Podcasts about rump parliament

This Day in Legal History: Charles I Placed on TrialOn January 6, 1649, the English Parliament took a momentous step by voting to place King Charles I on trial for high treason. This decision came in the wake of the English Civil War, a prolonged conflict between Royalists, loyal to the king, and Parliamentarians seeking to limit monarchical power. Leading up to the trial, the New Model Army, under Oliver Cromwell, orchestrated "Pride's Purge," expelling Members of Parliament likely to oppose the trial. The remaining assembly, known as the Rump Parliament, convened and authorized the creation of the High Court of Justice, an unprecedented legal body tasked with trying a sitting monarch.The trial marked a dramatic shift in the balance of power, challenging the divine right of kings—a cornerstone of monarchical rule. Charles I was accused of subverting the laws of England and waging war against his own people, charges that he denied, arguing that no court held legitimate authority to judge a king. Despite his defense, the court convicted Charles on January 27, 1649, sentencing him to death. His execution on January 30 sent shockwaves throughout Europe, signaling the emergence of parliamentary sovereignty and temporarily abolishing the monarchy in favor of the Commonwealth under Cromwell.This legal milestone not only altered the trajectory of English governance but also set a precedent for holding leaders accountable to the rule of law. The Supreme Court is expected to play a critical role in assessing the legality of anticipated Trump administration policies, particularly in immigration and administrative law. Immigration policies, such as ending birthright citizenship and mass deportations, are likely to be challenged in court, with outcomes depending on their framing, especially if tied to national security concerns, which the Court tends to view more favorably than economic justifications. The Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limited agency power by ending Chevron deference, may have far-reaching implications for both the Biden and Trump administrations. While reducing agencies' regulatory authority aligns with Trump's deregulatory goals, it also empowers blue states and civil rights groups to challenge his policies under stricter judicial scrutiny.Challenges to agency head tenure protections and interpretations of outdated laws could also come before the Court. Trump's potential push to dismantle longstanding precedents like Humphrey's Executor v. United States could make federal agencies more directly accountable to the presidency, further politicizing their functions. Critics note that these shifts in judicial doctrine cut both ways, curbing regulatory power broadly regardless of the administration in power. This duality underscores a tension between conservative goals of limiting administrative overreach and the desire to expedite executive policy-making.Trump Likely to Test Supreme Court on Agency Powers, ImmigrationPresident Joe Biden has permanently barred offshore oil and gas drilling across over 625 million acres of US coastal waters, including the East and West Coasts, parts of the Gulf of Mexico, and sections of the Northern Bering Sea. Citing environmental risks and minimal energy gains, Biden stated the move balances conservation and energy security, ensuring that protecting coastlines and maintaining low energy prices are not mutually exclusive. The decision does not affect existing offshore leases or ongoing drilling in Alaska's Cook Inlet and the central and western Gulf of Mexico, which account for a significant portion of US energy production.Biden's action builds on temporary protections enacted by former President Trump for Florida's Gulf Coast and southeastern waters but makes them indefinite. While praised by environmental advocates and coastal communities, the oil industry criticized the move, arguing that it restricts domestic energy potential and undermines national security. Some politicians from both parties have supported these protections, emphasizing the risks demonstrated by disasters like the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill.Although Biden's decision relies on a federal law provision that may be difficult to reverse, legal challenges could arise if a future administration attempts to undo the protections. The debate underscores tensions between environmental stewardship and energy independence.Biden Bars Offshore Oil Drilling in US Atlantic and PacificBiden to ban offshore oil, gas drilling in vast areas ahead of Trump term | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Justice has urged the Supreme Court to deny President-elect Donald Trump's request to delay a law requiring TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to sell its U.S. assets by January 19 or face a nationwide ban. Trump argued for more time after his inauguration to seek a political resolution, while the DOJ countered that ByteDance has not demonstrated it is likely to succeed on the merits of its case. The government emphasized the national security risks of TikTok's data collection on 170 million American users, framing it as a tool for potential espionage.TikTok, however, has requested the Court block the law on First Amendment grounds, claiming it is being unfairly targeted for its content rather than its data practices, especially given Congress's lack of action against other Chinese-owned apps like Shein and Temu. If the law takes effect, new downloads of TikTok will be prohibited, and existing services will degrade over time as companies are barred from providing support. The Biden administration could extend the compliance deadline by 90 days if ByteDance shows significant progress toward divestment. This marks a shift in Trump's stance from 2020, when he sought to ban TikTok over similar concerns. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on January 10.Justice Dept. urges Supreme Court to reject Trump request to delay TikTok ban law | ReutersDisney, Fox, and Warner Bros Discovery are appealing a court ruling that blocked the launch of their joint streaming service, Venu Sports, arguing it unfairly restricts competition and consumer choice. The district court previously halted Venu's debut after rival FuboTV sued, claiming the service violated antitrust laws by bundling sports content in a way that would harm competition and raise prices. The district court sided with Fubo, finding that the bundling practices could foreclose other sports-focused services and granted an injunction against Venu's launch.The media companies argue that the ruling denies consumers a lower-cost streaming option aimed at price-sensitive sports fans and protects Fubo from competition. They assert that Venu would increase consumer choice and lower prices. However, the Justice Department and several states have supported the injunction, stating that Venu's creation would consolidate market power among the companies—who control over half of U.S. sports rights—and hinder the emergence of competing sports-only platforms like Fubo.At the heart of the dispute is whether the bundling practices by Disney, Fox, and Warner Bros unfairly disadvantage distributors by tying access to desirable sports content with less popular programming. The appeals court will now decide if the injunction stands.Disney, Fox and Warner Bros to ask court to lift ban on launch of Venu Sports service | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

