IN

CHAPTER III

THE PROBLEM OF THE AGE-ECCLESIASTICAL

N the previous section an attempt has been made to define with some precision the scope of the constitutional problem which the seventeenth century was called upon to solve. But it has been shown that the political issue would not in itself have been sufficient to produce those deep divisions which eventually draw good men on both sides to plunge, however reluctantly, into fratricidal war. It needed the concomitant stimulus of ecclesiastical passion and religious zeal. It is necessary, therefore, to attempt a similar analysis of the conditions which prevailed in the spiritual sphere.

The ecclesiastical problem may be stated crudely thus. What was to be the connotation of the term The Church? Was the Church to be in the future as in the past co-extensive with the nation? Was it to continue to be the State in its ecclesiastical and religious aspect? Assuming an affirmative answer to this question, a second remained: What was to be the government and doctrine of this National Church? Was it to be Roman, Anglican or Puritan? Was it to be governed by Bishops or by Presbyters? Was it to look for definition of doctrine to Trent, to Augsburg, or to Geneva? Or might it rest content with the compromise of the Elizabethan Settlement? If, on the other hand, the old unity of Church and State was to be dissolved, if diversity of creed and worship and government was to be admitted, still more difficult and novel were the problems which would press for

solution. Were all creeds and churches to be on an equality, mutually tolerant of each other? Or was the State to associate itself in particular with one form of ecclesiastical organisation? If so, which was it to be? And what were to be the relations of the State and the State Church to the other religious bodies? It may be said at once that these latter questions were purely academic-at any rate during the earlier years of the century. Upon one point all parties were agreed that the Church must be co-extensive with the nation. The only practical question to be decided was, whether that National Church should be Roman Catholic, Anglican or Presbyterian.

The first stage in the English Reformation had been closed by the Elizabethan Settlement. That Settlement was based upon the great Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity (1559), and upon the acceptance of the Thirty-Nine Articles, first by Convocation (1563) and subsequently by Parliament (1571). Effected by statesmen and not by theologians inevitably it was a compromise, which though acceptable to and accepted by the great mass of Elizabeth's subjects could not be otherwise than disappointing, if not distasteful, to the more zealous adherents both of Rome and of Geneva. What proportion of the nation these formed it is impossible It is easy to trace the history of the English Reformation so far as it is recorded in the pages of the statute-book. It is not difficult to draw certain conclusions from confessions and creeds. But the attempt to gauge with precision the religious sentiments of the people at large is a task which baffles the most patient and ingenious historical research. But while admitting the liability to error, it is permissible to hazard the conjecture that the mass of the nation would have been well content had the Reformation movement been permitted to stop at the point where Henry VIII. ultimately left it.

Englishmen of all classes had long chafed under the domination of the Papacy; and they heartily welcomed the abrogation of Papal authority and the transference to the Crown of the Supreme Headship of the English Church. The whole body of the laity were glad to see the end of many clerical abuses and extortions, and they witnessed without regret the curtailment of the powers of the Ecclesiastical Courts and of Convocation. The dissolution of the monasteries, though not accomplished without some popular protest, at least formed an effectual guarantee against the complete restoration of the old order. But for any sweeping changes in doctrine or ritual few were prepared, and it may be surmised therefore that Henry VIII.'s Six Articles represented not unfairly the doctrinal preferences of the great majority of his subjects. With the accession of Edward VI. England was subjected to other influences. Foreign divines were appointed to important posts in the universities and elsewhere, and things began to move, steadily under Somerset, precipitately under Northumberland, in a Protestant direction. How little the new tendencies were liked by the people was proved by the insurrections under Edward VI., and still more by the unanimity of the welcome accorded to the daughter of Catherine of Aragon. But Queen Mary was not merely a fervent Catholic, but a fanatical Papist. For the restoration of Catholicism her subjects were prepared; to the complete reinstatement of Papal authority they demurred. The Marian persecution did far more for doctrinal Protestantism than the Edwardian divines; while the continental complications in which the country was involved by the Spanish marriage gave emphasis to the growing sense of nationalism in England.

For this, and for other reasons, the accession of Queen Elizabeth was hailed with enthusiasm by all parties. But

despite the warmth and unanimity of her welcome, the path of the new Queen was beset by appalling difficulties and dangers. Of these the ecclesiastical problem was the most urgent. Elizabeth may have possessed strong religious convictions, but she was not a keen partisan. More of a statesman than a theologian, she was apt to subordinate ecclesiastical to political consideration. But as a politique she was, perhaps, all the better fitted to preside over a settlement, which, from the nature of the case, was bound to be a compromise. That settlement, however, was accepted by the nation at large as at any rate sufficient for the time. As the reign went on, both parties became more restless. The Papacy could not afford either to ignore or to acknowledge the daughter of Anne Boleyn. In Mary Stuart the Papal party had ready to hand an excellent candidate for Elizabeth's throne. Circumstances brought the two Queens, and the two women, into lifelong antagonism. Thus from the moment of her flight into England, after the defeat at Langside, until the day of her death, Mary Stuart became the inevitable focus, if not the instigator, of ceaseless plots and intrigues against the Crown and life of Queen Elizabeth. Other elements of restlessness were not wanting. The devoted but mischievous labours of the Jesuit mission began in time to tell even upon the loyalty of the English Catholics. Elizabeth was moved to action slowly and with reluctance. For the first twelve years of her reign she steadily declined to interfere with the religious opinions of her subjects so long as they paid outward deference to the Established Church of the realm. But the attack delivered by the Papacy and sustained by the Jesuits and the Seminary Priests compelled Queen and Parliament to abandon the policy of prudent and tolerant laissez-faire. To speak of the statutes passed by Parliament for the protection of the Queen and country, or the con

1