WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED

DAY ONE

SATURDAY: JANUARY 14 , 1604

The participants assembled at 9am for an 11am start. The bishops were all wearing their full regalia, looking resplendent in silks and satins. This was designed to intimidate and annoy the Puritans who believed that such splendour was too close to Catholic pageantry. One observer noted that Thomas Sparke had taken no pains with his dress at all, turning up dressed in “such that Turkey merchants wear”.

The first thing James did was to dismiss the Puritans for the day and concentrate on the members of the Established Church. He opened with an hour-long speech that diplomatically stated both that as King he was unequivocally head of the Church and therefore in charge, and that he appreciated the skills of the learned men who had met with him. He expressed a wish not to change anything unless, of course, it needed changing. “Our purpose…is, like a good physician, to examine and try the complaints, and fully to remove the occasions thereof, if scandalous, cure them if dangerous.” The bishops played up to this flattery, addressing the King from their knees. He soon tired of their pleasure in the idea of nothing changing.

Continuing his simile of the Church as a diseased body, James exclaimed: “It was no reason that because a man had been sick of the pox 40 years, therefore he should not be cured at length.” The bishops were horrified at his language and saw James was not going to be as easy to control as they had hoped. They moved on, debating technical issues about the ceremony of confirmation and the over-use of excommunication.

On the issue of baptism there was division. Bancroft was in favour of lay baptism in the case of necessity. Babington, siding with a more Puritan outlook, was not. When Dove decided to wade in by citing a patristic source that in case of necessity sand could be used instead of water, James retorted with “a turd for the argument, he might as well have pissed on them”. Things got even more out of hand when Bancroft lost his cool and shouted at Montagu, “Speak out, Mr Doctor, and do not cross us, underhand,” because he was whispering something to the King. In this atmosphere of backstabbing and one-upmanship, the conference day was brought to a close after just three hours. Anxious to make it seem as if the King and bishops were always in one mind, Barlow left this exchange out of the official account.

SUNDAY: A DAY OF REST  

DAY TWO

MONDAY: JANUARY 16, 1604

The next day of business saw a change in the cast list. James summoned the four Puritans and only retained two trusted advisors, Bilson and Bancroft, from among the bishops. It is recorded that little Prince Henry, then only ten years old, was also present. Barlow’s use of the word “plaintiffs” when referring to the Puritans is apt when you consider James’s tactics with them that day. He charged them to give proofs of the practices they objected to being condemned in the Scriptures. It was an ambush. James allowed them to make their points purely to knock them down. He was enjoying himself. For example, the Puritans had concerns about the use of certain words in the Book of Common Prayer. “With my body I thee worship” was a phrase in the marriage ceremony. James skillfully pointed out that the word “worship” was not being used literally here, and besides, is that word not used often in the English language in a non-theological context? He couldn’t resist having a dig at the celibate Reynolds: “If you had a good wife yourself, you would think that all the honour and worship you could do her were well bestowed.”

The Puritans were losing ground. They had expected James, as a Scottish king who had supported John Knox and presided over a flourishing of Presbyterianism, to be sympathetic to their cause. Had he brought them here simply to allow Bancroft to ridicule their dress sense and interrupt them? (James was actually moved to tell Bancroft off for rudely interrupting on two occasions during the day). Reynolds then made an error. As part of a discussion of how the hierarchy of the Church would be best organised for efficient government, he used the word “presbytery”, meaning committee. This was a red rag to a bull. James was very sensitive about the way the Presbyterian influence in Scotland had restricted his power as a monarch. There was no way he was going to let that happen in England. He shouted, “If you aim at a Scots Presbytery, it agreeth as well with monarchy as God and the devil!” He followed this up with the famous line, “No Bishops, no King!” The day ended on a sour note.

Bancroft must have been overjoyed. He had been exploiting James’ distrust of Presbyterianism for some time, focusing on how their views would lead to an undermining of the King’s authority. If he could make James think the Puritans had sympathy with Presbyterianism, James would never give in to any of their demands. But James had to be seen to give the Puritans some concessions in order not to be accused of being one-sided. If only the Puritans would offer something he could give in to without incurring the wrath of the Established Church.

Among a list of points brought up by Reynolds, the idea of a new translation of the Bible had emerged. This was probably a development of his comment “one only translation of the Bible to be declared authentical and read in the Church”. Reynolds would have been hoping for this “one” Bible to be the Geneva Bible (as opposed to the current “Bishop’s Bible”) but with its anti-monarchist footnotes, James could not have been expected to allow this. However, a new translation might solve the problem. Bancroft completely opposed the idea but he had to find himself on James’s side or he would not get the nomination to be Archbishop of Canterbury.

TUESDAY: NO BUSINESS

DAY THREE

WEDNESDAY: JANUARY 18, 1604

At the beginning of the day James met with the Bishops and Deans once more. In the meantime, they had been consulting with ecclesiastical lawyers. He then called in the Puritans to hear his decisions. There were small changes only to the Book of Common Prayer, which would have been a disappointment. Then James began to expand on the idea of a new translation of the Bible:

“His Highness wished, that some especial pains should be taken in that behalf for one uniform translation…and this to be done by the best learned of both the Universities, after them to be reviewed by the Bishops, and the chief learned of the Church; from them to be presented to the Privy Council; and lastly to be ratified by his Royal authority; to be read in the whole Church, and no other.” He also added “that no marginal notes should be added – having found in them which are annexed to the Geneva translation… some notes very partial, untrue, seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous and traitorous conceits.”

James’s proposal was clever for several reasons: it would play to the public like a big concession to the Puritans; it would take ages to do, thereby delaying any more conversations of this kind; by criticising the Geneva Bible he was keeping in with the Bishops; he would be stealing the thunder of the new Roman Catholic translation that was on the way; and he established a system for checking and, if need be, censoring the version at each step of the way. Bancroft was happy because although he didn’t like the idea, he was given a role in choosing the scholars who would work on it. The day ended with Bancroft leading a Thanksgiving to God and a prayer for the Royal Family.

THE AFTERMATH

The most important thing to come out of the conference was, without doubt, the commissioning of the new translation of the Bible that would go on to be such an influential text. However, what happened next to the actors in this drama? Just as he desired, Richard Bancroft was chosen to be the Archbishop of Canterbury when John Whitgift died only a little more than six weeks after this conference. James had made it clear that he could act without his bishops and steer his own course in shark infested diplomatic waters. Several of those present worked as part of the six groups charged with the actual translating of the Bible: William Barlow worked on the epistles from Romans to Jude; John Reynolds was part of the Oxford group that met three times a week in his lodgings, working on the major and minor prophets; and Thomas Bilson was one of the two overall supervisors of the final version. Over time, all of the participating Deans became Bishops.