24
November 1693 A.D. William
Sancroft Dies—79th of 105 Archbishops of Canterbury; a Non-Juror, Opposed to James II &
William of Orange; Did Brig Time
Hong,
Esther. “William Sancroft, Archbishop of
Canterbury and Nonjuror (1617-1693).
Fall, 2007. http://www.thegloriousrevolution.org/docs/williamsancroft.htm. Accessed 4 Jun 2014.
William
Sancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury and Nonjuror (1617-1693):
Archbishop Sancroft’s life was unpredictable:
“None of us can expect to be on the defeated side in a
civil war, to suffer ten years of rustication and exile as a result; to see the
cathedral of which we are dean (St. Paul’s no less) consumed by fire, and then
to pore over the plans for its reconstruction with the architect, and that
architect none other than Sir Christopher Wren; to crown a king, to be sent to
the Tower by that same king, and then to see him deposed after a foreign
invasion; and yet to remain loyal to that dethroned king.” (Collinson
173).
Archbishop of Canterbury William Sancroft was born on January 30, 16 17 in Fressingfield,
Suffolk. According to author, R. A. P.
J. Beddard, the Archbishop spelled his name differently throughout his life,
Sancroft or Sandcroft. Sancroft had one
older brother and six sisters. He was
the second son of Francis and Margaret Sancroft. The Sancroft family was from a line of yeoman
farmers. (According to the Concise
Oxford Dictionary, a yeoman farmer is "a person qualified by possessing
free land … He is sometimes described as a small landowner, a farmer of the
middle classes.")
Bury
St. Edmunds and Emmanuel College
Sancroft attended Bury St. Edmunds, a school where the sons
of local landowners were educated. After
Bury St. Edmunds, Sancroft attended Emmanuel College where his uncle, Dr.
William Sancroft was master from 1628 through 1637. According to Beddard, since Sancroft was the
second oldest son of a religious family, he was most likely to work with the
church. While at Emmanuel, it has been
alleged, Sancroft began an affair and fell in love with Arthur Brownest, his
roommate. (Collinson 176). Brownest died in May 1641 from tuberculosis
and Sancroft lived the remainder of his life like a celibate and never married.
(Id.)
At Emmanuel College, Cambridge, Sancroft studied theology
and was elected a fellow in 1642. As a
fellow, he tutored pupils. According to
Beddard, Sancroft was a “church of England loyalist who reverenced the established
laws, [] held to the conjoint rule of king and bishop, and adhered to the Book
of Common Prayer.”
Charles
I’s Execution in 1649
Sancroft was a royalist and executing the king meant
executing one appointed by God.
(Collinson 177). Sancroft immediately
transferred his loyalty to Charles II.
In July 1651, Sancroft’s fellowship at Emmanuel was taken away because
he refused to support the new Commonwealth.
During the 1650s, Sancroft spent his time partly in his
hometown of Fressingfield, Suffolk and partly traveling to London, the United
Provinces, the Netherlands, and Italy.
According to Beddard, during his trips, Sancroft would interact with
local scholars as well as collect books.
Although Sancroft was offered opportunities to publicly lead churches,
he refused these offers during this time.
(Id.). With the restoration of Charles II to the
throne in 1660, Sancroft returned to London.
Charles
II
Sancroft was well liked by Charles II. A few years after returning to England,
Sancroft was made Master of Emmanuel College in 1662. “Royal favour knew no bounds where Sancroft
was concerned. On 8 January 1664 Charles nominated him
dean of York. Elected on 23 January, he
was installed by proxy on 26 February, and held deanery barely nine
months.” (Id.)
Then on November 8, 16 64 ,
Sancroft was nominated by Charles II to become dean of St. Paul’s. A few months later, Sancroft left his
position as master of Emmanuel.
According to Beddard, “it was a measure of Charles’s confidence in
Sancroft’s loyalty and devotion to duty that he put him in charge of the
cathedral of this capital – the city where the rebellion had begun in 1642, and
in which, for all of Sheldon’s exertions, nonconformity and disaffection were
still rife.”
When Sancroft became dean of St. Paul’s, the cathedral was
in disrepair as a result of neglect during the interregnum. Unfortunately, soon after Sancroft was
appointed, London was hit by the “the Great Plague” in 1665 and “the Great
Fire” in 1666. The fire destroyed St.
Paul’s, but this did not keep Sancroft from taking on the restoration of the
cathedral. Sancroft worked with
Christopher Wren to rebuild the cathedral (Collinson 182). Christopher Wren was one of the most renowned
English architects at the time. Sancroft
was dedicated to restoring St. Paul’s.
“Long after he left Emmanuel, Sancroft would continue to be involved in
the chapel project as benefactor, fund-raiser and architectural
consultant.” (Collinson 182).
