ENGLAND UNDER JAMES I.

435

unfairness and insolence. He plumed himself on the theological learning and acumen which he fancied himself to possess, and which formed one of his titles to the distinction, which his flatterers gave him, of being the Solomon of his age. The praises lavished on him by the bishops, -one of whom declared that he undoubtedly spoke by the direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost -in connection with their extravagant theory of royal authority, and of the submission owed by the subject, filled him with delight. This Conference had one valuable result. Dr. Reynolds, one of the Puritan representatives, and perhaps the most learned man in the kingdom, recommended that a new or revised version of the Scriptures should be prepared; and this suggestion James, who complained of certain marginal observations in "the Geneva Bible," which were unfavorable to the sacredness of royalty, caught up and caused to be carried out. The desire of the clergy to enhance their own authority by exalting that of the crown, appears in the ambitious schemes of Bancroft, the Archbishop of Canterbury, which encountered the resistance of Coke, the great champion of the common law. As long as Cecil was in power, the foreign politics of James were not destitute of spirit; but the timidity of the King, joined with his desire to marry his son to a Spanish princess, prevented him from efficiently supporting his son-inlaw, the Elector Palatine, at the outbreaking of the thirty years' war, and moved him basely to sacrifice Raleigh to the vengeance of Spain. His want of common sense was manifested in his attempt to impose episcopacy upon the Scottish Church. His arbitrary principles of government, which he had not prudence enough to prevent him from

1 The Hampton Court Conference is interesting and important, as presenting the characteristics of the two ecclesiastical parties and of the sovereign. Most of the accounts of it are derived from Dr. Barlow's report, who was on the anti-Puritan side. See Fuller, Church History, v. 266; Neal, p. ii., ch. i.; Cardwell, History of Conferences, p. 121; Burton, History of Scotland, vi. 218 seq. Hallam (Const. Hist., ch. vi.) has candid and just remarks on the behavior of the king and of the bishops.

constantly proclaiming, prepared the way for the great civil contest that broke out in the next reign.

Charles I. (1625-1649) made the deliberate attempt to govern England without a Parliament. There is no doubt that it was his design to convert the limited monarchy into an absolute one. Although a sincere Protestant, he sympathized fully with what may be termed the Romanizing party in the English Church, or the party which stood at the farthest remove from Puritanism, and nearest to the religious system of the Church of Rome. Charles's treatment of the Papists was vacillating. Now the laws would be executed against them, and now the execution of them would be illegally suspended by the King's decree. But the occasional severities of the government towards them could not efface the impression which had been made by the sending of an English fleet to aid in the blockade of Rochelle (1625), which the French King was seeking to wrest from the Huguenots. Laud, an honest but narrow-minded and superstitious man, became Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1633. To advance, in respect to doctrine and ceremonies, as near as possible to the Roman Catholic system, without accepting the jurisdiction of the Pope, was his manifest inclination. He records his dreams in his diary. On one occasion he dreamed that he was reconverted to the Church of Rome. It was an unpleasant dream, since it related to a danger that, as he doubtless felt, attended his measures, but which he meant to escape. His impracticable character and lack of tact, even James I. accurately discerned. "The plain truth is that I keep Laud back from all place of rule and authority, because I find that he hath a restless spirit; and cannot see when matters are well, but loves to toss and change, and to bring things to a pitch of reformation, floating in his own brain, which may endanger the steadfastness of that which is in a

1 Burton, Hist. of Scotland, vi. 390.

THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY.

