On William Walwyn's Demurre to the Bill for Preventing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ON WILLIAM WALWYN’S DEMURRE TO THE BILL FOR PREVENTING THE GROWTH AND SPREADING OF HERESIE by Andrew LeClair A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, FL December 2018 Copyright 2018 by Andrew LeClair ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express sincere gratitude to his committee members, Dr. John Leeds, Dr. Emily Stockard, and Dr. Tom Martin for all of their guidance and support, and special thanks to my advisor for his persistence, patience, and encouragement during the writing of this manuscript. iv ABSTRACT Author: Andrew LeClair Title: On William Walwyn’s Demurre to the Bill for Preventing the Growth and Spreading of Heresie Institution: Florida Atlantic University Thesis Advisor: Dr. John Leeds Degree: Master of Arts Year: 2018 During the English Revolution of the seventeenth century, writers like William Walwyn produced documents contesting the restriction of their liberties. This thesis is a critical edition of Walwyn’s Demurre to the Bill for Preventing the Growth and Spreading of Heresie, unedited since its original publication in 1646. In this text Walwyn advocates for man’s right to question religious orthodoxy in his search for Truth and urges Parliament not to pass a proposed Bill for the harsh punishment of religious sectarians. Prior to a transcription of the text is an introduction to Walwyn and an attempt to situate the reader in the context of his time. Following that is a style and rhetorical analysis, which concludes that despite his rejection of rhetorical practices, Walwyn’s own use of them is effective. Perhaps this skill is one of the reasons that Parliament passed a milder, non-punitive version of the Bill Walwyn argued against. v DEDICATION This manuscript is dedicated to my family without whom it would be impossible. Tiffany, thank you for the countless hours you allow me to spend writing in the office while you run the restaurant. Cailee, Gavin, Rollie, thank you for the joy—and ice cream—that you bring to the most trying times. Mom and Dad, thank you for all the times you look after things while Tiffany and I are off chasing dreams. Success would not exist without you six. ON WILLIAM WALWYN’S DEMURRE TO THE BILL FOR PREVENTING THE GROWTH AND SPREADING OF HERESIE Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4 Biographical Material ........................................................................................................ 7 Historical and Political Context ....................................................................................... 13 Transcription .................................................................................................................... 23 Stylistic and Rhetorical Analysis ..................................................................................... 33 The Ordinance Passed ...................................................................................................... 61 Clarification of Terms ...................................................................................................... 63 Appendix .......................................................................................................................... 66 Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 74 vii I: INTRODUCTION My project is a critical edition of a text apparently unedited and unpublished since its original publication in 1646. The piece I have chosen, A Demurre to the Bill for Preventing the Growth and Spreading of Heresie, appears to have been published in October 1646, by an unidentified printer in London, and consists of eight pages of Roman type. Its composer, William Walwyn (1600-1681), leader of the seventeenth-century Leveller movement, wrote in the context of the English Revolution and Civil War. Walwyn’s Demurre objects to The Bill Preventing the Growth and Spreading of Heresie which, if passed, would prevent religious free speech. His treatise is addressed to the members of the House of Commons directly and rejects the harsh punishment imposed on sectaries. He writes just after the Parliamentary army had prevailed in its military struggle against the king—while the Presbyterian majority in Parliament (under the influence of the clergy in the Westminster Assembly) had turned its attention to punishing and rooting out the growing religious sectarianism in the army. Thus, the Demurre is radical in its context: Walwyn writes contrary to official belief in a time when the expression of unorthodox opinion could be a capital offense. My thesis is laid out in several parts, each with a particular aim. Section one briefly introduces the reader to the scope of the project and its structure. There, too, I offer a brief synopsis of each section. Section two introduces Walwyn as a leader of the Leveller movement and its aims. Following the background information is the heart of 1 this work: the transcription of Walwyn’s Demurre, which is—apart from beingtypographically cleaner and easier to read—a replica of the original. All of Walwyn’s language and style choices have been retained such that his message is exactly what it was in 1646. The only changes that I have made are to the spacing and general type-setting of the document. Following the transcription is an analysis of the rhetorical techniques that Walwyn used in his attempt to prevent Parliament from passing the bill in question. Because rhetoric was an area of large concern for Walwyn’s time, particularly when it was used in religious discourse, it is necessary to examine Walwyn’s own use of it here. I will argue that Walwyn occupies an ironic space throughout the Demurre. Walwyn begins by positing himself on the side both of the members of the House of Commons and of the members of a dissenting community. He does this through the use of a collective “we” perspective and a redirection of fault—from the House of Commons to the church presbyters, despite the fact that the bill technically originated in the House. He goes on to occupy a humble but assertive position from which he argues for the dismissal of a bill that would, in the name of preventing the growth and spread of heresy, suppress religious freedom of conscience. However, the logic that Walwyn applies, particularly in his attack on the Presbyters, makes perfect sense. It is not that Walwyn believes people should go around cursing the name of God—though, if that is part of one man’s process, Walwyn would say that it is his God-given right. Walwyn believes that, whether they come to the same conclusion or not, all people should be allowed to realize the Truth for themselves rather than be forced to believe all that the clergy professes. Here, we have an especially radical 2 view of the separation of church and state. Walwyn separates the interests of church presbyters from those of Parliament when he accuses parliamentarians of going against their own belief system to further the unjust ends of the presbyters. He does not leave any room for the possibility that Parliament should endorse any aspect of a bill that would prevent religious free speech. Rather, he gives full responsibility to the presbyters. This choice is so important and so effective because it transforms the dynamic between the people, their government, and their church. It not only makes the government an innocent party, but it also gives them the ability to protect the people from the church. For Walwyn, to prevent someone from studying scripture is to block his path to Heaven—the ultimate enslavement. Following the analysis of Walwyn’s rhetoric, I inform the reader that The Bill Preventing the Growth and Spreading of Heresie was not passed by Parliament “as-is.” Instead, a much watered-down version was passed; the text of this bill is attached as my sixth section. I also speculate about whether Walwyn played a role in Parliament’s decision to dilute the bill prior to its passing. The final section is a glossary of unfamiliar terms. Here, I clarify terms used by Walwyn which are no longer in use—Socinians, Anabaptists, Brownists, etcetera—to provide further understanding of both the rhetoric that he uses and the time in which it was used. It is frightening to think that, like the terminology, the revolutionary works of earlier ages are losing currency today. The philosophical, political, and religious leaders who composed these works built the framework upon which our free society stands, but most of their names are unfamiliar to us. It is an interesting thought that the people we revere today, we revere because they stood up for what they believed in. But there is no such reverence for Walwyn, even 3 though his advocacy of Christian liberty influenced so great a figure as Milton. This thesis, in part, is an effort to rectify that situation. 4 II: BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL Unlike the years surrounding the publication of the Demurre, the beginning of Walwyn’s life was unremarkable. “Walwyn was born in 1600 into the landed gentry” (Pick 51). He was the second son of a Worcestershire country gentleman, Robert Walwyn, and his mother, Elizabeth, was the bishop of Hereford’s daughter (Pick 51). Walwyn enjoyed a prosperous upbringing but did not stand out as an academic in his youth. In adulthood, though, Walwyn was known for many things.