XII INVASION OF WILLIAM OF ORANGE 231 Church and their duty to him were sufficiently understood before, and would have been equally so if they had not stirred one foot out of their dioceses." This was satisfactory to no one, and on October 3, Sancroft, at the head of the bishops, visited the king. They recommended him to withdraw all his dispensations; to restore the President and Fellows of Magdalen; to fill the vacant bishoprics; to prohibit the "four foreign bishops, who style themselves vicars apostolical," from invading the lawful ecclesiastical jurisdiction; to abolish the ecclesiastical commission; to call a Parliament "for the purpose of securing the uniformity of the Church of England, the liberty of conscience, and the liberties and properties of the subject, and for establishing between himself and all his people a mutual confidence and good understanding"; and lastly, to permit the bishops to offer him "such motives and arguments as might, by God's grace, be effectual to persuade him to return to the communion of the Church of England, into whose most Holy Catholic faith he had been baptized and educated, and to which it was their earnest prayer to God that he might be reunited." James took part at least of the advice. But when he asked the bishops to declare their abhorrence of the invasion, "they told him," says Bishop Sprat, "they could not do it, for the prince might have a just cause of war, for what they knew." Nor would they "declare a dislike of the invasion. Sancroft, however, willingly prepared a prayer for the restoration of public tranquillity, and so well, says Burnet, that even those who wished for the prince might well have joined in it. Compton, Bishop of London, had already joined in the invitation which had been sent to William, and yet when James questioned him as to the share of the bishops in the matter, he said, "I am sure my brethren will say that they have taken as little part in it as I have." The other bishops, who did know of his share, of course replied when they were questioned that they had not joined at all. James did his utmost to secure the support of the archbishop; and Evelyn The seriously warned him not to be entrapped into invasion of furthering the designs of the papists. On November William of Orange. 5 William of Orange landed at Torbay. Two days earlier, after several interviews with the king, Sancroft had drawn up a declaration that he had never incited or encouraged the invasion, but he had refused to repudiate the declaration that had been put out in William's name. At every step in the great national crisis the archbishop stood forward as a true leader of the Church, loyal to the king, but firm in his attachment to law. On November 17 he went with the facile Lamplugh, whom James had now made Archbishop of York, and with Turner of Ely and Sprat the king, of Rochester, to strongly urge the summoning of a "free Parliament," advice which the king took. 1688. On December 10 the queen fled with the baby Flight of Dec. 10, prince, and on the next day the king followed. Sancroft then joined in signing the order to the fleet to abstain from any hostility towards the Dutch, and on December 11 joined in the meeting at the Guildhall which invited the help of William to secure peace and a parliamentary settlement. At this point he stayed. He would give no further support to the Revolution, feeling the obligation of his oath of allegiance too strongly to assist in any act that might deprive James of the crown. He alone of all the bishops would not wait on William or attend in the House of Lords. No new king, he declared, could be appointed by law, but only "by force of conquest." The Matters had indeed gone beyond his intervention. Strong men held the helm of State, and would carry the bark through the troubled waters. Sancroft knew that he must give up all for conscience' sake. "Well," he said to a friend, "I can live on £50 a year," and he boldly announced to the prince that he did not approve of some things that had been done by him. A large meeting was held at Lambeth to Revolution. discuss the situation; but when the convention on January 22, 1689, voted the throne vacant, Sancroft was not present. On the day of the proclamation of William and Mary, as king and queen, Henry Wharton, the archbishop's chaplain, prayed for them at evensong in Lambeth Palace chapel; his diary tells that Sancroft, "with great heat, told him that he must thenceforward desist from offering prayers for the new king and queen, or else from performing the duties of his chapel, for as long as King James was alive no other persons could be sovereigns of XII THE REVOLUTION 233 the country." He was expressing the settled judgment of many of his Episcopal colleagues and many of the clergy, that a crowned and anointed king could not lawfully be deposed by his subjects. It was clear that whatever might be the political result of revolution, England was in danger of a new religious schism. AUTHORITIES.