William Laud | |
|---|---|
| Archbishop of Canterbury | |
 Portrait byAnthony van Dyckc. 1636 | |
| Church | Church of England |
| Diocese | Canterbury |
| In office | 1633–1645 |
| Predecessor | George Abbot |
| Successor | William Juxon |
| Orders | |
| Ordination | 5 April 1601 (1601-04-05) |
| Consecration | 18 November 1621 (1621-11-18) by George Montaigne |
| Personal details | |
| Born | (1573-10-07)7 October 1573 Reading, Berkshire, England |
| Died | 10 January 1645(1645-01-10) (aged 71) Tower Hill, London, England |
| Buried | St John's College, Oxford |
| Parents | William Laud Lucy Webbe |
| Education | Reading School |
| Alma mater | St John's College, Oxford |
| Signature |  |
| Sainthood | |
| Feast day | 10 January |
| Venerated in | Anglican Communion |
William Laud[a] (7 October 1573 – 10 January 1645) was a bishop in theChurch of England. AppointedArchbishop of Canterbury byCharles I in 1633, Laud was a key advocate ofCharles I's religious reforms; he was arrested byParliament in 1640 and executed towards the end of theFirst English Civil War in January 1645.
Laud believed inepiscopalianism, or rule by bishops. "Laudianism" was a reform movement that emphasised liturgical ceremony and clerical hierarchy, enforcing uniformity within the Church of England, as outlined by Charles. Its oftenhighly ritualistic aspects prefigure what are now known ashigh church views.
In theology, Laud was accused ofArminianism,[1] favouring doctrines of the historic church prior to the Reformation and defending the continuity of the English Church with the primitive and medieval church, and opposingCalvinism. On all three grounds, he was regarded byPuritan clerics and laymen as a formidable and dangerous opponent. His use of theStar Chamber to persecute opponents such asWilliam Prynne made him deeply unpopular.
Laud was born atReading, Berkshire, on 7 October 1573, the only son of William Laud, aclothier,[2] and Lucy, born Webbe, widow of John Robinson, another clothier of the town, and sister of SirWilliam Webbe,Lord Mayor of London. He was educated atReading School and on 17 October 1589 matriculated toSt John's College, Oxford,[2] where he was taught byThomas Holland. In 1593 he became a fellow of the college.[3] He graduatedBachelor of Arts in 1594,Master of Arts in 1598 andDoctor of Divinity in 1608. When Laud was going through his exercises as a candidate for the degree of Bachelor in Divinity, in 1604, he contended "that there could be no true churches without diocesan episcopacy". For this the young aspirant was sharply and publicly rebuked by Holland, who presided on the occasion; and who severely reprehended the future Primate of All England as "one who sought to sow discord among brethren, and between the Church of England and the Reformed Churches abroad".[4] While he was an undergraduate, Laud's tutor wasJohn Buckeridge, who becamepresident of St John's College in 1605.[5]
Laud was ordained deacon on 4 January 1601 and priest on 5 April the same year. On 4 May 1603, he was one of the university proctors for the year.[5]
When Buckeridge left St John's in 1611, Laud succeeded him as president, but only after a hard patronage struggle reaching high circles at court. The rival candidate,John Rawlinson, was chaplain toLord Ellesmere, who was both chancellor of the university andLord Chancellor of England. Laud was chaplain toRichard Neile, who wasClerk of the Closet. Eventually, King James brushed aside irregularities in the election, settling matters in Laud's favour.[6]
Laud becameDean of Gloucester in 1616. AtGloucester Cathedral he began ceremonial innovations with thecommunion table.[7] By local custom, the table stood in the middle of thechoir, as was then usual in a parish church, rather than at the east end as was typical of cathedrals. Laud believed he had the king's blessing to renovate and improve the run-down building, but he offended his bishop,Miles Smith.[5]
Neile was Laud's consistent patron. Neile sought, but could not obtain, Laud's appointment asDean of Westminster, a post thatJohn Williams retained. But at the end of 1621, and despite the king's view of Laud as a troublemaker, Laud received the relatively unimportant see ofSt Davids.[6]
