Editing Personal Rule (section)

==Religion during Personal Rule==
Without the influence of Parliament, the Caroline government was able to exert a much greater force on the Church. During Personal Rule, there was a noticeable shift in the [[Church of England]] towards a more sacramental and ceremonialist direction.{{sfn|Cust|2005|pp=97–103}} The appointment of [[William Laud]] to the role of [[Archbishop of Canterbury]] in 1633{{sfn|Cust|2005|p=133}} signalled this shift most of all. One of Charles' main concerns was the liturgical and religious unity of his Three Kingdoms. His government tried to squash dissent legalistically, by making use of the [[Court of High Commission]] and the [[Star Chamber]]. One very prominent example of this was the punishment of three dissenters – [[William Prynne]], [[Henry Burton (theologian)|Henry Burton]] and [[John Bastwick]] – in 1637; they were pilloried, whipped and mutilated by cropping and then imprisoned indefinitely for their publication and authorship of anti-episcopal pamphlets.{{sfn|Coward|2003|p=176}}

Liturgical shifts were important to the theology of Laud. A greater insistence on the usage of the [[Book of Common Prayer]] in all services (which was enforced by episcopal visitation);{{sfn|Smith|1998|p=92}} the placement of the altar at the east end of the Church;{{sfn|Smith|1998|p=92}} and kneeling for the reception of the sacrament{{sfn|Smith|1998|p=92}} were all hallmarks of Laudian liturgy. This was all encompassed within a policy called 'the beauty of holiness' (this phrase coming from Psalm 96), which described how Christian worship should be couched in ceremony and splendour to further devotion. Foreshadowing debates that would later emerge over clerical dress, Laud also imposed a rule which decreed all ministers should wear a surplice<ref>{{cite book |last= Young |first= Michael |title= Charles I |year= 1997 |publisher= Red Globe Press |isbn= 9780292720619 |page= 107 }}</ref> when performing a service. All of these reforms and changes were often criticised by Puritan and other opponents as a return to popery<ref>{{cite book |last= Braddick |first= Michael |title= God's Fury, England's Fire: A New History of the English Civil Wars |year= 2009 |publisher= Penguin |location= United Kingdom |isbn= 9780141008974 |page= 49 }}</ref> and the vicious influence of Roman Catholicism returning to a semi-reformed English Church.

Whilst opposition from the Church of Scotland as well as radical Puritans was strong and consistent throughout Personal Rule, there was little opposition from the English population at large. Indeed, the Church was generally accepted as becoming more ceremonial in its style of worship, such as through the acceptance of the installation of Laudian altar rails. It is estimated that as many as three-quarters of England's parish churches had altar rails installed by 1639.{{sfn|Seel|Smith|2001|p=90}} However, much of this ceremonial progress was undone by Parliamentary decree upon the calling of the [[Long Parliament]], which ordered the destruction of all altar rails in 1641.{{sfn|Seel|Smith|2001|p=90}}

Historians generally agree that Laudian reforms were divisive, but disagree over the salience of religious issues in the bringing about of the end of Personal Rule. [[John Morrill (historian)|John Morrill]] argued that, 'it is impossible to overestimate the damage done by the Laudians'.<ref>{{cite journal |last= Morrill |first= John |title= The Religious Context of the English Civil War |year= 1983 |journal=Transactions of the Royal Historical Society |volume=34 |publisher= The Royal Historical Society |location= United Kingdom |doi= 10.2307/3679130 |page= 162 |jstor= 3679130 |s2cid= 154659894 }}</ref> Other historians, like [[David Smith (historian)|David Smith]] and Ian Gentles argue similarly the primacy of religious issues in the coming of the downfall of Personal Rule, as well as the start of the Civil War in general. However, historians like John Adamson stress the importance of constitutional, short-term issues like the trial and execution of [[Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford]] as the most important context for the outbreak of Civil War. There can be little denial of the importance of religion in the contentions within Personal Rule. The attempts to instil religious conformity, especially in Scotland, generated opposition and drove the impetus towards the calling of the [[Short Parliament]], and then the [[Long Parliament]]. The [[Bishops' Wars]] were a direct consequence of the attempt to impose the English Book of Common Prayer on the Scottish [[Kirk]], and Charles' defeat here signalled the necessity to end Personal Rule before such a war could break out in England (as it would in 1642).{{sfn|Seel|Smith|2001}}