3 Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and England's 'wars of religion' - Apollo ...

3 Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowarsof religionrsquolowast

David L Smith

I

This essay examines the public career of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd (1572ndash1658) especially during the period 1640ndash5 After first consideringRudyerdrsquos activities during the 1620s and 1630s by way of context theessay will then focus on his career during the two years before the out-break of the English Civil War and the first three years or so of the waritself (after which he became less and less active in political affairs) Inparticular the essay will explore the development of Rudyerdrsquos politicaland religious ideas and their impact on his actions A reconstruction ofhow Rudyerdrsquos position evolved in the years leading up to war and duringthe early part of the conflict allows us to assess the significance of ideol-ogy especially religion as against other motives in shaping his moderateParliamentarian allegiance The essay thus engages with John Morrillrsquoswork at two levels first by reconsidering the importance of religion incausing the Civil War and influencing the choice of sides and second byoffering a case study of the lsquopolitical psychologyrsquo of one prominent andwell-documented but hitherto little studied individual The essay willexplore the intertwining of religious and political attitudes in this periodIt will also grapple with the challenge of reconstructing the relationshipbetween beliefs and actions and hence of explaining the nature of polit-ical motivation It thus offers a case study of moderate Parliamentarianallegiance that can be situated within the wider context of some of the

lowast I first became interested in Sir Benjamin Rudyerd back in 1984ndash5 when I wrote aCambridge BA dissertation on his career supervised by John Morrill It thereforeseems appropriate for this volume over a quarter of a century later to revisit a subjectthat I first explored under Johnrsquos expert guidance An early version of this article waspresented at the seminar on the religious history of Britain 1500ndash1800 at the Instituteof Historical Research in May 2007 and I am grateful for their helpful comments to allthose who were present especially Ken Fincham Tom Freeman and Nicholas Tyacke Ialso wish to thank Mike Braddick for his valuable advice on the first draft of this pieceand the History of Parliament Trust for permitting me to see prior to publication SimonHealyrsquos article on Rudyerdrsquos career up to 1629

52

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 53

central concerns and approaches of lsquorevisionismrsquo in general and of JohnMorrillrsquos work in particular

II

Rudyerdrsquos parliamentary career began relatively late in his life born inDecember 1572 he was aged nearly fifty when he first entered the Com-mons in 1621 He sat in every parliament from then until 1648 and hewas one of the thirteen oldest members of the Commons by the time theLong Parliament assembled in November 16401 Educated at Winch-ester College and St Johnrsquos College Oxford he was later admitted to theMiddle Temple in April 1590 and called to the Bar in October 1600 Atan unknown date he married Mary Harrington and in 1610 he obtaineda licence to travel abroad for three years After his return he was knightedin March 1618 and the following month was appointed Surveyor of theCourt of Wards for life He held that lucrative office until the courtrsquosabolition in February 1646 whereupon the Long Parliament voted himpound6000 as compensation In 1619 he was also granted an annuity of pound200that was apparently still being paid in the 1640s2 Rudyerd was noted forhis eloquence and Sir Edward Dering referred to him in the Long Par-liament as lsquothat silver trumpetrsquo3 Sir John Eliot was less impressed andonce wrote that Rudyerd lsquodid speak never but premeditated which hadmore show of memory than affection and made his words less powerfulthan observedrsquo4 but what Rudyerdrsquos speeches may have lacked in spon-taneity they made up for in rhetorical prowess and colour of languageHis attitudes can be reconstructed principally from these parliamentaryspeeches and his concerns ranged broadly across the public issues of theperiod from foreign policy to the crownrsquos finances and the future of theChurch of England

The key influence on Rudyerdrsquos political career appears to have beenhis friendship with William Herbert third earl of Pembroke and withhis younger brother Philip Herbert earl of Montgomery and fourth earlof Pembroke Rudyerdrsquos connection with the Herberts apparently grewout of his early association with Robert Sidney Lord LrsquoIsle whose elder

1 Mary Frear Keeler The Long Parliament 1640ndash1641 A Biographical Study of its MembersMemoirs of the American Philosophical Society 36 (Philadelphia 1954) p 19 table 4

2 For biographical accounts of Rudyerd see J A Manning ed Memoirs of Sir BenjaminRudyerd Knt (1841) C H Firthrsquos life of Rudyerd in the old DNB and my life of Rudyerdin the ODNB

3 The speeches of Sr Edward Deering in the Commons House of Parliament (1641) p 4 (WingD 1116)

4 Maija Jansson and W B Bidwell eds Proceedings in Parliament 1625 (New Haven andLondon 1987) p 507

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

54 David L Smith

son he tutored on a grand tour The third earl of Pembroke to whomRudyerd owed his appointment as Surveyor of the Wards was LrsquoIslersquosnephew Rudyerd sometimes answered letters for both the third and thefourth earls of Pembroke and he also acted as a surety for some oftheir legal transactions such as indentures conveying land Similarly hisreturn to Parliament for Portsmouth (1621 1624 1625) and then forthe Wiltshire constituencies of Old Sarum (1626) Downton (1628ndash9)and Wilton (1640ndash8) was directly due to the earls of Pembroke whoseseat was at Wilton House During this period the earls of Pembrokenominated both members for Wilton and at least one for each of thethree other constituencies that Rudyerd represented

Throughout his parliamentary career Rudyerd co-operated closely withhis patrons Conrad Russell described him as lsquothe chief House of Com-mons spokesman for Pembrokersquo5 Both the third and fourth earls werestrongly committed to godly Protestantism an outlook with which Rudy-erd appears to have been instinctively in sympathy Vehemently anti-Catholic Rudyerd like the Herberts advocated a pan-Protestant pro-Dutch anti-Spanish foreign policy and was prepared to contemplate aFrench alliance if that helped to isolate Spain Rudyerdrsquos view of diplo-macy was guided primarily by his horror that lsquoour religion [was] batteredabroad and mouldered away at homersquo6 More specifically this outlooktranslated into a deep concern about scandalous livings as well as scan-dalous ministers and a wish to alleviate the poverty of the Church

This theme occurred repeatedly in Rudyerdrsquos parliamentary speechesduring the 1620s and was clearly among his highest priorities for thereform of the Church Thus on 15 May 1621 in his maiden speechin the Commons he advocated an oath to prevent patrons selling cleri-cal livings lsquoHere in this place have many good laws been made againstpapists but the best that I know would be to employ the best minis-ters for matter of belief is not to be compelled but persuadedrsquo7 Hisconcern with ecclesiastical matters was evident again on 25 June 1625when he spoke against inserting a proviso into the petition on religionthat aimed to allow silenced ministers to preach on agreed points of doc-trine and discipline on the grounds that lsquomoderate bishops would do itof themselvesrsquo8 During the later 1620s he became ever more preoccu-pied with the problems of scandalous livings and the under-endowmentof the Church of England Thus on 10 February 1626 he urged the

