“Cromwell and the Commonwealth”
A Lecture delivered at the
Huddersfield Branch of The English Church Union
On
the evening of the 21st November 1882 a lecture was
delivered by the Revd R. W. Enraght, of Holy Trinity, Bordesley, Birmingham, in the large
room, of the Byram Building, under the auspices of the Huddersfield
Branch of the English Church Union. The subject was “Cromwell and
the Commonwealth; a warning to the English Church.”
There was a
very small audience, over which Mr. J. R. Dore presided.
The
opening offices were said by the Revd Charles L. Hinde, Vicar of
Flockton; after which Mr. Micklethwaite, the secretary, read the
minutes of the last meeting. The Chairman read letters of apology
from Sir W. C. Worsley, Bart of Hovingham, and the Revd S. F. Green,
late of Miles Platting. Officers for the ensuing year were then
elected.
The Revd C.
Hinde proposed a resolution expressive of deep sorrow at the death of
the late Dr. Pusey, one of the clerical presidents of the English
Church Union. Dr. Boyd Joll seconded the resolution, and it was
unanimously carried.
The Chairman in introducing the Revd
R. W. Enraght, said he was one of that noble band of men who had
endured imprisonment rather than be disloyal to the Church of
England, and was therefore entitled to their greatest respect.
(Applause.)
When
Constantine was converted, it was thought that persecution for faith
of Jesus Christ had come to an end, but it was not so. The
inquisition succeeded to Constantine, and the Church Association
succeeded to the inquisition. (Hear, hear.)
The Revd R.
W. Enraght, at the outset of his lecture, asked what were the causes
which brought about the revolution in the time of Cromwell ?
He said it came about not suddenly, but gradually through the mistakes of the civil and eccesiastical authorities, so that watching the causes might be useful in enabling them to avoid the mistakes into which the authorities then fell. The Crown in the reigns of Elizabeth, James I., and Charles I. Meant very well to this Church, and so did the Archbishop of Canterbury; and they were earnest men and very powerful; and even down to the last, right up to the putting to death of Archbishop Laud and Charles I., and turning of bishops, and clergy, and faithful laity of the Church adrift, the people generally were friendly to the Church. How then, were they to account for such a revolution against the Crown and the Church as that which occurred?
The first cause of it was that Queen Elizabeth, James I., and Charles I., held the doctrine of the divine right of the Crown over the Church, and in that the archbishops and bishops, and too many of the clergy, upheld the Royal opinion. This was quoted now as a precedent they ought to follow, but he said it was a rock they ought to avoid.
Another
cause of the revolution was that the bishops and clergy allowed
themselves to be dragged into political support of wrongful measures.
The Crown influenced the bishops, who were appointed by the Crown,
as, alas ! They were upheld, and unjust exactions were made, and the
bishops and clergy became enemies of civil and religions liberty.
Charles I., with all his High Churchmanship, as it was called,
allowed the Scotch to put down Episcopacy, and that giving way in
principle, and he suffered for it. The remissness of many bishops and
clergy, and their subservience to the misdeeds of others, were
marked.
The Puritans of that day were very religious, they
were giants compared with the Puritans of the present day, and did a
great deal of good in redressing evils and grievances. So they did
now, and would do more if they would give up their fanaticism and
spirit of persecution.
He then
spoke of the persecutions of the orthodox Churchmen under the
Commonwealth, all of which were done in the name of liberty of
opinion and the rights of conscience. Then, as now, the Puritans
considered they had a right to liberty of opinion and the rights of
conscience, but denied them to others (Applause.)
What was
the warning from the foregoing ? Considering that King Charles I.
Died for his Churchmanship, not for his political mistakes and
errors, it was their business and his to keep down the influence of
the Puritan party, not by persecution, but preaching and by living to
set forth the orthodox faith and practice, and by willing to suffer
anything that was necessary for God’s sake.
That was the
principal lesson to be learnt, and in order to do that they must
learn not to put their trust in princes or any child of man, but only
in God and the principles which He had given them to hold fast.
Let them have no Erastianism – that is, no trusting in State power and State help for spiritual help, for if they did State was a read that would turn and pierce them. They must strive to reform abuses in the Church ; they must strive to give no offence to any one, and be careful of their of individual and spiritual life, and not persecute opponents by word or deed. All parties persecuted in the days to which he had referred. They knew no better, especially the Pilgrim Fathers and the followers of Cromwell. They persecuted as the Church Association persecuted now ; but the Church must not persecute them now.
The Church must not take up any political party, either Conservative or Liberal. English Churchpeople had been pulled and knocked about, not because they were a weak party in the State, but because they were politicians first and Churchpeople afterwards. Again let them give no valid cause for ignorant cry of Popery. There had been too much reason given for that, and he believed he had been suffering for the Romanising, but keep to the doctrine of the Church of England pure and simple as reformed, neither adding to nor taking from it, if he wished to escape the dangers of the past.
He said that the orthodox Churchmen were the true, original indigenous descendants of sound Churchmen of the last 300 years, and especially of 1662, and pointed out that the revisers of the Prayer Book placed the Ornaments Rubric in it, and never told them they were to add to or take the meaning out of it.
He pointed out amongst the causes which led to the present state of things, in spite of the House of Commons being friendly to the Church, the support given to Roman Catholicism by James II., and the suppression of the legislative and judicial voice of the Church in Convocation assembled.
They were suffering from the mistakes of their forefathers in one way or another; but thank God the ecclesiastical sky was clearing. He could point out many encouraging sign, and was not going to be the last to mention them, although he was on the eve of being turned out of his church and work, and his people scattered. No, notwithstanding that, they were surrounded by encouraging signs and he thanked God for them; and he had no doubt the Church of holy Trinity, Birmingham, would do a great deal more good for the truth and for the Church in its dying, and more harm to Atheism than it did in its living.
(Applause)
Let them
suffer what they might, and God defend the right
(Applause)
In
conclusion he spoke in praise of the firm adherence to principle on
the part of Archdeacon Denison, and commended his example to
Churchmen, saying that then they would prosper, and that they were
prospering he believed to be undoubted fact. A vote of thanks was
accorded to the chairman, after the Revd C. Hinde offered prayer, and
the meeting closed.
*******
SEE:- Revd Richard Enraght 'Prisoner of Conscience'
*******
Newspaper transcription by D. Sharp (2025)