The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1870-06-01
For THE CENTRAL PRESBYTERIAN.
HAS THE WORLD BEEN GROWING
BETTER?

Did the great work in the world of him
who made the world advance visibly to-
wards its promised triumph in the 18th cen
fury? Our stand point, be it observed, is
within the horizon contemplated bya reader
of the English language only.
This century brought the Stuarts on the
British throne. Mary Stuart, of Scotland,
the Royal ancestress of the Stuarts, was a
determined Catholic. Elizabeth, Of the
English House of Tudor, was daughter of
Henry the Eighth, and by his second marriage;
and as it was not sanctioned by the Pope,
she was by necessity Protestant. Yet Mary
Stuart's descendants were to reign over
England, Scotland, Ireland, and all the
colonies during half of this century. Mary
was heir to the British throne, but never
reached it. Her son and heir, James VI,
of Scotland, first of England, was not
brought up by his mother. Scotland, for
State reasons, had taken care of that
James was Protestant, and proud, l think,
of his Protestant liberty and Theology.
He caused the Bible to be translated, by
piOus learned men under State authority,
and given to the reading population of the
realm. The public estimate of this Royal
act is we'll expressed, though in the adula-
tory and cumbrous style of that age, in the
address of the translators to the King, still
printed as preface to the English Bible.
The British Parliament, in receiving the
Stuarts to the throne, made Professionalism a
necessary qualification. This made all the
Stuart monarchy Protestants by profession,
at least, till James H., whom it banished
from the throne in 1858, making William,
Prince of Orange, "a real Protestant, King
of England. Within this period there were
troubles enough. The Stuarts, after
James, were Professionals only in name They
were Catholics at heart, allied by marriage
to Catholic Courts. And if Protestants at
all, political ProtestaRts only, after the model
of Henry VIII, who had made himself and
his successors head of the Church. In this
view of the thing, the Church of England,
as between itself and the Church of Rome,
was only the least of the two evils. Yet
certainly it was the least. The Church of
England had given the Bible to the people.
The Church of Rome withheld it, and with
holds it still. The question was still an
open one, what does the Bible teach? And
especially, in this case, what, on State and
Church questions, does the Bible teach !?
In what does it require the subject to con-
form his religion to the laws and authority
of the State, and in what is he free? The
devout subjects of the British throne were
loyal and law-abiding till they were required
to do what the Word of God seemed to for
bid; or not to do what the Word of God
seemed to require. This qualified allegiance
to civil government, and qualified in con
science, and the fear of God had fixed upon
them the nickname at first, the name at
length, Puritans. We have no little non
sense written and spoken about the Puritans
in our day. This question between the
Puritans and the English Church and throne,
caused the interregnum, in which Charles
the /. was beheaded as a traitor-in which
the Parliament became supreme, in which
the nation was commonwealth, and Crom-
well became its protector. Puritanism had
been prosecuted under Charles l. with ex-