1. Among the more important studies are Bosher, Robert, The Making of the Restoration Settlement: The Influence of the Laudians 1649–1662 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 1951;Google ScholarGreen, I. M., The Re-establishment of the Church of England, 1660–1662 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978);Google ScholarSpurr, John, The Restoration Church of England, 1646–1689 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991);CrossRefGoogle ScholarSeaward, Paul, The Cavalier Parliament and the Reconstruction of the Old Regime (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988);Google ScholarSykes, Norman, From Sheldon to Seeker: Aspects of English Church History, 1660–1768 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959);Google ScholarBeddard, R. A., “The Restoration Church,” in The Restored Monarchy, 1660–1688, ed. Jones, James Rees (Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1979);Google ScholarMiller, John, Popery and Politics in England, 1660–1688 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Elton, G. R., The Tudor Constitution: Documents and Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), 365.Google Scholar

3. Cross, Clare, The Royal Supremacy in the Elizabethan Church (London: Allen and Unwin, 1969), 177.Google Scholar

4. On Hooker and the civil sovereign, see Booty, John E., “Richard Hooker,” in The Spirit of Anglicanism, ed. Wolf, William John (Wilton, Conn.: Morehouse-Barlow, 1979), 12–13.Google Scholar

5. Cross, Royal Supremacy, 64–65.Google Scholar

6. Bancroft caused a stir in 1589 by preaching on the divine right of episcopacy. See Babbage, Stuart Barton, Puritanism and Richard Bancroft (London: SPCK, 1962), 27–29.Google Scholar

7. Cross, Royal Supremacy, 66.Google Scholar

8. Under James I and Charles I, jure divino episcopacy did gain many adherents. It was once felt by historians that this vogue for jure divino undermined the royal supremacy early in the seventeenth century, but Sommerville, J. P., “The Royal Supremacy and Episcopacy jure divino 1603–1640,” journal of Ecclesiastical History 34 (1983), has demolished this view, and demonstrated that by a careful division of spiritual and ecclesiological matters, some bishops managed to combine a belief in jure divino episcopacy with a full acceptance of the royal supremacy. As we shall see below in considering Archbishop Laud, this intellectual device sharply limited the potential for jure divino to justify augmented or independent episcopal power. But it was an intellectual device that did not fully survive the English Revolution.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. Laud, William, “A Sermon Preached before His Majesty, on Tuesday the 19th of June at Wansted,” in The Works of Archbishop Laud, ed. Scott, William (Oxford: Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology, 1847–1860), 1: 3–6. Similar sentiments can be found in nearly all of Laud's published sermons.Google ScholarSee, for instance, “A Sermon Preached on Monday, the Sixth of February at Westminster: At the Opening of Parliament”;Google Scholar“A Sermon Preached before His Majesty on Sunday the Ninth of June at Whitehall”;Google Scholar“A Sermon Preached on Monday the 17th of March at Westminster: At the opening of Parliament,” all printed in Laud's Works, vol. 1.Google Scholar

10. Tawney, R. H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (London: J. Murray, 1926), 170.Google Scholar

11. Laud, , “Sermon Preached before His Majesty,” in Works, 1: 36.Google Scholar

12. Laud, , “Sermon Preached at Westminster at the Opening of Parliament,” in Works, 1: 79.Google Scholar

13. Laud, , “Sermon Preached at Whitehall on 24 of March 1621,” in Works, 1: 49–51.Google Scholar

14. Laud, , “Sermon Preached at Westminster,” in Works, 1: 84, 94.Google Scholar

15. Laud, , “Sermon Preached at Westminster,” in Works, 1: 80.Google Scholar

16. Laud, William, “An Answer to the Speech of the Right Honorable William Lord Viscount Saye and Sele Spoken in Parliament upon the Bill about Bishops Power in Civil Affairs, and Courts of Judicature,” in Works, 4: 151, 156.Google Scholar

