The events surrounding Bishop Harsnett's pursuit through Parliament in May 1624 marked another turning point in the city of Norwich's relations with local episcopal administration. Failure on the part of the godly to gain restitution ensured that the bishop's injunctions on lectureships and Sunday services remained. In the meantime during the 1620s – much to the consternation of the godly – novel programmes of church decoration and beautification were implemented in some city parishes, most conspicuously at St Peter Mancroft and St Gregory's. But before assessing the significance of these developments in detail, let us turn to the 1624 Parliament itself.

We are fortunate in that the unprecedented nature of proceedings against a bishop by the Commons attracted much contemporary interest and a number of entries within the historical record. Besides the outline in the journals of the two houses, Harsnett's replies to the original articles survive among the Tanner manuscripts. The case also proved more than a distraction for one MP, Sir Walter Erle, who made hurried notes in his diary of the damning evidence aired before the Parliamentary committee set up to investigate the Norwich petition. Another insider account is furnished by John Yates's recollection penned in the early 1640s. Combined, this material affords a glimpse of the pressure group at work to challenge diocesan authority, a point that Harsnett used to his advantage in nurturing James's suspicions over the subversive potential of puritanism.