Laud became a confidant ofGeorge Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, at the end of the reign. The Buckingham household employedJohn Percy (alias Fisher), aJesuit, as chaplain, and the king wished to counter well-founded rumours that Percy was making Catholic converts there. In a three-day series of private debates with Percy in 1622, Laud was introduced to argue the Protestant case on the final day; pamphlets followed.[8] He then displacedJohn Preston as religious adviser to the duke, a change that became clear around December 1624.[9]
Laud ascended rapidly to a position of influence in the period 1626 to 1628, advancing not alone but with a group of like-minded clerics who obtained bishoprics.[10] In 1626 he was translated from St David's to beBishop of Bath and Wells[2] and in September that year he took the court position ofDean of the Chapel Royal, vacant by the death ofLancelot Andrewes. A few years later, in 1633, he became Archbishop of Canterbury, whenGeorge Abbot died.[5] He immediately changed the Chapel services to privilege prayer over preaching, since King Charles's views were the opposite of his father's.[11]
In July 1628 Laud was translated fromBath and Wells to becomeBishop of London, in moves that followed on from the death of Andrewes. After this breakthrough in church politics, it becomes meaningful to define "Laudians" or "Lauders" as his followers.[12]
On the political stage, thepersonal rule of Charles I began in 1629 and Laud shortly became a key part of it, in alliance withThomas Wentworth. Historian Mark Parry argues that by 1626 in private consultations with the king and Buckingham, and in his public role in the House of Lords, Laud was a highly effective parliamentarian and a key adviser and policy-maker.[13] Laud distrusted parliamentary bargaining, and was always determined to resist all encroachments upon the royal prerogative, especially in matters of taxation. His strong positions were the focus of attack during his trial in 1644.[14] When Wentworth was posted to Ireland in 1632, Laud brought his personal correspondence from him rapidly to the king's attention.[15] It is in this correspondence, in 1633, that the term "Thorough" appears.[16] In practical terms it meant the pursuit of ambitious policy objectives, on behalf of the king, disregarding special interests, and, particularly, legalistic prevarications.[17] There were opponents at court:Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland,Francis Cottington, 1st Baron Cottington andQueen Henrietta Maria.[18] Cottington observed that Laud could not keep his temper in Council meetings, and by 1637 Laud found he could not follow Wentworth in imagining their push for rigid policies would succeed.[19]
 | This sectionneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "William Laud" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(January 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Laud was almost 60 years old when he became archbishop and, having waited for a decade to replace George Abbot, was no longer prepared to compromise on any aspect of his policy.[20] Abbot's chaplains had licensedHistriomastix for publication in 1630; the book which attacked English theatre and Christmas celebrations, among others, had caused scandal when it appeared in late 1632. One of Laud's early moves was to bring in his own men as censors:Samuel Baker (who was chaplain toWilliam Juxon),William Bray and Matthew Weeks.[21][22] The operations of the censors, includingWilliam Haywood who joined them, became a focus of theLong Parliament as soon as it was convened in November 1640, and Laud ultimately had to answer for Haywood at his own trial.[23][24]
Whereas Wentworth (who became the Earl of Strafford in early 1640) saw the political dangers of Puritanism, Laud saw the Calvinist movement's threat to theepiscopacy. But the Puritans themselves felt threatened: theCounter-Reformation was succeeding abroad and Protestants were not winning theThirty Years' War. In this climate, Laud's high church policy could be seen as sinister. A year after Laud's appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury, the shipGriffin left for America, carrying religious dissidents such asAnne Hutchinson, the ReverendJohn Lothropp and the ReverendZechariah Symmes.
