When James I came to the throne, the Puritans in the Church petitioned for a further reformation, hoping that James, brought up in the Scottish Church, would favor Presbyterianism. The Independents made an appeal to be allowed to worship according to a more scriptural pattern. They called it, “An Apology or Defense of such true Christians as are commonly (but unjustly) called Brownists.” James would have none of it and issued a proclamation discouraging such petitions. He indicated that the question was one to be decided by his conscience, not theirs. A conference was held between the Prelatists and the Puritans, over which the King himself presided and made long speeches, for he was quite well versed in theology. The Prelatists flattered his vanity with fawning adulation, some evidence of which can be discerned in the preface to the Authorized Version of the Bible. The decision to prepare that version was the only good thing which came out of the conference. “If you aim at a Scottish presbytery,” said the King, addressing the Puritans, “it agrees as well with monarchy as God with the devil,” and turning to the Archbishop and his colleagues, he remarked, “If you were out and these men in, I know not what would become of my supremacy — for no bishops, no king.” This last terse remark reveals James’ outlook on the matter and explains, in a phrase, the religious troubles of the Stuart period. What mattered to James and his successors was not what was right according to Scripture, but what suited the King. The suffering of the Puritans in England and the Covenanters in Scotland stemmed from this cause. Prelacy suited the King and it must suit his subjects. Bancroft became Archbishop of Canterbury soon after, and during his seven years of office, Puritanism was suppressed with merciless severity. Three hundred clergy were silenced or deprived of their livings. Large numbers gave up their livings in London and went into obscurity. Many Dissenters went abroad. The Puritans who remained in the Church lost their ardor.
About this time there was a revival in the counties of Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire, and Puritan teachings were very widely diffused. Many in those parts of the country separated from the State Church. Among those most prominent were John Smyth and John Robinson. These men, with many others, went to Holland to escape persecution. In 1620 Robinson and a hundred others — the famous Pilgrim Fathers — made their historic voyage in the Mayflower to find liberty of worship in the New World. Meanwhile, persecution had slackened, but not ceased, with the death of Bancroft. During this reign, fourteen heretics were burned for religious opinions. One, named Legatt, suffered for Arianism; another, named Wightman, was accused of a variety of heresies including Anabaptism. As they were charged with anti-Christian doctrines, they are not regarded as Christian martyrs. James did not encourage dissent by such severe measures. He left non-conformists to pine away secretly in prison.
James turned his attention to the Scottish Church, where the Presbyterian system, which was so obnoxious to him, prevailed. He was determined to establish episcopacy in that country. Indeed, his motto was “one king, one flock, one law” for both realms. Under the influence of Laud, who played a more conspicuous part in the next reign, an attempt was made to bring the ritual also into line with the Church of England. To many people in Scotland, these innovations, such as kneeling at communion and the observance of the Church festivals, were the reintroduction of features of popery. The new bishops did not press matters unduly, but the seed was sown which was to bear evil fruit in the next reign. Towards the end of James’ reign, parts of Scotland were visited by a remarkable spiritual revival in which the direct action of the Holy Spirit on human hearts was plainly evident.
Charles I inherited his father’s extreme views on the divine right of kings, but he was singularly narrow-minded and utterly unreliable. His promises meant nothing at all. Never was a man less fitted to rule. When he came to the throne, the Thirty Years’ War was raging, and popery was aggressive and triumphant on the Continent. The King’s wife was a Romanist, and although he professed to support the Protestant cause, many felt the popish recusants were treated very leniently, while there was an influential party in the Church which, to Puritan eyes, was Romanist in disguise. Archbishop Laud began to introduce popish features into the liturgy, and those of the clergy who spoke against images and crucifixes were fined, suspended and imprisoned.
The number of those who separated from the Church continually increased. There were eleven separatist churches in London alone, which were known to the authorities to be meeting in secret. A congregation was found in June 1632, meeting in a wood near Newington, Surrey. Another was broken up at Ashford, Kent, in 1637, and another the next year at Rotherhithe. Large numbers of pious folk were prepared to face fines, imprisonment and even death in order to worship God according to the truth.
Those who spoke against the existing church order were treated with barbarous cruelty. Dr. Alexander Leighton, a scholarly divine, had written a book severely condemning Prelacy. He was whipped and put in the pillory, one of his ears was cut off, one side of his nose was slit, and one cheek was branded with a hot iron with the letters S.S. (Sower of Sedition). A week later he was again whipped and pilloried, the other ear was cut off, the other side of his nose was slit, and the other cheek was branded. Then he was sent to prison and kept in close confinement for ten years. When released at the time of the Long Parliament, he could scarcely walk, see or hear. Laud himself recorded these facts in his diary. Many others suffered similar brutalities.
