Morrill: "the Religious Context Of The English Civil War"

Front 1

What three modes of opposition does Morrill identify?

Back 1

• localist
• legal-constitutionalist
• religious

Front 2

What is the basic argument of his paper?

Back 2

• localist and legal-constitutionalist perceptions of misgovernment lacked momentum and passion to bring about civil war
• it was religion that "drove minorities to fight and forced majorities to make reluctant choices"

Front 3

What does localism explain and not explain?

Back 3

• explains the nature of the war but not the causes of war
• perception of arbitrariness, innovation and disruption explains the mood of 1640 and pressures for reform in 1641
• led directly into neutralism in 1642

Front 4

To what extent was the monarchy criticised in 1640?

Back 4

• many had a belief in partial royal tyranny: criticising Charles' misgovernment and misuse of agreed powers, i.e. Ship Money and monopolies
• not criticising monarchy in general
• no request for revolution

Front 5

In what way did the Long Parliament try to meet legal/constitutional concerns?

Back 5

• no will to remodel the constitution or introduce parliamentary sovereignty
• wanted to rectify the failings of Charles I, not the political system
• "unhurried and largely uncontroversial programme of remedial legislation"
• little persecution of Ship Money sheriffs, Lord Lieutenants exceeding powers, JPs exceeding powers etc. in stark contrast to pursuit of Laudian clergymen

Front 6

How divisive were Laudian reforms and why?

Back 6

• "I believe it is almost impossible to overestimate the damage cause by the Laudians"
• "profoundly offensive to most lay and clerical opinion"
• uniformly alienated many people and removed key aspects of traditional worship
• "sty of all pestilential filth"

Front 7

How pervasive were religious concerns in the Long Parliament?

Back 7

• spilled over into all LP debates
• more regularly mentioned than secular discussion
• petitions called for "reform" of the "reformation"
• "the attack on the church was far wider than the attack on the laity"

Front 8

What characterised the debates and measures of the Long Parliament on religion?

Back 8

• polarised religious views of MPs
• 20 clergymen persecuted in early weeks as opposed to 2 civil officers
• "willingness to wink" in the Commons over breaches of ecclesiastical law
• militancy of rhetorical action led to militancy of conduct in matters of religion: many MPs now saw ecclesiastical reform as totally necessary
• new religious radicalism created conservative backlash and defence of non-Laudian episcopacy and the Anglicanism of Prayer Book and 39 Articles
• "there was no royalist party, but there was an Anglican party"

Front 9

How did this contrast with political and constitutional issues?

Back 9

• "largely uncontroversial and created no major division, generated no major political debate"
• renewed constitutional concern arose from the King's fresh misbehaviour
• "in 1642 questions of trust generated new constitutional demands which proved non-negotiable and became the occasions of civil war"

Front 10

Why does Morrill feel that the Militia Ordinance, Hull and the Nineteen Propositions are not evidence of overriding constitutional causes for the war?

Back 10

• "full of self-doubt, seeing the hazards of turning back as worse than the perils of pursuing their passage"
• "hesitant and half-hearted"
• "means to an end, not ends in themselves"
• very unlike the strong drive for religious legislation
• could not being themselves to claim the right for extra-monarchical taxation
• Militia Ordinance was "moral and not legal"

Front 11

What evidence is given of the motives of those who fought and those who were reluctant to?

Back 11

• Jan 1642: 4x as many pamphlets on the importance of bishops than the attempt on the Five Members
• Commons worked to promote those desiring total ecclesiastical reform
• fears of a popish plot were widespread
• Anglicans were scared of Parliament's leniency towards radicalism
• belief that Charles had abdicated his duty to fight against the Antichrist
• "distinguished by level of commitment to the godly cause"
• none of those defending the pre-Laudian church in 1641 became parliamentarians; only a few calling for total reform ended up supporting the king

Front 12

How were these contrasting motives reflected in the provinces?

Back 12

• majority of gentry and social groups had strong preferences for peace
• reaction in favour of established church
• actions were led by minorities with polarised views
• no outright sense of direct confrontation with the Crown
• "there were no constitutional militants"
• "dynamism of religious argument contrasts with a shrinking away from constitutional choices"