If you're seeing this, you probably can't read

Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail? Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivalled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion? In The Fall: The Last Days of the English Republic (Yale UP, 2024), Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable--and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilised its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail? Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivalled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion? In The Fall: The Last Days of the English Republic (Yale UP, 2024), Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable--and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilised its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail? Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivalled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion? In The Fall: The Last Days of the English Republic (Yale UP, 2024), Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable--and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilised its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail? Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivalled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion? In The Fall: The Last Days of the English Republic (Yale UP, 2024), Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable--and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilised its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail? Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivalled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion? In The Fall: The Last Days of the English Republic (Yale UP, 2024), Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable--and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilised its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

After the dissolution of the Rump Parliament, Oliver Cromwell and the Council of Officers decide on a new government. A new assembly - not an elected parliament - would be summoned, ordered to carry out the reforms long neglected by the Rump and to prepare a new parliament. It is given sixteen months to do this. It won't last six months. Join the Mailing List! Join the Patreon House of Lords for ad-free episodes! This episode could not have been written without the following works: Martyn Bennet, Oliver Cromwell, 2006. Michael Braddick (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution, 2015. John Coffey, 'Religious Thought', in Michael Braddick (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution, 2015. Barry Coward, The Cromwellian Protectorate, 2002. Jonathan Healey, The Blazing World, 2023. Anna Keay, The Restless Republic, 2022. John Morrill (ed.), The Letters, Writings, and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, Vol 2: 1 February 1649 to 12 December 1653, 2023 John Kenyon and Jane Ohlmeyer, The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1638-1660. Alan MacInnes, The British Revolution, 1629-1660, 2004. Ian Gentles, The New Model Army: Agent of Revolution, 2022. Leo F. Solt, 'The Fifth Monarchy Men: Politics and the Millenium', Church History, 30, 3, 1961. Jonathan Fitzgibbons, "'To settle a governement without somthing of Monarchy in it": Bulstrode Whitelocke's Memoirs and the Reinvention of the Interregnum', The English Historical Review, 137, 586, 2022, 655-691. Go to AirwaveMedia.com to find other great history shows. