One of Laud’s innovations involved moving the communion table to the east end of the church, the chancel, and to have it protected by rails. In the past, Puritans kept the communion table in the main body of the church; moving it to the chancel seemed like a move towards Catholicism. This caused a lot of angered and became known as the Altar Controversy. It caused opposition as people thought that it was a return to the ways of Roman Catholicism.
Laud also caused a lot of uproar over the case of Prynne, Bastwick and Burton in 1638. These men were anti- Arminians and they wrote their criticism of the Bishops and Clergy in pamphlets of the time. They were therefore accused of being ‘invaders of the King’s prerogative, contemners of the Scriptures, advancers of popery…….enemies of God and the King and servants of the Devil’. Laud had them put to trial and they were sentence to life in prison. They were also heavily fined and had their ears cut off. The treatment of these three men showed Laud’s favouritism towards Arminians and possibly towards Catholics. This upset a lot of people and led to opposition against him and the King.
Major opposition arose when Charles I and Laud tried to impose the New Scottish Prayer book upon Scottish churchgoers. It was based on the English Prayer Book and Charles I wanted it to be read in churches throughout Scotland. The New Scottish Prayer Book emphasised the importance of the ceremonies and the Scots believed that this was an English plot to turn to Scots away from the path of Protestantism towards that of Catholic. This suspicion led to the drawing up of the National Covenant in 1638; a pledge to, ‘maintain the true religion of Christ Jesus…..and abolish all false religion’. Many people came to sign the covenant, showing their opposition to Laud and Charles I. Even though Charles I tried to calm them down by giving them concessions, but when Church leaders met, they resolved to abolish episcopacy in Scotland. Charles saw that he needed to stop this as his authority as King was being challenged and decided to use force. In 1638 he ordered the counties of England to raise forces to fight the Scots; the first time for centuries that a monarch had attempted war without calling Parliament. This was the start of the First Bishops War and ended with the Treaty of Berwick, where Charles agreed to call a Scottish Parliament and General Assembly. This caused a lot of opposition to Charles, as people saw that he was more than willing to use force to settle issues and would do so without Parliament. This was not the end of opposition by the Scots.
In 1640, Charles called Parliament for the first time in 11 years, as he needed money to raise an army to crush the Scottish rebellion. The so-called ‘Short’ Parliament wanted to redress their grievances with him and Charles soon saw that he wouldn’t receive the money he wanted. He therefore dissolved Parliament, only a few months after he had called it. English MP’s and Scottish Covenanters soon saw that co-operating to coerce Charles I was the best way to serve their interests. This is what may have triggered the outbreak of the Second Bishops War in 1640, once again, showing very strong opposition to King Charles and his actions.
It can therefore be seen that religion played a major role in arousing opposition against the Charles I. This opposition arose mainly due to the fear of Roman Catholicism and popery being forced back into the Church. Laud played a large part in religious opposition, in turn, leading to opposition against the King.
Religion was not the only factor in stirring up hostility between the King and his subjects, arguments over the financial system also played a large role in causing anger and opposition. Troubles and grievances with finance originated with the forced loan in 1626 – 1627. It was demanded from the gentry and people were imprisoned for not paying. There were questions over whether this was really legal, but this was only the beginning of the King’s legally dubious methods of collecting money.
The main opposition was caused by the collection of Ship Money. Theoretically, coastal countries were required to provide ships for royal service in times of emergency, but in practice most people were charged and money was sent instead of ships. In the years 1634 – 1640, JP’s were made to collect ship money even though England was not at war. Charles I said the money was needed to protect the country against pirates. In 1635, ship money was collected from everyone. The tax raised many issues. It had become a permanent tax, not one that was collected when it was needed and everyone was paying it. Questions were also raised about where the taxes were spent, as it seemed as though it was being used to convey Spanish ships, not protecting the country against pirates. This caused a lot of suspicion and opposition towards the King as people didn’t like paying taxes, but they also were not sure where the money was being spent and didn’t like that it had become a permanent tax.
