Topic 2 essay plans- Religion, conflict and dissent.
Why did fear of Catholicism increase?
Why did dissent grow and survive?
Did the church evolve effectively?
1. How accurate is it to say that religious nonconformity survived persecution during the
Restoration (1660-88) mainly due to the actions and attitudes of Charles II and James II? -
Criteria for survival- Still meet, grow in numbers, long lasting, end up threatening the confessional
state
Argument- Legislation was most important.
- Mistakes by enemies in defining uniformity on too narrow a scale added strength and
organisation to the ranks of the dissenters, which allowed them to survive despite
persecution.
- Toleration Act made numbers (and thus strength) of dissenters large
- Years of freedom under TA made people familiar with living next to dissenters- see them as
peaceful neighbours, persecution unpopular and lacked local willingness to enforce- when
conventicle Act was renewed in 1670 due to the fearmongering of Archbishop Sheldon, it had
a limited impact- people were uncomfortable with the harassment of their neighbours.
- Excluding Presbyterians meant dissent had support in high places.
ACTIONS OF DISSENTERS AND THOSE WHO SUPPORTED THEM (Pres academy, Ralph Ward,
Hale and Bridgeman’s campaign, reorganisation of Quakers)
Evidence- 1669 Presbyterian Academy set up by Richard Frankland- 100 new dissenting clergy
added to the ranks by 1689
Analysis- Suggests Presbyterian dissenters were changing their attitudes- accepting existence
outside of the church and planning for the future. Strengthening numbers of dissenting clergy
Evidence- Ralph Ward, a Puritan minister ejected in York in was provided with income and
accommodation by Lord and Lady Hewley
Analysis- Wealthy landowners offered chaplaincy and payment for preaching- ensured that
dissenting clergy could still practise (albeit secretly). Helped independent churches and ministers.
Evidence- Reorganisation of the Quakers- 1668 York House conference to agree on a new structure-
decided on district monthly meetings, annual meeting in London run by a central committee.
Analysis- Success in creating a highly organised, disciplined church. Allowed them to survive as an
undercurrent in society despite persecution, helped by the localised nature of Quakerism which lacked
central church structure and hierarchy. Harder to clamp down upon a disciplined and organised
church.
Evidence- 1669 2 judges- Matthew Hale and Orlando Bridgeman, supported by the Bishop of
Chester, led campaigns to revise the Act of Uniformity to allow most dissenters in the church
Analysis- Indicates support for dissent among the ruling elite, those who supported them.
Counter/eval/judgement- Although actions of dissenters were important as they allowed non
conformist groups to become more organised and therefore easier to stamp out, the main actions
were taken by Prebsyterians, which would not have occurred without their exclusion from the church
under the Toleration Act. Narrow basis of the church under legislation created dissenters who were
forced to act to ensure survival, and the Toleration Act before then created the numbers of dissenters
that made it very difficult to curb.
ACTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF CHARLES AND JAMES (Breda, Dec of Indulgences,
, Ecclesiastical commission/arrest of 7 Bishops, Godden v Hales)
Evidence- Charles’ 1660 Declaration of Breda promised moderate toleration as part of his rule. 1672
Declaration of Indulgence allowed disenters to meet in licensed gatherings. Despite Test Act, licences
to preach given under the Declaration of Indulgence were not recalled until 1675.
Analysis- Suggests that Charles did not want to persecute religious radicals. Declaration of
indulgence ensured dissenters could hold licensed services- suspended the conventicle Act. As later
crackdown (due to fear of the Rye House Plot) shows, persecution could have been effective had
Charles chosen to persecute earlier. By time licences to preach were recalled, patterns of worship and
links with sympathisers were well established.
Evidence- James’ Declaration of Indulgence in 1687. Set up an Ecclesiastical Commission to arrest
those who refused to read it- arrest of 7 bishops in 1687 for refusing to read it in church.
Analysis- Conflict between the ruler and Parliament in terms of religious policy meant that the
government was unable to enact strong, unified and coherent religious policy due to failure to agree.
James, as a Catholic, was keen for religious toleration, and the 1687 ruling in Godden v Hales
confirmed his right to dispense with the law concerning religion- allowed him to let dissenters into high
positions (eg Catholic fellows at Magdalene College, Oxford). Non conformity is tolerated, and
encouraged, by those in power- gives it a kind of legitimacy that makes it easier to survive. After
James’ DofI, dissenters quickly reappeared- suggests they never really went away.
