the animosities of the people and the apprehensions of the nobles, for the purpose of keeping up a party in Scotland; and, under the nominal plan of introducing a conformity between the churches of the two nations, had been seeking her own interests and promoting divisions among the Scotch. The general assembly had, from the first, assumed to itself a considerable power, independent of the government; and in 1566 had decided on the adoption of the Geneva discipline, which virtually destroyed the spiritual authority of the bishops, though they retained in some measure their lands and their seats in parliament. The properties, indeed, and the higher situations connected with the abbeys, were generally in the hands of laymen, but the bishoprics were still filled by ecclesiastics. The authority possessed by the bishops varied at different times, depending in a great degree on the policy of the successive regents and favourites of James. Till 1592, the assembly had generally rejected episcopal interference,' and the court retained sufficient power to prevent the legal establishment of the presbytery. In that year, however, this step was effected, and soon after, in consequence of a tumult in Edinburgh connected with the presbyterian ascendancy, the life of James was endangered; an event which gave him a continual dislike to that form of church government and a decided preference to episcopacy, independently of the consideration of the political influence which the votes of the bishops furnished to the court. He obtained for the bishops, in 1597 and 1600, a concession of their right to sit in parliament; but this was fettered with such restrictions as rendered the spiritual authority of the order almost nugatory, and they accepted what was granted, though they never seem to have conformed to the stipulated conditions; and when he came to the throne of England he formed the wish of reducing the two churches to a uniformity of discipline. and service; a wish reasonable indeed in a king of Great Britain, and in correspondence with the desires of every friend of the two countries, but the plan 1 Guthry's Memoirs, 4. 2 Rapin, ii. 299. was not likely to succeed unless attempted by honourable and fair means. $565. (A. D. 1610.) In the assembly at Glasgow he so contrived to collect a body suited to his own views, that he carried all his points in favour of episcopacy, and presently set up a court of ecclesiastical commission. Episcopacy, therefore, now began to gain ground, and James was very careful in the selection of the men whom he advanced, consulting the older bishops, and bringing forward such men only as were suited to promote the real interests of the church. It was by these steps that the assembly of St. Andrew's was enabled to consult about introducing a liturgy, (1617,) which some of its members began to form, or rather to copy from the Prayer Book of the church of England; and the assembly of Perth to establish the five points connected with the rites and ceremonies of the church. (1618.) James would probably have gone further, had not the difficulties with regard to his daughter's kingdom prevented his doing any thing which might embroil him at home. $566. On the accession of Charles I. (1625,) the presbyterians addressed a petition to him, but found that he was not at all disposed to comply with their wishes; the interests of the anti-episcopal cause, however, were kept up by the appointment of a secret fast, which was observed, at stated periods, among their friends throughout the kingdom. (1633.) When the king visited Scotland, they had prepared a petition, which they purposed to have presented to him, had he not forbidden the earl of Rothes to do so and the next year, Lord Balmiranoch, having this petition Rapin, ii. 299. 4 Guthry, 13. 5 These articles are, from their number, which was five, sometimes mistaken for the Five Articles of the synod of Dort, with which they are in no way connected. They are printed in Spottistans, ii. 101; see also Wordsworth's Eccl. Biog. wood's Hist. of Scotland, p. 538; Neal's Puriv. 298. The 1st enjoins the posture of kneeling in receiving the Lord's Supper. The 2d allows of private communion in case of sickness. The 3d allows of private baptism in case of danger. The 4th enjoins the use of catechising and confirmation. The 5th enjoins the observation of holydays and festivals. • Guthry, 7, &c. in his possession, which he imprudently the power with which they were inshowed to a friend, was imprisoned, and vested. The ruling party was, for the most unjustly condemned to die,1 (1634,) time, generally the most in fault, as a sentence which, though immediately having the greater means of doing remitted, made him forever an enemy to wrong; and from 1610 to the date of the court, and induced him to combine these events, the country had been opwith others, who saw the danger to pressed by the episcopalians, and their which the lives and properties of every opponents were in secret brooding over one must be exposed under so arbitrary their discontent and the prospects of a government, and to form plans by revenge. which the chief authority might be transferred into their own hands. These circumstances had enrolled the lovers of civil freedom among the