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
A conference ensued between the Houses. The Bishop of Ely strenuously
argued against using the word _abdication_, or regarding the
throne as vacant; he hoped that Lords and Commons would agree in
this, not to break the line of succession, not to make the Crown
elective.[101] He wished to save the divine right. By some persons
the idea was entertained of making William sole King--an idea which
Burnet resisted, heart and soul, in a conversation held with Bentinck,
the Prince’s principal friend.[102] Amidst the heats of this debate,
the Prince thought it time for him to express his sentiments. It had
been proposed, he said, to settle the Government in the hands of a
Regent;--that might be a wise project. It had also been suggested that
the Princess should succeed to the throne, and that he, by courtesy,
might share in her power. Her rights he would not oppose, her virtues
he respected. But for himself, he would accept no dignity dependent
upon the life of another, or on the will of a woman. Should either of
the schemes be adopted, he would return to Holland, satisfied with
the consciousness of having endeavoured to serve England, though in
vain.[103]
[Sidenote: CHARACTER OF THE REVOLUTION.]
William’s decision took effect, and the conference ended in dropping
what was theoretical, and in coming to a practical resolution--that the
Prince and Princess of Orange should be declared King and Queen. The
Lords carried this by 62 against 47. Forty of the latter protested,
amongst whom were twelve out of the seventeen Bishops present. The five
who went with the majority were Compton, Lloyd of St. Asaph, Sprat,
Hall, and Crew.[104] Crew, the time-serving Bishop of Durham, had
supported James in his obnoxious measures, had fled at the outbreak
of the Revolution, had been lurking on the coast for a vessel to
convey him abroad, and had returned in time to secure the advantage of
supporting the new Sovereign. It has often been said that the Bishops
accomplished the Revolution. No doubt the seven imprisoned in the
Tower brought on the crisis which terminated in the new settlement,
and so far were the authors of the change. Certain of the brethren
contributed, in the way I have described, to terminate the despotism
of James II., but all the seven decidedly disapproved of the Prince of
Orange being constituted King, and two-thirds of the other Bishops
agreed with them in this respect.
[Sidenote: 1689.]
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