PRINCETON, N. J. BR 743 .J52 1882 Jennings, A. C. Ecclesia anglicana S/ie//. •"^^ J ECCLESIA ANGLICANA ^ l^istorg of tfjc OTburcfj of Cfjtist \xi lEnglanl) from tje iSarlicst to tje present ^fmcs BY THE REV. ARTHUR CHARLES^ENNINGS, M.A. JESUS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE (Sometime Tyrwkitt Scholar, Crosse Scholar, Hebrew University Priseman Fry Scholar of S. John's College, Cams and Scholefield Prizeman) Vicar of IVhitilesford THOMAS WHITTAKER 2 ^ Z BIBLE HOUSE MDCCCLXXXII TO EDWARD TOWGOOD, Esq, OF SAWSTOX, CAMBKroOESHIRE, THE AUTHOR DEDICATES THIS BOOK, AS A SMALL BUT SINCEKE TOKEN OF AFFECTIONATE REGAED FOR A VALrED FRIEND, AND FOR A FAITHFUL AND DEVOTED CHURCHMAN. PREFACE. This work has been written chiefly with the view of meeting the wants of candidates for theological examinations at Cambridge and elsewhere. Those who have gone through such ordeals may remember feeling the lack of a concise account of the whole history of the English Church. Handy volumes there were, which treated the subject from the sectarian standpoint, and made the Keformation the birth-time of the Church, thus depriving her of three- quarters of her existence. The more appreciative authors, who admitted our claim to be one with the pra3-Reformation body, had written too diffusely for the very practical purposes of an "examinee." The present author has endeavoured to include a remote horizon on a small canvas, without dis- paragement either to perspective or detail. He is unfeignedly conscious of his incapacity to do justice to the conception, but hopes that the present volume will, for a time at least, meet a long- acknowledged want. A. C. J. November, 1881. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. PAGE The Church of the Celts ..... 1 CHAPTER II. Conversion op the Anglo-Saxons . . . .20 CHAPTER III. The National Anglo-Saxon Church . . .33 CHAPTER IV. Anglo-Noeman Period . . . . .66 CHAPTER V. The Thirteenth Century . . . . .94 CHAPTER VI. The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries . .112 CHAPTER VII. Henry VIII. . . . . . . .136 CHAPTER VIII. Henry VIII. — continued . . . . . 163 CHAPTER IX. Edward VI. . . . . . . .203 viii CONTENTS. CHAPTER X. PAGF. Mary 241 CHAPTER XL Elizabeth ....... 279 CHAPTER Xir. Elizabeth— co??h*HrtefZ ...... 324 CHAPTER XIII. James I. ....... 341 CHAPTER XIV. Charles I. ...... . 3fi2 CHAPTER XV. The Interregnum ...... 397 CHAPTER XVI. Charles II. ...... . 403 CHAPTER XVII. James II. to George I. . . . , .421 CHAPTER XVIII. The Georgian Period ..... 451 CHAPTER XIX. The Church op the Present Day .... 473 iNi^EX 487 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTER I. Zi)t mjnxdj of t\)t ©clt0. Its connection with the Church of England— Early testimony to its existence — Traditional accounts of its origin — Perhaps an offshoot of the Church of Gaul — The British martyrs in the tenth persecution — British delegates at the Church Councils— British heretics — The mission of Germanus — Palladius and Patrick in Ireland — The Welsh mission to Ireland — Irish and Welsh missions to Scotland— Decadence of the Church in " England "—Severance of Celts and Saxons— The subsequent missions from Scotland— Peculiarities of the Celtic Church — Disproportionate number of bishops — Numerous monasteries — Pecu- liarities in computation of Easter — In Baptism, the tonsure, and consecration of bishops. Regarded as a political institution, the ChurcL. of Ene:- itsconnec- iTi'.i- • 1 1 1 tionwith Jand begins its history m the seventh century, when, the church Saxon heathenism having everywhere succumbed before the preaching of missionaries, Christianity was made the legal religion of the island. The identity of the corporate body thereupon " established " — the Church of Theodore and Dunstan, of Anselm and Becket, of Chicheley and Wolsey — with the society which now bears the name " Church of England," is a fact recog- nized by English law,^ and assailed only by those who ' As, for instance, in such cases as that cited by Dean Hook from the proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench : " A clergyman desired to establish his claim to certain marriage fees. He would have gained his suit if he could have proved that his predecessors in the time of Pilchard I. had received the payment, and failing in that proof he was nonsuited. The whole process depended upon the sameness of B 2 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. misconstrue the purpose of the Reformation. It might, therefore, appear natural to begin a history of this Church with an account of the celebrated mission of 596, and to substantiate her pretensions to Apostolic lineage by explaining what were the credentials of Augustine. The truth is, however, that the Catholic faith, in its connection with these islands, has a history centuries older than its recognition by Saxon legis- lature, and the consequent so-called union of Church and State. Long before Augustine's time there existed in these islands a society which professed the orthodox faith, maintained the episcopal lineage, and by sending its representatives to the great Councils asserted its claim to be reckoned among the scions of the Catholic Church. Though not initiated by this native Church, the conversion of the Saxon invaders was successfully accomplished only by the co-operation of missionaries belonging thereto. The stream which connects us with the Apostolic fountain head is, in fact, two-headed. It can be traced inferentially through the channel of a Celtic episcopate — through Aidan and Columban, — or perspicuously through Augustine and Theodore and the bishops accredited by Eome. A history of our Church would, if on this ground alone, be incomplete with- out an account of Celtic Christianity. Eariytesti- It is probablc that before the end of the first monytoits . . ^ x^i-av existence, ccutury Britain had received a knowledge of the Christian faith, and concurrently the then universal Orders of ministry. Soldiers in the Eoman legions the Church before and after the Reformation."— Lives of Archbishops, vol. vi. p. 36. The student may be reminded that the now common theory which would confound the Church of England with the creations of Protestantism, and assign its " estab- lishment •' to some undetermined date in the reign of Henry, Edward, or Elizabeth, was unknown before the Georgian period, save to unskilful Roman controversialists . Its present prevalence only deserves attention as attesting the impotence of the most substantial historical facts when arrayed against a theological prejudice. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 3 may have, even thus early, acted as missionaries. We may also find an evangelizing agency in that commer- cial intercourse between Britain and the Continent which received such rapid development in the first century. That an organized mission to Britain had been attempted is hardly probable, though, as will be shown below, tradition teems with legends of such enterprises. These legends are nevertheless valuable as proofs of the fact for which they profess to account — that a Christian Church existed in Britain shortly after the Apostolic age. The more general proofs of this fact are the state- ments of noted ecclesiastical writers. Tertullian (fl. 200) speaks of " those British districts hitherto inac- cessible to the Eomans, but subjugated to Christ." 1 Justin Martyr (d. cir. 166) testifies to the prevalence of Christianity in " every " country known to the Eomans.^ In the third century Origen states plainly that " the power of God the Saviour is even with those who live in Britain and are separated from our world." He asks, " When did Britain before the airival of Christ assent to the religious belief in One God ? But now, by reason of the Churches which occupy the ends of the world, the whole earth shouts with joy to the God of Israel." ^ In the time of Eusebius (d. cir. 340) the conversion of Britain in the Apostolic age appears to have been an accepted fact : — " That some (of the Apostles) should reach the extremities of the inhabited world, and that others should cross the ocean to the isles called Britannic, I no longer think to be the work of a mere man." ^ To the same effect writes Hilary (fl. 354) ' Adv. Judseos, c. 7. = Cum Tryphone Dial., p. 388. Ed. Thirlby, Lond, * Horn. VI. in Lucam., p. 939, iii. (i'aris, 1740); and Horn, in Ezek. p. 370. * Euseb., Dem. Evang., lib. iii. c. 7, p. 112. 4 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Traditional There arose in later years a desire to trace British Us origin. Christianity to its very fountain head, and if possible connect it with names eminent in Christian history. This is a sufficient explanation of the more detailed accounts of missionary work in Britain preserved in legends. Few of these legends can be traced further back than the sixth century. Missions to Britain have been attributed — (I.) To S. Paul himself, who is supposed to have visited Spain and the British Islands in the interval between his two imprisonments at Eome. It is urged that Clemens Romanus affirms that S. Paul "taught righteousness throughout the whole world, having travelled to the utmost bounds of the West." ^ The testimony of Clemens, S. Paul's personal friend, is doubtless weighty, but it is not plain that Britain is the region meant. There is, on the contrary, reason to believe that to repfxa t^s Svcrews means Spain. Nor is the statement of Theodoret (d. 458), that S. Paul " brought salvation to the islands l^'ing in the ocean " ^ quite perspicuous. In fact, the theory that S. Paul was the Apostle of Britain, though countenanced by Usher and Still ingfleet, is now regarded as destitute of substantial foundation, i^z H^ fiiin^ • ioJt cJuti t^ dj'-iMtr^Ji (II.) To other Apostles or persons mentioned in the New Testament. We have shown above how Eusebius attests the work of the Apostles in the British I>lands. Later writers pretend to speak less vaguely on the subject, giving the names of these Apostolic mission- aries. Besides S. Paul, the names of S. Peter, S. James the Great, and S. Simon Zelotes are recorded.^ There ' Clem. Eom. ad Cor., c. 5. ' In Tsalm cxvi., torn. i. p. 871. ' Stillingflcot, Orig. Britannicae, vol. i. ; and cf. Usher, De Primord., cap. i. pp. 5-7, cap. ii. p. 12. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 5 is also a once popular legend concerning tlie mission of Joseph of Arimathea,^ who is said to have come over from Gaul at S. Philip's bidding, bringing with him the Holy Grail, and to have settled with twelve com- panions at Glastonbury, then called Avalon. At the Council of Basle and other fifteenth-century Councils, where the question of precedence was keenly discussed between the representatives of the French and English Churches, this story was accepted as proof of the greater antiquity of the latter. The Glastonbury legends, how- ever, are not older than the eleventh century, and the mission of Joseph is doubtless a mere fable. The Welsh Triads connect the Church of Britain with Aristobulus, whose household is saluted by S. Paul in Rom. xvi., and who is supposed to have been one of the seventy disciples of the Saviour. Caradoc or Caractacus is said to have returned from Rome with Aristobulus in the character of a bishop. Other New Testament names are introduced in this legend : the Pudens and Claudia of Martial (lib. iv. epigr. 13) are the friends Avhom S. Paul mentions (2 Tim. iv. 21), and are also the son-in-law and daughter of Caradoc. The legend is not altogether worthless, since modern commen- tators have admitted that the British lady Claudia, whose marriage with Pudens Martial celebrates, may really be the Claudia mentioned in conjunction with Pudens by S. Paul.^ (III.) To the missionaries sent by Eleutherius Bishop of Rome (176-190) to the court of Lucius a British king. The simplest form of this legend is in a sixth-century catalogue of Roman bishops. To the name Eleutherius is attached an interpolation that he " received a letter ' Stillingfleet, Orig. Brit., vol. i. pp. SY-SQ. Oxf. 1842. " Alfoid, Commentary, vol. iii., Proleg. p. 104. 6 ^ ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. from Lucius, King of Britain, asking that he would order steps to be taken for making him a Christian." This short account is enlarged by Bede, and again by the Book of Llandaff (of the eleventh or twelfth century), and the Welsh Triads. According to its most embellished form Lucius, or Lleufer Mawr, sends two ambassadors, named Elfan and Medwy, to Pope Eleutherius, desiring instruction in the Christian faith. Ffagan and Dyvan, two most holy men, are deputed to the work ; the king and his people are baptized, the heathen temples re-dedicated, and an episcopate is established, with archbishoprics at London, York, and Caerleon-on-Usk. Perhaps an Without denying altogether the operation of other offslioot of . . . ... the Church and earlier missionary agencies, it is reasonable to sup- pose that, as regards Orders and organization at least, the British Church owed much to the Church of Gaul. At Lyons and Vienne Christian Churches were flourishing as early as a.d. 150. The subsequent relations of the British to the Galilean Church suggest that the former looked upon the latter as the mother Church. " Under the influence of this connection it was but natural that the British Church should follow the judgment of that of Gaul, (i.) in condemning the Donatists at the Council of Aries : (ii.) in fully approving, although with a tem- porary hesitation about the orthodoxy of the term o/xoowtos, of the Nicene condemnation of Arianism : and (iii.) in adopting for the observance of Easter the eighty- four years' cycle of Sulpicius Severus. To the influence of their mutual affection . . . should be attributed the great intercourse between the Galilean and British Churches in the fourth and fifth centuries. S. Martin of Tours, S. Germanus, S. Lupus, S. Severus are some of the Galilean bishops whose sympathy and active THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 7 assistance never failed the Cliurch in Britain. Chnrclies dedicated in their names indicate the honour in which British Christians filially treasured up their memory." ^ With the dawn of the fourth century British Chris- The Britisii tianity passes from the region of conjecture and doubtful J^g tenth legend to that of history. There is no reason to doubt J^q^®''^" that in the great persecution of 303 Britain was the scene of martj^rdoms. It is true that Lactantius writes that in these Western provinces the leniency of Con- stantius considerably abated the violence of the attack. In those regions, he says, Constantius only so far carried out the commands of his superiors that though the churches — the perishable walls of Christianity — were frequently demolished, " that true temple of God which is in the human body he preserved in safety." ^ This testimony, however, does not preclude occasional out- breaks of violence against the persons of Christians, especially such as were serving in the Eoman legions. What Gildas, the sixth-century historian, records with reference to the martyrdoms of Alban at Verulamium, Aaron and Julius at Caerleon-on-Usk, " and others of both sexes at divers places," ^ is therefore not incredible. In Bede the legend is so encumbered with supernatural accretions that it is difficult to distinguish fiction and fact.* Alban, a pagan, shelters a fugitive Christian cleric, is converted, and surrenders himself to suffer in the stead of his guest. The stream divides that he may pass through it to the place of martyrdom; a fountain gushes from the ground in answer to his last prayer. Such was the form of the story in the eighth century. In ' John Pryce, Ancient British Church, pp. 59, 60 — a work to which we are in- debted for much valuable information, and which we recommend to such students as desire a lively but sufficiently exliaustive treatment of an interesting subject. ^ Lactantius, De Mort. Persec, xv., xvi. ^ Hist. viii. (M. H. B. 8). * Bseda, Eccl. Hist., i. 18. ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. British delegates at the Church Councils. the later historians it appears with additional miraculous embellishments. In Britain, as elsewhere, the persecu- tion must have ceased with the death of Diocletian in 305. Soon the conversion and military successes of Constantino had secured for all branches of the Church external peace, and the age of persecution gave place to the age of controversy and (Ecumenical Councils. British Christianity now more plainly asserts it- self. At the Council of Aries (314), where the dispute was settled between Caecilian of Carthage and the schismatic Donatists, British bishops attended and affixed their signatures. According to the Corbey manu- script (to which Haddon and Stubbs give the preference), five British ecclesiastics were present ^ — three bishops, a priest, and a deacon. York, London, and Caerleon appear to have been the sees of the episcopal representatives. The language of Athanasius seems to indicate that British bishops were personally present at the great Council of Nicesa (325). In the existent list of subscrip- tions their names do not appear. There is, however, reason to believe that this list is defective. So too, in the case of the Council of Sardica (347), which acquitted Athanasius, and which gave the Eoman bishop the special power of ordering courts of appeal for rehearing causes, it is not plain whether the British episcopate was personally represented or only expressed subsequent concurrence. At Ariminum (359) a large number of British bishops were present, and with the other repre- sentatives, were persuaded to accept the plausible creed of the seini-Arians, which avoided the term 6/^oo7;crtos.^ But that throughout the controversy the British Church was on the side of the orthodox party is sufficiently ' Haddon and Stubbs, Concilia, 7. =■ Cf. Apolog. Contra Arianos; Migne, Series GrsEca, torn. xxv. col. 249. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 9 plain from the words of Athanasius. Its attitude in this great conflict elicited also the encomiums of Hilary, who congratulates " his co-bishops of Germany . . . and of the British provinces that they stood firmly, uncontaminated and uninjured by all the contagion of the detestable heresy."^ To the seductions of another " detestable heresy " British the British Church was more amenable. Pelagianism was a system which explained the paradox of man's free will and God's predestination in such a way as appa- rently to repudiate the doctrine of original sin. The Pelagians, if their antagonists do not misrepresent them, taught that the sin of Adam affected him only, and not all mankind ; that man can of his own free will choose good as well as evil, and so secure a certain degree of future happiness apart from Christianity ; that the divine grace of which Christianity tells is communicated by the influence of Christ's teaching and example ; that the first beginning of renewal lies with the man himself, and that predestination is merely God's foreknowledge of human actions. Pelagius was a Briton of great personal holiness ; his active disciple, Celestius, appears to have been an Irishman.^ Pelagian- ism was condemned at Councils held at Carthage, 412 ; Ephesus, 431 ; and Orange, 529. Though its two authors contracted their peculiar The mis- opinions abroad — perhaps from Euffinus at Rome — Germanus. yet it was in Britain that Pelagianism found widest acceptance. Its prevalence was the cause of the mission of S. Germanus. His biographer, Constantius, relates ^ that the British ecclesiastics, perplexed by the spread ' Hilary, De Synodis, Proleg. et § 2. * Augustin, Epist. 186, cap. i. ; Neander, Ch. Hist., vol. iv. p. 313. ^ Vita S. Germani, lib. i. cap. v. lo ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. of Pelagianism, invited the assistance of learned Galli- can divines, and that a synod deputed Germanns Bishop of Aiixerre and Lupus Bishop of Troyes to cross over to Britain. According to another account/ it vv^as Pope Coelestine who authorized the mission of Ger- manus. The Gallican ecclesiastics landed in Britain in 429. They proceeded to preach, not only in churches, but throughout the open country, and were successful in reclaiming those who had been led astray. The Pelagian teachers ventured to face them in a public disputation, only to be confuted shamefully. Germanus did not quit this land before he had attained a triumph with more carnal weapons. The Picts attempted to beset a Christian congregation who were celebrating Easter in the Yale of Mold, in Flintshire. Germanus succeeded in striking the enemy with panic by setting a corps in ambush, who, at a given signal, charged with cries of " Hallelujah ! " This event is known as the Hallelujah victory. Germanus is said to have paid Britain a second visit in 447, with Severus, Archbishop of Treves. A doubtful legend ascribes to him the monastic institutions at Llancarvan and Llanilltyd, and relates that he appointed Illtud to be the head, and Lupus to be the bishop, of the latter college. Eemem. bering that it was lack of theological learning in the British ecclesiastics which necessitated his visits, we may think it possible that he suggested the establish- ment of such seminaries, though Llancarvan and Llanilltyd were probably founded at a later date. An ancient manuscript records that Germanus introduced into Britain the " ordinem cursus Gallorum," which we may perhaps identify with that Gallican liturgy which Augustine found in use in the British Church. ' Prosper Aquitanus, Cbron. bub anno 433. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. ii How extensive was the influence of Germanus in the west of the island is attested by the still surviving churches dedicated to the Galilean missionary at S. Harmon, Bettws Garmon, and the several Llanarmons. Pelagianism was probably quite exterminated by Ger- manus. The tradition which records its subsequent condemnation at the synods of Llanddewi-Brefi and Lucus Victorise in the middle of the sixth century is of no value, though the synods themselves may be regarded as historical. The mission of Patrick to Ireland was contem- PaiiacUus poraneous with that of Germanus to Britain. In the Patrick in legend which makes Pope Coelestine authorize the ■'■'^®^^^^- journey of Germanus there is possibly a confusion of the two incidents. Christianity appears to have been planted early in the sister island, but hitherto had borne little fruit. Jerome, at the end of the fourth century, describes the contemporary Irish as idolaters, who fed on human flesh and acknowledged no restraint in sexual intercourse. To this unpromising field of labour Coelestine sent a monk of Brittany, named Palladius,^ as a missionary bishop, much in the same way as Gregory, a century later, sent Augustine to Britain. Palladius, it is said, built some churches in Wicklow, but failed to win many converts. Sailing round the coast northward, he was driven by a storm to the Scotch coast. His subsequent fate is uncertain. Patrick undertook the mission which had thus proved abortive, cir. 430, and his success was testified to by an Irish proverb, "Not to Palladius but to Patrick." ^ ' Prosper. Chron. ad Ann. 435: "Ad Scotos in Christum credentes . . . primus episcopus mittitur." This probably implies that some Christianity had survived in Ireland. But it is obvious from the sequel that Palladius was really sent as a missionary rather than an overseer. * Sexta, Vit, S. Patricii ap. Colgan, Trias Thaum. 70. 12 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Again the name of Coelestine is introduced. We are told that the missionary's baptismal name was Suchar, and that he was a Breton, the son of Calphurnius and Conche, S. Martin's sister. Educated by S. Martin and Germanus of Aiixerre, he was deputed by Coelestine to act as "Archiepiscopus Scotorum," under the new title Patricius. The accounts of Patrick's missionary labours are full of miracles. It appears credible that he did much, in conjunction with a corps of British monks, to exteiminate idolatry. That he established an eccle- siastical organization, instituted canons, and made Armagh the metropolitan city of several bishoprics, may perhaps be only a flattering legend. The Welsh At all cvcnts the work of Patrick was not des- to Ireland, tilled to survive. The traditionary date of the mission- ary's death is 493. Before 550 the Christianity of Iieland had so suffered from apostacy that " all, from the highest to the lowest, had cast aside the Catholic faith," ^ and the saints of Wales were implored to undertake the third mission to Ireland. Making allow- ance for the partiality of the British annalists and biographers, we may yet believe that no light duties were demanded of Gildas and his fellow-labourers, and that the subsequent prosperity of the Irish Church was due to their exertions. Certain it is that henceforward Ireland was noted as a great centre of Christian culture and missionary enterprise. Irish and A\ hat David, Cadoc, and Gildas had done for Ire- sions to°^'^ land the next generation of West British saints did for Scotland. Southern Scotland. The Irish mission of Columban, entering Scotland from the west, fell in with the repre- sentatives of the older Church, — the Welsh missionary band, headed first by Ninian, then by Kentigern. ' Vita S. Gildffi, xi., xii. ; Mabill, Actt. SS. Benedict., i. 138. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 13 The two parties laboured among the Picts in harmony and frequent interchange of good offices. On the island of Hy, or lona, which was given him by one of the native chieftains, Columban established a monastic college, which became an important missionary station. A cathedral church of white stone, dedicated to S. Martin, gave to the promontory in Galloway the name Whithern. In at least sixty-three districts, according to Bishop Forbes,^ the nomenclature of churches attests the popularity of the Welsh missionary. It will be shown in the next chapter what an im- portant influence these Christian stations in the north were destined to exercise on the history of our Church. Such is the account of Christianity in West Britain Decadence in the sixth century. Its external activity was making church m the sister island a veritable insula sanctorum, and ^^ ^^ establishing the Christian religion among the savage Picts of Scotland. Its internal prosperity was attested by the rise of monasteries and educational seminaries, and by the substitution of parochial churches for the earlier preaching stations. Very different was the state of that part of the island which we now distinguish as England. From the middle of the fifth century there had swept upon the eastern coast continuous waves of invasion. Year after year had witnessed the advance of Saxons, Angles, and Jutes towards the heart of Britain, and where these barbarous hordes had settled every trace of Christianity was effaced. The natives, incapacitated for resistance by disunion, were slaughtered by thousands on the field of battle. The survivors pressed farther and farther westward, till safety was at last attained in the moun- tain fastnesses and tangled forests of Wales and Devon- ' Kalendars of Scottish Saints, p. 424. 14 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. shire, where the pagans dared not penetrate. In this western region, therefore, was all that remained of British Christianity. Elsewhere the worship of Thor and Odin had utterly exterminated the religion of Christ. " The cities went to ruins : Christianity became extinct, and all culture with it. There were Btill Eoman roads leading to the walls and towers of empty cities; the Eoman divisions of the land were conspicuous ; the intrenched and fortified camps ; the great villas of the princely families; churches and burial-places : but they were become before the days of Bede mere haunted ruins, something like the mys- terious fabrics which in Central America tell of the rule of a mighty race whose name is forgotten." ^ This effacement of Christianity may be considered to have been completed in 586, when the last surviving bit-hops, Theonas of London and Thadiocus of York, are said to have joined their fugitive compatriots in their western asylum. Severance That WO havc no rccord of attempts to convert saxons.^'^ thesc savage tribes on the part of the vanquished Britons scarcely requires comment. Mutual animosity, engendered by years of bloodj^ conflict, is scarcely conducive to the propagation of the gospel of peace. In later times, when the hard tempers of the northern freebooters had encountered the gracious influences of Christianity, the converts of Augustine and Aidan maintained towards their British brethren all the hatred of the wrongdoer to his victims. The boundary line which divided the two races was Offa's Dyke. In the eighth century, the Welshman who crossed this boundary was liable to mutilation. Laws almost as barbarous were passed by subsequent generations of ' Stubbs, Const. Hist., vol. i. p. 61. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 15 Saxon princes. That there was a correspondent ill will on the part of the vanquished race is more than probable. There may be a substratum of authenticity in the reply which the Abbot of Bangor is represented as making to Augustine : " No, we will not preach the faith to the cruel race of strangers who have treacherously driven our ancestors from their country and robbed their posterity of their heritage." ^ It will be shown in the next chapter that the The subse- conversion of Saxon England was effected by native giin^^^m Christians as much as by foreign missionaries. But Scotland, these representatives of Celtic Christianity did not come from West Britain, but from Scotland. It was not directly from the parent stem, but from its scion — from those Northern settlements which through Columban no less than through Ninian, can be traced back to the saints of Wales — that the English Chris- tianity of the seventh century derived life and vigour. We close this chapter with an account of the pecuiiari- most striking features in the organization and disci- ceftic plirie of the native Church. We premise that the close <^^^'=^- relationship of Irish and North British Christianity to the Christianity of West Britain had effected a general uniformity in such matters in the. seventh century, and that " outside the Eoman and Augustinian circle of ideas there was substantially throughout Britain perfect uniformity on all points relating to divine worship and ecclesiastical discipline." ^ One notable feature in the British system is the Dispropor- seemingly disproportionate size of the episcopate, numb^erof The diocesan system was very imperfect at this time : bishops, there is reason to believe that when the Eoraans quitted Britain Caerleon was the only see in Wales. Yet, barely ' Brut. Tysilio in Myfyr. Archasology vol. ii. 365. 2 Pryce, Ancient British Church, i6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. a century later, 119 bishops attended the synod of Llanddewi-Brefi, and a century earlier the language of Athanasius and Hilary suggests that the number of British bishops at the time of the Arian controversy was disproportionately large. The existence of an order of monastic bishops explains the apparent ano- maly. Both in Ireland and Wales a resident bishop appears to have been considered essential to the right governing of a monastery. Sometimes such bishops were abbots ; usually, however, they were subordinate members of the religious house, exercising no other functions but those connected with the transmission of the priestly office. In some cases bishops lived together in colleges, which were probably centres of missionary enterprise. Many such episcopal csenobia of seven members are enumerated in Ireland, and in Wales an establishment of seven bishops is associated with the name of S. David. Numerous Ncxt to this extension of the episcopal order, and as a consequence of it, we are called upon to notice the development of the monastic system. Wales and Ireland were both covered with a network of religious houses, and the constant ebb and flow of missionaries between Wales, Cornwall, Ireland, and North Britain finds explanation in this prevalent monasticism, in- volving as it did celibacy and freedom from domestic ties. To what an extent monasticism was sometimes developed we gather from the account of Bangor Iscoed, the great establishment on the Dee. This monastery attained the proportions of a modern uni- versity. It was divided into seven parts, and each part contained no fewer than seven hundred men. It may be no exaggeration that when the praying monks of Bangor were put to the sword by jiEthel frith the Northumbrian, there were twelve hundred victims. monas teries. THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 17 It will be shown in tlie next chapter that the native Church had certain peculiarities of usage which they were unwilling to adapt to the Roman system advocated by Augustine. We here notice' the most conspicuous points of difference. (I.) The time for the observance of Easter. Pecuiiari- This deviation from Eoman usage was really the putaSon™' relic of an earlier controversy of considerable import- of faster. ance. The original ground of dispute was that the Christians of Asia Minor commemorated the Saviour's death and Resurrection contemporaneously with the Jewish Passover : i.e. the three sacred days began with the fourteenth moon of the first lunation after the spring equinox, without reference to the day of the week. They were on this account called quarto-de- cimani. The Western Churches, on the other hand, followed by the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria, observed Good Friday on this fourteenth day of " Nisan," if it fell on a Friday; if not, on the next Friday. The following Sunday was their Easter Day, The Church of Rome was particularly hostile to the quarto-deciman practice, and Pope Victor (cir. 200) went the length of excommunicating the Asiatic Churches. At the Councils of Aries and Nicaea the AVestern usage gained the day. It was ruled that Easter Day should always be a Sunday, and this Sunday was to be that which followed the first full moon which fell on or after the vernal equinox. Even now conformity was not established. The new source of discord was the reformed calendar, based on the dis- covery of the Metonic cycle of nineteen years. The new system of computation was adopted by the Church of Alexandria, but the Roman Church until 525 cluns: to the Jewish calendar with its cycle of eighty-four c i8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. years. In the years 475, 495, 496, 499, and 516, Easter Day was consequently eight days later in the West than in the East. The peculiarity of the British Christians was not^ connected with the quarto-deciman practice, but with a retention of the eighty-four years cycle. Isolated from the Continent when the Western Churches accepted the reformed calendar, they had continued to compute Easter as Eome had computed it until 525. A minor peculiarity existed, it seems, in their placing the equinox on the 25th of March. But the ancient quarto- deciman use does not bear directly onHhe question, save so far as it interprets the unfair insinuation of some Saxon writers, that the British Christians were " Judaic " in their observance of Easter. In Baptism. (H*) The administration of Baptism. Augustine, at the last conference with the British bishops, made the demand " ut ministerium baptizandi . . . juxta morem sanctae Eomanse et Apostolicse ecclesiae compleatis." ^ It is not known to what peculiarity in the British office this requisition points. That the Britons neg- lected either the chrism or Confirmation is not probable, for both were in use in the kindred Irish body. Some suppose that the trine immersion customary elsewhere had not been a part of the British ritual. Dr. Lingard, explaining the complementum haptismi as confirmation, suggests that Augustine desired con- formity with the Eoman rule that persons baptized on the eves of the greater festivals should be at once brought before the bishop for Confirmation.^ The ton- (III.) The tonsure. " The British Church, differing both from the Greek and the Eoman, shaved the head jn an imperfect manner, ' ab aure ad aurem,' across the ' See Bfeda, Hist. Eccl., iii, 11, and iii. 3, 25, 28 ; and v. 21. = Ibid., 11. 2. * Anglo-Saxon Church, vol. 1. p. 69, n. sure THE CHURCH OF THE CELTS. 19 front of the head, but leaving the occiput untouched." ^ The Greek or Pauline tonsure included the whole head ; the Roman or Petrine use was to shave the crown, leaving a circle of hair, which was supposed to represent the crown of thorns. The tonsure was one of the burning questions which were discussed at the Council of Whitby. (IV.) The consecration of bishops. In the Celtic Andconse- Churches a single bishop was considered sufficient to bishops, perform the act of consecration.^ At the Council of Whitby papal authority was held to be sufficient to set aside local usage. The Roman Easter was accepted in North Wales in 760, at the instance of Elfod, Bishop of Bangor ; in South Wales the continued divergence of custom provoked an English invasion about this time. A bishop named Cyfelach w^as slain, but victory rested with the Welsh. A few years later, South Wales accejDted the Roman use. ' Pryce, Ancient British Church, p. 208. 2 Vita S. Kentigern in Pinkerton, Vitte SS. Scot., p. 223. 20 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTER II. ^onbrnion of tjbe ^nglo=^axon0. A.D. 596-664. Gregory proposes to convert England — Mission of Augustine — Its success in Kent — Gtregory's extensive plan of organization — How is Augustine to deal with the Celtic Church ? — Gregory's instructions — Conference with its representa- tives— Augustine's ultimatum — The rupture — Augustine's work overrated — Kent and Essex relapse — Temporary success of Paulinus in Northumbria — In- tervention of missionaries from Scotland — Collision between the two systems — Council of Whitby. Gregory At tlie end of the sixth century the Teuton hordes convert had secured almost all England south of the Tweed and east of the Dee and Severn. Civilized only in their elaborate constitutional organization, the sub- jects of the Heptarchy showed their peculiarly brutal instincts in their religion. Their god Woden was pro- pitiated by human sacrifices. Unhallowed love was typified by the deity Ereyr. Their Valhalla was an intensity of debauchery and bloodshed. Traffic in slaves was pushed by these Anglo-Saxons to an extent imknown among other nations, for it was their common practice to sell their compatriots, and even their nearest relations, to the continental merchants. Indirectly this inhuman usage is connected with the first recorded mission to Anglo-Saxon England. Some fair-haired Yorkshire lads in the Roman slave-market attracted the notice of Gregory, the ascetic founder and abbot of S. Andrew's Monastery on Mount Ca^lius. The dialogue that ensued was seasoned by Gregory with CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 21 comments of characteristic humour. " These Angles," he said, " must become angels ; their province Deira must be rescued de ira Dei ; their king Ella shall have Alleluia sung in his dominions." ^ The purpose thus quaintly expressed took deep root in his mind, and was put in execution some years afterwards, when the Abbot of S. Andrew's was known to all Christendom as Pope Gregory the Great. Before this, he had himself set out on a mission to the western islands, but was forced to return, in obedience to Pope Bene- dict's peremptory summons, ere he had gone three days' journey.^ As Pope, at a time when he was harassed by the combined anxieties of a famine, a schism, and a threatened invasion, Gregory could spare symjDathy for the Anglo-Saxon heathens. A mission was en- trusted to his own establishment on Mount Caelius. Its prior, Augustine, a tall swarthy monk, whose some- what arrogant demeanour was not condoned by talents of any importance, becomes henceforth the central figure in the story. Augustine's missionary band con- sisted of forty monks, lay and cleric. With these he journeyed into Gaul, intending to take ship thence for England. The mission was altogether devoid of that enthu- Mission of siastic zeal which animated its author. Tales were told AJ?^^9a ^ in southern Gaul of the ferocity and barbarous practices of the English : ^ these soon brought Augustine back to Eome with a prayer that the enterprise might be abandoned. This Gregory would not hear of. By letters to the Frankish princes and prelates he secured for Augustine's mission protection on its journey through Gaul, and a sufficient contingent of ambassadors and ' Bseda, Hist. Eccl., ii. 2. ^ Joan. Diac, Vita S. Gregor., lib. i. 22, 23. * Gotselinus, Hist. Maj., i. 6. 22 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, interpreters to facilitate its work in England. So ^_^1_ aided, the missionaries reached the coast of Kent, landing on the very spot which had witnessed the arrival of the race they came to evangelize. Its success The King of Kent was the powerful Ethelbert. His wife was Bertha, daughter of Charibert King of the Franks of Paris, and a Christian — a circumstance which augured well for the success of the mission. It had been stipulated that she should be allowed the free exercise of her religion, and Luidhard, Bishop of Senlis, had been sent with her to England. The mission had, in fact, lighted on the one spot of Saxon England where Christianity was known and tolerated. Ethelbert appointed a day for an interview with his visitors, who were to meet him in the open air that he might not be duped by elaborate magical contrivances. At the time appointed the missionaries appeared before the king in a solemn religious procession. Before Augustine was carried a cross ; after him a picture of our Saviour painted on a board ; the brethren who followed sang to the lately revived Gregorian chants a litany for the salvation of their heathen hearers. To the interpreters who communicated Augustine's discourse Ethelbert gave an attentive hearing. The perilous enterprise was regarded as a proof of sincere purpose. The missionaries received a gracious reply, tempered with politic caution ; they were allowed to reside at Canterbury, and the old Church of S. Martin's still marks the spot where stood the edifice assigned for their use.^ To their preaching, their ascetic manner of life, and their reputed miracles Bede attributes their subsequent successes. On Whit-Sunday, 597, Ethelbert was baptized ; his wise men soon shared his convictions ' See Baeda, Hist. Eccl., i. 21 ; Gotselinus, Hist. Maj., ii. 15-19, CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 23 or obeyed his bidding. A decree was issued ordering chap. a recognition of Christianity,'' and 10,000 ^ Kentish "•. subjects were baptized at Christmas opposite the Isle of Sheppy. Auojustine communicated to head-quarters the success Gregory's ^ ^ , -^ . extensive of the mission, and Gregory's instructions took him plan of to Aries, where he was consecrated by Virgilius tion. as Archbishop of the English. The metropolitan church was to be built at Canterbury, the capital of his royal convert. Twelve bishoprics were to be founded in the south of England. Twelve more were to form a northern province. There was to be a metropolitan see at York, but it was to be subject to Augustine's supremacy.^ While such was the pro- gramme, the range of this Eoman mission really ex- tended to only one province besides Kent. In Essex Sebert nephew to Ethelbert had been converted. Here Mellitus, one of a second contingent of mission- aries despatched by Gregory, was consecrated Bishop of London. Kent also now received a suffragan bishopric at Rochester, which was placed under the superinten- dence of Justus, who had accompanied Mellitus. At the court of Ethelbert his friend Kedwald, King of East Anglia, was converted to Christianity and baptized. But East Anglia can hardly be reckoned among the provinces won by Gregory's mission. On returning home, Redwald was persuaded by his wife and the pagan priests to combine the worshij) of Christ with that of the national deities. No East Anglian bishopric was founded. In Augustine's letters to Gregory instructions are now is demanded with respect to his future relations with the to^eai w^tn ' Bseda, Hist. Eccl., i. 26; S. Gregor., Epist. VIII., 30. " S. Gregor., Epist. XI., 65. 24 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. native Cliurcli. A naive perplexity, as of one who knew no form of Christianity but that taught in the Koman monasteries, characterizes these questions. " Wbercas there is but one faith, why are there different customs in different Churches, and why is one custom of masses observed in the holy Koman Church, and another in the Gallican Church? . . . How are we to deal with the bishops of France and Britain?" In criticising Gregory's reply, we must take into con- sideration the ideas of Eoman supremacy generally accepted in the sixth century. Since the Council of Sardica, which had given the Eoman bishop the right of deciding whether a conciliar judgment should be reconsidered, Eome had been gradually establishing herself as the centre of Christendom, claiming from the other episcopates — of the West, at all events — an undefined allegiance. Various causes had combined to secure to Eome this supremacy ; not least effective had been the personal characteristics of certain Popes, — the brilliant pontificates of Innocent, Leo, and Gregory himself. Writing doubtless in ignorance of the deep- rooted animosity which divided Briton and Saxon, Gregory ordered that the new archiepiscopate in Ethelbert's dominions should control not only all bishops ordained by Augustine, or by the future Arch- bishop of York, " but also all the priests of Britain." " Over the bishops of France," writes Gregory, " we give you no authority, because the Bishop of Aries received the pall in ancient times from my predecessor, and we ought by no means to deprive him of the authority he has received ; but as to all the Bishops of Britain, we commit them to your care, that the un- learned may be taught, the feeble strengthened by persuasion, and the perverse corrected by authority." CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 25 The papal solution of the problem of nonconformity chap. in ritual is less open to censure than this encroachment ^ — on national independence. It breathes a spirit of wisdom and toleration. " If you have found anything either in the Roman, or the Galilean, or any other Church, which may be pleasing to Almighty God, select it carefully and sedulously ; teach the Anglican Church, which as yet is new in the faith, whatsoever you can gather from the several Churches. For things are not to be loved for the sake of places, but places for the sake of good things. Choose therefore from every Church those things that are pious, religious, and upright." ^ Already the new metropolitan had received from Gregory a pall, the token that he ruled as the delegate of the Papacy. That such was, even thus early, the significance of the pall appears undeniable. In later times it was pretended that the office of metropolitan was unattainable without it, and this assumption was finally embodied in a decree by the Lateran Council of 1215. The form of the vestment was then some- what like that of the pall in the archiepiscopal arms of Canterbury — a circular mantle with long pendants. But the pallium sent by Gregory appears to have been a robe of state, such as the emperors had been wont to confer on provincial governors. To the British Christians Augustine's assumption of conference .,,..,, "witli its metropolitan powers must have been as unintelligible representa- as ofi'ensive. For one hundred and fifty years the Church in Britain had kept the faith unaided by Popes or papal delegates. Eome it knew not, but Saxon princes, Rome's present allies, it knew and hated. Plainly no ordinary measure of meekness, humility, ' Baeda, Hist. Eccl., i. 27; S. Gregor., Epist. XI., 64. 26 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. and forbearance would be demanded of Augustine, if this part of his enterprise was to be successful, and the A.D. 597. insular Church was to be conformed to the Koman system. Such, however, was not the temper in which Augustine addressed the British bishops. Bede's account is that of a champion of the centralizing or Roman system, yet Bede sufficiently shows that Augus- tine's demeanour intensified rather than allayed the j)rejudices of the native Christians. The place of meeting was afterwards called Augustine's Oak (per- haps Austcliffe on the Severn). Here the Roman missionary descanted on the errors of the Britons, especially reprobating their observance of Easter ac- cording to the eighty-four years cycle. He cured a blind man as a proof of his divine legation. The insular clergy were impressed by the miracle, but demanded time to confer with their own people on the propriety of the desired changes. Again seven bishops and many learned men from Bangor Iscoed met Augustine, and now it was that his arrogant demeanour provoked his interlocutors to assume the attitude of antagonism. The conference ended in a ^n?s^' clecided rupture. Augustine haughtily propounded ultimatum, his ultimatum. " I ask but three things of you," he said : " one, that you should keep Easter as we do ; another, that you should complete the office of Baptism according to the use of the holy and Apostolic Roman Church ; a third, that you should join us in preaching to the Angles. With your other peculiarities we shall patiently bear." The Britons refused to accejDt these terms, or acknowledge their proposer as archbishop. Alluding to his discourtesy in receiving them sitting, they said, " If he deigns not now to rise up to us, how much more will he slight us when we shall CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 27 have accepted his authority." Augustine parted from chap. theui with a prediction that " they who refused to ^Jb-^ show their neighbours the way of life should by them be put to death." 1 Bade shows how the prophecy was Therup- accomplished when Ethelfrid, the pagan King of Northumbria, defeated the Welsh at Chester, and massacred the twelve hundred monks of Bangor Iscoed. The date (613) precludes the modern theory that Augustine had used influence with Ethelbert to induce Ethelfrid to invade Wales. We have adopted the usual course in assigning to Augustine's the story of Augustine more space than it really deserves. ^ted.°^^^" Augustine's visit to England was really but one episode in a record of missionary enterprise which extends over at least a hundred years. Under Augustine and his compatriots Kent and Essex became for a time Christian settlements. A work in Northumberland was also begun by Paulinus, only to be swept away when the reigning dynasty was ousted by the heathen Penda. Such is the brief sum of the results, as far as conversion is concerned. We consider, however, that a peculiar interest attaches to this Roman mission in that it laid the groundwork of our still surviving ecclesiastical organization. Other missionaries won the converts; Gregory and Augustine provided the system by which, when resuscitated by Theodore, those converts became the organized Anglican Church. Augustine died in 604, having appointed and con- Kent and secrated his compatriot Laurentius as his successor at lapse. Canterbury. Laurentius was as dependent on Rome as Augustine, but seems not to have obtained the honour of the pallium. He opened a corres23ondence with the Christians of Ireland, hoping to bring them ' Baeda, Hist. Eccl., ii. 2. 28 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, iiito conformity with the Eoman Church.^ His demands ^\- ^, . were somewhat similar to those of Augustine, and met A.D. 604. with as little success. Soon indeed the Eoman mission appeared likely to lose even the small territory which had formed the province of its first archbishop. Ead- bald, Ethelbert's son and successor, refused to dissolve his union with his father's widow at the bidding of Laurentius. Such marriages had been customary in the heathen times : the archbishop's persistency only pre- judiced the king against Christianity. The people, who had followed their chieftains in thousands to the pool of Baptism, were now as loyal in reasserting the dignity of Thor and Odin. In a few months Kent and Essex had relapsed into paganism. The bishops, Justus and Mellitus, fled before a storm of persecution. Laurentius bravely remained ; and by influences which Bede ^ con- nects with supernatural occurrences, such as can onl}^ be categorized as " pious frauds," prevailed on Eadbald to accept the Christian faith and dissolve his unhallowed marriage. Christianity again became the professed religion of his kingdom. Justus was recalled to Kochester, but Eadbald could not persuade the pagan Londoners to receive Mellitus. Justus and Mellitus successively presided at Canterbury after the death of Laurentius. Temporary The short-livcd offshoot in Northumbria remains success of to be noticed Patdinusin ^^ "^ nOLlceu. Northum- Eadbald's sister, Ethelbur^a, had married Edwin, bria. _ .... King of Northumbria, it being stipulated that she should be allowed free exercise of her religion. Paulinus accompanied her to the court of the heathen bridegroom, and, in deference to the scheme originally devised by Gregory, was consecrated by the primate ' See Baeda, Hist. Eccl., ii. 4. '^ Ibid., ii. 6. CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 29 Justus to a see at York. By appeals to a mind naturally superstitious, and by prediction of successes on the battle-field, he gained a hold over Edwin which resulted in his conversion to Christianity. The leading men of his kingdom assembling in councjl gave unanimous adhesion to the new religion ; Coifi the pontiff setting the example by confessing that the service of the paternal gods had never brought him any material good.