in the worship. And after those words 'Give peace in our time, O LORD,' an answer was to follow, promissory of somewhat on the people's part of keeping God's law, or the like; the old response being grounded on the predestinating doctrine taken in too strict an acceptance. "All high titles or appellations of the king or queen, &c. such as 'most illustrious,' most religious,' 'mighty,' &c. were to be left out of the prayers, and only the word sovereign retained for king and queen. These words in the prayer for the king, Grant that he may vanquish and overcome all his enemies,' as of too large an extent, if the king engage in an unjust war, were to be turned thus, prosper all his righteous undertakings against Thy enemies,' or after some such

manner.

66

Sponsors were to be omitted in baptism, if parents so desired. 'Healthful' was to be discarded as an obsolete word. If any minister refused the surplice, the Bishop or the people desired it, and the living would bear it, he was to provide a substitute who would officiate in it. The prayer which begins O GOD, whose nature and property,' was to be thrown out, as full of strange and impertinent expressions, and, besides, not in the original, but foisted in since by another hand; which might well compel Bishop Short to say, 'It is difficult to understand what is here meant.' He adds, 'the prayer was introduced 1560, from the Liturgy of the Salisbury Hours, and is certainly one of the most beautiful and Christian prayers in the Liturgy. He who has never felt the propriety and force of it, must either be a very good or a very bad man'-a piece of antithesis about as difficult to understand' as the criticism of the commissioners which elicits it."-pp. 40-43.

The temper of the clergy was soon made evident. The election of Dr. Jane as prolocutor in opposition to the government candidate Tillotson, their refusal to thank the king for the commission, their success in preventing the Church of England being mixed up in the address with other Protestant bodies, and the slight regard which they evinced for them, showed the court it had no chance, and the proposed alterations never came before the synod. So much for one development of the Dutch notions of supremacy.

Another, in which he was more successful, was his taking upon himself with the aid of his parliament to suspend bishops and priests from their spiritual functions. A bill was passed, 1 Gul. & Mar. c. 8, which enacted "that any person now having any ecclesiastical dignity, benefice, or promotion, who shall neglect to take the oaths appointed before August 1st, 1689, shall be and is declared and adjudged to be suspended from the execution of his office for the space of six months." After six months, deprivation was to follow.

Now it is not at all surprising that parliament should have taken such a step, but it is surprising to find the clergy acquiescing in it, and speaking of themselves in consequence of the act (as is the case, p. 79) as under suspension. Sancroft, too, absented himself from convocation. It would have been more manly and consistent

with his after history had he taken his seat as president, and left the civil power the responsibility of expelling him.

Mr. Palin attempts, p. 73, we think unsuccessfully, to account for the paucity of the number of the non-jurors. He repeats Mr. Macaulay's sneer, but does not answer it. We fear it cannot be answered. That after the whole Church of England had never been weary of repeating that the doctrine of non-resistance, and passive obedience was its peculiar doctrine, and that however tyrannical or oppressive the sovereign might be, however he might plunder, rob, dishonour, mutilate, not a hand must be raised against him, because all this was the prerogative of the LORD's anointed, so few should be found to show by their actions they believed what they had pressed on others, is certainly very strange. We cannot but think King James had too high an opinion of the English clergy. He, poor man, fancied they meant what they said, and that however he might demean himself towards them, they never could or would turn against him. He soon found out his mistake. The English clergy were not long in discovering that being persecuted themselves was a very different thing to seeing others persecuted. It might be very fine to turn out of house and home lowbred Cameronians or restless Covenanters, but when the process was repeated on fellows of Magdalen the doctrine of non-resistance assumed a very different aspect. It was the height of impiety and wickedness for Presbyterians or Baptists to wield the carnal weapon in order to secure quiet for their persons or liberty for their consciences: schismatics and nonconformists were fair game for the exercise of the monarch's persecuting tastes, to whose most arbitrary acts such individuals were bound to submit, and against whose sacred person such individuals might not without sin raise even a tongue. But when the king "stretched forth his hand to vex certain of the Church," immediately the answer, when he reminded them of their former professions, was, nous avons changé tout cela, you must be beside yourself for supposing we meant you might persecute us as you did them. There are cases which absolve subjects from their allegiance, and therefore we transfer that allegiance to William of Orange." So it always is—

"Naturam expellas furcâ, revertitur usque."