Evidence- Charles allows dissenters and Catholics in high places- 1667 appointment of the Cabal
had 2 Catholics, 1 atheist and 2 moderate Puritans. Shows a commitment to toleration of dissent.
Analysis/Counter/eval/judgement
Significant, but not as significant as legislation, which created the dissenters that leaders then
struggled/refused to quash.
LEGISLATION (Clarendon Code, Act of Uniformity too narrow, Toleration Act, Joseph Wilson
ejected in Yorkshire)
Evidence- 1662 Act of Uniformity was too narrow- it excluded Presbytarians, who had expected to be
included (evidenced by the fact that 2 Presbyterian ministers, Shaw and Bowles, marched to London
with General Monck to restore the Rump, believing that the new Parliament would pass an act
creating a church that accommodated Presbytarians.) Also excluded Puritans- 20% of ministers were
ejected from the church.
Analysis- Excluding Presbytarians added huge numbers to the category of “dissenters.” Without the
addition of Presbyterians, dissenters would have been a radical minority that lacked popularity. With
the addition of Presbyterians and Puritans, dissenters had strength in numbers, wider support, and a
large, organised and disciplined structure which helped them to survive the religious crackdown
during restoration.
- Popularity e.g when Joseph Wilson of Yorkshire (Puritan) was ejected, his congregation rioted
and barred the doors to his successor.
Evidence- 1650 Toleration Act passed by the rump Parliament
Analysis- Established freedom of worship for independent Protestant churches. Although later
religious clampdown attempted to eradicate nonconformists, the intervening years of freedom had
allowed religious dissenters to establish roots and foundations in society, spread their messages,
develop networks of informal associations of ministers, and create churches that had enough
numbers to survive during years of persecution. Also meant that people lived among and next to
dissenters= grow more comfortable and familiar with them= lack of support for persecuting peaceful
people when it happens later= lack of local enforcement
Evidence- Clarendon Code (1662 Act of Uniformity, 1661 Corporation Act, 1664 Corporation Act,
1665 5 Mile Act, 1662 Quaker Act)
Analysis- Too vengeful a religious settlement. 2 impacts:
Why did fear of Catholicism increase?
Why did dissent grow and survive?
Did the church evolve effectively?
1. How accurate is it to say that religious nonconformity survived persecution during the
Restoration (1660-88) mainly due to the actions and attitudes of Charles II and James II? -
Criteria for survival- Still meet, grow in numbers, long lasting, end up threatening the confessional
state
Argument- Legislation was most important.
- Mistakes by enemies in defining uniformity on too narrow a scale added strength and
organisation to the ranks of the dissenters, which allowed them to survive despite
persecution.
- Toleration Act made numbers (and thus strength) of dissenters large
- Years of freedom under TA made people familiar with living next to dissenters- see them as
peaceful neighbours, persecution unpopular and lacked local willingness to enforce- when
conventicle Act was renewed in 1670 due to the fearmongering of Archbishop Sheldon, it had
a limited impact- people were uncomfortable with the harassment of their neighbours.
- Excluding Presbyterians meant dissent had support in high places.
ACTIONS OF DISSENTERS AND THOSE WHO SUPPORTED THEM (Pres academy, Ralph Ward,
Hale and Bridgeman’s campaign, reorganisation of Quakers)
Evidence- 1669 Presbyterian Academy set up by Richard Frankland- 100 new dissenting clergy
added to the ranks by 1689
Analysis- Suggests Presbyterian dissenters were changing their attitudes- accepting existence
outside of the church and planning for the future. Strengthening numbers of dissenting clergy
Evidence- Ralph Ward, a Puritan minister ejected in York in was provided with income and
accommodation by Lord and Lady Hewley
Analysis- Wealthy landowners offered chaplaincy and payment for preaching- ensured that
dissenting clergy could still practise (albeit secretly). Helped independent churches and ministers.
Evidence- Reorganisation of the Quakers- 1668 York House conference to agree on a new structure-
decided on district monthly meetings, annual meeting in London run by a central committee.
Analysis- Success in creating a highly organised, disciplined church. Allowed them to survive as an
undercurrent in society despite persecution, helped by the localised nature of Quakerism which lacked
central church structure and hierarchy. Harder to clamp down upon a disciplined and organised
church.
