CHAPTER VII.

KING CHARLES II.

The Address of the Presbyterians to the King-Their proposal to set aside the Prayer-Book—Royal Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical affairs-The Savoy Conference-The concessions granted by the Bishops-Baxter's 'Reformation of the Liturgy'-Revision of the Prayer-Book by ConvocationThe Sealed Books.'

THE restoration of conscience and worship to Eng

HE restoration of the monarchy, in 1660, brought

lish churchmen. On the 1st of May, letters from King Charles II., dated from Breda, were brought to the Houses of Lords and Commons, with a Declaration, in which the King says, on the subject of religion, 'that no man shall be disquieted, or called in question, for differences of opinion in matters of religion, which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom.' By a resolution of the Commons (May 8), the King was desired to make a speedy return to his Parliament, and on the same day he was solemnly proclaimed: and on the 10th of May, on the occasion of a day of thanksgiving, the Common Prayer was read before the Lords.

Meanwhile (May 4), a deputation from both Houses was sent to meet the King at the Hague. Reynolds, Calamy, Case, Manton, and some other eminent Presbyterians went also with an address, to which the King answered kindly; but referred to Parliament to determine what toleration was necessary for the repose of the kingdom. This answer, however, was not the object which had brought these preachers to gain the King's

ear if possible, while he might be willing to listen to any terms of accommodation. In various private audiences they suggested that the Common Prayer had long been discontinued in England, that many of the people had never once heard it; and therefore it would be much wondered at if his majesty, at his first landing, should revive the use of it in his own chapel: and therefore to prevent the people being shocked at such uncustomary worship, they entreated him not to use it in form, and by rubrical directions; but only to order the reading some part of it with the intermixture of other good prayers.

Finding no hope of abridging the King's liberty of using the regular Service, they then requested that the use of the surplice might be discontinued by the royal chaplains, because the sight of this habit would give great offence to the people. But they were plainly told by the King, that he would not be restrained himself, when others had so much indulgence: that the surplice had always been reckoned a decent habit, and constantly worn in the Church of England: that he had all along retained the use of it in foreign parts: that though he might for the present tolerate a failure of solemnity in religious worship, yet he would never abet such irregularity by his own practice. These, however, were not the men to be easily put off from their purpose; and it seems that they teased the King, after his return to England, with continual complaints, until he bade them submit their grievances and wishes in writing. Whereupon they embodied their notions upon church-matters in a long address. They assume that there was no difference between Churchmen and themselves 'in the doctrinal truths of the reformed religion, and in the substantial parts of divine worship;' but only in some various conceptions about the ancient form of churchgovernment, and some particulars about Liturgy and

ceremonies.' Among these differences concerning the Prayer-Book, they say:

1. 'We are satisfied in our judgments concerning the lawfulness of a Liturgy, or form of Public Worship, provided that it be for the matter agreeable unto the Word of God, and fitly suited to the nature of the several ordinances and necessities of the Church; neither too tedious in the whole, nor composed of too short prayers, unmeet repetitions or responsals; not to be dissonant from the Liturgies of other reformed Churches; nor too rigorously imposed; nor the minister so confined thereunto, but that he may make use of those gifts for prayer and exhortation which Christ hath given him for the service and edification of the Church.'

2. 'That inasmuch as the Book of Common Prayer hath in it many things that are justly offensive and need amendment, hath been long discontinued, and very many, both ministers and people, persons of pious, loyal, and peaceable minds, are therein greatly dissatisfied; whereupon, if it be again imposed, will inevitably follow sad divisions, and widening of the breaches which your Majesty is now endeavouring to heal: we do most humbly offer to your Majesty's wisdom, that for preventing so great evil, and for settling the Church in unity, some learned, godly, and moderate divines of both persuasions, indifferently chosen, may be employed to compile such a form as is before described, as much as may be in Scripture words; or at least to revise and effectually reform the old, together with an addition or insertion of some other varying forms in Scripture phrase, to be used at the minister's choice; of which variety and liberty there be instances in the Book of Common Prayer.'

3. Concerning ceremonies, they ask 'that kneeling at the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and such holydays as are but of human institution, may not be imposed

upon such as do conscientiously scruple the observation of them; and that the use of the surplice, and cross in baptism, and bowing at the name of Jesus rather than the name of Christ, or Immanuel, or other names whereby that divine Person, or either of the other divine Persons, is nominated, may be abolished.'

The bishops, in their reply to these proposals of the Presbyterians, pronounce the Offices in the Common Prayer wholly unexceptionable, and conceive the book cannot be too strictly enjoined; especially when ministers are not denied the exercise of their gifts in praying before and after sermon. However they are content that the Book should be reviewed. As for the ceremonies, they are unwilling to part with any of them, being clearly of opinion that the satisfaction of some private persons ought not to overrule the public peace and uniformity of the Church; and that, if any abatements were made, it would only feed a distemper, and encourage unquiet people to further demands.

It was impossible to obtain any immediate and legal settlement of these differences between the Presbyterians and the members of the Church of England, who naturally looked for a restoration of their benefices and form of Service. The Convention Parliament could not be allowed to meddle with this question: if its members could be trusted, its acts would have no value from the illegal origin of the body from which they proceeded. The method adopted to meet the present difficulty was the issue of a 'Royal Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical affairs' (Oct. 25, 1660). This had the sundry advantages of not resting at all for its authority upon the existing Parliament, without seeming to encroach upon its functions; of allowing a greater measure of toleration than probably would be allowed by a final settlement of the matter by just authority, and hence of pacifying some of the nonconformists; while yet nothing

was finally settled, or granted; but the whole question was left open for discussion at a Conference which it promised between the discordant parties, and for the decision of a lawful Parliament and Convocation. Accordingly, this Declaration allowed a great number of the demands of the Presbyterians, touching the observance of the Lord's-day, the Episcopal jurisdiction, the examination of those who should be confirmed, a discretion as to the use of certain ceremonies, such as kneeling at the Communion, signing the cross at Baptism, bowing at the name of Jesus, the surplice, and the oath of Canonical obedience: and, although wishing ministers to read those parts of the Prayer-Book against which there could be no exception, yet promising that none should be punished or troubled for not using it, until it had been reviewed, and effectually reformed by the above-mentioned authority.

The result was a general expression of satisfaction on the part of the Presbyterians; and the attempt was made to gain some of them over to conformity by the offer of Church preferments. But although the Declaration, by a stretch of the prerogative, sheltered the dissenting ministers for the present from legal penalties, it did not satisfy all their scruples; for they did not look for the continuance of that amount of favour, when a royalist Parliament should have determined their position.

On the King's part there was no delay in forwarding the promised Conference. The warrant was issued on the 25th of March, 1661, appointing twelve bishops, and the same number of Presbyterians, with nine other divines on each side as assistants. The place of meeting was the Bishop of London's lodgings in the Savoy Hospital; and the Commission was to continue in force during the ensuing four months. The Commissioners were empowered to advise upon and review the Book of Common Prayer; comparing it with the most ancient