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Back in London, Oliver Cromwell loses patience with the Rump Parliament. The New Model Army is getting restless, and Parliament appears to be prioritising its own power over the reforms its soldiers fought for. Have your say in the Airwave survey! https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PAXBRITANNICA Join the Mailing List! Join the Patreon House of Lords for ad-free episodes! Jonathan Barth, The Currency of Empire, Money and Power in Seventeenth-Century English America (Cornell University Press, 2021). Martyn Bennet, Oliver Cromwell, 2006. Michael Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution, 2015. Barry Coward, The Cromwellian Protectorate, 2002. Jonathan Healey, The Blazing World, 2023. Anna Keay, The Restless Republic, 2022. John Morrill, The Letters, Writings, and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, Vol 2: 1 February 1649 to 12 December 1653, 2023 Nicholas Rodger, The Command of the Ocean: a Naval History of Britain, Volume 2, 1649-1815, 2004. Ian Roy, 'Prince Rupert', Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Roger Hainsworth, Christine Churches, The Anglo-Dutch Naval Wars, 1652-1674, 1998. Christian J. Koot, ‘A “Dangerous Principle”: Free Trade Discourses in Barbados and the English Leeward Islands, 1650—1689', Early American Studies, 5.1 (2007), 132–63. John Kenyon and Jane Ohlmeyer, The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1638-1660. Alan MacInnes, The British Revolution, 1629-1660, 2004. Go to AirwaveMedia.com to find other great history shows. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The new Council of State, and the Rump Parliament, cling to power after killing the king. The Levellers attempt the bring the government to its knees. J. C. Davis, Oliver Cromwell, in in Michael Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Philip Baker, 'The Regicide', in Michael J. Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Kenyon, J. and Ohlmeyer, J., The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1638-1660. Harris, T. Rebellion Geoffrey Robertson, The Tyrannicide Brief: The Story of the Man who sent Charles I to the Scaffold. Healey, J. The Blazing World. MacInnes, A., The British Revolution, 1629-60. Charles Spencer, Killers of the King. Michael J. Braddick, 'War and Politics in England and Wales, 1642-1646', in Michael Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Michael J. Braddick, God's Fury, England's Fire Peter Gaunt, The English Civil War: A Military History Blair Worden, The English Civil Wars: 1640-1660 Ian Gentles, The English Revolution and the Wars in the Three Kingdoms, 1638-1652. Antonia Fraser, Cromwell: Our Chief of Men Kishlansky, M, Monarchy Transformed Alexia Grosjean, Steve Murdoch, Alexander Leslie and the Scottish generals of the Thirty Years' War, 1618-1648 Steve Murdoch (ed), Scotland and the Thirty Years' War Stuart Reid, Crown, Covenant, and Cromwell: The Civil Wars in Scotland, 1639-1651. Nick Lipscombe, The English Civil War: An Atlas and Concise History of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, 1639-51 John Cunningham, ‘Politics, 1641-1660', Cambridge History of Ireland David Edwards, ‘Political Change and Social Transformation, 1603-1641', Cambridge History of Ireland John Jeremiah Cronin and Padraig Lenihan, ‘Wars of Religion, 1641-1691', Cambridge History of Ireland Patrick Little, Lord Broghill and the Cromwellian Union with Ireland and Scotland, 2004 Ó Siochrú, Micheál, (ed.) Kingdoms in Crisis: Ireland in the 1640s, 2000 Ó Siochrú, Micheál, Confederate Ireland, 1642-1649, 1999 Lenihan, Pádraig, Confederate Catholics at War, 1641-49, 2001 This podcast is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on this podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week's guest is friend of the show Mark Turnbull who returns to talk about the trial of King Charles I, which began on 20th January 1649. The trial was a sham, but Charles behaved admirably, and with great integrity and nobility. We talk about the events leading up to the trial, the Rump Parliament, New Model Army, Cromwell and the events of the trial itself. Part Two, the exectuion, is coming up on Tuesday.Mark Turnbull LinksThe King's CavalierMark on TwitterAspects of History LinksOllie on Twitter