Laud's desire to impose uniformity on the Church of England was driven by a belief that this was his office's duty, but his methods seemed persecution to those of differing views. Thus, they had theunintended consequence of garnering support for the most implacable opponents of the Anglican compromise. In 1637,Histriomastix's author,William Prynne, was convicted ofseditious libel along withJohn Bastwick andHenry Burton, and had their ears cropped and faces branded. Prynne reinterpreted the "SL" ("Seditious Libeller") branded on his forehead as "Stigmata Laudis". This led to popular discontent, particularly in London, and in May 1640 a large armed mob andattacking Lambeth Palace in the hope of capturing the Archbishop.[25] Laud also moved to silence his critic among the bishops,John Williams, who was convicted of various offences inStar Chamber. Contrary to Laud's expectation, Williams refused to resign asBishop of Lincoln, and the Lords forced his release, after which Williams supported theimpeachment of both Strafford (Wentworth) and Laud. Williams specifically urged the king not to commute Strafford's death sentence, and he was executed in 1641, months before Charles I promoted Williams to Archbishop of York (only to be re-imprisoned by Parliament and then join the King in Yorkshire upon his release).
Toward the end of his life, Charles I admitted that he had put too much trust in Laud, and allowed his "peevish humours" and obsession with points of ritual to inflame divisions within the Church: he warnedhis son not to rely on anyone else's judgment in such matters. Laud, on his side, could not forgive the king for allowing Strafford's execution and dismissed his royal master as "a mild and gracious Prince, that knows not how to be, or be made, great".[26]
.jpg)
TheLong Parliament of 1640 accused Laud oftreason and, in theGrand Remonstrance of 1641, called for his imprisonment.[27] Laud was imprisoned in theTower of London, where he remained throughout the early stages of theEnglish Civil War. Apart from a few personal enemies likeWilliam Prynne (and possibly Archbishop Williams), Parliament showed little eagerness to proceed against Laud; given his age (68 in 1641), most members would probably have preferred to leave him to die of natural causes. In the spring of 1644, he was brought to trial which ended without a verdict: as with Strafford, it proved impossible to point to any specific action seen as treasonable.
Parliament took up the issue and eventually passed abill of attainder, under which Laud wasbeheaded onTower Hill on 10 January 1645, notwithstanding being granted a royal pardon.[28] As the common hangman of London,Richard Brandon carried out Laud's execution, just as he had, in May 1641, of the Earl of Strafford.[29] Laud was buried in the chapel ofSt John's College, Oxford,[2] hisalma mater.
Laud isremembered in theChurch of England[30] and theEpiscopal Church of the United States with acommemoration on 10 January.[31]
His collected works in seven volumes were published between 1847 and 1860 in theLibrary of Anglo-Catholic Theology.[2]
The Englishdiplomat SirThomas Roe, told the queen of Bohemia that Laud was 'very just, incorrupt...a rare counsellor for integrity'.[32]
Emeritus Professor at Cambridge,Patrick Collinson, an expert in ElizabethanPuritans, in 1980 published this rebuke of Laud in his book on the decades until 1625: "the greatest calamity ever visited upon the English Church".[33]
In September 2016, followingKing's School, Gloucester,Reading School named their newest students' division Laud House after him.
Thepun "give great praise to the Lord, and little Laud to the devil" ("laud" meaning, "praise", from the Latin wordlaudāre) is a joke attributed toArchibald Armstrong, Charles'scourt jester; Laud was known to be touchy about his diminutive stature.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
| Political offices | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded byas Lord High Treasurer | First Lord of the Treasury 1635–1636 | Succeeded byas Lord High Treasurer |
| Church of England titles | ||
| Preceded by | Dean of Gloucester 1616–1621 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | Bishop of St David's 1621–1626 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | Bishop of Bath and Wells 1626–1628 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | Bishop of London 1628–1633 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | Archbishop of Canterbury 1633–1645 | Vacant Title next held by William Juxon |
| Academic offices | ||
| Preceded by | Chancellor of the University of Oxford 1630–1641 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | President of St John's College, Oxford 1611–1621 | Succeeded by |
| Preceded by | Chancellor of the University of Dublin 1633–1645 | Succeeded by |
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Artists | |
| People | |
| Other | |
.svg)