^ The temple of the disavowed religion was pro- faned and burnt ; and York Minster was anticipated by a humble wooden edifice, the metropolitan church of the North. Edwin was baptized on Easter Day, 627, and the example of the royal proselyte caused, as usual, the conversion of numerous subjects. The new religion was afterwards extended throughout North- umbria by less questionable influences ; and we are told that Paulinus devoted himself to incessant preaching and catechizing. Like the kindred foundation in Essex, however, the Northumbrian settlement depended on the life of its royal patron. Eight years after his baptism, Edwin died in battle. A pagan reaction set in, and Paulinus fled with the widowed queen to Kent, the only province in which Gregory's mission- aries had secured a jDermanent hold. Honorius, the Archbishop of Canterbury, appointed Paulinus to the see of Eoch ester. When Honorius died, some sixty years after the landing of Augustine, the only suffragan see in connection -with Canterbury was the neighbouring town of Rochester. For two years the see of Canter- bury remained void, an anomaly which has been ascribed to tlie jealousy of Wessex and Northumbria. The failure of Gregory's envoys was retrieved by interven- 11 ,1 • /> 1 tionofmis- missionaries who knew nothing 01 papal supremacy, sionaries ' Baeda, Hist. Eccl., iii. 25, 26. 30 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. A.B. 684. and whose customs were to some extent different from those of Eome. On this account their work has re- ceived but scant acknowledgment at the hands of historians who wrote when the Roman system had obtained the mastery. We have described in the preceding chapter the Christian settlements planted by the Welsh and Irish among the Picts of Scotland. It was by ecclesiastics connected with this North British Church that the permanent establishment of Christianity in the greater part of England was effected. About the year 634, there succeeded to the throne of Northumbria a prince who had been baptized and taught by the monks of Scotland. Oswald's first care was to send to Hy for a bishop who should rescue his subjects from the dark- ness of Paganism. Corman came first, but found him- self unfitted by temperament for a work requiring the utmost patience and self-control. Aidan, a man of great meekness and discretion, took his place.^ Igno- rant or heedless of the organization which Gregory had prescribed, Aidan placed his see not at York, but in Lindisfarne, afterwards called Holy Island. Hither he summoned a band of missionaries from the establishments of Columban in the North, and by their exertions Christianity was spread throughout the twin Northumbrian provinces of Bernicia and Deira. At the court of Northumbria Prince Peada of Mercia learnt Christianity. He took back with him to his father's kingdom four missionary priests — Cedda, Adda, Betti, and Diuma. Labouring among the people as much as among the nobles, these preachers gained for Christianity a permanent hold in the affections of the Mercians.^ Finan, also a disciple of the college at Hy, had succeeded ' Baeda, Hist. Eccl., iii. 5, 6, 14. " Ibid., iii. 21. CONVERSION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS. 31 Aidan at Lindisfarne. By Finan, Diuma was consecrated chap. as the first bishop of the Mercians. The centre of the _!!:_ episcopal see was Lichfield. Oswy, the successor of a.d. 642. Oswald, persuaded Sigebert, King of Essex, to embrace the faith. Here again a North British missionary was sent for. The missionary was Cedda. He succeeded in establishing Christianity in Essex, and was conse- crated by Finan as Bishop of London.^ East Anglia was converted by the exertions of Felix, a Burgundian missionary, with whom Fursy, a Celtic monk, co- operated. Felix received no assistance from Canter- bury. In Wessex there appeared a Eoman mission- ary, sent by Pope Honorius, who laboured with much success, and established the see of Dorchester, near Oxford. It is a singular fact that Honorius, in sending Birinus, took no notice of the establishment at Canter- bury. Sussex was the last kingdom to receive Chris- tianity, a fact which speaks little for the zeal of the neighbouring Church of Kent. Its king, ^dilwalch, was converted at the court of Wulfhere, King of Mercia. But the recovery of the tribe from heathenism and barbarous practices was reserved for Wilfrid, whose labours will be described below. A collision between the two srreat missionary schools collision . _ , . . -IT n P between was unavoidable. As might have been loreseen, thetwo the insular system was the one to succumb. The pretensions of the Papacy won the victory for the foreign ritual ; and the acceptance of the Eoman Easter prejoared England for a defined ecclesiastical organiza- tion such as Gregory had contemplated. Setting aside the means by which it was attained, such an issue is hardly matter of regret. The verdict was given at a synod held at Whitby (Streaneshale) in 664. The * Bseda, Hist. Eccl., ill. 21, 22. 32 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. two uses had come into collision at the court of Oswy, the very centre of North British influences. Oswy had married Eanfleda, the daughter of Edwin and the Kentish Ethelburga. From the Church of Canterbury Eanfleda had learnt the importance of keeping Easter according to the Eoman use. Her husband observed it as he was directed by the Church of North Britain. Hence the scandal that one part of the court feasted Council of while the other part kept fast. The matter was re- ^Tp'^eei ferred to a synod, to which the two Churches seilt representatives. Oswy, who presided, dilated on the value of uniformity and the duty of ascertaining which was the best tradition. Thereupon, on behalf of the British Easter, Bishop Colman cited the authority of S. John, of Anatolius the ecclesiastical historian, and of S. Columban. The champions of Eoman usage were Wilfrid, under whose tuition Oswy's son had been educated, and Agilbert Bishop of Dorchester. Wilfrid treated the arguments of Colman with unconcealed contempt : he appealed to continental usage, to the Council of Niceea, to the supreme power delegated to the Eoman Church by S. Peter. This last argument was considered decisive by Oswy. Colman having admitted that S. Peter kept the keys of heaven, " then," said the king, "I will not contradict him, lest when 1 come to the gates of heaven there should be no one to open them, if he is mj'- adversar}^" i The assembly agreed with Oswy. Colman and such of his adherents as were unconvinced retired to their monasteries ; Cedda, with the mass of English Christians, conformed to the Eoman usages. But it was not till about 716 that the monastic stations of the North accepted the coronal tonsure and the Eoman computation of Easter. ' Bseda, Hist. Eccl., ii. 13. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 33 CHAPTER III. Wsit i^ational ^ng;lo=^aaLOtt ®f)ut;c]^. A.D. 664-1066. Steps taken to consolidate the Heptarchic Church — Archbishop Theodore — Case of Wilfrid — Subdivision of large dioceses — Extended organization — The parochial system — Great literary impulse — Anglo-Saxon Church in its relations to Rome — Allegiance uncertain, e.g. in the case of Wilfrid — The one Church of the Heptarchic kingdoms — Its capacity for corporate action — Its relations to the tribal systems — Fusion of Church and State — Maintenance of clergy— The parish church — Treatment of heathen practices — Doctrines of the Anglo-Saxon Church — Celibacy of clergy — Penitential system — The age of great writers — Bede — Egbert of York — Csdmon the poet — Aldhelm— Alcuin — And great missionaries — Willibrord — Boniface — Mania for monasticism — And pilgrimages — Council of Cloveshoo — The archbishopric of Lichfield sanctioned by Rome — Peter's pence — England and the iconoclastic controversy — Union of the principalities — The Church shaken by the Danish invasion — Alfred — John Scotus Erigena — The dogma of transubstantiation — The False Decretals — Conflict between regulars and seculars — Odo — Dunstan — Elfric the homilist — Canute — Edward the Con- fessor— A glance at Church history abroad — Progress of the centralizing system — Its advantages — Tiie period closes on a harmonious state of things — Which is completely transformed in the age ensuing. In tlie kingdoTus of the Heptarcliy tlie triumph of steps Roman usage was from this time insured. The idea consoudate of conformity naturally suggested that of unity ; and tarcwc ' Oswy's recognition of the Roman Easter was succeeded ^^^^^• by measures for consolidating the independent Hep- tarchic sees in a national Church, such as had been conceived of by Gregory. The first step was to secure a primate to whom the bishops of the several kingdoms would render obedience. Northumbria and Kent, the two chief centres of Christian agency, seem to have come to an understanding on this point, without con- D 34 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, suiting the great kingdoms of Mercia and Wessex, III. Oswy and Egbert agreed that Canterbury was the A.D. 667. metropolitan see of England. Frithona, a Saxon, who after its two years' vacation was consecrated to this see with the title Deusdedit, had lately died. The kings of Northumbria and Kent selected Wighard as his successor, and sent him to Rome for consecration. Wighard died shortly after his arrival at Eome. It appears that the kings, when informed of this event, petitioned Pope Vitalian to nominate a primate.^ The archbishopric of Canterbury was offered by Vitalian to Adrian, a learned monk of African birth. Adrian refused, but recommended his friend Theodore, a native of Tarsus in Cilicia, and Theodore was consecrated at Rome in March, 668. Travelling very leisurely, he came to Canterbury, accompanied by Adrian, in May, 669. Ardibishop Thcodore of Tarsus was gifted by nature with talents of the highest order, and his advanced age at the time of his appointment had in no way impaired these endowments. He stands first chronologically among the primates of all England ; and, if not first, among the foremost in point of ability and historical import- ance. The bishops of the Heptarchy appear to have submitted to their new ecclesiastical chief with a unanimity for which Theodore's personal reputation and Roman credentials sufficiently account. Case of The first case which Theodore had to decide was that of the Northumbrian bishopric. Oswy had re- established York as the northern see, and Tuda, one of the Scotch divines, had occupied it till his death. Wilfrid, the champion of Roman usage at Whitby, had been appointed to succeed him. It was characteristic ' This fact is vainly contested by Mr. Soames : see Kemble, Saxons in England, ii. 365 and note. Wilfrid. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 35 of Wilfrid that he should scorn to be consecrated by insular prelates. The British and Scotch episcopate was spurned because not clearly connected with Kome. Deus- dedit's purer pedigree was not sufficient to atone for a latent sympathy with the "schismatic" Celts. Wilfrid went to Paris, and was there consecrated by Archbishop Agilbert. His sciaiples did not preclude a protracted absence from his new see, which induced Oswy to fill up his place by the appointment of Chad, brother to Cedda. Chad had been consecrated by Wine, the Bishop of Winchester, assisted by two British bishops. Wilfrid now appealed to Theodore to reinstal him. It is not pleasing to learn that Theodore's policy or conviction induced him to rule that a consecration in which the native prelates ^ had taken part was uncanonical, and that Chad's claim was therefore invalid. Wilfrid was restored. Chad retired cheerfully to his beloved abbey at Lastingham, to be raised shortly to the see of Lichfield, when he submitted to a second conse- cration. Hitherto Christianity in England had been repre- subdivision sented by bishoprics coextensive with kingdoms.^ dioceses. Some of these were far too vast for the care of one diocesan. This arrangement was also a bar to corporate action on the part of the Church, the bishops being too much associated with the conflicting interests of the several principalities to regard themselves as members of a religious fraternity. Theodore would obviously have to face the unpopular enterprise of subdividing the dioceses. Before taking steps in this direction, ^ * Or, to speak more strictly, such of the native prelates as did not accept the Roman Easter and tonsure. See Capitula et Fragmenta Theodori, Thorpe, 307. - "Kent," says Mr. Kemble, "is probably only an apparent exception. Rochester can hardly have been otherwise than the capital of a subordinate king- dom."—Saxons in England, vol. ii. p. 361. 36 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, he wisely endeavoured to make tlie suffragans realize ^-i^I— the advantages of a more elaborate ecclesiastical system. A.D. 673. He convened a synod at Hertford (673), at which he produced a body of canon law, ranged under ten heads, which he specially commended to the acceptance of those present.^ These canons prescribe the Eoman Easter; lay down certain rules for bishops, clergy, and monks; provide for the holding of synods twice in every year; and order penalties for breach of the matrimonial tie. They were examined and accepted by the synod in the name of the entire Church. Cloveshoo was appointed as the meeting- place ^ of a yearly synod. The scheme for breaking up the big dioceses was broached, and received some sort of sanction, one of the canons prescribing that as the number of the faithful increased the bishops might be increased to greater number. Theodore began at once to avail himself of this canon. East Anglia w^as provided with two sees, at Elmham and at Dunwich. Meicia, in spite of Winfrid's opposition, received the sees of Hereford, Worcester, and Leicester in addition to Lichfield. In Northumbria Wilfrid had lost court favour. Egfrid and his queen themselves urged Theo- dore to break up the unwieldy diocese of York. Wilfrid made resistance ; and was deposed, if not degraded, by Theodore, who had previously treated Winfrid with similar severity. The Northumbrian diocese was ulti- mately apportioned between Whithern, Lindisfarne, Hexham, and Sidnacester. Wessex alone of the large kingdoms succeeded in escaping disruption. Its appor- tionment to Winchester and Sherborne was effected ' The bishops of East Anglia, Eochester, Wessex, and Mercia were personally present. Wilfrid of Northumbria sent two representatives. Several learned divines of lower grade attended. - Baeda, Hist. Eccl., iv. 5. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 37 very shortly after Theodore's death. The Church then found itself ranged under sixteen sees, subject to one metropolitan at Canterbury.^ With the subdivision of dioceses came a great de- Extended velopment of the monastic system, and the establish- tfo^'^^^^" meut of some form of provision for the village clergy. That Theodore himself is the author of the arrangement, by which the patronage of the Church and the main- tenance of the incumbent lay in the founder's family,^ is a tradition of little value. Nor is it plain that Theparo- England was now adapted to any foreign form oftem. parochial system. " What measures Theodore, who is the traditional creator of the parochial system, took in this direction can only be conjectured : it is un- necessary to sujDpose that he founded it, for it needed no foundation. As the kingdom and the shire were the natural sphere of the bishop, so was the township of the single priest ; and the parish was but the town- ship or cluster of townships to which the priest ministered. The fact that the tv/o systems, the parish and the township, have existed for more than one thousand years side by side, identical in area, and administered by the same persons, and yet separate in ' This arrangement was so far altered in 735 that York, then presided over by the celebrated Egbert, became the metropolitan see of the northern dioceses of Lindis- farne, Hexham, and Whithern. It may be remarked here that the ambiguous relations of York and Canterbury proved a fruitful source of contention in the Anglo-Norman times. Thus Thomas of York tried to resist Lanfranc, maintaining that the primacy ought to be held alternately by Canterbury, York, and London. On Anselm's accession Thomas established his own claim to the rank of "metro- politan" (1093). The prerogative of Canterbury was in that year first expressed in the terms which still obtain — " totius Britannia Primas." Half a century later at the petition of Archbishop Theobald, the pre-eminence of Canterbury was put beyond dispute by the primate's becoming " Legatus Natus " of the Roman see by virtue of his office. During the Saxon period, however, the subordinate position of York was not often questioned. Nor was Theodore's scheme shaken by Offa's attempt to establish a third archbishopric in the midlands (787). The pretensions of Lichfield did not survive Archbishop Higbert. ' See Elmham, ed. Hardwick, pp. 285, 286. 38 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Great literary impulse. character and machinery, is a sufficient proof that no legislative act could have been needed." ^ The services rendered to literature by Theodore and his friend Adrian are scarcely less important than this work of ecclesiastical organization. Theodore has been called the father of Anglo-Saxon literature. With his primacy came an educational impulse somewhat like that of the " New Learning " in the sixteenth century. It was not till the destruction of the monasteries by the Northmen that this impulse subsided. By that time English scholars, such as Bede and Alcuin, had won a European reputation, and the skill of our monastic copyists become proverbial. " In a single century England became known as a fountain of light, as a land of learned men, devout and unwearied missions, of strong, rich, and pious kings." ^ Himself a Greek divine, Theodore introduced into England a class of studies almost unknown in Western Chris- tendom. For the special study of his native language he founded a school at Canterbury, on v^^hich he be- stowed a number of books. Greek copies of the Scrip- tures were transmitted from the East, and copied with assiduous care bj^ the monks of England.^ The Codex E.,^ one of the most precious treasures of the Bodleian, is supposed to be one of the manuscripts with which Theodore enriched England. It is related by Bede that the primate and Adrian themselves gave oral instruction to students in every branch of scholarship. Otlier names besides those of Theodore and Adrian deserve mentioh in connection with the revival of ' Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. 227. ^ Ibid., i. 219. ^ The value of such services can hardly be rightly estimated in our own days. It is difiQcult to conceive of an entire Christian diocese in which not one copy of the Old i)r New Testament in any language existed. Yet such Mr. Kemble shows to have been the state of the diocese of Lisieux in the 9th century : see Saxons in J^ngland, ii. 433, note. * Or Laudianus, 35. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 39 literature. Wilfrid, to borrow Dean Milman's ex- chap. pression, returned from his visits to Eome " with other — J.^ literarj'- treasures besides papal rescripts in his favour." Benedict Biscop, who had accompanied Wilfrid to Eome in 654, was equally assiduous as a collector of books. It was by these two Northumbrian scholars that the celebrated monastery at the mouth of the Wear was founded. Here their spoils were deposited; and here Benedict brought John the Precentor from Eome itself, to teach his monks the knowledge of Latin and of sacred music. The next generation witnessed the foundation of a library of probably greater value. This was Archbishop Egbert's collection at York. Of the contents Alcuin, Egbert's librarian, gives a cata- logue, which includes all the great ecclesiastical writers and not a few of the Latin classics. The anti-papal proclivities of some historians have Ang-io- been gratified by a hint supplied by Bede, which suggests cimrch in that Pope Vitalian mistrusted the allegiance of the Greek to Rome, primate to the customs of the Eoman see. Mr. Soames discovers that Theodore's friend Adrian was " a spy upon his actions," and that Yitalian " gladly renewed " this espionage by means of John the Precentor. It is probable that Theodore's Greek birth and independence of character did actually make him somewhat impatient of Eoman interference. Eome was undoubtedly re- garded in England as the metropolis of Christendom, and the decision of the Eoman synod which condemned the Monothelites was dutifully endorsed by a con- vention at Hatfield (680). But the pretensions of the Pope were still vague and undefined. How precarious was the allegiance of England to S. Peter's representa- tive is shown by the history of Wilfrid. Deposed by Theodore from the see of York, Wil- Allegiance 40 ECCLESTA ANGLICANA. CHAP, frid journeyed to Eome to secure papal interposition. — ^ — Some kind of synod held at Eome pronounced his ^^^^•'^^tiT' deposition uncanonical, and Pope Agatho gave him case of a letter which set forth this decision. Of so little "Wilfrid. value, however, was papal support,^ that Wilfrid only returned to Northumbria to be imprisoned for nine AD. 679. months by King Egfrid, and then banished the king- dom. The subsequent career of Wilfrid is too inter- esting for us to end the story here. Undaunted by failure and disgrace, he journeyed into the barbarous province of Sussex, to strike out a new career as a missiouary. The natives of Sussex were savages, so ignorant that Wilfred was hailed as their preserver when, in a season of scarcity, he taught them how to catch fish. He soon established a bishopric at Selsey, and the fame of his missionary labours reached the ears of Theodore. The aged archbishop seems to have thought that a man of such ability as Wilfrid would be a fit successor to himself at Canterbury. He ap- pealed to Alfrid, the successor of Egfrid, to reinstate the exiled prelate at York. Wilfrid, somewhat un- happily for his fame, returned to Northumbria. Fresh disputes arose, the ground being (according to Eddius) Wilfrid's continued aversion to the dismemberment of the Northumbrian see, and his repudiation^ of some of Theodore's canons. Again driven into exile, he again journeyed to Rome, and again a papal rescript in Wil- frid's favour was disregarded by the secular and eccle- siastical authorities of England. It was not till after Alfrid's death that Wilfrid was allowed to repossess ' He was accused of obtaining it by bribes : see Eddius, Vit. S. Wilfr., xxxiii. * He taunted the synod at Eastanfeld with Theodore's non-compliant attitude towards Rome. Did they dare, he asked, compare their schismatic prelate with " holy Agatho, and Benedict the chosen, and Sergius the blessed ? " The authority is Jlddius, who was probably present at the synod. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 41 liimself of a part of his former dominions. He recovered chap, the see of Hexham and the abbey of Kipon ; and these ^— ^1_ he held peaceably during the last four years of his life. He died in 709. His zeal for Italian usage and his invocation of Eoman authority were rewarded in after years by the posthumous honour of canonization, which has been denied to Theodore/ a greater divine but less dutiful servant of Rome. So readily had the organization provided by Theo- ^^^ ^^ dore been accepted, that from this time (more than a p,^"£?^ °^ J- ' /^ the Hep- hundred years before the Heptarchic kingdoms were tarcMc X o kingdoms. united under one temporal head) the Church of England maintained its unity and capacity for corporate action. The secular organization of England was one of disin- tegrated tribes, whose princes rarely met in council, soo and whose occasional coalition was a mere political accident. Its ecclesiastical organization, on the other hand, was based on the corporate action of its clergy. The bishops and abbots convened harmoniously from all parts of England, and passed canons which were accepted by the entire " ecclesia Anglorum et Sax- onum." ^ From time to time this harmony may have been disturbed by the doubtful claim of York, or the baseless pretence of Lichfield, to a primacy akin to that of Canterbury ; but such survival of tribal jealousy appears at no time to have effected absolute breach of communion. It may be added that the ecclesiastical polity of England was extended to regions which still defied the military skill of her temporal chieftains. ' Theodore died in 699, Achian in 680. * Mr. Stubbs remarks (Const. Hist., vol. 1. p. 113) : " The unity of the Church was the only working unity, the law of religion the only universally recognized common jurisprudence. The Archbishop of Canterbury stood constantly, as the Bretwalda never stood, at the head of an organized and symmetrical system, all of the ofiacers of which were bound by their profession of obedience to him." 42 ' ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Wales gradually changed its attitude of jealous conser- ni. vatism, and for ecclesiastical purposes became almost part and parcel of England. It had adopted the Anglican usages before the end of the eighth century : after the beginning of the ninth there are instances of Welsh bishops going to Canterbury for consecration. Its capacity The Anglo-Saxon Church may be depicted from two for corpo- t- . p- t !••• rate action. Qistmct points 01 vicw, accordiug as we regard it m its entirety, or in its relation to the several principalities. (1.) The bishops, the abbots, and perhaps the dele- gates of the parochial clergy met from time to time in ecclesiastical Councils. Their canons bore solely on the spiritual concerns of the nation ; but they were not binding on the clergy only. Kings and ealdormen were sometimes present at these Councils (as e.g. Offa at Calcuith in 787, and Kenulf at Chelsea in 816), and even attested their decrees. But it does not appear that they w^ere permitted to take part in the conciliar legislation. Theodore had provided that these Councils should be held annually at Cloveshoo. This arrange- ment was not observed with respect to time, nor even with respect to place. The Councils were convened rarely, to meet important exigencies : the places selected were often such border towns as were most accessible. Thus Boniface's complaints induced Archbishop Cuth- bert to convene the synod at Cloveshoo in 747, which passed canons for the amelioration of morals. The synod at Calcuith, in 787, met to consider Offa's important scheme for making Lichfield a metropolitan see. itsreia- (2.) The tribal relations of the clergy are a subject tions to tlie p j.'i» n» , ~r > j1/ tribal sys- ^i greater intricacy and importance, it appears that ®™®' as the Saxon kingdoms were converted, an adaptation of the tribal institutions took place, which resulted in what we should now call a union of Church and THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 43 State. The government in these kingdoms was, as is chap. • . . • IIT. well known, constitutional. Each had its Witenagemot ; — ^ — and therein sat bishops, and sometimes abbots, and per- haps other clergy, with the ealdormen of the shires and the king's thegns. Ecclesiastical matters, as well as secular, were certainly discussed by the tribal Witan ; and it is not easy to dejS.ne how its " dooms " were subordinated to those of the ecclesiastical Witan or national Church Council. The king and the Witan legislated on such matters as the sanctity of oaths and marriage vows ; the enforcement of Sundays and holy days ; the levy and expenditure of ecclesiastical revenue; and the appointment of fasts and festivals. Bishops, it seems, were often nominated in the Witan, Fusion of though in the case of the less important sees election stata^^'^'^ by the clergy appears to have been the rule. Christi- anity soon penetrated the judicial and executive institutions of the Anglo-Saxons. The bishop sat with the earl in the county court, besides taking cognizance of a certain class of offences in his own court. The State facilitated the execution of the episcopal sentence, even where purely spiritual : " the outlaw of God and the outlaw of the king, the excom- municated man and the convicted criminal, are alike set without the protection of the peace." Clerical criminals, however, were not let off, as in a later age, with spiritual sentences. They were punished as other citizens. In like manner the usual secular services were exacted from the lands belonging to the clergy. Except in a few rare cases, clerical property was sub- ject to the trinoda necessitas ^ — maintenance of roads and bridges, maintenance of forts, and maintenance of troops. ' See Palgrave's Engl. Commonwealth, i. 157-159. 44 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. This brings us to the subject of the incomes of the clergy, and the legal provisions for their sustenance. Tithe-pa3nient, customary since the fourth century, had been declared obligatory at the synod of Tours in 567 ; and there is little doubt that at the conversion of Anglo-Saxon England this mode of providing for the clergy-^ was introduced. The ecclesiastical Council at Calcuith (787) treats tithe-payment as an established practice. But no distinct legislation on this subject occurs till 920, when Athelstan and the national Witan enjoin the payment of the tenth "of live stock and of the year's increase." The same payment is enjoined by Edmund's law of 940. The laws passed by Ina^ and his Witan in 693 enforce on every house an as- sessment called " cyric-sceat," or " church-scot," to defray the expenses of divine service. Church-scot was to be paid in kind every Martinmas. This impost is enforced by many subsequent legislative acts of the period. " Leohtsceat " and " sawlsceat " were the names of certain other dues payable to the Church. If we except the hide of glebe land sometimes attached to the Church for the maintenance of the parish priest, eccle- siastical property of every kind was in the hands of the bishop. The dues above mentioned did not accrue directly to the clergy. They fed a diocesan fund, which was apportioned by the bishop according to fixed rules. The usual custom of the Eoman Church was to divide all oblations into four parts — one for the bishop, one for the clergy, one for the poor, and one for the repairs and ornamentation of the church. In England usually a tripartite ^ division obtained, one-third being allotted to the bishop and clergy. This arrangement ' See Theodore, Poenit., lib. ii. 2, and ii. 14. ' LL. Inse, 4, 10 ; Spelm., i. 184, 185. * Excerpta Egberti, 5. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 45 appears to be accounted for by the monastic character of chap. the early bishops. Gregory expressly directed Augustine -— — to make, not four, but three portions, because he, being a monk, could have no separate share of his own. The formation of parishes has been already alluded The parish ... . church. to. Here again Christianity was interwoven with the existent secular institutions of Anglo-Saxon England, the parish being only one or more of the already defined townships. The " monasterium " or episcopal church served as a kind of missionary depot. Its travelling preachers were gradually transformed into parish priests, " presbyteri plebei," as provision was secured for the maintenance of a resident clergy. This change doubtless went on briskly under Theodore's regime. Hence, perhaps, the legend that he introduced the parochial system into England from the East. In the time of Bede parish churches had been generally estab- lished throughout England. Mr. Kemble accounts for this speedy upgrowth by the supposition that in most cases the heathen temple (the fanum or liearli) was appropriated to Christian use. In this connection it Treatment Ox xl63/Ui3.611 may be observed that heathen practices were to some practices, extent incorporated in the Christianity of Anglo-Saxon England. The most remarkable survival is that of the " ordeal'' This relic of Teutonic superstition was condemned by Pope Stephen V. in the ninth century, and again by Alexander II. in the eleventh. But in England no active measures for its suppression ^ were taken until the reign of Henry III. Other ancient prac- tices, however, deemed of a less innocent character, were jealously proscribed. The Saxon rules with regard to prohibited degrees of marriage had been so indulgent that union with a widowed stepmother was a common ' See Johnson, sub an. 1065, can. 2. 46 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. practice. The matrimonial restrictions introduced by Christianity must therefore have been often found an intolerable burden. The Church forbade marriage within four degrees of consanguinity, or with sponsors, nuns, or divorced women. It also discouraged second marriages. The zeal of the prelates in enforcing these proviisions is illustrated by the episode of Odo and the unfortunate Elgiva. It was perhaps to guard against some barbarous practice of the old religion that the Anglo-Saxon canons maintained the primitive prohibi- tions with regard to tasting of blood or of strangled animals.-^ The ritual, and the doctrinal tenets of the Anglo- Saxon Christians were, broadly, such as prevailed among their contemporaries at Eome. Latin was the language of public worship. The priest was ordained to " offer sacrifice and celebrate mass as well for the living as for Celibacy of the dead." Celibacy was theoretically the rule of life for c ergy. ^^^ parochial clergy as well as for the monks ; but the denunciations of Boniface in the eighth, and Dunstan in the tenth century, were vainly launched against the Penitential prevalent contrary practice.^ The Anglo-Saxon divines are prolific sources of instruction on the subject of penance. Theodore's bulky Penitential was succeeded by the similar productions of Archbishop Egbert, Cummian, and Elfric. Every conceivable form of sin is assessed in these works, to be commuted by a pro- portionate fasting, money payment, or repetition of Doctrines oftlie Anglo- Saxon Churcli. system. ' Egbert's Penitential : see Johnson's Collection, i. can. 40 ; Wilkins, i. 124. ^ Wilfrid's son is mentioned by Eddius. A church is left hereditarily to Wulf- maer and his offspring : the sons of Bishop iElfsige, Oswald the presbyter, and other clerics are mentioned. Mr. Kemble concludes that there is •' an almost un- broken chain of evidence to show that, in spite of the exhortations of the bishops and the legislation of the Witan, those -at least of the clergy who were not bound to coenobitical order did contract marriage and openly rear the families which were its issue." — Saxons in England, vol. ii. p. 443. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 47 psalms. Tlie apology for such a system was the chap. hardened spiritual condition of the Anglo-Saxons, who ^^^^~. were, as we have shown, notorious abroad for violence and inhumanity. It need not be remarked what a scope it offered for abuse. Rome was regarded as the centre of Christendom, and, as a rule, dutifully obeyed. Two notable exceptions may be alleged. Image-worship and transubstantiation, as will be shown hereafter, were both rejected by the Church of England, despite the sanction they received from Rome. The eighth century is the golden age of the The age of Anglo-Saxon period. At Benedict Biscop's colleges at writers. Wearmouth and Jarrow was educated the theologian and historian Bede, called by the succeeding generation Bede. " venerabilis." The celebrity of Bede was such as to justify a tradition that Pope Sergius invited him to give Rome the benefit of his erudition. To modern readers Bede's theological works are of little value. They are merely excerpts from the great Christian Fathers, to whom we have, what Bede's countrymen had not, a more direct means of access. Just as Jerome had thrown open the Scriptures to the less learned minds of Western Christendom, so Bede revealed S. Augustine to Saxon England. Standing aloof alike from ecclesiastical duties and ecclesiastical disputes, the monk of Jarrow made it his life's work to master, and to disseminate in his writings, the literary trea- sures accumulated by Wilfrid and Benedict Biscop. Posterity, however, has forgotten Saxon England's obligations to Bede as an exponent of patristic thought. His fame now rests on what bis contemporaries probably considered his least valuable work, the Ecclesiastical History of England. To this record, compiled from ancient records, tradition, and personal knowledge, 48 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. Egbert of York. Csedmon the poet. we are indebted for almost all that we know of the Eno-land of the sixth and seventh centuries. Bede died in the act of completing a vernacular translation of S. John's Gospel (735). To Bede's learned friend, Archbishop Egbert of York, we have already alluded, as the founder of a valuable library and author of a vernacular Penitential. It is important to notice that Egbert's episcopate restored York to the metropolitan dignity, to which it had made no pretensions since the death of Paulinus. It may be conceived that the high connections of Egbert, whose brother Edbert was King of Northumbria, helped to secure him this dignity. Egbert's prelacy lasted from 732 to 706. Of Csedmon, the greatest of Anglo-Saxon poets, and his sudden acquisition of a talent for which he had no natural bent, we are told by Bede, who was not many years his senior. Caedmon's lips were opened by an angel, who bid him sing of the " Creation." In language in which his countrymen saw a beauty which they attributed to inspiration, Caedmon poured forth " the treasures of Biblical poetry, the sublime mysteries of the Creation, the Fall, the wonders of the Hebrew history, the gentler miracles of the New- Testament, the terrors of the judgment, the torments of hell, the bliss of heaven. . . . Thus was the whole history of the Bible, and the whole creed of Christianity in the imaginative form which it then wore, made at once accessible to the Anglo-Saxon people.^ Casdmon's poetry was their Bible, no doubt far more effective in awakening and changing the popular mind than a literal translation of the Scriptures could have been." ^ In ' Probably at a later time vernacular translations of most of the Scriptures were executed. The Gospels were certainly translated more than once, as also the Psalms. Elfric translated the Pentateuch and the historical Books of the Old Testament. * Milman, Lat. Christ., vol. ii. pp. Ill, 278. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 49 like manner the unimpressive sermons of tlie clergy were supplemented by the improvised utterances of the poet-preacher, Aldhelm of Malmesbury. Unfortunately Aicmeim. for his reputation, Aldhelm also attempted Latin verses, and these are all that survive of his poetical productions. Alcuin, the scholar and statesman, emerges from Aicuin. Egbert's college at York, as Bede does from the foun- dations of Benedict, acd aspired to yet loftier rank among the Anglo-Saxon worthies. Alcuin made his < Alma Mater so famous by his own talent for oral tuition that York was the resort of the theological students of the Continent. His friend and former pupil, Eanbald, when raised to the see of York, desired Alcuin to procure him the pall at Eome. The journey was destined to sever England's connection with the great luminary of the age. At Parma Alcuin was presented to Charlemagne, who contrived to secure his future residence at the Frankish court. As the privy coun- cillor of the emperor, Alcuin made his influence felt over all Europe. Once only was he permitted to revisit England. His ostensible mission was to negotiate a treaty between Charlemagne and Ofifa ; but he prolonged his stay three years, in spite of the emperor's remon- strances. In his old age Alcuin with difficulty obtained a.d.796. permission to retire to the abbey of S. Martin's at Tours, and devote himself to scholarly pursuits. To Tours ^ flocked students of all countries; and as an authority in all branches of learning, Alcuin survived for centuries. As the author of the so-called Caroline Books, Alcuin renders imj)ortant testimony to the opinions of the Saxon and Gallican Churches on the controverted subject of image- worship. Besides these men of letters the English Church pro- And great 1 Acta SS. Ord. Benedict., iv. 169, 173. E 50 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. mission- aries diTced at least two celebrated missionaries. Willibrord, with a band of preachers, brought the light of Chris- tianity to the barbarous Batavian tribes at the close of wiuibrord. the scventli century, and established a see at Utrecht. Boniface. Winifrid, or Boniface, the " Apostle of Germany," was born at Crediton in Devonshire, where he received a monastic education. Following the example of Willi- brord, he passed over into Friesland in 715. After attaining considerable success, he journeyed to Eome, and received a formal commission to work as an itinerant missionary among the heathen tribes of Northern Europe. On this occasion he took an oath of allegiance to Gregory II. as sole and absolute head of the Church. In 738 he was consecrated Archbishop of Mentz, with the appellation Boniface. A devoted servant of Eome, he procured the sy nodical submission of Germany to the papal see, and endeavoured to win over England to a like obedience. Writing to Archbishop Cuthbert, Boniface styles himself legate of the Catholic and Apostolic Eoman Churcb, and details how the synod at Soissons had decided that every metropolitan must appl}^ to Eome for a pall, and "that in all things we must strive to pay canonical obedience to the household of S. Peter." The relapse of his converts appears to have drawn Boniface back to Friesland in his old age. There he was murdered in 755. But it was in the self-seclusion of the monk and the laborious journeyings of the pilgrim that the religious enthusiasm of this period commonly found expression. The instances of Anglo-Saxon princes and princesses who exchanged the court for the cloister are too numerous to be detailed. Ceolwulf of Northumbria (cir. 725) is said to have been the eighth king who assumed the monastic garb, and the fashion became yet Mania for monasti- cism. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 51 more prevalent. The Benedictine form of establish- chap. ment had lono; been known in Eno-land : to this order -^-^-1^ belonged Biscop's foundation at Wearmouth, that of Cuthbert at Lindisfarne, and the monastery wherein Winifrid received his education. Dunstan, whom his monkish panegyrists style the first of the English Benedictines, really did but restore a system which had been overthrown amid the troubles of the Danish occu- pation. The female pilgrims from England obtained ^ndpii. an unenviable notoriety in continental cities. So in- primages, decent was their behaviour, that Boniface ■"■ wrote to England, asking that the practice of going on pilgri- mage should be limited by royal and synodical authority. It was in deference to the wishes of Boniface that counsel of the Council of 747 was held at Cloveshoo. Canons were ^^^74?°' passed similar to those enforced by the missionary bishop on his German converts. It was enacted that the people should learn the Creed and the Lord's Prayer in the vulgar tongue, and receive instruction as to the nature of the two sacraments ; prayers were to be used for the dead ; bishops were to visit their dioceses annually. A general conformity with the usages of Rome is enjoined ; but that submission to papal authority which Boniface had urged, and which was recom- mended by Archbishop Cuthbert, was not expressed. On the contrary, no higher court of appeal than that of the archbishop in synod is acknowledged. This submission was, however, rendered in 787 byThearch- Offa, King of the Mercians, in furtherance of Iris own otLichfieici ambition. While a bishop ranked only as an ealdorman, b^^^o^^*^^ the archbishops held the rank of athelings or princes of the blood, and had the right to issue coinage. It ' See Spelm., Cone, i. 233 ; Wilk., i. 88. 52 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. A.D. 787. was natural that when Offa conquered Kent, he should deem it politic to curtail the dignity and authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury, by establishing a third archiepiscopate in his own kingdom of Mercia. The new archbishopric of Lichfield survived for about twenty years. Papal connivance, and a pall for the new metro- politan were obtained by enormous bribes ; ^ and prob- ably the recognition of the pall as an essential was, at this time, even more grateful to Eome than the money payment. Two legates — the first papal commissioners since the appointment of Theodore — were sent to ratifj'' the new arrangement, which also received the approval of a Council held at Calcuith.^ Offa promised the legates that he would subscribe annually to a fund for supporting the English college founded by Ina at Eome and defraying the expenses of pilgrims. The subscription was levied by a tax of a penny on every family not absolutely destitute in his dominions. In this grant originated "Peter's pence," claimed from William I. after the Conquest by Pope Gregory VII., and paid with occasional interruptions until its final abrogation in 1559. England ^ Controversy as to the kind of devotion due to and the gacred imasres had been menacing Christendom from iconoclastic ° . . theory. \\^q time of Gregory I. This Pope, with his usual sagacity, had sanctioned the use of images, while depre- cating their worship. Sweeping condemnation of such stimulants to devotion was the platform of Leo the Isaurian, and his son Constantino Copronymus, whose opinions were espoused by a Council at Constantinople, in 754. The Empress Irene, on the other hand, reversed Peter's pence. ' " Data pecunia infinita, a sede Apostolica, qu(z nulli deestpecuniam largiente licentiam inipctravit."— Matt. Paris, Hist. Aug., p. 155. ? " Challoch or Chalk in Kent," according to Dr. Ingram. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH, 53 this policy. Through her instrumentality the second chap. Council of Nicaea was summoned to enact that an ex- . ™-_. ternal and inferior sort of worship might be offered to images (787). The Roman see emphatically pro- nounced in favour of image-worship. It is certain that the English and Galilean Churches were in this matter at variance with Rome. Under Charlemagne, the cele- brated Council of Frankfort, 794, condemned the Council a.d. 794. of Nicsea as a pseudo-synod, and the decrees of this Council were transmitted to the Anglo-Saxon clergy. By them the practice of image-worship was absolutely repudiated, as being " that which God's Church alto- gether execrates." ^ The views of the two Churches were defended by Alcuin in a treatise surviving in the so-called Caroline Books. While preserving the great- est deference to Rome as the metropolis of Christendom, the author plainly proscribes image-worship as an insidious relic of paganism. The ninth century introduced a great political change P^°^ °^ . in the consolidation of the various principalities under pauties. one ruler. Egbert, who ruled over England south of the Humber (827), was succeeded by Ethel wulf, who is the reputed author of the legislation which subjected the whole country to tithe-payment. It appears, how- a.d. 854. ever, that Ethelwulf 's enactments did no more than free Church property from a tenth part of the usual im- posts,^ and that the earliest distinct legislation as to tithe-payment is that of Athelstan, sixty-six years later. Ethelwulf journeyed to Rome, and there restored the English school founded by Ina, which had been destroyed by fire. He appears to have renewed or confirmed the grant of Peter's pence. The religious 1 For the canons of this synod see Spelm., Cone, vii. 103. " See Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. 228, 237 ; and Kemble, Saxons, ii. 481-490. 54 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. prosperity of England was rudely sliaken during this _ii.^.:_ reign by the invasions of the Northmen. Civilization The Church liad enervated her soldiers, and little resistance was shaken by . the Danish made Until resistance was useless. In the troublous period which ensued the Christian institutions of the island were wellnigh exterminated. Bishops and clergy fled from their benefices ; literature and peaceful arts succumbed; the religious houses, especially those of Northern England, were pillaged or destroyed. In seven years, it is said, every religious house in North- umbria had ceased to exist. The work of restoration A.D 878 consequent on Alfred's great victory at Ethandune in- cluded a re-establishment of the ancient territorial divisions — shires, hundreds, and parishes ; a compulsory baptism of the heathen ; the founding of schools and colleges ; the translation of portions of the Scriptures and other religious books into the native tongue ; the manumission of slaves ; and a general enforcement of the tenets and practice of Christianity on the lines of Alfred. Offa and Ina. Alfred prefaces his laws with a version of the Decalogue, in which the second commandment is omitted. From this it is inferred that England no longer reprobated the second Council of Nic^a. It is also noteworthy that Alfred stipulated for the payment of Bome-sceat in the laws which enjoin the usual offerings for the maintenance of the clergy. But the tradition of his patronage of John Scotus Erigena, who was deemed heterodox at Eome, indicates that his deference to the papal see was not extravagant. This divine was the only great writer produced by these islands in the ninth century. He appears to have been born in Ireland, and to have spent his earlier years in France, under the patronage of Charles the Bald. By Charles he was employed with Hatramn THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 55 to examine the doctrine of transubstantiation lately broached by Paschasius Radbertiis. Both scholars condemned the doctrine. This, together with his peculiar views on the subject of predestination, brought Erigena into disrepute at Eome. At Alfred's summons he accepted a post as teacher at the newly founded school at Oxford. Thence he moved to Malmesbury Abbey, where he continued to engage in tuition. He died by the penknives of his pupils,^ who are sup- posed to have been incited by some of his theological antagonists. The doctrine which Erigena repudiated will be The dogrma ^ ^ oftransub- frequently alluded to hereafter, and the present stantiation. appears a suitable place for an account of it. From the earliest times it had been held that there was a veritable but mysterious Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. On this subject all the Fathers are in agreement. Seldom, however, was it attempted to define the nature of Sacramental grace dogmatically. In the liturgies of SS. Basil and Chrysostom this Presence is regarded as so real as to give to the Eucharistic rite a sacrificial character.^ In 787 the second Council of Nice determined that the symbols are not figures or images, but the very Body and Blood. Paschasius Radbertus (831) appears to have a.d. ssi. combined the doctrine of a Eeal Presence with the philosophical tenet of the times, — that in all bodies there existed a substance apart from the accidents appre- ciable by the senses. His followers maintained that after the act of consecration the substance of the sacred elements was changed, albeit the accidents re- mained. This view was opposed by Erigena, Ratramn a learned monk of Corbey in France, and Rabanus ' Malmesb. Script, post Bed, 24. - See also Cbrysost., De Sacerdot., iii. $ 4. 56 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. The False Decretals. Maurns, a disciple of Alcuin. Elfiic, the Anglo-Saxon homilist (cir. 995), sa3^s distinct!}^ that the conse- crated elements " are not the same body that Christ suftiered in, nor the same blood in bodily substance that He shed for us ; " and during the Anglo-Saxon period our Church appears to have rejected the rationalistic dogma of Eadbertus. In the Gallican Clmrch Beren- garius (cir. 1050), while admitting the Keal Presence in the sacrament, argued that the bread and wine re- tained their natural substance. But the dogma of " tran substantiation " (a term first applied about 1100) had throughout the controversy been supported by Eome. A Council at Yerceil, under Leo IX., con- demned John Scotus and Berengarius (1050). Councils held shortly afterwards at Eome endorsed the verdict ; and among those who endeavoured to confute Beren- garius in writing was Lanfranc, afterwards primate of England. From this time the dogma was generally received.^ It was formally declared to be an article of faith by the fourth Lateran Council under Innocent III. (a.d. 1215). Before the middle of the ninth century the False Decretals were published by some Gallican ecclesiastic eager to aggrandize Eome. A collection of papal canons and decretals from the pontificate of Siricius to his own time, i.e. 384-525, had been made by Dionysius the Less. Isidore of Seville had, in 635, undertaken to revise and complete this collection. The forged decretals, which first saw light about 836, profess to be the work of Isidore. They trace back the decretal epistles of Popes, not to Siricius, but to a period when 1 When in this worlc we use the term " transubstantiation " we mean this rationalistic dogma of Radbertus, and not, as some writers, the ancient doctrine of a real, if undefinable, Presence. