Independency of God is his existence in and of himself, without depending on any other being. " His being and perfections," as Dr.Ridgely obser\'es {Bodij of Divinity, p. 7), " are underived, and not communicated to him, as all finite perfections are by him to the creature. This attribute of independency belongs to all his perfec- tions. 1. He is independent as to his knowledge. He doth not receive ideas from any object out of himself, as intelligent creatures do. This is elegantly described bj"^ the prophet, Isa. xl, 13, 14. 2. He is independent in power. As he receives strength from no one, so he doth not act dependently on the will of the creatiu-e (Job xxxvi, 23). 3. He is independent as to his holiness, hating sin necessarily, and not barely depending on some reasons out of himself inducing him thereto ; for it is es- sential to the divine nature to be infinitely opposite to sin, and therefore to be independently holy. 4. He is in- dependent as to his bounty and goochiess. He commu- nicates blessings not by constraint, but according to his sovereign will. Thus he gave being to the world, and all things therein, which was the first instance of bounty and goodness ; and this not by restramt, but by his free will : ' for his pleasure they are and were created.' In
like manner, whatever instances of mercy he extends to miserable creatures, he acts independently and not by force. He tliows mercy, because it is his pleasure to do so (Rom. ix, 18). That God is independent, let it be fur- ther considered, 1. That all things depend on his power which brought them into and preserves them in being. If, therefore, all things depend on God, then it would be absurd to say that God depends on anything, for this would be to suppose the cause and etfect to be mutuaUy dependent on and derived from each other, ^vhich in- volves a contradiction. 2. If God be infinitely above the highest creatures, he cannot depend on any of them, for dependence argues inferiority (Isa. xl, 15, 17). 3. If God depend on any creatm-e, he does not exist necessarily; and if so, then he might not have been ; for the same will by which he is supposed to exist might have de- termined that he should not have existed, which is al- together inconsistent with the idea of a God. From God's being independent, we infer, 1. That wc ought to conclude that the creature cannot lay any obligation on him, or do anything that may tend to make him more happy than lie is in himself (Eom. xi, 35 ; Job xxii, 2, 3). 2. If independency be a divine perfection, then let it not in any instance, or by any consequence, be attrib- uted to the creature : let us conclude that all our springs are in him, and that all we enjoy and hope for is from him, who is the author and finisher of our faith, and the fountain of all our blessedness." — Buck, Theol. Diction- ary. See God.
Independent Baptists. See Baptists.
Independents, a name given to certain bodies of Christians who assert that each Christian congregation is independent of all others, and from all ecclesiastical authority except its own. Some writers inaccurately use this name as synonymous with " Congregational- ists," forgetting that the latter do not claim the absolute independence of individual character. " The chiu-ches of New England are congregational. They do not ap- prove the name of ' Independent,' and are abhorrent of such principles of independency as would keep them from giving an account of their matters to neighboring churches, regularly demanding it of them" (Mather).
See CONGEEGATIONALISTS.
I. History. — After the reformation of religion in Eng- land, the greater body of Protestants adopted the Epis- copal form of Church polity, and this was finally estab- lished as the religion of the nation. But the smaller body of Protestants opposed episcopacy on the ground that it too nearly resembled the Roman Catholic form of Church polity, and these so-called Nonconformists (q. V.) came to be stigmatized by the derisive name of Puritans, which the followers of Novatian had home in the third centiu-y. To this class (i. e. Noncomform- ists) belong the Independents, who claim that their sys- tem is substantially the same as that of the apostolic churches, which had been corrujited by the tendencies that culminated in papacy, and that traces of dissent from the episcopal power may be found in every age back to the 4th centurj' (see Punchard, History of Con- gregationalism). They are supposed to have originated in England about the year 1581, mider the leadership of Robert Brown, bearing thence tlie name of Brownists (q. V.) ; but Richard Fitz is generally named as the first pastor of the first Independent church in England (coir- pare Skeats, History of the Free Churches, p. 23). The jiersecution which they were obliged to endure from the Established Church soon necessitated the emigration of these first Independents, and they removed to the Neth- erlands. Deserted by Brown, who conformed, and be- came an adherent of the Church of England, they chose as their leader John Robuison, to whom belongs the chief merit of a better organization of them. Brown, who, by the persecutions which, as a Nonconformist, he had to endure, had become greatly embittered, had, with hardly less bigotry than his persecutors, declared all other forms of Church government not only as inconsis- tent, but denounced them in the severest terms, even