enemies of episcopacy. The prejudices of the common people were against it, and the lower clergy exerted their influence to increase this dislike; the nobles were afraid that their titles to the church property which they held, would be called in question, and to this was added a considerable irritation among them, particularly in the earls of Traquair and Argyle (then Lord Lorn) by the appointment of the archbishop of St. Andrew's to the chancellorship, and the advancement of other churchmen to high civil offices. Fuller insinuates that the bribery which James had carried on among the leading presbyterians now ceased, and that this, among other causes, contributed to the subsequent opposition; and whether this were so or no, it is difficult to determine how much blame attaches to Charles I. in all these proceedings. He had been much less careful than his father in appointing proper men to the several sees as they became vacant, and in the selection of those whom he chose he had been guided by personal favour, as well as the hope of promoting his own political ends; and probably much influenced by Laud, who fancied that the advancement of churchmen into the higher offices of state was likely to benefit the cause of the church. But the great evil in Scotland was, that party was allowed to trample on law and justice, so that men sought for power in self-defence; and when further disturbances arose, neither the one side nor the other had any other principles than those of using to the utmost § 567. (A. D. 1637.) It was at this time, and under these circumstances, that Charles endeavoured to introduce the new liturgy. He had originally intended to send down the English Common Prayer Book, but the advice of some of the Scotch bishops had induced him to alter this plan, and to substitute one which might belong peculiarly to themselves, though it corresponded very nearly with that of the church of England. This was drawn up in Scotland," chiefly, in all probability, by Weederburn, dean of the Chapel Royal, Edinburgh, but overlooked by Laud, Juxton, and Wrenn. In the year 1635 certain canons had been sent down to Scotland as the first step in the intended alterations; and these, without any other sanction than that of a proclamation from the king, directed throughout that the forms of the liturgy, not then published, should be used. If the king had possessed a right of imposing canons and a liturgy without the concurrence of the church, a right quite incompatible with the political existence of any church, this method of proceeding would have been very impolitic, as it could only irritate the nation, and prepare them for resistance whenever any tumult should give them an opportunity of showing their dislike. The discontented party had long been in correspondence with the nonconformists in England, and they well knew the strength which their friends possessed in that country. The persons who were chiefly engaged in promoting this step, with regard to the canons and liturgy, were some of the Scotch bishops who had been most lately raised to their office, and who, having been ad vanced by interest, not dependent on but his line of policy was in reality the older bishops, never cordially joined much sounder than that of Laud, and with them, but hurried on the introduc- his fidelity seems adequately established tion of the Liturgy without foreseeing by his subsequent sufferings and death. the danger. Laud had frequently urged It is obvious that any friend of the court them to take care that their proceedings of Charles I. would have been esteemed were according to the law of Scotland, a traitor, who had given that advice which he did not pretend to understand; which we should now deem to have but they, supposing probably that the been for the real advantage of the king power of the court and the archbishop and the nation; and be it remembered, would carry them through in a point on that the marquis of Montrose, who which the king's heart was much set, was undoubtedly a patriotic royalist, and neglecting the advice of the older was at this time on the side of the covebishops, prepared the liturgy and pro- nanters. This appellation was assumed cured its adoption without any of those by those who were enemies to the Liturauthorized forms with which it ought gy and to the arbitrary power of the legally to have been received. throne, from a solemn league and covenants now framed, and to which the subscriptions of all those who approved of the cause were affixed. Hardly any steps could have tended more strongly than this to mix up church politics with civil: for, among the various objects of the confederacy, the second was to root out prelacy, i. e., church government by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors, commissaries, deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, and all other ecclesiastical officers depending on that hierarchy; and the third, to preserve the privileges of parliament and the kingdom. The proceedings of the assembly at Glasgow, (1638,) were such as might have been expected. The church had been tyrannized over 6 § 568. When, therefore, it was first read at Edinburgh, (July 23,) it is not wonderful that it was received with so much tumult that the