disgust
towards faction, and the authority of Monk, had prevailed over that
jealous project of limitations, the full settlement of the hierarchy,
together with the monarchy, was a necessary and infallible consequence.
All the royalists were zealous for that mode of religion; the merits of
the Episcopal clergy towards the king, as well as their sufferings on
that account, had been great; the laws which established bishops and the
liturgy, were as yet unrepealed by legal authority; and any attempt of
the parliament, by new acts, to give the superiority to Presbyterianism,
had been sufficient to involve the nation again in blood and confusion.
Moved by these views, the commons had wisely postponed the examination
of all religious controversy, and had left the settlement of the church
to the king and to the ancient laws.
The king at first used great moderation in the execution of the laws.
Nine bishops still remained alive; and these were immediately restored
to their sees: all the ejected clergy recovered their livings: the
liturgy, a form of worship decent, and not without beauty, was again
admitted into the churches: but at the same time a declaration was
issued, in order to give contentment to the Presbyterians, and preserve
an air of moderation and neutrality.[*] In this declaration, the
king promised, that he would provide suffragan bishops for the larger
dioceses; that the prelates should, all of them, be regular and constant
preachers; that they should not confer ordination, or exercise any
jurisdiction, without the advice and assistance of presbyters chosen
by the diocese; that such alterations should be made in the liturgy as
would render it totally unexceptionable; that, in the mean time, the use
of that mode of worship should not be imposed on such as were unwilling
to receive it; and that the surplice, the cross in baptism, and
bowing at the name of Jesus, should not be rigidly insisted on. This
declaration was issued by the king as head of the church; and he plainly
assumed, in many parts of it, a legislative authority in ecclesiastical
matters. But the English government, though more exactly defined by
late contests, was not as yet reduced in every particular to the strict
limits of law. And if ever pre-rogative was justifiably employed, it
seemed to be on the present occasion; when all parts of the state were
torn with past convulsions, and required the moderating hand of the
chief magistrate to reduce them
|