Church and state in New England

Front matter

m:

Jill

Wm

Preface

The complete separation of church and state is an American doctrine. European governments have long maintained church establishments. The Puritan colonists of New England in the seventeenth century were not prepared to organize on principles that characterize the relations of church and state in America to-day. They followed the example of the mother country and united the civil and ecclesiastical organizations. They established the Congregational church and endeavored to maintain it by law against all opposition.

The design of this monograph is to give the history of the establishment, to point out the causes that led to the dis-establishment and also the steps by which the latter was brought about. The author aims, in this way, to trace the growth of religious liberty from the time of the first settlements to the final triumph of religious freedom in New England in 1834.

P. E. L.

Contents

PAGE.

Chapter I. — Introductory. The Eeformation in England 12

Rise of the Puritans 15

Kise of the Brownists 17

The Brownists in Holland ■ 18

Their Reasons for Coming to America 19

Ideas of the Relations of Church and State 24

The Puritans 26

Their Reasons for Coming to America 27

The Organization of the Colony at Salem 28

Plymouth and Salem 29

Chapter II.— The Civil and Ecclesiastical Beginnings of New England. Massachusetts "^1

Extension of the Plymouth Colony; its Causes and Results 31

Extension of the Puritan Colony ^^

(a) At Plymouth 32

(6) The Puritans 33

(c) The Charter of 1691 35

Its provisions for Liberty of Conscience 35

Laws under the Charter •••• 36

Maine.

The Popham Colony 36

Maine Episcopal , ^'

Massachusetts assumes the government of Maine 38

New Hampshire '*^

Early Settlements "11

Massachusetts' Jurisdiction 41

Connecticut 4o

The Connecticut Colony 43

8 Contents.

PAGE.

New Haven Colony 43

Their Puritan Character , 44

Congregational Order approved 45

The Condition of Connecticut in 1680 45

Rhode Island 46

Founded by Roger Williams 46

Religious Freedom guaranteed by Charter of 1663 48

Vermont 49

Its Early Settlements 49

Controversy with New York 49

Article III of Bill of Rights of the Constitution of 1777 50

Chapter III. — The Development of Religious Liberty in the Seventeenth Century to 1691. (1) Persecution develops Religious Liberty 52

In Massachusetts 52

In Connecticut 55

In Rhode Island — its Religious Liberty the first fruits of persecution in Massachusetts 55

(2) The Extension of the Franchise 56

In Connecticut 56

By Charter of 1662 56

In Massachusetts 57

(a) Maine and New Hampshire citizens not church members 57

{h) The Adoption of the Half-way Covenant 58

(c) The King insists upon giving all citizens the Franchise.. 60

His letter 60

The Church Membership Qualification law repealed.. 61

Its substitute 61

(3) Massachusetts' controversy with the King forces her to a more

liberal policy 64

All persecuting laws repealed 64

Chapter IV. — Development of Religious Liberty in the Eighteenth Century to 1787. The Commercial and Industrial Life of New England tends towards

Religious Liberty 68

Breaking up of the Old Town-Church System 69

Charter of 1691. Baptist Swansea under jurisdiction of Massachusetts 69

Towns begin to support two Churches 70

Contents. ^

PAGE.

Boston, Hartford, Windsor and Newbury '^^^

Increase in Number of Dissenters ^^

Baptists and Episcopalians ^^

Prominent men among Dissenters ^

Dissenters not social outlaws in 1700 ^^

Baptist ordination in Boston

Eector Cutler and the Episcopalians ".- ••'■"••■■

The condition of religion at the beginning of the Eighteenth Cen- ^^

tury r.g

Influence of the Half-way Covenant ^^

Influence of State Churchism VV;'"';Vr-iVJ' *i,"I

Opinions of the Rev. Torry, Dr. Mather and Mr. Willard on the ^^

Condition of Religion • ^^

The Dissenters and the Exemption Laws ^^

Progress of Religious Liberty ^^

Jn Massachusetts '„""A!""i" a

Exemption Laws for Episcopalians, 1735, 1742 ; for Quakers and ^^

Baptists ■. ■ i"j" "

Baptists object to Certificate System because it acknowledges ^^

State control .

