On this day in 1649, Charles I was executed by order of the
Rump Parliament. In January 1661, shortly after the Stuarts were restored to
the monarchy, the 30th of January was established as a national day
of fasting and prayer. Until the nineteenth century, observations of this
anniversary regularly included sermons that considered the events of the day
and the importance of the occasion for the nation. Hundreds of 30 January
sermons were published during this period, and many more were preached in
British churches, chapels and meetinghouses.
Although sermons were an important part of the observation
of the 30th of January for many years, the content of these sermons
evolved over time. During the Restoration, preachers routinely called on the
nation to repent for the great crime regicide and portrayed Charles I as a
virtuous and good king, in fact a martyr, who fell victim to the excesses of
evil men.[1] By the early eighteenth century, some preachers began to debate
the actions and character of Charles I and to question the importance of
observing the anniversary. 30th of January sermons were caught up in
the partisan battles between Whigs and Tories, when conflicting interpretations
of recent history were used to defend party principles. On this anniversary, staunch
Tories extolled the principles of the divine right of kings, the duties of
non-resistance and passive obedience to monarchs. In contrast, some Whig preachers
suggested that Charles I was not an innocent martyr but was at least partly
responsible for his fate. They also were anxious to emphasize the differences
between 1649 and the Revolution of 1688/9, so that they could condemn the
regicide without suggesting the Revolution was resistance against a legitimate
monarch. More radical Whigs took this argument further and, though they did not
justify the execution of Charles I, they began to argue for the right of
resistance to tyrannical rulers, including Charles I.[2]
Much of the scholarship on 30th of January
sermons has focused on printed sermons, but the debate about the significance
of this occasion also left its traces on manuscript sermons. One notable
example of this is an anniversary sermon by Thomas Brett, which he preached at
least five times between 1706 and 1718 (Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2220, fols.
2r-8v). This sermon is particularly interesting because it was edited twice,
and the changes reflected evolving interpretations of the anniversary. By the
early eighteenth century, Brett was a committed Tory,[3] so it is no surprise
that the sermon is staunchly royalist and closely followed traditional
interpretations of the occasion. In the original 1706 version of the sermon, Brett
emphasized the importance of monarchy for the prosperity and security of the
nation and praised both Charles I and Queen Anne. He also condemned the
regicides and called for national repentance for the sins of that day. Brett
described Charles I as “a great Example of Vertue & piety,” and he
portrayed Anne as “a gracious Queen,” “in whose Welfare ye Welfare, Happiness
& prosperity of ye Nation consists” (fols. 6v, 3v, 8r). He repeatedly
emphasized their kinship, warning: “That should we prove disloyal &
disobedient to her, & make such a Defection from her as ye Rebellious
Subjects of her Royal Grandfather did from him, we shall bring this Nation,
& ourselves as parts of it into ye most miserable confusion imaginable”
(fol. 7r). Brett was likely targeting radical Whig principles, such as the
right of resistance, when he further urged his auditors: “Let us then, as I
said, abhor those detestable Principles & practices of Subjects calling
princes to an Account, of Deposing & Murdering them, & such like
seditious Doctrines wch incited Wicked Men to shed so much innocent blood in ye
Land” (fol. 8r).
The first round of editing, very likely by Brett, added more
lavish praise of Charles I and harsher reflections on those who had opposed
him. After asserting Charles’s divine right to rule as God’s anointed, Brett
described him as “a prince of a most excellent Temper & Strength of
Understanding & regularity of Affections, having no Transports for any
Vice, but endued with Habits of Knowledge & piety” (fol. 5r). Brett further
argued that there was never “a more hearty Lover of or [sic] Constitution both
in Church & State than he was” (fol. 6v). In contrast, Brett described the
regicides as “cruel & unreasonable Men,” “sacrilegious wretches” and “Bloodthirsty
& merciless men” (fols. 5r, 7v, 7r). He emphasized that, during the
Commonwealth, “this Nation groaned under ye most miserable & slavish
oppression, & each particular person was exposed to ye Rapine &
Violence of those who had invaded their prince’s prerogative &
Fellow-Subjects Rights & privileges” (fol. 5r). The additions may have
reflected a hardening of Brett’s opinions in the wake of the trial of the high-flying
Tory preacher Henry Sacheverell in 1710. It was at this time that Brett adopted
nonjuring views, refusing to take any oaths to the monarchy on the grounds that
the legitimate line of royal succession had been broken when James II was
deposed in 1688/9.[4] Just before the trial in 1710, many Tories preached
strongly in support of non-resistance on 30th of January. In
response, Whig preachers condemned high-flying preachers for abusing the
occasion and renewed their attacks on the behaviour of Charles I. In the early
1710s, Dissenters also sought to defend themselves and their predecessors from Tories’
accusations of disloyalty to the crown.[5] The provocative language added to
the sermon may have been Brett’s response to the challenges to the traditional
interpretation of the day by his political opponents, when he preached the
sermon in 1711 at Gray’s Inn Chapel, London or in 1712 at Wye, Kent.
