Supporting the Monarchy and the Church of England during the Restoration

2020 ◽  
pp. 139-184
Author(s):  
Joseph Arthur Mann
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Father Figure ◽  
The Public ◽  
Oliver Cromwell ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
Musical Propaganda ◽  
The Church

With rebellion and regicide an ever-present worry for the newly-restored monarchy and the new king Charles II, public opinion could not be ignored. Charles II was welcomed back to his kingdom with a mix of enthusiasm and relief, but his Church of England faced a more difficult restoration. After being outlawed for a decade, it faced the difficulties inherent in reconstituting the institution itself. It faced the challenge of countering the sentiments against it that had been spread during the Commonwealth. It also needed to establish religious harmony in a populace fractured into numerous denominations than it was before the war. Chapter three reveals how music was consistently pressed into service to maintain a favorable public opinion of Charles II and later James II and in the 1660s to support the restoration of the Church of England. It shows how musical propaganda was used to tout Charles II’s lack-luster victories over the Dutch as masterful triumphs, paint him as a benevolent father-figure to his people, and even give him a fictional victory over Oliver Cromwell. While these tactics recurred during the reign of James II, they were ultimately unable to overcome the public distaste for his Catholicism.

A Leicestershire Recusant Family: The Nevills of Nevill Holt – I

1984 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Elliott
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
James I ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
Late Nineteenth ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries ◽  
The Church

At the Reformation, three possibilities faced English Catholics. They could continue to be Catholics and so suffer the penalties of the penal laws; they could conform to the Church of England; or they could adopt a middle course and become Church Papists. The Nevills of Nevill Holt, near Market Harborough in Leicestershire, went through all three phases. In the reign of Edward VI, Thomas Nevill I became a Protestant. His grandson, Thomas Nevill II, became a Church Papist under James I; and Thomas II’s son, Henry Nevill I, continued to be one at the time of the Civil War. But Henry l’s son William was definitely a Catholic and went into exile with King James II, while William’s son, Henry Nevill II, was an open Catholic under Charles II. Henry Nevill II’s descendants continued to be Catholics throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries until they left Nevill Holt in the late nineteenth century.

scholarly journals Shaftesbury, Locke, and Their Revolutionary Letter? [Corrigendum]

Locke Studies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
D. N. DeLuna
Keyword(s):  
John Locke ◽  
Church And State ◽  
Careful Examination ◽  
Biblical Hermeneutics ◽  
The Public ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Henry Vi ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Church

A correction of an article originally published in vol 17 (2017). In 1675, the anonymous Letter to a Person of Quality was condemned in the House of Lords and ordered to be burned by the public hangman.  A propagandistic work that has long been attributed to Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, and less certainly to his secretary John Locke, it traduced hard-line Anglican legislation considered in Parliament that year—namely the Test Bill, proposing that office-holders and MPs swear off political militancy and indeed any efforts to reform the Church and State.  Careful examination of the text of the Letter, and that of one of its sources in the Reasons against the Bill for the Test, also circulated in 1675, reveals the presence of highly seditious passages of covert historical allegory.  Hitherto un-noted by modern scholars, this allegory compared King Charles II to the weak and intermittently mad Henry VI, while agitating for armed revolt against a government made prey to popish and French captors.  The discovery compels modification, through chronological revision and also re-assessment of the probability of Locke’s authorship of the Letter, of Richard Ashcraft’s picture of Shaftesbury and Locke as first-time revolutionaries for the cause of religious tolerance in the early 1680s.  Even more significantly, it lends support to Ashcraft’s view of the nature and intent of duplicitous published writings from the Shaftesbury circle, whose members included Robert Ferguson, ‘the Plotter’ and pamphleteer at home in the world of skilled biblical hermeneutics.  Cultivated for stealthy revolutionary purposes, these writings came with designs of engaging discrete reading networks within England’s culture of Protestant dissent.

