their own cherished model. Their creed and polity suited the tastes of the people, and were accepted with enthusiasm. The Catholic faith was renounced everywhere but in some parts of the Highlands; and the Reformed establishment at once assumed the comprehensive character of a national church. But while supported by the people, it was in constant antagonism to the state. Its rulers repudiated the supremacy of the crown: 2 resisted the jurisdiction of the civil courts; and set up pretensions to spiritual authority and independence, not unworthy of the church they had lately overthrown.1 They would not suffer temporal power to intrude upon the spiritual church of Christ.5 3 The constitution of the Scottish church was republican: her power at once spiritual and popular. Instead of being governed by The church of Scotland. 1 1560-1592.—The events of this period are amply illustrated in Spottiswood's Hist. of the Church of Scotland; M'Crie's Lives of Knox and Melville; Knox's Hist. of the Reformation; Robertson's Hist. of Scotland; Tytler's Hist. of Scotland; Cook's Hist. of the Reformation in Scotland; Cunningham's Church Hist., i. 351; Row's Hist. of the Kirk of Scotland; Stephen's Hist. of the Church of Scotland; Buckle's Hist., ii. ch. 3; Froude's Hist., vii. 116, 269. 2 In the Book of Polity, it is laid down that the power ecclesiastical flows immediately from God and the Mediator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head on earth, but only Christ, the only spiritual governor and head of his kirk.' 3 Cunningham's Church Hist., 535; Calderwood's Hist., v. 457– 460, 475; Spottiswood's Hist., iii. 21; Tytler's Hist., vii. 326; Buchanan's Ten Years' Conflict, i. 73-81. • Mr. Cunningham, comparing the churches of Rome and Scotland, says: With both there has been the same union and energy of action, the same assumption of spiritual supremacy, the same defiance of law courts, parliaments, and kings.'-Pref. to Church Hist. of Scotland. 5. When the church was Roman, it was the duty of the magistrate to reform it. When the church was Protestant, it was impiety in the magistrate to touch it.'-Cunningham's Church Hist., i. 537. courtly prelates and an impotent convocation, she was represented by the general assembly,—an ecclesiastical Parliament of wide jurisdiction, little controlled by the civil power. The leaders of that assembly were bold and earnest men, with high notions of ecclesiastical authority, a democratic temper, and habitual reliance upon popular support. A church so constituted was, indeed, endowed and acknowledged by the state: but was more likely to withstand the power of the crown and aristocracy, than to uphold it. tion with the state. The formal connection of the church with the Her connec- state was, nevertheless, maintained with scarcely less strictness than in England. The new establishment was the work of the legislature; the Protestant religion was originally adopted; the church's confession of faith ratified; and the entire Presbyterian polity established by statute.' And further, the crown was represented in her assembly, by the Lord High Commissioner. Reformation in The Reformation had also been extended to Ireland: but in a manner the most extraordiIreland. nary and exceptional. In England and Scotland, the clergy and people had unquestionably been predisposed to changes in the Catholic church; and the reforms effected were more or less the expression of the national will. But in Ireland, the Reformation was forced upon an unyielding priesthood and a half-conquered people. The priests were driven from their churches and homes, by Scots Acts, 1560; 1567, c. 4, 6, 7, 1592, c. 116; Ibid., 1690, c. 5, 23. ministers of the new faith,--generally Englishmen or strangers, who were ignorant of the language of their flocks, and indifferent to their conversion or teaching. Conformity was exacted in obedience to the law, and under severe penalties: not sought by appeals to the reason and conscience of a subject race. Who can wonder that the Reformation never took root in Ireland? It was accepted by the majority of the English colonists: but many who abjured the Catholic faith, declined to join the new establishment, and founded Presbyterian communions of their own. The Reformation added a new element of discord between the colonists and the natives: embittered the chronic discontents against the government; and founded a foreign church, with few communicants, in the midst of a hostile and rebellious people. It was a state church: but, in no sense, the church of the nation.' Such having been the results of the Reformation, the accession of James united the three The three churches under James I. crowns of these realms; and what were his relations to the church? In England, he was the head of a state church, environed by formidable bodies of Catholics and Puritans. In Scotland, a Presbyterian church had been founded upon the model approved by English Puritans. In Ireland, he was the head of a church maintained by the sword. This incongruous heritage, unwisely used, brought ruin on his royal house. Reared 1 Leland's Hist., ii. 165, 224, &c. ; Lanigan's Eccl. Hist., iv. 207, &c.; Mant's Hist. of the Church of Ireland, i. ch. 2, 3, 4; Goldwin Smith's Irish History and Irish Character, 83, 88, 92, 100. among a Presbyterian people, he vexed the English Puritans with a more rigorous conformity; and spurning the religion of his own countrymen, forced upon them a hated episcopacy, the supremacy of the crown, and observances repugnant to their creed. No less intolerant of his own mother's church, he hastened to aggravate the penalties against Popish recusants. Such was his rancour that he denied them the right of educating their children in the Catholic faith. The laws against them were also enforced with renewed severity. The monstrous plot of Guy Fawkes naturally incensed Parliament and the people against the whole body of Catholics, whose religion was still associated with imminent danger to the state; and again were treason and Popery scourged with the same rod. Further penalties were imposed on Popish recusants, not attending the services and sacraments of the church; and a new oath of allegiance was devised to test their loyalty. In Ireland, Catholic priests were banished by proclamation; and the laws rigorously enforced against the laity who absented themselves from Protestant worship. The king's only claim upon the favour of the Puritans was his persecution of Papists; and this he suddenly renounced. In compliance with engagements entered into with foreign powers, he began openly to tolerate the Catholics; and granted a pardon to all who had incurred the penalties of recusancy. The breach was ever widening between the Puritans and the 2 Lingard's Hist., ix. 41, 55. 11 Jac. I. c. 4. throne; and while the monarch was asserting the divine right of kings, his bishops were exalting prelacy, and bringing the Reformed church nearer to the Romish model. Rela tions of Charles I. with Ca tholics and Puritans. Charles continued to extend an indulgence to Catholics, at once offensive to the Puritan party, and in violation of laws which his prerogative could not rightfully suspend. Even the toleration of the Stuarts, like their rigour, was beyond the law. The prerogatives and supremacy of the crown were alike abused. Favouring absolutism in the state, and domination in the church, Charles found congenial instruments of tyranny in the Star Chamber and High Commission,-in Strafford and in Laud. In England he oppressed Puritans: in Scotland he introduced a high church liturgy, which provoked rebellion. Arbitrary rule in church and state completed the alienation of the Puritan party; and their enmity was fatal. The church was overthrown; and a republican commonwealth established on the ruins of the monarchy. The polity of the Reformation was riven, as by a thunderbolt. Religion The Commonwealth was generally favourable to religious liberty. The intolerance of Presbyterians, indeed, was fanatical. In the under the words of Milton, new Presbyter was but 6 Commonwealth. 'Life of Baxter, 103. Their clergy in London protested against toleration to the Westminster Assembly, Dec. 18th, 1645, saying, we cannot dissemble how we detest and abhor this much endeavoured toleration.'-Price's Hist. of Nonconformity, ii. 329. Edwards, a Presbyterian minister, denounced toleration as the grand design of the devil,' and 'the most ready, compendious, and sure way to destroy all religion,'' all the devils in hell and their instruments being at work to promote it.'-Gangræna, rart i. 58. |