In 1637 Archbishop Laud introduced a new liturgy for the Church of Scotland which bore an alarming resemblance to the popish breviary. The Privy Council of Scotland protested, but the King was obdurate and opposition was treated as treason. In 1638 the Scottish people renewed the National Covenant. The King was exasperated but helpless. A general assembly of the Church was convened and proceeded to depose the bishops who had been appointed against the wishes of the Scottish Church. Charles summoned Parliament and asked for supplies for a war with the Scots. It was refused, but money was found by the clergy, Romanists contributing willingly (a sinister fact). Scotland was invaded, but without success, and peace was signed. In spite of this, true to his character, Charles renewed his attack the next year. The Scots were again victorious and won for themselves free Parliaments and free Church Assemblies. Save for the sporadic raids of Montrose, who ravaged many parts of the country with fire and sword, Scotland enjoyed twenty years of religious liberty. Charles himself ratified the National Covenant.
Rome’s agents, the Jesuits, were busy throughout the country. Fear of popery and continued interference with the liberties of the people led to a crisis. In 1641, fifteen thousand persons signed a petition for the abolition of Episcopacy. Such an exodus of Puritans was taking place that efforts were made to arrest it. By the time the Civil War began, twenty thousand had emigrated to New England.
Meanwhile, the English Parliament had taken action against the King’s tyrannical rule, and Charles made fair promises to appease his discontented subjects. In 1642 Charles himself began the Civil War. The English Parliament and the Scottish people joined hands and the Solemn League and Covenant was signed all over the country.
In 1643 Parliament took in hand the reformation of the Church. In July that year, Lords and Commons passed an ordinance for an assembly of “learned and godly divines” to settle the vexed question of church order and liturgy. They labored for five years. The outcome was the Westminster Standards, consisting of a Confession of Faith, a Form of Church Government, a Directory of Public Worship and a larger and shorter catechism. These were based on the teachings of Calvin. In 1647 these standards were adopted by the Church of Scotland. In England, Presbyterianism was only partially adopted.
Two years later the King was executed, and Cromwell took over the reins of government. More thorough reforms followed; a commission was appointed to weed out useless and unworthy ministers, and it appears to have done its work conscientiously. Provided a man was competent to preach and led a holy, unblamable life, he was allowed to serve as a minister in an endowed Church, whether he was an Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Independent or Baptist. There was at the same time liberty for Non-Conformists to meet separately as Independents, Quakers or Baptists. Roman Catholics, Unitarians and non-Christian sects were excepted, but Royalist Churchmen continued to meet without interference. “If the poorest Christian, the most mistaken,” said Cromwell to Parliament, “shall desire to live peaceably under you ... let him be protected.”
Richard Baxter, who was not very partial to Cromwell, says that there was a notable increase of godliness under the Protectorate. Nothing was nearer to Cromwell’s heart than liberty for all true Christians to worship according to their light. It seems that it was because he felt that this and other liberties would disappear if matters were left in other and weaker hands that he clung to power. He believed he was divinely called to this mission—a fact which helps to explain the strange contradiction of his life, between his confession of Christianity and his assertion of despotic authority. The divine right of rulers had been a doctrine taught in Christendom for ages: Queen Elizabeth held it; James I and Charles I insisted on it. Cromwell seems to have felt he had been divinely appointed to rule righteously where others had ruled evilly.
Though the sword in the hands of Christians is a dreadful anomaly and contrary to the Lord’s express command, the victory of the Parliamentary forces and the brief period of Cromwell’s ascendancy gave true Christians a breathing space, and there is no doubt that piety and spirituality spread in this period. Certainly the moral condition of the country had never been better.
“The dress and conversation of the people were sober and virtuous, and their manner of living remarkably frugal. There was hardly a single bankruptcy to be heard of in a year, and in such case the bankrupt had a mark of infamy set upon him that he could never wipe off. Drunkenness, fornication, profane swearing and every kind of debauchery were justly deemed infamous and universally discountenanced. The clergy were laborious to excess in preaching, praying, catechizing youth and visiting their parishes. The magistrates did their duty in suppressing all kinds of games, stage plays and abuses in public houses. There was not a play acted in any theater in England for almost twenty years. The Lord’s Day was observed with unusual reverence, and there were a set of as learned and pious youths training up in the university as had ever been known.”
Cromwell was an Independent and favored full liberty of conscience in the form of worship. It was therefore a time of peace for the persecuted Dissenters. Men no longer had their noses slit, their cheeks branded or their ears cut off for failure to conform to the established Church.
The worldly element in the nation, though held in check by Puritan influence and discipline, found such standards of life irksome, and when Cromwell died the monarchy was restored with delirious joy. Everything was reversed. Charles was a lover of pleasure, sensual and profligate, and the court attracting to it men of his own ilk set the country a disgraceful example.
