In November 1685, James II dismissed the Parliament of England for refusing to pass measures removing legal restrictions on Catholics and Protestant Nonconformists. In August 1686, the Parliament of Scotland suffered the same fate and neither body met again until 1689. James nevertheless imposed the measures in April 1687 though a royal Declaration of Indulgence which was widely opposed in both countries, including by Nonconformists who feared this would jeopardise their hopes of readmission to the Church of England.
The Declaration was reissued in April 1688, and James ordered the English bishops to have it read in every church. The seven signed a petition to be excused from this duty, arguing it relied on an interpretation of Royal authority declared illegal by Parliament. After the petition was printed and publicly distributed, the bishops were charged with seditious libel and held in the Tower of London. They were tried and found not guilty on 30 June.
Most Protestants had been willing to tolerate James' personal Catholicism, since he seemed unlikely to produce more children and the heir was his Protestant daughter Mary II of England. The unexpected birth of his son James Francis on 10 June meant the prospect of a Catholic dynasty, and the indictment of the bishops seen as part of a wider attack on the Church of England. The trial led to anti-Catholic riots throughout England and Scotland and ultimately the deposition of James in November 1688, although five of the seven bishops were subsequently removed from office for refusing to swear allegiance to his successors.
Despite his Catholicism, James II became king in February 1685 with widespread support in all three kingdoms, resulting in the rapid defeat of the 1685 Monmouth Rebellion in England and Argyll's Rising in Scotland.[1] Less than four years later, he was forced into exile; although religious toleration was the ostensible issue, historians generally view it as the continuation of a century-long struggle for control between Crown and Parliament, which included the 1638–1651 Wars of the Three Kingdoms.[2] His measures for the relief of Catholics were inopportune: after the October 1685 Edict of Fontainebleau revoked tolerance for French Protestant Huguenots, over 200,000–400,000 went into exile, 40,000 settling in London.[3] The killing of 2,000 Vaudois Protestants in 1686 and French territorial expansion under Louis XIV reinforced fears that Protestant Europe was threatened by a Catholic counter-reformation.[4]
There were two elements of the religious penal laws, the first being the right to private worship. In practice, this was already tolerated and indulgences were issued on a regular basis, largely because the numbers were insignificant; in 1680, Catholics comprised less than 1% of the English population, while Protestant Nonconformists formed about 4%.[5] The second was the Test Act which required all public officials to subscribe to the beliefs of the Church of England. Many were willing to allow private worship but viewed the Test Act as essential since the royal prerogative could exempt individuals from certain laws, but also be withdrawn at will, unlike an Act of Parliament.[6]
Sequence of events
Henry Compton, Bishop of London; already suspended by James, he was not one of the Seven but played a significant role in the petition
The Declaration of Indulgence was issued in Scotland on 12 February 1687, then in England on 4 April. Many disliked it but did not actively oppose it, although the political implications caused considerable debate. As king, James himself was not subject to the Test Act and could also 'dispense' or exempt individuals. Although only intended for exceptional cases, it was widely used by James to appoint Catholics to senior positions in the army and government; after dismissing those judges who opposed his interpretation, he obtained a legal ruling in 1686 in his favour. Few challenged a long-standing principle established during the Tudor period, but in a society that feared instability and relied on the law to ensure against it, his approach caused resentment and unease.[7] This was true even for those who benefitted, such as the Nonconformist Sir John Shorter, nominated by James for Lord Mayor of London in 1687. Before taking office, he insisted on complying with the Test Act, reportedly due to a "distrust of the King's favour... thus encouraging that which His Majesties whole Endeavours were intended to disannull".[8]
The Declaration also effectively abolished an Act, a right reserved for Parliament and reconfirmed in 1663 and 1673 by the Cavalier Parliament. In addition, even if James was above the law, his subjects were not; they were being ordered to ignore the law and their oaths of office, making them guilty of perjury, then considered both a crime and a sin.[9] The implications led to intensive debate, one of the most powerful opponents being the London priest William Sherlock.[10] The Declaration was republished in April 1688 and on 4 May James ordered it to be read in every church, starting in London on 20 and 27 May, then 3 and 10 June elsewhere. The objective was to force the Church of England to publicly back the suspension of the Test Act.[11]