Anti-Reredos Cases and the Fight against Idolatry in the Late Victorian Church, c. 1860–c. 1900

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Hugh Pattenden
Keyword(s):  
Church Of England ◽  
Church Architecture ◽  
The Public ◽  
Local Newspapers ◽  
The Church ◽  
Public Worship

Abstract This article considers attacks on reredoses in the late Victorian Church of England with the objective of placing such controversies within the context of anti-idolatry and anti-ritualism campaigns of the period. By doing so it seeks to rectify the lack of focus in the historiography on how the ritualist controversy affected discussion of changes to church architecture. In particular, by using local newspapers, it extends consideration of the reredos issue beyond the two main cases, namely those of Exeter and St Paul’s cathedrals. It argues that the reredos cases provide a powerful tool for considering how the Church of England moved towards a more ‘catholic’ position on ornamentation during this period, showing how it became impossible for the more Protestant members of the Church to prevent what they saw as the ‘Romanization’ of ecclesiastical spaces. This was part of a broader process by which ornamentation was coming to be accepted on purely aesthetic terms, and not as a challenge to the theology of the Church of England. It further assesses the significance of the Public Worship Regulation Act 1874 in relation to cases involving church fabric, arguing that the introduction of the bishops’ veto had only limited practical effects on such disputes.

John Rogers: A Disillusioned Fifth Monarchy Man

1972 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suellen M. Hoy
Keyword(s):  
Church Of England ◽  
Childhood Experiences ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Oliver Cromwell ◽  
Assurance Of Salvation ◽  
The Church

In a letter to Oliver Cromwell in April 1653, John Rogers wrote that his soul was “boiling over into earnest prayers to the Great Jehovah for wisdom, counsel, and courage for you … the great deliverer of His people. …” Rogers perceived in the person of Cromwell another Moses, charged with the duty of liberating the saints of “the Commonwealth of Israel.” Yet in a face-to-face confrontation with Cromwell in February 1655, Rogers warned him, “in the name of the Lord Jehovah,” that his condition was “very desperate,” and that “the next Vial which is to be poured out … the scorching hot one … must fall upon him … [for having] forsaken and betrayed the Cause of Christ.” In less than two years, Rogers had gradually slipped from a summit of hopeful expectation into an abyss of bitter disillusionment, as he watched the man in whom he had placed all trust take for himself the crown that had been reserved for the Lord Jesus.Born in 1627 at Messing, Essex, John Rogers was the second son of Nehemiah and Margaret Rogers. Nehemiah Rogers, an Anglican clergyman and a firm advocate of the policies of Archbishop William Laud, endeavored to educate his son in a manner that would fit him for service in the Church of England. Early in life, under the tutelage first of his father and later of two Puritan clergymen — William Fenner and Stephen Marshall, John Rogers became acutely aware of contemporary theological controversies and intensely preoccupied with his own religious condition. Later as a minister in Ireland, Rogers recounted various childhood experiences in his quest for some assurance of salvation: … when I was a schoolboy at Maldon, in Essex, I began to be roused up by two men, viz. Mr. Fenner and Mr. Marshall … hearing Mr. William Fenner full of zeal, stirring about, and thundering, and beating the pulpit, I was amazed and thought he was mad … “Oh”, says he, “you knotty! rugged! proud piece of flesh! you stony, rocky, flinty, hard heart, what wilt thou do when thou art roaring in hell amongst the damned!” … I began now to be troubled, being scared and frighted, and out of fear of hell I fell to duties, hear sermons, read the scriptures … and learned to pray. …

Hillsborough and the Church of England

Theology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 120 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10
Author(s):  
James Jones
Keyword(s):  
Church Of England ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
Independent Panel ◽  
The Government ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Church ◽  
British Football

In 1989, 96 Liverpool Football Club supporters were killed at the Hillsborough Stadium in Sheffield. It was the biggest sporting disaster in British football. The original inquests returned a verdict of ‘accidental death’. For over 20 years the families of the 96 and the survivors campaigned against this verdict. In 2010 the government set up an Independent Panel with myself as its Chair. Its remit after consultation with the families and survivors was to access and analyse all the documents related to the disaster and its aftermath and to write a report to add to public understanding. The Panel’s Report was published in 2012 and led to the quashing of the original verdicts and the setting up of fresh inquests. After two years and the longest inquests in British legal history, the jury gave its determination of ‘unlawful killing’. Here I reflect theologically on the public and pastoral role of the Church of England and its mission to wider society.

