Declaration of Indulgence - Revision history

WikiSysop at 19:34, 23 July 2018

2018-07-23T19:34:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:34, 23 July 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	There were two Declarations of Indulgence under [[Charles II]] in 1662 and 1672, and three under [[James II]]: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.		There were two Declarations of Indulgence under [[Charles II]] in 1662 and 1672, and three under [[James II]]: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of [[Dissenters\|dissenters]] and recusants, i.e. [[Puritanism\|Puritans]] and [[Catholicism\|Catholics]].

	== Charles II’s (so-called) first Declaration of Indulgence ==		== Charles II’s (so-called) first Declaration of Indulgence ==
Line 12:		Line 12:

	The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.		The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.
	The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. to charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to be open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.		The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the [[Church of England]] maintained its privileges e.g. to charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to be open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.

	Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the [[Test Act]] was established.		[[Parliament]] was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the [[Test Acts\|Test Act]] was established.

	== James II’s First Declaration of Indulgence ==		== James II’s First Declaration of Indulgence ==

WikiSysop at 19:31, 23 July 2018

2018-07-23T19:31:38Z

Pankratz at 13:47, 25 April 2013

2013-04-25T13:47:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 25 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.		There were two Declarations of Indulgence under [[Charles II]] in 1662 and 1672, and three under [[James II]]: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.

Pankratz at 08:59, 21 July 2009

2009-07-21T08:59:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:59, 21 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters i.e. ~~Protestants~~ and Catholics.		There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.


Line 16:		Line 16:

	The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.		The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.
	The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants ~~(opponents of the Anglican Church)~~ were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to ~~bee~~ open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.		The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. to charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to be open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.

	Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the Test Act was established.		Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the [[Test Act]] was established.

Julia K at 18:30, 20 July 2009

2009-07-20T18:30:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:30, 20 July 2009
Line 6:		Line 6:

	26 December 1662		26 December 1662

	This “propose[d] relief to E. dissenters by royal dispensation” (Holmes 4). But already in February 1663 this proposition was rejected by the [[House of Commons]].		This “propose[d] relief to E. dissenters by royal dispensation” (Holmes 4). But already in February 1663 this proposition was rejected by the [[House of Commons]].

Line 13:		Line 14:

	15 March 1672		15 March 1672

	The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.		The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.
	The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants (opponents of the Anglican Church) were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to bee open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.		The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants (opponents of the Anglican Church) were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to bee open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.
Line 23:		Line 25:

	4 April 1687		4 April 1687

	This aims at giving pragmatic reasons for religious toleration, suggesting that religious persecution damaged the interest of the government (spoiling trade, discouraging strangers from immigrating). All penal laws in ecclesiastical matters were to be suspended and worship became legal in private as well as in public places. The [[Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy]] that had been made obligatory by the [[Test Acts]] of 1673 and 1678 were abolished.		This aims at giving pragmatic reasons for religious toleration, suggesting that religious persecution damaged the interest of the government (spoiling trade, discouraging strangers from immigrating). All penal laws in ecclesiastical matters were to be suspended and worship became legal in private as well as in public places. The [[Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy]] that had been made obligatory by the [[Test Acts]] of 1673 and 1678 were abolished.

Line 30:		Line 33:

	27 April 1688		27 April 1688

	This was a reissue of James’s First Declaration and the obligation to read it out in all Anglican churches. There was protest among the bishops and “the immortal Seven [bishops]” (Holmes 184) issued a petition against this pro-Catholic treatise which was later regarded as one of the reasons of the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1688.		This was a reissue of James’s First Declaration and the obligation to read it out in all Anglican churches. There was protest among the bishops and “the immortal Seven [bishops]” (Holmes 184) issued a petition against this pro-Catholic treatise which was later regarded as one of the reasons of the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1688.

Julia K: Created page with 'There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of In…'

2009-07-20T18:28:43Z

Created page with 'There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of In…'

New page

There were two Declarations of Indulgence under Charles II in 1662 and 1672, and three under James II: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters i.e. Protestants and Catholics.

== Charles II’s (so-called) first Declaration of Indulgence ==

26 December 1662
This “propose[d] relief to E. dissenters by royal dispensation” (Holmes 4). But already in February 1663 this proposition was rejected by the [[House of Commons]].

