Memoirs of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, and of the Court of Queen Anne Vol. 1 (of 2)Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
History
Memoirs of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, and of the Court of Queen Anne Vol. 1 (of 2)
Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
Great Britain -- Court and courtiers -- Biography; Marlborough, Sarah Jennings Churchill, Duchess of, 1660-1744
The Church of England, the Duchess thought, could not be in any
immediate danger with such a “_nursing_ mother” as the Queen, or, as the
Tories called her, the illustrious ornament of the church; and the
Tories, in bringing forward this famous measure, “by the heat and
agitation with which they over-acted their part, exposed their
monopolizing ambition, which ought to have been better concealed under
the cloak of zeal for the church.”[467]
The affection of her Majesty for the church, the Duchess considered,
could not be doubted, since, for its better security, she had chosen
“its renowned champions to be of her ministry and council.
Nevertheless,” she adds, “in the very first new parliament after her
Majesty’s accession, it was thought necessary, with all diligence, to
provide new strength, new supports for this flourishing church, as if it
had been in the most tottering and declining condition.”[468] The
motives for such conduct were, in the Duchess’s estimation, interested
and invidious. The bill did not, in her opinion, “aim at excluding the
_occasional_ conformists only, but all those _constant_ conformists,
too, who could not relish the high church nonsense of promoting religion
by persecution.”
The measure, if intended, as the Duchess further asserts, to distinguish
in her Majesty’s estimation the friends, from the foes of the church,
succeeded in producing that effect, as subsequent events fully proved.
Those who contemplated by its enactments the immediate prevention of the
scandal of non-conformity, were disappointed, for it was not finally
successful. It was brought into the Commons and passed; its “hottest”
panegyrists being, according to Cunningham, “the clergy, and a crowd of
women of the lowest rank, inflamed, as it were, with a zeal for
religion.” “These women,” he observes, “expressed as great an exultation
at the supposed victory, as if they had taken more pleasure in such
religious triumphs, than in the gratification of even their lusts and
their appetites.”[469]
The Peers, however, less carried away at this time by religious or
political zeal than the Commons, threw out the bill, being of opinion,
not only that it was the offspring of party and prejudice, but that it
would be impolitic during the time of war to disgust so large a body of
her Majesty’s subjects as the Protestant dissenters. They argued, also,
that it was not then expedient to set about the reformation of religious
controversies.
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