Search results
William Laud (LAWD; 7 October 1573 – 10 January 1645) was a bishop in the Church of England. Appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by Charles I in 1633, Laud was a key advocate of Charles I's religious reforms; he was arrested by Parliament in 1640 and executed towards the end of the First English Civil War in January 1645.
- Overview
- Early life and career.
- Persecution of Puritans.
William Laud (born Oct. 7, 1573, Reading, Berkshire, Eng.—died Jan. 10, 1645, London) archbishop of Canterbury (1633–45) and religious adviser to King Charles I of Great Britain. His persecution of Puritans and other religious dissidents resulted in his trial and execution by the House of Commons.
Laud was the son of a prominent clothier. From Reading Grammar School he went on to St. John’s College, Oxford, and until he was nearly 50 combined the successful but unspectacular careers of academic and churchman. He was soon associated with the small clerical group, followers of the patristic scholar Lancelot Andrewes, who, in opposition to Puritanism, stressed the continuity of the visible church and the necessity, for true inward worship, of outward uniformity, order, and ceremony. In 1608 Laud entered the service of Richard Neile, bishop of Rochester, with whose help he secured a succession of ecclesiastical appointments. From 1611 he was a royal chaplain and came gradually to the notice of King James I. His lifelong conflict with John Williams, later bishop of Lincoln and archbishop of York, began when both sought advancement through the patronage of Charles’s favourite, the Duke of Buckingham. During Buckingham’s years of power, Laud was his chaplain and confidant, and he established a dominant voice in church policies and appointments. He became a privy councillor in 1627 and, a year later, bishop of London.
In his London diocese, Laud devoted himself to combating the Puritans and to enforcing a form of service in strict accordance with the Book of Common Prayer. The wearing of surplices, the placing of the communion table—railed off from the congregation—at the east end of the chancel, and such ceremonies as bowing at the mention of the name of Jesus were imposed, though cautiously enough to avoid unmanageable opposition. Churches, from St. Paul’s Cathedral down to neglected village chapels, were repaired, beautified, and consecrated. To religious radicals, all such reforms seemed moves toward popery.
From 1634 to 1637 visitations of every diocese (including, after strong resistance by Williams, that of Lincoln) showed the extent of deficiencies within the Anglican Church and the strength of Puritan practices. A succession of detailed orders from the Archbishop laid down the remedies. Preaching, to Puritans the essential task of the ministry, was to Laud a most dangerous source of “differences” in religion to be curtailed and controlled. In London his attack on Puritan “lectureships” culminated in the overthrow of the “feoffees for impropriations,” the City organization for buying up tithes and church patronage for the benefit of Puritan clergy. The printed word was dangerous, too: celebrated Puritan propagandists such as Alexander Leighton and William Prynne were mutilated and imprisoned. Occasionally, Laud was less harsh than his enemies admitted, especially to the clergy. But he rejected all conciliation of the Puritan movement, whose strength and qualities he never understood. He had, in fact, much in common with some forms of it: the unrelenting quest for the godly life, the intolerant certainty of his own rectitude, the hatred of corruption and extravagance. He could do much to diminish inefficiency, pluralism, absenteeism, and sheer idleness. But his wider efforts to overcome the poverty of clergy and parishes and restore something of the church’s position as a great and powerful landowner had extremely limited success.
To Laud, the strength of the church was inseparable from that of the state. Conflict between royal and ecclesiastical power was a possibility he never faced: under Charles I both could be exalted simultaneously. Holding no state office, he used his position on the privy council and his influence over the King to attack “the Lady Mora” (delay) in what he considered her first personification, the treasurer Richard Weston, and afterward in other ministers. His most effective direct impact on government was in the social policy he applied through the council and the courts. Exacting landlords and unscrupulous officials were attacked, and the poor were protected against everyone except the state itself.
Exclusive academic rate for students! Save 67% on Britannica Premium.
Learn More
William Laud was a significant religious and political advisor during the personal rule of King Charles I . He was considered one of the key instigators of the conflict between the monarchy and Parliament, which ultimately paved the way for the English Civil War…
Jan 17, 2022 · Archbishop William Laud, 1573-1645. Archbishop of Canterbury whose attempts to bring uniformity of worship and the “beauty of holiness” into the Anglican liturgy precipitated the slide into Civil War. Born at Reading in Berkshire, William Laud was the tenth son of a prosperous clothier.
William Laud, (born Oct. 7, 1573, Reading, Berkshire, Eng.—died Jan. 10, 1645, London), Archbishop of Canterbury (1633–45) and religious adviser to Charles I. He became a privy councillor in 1627 and bishop of London in 1628, devoting himself to combating Puritanism and enforcing strict Anglican ritual. By the time he became archbishop of ...
William Laud - Archbishop, Puritanism, Execution: In the spring of 1640 Parliament met for the first time in 11 years and with it the clerical assembly, the Convocation, which laid down in a new set of canons the principles of the Laudian church.
May 8, 2018 · William Laud. The English prelate William Laud (1573-1645) was archbishop of Canterbury and architect of Charles I's personal government. He was executed by the Long Parliament. William Laud was the son of a Reading clothier.