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 57 no papal decrees were dreamt of; in fact, to the days chap. of Clement, Bishop of Rome (a.d. 91). The False ^I^ Decretals also contain the so-called Donation of Con- ^■'^- sse. stantine. Pope Sylvester is herein endowed by Constantino the Great with the empire of Italy and the West, the donor at the same time confessing the dependence of all power, whether ecclesiastical or civil, on the j^apal see. The Church of Rome is declared to be constituted as head over other Churches by our Lord Himself. The clergy are said to be exempt from secular control, and to be responsible only to their diocesans ; these in turn are subject to their metropolitans, and these to the patriarchs, at the head of whom is the successor of Peter. The False Decretals, though now acknowledged to be a clumsy forgery, teeming with anachronisms, were universally acce^Dted in the Middle Ages, and were of great influence in establishing the papal supremacy. Nicholas I. is the first Pope who refers to them as authorities. Hildebrand, in the eleventh century, was the first to deduce from them that system of papal tyranny in which originated most of the evils of mediaeval Christianity. During the troublous period preceding the reign of conflict Alfred the regulars or monastic clergy had almost regulars vanished from the land. When order was restored, f^g^®*^^" many of the religious houses became the habitation of a clergy who did not acknowledge the Benedictine rule, and some of whom were married men. Against such laxity of discipline strict religionists raised ^ an outcry. The Church was soon divided between two ' The same anomaly had vexed the divines assembled at Cloveshoo in 747. " It is necessary for bishops to go to monasteries, if they can be called monasteries which in these times cannot be in any wise reformed according to the model of Christianity, . . . which are, we know not how, possessed by secular men." — Coac. Cloves., can. 5. Spelm. i. 247. 58^ ECCLESM ANGLICANA. CHAP, parties, the secular and tlie monastic. Supported by v^Jil_ the approval of Eome, the monastic party not only A.D.900- recovered their just rights, but began to intrench upon those of the seculars. An atteinj)t was made to oust the seculars — especially such as had married — from the cathedral chapters, even from the livings. The an- tagonism between the two kinds of religionists, we may here remark, was a continual source of disturb- ance until the Reformation. The regulars were always backed up by the papal see, which, by alienating them from their compatriots and exempting them from episcopal control, used them as tools to weaken the influence of the national Church. Two successive primates in the tenth century warmly supported the cause of the regulars. Little is known of the earlier English monasteries — so little that, though the Benedictine rule was certainly known in England shortly after the j)rimacy of Theo- dore, its introduction has often been attributed to Odo and Dunstan.^ The task of these distinguished eccle- siastics was really perhaj)s one more arduous — that of re-establishing a system which had been secularized and sapped, and extending it beyond its legitimate Odo. sphere. Odo was of Danish blood and heathen parent- age. Before his translation to Canterbury he appears to have filled the see of Eamsbury. It was probably at his friend Dunstan's instigation that he proceeded, before his promotion, to the celebrated Benedictine establishment at Fleury,^ and returned a monk. For- saking the party of the secular clergy, to which he had hitherto belonged, he thus " expressed his opinion that no one was fit to be an archbishop unless he had 1 Dunstan is called " rater_monacborum et sidus Auglorum." — Brompton X., Script. 877. ~ - Ibid., 863. A.D. 942. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 59 first become a monk — one of the religious." ^ Three chap. great measures of reform monopolized this primate's — ^ thoughts, and were executed with pitiless assiduity — the enforcement of the Benedictine rule in all mon- asteries; the separation of the married clergy from- their wives; and the expulsion of the secular clergy from the cathedral chapters. To Odo's canons, pro- hibiting marriage within certain degrees, King Edwy was obliged to submit. The archbishop's retinue forced the queen, Elgiva, from his palace, and, lest her beaut}^ should weaken his resolution, branded her on the face. Despite or in consequence of such acts of brutality, the archbishop was known to monastic historians as " Odo- the Good." ^ Contemporaries gave him the less flatter- ing epithet, " Odo^ Severus." Dunstan, the friend and uunstan. successor of Odo, was more gentle in temper and •^•®^^- infinitely superior in talent. A statesman as well as an ecclesiastic, his influence in the secular history of his time may be compared to that of Wolsey or Eichelieu in subsequent ages. Born of good parentage, Dunstan was educated in a noted monastery at Glaston- bur3\ Here, acsording to his monkish biographers, youthful visions predicted to him his future task of restoring the Benedictine discipline. His introduction to the court of Athelsta,n was succeeded by an enjoy- ment of royal favour which provoked jealousy. His enemies accused him of proficiency in magic, and he was ignominiously expelled from the royal presence. Disappointment and illness led him to Fleury, whence he returned an ardent champion of the Benedictine system. He persuaded Edmund to endow a Bene- dictine monastery at Glastonbury after the model of Fleury, where he himself presided as abbot. Without 1 Hook, Archbishops, vol. i., " Odo." * See Malmesb. Script, post Bed., 115. 6o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. Elfric the homilist. resigning this office, he became bishop both of Worcester and London. Edwy and the anti-monastic party were unable to exclude him from the secular administration ; and, with Odo at Canterbury, Dunstan was already the guiding spirit in ecclesiastical matters. The deaths of Odo and Edwy were almost contemporaneous. Edgar at once installed Dunstan at Canterbury (959). The work which Odo had initiated was now brought to a successful conclusion. No less than forty-seven mon- asteries were founded, chiefly at the expense of the secular clergy. The cathedral chapters were purged, and stocked with regulars. Oswald Bishop of Wor- cester, and Ethelwold Bishop of Winchester, warmly sup]3orted this innovation ; and the roj^al guarantee for effecting it was known as " Oswald's Law." The opposition of the defrauded canons was violent, but when they clamoured for redress at Winchester, Dun- stan contrived that the crucifix should utter a voice of protest,^ "Absit hoc ut fiat." By a similar im- posture he awed his opponents at a Council at Calne. In a primacy which considerably sapped the indepen- dence of the English Church it is pleasant to witness one instance of resistance to the papal mandates. An earl whom Dunstan had excommunicated for an in- cestuous marriage obtained letters from Eome com- manding Dunstan to grant absolution. The arch- bishop flatly refused compliance till the sin should be forsaken and penitence expressed." To the same century as Dunstan jDrobably belongs the great Saxon homilist Elfric, a voluminous writer, of uncertain date. To Elfric are ascribed translations of several portions of the Scriptures, eighty homilies, ' Osbern, De Vit. S. Dunst., Angl. Sacr., ii. 112 ; cf. Spelm., Cone, ii. 490. * See Hook, Archbishops, vol. i. p. 408. THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 6i a book of ecclesiastical laws and canons, and some chap. hortatory epistles. Much importance is attached to , "^' , these works, as illustrating the usages of the Church in England at the close of the Saxon period. The canons enumerate seven orders of clergy, viz. the 08i%ar\j or sexton, the exorcist, the lector who read the ^"^ ^®^- lessons in church, the acolytJi, the suhdeacon who per- formed subordinate functions at mass, the deacon, and the priest. Bishops and archbishops were regarded as leading members of the priestly order. Elfric directs that consecrated oil should be sprinkled on infants at baptism, and on sick persons in extremis. He insists on the celibacy of the clergy, and attaches much weight to acts of penance and to the intercession of saints. Bede had considered purgatory a thing only not in- credible ; Elfric appears to have believed in purgatory as efficacious for the cleansing of less perfect souls. As we have before remarked, Elfric is decidedly opposed to the doctrine of transubstantiation.^ Perhaps it is on this ground that the historians of the Anglo-Norman period, Osbern and William of Malmesbury, tell us so little of the learned homilist. That he was an abbot and a bishop is gathered from his works, but neither his abbey nor his see can be identified. An Elfric succeeded to the see of Canterbury in a.d. 995 ; another Elfric was appointed by Canute to the see of York in a.d. 1025. Dr. Hook decides that the former is the author of the homilies. The succeeding reigns contribute little material to the Church history of the Anglo-Saxon period. The ^^'''^^^■ vitality of English Christianity is illustrated by the conversion of Canute the Dane from a life of brutality •^ A.D. 1017. (1017). This occurred soon after his accession. His ^ See the Paschal Homily. 62 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. III. Edward the Con- fessor A.D. 1043. reign was marked by numerous acts of piety and beneficence. A liberal supporter of the parochial clergy, as well as of the regulars, Canute contrived to allay for a time the mutual jealousies of the two rival factions. A dangerous precedent was, however, estab- lished in this reign by the monarch assuming to him- self the right of electing bishops. Hitherto the clergy and people had shared this right ; the king had recom- mended the candidate, but this recommendation was not necessarily construed as an order. From this reign, too, the royal investiture of bishops by means of ring and crosier — the practice so offensive to the clergy of the Anglo-Norman period— is said to date. Edward the Confessor is extolled by monkish writers on account of his preference for the celibate state. There is really little to admire in his character ; and his unpatriotic policy undoubtedly paved the way for the Norman invasion and the miseries resulting therefrom. So hateful to Saxon England was the sight of a court and a Church in which the highest places were monopolized by Normans, that Edward's subjects rose in revolt to expel Archbishop Eobert and other dignitaries of foreign extraction. Stigand, Bishop of Winchester, was appointed by the Witan to the primacy ; and the papal mandates ordering the reinstatement of Eobert were disregarded. After the battle of Hastings Stigand anointed Edgar Atheling as king. William appears to have made overtures to the last Saxon primate; but Stigand clung to that party of irreconcilables of which Here ward was the champion. Stigand's appointment had from the first been a grief to Eome. In 1070 the patriot prelates were deposed by a papal order. Before we close this chapter, we must remind the THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 63 reader that the history of the Anglo-Saxon Church, of chap. III. which we have given only a compendium, can be rightly stutlied only in view of the history of Western Christianity. The period intervenins; between Ausfus- Ag-ianceat . . . . . Church tine's mission and the invasion of \\ illiam of Normandy history happens to synchronize with one of the great divisions in the history of Western Christendom. The tendencies of this historical period will exj)lain more especially the relations of Saxon Christianity and the Papacy. The most noticeable feature in these five centuries is progress of the adoption by Christianity of the centralizing ^^^^^^^^^^f^" system of Eoman imperialism. As far back as the *®™- middle of the fifth century, Leo I. had asserted the supremacy of the Roman bishop as the successor of S. Peter. After the brilliant career of Gregory the Great, this supremacy became the leading idea of the Popes ; and the Papacy at length assumed that relation to the converted which Eoman imperialism had borne to the conquered. Episcopal prerogatives were gradually concentrated in the person of the Pope ; and the system of ecclesiastical polity was yet further narrowed when the nomination to the papal chair was declared to be vested in the body of cardinals. Similarly, clerical prerogatives everywhere became centred in the bishoprics and monasteries; and the parochial clergy gradually ceased to have any voice in the management of Church affairs. Before the end of this period the independence of the Church was sapped by the system '•< of which the forged Decretals are the exponent. Pernicious in its consequences, it must be admitted its advan- that the centralizing system at first sight appears to be ^^^®^- the system best suited to the age. Civilizing influences were thus radiated simultaneously throughout an obedient Christendom ; and religious unity — a principle 64 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. which, the uneducated seldom appreciate spontane- ously— was authoritatively maintained. Justice, when denied by local ignorance and prejudice, was sought at the Eoman court of appeal, and not so vainly as in the age succeeding. " During this period," says an impartial writer, " the decisions of Eome — be it said to her credit — were mostly just and in the interests of morality." Moreover, the Church was enabled to contend successfully against slavery ; against the debasing practice — as yet disowned by Christendom — of expiating crimes by money payment ; against neglect of the needy and oppressed ; and against that rough and hasty resentment of injury which barbarians mistake for justice. Vice in high places received the rebuke or the punishment which under other systems it would have escaped. Attempts were made to discountenance warfare ; and such pacts as the " Truce of God" attest the salutary influence of the Church on a rough and petulant generation. Unity throughout this period, as we have already closes on a gljown, kept out of mcn's minds the now familiar dis- harmo- ■•- nious state tinction between Church and State. In the sphere of politics the Anglo-Saxon bishop was an eorl, imjiroved by the influences of culture, learning, and religious aspirations. He sat as a judge in the hundred court ; had special jurisdiction in suits concerning public morality ; and was often the king's chief minister. On the other hand, the king, who not unfrequently ended his life in a monastery, took a leading part in the ordering of matters ecclesiastical. His rights in ap- pointing to vacant bishoprics have been mentioned. He convened synods, wherein laws both civil and ecclesiastical were passed, and was even present at councils of a strictly ecclesiastical character. To him The period THE NATIONAL ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH. 65 and his nobles belonged extensive rights of patronage, chap. the rule being that founders of endowed chnrches be- -—J~~> queathed to their heirs the right of appointing the incumbents. It will be seen in the next chapter how the harmony which is subsisting between the powers lay and ecclesiastical trans- was rudely shaken amid the contentions of tyrannical the^ge"^ sovereigns and pretentious Popes ; — how the secular ®^^^^^ and spiritual courts were first separated and then estranged ; — how the term " religion " was monopolized by the monks, who affected as great a disdain for the secular clergy as for the laity ; — how the monks encroached on the prerogatives of the bishops, and were encouraged by the Popes to do so; — how Hil- debrand and Innocent III. taught the Anglican Church to view Rome with jealous suspicion, and thus paved the way for the anti-papal statutes of the succeeding period, and for the revolutionary movements of the four- teenth and fifteenth centuries. 66 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTER IV. A.D. 1066-1216. Contrasted with the period preceding — Alienation of temporal and spiritual powers— The Churchmen fight for constitutional government — Liberties of the Church recognized — Guaranteed again in the succeeding period— The Church the stronghold of Anglo-Saxon patriotism — William's harsh ecclesiastical laws — The conflict also attributable to papal influence — Hildebrand — Roman " media- tion " — A means of establishing temporal pretensions — The conflict often misin- terpreted— Chief points at issue — William's dealings with the Church — Lanfranc — Feudal tenure of bishops — Canons and paj^al sentences dependent on royal pleasure — Separation of civil and ecclesiastical courts — William's conquest Rome's conquest — But William sometimes resists papal pretension— William compared with Henry VIII. — Church reforms offensive to the English — Norman influence in many respects salutary — Vain attempts to enforce clerical celibacy — Anselm and William Rufus — The confiscation grievance— Anselm and Henry I. — The investiture grievance — Rome always the real gainer — Becket and Henry II. — How are clergy to be tried ? — Career of Becket — Forced to head the opposi- tion— Council of Westminster — Constitutions of Clarendon — Becket's party the champions of constitutional government — The six years' contest— Decision of the question — Treatment of heresy — The Publicani in England — Heretics on the Continent — Monasticism in the ascendant — The primate appointed by monks — The Pope appoints Langton— John wages war with the Church — This ends in a disgraceful surrender to the Pope — The Charter offensive to Rome— The crown offered to Louis— Survey of general history— Innocent III. Contrasted DuRiNG the Ano;lo-Saxon period tlie relations of the witli the "^ •*• period pre- Church to the State were seldom other than friendly. Religion and politics, ecclesiastical and secular influ- ences, were so interwrought in the fabric of the consti- tution as to be almost inseparable. The Anglo-Norman period, on the contrary, is characterized by conflicts almost continuous between the high powers of Church and State, notably between the primate and the king. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 67 The Conqueror deposes Stigand ; Eufus and Henry I. are at issue with Anselm, Henry II. with Becket, John with Langton. The representatives of foreign tyranny press home the harsh ecclesiastical laws of William I. ; the prelates of the national Church clamour for the Alienation liberties guaranteed to Churchman and commoner by an?°^^°^^^ the Ano-lo-Saxon constitution. The people are invari- ^p^^^^^^ o 1 i powers. ably on the side of the Church, the Norman barons on that of the throne. The regulars, who have swarmed into England in the wake of the foreign dynasty, and under the patronage of the Pope, are themselves en- croaching on the prerogatives of the Churchmen ; their sympathies and interests are naturally on the side of foreign aggression. Gradually, as the conquered and The conquering races blend, the interests of the royal re- fight for ^^ tainers are identified with those of the English people ; tkmaf^" the barons become infected with the national spirit, g'ov®^^^- i ' ment. they catch up the Churchmen's oxy of libertj^ ; there is a struggle, in which the sovereign fights single-handed, or with no ally but the Pope; the issue is the en- largement of the subject's rights, and the limitation of royal prerogative by the admission of representative Houses to a share in the administration. The estate which had borne the brunt of the battle Liberties was rewarded, at the beginning of the thirteenth church century, by John's admission that the "holy Church ''^''°^'''^^'^- of God is a free Church," not to be " sold or farmed out" at the pleasure of the sovereign. In the suc- ceeding period we shall find repeated attempts to secure the immunities of the Church against Pope and sovereign by protective statutes, preparing men's minds for the acceptance of a body, self-governing, molested and despoiled neither by king nor pontiff. Part of this ideal was realized when Henry VIII., to 68 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Guaran- teed again in tlie suc- ceeding' period. Tlie Churcli tlie strong- hold of Anglo- Saxon patriotism. William's liarsli ecclesiasti- cal laws. the gratification of nearly all the secular clergy, crowned the work of the patriotic statesmen of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries by an absolute re- nunciation of Roman supremacy. But the avarice of the Tudors, the personal pretensions of the Stuarts, and the jealousies resulting from the great constitu- tional catastrophes of the seventeenth century post- poned its fuller realization, and the present relation of the Church to Government can hardly be considered a final settlement of the question.^ The conflict between the secular and spiritual powers during the Anglo-Norman period was to some extent a political necessity. The Church was the recognized stronghold of Anglo-Saxon patriotism. Peculiarly in- dependent of continental influences even in the reign of the degenerate Edward the Confessor, the clergy resisted the usurpation of William long after the less patriotic nobility had succumbed ; when forced to accept "the Norman dynasty, they obstinately opposed the religious innovations of the invading race. William found it necessary to depose the native prelates, and to place the Church under the control of a foreigner, willing and able to curb this spirit of independence — Lanfranc, Abbot of Bee. The Conqueror's legislation betrays the aim of making the priesthood an unpopular caste, alienated from sym- pathy by severance from public life, and deterred from disloyalty to the throne by liability to oppressive Statutes. This policy overreached itself. The restric- tions on the clergy and their exemption from the privi- leges and liabilities of ordinary citizens caused continual 1 Qiurcbmen may reasonably complain that one estate of tlie realm has secured self-government at the expense of the other, ihat the Church's representative body is a vox et praterea nihil, and that Christianity and common sense are alike outraged when a Government of any or no religion is empowered to legislate for (or against) the Church. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 69 entanglements nnder the Conqueror's hot-headed suc- cessors, and in every dispute between king and Church- man the latter, regarded as the champion of national liberties, commanded the sympathies of the lower orders. But it is not only to antijiathy of race, nor to The conflict oppressive legislation, that this conflict is to be ascribed, butawe With the Norman djmasty there entered England the inm^n^e. influence of a court, here hitherto inappreciable as a political force; — a court which, jealous alike of throne and national Church, loved to enhance its own import- ance by setting the two at variance. We have alluded to the dissemination of the False Decretals, and the influence of that publication in establishing the pre- tensions of the Papacy. Contemporary with William micie- lived the great Hildebrand, raised to the pontifical chair as Gregory VII. in 1073. The object of this man's life was to reform Europe by the extension of the powers accredited by the Decretals. The Pope was to be, according to Hildebrand's theory, the recognized umpire in all disputes, whose arbitration should antici- pate the millennium and put an end to warfare and in- justice. But to be able to act as universal arbiter, the pontiff must be recognized by all prelates, princes, and kings, as their suzerain or liege lord. The triumph of this well-meaning but short-sighted reformer over the Emperor Henry IV. convinced a generation, which received the False Decretals unquestioningly, of the feasibility of the scheme. Less conscientious successors reasserted the pretensions of Gregory VII. from more questionable motives. Kings and prelates were en- couraged to make appeals to Rome, and accompany their appeals by bribes. Disregard of the papal verdict might entail the fearful sentence of an excommunica- tion or interdict. The interposition of a power whose 70 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV. Roman " media- tion." A means of establisli- ing tempo- ral preten- sions. The con- flict often misinter- preted. interest it was to set Chnrch and State at variance widened the rupture which severed the Auglo-Korman dynasty from the clergy of England. The policy of Eome everywhere throughout this period was to engender and embitter strifes between Churchmen and sovereigns as to questions of clerical prerogative, so as to bring both parties as appellants to the papal court. The policy of William and his immediate successors was, as we have seen, one of undisguised hostility towards the English Churchmen. England therefore during this period was a fruitful source of revenue to the court of appeal. The response of the oracle was seldom directly favourable to the ecclesiastics. The successor of S. Peter usually took care that other episcopates should not be unduly exalted ; and Canterbury, the patri- archate of the extreme West, appears to have been honoured with special jealousy. An appeal from a monastic house against the English epi.>eopate almost invariably resulted in a verdict for the appellant ; and the regulars were thus encouraged to consider them- selves dependent on Kome alone. On the other hand, the dynasty which had introduced the custom of appealing to Eome received great boons from the Pope ; but for every boon a price was paid by the establishment of a precedent derogating from the honour of the crown. The climax was reached during the conflict of King John with the barons lay and spiritual, when the payment due for the sanction given to the Norman Conquest and for other papal favours was at last dis- charged by a royal acknowledgment that England was a fief of Kome. From party historians the conflict of the Anglo- Norman period has received a religious colouring. The ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 71 party whicli happened to fare ill at Rome is in- chap. vested with the sentiments of Edward YI.'s Ee- . ^^' formers. Or the clergy are presumed to be fighting on the side of Romanism against rulers of anti-papal proclivities. The student is warned against such mis- representations of a struggle, which was, in fact, rather political than religious. As regards the Pope, the only doubtful question was, What were the limits of his jurisdiction? His spiritual supremacy was admitted by all : kings, barons, bishops, and monks were so far of one mind. The powers of interference involved in this supremacy were undefinable. Hence men ex- aggerated or curtailed them just as their personal interests chanced to be affected. But to aggrandize a foreign despot was as little the settled policy of the clergy as of the sovereign. As regards the Church, the conflict bore on the cMe political position of the estate whose liberties had been issue, most injured by the Norman Conquest. Was the king to be allowed to plunder vacant sees ? Did the re- ligious character of his office permit a newly appointed bishop to do homage for his temporalities in the same way as a lay baron ? The Churchmen being excluded from the county courts, who was to guarantee that a baron might not murder a cleric with impunity, or, on the other hand, that a clerical offender would be tried impartially in the ecclesiastical courts ? What, again, were the respective rights of the sovereign and the suffragan bishops in the election of a metropolitan ? Such were some of the issues necessarily raised by William's limitation of clerical liberties. We now proceed to a detailed account of this wiiiiam's stormy period in the history of our Church. Arch- tlthtSe bishop Stigand and three bishops were deposed by c^^^^'^^- 72 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV. AD. 1070. lianfranc. Feudal tenure of bishops. Canons and papal sen- tences dependent on royal pleasure. ■William *s conquest Rome's conquest. William as hopelessly disaffected to the new dynasty ; and many of the leading Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastics fled the country after the battle of Hastings. The interests of the Norman ecclesiastics who filled the episcopates thus vacated were so linked with those of the Conqueror, that they readily accepted the harsh statutes devised to suppress the native clergy. William's first pro- ceeding after the appointment of Lanfranc (1070) was to reduce the episcopate to a state of vassalage. In Saxon times the bishops had held their lands under the tenure of frankalmoign or free alms. This was now altered to tenure by barony, involving the usr»al feudal obligations. In view of the possible disloyalty of the new vassals, the king ruled that no Church Council should pass canons disagreeable to himself. Mal- contents would probably follow the royal example of enlisting the good offices of the Pope; therefore no letters from Kome should enter the country till ap- proved of by the king; nor should the aggrieved ecclesiastics have liberty to quit England. It some- times happened at this i)eriod that there was more than one claimant to the Papacy; the English eccle- siastics were forbidden to recognize any Pope but the king's Pope. Hitherto the bishop and ealdorman had together dispensed justice in the county court. Hence- forward there were to be two courts, the civil and the ecclesiastical. Cases in which clerks were con- cerned were to be tried in the latter. But no bishop was to implead or excommunicate any of the king's vassals, even for the grossest offences, without the consent of the king.-"^ Pope Alexander 11. had hallowed William's expe- dition with the contribution of a consecrated banner. 1 Blackstone, Book I. c. 2 ; Seldeni notffi ad Eadm., 104. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 73 The conquest of England was justlj^ regarded at Eome as effecting the affiliation of a Church hitherto severed from papal influences. The Conqueror perhaps considered that this gain to the Papacy was sufficient requital for Alexander's patronage. He was visited by a papal legate, demanding homage to Gregory YII. as suzerain of all the powers of Europe, and com- plainino- of the non-pa\anent of Peter's pence. Ad- But wn- ... . . liamsome- mitting the indebtedness of the kingdom m the latter times rGsists respect,^ William let the Pope plainly understand that papal pre- the claim to homage which he had established in other countries would not be recognized by the sovereign of England. "Homage to thee," he replies, "I have not chosen, neither do I choose to do. I neA^er made a promise to that effect; neither do I find that it was ever promised by my predecessors to thine." ^ Arch- bishop Lanfrano imitated the policy of his patron. It is true that he obeyed a papal summons to Rome, when, without compliance, he could not secure the pall. But at a later time he completely disregarded a papal letter, desiring him to visit Rome " for the confirmation of the faith and of the Christian religion," under pain of sus- pension. The policy of William with regard to Rome wmiam was, in short, that afterwards adopted by Henry VIII. with He was the obsequious servant of the Pope as long as viil^ the Pope could be of service ; his object gained, he preferred to be "supreme head" himself. Lanfranc abetted this policy, and sacrificed the liberties of his 1 Which, as Dean Hook observes, was more than he need have conceded. For the tax had hitherto not been levied on the kingdom, but only on the private estates of the king, and was paid, not as a tribute to the Pope, but as a fund for the sustentation of the English college at Rome. Of these facts the Conqueror was doubtless ignorant. It may be noticed here that the payment of Peter's pence continued from this reign till that of Edward III., when it was prohibited. It was abrogated by statute 23 Hen. VIII. c. 21, to be re-established by statute 1 & 2 Philip and Mary, c. 8, and finally abrogated by statute 1 Eliz. c. I. "^ Opp.Lanfr., i., of, 10. I 74 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV. Churcli reforms offensive to the English. clerical brethren with Cranmer-like complaisance. The obligations of the new dynasty were, however, kept in remembrance by S. Peter's representatives. The debt which the strong-willed Conqueror could ignore with impunity was exacted with interest from weaker or less politic successors. The rule of Lanfranc and the Norman prelates was, of course, ungrateful to the native clergy. The monastic bodies, which had been filled with foreigners by King Edward, were less hostile to the new s^'stem. The Norman bishops, however, in the enforcement of reforms, acted with perfect indifference to the prejudices of the Church upon which they had been foisted. They deprived small Anglo-Saxon saints of their posthumous honours ; ^ they transferred the sites of ancient cathedrals to cities of greater importance ; ^ they silenced the old Gregorian chants in favour of a new system of music devised by William of Fescamp.^ Monasticism was developed — too often at the expense of the parish churches; and the "secular '' clergy were finally swept from all the cathedrals. These remained monastic till the time of the Reformation. The inno- vations were so far distasteful to the regulars that they involved the introduction of new orders of monks. With the Conquest came the Canons Eegular of S. Augustine ; the Cluniac and Carthusian orders shortly 1 This, of course, was done to deprive Anglo-Saxon patriotism of a religious stimulus. It is curious to read that the idolatrous tendency of such devotion was Lanfranc's alleged pretext in punishing Wulfhetul, the Abbot of Croj'land, where people floclied to see the wonder-worlting shrine of Waltbeof. See Florence of Worcester; Matthew of Paris ; Ordericus Vitalis, iv. c. 17. = The Council uf London (1075) ruled that the see of Sherborne should be removed to Sarum, that of Sclsey to Chichester, and that of Lichfield to Chester. The see of Lincoln took the place of Dorchester in 1085 ; the see of Elmham was trans- ferred first to Thetfurd (1078), and finally to Norwich (1101). => For the account of this innovation at Glastonbury and the consequent insur- rection of the monks, see Florence of Worcester, ad ann. 1083. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 75 followed ; the close of the century witnessed the insti- chap. tiition of the order of Citeaux or Cistercium, destined . — ^1_, to become the most popular of all. Already the rival houses in many places impaired the prestige of old foundations. At Canterbury the ancient monastery of S. Augustine's ^ had not only to endure the presence of a new Benedictine establishment, substituted for the secular cathedral chapter — the primate forced upon them an abbot of his own choosing, and severely punished some brethren who ventured to resist^ (1089). Offensive as such high-handed proceedings were to Norman Anglo-Saxon patriotism, it was soon manifest how in many greatly the Church had gained by the infusion of the gaiStarJ. Norman element. With the Normans came architec- tural science, which, if it built castles for the suppres- sion of the insubordinate, provided for the devout churches and cathedrals surpassing^ the highest con- ceptions of Saxon genius. Bj^ giving the Church a more elaborate organization, Lanfranc allayed ancient jealousies and provided for the establishment of orderly administration. The Archbishop of Canterbury claimed to be primate, not of England, but of " the British Isles " — a claim he could vindicate by telling how Patrick, Archbishop of Dublin, had tendered to him the oath of canonical obedience. York was declared to be distinctly subordinate to Canterbury,'* an arrangement 1 The first in rank of the English religious bouses ; and in^Western Christeudom ranliing as second only to Monte Cassino. See Robertson, vol. v. 395. ^ See the account in Hook's Archbishops, vol. i. pp. 159, 160. ^ The new Cathedral at Canterbury was begun by Lanfranc shortly after the Conquest. Rochester cathedral dates from 1077 ; Chichester was begun in the same year. Durham belongs to the reign of William II., as also Norwich and Winchester. More than three hundred monasteries were built between the years 1100 and 1200. * The northern primate was to go for consecration to Canterbury, or wherever the Archbishop of Canterbury should direct. Thomas of York had to succumb before Lanfranc ; but he gave trouble agam in the time of Auselm. 76 ' ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV. Cir. A.D. 1090. Vain attempt to enforce clerical celibacy,. wliicli tlie northern metropolitans tardily accepted.^ Winchester was to rank next to York, London next to Winchester. HithertO' there had been diversity of ritual in the various episcopates, even in the different abbej's. At Glastonbury, the enforcement of the new Norman chants in the place of Gregorians had resulted in an insurrection of the monks. It was, perhaps, this episode which prompted the subsequent measures for establishing uniformity. To prevent the recurrence of such a scandal in his diocese, Osmund, the Bishop of Sarum, composed a " custom book" to be used by all his clergy. The production was of singular merit, and won Lanfranc's approval. Under the name of the " Use of Sarum " it gradually penetrated every diocese. The "Use of Sarum" survives, expurgated and sup- plemented, in our Book of Common Prayer, B}'^ the Romanists of Mary's time, this national Use was ex- changed for the Eoman breviary of the continent.^ The national Churches of the Continent had all been affected by Gregory's vigorous warfare against simo- niacal contracts for benefices, and clerical marriages, considered the two crying evils of the day. His senti- ments so far influenced England that a synod held at Winchester in 1076 enacted that no married man should be ordained, and that no priest or deacon might be allowed to marry .^ It has already been pointed out that before Dunstan's time marriage was rather tbe rule than the exception with the English clergy. After Dunstan, celibacy was the law even for the parochial priests, but was pretty generally evaded. The censures ^ See p. St, note. " The title of the Roman Service Book used in England is, as Dean Hook points out, " Ordo administrandi Sacramenta, etc., in niissione Anglicana ex Rituali Romano jussu Pauli V. edito cxtractus ; nonnuliis adjutis ex antiquo Rituali Anglicano." — Foxe's Romish Rites, p. 256. ^ Wilkins, Concilia, i. 307, ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 77 of this synod and many succeeding synods effected little change of practice. In Anselm's time the Pope admitted that clergymen's sons formed " the greatest and best part of the priesthood," and this was probably equally true a hundred years later, when Fitzjocelyn, a clergyman's son, became primate. John could find no more effective method of punishing the London clergy than imprisonment of their focarice. And down to the time of the Eeformation married priests and sons of priests often filled the highest places in the Church. Lanfranc was succeeded by Anselm, a more typical Anseim eleventh-century ecclesiastic, who secured the goodwill nam utifus. of clergy and populace by resisting regal aggression jealously and persistently, if not always discreetly. For nearly four years William Eufus had kept the archbishopric vacant and appropriated its emoluments, and he was dealing in the same way with many other pieces of preferment. At one time this king appears to have pocketed the revenues of three bishoprics and thirteen abbeys. Frightened by illness, he pressed the -&=i>- io93- primacy on Anselm. The latter accepted it on condi- tion the wrongs of the Church were redressed. The fi^c^ati'Sl continuance of confiscations and exactions led to an ^^'^^^^^c®- open rupture between the king and the new arch- bishop. The Conqueror's ecclesiastical laws were now used by Rufus as a means of annoying his censor. A pall had to be procured from Eome for the metropolitan. But there were two rival claimants to the Papacy. Rufus for a time pretended not to recognize Urban as pontiff. Then he tried by finessing with Urban's legate to constitute himself the bestower of the pall. When the pall was at length obtained, Anselm desired leave to journey to Rome on business. The business pro- bably included a very evil report of his sovereign's 78 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV. Anselm and Henry I. proceedings. "Let him know for certain," replied Eufus, " that if he goes I shall take possession of the archbishopric, and never receive him in the capacity of archbishop again." The words were fulfilled. Anselm went to Eome, and remained abroad for three years, when he received tidings of tflie tyrant's death. His successor entreated the primate to return, promising that he would not repeat the misdeeds of Eufus, but would govern the Church according to the laws of King Edward. Anselm returned, but it was only to become embroiled with Henry on the great " investi- ture" question. Under Canute England had accepted the old conti- nental ^ rule that the sovereign should invest ecclesiastics with the temporalities of their benefices by the transfer of certain symbols. Those used in the case of a bishop were at this time a staff and ring. On the establishment of the feudal system, the church everywhere began to look upon this ancient ceremony with suspicion. It was thought that its continuance made the Church too dependent on the sovereign. The staff and ring, moreover, symbolized to some extent the spiritual powers of the episcopate. It was argued that, inas- much as these were not derived from earthly sovereign- ties, such investiture was misleading. The controversy was one of the kind that it was Eoman policy to embitter. In the pontificate of Gregory YIL, a synod at Eome forbade prelates to accept the insidious symbols of investiture, or do any act of homage for preferment (February, 1075). Anselm, who seems not to have heard of the controversy till he went to Eome, professed himself unable to do homage to Henry I., and refused to consecrate the bishops whom the king had invested. 1 See Mosheim, Inst. Hist. Eccl. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 79 Henry in a fury vowed that no one should remain in chap. . . . IV. the kingdom who refused to do homage to his suzerain. — . — • Rome was appealed to by both sides, and by Henry bribed. The papal trumpet consequently gave an un- certain sound. The disjDute was eventually settled in a.d. 1101. an English Council (1107). A compromise was then effected. The Churchmen consented to do homage for their temporalities, and the sovereign gave up all claim to investiture.^ By the Concordat of Worms, in 1122, a somewhat similar agreement^ was concluded between Pope Calixtus II. and the Emperor Henry Y. At this time the national Churches were persuaded Rome , -^ al-ways the that every metropolitan must obtain the pall from real gainer. Eome. This was usually conveyed by a papal legate, though sometimes, as in the case of Lanfranc, the metropolitan had to journey to Rome to fetch it. The next step in the policy of interference was to obtrude uninvited legates, who summoned and presided at national synods to the detriment of archiepiscopal dignity. One such attempt Anselm experienced, and boldly resisted. A weaker primate, William of Cor- beuil, suffered a papal legate, John of Crema, to convene -^-^ '^'^^^■ a Council at Westminster, wherein he took jorecedence of the episcopate and nobility (1125). The monk Gervas describes this as " a sight hitherto unknown in the realm of England," which " put the whole kingdom into no small state of indignation." - Stephen's doubt- ful title rendered him the servile dependent of Pope Innocent II.* In this reign Alberic, Bishop of Ostia, visited England as papal legate, inspected the monas- teries and colleges, convened a synod at Westminster (December, 1138), and, disregarding national custom, 1 Spelman, ii. 26 ; Wilkins, i. 387. ^ See Robertson, History, vol. v. p. 20. ^ Gervas, Chron., 1663. * See Ibid., 1346, 1347. 8o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, insisted that the king had no voice in the appointment . ^^' . of the primate. True to its principle of meting out humiliation to sovereigns and metropolitans in equal proportion, the Eoman court in the next year appointed William of Winchester its legate, thus empowering the suffragan bishop to take precedence of the Arch- bishop of Canterbury. A.D. 1154. Henry II. came to the throne under the pontificate of Nicholas Breakspear (Adrian IV.), the only English- man that has ever occupied the papal see. When the king proposed to invade Ireland, he followed the ex- ample of his great-grandfather, and asked Adrian to sanction the expedition. The Pope saddled his bene- diction with a proviso that the conquered island should pay Peter's pence, " since all the islands which are enlightened by Christ are unquestionably Peter's Becket and right." The great episode of this reign, the conflict Henry II. -j^g^^^ggj^ Henry and Becket, is of that kind which elicits undivided sympathy only in men of strong party feeling. Each faction appears to have had a good cause and grievously disgraced it. It will be re- membered that the Conqueror had tried to make the Churchmen a caste alienated from popular sympathy, and unable to appear in the civil courts of law. The system thus established was soon found to be unsatis- factory to right-thinking men of all parties. On the one hand, injured Churchmen could not obtain adequate redress, since the ecclesiastical court was not able to enforce its judgments. The murderer of a clergyman thus frequently escaped all penalties save excommuni- cation, and the clergy were worse off, as a contemporary writer puts it, than " Jews or laymen of the lowest grade."! Qn the other hand, clerical offenders some- ' Letter of Archbishop Richard, quoted by Dean Hcok, Archbishops, vol. ii. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 8i times escaped easily, since the canon law inflicted on chap. them no severer penalty than stripes. Henr^^'s judges v_i3:__ represented that 2:ross crime had frequently escaped How are • +1 1 • ^- 1 \ T^. clergy to proper cognizance m the ecclesiastical courts. 1 he be tried? difficulty would have been speedily settled hut for the touchiness of Becket. Thomas Becket, a Londoner of Norman parentage, career of had been employed by Archbishop Theobald in impor- tant diplomatic service, and had been rewarded, after the fashion of the times, with sundry Church prefer- ments, including the lucrative archdeaconry of Canter- bury. On the accession of Henry II. he was recom- mended by Theobald to royal notice, and became the king's chancellor — an office in reality, though not in rank, the highest in the kingdom. In this capacity he served the country well. He is credited with the questionable distinction of being founder of our present Court of Chancery, and he secured contemporary ad- miration by his zeal and personal courage in the Toulouse campaign. As ambassador to France Becket created a sensation by his magnificence, and his tastes were naturally luxurious. But the attempts to repre- sent him as at this time a boon companion of the king, intemperate and licentious, have no better origin than party malevolence. The interests of the court and the Church were at this lime considered almost essentially antagonistic. The chancellor was on the king's side in every matter of dispute, and was regarded by the p. 517. The Churchmen's view of the subject has been so generally misrepre- sented that it will be instructive to cite some passages at length. " If a Jew or a layman of the lowest grade be killed, the murderer is immediately sentenced to the punishment of death ; wliereas if any one has killed a priest or clergyman of the lower or higher order, the Church, contented with excommunication, or I should rather say contemned through it, refuses the aid of the carnal weapon. . . . Murderers of a clergyman or a bishop are sent to Rome ; they go in mere jest with the plenitude of the Apostolic favour, and return to commit crime again with greater audacity." G 82 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IV A.D 1162. Forced to head the opposition. Council of "West- minster. Constitu- tions of Clarendon. AD. 1164. ecclesiastics as a persecutor of holy Church. This was the man whom Henry insisted on raising, on the strength of his deacon's orders, to the highest post in the Anglican Church. The king's wish was to secure an ally instead of an antagonist at Canterbury. Becket, on the other hand,^ warned the king that his prefer- ment would make him a true ecclesiastic, identified with a party markedly hostile to the court. The pre- diction fulfi-Ued itself, and primate and king were in their normal position of ill-concealed hostility when the readjustment of the civil and ecclesiastical courts became a matter of public consideration. At a Council at Westminster Henry demanded that a guilty eccle- siastic should be degraded by the bishop, and subse- quently punished like a layman by sentence of the civil court. To this arrangement the prelates were prepared to assent. Becket, however, not unreason- ably objected that the clerical culprit would thus be twice punished for the same offence ; then, assuming a defiant tone, he informed the king that he would not obey any law of the realm that should compromise " the privileges of his order." Henry left the meeting in great wrath,^ and summoned a council of barons and Churchmen to the Castle of Clarendon, where the grand justiciary drew up the sixteen articles known as the Constitutions of Clarendon. The most noticeable enactments in these Constitutions were — that in all civil and criminal causes the clergy should be arraigned in the king's courts; that in ecclesiastical questions appeals should lie from the archbishop to the king ; that no archbishop, bishop, or " other exalted person " should leave the kingdom > See the Lives— Herbert of Bosham, vii. 27 ; Roger of Tontiguy, 11. 108, 2 Herbert, vii. 109, 110; Roger, ii. 117, ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 83 without royal permission ; that the revenues of vacant chap. proferments should accrue to the king ; that in elections ..J^Il^ to an archbishopric, bishopric, abbacy, or priory, the king should " recommend the best persons," the subse- quent election should be made with the king's consent, and the dignitary elect should do homage to the king for his temporalities. It will be observed that the Constitutions are based Becket* s party the on William's ecclesiastical statutes. Under the pretext champions CO' -TT l^ ^ ' -tj ofconstitu- ot reiormmg a recognized abuse, the king aimed at tionai resuscitating that system of personal tyranny which meS"^ had been recently invalidated by a disputed succession and a civil war. On the other hand, the policy of the Church — the policy of which Becket was now the cham- pion— was to limit the preponderance of the crown by establishing a counterbalance. The Church, enjoying the same freedom as in Anglo-Saxon times, was to act as the people's bulwark against the encroachment of king and barons. The general concessions afterwards defined by Archbishop Langton in Magna Charta were probably included in the political programme of Becket's party. It was desired, in fact, that not only the clerical estate, but every class, should be fairly taxed, tried by its peers, conceded its rights free of purchase, and allowed to pass freely from land to land, save only in times of war. This was just the class of concessions, which the Constitutions of Clarendon re- fused. Hence Becket, the opponent of the Constitu- tions, became at once the idol of the middle and lower classes, and did in fact give an impulse to the cause of civil liberty, for which he has scarcely received sufficient credit. The characteristic infirmities of the man, his bigotry, petulance, and sijiritnal j)ride, have engrossed the attention of writers who might have 84 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. AP. been expected to do justice to his public position as a s_i3l_. demagogue, champion of liberty, and patron saint of the populace. The six Becket appears to have been brought to the Council test. by treachery, and there bullied till he swore to observe 1170 " the "so-called customs." But he subsequently^ re- fused to set seal or signature to these restrictions of ecclesiastical prerogative, and he was absolved by the Pope from his oath. Henry retorted by a preposterous claim on Becket for moneys received during his chancellorship. He wrung from the Pope, now me- naced by the pretension of an antipope, a legatine commission for the Archbishop of York, Becket's enemy and would-be rival. He even procured the primate's condemnation for perjury and treason at the Council of Northampton, where Becket's enemies, lay and clerical, heaped on him shameful^ indignities. Becket suc- ceeded in making his escape to France. A six years' contest ensued. The king plundered the revenues of Canterbury. Becket from his cell at Pontigny launched excommunications on the whole court faction. Policy still precluded the Pope from espousing Becket's cause. The bishops were many of them on the side of the king — notably York, Salisbury, and London. The stronghold of the exiled primate was the pro- nounced sympathy of the English people. Incon- clusive meetings were held at Bayeux, Caen, and Kouen ; all terms of truce were cancelled by Henry's reservation, " Saving the honour of my crown," or by Becket's, " Saving the honour of God." Fresh en- croachment was made on the primate's rights. The prince Henry was to be crowned during his father's » See Grim, Vita, i. 31 ; Roger of Pont, i., 127 ; Gardiner, 72. 