Primate
of All England
After the death of Archbishop Sheldon on November 9, 16 77 , Charles II
nominated Sancroft to become the next Archbishop of Canterbury, also known as
the “Primate of All England”. (Primate
comes from the latin term, primus,
which means “first”.) Sancroft became
the primary and prominent leader in the Church of England. As Archbishop of Canterbury, Sancroft would
be required to participate in coronations and other public ceremonies. According to Beddard, it was no surprise that
Sancroft would be nominated by Charles II to succeed Sheldon,
“Unencumbered by aristocratic connections, Sancroft was
what he had always been – the king’s man.
His year of service in both provinces of the church under Cosin,
Sheldon, and Henchman had equipped him with the necessary experience to be
primate of all England, and Charles knew he could depend on him to rule the
church on his behalf. His nomination to
Canterbury announced the king’s resolution to make the most of the Church of
England’s traditional role as a bastion of monarchy.”
On February 21, 16 78 ,
Sancroft and Bishop Morley of Winchester spoke to Charles II’s brother, James
II, about the importance of maintaining the established religion. According to Beddard, this would be unheeded
advice and foreshadowed the fall of James II from the throne.
As Archbishop, Sancroft was committed to making sure that
most of those appointed to work with the church were dedicated to ensuring that
James II’s would eventually take his place as king following the reign of his
brother, Charles II.
James
II
Charles II died on February
6, 16 85 and Sancroft, as Archbishop, crowned James II
on St. George’s Day (April
23, 1685 ) in Westminster Abbey.
“The Archbishop officiated at the ceremony of the
coronation of James II.; and the fact of his placing with his own hands the
crown on the head of the monarch seems to have greatly contributed to bind his
attachment to him as his only lawful sovereign, and to confirm him in the
steady refusal to transfer, under subsequent change, his allegiance to
another.” (D’Oyly at 210, vol. I)
According to Beddard, soon after James II’s coronation,
Lambeth Palace (the home of Archbishops) began receiving complaints that
papists were being granted dispensations.
Then in a November meeting with Parliament, there was outright protest
against James II’s latest action. James
II had decided to keep the Roman Catholic officers who had suppressed the
rebellions by Monmouth and Argyll. (Id.).
Sancroft and other bishops supported the opposition to James II’s
actions. Soon afterwards, James
prorogued Parliament. As a result of
Sancroft’s opposition to James II’s actions, his advice over church
appointments were not followed. Beddard
states that in “July 1686 his recommendations of Robert Smith for Oxford and
James Jeffreys for Chester were ignored in favour of Samuel Parker and Thomas
Cartwright, two maverick ultra-tories.”
Sancroft continued to show disagreement over James II’s
support for Catholicism for which he was punished. In 1686, Sancroft refused “to serve on James
II’s Ecclesiastical Commission, an illegal engine for the advancement of the
Catholic interest. This led to his
removal from the Privy Council, exclusion from the Court, and the loss of all
influence over preferments.” (Collinson 189)
According to Beddard, Sancroft was careful with his
actions, “Condemned to the wilderness of royal disfavour Sancroft had to pick a
precarious middle way as best he could between compliance and truculence.” Sancroft had been accused by Gilbert Burnet
of passively allowing James II to carry on with his “catholicizing”
policies. However, Beddard believes
Sancroft was trying to find a balance between his loyalty to the king and his
loyalty to the Anglican Church.
Declaration
of Indulgence
On April 4, 16 87 ,
James II issued the Declaration of Indulgence, also known as the Declaration
for the Liberty of Conscience. This
document established religious toleration and was written to gain the support
of Roman Catholics. The Declaration: suspended penal laws that forced people to
follow the Church of England, permitted individuals to worship in their homes
as they wished, and no longer required religious oaths by individuals before
working for the government.
The Declaration destroyed the hopes of restoring an
Anglican monopoly in England. The
Declaration was later amended, without substantial changes, by James II in
1688. James II ordered that the
Declaration be read in churches across England.
Sancroft and six other bishops disobeyed the order by James II to read
the Declaration because they believed it was illegal for the king to exercise
dispensing powers. They believed the
king did not have suspending powers.
Trial
of the Seven Bishops
In response to James II’s order that the Declaration be
read in church, the Seven Bishops wrote a petition. The Seven Bishops were: William
Sancroft (Archbishop of Canterbury), Thomas
Ken
(Bishop of Bath and Wells), John Lake (Bishop of Chichester), William
Lloyd (Bishop of St. Asaph), Jonathan Trelawny (Bishop
of Bristol), Francis
Turner (Bishop
of Ely), and Thomas White (Bishop of Peterborough). James II viewed the ptition as an act of
rebellion and ordered that the Seven Bishops be imprisoned in the Tower of
London. The bishops were kept in the
tower for seven days. (Strickland
68). James II charged them with
seditious libel, a misdemeanor. The
Seven Bishops were brought before the Court of the King’s Bench for trial and
were found not guilty.
Although the imprisonment and trial of the bishops only
lasted for a short period of time, this act contributed significantly to the
downfall of James II. (Id. at 69). James II’s son, “the old pretender”, was born
two days after the bishops were committed to the tower. (Id.
at 70). If Sancroft had not been
imprisoned, but instead had witnessed the birth of the heir to the throne, then
there would not have been doubt as to the legitimacy of the birth. (Id.
at 71). Those who opposed James II
attributed Sancroft’s absence as evidence that no child was born. (Id.).
