Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the RevolutionStoughton, John
History
Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the Revolution
Stoughton, John
Great Britain -- Church history
Sancroft, soon after the Revolution, published what was called
_Bishop Overall’s Convocation Book_, written in the reign of James
I., containing certain conclusions respecting Ecclesiastical and Civil
Government, one of which, notwithstanding the current tone of the
book in favour of non-resistance, is to the effect, that a Government
originating in rebellion, when thoroughly settled, should be reverenced
and obeyed as “being always God’s authority, and therefore receiving no
impeachment by the wickedness of those that have it.” The Convocations
of Canterbury and York had endorsed the contents of Overall’s volume;
and, by a canon, distinctly condemned the doctrine that a Government
begun by rebellion, after being thoroughly settled, is not of God.[194]
Sherlock made a good deal out of this, and said he should have
continued to stick at the oaths, had he not been relieved by Overall’s
book, and had not the venerable authority of a Convocation given him a
freedom of thinking, which the apprehensions of novelty and singularity
had cramped before.[195] He did not consider, as is sometimes
represented, that the Bishop and Convocation settled the matter, and
that he was to submit as a child to the authoritative decree; but that
a door had been thereby opened to the sons of the Church to look at
the matter;[196] and that he, having been thus induced to examine it
afresh, had for various reasons, which he assigns--some of which, it
must be acknowledged, run counter to his previous publications on the
subject[197]--arrived at the conclusion that he could conscientiously
take the required vow. A terrible storm assailed him after this.
Argument, satire, and abuse, sometimes in vulgar prose, sometimes in
doggerel rhyme, descended in torrents upon his devoted head. Nonjurors
reviled him on the one side; Revolutionists on the other; and people
who did not care for either side joined in the old English cry against
turncoats and time-servers. Most people maintained he had changed
for the sake of loaves and fishes; and, as Mrs. Sherlock had made
herself very notorious, and was said to have had immense influence
over her husband, she caught a terrible pelting from a literary mob,
who assailed her as Xanthippe, Delilah, and Eve, all in one. Sherlock
had to pay the penalty, which men, whose new opinions jump in the
same direction as their pecuniary interests, must ever pay; but human
motives, whether good or evil, lie so far beneath the surface, that the
reading of them by even honest historians may widely differ from the
reading of them by the only Omniscient One. Contemporaries were too
much involved in party strife to take an unbiassed view of Sherlock’s
conduct; and writers since have scarcely been able to free themselves
from prejudices handed down by the pamphlets of that day. The grave
feature of the case affecting the reputation of the Master and Dean,
is to be found, not in the new application of a principle which he
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account