5 Conrad Russell Parliaments and English Politics 1621ndash1629 (Oxford 1979) p 136 Wallace Notestein F H Relf and H Simpson eds Commons Debates 1621 7 vols

(New Haven 1935) II p 4457 Ibid IV p 344 8 Proceedings in Parliament 1625 p 248

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 55

Commons lsquoto enlarge ministersrsquo livings and lamented the case of twoLancashire ministers whose livings yielded lsquobut pound6 per annumrsquo and whohad been lsquofound to be unlicensed alehousekeepersrsquo There was he com-plained lsquoscarce such blindness or ignorance in Christendom as in someparts of this kingdomrsquo9 He called for a bill to improve the endowmentof scandalous livings and subsequently suggested that this be pairedwith another bill concerning scandalous ministers10 A subcommitteewas appointed to draw up such a bill but it does not appear to havereported before the parliament was dissolved11

Two years later Rudyerd explored these problems much more fully ina major speech probably delivered on 21 April 1628 and later publishedas a separate entitled Sir Beniamin Ruddierdrsquos speech in behalfe of theCleargy12 He maintained that lsquothere were some places in England whichwere scarce in Christendom where God was little better known thanamongst the Indiansrsquo These places included lsquothe utmost skirts of thenorth where the prayers of the common people are more like spells andcharms than devotionsrsquo and Rudyerd detected lsquothe same blindness andignorance in divers parts of Walesrsquo He insisted that lsquoto plant goodministers in good livings was the strongest and surest means to establishtrue religionrsquo and that lsquoit would prevail more against papistry than themaking of new laws or executing of oldrsquo He believed this was lsquoabsolutelywithin our powerrsquo Rudyerd was tough on scandalous ministers ndash lsquothereis no man shall be more forward to have them severely punished than Iwill bersquo ndash but also tough on the causes of scandalous ministers lsquolet usprovide them convenient livings and then punish them in Godrsquos namebut till then scandalous livings cannot but have scandalous ministersrsquoThe lsquoglorious and religious work of King Jamesrsquo offered an inspiringexample lsquowithin the space of one year he caused to be planted churchesthrough all Scotland the Highlands and the Borders with pound30 a yearapiece with a house and some glebe land belonging to them which pound30a year considering the cheapness of the country and the modest fashionof ministers living there is worth double as much as anywhere within an100 miles of Londonrsquo He asserted that lsquothough Christianity and religionbe established generally throughout this kingdom yet until it be plantedmore particularly I shall scarce think this a Christian commonwealthrsquo

9 Maija Jansson and W B Bidwell eds Proceedings in Parliament 1626 4 vols (NewHaven and London 1991ndash6) II pp 12 15 17

10 Ibid II p 128 III p 101 11 Ibid II pp 26ndash912 For the problems of dating this speech and a convincing case for regarding 21 April

1628 as the most probable date see M F Keeler M J Cole and W B Bidwell edsProceedings in Parliament 1628 6 vols (New Haven 1977ndash83) III p 17n Sir BeniaminRuddierdrsquos speech in behalfe of the Cleargy (London 1628) is ESTC S2865 214357

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

56 David L Smith

This matter would Rudyerd declared lsquolie heavy upon Parliaments until itbe effectedrsquo and he concluded lsquoI will never give over soliciting this causeas long as Parliaments and I live togetherrsquo Rudyerd believed that untilParliament took radical steps the Churchrsquos economic problems wouldremain unresolved When on 16 May 1628 the scandalous ministers billreceived a third reading he again urged that it might go lsquohand in handrsquowith the scandalous livings bill although the latter was never reported tothe House13

By the later 1620s Rudyerd had another growing concern aboutthe state of the Church of England namely the increasing influenceof Arminianism His anxieties became evident in April 1626 when heinformed Sir Francis Nethersole that Pembroke lsquodoes not think fit hisMajesty should stand neutral towards the Arminians lest he should givethem too much countenancersquo14 A few days later he supported Pymrsquosinvestigation of Richard Montagu and urged that the charges againsthim should be related to the Lords15 In the 1628 Parliament Rudyerdwas named to the committees that drew up charges against two otherdivines Roger Maynwaring and Richard Burgess16 Parliamentary fearsof creeping Arminianism came to a head in the 1629 session and on29 January Rudyerd made a remarkable speech in the committee of reli-gion that offers an important insight into his conception of the Church ofEngland and the dangers that it faced According to Sir Edward NicholasRudyerd argued that

His Majesty hath already publicly declared to keep the unity of love in the bondof peace popery is ancient amongst us and in that we complain only of the wantof execution of laws against recusants Arminianism lately crept in and crept upinto high places Moves that we should consider of the articles of our faith longsince agreed 1552 and published again lately the ancient catechism appointedand published in our book of common prayer and to consider also of those alsoat Lambeth from all which he would have us to take our proceedings to expresswhat those were and to advance against all that shall vary from those withoutdisputing for or against particulars nor upstart opinions17

By highlighting the 1552 Articles and the Lambeth Articles of 1595Rudyerd was espousing a strongly Protestant ndash indeed Calvinist ndash visionof the Church of England Small wonder then that he was deeplyopposed to any signs of growing Arminian influence and about twoweeks later on 10 February he urged the Commons to write to the

13 Proceedings in Parliament 1628 III pp 431 438 44014 Proceedings in Parliament 1626 IV p 309 15 Ibid III p 10116 Proceedings in Parliament 1628 IV pp 36 6017 Wallace Notestein and F H Relf eds Commons Debates for 1629 (Minneapolis 1921)

p 116

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 57

universities of Oxford and Cambridge requesting details of the lsquopub-lic censures and recantations made on such as have held tenets ofArminianism and poperyrsquo18 The House duly resolved that the Speakershould do this19

Rudyerdrsquos religious outlook was consistent not only with Pembrokersquosbut also with that of other members of the Commons with whom he reg-ularly collaborated politically not least in seeking an overhaul of crownrevenues most notably Sir Nathaniel Rich Sir Dudley Digges and JohnPym These members aimed both to enlarge the monarchrsquos income andto safeguard the future of parliaments Politically Rudyerd was probablythe least radical of them and throughout the 1620s he mainly confinedhimself to advocating the grant of a generous number of subsidies Forexample on 26 November 1621 he moved that lsquowe would not suffer theinstrument to be strained too high to the ruin but proceed to bountyspeedilyrsquo20 Rudyerd consistently urged the Commons to back up itsadvice on foreign policy and especially its calls for war with generousgrants of supply Thus on 22 June 1625 he hoped that members wouldlsquocarry [them]selves in this first sessionrsquo of Charles Irsquos reign lsquowith sweet-ness with duty with confidence in and towards his Majestyrsquo who hadbeen lsquobred in Parliamentsrsquo21 Eight days later he reminded membersthat lsquothe Kingrsquos domestical charges [were] exceeding great for funeralentertainment of ambassadors and coronation The charge of the navylike to be 3 hundred thousand poundsrsquo and he wanted the House tolsquogive in some proportion to this great chargersquo22 In a similar veinRudyerd declared on 22 March 1628 that lsquothe way to show that we arethe wise counsellors or that we should be so is by giving a large andample supply proportionable to the greatness and importance of thework in hand for counsel without money is but a speculationrsquo23 He rec-ognized that Parliamentrsquos lsquopower of the pursersquo if pushed too far couldforce the king to resort to non-parliamentary means of raising moneyand this fear lay behind his celebrated warning to the Commons earlierin that same speech that lsquothis is the crisis of Parliaments we shall knowby this if Parliaments live or diersquo24