What makes this sermon even more interesting is that there
was a second round of editing in pencil, when Brett, or more likely someone
else, crossed out phrases and whole passages of the sermon that revered Charles
I and condemned supporters of the Commonwealth. This editor crossed out a
reference to Charles having died as a martyr for the nation (fol. 6v). He also
struck out a paragraph condemning the “Mock Trial before a pretended High Court
of Justice” and describing the reported horrors of the Commonwealth, when “for
many years Hypocrisy, Murder, Sacrilege, Cruelty, Rapine & Tyranny
overspread ye Land” (fol. 7v-r). It is possible that Brett regretted some of
his more excessive praise of Charles I after the party conflict of the 1710s
began to cool, or he may have thought it prudent to moderate his language. It is
unlikely that Brett’s views of the anniversary changed because he was strongly
committed to the Stuart line. In 1716, Brett was consecrated as a nonjuring
bishop, and he remained active in the movement until his death in 1744.[6] It
seems probable that someone else modified the sermon. A reader may have crossed
out offending passages, or a more mainstream preacher may have tried to adapt
Brett’s sermon to the changing political climate later in the eighteenth
century, when party heats had waned and auditors wanted a more temperate view
of the events of 1649.[7]
The modifications made to Brett’s sermon almost certainly
reflect changes in the political climate in the early eighteenth century, as
the debate over the interpretation of the anniversary of the execution of
Charles I reached a peak. This manuscript sermon also demonstrates, in a way
that printed sermons rarely do, how preachers revised their sermons to suit
different contexts of delivery, changing expectations of auditors or their own
evolving views. It also may illustrate how preachers adapted others’ sermons
for their own purposes. Even on the topic of 30th of January
sermons, which has been extensively examined by scholars of printed sermons, new
insights on preachers’ evolving perspectives on the day can be gleaned from
manuscript sermons.
References
[1]
For 30 January sermons before 1689, see Andrew Lacey, The Cult of King Charles the Martyr (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell, 2003),
chs. 4-5; Helen W. Randall, “The Rise and Fall of a Martyrology: Sermons on
Charles I,” Huntington Library Quarterly
10, (1946-7): pp. 135-52; Kevin M. Sharpe, “‘So Hard a Text’?: Images of
Charles I, 1612-1700.” The Historical Journal
43, no. 2 (2000): pp. 394-400; Howard Tomlinson, “Commemorating Charles I -
King or Martyr?” History Today 45,
(1995): pp. 13-17.
[2]
On 30 January sermons in the early eighteenth century, see Jennifer Farooq, Preaching in Eighteenth-Century London (Woodbridge,
Suffolk: Boydell, 2013), pp. 125-31, 228-30; J. P. Kenyon, Revolution Principles: The Politics of Party 1689-1720 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1977. Reprint, 1990), pp. 72-82; Lacey, Cult of King Charles, pp. 191-207; Randall,
“Rise and Fall of Martyrology,” pp. 156-57; Howard D. Weinbrot, “The Thirtieth
of January Sermon: Swift, Johnson, Sterne, and the Evolution of Culture,” Eighteenth-Century Life 34, no. 1
(2010): pp. 31-38.
[3] Robert D. Cornwall, “Brett, Thomas (1667–1744),” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Oct 2008
[http://www.oxforddnb.com.libproxy.uregina.ca:2048/view/article/3349, accessed 26
Jan 2016]
[4] Cornwall, “Brett, Thomas.”
[5] Farooq, Preaching,
pp. 137, 229-30; Lacey, Cult of King
Charles, pp. 198-207; Tomlinson, “Commemorating Charles I,” p. 16.
[6] Cornwall, “Brett, Thomas.”
[7] James Caudle, “Measures
of Allegiance: Sermon Culture and the Creation of a Public Discourse of
Obedience and Resistance in Georgian Britain, 1714-1760” (PhD, Yale University,
1996), pp. 243-47; Randall, “Rise and Fall of Martyrology,” pp. 157-67; Weinbrot,
“Thirtieth of January Sermon,” pp. 38-47.
~ Jennifer Farooq
