obedience to its enactments, when not contrary to conscience, and passive obedience if they were so contrary.  Therefore, were he alive to-day, and did he think it contrary to conscience (as he easily might) to pay a school-rate for an ‘undenominational’ school, he would not draw a cheque for the amount, but neither would he punch the bailiff’s head who came to seize his furniture.  Kettlewell’s treatise is well worth reading.  Its last paragraph is most spirited.

There could be no doubt about it.  The High Church party were bound hand and foot to the doctrine of the Cross—­i.e., passive obedience to the Lord’s Anointed.  Whoever else might actively resist or forsake the King, they could not without apostasy.  But the Revolution of 1688 was not content to pierce the High Churchmen through one hand.  Not only did the Revolution require the Church to forswear its King, but also to see its spiritual fathers deprived and intruders set in their places without even the semblance of any spiritual authority.  If it was hard to have James II. a fugitive in foreign lands and Dutch William in Whitehall, it was perhaps even harder to see Sancroft expelled from Lambeth, and the Erastian and latitudinarian Tillotson, who was prepared to sacrifice even episcopacy for peace, usurping the title of Archbishop of Canterbury.  After all, no man, not even a Churchman, can serve two masters.  The loyalty of a High Churchman to the throne is always subject to his loyalty to the Church, and at the Revolution he was wounded in both houses.

When Queen Elizabeth ascended the throne, and established what was then unblushingly called ‘the new religion,’ the whole Anglican Hierarchy, with the paltry exception of the Bishop of Llandaff, refused the oaths of supremacy, and were superseded.  In a little more than 100 years the Protestant Bench was bombarded with a heart-searching oath—­this time of allegiance.  Opinion was divided; the point was not so clear as in 1559.  The Archbishop of York and his brethren of London, Lincoln, Bristol, Winchester, Rochester, Llandaff and St. Asaph, Carlisle and St. David’s, swore to bear true allegiance to Their Majesties King William and Queen Mary.  The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops of Bath and Wells, Ely, Gloucester, Norwich, Peterborough, Worcester, Chichester, and Chester refused to swear anything of the kind, and were consequently, in pursuance of the terms of an Act of Parliament, and of an Act of Parliament only, deprived of their ecclesiastical preferments.  They thus became the first Non-Jurors, and were long, except two who died before actual sentence of exclusion, affectionately known and piously venerated in all High Church homes as ‘the Deprived Fathers.’