Rudyerdrsquos repeated calls for generous supply closely resembled Pem-brokersquos own views and their attitudes towards the duke of Buckinghamwere similarly aligned Throughout they remained at heart suspiciousof the duke but they were prepared to co-operate with him for tacticalreasons especially after 1623ndash4 when Buckingham became committed

18 Ibid pp 57 137 19 CJ I pp 928 930 20 Commons Debates 1621 II p 44521 Proceedings in Parliament 1625 p 219 22 Ibid p 27423 Proceedings in Parliament 1628 II p 59 24 Ibid II p 58

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

58 David L Smith

to an anti-Spanish foreign policy This reconciliation was however onlyskin-deep it was a member of the Pembroke lsquointerestrsquo Dr Turnerwho launched the attack on Buckingham in the 1626 parliament andRudyerd was among the sixteen members of the Commons appointed toassist the managers of the dukersquos impeachment25 A further attempt atreconciliation in the form of a marriage agreement concluded in earlyAugust 1626 between Buckinghamrsquos daughter and Pembrokersquos nephewappears to have had some effect26 and probably explains why both Rudy-erd and Pembroke took a moderate line in the debates over the Petition ofRight in 1628 and in particular opposed naming the duke in the Petition

Rudyerd indicated his view of the Petition on 28 April 1628 whenhe told the Commons that lsquoif justice and wisdom may be stretched todesolation let us thereby learn that moderation is the virtue of virtues andwisdom of wisdoms Let it be our masterpiece so to carry the businessthat we may keep parliaments on foot for as long as they be frequent therewill be no irregular power which though it cannot broken at once yetin short time it will be made and moldered awayrsquo Rudyerd was pleasedto see lsquothat old decrepit law Magna Carta which has been so long keptand lain bedridden walk abroad again with new vigour and lustrersquoEqually he insisted that lsquothe King is a good man who is greater thanany king who is not sorsquo and he reminded members that lsquothe King hasintimated that he would have the abuses of power reformed a happinessto usrsquo27 Pembrokersquos stance in the Lords while supportive of the Petitionin principle was likewise conciliatory On 9 May he reportedly lsquooccurs[sic] with the petition Moved to sweeten the manner not to lay downthe particulars so at large As many of the particulars to stand as maystand None to be omitted but such as will distaste the Kingrsquo28 Rudyerdspoke in very similar terms on 11 June in the Commons lsquoWe have dailyexperience of his Majestyrsquos grace I desire that we be so provident that wegratify his Majesty with a good turn so as we may have the benefit Thework we are about must have a future operation if his Majesty considerhow dangerous the counsel is that has been offered him If we namethe person we may give a distaste to his Majestyrsquo According to anotherversion of this speech Rudyerd warned that lsquoif we give the King distasteour counsel will not go down with himrsquo29 Rudyerdrsquos attitude towards thePetition ndash and even his specific language about the need to avoid causingCharles I lsquodistastersquo ndash was thus strikingly close to that of his patron

25 Proceedings in Parliament 1626 II pp 261ndash2 268ndash9 III pp 140 14726 Roger Lockyer Buckingham The Life and Political Career of George Villiers First Duke of

Buckingham 1592ndash1628 (Harlow 1981) p 33327 Proceedings in Parliament 1628 III pp 128ndash9 138 28 Ibid V p 40129 Ibid IV pp 247 260

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 59

These political and religious associations remained very much in evi-dence during Charlesrsquos Personal Rule The third earl of Pembroke diedon 10 April 1630 and was succeeded by his younger brother PhilipHerbert earl of Montgomery Rudyerd shared his new patronrsquos interestin colonial enterprises and on 4 December 1630 he became one of theoriginal incorporators of the Providence Island Company Here again wefind him working regularly with Pym and Rich Although this companywas not the hotbed of Puritan opposition that has sometimes beenclaimed many of its members shared Rudyerdrsquos commitment to godlyProtestantism30 One particular letter written in 1633 on behalf of hisbrother to the governor of Providence Island Philip Bell is very useful inthrowing further light on Rudyerdrsquos religious attitudes Rudyerd wrote

[P]icking here a Verse and there a Verse to be sung after the Sermon whereintwo Reverend Preachers were cited for Examples this is a Course I never heardor heard of and I am sure that in London congregations it is not used neither canit be conveniently performed where the Clerk doth publicly direct what Psalmor what part or what parcel by itself is to be sung and although it be no ill norunlawful thing to sing the scattered collected pieces of a Psalm yet certainly itis no discretion to be unnecessarily singular31

This letter suggests that Rudyerd wanted a clear liturgical frameworkand his defence of the established order of worship is consistent with hiscomments in January 1629 about the Book of Common Prayer

Rudyerdrsquos religious concerns again came to the fore when Parliamentwas recalled in 1640 In a major speech on 16 April32 he reportedlylamented that lsquoin so long a vacation between Parliaments many disordersmust needs grow in upon us as deviation in religion violation of lawsinvasion upon libertiesrsquo He argued that lsquothe best religion makes the bestsubjectsrsquo and declared

Let us set up more and better lights to lighten their darkness burning shininglights not lukewarm glow-worm lights that the people in all places of the king-dom may be diligently taught carefully instructed in soundness of doctrine byGodrsquos example in their pastors The best way to suppress all other religion isto uphold our own to the height

30 See especially Karen Ordahl Kupperman Providence Island 1630ndash1641 The Other Puri-tan Colony (Cambridge 1993)

31 Ibid p 23232 The fullest surviving accounts of this speech are found in Esther S Cope ed Proceed-

ings of the Short Parliament of 1640 Camden Society 4th series 19 (1977) pp 138ndash40248ndash51 The following quotations are taken from these texts unless otherwise statedThere is another rather more abbreviated version in Thomas Aston The Short Par-liament (1640) Diary of Sir Thomas Aston ed Judith D Maltby Camden Society 4thseries 35 (1988) pp 3ndash4