Bill of Rights of 1780 ^^

In Connecticut „_

Act of Toleration, 1708 ^^

Exemption Laws

Episcopalian, 1727

Quaker and Baptist, 1729 ^^

The Great Awakening

Law of 1742 gg

Separates gg

Saybrook Platform abrogated 1784 ^^

In Nexv Hampshire

Law of 1714 cited ^^

Bill of Rights, 1784 ^^

In Vermont g^

Bill of Rights, 1777 ^^

Law of 1783 quoted ^^

In Rhode Island „„

No State Church-Disfranchised Catholic."

Chapter V -Development of Religious Liberty in the Nineteenth Century— Disestablishment. The Federal Constitution ••■•; ',""'r""i'll',^'Z

Its amendments as to religious tests and religious freedom help to ^^ settle the question in the States

10 Contents.

PAGE.

Disestablishment 98

In Vermont 98

Law of 1801 to appease dissenters not satisfactory 98

Disestablishment in 1807 99

In Connecticut 99

Could more be asked for than the Law of 1791 granted? Law

quoted ' 99

Dissenters combine with Kepublicans to overthrow the Charter

government 100

Bill of Rights, 1818, destroys the Church establishment. Articles quoted 101

In New Hampshire 101

Baptists recognized as a sect in 1804; Universalists in 1805;

Methodists in 1807 101

Toleration Act of 1819 102

In Maine 102

Separates from Massachusetts — ^ew constitution puts religion

on a voluntar}' basis 102

Article III of the Bill of Rights quoted 1C2

In Massachusetts 103

Baptists test Certificate System under Bill of Eights 103

Unjust interpretation of the Laws 104

Religious Freedom Act of 1811 104

Government by majority 104

Dedham case cited 105

The Unitarian Ascendancy 106

Disestablishment, 1834 106

A/^^ OF THE ^.

CHURCH AND STATE IN NEW ENGLAND.

CHAPTER I. IlSTTEODUCTOEY

A study of church and state in America may well begin with results of the Reformation in England. Puritan, Independent, Separatist, Pilgrim, were but the names of those zealous English Protestants who, no longer satisfied with the Church of Rome, stood for the reform of its doctrine and polity. The teachings of Wycliffe, Erasmus and Colet had prepared the way for the reform in England, and, whatever may have been Henry VIII. 's motive for declaring his ecclesiastical independence, there is little doubt that there was a considerable party ready to support him in his opposition to the Pope. The Defender of the Faith was far from ready to take up tiie cause of Protestantism ; nevertheless, the advocates of reform saw in the separation from Rome a point gained for their cause. The dissolution of the monasteries which followed gave the death-blow to the Catholic hierarchy in England and undermined the whole Catholic party ; and, more than that, it raised up a party which not alone from principle but from self-interest opposed every effort to re-establish Catholicism. In this way again the King aided the cause of the reformers. Henry VIII., however, was at heart a Catholic and he aimed to enforce a Catholicism, with himself as Pope, upon the English people. The Statute of Six Articles passed in his reigu made it a crime punishable by death to write, preach or dispute against transubstantiation ; celibacy of the clergy and auricular confession were insisted upon. Aside from these and some minor points the King was not unwilling to be more or less liberal to the Protestants, He at one time permitted an English translation of the Bible to be used in every parish church ; but even this privilege was abridged a few years before the King's death.

The reign of Edward VI. is marked by the effort made to establish Protestantism. Images were removed from the churches ; auricular confession was made optional with each individual ; marriage was allowed to the clergy ; the sacrament of the altar was administered in both kinds. Hallam tells us that the Roman worship was proscribed ; that many persons were sent to prison for hearing mass, and that Mary herself was not permitted to have the exercise of her religion at home.^ Parliament made it penal for any minister to use in any cathedral, parish or church any other than the Book of Common Prayer. In this way uniformity of service was to be secured. The Six Articles of Henry VIIL were repealed. A Book of Homilies embodying the doctrines of Cranmer was compiled and ordered to be read in the churches. The Forty-two Articles of Religion were introduced as the standard of doctrines. Subscription to these Articles was demanded of all clergymen, church-wardens and school-masters. The Reformation in England under Edward tended towards a Calviuistic theology and Zwinglian ceremony. "The new Prayer-book," says Green, " was revised, and every change made in it leaned towards the Protestantism of Geneva." ^ It must be remembered, however, that the great body of English people was Catholic and consequently there was no little opposition to these reforms. It was, therefore, inexpedient for

1 Constitutional History of England, Vol. I, Chap, ii, p. 106. The references are to the Standard Edition.

''Green's Short History of the English People, p. 366.