The event proved that the extreme doctrine of passive obedience was unnatural, but the more credit is due to those brave men who acted upon their convictions, and voluntarily embraced poverty sooner than take the oaths to the new occupant of the throne. It was a sad day, when they were expelled; and their successors, however "judicious" for State purposes their appointment might have been, had but little weight in the Church, the state of which soon became worse and worse. Mr. Palin quotes from "Kettlewell's Biographer" the following sad sketch of the times :

"The public prayers of the Church, which had been so much frequented while King James sat upon the throne, and while there was an apprehension of his design to introduce Popery, began now to be very much neglected every where. It was openly complained, that there were few who came to them, even of those that were under no prejudices against them, on occasion of the State Prayers, and the alteration of names. The Communion, which was ministered every LORD's day in several of the parish churches in and about London and Westminster, as also upon the festivals of the Church, was now much unfrequented in comparison of what it had been; and in cathedral churches throughout England it was yet worse; so that the alms then collected at the Communion did only little more than defray the charge of the bread and wine. It was observed, that several of the dignitaries of the Church, and they some of the most zealous for bringing about the Revolution, as in behalf of the Church which was in danger, neglected now their residence (how short soever that was) enjoined by the statutes; and that many of the inferior Clergy were likewise notoriously guilty of non-residence. It was complained, moreover, that they were faulty in their morals, that they gave not due attendance to their offices, and that some of the dignified Clergy had cures more than one apiece, which were inconsistent with that duty they did owe to the Mother-Church, and against the ecclesiastical canons. Nay, it was even publicly represented by the most hearty friends of what was then commonly called the constitution, that others belonging to the Church [Clergy], were often seen in ale-houses and taverns, and to be in great disorder through their intemperance; that not a few of them were newsmongers and busy bodies; that those Presbyters whom the Bishops ought to consult with, were generally absent from the church; and the archdeacons, which are to be their eyes, were in the ends of the earth; that some of them did not so much as live in the diocese, and were so far from visiting parochially, that they did it not at all in person; that they had, indeed, their deputies who did little more than dine, call over names, and take their money; that some in the country had two cures, and resided on neither; that others left their own cures, and either became curates to others, or else spent their time in hunting after other preferments in the city; and this too though they were well provided for, and under no manner of temptation by poverty; that the catechizing of children and servants was now very much disused, and even by those who vaunted not a little of their zeal for the Church; that there was not that care which there ought to be in instructing the youth, and preparing them for the Holy Sacrament of CHRIST's Body and Blood; and that, lastly, the preparation of children for Confirmation, was extremely neglected, the bare saying some words by rote being as much as generally was done, and sometimes more. These and a great many other vices and defaults of the Clergy, were complained of publicly in the pamphlets of those times, and that not by enemies but friends to them, and such as studied chiefly a reformation of the abuses complained of and which they had promised themselves from the piety of their new king, to whom they were most strongly attached.'"-pp. 110-112.

The licentiousness of the age became so outrageous, that another development of the royal supremacy was brought into play. The year 1689 witnessed a royal letter, addressed to the Archbishops and Bishops, of which the following are extracts:

"Because as our duty requires, we most earnestly desire and shall endeavour a general reformation in the lives and manners of all our subjects, &c.; we therefore require you to order all the Clergy to preach frequently against those particular sins and vices which are most prevailing in this realm."

"And whereas, there is yet no sufficient provision made by any statute law for the punishing of adultery and fornication; you shall therefore require all churchwardens in your diocese to present impartially all those that are guilty of any such crimes in their several parishes; and upon such presentments, we require you to proceed without delay, and upon sufficient proof, to inflict those censures which are appointed by our ecclesiastical laws against such offenders. In doing whereof according to your duty, you shall not want our effectual assistance and support."