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

60 David L Smith

This emphasis on improving the quality of the ministry was entirely con-sistent with Rudyerdrsquos recorded words in the parliaments of the 1620sHis commitment to conciliation between crown and parliament and tothe granting of generous supply remained equally striking He report-edly warned the Commons that lsquoit is wisdom in us to preserve temperand moderationrsquo lest lsquowe may turn the medicine into a worse diseaseand so undo all even root out the race of parliaments for everrsquo Parlia-ment was lsquothe bed of reconciliation between a King and his peoplersquo andRudyerd continued to regard the speedy and generous granting of supplyas essential to achieving this lsquoBefore the ending of this Parliament theuntimely breaking whereof would be the breaking of us I doubt not butHis Majestyrsquos revenues may be so settled that he may live plentifully athome and abroadrsquo However his warning to the Commons not to lsquofallwith too much vehemence on our own grievances before we look on thekingrsquos occasionsrsquo33 went largely unheeded and Charles I faced with amajority of members who refused to grant supply until their grievanceswere fully aired dissolved the parliament after only three weeks

III

When the Long Parliament met the following November Rudyerdrsquosrhetoric became rather more forceful yet his two central concerns ndash reli-gion and supply ndash remained the same In a lengthy speech on 7 November1640 he stressed the primacy of religious issues lsquolet religion be our pri-mum quaerite for all things else are but etcaeteras to itrsquo34 He bitterlydenounced Laudian innovations and complained that they lsquowould evap-orate and dispirit the power and vigour of religion by drawing it out intosome solemn specious formalities ndash into obsolete antiquate ceremoniesnew furbished uprsquo35 He felt that

they have so brought it to pass that under the name of Puritans all our religion isbranded Whosoever squares his actions by any rule either divine or humanhe is a Puritan Whoever would be governed by the Kingrsquos laws he is a PuritanHe that would not do whatsoever other men would have him do he is a PuritanTheir great work their masterpiece now is to make all those of the religion tobe the suspected party of the kingdom36

Rudyerd lamented the lsquodisturbance [that] hath been brought upon theChurch for vain petty trifles How the whole Church the whole kingdom

33 Aston Diary p 434 Five Speeches in the High and Honourable Court of Parliament by Sir Beniamin Rudyerd

(1641) p 8 (Wing R 2184)35 Ibid p 9 36 Ibid p 10

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 61

hath been troubled where to place ldquoa metaphorrdquo ndash an altar We haveseen ministers their wives children and families undone against alllaw ndash against conscience ndash against all bowels of compassion ndash aboutnot dancing upon Sundays These inventions are but sieves made onpurpose to winnow the best men and thatrsquos the devilrsquos occupationrsquo37

Rudyerd insisted that these religious issues should be the parliamentrsquoshighest priority and argued that

if we secure our religion we shall cut off and defeat many plots that are now onfoot by them and others Believe it our religion hath been for a long time and stillis the great design upon this kingdom It is a known and practised principle thatthey who would introduce another principle into the Church must first troubleand disorder the government of the state that so they may work their ends in aconfusion which now lies at the door38

He was he declared lsquozealous of a thorough reformation in a time thatexacts that extorts itrsquo39

Equally Rudyerd remained sympathetic to the crownrsquos financial prob-lems In this same speech he went on to call for the removal of what hetermed the lsquosubverting destructive counselsrsquo who rang lsquoa doleful deadlyknell over the whole kingdomrsquo and who had lsquonot suffered his Majesty toappear unto his people in his own native goodnessrsquo and had lsquoeclipsed himby their own interpositionrsquo40 Once these counsels had been removed heargued the king would be able to shine lsquoin his own splendourrsquo41 andRudyerd hoped that the Houses would then grant generous supply Hecontinued to affirm the innate symbiosis between the monarch and hissubjects lsquothe King must always according to his occasions have use ofhis peoplersquos power hearts hands purses The people will always haveneed of the Kingrsquos clemency justice protection and this reciprocation isthe strongest the sweetest unionrsquo42 He hoped that lsquoas we shall be free inour advices so shall we be the more free of our purses that his Majestymay experimentally find the real difference of better counselsrsquo43 Hereagain we can see a direct continuity with Rudyerdrsquos earlier speechesduring the 1620s in his promotion of good relations between crown andparliament his attack on evil advisers and his advocacy of a generousgrant of supply

Rudyerd returned to this last point on 23 December 1640 when heasserted that lsquothe principal part of this business is money and now weare about it I shall be glad we may give so much as will not only serve theturn for the present but likewise to provide that it comes not quick upon

37 Ibid pp 8ndash9 38 Ibid p 11 39 Ibid pp 15ndash16 40 Ibid pp 12 1441 Ibid p 14 42 Ibid pp 14ndash15 43 Ibid p 15

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

62 David L Smith

us againrsquo He declared that lsquothis is the business of all the businesses ofthe House ndash of all the businesses of the kingdom if we stand hacking fora little money we may very shortly lose all we haversquo Convinced that lsquofoursubsidies will do the work if they be given presentlyrsquo he urged membersto lsquodo this whilst we mayrsquo44 Rudyerdrsquos speech appears to have had thedesired effect for the Commons resolved to grant two further subsidiesin addition to the two on which they had already agreed45

Rudyerdrsquos religious and financial concerns and the close connec-tion between them were further illustrated in a speech that he madethe following month probably on 21 January 164146 He regarded theScottish commissionersrsquo demand for pound514000 as lsquoa portentous appari-tion which shows itself in a very dry time when the Kingrsquos revenue istotally exhausted his debts excessively multiplied the kingdom gener-ally impoverished by grievous burdens and disordered coursesrsquo He feltthat it would lead to lsquothe utter draining of the people unless Englandbe puteus inexhaustus [an inexhaustible well] as the Popes were wontto call itrsquo Nevertheless he would lsquomost willingly and heartily afford theScots whatsoever is just equitable and honourable even to a convenientconsiderable round sum of money towards their losses and expensesrsquoHe regarded the Scots as lsquobeing truly touched with religion accordingto their professionrsquo and hoped that such a settlement would lsquocontracta closer firmer union between the two nations than any mere humanpolicy could ever have effected with inestimable benefits to both inadvancing the truths of religion in exalting the greatness of the Kingin securing the peace of his kingdoms against all malicious enviousambitious opposites to religion to the King [and] to his kingdomsrsquoRudyerdrsquos sympathy for the Scots as a nation lsquotruly touched with reli-gionrsquo was thus consistent with his more general commitment to godlyProtestantism

That Rudyerd did not however want the Church of England to bereformed along Scottish lines became increasingly clear as Parliamentfound itself faced with demands for radical reform such as the Londonlsquoroot and branchrsquo petition When the Commons debated whether or notto commit this petition on 8 February 1641 Rudyerd argued that lsquoit nowbehoves us to restrain the bishops to the duties of their functions as theymay never more hanker after heterogeneous extravagant employmentsrsquoand he stressed the need lsquoto regulate them according to the usage ofancient churches in the best times that by a well-tempered government