2 Will. Cant. ii. 13. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 85 lifetime; in defiance of Becket's prerogative the chap. Archbishop of York performed the ceremony. The v_f3^ enraged primate bitterly rebuked the politic Pope, whose connivance at this usurpation had been secured ; and himself menaced England with an interdict. Suddenly and informally the controversy appeared to end. A singularly peaceful interview between Henry and Becket took place at Fretville. The primate re- turned, to be greeted with acclamations by the popu- lace, but with insults and threats of violence from the knights and barons who had divided the archiepiscopal emoluments, and the bishops whom he had excommuni- cated.^ He vainly sought redress from the young king at Woodstock. Inspirited, however, by his popularity with the lower orders, he proceeded to launch excom- munications, not only on the chief offenders, the sacri- legious knights and the contumacious suffragans, but on all such clergy as had been presented to preferment in his diocese during his exile. The leaders of the hostile party sought the king at Bayeux and claimed his pro- tection. Henry's hasty speech, taken too literally by four brutal and obsequious knights, the murder in Can- terbury Cathedral (December 29, 1170), and the subse- quent penitence of the excommunicate king, are familiar to every reader. It remains to notice that the violent death of Becket practically gave the victory to the supporters of clerical prerogative. To clear himself of complicity in the murder, Henry, in the presence of the papal legates, resigned all customs and usages practised in his time to the prejudice of the Church ; and in Decision 1177 he definitely promised the legate Vivian that no question, clerk should be prosecuted in a secular court for any crime, and that no ecclesiastical revenues should be 1 Grim, i. 67 ; Gamier, 121, 86 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Treatment of heresy. The Pub- lican! in England. AD. 1160. detained in the king's hands more than a year. On the other hand, Archbishop Eichard, Beeket's successor, with the view of restoring harmony, conceded to the king the privilege of impeaching offending clerks, and thus removed the only pretext for oppressive legislature. For the rest of his reign Henry appears to have acted towards the Church with justice and wisdom. In the age of which we are treating it was held that the spiritual welfare of the community deserved pro- tection, just as much as its temporal or political welfare. The heretic who propagated his heresy was classed with the murderer and traitor, as an enemy to the State; or, rather, his guilt exceeded theirs in proportion as the soul outvalues the body. This opinion was main- tained and acted upon by both the contending parties in the Eeformation period ; and it was not decidedly discredited till the eighteenth century. In an age in which there was no thought of making punishments other than brutal, the heretic was treated with a severity which excites the compassion of a more en- lightened generation. The reign of Henry 11. presents us with an instance of this forcible suppression of religious error. A company of German heretics, called Publicani, entered England in 1160, under the leader- ship of Walter Gerhard. They denounced the use of all sacraments, and endeavoured to propagate an absurd asceticism, prohibiting marriage and the use of animal food and wine. Having turned a deaf ear to persuasion, they were at last sentenced to be publicly whipped, and as it was ordered that no man should give them entertainment, they were fairly starved out of the country. This is said to be the first occasion when punishment for heretical teaching was lequiied in ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 87 England, and only one instance of the capital punish- chap. ment of heretical or immoral preaching occurs before - — . — the reign of Henry IV. Other nations were not so fortunate in this respect. Heretics Almost every continental state was disturbed during continent, the twelfth century by the preaching of sectaries, who, under the pretext of remedying abuses of religion, propounded new systems in which grotesqueness vied with immorality. In this connection the names of Peter de Bruys, Henry, the founder of the Henricians, Arnold of Brescia, and Tanquelm, a kind of twelfth- century Mormonite, may be mentioned. Usually the founder of the sect contrasted favourably with his followers. The heresiarch, sincerely convinced of his crotchet, inveighed against matrimony or preached polygamy, rejected all dogma or devised new dogma, clamoured to enrich himself with ecclesiastical property, or went naked. The followers were for the most part a worthless rabble, who made the shibboleth of their leader a pretext for the gratification of their own lust and avarice. The most notorious among the sects of this time were the heretical Albigenses of Toulouse, said to be a branch of the Bulgarian Cathari, and the Waldenses, or poor men of Lyons.^ Both these were ' The Albigenses appear to have denied the doctrine of the resurrection, dis- carded all sacraments, and accepted in part the ^Manicbcean teaching- of the Cathari, asserting the existence of two First Causes — one good, one evil. Like some later sects, they used a conscientious scruple against taking oaths as a covert for prevarication. Innocent III. ordered a kind of crusade against the Albigenses and the nobles of France suppressed the sectaries with terrible severity. A few of this persuasion are said to have existed in the sixteenth century and embraced the doctrines of Zuingle. With this sect are often confounded the harmless Waldenses, or poor men of Lyons, who probably derived their origin and name from Peter of Valdum, a town in the marquisate of Lyons. These were a sect of pietists, whose aim it was to prohibit warfare, lawsuits, and all accumulation of wealth. The doctrinal chimeras of the Waldenses are interesting as anticipating those of later sects, and a modern admirer has not unfairly designated them as " premature Protestants." Unable to discern living energy in the religious institutions of 88 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Monasti- cism in the ascendant. A.D. 1176. subjected to persecutions of fearful cruelty, and the Albigensian heresy first suggested to Innocent III. the idea of an inquisitorial commission to take cogni- zance of irreligious teaching. This gave place, under Gregory IX., to the standing tribunal of Dominicans, called the Inquisition. The reigns of Henry II. and his sons illustrate the growing pretensions of the monastic houses and the connivance given to these pretensions by the papal court. The abbots of Malmesbury and S. Augustine's, Canterbury, were encouraged to refuse the oath of canonical obedience to their respective diocesans, and Richard, Archbishop of Canterbury, was impelled to write an indignant remonstrance on this subject to Alexander III. This kind of insubordination was shown in many other monastic centres. The abbots of Battle were in conflict with the bishops of Chi- chester, the abbots of Malmesbury with the bishops of Sarum, the abbots of St. Albans with the bishops of Lincoln. Canterbury, however, was the focus of all monastic pretension. " It seems," writes John of Salisbury, "as if hatred of their archbishops were an inheritance of the monks of Canterbury." Here, in consequence of Lanfranc's transformation of the cathedral chapters, the diocesan was also Abbot of Christ Church. The monks of Christ Church there- fore claimed a voice in the election of the English their day, the Waldenses conjured up an imaginary Apostolic age to disprove the antiquity of such institutions. The ideal Apostolic age was to be created out of such scanty details or indications as could be found in the New Testament, to the exclusion of other sources of information. Such a system has only to be supple- mented by the idea that the New Testament can be interpreted aright by every unlettered pietist, to damage the pedigree and reputation of every doctrine and practice of the Christian religion. The ecclesiastical policy of such bodies is, in fact, a system of negation or "protest" — negation which, as history teaches us, gradually extends, and ends at last in absolute infidelity. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD, 89 primate. Not satisfied witli this claim, they endea- voured to overthrow the concnrrent right vested in the bishops. Baldwin, Eichard's successor, was elected by the bishops, but had to accept a distinct nomination from the monks of Christ Church. This archbishop tried to break the disagreeable connection by erecting a.d. iiss. a new canonical establishment at Hackington. He apparently proposed to transfer the electoral rights to this foundation, by presiding as abbot there instead of at Christ Church. The monks, however, obtained a letter from Pope Urban forbidding the undertaking.^ The archbishop and other prelates protested against this interference of Eome. The monks, however, re- tained their rights, and a subsequent attempt to transfer the primate's abbotship to a new house at Lambeth was stopped in the same way. Disputes of this kind were of frequent occurrence. The The audacity of the regulars may seem to have reached appointed its climax in 1205, when a party at Christ Church ^u 5^205' secretly appointed Reginald, their sub-prior, to the metropolitan see, and sent him to Eome to have his title confirmed before the king or prelates should get wind of the matter. The sub- prior not having scru- pulously observed the oath of secrecy, the monks cancelled this appointment, and consented to elect the king's nominee, John de Grey, Bishop of Norwich. But the sufiragan bishops had not been consulted ; they appealed to the Pope against this second appoint- ment. The dispute ended, as usual, in the establish- ment of a precedent advantageous to Eoman assumjition. The Pope first recommended, and then, by threats of excommunication, forced,^ the monks to accept a third > Gervas, Chron. 1491, 1495, 1496, 1530. * The monks s;ood out boldly for de Grey in the papal presence. Matthew of 90 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. candidate, his own favourite cardinal, Stephen Langton. The new primate was already distinguished as a divine ^ The Pope and a man of letters. He was destined to immortalize appoints . , , . i • i liangton. himself as the champion of the liberties of the English A D 1207. Church and people, the statesman who led the barons to identify their interests with those of the people, and the author of Magna Charta. It need not be said that Innocent III. did not foresee such a career when he appointed Langton to the primacy. John wages John was justly indignant at the papal encroach- thTchurch. uieut ; he unjustly punished the Church for the offence of the unassailable Pontiff. Not content with expell- ing the monks of Christ Church from the kingdom, he vented his hatred of Langton in blind violence towards the whole body of Churchmen, who, with judicious management, might have been induced to side with him against the Pope. He wrote an insolent letter to Innocent, who replied by putting England under an A.D.1S08. interdict. The sufferings of the countiy under this sentence have been exaggerated. Langton contrived to mitigate its severity, and the bishops of Winchester, Durham, Warwick, and other leading Churchmen abso- lutely ignored it. John profited by it, as he expelled many of the clergy who enforced it and pocketed their revenues. Innocent next pronounced the excommuni- cation of John, and (upon his refusing to come to terms with Pandulph, the papal nuncio) his deposition from the throne. Philip of France was charged to invade Paris states that they had been previously bound by oath to the king not to accept any other nominee. Finding themselves between two fires, they preferred the wrath of the temporal to that of the ecclesiastical tyrant. ^ He had been, it seems, president or chancellor of the schools of Paris. He held a prebend at Notre Dame as well as at York Minster. Dean Hook describes him as "profoundly erudite," and "distinguished as a poet, a schoolman, and a Biblical scholar." He had been made cardinal in 1206, and King John had written him a letter of congratulation on this occasion. ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 91 England, and the barons, victimized by John's rapacity chap. and lust, viewed the invasion with indifference. John, ^^_J — ■ now as abject as he had been arrogant, tendered a servile submission to Innocent. By a pact, the disgrace ad. 1213. of which attaches to the barons no less than to the king, England and Ireland ^ were acknowledged to be fiefs of Eome, and the king was pledged to pa}'' the papal suzerain one thousand marks yearly.^ John having also promised to cease his persecution of the clergy, Langton ignored the papal sentences which were still in force, and, on his own responsibility, gave him absolution in Winchester Cathedral. This pro- ceeding gave great offence at Eome ; ^ it was shortly followed by another yet more offensive. Stimulated by the bold example of the Churchmen, and acting under the advice of Stephen Langton, the barons demanded a.d. isis. a formal security for the liberties of all classes, and the king was forced to make the concessions embodied in the Great Charter. But documents which protected tj^q the subject against his lord were as injurious to the offensive Papacy as to the throne now that the Pope was suzerain ^° Rome, of England ; and those clauses which claimed for the Church of England her ancient rights and liberties, and protected her bishoprics from simoniacal appointments,^ were particularly displeasing to such a Pope as Innocent 1 Scotland, in the time of Edward I., followed the example of the sister kingdom. To defeat Edward's pretensions the patriots acknowledged the Pope as their suzerain, and confessed that Scotland had always been a fief of Rome. ' This paj^ment was not abolished till 1366, when Edward III. ordered an in- vestigation of John's conduct, and prelates, peers, and commons unanimously pronounced it illegal, and pledged themselves to support the king in resisting such papal encroachments. ' Innocent, Ep. xvi. 164 ; cf. Ep. xvi. 89. * " I ... in the first place constitute the holy Church of God a free Church, so th£.t I will not sell it nor farm it out, nor will I, on the death oi any archbishop, bishop, or abbot, take anything from the domain of the Church or its people until his successor takes his place." — Charter of Henry I., accepted by John in 1213, and confirmed by Magna Charta. 92 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, CHAP. IV. The cro^vn offered to Xioujs. A.X). 1217. Survey of general history. Innocent III. 1198-1216. III. Eome was henceforth on the king's side. Inno- cent annulled the Charter, excomnmnicated the barons, and pronounced the suspension of Archbishop Langton. These sentences were so far regarded that Langton journeyed to Eome to make remonstrance. Meanwhile, the barons, despairing of obtaining redress from such a king as Innocent's " well-beloved son in Christ, John the Illustrious," offered the crown to Louis, the eldest son of Philip of France, and in defiance of papal threats, that prince landed on the I^5le of Thanet. The opportune deaths of John and Innocent extricated public affairs from a state of hopeless confusion. Langton returned unforgiven to confirm the Charter in the name of the boy-king Henry ; Louis retired defeated by land and sea ; the papal sentences were unheeded, and Langton actually wrested from Eome a promise that as long as he lived no legate should be sent into England. This period begins with the great Hildebrand — it closes with the death of a pontiff of more extravagant pretensions and less respectable motives. Under Inno- cent III. the Papacy attained its acme of aggrandize- ment. The princes of Europe marched by his orders against the wretched heretics of Southern France; the powerful Philip Augustus of France and the weak John of England alike succumbed before him. The mendicant orders and the Inquisition — two in- fluences of paramount importance in the Church history of after years — originate in this pontificate. The Greek Church acknowledged Innocent's su- premacy, and its prelates attended at the fourth Lateran Council (1215), where seventy canons were passed by the Pope on his own authority. The most noticeable of these canons are those which assert the ANGLO-NORMAN PERIOD. 93 dogma of transubstantiation, and declare that princes chap. are obliged to clear their dominions of heresy under . ^^- pain of excommunication and deposition. In the very- grandeur of such Popes as Innocent III. lay the greatest danger to the papal power. The pretensions bequeathed by Innocent harmonized ill with the weak or contemptible characters of his successors, and the contrast suggested revolt. Kor did it escape notice that when papal assumption was backed up, as in Innocent's case, by real strength of character, the Hilde- brandine ideal of a universal arbiter was so far from being realized that the Pope's influence was usually on the side of tyranny and oppression. " Woe unto him that justifieth the wicked for a reward," said the barons as they read the papal letter which denounced the Charter. Already the legitimacy of the misused prerogatives was matter of question, and men were heard to argue that "the ordering of secular matters appertaineth not to the Pope." v Circumstances soon changed such chance expressions of discontent to an open policy of resistance, speaking through statutes of unequivocal import. 94 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTEE Y. A.D. 1200-1300. struggle for "constitutional government — Guided by great Churchmen — Convoca- tion established — Convocation not distinct from Parliament for a time — Its constitution — The Church harassed by Pope and king — Grosseteste the Church's protector — Edward resists the Pope, but persecutes the clergy — " Statute of Mortmain " —The universities supplant the monasteries — The statute "Circum- specte Agatis" — Edward's collision with Wiiichelsey — Decline of the Papacy — Boniface VIII. — Papal encroachments resisted —Moral influence of Church waning— Statesmen bishops— Clergy and monks — Errors in doctrine and practice — Revival of religion by the preaching friars— Their success in England — They become demoralized — The friars at the universities — The friars and papal malpractices— Indulgences. The reign of Henry III. is marked by a continued struggle of the baronage, now thoroughly identified with the insular population, against arbitrary govern- ment on the part of the king. From this struggle there emerges a constitutional government in which the factors are the three estates of clergy, lords, and commons. The pretensions of the throne were still supported by Eome, for the most conspicuous feature in the policy of Henry III. was his devotion to the Papacy. The clergj^ continue to head the party of resistance. They protect themselves against king and Pope by conciliar action, involving the adoption of a representative system. Thus is established a precedent for Parliaments including burghers as well as knights of shires. The thirteenth century, according to Professor Stubbs, is " the golden age of English Churchmanship. THE 12>TH CENTURY. 95 The age tliat produced one Simon among the earls produced among the bishops Stephen Langton, S. Edmund, Grosseteste, and the Cantilupes. The Charter of Eunnymede was drawn in Langton's age ; Grosseteste was the friend and adviser of the constitutional oppo- sition ; Berksted, the episcopal member of the electoral triumvirate, was the pupil of S. Eichard of Chichester; S. Edmund of Canterbury was the adviser who com- pelled the first banishment of the aliens ; S. Thomas of Cantilupe, the last canonized Englishman, was the chancellor of the baronial regency." The great states- men, patriots, judges, and lawyers were in fact, now Gmdedby and for years afterwards, clerks in Holy Orders.^ And churcii- if we except the foreigners foisted into benefices by the ^^^' king or the Pope, the leading Churchmen gave unani- mous adhesion to the party which elamoured for constitutional government. During this struggle, how- ever, the difi'erence between the lay and the clerical status was emphasized, the clergy being now subjected to new exactions, which did not press upon the laity, by the substitution of taxation of spiritual revenues for that of land. When King John proposed in 1207 to inflict a charge of this nature, it was resisted as without precedent. The attempt was repeated shortly afterwards by the Pope. Gradually this sj'^stem of taxation became established, and the clergy were henceforth convened in distinct assemblies for purposes of taxation. It was thus that " the clerical estate worked out an organization as an estate of the realm, asserting and possessing deliberative, legislative, and 1 Dean Hook enumerates the following offices as filled by clergymen in the reign of Edward III. : Lord High Chancellor, Keeper of the Privy Seal, Master of the Rolls, Master of Chancery, Chief Chamberlain of the Exchequer, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Clerk of the Privy Seal, Treasurer of the King's House, Master of the King's Wardrobe, etc. 96 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Convoca- tion not distinct from Par- liament for a time. Its consti- tution. A. T). 1283. taxing powers." This, in fact, is the origin of Con- vocation, the Church's tax-paying agency until the year 1664, and her administrative agency — in theory at least — until 1717, and tolerated since the year 1854 as a debating society. The history of Convocation is, however, at this time so mixed up with that of Parliament that it is hard sometimes to distinguish the lay from the clerical convention. Sometimes a Parliament included not only the bishops and priors, but archdeacons and deacons. In the Parliaments summoned by Henry in 1265 and 1282 were proctors for cathedral chapters. In 1295 Edward held a mixed assembly, in which the Church- men were represented by the same procuratorial arrange- ment as had been established for the province of Canterbury. During this latter reign, however, the clerical element plainly severs itself from the lay ; the summons to Parliament ^ is sent only to the bishops and a limited^ number of abbots and priors, and it is in Convocation that the clergy tax themselves. The abbots and priois retained their seats up to the time of the dissolution of the monasteries (1538). The arrangement by which the clergy are still represented in the Canterbury Convocation dates from 1283, when Peckham was primate. With the bishops, abbots, priors, deans, and archdeacons, there are two proctors for the clergy of each diocese, and one for each cathedral chapter. The arrangement for the Convocation of York is one in which the parochial clergy are more 1 From the year 1314 to the year 1340 the clerical proctors were summoned to Parliament. After 1340 their attendance in Parliament was rarely insisted on. After the beginning of the fifteenth century they appear to have ceased attendance. "■ About thirty or forty, according to Palgrave. This number, with the episco- pate, was sufficient to give the lords spiritual a majority in the Upper House, where all measures were at this time initiated. THE 12>TH CENTURY. 97 fairly represented, two proctors being sent for eacli archdeaconry. This rule dates at least as far back as 1279. That two provincial synods were established rather than one national Convocation is explained by the jealous assertions of independence to which the northern metropolitans were addicted. The union of the two sj^nods, one of the many wise reforms con- templated by Wolsey, will doubtless be effected when the Church recovers full liberty of action. It was not till 1307 that any anti-Eoman legislation Tiie church was initiated by the Crown, and it would be hard to by^pope say whether the clergy in the thirteenth century ^^^ ^^^" suffered more from the Pope or from the king. The bold patriotism of Langton protected his brethren from exactions during his own lifetime. His demise (1228) was at once followed by a papal demand for a tenth of movables to prosecute the war against the emperor. The clergy vainly endeavoured to resist this demand. The king and the papal legate pulled together: the former lavished his patronage on Bretons and Pro- vengals, the latter gave the English benefices to Italians. These foreigners, in most cases, resided w^holly abroad. Already a claim had been made by Gregory IX. to two prebends in every cathedral and the allowance of two monks in each monastery. The patrons of livings were particularly aggrieved by the practices known as " provision " and " reservation." By " pro- vision " a living not yet vacant was provided with its future incumbent by the Pope. " Reservation " gave un- limited facility for such provision, it being a claim on the part of the Pope to reserve to himself any benefice he desired. It was an evil time for all but favourites of the Pope and the king. The patronage of churches was usurped to the detriment of private patrons; the H 98 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CFiAP. appointments to bishoprics were made without regard — ^ — to the electoral rights of chapters; episcopal right of institution was ignored. Edmund Eich, the primate, though himself a papal nominee, protested against Pope A.D. 1240. and king, till sheer despair drove him from his post to die in peace abroad. At the Council of Lyons in 1245, Eoger Bigod and others, as deputies for the realm of England, vainly demanded a relaxation of the " execrable extortions " of the Pope, by which it was said sixty thousand marks a year passed from the Eng- lish Church into Italy. At a Parliament at Westminster in 1246, a list of grievances was drawn up and sent with special letters to the Pope, by each of the great bodies present, " the king, the bishops, the abbots, the earls, with the whole baronage, clergy, and people." Pope Innocent IV. appears to have answered haughtily, counselling Henry to take warning from the fate of the deposed Emperor Frederic. The king succumbed, and the clergy were harassed with fresh exactions. Grosseteste King and Pope found a resolute opponent of tyranny chvirch's in Eobort Grosseteste, the guiding mind of Simon de Montfort's party, who became Bishop of Lincoln in 1235. Although Grosseteste denounced the Papacy as anti-Christian-^ on his death-bed, we should err in attributing his protests to doctrinal considerations. Due allegiance to Eome as the centre of Christendom he at least allowed ; but the avarice and ambition of the pontiffs Grosseteste was prepared to resist as emphatically as he did the arbitrary rule of the English king. When Innocent IV. nominated an infant nephew 1 Or rather perhaps an individual Pope as an Antichrist. The special e\ils denounced by Grosseteste were abuse of indulgences, maladministration of patro- nage, employment of clergy in secular business, subjection of clergy to secular tribunals, and clerical marriages. protector. THE i^TH CENTURY. 99 to a canonry at Lincoln,^ Grosseteste made a bold and chap. successful resistance to the appointment. With similar . \^ spirit he joined the committee of twelve, representing the three estates of prelates, earls, and barons, who refused to yield to Henry's demand for fresh subsidies a.d. 1244. unless the Charter should be confirmed and a Council appointed. Grosseteste on this occasion emphatically declined to respect a papal letter ordering the bishops to vote the subsidy. He wisely refused to hear of any severance of the clerical and lay interests in the treatment of this question. Grosseteste caused some sensation by preaching at Lyons ^ against the corrup- tions of the papal court in 1252. On one occasion he successfully combated the attempts of the monks of Canterbury to meddle in his diocese when the archiepis- copal see was vacant. Matthew of Paris describes how Grosseteste was once requested by Archbishox^ Boniface to examine a royal favourite who was about to be pre- sented to the see of Chichester. He complied, and set the king's nominee aside on the score of ignorance. Equally conscientious was the patriot bishop in his enforcement of discipline and reform of manners among the clergy of his diocese. He was a warm supporter of the mendicant movement, which exercised as yet a beneficial influence in the country, and he employed the friars largely in his diocese. One of his last acts was to procure a bull from Innocent sanctioning a visitation of the religious houses. The reia-n of Edward L, although it did little to Edward o ° resists the lighten the burdens of the clergy, was really favourable Pope, but . .,.'., 1 persecutes to their interests m causing alienation between the two theciergy. i See Grosseteste, Epp., ed. Luard, 18Y ; Pegge's Life, 295. * For this sermon, of which copies were given to the Pope and cardinals, see Brown's Fasciculus, ii. 250, seqq. 100 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. AD. 1273. " Statute of Mort- main." A.D. 1279. authors of oppression. This reign introduced a decided tendency to isolate England from all continental in- fluences. Hence emanated the idea of an independent national Church, finally realized under Henry VIIT. Eichard I. had acknowledged the emperor as his suzerain ; John and Henry had been vassals of the Pope ; Edward, though usually dutiful to Eome, dis- tinctly declared that his realm was independent of all foreign sovereignties. His reign produced measures directly detrimental to the papal pretensions, but indirectly also compromising the liberties of the clerical estate. Archbishop Peckham had signalized the first year of his primacy by a bold attempt to maintain the doctrine of the charters. In a Council held at Eeading in August, 1279, he issued articles to the clergy, charging them to explain to their parishioners the sentence of excommunication prescribed against such as violated Magna Charta and such as obtained royal writs to obstruct ecclesiastical suits. Peckham was compelled by the king to renounce these articles. It was perhaps to retaliate on Peckham, as well as to stay the growth of the regular or monastic system, that the celebrated " De Eeligiosis " was passed in the same year. This Act, commonly called the " Statute of Mortmain," had been devised by Burnell, Bishop of Bath, Edward's chancellor. Its aim, as that of the subsequent " Quia Emptores " (1290), was to prevent damage to superior lords by transfer of property. A large proportion of property was at this time in the hands of the monastic corporations, and was conse- quently exempt from rendering knight service, from reliefs upon succession, and from other feudal imposts. Such unprofitable propert}^ was said to be in mortmain, or in dead hands, since as far as the superior lord was THE i^TH CENTURY. loi concerned the holders mi2;ht as well be dead. The " De chap. y, Eeligiosis " prohibited for the future such detrimental transfers. Henceforth all lands bestowed on persons or institutions incapable of fulfilling the legal obliga- tions were to be forfeited to the immediate lord, or ultimately to the Crown. One important result of the " De Eeligiosis " statute was the impulse given to the university system. Henceforth the charitable were Theum- , PI • versities induced to bequeath their money for the maintenance supplant of poor scholars at the universities, rather than for teries. the foundation of monastic houses. The number of monasteries founded in the fourteenth century is small when compared with the long list of those which date from the Anglo-Norman reigns. It appears indeed that more religious houses were founded in the single reign of Henry III. than in the two hundred years which separated Edward from Henry VIII. By the The statute " Circumspecte Agatis," passed in 1285, the "circum- protracted contest as to the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical Agatfs." courts was decided. The statute recognized the rights ^'^' ^^^^' of the courts to hold pleas on subjects purely spiritual, i.e. tithes, mortuaries, churches, churchj^ards ; and offences for which penance was due, to wit, injuries done to clerks, perjury, and defamation. On more than one occasion Edward adopted towards the clergy a policy of high-handed tyranny. In 129-1:, when war with France was decided upon in Parliament, the king seized the treasures in the sacristies of monasteries and cathedrals, and proceeded to demand from the clergy a half of their revenues. The claim had to be granted ; and it was in vain that the clerical representatives petitioned for a set-off in the repeal of the " De Eeligiosis" statute. In 1296, the demand for subsidies was repeated. But Pope Boniface VIII. had I02 ' ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. just issued tlie bull " Clericis Laicos,"^ forliidcling the clergy to pay contributions, taxes, tenths, hundredths, etc., to the secular powers. Archbishop Winchelsey rashly made this bull the pretext for a clerical de- murrer to the king's demand. Edward at once put the clergy out of royal protection, and proceeded to seize their chattels. Some came to terms with the king by private compacts ; others were despoiled per- force. The archbishop persisted in a policy of resist- ance, and appears to have himself escaped spoliation. Edward as yet could not afford to lose his friendship, and therefore contrived to effect a reconciliation, recline of A. courso of lecj-islation directly hostile to Eome the Papacy. ^, '' was rendered possible by the collapse of the pre- sumptuous Boniface, and the consequent subjection of Boniface the Papacy to France. Unworthy to be compared with Gregory VII. and Innocent III. in character or ability, Boniface YIIL (1294-1303) outdid these great Popes in his preposterous exaltation of the Roman over the temporal courts. The bull " Clericis Laicos," which anathematized all princes who should impose taxes on the clergy, has been already mentioned. The more celebrated " Unam Sanctam " announced that S. Peter's successor inherited the " two swords " of spiri- tual and temporal supremacy, and that submission to the Pope was absolutely necessary to salvation. But Boniface VIII. vainly tried to master Philip the Fair as Innocent III. had mastered John. The contest ended in the capture and ignominious treatment of the pontiff, who, driven to despair, committed suicide. With Boniface VIII. there passed away not only the 1 This bull appears to have been specially aimed at Edward and Philip of France. It pronounces excommunication ipso facto on those who paj' or promise, as well as on those who demand contributions. THE \ZTH CENTURY. 103 political pretensions of the Papacy, but, for a time at least, its very independence. Clement V., a tool of the French king, retired to Avignon. A period of dis- graceful subservience to France ensued, known as the Seventy Years' Captivity (1309-1378). The tendency to resist papal encroachment was Papai • again illustrated in England by the affair of William ments de Gainsborough. This ecclesiastic, on his promotion '^^^^^^^ to the see of Worcester, unadvisedly accepted a papal bull investing him with the temporalities of the see, as well as with spiritual jurisdiction. He was punished with a fine, and was compelled to acknowledge the king's power over the temporalities (1302). About the same time a subject who had procured a bull of ex- communication from Eome against his adversary was declared guilty of treason, and narrowly escaped hang- ing. In 1307, the Parliament held at Carlisle passed an Act forbidding the payment of tallages on monastic property, and other imposts by which money was taken out of England. At this Parliament a petition from certain of the laity was presented, praying for legislation to restrain exactions and abuses con- nected with papal pretensions, viz. " provisions," pro- motion of aliens, diversion of monastic revenues, reservation of first-fruits, and Peter's pence. The Parliament drew up a remonstrance, but took no further measures. The king's death shortly followed, and anti-papal legislation was deferred till the reign of Edward III. It is not surprising to find that during the thirteenth Moral century the Papacy was fast waning in repute — the o^chm-ch pontiff being regarded by many as nothing more than "wa,ning. a foreiorn extortioner — nor that the whole Church was infected with the vices sanctioned by its head. I04 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. QIIS.V. -^ state of spiritual decadence prevailed during this ^'- and the succeeding century, against which the clergy- did not even attempt to contend. We have noticed the important part played by the English clergy in the politics of the day. Work of this kind monopo- lized the attention of the leading Churchmen. They were usually the only persons of sufficient education to shine as lawyers, statesmen, leaders of party, and legislators ; to these, rather than to clerical em23loy- ments, they devoted themselves. The larger benefices were therefore wholly neglected, and the duties of diocesans, where performed at all, were i)erformed by bishops in partihus,^ or by stray bishops from Ireland and the Continent. The Tudor practice of rewarding court favourites with livings was already foreshadowed by the anomaly of an episcopate and priesthood whose best members were paid with Church revenues for serving the State. Between the incomes of these prelates and the working clerg}^ there was a shameful disproportion. Poverty impelled the latter to eke out a livelihood as physicians, surgeons, or ecclesiastical lawyers. In the latter profession there appear to have been temptations to venality and peculation, and petty trickery. As Dean Hook points out, a clergyman thus employed lowered himself in public estimation, if not in fact, to the level of a modern pettifogging attorney. From the ciersy and regulars the spiritual welfare of society received little monks. ^^ ^^ Consideration, though the religious houses con- tained many persons in holy Orders. The great > Of these there was apparently a sufficiency. Piers Ploughman sarcastically marvels that Mahometanism is not extinct : " So many prelates to preche, As the Pope maketh, Of Nazareth, of Nynyve, Of Neptalym, of Damaske." Vis ton XV. THE \ZTH CENTURY, 105 monastic officials took as active a j^art in politics as the bishops ; the subordinate brethren went through a routine of religious services, and spent the rest of their time in school teaching, in agriculture, and in literar}'' pursuits. The literary pursuits were, of course, con- ceived to be idleness by the unlettered opponents of monasticism ; but the fundamental evil in the monkish system was not idleness, but selfishness. The maxim of the regular was self-preservation. He had chosen the monastic life as securing himself against damnation. Zeal for the souls of the worldly outside the monastery walls was no part of his Christianity. Hence the cure of souls in benefices possessed by regulars was the monopoly of an ill-paid vicar, the proceeds of the living being chiefly devoted to the maintenance and aggran- dizement of the monastery. Meantime, it will be remembered, the spiritual life of Christendom was being sapped by the prevalence of superstition and by the exaltation of a religion of formalism. The Holy Com- Errors in p I . . 1 doctrine munion, as the dogma 01 transubstantiation won general and credence, became a priestly sacrifice and nothing more. ^^^^ ^^^' l^he congregation attended not as communicants, but as spectators. Commemoration of Christian sanctity took the form of a superstitious respect for saintly relics, and these were, of course, multiplied by the clergy. AVhile these and other superstitions did much to obscure the light of the Gospel, the indiscriminate use of indulgences threatened to exclude even the light of conscience. Penance was fast degenerating into something very like a formal barter for licence to commit sin. The deerenerate condition of the Church had roused E-evivaiof " ^ , ^ , religion by the zeal of the begging friars early in the thirteenth the preach- . , ., , ,1 T I 11 , ing friars. century. At its outset the " mendicant movement io6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. may be fairly regarded as an ebullition of genuine Christian enthusiasm. It was a " revival," akin in many respects to that initiated by the Methodists in the eighteenth century. If erroneous in some of their doctrinal tenets, the friars nevertheless possessed the essential traits of the successful missionary — con- viction of the Gospel's claims, self-denial, fervent zeal, Christian sympathy, and that peculiar rhetorical power which moves the illiterate masses. In the history of such movements it usually appears that unpopularity is the measure of usefulness, and that success is ever accompanied by moral depreciation. Impulses of this nature are, in fact, curative or antagonistic, and for that reason cannot be permanent. When recognized by the world as commendable or even tolerable, it is because they have done their work and are become effete, or are sacrificing principle and drifting to hypocrisy. The mendicant Orders became one of the most per- nicious influences of their age. They nevertheless make their first appearance as guilds of unexampled austerity and great usefulness. The origin of these Orders may be traced to the Spanish zealot, Dominic de Guzman, who, under the patronage of Innocent III., A.D. 1216. foi'ined an itinerant guild of " friars preachers " to cope with the Albigenses of Southern France. Dominic's plan was to enlist on behalf of Catholic dogma agencies hitherto monopolized by the sectaries : " Zeal must be met by zeal, lowliness by lowliness, false sanctity with real sanctity, preaching lies by preaching truth." Nearly at the same time the enthusiast Francis of Assisi sent out a band of friars, who were to preach the Gospel to the poor in apostolic simplicity. The " Friars Minorite," as the Franciscans in their humility called themselves, were obliged to resign all woiidl}'' THE izTH CENTURY. 107 possessions, and to depend on alms for subsistence, chap. Tins rule was afterwards adopted by the other Orders .^^ of friars. The extraordinary assumptions of S. Francis, whose zeal gradually degenerated into religious mania, gave the Order which bore bis name a special popu- larity. In the year 1219 the delegates to the General Chapter of Franciscans nnmbered five thousand. The Dominicans — here called Black Friars, and in France known as Jacobins — entered England about the year 1221. They received encouragement from Ste^Dhen Langton, then primate. The Franciscans followed in 1224. Several years later came the other two preach- ing Orders, the Carmelites or White Friars, and the Austin Friars or Augustinians.^ That the mendicant mission infused new life into Their ' SU.CCGSS in the Church of England appears undeniable. With it England. came a system of evangelizing unknown to the ad. parochial clergy. The preaching friars penetrated into places where the parish priest was never seen — the lazar house, the hospital, the foul courts and alleys of towns and cities, ignorant of learned phraseology (the Dominican was not even allowed to possess a book), the friars spoke as from heart to heart, relying on their own enthusiasm, their knowledge of human nature, and some pretence to medicinal skill. The statesman bishop, the mass priest with his perfunctory routine of duty, the clerical summoner with his lawyer's appetites, compared badly with the new preaching brothers. They soon enlisted the sympathy of the higher classes, and from the streets and hedges passed into castles and palaces. Men of wealth were induced ^ The brotherhoods professing the rule of S. Augustine were united in one guild by Pope Alexander IV, in 1256. The guUd was converted into a preaching fraternity. , io8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. V. The friars at the universi- ties. to leave them, bequests. That they might enjoy these Gregory IX. published a bull relaxing their rule of poverty. In 1245 Innocent IV. cancelled this restric- tion altogether, claiming however that all property of mendicant brotherhoods should be subject to the disposal of the papal see. In 1259 Matthew Paris, the Benedictine chi^onicler, describes the magnificent buildings reared by the Franciscans and Dominicans, and sneers at their change of principle.-^ The sequel might have been anticipated. The friars became greedy bequest-hunters ; their zeal for religious reform spent itself in abuse of the parish priests, and in defence of every papal encroachment on the Church. In their wake came a mob of sturdy vagrants, wdiose friar's cowl betokened nothing but a desire to live without working. Seldom has the irony of fate made practice so inconsistent with principles. From " having nothing " — in the words of the popular taunt — the friars had come to " possess all things ; " beginning as religious enthusiasts who despised book learning, they were noted ere the close of the century as the most pedantic of hair-splitting controversialists. The universities, which had now ousted the monastic and cathedral schools, rang with the endless disputes of Franciscan and Dominican. The mention of the universities leads us to say a few words on the course of study at this time fashionable. In the twelfth century the studies of canon law and scholastic theology had been added to the ordinary educational curriculum, which had hitherto comjDrised only the " trivium " and " quadrivium." " Scholastic 1 Matt. Paris, 612. 2 The trivium included grammar, logic, and rhetoric ; the quadrivium, arith- metic, geometry, music, and astronomy. THE \ZTH CENTURY. 109 theology, however, had degenerated since the days of Lanfranc and Anselm. Its professors now confined themselves to wearisome expositions of Peter Lombard, the high authority who had published the four "books of sentences." Under the influence of the friars in the thirteenth century, the system underwent another change — we can hardly say for the better. The works of Aiistotle had lately risen to extraordinary favour, and had been translated and circulated under the patronage of Frederic II. A miserable combination of Aristotle and Christian theology succeeded the expo- sitions of the Sententiarii, and a meagre system of philosophizing was thus introduced at the universities, to the utter exclusion of originality and critical inves- tigation. The most eminent professors of the new scholastic theology — Alexander Hales, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotns — belonged to the two great brotherhoods. Inimical as the mendicant fra- ternities were to the parish priests, their invasion of the universities^ was succeeded by yet fiercer antago- nism among themselves. The Franciscans were Realists, the Dominicans Nominalists : the former magnified, the latter disparaged, the power of Free Will; the one part}'' taught the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, the other denied it. On account of these differences the universities were in a continual state of turmoil. In 1370 the satirist who wrote "Piers Plough- man's Creed " could show how the essential in religion witli each Order was that no other Order should be credited. The mendicant friars did as much to strengthen the The fri 1 The Franciscans prpponderated at Oxford, the Dominicans at Paris. Some of the greatest schoolmen were educated at Oxford, t.g. Alexander Hales, Duns Scotus, Occam, and Bradwardine. no ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. V. and papal mal- practices. Indulg-- ences. worst influences of the Papacy as to impair the dignity of the English clergy. These loyal servants of Rome were exempt from episcopal jurisdiction ; they were not amenable to ecclesiastical courts, and they could give absolution in every parish. More pernicious still was their connection with the traffic in indulgences. The growth of this practice, now sanctioned by authority and destined to become the darkest blot in the mediaeval system, deserves the reader's attention. We have shown how, in Anglo-Saxon times, elaborate penitential systems testified to the Church's anxiety that the repentant should give practical proof of their sincerity before restoration to Christian privileges. It was not un- common in that period to prescribe a pilgrimage as a form of penance. In the twelfth century enlistment in the Crusades took the place of the ordinary pilgrimage. Next, men were taught that a papal absolution insured the soldier who fell in this holy cause against future consequences of sin. Payment to the cause was frequently accepted in lieu of actual service. The transition to a s}stematic sale of indulgences was made easier by the invention of the doctrine of " super- abundant merit." Saintly excess of righteousness, it was taught, formed a treasury upon which the Church could draw for the benefit of her living members. The year 1300 — that of Boniface's jubilee — witnessed an oifer of indulgences of " extraordinary fulness " to all persons who should visit Eome. The enormous wealth accruing to the papal chest on this occasion perhaps suggested a further pervei sion. Papal hawkers, known as qucBstionarii or pardoners, were employed to sell indulgences to all applicants. This degrading employ- ment became the monopoly of the Dominicans. The student will remember that it was the spectacle of a V. THE \yrH CENTURY, in Dominican hawking pardons that first revealed to chap. Luther the corrupt condition of the Church. The same sight had, however, roused the indignation of honest and intelligent Christians in every country a century before the time of Luther. In the next chapter it will be shown how the Lollard anarchists prevented such feelings from ripening into a reformatory move- ment. 112 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Hilde- brand's theory- shattered. CHAPTEE VI. ^I^f dFourtccnt!) ant) iFiftccntl) ©enturic^. A.D. 1300-1499. Hildebrand's theory shattered — Doubtful limits of papal authority — Instances — (1) Usurpation of patronage — The metropolitan sees — The suffragan sees — " Statute of Provisors" — (2) Invasion of the king's rights — Praemunire statutes — (3) Pecuniary exactions— Reformers — John Wyclif — His life — His religious system — Dangerous principles— Reform consequently impeded— Other reformers abroad — Legislation against Lollardy — Its aristocratic champion, Oldcastle — Wyclifs Bible suppressed — Bishop Pecock — Reforming movement on Church principles — The Councils — Reforming ecclesiastics — Hopeless condition of the Church — The New Learning. In England, more than other countries, the prestige of the Papacy was lowered by the migration to Avignon. The glory of St. Peter's chair was dimmed, indeed, in the eyes of Englishmen when the Pop6 became the puppet of the dynasty which had experienced a Crecy and Poitiers. After 1 332 the yearly payment to which John had pledged himself and his successors remained in arrear. To send such payment was virtually to subsidize a country at war with England. Urban Y.'s demand for this tribute in 1366 was met with a declaration from all estates of the realm that Kins: John had acted unconstitutionally, and it was unani- mously determined to resist all such papal claims for the future. Never again did England acknowledge the theory of Ilildebrand. How quickly the feudal relation to Rome was forgotten is shown by the language of the articles of complaint against King THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 113 Richard in 1399. The Parliament gravely declared chap. that Eichard's appeal to Eome for corroboration of ^]- _ . statutes was culpable, because the crown of the realm and the realm itself had been " in all time past so free, that neither the pontiff nor any other person outside the realm has a right to meddle with the same." On the other hand, the papal claim to spiritual Doubtful n T ' , -I -r, limits of supremacy was universally admitted, it was no easy papal matter to define in what way this prerogative could be ^^ °" ^' recognized without intrusion on temporal interests. From the time of the collapse of the old Hildebrandine theory the mutual relations of England and the Papacy become complicated and difScult to analyze. The best method, perhaps, of realizing these relations in the period before us is to trace out the history of some of the more prominent papal prerogatives. It will be seen, on the one hand, that the legislation of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries armed the nation with statutes emphatically condemning papal usurpation. On the other hand, it appears that the connivance of the sovereign usually enabled the Popes to go on acting in defiance of these statutes, especially when the clergy were to be victimized. Theory and practice were thus at issue, and so remained until the Eeformation. One of the most baneful practices of the time was instances- papal usurpation of patronage. The claim to appoint tionof to suffragan sees was based upon the old papal pre- p^^^°^^s'®- rogative of taking part in the appointment of a metropolitan. The practice of applying to Eome for the pall has been frequently mentioned. As early as the late Saxon period the pall was deemed essential to the office of a metropolitan. Besides having to pro- The metro- cure the pall from Eome, the mediaeval archbishops sees. were more or less pledged to allegiance by the fact I 114 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, of their being lecjaii nail or ex-officio legates. Arcli- _2il_ bishop Langton secured the title legatus natiis for Canterbury, with the object of protecting the Church from the foreign representatives of Kome. But this appears to have been a short-sighted policy. The legatine oflSce of the archbishop strengthened the papal pretension that all bishops were servants of Rome, without at all precluding the mission of foreign legates ^ — legates a latere — when the Pope was powerful enough to send them. The ex-officio legation of the English primate dates from 1221. A hundred and thirty years later York secured the same doubtful honour at the instance of Archbishop Thoresby. All his successors in the northern primacy down to the Eeformation period received the legatine commission and the pall. Lang- ton's primacy introduced another and a more serious innovation. Hitherto the election of the metropolitan was conducted in England ; the archbishop elect went to Eome for formal confirmation of his title. But Langton's case gave a precedent for the mission of an English primate from Eome without consent of king, bishops, or chapters. Edmund was appointed in 1234 in the same way as Langton. So, too, Kirkwardby in 1273, and Peckham in 1279. It was by pajDal "reser- vation" of the metropolitan see that Eeynolds was appointed in 1313. Thesuffra- With rcspcct to the suffragan sees, few attempts at papal interference are heard of until the thirteenth century. After the settlement of the "investiture" 1 Who claimed to be superior to the resident legates. Of such legates Mr. Stubbs instances in the thirteenth century "Otho and Olhobon, and that cardinal Guy Foulquois, who assisted Henry HI. against Simon de Moiitfort. Their visits were either prompted by the king when he wanted support against the nation, or were forced on king and nation alike by the necessities of foreign politics." — Const. Hist., iii. p. 300. g-an sees. YI. THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 115 controversy the chapters again enjoyed the right of chap. free election, subject to the royal license and approval, which (according to the charter ceded to the bishops by John) were not to be withheld without due cause. The chapter elected ; the archbishop confirmed the elec- tion and gave consecration; the Crown licensed and gave the temporalities in exchange for a promise of fealty. The Pope only intervened when these several prerogatives could not be exercised harmoniously. But this contingency was of frequent occurrence in the reign of Henry III., and from being an arbitrator in numerous disputed elections, the Poj)e became sole elector. Between 1215 and 126-i thirty disputed elections were referred to the papal tribunal. One of these at least — an election to the vacant see of Winchester in 1262 — was settled offhand by the Pope putting in his own nominee. This plan had been already adopted by Innocent III. and Gregoiy IX., and the precedent was soon established in such a w^ay as to extinguish the elective rights of the chapters. This papal prerogative was strengthened by the prevalent belief that no bishop could be translated ^ without papal sanction. Besides promoting the bishop translated, the Pope put forward a claim to fill up the see vacated by his translation. This claim established, a more general invasion of the rights of the chapters was easy. The claim to " provision " and " reservation " had been recognized since 1226^ for minor pieces of preferment, the fourteenth century witnessed the extension of the same system to the bishoprics. Between 1317 and ' The practice of translating appears to have been rare hitherto. ° In this year the pupal envoj', Otho, came to England and claimed for the Pope two prebends in each catliedral church. The claim was resisted. But subsequent Popes extended this kind of usurpation, even to livings in private patronage. ii6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. "Statute of Pro vi- sors." AD. 1351. A.D. 1417. (2) Invasion of the king's rights. 