صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

the cruel persecutions and oppressions already mentioned, celebrates the felicity of these times in the following words: "Now, after all this, I must be so just as to say, that from the dissolution of the parliament in the fourth year of the king, to the beginning of the long parliament, which was about twelve years, this kingdom and all his majesty's dominions enjoyed the greatest calm, and the fullest measure of felicity, that any people, in any age, for so long time together, have been blessed with, to the wonder and envy of all other parts of Christendom :-the court was in great plenty, or rather excess and luxury, the country rich and full, enjoying the pleasure of its own wealth; the church flourished with learned and extraordinary men; and the Protestant religion was more advanced against the church of Rome, by the writings of archbishop Laud and Chillingworth, than it had been since the reformation.-Trade increased to that degree, that we were the exchange of Christendom; foreign merchants looking upon nothing so much their own as what they had laid up in the warehouses of this kingdom.-The reputation of the greatness and power of the king with foreign princes was much more than any of his progenitors. And lastly, for a complement of all these blessings, they were enjoyed under the protection of a king of the most harmless disposition, the most exemplary piety, and the greatest sobriety, chastity, and mercy, that any prince had been endowed with, and who might have said that which Pericles was proud of upon his deathbed, concerning his citizens, that no Englishman had worn a mourning-gown through his occasion.' In a word, many wise men thought it a time wherein those two adjuncts, imperium and libertas, were as well reconciled as possible."

Not a line of this panegyric will bear examination. When his lordship says, "that no people in any age had been blessed with so great a calm, and such a full measure of felicity for so long a time together [twelve years]," he seems to have undervalued the long and pacific reign of his majesty's royal father, king James, who was distinguished by the title of Blessed. But where was the liberty or safety of the subject, when magna charta and the petition of right, which the king had signed in full parliament, were swallow

* Lord Clarendon's Representation of the Times, vol, 1. p. 74. 76.

[ocr errors]

ed up in the gulf of arbitrary power? and the statute laws of the land were exchanged for a rule of government depending upon the sovereign will and pleasure of the crown? If the court was in excess and luxury, it was with the plunder of the people, arising from loans, benevolences, shipmoney, monopolies, and other illegal taxes on merchandise. The country was so far from growing rich and wealthy, that it was every year draining off its inhabitants and substance, as appears not only by the loss of the foreign manufacturers, but by his majesty's proclamations, forbidding any of his subjects to transport themselves and their effects to New England without his special licence. Was it possible that trade could flourish, when almost every branch of it was engrossed, and sold by the crown for large sums of money, and when the property of the subject was so precarious, that the king might call for it upon any occasion, and in case of refusal ruin the proprietor by exorbitant fines and imprisonment? Did no Englishman wear a mourning-gown in these times, when the Seldens, the Hollises, the Elliots, the Strouds, the Hobarts, the Valentines, the Coritons, and other patriots, were taken out of the parliament-house, and shut up for many years in close prisons, where some of them perished? How many of the nobility and gentry were punished with exorbitant fines in the star-chamber? how many hundred ministers and others were ruined in the high-commission, or forced from their native country into banishment, contrary to law? The jails in the several counties were never free from state or church prisoners during the past twelve years of his majesty's reign, and yet it seems no Englishman wore a mourning-gown through his occasion! Is it possible to believe, that the reputation of the greatness and power of king Charles I. with foreign princes (however harmless, pious, sober, chaste, and merciful, he might be) was equal to that of queen Elizabeth or king Henry VIII.? What service did he do by his arms or counsels for the Protestant religion, or for the liberties or tranquillity of Europe? When his majesty's affairs were in the greatest distress, what credit had he abroad? or where was the foreign prince (except his own son-in law) that would lend him either men or money? If the Protestant religion was advanced in speculation by the writings of archbishop Laud and Chillingworth; is it not sufficiently evident that the

Roman Catholics were prodigiously increased in numbers, reputation, and influence? Upon the whole, the people of England were so far from enjoying a full measure of felicity, that they groaned under a yoke of the heaviest oppression, and were prepared to lay hold of any opportunity to assert their liberties; so that to make his lordship's representation of the times consistent with truth, or with his own behaviour in the beginning of the long parliament, one is almost tempted to suspect it must have received some amendments or colourings from the hands of his editors. This was the state of affairs at the end of the pacific part of this reign, and forwards to the beginning of the long parliament.

CHAP. VI.

FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE COMMOTIONS IN SCOTLAND, TO THE LONG PARLIAMENT IN THE YEAR 1640.

We are now entering upon a scene of calamity which opened in the north, and in a few years, like a rising tempest, overspread both kingdoms, and involved them in all the miseries of a civil war. If archbishop Laud could have been content with being metropolitan of the church of England alone, he might have gone to his grave in peace; but grasping at the jurisdiction of another church founded upon different principles, he pulled both down upon his head and was buried in the ruins.

