"During the time I was at London I had many services laid upon me, for it was a time of much suffering. I was moved to write to Oliver Cromwell, and lay before him the sufferings of Friends both in this nation and in Ireland. There was also a talk about this time of making Cromwell king; whereupon I was moved to go to him and warn him against accepting it; and of diverse dangers which, if he did not avoid them, would, I told him, bring shame and ruin upon himself and his posterity. He seemed to take well what I said to him, and thanked me; yet afterwards I was moved to write to him more fully concerning that matter."
Cromwell was not made King by name.
He did, though, take to styling himself Lord Protector, and he passed alog the title of Lord Protector to his son, so one might think the distinction between his Lordship and an earthly kingdom unpersuasive.
Surely, Fox' objection to Kingship wasn't simply that the Stuart family were the wrong folks, nor was it simply that the name 'King' was an inadequate one for the hereditary office of protector.
I would expect, and of course I speak open to correction by friends or Friends, that Fox' objections have much to do with the 8th chapter of the book of Samuel.
Cromwell was not made King by name.
He did, though, take to styling himself Lord Protector, and he passed alog the title of Lord Protector to his son, so one might think the distinction between his Lordship and an earthly kingdom unpersuasive.
Surely, Fox' objection to Kingship wasn't simply that the Stuart family were the wrong folks, nor was it simply that the name 'King' was an inadequate one for the hereditary office of protector.
I would expect, and of course I speak open to correction by friends or Friends, that Fox' objections have much to do with the 8th chapter of the book of Samuel.
Comments
Post a Comment