1334 seYenteen appointments to bishoprics were "re- served," and the practice continued unchecked till 1350. In some cases the Pope appointed a person recommended by the king, but the rights of the cathedral chapters were usually quietly ignored. The celebrated " Statute of Pro visors " (1351), which made all persons receiving papal provisions liable to imprisonment,^ really did nothing to restore these rights, and little to put down papal intrusion. The king and the Pope came to an understanding. The former asked the latter to give provision to his nominee, and this nominee was sent to the chapter for acceptance. Matters were not much more satisfactory under Eichard IL, despite more Statutes of Provisors and Praemunire. Henry V., however, restored to the chapters the right of election ; and while the Papacy was itself contested, it was not difficult for the arch- bishop to exercise his ancient right of confirming the appointments. When Martin V. made good his claim, the abuse revived. Thirteen bishops were " provided " in two years, and Archbishop Chicheley was threatened with deprivation for not securing the repeal of the prohibitive statutes.^ The reign of Henry YI. was a signal era of papal aggress^ion. Under Henry YII. and Henry VIII., however, roj^al nominees appear to have usually secured the appointments. The statutes which defended the king's rights gene- rally against all manner of papal encroachments were not much more effective than those v/hich j)rohibited 1 25 Edw. 111. Stat. iv. This statute also provided that all preferments to which the Pope should venture to appoint should be forfeited for that turn to the king. " " The execrable statute of prjemunire " was the special bugbear of Pope Martin. " By this," he writes, " the King of England assumes the spiritual juris- diction, and governs the Church as completely in ecclesiastical affairs as if he had been constituted by Christ His vicar." THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 117 usurpation of patronage. The great " Statute of Free- chap. munire " — tliat of 1393 — had been anticipated by similar _1L— measures in 1353 and 1365.^ That of 1365 was a Prseimmire . , statutes. distinct appeal against papal encroachment on the rights of the Crown, and was followed up in the next year by the repudiation of the national tribute to Eome. The term " Praemunire " is taken from the terms in which the writ against offenders was couched — ^' prcemunire facias,'^ etc. In the statute of 1393 it is enacted that " whoever procures at Eome or elsewhere any translations, processes, bulls, instruments, or other things which touch the king, against him, his crown, and realm . . . shall be put out of the king's pro- tection, their lands and goods forfeited to the king's use." This statute was a response on the part of the king to a pajDal bull which prohibited bishops from executing the sentences of the royal courts in suits relating to patronage. Collusion between the Crown and the Papacy usually prevented its operation in the fifteenth century. In the sixteenth it was most un- fairly made use of by Henry VIII. for the destruction of Wolsey. Besides the invasion of patronage and jurisdiction, (3)Pecu- the pecuniary exactions of the Papacy constituted a exactions, grievance of most serious character. Despite the pro- hibition of 1366, Eome continued to gather an enormous tribute from England. Besides first-fruits and pay- ments for bulls and dispensations, there were continual demands for subsidies for special purposes, as, e.g., for crusades against the Turks or heretics. An official collector was established in England to gather in these 1 That of 1353 is simply directed against those who "annul judgments in the king's courts " by taking their suits abroad. The court of Rome is not mentioned in this first Act of Praemunire. ii8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. contributions. Mr. Stubbs points ont tliat "a series of petitions against the proceedings of this most un- popular official was presented in the Parliament of 1376," and that "in 1390 the king had to reject a petition that the collector might be banished as a public enemy." With respect to the clergy, who were the chief sufferers, it may be noticed that the claim to the first-fruits of bishoprics was first made by Alexander IV. in 1256. It was resisted from time to time, but vainly. In the Act ^ which bestowed these annates on the Crown, it is stated that the sum of £160,000 had been paid on this account to the Pope between 1486 and 1531. Reformers. Tlicsc instances will enable the reader to appreciate the kind of hold maintained by the Popes in the age preceding the Eeformation. To the abuses in doctrine and practice which had infested the churches we have already alluded. We have shown how the mendicant friars of the thirteenth century had not only failed to effect a reformation, but had added a fresh scandal by systematizing the sale of indulgences. The fourteenth century, equally alive to the degeneracy of Christendom, failed as conspicuously when it attempted measures of redress. When such men as the author of *' Piers Ploughman's Vision " ^ bemoaned the wholesale ap- pointment of bishops in partihiis, or the officious inter- cession of the "pardoners," or when Fitzralph^ of Armao-h denounced the mendicant orders in his " Apology against the Friart^," they probably only ex- ■ 23 Hen. VIII. c. 20, stat. iii. 386. " This remarkable work is attributed to a priest named Eobert Langland or Loiigland. According to Bale, he completed it in 1369. "Piers Ploagbman's Creed " is probably an imitation of the " Vision " by a later hand. ■' Fitzralph was a man of some note. He was an eminent teacher at Oxford, where probably he imbibed his dislike for the friars. He took his grievances to Avignon, and several prelates subscribed to defray the expenses of the suit. The monks, however, were the party best able to buy papal favour. The case lan- guished, and Fitzralph died at Avignon iu I3G1. THE i/^TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. T19 pres>ed sentiments of wide acceptance. But liow were chap. these abuses to be removed? This was a question _Ji_ which Fitzralph and Langland, and the scurrilous pam- phleteers who endeavoured to imitate the " Vision " and the " Apology," were all alike unable to answer. John Wyclif was, it seem^;, the first to attempt a diagnosis of the disease for practical purposes. But in the hands of Wyclif's disciples remedial theories were quickly transformed into schemes of destruction. To these succeeded a reaction, for the cure was worse than the malady. The early life of this remarkable divine is wrapped john in obscurity. He appears to have been born at Eich- hisufe. mond, in Yorkshire, about the year 1322. He went to Oxford, but of his doings there we have no record till he emerges as master or warden of Balliol. To another person bearing a similar name probably belong the fellowship at Merton and the mastership of Canterbury Hall-^ with which John Wyclif, the Eeformer, has been sometimes credited. Equally unauthentic is the tra- dition which makes Wyclif the author of the " Last Age of the Church," a book which is probably the work of a Franciscan monk.^ The treatise " On the Eeality of Universals," written by Wyclif at Oxford, shows that he had adopted the philosophy of the Eealists. Nomi- nalism, the opposite school, had been for some time in the ascendant, and Wyclif's work apj)ears to have caused some sensation. It was probably before 1365 that Wyclif was made a king's chaplain. This office in the mediasval times was frequently the first stepping- stone to political distinctions. In 1366 the Government " So Robertson, History, Book viii. chap. vi. : for the other view, see Lechler, John Wyclif, vol. i. p. 160, seqq. ' See Shirley, Introd. to the Fasciculi Zizaniorum, xiii. I20 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, CHAP, looked about for a clerical cliampion to defend the _1[3^ refusal of the arrears of tribute lately claimed by Rome. The roj^al chaplain gained prestige by supporting this policy in a public argument at Oxford. The employ- ment of prelates in high secular offices was, as we have seen, one of the scandals of the age. The piactice w^as attacked at this time by a self-seeking clique headed by John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster. Wyclif, w^ho out of regard for the Church's best interests denounced a system which sujoplied the court with intellect and ability at the expense of the diocesan centres, was compelled to serve under this despicable leader. The most prominent representative of the pernicious s^^stem was William of Wjkeham — a man whose virtues w^ere almost such as to exculj^ate his false position. Lan- caster's party succeeded in ousting Wykeham's party for a time, and in depriving several prelates of their secular emplo3^ments (1371). Wyclif next appears in the political conference between England and France, which had been arranged to take place at Bruges AD, 1374. under the superintendence of papal nuncios. The English Church availed itself of this opportunity to send certain envoys, to petition the papal representa- tives for redress of grievances. W^yclif was one of these envoys. The grievances were those which so often recur in the clerical gravamens — levying of ex- actions, reservation of benefices, interference with bishoprics. The complaint elicited a worthless promise of redress. Erom his experience at Bruges, Wyclif probably learnt how thoroughly demoralized the papal system was. His learning enabled him to satisfy him- self that the pretensions which had been so grossly abused had little or no foundation. He began to write, lecture, and preach on the subject in no measured THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 121 terms. His censures^ extended from tlie Pope, who chap. was " Antichrist, the proud worldly priest of Eome, and ^]- the most cursed of clippers and purse-carvers," to the luxurious prelates and ignorant parish priests of his own country. These strictures were doubtless to some extent prompted by political animosity. It was imagined, and not without reason, that Wyclif was one of the political faction who aimed at a confiscation of all ecclesiastical property. He was accordingly summoned to S. Paul's to explain his invectives before the primate, and Courtenay, Bishop of London.^ At the convention there appeared with Wyclif his political allies, Lancaster and Lord Percy. The indecent be- haviour of the duke to Bishop Courtenay provoked a tumult at an early stage in the proceedings, and Wyclif's party narrowly escaped the vengeance of the infuriated Londoners. Meantime the Pope had dis- covered that Wyclif was guilty of several heresies, and a bull was addressed to Oxford, ordering the sup- pression of his teaching. Oxford showed itself in no hurry to obey, and Wyclif acquired favour with the Government of Eichard 11. by arguing that the king could prohibit exportation of treasure even when demanded by the Pope. Lancaster's influence was much diminished by the death of Edward III., and a.d. 1377. henceforward Wyclif's cause ceased to be discredited by this unworthy supporter. The schism which followed the death of Gregory XL saved him from papal ven- geance, and for the future he had chiefly to reckon with the prelates of his own country, who were offended 1 Lewis, Life of Wyclif, 31, 35-38. - " The character of the prosecution," says Canon Robertson, "is shown by the fact that, although errors of doctrine had already been laid to his charge, those which were now brought forward related entirely to political and social (questions,'* — History, Book viii. chap, vi. vr. 122 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, by his atfacks on clerical property rather than his nnorthodoxy. That the protests of these antagonists Avere not nnreasonable was proved in 1381, when Wat Tyler's insurrection, and the murder of Archbishop Sudbury, showed how dangerous a spirit now animated the lower orders. It is absurd to argue that this socialist outbreak is attributable to Wyclif. But it is as absurd to deny that the communists would have found in Wyclif s writings, had they read them, a justification of their principles. From this time Wyclif s hold on the upper classes was loosened. His unpopularity was increased when his new opinions concerning the Eucharist were made known. These were r&probated even in quarters where his attacks on Rome had found readiest acceptance. Oxford ex- pelled its great schoolman; a Council at London, under the new primate, Courtenay, condemned nine of his opinions as heretical, and fifteen as erroneous (1382). Three of his followers were subjected to punishment ; and it is not easy to understand how Wyclif escaped, unless we accept his enemies' testimony that he baffled his accusers by an evasive and quibbling line of de- fence. Wyclif retired to his rectory at Lutterworth in 1382. He died in 1384. Shortly before his death he is said to have received a citation to appear before Urban VI. It appears that these two years of retire- ment were by no means a season of inactivity. It was at this time that he published his pamphlets " On the Schism " and " Against the Pope's Crusade," and the most pronounced of bis doctrinal treatises, " The Trialoffue." It is also recorded that he was assiduous in his duties as a parish priest, and that the country surrounding Lutterworth was for some years a noto- rious centre of " Lollavdism." THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 123 The chief merit in Wyclif s system was that which, chap. a hundred and fifty years later, secured Protestantism _J[L_ its extraordinary success. Against the objective re- Hisreii- ligion of the mediaeval Church, with its manifold per- system. versions of doctrine and practice, Wyclif set up a religion of individuality based on an internal apprehen- sion of the Saviour's atoning merits. This religion was to be formed exclusively from the Scriptures. He accordingly proceeded to publish a vernacular transla- tion of the whole Bible. It is a much controverted point whether this publication was regarded as a dangerous novelty,^ or whether the suppression of Wyclif s Bible is not fully accounted for by the great Reformer's socialist theories and so-called heresies, which it was presumed might be promulgated by its circulation. Passing from his broad principle of reform to doctrinal details, we find the most salient heresy of Wyclif was his opinion concerning the Eucharist. Rejecting all teachers since the year 1000, with the sole exception of Berengarius,^ Wyclif took that view of the Sacrament which was afterwards adopted by Cranmer, and which has been explained in our Church 1 Against this assumption the men of the Old Learning protested in the six- teenth century. Sir Thomas More writes thus : " The whole Bible was, long before AV'yclif s days, by virtuous and well-learned men translated into the English tongue, and by good and godly people with devotion and solemnness well and devoutly read." With reference to Arundel's constitution prohibiting Wyclif's version. More remarks, " This order neither forbade the translations to be read that were done before Wyclif's days, nor condemned his because it was new, but because it was naught." It must, however, be remembered that More was strongly prejudiced, and may have based such stitements on hearsay evidence. Between the Saxon period and the time of Wyclif, only two translators are known to us by name. Early in the reign of Edward III., William of Shoreham rendered the Psalter into English prose. Shortly afterwards the same portion of Scripture was translated by Richard Rolle, " the hermit of Hampolf," with the addition of a commentary. The study of the Bible in the Vulgate Version was, of course, encouraged before Wyclif's time. We find Grosseteste advising the Oxford students to devote the best morning hours to scriptural studies, " in accordance with ancient customs and the example of Paris." See Seebohm, Oxford Reformers, p. 3. • See Fasciculi Zizaniorum, 114 ; and compare Wyclif s Trialog., ii. 7, p. 153. 124 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Catechism. The Sacrament, according to Wyclif, was _ZL^ not a mere sign ; the Body of Christ was in it virtually, spiritually^ and sacrameutally.^ But it was not in it " substantially." As the accidents, so the material substance of the bread and wine remained after con- secration. In other words, Wyclif maintained the doctrine of the Eeal Presence, but rejected the dogma of transubstantiation. Unfortunately, a number of fantastic and pernicious tenets were also held by Wyclif. They were for the most part evolved from his favourite proposition, " Dominion is founded upon grace." The Reformer argued that all kinds of do- minion were granted by God on condition of obedience to His commandments. Disobedience cancelled the grant. It is easy to see how from such premises Wj^clif reached the conclusion that the ministrations of bishops and priests who are in mortal sin are null.^ It is also plain that confiscation of the unworthy rich and deposition of inefficient princes could be logically de- duced from them by the socialist fanatics. Wj^clif seems, however, not to have gone thus far ; he qualified his propo.sitions with the statement, " God must obey the devil in this world," meaning that evil must often prevail over good. The modification thus strangely ex- pressed was, of course, misunderstood by his adversaries,^ and probably gave greater ofience than the propositions lie sought to tone down. Priests and deacons were conceived by Wyclif to be the only orders instituted in the primitive times. The " Ca^sarean " bishops he accordingly designates as lesser Antichrists ; * the great 1 Trialog., iv. 4, p. 256 ; 9, pp. 274, 275 : see Fasciculi Zizaniorum, 107. 2 An opinion which is disallowed in the Articles of our Church (Art. XXVI.). Wyclit's words are, "NuUus e^t dominus civilis, nullus tpiscopus, nuUus est praelatus, dum est in peccato mortali." See Shirley, Introd. to F. Z., Ixiii. ; 'i'rialog., iv. 19 ; Walsingham, ii. 53. ^ See Shirley, Ixiv, * Trialog,, iii. 17. THE i^TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 125 Antichrist predicted in Scripture lie supposes to be the Pope. But most of the evils in the Church are ascribed by Wyclif to the existence of endowments. Against these he directed his most passionate invectives, actually arguing that it was a greater sin in Con- stantine to endow the Church than it w^as in Paul to persecute it.^ When we reflect that opinions so discordant with the Dangerous spirit of the age were usually couched in whimsical ^^^^^^^' ®^' and exaggerated language, we cannot wonder that Wyclif's religion of individuality and free inquiry was palatable to few besides crazy fanatics and gi'eedy socialists. Wyclif's theories had, indeed, only to be pushed to a legitimate extent to make Christianity in- tolerable to society. In so speaking we cannot except the theory — afterwards endorsed by some Protestant sects — that all religion is to be got from the Bible, each reader being his own commentator. In effect, the Lollards found it as easy to prove that Biblical patriarchs married within the degrees of consanguinity, or that the early Christians were communists, as their master had found it to prove that bishops were one with priests in the Apostolic age. For many years after Wyclif's death England teemed with turbulent persons, whose sanctimonious professions cloaked a desire to hasten to opulence at their neighbour's expense. It was un scriptural for ecclesiastics to possess property. It was scriptural that " the saints," i.e. themselves, should " possess the earth." It was scrijDtural to main- tain opinions with which the vagaries of mediaeval the- ology contrasted as the mote with the beam. Such were the natural results of Wyclif's appeal to popular io-no- rance. The educated were soon convinced that the ' Trialog., iv. 17, 18. 126 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. other reformers abroad. Bible was dangerous reading for the populace, and measures were taken to prohibit the circulation of W'yclif s version. Worse still, a deep-rooted prejudice was established in the upper classes against all schemes for reforming the Church. Especially apparent was this feeling among the nobility. Now, in fact, as often since, the burning house of the clerical Ucalegon was too perilous to his lay neighbour to be a gratifying spectacle. Much of the legislation against the Lollards is really illustrated by the Parliamentary petition of 1413, imploring Henry IV. to silence those who in- veighed against tenure of property by ecclesiastics, " because " (huch is the excuse of the lay lords for pro- tecting the clergy) " it is very likely that in process of time they will also excite the people of your kingdom to take away from the said lords temporal their posses- sions and heritages." In several parts of the Continent, and notably in Bohemia, opinions resembling those of Wyclif survived. Occasionally the principle of salvation by personal faith was presented in its purity, without detriment to order and discipline, and without sanction to individual conceit. The " Friends of God," and the " mj^stics," Eckart, Tauler, Gerson, and Hameiken (better known as Thomas a Kempis), may be instanced as burning and shining lights in an age of deej) darkness, and from them the sacred fire was handed down to a more favoured generation. But of the much-vaunted name of Wyclif no such abiding influence can be predicated. VVyclifism disappears from view save as the creed of a wrong-headed and turbulent few. When the day (;f English reformation arrived, it does not appear that our Reformers professed sympathy wiih the eccentric schoolman. THE \\TH AND lyrH CENTURIES. 127 The legislation against Lollardy is particularly noticeable, because it habituated England to that prin- ciple of extirpating religious error by brute force, Legislation which m the sixteenth century is so amply and un- LoUarciy. A. D happily illustrated. As early as 1381 the sheriffs had 1381-1415. been ^ charged to arrest and bring to trial the Lollard preachers, as men who sowed " discord and dissension" and " excited the people to the great peril of the realm." The accession of the Lancastrian dynasty inaugurated a severer course of action. Burning was already the nominal punishment of heresy by the common law ; but only one^ case of its infliction is recorded before the year 1400, when Parliament passed the statute, "De Haereticis Comburendis." ^ The preamble charges the Lollard preachers with " wickedly instructing and in- flaming the people, and as much as they may, exciting and stirring them to sedition and insurrection." The statute orders that all persons convicted of teaching heresj'' must either renounce their errors or be delivered over by the bishop to the mayor or sheriff, " who shall bring them before the people to be burnt." The progress of the socialist movement under Sir John Oklcastle led to a supplementary Act in the reign of Henry V., according to which all judges, sheriils, etc., were to be sworn to extirpate Lollardy.'* William Sawtrey, a London priest, was the first victim of the statute of 1400. Other ordained men suffered within the next 1 5 Kich. II. c. 5. 2 It is recorded that in 1222 a deacon, who had been perverted to Judaism, was ijondemned at Oxford and burnt or (according to Matthew Paris) hanged. Ann. Wykes., p. 63; Matt. Paria, p. 315. ^ 2 Hen. IV. c. 15. * Henry VIII. repealed the "De Htereticis Comburendis," to replace it by an Act which, while making allowance for the transfer of papal supremacy to himself, re-enacted the punishment of burning for heresy, and also facilitated the legal j)rocess by diminishing the precautions hitherto taken with respect to informers. The penalty was not finally abolished till 1077. 128 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Its aristo- cratic champion, Oldcastle. twenty-five years, viz. William Thorpe, William Taylor, and the monk Garentin. But the majority of the victims were small tradesmen and illiterate persons. The number of those who suffered was not great ; and in criticising this Act we must bear in mind that the safety of the country depended on the suppression of these turbulent and licentious sectaries. To complain that the instrument of suppression sanctioned a punish- ment of fearful cruelty, is merely to complain that it was the statute of a mediaeval Parliament. To the aristocracy LoUardy was, as we have already observed, almost as offensive as to the clergy. Never- theless, one person of rank was found to head the Lollard rioters of the reign of Henry V. Sir John Oldcastle, who married the widow and claimed the title of Lord Cobham, is supposed to be the original of Shakespeare's Falstaff.^ He appears to have inferred from the dissolute character of Prince Henry's youth that the throne might be overthrown by a republican league. Accordingly, on the death of Henry IV., Old- castle attached himself to the Lollard faction. He hired agents to raise disturbances in the dioceses of London, Eochester, and Hereford. He also caused menacing placards to be posted on the doors of the London churches, affirming that the Lollards were prepared to rise, a hundred thousand strong. Oldcastle was appre- hended, and the king himself, mindful of former friend- ship, endeavoured to argue with him. This failing, he was tried before Archbishop Arundel and excommuni- cated.^ The civil powers subsequently committed him to the Tower. Oldcastle appears to have expressed a 1 Sec Collier's Shakespeare, Introd. to "Henry IV." - See the report, "Processus contra Johann. Oldcastle," quoted at length in Hook's Archbishops, chap. xvii. THE i^TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 129 disbelief in the doctrine of transubstantiation and the chap. efficacy of pilgrimages. In view of these opinions, Foxe — I^ represents the demagogue as a martyr, and the primate as a "beast," "wolf," "Caiaphas," and "bloody murderer." Whether Oldcastle was in any true sense a religious man is really unknown. He contrived to escape from the Tower, and lay concealed in Wales for four years. During this time he appears to have kept up his com- munications with the revolutionary faction. ^ A riot was raised by the Lollards in St. Giles's Fields. Sir John was shortly afterwards discovered and made an example of. The scene of the riot was appointed as the place of execution. Its manner denoted the two- fold offence — treason and heresy — the criminal being first hung in chains and then burnt. The measures for suppressing the Lollard Bible were wyciif s probably suggested by Archbishop Arundel himself, presled?'' The provincial synod of Canterbury held at Oxford ^^ ^^^^' (1408) issued the celebrated " Constitutions " which bear his name. These forbid all preaching unlicensed by the diocesan — thus silencing both the popish friars and the Lollard preachers — and prohibit the reading of Scripture in Wyclifs English version. The in- accuracy of the version and the seditious designs of those who circulated it perhaps sufficiently explain such enactments. Other translations, such as the clergy had been wont to place in the hands of educated laymen, were, of course, not suppiessed ; ^ and it ap- 1 In 1414 a proclamation was issued by the Government, charging the Lollards with the intention of constituting Sir John Oldcastle, of Couling, in the county of Kent, regent of the realm. Fcedera, ix. 170. 2 Such was the interpretation put on the constitution by the great lawyer. Bishop Lyndwood, about twenty-two years afterwards : " Ex hoc quod dicitur ' noviter conipositus ' apparet quud libros libellos vel tractatus in Anglicis vel alio idiomati prius translates de texta ScripturiE legere non est prohibitum." E 130 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. VI. Bishop Pecock. pears from Arnndel's " Constitutions " that a vernacular version, authorized by a provincial council, was already contemplated.^ The theory that religious thought was suppressed at this period, as it was in the reigns of the Tudors, appears to lack confirmation. What lax opinions with regard to the established doctrines and practices of the Church were sometimes openly preached may be gathered from the career of Eeginald Pecock. This free-thinking and somewhat unscrupulous pre- late has been erroneously classed^ with the sectarian or anti-Eoman party. Eeally, he was chiefly notorious as an ultra-Eomanist. He was educated at Oxford, and became a fellow of Oriel in 1417. He distin- guished himself in the Church, and in 1444 became Bishop of St. Asaph by means of a papal provision and prepayment of some portion of the episcopal revenue. This was an offence against the " Preemunire " statutes, but Pecock defended his conduct by arguing that all ecclesiastical property belonged originally to the Pope. On similar grounds he argued in favour of papal pen- sions and the payment of annuities. Pecock's enuncia- tion of these opinions caused great indignation among his brother bishops. He incurred no punishment, how- ever, and was subsequently translated to Chichester. Pecock inclined to the theory broached by Wyclif, that all the tenets of Christiaiiity are to be extracted 1 The Constiti;tions prohibit the introduction of any new translation till it " shall be approved either by the bishop of the diocese, or, if necessary, by a provincial council." — Wilkins' Concil., iii. 317. No version received conciliar sanction, but if Sir Thomas More is to be believed, other translations than Wyclif s sometimes received a kind of episcopal licence for private use : " Myself have seen and can show you Bibles fair and old, which have been known and seen by the bishop of the diocese, and left in laymen's hands and women's, to such as he knew for good and catholick folk, that used it with soberness and devotion." - See Foxe, the martyrologist. It is amusing to find this imaginative writer hold- ing a brief for the most pronounced " papist " of his day, simply because he was accused of heresy. THE i\TH AND \^TH CENTURIES. 131 from the New Testament, studied apart from other chap. ecclesiastical literature. ThuB restricting the field of ^- inquiry, he was led to reject not only transubstantia- tion, but also some of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity — our Saviour's descent into Hades, and the operation of the Holy Spirit. This, at all events, was the charge brought against him. But Pecock's theological position is somewhat unintelligible — wholly so to those who make him a genuine Lollard. He certainly maintained very strongly the supremacy of the Pope, giving the Papacy a divine institution, and making all episcopal authority emanate therefrom. At the same time he took a broad, intelligent view of such usages as pilgrimages and adoration of images ; and against clerical celibacy he emphaticall}^ inveighed. His want of patriotism in policy, rather than his peculiar views in religious matters, led to his expulsion from the House of Lords in 1457. The next year his heretical opinions were the subject of an examination conducted by Archbishop Bouchier. It appears that what specially irritated his inquisitors was Pecock's crafty exaltation of the Pope over Councils. This, however, Bouchier did not care to say plainly. He condemned Pecock as heretical for his audacious denun- ciations of the Councils. Menaced with the usual penalty, Pecock saved himself by abjuring his oj^inions. His deprivation and a bloodless sacrifice of his books satisfied the authorities, but the populace, " inflamed into fury against the man who exalted the Pope above the Church," ^ were with difficult}^ prevented from rabbling him. The bishop had suffered in the cause of the Pope. Three papal bulls were therefore launched against Bouchier in vindication of Pecock. But the ^ See Hook's account, Archbishops, vol. v. chap. xsi. 132 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, only result was that the papal client was committed to — ^ — stricter confinement. He escaped, however, the more serious penalties of prcemunire, and was allowed to end his days at Thorney Abbey, in enjoyment of everything except liberty. Reforming: Pecock's mcdlcv of opinious will not secure him a movement . inp- !•• t on Church placc m tlic rauKs of reforming ecclesiastics. It must not, however, be imagined that the cause of reforma- tion found no worthier champions at this period than the English Lollards or their congeners abroad, or that sober-minded Churchmen were blind to abuses which had been made the pretext for sectarian extravagances. To some of the " mystic " or " pietist " school of reformers within the Church we have already alluded ; and an age in which the "Imitation of Christ"^ was written and extensively circulated can hardly be con- sidered quite void of spiritual life. The need of reformation was the constant theme of pulpit oratory. The attempts on the part of individuals and of Churches to probe the wounds of Western Christendom were at least earnest, if ineffectual. It is impossible in such a work as this to do more than indicate some few of these attempts. Foremost we rank the proceedings at the great Church Councils. These Councils, in seeking to effect amendment, seriously disparaged the assumptions of the Papacy. The Seventy Years' Captivity had ended in 1378, to be succeeded by the deeper disgrace of a two-headed Papacy. In dealing with this anomaly the Church reasserted the ancient principle that Popes are subordinate to General Councils. The legation of cardinals which proposed to the English Church this solution of the question at issue was received with 1 Probably written by Thomas Hamerken of Kempten, canon of Zwoll (died 1741). THE \\TH AND i^TH CENTURIES. 133 enthusiasm. At Pisa (1409), Constance (1415), and Basle (1431), earnest attempts were made to effect a reformation of the Church. England sent to Pisa a The gravamen worthy of her Church. The most flagrant ^^o^^^^^^- abuses in English Christianity were declared to be the appropriation of benefices by religious houses and State officials, who made insufficient provision for the spiritual charge of the parishes — the non-residence of bishops, who were often aliens ignorant of the native tongue — the purchase of papal favours with bribes — and the exemption of monastic houses from episcopal control. These abuses are summed up in a memorial which was prepared at Oxford and laid before the Council of Pisa by the chief English delegate, Hallam, Bishop of Salis- bury. The representatives of Christendom at these three Councils doubtless accepted it as a principle that the root of the evil lay in the unwarrantable pretensions of the Papacy. The Council of Pisa deposed and excom- municated both the rival Popes in favour of a new nominee. The Council of Constance distinctly declared that Popes were inferior to (Ecumenical Councils, and removed the wicked John XXII. from the pontificate. The Council of Basle, which deposed Eugenius IV., proceeded to abolish annates, expectatives, provisions, and reservations, and restored to the chapters and metropolitans the right of appointing to benefices. The decrees of Basle were embodied in the Pragmatic Sanction of 1438. They were accepted by Pope Nicholas V. But subsequent Popes indignantly re- pudiated the guiding principle of these Councils. The supremacy of the pontiff over Councils was reasserted, and the Church's attempt to secure reformation by conciliar action was thus made fruitless. Besides united action, attempts were made by leading 134 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. ecclesi astics Hopeless condition of the Cliurcli. ecclesiastics to reform abuses in their own provinces. In Spain, Cardinal Ximenes undertook a sweeping Keforming visitation of the monasteries (1495). In England, Archbishop Morton had applied to Innocent YIII. for a bull empowering him to conduct a similar work (1489). The duty subsequently devolved on Cardinal Wolsey. At Florence, Savonarola waged war against the vices of society with a sincerity and earnestness which more than condone his many errors. But decrees of Councils and individual exertions were alike powerless against evils which literally lay at the heart of Christendom. The Papacy exhibited in the person of Alexander VI. the most detestable of all its representatives. Not long afterwards came Leo X., who, in order to build S. Peter's, re-estab- lished the practice of hawking indulgences. This period closes on a scene of general depravity, which Cardinal Bellarmine thus describes : " Some years before the rise of the Lutheran and Calvinistic heresy, according to the testimony of those who were then living, there was almost an entire abandonment of equity in the ecclesiastical judgments, in morals no discipline, in sacred literature no erudition, in divine things no reverence : religion was almost extinct." ^ Perhaps the best influence was that intel- lectual revival which in the next century served as the handmaid of theology, and powerfully aided the work of reformation. As yet, however, it was little more than a resuscitation of mental energy, having little in common with Christianity, and nowhere less than in Rome itself. The importance of Greek — a study lately revived — in the field of theological research was as yet hardly recognized. In so speaking, we may make an 1 Concio, sxviii., Opp. vi. 296. THE \\TH AND iSTH CENTURIES. 135 honourable exception in favour of England. In tbe chap. hands of such men as Colet and Grocyn, Linacre and ^]' Warham, the literary impulse had already assumed a theological and a practical bearing. By these and The New- other English scholars the facilities offered by the New Learning for the study of early Christian literature were rightly valued. The connection of such studies with religious reform was consequently appreciated at Oxford some years before the Protestant movement in Germany. The work of these educational reformers will be noticed in the next chapter. 136 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTER VII. A.D. 1509-1534. Marriage with Catharine — Protestantism — Its history — Its principles — Its un- scientific character — Its schismatic tendency — Its relation to the English Refor- mation— The English Church under Wolsey — Wolsey's downfall— Other Ee- formers at the universities — The divorce question — Result of negotiations with Rome — The appeal to the universities — Cranmer becomes primate and decides the question — Anti-papal legislation — Papal licences and bulls prohibited — The king's ecclesiastical supremacy — The Commons extort the " submission of the clergy" — Annates, etc., prohibited at the instance of Convocation — "Statute for the Restraint of Appeals "—Negotiations with the Pope resumed to no purpose — Papal interference in bishoprics prohibited — The separation is accom- plished, the clergy acquiescing. Arthur, the eldest son of Henry VII., had died in 1502, shortly after his marriage with Catharine, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella. A scheme sug- gested itself to the grasping English king* for retaining the large dowry and the political advantages which were accessories to this alliance. Henry, the heir to the throne, a boy of eleven years of age, should be betrothed to his brother's widow. Appeal was made to Rome for a dispensation sanctioning this irregular union, and it is noticeable that at the outset it was urged — with what truth is now unknown — that the marriage of Arthur and Catharine had never been consummated. So grave, however, were the objections to a union between persons thus related, that two Popes refused to accede to the king's request. Julius II. was at length HENRY VIII . 137 persuaded to grant a full dispensation, allowing chap. Catharine to marry Henry, even if the marriage with ^Z^ his brother had been consummated (1504). Even now it seemed probable that no use would be made of the sanction thus hardly won. Eeligious scruples and a rupture with Spain combined to induce Henry YII. to relinquish the scheme, and the young prince was per- suaded to repudiate his marriage contract with all requisite formalities before Fox, Bishop of Winchester (1506). Even now the avaricious sovereign could not face the prospect of resigning Catharine's dowry. Nego- tiations with the Spanish court were renewed, and the formal repudiation was considered cancelled. Prince Henry grew up cheerfully accepting this strange alliance as his destiny, and when he succeeded to the throne at the age of eighteen, his Council urged the speedy fulfilment of his father's scheme. Accordingly, on June 3, 1509, King Henry VIII. was married to Catharine of Aragon. Though his bride was eight years his senior, the happiness of the king's union was for many years all but complete. The exception was in the matter of children ; several times Catharine had been delivered, but only one child, and that a girl, was the surviving issue. During this period of Henry's reign the management of affairs political and eccle- a.d. siastical was confided almost exclusively to Thomas Wolsey, a devoted minister, whose energy made ample amends for the youthful king's dihinclination for business. The conduct of ecclesiastical matters in England protestant- during Wolsey 's administration will be noticed here- h:^ory.^ after. The student's attention must for the present be directed to the great religious changes now taking place on the Continent. We have seen how general 138 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, and how hopeless was the yearning for religious reform ■ J^J"^ ■ in the preceding century. In the Protestant move- ment these pent-up feelings at length found adequate expression. The origin of this movement was a dispute A.D. 1517. between Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk and pro- fessor of theology at Wittenberg, and John Tetzel, a Dominican employed by Leo X. to hawk indulgences. From impugning papal indulgences, Luther went on to assail other notorious abuses in the Roman system. Against these he inveighed in the " Tract against Popedom " and " The Babylonish Captivity." Though A.D.1521. Luther's opinions were condemned by the princes and prelates of the empire at the Diet of Worms, they soon sained numerous and influential adherents. The anti- papal agitation became connected with the intellectual revival mentioned in the preceding chapter, and its promoters were usually known as the men of the New Learning, a designation which of right belonged to educational reformers who had nothing to do with the Lutheran movement. When the second Diet of Spires A.D. 1529. deferred the subject of religious reform till a General Council should be called, the new religionists "pro- tested " against the prorogation, and thus precipitated a schism. The societies in which they were incorporated were hence called " Protestant." Protestantism found adherents in all grades of society. It included pious and learned divines who longed for doctrinal reform. It appealed to such men of rank as grudged the clergy their social and political dignity, no less than to those who sincerely regretted the moral degradation of the Church. The lower orders welcomed a system which seemed conducive to civil and religious liberty. In many places, indeed, the new scheme of religion assumed that socialist character which had tainted the HENRY VIII. 139 Lollard system. The seditious teaching of the fanatic chap. Miinzer and the gross immoralities of the Anabaptist — ^-i^ section were, however, emphatically disowned by Luther. The new religion became the basis of a political union, and a protracted war was waged between the emperor and the allied Protestant princi- palities. Of this war we need only say that it ended in a compromise at Augsburg, whereby the Protes- tants of the empire secured toleration by promising a.d. 1555. loyalty. The principles asserted by the Protestant Eeformers its • Trm- n • 'ixi principles. must now be noticed. Their adversaries might nave urged that on almost every point of doctrine the leaders of the Protestant movement were at variance. Nevertheless certain definite hypotheses lay at the base of all the new systems of the sixteenth century, and justified a claim to aflSnity where outward unity was unattainable. The disciples of Luther, Melancthon, Zuingle, Calvin, all maintained that the medieeval system, with its machinery of propitiatory masses, in- dulgences, works of satisfaction, and works of superero- gation, had caused men to undervalue personal faith in the Saviour. Individual appreciation of the fact of the Atonement was, they agreed, the end and aim of Christianity. The means employed by the Church to secure this were, some illegitimate, some inefficient, many unduly aggrandized so as to be themselves ends rather than means. A new system must therefore be develoj)ed : and since all subsequent periods in Church history had been more or less corrupt, the " re-forma- tion" must be based on the Gospels and such other relics of the Apostolic age as the Church had included in her canon of Scripture. For such a second creation of Christian religion the recent literary impulse, with 140 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Its schismatic tendency. its revival of the study of Greek, might seem to have offered great facilities. But by Luther and the Pro- testant doctors the questions which this remodelling of Christianity revived were submitted to the adjudica- tion, not of scholarship, but of individual proclivity, and this was considerably biased by the recoil from the Church's system. The relative value of the several New Testament writings — even the genuineness of some — had first to be accurately determined. But the deci- sion of the Protestants on these points was so arbitrary as to be worthless. S. James's Epistle insisted on the efficacy of good works, and this efficacy had been over- rated by the mediaeval Church ; therefore this Scripture was, according to Luther, " an epistle of straw." On the other hand, S. Paul, writing to men who had mounted to Christianity from Judaism, had said much aboiit the superiority of personal faith to religion of system. Personal faith was the Protestant panacea; therefore the basis of the new Christianity was St. Paul's Epistles, rather than the Gospels or other New Testament Scriptures. When the Protestant doctors got beyond these elementary questions, they found it impossible to agree about the nature and efficacy of the sacraments, the extent of free-will in man, the relations of faith and works in the scheme of salvation, the form of govern- ment to be adopted by Christian bodies, and the duties of Christians to the civil authorities. Schisms conse- quently ensued, and the Protestant movement resulted in the production of many disintegrated societies. Some of these differed from the Catholic Church of the early ages only in points of discipline. Many of them, however, evolved from the Scriptures systems by which personal faith was made to sanction or excuse gross HENRY VIII . 141 immorality and insubordination to all constituted authority. The increase of Protestant sects has created in modern times a belief in the right of " private judgment " in religious matters. Such a belief would seem to be a logical deduction from the premises of Protestantism. It must be noted, however, that the early Protestant doctors, and their Puritan successors (both of whom punished what they considered heresy with death), persistently disowned it. The new system obtained a hold in Denmark, its relation Sweden, and Scotland, which was destined to be English permanent. The tenure of Protestantism in France, the tion°^™'^' Low Countries, and Southern Germany was for various reasons more precarious. In England its principles were thoroughly sifted during the " Eeformation period," the ascendant being gained now by the State Churchman, now by the Komanist, now by the Puritan. This period of transition ranges over some hundred and thirty years. Its progress was illustrated by many new religious formularies, of which the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1571, and the Canons and Catechism of 1604, are the chief survivors, and by repeated revisions of the Use of Sarum, of which our Liturgy is the final out- come. The earliest of these publications is the Ten Articles of 1526 ; the last is the Prayer-Book of 1662, which has received no additions of doctrinal importance. Such a transition was rendered possible by a change in the political constitution of the Church, which, though contemporaneous with the Lutheran movement, was not connected with it either in origin or purpose, and to which England had really been drifting ever since the accession of Edward I. The change we allude to was the formal repudiation of papal supremacy — a repudiation enforced by King Henry VI 11. from 142 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. VII. The Englisli Chiircli under "Wolsey. questionable motives, but welcomed by most English Churchmen as a measure which, without impairing the catholicity of their country, opened the way for long- desired ecclesiastical reforms. These internal reforms were carried on throughout Henry's reign, seldom with singleness of aim, but always without detriment to the Church's continuity. In the administration of Edward's Erastian Council the foreign Protestants found a coign of vantage, and at that time assimilation to the new and hastily formed continental systems seemed imminent. Through this crisis, however, the English Church passed without loss of Apostolical succession or Catholic doctrine; and at no subsequent time was anything done that invalidated her claim to be the very society planted by Augustine, or that merged her among the new creations of Protestantism. She repudiated the media3val doctrine of papal supremacy, yet remained Catholic; she appropriated the real fruits of the con- tinental revolution, yet never became a sect. A brief account of the administration of Wolsey will illustrate the condition of the English Church just before this formal severance from Eome. It will be borne in mind that for years past good men had recog- nized the necessity of a reform in the English Church, though unable to mark out the lines on which such reform should be based, and entirely averse to any- thing like doctrinal change. Of such persons Cardinal Wolsey is a favourable type. The character and the reforming influence of this great statesman appear to have been undervalued in consequence of the mis- representations of contemporaries who profited by his disgrace, or were in other ways interested in dis- paraging him. Impartial modern historians have vindicated Wolsey's fame and acknowledged the ser- HENRY VIII. 143 vices he rendered in preparing England for the Eefor- chap. mation. Thomas Wolsey appears to have been born ^I^L. of hnmble parentage^ at Ipswich, in 1471. He took his degree at Oxford at an unusually early age, be- came a fellow of Magdalen, was recommended to the notice of Henry VII. by Fox, Bishop of Winchester, and was Dean of Lincoln when Henry VIII. suc- ceeded to the throne. With the young king Wolsey's influence was from the first great, and gradually be- came paramount. He was made Bishop of Lincoln and Archbishop of York. In 1515 he was appointed to the Chancellorship, and, according to the evil custom of the time, received the sees of Durham and Win- chester in commendam to enable him to bear the 2:reat expenses of this office.