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
Church Peers was to support those Clergymen with whom they sympathized
in Ecclesiastical views, and to relieve them from the pressure of
the new oaths; and the policy of the Whig Low Church Peers was to
conciliate the same party as much as possible. Even Burnet, just
exalted to the Bench, took part in a debate before his consecration,
advocating a mild arrangement of the matter in reference to his
scrupulous brethren.[120] It followed that the Bill left the Lords with
a provision allowing every beneficed divine to continue in his benefice
without taking the oath, unless the Government saw reason for putting
his loyalty to the test. Upon this point the temper of the Lower House
differed from that of the Upper. They inserted in the Bill a clause
rendering it absolutely incumbent on every one holding preferment to
take the oath by the 1st of August, 1689, under pain of immediate
suspension--by the end of six months afterwards, upon pain of final
deprivation.[121] With that claim embodied in it, the Bill went back
to the Lords. They fought for their own gentler method. Conferences
were held between the Houses: compromises were suggested: reports were
made: debates were renewed; but the Lords could not stand against the
Commons, and the stringent method insisted upon by the latter became
the law of the land.
[Sidenote: 1689.]
The Whig majority in the House of Commons were as zealous as the Tory
majority in the House of Lords in maintaining the Church of England,
but they were utterly averse to the secular and ecclesiastical politics
of that party, which the project of William, supported by the Peers,
sought to win over by conciliation. They could not forget the support
that party had rendered to the Stuart despotism, their opposition
to the Exclusion Bill, their intolerant despotism, and their steady
opposition to the Whig Commons. They could not favour High Church
views, they had no notion of the Church being independent of the
State. If the Clergy received honours and emoluments from the Civil
power, then to the Civil power they must, like other subjects, yield
obedience. The spirit of the House was Erastian; and no doubt passion
mingled with principle--resentment with the maintenance of supremacy.
[Sidenote: OATH OF ALLEGIANCE.]
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