17. Laud, , “Answer … about Bishop's Power,” in Works, 4: 183.Google Scholar

18. Laud, William, “A Relation of the Conference between William Laud and Mr. Fisher the Jesuit, by the Command of King James of Ever Blessed Memory,” in Works, 2: 223, 228.Google Scholar

19. Laud in fact encouraged the controversial publication of Bishop Hall's Episcopacy by Divine Right Asserted.Google Scholar

20. Laud, William, “The Answer of the Most Reverend Father in God, William, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, to the Speech of the Lord Saye and Sele Touching the Liturgy,” in Works, 4: 142.Google Scholar

21. Laud, , “Answer … Touching the Liturgy,” 4: 43.Google Scholar

22. Trevor-Roper, Hugh, “Laudianism and Political Power” in his Catholics, Anglicans, and Puritans: Seventeenth-Century Essays (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 69.Google Scholar

23. Juxon, , an old ally of Laud's, was an aged figurehead by 1660. He had been far more circumspect than his patron on the issue of divine right episcopacy.Google ScholarMason, Thomas, Serving God and Mammon, William Juxon, 1582–1663 (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1985), 12.Google Scholar

24. Spurr, John, Restoration Church, 30–37;Google ScholarSeaward, Paul, Cavalier Parliament, chap. 7;Google ScholarGreen, I. M., Re-establishment of the Church.Google Scholar

25. Spurr, , Restoration Church, 3.Google Scholar

26. Hutton, Ronald, Charles the Second: King of England, Scotland, and Ireland (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 180, 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, rev. ed., s.v. “Erastianism.”Google Scholar

28. Figgis, J. N., “Erastus and Erastianism,” Journal of Theological Studies 2 (1990): 66–97;Google ScholarOxford English Dictionary, s. v. “Erastianism.”Google Scholar

29. See relevant entries in the Dictionary of National Biography (hereafter DNB).Google Scholar

30. Bosher, , Restoration Settlement, 80.Google Scholar

31. Spurr, , Restoration Church, 299, 309.Google Scholar

32. The reaction against Calvinist theology is treated throughout Henry McAdoo, The Spirit of Anglicanism: A Survey of Anglican Theological Method in the Seventeenth Century (New York: Scribner, 1965).Google Scholar

33. Sanderson, Robert, Episcopacy (as established by law in England) Not Prejudicial to Regal Power (London: 1661), 19 and postscript.Google Scholar

34. Laney, Benjamin, “The Shepherd or the Pastoral Charge and Obedience Due It; Instituted to Preserve the Sheep from Straying,” sermon delivered 9 March 1661, before the king at Whitehall, and printed in Five Sermons before His Majesty at Whitehall Published Severally by Command and Now Printed Together (London: 1669), 3.Google Scholar

35. Laney, , “Shepherd,” 10–12.Google Scholar

36. Thorndike, Herbert, Just Weights and Measures: That is, the Present State of Religion Weighed in the Balance and Measured by the Standard of the Sanctuary (London: 1662), 41;Google Scholaridem, A Letter Concerning the Present State of Religion amongst Us (London: 1656), 19.Google ScholarOn Thorndike, see Lacey, J. A., Herbert Thorndike, 1598–1672 (London: SPCK, 1929).Google Scholar

37. Wren, Matthew, Bishop Wren's Petition to Parliament, in Defense of Episcopacie. In Behalf of Himself and the Rest of the Bishops, (London: 1642), 3.Google Scholar

38. Trevor-Roper, Hugh, “‘Little-Pope Regulus’: Matthew Wren, Bishop of Norwich and Ely,” in From Counter Reformation to Glorious Revolution (London: Seeker and Warburg, 1992), 151–72.Google Scholar

39. “Relation by John Cosin, Prebendary of Durham, of the Particulars of a Conversation as to the Royal Supremacy,” in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I (hereafter CSPD: Charles I, 121: 33).Google Scholar

40. Hackett, John, A Sermon Preached Before the King's Majesty at Whitehall on Friday the 22 March 1660 (London: 1660), 16.Google Scholar