44 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd pp 166ndash7 45 CJ II p 5746 Maija Jansson ed Proceedings in the Opening Session of the Long Parliament 7 vols

(Rochester and Suffolk 2000ndash7) II pp 239ndash40

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 63

they may not have power hereafter to corrupt the Church to undo thekingdomrsquo47 He was not however in favour of the outright abolitionof episcopacy and declared that lsquothis superintendency of eminent menbishops over divers churches is the most primitive the most spreadingthe most lasting government of the Churchrsquo He warned the CommonslsquoWhilst we are earnest to take away innovations let us beware we bringnot in the greatest innovation that ever was in England I do very wellknow what very many do very fervently desire But let us well bethinkourselves whether a popular democratical government of the Church(though fit for other places) will be either suitable or acceptable to a regalmonarchical government of the Statersquo48 Rudyerd concluded by movingthat

we may punish the present offenders reduce and preserve the calling for bettermen hereafter Let us remember with fresh thankfulness to God those gloriousmartyr-bishops who were burnt for our religion in the times of popery whoby their learning zeal and constancy upheld and conveyed it down to us Wehave some good bishops still who do preach every Lordrsquos day and are thereforeworthy of double honour They have suffered enough already in the disease Ishall be sorry we should make them suffer more in the remedy49

Rudyerdrsquos godly Protestantism and hatred of Laudianism were typicalof many who became Parliamentarians in the Civil Wars where he wassomewhat less usual was in his continuing attachment to the institutionof episcopacy and his mistrust of lsquoroot and branchrsquo reform

Rudyerd returned to these issues in a major speech on 11 June 1641when the Commons debated at length a bill for the abolition of epis-copacy This speech contained perhaps the fullest and most eloquentstatement of Rudyerdrsquos view of the church and the nature of churchgovernment He began by stating that lsquoone thing doth exceedingly trou-ble me it turns me quite round it makes my whole reason vertiginouswhich is that so many do believe against the wisdom of all ages that nowthere can be no reformation without destruction as if every sick bodymust be presently knocked on the head as past hope of curersquo50 ConradRussell wrote perceptively that this statement revealed lsquothe frustrationwhich increasingly afflicted those who had been happy with ArchbishopAbbotrsquo51 This is a very telling point because the debate over churchgovernment was rapidly moving into uncharted waters in which Rudyerdfelt increasingly out of his depth He was not he affirmed lsquoof their

47 Five Speeches p 21 Cf Proceedings in the Opening Session of the Long Parliament IIp 390

48 Five Speeches p 22 49 Ibid p 23 50 Ibid pp 24ndash551 Conrad Russell The Fall of the British Monarchies 1637ndash1642 (Oxford 1991) p 345

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

64 David L Smith

opinion who believe that there is an innate ill quality in episcopacy like aspecifical property which is a refuge not a reasonrsquo He hoped that lsquothereis no original sin in episcopacy and though there were yet may thecalling be as well reformed as the person regeneratedrsquo52 Rudyerdremained committed to episcopacy albeit of a reduced kind lsquoLet thembe reduced according to the usage of ancient churches in the best timesso restrained that they may not be able hereafter to shame the callingrsquo53

He warned that lsquoif we pull down bishoprics and pull down cathedralchurches in a short time we must be forced to pull down colleges toorsquoThis was he felt lsquothe next way to bring in barbarism to make the clergyan unlearned contemptible vocation not to be desired but by the basestof the people and then where shall we find men able to convince anadversaryrsquo54 This brought Rudyerd back to his long-standing concernwith the under-endowment of the clergy lsquoIt willrsquo he declared lsquobe ashameful reproach to so flourishing a kingdom as this to have a poorbeggarly clergy For my part I think nothing too much nothing too goodfor a good minister a good clergyman Burning and shining lights dowell deserve to be set in good candlesticksrsquo55 Rudyerd concluded bysumming up his position thus lsquoI am as much for reformation for purg-ing and maintaining religion as any man whatsoever but I profess I amnot for innovation demolition nor abolitionrsquo56

What is perhaps most interesting about this speech is that from latesummer 1641 such an attachment to a moderate primitive episcopacyinclined some members of the Long Parliament to rally to the king57 YetRudyerd remained at Westminster and his deep commitment to godlyProtestantism and lsquoreformationrsquo probably contributed strongly to thisdecision Conrad Russell included Rudyerd straightforwardly on his listof lsquomembers of the Commons in favour of further reformationrsquo58 Rudy-erd broadly shared this religious outlook with his patron the fourth earlof Pembroke and the close political alignment between them contin-ued to be apparent throughout 1641ndash2 Pembroke became progressivelymore estranged from the court during summer 1641 and on 3 Mayhe promised the crowds at Westminster that he would lsquomove his Majestythat justice might be executedrsquo against Strafford lsquoaccording to theirrequestsrsquo59 Charles I never forgave Pembroke for these words to thecrowd and dismissed him as Lord Chamberlain of the Kingrsquos Household

52 Five Speeches p 25 53 Ibid p 25 [recte = p 26] 54 Ibid pp 28ndash955 Ibid p 29 56 Ibid p 2957 Cf John Morrill Revolt in the Provinces (Harlow 1999) p 7058 Conrad Russell The Causes of the English Civil War (Oxford 1990) p 22459 A Perfect Journal of the Daily Proceedings and Transactions in that memorable Parliament

begun at Westminster 3 November 1640 (1641) p 90

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 65

the following July60 During Straffordrsquos trial Rudyerdrsquos main concernappears to have been that the Commons should act in close consulta-tion with the Lords and follow the lead of the upper House as muchas possible Thus on 12 April 1641 he lsquoshowed the great treason of theEarl of Strafford and yet said that one full third part of the evidence wasnot heard and that divers of the Lords who were present at the openingthereof were not satisfied that it was treasonrsquo61 Rudyerd went on todecline lsquothe reading of the bill to that effectrsquo and moved lsquofor a confer-ence with the Lordsrsquo62 Four days later Rudyerd warned the Commonslsquoinvert not the saying ldquoslow to speak and swift to hearrdquo Judges must firstfully hear and then justly determinersquo63 In addition to his looking to theupper House for a political lead these contributions to the debates overStraffordrsquos fate also show a judiciousness that was highly characteristicof Rudyerd