Evidence- 1669 2 judges- Matthew Hale and Orlando Bridgeman, supported by the Bishop of
Chester, led campaigns to revise the Act of Uniformity to allow most dissenters in the church
Analysis- Indicates support for dissent among the ruling elite, those who supported them.
Counter/eval/judgement- Although actions of dissenters were important as they allowed non
conformist groups to become more organised and therefore easier to stamp out, the main actions
were taken by Prebsyterians, which would not have occurred without their exclusion from the church
under the Toleration Act. Narrow basis of the church under legislation created dissenters who were
forced to act to ensure survival, and the Toleration Act before then created the numbers of dissenters
that made it very difficult to curb.
ACTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF CHARLES AND JAMES (Breda, Dec of Indulgences,
, Ecclesiastical commission/arrest of 7 Bishops, Godden v Hales)
Evidence- Charles’ 1660 Declaration of Breda promised moderate toleration as part of his rule. 1672
Declaration of Indulgence allowed disenters to meet in licensed gatherings. Despite Test Act, licences
to preach given under the Declaration of Indulgence were not recalled until 1675.
Analysis- Suggests that Charles did not want to persecute religious radicals. Declaration of
indulgence ensured dissenters could hold licensed services- suspended the conventicle Act. As later
crackdown (due to fear of the Rye House Plot) shows, persecution could have been effective had
Charles chosen to persecute earlier. By time licences to preach were recalled, patterns of worship and
links with sympathisers were well established.
Evidence- James’ Declaration of Indulgence in 1687. Set up an Ecclesiastical Commission to arrest
those who refused to read it- arrest of 7 bishops in 1687 for refusing to read it in church.
Analysis- Conflict between the ruler and Parliament in terms of religious policy meant that the
government was unable to enact strong, unified and coherent religious policy due to failure to agree.
James, as a Catholic, was keen for religious toleration, and the 1687 ruling in Godden v Hales
confirmed his right to dispense with the law concerning religion- allowed him to let dissenters into high
positions (eg Catholic fellows at Magdalene College, Oxford). Non conformity is tolerated, and
encouraged, by those in power- gives it a kind of legitimacy that makes it easier to survive. After
James’ DofI, dissenters quickly reappeared- suggests they never really went away.
Evidence- Charles allows dissenters and Catholics in high places- 1667 appointment of the Cabal
had 2 Catholics, 1 atheist and 2 moderate Puritans. Shows a commitment to toleration of dissent.
Analysis/Counter/eval/judgement
Significant, but not as significant as legislation, which created the dissenters that leaders then
struggled/refused to quash.
LEGISLATION (Clarendon Code, Act of Uniformity too narrow, Toleration Act, Joseph Wilson
ejected in Yorkshire)
Evidence- 1662 Act of Uniformity was too narrow- it excluded Presbytarians, who had expected to be
included (evidenced by the fact that 2 Presbyterian ministers, Shaw and Bowles, marched to London
with General Monck to restore the Rump, believing that the new Parliament would pass an act
creating a church that accommodated Presbytarians.) Also excluded Puritans- 20% of ministers were
ejected from the church.
Analysis- Excluding Presbytarians added huge numbers to the category of “dissenters.” Without the
addition of Presbyterians, dissenters would have been a radical minority that lacked popularity. With
the addition of Presbyterians and Puritans, dissenters had strength in numbers, wider support, and a
large, organised and disciplined structure which helped them to survive the religious crackdown
during restoration.
- Popularity e.g when Joseph Wilson of Yorkshire (Puritan) was ejected, his congregation rioted
and barred the doors to his successor.
Evidence- 1650 Toleration Act passed by the rump Parliament
Analysis- Established freedom of worship for independent Protestant churches. Although later
religious clampdown attempted to eradicate nonconformists, the intervening years of freedom had
allowed religious dissenters to establish roots and foundations in society, spread their messages,
develop networks of informal associations of ministers, and create churches that had enough
numbers to survive during years of persecution. Also meant that people lived among and next to
dissenters= grow more comfortable and familiar with them= lack of support for persecuting peaceful
people when it happens later= lack of local enforcement
Evidence- Clarendon Code (1662 Act of Uniformity, 1661 Corporation Act, 1664 Corporation Act,
1665 5 Mile Act, 1662 Quaker Act)
Analysis- Too vengeful a religious settlement. 2 impacts:
