SB AHHH Flashcards
(36 cards)
Who was Bancroft / what was his thing?
Bancroft: Made Archbishop of Canterbury in 1604.
Bancroft’s Cannons: Released in 1604; a response to Puritans, promoting anti-Puritan policies despite the Hampton Court Conference. A set of church laws that enforced strict conformity to Anglican practices like use of cross or traditional ceremonies.
Explain :
The General Assembly of the Scottish Kirk reluctantly accepts the Five Articles of Perth
The General Assembly of the Scottish Kirk reluctantly accepted the Five Articles of Perth in 1618 imposed by James to bring Presbytarians closer to Anglicanism.
The Articles introduced practices such as the use of the cross in baptism which were seen as unscriptural by Presbyterians.
Despite resistance, the Assembly formally accepted these practices to avoid conflict with the monarchy, though many Scots remained opposed. James did not enforce strictly.
Explain a new gagg for an old goose?
In 1624, Montagu’s “A New Gag for an Old Goose” (a pamphlet) was published, defending the use of ritual and episcopacy, directly challenging Puritan theology.
James blocked any opposition or punishment to Montagu.
What was the Act Of Revocation?
The Act of Revocation (1625) was an attempt by King Charles I to assert royal control over church lands and property in Scotland. It aimed to revoke grants given by previous monarchs, but it was unpopular and sparked resistance, especially in the Scottish nobility, leading to tensions.
This gave landowners a common enemy against Charles as he threatened their power. - roots of bishops war.
What was the 5 knights case?
The Five Knights’ Case (1627) was a significant legal case during the reign of Charles I.
It involved five men who had been imprisoned for refusing to pay the forced loan that Charles I had imposed without Parliament’s consent.
The five knights challenged their imprisonment in court, arguing that the king had no legal right to imprison them without cause or due process, thus violating their rights under English common law.
However, the court, influenced by the king’s authority, ruled in favor of the crown, affirming that the king’s prerogative powers allowed him to imprison individuals without specific charges if deemed necessary.
It was very controversial and meant when Charles recalled Parliament in 1628 they were bitterly opposed to him and quickly passed the petition of right.
What was the Petition of Right?
Petition of Right, 1628
This was a significant constitutional document presented to King Charles I by Parliament, seeking to limit the king’s powers and protect individual liberties.
The Petition demanded that the king could not imprison subjects without just cause, levy taxes without Parliament’s consent, or enforce martial law during peacetime.
Although Charles I reluctantly agreed to the Petition, he did not fully comply with its terms - he agreed because he was desperate for finance after Cadiz / La Rochelle.
Why did the Petition Of Right Fail?
He initally agreed because 1) he needed money and 2) he feared parliamentary proceedings against Buckingham.
However Buckingam was killed soon after the Petition and Charles continued to collect Tonnage And Poundage.
Charles also told the royal printer to deface the statue number making it not legally binding. When this all came out in parliament in 1629, MPs’ trust completely broke down.
What were the 3 resolutions?
The three resolutions, 1629
Just as the speaker was about to dissolve parliament by royal order, two radical MPs held him down until the three resolutions were passed.
The resolutions condemned Arminianism, seen as a Catholic influence in the Church of England, and rejected the king’s right to collect tonnage and poundage (customs duties) without Parliament’s consent. They also asserted that Parliament could not be dissolved by the king without its own approval.
Charles reaction to the 3 resolutions?
These resolutions were a direct challenge to Charles’s authority - he saw them as acts of revolution, which led to the king dissolving Parliament and beginning his personal rule only 3 days later. He immediately arrested his top critics and charged them all with treason.
What showed Parliament Charles was commited to Arminiansim in the years 1625 - 1629?
Laud and Montagu became bishops in 1628
Charles also defended Montagu when Parliament attacked him in 1625 and his book.
York House Conference (1626): Charles allowed a debate heavily biased toward Arminian views; refused to condemn Arminianism.
What was the Feoffees of Impropriations - and when did they end?
The Feoffees for Impropriations (founded in 1626) were Puritan clergy who pooled their money to buy up church livings, so they could install Puritan-friendly ministers across England.
They wanted to push the Church of England in a more Calvinist/Puritan direction, against the growing influence of Arminianism and high church practices that King Charles I and Archbishop Laud favored.
In 1632, Laud brought a lawsuit against them in the Court of Exchequer, arguing they undermined the authority of the established Church. The court ruled against the Feoffees and confiscated their properties.
