II

Thus when the synod called for in the Grand Remonstrance first met as the Westminster Assembly in the summer of 1643,the majority of the members(mostly clergymen)began to plan for a Presbyterian church.Presbyterianism was the obvious alternative to an Episcopal structure in the Protestant tradition,while commitment to Presbyterianism was strengthened by the alliance between the English parliamentarians and the Scots in autumn 1643.The Scots’revolt against Charles in 1638 had secured a self-confident Presbyterian kirk in that kingdom,so the‘Solemn League and Covenant’,the oath that was the symbol of the Anglo-Scots alliance called for:

The preservation of the reformed religion in the Church of Scotland,in doctrine,worship,discipline and government,against our common enemies;the reformation of religion in the kingdoms of England and Ireland,in doctrine,worship,discipline and government,according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed churches;and we shall endeavour to bring the churches of God in the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion,confession of faith,form of church government,directory for worship and catechising,that we,and our posterity after us,may,as brethren,live in faith and love,and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us.^[9]

Presbyterianism involved parish committees or elderships(in which lay elders assisted the ministers in the discipline of the congregation)with representatives elected to neighbourhood and regional assemblies beyond the parish,and a national or general assembly with overall authority.A Presbyterian church should be a national,comprehensive and compulsory institution;members of regional and national assemblies would be elected by the parishes,but the decisions of these bodies were binding on the parish.The majority of the Westminster Assembly were broadly sympathetic to this structure,but it ran counter to alternative visions of church government already present in English Puritan circles.In New England,to the dismay of some Puritans,a‘congregational’or‘Independent’structure had emerged where individual congregations were autonomous,and where ultimate power lay with the members of the congregation as a whole rather than with the minister and elders alone.Where the Scots and some English figures took it for granted that reformation‘according to the word of God’meant a Presbyterian church,others were not so sure.Men sympathetic to the‘New England way’,or those who had served in English exile churches in the Netherlands,such as Thomas Goodwin or Jeremiah Burroughs,became known as‘congregationalists’or,to their enemies,‘Independents’,and formed a determined opposition to the Presbyterian majority in the Assembly.^[10]

More ominously for Presbyterians in the Assembly,many of the practices developed within Puritan circles during the years of harassment before 1640 were difficult to reconcile with an authoritarian Presbyterian structure.These practices have been summed up by Patrick Collinson as‘Voluntary religion’and included people's‘gadding’or roaming from their home parishes to hear sermons from sympathetic preachers,and the practice of holding private meetings for prayer,discussion of sermons,and religious debate.^[11]There were also long-standing tensions between lay and clerical aspirations within Puritanism,between the commitment to a well-educated,well-paid godly ministry,as seen in Anthony Burgess's sermon,and the traditions of conscientious lay activism.Hence significant opinion amongst parliamentarians sought some flexibility within a national church.The alternative of autonomous congregations championed by men like Goodwin and Burroughs in An Apologeticall Narration of January 1644 seemed attractive to some,while a majority in parliament were reluctant,and in the end unwilling to cede ultimate control of the church to a clericalist General Assembly.The conflict between parliament and assembly from 1645 focused on the issue of exclusion from the sacrament of the lord's supper which was the main disciplinary tool for Presbyterians.Parishioners whose knowledge of Christian religion was inadequate or who were‘scandalous’in their lives would not be allowed to take the sacrament—a public humiliation that would,it was hoped,lead people to improve their knowledge and behaviour.The procedure is alluded to in Marshall's Naseby sermon:God‘seems to expect what portion himself shall have in England for time to come,what kind of subjects he shall have,what worship shall bee offered to him,what kind of guests shall sit with him at his table’.^[12]Prominent lay people(like MPs)were very reluctant to place ultimate control over who should sit at God's table in the hands of a clerically dominated General Assembly.Parliament insisted instead that a lay commission should be established as the ultimate court of appeal for those excluded from the sacrament,and as the overall supreme authority in the church.In response the Presbyterians in the Assembly protested against parliament's legislation as inadequate.From 1645-1648,bitter conflict over the nature of the church fragmented parliamentarianism even as it triumphed militarily over the king.Presbyterians argued that the lack of an effective national church provoked the spread of dangerous heresy and disorderly separatism;others—Independents and separatists—denounced a coercive national church as an illegitimate intrusion into individual consciences.Religious divisions contributed to other cleavages within parliamentarianism with Presbyterians more likely to seek a negotiated peace,while commitment to religious liberty was usually combined with a more uncompromising attitude to political settlement.

A framework for a Presbyterian national church emerged painfully slowly in a context of fierce debate and disagreement;by the time it was completed it was too late.A series of measures was passed by parliament between August 1645 and August 1648,but the legislation for church government was never effectively enforced although it was never formally repealed.A plainer‘Directory of Worship’was drawn up to replace the more ritualistic Elizabethan Book of Common Prayer,but no national or general assembly ever met in England,and provincial assemblies operated only in the Presbyterian strongholds of London and Lancashire.Even here,however,they were essentially voluntary bodies—there was no way of forcing reluctant ministers to participate,and it was not possible to impose Presbyterian discipline in a situation where there was no compulsion for parishioners to attend their parish church.Voluntary Presbyterianism was a contradiction in terms.By 1648 an enormous variety of religious practice,belief and organisation had emerged,particularly in London,and an unprecedented degree of religious liberty had come into existence.A commitment to religious liberty and hostility to the Presbyterian Solemn League and Covenant had become identified particularly with parliament's radicalised New Model Army.Consequently the military coup of December 1648 which purged the parliament,forced through the trial and execution of the king,and established a republican state,also ensured the failure of Presbyterian church government.The Rump parliament(so called after the purge of December 1648)repealed the Elizabethan laws making weekly attendance at parish worship compulsory and inaugurated a period of unprecedented religious liberty in England.