33.Owen "not concerned"

Owen "not concerned" even if Presbyterian Government had been settled in 1660 According to Goold, Owen was "led...in the end to...Congregationalism." Yet according to actual fact, at the end of his life Owen seems rather to have been led back to the Presbyterianism of his earlier days. For during his turbulent years, he had become increasingly disillusioned with Congregationalism. Hence the episcopalian Anglican Dr. Stillingfleet not inappropriately asked, after the 1660 enthronement in England of Charles II: "Hath Dr Owen yielded, that...if Presbytery [rather than Episcopalianism] had been settled upon the king’s restoration  would they [Owen’s Congregationalists]...have continued in their separation?" To this, the decongregationalizing and represbyterianizing Owen responded (XV:432f):

"Had the Presbyterian Government been settled at the king’s restoration, by the encouragement and protection of the practice of it, without a rigorous imposition of everything supposed by any to belong thereunto, or a mixture of human constitutions, if there had [been] any appearance of a schism or separation continued between the parties I do judge they [Congregationalism and Presbyterianism] would have been both to blame" had they ’continued in their separation.’

For, Owen adds: "It would have been a matter of no great art absolutely to unite them.... If it shall be asked, then, Why did they not formerly agree in the [Westminster] Assembly? I answer, (1) I was none of them, and cannot tell;

(2) They did agree, in my judgment, well enough.... I am not concerned in the difference."