We have mentioned the preposterous publishing the Scots book of canons a year before their liturgy, which was not finished till the month of October 1636. His majesty's reasons for compiling it were, that "his royal father had intended it, and made a considerable progress in the work, in order to curb such of his subjects in Scotland as were inclined to Puritanism; that his present majesty resolved to pursue the same design, and therefore consented to the publication of this book, which was in substance the same with the English liturgy, that the Roman party might not upbraid us with any material differences, and yet it was so far distinct, that it might be truly reputed a book of that

church's composing, and established by his royal authority as king of Scotland."*

The compilers of this liturgy were chiefly Dr. Wederburne, a Scots divine, beneficed in England, but now bishop of Dunblain; and Dr. Maxwell, bishop of Ross. Their instructions from England were to keep such Catholic saints in their calendar as were in the English, and that such new saints as were added should be the most approved, but in no case to omit St. George and St. Patrick; that in the book of orders, those words in the English book be not changed, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," and that sundry lessons out of the Apocrypha be inserted; besides these, the word presbyter was inserted instead of priest; and the water in the font for baptism was to be consecrated. There was a benediction or thanksgiving for departed saints; some passages in the communion were altered in favour of the real pre sence; the rubrics contained instructions to the people, when to stand and when to sit or kneel: to all which the Scots had hitherto been strangers. The main parts of the liturgy were the same with the English, that there might be an appearance of uniformity; it was revised, corrected, and altered, by archbishop Laud and bishop Wren, as appeared by the original found in the archbishop's chamber in the Tower, in which the alterations were inserted with his own hand.

The liturgy, thus modelled, was sent into Scotland, with a royal proclamation, dated December 20, 1636, commanding all his majesty's loving subjects of that kingdom to receive it with reverence, as the only form his majesty thinks fit to be used in that kirk, without so much as laying it before a convocation, synod, general assembly, or parliament, of that nation. It was appointed to be read first on Easter Sunday, 1637, against which time all parishes were to be provided with two books at least; but the outcries of the people against it were so vehement, that it was thought advisable to delay it to the 23d of July, that the lords of the session [or judges] might see the success of it before the end of the term, which always ends the 1st of August, in order to report in their several counties the peaceable receiving the book at Edinburgh and parts adjacent. The archbishop of St. Andrew's, with some of his more prudent * Rushworth, vol. 1. part 2. p. 386.

brethren, foreseeing the disorders that would arise, advised the deferring it yet longer: but archbishop Laud was so sanguine of success, that he procured a warrant from the king, commanding the Scots bishops to go forward at all events, threatening that if they moved heavily, or threw in unnecessary delays, the king would remove them, and fill their sees with churchmen of more zeal and resolution.*

In obedience therefore to the royal command, notice have ing been given in all the pulpits of Edinburgh, that the Sunday following [July 23, 1637] the new service-book would be read in all the churches, there was a vast concourse of people at St. Giles's or the great church, where both the archbishops and divers bishops, together with the lords of the session, the magistrates of Edinburgh, and many of the council, were assembled; but as soon as the dean began to read, the service was interrupted by clapping of hands, and a hideous noise among the meaner sort of people at the lower end of the church; which the bishop of Edinburgh observing, stepped into the pulpit, and endeavoured to quiet them, but the disturbance increasing, a stool was thrown towards the desk; upon which the provost and bailiffs of the city came from their places, and with much difficulty thrust out the populace, and shut the church-doors; yet such were the clamours from without, rapping at the doors, and throwing stones at the windows, that it was with much difficulty the dean went through with the service: and when he and the bishop came out of church in their habits, they were in danger of being torn in pieces by the mob, who followed them, crying out, "Pull them down, a pape, a pape, antichrist," &c.

Between the two sermons the magistrates took proper measures for keeping the peace in the afternoon, but after evening-prayer the tumult was greater than in the morning; for the earl of Roxburgh returning to his lodgings with the

*"This (says Dr. Grey) is not very likely, and as he [i. e. Mr. Neal] produces no vouchers for what he says, he cannot reasonably take it amiss, if we do not readily assent to it." To this it is sufficient to reply, that the fact is stated by Collyer in his Ecclesiastical History, vol. 2. p. 770, whose words Mr. Neal uses. The eagerness of Laud to carry this point was stimulated by the earl of Traquair, who carried a letter to him from some of the lately-preferred Scotch bishops, who had an overbalance of heat and spirits, urging execution and dispatch in the business. In this instance the archbishop was the dupe of the insidious policy of the earl of Traquair, whose aim was, by pushing things to extremity, to ruin the older Scotch bishops; who, as he thought, stood in the way of his ambitious views, and "might grow too big for his interest."-ED.

« السابقةمتابعة »