“At the Restoration there returned with it a torrent of debauchery and wickedness. The times which followed the Restoration were the reverse of those which preceded it, for the laws which had been enacted against vice for the last twenty years being declared null and the magistrates changed, men set no bounds to their licentiousness ... but in reality the King was at the head of these disorders, being devoted to his pleasures and having given himself up to an avowed course of lewdness. There were two play houses erected in the neighborhood of the Court, women actresses were introduced into the theaters, which had not been known till that time, the most lewd and obscene plays were brought on the stage and the more obscene the better the King was pleased, who graced every new play with his royal presence. Nothing was to be seen at court but feasting, hard drinking, reveling and amorous intrigues, which engendered the most enormous vices. From court the contagion spread like wildfire among the people, insomuch that men threw off the very profession of virtue and piety.”
Charles would have favored religious toleration for a time at any rate, in order to please the Church of Rome to which he was secretly attached. The Royalist and High Church party under Clarendon were determined otherwise. On St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1662, the Act of Uniformity came into force. Every minister was thereby compelled to declare his complete assent to everything contained in the Book of Common Prayer. Two thousand ministers thereupon gave up their livings rather than subscribe to what was against their consciences. For many this meant sacrificing their livelihood, and not a few had no other support than charity. They were, moreover, ordered to move twenty miles from their parishes and at least six miles from a cathedral city or three from a royal borough, while no two of them were allowed to live in the same town. What this involved in the way of hardship it is not difficult to imagine.
Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists and Quakers were all affected. For the next twenty years Non-Conformists were spied upon, fined and imprisoned in great numbers. The Conventicle Act of 1664 forbade any gathering of over five persons. It was a dark period in Britain’s history. In 1665 the Plague visited London and decimated its population. While most of the Anglican ministers fled, many of the persecuted Non-Conformist preachers returned and risked their lives to minister to the dying citizens. In the same year, the Five Mile Act forbade any ejected minister from approaching nearer than five miles to any corporation. The total number of Dissenters in England in 1669 was estimated at 120,000.
Having his eye, doubtless, on the Roman Catholics, Charles eased the situation in 1672 by a Declaration of Indulgence, allowing Non-Conformists to teach in licensed places. Parliament, however, opposed the King’s clemency and in the next year passed the Test Act, making it impossible for any who did not take communion in the Church of England to occupy any office under the Crown. Charles annulled his Declaration of Indulgence.
In Scotland an even heavier blow was struck. An act was passed making the Scottish Church completely subject to the King and an Oath of Supremacy was framed in which the King was to be acknowledged as supreme in religious as well as in civil affairs. The liberties of Scotland were swept completely away. The Solemn League and Covenant was condemned as a treasonable compact. The bishops were restored; ministers who would not submit were ejected. Many churches were closed, and preaching without a license was forbidden. The people now began to gather for worship on the moors, on the hills and in caves. Hundreds of thousands attended preachings in the open air. Bitter persecution ensued. From 1663 Charles ruled Scotland as a despot. Persons absent from church were subjected to brutal treatment from the soldiers who were employed to enforce the King’s orders. Dragoons were sent out to hunt, harass and distress the absentees and compel them to fill the empty churches. The plight of the poor people thus delivered up to the tender mercies of brutal soldiery, who committed acts of indecency and violence against them, is painful to contemplate. For five years they bore this unresistingly, until in 1666 the cruel treatment of an aged man by some of the soldiers provoked armed retaliation, and a reign of terror followed. Many now worshipped in the open air, while armed scouts kept guard for fifty miles around. Tyranny and persecution drove the Covenanters into open resistance. In the twenty-eight years during which these persecutions lasted, over twenty-eight thousand persons were put to death or died as a result of the conflict.
This was the awful outcome of the Church being dominated by the secular power. Charles was professedly a Protestant monarch. These thousands of poor folk, many of whom were doubtless devout Christians, were sacrificed in the relentless determination to force upon Scotland a form of worship which was against the consciences of many of its people.
Charles died in 1685. In his dying moments, a popish priest was smuggled into his room, and before he drew his last breath, he was reconciled to the Romish Church. The movement which Rome had so long awaited now arrived. Charles’ brother, an avowed papist, came to the throne. The papal nuncio entered Britain. Religious liberty was proclaimed in order to free the Romanists. An attempt was made to officer the army and navy with papists. But James II moved too fast. The country took fright at the specter of a revival of Romanism. William of Orange, who had married the King’s daughter, was invited to receive the crown. He came over in 1688, the nation rallied to his standard, James fled to France, and William and Mary ascended the throne. The event is commemorated by a statue in Brixham harbor bearing the following inscription:
WILLIAM, PRINCE OF ORANGE, afterwards William III, King of Great Britain and Ireland, landed near this spot, November 5, 1688, and issued his famous declaration: “The liberties of England and the Protestant religion I will maintain.”
In this swift and bloodless revolution Britain was finally delivered from Romish tyranny. For years plotting and scheming continued, but the decrees of Providence cannot be thwarted. A large and increasing measure of liberty was henceforth to be granted to the people of Britain in matters of faith and conscience.