lives of those who performed the service were endangered, and that there was no readiness on the part of the magistrates or nobility to defend the insulted prelates, or to punish those who were guilty of the disturbance. The enemies of episcopacy rejoiced in these failures, and the mass of the nobles, and those in authority, were not sorry to observe the overthrow of a project which had been carried on without their advice, by churchmen, of whose exaltation into civil offices they were peculiarly jealous. Those among the lower clergy who were friends to episcopacy, and who probably would have shown themselves in greater numbers, if the interests of the bishops had been managed with any prudence, were offended that the introduction of the liturgy had been carried on without their advice, or the forms which were necessary to render it legal, and therefore little disposed to befriend or support steps which were thus imprudently taken. After several applications had been made to London, Hamilton, as commissioner from the king, ultimately rescinded all that had been done, convoking a general assembly at Glasgow, and calling a parlia-liberty of the kingdom, the person and authority ment for the next spring. He is generally accused of duplicity and cunning in all these transactions, and there is some evidence apparently against him ; 4 Guthry, 32-49. 5 N. B. There were two covenants: the first This signed by James I., 1580, and the one here men- nant: 1. "That they should reduce the church of England and Ireland to the same model as that of Scotland. They agree 2. To extirpate popery, prelacy, and superstition, and to establish godliness. 3. To defend the rights of parliament and the of the king. 4. "To discover and punish all malignants, hinderers of reformation, &c. 5. To preserve the peace of these kingdoms. 6. "To defend and assist all those who have entered into the covenant. 7. "To humble themselves for the sins of the nation, and to try to reform them." 6 Guthry, 41. for a time, and when allowed to express | leaving the church. Most of which its feelings, broke down all barriers, ceremonies were in themselves very continued its sessions after it had been innocent, and it was natural, at a time legally dissolved by the king's commissioner, and went on to rescind at once all that had been established since 1605, i. e., episcopacy, the articles of Perth, the canons, and liturgy. These steps naturally and necessarily led to a civil war. Leslie was appointed to the command of the army which they levied; the castle of Edinburgh fell into their hands, and the king was forced to treat, and make peace with his rebellious subjects. when the neglect of them was growing into fashion, that a man of Laud's views should studiously observe them; but it was madness to suppose that the enforcing them would cure the evil, or fail to irritate and augment the disorder. Pure Christianity, when placed near fanaticism or formalism, will ordinarily soon gain the ascendant over either the one or the other; but extremes are little likely to produce a cure to their opposite evils. § 569. The same steps had been § 570. Laud, however, was not conleading silently to the same result in tented with putting in force the existing England. The power exercised by laws, or practising such ceremonies as Laud not only disgusted the nobility, he himself approved; but when, in who might be deemed his rivals, and 1640, Charles was compelled to call a who found themselves supplanted by parliament, which he so soon dissolved, churchmen, but the severity exercised to the regret of all good men, the conby some of the bishops on their non- vocation which was then assembled conformist brethren, was likely to ren- proceeded to frame a body of canons, and der the lower and more numerous por- continued their session beyond the extion of the members of the establish- istence of the parliament. These cament hostile to the government of the nons were put forth to the world at a church, and consequently not friendly moment when every one was ready to to that of the state which upheld it. cavil at the acts of legitimate authority, When Laud was made archbishop, and under circumstances which might (1633,) he pressed conformity, and at- have rendered them questionable at tended much to the ceremonies of the any other time, inasmuch as it was prechurch, so that a preacher was censured sumed by many, that upon the dissolufor saying that the night was approach- tion of the parliament its sister asseming, since shadows were growing so bly ceased at the same moment. The much longer than the bodies, and cere- convocation was in fact now changed monies regarded more than the power into a synod, in which capacity, to use of godliness. In his eagerness in this the words of Lord Clarendon," it "made respect, he not only enforced those canons, which was thought it might do; ceremonies which had been appointed, and gave subsidies out of parliament, but took great delight in increasing the and enjoined oaths, which certainly it number of them. He had put up a might not do; in a word, did many crucifix on the altar in Westminster things, which in the best of times might Abbey at the coronation; had used have been questioned, and therefore considerable pomp in the consecration were sure to be condemned in the of churches, adopting an office composed by Andrews, bishop of Winchester, which corresponds almost entirely with the service of the church of Rome; had directed the communion tables to be surrounded with rails, and the communicants to approach the altar, and caused various genuflexions and bowings to be used on entering and worst; and drew the same prejudice upon the whole body of the clergy, to which before only some few clergymen were exposed." The canons themselves are such as prove the violence of those who framed them, who must have been actuated by despair or fatuity to select such a time for their publication. They enact that every officiating minister shall, on some 4 Fuller, xi. 168. 