James received it on 18 May and reacted with his customary fury to being opposed; calling it "a standard of rebellion", he dismissed them, saying he expected to be obeyed. Within hours, copies of the petition were being sold on the streets of London; Compton was alleged to be the instigator.[16] On 20 May, only seven churches in London read the Declaration, the congregation walking out in at least three of them; none of them read it out on the 27th. In the country as a whole, only 200 out of 9,000 did so; even worse from James' perspective, many Nonconformists supported the decision of their Church of England colleagues not to comply.[17]
Senior government advisors like the Earl of Melfort, a Scottish Catholic convert, argued publication of the bishops' petition constituted seditious libel and urged James to put the bishops on trial. The Ecclesiastical Commission of 1686, set up to enforce discipline on Church of England clergy, refused to take the case, while Lord Jeffreys recommended against prosecution; overruled, he asked if James would listen to his ministers or whether "the Virgin Mary is to do all".[18] James instructed the bishops to appear before him on 8 June to explain their actions; they did so but refused to answer, arguing that "no Subject was bound to accuse himself" and were ordered to appear in court on the 15th. When asked to provide bail, they claimed exemption as peers and offered to give their word instead; James lost his temper and ordered them to be held in the Tower of London.[19]
Although there was little evidence to suggest they intended to provoke this reaction, the result was a public relations disaster for James.[20] When the bishops were escorted to court on 15 June, they were accompanied by huge crowds. Twenty-one noblemen appeared, promising to provide bail if needed, among them Danby and James' brother-in-law Clarendon. Among those pledging bail for Bishop Ken was a Quaker, the Nonconformist sect most sympathetic to James.[21]
The trial took place at the Court of King's Bench in Westminster Hall on 29 June, with James confident of victory. Successive purges of the judiciary over the previous three years meant it was largely staffed by loyalists, while the jury selected by the Sheriffs of the City of London included several former Dissenters and government employees. However, of the four presiding judges, Powell and Holloway clearly favoured the bishops, Lord Chief Justice Wright was 'unusually moderate' and Richard Allibond impartial.[22]
Lawyers for the bishops argued their petition simply confirmed a ruling established by Parliament and thus could not be considered a libel. In their summing up for the jury, three judges refused to comment on whether James was entitled to use his dispensing power and focused on the issue of libel. Wright and Allibond claimed it was, Powell and Holloway that it was not; Holloway went further, inviting the jury to consider whether the bishops were correct in claiming the dispensing power was illegal.[23] The jury were allegedly ready to return a verdict of not guilty immediately after the trial but were delayed until the next morning by two members employed in James' household.[24]
The decision to prosecute in the first place was a political disaster for the Government, regardless of the outcome, made worse by the incompetence of the Crown prosecutors; a modern historian remarked it "had a strong element of the grotesque".[25] Their acquittal resulted in wild celebrations throughout London, including among English Army regiments based in Hounslow, much to James' annoyance and concern.[26]
Aftermath
Acquittal of the Bishops, 30 June 1688, a key factor in the eventual removal of James; five later became Non-Jurors
The birth of James Francis on 10 June raised the prospect of a Catholic dynasty, while the trial resulted in widespread anti-Catholic riots throughout England and Scotland. The combination of these events is often seen as a key turning point.[27] James' chief advisor, the Earl of Sunderland, who had grown alarmed by the regime's unpopularity, was visibly shaken by the hostility with which he was greeted when he attended the trial.[28] The same day, an Invitation was sent to William of Orange, 'inviting' him to take the throne on behalf of his wife Mary, James' Protestant daughter. Drawn up by Henry Sydney, Sunderland's uncle and close friend since childhood, it was signed by the Immortal Seven, representatives from the key political constituencies whose support William needed to commit to an invasion.[29]
Following the November 1688 Glorious Revolution, nine bishops became Non-Jurors, including five of the Seven: Sancroft, Ken, Lake, Turner and Lloyd. William Sherlock was one of 400 members of the clergy who did the same, although, like many others, he was later readmitted to the church.[30] The majority did so out of conscience, rather than opposition to the new regime, and by confirming the supremacy of latitudinarians in the church establishment, their removal arguably made it more tolerant. The Toleration Act 1689 granted freedom of worship to Nonconformist Protestants, while the Occasional Conformity Act 1711 allowed Catholics and others to avoid serious fines.[31]
The Glorious Revolution is the sequence of events that led to the deposition of James II and VII in November 1688. He was replaced by his daughter Mary II and her Dutch husband, William III of Orange, who was also his nephew. The two ruled as joint monarchs of England, Scotland, and Ireland until Mary's death in 1694. The Revolution itself was relatively bloodless, but pro-Stuart revolts between 1689 and 1746 caused significant casualties, while the political movement known as Jacobitism persisted into the late 18th century. William's invasion was the last successful invasion of England.