Debating the Legal Status of the Ornaments Rubric: Ritualism and Royal Commissions in Late Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth-Century England

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 434-454
Author(s):  
Dan D. Cruickshank
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Royal Commission ◽  
The Public ◽  
Early Twentieth Century ◽  
History Of ◽  
Late Nineteenth ◽  
Parliamentary Oversight ◽  
The Church

This article uses the history of the Ornaments Rubric in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century to explore the emergence of claims to self-governance within the Church of England in this period and the attempts by parliament to examine how independent the legal system of the church was from the secular state. First, it gives an overview of the history of the Ornaments Rubric in the various editions of the Book of Common Prayer and the Acts of Uniformity, presenting the legal uncertainty left by centuries of Prayer Book revision. It then explores how the Royal Commission into Ritualism (1867–70) and the Public Worship Regulation Act (1874) attempted to control Ritualist interpretations of the Ornaments Rubric through secular courts. Examining the failure of these attempts, it looks towards the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline (1904–6). Through the evidence given to the commission, it shows how the previous royal commission and the work of parliament and the courts had failed to stop the continuation of Ritualist belief in the church's independence from secular courts. Using the report of the royal commission, it shows how the commissioners attempted to build a via media between strict spiritual independence and complete parliamentary oversight.

Church and State in England

1937 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-92
Author(s):  
E. P. Chase
Keyword(s):  
Church Of England ◽  
Church And State ◽  
General Election ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
Revolutionary Movement ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Church

In that revolutionary movement by which slowly and unobtrusively the government of England has been made over in the last twenty years, no institution has changed more perceptibly than the Church of England. Church and State: The Report of the Archbishops’ Commission on the Relations between Church and State, dated 1935 but withheld from the public by the Commission until after the general election of that year, sets forth the latest stage in a notable constitutional development.

Unity, Uniformity and Diversity: the Anglican Liturgy in England and the United States, 1900-1940

1996 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 465-475
Author(s):  
Martin Dudley
Keyword(s):  
Church Of England ◽  
The United States ◽  
Book Of Common Prayer ◽  
Queen Victoria ◽  
The People ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Common Prayer ◽  
The Church

‘Uniformity’, declared Sir John Nicholl, one of the greatest of Anglican ecclesiastical lawyers, ‘is one of the leading and distinguishing principles of the Church of England - nothing is left to the discretion and fancy of the individual.’ At the Reformation the English Church was distinguished not by the decisions of councils, confessional statements, or the writings of particular leaders, but by one uniform liturgy. This liturgy, ‘containing nothing contrary to the Word of God, or to sound Doctrine’ and consonant with the practice of the early Church, was intended to ‘preserve Peace and Unity in the Church’ and to edify the people. It was also opposed to the ‘great diversity in saying and singing in Churches within this Realm’ and, abolishing the liturgical uses of Salisbury, Hereford, Bangor, York, and Lincoln, it established that ‘now from henceforth all the whole Realm shall have but one Use’. This principle of liturgical uniformity was enshrined in the several Acts of Uniformity from that of the second year of King Edward VI to that of the fourteenth year of Charles II, amended, but not abolished, in the reign of Queen Victoria. It was a principle conveyed to the churches in the colonies so that, even if they revised or abandoned the Book of Common Prayer in use in England, as the Americans did in 1789, what was substituted was called ‘The Book of Common Prayer and declared to be ‘the Liturgy of this Church’ to be ‘received as such by all members of the same’. The principle of uniformity was modified during the Anglican Communion’s missionary expansion. The Lambeth Conference of 1920 considered that liturgical uniformity throughout the Churches of the Anglican Communion was not a necessity, but the 1930 Conference held that the Book of Common Prayer, as authorized in the several Churches of the Communion, was the place where faith and order were set forth, and so implied a degree of uniformity maintained by the use of a single book.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document