5 Hist. i. 148. one Sunday in every quarter, insist on view of the feelings of the country with the divine right of kings, and on their regard either to church or state, without prerogatives, in which the power of entering into a protracted discussion, taxing was indirectly implied. That which must be little suited to this work; the day of the king's inauguration shall but as it is impossible to understand the be carefully observed. They were condition of the kingdom without doing very severe against papists, Socinians, so, a brief outline must be attempted. and all sectaries. In order to support Every real friend to his country, who the establishment, an oath was imposed understood the circumstances under against innovations, in which every which England was then placed, must clergyman, or person taking a degree, have desired a reformation, both in was to swear "that he would not con- church and state. The power of the sent to alter the government of the king was so ill defined, that it was church by archbishops, bishops, deans, scarcely possible for an honest man to archdeacons, &c.;" a form sufficiently have served him without great compuncequivocal, and which acquired for the tion; and however little Charles might oath the name of the "et cætera oath." have wished to play the tyrant, it is difIt was ordered that the communion ficult for a king to restrain his ministers, table should stand as in the cathedral if arbitrary power be once placed in church; that it should be railed in, and their hands. Such a power indeed might the people approach the holy table be easily borne by the people, were it when they received; and that on enter- not for the ramifications to which it is ing and quitting church they should do liable; for a monarch, unless he be unobeisance. Every preacher was directed bendingly severe on his immediate serto enforce in his sermons, twice every vants, becomes, against his will, a tyrant year, conformity to the rites and cere- to every one of his subjects who is exmonies of the church of England.1 posed to the arbitrary government of those whom he trusts. The Court of Ecclesiastical Commission had frequently exercised severity, and sometimes cruelty, on those who were called before it, and the people had indistinctly mixed up the idea of the church government under which they groaned, with episcopacy and the higher offices in the church. It was this which gave rise to the supposed necessity of imposing the et cætera oath; and the very nature of that oath tended to countenance the error. Laud and his party were justly alarmed at the spirit of innovation which they beheld; and in their attempts to maintain what was valuable, they were too fearful to allow that any part of the fabric was unsound, and endeavoured to defend the whole, corruptions and all. The honest party, on the other side, who were anxious for the correction of abuses, found that they had no hopes of accomplishing their projected reforms, except by breaking down the barriers of what was in itself excellent; but which they were forced to couple with the evils which they wished to remedy, because the same defence was thrown around both: nor can it be doubted, that the enemies of the ecclesiastical constitution rejoiced to perceive the church thus imprudently connected The effects of such a proceeding were obvious. The state of the question between the king and the people at this moment was, whether they should be governed constitutionally by law, or by the arbitrary proceedings of the court: whether they should possess the right of taxing themselves, or whether the security of their property were to depend on the necessities of those who governed them: whether the petition of rights were to be observed or no. Whoever, therefore, among the clergy had followed these canons, as to their spirit, must have taken a part in the great question at issue, in favour of the court. The words indeed of the canon are very cautiously chosen, so as to assert in general terms only the right of kings to tribute, custom, and aid, while the property of the subject is secured, a position which no Christian will deny; but the question was, whether the king had a right to collect that tribute as he pleased, and to dispense with the laws of the country. § 571. It is difficult to give a distinct I Walker, in his Sufferings of the Clergy, p. 7, supposes that these canons are now as much binding as those of 1603; in this he is mistaken. See 756, or the Act 13° C. II., ch. 12. |