-State Papers, Domestic; Tanner MSS., including Sancroft's Papers; D'Oyly, Life of Sancroft; Howell, State Trials. The case of Alice Lisle, the only one in the "Bloody Assize" of which we have full details, and the other cases, are fully examined in the Life of Jeffreys, by H. B. Irving (1898). See " Matters of Fact at the Time of the Revolution," by Bishop Sprat, in Gutch, Collectanea Curiosa, vol. ii. Autobiography of Bishop Kidde (in Cassan, Bishops of Bath and Wells). The proceedings and trial of the seven bishops were published verbatim in 1689. The actual petition, as well as a draft for it, presented by the bishops to the king, and another copy, with additional signatures, and also a full account of the proceedings, all in Sancroft's own hand, are among the Tanner MSS. A number of important documents, chiefly from the Tanner MSS., are printed by Gutch in Collectanea Curiosa, vol. i. (1781). Bishop Cartwright's Diary was published by the Camden Society, 1843. The documents relating to Magdalen College were collected and edited by Dr. J. R. Bloxam (Oxford Historical Society, 1886). Dean Plumptre's Life of Ken is full and valuable (2nd edition, 1890). Historical MSS. Commission, on Earl of Dartmouth's Papers, contains some facts of importance. See also A Compleat Collection of Papers relating to the Great Revolution in England, 1689. Perry and Stoughton, as before. Lathbury, History of the Non-Jurors. An interesting sketch of the chief interests and chief men is to be found in Life in the English Church, 1660-1714, by Canon Overton, 1885. CHAPTER XIII THE REVOLUTION SETTLEMENT AND THE NON-JURORS crown. It was his attack on the Church which had cost James his It might have seemed as if the Church would be the chief gainer by the Revolution which overthrew him. It was far otherwise. Again Erastianism came to the top of the tide. Parliament formally accepted the unhistorical theory of an original contract between king and people, in opposition to the theory of Divine right originally developed as a counterblast to the papal doctrine in politics. James was declared to have broken the contract; and the throne was conferred, without any pretence of religious sanction, upon the Prince and Princess of Orange. Coronation and Mary, April 11, Sancroft gave a commission to his suffragans, which virtually empowered them to crown the new sovereigns, and Compton, Bishop of London, crowned them on of William April 11, 1689. In the coronation oath, by Act of Parliament, an additional safeguard was inserted, 1689. by the use of the words "the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law." James had not regarded his attack on the Church as contrary to his oath it was clear that the oath must be made stricter; and before long the Act of Settlement made the security of the Church still more certain by the provision that the sovereign must be a member of it. The king and queen took the oath separately, and vowed to preserve to the bishops and clergy all their legal rights. William's views of the Church of England were well known to some of the English clergy. He had told Burnet that all CH. XIII WILLIAM III. AND HIS ADVISERS Burnet. 235 he desired was a toleration for those who would not accept Episcopacy, and the abolition of the surplice, the sign The character of the cross in baptism, and the customary bowing and opinions of William III. to the altar. He was himself a Dutch Calvinistic Presbyterian, and he had expressed before he came England a strong dislike to the High Church party (as it may now be called). Ken, who had been his wife's chaplain, had remonstrated with him on his evil life. His adviser in church matters was the bustling, thick-skinned, but industrious and well-intentioned Gilbert Burnet. A Scottish Presbyterian by birth and training, like several other notable English prelates since the Reformation, he never lost his sympathy with the Scottish Puritan theology, though he came to hold what was known as the Low Church, or Latitudinarian, position. He was the first to be nominated by William to a bishopric, and he was consecrated to the see of Salisbury on March 31, 1689, by the bishops of London, Winchester, Llandaff, and St. Asaph. A second adviser was soon found in a man of gentler character but practically the same theological views, John Tillotson, who was appointed Dean of St. Paul's on the election of Stillingfleet to the see of Worcester. These were William's best advisers. Mary was reduced to entire submission. She wished well to the Church, as she had wished well to her father; but she could give to neither more than prayers and tears. Tillotson. The first acts of the reign showed the policy that would be followed. They were the deprivation of several of the old bishops, the appointment of new bishops, and the preparation of a revised Prayer-book to conciliate the Protestant dissenters. Parliament decided that the clergy must take the oaths to the new sovereigns, under penalty of deprivation. The position of the primate was quite certain from the first. He would do no act which might imply his non-jurors. assent to the Revolution. The House of Lords had summoned him to attend on March 23; he had taken no notice. On August 1 he was suspended, and on February 1, 1690, he was deprived. With him were deprived five bishops, Lloyd of Norwich, Turner of Ely, Frampton of Gloucester, White of Peterborough, Ken of Bath and Wells. Thomas of The |