Chap. XII. 77e HISTORY of the PURITANS. 8or s' few, had been conformifs, and kept up an honourableefeem for thofe K. Charles L "- bithops that they thought religious; as archbishop Ufher, bishop Da- ' " venant, HallMoreton, &c. Thefe would have been content with an " amendment of the hierarchy, and went into the parliament, becaufe " they apprehended the interefts of religion and civil liberty, were on " that fide." But the politicalprinciples of thefe divines gave the greateft difguft to Their petái the royalifts; they encouraged the people to Rand by the parliament, and Cal behave- preached up the lawfulnefs of defending their religion and liberties againft Huib. the king'sevil counfellors. They were for a limited monarchy, agreeable lea. to our prefent happy conflitution, for which, and for what they appre- P. 514 hended the purity of the proteflant religion they contended, and for no- thingmore ; but for this they have fuffered in their moral character, and have been left upon record, as rebels traitors enemies to God and the king, &c. His majefty in one of his declarations calls them ignorant in learn- ing, turbulent and feditious in difpofition, fcaúdalous in life, unconformable to the laws of the land, libellers, revilers both of church and fiate, and preachers of[edition and treafon itfelf. Lord Clarendon Pays, " that un- " der the notionof reformation, and extirpating popery, they infufed fe- " ditious inclinations into the hearts of men againft the prefent govern- " ment of the church and Rate ; that when the army was railed they con- " tained themfelves within no bounds, and inveighed as freely againft the " perfon of the king, as they had before againft the worft malignant; " profanely and blafphemoufly applying what had been fpoken by the " prophets againft the moil wicked and impious kings, to ftir up the peo- " ple againft their mot gracious fovereign. His lordship adds, " that Vol. I. " the puritan clergy were the chief incendiaries, and had the chief influ- P. 3O2. " ence in promoting the civil war. The kirk reformation in Scotland and " in this kingdom (lays his lordfhip) was driven on by no men fo much " as thofe of their clergy; and without doubt the archbifhop of Canter- " bury never had fuch an influence over the councils at court, as Dr. Bur- "ges and Mr. Marfhal hadthen on the houles; nor did all the bill-lops of " Scotland together fo much meddle in temporal affairs as Mr. Henderfn " had done." Strange ! when the [cots bishops were advanced to the higheft polls of `!'heir vindi- honour and civil truft in that kingdom ; and when archbifhop Land had cation the direction of all public affairs in England, for twelve years together. Was not the archbifhop at the head of the council-table the ftar-cham- ber and the court of high-commit-lion ? Was not his grace the contriver or promoter of all the monopoliesand oppreffionsthat brought on the ci- vil war ? What could the puritan clergy do like this ? Had they any pla- ces of profit or truft under the government, or any commif ions in the VoL. I. 5 K eccle-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=