the English reformers to go as far as those of the continent wished them to go. Cranmer thought it wise to retain some of the ceremonial usages. He refused to do away with the copes and rochets of the bishops and the surplice of the priest. On account of this and in spite of all the sweeping changes that had been made, some of the continental reformers did not hesitate to utter their dislike of " the backwardness of the English Reformation." But there is no doubt that it approached in both doctrine and ritual as near to Protestantism as the circumstances of the time would permit. The position taken bv the English church was midway between Catholicism and Protestantism. It satisfied neither party; its authority had now to be maintained by persecution of Catholic and Protestant alike.

At the accession of Mary the realm was brought back to the old religion. The Anti-Catholic acts passed in the reigns of Edward and Henry were swept away. Many of the nobility and a large part, perhaps a majority, of the people supported Mary in the return to Catholicism. Her marriage with Philip of Spain, however, made her unpopular ; it also " created a prejudice against the religion which the Spanish Court so steadily favored." ^ In addition to this, her widespread and cruel persecution of the Protestants alienated many of her subjects. Hallam tells us, on the authority of Strype, that many became Protestants under Mary who, " at her coming to the throne, had retained the contrary persuasion." - Persecution drove Protestants out of the realm. Some of them took refuge iu Switzerland, others in Germany. Calvin and Zwingli received the exiles kindly, but Luther had little sympathy with them. During their stay in Geneva and other parts of Switzerland they observed the simplicity of worship so characteristic of the Zwinglian churches. Here they saw the affairs of church and state administered by the people. By a majority of vqtes the people chose their ministers. That

> Hallam, Vol. I, p. 115. * Const. HisL, I, 115.

form of worship was adopted which had been agreed upon by the voters. There was here no hierarchy with the King at its head. Here the English exiles saw and learned democratic government. For some of them this became the ideal church government. The proof of this is the rise of the Independents in England a few years later.

The accession of Elizabeth in 1558 brought a return to Protestantism. Elizabeth, like Cranmer, seemed to recognize that many of the English people were Catholic. She made it her policy to avoid extremes. The position that the Church of England had taken midway between the old and new religions Elizabeth endeavored to maintain. She brought back into service Edward YI.'s Prayer-book altered but little. The Forty-two articles drawn up under Edward, revised and reduced to thirty-nine, again became the standard of doctrine. By the Act of Supremacy she rejected the papal authority over the English Church but she did not assume the title of Supreme Head of the Church, as her father had done. In doctrine she may be said to have taken the position of a Protestant. In ceremony she inclined toward the Catholic. She had a strugole with the reformers about images and particularly the cmcifix. In 1559 she yielded and ordered them to be taken out of the churches. As to the celibacy of the clergy she never could be brought to adopt the Protestant view ; she never would consent to make their marriage lawful. Conflicts with Catholics and Protestants were inevitable. Elizabeth was firm in maintaining her ecclesiastical supremacy. She determined to secure outward conformity to the religion she had established. To carry out her determination persecuting acts against Catholic and Protestant sectaries had to be passed. This policy of coercion was maintained by her throughout her reign.

Elizabeth's struggle with the Catholics was no less a political than a religious one. ^Nlary, Queen of Scots, was asserting her claim to the English crown. The Catholics were, doubtless, in sympathy with her, and supported and encouraged by an organized band of Jesuits, they were a source of danger to Queen Elizabeth. It is not surprising that their zeal for ]Mary's cause brought upon them the suspicion of disloyalty. But there was more than disloyalty ; there is evidence of a plan to assassinate Elizabeth that Mary of Scotland might be placed on the throne. There is, therefore, at least a partial justification for the severe persecution that the Catholics endured in this reign.