This quality was evident again the following November in the ambiva-lent view that Rudyerd took of the Grand Remonstrance He acceptedthat it was lsquorequisite we should publish a declaration because there areso many depravers of this Parliamentrsquo64 such as lsquopapists delinquentsand libertines [who] accuse us falselyrsquo65 It was he felt important tomake it clear that lsquowe have done great things in this Parliament Thingsof the first magnitudersquo These included lsquosomething of religionrsquo whichhe lsquoreckoned last because least donersquo66 Regarding the Grand Remon-strance his vote went lsquoalong in general with the narrative historical partof it but for the prophetical part to foresee the whole work of this Par-liament to come and to bind it up by anticipation and engagement ofvotes beforehand for ought I know Sir we have no such customrsquo67 Hecould agree to lsquothe narrative part but not the prophetical part lestwe fail of our performancersquo68 He was thus lsquofor the narrative [but] againstthe prophetical part [because] to engage by way of anticipation this Par-liament is new and wherein he cannot satisfy himselfrsquo69 Rudyerd waswilling to endorse the Long Parliamentrsquos previous measures but not the

60 TNA SP 1648295 (Thomas Wiseman to Sir John Pennington 29 July 1641)61 Proceedings in the Opening Session of the Long Parliament III pp 512ndash1362 Ibid p 51763 H Verney ed Notes of Proceedings in the Long Parliament by Sir Ralph Verney Camden

Society 1st series 31 (1845) p 4964 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd pp 221ndash365 Verney Notes of Proceedings in the Long Parliament p 12266 Simonds DrsquoEwes The Journal of Sir Simonds DrsquoEwes from the First Recess of the Long

Parliament to the Withdrawal of King Charles from London ed Willson H Coates (NewHaven 1942) p 184

67 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd pp 221ndash368 Verney Notes of Proceedings in the Long Parliament p 12269 DrsquoEwes Journal p 184

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

66 David L Smith

demands for future reforms and this important distinction may well havereflected a desire to avoid further inflaming relations between the kingand Parliament Certainly a wish to secure an accommodation betweenCharles and the Houses was entirely characteristic of Rudyerd as was afeeling that religious reform had not yet been given as high a priority asit deserved Both these attitudes continued to be evident in Rudyerdrsquosspeeches as England moved closer towards civil war

The outbreak of rebellion in Ireland strengthened Rudyerdrsquos instinc-tive anti-Catholicism and when the Commons debated Irish affairs on29 December 1641 he warned of lsquothe great danger this kingdom is inthrough the practices of priests and Jesuits and all of the popish religionrsquoThere were hazards he argued in lsquonot removing those popish officersin this state that have places of great trust and strength committed to theirfidelityrsquo and he hoped lsquothat they may by degrees remove such dangerousofficers and place good Protestants in their roomrsquo He also wished to seelsquothe bishops and such lords as favour[ed]rsquo the retention of their votes inthe upper House lsquospeedily brought to trial and by the sword of justicetaken out of the wayrsquo so that they lsquomay be removed from the presenceof his Majesty by whom he is mis-counselled and his mind somewhataverted from complying so willingly with the Parliament as otherwise itis conceived he would bersquo Rudyerd thought it lsquoof absolute necessity toremove such as are not inclined towards the Protestant religionrsquo andhe reminded the House of lsquothe treacherous stratagems that have beenattempted against not only the persons of the princes of this kingdomthat have been Protestants by papists and the favourers of that part butalso against the whole state to bring it to confusion and place them-selves and their religion hereinrsquo70 In Rudyerdrsquos mind these defensivemeasures against Catholicism were closely associated with a continuingdesire for further reform of the church and on 26 March 1642 he movedlsquoto appoint a speedy day to consider of the matter of religion to settle thedistractions of the church for the present and to provide for the futurersquo71

Following the kingrsquos withdrawal from London in January 1642 Rudy-erd repeatedly tried to encourage reconciliation between Charles andParliament On 7 February he lsquodesired that we might move his Majestyto return and to give thanksrsquo72 Interestingly when on 10 June Rudyerdadvanced pound100 for Parliamentrsquos military preparations he did solsquofreely without interest for defence of king kingdom and parliament

70 Sir Beniamin Rudyerd his Learned Speech in Parliament on Wednesday being the twenty ninthday of December 1641 (1641) pp 2ndash4 (Wing R 2186)

71 Willson H Coates Anne Steele Young and Vernon F Snow eds The Private Journalsof the Long Parliament 3 vols (New Haven and London 1982ndash92) II p 89

72 Private Journals of the Long Parliament I p 297

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 67

conjunctivelyrsquo73 Such a form of words seems consistent with someonewho like Pembroke tried vigorously to promote an accommodationbetween the crown and the two Houses On 9 July 1642 for examplethey can be found presenting the same message that morning Pembrokemade a speech lsquolaying open the means for that happy unionrsquo74 whilelater that day Rudyerd begged the Houses lsquoto compose and settle thesethreatening ruining distractionsrsquo and lsquomake a fair way for the Kingrsquosreturn hitherrsquo He praised the reforms of 1640ndash1 as a lsquodream of hap-pinessrsquo and cited in particular the abolition of High Commission StarChamber and forest fines the provision for triennial parliaments and thefact that lsquothe bishopsrsquo votesrsquo had been lsquotaken awayrsquo He urged Parliamentnot to lsquocontend for such a hazardous unsafe security as may endanger theloss of what we have alreadyrsquo and in a memorable phrase warned that theHouses lsquocannot make a mathematical securityrsquo He concluded by statingthat lsquowe are at the very brink of confusion and combustionrsquo and thatlsquoevery man here is bound in conscience to employ his uttermost endeav-ours to prevent the effusion of bloodrsquo75 Similarly two weeks later on23 July when the Commons was considering how to react to Charles IrsquosAnswer to the XIX Propositions Rudyerd moved that they should lsquoembracean accommodation of peacersquo76

IV

Rudyerdrsquos support for peace negotiations continued during the Civil WarFor instance on 17 February 1643 as the Commons debated Charles Irsquosresponses to the Oxford Propositions Rudyerd warned the House thatlsquowe have already tasted the bitter bloody fruits of war [and] we are grownexceedingly behind-hand with our selves since we began itrsquo He imploredmembers to consider

who shall be answerable for all the innocent blood which shall be spilt hereafterif we do not endeavour a peace by a speedy treaty Certainly God is as muchto be trusted in a treaty as in a war it is he that gives wisdom to treat as well ascourage to fight and success to both as it pleases him Blood is a crying sin itpollutes a land why should we defile this land any longer Let us stint bloodas soon as we can Let us agree with our adversaries in the way by a presentshort wary treaty77

73 Ibid III p 46774 A Perfect Diurnall of the Passages in Parliament from 4 to 11 July 1642 (1642) p 675 A Worthy Speech spoken in the Honourable House of Commons by Sir Benjamin Rudyerd

this present July 1642 (1642) pp 2ndash4 (Wing R 2207)76 Private Journals of the Long Parliament III p 12077 Sir Benjamin Rudyerd His Speech in the High Court of Parliament the 17 of February [1643]

for a speedy Treaty of Peace with His Majestie (1643) pp 4ndash5 (Wing R 2196)

