Thursday 30 January 1661/62

Fast-day for the murthering of the late King. I went to church, and Mr. Mills made a good sermon upon David’s words, “Who can lay his hands upon the Lord’s Anoynted and be guiltless?” So home and to dinner, and employed all the afternoon in my chamber, setting things and papers to rights, which pleased me very well, and I think I shall begin to take pleasure in being at home and minding my business. I pray God I may, for I find a great need thereof. At night to supper and to bed.

15 Annotations

A. Hamilton   Link to this

"I shall begin to take pleasure in being at home and minding my business. I pray God I may, for I find a great need thereof."

Tis always the prayer of the busy man with a somewhat obligatory social schedule.

vicenzo   Link to this

January 1649 was the year "... for the murthering of the late King..." murther dial. version of murder:
I doth think he mean watch his P's & Q's after hearing what is being said about the laws being overthrown and revised in the HofL, and jailing of the Quakers for their attitudes to dothing their caps etc.,, and the punishment being meted out to former supporters of the inter Regnum mob.

vicenzo   Link to this

parliament be shut: PRAYERS.
FAST DAY.
The Lords went to hear the Fast Sermon, in the Abbey Church of Westm.

From: British History Online
Source: House of Lords Journal Volume 11: 30 January 1662. Journal of the House of Lords: volume 11, ().
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?com...
Date: 31/01/2005

OzStu   Link to this

Fast-day for the murthering of the late King....So home and to dinner..
Doesn't sound as though serious fasting was required for the fast day. More like a modern bank holiday since he didn't go to the office ?

Australian Susan   Link to this

Up until the 19th century, the Book of Common Prayer had prayers for "Charles, King and Martyr" to be said on this day and there are Churches in England which have the dedication of Charles, King and Martyr. See http://www.skcm.org/SCharles/Cult/cult.html for details of this and other aspects of ongoing veneration of Charles. At this time, in the diary, everyone is being Very Careful to be Seen To Be Loyal!

Clement   Link to this

Fast-day.
It's likely that day is only sacred to the staunchest royalists, or those in a position to be seen by the staunchest royalists.

I doubt most Londoners would consider the King's murthered father "the Lord's Anoynted,” but there must be no coincidence in the reverend’s sermon.

We’ve just seen an “Execution of Those Attained for Treason” bill before parliament, repented regicides hauled to the gallows and back, and now a Fast day. Perhaps Pastor Mills was reassuring the sheep of the occasional need for bloody vengance, within the context of a Christian state of grace. Always tricky logic that Sam seems to have appreciated.

Anthony   Link to this

Murthering of the late King ... still commemorated by wreaths laid today at the base of his statue on the traffic island by Trafalgar Square.

Ruben   Link to this

There are 2 very similar quotations that Mr Mills could use that day:
"And Dauid answered and said to Abisai, there are two Destroy him not, for who can lay his hands on the Lords anointed, and be guiltlesse? And Dauid sayd furthermore, As sure as the Lord liueth, the Lord shall smite him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall descend or goe downe into battaile, and there perish, the Lord keepe me from laying my handes vpon the Lords anoynted."
That was when the King was alive and David was running away from him.

And after King Saul's dead (good for David, politically speaking):
"But godly Dauid was so farre from reioycing at this newes, that immediatly and foorthwith hee rent his clothes off his backe, hee mourned and wept, and said to the messenger, How is it that thou wast not afraid to lay thy hands on the Lords annointed to destroy him? And by and by Dauid made one of his seruants to kill the messenger, saying, Thy blood bee on thine owne head, for thine owne mouth hath testified and witnessed against thee, granting that thou hast slaine the Lords annointed."
By the way, like in Mexico years later, the messenger pays the price of the good news...sorry, of the news.

From all this I would say that the gilt is in those that plotted against their King, those that comitted regicide and finally in those that profited from his murder...(that last is something that you would say in a hush only to your best friends)

More at the Anglican Church site:
http://www.anglicanlibrary.org/homilies/bk1hom1...

Ruben   Link to this

Of course, if your boss or your best friend was Montague you would not dare say that at all!

Martin   Link to this

Fast Day
As late as 1991, New Hampshire (USA) still had a legal Fast Day, see http://www.nh.gov/nhinfo/fast.html.

Martin   Link to this

Sorry about the link.
It shouldn't have a period at the end. Try:
http://www.nh.gov/nhinfo/fast.html

Pedro.   Link to this

Fast Day, the Rev Ralph Josselin says..

30. a public fast for the Kings death not above 70 persons or thereabouts hearing, surely not a 100. preached on Jer. 3.22.
http://linux02.lib.cam.ac.uk/earlscolne//diary/...

nick sweeney   Link to this

The Oxford University diary still marks January 30 'Charles, King and Martyr', in the same italics it uses for saints' days; a reflection of Oxford's role as a Royalist stronghold, and the seat of Charles I's court-in-exile.

A study of the cult of Charles, King and Martyr is reviewed here:

http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/paper/knoppers...

One has to remember that the veneration of Charles as Christian martyr was an underground phenomenon throughout the 1650s; the Restoration allowed it to go public. So it's unsurprising that it takes an uncompromising form:

'Attached to the Bill of Attainder of the regicides as instructions to keep 30 January as a fast day, the service focused on an Old Testament theology of the chosen people, God's law and human rebellion, judgement and vengeance provoked by disobedience and regicide, and expiation of bloodguilt… [T]he political doctrines embodied in these texts were deeply conservative: divine right of kings, non-resistance, passive obedience, indefeasible hereditary right and prerogative power.’

The liturgical additions to the Book of Common Prayer, and their history, are described here in an essay from 1907:

http://justus.anglican.org/resources/pc/charles...

The Collect from the January 30th service appeals directly for divine forgiveness from collective guilt:

‘O gracious God, when Thou makest inquisition for blood, lay not the guilt of this innocent blood (the shedding whereof nothing but the blood of Thy Son can expiate) lay it not to the charge of the people of this Land, nor let it ever be required of us, or our posterity. Be merciful, be merciful unto Thy People whom Thou hast redeemed; and be not angry with us forever; but pardon us for Thy mercies’ sake, through the merits of Thy SON our LORD JESUS CHRIST. Amen.’

Australian Susan   Link to this

Bibles and Prayers Books
The Bible translation used in the annotation given by Ruben above is one that Pepys would not have been familiar with: it is the mid-16th century Coverdale translation not the Authorised King James Bible of 1611. Coverdale had a good way with words and it is a shame his translation is not more well known. His translation survives in part in the Book of Common Prayer which derives from the original book of Common Prayer of 1549 (translated by Cramner, who wrote the Homily Ruben quotes from above): Coverdale's Psalm translation's were used. This is why a 1662 Authorised Book of Common Prayer differs in its Psalm translation from the Auhtorised Bible of 1611. See http://www.bible-researcher.com/1911-coverdale.... for information on Coverdale. Incidently, the Collect quoted by Nick Sweeney (for which much thanks) had not yet been published, so Sam would not have heard it: the 1662 BCP has yet to be published in diary time, so Mr Mills could have used the collect for that Sunday or a general one for Christian Martyrs.See http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/everym... for Prayer Book History

nick sweeney   Link to this

"the 1662 BCP has yet to be published in diary time"

Quite so, which reminds me that I managed to cut out a comment I intended to make...

As the essay I linked earlier notes, two appendices to the BCP outlining the January 30th Office had been issued: one in 1661, presumably never used, unless in error, since it was superseded by one in January 1661/2. It would be interesting to know the full contents of those appendices... the BCP's equivalent of errata and update slips.

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.