41. Gauden, John, The Loosing of St. Peters Bands; Setting Forth the True Sense and Solution of the Covenant in Point of Conscience so far as it Relates to the Government of the Church by Episcopacy (London: 1660), 11.Google Scholar

42. Lucy, William, A Treatise of the Nature of a Minister in all its Offices, to which is annexed an Answer to Dr. Forbes Concerning the Necessity of Bishops (London: 1670), 231.Google Scholar

43. This argument finds itself slightly at odds with some recent scholarship. It presupposes, for example, that the jure divino status of episcopacy, while certainly increasingly evident under James I, had not “hardened into a Jacobean orthodoxy,” as Fincham, Kenneth has asserted in Prelate as Pastor: The Episcopate of James I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), 10.Google ScholarBut elsewhere, Fincham himself concedes that the Whitgif temporiztian vision of “several permissible models” of church government survived through James' reign (300). Further, the contention that surrounded the jure divino views of clerics like Cosin indicates that it was not a “Jacobean orthodoxy'” or even a Caroline one, so much as an “orthodoxy” for a certain set on the theological right. Finally, this paper finds itself somewhat at odds with the recent work of Jonathan Spurr on the Restoration church. Spurr, Restoration Church, 145, 163, asserts that there was “reticence” about the nature of episcopal authority and that “the Restoration church had precious little interest in exploring the episcopal office.”Google Scholar

44. On Hammond's views of episcopacy and their influence on the Restoration settlement, see Packer, John W., The Transformation of Anglicanism, with Special Reference to Henry Hammond, 1643–1660 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1969), chap. 5.Google Scholar

45. Hammond, Henry, A Vindication of the Dissertations Concerning Episcopacy, from the Answers or Exceptions Offered against them by the London Ministers in Jus Divinium Ministerii Evangelicii (1654), in Works of the Reverend Learned Henry Hammond (London: 1684), 2: 11.Google Scholar

46. Hammond, , Vindication, 23–25.Google Scholar

47. Spurr, , Restoration Church, 138.Google Scholar

48. Laney, Benjamin, A Sermon Preached before his Majesty at Whitehall, March 18, 1665 (London: 1665), 126, 137–38.Google Scholar

49. Laney, , Sermon … March 18, 1665, 138.Google Scholar

50. Laney, , Sermon … March 18, 1665, 139–41.Google Scholar

51. Sanderson, , Episcopacy not Prejudicial, 27.Google Scholar

52. Ward, Seth, Against Resistance to Lawful Powers: A Sermon Preached at Whitehall November 5 1661 (London: 1661).Google Scholar

53. The charge was laid against Cosin in 1628 by Thomas King. King alleged that Cosin had said that “King Charles is not supreme head of the Church of England next under Christ, nor hath he any more power of excommunication than my man that rubs my horses heels.”Google Scholar“Affidavit of Thomas King Respecting the Alleged Denial of the Royal Supremacy by John Cosin,” in CSPD: Charles I, 119: 42.Google Scholar

54. “Relation by John Cosin, Prebendary of Durham, of the Particulars of a Conversation as to the Royal Supremacy,” Correspondence of John Cosin together with other Papers Illustrative of His Life and Times, ed. Ornsby, George (Durham: Sutrees Society, 1869), 1: 148–49.Google Scholar

55. Sanderson, , Episcopacy not Prejudicial, 22.Google Scholar

56. Laney, , Sermon … March 18, 1665, 123.Google Scholar

57. Heylyn, Peter, Aerius Redivivus: Or the History of the Presbyterians Containing the Beginnings, Progress, and Successes of that Active Sect … from the year 1536 to the year 1647 (Oxford: 1670), preface. DNB.Google Scholar

58. Champion, J. A. I., The Pillars of Priestcraft Shaken: The Church of England and Its Enemies, 1660–1730 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 21, 63, 69, 77.Google Scholar