^ In the same year Henry's influence with the Pope procured him promotion to the cardinalate. As a cardinal he took precedence of the primate Warham, and the administration of the Church of England was in his hands from this time till his death. Zealous for the reform of the Church, and per- haps stimulated by the example of Cardinal Ximenes in Spain, Wolsey applied to the Pope for a licence enabling him to conduct a visitation of the English monas- teries. Leo X. was somewhat suspicious of Wolsey's fidelity to the Papacy, and tried to put this busi- ness into the hands of an Italian, Cardinal Campeggio. The king, however, refused to recognize Campeggio's legatine authority unless Wolsey was associated with him in the commission. Eventually Wolsey was made 1 The tradition that his father was a butcher originated in a misunderstood witticism of Charles V. Alluding to the execution of Buckingham, the emperor said that the best "buck" in England was destroyed by a " butcher's dog," im- plying, of course, that Henry was a butcher and Wolsey his obsequious servant. 2 Mr. J. H. Blunt remarks that Wolsey's mission to Fiance alone cost him £10,000. Henry recouped him on this occasion by making bim Abbot of S. Albans : see Ellis, Orig. Letters, III. 1. 274. 144 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, sole legate for a short period. By the special request of ^^' theking^ this period was extended ; and at last Clement VII. allowed the legateship to be held for life. After the cardinal's downfall, and when a breach with Eome was in contemplation, Henry had the audacity to fine » the English clergy, as rendered liable to a prcemunire by their acknowledgment of Wolsey's legatine authority. Wolsey hoped to put the monastic system in accord with the spirit of the age by a reorganization which should benefit the universities. The larger houses were merely to be purged of abuses ; the smaller he pro- posed to suppress by drafting their inmates into the larger. The revenues thus gained were to be em- ployed in facilitating education at Oxford and Cam- brid2:e. The contrast between this excellent scheme and the work of vandalism subsequently executed by Cromwell at once suggests itself. Twenty of the smaller and really useless houses were actually sup- pressed in this way by Wolsey, and their revenues^ A.D. 15S0. devoted to the foundation of the college now known as Christ Church. Seven professorships, the endowments of which were in later years appropriated by the king, were also established at Oxford. At both universities Wolsey offered liberal patronage to the " New Learn- ino- " properly so called, i.e. to the study of Greek and patristic theology. In thus befriending the educational centres of the Church, Wolsey seems to have recog- nized that the real stronghold of the sectarians who were now flocking in from Germany was the ignorance and mental degradation of the English clergy. Both universities were at this time slightly infected with 1 " Intercessione etiam prsefati Heurici Regis." — Brewer's Calend. State Papers, 1216 ; Rymer, xiii. 739. 2 S. Frideswide, the largest, together with the adjoining Canterbury Hall, formed the nucleus of the new college. HENRY VI I L 145 LiitlieranisTn, and by his rational and lenient treatment chap. of what he believed to be heresy Wolsey showed him- — ^-L^ self quite beyond his age. Warham in vain^ urged him to burn the Oxonian Lutherans. The cardinal was content to confute them in argument, and compel their attendance at a holocaust of heretical literature. Protestant books, in fact, rather than Protestant persons, were the victims of Wolsey's orthodoxy. His forcible suppression of these was justified by the irreverent tone of such treatises as " the Babylonish Captivity," and b}^ the scurrilous, even blasphemous, tendency'' of the subsequent productions of the Protestant press. But it was directly necessitated by the fact that Henry had, notwithstanding Wolsey's remonstrances,^ taken the ultra-Roman line in his answer to Luther. Besides facilitating theological studies at the universities, Wolsey proposed to benefit the Church more directly by an extension of the episcopate. The bishops of the Middle Ages were, as we have seen, too much burdened with State duties to do their work as Church officers. Wolsey proposed to relieve the lords spiritual of much of their responsibility by creating twenty-one new bishoprics out of the revenues of useless monasteries. Only six of these were allowed to survive when the administration of the Church passed into the rapacious hands of Cromwell. Another project of Wolsey's was the amalgamation of the two Houses of Convocation, a.d. 1523. This change would have greatly facilitated the de- spatch of reformatory measures. Wolsey unfortunately 1 See Warham's letter, Ellis, Orig. Letters, III. i. 239. 2 "On June 24, 1518, Secretary Pace had written to the cardinal that the king was pleased with some signs of commendation which Wolsey had at lengtli sliown. He is very glad to have noted in your Grace's letters tliat his reasons be called in- evitable, considering your Grace was sometime his adversary therein, and of con- trary opinion." — Brewer's Calend. State Papers. L \ 146 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. VII. "Wolsey's downfall. Oct. 1529. did not succeed in recommending it to the southern House. ^ Such were the most striking features in Wolsey's administration. It will be convenient to carry on the history of the reforming cardinal to its melancholy close. As early as 1525, Wolsey's unpopularity with a jealous aristocracy seems to have shaken his in- fluence over Henry. Eoyalty itself had been dis- satisfied with Wolsey's way of dealing with the monasteries and the sectaries. No part of the monastic revenue had fed the insatiable cravings of the royal treasury ; ^ and (to borrow the words of the subsequent indictment) Henry considered the cardinal to have been " an impeacher and disturber of due and direct correction of heresies." But the immediate cause of Wolsey's downfall was his inability to further the king's wishes in the matter of the divorce, an inability which Henry was induced by Anne Boleyn to mis- interpret. It would have been creditable to Wolsey had the imputation of unwillingness to aid in " the king's matter " been deserved. The one dark blot on his fame is that he unscrupulously devoted his energies to this unworthy cause, and was thus involved in intrigues of disgraceful character. His sin found him out, when it became plain that the Pope had been duping Henry, and that it was not intended that the question should be settled by legates, or in England. Wolsey suffered as the papal legate, though he was in no way accessory to the Pope's policy. He was 1 The two Houses would have sat together as a legatine synod, with Wolsey for president. The southern Convocation, perhaps, regarded this arrangement as impairing the dignity of the primate of Canterbury. 2 "These noble lords," writes the French ambassador, "imagine that the cardinal once dead or ruined, they will incontinently plunder the Church and 6trip it of all its wealth." — Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, iii. 374. HENRY VIII. 147 suddenly deprived of the chancellorship and proceeded chap. against under the " Praemunire " statutes. B^^ the verdict — ^^ of the law courts, all his possessions were forfeited to the king. Even now it seemed likely that Henry would let him end his days in the retirement of his northern see (Feb. 1530). Wolsey was actually at Cawood Castle, preparing to be enthroned in York Minster, when fortune dealt its last and fatal stroke. He was informed that some secret correspondence with the King of France had been betrayed to Henry, who had put an evil construction on it, and that he was to be taken to the Tower on a charge of high trea- son. Throughout his reverses Wolsey had displayed little fortitude. He was now so overcome that his health became fatally impaired. He journeyed as far as Leicester Abbey, and there died of a broken Nov. 30. , , 1530. heart. Contemporaneously with Wolsey there had flourished other \ -^ "^ . . Reformers a distinguished group of Reformers of similar type — men at the who wished to use the intellectual revival in the service sities. of religion, and to purge the Church of the super- stitious accretions of a darker age without impairing its catholic character. It is these men we have to thank for that sober and inquiring spirit which in- fused itself into the assemblies, of the sixteenth-century divines, and which made the English Reformation, when not interfered with by the secular power, contrast so favourably with the religious movements on the Continent. Foremost among these men was Colet, Dean of St. Paul's, whose readings on the Greek Testament attracted numerous audiences at Oxford and at his own cathedral, and whose denunciation of such abuses a.d. 1512. as simony, nepotism, non-rei^ident clergy, and secu- larized bishops caused considerable sensation. Like 148 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, minded was Colet's friend Grocyn, who had revived the — .-L^ study of Greek at Oxford and himself given instruction to Erasmus. His pupil's great publication, a printed A.D. 1516. Greek Testament with a commentary, paved the way for a scientific review of the doctrinal tenets of the Church. Included in this Oxford coterie (in the years 1492-1496) was Thomas More, equally zealous for reform by means of education, and as late as 1516 pre- pared to advocate, or at least able to conceive of, a tolera- tion to all religious creeds. That such toleration was utterly impracticable in the sixteenth century is shown by the conduct of the author of " Utopia " when he afterwards had to deal with heresy as a statesman. Warham, the primate, a prelate whose abilities the genius of the northern archbishop has somewhat eclipsed, was no less desirous of reform. His friend Erasmus writes to him, detailing the most conspicuous abuses in the Church's system, and Warham ^ corre- sponds with Wolsey on the evils connected with monastic appropriations. Fox, Bishop of Winchester, was in communication with Wolsey on the same subject in 1518. Convinced of the necessity of basing reformation on theological research, this prelate had endowed the College of Corpus Christi, Oxford, for the study of the three sacred languages, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. The pious Fisher, Bishop of Eochester, was instrumental in introducing the new studies at Cam- bridge, and it was at his instigation that Lady Margaret's endowments at both universities were be- stowed. Public lectures on the Greek Testament were being given at Cambridge by Dr. Warner and Mr. Stafford. Such influences were radiated from the universities to all jDarts of England, and everywhere i See Ellis, Orig. Letters, III. ii. 30, i HENRY VIII. 149 men's minds were roused to consider the necessity of chap. a religious reform. But the educational reformers ^-.^J-- seldom ventured to impugn those papal pretensions which the modern historian regards as the fountain head of all mediaeval abuses. The king himself, indeed, had recently silenced all controversy on this topic by his strong assertion of papal supremacy in his treatise ^ against Luther, the treatise which obtained for the English sovereign the title " Defender of the Faith." And the fanaticism and irreverence of the refugee Protestants had done little to attract English sympathies to the cause of anti-papal systems. The irony of fate now ruled that the stoutest champion of the Papacy should sever England from the Eoman communion, and that the repulsive episode which terminated his first marriage should inaugurate a purification of the national Church. Henry appears to have professed no doubts as to the The divorce validity of his marriage with Catharine and the legiti- macy of the Princess Mary before 1526. By this time the queen, who was much his senior, had lost her beauty. Of her children only one had survived, and that a female, whose claim to the succession would be an anomaly, and whose legitimacy might certainly be questioned by the men who disallowed papal dis- pensations. In this same year Henry's affections were undoubtedly attracted by Anne Boleyn, a lady of the queen's retinue. It will be unnecessary here to ask which of these considerations first suggested to the king the idea of a divorce. It will be sufficient to remark that Henry's conduct throughout the proceedings was disgustingly brutal, on the most favourable assumption. 1 Assertio Septem Sacramentorum, printed in 1521. ISO ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Tlie " king's matter " agitated Europe for about five _Iiil_ years, and involved a series of political complications and discreditable intrigues. These also we cannot in- vestigate fully in such a work as this. We content ourselves with indicating what appear to be the pro- minent features in the episode, and treating it in its relation to ecclesiastical history. The ground on which Henry claimed a divorce was that a marriage with a brother's widow was prohibited by God's law, and could not be legalized by any papal dispensation. Still more irregular was such a marriage if the j)revious union had been consummated, as Henry argued that of Catharine and Prince Arthur had been. It seems that Wolsey's services were enlisted on the side of the king before the end of 1526, and that in May, 1527, he thought to settle the question offhand by pronouncing the divorce himself in his capacity as jDapal legate. This proceeding was forbidden by Pope Clement VIL, who was a prisoner in the hands of the Emperor Charles, Catharine's nephew. Counsel was now taken with several bishops, theologians, and doctors of law, but rather with the view of vindicating the king, and propping an unpopular cause with respectable names, than of obtaining a final verdict. Thus early ^ a course had been suggested which was adopted at Cranmer's recommendation two years later, viz. that the question at issue should be submitted for decision to the uni- versities. Wolsey, against whom Anne Boleyn had conceived a violent prejudice, knew that his only hope of retaining court favour lay in a zealous advocacy of Result of Henry's interests at Eome. Twice his negotiations negotia- '^ , tions with Were foiled, when seemingly on the verge of success, by the artifices of the shifty Pope, who dared not ofiend 1 See J. H. Blunt, The Reformation, pp. 129, 130. VII. HENRY VIII. 151 the Emperor Charles. In 1528 a third attempt was chap. made. Dr. Fox and Dr. Gardiner were sent to bring from Clement a commission empowering Wolsey and Campeggio (a cardinal vv^ho was known to the king, and who held the English bishopric of Salisbury) to act as his representatives, and give a final judgment on the question in a legatine court. After great difficulties had been surmounted, this court was formally sanc- tioned ; and before it Henry and Catharine were cited in the hall of Blackfriars Palace (May 31, 1529). The injured queen, arguing her cause in person, thought it best to repudiate the authority of the court, and make a formal appeal to the Pope himself. The legates pronounced her contumacious, and continued the sessions. On June 28 Catharine's cause was defended by Bishop Fisher, who argued the validity of the marriage with an earnestness which was never forgiven by Henry. Fisher stood almost alone in his opposition to the king's project : More was tongue-tied by his hopes of office ; other leading men had been persuaded or silenced by Henry's machinations. Suddenly it came out that Campeggio had been privately instructed by Clement not to decide the question in England. On July 23 he adjourned the court, and it was understood that Henry was to be cited to Eome, and a new trial instituted. The proceedings in the legatine court had only been sanctioned to gain time. The anger of the disappointed monarch was excusable. We have told how it was wreaked upon Wolsey, who had really been duped as completely as the king himself. The cardinal was deprived of the Great Seal this autumn, the new Chancellor being Sir Thomas More. This autumn also saw the initiation in Parliament of measures inimical to the Pope and the ecclesiastics (who were supposed 152 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, to be partisans of Wolsey) — measures which quickly ^^}- brought England to the first landmark in the Eeforma- tion period, the formal repudiation of all pajoal pre- tensions. The progress of these measures will be considered below. Confining ourselves to the matter of the divorce, we notice the appearance of an adviser hitherto unknown, but destined to play as important a part in English history as Wolsey himself. Gardiner and Fox were accompanying the king on a progress, Oct. 1529. when they chanced to meet with Dr. Cranmer, fellow ^ of Jesus College, Cambridge, at Waltham, and converse with him on the great question of the day. Dr. Cranmer, although little known in Cambridge,^ and certainly not ranking high among men of learning, possessed a considerable knowledge of law and some natural acumen. Like the rest of the world, he had followed the progress of the " king's matter " with interest. In his conversation with Gardiner and Fox he suggested that the opinions of the universities should be taken, and the matter then be decided in an English The appeal court. This counsel was reported to the king. It at univer- oucc took his fancy; for the universities and courts A^D ^1530 ^^ England could probably be coerced to give a favourable decision. Cranmer was ordered to write a book ex- pressing his views, and was afterwards sent to Rome, probably to broach the new expedient to the Pope. Thence he journeyed to the various Italian universities, to secure verdicts on Henry's behalf. The king's appli- cation- to the universities was accompanied with bribes ; 1 Cranmer's marriage with his first wife had not lost him his fellowship. She died within the twelvemonth, and he claimed a right to be reinstated, ^ " For a quarter of a century he was resident in Cambridge — twenty- five years of excitement, of reform, and of progress : and yet we can only remai'k and lament that among the distinguished men of the university the name of Cranmer does not appear." — Hook's Archbishops. HENRY VIII. 153 and Orleans, Paris, Angiers, Bourges, Toulouse, Padua, chap. and Bologna pronounced that Henry's marriage was ^Ii!l_ against God's law, and that the Pope had no power to sanction it by dispensation. But the English uni- versities were less amenable to persuasion than had been expected. Cambridge yielded to menaces, but only acknowledged the illegality of such a man iage " when the matrimony had actually been consummated." ^ Oxford, still grateful to her benefactor Wolsey, made a much bolder stand. In fact, the desired response could only be secured by manipulating Convocation. The king's party were summoned to vote without the knowledge of the opposition. And even then the ille- gality of Henry's marriage was voted in the same terms as at Cambridge. A servile Parliament was now incited to demand from the Pope a declaration that the marriage was null, on the ground that the universities had so decided, and to reproach him for his delay in the matter (July, 1530). The Pope replied rebuking the Parliament for its audacity. This reply elicited a royal proclamation which make it penal to introduce bulls from Eome (Sept. 19, 1530). The Houses of Convocation were intimidated by a preposterous threat of prosecution for having acknowledged Wolsey's legatine authority. They appear to have voted the nullity of Henry's marriage in terms less equivocal than those adopted by the universities. The death of Warham (Aug. 1532) enabled Henry to put the finishing stroke to the business. Passing over Gardiner cranmer and other deserving ecclesiastics, Henry conferred the primate, primacy on the new Cambridge luminary. Thomas 1 " Respondemus . , . quod ducere uxorem fratris mortui sine liberis, cognitam a priori viro per carnalem copulam, nobis Christianis hodie est prohibitum jure divino ac naturall." — Lamb's Corpus Christi Documents, p. 21. 154 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Cranmer was nominated by the Crown, and dutifully _ZJI:_ elected by the monks of Canterbury. He took the Marchi533. nocessary oath of obedience to Rome (presumably with a secret reservation), and thus obtained the bull of consecration and pallium, which were still considered essentials. Andde- Convinced that the new primate would have no question, scruple about pronouncing the divorce, Henry antici- pated this formality by privately marrying Anne Boleyn at the end of 1532. Cranmer made a parade of a second appeal to Convocation, and of a petition to Henry, asking leave to " proceed to the final determina- tion" of his cause. The king was pleased to grant the request of his " most humble orator and bedeman." Cranmer held a court at Dunstable, pronounced the queen to be contumax for refusing to appear, and gave sentence that it was not within the power of a Pope to license a marriage with a brother's widow (May 23). A week later he pronounced at Lambeth the validity of Henry's private marriage with Anne Boleyn. The new queen was crowned on June 1, and on September 5 gave birth to the Princess Elizabeth. The Pope had meantime annulled Cranmei-'s sentence, and threatened the king with excommunication. On March 23, 1534, the long-delayed papal verdict found utterance. Clement declared that the marriage with Catharine was valid, and that Henry could have no other wife while she lived. Anti-papal We must now turn our attention to the ecclesiastical legislation of the celebrated " Reformation Parliament " (1529-1536). Wolsey's downfall had been hailed with joy by both Houses. There was much ill feeling at this time between clergy and laity, and as the whole body of ecclesiastics was supposed to be implicated in HENRY VII I. 155 the disgrace of the favourite, the winter of 1529 was thought a fit season for introducing measures to their detriment. Three bills of such tendency were passed. The fees charged in the bishops' courts for probate of wills were cut down by the first ; mortuary fees by the second ; the third forbade clerics to obtain from the Pope licences to hold a plurality of benefices. This bill I'apai ..... licences in no way prohibited pluralities; it merely made theandbims •TTf»i'--p if» prohibited. king the lountam-head of the iniquity for the future, a.d. 1529. instead of the Pope. The same tendency is observable in many other reformatory measures of this Parliament, which, it will be borne in mind, was well stocked with holders of offices under the Crown. We have already mentioned the proclamation of Sept. 19, 1530, which forbade the introduction of Eoman bulls. It may appear somewhat inconsistent that Cranmer, two years after- wards, applied to the Pope for a bull to sanction his consecration. But it was important that no one should be able to dispute the title of the metropolitan whose business it was to pronounce the divorce ; and even at this date the rupture with Rome was not considered final. Other and more important measures, however, were The king's preparing men for a final severance from Rome during siasticai the years 1530-1534. The most remarkable of these ^''p''^"'^''''- was the Act which vested the supremacy of the English Church in the sovereign. We have already related that the clergy were punished for accepting Wolsey's legatine authority, it being argued that they were thus accessory to his supposed misdemeanours. Judges were found who ruled that for this ofience the whole body of the clergy were liable to the penalties of the "Prae- munire" statute; in other words, that their liberties and possessions were entirely at the mercy of the king. 156 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. To purcliase the royal pardon tlie Houses of Convocation -HiL^ paid an enormous sum of money. They were told that in the preamble to the Act granting this payment a form must be introduced asserting that the sovereign was supreme head of the English Church. The words suggested by Henry were, " the English Church, of which the king alone is protector and supreme head." This wording appeared to the clergy objectionably vague, if not irreverent. It certainly might be con- strued as giving the sovereign the powers hitherto vested in the pontiff, and though most of the clergy were inclined to renounce Roman supremacy, none wished for a Pope at home in the person of Henry YIII. To allay their fears, Henry disclaimed all pretence to interfere with the spiritual functions of the clergy, or disparage the Apostolical succession. He only insisted that tiie head of a Christian state must be the head of its Church also. As the view was expressed afterwards by its champion Gardiner, Henry claimed to be " a prince of his whole people, not of a part of it," and to " govern them in all things, not in some only ; and as the people constitute the Church of England, so he must needs be the supreme head of the Church, as he is the supreme head of the people." ^ Cranmer did his best to expound this view to Convocation. Still the members, especially those of the Lower House, were dis- satisfied. They insisted on a qualifying clause, " quan- tum 'per Christi legem licet etiam supremum caput," ^ and Henry had to be content with this modification of the title. To the " Reformation Parliament," however, the maintenance of the liberties of the Church was a matter ^ Gardiner, De vera obedientia. f, " Ecclesije et cleri Anglicani, cujus singularem protectorem, imicum ct supremum dominum, et quantum per Christi legem licet etiam supremum caput ipsius majestatem recognoscimus." — Wilkins, Cone, iii. 725. Feb. 1531. HENRY VIII. 157 of small importance. When the claim to supremacy was chap. embodied in an Act of Parliament in 1534, the qualify- — .-1— ing clause was omitted. The " Act of Supremacy " was succeeded by an Act yet more disgraceful to the national representatives. This made non-recognition of the Nov. 1534. new title punishable with death. It declared it to be treason " to imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm " against any of the royal family, or "to deprive any of them of their dignity, title, or name." The " Treason Act," as it is called, was apparently devised by Henry to bring to the scaffold More and Fisher, of whose fate we shall speak presently. It was repealed by 1 Edw. VI. c. 12. The " Act of Supremacy " was re- pealed in the first year of Mary, and never resuscitated. Under Elizabeth, who would not accept a more pre- tentious title than " Supreme Governor of the Church," an Act was passed which centred in the Crown all corrective jurisdiction for the punishment of " errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, etc." Such jurisdiction had really always been a constitutional prerogative of the Crown, though in recent times it had been invaded by papal pretensions. But Henry claimed, and by the servility of Parliament was enabled to exercise, a directive jurisdiction, or power to give orders to the clergy in matters of doctrine, discipline, and practice. And the same claim was made by those who represented the Crown in the reign of Edward VI. The mismanage- ment of the Church in which this claim at last resulted so disgusted England, that on Edward's death it was prepared to put Eoman supremacy again on its trial rather than tolerate a continuance of the lay papacy. AVith regard to the fine demanded of the clergy, it is to be noticed that the payment made by the Canterbury Convocation alone amounted to a million and a half of 158 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, CHAP. VII. modern monej''. The representatives of the laity were, of course, equally liable to a prcemunire, since all England had recognized Wolsey's legatine authority. But it was only the clergy whom Henry dared to despoil. From the Commons he received a grovelling apology for their fictitious offence, and with this he professed himself satisfied.^ The Com- The next reformatory measure came from the Com- mons '^ extort the mous, who, on March 18, 1532, petitioned the king for "submiS- T- n r T T'l • ^ • ^^ sionofthe reiiei irom divers clerical exactions, and especially c ergy. complained of being subject to canons which had never received assent of Parliament. The king was thus induced to send to the Houses of Convocation three Articles for signature, viz. (1) No constitution or ordinance shall be hereafter enacted by the clergy without the king's consent ; (2) The canons are to be reviewed by a committee of thirty persons, who shall abrogate therein whatever " is prejudicial to the king's prerogative and onerous to his Highness's subjects ; " (3) All such canons as the committee approve of shall be binding when ratified by the king. The third of these Articles was rejected by Convocation, acting under the influence of Bishop Fisher. Their acceptance of May, 1532. the othcr two was embodied in a subsequent Act of Parliament (January, 1534), called the "Statute of the Submission of the Clergy." This enacted that sixteen men of both Houses of Parliament and sixteen of the clergy should be named by the king to review the canons. It also ordered that henceforth all convoca- tions should be called by the king's writ ^ (instead of by the writ of the archbishop), and that nothing should be done therein without the king's licence. 1 See Amos, Statutes of Henry VIII., p. 57. 2 By an iinconstitutional refusal of this writ the anti-Church administratioa of George I. was able to suppress the Church's representative body. HENRY VIII. 159 We next notice the statute prohibiting the payment chap. of annates to Eome. This measure originated in a ^^}' . petition of Convocation in 1531. This petition is Annates, remarkable as proving that the idea of separation from hibited°at Eome was not unacceptable to the clergy ; indeed, that i^J-ance of the first suggestion of separation came from them. J°^^°'^^" How impoverishing the impost of annates was to the Church may be gathered from the fact that a newly appointed bishop was not only charged with fees for papal bulls before he could be consecrated, but also had to pay in advance the whole of his first year's income. Convocation prayed the King that this impost should be abolished, and that if the Pope oifered opposition, " forasmuch as S. Paul willeth us to withdraw ourselves from all such as walk inordinately, it may please the king's most noble majesty to ordain in the present Parliament that then ilie obedience of Mm and his people he loitlidrawn from the see of Horned This petition was immediately followed by an Act of Parliament ^ ordering that payment of annates should cease, and that the Pope should only receive a payment of five per cent, on the income of the see, as an acknowledgment for the requisite bulls ; and if the Pope should resist this measure and refuse bulls for consecration, then it should " be lawful for the bishops to be consecrated without them, and for the clergy to minister all manner of sacraments and sacramentals, any excommunication, interdiction, or inhibition of the Pope notwithstanding." Here again, however, we meet with a testimony that these reformatory measures were all subsidiary to the divorce business. This statute was not to be ratified by the king till Easter, 1533. It was doubtless levelled in terrorem, as a method of coerciug the Pope to pro- nounce the desired sentence. 1 23 Hen. VIII. c. 20. i6o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Negotia- tions with the Pope resumed to no purpose. Still more apparent was Henry's motive when the Parliament was inspired to pass the " Statute for the Eestraint of Appeals " (Feb. 1533). In this statute it is alleged that England is composed of a temporality and a spirituality, each competent to judge its own causes. Yet, despite the prohibitions of former kings, appeals have been made to the see of Rome in causes of matrimony and others, which have delayed and defeated justice. For the future all such causes are to be decided within the kingdom and in the several courts to which they belong.^ -^i^y spiritual per.son who shall refuse to execute the sentence of these courts shall be imprisoned or fined. Those who introduce censures from Eome shall be liable to the penalties already provided by the statute 16 Rich. II. Appeals are to be made from the archdeacon to the bishop, or from him to the arch- bishop or Dean of Arches. Here the right of appeal shall end, save in the case of the king and his heirs, who may appeal from the archbishop to the Upper House of Convocation. Thus was new machinery provided for effecting the divorce, in case the Pope should continue obdurate. It was by virtue of this statute that Cranmer actually took upon himself to give judgment in this matter in the following May. All these reformatory measures were wellnigh can- celled in the winter of this year. Francis, King of France, mediated between Henry and the Pope. An arrangement was pending that the former should give up all measures for a severance from Rome, and the Pope ' Spiritual causes, it -will be seen, are strictly confined to the spirituality "which," says the preamble, " always hath been reported and also found of that sort, that both for knowledge, integrity, and sufficiency of number it hath been always thought and is at this hour sufficient and meet of itself, without the inter- meddling of any exterior person or persons, to declare and determine all such doubts." We need not point out how utterly opposed to this principle is the practice of the present times. HENRY VII I. i6i should allow tlie divorce case to be reconsidered by chap. impartial judges at Cambrai. Henry's assent was to ^"- reach the Pope by a certain day. The English courier was despatched with the concession required, but failed to arrive in time.-^ Pressed by the Emperor Charles, and ignorant of Henry's acquiescence, the Pope took the fatal step by passing that sentence of March 23 of which we have made mention. The rupture was completed in the following year, when a new Pope, Paul III., was roused by the unjust executions of More and Eisher to pronounce sentences of excommunication and deposition against Henry VIII., and to absolve all his subjects from their allegiance. Against such hostility, however, England was forearmed by the statutes we have enumerated. But a few more measures were necessary to re- papai establish the independence of the English Church. JJrence in One of them was an Act prohibiting papal inter- proMbited ference in appointments to bishoprics. The " Statute of Provisors " and other Acts of recent reigns had in- validated the papal claim to nominate to English bishoprics ; and of late years the usual method of filling up a vacant see had been that which obtains now. A conge d'elire was given to the diocesan chapter, but was really made a legal fiction by the sovereign's preroga- tive of nomination. But even down to the date of Cranmer's consecration papal bulls were thought neces- sary to give final confirmation, and the Pope thus had it in his power to invalidate the sovereign's appoint- ment. This power was taken away by an Act of 1533, which required that no person shall " henceforth be presented to the Bishop of Rome, nor apply for bulls from him," and that the archbishop and bishops shall • See Hubert's Henry VIII. ; Kennctt, ii. pp. 170-173. M i62 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, at once consecrate the nominee of the king and chapter, " giving and using to him pall, and all other benedic- VII. " 1 Thesepara- tions, witliout applying for them to the see of Eome accom- The supremacy had as yet only heen sanctioned by ciergyac^^ Convocation ; now, expressed in unequivocal terms, it quiescmg. ^^g embodied in an Act of Parliament. Before this was done the Convocations and universities, and even the regular clergy, had spontaneously repudiated the Pope's pretensions to authority in our Church, declaring that the Bishop of Eome had " no greater jurisdiction " in this kingdom " than any other foreign bishop " ^ (spring and summer, 1534). By virtue of his new title Henry had charged the prelates to see that the name of the Bishop of Eome was struck out of all manner of "oraisons, rubricks, canons of mass books, etc." The mandate was cheerfully complied with, and the bishops were for the most part zealous in urging the clergy to preach about the supremacy of the sove- reign and " his just cause of matrimon}^" Thus was the first stage in the Eeformation reached, and a con- stitutional change established which made the English Church independent of Eome. " This statute was supplemented by 26 Hen. VIII. c. 14, " For the Nomina- tion of Suffragans and Consecration of them." Twenty-six towns are herein men- tioned as to be accounted suffragan sees, and the regulations for the appointment of their bishops are laid down. This Act is still in force. It is highly discreditable to our episcopate that until quite recently there was little thought of using what in thinly populated mediaeval England was always a recognized part of the Church's machinery. ^ See Wilkins, Cone, lii. 769, 782, 783; and Rymer, xiv. 493. How general this repudiation was is shown by Wharton's statement, that in his time there were in the Exchequer at least 175 instruments disowning papal jurisdiction. These con- tained the subscriptions of all the bishops, chapters, monasteries, colleges, hospitals, etc., of thirteen dioceses, and he knew where the subscriptions of the remaining dioceses were to be found : see Mr. J. H. Blunt, The Reformation, p. 275. HENRY VI 11. 163 CHAPTER VIII. i^cnrg imi, — continued. A.D. 1534-1547. Two distinguished malcontents — Implicated by Elizabeth Barton — And disposed of under the "Treason Act"— Careers of More — And Bishop Fisher— Cromwell in the ascendant (1530-1540) — His history — His scheme for spoiling the monasteries — Possible arguments in its defence — Precedents — Detailed account of the scheme — Its execution — Suppression of the smaller houses — Second visitation — Enforced resignation of the larger houses — The " Pilgrimage of Grace " — Third and final visitation — Fate of the ejected — Ex post facto Act of 1539 — Vandalism — How the spoil was spent — Effect on the House of Lords and the cathedrals — The loot at Canterbury— Henry excommunicated — Progress of Reformation — State of parties — The foreign Protestants and Henry — The Ten Arlicles passed — Progress of Reforming measures — Royal injunctions — Proceedings in Convocation — The " Bishops' Book " — More royal injunctions — The open Bible — Foreign Protestants again at Henry — The King no Protestant — Religious persecutions— A retrospect — Hunn and turbulent Protestantism in 1515 — Why ultra-Protestants were tolerated from 1534-1539— But persecuted from 1529-1534 — Instances— The sop to the Protestant faction — Romanists are the onlysufiferers from 1534 to November, 1538— The Six Articles of 1539— This Act not often enforced— Fall of Cromwell— Henceforward both extremes suffer — But an orderly Reformation is continued — The " King's Book " — Purgation of devotional offices— English Litany and King's Primer — The " Book of Homilies." To most persons, whether lay or clerical, the religions two dis- changes w^ere satisftictory. Two important exceptions maicon- mnst be noticed. Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher ^®^*®' were known to sympathize with the partisans of Queen Catharine ; they were also averse to the royal supre- macy. For the former cause they had been marked out for destruction by the king ; their scruples about forswearing their allegiance to the Pope were now made a means to ensnare them. Already they had i64 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, been imperilled by alleged implication in tlie affair of VIII. Elizabeth Barton, the nun of Kent. This unfortunate person had had her mind upset, it seems, by the subject of the queen's wrongs — a cause which had many ad- herents among the middle and lower classes. During her fits of hysteria she was wont to utter strange saj^ings, which the clergy in the neighbourhood passed off as prophecies with a view to gain.-^ Archbishop Warham and Bishop Fisher both believed in the in- spiration of the girl. More had an interview with her, but refused to hear her revelations when he found they bore on the great political question. She was led by her employers to litter predictions of the misfortunes which should befall the king if he persisted in di- vorcing Catharine. This caused a sensation, and in June, 1533, Cranmer thought it necessary to investigate the matter. The nun, the parish priest, and five monks were apprehended and examined ; and torture revealed the existence of a plot to place the Princess Mary on Implicated the throne. The names of Fisher and More were by Eliza- . p • betii mentioned in this worthless confession. Barton was AD. 1533. hanged with her six clerical adherents ; Fisher and More were reserved to be the victims of a more elabo- rate process. To the " Act of Succession," which made Anne Boleyn's children the lawful heirs to the crown, was attached, on the sole authority of the king, a form of oath to be taken by the leading persons in the State. This oath involved a repudiation of the authority of all foreign potentates, despite of any oath made to the contrary in former time. To More and Fisher, who were known to be maintainers of the papal supremacy, 1 Or perhaps to serve political ends. Dr. Booking, of Canterbury, and Richard Masters (the incumbent of Aldington, Joan's parish) appear to have been the chief agents. I HENRY VI I L 165 this oath was immediately offered. Both professed chap their inability to take it ; they were consequently com- — _!-- mitted to the Tower. In the autumn of 1534 theAnddis- . I'll posed of " Treason Act was brought m to ensure their destruc- under the tion. Eefusal to repudiate the Pope might be construed Act." as " imagining " to the disparagement of the king's ^'^' ^^^^ titles. The execution of ten of the monks of Charter- house for their inability to forswear papal supremacy was a presage of the fate awaiting these more dis- tinguished culprits. Nevertheless their case was not proceeded with till Pope Paul III., in May, 1535, drove Henry to fury by making Pisher a cardinal. They were then tried, condemned, and beheaded. We have already noticed More as one of the educa- careers of tional reformers. He had attained eminence as a lawj'cr and statesman, had been Speaker of the Commons, and in 1529 was invested with the Chancel- lorship, a dignity seldom conferred on a layman. Though a reformer, he was strongly opposed to the Protestant systems, and not only wrote treatises ex- posing their antinomian tendency, but suppressed the circulation of their literature with great severity. Among the works prohibited by More was Tyndale's translation of the New Testament,^ which he considered inaccurate, and likely to cause ill feeling among the lower classes. The Chancellor declared, however, that when the anti-Church literature had been suppressed, a translation of the Scripture should be made by 1 Printed at Cologne in 1525. To arrest its circulation Warham had unwiselj' bought up a whole edition. The prejudice against unauthorized translations of Scripture has been already alluded to. Tyndale's " prologues " and glosses (the former more bulky than the translation itself) did not tend to alter the opinion of the authorities. It is noteworthy that in some of Tyndale's editions (1531 and 1534) there occurs a wilful mutilation of the passage, 1 Pet. ii. 13, 14, which teaches submission to civil authorities. The words " whether it be to the king as supreme" are omitted. i66 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, "great learned and catholick persons." The earliest — .^L. of More's theological works is the " Supplication of Souls." This was written in answer to the " Supplica- tion of Beggars," a scurrilous production in which Simon Fish had assailed the doctrine of purgatory, and inveighed against the monks as monopolizing all the alms of England. Fish's cause was taken up by John Fryth, an Oxford Lutheran, at this time harboured abroad. Fryth was imprudent enough to return shortly afterwards to England. He was apprehended ^ by More's agents, and brought before Archbishop Cranmer and other prelates, who delivered him to the secular power to be burnt (July, 1533). With Eobert Barnes, another refugee, More disputed on the nature of the Church. Tyndale himself was attacked by More in his " Dialogue," and a controversy ensued, in which his adversary's antinomianism and denial of sacramental grace gave More a strong position. The epitaph which More composed as his own memorial contains the words " Furibns autem et homicidis, Jisereticisque moles- tus." That he thus prided himself on being a persecutor was in accordance with the spirit of the age. It appears, nevertheless, a deplorable inconsistency in a man whose mind had entertained the aspirations of " Utopia." The pious and self-denyino; Fisher had been, like And Bishop ^ "^ ^ n i ■ Pisher. Morc, an educational reformer. The sphere of his labours was Cambridge, where he had been President of Queen's College before his promotion to the episco- pate. He had been selected by the Lady Margaret, Countess of Eichmond, to be her confessor. He per- suaded his patroness to endow the foundations of S. John's and Christ's, Cambridge, and the two pro- fessorships which still bear her name. Yet for himself i See p. 192. HENRY VI 11. 167 he refused higher preferment than the poor bishopric of Eochester. Fisher had persistently opposed the divorce scheme, and — partly, perhaps, because he pene- trated Henry's motive in introducing ecclesiastical changes — he remained unshaken in his allegiance to the Pope when the other bishops gladly repudiated papal supremacy. Fisher met death with the serenity of a Christian; More, no less sincere in his religious convictions, did himself injustice by affecting on the scaffold the demeanour of a stoic. The death of Fisher afforded intense gratification to Anne Boleyn. The story of Herodias and John Baptist cannot but suggest itself, when we read how Henry's new queen demanded the dissevered head and buffeted the lips that had once protested against her consort's sin.^ Contemporaneously with Cranmer there emerged from cromweii obscurity a man of equal talent, but far less respectable ascendant, character — Thomas Cromwell. This man headed the 1540 political Protestant party for several years, and it is to his influence with the king that the spoliation and destruction of the monastic houses is to be ascribed. Before treating of this discreditable work, the details of Cromwell's career may be summarized for the benefit of the student. He appears to have been born at Putliey, his history, of obscure parents, in 1490. His early years were ' full of strange vicissitudes and gave but scant presage of his future greatness. He is said to have been suc- cessively a servant of the Marchioness of Dorset, a common soldier in the Italian army, and a clerk in a merchant's house, first at Venice, then at Antwerp. But the incidents relating to this j3eriod of his life are not well anthenticated. The first uncontested fact is that he had risen to the condition of a merchant at ' See J. H. Blunt, The Reformation, p. 422. i68 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Micldleburgli in the year 1512. Before 1520 lie had em- braced the avocation of a scrivener, with which he combined the lucrative but discreditable business of a money-lender. He became attorney to Cardinal Wolsey before 1528, and appears to have won by his ability the respect and confidence of the great statesman. Though threatened with danger by the impending ruin of Wolsey, he defended his master earnestly and skilfully in the House of Commons. The next we hear of him is that he had passed into the service of Henry, whose talent for discovering serviceable tools had been illus- trated but a little while before by his promotion of Cranmer. The scrivener's upward flight was as rapid as that of the Churchman. He was Master of the Jewels in 1532 ; Chancellor of the Exchequer for life, and a knight in 1533 ; Master of the Eolls, Secretary of State, and "Vicar-General" in 1534:. This newly coined title was exchanged for one equally anomalous — "Vicegerent in Ecclesiastical Causes" — in 1536. For his management of the spoliation of 1535-1539 he ap- pears to have received an enormous honorarium — thirty monastic manors ; to these were added the emoluments of the deanery of Wells. The top of the ladder was reached when in 1540 he was made Earl of Essex. His scheme Henry had probably cast a greedy eye on the themonas- monastic houses long before 1535, when he first pro- posed their suppression in his Council. The scheme of spoliation was apparently put in shape by the man who afterwards had charge of it — Thomas Cromwell — who had acquired a practical knowledge of the religious houses in serving under Wolsey. Henry's object was doubtless to replenish an exchequer drained by his un- bridled profusion and threatened with new calls by the quarrel with the emperor. But he had a pretext in HENRY VII I. 169 Wolsey's project for reforming the monasteries, since chap. that statesman had allowed that the smaller houses _Ii^ might well be suppressed. The reasons which in- fluenced Wolsey and other conscientious men in demanding a thorough reform of the monastic houses were probably these. (a.) Their uselessness. The ancient belief that heaven possible was most easily attained by a life of monastic seclu- j^ its sion had worn itself out. The learning which had ^^e^ence. once been monopolized by the monks had long found a home in the universities. The manual labour by which the monks had transmitted literature to posterity, was now rendered unnecessary by the inven- tion of printing. (h.) The laxity of the inmates. A community whose vocations and very raison d'etre were thus antiquated would naturally become corrupt. The monk was gene- rally an idle man, and did not pretend to that asceti- cism which had once been held to justify idleness. Many of the inmates were married ; more ought to have been. In some cases, notably at Fountains, Bury, Walden, and Langdon, the superior was a person of profligate habits or unbridled passions, and the subordi- nates followed his bad example. In many the superior was doubtless elected simply because he was no dis- ciplinarian. Nevertheless, the sweeping charge of immorality so often levelled against the monks and nuns of the sixteenth century was unknown to con- temporary censors of any character. Many good men desired a sweeping reform of the religious houses, but they had not discovered what Cromwell's inquisitors reported — that two-thirds of them were defiled by abominable impurities. Such imputations originated with men who were interested in discovering facts to I70 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, the prejudice of the houses, who showed themselves ^"^; in other matters glaringly unscrupulous, and who had no time to investigate fairly the scandalous gossip which they reported as matter of fact. (c.) Their injurious influence on the Church. The immunity of the religious houses from episcopal control was calculated to weaken the system of diocesan dis- cipline and aggrandize the see of Rome. The regular clergy had hitherto acknowledged no ecclesiastical authority save that of the Pope, and had often caused great disturbance by the resistance they oifered to the diocesans. The system of " appropriations," by which the tithes of benefices belonged to the monastic house and the care of souls to an ill-paid vicar, has been already mentioned. Often, perhaps, as little of the money was spent on the parish churches as under the regime of lay impropriators by which Henry replaced this system. (^.) Their injurious influence on the State. The number of houses was grossly disproportionate to the popula- tion ; so too were their nominal revenues to the wealth of England. They numbered more than six hundred. It is estimated that they actually enjoyed a tenth of the capital of the country, and that they might be credited with a larger proportion than this but for their practice of giving long leases. Much of this wealth went out of England to meet the exactions of the Pope, and the present relations of England and Rome were incompatible with the continuance of such tribute. Precedents. The powcr of the Crown to dissolve or transform religious corporations had been illustrated by cases occurring in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The Knight Templars had been dissolved in 1307, and HENRY VIII. 171 a papal bull put their property in tlie hands of the chap. king for a time. It was finally assigned by an Act ^U^ of Parliament to the brethren of the Hospital of S. John of Jerusalem. In 1416, again, the war with France suggested the propriety of dissolving the " alien priories " in England. Here also the property was transferred to other foundations. With some of the lands the monasteries of Sheen and Sion were en- dowed; others were given to New College and Winchester. Neither case afforded a precedent for the alienation of religious property to secular uses.