Asaph knocked at a door in the little cloisters at Westminster, Dr. Paman, a domestic of the Archbishop of Canterbury, called on Dr. Patrick to inform him that the Prince had appointed three o'clock in the afternoon to receive the Bishops. "Will my Lord of Canterbury be with them?" asked Patrick. "Yes, yes," was the reply. Whether an interview between the Prince and any Bishops did take place that day, or the messenger had mistaken the time, or the appointment had been altered, certain it is that the Archbishop did not go, and we have no particular account of the presentation of an address before the 21st.

On that occasion, Compton, Bishop of London, took the lead. Two days before, he and some of his clergy met to agree upon an address. There were present persons who desired the insertion of a passage to the effect that the Prince should “have respect to the King, and preserve the Church established by law;" and "one of considerable note refused to go, because these clauses were not inserted." Certain Nonconformists heard what was going on, and requested they might unite with their Episcopal brethren. Compton complied, and on Friday morning, the 21st, when the address was to be presented, sixteen early risers left their homes and threaded their way through the dusky streets. "No more could be got together in due time that morning, for the Bishop was to make the address about 9 or 10 o'clock that day." They deputed Howe, Fairclough, Stancliffe, and Mayo "to go with the conformable clergy (who numbered about 99) and the Bishop of London to attend the Prince." Admitted to His Highness's presence, the Bishop-a perfect courtier— conducted the interview with becoming grace, addressing him viva voce, and gratifying the Nonconformists by a special reference to them as brethren who differed on some

minor matters, but in nothing substantial, and who fully concurred in the address presented, "at which words, the Prince took particular notice of the four Nonconformist ministers "an incident which no doubt would give rise to some talk that memorable Christmas-time.

A large meeting of Presbyterian and Independent brethren was held just afterwards, to depute four of their number to wait on Compton, to thank him for his courtesy, and whilst they were considering this matter, "there were divers bundles of the King's letters, containing the reasons of his withdrawing, delivered or thrown in amongst them by a stranger. Some bundles had particular directions on them." The circumstance indicates the activity of James' agents, and their idea that he had special claims on the Dissenters, who had taken advantage of his Indulgences. But, says the person who records the incident, "they are the more fortified hereby in their purpose, that they may cast off the imputation cast upon them by their enemies, as betrayers of the religion and laws of the kingdom, by complying with the Court." Other Nonconformists, who did not hear of the Bishops' audience in sufficient time, presented a distinct address a few days afterwards, promising "the utmost endeavour, which in their stations they were capable of affording, for the promoting the excellent and most desirable ends for which His Highness had declared."2

1 This account is taken from a Diary in what is called the Historical Register Entering Book, vol. ii. 383. Morice MSS., Dr. Williams' Library. 2 Ralph, i. 1073.

CHAPTER III.

NGLAND was now in the midst of a revolution.

Eat Waits character? Its ecclesiastical aspects

alone demand our attention, but these are so closely connected with others, that we shall be compelled to look at them all together. Politics and religion were inextricably interwoven. They had been so in earlier changes. Changes mainly religious were also political; changes mainly political were also religious. Lollardism wrought a vast religious revolution, but though it principally aimed at purifying the Church, it sought, as a means to that end, the amendment of the State. The Reformation was pre-eminently an ecclesiastical movement, but its political entanglements are obvious to everybody. The Civil Wars were struggles for civil liberty-for the rights of the people against the oppression of the Crown; but the religious spirit, at first hidden in the heart of those conflicts, was so strong, and soon burst out in other forms so conspicuously, that the Commonwealth of England and the Protectorate of Cromwell became entangled with ecclesiastical and theological controversies. The Revolution of 1688 came in the wake of the Puritan movement.

The union between Church and State, which runs back through English history to its earliest days, rendered this

intermingling of interests an unavoidable necessity. Great movements in the Church affected the Government; great changes in the Government affected the Church. Whilst this union is obviously a cause of additional complexity, no thoughtful person can fail to discover in even the simplest principles of polity and doctrine, forces which are sure to touch society in its temporal interests, and render inevitable political developments of religion and religious developments of politics. If the Church were separated from the State to-morrow, a connexion between religion and politics would remain.

The two great political Revolutions of England in the 17th century sprung from religious feeling, from religious antipathies, from religious aspirations. Fiery impulses, kindled by faith, did more to scorch and destroy civil despotism than any constitutional traditions, any maxims of secular policy. Religion was the prime mover in the events of 1688. Not only did ministers of religion take part in it, but religion itself entered deeply into the political question. When moving in one direction the Popery of James prompted him to play the despot, and when moving in another direction the Protestantism of his subjects impelled them to fight for their liberties-the two forces came in contact, and issued in a crash, bringing about the King's downfall and the Prince's elevation. The same influences led to a settlement of the long-debated question of prerogative--they consolidated the power of Parliament, they created the Bill of Rights; without such religious enthusiasm as then existed, it may be doubted whether such a Revolution would have been possible; and as it sprung from religious causes, so the Revolution produced religious results. It checked the progress of Popery, it inaugurated a new form of Protestant ascen

dency, which has lasted down to our own time; it altered the position of the Church Establishment; it materially modified the Act of Uniformity; and it legally secured toleration. These subjects will claim attention as we proceed, and a fuller estimate of the character of the Revolution had better be deferred for the present.

66

The Peers met in their own House on the 22nd of December. Nothing of moment passed. The day before Christmas-day they met again, and we find Clarendon, with a lingering regard for the Stuart family, asking for an inquiry into the birth of the Prince of Wales, when Lord Wharton, an old Puritan, indignantly replied, “ My Lords, I did not expect, at this time of day, to hear anybody mention that child, who was called the Prince of Wales; indeed I did not, and I hope we shall hear no more of him." It was at last decided that an address should be presented to the Prince of Orange to take on him the Administration of affairs, and to issue circular-letters to the counties, cities, universities, and cinque-ports, to send Representatives to a Convention at Westminster on the 22nd of January following.

The Archbishop did not attend. Clarendon and the Bishop of Ely sent for him, "but the King's being gone had cast such a damp upon him that he would not come."2 James, soon after his flight, had written to the Primate, informing him that, but for his hasty departure, he should have explained the reasons of his becoming a Roman Catholic; that although he had not thought proper to do this on a former occasion, when his re-conversion had been attempted, yet he never refused speaking freely with Protestants, especially with His Grace, "whom he

1

Diary and Correspondence, ii. 235.

2 Ibid., ii. 234.