59. Tawney, , Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, 279.Google Scholar

60. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 24.Google Scholar

61. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 27.Google Scholar

62. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 40.Google Scholar

63. Thorndike, Herbert, A Letter Concerning the Present State of Religion, 4; DNB.Google Scholar

64. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 131.Google Scholar

65. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 134.Google Scholar

66. Thorndike, Herbert, A Discourse of the Forbearance or the Penalties which a Due Reformation Requires (London: 1670), 42–44.Google Scholar

67. Lucy, William, Observations, Censures, and Confutations of Notorious Errours in Mr. Hobbes, His Leviathan, and Other Books (London: 1663), 117.Google ScholarOn the church's reaction to Hobbes's Erastianism, see Collins, Jeffrey R., Thomas Hobbes and the English Revolution (Ph.D. diss., Harvard, 1999), chap. 8.Google Scholar

68. Lucy, , Observations, 180.Google Scholar

69. Lucy, , Observations, 285.Google Scholar

70. Laney, , Sermon … March 18, 1665, 142.Google Scholar

71. Thorndike, , Just Weights and Measures, 132.Google Scholar

72. Heylyn, Peter, Cyprianus Anglicus, or the History of the Life and Death of the Most Revered and Renowned Prelate William, by divine Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury (London: 1661), 1–2.Google Scholar

73. Heylyn, , Cyprianus, 36–37.Google ScholarSee also Heylyn, , Ecclesia Restaurata; or the History of the Reformation of the Church of England (London, 1660).Google Scholar

74. In so arguing this paper disagrees with some earlier historical scholarship. Lamont, William, Godly Rule: Politics and Religion, 1603–1660 (New York: Macmillan, 1969), 157–58, has argued that Archbishop Laud used the logic of jure divino to undermine the Royal Supremacy.CrossRefGoogle ScholarLamont argues that both the early Stuarts and Laud sought to institute “Godly Rule,” but that they had differing views as to whether the godly monarch or the godly bishop should be preeminent. He argues that at the Restoration, the millenarianism that had fueled this quest for “Godly rule“ had burned itself out, and the jure divino claims of the Restoration bishops became merely a tool for survival, no longer constituting a “philosophical challenge” to the spiritual power of the civil magistrate. This paper has reached different conclusions, exactly inverting Lamont's argument. Sommerville has demonstrated that Lamont failed to understand just how circumscribed the extent of early Stuart claims for divine right episcopacy were. This paper has sought to demonstrate the fallacy of Lamont's argument that Laud meant divine right episcopacy to challenge the King's spiritual authority (though Laud's critics often understood him in this way). It was not before, but after the Revolution, that the divine right of bishops was used to challenge the royal supremacy.Google Scholar

75. On which, see Simon, Irene, Three Restoration Divines: Barrow, South, Tillotson (Paris: 1967), chap. 3;Google ScholarCarpenter, Edward, Thomas Tenison: Archbishop of Canterbury, His Life and Times (London: SPCK, 1948).Google Scholar

76. Spellman, W. M., The Latitudinarians and the Church of England, 1660–1700 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1993), chap. 2;Google ScholarChampion, , Pillars of Priestcraft Shaken, 63, 92.Google Scholar

77. Head, R. E., Royal Supremacy and the Trials of Bishops, 1558–1725 (London: SPCK, 1962), 72.Google Scholar

78. Goldie, Mark, “The Theory of Religious Intolerance in Restoration England,” in From Persecution to Toleration: The Glorious Revolution and Religion in England, ed. Grell, Ole Peter, Israel, Jonathan, Tyacke, Nicholas (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 334.Google Scholar

79. Brabourne, Theophilius, Humble Petition of Theophilius Brabourne unto the Honorable Parliament that, as All Magistrates in the Kingdom doe in their Office, so Bishops may be Required in their Office to Own the Kings Supremacy (London: 1661), 11, 2. DNB.Google Scholar

80. Hammond, Henry, An Answer to the Animadversions on the Dissertations touching Ignatius's Epistle and the Episcopacy in them Asserted, in Works, 2: 22.Google Scholar