Who could imagine that England could ever be a republic? And yet for eleven years it became one. Still, it would be a serious mistake to confuse 'republic' with 'democracy'. It swiftly became clear, as Oliver Cromwell rose to the summit of power - a power he never sought for personal satisfaction but saw as a necessary chore to take the country in a godly direction - that it was going to become something far closer to a despotic regime. A limited one, without the persecution of opponents you might expect, but not by any means a state based on the consent of the governed. That, the hope of some including, most notably, the Levellers, was not going to happen. Illustration: Cromwell turns out the Rump Parliament because of its corruption, 1653 ©petervick167/123RF.COM Music: Bach Partita #2c by J Bu licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives (aka Music Sharing) 3.0 International License

A Second English Civil War and a 3rd Scots invasion? Are the royalists nuts? Aren't they tired of war?The New Model Army still exists, it wiped the floor with the Royalists last time and this time it is no different. The defeat of the Scots and Royalists is so complete it brings Napoleon’s destruction of the Prussians after Jena/Auerstadt to mind.The Army decides that Charles I, that bloody man, cannot be allowed to live. But, but, but, the constitution still has a king, the vast majority want a king. Cromwell and crew decide that to unite the Army and prevent a third civil war, the king must die, the House of Lords be abolished and the Bishops must go.The Presbyterian Parliament stands in the way, but is swept away during Pride’s purge, leaving only the Rump Parliament. Brød heks is our guest.

In Episode 8, Sam looks at what happened following the execution of Charles I. Sam assess the Rump Parliament, looks at the Instrument of Government, and asks whether Cromwell was King in all but name? Before looking at why the monarchy was restored. If you've liked this episode, hit the subscribe button and you'll be notified as soon as the next episode is ready. But if you can't wait that long, head over and subscribe to our YouTube channel by searching ‘History Hub' or by following this link https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1k4S7pliX3Ke-051ftTP1g

Professor Blair Worden is an expert on early modern European history and the English Civil War period in particular. He has written numerous books, the principal of which are The Rump Parliament, 1648-1653 (1974), The Sound of Virtue: Philip Sidney's 'Arcadia' and Elizabethan Politics (1996), Roundhead Reputations: The English Civil Wars and the Passions of Posterity (2001), Literature and Politics in Cromwellian England: John Milton, Andrew Marvell, Marchamont Nedham (2007), The English Civil Wars 1640-1660 (2009) and God's Instruments: Political Conduct in the England of Oliver Cromwell (2012).  In this lecture, Blair Worden explores Ben Jonson's conception of liberty in relation to the writing of history.

It's election season in Iowa. Let's talk about democracy. Today, what on earth could Joshua's sermon about all God has done for the exiled Israelites have to do with voting? It comes from forgetting when we were in exile. And detours through oliver cromwell.

When the New Model Army's leaders wanted the English Parliament to put King Charles I on trial for treason, they faced the problem that most Members of Parliament did not want to put the King on trial. So Colonel Thomas Pride and his Regiment of Foot were placed on the steps of Parliament, only allowing sympathetic members inside. Essentially, Pride's Purge was a coup d'etat which happened so easily no one even fought back. Partly, this was because Parliament had been fighting the King for eight years. In a Civil War, England had seen pitched battles where Parliament's New Model Army, led by Oliver Cromwell, beat the Royalist forces of Charles I. Officially, Charles had accepted Parliament's demands, until he decided to flee. That led to a second Civil War, which saw a military occupation of London, where Thomas Pride was a commander. That's why the New Model Army stationed his Regiment of Foot in the way of Parliament. The strategy worked so well that only 200 of the 471 Members were left in what became known as the "Rump Parliament." It was that Parliament that would subsequently and swiftly try King Charles and execute him.