^ Wolsey, as we have shown, had proposed to treat the smaller monasteries as the "alien priories" had been treated, transferring their endowments to more useful centres of religious education. For this project, besides the cases cited above, he could find precedents in the dealings of Archbishop Chicheley, the founder of All Souls ; of Bishop Waynfleet, the founder of Magdalen, Oxford ; or of Bishop Alcock, who had recently trans- formed S. Ehadagund's Nunnery into Jesus College, Cambridge. After the cardinal's overthrow, Henry had seized on Detailed those monastic revenues which had been destined to the scheme. enrich Oxford. The endowments of the cardinal's colleges and professorships, though subsidized by the fine unjustly wrung from the clergy, only filled the exchequer for a few years. Then the king conferred with his Council as to the propriety of a general spolia- tion of the monastic houses. To effect this a com- 1 That such alienation was legal is, however, hardly deniable. Kennett points out that " according to the most ancient laws of the kingdom," where it could be proved that Church property was applied without regard to " the use, cause, con- dition, or terms of the primary donation," it lapsed' to the heirs of those who had conferred it. And the Crown, of course, had the right to such property, if owner- ship could not be proved. See Kennett on Appropriations, p. 111. 172 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, mission was appointed to act under Cromwell. It was _Ii!^ to set on foot a visitation, which was to be the basis of a foimal report as to the state of the houses. This report was to be laid before Parliament, as a pretext for a Bill of Dissolution. The members of the com- mission were unscrupulous persons ^ chosen by Cromwell. Leigh, Leighton, London, and Ap Rice were to pre- side over the visitation of monks and nuns ; Richard Thornton, the bishop-suifragan of Dover, over that of the friars. Subordinated to these were several other persons of similar character. Lest the bishops should stop the sacrilegious work which was the real object of this visitation, a most singular use was made of A.D.1535. the royal supremacy. Thomas Cromwell was ap- pointed to " treat and examine all causes ecclesiastical " as the king's representative. He had power to nominate persons who should " visit all and singular churches, even metropolitan churches, cathedrals, and collegiate churches, hospitals, and monasteries," and have autho- rity to sequestrate revenues, make statutes, call synods, hold courts, receive resignations, preside at and direct the elections of prelates, institute and induct into possession of churches, etc. Cromwell's nominees were thus put on the footing of bishops ; while the diocesans had their'jurisdiction suspended by another instrument, which forbade them " to visit the monasteries, churches, etc., or to exercise any jurisdiction, or in any way to interfere with our general visitation." Cranmer 1 That they were chosen because unscrupulous can hardly be contested. London had afterwards to do penance for gross immorality, and died a prisoner in the Fleet on the charge of perjury. Leighton, a man of similar character, pandered to the king's vices, and by bribes secured the deanery of York. After his death it was found that he had pawned the cathedral plate. The arrogance and the extor- tions of Leigh were complained of to Cromwell by one of his fellow-commissioners. On the statements of these and similar persons the oft-cited indictments against the monks are really based. HENRY VIII. 173 having acquiesced in this arrangement with his Tisiial chap. complaisance, the visitation of houses with incomes — ^-^ tinder £200 began. The visitors were ostensibly an its execu- inqnisitorial body who came with the purpose ofpressionof compiling a report. They were instructed, however, to i^ousS^ put such pressure on the religious corporations as to compel them to resignation. And their more special care was to strip these establishments of the jewels, crosses, and ecclesiastical ornaments with which the piety of former years had enriched them. These were packed and forwarded to London. The visitation began in October, 1535. Absurd though it may appear, three months were considered sufficient time for the compila- tion of a rej)ort on the state of the religious houses, and in February, 1536, a Bill was brought in for the dissolu- tion of those with incomes under £200 a year. The " Black Book," as the report of the visitors was called, was, of course, filled with such scandalous stories about the lives of the monks and nuns as could be raked up in the neighbourhood of the various houses. It is not much to be regretted that it was destroyed in Queen Mary's time; had it survived its testimony would be worthless. It served, however, to give a high moral tone to proceedings of which royal cupidity was the true explanation. Prudence suggested that the larger houses should not yet be attacked, and the abbots in the Upper House seemed to have sacrificed their weaker brethren in the hope of thus saving themselves. They offered no resistance to the Bill of February, 1536. The revenues of the three hundred and seventy-six smaller houses thus lapsed to the king, to be disposed of " to the honour of God." By the " Act of Suppression " and the previous loot Henry appears to have secured about a million and a 174 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. VIII, Second visitation. Enforced resigna- tion of the larger houses. The "Pil- grimage of Grace." AD. 1536-7. quarter of modern money. A great part of tliis booty, however, had to be dispersed among the aristocracy to purchase connivance at a more extensive spoliation. A Court of Augmentation was established to gather in the revenues, and a second visitation was undertaken by agents of this court to complete the demolition of the doomed establishments, and to harass the larger houses. Such of these as should resign lapsed, according to the recent Act, to the king. Every effort was made, there- fore, to coerce them to resignation. The inmates were freely paid to accuse one another of breaches of dis- cipline,^ that the reputations of the communities might be disparaged. Temptations of a more hateful character were offered to the nuns with a similar motive. Preachers were sent about the country to defame the monastic establishments in sermons. The gentry were promised and actually given a liberal share of the plunder ; the secular clergy were soothed with promises of the rectorial tithes, hitherto held by the monasteries, and really destined to pass into the more tenacious grasp of lay impropriators. The j)rogress of this business was delayed by an insurrection, incited perhaps by the expelled regulars, but joined in readily b}^ the lower classes, who were mainly dependent on the religious houses for education, alms, and employment. The " Pilgrimage of Grace " began at Louth in Lincolnshire, and spread throughout the eastern and northern counties. The insurgent forces were headed by Robert Aske, a Yorkshire squire ; with him were Lords Darcy and Hussey, and the Archbishop of York. Marching under a standard marked with the five wounds of Christ, the insurgents 1 See Fuller, Ch. Hist., ii. 215, 216, ed. 1837 ; aud cf. State Papers, Henry VIII., vii. 540. HENRY VIII. 175 clamoured for a redress of the Churcli's wrongs. The chap. chief ground of complaint was, of course, the recent mis- treatment of the religious houses. But the whole ecclesiastical policy of the king was really disparaged by the insurgents. The northern clergy who joined in this movement held a kind of convocation, to condemn the recent measures affecting the Church. They voted that no temporal officer can be supreme head of the Church or have jurisdiction in the same ; that the Pope, having been declared head of the Church by Councils, ought to be so regarded ; that papal dispensations and indulgences are efficacious ; that lands given for pious uses cannot be alienated for secular purposes. In oppo- sition perhaps to the Ten Articles recently accepted by the southern Convocation, they denounced all such as preached against purgatory, pilgrimages, and worship- ping of saints and images. Henry preferred to quell this rebellion by diplomacy of a questionable character. He held out hopes of meeting the demands of the insurgents, and he pro- mised a general pardon. He was thus enabled to secure the persons of the leaders. The undisciplined rabble was then routed, and the royal word was dishonoured by the execution of Darcy, Hussey, Aske, twelve abbots, and many clergy. The insurrection was a pretext for heavier pressure on the surviving corpora- tions. A third visitation was instituted in the summer r^^. •, Third and of 1537, to charo;e them, wherever possible, with com- final visita- plicity m the late insurrection, and to induce them by systematic intimidation to a so-called voluntary surrender. Great was the satisfaction of the inquisitors, and less harsh the fate of their victims, if the latter could be coerced to attest the justice of the spoliation by putting their names to ready-made confessions of Fate of the 176 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, misdemeanour and immorality. Such compliance was '^"^' rewarded by an augmentation of the miserable pension with which the ejected regulars were turned adrift. On the other hand, it was easy to entangle such as were not amenable to persuasion within the meshes of the law. It was held treasonable for an abbot to conceal the property of his own church. For thus ejected. attempting to save Glastonbury from spoliation, Abbot Whiting, a man of blameless character, was slaughtered, or, as Cromwell words it in his own memorandum on the subject, it was decided that " he should be tried and also be executed." It is satisfactory to find that in some few cases adequate provision was made for the victims of royal avarice. Tewkesbury, where the abbot's income was to be £266 13s. 4fL, and that of the monks at least £6 13s. 4c?., appears to have fared best of all the religious houses. Some abbots had as little as £6 ; and not a few monks appear to have been compelled to begin life afresh with a single payment of forty shillings and a priest's gown. The pension of the nuns was usually less than that of the monks. What the trials of some of these disbanded regulars must have been may easil}^ be conceived. A testimony to their misery may be found in the sanguinary Acts against mendicancy which shortly followed. So suc- cessful was this final visitation that there was no occasion for any Act suppressing the large houses. The previous Act had given to the Crown all such monasteries as should resign within the twelve months following; the only legislation now required was an Act legalizing the plunder of the houses which had resigned after the expiration of the twelvemonth. Ex post This ex post facto sanction was given by an Act of 1539. passed in the spring of 1539, which is sometimes mis- termed the second " Act of Suppression." HENRY VIII. 177 The barbarous treatment of tbe edifices and their costly accessories, which was the immediate result of the visitation, has been alluded to. The bells, glass, vandaiisir lead, pavement, timber, and carved work were sold for a mere song, or were left to the mercy of the rabble. The jewels, moneys, and plate were carefully packed up to become the prey of robbers of a higher class. Some pains were taken to prevent the utter loss of the literary treasures of the monasteries. John Leland, the king's antiquary, and John Bale were engaged at this time in making extracts from the chronicles and other manuscripts of the monks. Nevertheless the damage done to the cause of English literature^ in this season of spoliation was incalculable. It must also be added that with the monasteries the ecclesiastical style of art perished — architecture sus- taining a blow which it has never recovered, — and that the ruin of the great educational nurseries necessitated that decadence at the universities which was so bitterly deplored by Latimer. Mr. Perry estimates that the gross gain which accrued How the to the Crown by the dissolution of the monasteries was, spent. in modern value, £38,400,000. Even in view of the reckless extravagance of Henry's court, the system of bribery which the scheme entailed,^ and the king's habit of lavishing gifts of preposterous value on the favourites of the hour, the fate of these enormous revenues cannot be accounted for. The portion ceded, by way of compensation, to the causes of philanthropy ' See Bale's own account in the Declaration upon Leland's Journal, 1549. ^ Lord Audley, the Chancellor, received eight monastic demesnes ; Lord Clinton, thirteen; Cranmer, eight (some of them for poor relations and dependents) ; Lord Russell, three of great value ; Lord Parr, four; the Duke of Norfolk, thirteen; the Duke of Northumberland, eighteen ; the Duke of Somerset, thirteen ; the Duke of Suffolk, thirty. N 178 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. VIII. Effect on the House of Ijords and ttie cathedrals. and religion was scanty indeed. Of revenues so spent the foUowins: is the account : — S. Bartholomew's and S. Thomas's Hospitals were allowed to remain endowed, for the use of the poorer classes. Some of the mo- nasteries were turned into collegiate churches {e.g. Eipon, Beverley, and Manchester) ; others survived to be converted into parish churches, as S. Albans, Croy- land, Stow, Malvern, etc. In most of these cases, some part at least of the ancient revenues was usually re- tained as an endowment. At Oxford, Wolsey's splendid plans with respect to Christ Church were completed in a meagre fashion. Cambridge, more fortunate, gained the magnificent institution of Trinity College. Six new sees were founded and inadequately endowed, viz. Oseney (near Oxford), Peterborough, Bristol, Gloucester, Chester, and Westminster. The last-named became the prey of Edward's Council, and was never restored to its episcopal dignity. The dissolution of the monasteries necessarily in- volved a complete change in the character of the House of Lords. Hitherto the majority of the members had been spiritual lords, since the abbots and priors who had seats were far more numerous than the bishops. The ejection of these practically changed the House from an ecclesiastical to a lay assembly. The cathedral system was also affected by the downfall of the monks. In eight of the cathedrals — Canterbury, Win- chester, Durham, Ely, Norwich, Worcester, Carlisle, and Rochester — the chapters were composed of regular clerg5\ As the regulars had always professed to be independent of episcopal authority, this organization was necessarily detrimental to diocesan discipline. In some cases, moreover, the secular clergy had really a prior claim to the cathedral emoluments, the regulars HENRY VII I. 179 having succeeded in ousting their brethren in the chap. Norman period, when the monastic system was in the , V^\ ascendant. On these grounds the establishment of secular canons in such towns, and the conversion of the -• cathedral priories into colleges, might be defended. The restoration of a secular chapter at Canterbury, The loot at where^the monks of Christ Church had held sway since bury^^ the Conquest, was preceded by a curious manifestation "^•^■■^^^®- of hostility against the mart^-red Thomas Becket. Hitherto no English saint had received so much vene- ration as S. Thomas of Canterbury. His influence in the next v^orld was attested by miracles, his popularity in this by a shrine which literally blazed with gold and precious stones. But to Henry the canonized primate was odious, as personifying the triumph of the Church over the throne. " Thomas Becket " was gravely cited by the Attorney-General to answ^er a charge of treason, contumacy, and rebellion. Thirty days in succession a pursuivant read this summons at the celebrated shrine. Neglecting to regard it, the contumacious saint was deprived of his festival, special office, and other commemorative honours, and the priceless treasures of his shrine were appropriated by the king (August, 1538). This proceeding caused great indignation in the papal court. A sentence of excommunication against Henry had been pending ever since the exe- cution of Bishop Fisher, but the intervention of the King of France had stayed its publication. Paul III. g-g now issued the bull declaring Henry excommunicate excom- ° '' muDicated, and deposed, and his subjects absolved from their allegiance. We must now resume our account of the religious Progress of Eeformation of this reign. The constitutional change tion. which emancipated England from the tyranny of the i8o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, papal court was, as we have oTDserved, acceptaV)le at first _.„J:_ to almost all classes. As to the propriety of making changes in matters of doctrine there was not the same unanimity. And the course of royal policy with refer- ence to the Church becomes henceforth difficult to follow, inasmuch as Henry was induced by interest or religious sympathies to patronize now the men of the state of Old, now those of the New Learning. An account of parties. , . the chief agencies which regulated the course of Re- formation in this reign will make the events we have to describe more intelligible. (1) On the throne was a man well read in theology, who had a real wish for the Church's welfare, but a stronger wish to enjoy undis- puted supremacy and inexhaustible revenues. The party which could best minister to these latter tastes could usually count on securing consideration for its theological tenets. Henry's own views, when not biased, might now be defined as Catholicism without the Pope. He was a strong believer in the efficacy of sacraments, was regular in his attendance at mass, had little sympathy for the new hair-splitting controversies about justification by faith, and was very determined that the modern religionists should not disturb public peace or endanger constituted authority in England, as they had done abroad. (2) The party henceforth known as the men of the " Old Learning " were for the most part prepared to be rid of papal supremacy, provided its repudiation did not lead to precipitate changes in doctrine and discipline. How far reform ought to go they were not agreed. These men were much frightened by Henry's spoliation of the monasteries. Many of them, as we have seen, would now fain retrace their steps, and restore to the Pope the powers which the king had so much abused. Most of them were hence- HENRY VIIL i8i forth anti-reformers rather perhaps from caution than chap. conviction. Some, however, became so pronounced in ^i". their repudiation of the royal supremacy as to bring on themselves the penalties of the law ; and this cause produced more martyrs in England than that of Pro- testantism. The leading men of this party were Lee, Archbishop of York; Tonstal, Bishop of Durham; Stokesley, Bishop of London ; and Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester. (3) The party of the " New Learning " included many heterogeneous elements. Its most respect- able members were men who were actuated by a sincere desire to reform the Church, and who thought this might be done by applying to all the doctrines and practices assailed by Luther the test of Scripture and primitive Confessions. They were prepared to accept whatever changes should be thus sanctioned, but they were for the most part determined not to decatholize the Church in Protestant fashion. They had not, however, a very high idea of the prerogatives of the spiritualty, and they did not object when Henry issued licences to bishops, suspended and restored their powers, or obtruded on Convocation a lay "Vicar-General" as president — proceedings which somewhat staggered the men of the Old Learning, At the head of this school were Cranmer, the primate ; Goodrich, Bishop of Ely ; Latimer, Bishop of Worcester ; Fox, Bishop of Hereford ; and Hilsey, Bishop of Rochester. But the New Learning had also adherents of a very different character. It was dis- paraged by sectaries and fanatics of the lower orders, whose impatience could not brook the leisurely method of reform contemplated by their ecclesiastical superiors, and whose silly and irreverent tirades on the grave questions at issue frequently brought them to condign punishment. It had also, like the Lollard school, a i82 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, following of demagogues and socialist agitators, sucli as ^^^; reap a harvest off all can.ses that are subversive of establislied system. Worst of all, the New Learning had, in the upper classes, champions of the Cromwell type — men who affected anti- Church sentiments with the view of raising themselves to opulence or political importance, and who would pander to Henry's avarice at the expense of the ecclesiastical revenues. The foreign In 1535-36 Cromwell's machinery for despoiling the and Henry, nionasteries was working well, and the anti-Church party was in high favour at court. The Protestant princes of Germany met at Smalcald to form a league in support of the new religious systems. The English king was, it seems, nearly persuaded to identify his cause with Protestantism by joining in this league. Such a course would probably have necessitated the acceptance of the " Confession of Augsburg." Gardiner was fortunately at hand to insist that union with the Pio- testants would be derogatory to English independence, and would really impede the desired Eeformation. The king gave up this project, but so far deferred to Pro- testantism as to draw up Articles for the English Church which were partly based on the Augsburg " Confession." The Ten In the preparation of the Ten Articles the king was pass2^ helped probably by Cianmer and Fux. Policy or A.D. 1536. iiigher motives infused into this formulary a spirit of concession, so that while it was a compliment to the Protestants, it enforced on the conservative party at home nothing which they would deem objectionable. Convocation was at this time sitting, with Cromwell as President of the Upper House, the King having deter- mined that his ignorant " Vicar-General " should have all the honour which Church assemblies had formerly paid to the papal legate a latere. To Convocation then VIII. HENRY VIII, 183 the Articles were sent, and by botli Houses they were chap. readily accepted. The Ten Articles may be briefly summarized thus : — I. The foundations of the faith — are the Scriptures and three Creeds, as interpreted by the four Holy Councils and by approved doctors of the Church. What these interpreters have condemned ought to be repro- bated by all clergymen. II. Baptism — is necessary to salvation, as cleansing from sin and conferring the gift of the Holy Ghost: it ought to be administered to infants. III. Penance — is a sacrament instituted for the re- covery of those who have fallen away after baptism ; it requires contrition, confession, and amendment : the absolution is pronounced by the priest on the authority given to him by Christ in the Gospel. IV. The sacrament of the Altar : — The self-same Body and Blood of the Saviour which were born of the Virgin Mary are declared to be present, under the form of bread and wine, " vere, suhstantialiter,^ et realiter." V. Justification — is said to be " attained by contrition and faith joined with charity for the sake of the merits of Christ's Passion." VI. Images — are useful as helps to prayer, but care must be taken lest the reverence paid to them lead to idolatry ; they are not to be censed or presented with offerings. VII. Saints — are to be honoured, not with the honour due to God, but to the end that Christ may be glorified for the virtues He has planted in them. VIIL Prayers to saints — are permitted, not because saints can take the place of the One Mediator, but because they can intercede with God on man's behalf. ^ The term substantialiter implies, of course, the dogma of transubstantiation. i84 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. I^- Rites and ceremonies — whether as pertains to viir. vestments or to such practices as using candles on Candlemas Day, ashes on the first day of Lent, palms on the last Sunday in Lent, etc., are esteemed useful and laudable, " not as having power to remit sin, but only to stir and lift up our minds to God." X. Purgatory : — The place where souls departed abide is not known, " nor the name thereof and kind of pains therein," but prayers and masses on their behalf are a charitable work, though abused by the Bishop of Rome. Progress of This Convocation also ruled that Church holidays measures, had been so multiplied as to conduce to idleness and lewdness rather than real devotion ; it therefore abolished many of the minor Church holidays — those especially which fell in the harvest season. It also appointed one day (the first Sunday in October) to be observed as the Feast of Dedication by all churches. In view of the Pope's proposal to hold a General Council at Mantua in 1537, Convocation voted that though true General Councils were most valuable, a Council summoned " not Christianly and charitably, but for and upon private malice and ambition, or other worldly respects," was worthless, and that " neither the Bishop of Rome nor any one prince " had power to call a General Council without the express consent of i\i^ residue of Christian princes, " and specially such as have im^erium merum — that is, the whole entire and supreme government and authority over all their subjects." The Ten Articles were published by the king as *' devised by the kinges highnes majestic to stablyshe Christen quietnes amonge us," and as " approved by the consent and determination of the holy clergie." " Christen quietnes " was further insured by an order suspending all clergy, except bishops and cathedral HENRY VIH. 185 preachers, from their pulpit duties until Michaelmas. chap. The parish priests were thus prevented from speaking '^"i- on behalf of the monasteries. By virtue of his supre- Royai niacy the king issued at the same time a set of " In- tions." junctions " to the clergy. These were ten in number. ^'^ ^^^^' The clergy were enjoined to preach once a quarter against the Pope ; to inform their people as to the new arrangements about holidays, and as to the doctiine of the Ten Articles with respect to ceremonies, saints, and images ; to make them learn intelligently the Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Ten Commandments in the vulgar tongue ; to provide for the proper administration of the sacraments ; to live soberly and studiously ; to give alms ; to tax themselves to provide one exhibition at the universities for every £100 of income; and to expend one-fifth of their benefices on the repair of their chancels and glebe houses. Hitherto the two great parties in Convocation had Proceed- worked together harmoniously. The insurrection in vocation, the north did much to impair this good feeling, and when Convocation met in January, 1537, there was some angry speaking on the subject of the minor sacraments. Cromwell insulted the House by introducing a Scotch Protestant refugee, named Aless or Allen, to act as his ^ts as a mere form. Dean Hook writes: "It is wise, however, to cling to a form which may hereafter be inspired with life. The ceremonial opening of Convocation was for many years a mere form, but by attending to the form the Convocation was prepared to act, when that liberty of action ])crmitted to all other institutions could no Ioniser be held from the Church of England. The time may come— much to be deplored — when, in a revolutionary age, it may be the duty of the Englisli Church in a popular movement to take a decided part against the Crown, and nothing is to be despised which gives to any inbtitution the power of free action." — Archbishops, " Thomas Cranmer," p. 237. EDWARD VI. 209 ceded to the dean and cliapter. This proceeding excites chap. our indignation as an encroachment on the liberty of ■-J^X- the subject. It is yet more reprehensible in that it led contemporaries and posterity to believe that the arch- bishop held those low views with regard to his sacred office which were entertained by Somerset and the Gospel " professors." Dean Hook has, we think, cleared Cranmer ^ of real participation in such views, pointing out that in the " Bishops' Book " of 1537, in the " King's Book" of 1543, and in the Catechism of 1548, the arch- bishop plainly traces Holy Orders to an Apostolic source, was And he is, perhaps, right in describing Cranmer as an an^Eras'^ " ultra-Tory " rather than an Erastian, maintaining that *^^^^ the nomination to bishoprics was vested absolutely in the Crown, just as he maintained that the king held his Crown of hereditary right, and not (as all other primates had believed)" by consent of Church and State. Cranmer may have known that such royal prerogative no more makes the Crown the source of episcopal functions, than the prerogative of a lay patron makes him competent to confer Holy Orders. But the Protestant statesmen thought otherwise, and we do not find that Cranmer tried to enlighten them. Having done their best to secularize the Church's Appropria- officers, the party in power made another clutch at the chantries. Church's revenues. A bill was brought in to confer ^'^' ■"•^^^ on Edward those endowments of chantries, hospitals, and guilds which an Act of Parliament had granted to his father. Edward would, of cour.se, be represented ' This, however, may well be doubted in view of the correspondence between the arclibishop and the committee of divines appointed to compose the Erudition. Cranmer actually commits himself to such statements as these: "A bishop may make a priest by the Scripture, and so may princes and governors also." " He that is appointed to be bisliop or priest needeth no consecration by the Scripture, for election or appointmc nt thereto is sufiBcient." — See Cranmer, Remains (Parker Society), p. 117. 2IO ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. by tlie Council. The chantries were chapels endowed for the offering of prayers and masses on the founder's behalf. It was now plausibly argued against these foundations that " a great part of superstition and error in Christian religion " was due to the retention of masses for the dead. Cranmer on this occasion endeavoured to resist the Protector. The uselessness of masses for the dead he could not j^et have realized, and he per- haps dreaded lest this insidious bill should be a means of despoiling the universities. Adopting for the nonce the line of the conservative divines, he moved that the measure might well be postponed till the king should be of age. His proposal won the support of the Com- mons. But a hungry clique in the House of Lords vehemently abetted the Protector's scheme, and the bill was carried. The lands and other endowments of the chantries were nominally made over to the king. They were really sold for little or nothing to Somerset's partisans. When times are ripe for change, it requires no ordinary wisdom and firmness to enforce the distinction between reform and revolution. Henry had found it necessary to curb the violence of the Protestant sectaries with the Violence " Act of Six Articles." This and the Acts of Henry IV. Reformers, ^^cl Henry V. against Lollards were, of course, repealed by the Protector. The party of disorder had full liberty of action, and it seemed likely that Henry's pro- gressive reformation would give place to a destruc- tive outbreak. Two extreme men. Barlow Bishop of S. David's, and Eidley, principal of Pembroke Hall, Cam- bridge, were encouraged to denounce the old ceremonial in sermons at S. Paul's Cross. Their note was taken up by a host of sycophant preachers. In vain Gardiner pleaded with the Protector that the use of images and EDWARD VI. 211 holy water might be continued without danger of chap. superstition, if the people were properly instructed ; __ ^^'^ . that it would be found easier to raise than to direct this flood of popular captiousness ; above all, that reli- gious innovations were inappropriate while a child was on the throne.^ The ultra-Protestants had it all their own way. A visitation of dioceses was ordered by the The visita- Protector, which threatened to deal with the churches ^o^eses. much as Cromwell had dealt with the monasteries. "^^^- ^^'*'^' Every picture, every image was to be treated " so that there should be no memory of the same." Stained glass Desecra- was destroyed ; frescoes were whitewashed ; bells and ornaments. altar plate, where not concealed by faithful Churchmen, were seized and consigned to the melting-pot. For the execution of these outrages the kingdom was divided into six circuits ; to each circuit was appor- tioned a committee composed of two gentlemen, a civi- lian, a divine, and a registrar, and accompanied by a cortege of Protestant preachers. Following the prece- dent of Cromwell's visitation, the Protector suspended the powers of the bishops while the visitation lasted. "Injunctions" with regard to the future performance of clerical duties were to be circulated by the visitors. The purport of these was that incumbents were to use tlie Litany in the English tongue ; to preach about the royal supremacy at least four times a year ; to set up copies of the Bible and of Erasmus's Paraphrase of the Gospels ; and to take heed that all shrines, pictures, and paintings were destroyed. The " Book of Homilies " Enforce- was also forced upon their acceptance by these " In- ^l^rst junctions." We have already mentioned the publica- Ho^j^jfes." tion of this work by Archbishop Cranmer. Such curates as were unable to produce original sermons ' See the Letters in Foxe, Acts and Monuments, vol. vi. p. 24 and seg. 212 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. were now charged to preach one of the Homilies every Sunday. It need scarcely be observed that this invasion of clerical rights was as impolitic as it was discredit- able to its authors. The experiment of conducting visitations by means of an inquisitorial commission had been tried and universally reprobated when the monas- teries were despoiled. The enforcement of a new- religious manual on the sole authority of the primate was unprecedented. It was a silly feat of absolutism — the more silly in that the sanction of Convocation would doubtless have been easily obtained for the " Book of Homilies." We may add that it was a feat charac- teristic of such a mind as Crammer's. Like most weak rulers, the primate could atone for vacilla- tion and neglect of duty by occasional instalments of tjranny in quarters where tyranny could not be resented. The liberties of the Church were now bravely main- tained by Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester. He did not admire the Homilies or the Paraphrase, and believed that the former publication contradicted the authori- tative Erudition of 1543. Nor did he see on what ground he, as a bishop, was expected to enforce the " Injunctions." They had no authority,^ and they were not needed. In short, he saw his " late sovereign slandered, religion assaulted, the realm troubled, and ' No tenable theory of the relations of Church and State admits of such acts of usurpation as were perpetrated in the reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. The sovereign has no more right to encroach on the functions of sjmods or eccle- siastical officers by virtue of a royal supremacy over the national Church, than he has to supersede the secular judges and administer justice in person, on the plea that he is " over all causes within his dominion supreme." Nor would the acquiescence of courtier prelates of the Cranmer type make such transfer of jurisdiction a whit more constitutional. Gardiner, in arguing that royal " Injunc- tions "cannot supersede constitutional rights, instances the fate of VVolsey, who had (according to the judges) incurred a prczmunire for serving Henry too well. See the Letter in Foxe, vol. vi. p. 43. EDWARD VL 213 peaceable men disquieted." He could but cry — Let chap. things remain as Henry VIII. had left them. The ^^' ~. prelate's influence was great; it was therefore deter- mined to purchase his connivance with an offer of a seat in the Privy Council. But Gardiner was not of He is im- the venal order of statesmen so common at this time. and°^^ He remained true to his convictions, and refused both ^^^p"'^®^ " Injunctions" and Homilies. He was thereupon com- mitted to the Fleet. Shortly afterwards, he was re- quired to preach before the king on the authority of the Council, the abolition of chantries, the use of common prayer in the vernacular, and other innovations. His sermon, says an unfriendly historian, " was such as a moderate High Church English divine might preach at the present day, with applause even from Evangeli- cals." ^ It was nevertheless deemed unsatisfactory ; he was committed to the Tower, and the Government licence empowering him to act as Bishop of Winchester was withdrawn. Later on, the Council disgraced itself by giving the bishopric to Poynet, a professed ultra- Protestant, who consented to pay an enormous per- centage of the episcopal revenues. Poynet was a man Poynet, Ms of some ability, and the Catechism which was published with the forty-two Articles of 1553 was his com- position. But his moral character was notoriously bad. It appears that in July, 1551, he was convicted of living in open adultery with a butcher's wife, and compelled to pay the outraged husband a yearly fine. A less determined resistance was offered by Bonner, Bishop Bishop of London, a prelate of staunch Catholic prin- ciples, but in character altogether inferior to Gardiner. Bonner professed to receive the " Injunctions " and ' Froude, History of England, vol. vi. p. 347. 214 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. IX. Homilies "under protest. This was not considered suffi- cient, and an incarceration in the Fleet soon induced him to withdraw his protest. He was accordingly restored for a time to liberty. Foreign Protestantism had in vain attempted to meddle with the English Eeformation under Henry. The present reign was more propitious to such in- fluences. Continental refugees swarmed into England, and for a time obtained influence among the clergy and in the universities. Cranmer, " ever learning," accorded them a patronage which was too often requited with an offensive assumption of spiritual superiority. The Lutherans appear to have had most influence with the primate ; the Calvinists were the most insolent and dictatorial. Vermigli, commonly called Peter Martyr, who had struck out a line between those of Luther and Zuingli, was placed in the divinity chair at Oxford, in 1548. Bucer, an excellent divine of similar senti- ments, held the same position at Cambridge, and with him came Paul Fagius, an erudite Hebraist. Bernard Ochin, a less creditable sample of foreign Protestantism, who defended polygamy and eventually became a Socinian, was made a prebend of Canterbury. John a Lasco, a learned Polish nobleman, was appointed superintendent of the foreign congregations in London, and is supposed to have had much weight with Cranmer. It must, however, be admitted that none of the religious formularies of this reign gave satis- faction to the foreigners. They were the first to abuse every publication ^ of the Reforming prelates, and ' The usual tone of the foreign teachers is illustrated by a letter written by John ab Ulmis to Bullinger on the subject of Cranmer's Catechism : " I would have you know this for certain, that this Thomas has fallen into so heavy a slumber that we entertain but a very cold hope that he will be aroused even by your most learned letter. For he has lately published a Catechism, in which he EDWARD VI. 215 showed themselves utterly unable to distinguish be- chap. tween reformation such as Henry had inaugurated and ^^•_. , schism such as had found favour on the Continent. Had matters been left entirely in their hands, the Church would doubtless have become a Protestant sect. When Edward died, these clamorous divines hastily fled, resigning the crown of martyrdom to the prelates whose faint-heartedness they had so often impugned. We have noticed the publication of an English Litany in 1545, and the appointment of a commission to revise the missal and breviary. It is not clear how far this commission had proceeded before the death of ^iie Henry. On the accession of Edward two crucial ques- ^^charist •^ -I contro- tions affecting the character of the future missal ^ersy. became the subject of much public discussion. The divines of the Old Learning maintained the dogma of transubstantiation, and discerned in the Holy Eucharist a sacrificial efficacy, which might benefit the souls of the departed. Cranmer's continental friends, on the other hand, though differing among themselves as to the meaning, value, and efficacy of the Sacrament, were unanimous in disavowing transubstantiation, and in treating the sacred rite as a communion rather than a sacrifice. Many English divines held these views, com- and Cranmer was fast inclining to them. On Decem- ^^^^^^s ber 2, 1547, Convocation had unanimously resolved that the Sacrament ought to be received in both kinds. Government, perhaps mindful of the effect of such religious changes on the much-coveted cbantries, had promptly passed an Act to the same effect (Dec. 20). has not only approved that foul and sacrilegious transubstantiation of the Papists in the Holy Supper of our Saviour, but all tbe dreams of Luther seem to him sufBciently well grounded." In a similar strain John Burcher writes to Bullinger with reference to the same subject. 2l6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. In March, 1548, without further appeal to Convoca- tion, a Latin-English missal was published in the The Latin- king's name which provided for the change of practice. missal. This missal was compiled by the thirteen divines^ who were engaged in revising the ancient Offices, and who at the close of this year brought out the new Book of Common Prayer, commonly called the Prayer-book of 1549. In this missal we find a less marked deviation from the mediaaval usage than in the work which superseded it. The service is in Latin until the priest has himself partaken of the elements, and the holy rite is termed a sacrifice ^ for living and dead. The English portion begins with an exhortation not very different from our "Dearly beloved in the Lord." Then come the address, " Ye that do truly and earnestly repent," the Confession, and the Absolution, the last differing slightly from the form now in use. Then the " comfortable words," the prayer of humble access, and the formulae of administration. The clauses, " Take and eat this, etc.," " Drink this, etc.," as yet form no part of these formulae. The Office then closes with the blessing. The greater part of this Office was, of course, taken from the ancient missals ; what new matter was added was borrowed from the " Consultation " of Hermann, Archbishop of Cologne. * Cranmer, Day, Goodryke, Skyp, Holbeach, Ridley, and Thirlebj', all of the episcopate ; Deans May, Taylor, and Haynes ; and Doctors Eobertson, Redman, and Cox. Day, Thirleby, and Skyp formed a conservative minority which protested against the changes embodied in the Prayer-book which their brethren brought out at the end of this year. ^ It is plain that a prominence is given to the sacrificial character of the function which is missing in the Prayer-book of 1549. In the latter, as in our present Prayer-book, the sacrificial character is not excluded, but made subordinate. It is mentioned only in the prayer which now follows the act of reception. In the Missal of 1548, on the other hand, the priest is directed to " olfer the sacrifice unto the Lord," with the prayer (in Latin), " Receive . . . this oblation which I, an unworthy sinner, offer in Thine honour, and in that of Blessed Mary and of all Thy saints, for mine own sins and offences, and for the health and salvation of the living, and for the rest of all the faithful departed." EDWARD VI. 217 This Latin-Engiisli missal was probably intended to chap. j)ave the way for the English Prayer-book. Its publica- ^^- . tion excited much controversy, and the nature of the Eucharist became such a burning question that the Government thought fit in the antumn of this year to inhibit all preaching. Meantime the thirteen divines The "First were preparing the collection of English Offices which bookof formed the " First Prayer-book of Edward VI." They vi"^^""** finished their work in November. The book is de- ^'^ ^^^^" scribed by the Council as " agreed to by the whole clergy," and as having received the consent of " the bishops and all other the learned men in this our realm in their synods and convocations provincial." In this matter, then, we may infer that deference to the constitutional privileges of Convocation was deemed advisable. The Prayer-book received the sanction of the king in Council, and was laid before Parliament in December. It encountered much opposition, especially from eight bishops in the Upper House. At last an Act enforcing its exclusive reception on and after Whitsunday follow- ing was carried, and the provisions of this Act were forestalled by the London clergy, who adopted the new Office as early as Easter. This " Act of Uniformity " says nothing about any change in doctrine, but only dwells on the inconvenience caused by the divergencies in the Uses of Sarum, York, Bangor, Lincoln, etc., and on the advantages of uniformity. Penalties for de- praving or ridiculing the Prayer-book were provided by this Act, and a subsequent Order in Council prescribed the destruction of such " books called antiphones, manuals, missals, grails, processionals," etc., as should be judged obstructive to the new Office. We shall hereafter mention in detail the respects in which the first Prayer- 2i8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, book differed from our present Book of Common Prayer. . Ji^ One obvious deficiency in the new formulary — the ab- TheEngiish scncc of an Ordinal — was soon met by the appointment Feb. 1550. of a Committee consisting of " six prelates and six other men learned in God's law." By one of those pieces of proleptic legislation so common in this period, the ordinal drawn up by these commissioners had legal authority before it was completed. It was pub- lished, with the assent of eleven of the twelve com- missioners, on February 28, 1550. The Prayer-book of 1549 appears to have satisfied neither party. The foreign divines especially resented its conservative spirit, and Cranmer was reproached with indifference to the tenets of Protestantism. In deference to the opinion of these persons the work was recast, and there appeared in April, 1552, that Second Prayer-book of Edward VI. in which the Communion Service is so mutilated that it might well be mistaken for a mere memorial rite. Forttinatel}', the death of Edward occurred before the date which was to give this work legal authority. Though circulated in certain dioceses, it never had even State sanction, much less the approval of Convocation. The Prayer- book of Elizabeth, though sanctioning many of the concessions made to the Eeforming party in 1552, restored the central act of Christian worship to its true dignity. Clerical In the Opinion of most members of our communion the compulsory celibacy of the clei'gy is one of the most pernicious accessories of the mediaeval system. It is surprising, therefore, to find that it was with the erreatest reluctance that Edward's Parliament ceded to the priesthood the right of marrying. Convocation had decided that the clergy should be free in this celibacy. EDWARD VI. 219 matter. A bill permitting tlie ordination of married cfiap. men was discussed in December, 1547, but could not -_ii__- obtain the sanction of the Lords. The subject was again brought before the Houses in 1548, and a repeal of all positive laws enforcing celibacy was grudgingly conceded. The Act was saddled with this testimony to the state of popular sentiment : " It were better for the estimation of priests, and therefore much to be wished, that they would willingly endeavour themselves to a perpetual chastity." The popular pre- judice on this subject is the more remarkable since the clergy of England had never been pledged to celibacy by a special vow. They only transgressed a canon of the Church by entering the state of matrimony. Such transgression was winked at — was, in fact, rather the rule than the exception. By ascetics it was inveighed against in no measured terms — terms which modern Protestants have sometimes interpreted as proving the gross licentiousness of mediaeval times. But, as a rule, neither priests nor laymen saw much harm in the prevalent neglect of this canon. Archbishop Warham was a married man ; so probably was Wolsey ; so cer- tainly was Cranmer. It might certainly have been survival of supposed that these and countless other conspicuous ^ cases had prepared the country for the abrogation of the nominal restrictions. By both parties, however, this concession to the clergy was disliked. The so- called Eeformers were, as we have before observed, to a large extent men who merely hated the clergy ; to this section anything calculated to extend clerical liberties was necessarily displeasing. The conserva- tive minority had, of course, now learnt to regard all religious changes with suspicion. So unacceptable was the measure that in 1552 another statute had to be 220 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, passed, declaring that cliildren of married clergymen ■ ^^- must be regarded as legitimate. The Parliaments of this reign readil}^ undertook the discussion of all such subjects as are the province of clerical assemblies. In the session of 1548 the duty of fasting received consideration. A liberal view with regard to superstitious restrictions is easily attained Fasting v^hcn we ourselves are the parties restricted. The torious. Houses clung, as we have seen, to clerical celibacy, but they readily acknowledged that there was nothing pleasing to God in observance of fasts. But by an amusing amalgamation of things sacred and secular, they ruled that the days of abstinence, Fridays and Saturdays in Lent, the Ember days, etc., should still be strictly kept, since their observance impelled men to eat fish, and " by eating of fish much flesh is saved to the country." The years 1549 and 1550 did much to embitter the animosity of religious parties. The foreign Protestants, disgusted at the conservative character of the Prayer- book, vented their wrath in clamorous denunciations of the Old Learning. They challenged their adversaries Disputes on to public disputations at the two universities. The the Sacra- i i i p mental subject of the Ecal Presence was the usual theme oi disputation, and the doctrine of transubstantiation was, of course, specially assailed by the champions of foreign Protestantism. Their conduct in these controversies can hardly be considered creditable. They refused to treat the scholastic term " transubstantiation " in its scholastic sense, but persistently argued as if it implied " transaccidentation " — an easy butt for their ridicule. Sometimes they would decline to argue unless their adversaries confined themselves to terms used in the New Testament, though it was a palpable petitio p-incipii to EDWARD VI. 221 assume that tlie New Testament writers had spoken exhaustively on the nature of the Holy Eucharist. In this way a cheap triumph was secured by Peter Martyr, who ousted Dr. Smith from the divinity chair at Oxford. The same unfairness marks Cranmer's strategy in his pamphlet controversy with Gardiner. Again and again Unfairness the champion of the Old Learning explains what is of the ,.. ,, ., ,, Reforming: transubstantiation and what it is not ; as repeatedly champions. Cranmer invei's-hs asrainst transaccidentation as if it •»/ l were maintained by Gardiner.