When we remember, as Mr. Palin remarks, that the author of this precious document was living, at the time he issued it, in adultery with Elizabeth Villiers, we are amazed at his effrontery. Apparently, his Dutch Majesty found the issuing of pastorals to his taste, for in 16941 and 1695, he was pleased to favour the Church with his views on various important matters. We again subjoin extracts, from "The directions to our Archbishops and Bishops, for the preserving of unity in the Church, and the purity of the Christian faith concerning the Holy Trinity."

His Majesty enjoins :—

"1. That no preacher whatsoever, in his sermon or lecture, do presume to deliver any other doctrines concerning the Blessed Trinity, than what is contained in the Holy Scriptures, and is agreeable to the Three Creeds and Thirty-nine Articles of religion.

"2. That in the explication of this doctrine, they carefully avoid all new terms, and confine themselves to such ways of expression as have been commonly used in the Church."

However good and right these orders may be in themselves, yet it is obvious what a wide door is opened towards allowing the Crown to "tune the pulpits," as Queen Elizabeth is said to have boasted of having done.

That William should systematically promote such men as Tillotson and Burnet, and for as long as he dared keep convocation from sitting, was only natural. The Church had invested him with these powers, and it would have been too much to have

1 The royal letter of 1694 was a collection of rules to be observed by the Archbishops and Bishops, chiefly concerning Ordination.

expected him not to use them. She was however too strong for him to manage, and after having suspended its sessions for ten years, the force of public opinion compelled him to allow convocation to assemble, when the miserable spectacle was seen of the lower house in vain demanding a censure of an heretical work, around whose author the bishops, in order to please the court, threw the shield of their protection.

But the alien's end was fast drawing near. He died as he had lived, cold, gloomy, reserved, without friends, save Bentinck, distrustful and distrusted. Not even at the last did religion seem to occupy a prominent place in his thoughts. Whether he then communicated or not is uncertain, as is his baptism. While he lived he did as much harm as could well be done to the Church which he governed, without being one of its members. His chief aim seems to have been to have destroyed her distinctive character by the appointment of prelates bred in dissent, but attracted by the favour of the court to outward conformity. His attempt failed, but it sowed the seeds of the present sad want of confidence between bishops and clergy, and rendered unavoidable the disgraceful squabbles of the latter years of convocation. His character, and the effects his reign had upon the Church, are thus summed up by our author, though we must not be supposed to agree with him when he calls the Dutch Monarch's arrival "a great and glorious event:"—

"He seems to have been a man of a generally restless and unhappy temper. He won, if such courtship can be called winning, a beautiful young bride, and soon tired of her. He succeeded to a noble crown, and soon wearied of it, either because he was not allowed to boast of it as a conquest, or from a constitutional inability to understand or reconcile himself to the English character, much less to acquire it. He gave all his confidence to the Whigs in the former part of his reign, only to leave them in the latter. His wars were so unceasing, and he was so entirely absorbed in them, though not generally successful in them, that a history of his life is a history of Europe, supposing history to be made up of such things, as it generally is. The soil of Flanders is spoken of as literally saturated with British blood' during his reign; and Gregory King, a contemporary of the Dutch king, informs us that, from 1688 to 1695, the population of England had decreased to the startling amount of fifty thousand.”—p. 215.

"He was a thoroughly hard and selfish man, and not unsuccessfully painted by a contemporary, as follows: He hath, if any ever had, two faces under one hood; and though he had a double conscience, one for this, and another for the other side of the Tweed, yet he hath but one principle, that gain is great godliness; and one interest, to become all things to all men, to gain all to himself. Surely, a dark lantern, under a crown or mitre, is as dangerous as under a parliament-house." "-p. 222. "Thus ended a reign, to be ranked among the most important in the annals of the English Church and nation, but deriving its impor