Ever wanna go to the Alps? Sure you have. Got Pals? I hope you do. ‘Cause there’s some pals that you can go to the alps with that’ll let you slap laps with, and really, those’re the best pals of all. Lap slapper John Ross welcomes alp pals Luke Soin, Andrew Absher and Jesse Jones … Continue reading »

In 1653 Oliver Cromwell dissolved the Rump Parliament and then Barebone's Parliament dissolved itself. The Commonwealth was not getting off to a great start. 

After Pride's Purge, Charles I was executed by the Rump Parliament on January 30, 1649. Then Cromwell invaded Ireland. 

In this lecture Professor Wrightson considers the events leading to the execution of Charles I in 1649, and the republican regimes of 1649-60 (the Commonwealth and the Protectorate), with particular attention to the role of Oliver Cromwell. He begins with the unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a settlement with Charles I after the civil war, the intervention of the army in 1647 and the outbreak of the second civil war in 1648, which culminated in Pride's Purge and the trial and execution of Chares I. He then considers Cromwell's campaigns in 1649-51, his expulsion of the Rump Parliament in 1653, the nominated parliament of 1653 (Barebone's Parliament) and the two phases of the Cromwellian Protectorate 1654-8, ending with the instability following Cromwell's death and the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. Professor Wrightson notes that although the Restoration marked the failure of the revolution, the political landscape had been irrevocably changed. The restored monarchy lived in the shadow of the civil war, the politicization of a large section of society was not reversed, religious dissent was now a permanent reality, and a plethora of new political and religious ideas had been advanced.

In this lecture Professor Wrightson considers the events leading to the execution of Charles I in 1649, and the republican regimes of 1649-60 (the Commonwealth and the Protectorate), with particular attention to the role of Oliver Cromwell. He begins with the unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a settlement with Charles I after the civil war, the intervention of the army in 1647 and the outbreak of the second civil war in 1648, which culminated in Pride's Purge and the trial and execution of Chares I. He then considers Cromwell's campaigns in 1649-51, his expulsion of the Rump Parliament in 1653, the nominated parliament of 1653 (Barebone's Parliament) and the two phases of the Cromwellian Protectorate 1654-8, ending with the instability following Cromwell's death and the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. Professor Wrightson notes that although the Restoration marked the failure of the revolution, the political landscape had been irrevocably changed. The restored monarchy lived in the shadow of the civil war, the politicization of a large section of society was not reversed, religious dissent was now a permanent reality, and a plethora of new political and religious ideas had been advanced.

