the Erastians broke the rules of assembly debate (part of their vows) and took their respective cases directly to press and to parliament. All sides did politicking to gain advantage but I'm not aware of any similar breaking amongst the Presbyterians (no pressure to; they had the majority). The closest is Robert Baillie for his gossipy letters about the work of the assembly to his cousin, which now are invaluable for stuff we would not otherwise know.
 
Actually, no, because it is clear both the congregationalists and the Erastians broke the rules of assembly debate (part of their vows) and took their respective cases directly to press and to parliament. All sides did politicking to gain advantage but I'm not aware of any similar breaking amongst the Presbyterians (no pressure to; they had the majority). The closest is Robert Baillie for his gossipy letters about the work of the assembly to his cousin, which now are invaluable for stuff we would not otherwise know.
Point taken. Yet I'm thinking more along the lines of some uber-non-conformist works still making it to publication, like the 1644/46 LBC...
 
Last edited:
The closest is Robert Baillie for his gossipy letters about the work of the assembly to his cousin

Actually I've been going through some of these lately in relation to his treatment of the anabaptists/baptists. For someone who typically addressed things in such a succinct manner he sure wrote a lot... And of course the episcopal divine Daniel Featly was evicted and imprisoned for supposedly smuggling gossip to Ussher, whereas the evidence suggests the real reason was his opposition to the SLC. Talk about politicking...
 
Actually I've been going through some of these lately in relation to his treatment of the anabaptists/baptists. For someone who typically addressed things in such a succinct manner he sure wrote a lot...
Baillie spoke only once in the assembly (that we know); he was better at complaining in letters I guess. ;)
 
Interesting. Was he known to be a regular attendee?
He was part of the Scottish delegation and regularly attended while in London. He took one trip back with Gillespie to report in with the directory (I think) and give a progress report to the general assembly and unless other things prevented (other meetings the Scots would attend such as the Grand Committee, or if out preaching to the armies, etc.) he was a regular attendee.
 
He was part of the Scottish delegation and regularly attended while in London. He took one trip back with Gillespie to report in with the directory (I think) and give a progress report to the general assembly and unless other things prevented (other meetings the Scots would attend such as the Grand Committee, or if out preaching to the armies, etc.) he was a regular attendee.
Makes sense. How else could he get so much material for his gossip... :rolleyes:
 
Baillie spoke only once in the assembly (that we know);
Chris - (sorry to derail the thread a bit more...) but does this silence by Baillie extend to any oral disputations during the Grand Debate, or is that episode considered a separate issue - and if separate, was Baillie involved in that process? If he did participate but was silent, that would seem odd, since he had such a prolific and tart pen in terms of denouncing Independency. Anyway, you're the expert in this area so any light you can shed would be welcome!
 
Chris - (sorry to derail the thread a bit more...) but does this silence by Baillie extend to any oral disputations during the Grand Debate, or is that episode considered a separate issue - and if separate, was Baillie involved in that process? If he did participate but was silent, that would seem odd, since he had such a prolific and tart pen in terms of denouncing Independency. Anyway, you're the expert in this area so any light you can shed would be welcome!
We don't have minutes for the committees including those that drafted the Grand Debate papers. It is conceivable Baillie was more active in committee but he seems to have been the retiring type; on at least two occasions when Gillespie and Baillie were assigned something to draft for the Scottish General Assembly, the trips they returned, he remarks the task was all done by Gillespie.
 
Gillespie and Baillie were assigned something to draft for the Scottish General Assembly, the trips they returned, he remarks the task was all done by Gillespie.
Baillie obviously held Gillespie in highest regard, having remarked:

We gett good help in our Assemblie debates of my Lord Warriston, but of none more than that noble youth Mr Gillespie. I trulie admire his facultie, and blesses God, as for all my colleagues, so for him, in that facultie with the first of the whole Assemblie. (Letters, 2:140)​
 
Correct; but the Engagement changed the harmony. I don't recall if Baillie has a negative comment on Gillespie's leading the opposition against the foolish plan to invade England and capture the King away from Cromwell. I know one royalist Scott blamed Gillespie exclusively for his role; essentially those ministers opposed helped ensure few troops and supplies would join up as the army headed toward and into England. It was ill conceived and it was not a surprise to the English who immediately crushed the Scottish army.
Baillie obviously held Gillespie in highest regard, having remarked:

We gett good help in our Assemblie debates of my Lord Warriston, but of none more than that noble youth Mr Gillespie. I trulie admire his facultie, and blesses God, as for all my colleagues, so for him, in that facultie with the first of the whole Assemblie. (Letters, 2:140)​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top