William Laud’s campaign against unlicensed preaching and the Feoffees for Impropriations (1632) was part of his effort to enforce religious conformity and suppress Puritan influence
What was the Book Of Orders?
The Book of Orders (1631) was issued by Charles I’s government to improve the administration of justice and poor relief in the localities.
It instructed Justices of the Peace (JPs) on how to enforce laws more actively — especially regarding social discipline (vagrancy, poor relief, road maintenance).
It was part of Charles’ “Thorough” policy with Laud and Wentworth, aiming to make royal government more efficient without Parliament.
It increased central control and was seen as royal interference in local government, causing resentment among the gentry.
Book of Sports - both James and Charles?
1618 - undermined Puritan power
1633 - More enforced - had to be read out in church - wanted to enforce religious conformity and royal authority. They disliked Puritan attempts to control church practices and restrict people’s behavior.
Charles’ planned war expenditure, amount given by parliament and reason?
1625
Charles planned a war expenditure of £1million, for this he needed cooperation of his first parliament of 1625. He refused to explain his position, goals or ask for a specific subsidy. The commons exhibited their distrust by granting only two subsidies totalling about £140,000.
Charles’ response to Parliament critising Montagu?
Made him his royal chaplain (personal spritual guider) in 1625
Made Bishop of Chichester in 1628
What are the things to use in why Charles PR alienated Puritans?
- St Gregorys Case - 1633
- Book of Sports - 1633
- Prynne Burton and Bastwick - 1637
- John Lilburn - found guilty in 1637
- Bishop John Williams imprisonment - 1637
Prynne, Burton and Bastwick
Prynne, Burton and Bastwick - 1637
In 1637, 3 well respected Puritans were brought before the court of the Star Chamber for their criticisms of Church Policy.
The three men were found guilty of criticising Laud’s measures.
They were each fined £5000 and imprisoned for life, but it was the public cropping of their ears that earned the three men sympathy and made their names more household - growing opposition towards Laudism.
John Lilburne?
John Lilburne - 1637
Lilburne helped spread anti - laudism literature like John Bastwicks work. He was found guilty by the Star Court Chamber of printing unlicensed literature. He was whipped and pilloried in public. The brutality of the punishment also built opposition towards Laudism and Charles and shifted more Protestants towards Puritanism.
Emigration from England from Laudinism?
Another sign of discontent with the Lauding Church of England and the Personal Rule in general was the high level of emigration to NA from 1629 to 1640. – about 20,000 people / just under 1% of the population
Summarise pre - laudian prayer book events in Scotland regarding Charles.
Through the Act of Revocation, Charles exploited a feudal right to take land from the Scottish elite to support the Church in Scotland.
This gave landowners a common enemy against Charles as he threatened their power.
The king also issued a proclamation in 1625 commanding observation of the Five Articles of Perth - while they were created by his father, James did not enforce them strictly unlike Charles.
It took Charles eight years to visit Scotland for the first time to be crowned, showing his care for the country was little. Indeed, this very fact that it took him so long sent a very clear sign to Scots of his priorities. His crowning in Scotland went against tradition and looked more Catholic than even Anglican let alone Presbyterian!
What were the laws Charles imposed on Scotland?
In 1636, Charles imposed new church laws on Scotland. It demanded more focus on ceremony and improvised prayer was banned.
All of these canons were interpreted as an attempt to return to Catholicism.
What made these reforms worse for the Scots was the fact they were imposed by the royal prerogative. The Scottish Parliament or the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland (Scottish high court for the Church) had 0 say in any of the new laws.
End of First bishops war?
Not wanting to recall parliament to resolve his financial issues, Charles negotiated the Truce of Berwick in June 1639, agreeing to a meeting of the general assembly of the Church of Scotland as well as the disbandment of both parties.
However, the Scots didn’t disband their army and so he had to recall parliament for finance in 1639 - the short parliament.
Why did Parliament see Wentworth as a threat?
Regarded by many as the man with the potential to make Charles absolutist.
Wentworth was loyal to Charles and had shown he was capable of dealing with conflict in Ireland. He was becoming Charles’ main adviser to sort out bankruptcy and the Scots Covenanters. He wanted to renew the war against the Scots, whereas parliament wanted to make peace.
He also controlled the 9000 strong partly catholic army in Ireland.
What was the Bill of Attainder?
Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford, was condemned to death by a Bill of Attainder in 1641.
Charles initially helped him as WW skillfully defended himself. But once Pym used the Bill Of Attainder he abandoned help and signed off!
Charles did this because he feared for his saftey - london crowd and MPs were getting restless.
It meant blood had been split.