This is the second episode in which we look at English Puritanism.We left off last time with King Charles I fleeing London after breaking into The House of Commons to arrest the Puritan members of Parliament he accused of treason. The men had been warned and had fled. What Charles had hoped would be a dramatic show of his defense of the realm against dangerous elements, ended up being an egregious violation of British rights. So in fear for his own life, he packed up his family and headed out of town.Back in London, John Pym, a leader of Parliament, ruled as a kind of king without a crown. The House of Commons proposed a law excluding the royalist faction of bishops in the House of Lords from Parliament. Other members of the House of Lords surprisingly agreed, so the clergy were expelled. This commenced a process that would eventually disbar anyone from Parliament who disagreed with the Puritans. The body took on an ever-increasing bent toward the radical. Feeling their oats, Parliament then ordered a militia be recruited. The king decided the time had come to respond with decisive action. He gathered loyal troops and prepared for battle against Parliament's militia. Civil War had come to England.Both sides began by building forces. Charles' support came from the nobility, while Parliament found it among those who'd suffered most in recent royal shenanigans. Parliament's army came from the lower classes, to which were added some from the emerging merchant middle-class, as well as a handful of those nobles who'd not been in favor at Court. The king's strength was the cavalry, which of course was traditionally the noble's military specialty. The Parliamentary forces strength was in their infantry amd navy, which controlled trade.At the outset of the war, there were only minor skirmishes. Parliament sought help from the Scots, while Charles sought it from Irish Catholics. In its efforts to attract the Scots, Parliament enacted a series of measures leaning toward Presbyterianism. English Puritans didn't agree with the Presbyterian plan for church government, but they certainly didn't like the episcopacy of the Church of England's royalist bishops. English Puritans ended up adopting the Presbyterian model, not only because it irked those Bishops, but because it made more Biblical sense at the time, and because confiscation of bishops' property meant Parliament could fund the war without creating new taxes.Parliament also convened a groups of theologians to advise it on religious matters. The Westminster Assembly included 121 ministers, 30 laymen and 8 Scottish representatives. Being that the Scots had the strongest army in Great Britain, though they numbered only 5% of the total participants in the assembly, their influence was decisive. The Westminster Confession which they produced became one of the fundamental documents of Calvinist orthodoxy. Although some of the Assembly's members were Independents who followed a congregational-form of government, and others still leaned toward an episcopacy, the Assembly settled on a Presbyterian church government, and urged Parliament to adopt it for the Church of England. In 1644, Parliament joined the Scots in a Solemn League and Covenant that committed them to Presbyterianism. The following year the Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, was executed on the order of Parliament.As Parliament built up its army, Oliver Cromwell came to the fore. A relatively wealthy man, he descended from one of Henry VIII's advisors. Oliver was a devoted Puritan, convinced that every decision, both personal and political, ought to be based on the will of God as revealed in Scripture.  Though he was often slow in coming to a decision, once set upon a course, he was determined to follow it through to its conclusion, believing it to be, in fact, God's Will. Respected by fellow Puritans, until the Civil War he was simply known as a member of the House of Commons. But when he was convinced armed conflict was inevitable, Cromwell returned home where he recruited a cavalry corps. He knew cavalry was the king's main weapon, and that Parliament would need their own. His zeal was contagious, and his small force accomplished great deeds. They charged into battle singing psalms, convinced they were engaged in a holy cause. That attitude spread to the rest of the Parliament's army which crushed the royal army at the Battle of Naseby.That was the beginning of the end for the king. The rebels captured his camp, where they found proof he'd been asking foreign Catholic troops to invade England. Charles then tried to negotiate with the Scots, hoping to win them with promises. But the Scots took him prisoner and turned him over to Parliament. Having won the war, Parliament adopted a series of Puritan measures, including setting the precedent that Sunday was to be reserved for solemn religious observances rather than the frivolous pastimes increasingly being adopted by the English nobility and emerging middle-class.The Puritans, who' had to unite due to war, now returned to what they best at, arguing among themselves. Most of Parliament supported a Presbyterian form of church govt, which made for a national church without bishops. But the Independents who made up the majority of the army leaned toward congregationalism. They feared a Presbyterian church would begin to limit their ability to pursue their faith the way their conscience demanded. Tension grew between Parliament and the army.In 1646, Parliament unsuccessfully tried to dissolve the army. Radical groups gained ground. A wave of apocalyptic fervor swept England, moving many to demand a transformation of the social order thru justice and equality. Parliament and the leaders of the Army began to square off with each other.Then è The king escaped. He opened negotiations with the Scots, the army, and Parliament, making contradictory promises to all three. Somehow he managed to gain support from the Scots by promising to install Presbyterianism in England. When the Scots invaded, the