Later in 1688 when James was deposed, the Declaration was
voided. In the 1689 Bill of Rights, it
was codified that it was illegal to prosecute those who petitioned the
king.
. Petitioning the king was not punishable. (Id.).
Even though they were put in the Tower and forced to go
through a trial, five out of the seven bishops maintained their loyalty to
James II even after James II fled to France following the Glorious Revolution
of 1688.
. Bishop Lloyd and Bishop Trelawny were the two
bishops who severed their loyalty to James II.
(Id.). The five out of seven bishops who maintained
their loyalty to James II were part of the nine bishops who became non-jurors
following the coronation of William III and Mary of Modena. (Id.). (The non-jurors refused to plead allegiance
to William III and Mary of Modena and as a result, lost their appointments as
bishops.) (Id.).
The
Glorious Revolution of 1688
After being found innocent at trial, Sancroft returned to
his position as Archbishop and began the work of resisting Catholics and their
practices. According to Beddard,
Sancroft maintained his allegiance to James II while trying to suppress the
“‘popish emissaries’, meaning the vicars apostalic sent from Rome, and to
cultivate their ‘brethen’, the dissenters.”
Sancroft also compelled James II to amend his domestic policies, which
James II consented to. (Id.).
Earlier that year, June 10,
16 88 , James II’s son with Mary of Modena was born.
. According to Beddard, on October 22, Sancroft
attended a meeting of the council in order to take away any doubt that this was
a legitimate son of James II and Mary of Modena and thus rightful heir to the
throne. Sancroft and other Protestants had
hoped that the birth of Sancroft’s son would restore the religious
establishment in England. Sancroft tried
to summon a “free parliament” to restore order in the kingdom. (Id.). Unfortunately these efforts proved futile
when James II fled England in December 1688.
According to Beddard, Sancroft and twenty-seven peers met
at Guildhall on December 11, 16 88
to try to restore order. They asked
William III for his help in getting Parliament together, but they did not
request for William III to come to London or to take over government. (Id.). The assembly was successful in bringing order
to London.
Later on December 16, 16 88 ,
James II returned to London. Sancroft,
once again, demonstrated his allegiance to James II and waited on him. (Id.). After James II left England for good on December 23, 16 88 ,
Sancroft withdrew from his public duties and became a hermit. (Id.).
This was the second interregnum that Sancroft had
experienced during his life, (the first after Charles I was executed and before
Charles II was restored to the throne).
And now, Sancroft was witness to his second interregnum in which James
II had been deposed and replaced by William III and Mary of Modena on February 13, 16 89 .
As Archbishop of Canterbury, it was Sancroft’s duty to coronate
William III and Mary of Modena but Sancroft refused. (Collinson 193). Instead, he offered excuses for his absence
and Bishop Compton took over these duties on behalf of Sancroft. (Id.).
Ejection
of his position as Archbishop of Canterbury and the Remainder of his Life in
Fressingfield
Sancroft refused to recognize William III and Mary of
Modena as King and Queen of England. As
a result, on February 1, 16 90 ,
Sancroft, and four of the other Seven Bishops and 400 members of the clergy
were fired from their positions.
Sancroft and those who refused to pledge allegiance to the new king and
queen became known as the non-jurors.
Shortly after the clergy members were fired, the Church was inundated
with treatises by those who did not want the clergy to be replaced. (Luckock 216). Some viewed the non-jurors as the real
Church. (Id. at 216). The opposers
did not want to see a separation between church and state (Id. at 216). On April 23, 16 91,
John Tillotson replaced Sancroft as Archbishop of Canterbury.
On August 3, 16 90 ,
Sancroft left London and returned to his childhood home in Fressingfield. Sancroft remained a private figure and spent
his time reading books and writing papers.
During the summer of 1693, Sancroft contracted malaria. (Id. at 199).
Later that year, on November 23, 16 93 ,
Sancroft died and was buried in Fressingfield, Suffolk. (Id.).
Bibliography
Beddard, R. A. P. J.. “Sancroft,
William (1617–1693).” Oxford
Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian
Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed. Ed. Lawrence Goldman. Oct. 2005. 18 Nov. 2007
.
Collinson, Patrick. From
Cranmer to Sancroft. Continuum
International Publishing Group, 2006.
Concise Oxford Dictionary, (edited by H.W. & F.G.
Fowler, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1972 reprint, p.1516). <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeoman_farmer#Yeoman_farmers> .
D’Oyly, George. Life
of Archbishop Sancroft. J.W. Parker, 1821.
(2 vols.)
Luckock, Herbert Mortimer.
The Bishops in the Tower (1887).
Strickland, Agnes. The
Lives of the Seven Bishops Committed to the Tower in 1688 (1866).
No comments:
Post a Comment