Jacobitism was a political movement that supported the restoration of the senior line of the House of Stuart to the British throne. The name derives from the first name of James II of England, which is rendered in Latin as Jacobus. When James went into exile after the November 1688 Glorious Revolution, the Parliament of England decided that he had abandoned the English throne, which they offered to his Protestant daughter Mary II of England, and her husband William III. In April, the Scottish Convention held that James "forfeited" the throne of Scotland by his actions, listed in the Articles of Grievances.
Mary II was Queen of England, Scotland, and Ireland, co-reigning with her husband, King William III and II, from 1689 until her death in 1694. She was also Princess of Orange following her marriage on 4 November 1677. Her joint reign with William over Britain is known as that of William and Mary.
William Sancroft was the 79th Archbishop of Canterbury, and was one of the Seven Bishops imprisoned in 1688 for seditious libel against King James II, over his opposition to the king's Declaration of Indulgence. Deprived of his office in 1690 for refusing to swear allegiance to William and Mary, he later enabled and supported the consecration of new nonjuring bishops leading to the nonjuring schism.
The Declaration of Indulgence, also called Declaration for Liberty of Conscience, was a pair of proclamations made by James II of England and Ireland and VII of Scotland in 1687. The Indulgence was first issued for Scotland on 12 February and then for England on 4 April 1687. An early step towards establishing freedom of religion in Great Britain and Ireland, it was cut short by the Glorious Revolution.
The Nonjuring schism refers to a split in the established churches of England, Scotland and Ireland, following the deposition and exile of James II and VII in the 1688 Glorious Revolution. As a condition of office, clergy were required to swear allegiance to the ruling monarch; for various reasons, some refused to take the oath to his successors William III and II and Mary II. These individuals were referred to as Non-juring, from the Latin verb iūrō, or jūrō, meaning "to swear an oath".
The Declaration of Right, or Declaration of Rights, is a document produced by the English Parliament, following the 1688 Glorious Revolution. It sets out the wrongs committed by the exiled James II, the rights of English citizens, and the obligation of their monarch.
John Drummond, 1st Earl of Melfort, styled Duke of Melfort in the Jacobite peerage, was a Scottish politician and close advisor to James VII & II. A Catholic convert, Melfort and his brother the Earl of Perth consistently urged James not to compromise with his opponents, contributing to his increasing isolation and ultimate deposition in the 1688 Glorious Revolution.
Patriot Parliament is the name commonly used for the Irish Parliament session called by King James II during the Williamite War in Ireland which lasted from 1688 to 1691. The first since 1666, it held only one session, which lasted from 7 May 1689 to 20 July 1689. Irish nationalist historian Sir Charles Gavan Duffy first used the term Patriot Parliament in 1893.
James VII and II was King of England and Ireland as James II and King of Scotland as James VII from the death of his elder brother, Charles II, on 6 February 1685. He was deposed in the Glorious Revolution of 1688. He was the last Catholic monarch of England, Scotland, and Ireland. His reign is now remembered primarily for conflicts over religious tolerance, but it also involved struggles over the principles of absolutism and the divine right of kings. His deposition ended a century of political and civil strife in England by confirming the primacy of the English Parliament over the Crown.
