This special program will showcase the global impact of our unrestrained and lavish pursuit of souls with God’s Word in Rhapsody …

29 COMMENTS

  9. negotiations, and the Scots demanded that Parliament be involved.

    This induced Charles to call what then became known as the Long

    Parliament, because it continued to sit until 1648, refusing to dissolve

    even when Charles demanded it do so.

    In 1642 the Civil War broke out between Charles and Parliament,

    even though there were many in Parliament who sided with the

    Crown. The pattern of conflicts reflected the struggle over economic

    and political institutions. Parliament wanted an end to absolutist

    political institutions; the king wanted them strengthened. These

    conflicts were rooted in economics. Many supported the Crown

    because they had been granted lucrative monopolies. For example,

    the local monopolies controlled by the rich and powerful merchants

    of Shrewsbury and Oswestry were protected by the Crown from

    competition by London merchants. These merchants sided with

    Charles I. On the other side, the metallurgical industry had flourished

    around Birmingham because monopolies were weak there and

    newcomers to the industry did not have to serve a seven-year

    apprenticeship, as they did in other parts of the country. During the

    Civil War, they made swords and produced volunteers for the

    parliamentary side. Similarly, the lack of guild regulation in the

    county of Lancashire allowed for the development before 1640 of the

    “New Draperies,” a new style of lighter cloth. The area where the

    production of these cloths was concentrated was the only part of

    Lancashire to support Parliament.

    Under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell, the Parliamentarians—

    known as the Roundheads after the style in which their hair was

    cropped—defeated the royalists, known as Cavaliers. Charles was

    tried and executed in 1649. His defeat and the abolition of the

    monarchy did not, however, result in inclusive institutions. Instead,

    monarchy was replaced by the dictatorship of Oliver Cromwell.

    Following Cromwell’s death, the monarchy was restored in 1660 and

    clawed back many of the privileges that had been stripped from it in

    1649. Charles’s son, Charles II, then set about the same program of

    creating absolutism in England. These attempts were only intensified

    by his brother James II, who ascended to the throne after Charles’s

  10. death in 1685. In 1688 James’s attempt to reestablish absolutism

    created another crisis and another civil war. Parliament this time was

    more united and organized. They invited the Dutch Statholder,

    William of Orange, and his wife, Mary, James’s Protestant daughter,

    to replace James. William would bring an army and claim the throne,

    to rule not as an absolutist monarch but under a constitutional

    monarchy forged by Parliament. Two months after William’s landing

    in the British Isles at Brixham in Devon (see Map 9, this page),

    James’s army disintegrated and he fled to France.

    THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION

    After victory in the Glorious Revolution, Parliament and William

    negotiated a new constitution. The changes were foreshadowed by

    William’s “Declaration,” made shortly prior to his invasion. They

    were further enshrined in the Declaration of Rights, produced by

    Parliament in February 1689. The Declaration was read out to

    William at the same session where he was offered the crown. In many

    ways the Declaration, which would be called the Bill of Rights after

    its signing into law, was vague. Crucially, however, it did establish

    some central constitutional principles. It determined the succession to

    the throne, and did so in a way that departed significantly from the

    then-received hereditary principles. If Parliament could remove a

    monarch and replace him with one more to their liking once, then

    why not again? The Declaration of Rights also asserted that the

    monarch could not suspend or dispense with laws, and it reiterated

    the illegality of taxation without parliamentary consent. In addition,

    it stated that there could be no standing army in England without

    parliamentary consent. Vagueness entered into such clauses as

    number 8, which stated, “The election of members of Parliament

    ought to be free,” but did not specify how “free” was to be

    determined. Even vaguer was clause 13, whose main point was that

    Parliaments ought to be held frequently. Since when and whether

    Parliament would be held had been such a contentious issue for the

    entire century, one might have expected much more specificity in this

  13. Thank you, Pastor Sir, for ROR, 24 years in print, and not one month has gone without this precious article not published. ROR is truly a messenger angel. I sincerely believe that ROR is God's tool to fulfil Scripture that this Gospel will get to the ends of the earth. Thank You, Lord, for giving me the financial resources to help spread ROR all over the world 🎉❤

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here