81. Bosher, , Restoration Settlement, 87, 157, 217.Google Scholar

82. Hutton, Ronald, The Restoration: A Political and Religious History of England and Wales, 1658–1667 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 166.Google ScholarThe most convincing statement of this view of Clarendon is found in George Abernathy, “The English Presbyterians and the Stuart Restoration, 1648–1663,” American Philosophical Society Transactions 55 (1965): 91.Google Scholar

83. Hyde, Edward, Religion and Policy and the Countenance and Assistance Each Should Give to the Other (London: 1811), 2.Google ScholarThis manuscript was not published until the nineteenth century, but was dated 1673 by Clarendon, and was apparently written during his second exile. The subject of the work is papal usurpation, but the first chapter contains general principles of church and state that are revealing within the context of this article.Google Scholar

84. Hyde, , Religion and Policy, 3–4.Google Scholar

85. Hyde, , Religion and Policy, 4.Google Scholar

86. Hyde, Edward, Second Thoughts or, the Case of a Limited Toleration, Stated According to the Present Exigence of Affairs in Church and State (London: 1660), 5–6.Google Scholar

87. Harris, R. W., Clarendon and the English Revolution (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1983), 170–71.Google Scholar

88. State Papers Collected by Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon (Oxford, 1773), 2: 308, 359.Google ScholarQuoted in Wormald, B. H. G., Clarendon: Politics, Historiography, and Religion, 1640–1660 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951), 310.Google ScholarWormald's book was the first to explicate fully the differences between the High Church Laudians and Hyde, the latter of whom was most influenced by the latitudinarian, anticlerical Tew Circle around Lord Falkland. See 2–3, 134, 297–310.Google Scholar

89. Clarendon MS 60, fol. 481, Bodleian Library, Oxford.Google Scholar

90. Harris, , Clarendon, 319.Google Scholar

91. Harris, , Clarendon, 402.Google Scholar

92. Prynne, William, The First Tome of an Exact Chronological Vindication and Historical Demonstration of our British, Roman, Saxon, Danish, Norman, English Kings Supreme Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction (London: 1666); see the epistle dedicatory.Google Scholar

93. Miller, , Popery and Politics, 27, 57–66, 91–120.Google Scholar

94. MS Tanner 44, f. 192. This manuscript recounts a 1670 conversation between Charles II and his sister that described the king's efforts to retain his prerogative in the church.Google ScholarAshcraft, Richard, Revolutionary Politics and Locke's Two Treatises of Government (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 27.Google Scholar

95. Hutton, Ronald, Charles II (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 149–53, 176, 178, 292. Note Charles's early willingness to maintain Presbyterianism in Scotland as a purely political expedient.Google Scholar

96. Sutch, Victor D., Gilbert Sheldon: Architect of Anglican Survival, 1640–1675 (Hague: M. Nijoff, 1973), 92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarFor a critique of Sutch, see the review by Beddard, R. A. in Historical Journal 19 (1976): 1005–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

97. Sutch, , Sheldon, 98–99.Google Scholar

98. Miller, John, Charles II (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1991), 138,190.Google Scholar

99. Sutch, , Sheldon, 103. Hutton, Charles II, 194, 294, 340–41.Google Scholar

100. See Seaward, , Making of the Restoration Settlement, 180–95;Google ScholarGreen, , Re-establishment of the Church, 22–23, demonstrates the reliance of the clergy on the support of the Anglican gentry.Google Scholar

101. Head, , Trials of Bishops, 50–57;Google ScholarCross, , Royal Supremacy, 57–56.Google Scholar

102. Hutton, , Charles II, 182.Google Scholar

103. Simon, Walter, The Restoration Episcopate (New York: Bookman, 1965), 69.Google Scholar

104. Diary and Correspondence of Samuel Pepys, F. R. S. (London: Hurst and Blackett, 1954), 3: 328; DNB.Google Scholar