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

68 David L Smith

Like other moderate Parliamentarians such as Sir Simonds DrsquoEwes Bul-strode Whitelocke and John Selden Rudyerd advocated peace talks withthe Royalists at every possible opportunity

Rudyerd likewise remained strongly committed to godly reformationand on 12 June 1643 he and Pembroke were among those who wereappointed lay members of the Westminster Assembly78 Rudyerd doesnot appear to have spoken often in the Assembly and such contributionsas he did make suggest that his ecclesiastical position was complex anddifficult to categorize in simple terms as either Presbyterian or Indepen-dent He seems to have been nervous about the activities of the moreradical Independents and on 14 November 1643 when some membersof the Assembly expressed concern about lsquothe Independents gatheringchurches in the city and elsewherersquo he lsquopromised to present [the matter]to the Housesrsquo of Parliament79 This would seem consistent with thereservations he had expressed in connection with Providence Island in1633 Rudyerdrsquos first priority appears to have been reformation within anorderly framework and this may have made him suspicious of the asser-tions of ius divinum that Presbyterians and Independents alike assertedagainst those who favoured a more Erastian approach

This concern came through in Rudyerdrsquos speech in the Assembly on30 April 1646 when a delegation from the Commons presented a seriesof nine queries to the Assembly on the subject of church governmentRudyerd asserted that

The matter you are now about the jus divinum is of a formidable and tremendousnature It will be expected you should answer by clear practical and expressScriptures not by far-fetched arguments which are commonly told before youcome to the matter I have heard much spoken of the pattern in the mountso express I could never find in the New Testament The first rule is letall things be done decently and in order to edification Decency and order arevariable and therefore cannot be iure divino Discipline is but the hedge

Rudyerd continued by hoping that the Assembly would make its lsquoanswerin plain termsrsquo He had

heard it often very well said the present Assembly are pious and learned men buta Parliament is to make laws for all sorts of men It hath been often objected thispower is so strongly opposed bec[ause] it makes a strict discipline I believewe have done nothing against the word of God neither do all the churchesagree throughout The civil magistrate is a church officer in every Christian

78 AampO I p 18179 Cambridge University Library MS DdXIV21 (Journal of John Lightfoot) fo 36r

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 69

commonwealth In Scotland nobility and gentry live commonly in the countryand so the clergy are moderated as by a scattered Parliament80

These words seem to reflect sympathy with an Erastian approach tochurch government and this possibility is reinforced by the fact that Pem-broke to whom Rudyerd continued to be close apparently had leaningsin the same direction From 1643 Pembroke also served as a member ofthe Westminster Assembly and as the 1640s progressed his most consis-tent priority was an Erastian hostility to the more radical demands of boththe high Presbyterians and the Independents In early November 1644 heand the earl of Warwick went to the Westminster Assembly and lsquochide[d]the Independents for retarding the work of reformationrsquo81 He supportedLaudrsquos attainder in January 1645 but in March 1646 he voted to rejectthe high Presbyterian petition submitted by the City of London Interest-ingly Pembroke like Rudyerd remained sympathetic to the preservationof episcopacy and evidence of the earlrsquos moderate episcopalianism maybe found in his choice of the future bishop of Winchester George Mor-ley as his domestic chaplain as well as in the nature of his ecclesiasticalpatronage within the parish of St Martin-in-the-Fields of which he wasa resident82

The continuing friendship between Rudyerd and Pembroke was evi-dent in other ways Both were appointed commissioners for the planta-tions in the West Indies on 2 November 164383 On 14 June 1645 inthe Committee of Both Kingdoms lsquotwo letters were brought in by SirBenjamin Rudyerd one directed to himself and the other to the Earl ofPembrokersquo84 In his will dated 1 May 1649 Pembroke stipulated thatRudyerd was to continue to occupy the premises in Kent that the earlhad assigned to him by an indenture of 21 February 1639 At his deathin January 1650 Pembroke owed Rudyerd a debt of pound260 which wasdischarged shortly afterwards by the earlrsquos executors85

During the second half of the 1640s Rudyerd became less and lessactive in political affairs He made fewer speeches in the Commons and

80 Chad B Van Dixhoorn lsquoReforming the Reformation theological debate at the West-minster Assembly 1643ndash1652rsquo PhD dissertation University of Cambridge 2005 VIIp 546

81 Thomas Juxon The Journal of Thomas Juxon 1644ndash1647 ed Keith Lindley and DavidScott Camden Society 5th series 13 (1999) p 62 See also Van Dixhoorn lsquoReformingthe Reformationrsquo V pp 449ndash50

82 For a fuller discussion see my life of Pembroke in the ODNB 83 AampO I pp 331ndash384 TNA SP 218 (Committee of Both Kingdoms fair day book) pp 335ndash685 Sheffield Archives Elmhirst MS (Pye deposit) EM 13581 EM 13582 EM 1360

Hatfield House Accounts 1682 pp 22 28

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

70 David L Smith

was appointed less regularly to committees Early in 1646 he adopted acharacteristically judicious position on the fate of the Court of Wards ofwhich he had been Surveyor since April 1618 He urged that lsquoif in anypart of it there be any thing unfit or exorbitant it may be reduced andrectified by a better law but if there be found corruption extortion orbribery in any of the officers let them be prosecuted and punished tothe utmostrsquo Rudyerd claimed that lsquoI have always endeavoured to per-form my best service to the King yet my tenderness hath been to thesubject because we do meet with many estates sore bruised and brokenwith debts and childrenrsquo86 As usual he struck a balance between theinterests of the crown and those of the subject and was an inveterate foeof corruption and injustice When the Court of Wards was abolishedthe Commons granted him a sum of pound6000 together with the contin-uation of his existing annuity of pound200 in compensation for his office87

Rudyerdrsquos reduced activity during the later 1640s may partly have beena consequence of old age ndash he turned seventy-five in December 1647 ndashbut it may also have owed something to growing disillusionment with thecourse of events and with the conduct of Parliament and the New ModelArmy In his last recorded speech on 5 August 1648 Rudyerd lamentedthat lsquowe have sat thus long and are come to a fine pass for the wholekingdom is now become Parliament all over The army hath taught usa good while what to do the city country and reformadoes teach uswhat we should do and all is because we ourselves know not what todo Some men are so violent and strong in their own conceits that theythink all others dishonest who are not of their opinionrsquo88 These wordsreflected Rudyerdrsquos deep unhappiness at the turn that events had takenand his yearning for a settlement between crown and Parliament

The following month Pembroke was one of the Parliamentarian com-missioners appointed to negotiate with the king at Newport while backin London on 5 December Rudyerd voted that the talks should con-tinue The next day he was among those arrested and briefly impris-oned by Colonel Pride89 However Rudyerd was released later the sameday and David Underdown has commented that lsquoRudyerd was too oldand decrepit to be dangerous and had powerful friends like his patronPembrokersquo90 Immediately after his release Rudyerd who was then justshort of his seventy-sixth birthday retired to his seat at West Woodhayin Berkshire He lived out his remaining years there very quietly until hisdeath on 31 May 1658 and he was buried in the chancel of the church at