The struggle with the Protestants was more religious than political. Those who had been exiled in the reign of Mary now returned home from Switzerland and were thoroughly determined to set up a church with as simple a worship as they had seen in Geneva. They believed that the vestments worn by the clergy, if of no importance in themselves, recalled their former superstition. From vestments to Catholicism was but a short step. '' Such eminent churchmen as Jewell, Griudall, Sandys, Newell, were in flivor of leaving off the surplice and what were called the papish ceremonies." ^ The party favoring these reforms was called Puritan in reproach of their demands for a pure worship. There was in the church another party represented by Parker and the Bishop of Ely. Their ideas of the Reformation were like those of Elizabeth ; in doctrine they were thoroughly Protestant, in ceremony they inclined to the Catholic. They were not willing at a blow to remove vestments, images and all that was dear to the hearts of thousands of Englishmen. They wished to give as little shock as possible to the many loyal Catholics. They aimed to change oulv those forms and ceremonies which they considered absolutely necessary to change, and to retain as much of the old as they could. These two parties were, at first, but factions of the great Protestant party. The points on which thev agreed were far more important than those upon which they differed. Their long continued disputes on their differences, however, made them forget their common principles

1 Child's Church and State under the Tudors.

Church and State in Neic England. [98 and aims. These were relegated to the background, while their wranglings about mere habits and ceremonies were brought forward. The two factions were alienated and became bitter political enemies.

In the year following the accession of Elizabeth the Act of Uniformity was passed. This act brought into use the revised Book of Common Prayer; it provided a penalty for any parson, vicar and other minister using any but the established liturgy ; it made attendance at the parish church on Sunday and holidays compulsory. Both this act and the Act of Supremacy were, at first, cautiously enforced. The consciences of some of the Puritans would not allow conformity to the rites of the church. The Puritan laymen held their secret meetings. The Puritan clergymen managed to evade the laws and to adopt ceremonies more in accordance with their tastes. "Some clergymen continued to wear the habits, others laid them aside. The communicants received the sacrament sitting, or standing, or kneeling, according to the ministers' tastes."^ The malcontents were growing more numerous every day. Elizabeth determined to enforce the laws more rigorously. In 1565 an effort was made to put a stop to the irregularities in worship. "■ Two of the most eminent Puritans were deprived of their preferments ; and tliirty-seven of the London clergymen refusing to comply with the legal ceremonies, were suspended from their ministry and threatened with punishment of deprivation." ^ The Puritans in Parliament introduced Bills for abolishing various ecclesiastical rites and ceremonies. To all these proposed reforms the Queen stood rigidly opposed.

As the Protestant party had become divided into two factions, so now one of these, the Puritan, became divided. The larger part continued their struggle without leaving the church. They hoped by their influence in Parliament and in

^ Hallam, Vol. I, p. 182.

^ Taswell-Langmead, English Constitutional History, p. 477.

the Council to bring about their reforms. This part retained the name Puritan. Geneva is said to have been at once the strength and weaisness of the Puritan ; his strength because here he saw liis ideal realized ; his weakness because it taught him to try to get his reforms through the state.

To the other, the smaller faction, observance of a ritual which they considered idolatrous was sin. To them the idea of a national church was repulsive. They believed that a church is a company of believers organized in the name of Christ, independent of civil or other ecclesiastical organization. With such a conception of a church they claimed it to be their right to separate from the Church of England and to organize for themselves. They were called Brownists after one of their leaders, or Barrowists after another. As early as 1580 Robert Brown began to promulgate his doctrines. Any number of Christians, themselves choosing and ordaining their pastors, and administering all their ecclesiastical affairs, — a body entirely independent of the civil power, — was his ideal church. Dr. H. ]M. Dexter in his Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years claims that to Robert Brown is due the proud distinction of first advocating in the English tongue the modern doctrine of the relation of church and state.^ Brown deserted the Brownists but his associate, Harrison, took his place. The little company never wantedleaders. After Brown and Harrison came Copping and Thacker, then Greenwood and Barry, then Johnson and Penry. By 1592 there were said to be more than 20,000 Brownists in England. "As they went far beyond the Puritans in their aversion to the legal ministry, they were deemed in consequence still more proper subjects for persecution."^ Barrow and Greenwood were indicted for spreading seditious writings. For six years they lay in prison where they wrote, as they had opportunity, short statements of their views and doctrines. These were sent to Holland to be printed and then

1 Dexter, p. 101. ^HaUam, Vol. I, p. 216.

18 Church and State in Xew England. [100

returned to England for circulation. One of these papers " preserved in the state records, endorsed by Jerome Studley, one of the Separatist prisoners," has the following statements : " The church as it is seen in this present world, consisteth of a company and fellowship of faithful and holy people, gathered in the name of Christ Jesus, their only King, Priest and Prophet, worshipping Him aright, being peaceably and quietly governed by his officers and laws, keeping the unity of the faith in the bond of peace and love unfeigned.