Puritan army defeated them, captured Charles I, and began a purge of those factions in Parliament they deemed inconsistent with the reforms they envisioned. Forty-five MPs were arrested. What remained was labeled by its enemies the Rump Parliament because all that was left was the posterior of a real parliament.The Rump Parliament began proceedings against Charles, accused of high treason and of having thrust England into a bloody civil war. The fourteen lords who appeared for the meeting of the House of Lords refused to agree to the proceedings. But the House of Commons carried on, and Charles, who refused to defend himself on the grounds his judges had no legal standing, was beheaded at the end of Jan, 1649.Now, I'm sure someone's likely thinking, “Is this Communio Sanctorum or Revolutions?” Yeah, this doesn't sound much like CHURCH history. It's more English History. So what's up? Well, it's important we realize the roll Puritanism and Presbyterianism played in this period of English history. The Reformation had a huge impact on the course of events in the British Isles.Fearing the loss of their independence from England, the Scots quickly acknowledged Charles' son Charles II, as their sovereign. And in the South, England descended into chaos among several factions all vying for powerThat's when Cromwell took the reins. He commandeered the Rump Parliament, stamped out a rebellion in Ireland and the royalists in Scotland. Charles II fled to the Continent.When Parliament moved to pass a law perpetuating its power, Cromwell expelled the few remaining representatives, and locked the building.  Seemingly against his will, Cromwell had become master of the nation. He tried to return some form of representative government, but eventually took the title Lord Protector. He was supposed to rule with the help of a Parliament that would include representatives from England, Scotland, and Ireland. In reality, the new Parliament was mostly English, and Cromwell was the real government.He set out to reform both church and state. Given the time, his policies were fairly tolerant. Although he was an Independent, he tried to develop a religious system with room for Presbyterians, Baptists, and even advocates of episcopacy. As a Puritan, he tried to reform English society through legislation. These laws were aimed at keeping the Lord's Day devoted to sacred rites, ending horse races, cockfights, the theater, and so on. His economic policies favored the middle-class at the expense of the nobility. Among both the very wealthy and the very poor, opposition to his rule, which is called the Protectorate, grew.Cromwell retained control while he lived. But his dream of a stable republic failed. Like the monarchs before him, he was unable to get along with Parliament—though his supporters kept his opponents from taking their seats. Since the Protectorate was clearly temporary, Cromwell was offered the crown, but refused it, hoping to create a republic. In 1658, shortly before his death, in a move that seems politically schizophrenic, Cromwell named his son as his successor. But Richard was most definitely not his father. He resigned his post.Parliament then recalled Charles II to England's throne. This brought about a reaction against the Puritans. Although Charles at first sought to find a place for Presbyterians within the Church of England, the new Parliament opposed it, preferring a return to the bishops' episcopacy. The Book of Common Prayer was reinstalled after being out of favor for several years, and dissenters were banned. But such laws weren't able to curb the several movements that had emerged during the previous unrest. They continued outside the law until, late in that 17th C, toleration was decreed.In Scotland, the consequences of the restoration were more severe. With the episcopacy reinstalled in England, the staunch Presbyterianism of the North was challenged anew. Scotland erupted in riot. Archbishop James Sharp, prime prelate of Scotland, was murdered. This brought English intervention in support of Scottish royalists. The Presbyterians were drowned in blood.On his deathbed, Charles II declared himself a Catholic, confirming the suspicions of many that he'd been an agent of Rome all along and thus all the blood of Puritans and Presbyterians.  His brother and successor, James II, moved to restore Roman Catholicism as the official religion of his kingdom. In England, he sought to gain the support of dissidents by decreeing religious tolerance. But the anti-Catholic sentiments among the dissidents ran so strong they preferred no tolerance to the risk of a return to Rome. Conditions in Scotland were worse, for James II placed Catholics in positions of power, and decreed death for any who attended unapproved worship.After three years under James II, the English rebelled and invited William, Prince of Orange, along with his wife Mary, James's daughter, to take the throne. William landed in 1688, and James fled to France. In Scotland, his supporters held on for a few months, but by the next year, William and Mary were in possession of the Scottish crown as well. Their religious policy was tolerant. In England, tolerance was granted to any who subscribed to the thirty-nine Articles of 1562, and swore loyalty to the King and Queen. Those who refused, were granted tolerance as long as they didn't conspire against the crown. In Scotland, Presbyterianism became the official religion of State, the Westminster Confession its doctrinal norm.But even after the Restoration, the Puritan ideal lingered and greatly influenced British ethics. Its two great literary figures, John Bunyan and John Milton, along with Shakespeare, long endured among the most read of English authors. Bunyan's most famous work, known by its abbreviated title Pilgrim's Progress, became a hugely popular, and the subject of much meditation and discussion for generations. Milton's Paradise Lost determined the way in which the majority of the English-speaking world read and interpreted the Bible.