== Charles II’s Declaration of Indulgence ==

15 March 1672
The preamble said that religious restrictions were loosened to prevent secret meetings of dissenters and as a result conspiracies or riots.
The declaration contained four articles that stated that first, the Church of England maintained its privileges e.g. charge fees (“tithes”) from Anglicans and Nonconformists as well. Second, penal laws against Nonconformists and recusants (opponents of the Anglican Church) were to be suspended. Third, meetings of Nonconformists had to be licensed and were to be held by licensed ministers. Those meetings had to bee open to the public. Fourth, Catholics could only hold their services in private.

Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the Test Act was established.

== James II’s First Declaration of Indulgence ==

4 April 1687
This aims at giving pragmatic reasons for religious toleration, suggesting that religious persecution damaged the interest of the government (spoiling trade, discouraging strangers from immigrating). All penal laws in ecclesiastical matters were to be suspended and worship became legal in private as well as in public places. The [[Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy]] that had been made obligatory by the [[Test Acts]] of 1673 and 1678 were abolished.

== James II’s Second Declaration of Indulgence ==

27 April 1688
This was a reissue of James’s First Declaration and the obligation to read it out in all Anglican churches. There was protest among the bishops and “the immortal Seven [bishops]” (Holmes 184) issued a petition against this pro-Catholic treatise which was later regarded as one of the reasons of the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1688.

== Source ==

Holmes, Geoffrey. ''The Making of a Great Power. Late Stuart and Early Georgian Britain. 1660-1722.'' London: Longman, 1993.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 23 July 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	There were two Declarations of Indulgence under [[Charles II]] in 1662 and 1672, and three under [[James II]]: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.		There were two Declarations of Indulgence under [[Charles II]] in 1662 and 1672, and three under [[James II]]: one in Scotland and one in England in 1687 and the Second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688. The declarations were concerned with expanding the religious freedom of dissenters and recusants, i.e. Puritans and Catholics.



	== Charles II’s (so-called) first Declaration of Indulgence ==		== Charles II’s (so-called) first Declaration of Indulgence ==
Line 8:		Line 6:

	This “propose[d] relief to E. dissenters by royal dispensation” (Holmes 4). But already in February 1663 this proposition was rejected by the [[House of Commons]].		This “propose[d] relief to E. dissenters by royal dispensation” (Holmes 4). But already in February 1663 this proposition was rejected by the [[House of Commons]].



	== Charles II’s Declaration of Indulgence ==		== Charles II’s Declaration of Indulgence ==
Line 19:		Line 15:

	Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the [[Test Act]] was established.		Parliament was suspicious of granting Catholics liberties and rejected Charles’s declaration in February 1673 on the grounds that penal statutes in ecclesiastical matters could only be suspended by an act of Parliament. Later that same year the [[Test Act]] was established.



	== James II’s First Declaration of Indulgence ==		== James II’s First Declaration of Indulgence ==
Line 27:		Line 21:

	This aims at giving pragmatic reasons for religious toleration, suggesting that religious persecution damaged the interest of the government (spoiling trade, discouraging strangers from immigrating). All penal laws in ecclesiastical matters were to be suspended and worship became legal in private as well as in public places. The [[Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy]] that had been made obligatory by the [[Test Acts]] of 1673 and 1678 were abolished.		This aims at giving pragmatic reasons for religious toleration, suggesting that religious persecution damaged the interest of the government (spoiling trade, discouraging strangers from immigrating). All penal laws in ecclesiastical matters were to be suspended and worship became legal in private as well as in public places. The [[Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy]] that had been made obligatory by the [[Test Acts]] of 1673 and 1678 were abolished.



	== James II’s Second Declaration of Indulgence ==		== James II’s Second Declaration of Indulgence ==
Line 35:		Line 27:

	This was a reissue of James’s First Declaration and the obligation to read it out in all Anglican churches. There was protest among the bishops and “the immortal Seven [bishops]” (Holmes 184) issued a petition against this pro-Catholic treatise which was later regarded as one of the reasons of the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1688.		This was a reissue of James’s First Declaration and the obligation to read it out in all Anglican churches. There was protest among the bishops and “the immortal Seven [bishops]” (Holmes 184) issued a petition against this pro-Catholic treatise which was later regarded as one of the reasons of the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1688.