Events from the year 1688 in England. This was the year of the Glorious Revolution that overthrew King James II.
Events from the year 1689 in England.
The 1689 Convention of Estates sat between 16 March 1689 and 5 June 1689 to determine the settlement of the Scottish throne, following the deposition of James VII in the 1688 Glorious Revolution. The Convention of the Estates of Scotland was a sister-institution to Parliament, comprising the three estates of bishops, barons and representatives of the Burghs. Historically, it had been summoned by the king of Scots for the limited purpose of raising taxes, and could not pass other legislation. Unlike the English Convention Parliament of 1689, the 1689 Scottish Convention was also a contest for control of the Church of Scotland or Kirk.
Major General Charles Trelawny, also spelt 'Trelawney', was an English soldier from Cornwall who played a prominent part in the 1688 Glorious Revolution, and was a Member of Parliament for various seats between 1685 and 1713.
Theophilus Hastings, 7th Earl of Huntingdon was a 17th-century English politician and Jacobite. One of the few non-Catholics to remain loyal to James II of England after November 1688, on the rare occasions he is mentioned by historians, he is described as a 'facile instrument of the Stuarts,' a 'turncoat' or 'outright renegade.'
The English Convention was an assembly of the Parliament of England which met between 22 January and 12 February 1689 and transferred the crowns of England and Ireland from James II to William III and Mary II.
The Toleration Act 1689, also referred to as the Act of Toleration, was an Act of the Parliament of England. Passed in the aftermath of the Glorious Revolution, it received royal assent on 24 May 1689.
The Glorious Revolution in Scotland refers to the Scottish element of the 1688 Glorious Revolution, in which James VII was replaced by his daughter Mary II and her husband William III as joint monarchs of Scotland and England. Prior to 1707, the two kingdoms shared a common monarch but were separate legal entities, so decisions in one did not bind the other. In both countries, the Revolution confirmed the primacy of Parliament over the Crown, while the Church of Scotland was re-established as a Presbyterian rather than Episcopalian polity.
The Jacobite rising of 1689 was a conflict fought primarily in the Scottish Highlands, whose objective was to put James VII back on the throne, following his deposition by the November 1688 Glorious Revolution. Named after "Jacobus", the Latin for James, his supporters were known as 'Jacobites' and the associated political movement as Jacobitism. The 1689 rising was the first of a series of rebellions and plots seeking to restore the House of Stuart that continued into the late 18th century.
The Patriot Parliament is the name given to the Irish Parliament called by James II during the 1689 to 1691 war in Ireland. The first since 1666, it held only one session, from 7 May 1689 to 20 July 1689.
Flaningam, John (1977). "The Occasional Conformity Controversy: Ideology and Party Politics, 1697-1711". Journal of British Studies. 17 (1): 38–62. doi:10.1086/385711.
Harris, Tim (2006). Revolution; the Great Crisis of the British Monarchy 1685-1720. Penguin. ISBN0141016523.
Harris, Tim; Taylor, Stephen, eds. (2015). The Final Crisis of the Stuart Monarchy. Boydell & Brewer. ISBN978-1783270446.
Henning, Basil D (1983). The House of Commons; 1660 to 1690 Volume I. Secker & Warburg.
Miller, John (1978). James II; A study in kingship. Menthuen. ISBN978-0413652904.
Milne-Tyte, Robert (1989). Bloody Jeffreys: the hanging judge. André Deutsch.
Mullett, Charles (1946). "A Case of Allegiance: William Sherlock and the Revolution of 1688". Huntington Library Quarterly. 10 (1): 86–88. doi:10.2307/3815830. JSTOR3815830.
Sowerby, Scott (2013). Making Toleration: The Repealers and the Glorious Revolution. Harvard University Press. ISBN978-0674073098.
Spielvogel, Jackson J (1980). Western Civilization. Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN1285436407.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
