Conscience and Allegiance in Seventeenth Century England : The Political Significance of Oaths and Engagements

This book examines the evolution of a distinctive English practice of conscience and allegiance. From the Reformation onward the English monarchy faced difficulties in policing its claim to obedience in church and state. To address this security problem, the English government promulgated oaths to assess the intensity of popular allegiance. The oath offered interesting political possibilities, both as a device sanctioned by common law and a bond of conscience. In an age increasingly preoccupied by conscience, the oath helped to crystalize a distinctively English understanding of that concept. Yet the state's attempt to foreclose the details of allegiance by oath unintentionallysucceeded in creating a countervailing pressure opposed to its use. Throughout the Tudor-Stuart period, religiously and constitutionally motivated groups objected to state oaths. Responding to their tactics, government apologists defined an official practice of conscience. By the second decade of the seventeenth century, a fully articulated state casuistry demonstrated that lawful oaths indissolubly bound the conscience of the moral subject.Significantly, those who challenged the character of the emerging confessional state, resisted it in terms of a shared vocabulary of conscience and law. In fact, the performative enactment of the oath invited a language game conducted in casuistical terms. Throughout the century and a half that the government experimented with the concept of unconditional allegiance to the person of the monarch, there existed a countervailing tradition that maintained that the crown could be lawfully opposed. The history of the state oath ultimately revealed its inability to provide the indefeasible allegiance that government craved.After 1688, the inability to negotiate an elite consensus facilitated a new moral psychology grounded in the affections and managed by a probable reason. Political practice came to reflect this. As a unitary confessionalism collapsed and the unstable multiple kingdom fused in During The Stuart Monarchy, Oath Taking Became A Means To Enforce Popular Allegiance To The King, Who Had Become Head Of Both The Church And The State During The Previous Tudor Reign. In An Age Increasingly Preoccupied By Conscience, This Initially Helped To Strengthen The Monarch's Power. Yet, Paradoxically, Religiously And Constitutionally Motivated Groups Strongly Objected To Such State Oaths, And The Attempt By The Crown To Enforce Unconditional Allegiance Served To Create A Countervailing Tradition That Opposed It. In Conscience And Allegiance In Seventeenth Century England, David Martin Jones Discusses Both The Attraction Of The State Oath To Government As A Devise To Promote And Secure Support, And The Reasons Why Conscience Declined In Political Relevance In The Course Of The Eighteenth Century.--jacket. Introduction. Oaths, Conscience, And The Tacit Dimension In Early Modern English Political Thought -- Ch. 1. State Oath In Law And Conscience: A Brief History Of The Safest Knot Of Civil Society -- Ch. 2. Of Oaths, Their Object, Form And Bond: The Impact Of Common Law, Casuistry, And Character Upon The State Oath -- Ch. 3. Endless Janglings And Perplexities: The English Experience Of The State Oath, 1640-1660 -- Ch. 4. Oath Restored: The Problems Raised By The Imposition Of State Oaths Between 1660 And 1690 -- Ch. 5. Conscience, Character, The Prostitution Of The Oath, And The Evolution Of A Political Disposition -- App. Genealogy Of The State Oath. 1. Feudal Oath Of Liege Homage Or Liegeance. David Martin Jones. Originally Presented As The Author's Doctoral Thesis In The Government Department At The London School Of Economics In The Mid 1980's. Includes Bibliographical References (p. [286]-329) And Indexes. During the Stuart monarchy oath taking became a means to enforce popular allegiance to the king (who had become head of both the church and the state during the previous Tudor reign). In an age increasingly preoccupied by conscience, this initially helped to strengthen the monarch's power. Yet, paradoxically, religiously and constitutionally motivated groups strongly objected to such state oaths, and the attempt by the crown to enforce such unconditional allegiance served to create a countervailing tradition that opposed it. This book discusses both the attraction of the state oath to government as a devise to promote and secure support, and the reasons why conscience declined in political relevance in the course of the eighteenth century. Provides an explanation of the use of the state oath in Tudor and Stuart England to promote and secure a society bound by law and conscience.