The New King: A Critic Of Puritanism
THE NEW KING: A CRITIC OF PURITANISM
James VI had previously reigned over Scotland, in which the religious ideas that had been championed at Geneva had gained the ascendancy. English Puritans looked enviously north of the border to the happy situation enjoyed by their Scottish brethren. The triumph of Calvinism in Scotland seemed to them to be an ideal to which they could only hope to aspire during the long reign of Elizabeth I. The death of Elizabeth and the announcement that James VI of Scotland was to succeed her caused undisguised delight in Puritan circles in England. Their hour had come. England seemed set to become a properly Protestant nation, in which the compromises of the Church of England would be put to an end.
Yet the reality of the situation was very different. James disliked Presbyterianism, believing passionately that his royal authority was dependent upon bishops. “No bishops, no king” summarized admirably his view of the interrelationship of church and state. It is true that the Scottish church (or “kirk”) had adopted the Presbyterian system of church government, developed by Calvin in Geneva, under reformers such as John Knox and Andrew Melville. Yet whatever his public obligations may have been to support this system, in private James VI had serious misgivings about Presbyterianism, which had no place for any bishops. He lobbied for the retention of episcopal government of the Scottish church. James believed that Presbyterianism was linked with egalitarianism and republicanism—after all, had not the city of Geneva declared itself to be a republic after overthrowing its former rulers? He preferred an episcopal system, not least because of its more positive associations with the monarchy.
His views on this matter were shaped to no small extent by some unpleasant experiences with Scottish presbyteries, particularly under Andrew Melville, a Scottish presbyterian who had taught at the Genevan Academy, and formed a close personal friendship with Calvin's protégé, Theodore Beza. At a heated encounter between the king and senior churchmen at Falkland Palace in October 1596, Melville had physically taken hold of James, and accused him of being “God's silly vassal.” Melville pointedly declared that while they would support James as king in public, in private they all knew perfectly well that Christ was the true king in Scotland, and his kingdom was the kirk—a kingdom in which James was a mere member, not a lord or head. James was shaken by this physical and verbal assault, not least because it suggested that Melville and his allies posed a significant threat to the Scottish throne.
The simple fact of the matter is that James had not the slightest intention of promoting a Puritan or Presbyterian agenda in England. He thoroughly detested what he had seen in Scotland, and did not wish to encounter the same difficulties in England. He much preferred the Anglican system of church government, seeing the institution of episcopacy as a safeguard to the monarchy.
English Puritans, who were not aware of James's strong views on this matter, naturally assumed that they were about to receive a monarch who would not merely take them seriously, but would actually be sympathetic to their agenda. It would take some time before the real state of affairs became clear—and James made the most of that window of opportunity to neutralize the Puritan threat, while pretending to honor its concerns.
Yet James's dislike of Scottish Presbyterianism extended beyond its ideas and personalities, and embraced the translation of the Bible that had become the favored translation of the Scottish church. The translation in question? The Geneva Bible.