86 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd pp 241ndash2 87 CJ V p 4688 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd p 24489 Mercurius Elencticus no 55 (5ndash12 December 1648) 52790 David Underdown Pridersquos Purge (1971) pp 147ndash8

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 71

West Woodhay Rudyerdrsquos will which he composed earlier that monthsurvives but reveals little that was individual about Rudyerdrsquos religiousbeliefs The opening form of words reads

I do freely bequeath my soul unto Almighty God my creator and to his belovedson my Saviour Jesus Christ by and through whose only death and passion I doealready trust to have remission of my sins and to enjoy everlasting life My bodyI do commit to the earth from whence it came91

It may be however that the absence of a dogmatic religious position inRudyerdrsquos will is in itself revealing of someone who apparently felt mostat home within the broad church of Elizabeth and James That churchcould accommodate Rudyerdrsquos commitment to a well-endowed preach-ing ministry within an episcopalian framework that preserved order anddecency while allowing freedom from antiquated formality

A similar conclusion may perhaps be drawn from a hymn that Rudyerdcomposed in his later years

O God My God What shall I giveTo thee in thanks I am and liveIn thee and thou dost safe preserveMy health my fame my goods my rentThou makest me eat while others starveAnd sing whilst others do lamentSuch unto me thy blessings areAs though I were thine only careBut Oh My God thou art more kindWhen I look inward on my mindThou fillrsquost my heart with humble joyWith patience meek and fervent love(Which doth all other loves destroy)With faith which nothing can removeAnd hope assured of Heavenrsquos blissThis is my state my grace is this92

It is possible that the closing reference to lsquohope assured of Heavenrsquosblissrsquo would tend to place Rudyerd at the more clearly Calvinist end ofthe Jacobean spectrum and this would be entirely consistent with thepicture of him that emerges from his parliamentary speeches

V

Rudyerdrsquos religious and political views as they evolved during the courseof his life thus provide a fascinating case study of how a strongly

91 TNA PROB 11284 92 Manning Memoirs of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd pp 255ndash6

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

72 David L Smith

Protestant layman reacted to the changing circumstances of early andmid-seventeenth-century England Having been happy with the churchled by Archbishop Abbot and having advocated improving reformswithin this Jacobean framework Rudyerd felt much less at ease in themore polarized atmosphere of Charles I and the Laudians He felt equallyunhappy with the more radical Parliamentarian responses to Laudianismand as both official policies and reactions to them moved further apartRudyerd who disliked confrontations and always preferred persuasionto coercion proved less able to cope and became a progressively moremarginal figure In that sense he was perhaps a lsquoJacobethanrsquo whose longlife meant that he saw events turn in directions that he regretted

He believed in the English Reformation and praised the lsquomartyr-bishopsrsquo of the 1550s He was deeply committed to further reformationof the church and especially to improving the endowment of the clergybut he did not want destruction or liberty to turn to licence He soughtorderly reformation and believed that this could best be achieved bymore generous funding of the Church of Elizabeth and James Rudyerdabhorred the hijacking of that church by Laud and his allies but he wasequally suspicious of the more radical measures that Parliament adoptedin response during the 1640s He deprecated both the Laudiansrsquo actionsand the Long Parliamentrsquos reactions Instead his heart really lay in theChurch of Elizabeth and James in which he had grown up and which hehad sought to reform

Politically Rudyerd consistently sought harmony between crown andParliament He believed in the innate constitutional symbiosis of thetwo and throughout his public career he strove to overcome differencesbetween them In practical terms this often led him to advocate reform ofthe royal finances accompanied by generous grants of supply as evidenceof Parliamentrsquos trust in the monarch The more that that trust becameeroded the more Rudyerd sought to restore it and to promote an accom-modation between crown and Parliament If his religious attitudes helpedto make him a Parliamentarian his political attitudes ensured that healways remained a moderate This was a pattern that he shared with hispatron the earl of Pembroke who appears to have been a further influ-ence behind Rudyerdrsquos Parliamentarian allegiance Rudyerdrsquos behaviourwas thus the product of a complex blend of motives in which politicalreligious and personal considerations were fascinatingly intertwined

These points bring us back in conclusion to the two problems withwhich this essay began namely the role of religion as an influence onthe choice of sides in the Civil War and the nature of lsquopolitical psychol-ogyrsquo in motivating behaviour Like many of those who were committedto godly Protestantism and further reformation of the Church Rudyerd

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd and Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo 73

became a Parliamentarian His allegiance was thus consistent with anddirectly reflected his religious attitudes These were not however hisonly motive for other aspects of his behaviour owed much to his politicaland constitutional beliefs In particular his long-standing desire to pre-serve harmony between crown and Parliament was crucial in ensuringthat he remained a moderate and tried constantly to achieve an accommo-dation between Charles and the Houses in the years immediately beforeand during the Civil Wars Furthermore his characteristic religious andpolitical beliefs placed him in close accord with his patron PembrokeThis brings us to the second problem for it shows that lsquopolitical psychol-ogyrsquo often involved a complex blend of motives which merged to form anintegrated whole within which they were distinguishable but not separa-ble Rudyerdrsquos religious political and personal motives were analyticallydistinct but they cannot be fully understood in isolation from each otherThis in turn suggests the fundamental ndash and psychologically plausible ndashconclusion that an individual with several reasons for doing something iseven more likely to do it than someone with only one reason In a caselike Rudyerdrsquos to assert the primacy of any one consideration would beto risk distorting the complexity of the multiple motives that guided hisbehaviour He saw the world in terms of an integrated vision that unifiedboth political and religious elements and the integrated quality of hisideas comes through strongly in the accounts in his own words quotedthroughout this essay

Rudyerdrsquos tragedy was to live in a period when the harmonies that hewished to preserve ndash between crown and Parliament and between theestablished Church and Protestant reform ndash steadily became incompat-ible with each other and in the end events forced him to make choicesbetween them His search for gradual orderly religious reform within aframework of political and constitutional harmony took place against abackground where opinion was becoming ever more polarized and thenation ever more deeply divided and as a result his quest ultimatelyturned out to be in vain He nevertheless pursued it with a singulareloquence and integrity that make it still worthwhile to reconstruct thesounds of the lsquosilver trumpetrsquo of the early seventeenth-century Houseof Commons In the voice of that trumpet we can hear the authenticanguish of a prominent lsquoJacobethanrsquo who in his advancing years had toexperience the trauma of Englandrsquos lsquowars of religionrsquo

terms of use available at httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpsdoiorg101017CBO9780511975745006Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore Cambridge University Main on 27 May 2017 at 143110 subject to the Cambridge Core