"We seek to worship and obey Christ as our only King, Priest and Prophet : and to our prince we are humble aud obedient subjects in all things which are not repugnant ta God's laws.

" There is no power given the prince to restrain any jot or liberty of the Church or to withhold any one person from doing the whole will of God in their calling, much less is there any power given the prince to draw or compel the Church, or any member thereof, to the least transgression or error." ^

Here the church and state were differentiated. There seems to be little doubt that these Brownist prisoners had as early as 1597 the modern view of the relation between church and state.

England had no place for such views in the seventeenth century. The most of the Brownists were put down by persecution. One little band had organized themselves into a church at Scrooby in Xottinghamshire. Their minister was "Mr. Richard Clifton, a grave and reserved preacher. Among them was that famous and worthy man, Mr. John Robinson"^ and Mr. William Brewster. Tliey endured persecution until 1608 when they took refuge in Holland, which had been for many years an asylum for religious exiles. As early as 1593 a band of Brownists had fled from London and

1 Waddington's History of Congregationalism, Vol. II, p. 32. ^Bradford's Hislory of Plymouth Plantation, p. 10. Mass. Hist. Society Col., Vol. Ill, IV Series.

had organized a church at Amsterdam. Later a second congregation who were of " sundry towns and villages, some in Nottinghamshire, some of Lincolnshire, and some of Yorkshire, with their pastor, John Smith," ^ joined their brethren in the Netherlands. Here they aimed to carry out the principles of Brownism to their full extent. Controversies with the reformers of the continent and disputes among themselves soon arose. There was much dissension among them when the Pilgrims from Scrooby with their pastor, John Robinson, arrived. Bradford says: "And when they had lived at Amsterdam about a year, Mr. Robinson, their pastor, and some others best discerning, seeing how Mr. John Smith and his company were already fallen into contention with the church that was there before them, and no means they could use would do any good to cure the same, and also that the flames of contention were likely to break out in the ancient church itself; which things, they prudently foreseeino;, thought it was best to remove, before they were any way engaged with the same. For these and some other reasons they removed to Leyden." ^ Here '' they fell to such trades and employments i as they best could ; valuing peace and their spiritual comfort i above any other riches whatever. And at length they came to raise a competent and comfortable living but with hard and continued labor." ^ Their relations with the Dutch were pleasant. They were readily employed because of their hon- \ esty and faithfulness. " The Dutch would trust them in any 1 reasonable matter when they wanted money." * There were, however, many objections to their making Leyden their permanent home. After they lived there about twelve years they began to think of emigrating to another country. The following are the chief reasons as given by Bradford for their removal from Holland to America. (1) "Great labor and| hard fare, with other inconveniences " ^ had to be endured, i

/ "Some preferred and chose prisons in England rather than liberty in Holland with those afflictions. But it was thought that if a better and easier place of living could be had, it N^ould draw many and take away these discouragements." (2) They saw " old age began to come on some of them ; and their great and continued labors, with other crosses and sorrows, hastened it before the time ; so as it was not only probably thought, but apparently seen, that within a few years more they were in danger to scatter by necessity pressing them, or sink under their burdens, or both ; and, therefore, according

^"-~to the divine proverb, that ' a wise man seeth the plague when it cometh, and hideth himself,' so they, like skillful and beaten soldiers, were fearful either to be entrapped or surrounded by their enemies, so as they should neither be able to fight nor fly ; and, therefore, thought it better to dislodge betimes to some place of better advantage and less danger, if any could be found." (3) They saw that their children " were drawn away by evil examples into extravagant and dangerous courses, getting the reins on their necks, and departing from their parents. Some became soldiers, others took them upon far voyages by sea, and others some worse courses, tending to dissoluteness and the danger of their souls, to the great grief of their parents and the dishonor of God ; so that they saw that their posterity would be in danger to degenerate and be corrupted." (4) " Lastly (and which was not the least), a great hope and inward zeal they had of laying some good foundation, or at least to make some way thereunto, for the propagating and advancing of the Gospel of the kingdom of Christ in these remote parts of the world ; yea, though they should be put as stepping-stones unto others for performing of so great a work." To these reasons may be added those given by Edward Winslow in his Brief Narrative.^ They are : (1) the desire to live under the protection of England and retain the language and name of Englishmen ;

^ As given in Baird's Religion in America, p. 99.

(2) their inability to give their children such an education as they had themselves received ; (3) their grief of profanation of the Sabbath in Holland.