437

good pass. Of Laud's plans respecting the Scots, James added: "He knows not the stomach of that people."1 By means of the Court of High Commission, a species of Protestant Inquisition, he engaged with a vigilant and merciless zeal in the persecution of Puritans. They were even prosecuted for not complying with new ceremonies which Laud himself had introduced, and for preaching Calvinism; and they were punished for declining to read in the churches, the "Book of Sports," which recommended games and pastimes, of which they did not approve. The Star-Chamber, and the High Commission, are emblems, as they were effective instruments, of the ecclesiastical and civil tyranny to which the English people were subjected. The endeavor to force the English Prayer-book upon Scotland, called out, in 1638, the Solemn League and Covenant of the Scots for the defense of Presbyterianism. In 1642, hostilities began between the Long Parliament and the King, the immediate occasion being the abortive attempt of Charles, in violation of his pledges, to arrest Pym and his associates, in the House of Commons. The same year Parliament convoked the Westminster Assembly to advise them in the matter of reconstructing the Church of England. At the outset, a majority of its members were not only conforming ministers, but would have been content with a moderate episcopacy. It has been said with truth that moderate Episcopalians of the school of Usher, and moderate Presbyterians of the stamp of Baxter, had little difficulty in finding a common ground on which they could unite. A second party which, if not numerous in the Assembly, was growing in the nation, was that of the Independents who held to the self-governing power of the local congregation or church, into the communion of which they would receive none who did not give proof of

1 The authority for this statement of James is Bishop John Hacket. Burton, vi. 338.

being spiritual or regenerated persons. Rejecting the government of prelates and of synods, they favored voluntary associations for counsel, and for the prosecution, in concert, of Christian work. The Independents were denied the liberty which they strove to obtain at the hands of the Presbyterians; and the rejection by them of a scheme of comprehension, which would have united both sections of the Puritan party, has been deplored, even by Neal and Baxter, advocates of the Presbyterian system. The Erastians, among whom in the Assembly were Lightfoot and Selden, of all the members the most eminent for their learning, were in favor of giving the regulation of all ecclesiastical affairs to the state. The influence of the Scots, and the necessity of a union with them, in order successfully to withstand Charles, were powerful considerations with the whole Puritan body. Parliament adopted the Scottish Covenant, and the Assembly the Presbyterian polity. But Parliament steadily refused to concede to this system a divine right, or to yield up its own supremacy, as a court of ultimate appeal. The Calvinistic theory of the Church, as a distinct power, having the complete right to excommunicate its members, or to interdict communion, was not allowed. It was a point which the Scottish influence was not strong enough to carry. The Confession and Catechism, prepared by the Assembly, were made the Creed of the Church of England, and their "Directory" was put forth by authority of Parliament, for the regulation of worship, in the room of the Prayer-book. Between one and two thousand ministers who refused the new subscriptions, were deprived of their places. The Presbyterian system, similar to that in Scotland, with the exception that appeals might be taken from the highest ecclesiastical tribunals to Parliament, was now legally established in

1 As to the number and character of the ejected ministers, see Vaughan. English Nonconformity, p. 127.

THE INDEPENDENTS.

439

England. But shortly after the new regulations were passed, the Independents, of whom Cromwell was the chief, attained to supreme power in the state. The consequence was, that Presbyterianism was never fully established in more than two counties, Middlesex and Lancashire. Cromwell set up a Board of "Triers" for the examination and approval of candidates for benefices; and without the certificate of this Board, composed mostly of Independent divines, no person could take an ecclesiastical office. Their certificate was a substitute for institution and induction. But the Puritans, when they found themselves in possession of power, interdicted the use of the Prayer-book in private houses as well as in churches, and imitated, but too successfully, the persecuting spirit of their opponents. Cromwell himself, in comparison with the Puritan leaders generally, was of a liberal and tolerant spirit. The Independents were, generally speaking, favorable to religious toleration. Yet, it was only a few, at first, who fully adopted the principle that the magistrate should use no coercion whatever in matters of religious belief, or the principle that the state should leave entirely to the congregations the pecuniary support of the ministry. The doctrine of religious liberty found, at that day, some warm advocates, such as Vane, and John Milton, the ornament of the Independent party.

The settlement of New England was a result of the religious conflicts among the Protestants of England. In the reign of James I., a congregation of Independents escaped from persecution in England, under circumstances of great difficulty and hardship, and found an asylum in Holland. A portion of this church of emigrants, at Leyden, having received the benediction of their pastor, John Robinson, crossed the Atlantic in the Mayflower, and in December, 1620, began the settlement of Plymouth. Afterwards, in the reign of Charles I., bands