It is thus made plain why the Separatists came to America. Their objects seem to have been largely prudential. AVhile this is true we must not forget that the master motive in all was their desire to set up their ideal "church, to worship as their consciences dictated. This explains their leaving their native land. In Holland they enjoyed religious liberty but their temporal prospects discouraged them. They had to seek a new home where they might have liberty and, at the same time, permanent economic prosperity. Many places were considered but America was decided upon. Though under English dominion the Pilgrims hoped to enjoy to some degree their peculiar religious worship. They even tried to get the Kiup-'s consent to freedom in America. Bradford says : ^ "And some of the chief of that company doubted not to obtam their suit of the King for liberty in religion, and to have it confirmed under the King's broad seal, according to their desire. But it proved a harder piece of work than they took it for ; for though many means were used to bring it about, yet it could not be effected ; for there were diverse of good worth labored with the King to obtain it (amongst whom was one of the chief secretaries), and some others wrought with the Archbishop to give way thereto ; but it proved all in vain. Yet, thus far they prevailed in sounding His Majesty's mind, that he would connive at them and not molest them, provided they carried themselves peaceably. But to allow or tolerate them by his public authority, under his seal, they found it would not be." The Pilgrim Fathers did not have a great deal of confidence in this assurance of the King, but so great was their desire to improve their condition that they were willing to take a little risk in religious liberty. They were willing even to take the oath of supremacy if it were

' Bradford, p. 29.

required of them, and if it were not sufficient to take the oath of allegiance. We have seen that the Separatists had differentiated the church and state. They had advocated the now accepted ideas of the relation between the two. The Barrow and Greenwood prison writings show that they held that no power was given the prince to control, in the slightest degree, the religion of his subject. All the more difficult does it become to explain the following articles which were drawn up while the Pilgrims were negotiating with the Virginia company. They were sent to enable the company to answer any objection to their plans on the part of the Crown or the High Church party.

"(1). To the confession of faith published in the name of the Church of England, and to every article thereof, we do with the reformed churches where we live, and also elsewhere, assent wholly.

"(2). As we do acknowledge the doctrine of faith there taught, so do we the fruits and effects of the same doctrine to the begetting of saving faith in thousands in the land (conformists and reformists as they are called), with whom also, as with our brethren, we do desire to keep spiritual communion in peace, and will practice in our parts all lawful things.

" (3). The King's Majesty we acknowledge for supreme governor in his dominion in all causes and over all persons, and that none may decline or appeal from his authority or judgment in any cause whatsoever, but that in all things obedience is due unto him, either active, if the thing commanded be not against God's word, or passive, if it be, except pardon can be obtained.

" (4). We judge it lawful for His Majesty to appoint bishops, civil overseers or officers in authority under him, in the several provinces, dioceses, congregations or parishes, to oversee the churches and govern them civilly according to the laws of the land, unto whom they are in all things to give account, and by them to be ordered according to godliness.

105] Introductcyry. 23

" (5). The authority of the present bishops in the land we do ^acknowledge, so far forth as the same is indeed derived from His Majesty unto them and as they proceed in his name, whom we will also therein honor in all things and him in them.

" (6). We believe that no synod, class, convocation or assembly of ecclesiastical officers has any power or authority at all, but as the same by the magistrate given unto them.

"(7). Lastly, we desire to give unto all superiors due honor, to preserve the unity of the spirit with all that fear God, to have peace with all men what in us lieth, and wherein we are to be instructed by any." ^

Doyle commenting on these articles says : " On the surface they look like an unconditional acceptance of what by anticipation one may call Erastianism. They seem to contain a definite acknowledgment that all ecclesiastical authority must proceed from the civil power and be responsible to it. A <;areful inspection, however, shows that the more important concessions are qualified by distinct, though cautiously expressed, reservations. In the first article the acceptance of the confession of faith published by the Church of England is limited by the introduction of the reformed churches of Holland as partners in that acceptance. So the promise of obedience to the King's authority is modified by the condition that the thing commanded be not against God's word, a condition which might easily be so interpreted as to nullify the general admission. Yet even if we presume the most favorable interpretation of these Articles, the fourth contained an admission of the right of the State to control religion, which seems strangely at variance with the recognized doctrines of the Nonconformist. In truth, we must look on these seven Articles not so much as an exposition of faith but rather as I conditions of agreement." ^