^ Cranmer was probably f little versed in scholastic theology, but it can hardly y Hak-^^mm, ^ >»^ be maintained that he did not know the meaning of a j||^ lJnto^ the educated can apprehend. Misapprehension, how- mMif^^^ ^vwir-e- ever, can hardly be pleaded on behalf of controversialists m*^ jv'v**<*^w- ; who had studied theology, and studied it as Eomanists. Ho guH^jS^t^^ It need scarcely be said that in such controversies ccu^ Ct. tAot^jt^Ji the New Learning always came off triumphant. Bonner's uu»Jg,4j ^ a cci' celebrated apophthegm at the Marian disputation, " You dju^ «u=*. aX^^ have the word, but we have the sword," was j)raetically Theoid r /^ni.yci/ forestalled by the behaviour of the Reformers to the proscribed ' Here is a specimen of Cranmer's controversial style. Gardiner has been pleading that the terras "sensibly," "really," "substantially," •' corporally," were used by Transubstantiationists, and even Lutherans, in the scholastic sense, and must be so interpreted by his adversary. Cranmer replies, " When you come here to your iies, declaring the words 'sensibly,' ' reaUy,' ' substantiaUy,' . . . you speak so fondly unlearnedly and ignorantly as they that knew you not right think you understood neither grammar, English, nor reason. , . . All Englishmen understand by these words . . . the manner and form of being, and not the thing itself without the said forms and manners. . . . But this one thing I wonder at, that you, being so much used to lie, do not yet know what 'ly' meaneth." — Cranmer on the Lord's Supper (Parker Society), 157, 158. 222 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Transiibstantiationists. Penalties were attached to a retention of the old mif-sal after Whitsuntide, 1549. Gardiner had been ali eady imprisoned ; Bonner and other bishops of the Old Learning were soon to share his fate. When religious sympathies and indignation at the Council's mismanagement imjoelled the Oxford- shiie peasantry to insurrection, the parit^h priests were promptly hanged by Lord Gray from their own church towers. "Godly jealousy for the Gospel" not un- frequently gave its peculiar interpretation to the Pauline adage that " godliness is great gain." Such relics of superstition as church bells and Communion vessels of silver had already found their way to the Government melting-pots. A greedy eye was now Maiadmin- cast on the cpiscopal revenues. Most sees were in this of^sees?'^ reign robbed of their best manors. The occupants uving-s.and counted themselvcs fortunate if the alienation took the university revenues, insidious form of an exchange. In some dioceses the bishopric was kept vacant and administered by a Government agent. * The squire who had Church patronage dutifully followed the lead. He " protested " against Catholicism by instituting to his vacant benefice his steward, or huntsman, or gamekeeper, and quietly pocketing the revenues. Avarice and bigotry, even when the accessories of a New Learning, are as inimical to the cause of education as to that of religion. The universities accordingly suffered as severely as the Church. The professors of a stereotyped Gospel could aiford to scorn learned pursuits and vote degrees anti- Christian. Government showed its sympathy for this ultra-Protestant contingent by suppressing exhibitions and professorships both at Oxford and Cambridge. Both universities were forsaken by the studious, and given over to irreverent undergraduate orgies. EDWARD VI. 223 *' Missals were chopped in pieces with hatchets ; college libraries plundered and burnt. The divinity schools were planted with cabbages, and the Oxford laundresses dried clothes in the School of Arts. Anarchy was avenging superstition, again in turn to be more fright- fully avenged." ^ The conduct of domestic and foreign policy in this reign vv^as as unsatisfactory as that of religious reform. The jDresent was an era of great social change. The decay of the feudal system — the transfer of land to the commercial class — the increasing wool trade, with the consequent conversion of arable into pasture land and diminution of agricultural labour — the introduction of foreign luxuries and diversion of money hitherto spent at home ; — these were problems with which the present Government was quite unable to cope. Abroad unsuc- Political cessful wars were being waged with Scotland and J'gement. France. At home the administration was an outrao-e alike to principles of economy and to the dictates of justice. Money was borrowed from foreign usurers at enormous percentage ; the coinage was debased again and again ; the landed gentry were allowed to enclose the commons hitherto accessible to the poor ; and when religious houses were suppressed no provision was made for the continuance of alms. The dissatisfaction of the Revolt lower orders asserted itself in the form of insurrection. JJeiTew The movement in Devonshire and Cornwall cost the reUg-ion. lives of five thousand men ; almost as many perished in Norfolk. Strategy, like theology, looked abroad for assistance, and while German divines argued down the champions of Catholicism, German Lanzknechts shot down the rebels. It is not surprising that the peasantry ascribed their sufferings to the introduction of the ' Froude, vol. v. p. 270. 224 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Lamenta- tions of Latimer. Maladmin- istration continued by North- umberland. New Learning and clamoured for the restoration of the missal. Nor was the Reforming party without ad- herents who could discern that a Puritan faith did not necessarily involve purity of practice, and who could depict in their true colours the proceedings of the Government. Latimer, who did not return to his bishopric on Edward's accession, but devoted himself to preaching, boldly attacked the landlord class as " rent raisers," "step lords," "who do intend plainly to make the yeomanry slavery." While the foreign preachers likened the depredators to Moses or Joshua, or dubbed them " valiant soldiers in Christ," this true Reformer saw little cause for Protestant self-congratulation in the present state of affairs. " In times past," he says, " men were full of pit}'- and compassion . . . now charity is waxen old, none helpeth the scholar, nor yet the poor; now that the knowledge of God's word is brought to light, and many earnestly study and labour to set it forth, almost no man helpeth to maintain them." ^ To the same effect spoke Bernard Gilpin. Cranmer did not de- nounce the prevalent antinomianism, but his confidence in the foreign preachers appears to have been shaken. Somerset's mismanagement resulted in his disgrace in the autumn of 1549. His life was for the present spared, but he was deprived of the Protectorate, and henceforth the leading spirit in the Council was War- wick, created in 1551 Duke of Northumberland The Old Learning party, at first inclined to regard this change with satisfaction, found that it brought them little benefit. By Bale, the chaplain of Bishop Poynet, Northumberland is described as the " second Moses " of the reign. Even Hooper could represent him as "a most holy and fearless instrument of the end of God," ' See Latimer's Sermons (Parker Society), Sermons vi. nd vii. EDWARD VL 225 because also " the terror and thunderbolt of the Roman chap. bishops." Really he inherited the avarice and inca- ^^- pacity, without the religious convictions, of the minister whom he succeeded. Protestantism of a Calvinistic type continued in the ascendant, and it became plain that concessions would be made to this school of relisrion in the formularies of the future. Already the Govern- ment, provoked by the anti-Protestant cries of the insurgents, had assumed a more uncompromising atti- tude with reference to the Old Learning. The autumn "injunc- of 1549 had produced a new batch of " Injunctions," against the which rendered it impossible for the conservative clergy r^uai^* to qualify their adoption of the new Praj^er-book by a ^'^' ^^^^ retention of the ancient ritual. These " Injunctions " prohibited many practices^ hitherto used at the cele- bration of mass, and allowed not more than one celebration in a day. Foremost among those clergy who had obeyed the Bonner letter of the law while detesting its spirit had been example of. Bonner, Bishop of London. The treatment of this malcontent was as unjust as that of Gardiner, and it is unpleasant to record that Hooper was foremost among his persecutors. Bonner was ordered, in the July of this year, to preach a sermon at Paul's Cross on behalf of the Government and their Erastian policy. He was to state that the rebels " were incurring damnation, ever to be in the burning fire of hell with Lucifer ; " that the magistrate might change the rites, forms, and ' Among the particular practices forbidden are kissing the altar, breathing upon the bread or chalice, ringing of sacring bells, and '• setting any light upon the Lord's Table at any time." With reference to the last-named practice, it is notice- able that the first set of " Injunctions" had ordered " two lights on the altar afore the Sacrament, for signification that Christ is the true light of the world." A notorious verdict of recent date has, however, prohibited this most suggestive ancient emblem, in defiance of the rubric, which orders the retention of the ornaments commonly used in 1548. Q 226 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. ceremonies of religion at his pleasure; that the Govern- ment had this power during Edward's nonage; and that the devotion of a person retaining the Latin service was rendered valueless by his sin in disobeying the magis- trate. Bonner was coarse, vulgar, and cruel, but hypo- crisy was no part of his character. In preaching he omitted some of the topics prescribed ; on others he discoursed in an unsatisfactory manner. Hooper was employed to indict him ; he was committed to the Mar- shalsea, and in October was deprived of his bishopric. Ridley's The couduct of the great Reforming bishop who w^as innova- appointed to succeed him was as indefensible as that of juSei 1550. Hooper. Acting on his own responsibility, Eidley had begun to substitute tables for altars in his diocese of Rochester. When translated to London, he pulled down the altar at S. Paul's, and ordered that throughout his diocese the "Lord's board" should be set up, "after the form of an honest table," in such place as should be considered convenient. Ridley probably thought that the impending revision of the Prayer-book would justify this transformation, which really might imply that the Sacrament was only a commemorative meal. But that an individual bishop should make this change while the " Act of Uniformity " still sanctioned a Eucharistic Sanctioned scrvicc of a Catholic character, was strange indeed. The Council. inconsistency, however, was indiscernible to the Council, Nov. 1550. ^r}^Q jj^ November legalized Ridley's innovation by ordering all the bishops to remove altars and substitute tables " to be set up in some convenient part of the chancel." This arrangement was treated by Elizabeth in the spirit of compromise,^ and the j)ractice of placing the altar lengthways down the chancel was not suc- cessfully resisted until the time of Archbishop Laud. ^ See pp. 301, 302. EDWARD VL 227 A memorial of this singular arrano;ement still exists in ch.m'. . . IX. that rubric of the Communion Office which describes — . — the priest standing at the middle of the altar as " standing at the north side of the table " — a prescription which can only harmonize with the present arrangement of the altar when " north side " is interpreted as " west side." It is pleasant to learn that this degradation of the Church's most sacred rite was staunchly resisted b}'' some of the bishops. Day, Bishop of Chichester, refused More , . . bishops in compliance, and was imprisoned. His fate was shared prison. by Heath of Worcester, who had also offended by refusing to attest the new ordinal with his fellow- commissioners. The most eminent of the imprisoned prelates, Gardiner of Winchester, had recently been offered concessions on condition of his signing a con- fession of guilt. Gardiner perhaps recalled to mind the signatures wrung from the abbots in Henry's reign. He was wise enough to regard the offer as a snare. As a penalty for his contumacy, he was " removed to a meaner lodging," denied the use of books, pen, ink, and paper " to work his detestable purposes," and formally deprived by a mixed commission of clergy and laymen. Hardly less eminent among the men of the Old Learn- ing was Tonstal, the Bishop of Durham. This prelate's estates were, moreover, a kind of Naboth's vineyard to Northumberland. Tonstal had accepted the religious changes ordered by the Council ; he therefore escaped for a time. At the end of 1551, when Somerset at- tempted to regain power, Tonstal was imprisoned for alleged complicity in his plot. He was deprived shortly afterwards, and an attempt was made to transfer the greater part of the temporalities of the see to Northum- berland. The sees of Westminster and Gloucester had ma sees been already plundered. robbaa. 228 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. We may here notice the Council's dealings with an- —^^ other recusant of even more importance than Gardiner. Attempt to The Princess Mary continued to use the mass. She coerce the t • i t • i /. -n- Princess had acquicsced m the religious changes of Henry s reign, but she was not attracted by the Erastianism of Edward's Council, and she resolutely refused to ac- knowledge any innovations introduced during the king's minority. The attempt to compel her chaplains to use the Prayer-book was rendered unsuccessful by the in- terposition of the Emperor Charles V., who vowed that " his cousin should not be worse treated by English councillors than his aunt had been by an English sovereign." When it was understood that the Council must suffer Mary's superstition or go to war, the Re- forming bishops, Cranmer, Eidley, and Poynet, advised toleration as the less of two evils. The annoyances sustained by the princess in the years 1550-51 were nevertheless sufficient to inspire her with that strong hatred of the Eeforming party which asserted itself so fearfully five years later. " She had accepted the alterations introduced by her father, and had nothing else intervened she might have maintained as a sove- reign what she had honestly admitted as a subject. Her own persecution only, and the violent changes enforced by the doctrinal reformers, taught her to believe that, apart from Eome, there was no security for orthodoxy." ^ suppres- Somerset had repealed the ancient laws a2:ainst sion of ■■- ^ heretics. heresy simply to gratify the Protestants, the only party that could be taxed with heretical opinions. But so grossly profane and violent was the extreme section of this school during the Eucharistic controversy, that the Protector was forced to build again what he had 1 Froude, History, vol. v. p. 368. EDWARD VI. 229 destroyed, and coerce his unmanageable allies by puni- chap. tive enactments. Hooper and Calvin both attest the _!JL_ turbulence of the sectarians. " How dangerously England is afflicted by heresies God only knows, Hooper writes to BuUinger. . . . There are wretches who dare, in their conventicles, not only to deny that Christ is our Saviour, but to call that Blessed Child a mischief-maker and a deceiver." By Calvin Somerset was advised to inflict the severest penalties on "the fantastical people who, under colour of the Gospel, would set all to confusion," no less than on the papists. To Somerset's credit it may be recorded that the cruel policy suggested by the gloomy Genevan was not ac- cepted. His Heresy Commission only compelled certain joan anabaptists to abjure and carry faggots at S, Paul's, and imprisoned Joan Bocher. This unhappy person preached an opinion concerning Christ's human nature somewhat akin to Docetism. She was tried in April, 1549, by a commission which included Cranmer and Latimer, and was delivered over to the secular power. She was burnt at Smithfield about a year afterwards, by order of the Council, under a writ de liceretico comhu- rendo. The story about Edward reluctantly signing her death-warrant appears to be one of Foxe's myths. The signatures of the Council were sufficient for the warrant, and there is no reason to believe that the king's signa- ture was even asked for. The fate of Joan Bocher was shared in 1551 by George von Paris, a Dutchman of Arian opinions. Erom what has been already stated it will be under- stood that the Government of this reign systematically stocked the episcopate with divines of the New Learn- ing. If a Reformer could not be found with any claim to distinction, the bishopric was left vacant, and its 230 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. revenues were appropriated. We have already men- tioned the appointment of the infamous Poynet to Appoint- Winchester. In July, 1550, Gloucester received a Hooper to nomination almost as unfortunate. Dr. Hooper was Gloucester. ^ ginccre Christian, who had lived among the conti- nental Calvinists, and so contracted opinions at variance with Anglicanism, even as represented by Cranmer and Ridley. He was recommended to the bishopric by Northumberland, who thought to humour King Edward's Protestant proclivities. The consecration would, of course, be conducted according to the ordinal recently sanctioned by Parliament. The OfSce which was to be used was substantially that in our present Prayer-book. It included, however, a more impres- sive ritual. The vestment to be worn by the bishop was a chimere of scarlet ; a Bible was to be laid on his neck, and a pastoral staff placed in his hand, at the consecration. Moreover, the oath of supremacy contained the words, "by God, the saints, and the HisPuritan Holy Gospel." Tlicsc things were an offence to S C 1*U.T) 1 f^ S Hooper. The oath was altered in deference to his argument that men ought to swear by God only; but still Hooper was not satisfied. He considered it wrong that a bishop should have a distinctive dress ; he would not " be made a magpie of," he disliked the tonsure, he would not have the Bible on his neck. The surplice riots and other anti-ritual movements in our own days have taught us that there is a deep significance in the adoption or rejection of a vestment or a piece of religious ceremonial. It is im- possible, therefore, for us to call Hooper's objections puerile. Eather should we argue that he had no ap- preciation of the dignity of the episcopate, and ought not to have been in the Anglican ministry at all. EDWARD VI. .231 It must in fairness be added that the bishopric was chap. thrust iipon him by Northumberland, unasked for, if _1^ not against his wish. What was really perhaps a question of fundamental principle was now narrowed to the petty issue of a ritual dispute. Cranmer, with unwonted firmness, insisted on Hooper's conformity. Ridley also on this occasion appeared on the side of decency and order. Hooper, however, continued to fulminate against chimere, cope, and surplice. He ap- pears to have had the support of Northumberland and the king. An appeal, however, to Bucer, the Protestant luminary, only elicited the unfeeling reply that a vest- ment was a trivial matter at a time when hypocrisy and infidelity were rampant. Zeal, he urged, should rather be directed to " the staying of sacrilege and the providing decent ministers in the parishes." To a like effect spoke Peter Martyr. Still Hooper was not con- vinced. He denounced the retention of Catholic usages from the pulpit till he was inhibited from preaching ; he then asserted his sentiments in a " Confession of Faith," in which the Council was treated disrespectfully. The Council asked Cranmer to deal with him. The He is im- primate cuuld find no better persuasive than incarce- cranmer ration. The " first Puritan confessor" remained in the firms. '^^^ Fleet prison for nearly two months ; he then tendered his submission, and was consecrated in the objectionable vestments on March 8, 1551. Cranmer was now engaged in drawing up a code of The Forty Articles which should determine the bounds within Articles, which public teaching should be exercised. He was not so presumptuous as to think of impo:5ing on the Church a new "Confession of Faith;" the code was merely intended to check pulpit vagaries. The Forty-two Articles of Cranmer were reshaped in the time of Arch- 232 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, bishop Parker, and survive in that syllabus of Thirty- _J.^^ nine Articles to which every preacher of our Church still makes assent. It has frequently been attempted to raise this document to the dignity of a Creed or Confession; such, however, was not the purpose either of Cranmer or Parker. We may add that it will be an evil day for our Church when Articles which are clearly designed only as a secui'ity against pulpit ex- travagance, shall be misinterpreted as the gauge of faith for all members of the Anglican Communion. The Articles were concessory in character — so worded that clergymen who inclined to Calvinism might not be forced to vacate their pulpits. To both extremes of error, however, they presented an uncompromising front. Some are directly aimed at the extravagances of mediaeval Romanism, more at the heresies of sixteenth- century Protestantism. In compiling these Articles Cranmer was probably much influenced by the writings of Archbishop Hermann and Melancthon. Of his brother clergy he selected Eidley to assist him. The rights of Convocation were in this, as in other matters, treated by Cranmer with scant deference. The Church's representatives were not summoned to accept the new formulary till after it had been authorized by the king in Council. The Articles were published in May, 1553 ; the bishops were charged to see that their clergy subscribed them. The following analysis will show the student how the Articles of 1553 differ from those to which the clergy now declare assent : — The Forty-two Articles included seven which were omitted in 1563, viz. Art. X., *' Of Grace,"— showing that no man can attribute his sinfulness to the constraining influence of predesti- nation ; Art. XVI., " Of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost," EDWARD VI. 233 — which is defined as wilful and malicious resistance to the chap. impulses of conscience ; Art. XIX., " All men are bound to ^x^ keep the precepts of the Moral Law/' a part of which Article is retained in our Art. VII. ; Art. XXXIX., " The Eesurrection of the Dead is not passed already ; " Art. XL., " The Souls of men deceased do neither slumber nor perish with their bodies ; " Art. XLL, " Of the Millenarians," — declaring the notion of a millennium to be a Jewish fable ; Art. XLIL, " All men not to be saved at the last," — intended to confute such as limited the duration of future punishment. Instead of these the following four were inserted in 1563 : — Art. v., " Of the Holy Ghost ; " Art. XIL, " Of Good Works ; " Art. XXIX., " Of the Wicked which eat not the Body of Christ in the Lord's Supper ; " Art. XXX., " Of Communion in both kinds." In some of the Articles which are common to both formula- ries important differences may be discovered. Our references are to the numbering of the Thirty-nine. Art. II. had not the words " begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God." The spread of Arian opinions among the Pro- testants induced Archbishop Parker to add this clause in 1563. Art. YI. did not include the catalogue of Old Testament Books. Art, XL did not define "justification," but merely referred to the Homily. Art. XX. had not the clause, " The Church bath power to decree llites or Ceremonies, and autho- rity in Controversies of Faith." Art. XXIV. did not condemn " ministering in a tongue not understanded," in such strong terms. Art. XXVIII. differed, perhaps, rather in phraseology than doctrine. It had not the clause, " The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten . . . only after a heavenly and spiritual manner," but it had a statement as to the impossibility of Christ's natural body being simultaneously in more places than one, and in confutation of the Transubstantiationists it denied "a real and corporal Presence, as they phrase it." Art. XXXV. necessarily said nothing about the Second Book of Homilies, which was not compiled till Elizabeth's reign. In the place of this there was an emphatic approval of the ordinal and the recently published " Second Prayer-book." Art. XXXVII. bad not its explanation of the royal supremacy in matters ecclesi- 234 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, astical, and instead thereof was a statement, " The King of IX. England is, after Christ, the supreme head on earth of the Church of England and Ireland." The A committee of Convocation sanctioned in the same c^t°'^k^^'^^ year a Catechism, composed chiefly by Poynet, the disreputable divine who had succeeded to Gardiner's bishopric. This work gives an exposition of the Ten Commandments and the Creed, together with a para- phrase of the Lord's Prayer, and some other forms of devotion. It says little more about the sacraments, than that they are two in number, and that it is a part of a true Christian's duty to use them. Poynet's Catechism was the basis of Nowel's larger work, a Catechism of a Puritanical and Calvinistic type, from the infliction of which, by authority of Convocation, the Church nar- rowly escaped under Elizabeth. The Forty-two Articles were published, bound up in one volume, with Poynet's Catechism. The Second But the uiost important production of the last years boor''" of this reign was the Second Prayer-book, which an " Act of Uniformity " ordered to be used after Novem- ber 1, 1552. The continental divines had impugned the Prayer-Pook of 1549 in no measured terms, and Bucer and Peter Martyr drew up, at Cranmer's request, a report of its most prominent faults. Though this report was not followed in the subsequent revision,^ the modifications now effected in the Communion Office were 1 We have already remarked that Cranmer had learnt to distrust these captious foreign Protestants. His language, in a letter to the Council with reference to this proposed revision of the Prayer-book, is remarkable : " I trust ye will not be moved with these glorious and unquiet spirits, which can like nothing but that is after their own fancy ; and cease not to make trouble when things be most quiet ■ and in good order. If such men should be heard, although the book were made every year anew, yet it should not lack faults in their opinion." The verdict of the foreign Protestants when the Prayer-book of 1552 was issued fully justified Cranmer's anticipations. EDWARD Vr. 235 doubtless attributable to Protestant influences. Cranmer chap. had passed, at the beginning of the reign, from transub- ^^• stantiation to consubstantiation. In 1550 he had aban- doned the Lutheran dogma and accepted that view of the Eucharist which he maintained consistently hence- forward. The " Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the Sacrament," which he published in that year, asserts that there is a real sjnritual presence con- veyed to the believer, but discards many of the dogmas which mediaeval theology had built upon this premise. The change of " substance," the material or corporeal cranmers Presence, even the sacrificial efficacy of the Eucharist, modifiS and the receiving of Christ by unworthy partakers, are impugned in this treatise. Cranmer takes, in the main, the same line as the writers who argued against transubstantiation when first that doctrine was broached. The arguments of Peter Martyr and of Kidley, the latter of whom made him acquainted with the so-called " Book of Bertram," John Scotus's treatise against transubstantiation, are said to have effected this change in the primate's opinions. Eidley had probably not halted here, but had embraced views akin to those of the sacramentaries before the publication of the Second Prayer-book. For the changes introduced in the Com- munion Service ot this Second Prayer-book Cranmer and Eidley were mainly responsible, and the influence of the latter appears unfortunately to have overridden that of the more conservative primate. Not only was -crnfor- much that was beautiful in the way of ritual expunged, ciiang-es m but John a Lasco's sacramentarian formulae, " Take and Son office, eat this in remembrance," " Drink this in remembrance," now accompanied the presentation of the elements instead of those which asserted the reality of the Saviour's Presence. 236 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. The " Act of Uniformity " whicli enforced the use of _J3__ this Second Prayer-book was passed in April, 1552. It was so worded as to avoid manifest disparagement of the First Prayer-book, and accounts for the new Office on the ground that " divers doubts and disputes had arisen as to the way in which the book was to be used." It provided penalties of a less severe character than those of the first Act. Happily the inaccuracy of the edition, and the king's anxiety to make further concessions to Protestantism, suggested a suppression of this book before the date when its use became compulsory. It Fateoftiie ^g^g ^q comc iuto use on November 1, 1552. But Second ' Prayer. before the end of September there appeared an Order Ijook. in Council forbidding the issue of more copies. The illness of the king delayed the j^roposed alterations ; on July 6, 1553, he died, and nothing more was heard of the Second Prayer-book till the accession of Elizabeth, who vainly tried to restore the Liturgy of 1549. A compromise appears to have been effected with the revising commissioners. The ancient formulae of administration appeared in 1552 in conjunction with those of John a Lasco, but the Communion Office was imperfect in the matter of ritual, and the absence of many venerable usages throughout attested the influ- ence of the "Vandal" Liturgy. It was not till 1662 that concessions were made in these respects to the Catholic school. The We give here a resume of the most important changes thSiSyer-^ made in 1552, noticing how far these were modified by ^°°^ , the revisions of 1559 and 1662.-^ compared. ' That of 1604 introduced only two important changes. Lay Baptism ■was no longer sanctioned, and the Catecliism received the addition of Dr. Overall's questions and answers on the sacraments : see chap. xiii. EDWARD VL 237 1. In the Morning service the Scripture sentences, " Dearly chap. beloved Brethren," Confession, and Absolution were added. ix. This service had in 1549 opened with the Lord's Prayer, as did the Evening service until 1662. 2. In the Communion Office the Ten Commandments were added. No prayers or oblations for the dead were prescribed ; the prayer " for the whole state of Christ's Church " received in its title the significant addition " militant here on earth," and the words which commemorate the faithful departed were not added till 1662. The prescription to add to the wine " a little pure and clean water " was omitted from the rubric. At administra- tion the second only of the two clauses now in use was to be employed in the case of both elements. The first clauses were reinserted in 1559. The directions as to the priest's manipula- tion of the elements during the act of consecration had also dis- appeared. These were not restored till 1662. The rubric of 1549 had ordered "unleavened bread." That of 1552 says that " it shall suffice that the bread be such as is usual to be eaten with other meats." This was supplemented in 1559 by an " Injunction " ordering the use of wafer bread, " made and formed plain, without any figure thereupon." Lastly, in 1662 came the present rubric. Tins in order to take away from the Puritans "all occasion of dissension and superstition" allows the alternative, scil. "it shall suffice^ that the bread be such as is usual to be eaten, but the best and purest wheat bread that con- veniently may be gotten." The rubric apologizing for the act of kneeling first appears in 1552. It was omitted, as derogatory to the dignity of the Sacrament, in 1559, but restored, for the instruction of the Puritans, in 1662. The rubric directing the Minister to read the Lord's Prayer and Collect standing on the " north side " (see p. 227) also dates from 1552. 3. The Office of Baptism no longer prescribed a form of adjura- tion or exorcism, nor the ancient practice of trine immersion, nor the investiture of the baptized with the white dress called the chrisom. Neither of the two first Prayer-books had any prayer for the sanctification of the water. This deficiency was met in 1662 by the insertion of the prayer " Almighty and everlasting God." ' A rubric the purport of which was discovered by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1871 to be a prohibition of wafer bread. 238 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. 4. In Confirmation the prayer at tlie laying on of hands was introduced. In the Prayer-book of 1549, instead of a prayer, there was this address : " N., I sign thee with the sign of the cross and lay my hands upon thee, In the name, etc." 5. In the " Solemnization of Matrimony " the giving of gold and silver with the ring was no longer prescribed. The rubric still ordered the reception of Holy Communion on the very day of marriage. It was not altered to its present form till 1662. 6. In the " Visitation of the Sick " the formula at anointing the sick person " upon the forehead or breast " was omitted, and the practice no longer prescribed. In other parts of the service there were several unimportant verbal alterations made both now and in 1662. 7. In the" Burial of the Dead " the Psalms of 1549 (Psalms cxvi., cxxxix., cxlvi.) were omitted, and it was not till 1662 that their place was supplied by Psalms xxxix. and xc. The portion of the service following the Lesson took its present form. In 1549 there had been a prayer for the forgiveness and acceptance of the departed soul, followed by a celebration of Holy Communion with special Collect, Epistle, and Gospel. 8. The ordinal attached to the Prayer-book of 1549 had been altered in deference to Puritan scruples. The Office incorporated in the Prayer-book of 1552 was almost identical with our present Ordination Service. Besides appeals to saints and evangelists, certain sjaiibolical practices had been omitted, viz. the laying a Bible on the neck of a bishop and placing a pastoral staff in his hands, and the delivering of a chalice and bread at the ordination of a priest. 9. The Vestment or Ornament rubric at the beginning of the book now ordered that the minister should use " neither alb, vestment, nor cope," but that, being a bishop, he should wear a rochet, and being a priest or deacon, a surplice. This restriction was abolished in 1559, and the rubric henceforth ordered (as it does still) the use of such vestments as were in use by authority of Parliament in the second year of Edward VI. This Prayer-book of 1552 might well be regarded as an extravagant concession to the destructive faction. After the manner of such concessions, it gave most EDWARD VI. 239 offence to the party whose opinions were deferred to. chap. The foreign refugees abused the new Prayer-book as ^^' virulently as they had abused that of 1549, and Calvin himself aspersed it as " intolerable stuff," " intolerable fooleries." It will be remembered that when Henry's ecclesi- astical changes were imminent, an Act of Parliament had appointed thirty-two commissioners to undertake the revision of ecclesiastical " constitutions, ordinances, and canons" (1534). Various causes had hitherto hindered the completion of this work. In November, 1551, a new commiisions to the ultra-Eefurmers were never of such a kind as to impair the catholicity of the Church, or effect a breach of continuity. The theory of the modern Dissenter is that our Church's existence begins at some hitherto undetermined date, when Government disestablished and disendowed a Eoman Church, and set up a Re- formed Church in its stead. The Church is thus art- fully represented as a Protestant sect, differing from the other sects only in the enjoyment of peculiar patronage from the secular power. This fabrication has been as successfully crushed by the forceps of his- torical fact as such shadowy myths can be. With persons, hov/ever, to whom the gratification of sectarian animosity is more dear than truth, it still finds favour, as also with the ignorant and thoughtless. At the risk, therefore, of wearying the well-informed student we detail some of the incontestable facts, iiiustra- "^tie Church of England under Elizabeth no more ^SncfVe^^^ jorofessed to be a different body from the Marian Church, than — to borrow an oft-cited metaphor — a man who has changed his clothes professes to have parted with his individuality. With few exceptions, the same laity worshipped under the two systems, the same clergy officiated. The exact number of Marian clergy who resigned on account of the religious changes under Elizabeth has been preserved. It included 189 only, out of a clerical force of 9400. These were the only clergy who thought that repudiating the Pope meant decatholicizing the Church. It was foreseen that enemies might bring against our Church this false ELIZABETH. 285 charge of a schismatic design. The greatest pains chap. were therefore taken to show that there had been no — J — - breach of continuity, no new creation in the English ecclesiastical system. Matthew Parker, the new primate, was consecrated with the strictest regard to Catholic essentials. Lest there should be a shadow of doubt as to his being the legitimate successor of Wolsey, Cranmer, and Pole, no prelates officiated at his consecration, save such as had themselves been consecrated before the disorderly reign of Edward YI. As nothing was introduced into our Prayer-book that could de2:rade the Church to the level of the Protestant formations, so did the queen resent all attempts to treat her as a schismatic, although brought by political accident into alliance with the Protestant Powers. Pope Pius IV., after his offer to sanction the Prayer- book was refused, addressed the queen in the same terms as the Protestant pvinces in the invitation to the Council at Trent. An indignant remonstrance was returned, that " an invidious distinction is made be- tween me and such other Catholic potentates as have been invited to this Council some time ago." We resume the thread of our story. It was under- The queen stood when Mary died, on November 17, that her desire pre- successor was averse to papal supremacy, but the change speed with which the rupture with Eome was effected was probably foreseen by no one. In the lengthy paper of agenda, drawn up by Elizabeth and Cecil on that very day, there is no allusion to religious changes. The Pope is to be informed of Elizabeth's accession, as well as the other friendly Powers. The only memo- randum concerning religion is, " To consider the con- dition of the preacher of Paul's Cros^, that no occasion be given by him to stir an^^ dispute touching the 286 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, governance of the realm." The old Offices continued XI. & to be used at the Eucharistic service, and remained authoritative for the next seven months. The royal cha]3el remained in the same state as in Mary's time, save that Elizabeth objected to the elevation of the concUict of host. Pope Paul lY., however, a foolish, hot-headed man, had heard of Elizabeth's Eeforming tendencies, and chose to precipitate the rupture. He doubtless thought that a young queen with a disputed title would not be able to resist the pretensions of the Holy See. He wrote, it seems, an insolent letter, re- minding Elizabeth that she had been declared ille- gitimate, and stating that her accession required his sanction, because England was "held in fee of the Consequent Apostolic scc." England promptly disproved the in- sinuation by passing an Act which declared the queen to have suj^reme rule over all her subjects, and disallowed the pretensions of all foreign potentates. This insult from Eome necessarily prejudiced the positions of those persons whose consciences did not permit them to disavow papal supremacy. But to nothing else in the mediiieval system besides this did Elizabeth show any hostility. In her Council she retained thirteen of her sister's advisers. The late queen and the cardinal were, of course, buried with the ancient Offices (December 10). At Mary's funeral, "White, Bishop of Winchester, spoke violently against changes in religion. For this he was kept to his house for five weeks, then brought before the Council and admonished. It was found, however, now as in the preceding reign, that coercion was not so much needed for the Romanists as for the other extreme of faction. Many of the Puritans fondly imagined that the dis- orders of King Edward's reign were about to be restored. ELIZABETH. 287 The fugitive divines were clamouring for livings; the lay " evangelics " were beginning to tear down images and destroy relics. They were quickly undeceived. Tvirbuier.ca On December 28 there was issued a royal proclamation "evanere very like that which appeared on Queen Mary's accession. The royai It stated that certain " who had formerly in times past tk)°n. ^"^^ the ofSce of ministry in the Church " had convened ^^''- ^^^°- assemblies and raised disputations, especially in London ; " whereupon riseth among the common sort not only unfruitful dispute in matters of religion, but also contention, and occasion to break common quiet." The queen orders, therefore, that until the three estates of the realm be consulted with on the subject, there shall be no alteration in the established forms of worship, except that the English Litany, Lord's Prayer, and Creed may be permitted. The coronation took place on January 15, with the mass The „,, T • 1 1 1 1 • ii • coronation. and usual ceremonies. 1 he bishops attended m their jan. 1559. scarlet robes, all except Bonner, who (it is presumed") was in disgrace. Heath, the Archbishop of York, did not officiate, probably because he could not demur to Elizabeth's prejudice against the elevation of the host. His place was taken by Oglethorpe, Bishop of Carlisle, who agreed to meet the queen's wishes in respect to this accessory. As Cardinal Pole's successor in the primacy, the Matthev^ queen and Cecil thought of Matthew Parker, Dean of ^^^^®^* Lincoln under Edward VI. Parker was learned, de- vout, and sufficiently removed from either pole of relififions intolerance. He was averse to the restoration of media3val doctrine in Mary's reign. He had there- fore been deprived of his preferments. He had not, however, retired to the Continent, nor had he any sym- pathy with what he called the " Germanical natures " 288 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Prayer- book revisionists appointed. of the self-exiled divines. His desire was, not to con- form the Church to Luther's system or Calvin's system, but to reform by " imitating and following the example of the ancient and worthy Fathers." He held, in fact, the principles which found favour with such persons as Cecil, Bacon, Paget, Roger Ascham, and Elizabeth her- self. Parker had lived quietly in Mary's reign, and had nothing to complain of beyond the loss of his preferments.^ Early in 1559, Parker was summoned to London to confer with his friend Cecil on the course religious reform should take. What the queen and Cecil desired was a restoration of the First Praj'er-book of Edward VI. To this proceeding Parker himself probably objected, on the ground that it would drive the " Germanical natures " entirely out of the English communion. The queen would have to contend against Romanist malcontents, including some of the most in- fluential clergy; it would be imperatively necessary not to swell the numbers of the anti-Catholic faction. A revision of the Second Prayer-book suggested itself as a wiser expedient. This and other measures of eccle- siastical reform were put into the hands of a small com- mittee, including not only Reformers 'of the old school, but also some of the Puritan party. The names of the committee were Parker, Pilkington, Hill, May, Cox, Grindal, Whitehead, and Sir Thomas Smith, who appears to have attended as representative of the Crown. ^ 1 That he escaped thus easily suggests that the severities of the late reign have been exaggerated by such historians as Foxe and Burnet. For there is good reason to believe that Parker had gone the length of implicating himself in Northumber- land's conspiracy in favour of Lady Jane. Yet he had lived through the years of the Marian persecution, not indeed iu enjoyment of court favour like Ascham, or Dr. Wright, or Cecil— all of them men confessedly anxious for a religious Refornia- lion— but " as a private individual " " happy before God," and finding in "delight- ful literary leisure greater and more solid enjoyments than my former busy and dangerous kind of life ever offered me." "sBesides conferring with Parker, Cecil meanwhile had circulated questions ELIZABETH. 289 Parliament opened on January 25. Sir Nicholas chap. Bacon was the interpreter of the royal intentions. On _^: the one hand, nothing: was to *'be advised or done The new which . . . were likely to breed or nourish any kind meat. of idolatry or superstition, ... so, on the other side, heed is to be taken that by no licentious or loose handling any manner of occasion be given to any contempt or irreverent behaviour towards God or godly things." 1 The relative positions of the Churjh and the throne had to be determined before ecclesiastical leojislation could be entered on. Theoretically, at least, Elizabeth's claims in this regard were only what an overwhelming majority of English Catholics had for centuries acknowledged. Disowning as impious Henry's new-coined title "Head of the Church," the queen challenged no other authority than that which " was of ancient time due to the imperial crown of the realm, that is, under God to have sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons."^ The title adopted by Eliza- The beth was " supreme governor." Thus limited, the governor- principle of the royal supremacy would have certainly ^^^^ been accepted by most Catholics of the pree-Reformation period. The leading ecclchiastics, however, were now fairly committed to a papal — as distinct from a among men of all parties as to the ecclesiastical policy to be adopted. The answers were, of course, of varying cimiplexion. One of them deserves attention as illustrating the difficulties of the situation. From this "device offered to Secre- tary Cecil " we learn that it was daily expected that the Pope would excommuni- cate Elizabeth and invite the Roman Catholic sovereigns to a crusade. The claims of Mary Stuart might be supported by France, Scotland, and Ireland. Among men of the "papist sect" this opposition might find supporters. Such was one danger to be ajtprehended. On the other hand, another and greater danger lay in the bigotry of the Puritans. There were some who, when they saw many of the old ceremonies retained and the doctrines of the foreign Protestants disallowed, •'would call the alteration a clokf^d papistry or a mingli'-mangle." The device continues, " It is better that they should suffer than that her highness or the commonwealth should shake or bi^ in danger." ' D'Ewes, Journals of Q. Eliz. Parliam., p. 12. - Eliz. Injunctions, vi. U 290 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The ■' Spolia- tion Bills. The conge d elire. Catholic — cause. Powerful speeches were made by Archbishop Heath and Bishop Scott against the Supre- macy Act. This Act became law on April 29. In view of the probable disloyalty of the opponent faction, it required all clergymen, magistrates, and officers to take an oath acknowledging the queen's supremacy. The deplorable financial condition of England is the only excuse that can be made for the " Spoliation Bills," which passed on March 2 and April 6. By one of these the firstfiuits and tenths of ecclesiastical benefices were again attached to the Crown. By the other the queen was empowered, on the avoidance of a see, to take what manors she should choose, giving in exchange impropriate tithes. This revival of the policy of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. was not only bravely resisted by the lords spiritual, but opposed b}^ a large minority in the Commons. Some ten sees were at this time vacant. The timely windfall more than replenished the exhausted exchequer ; the excess was spent in sub- sidizing court favourites. A great impoverishment of the Church was the necessary consequence. In ex- clianse for lands and manors the diocesans received ill-paid tenths and the dilapidated parsonages formerly belonging to the monasteries. The iniquity of the transaction was boldly depicted by Dr. Cox, Bishop- elect of Ely, in two letters to the queen. ^ In her exposition of the supremacy the queen had echoed, not the opinions of Henry VIII. or her brother's Erastian Council, but those maintained b}^ the patriot statesmen of old times. Similarly, she disowned the unconstitutional practice obtaining in those two reigns of appointing bishops by letters patent from the Crown. The conge d'elire was re-established, subject to the same ' The letters may be found in Strype, Annals, i. pt. i. pp. 1-44, sqq. ELIZABETH. 291 rule as had obtained before the reign of Henry VIII., that the Crown directed the choice of the chapter by nominating a candidate or candidates. This arrange- ment subsists at the present time. The difference be- tween a Government appointment so qualified and one in which the Church has no voice will appear fanciful only to the unreflecting. Had "letters patent" become part of the Anglican system, the Church could claim no redress should an unorthodox or even unordained person be appointed to a bishopric. As it is, the appointment of a bishop suspected of heterodoxy is a legitimate grievance; the appointment of a layman, common enough in Germany, would here be impossible. The proo-ress of Reformatory mensures was satis- convoca- ^ *=■ " tion re- factory to Parker, Scory, and other dignitaries; but the actionary. Marian bishops had gained the suffrages of the Lower House of Convocation, and for a time it appeared as if a large proportion of the clergy was hopelessly alienated from the cause of reformation. The ex- periences of the clerical body under Edward sufficiently justified a strong prejudice against anti-papal policy. It is not surprising to find that at a time when " Spo- liation Bills " were in progress, Convocation pronounced in favour of papal supremacy and the dogma of tran- substantiation. These principles certainly had no hold on the bulk of the clergy, but were deemed preferable to royal aggression and " sacramentarian " profanit}-, seemingly the only possible alternatives. The prejudice against royal supremacy was shaken b}^ Elizabeth's persistent disclaimer of all desire to obtrude on spiritual prerogative ; the sovereign's example in her own chapel showed that belief in the Real Presence did not require to be bolstered up by the materialistic dogma of Paschasius Radbertus. The clergy were satisfied. The 292 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. sacrificial efficacy of the Eucharist remained, as it is still, a moot question in the Anglican communion. The majority of those who became bishops did not acce^Dt it ; those, however, of the clergy who continued to teach it were not regarded as acting in defiance of the revised Prayer-book, much less was any endea- vour made to oust them from their preferments. The main ground of difference between Anglican and Eomanist Avas henceforth to be papal supremacy. If a clergyman disowned the mediaeval theory of Eoman prerogative by taking the prescribed oath, his view of the Eucharist would certainly not bring him into trouble; in some cases even non-acceptance of the revised Prayer-book doubtless passed unnoticed. It was not till 1571 that attempt was made to enforce a closer conformity of doctrine. The Eliza- Meanwhile much was done which mip;ht well be bethan ^ ... Prayer- regarded as an infringement on the liberties of the A D^i559. Church. The committee appointed by the queen had to effect the revision of the Prayer-book without the sanction of Convocation. The new edition, moreover, did not reach that level to which Elizabeth liad hoped to raise Edward's Second Prayer-book, and which it might have been expected to attain under the auspices of such a divine as Parker. The defect must be ac- counted for by Parker's illness and his nomination of Dr. Guest, a divine of Puritan proclivities, to take his place on the committee. Cecil communicated to the committee the queen's wish that crucifixes, processions, prayers for the dead, and reception of the consecrated elements in the mouth should be sanctioned. She also desired that the celebrant should have a distinctive dress, and that non-communicants slmuld attend at the performance of the Church's gieat act of worship. ELIZABETH. 293 While this was the mind of the queen, four at least of ' " ^i'- the commissioners — Whitehead, Grindal, Pilkington, ^-U— ^ and Guest — were bent on making large concessions to the Puritan party. The course of the negotiations is not easily traced, but it can scarcely be doubted that Theaueen's r\ jj J !• xi influence the prescription as to " Ornaments emanated irom the apparent. Queen herself. Henceforth the minister was to use "at the time of the Communion, and at all other times of his ministration, . . . such ornaments in the Church as were in use by authority of Parliament in the second year of Edward VI." This direction was accepted as a rubric at the revision of the Prajer-book in 1662. It Avas doubtless by the same authority that the " Black Piubric " of Edward's Second Prayer-book, which apologizes for the act of kneeling at Holy Communion, was struck out.^ Seldom has the Church had such reason for condoning royal interference in matters spiritual. The "Act of Uniformity" which sanctioned the new Prayer-book pretended that it was all but identical with the Second Prayer-book of Edward VI. It makes a most cursory mention of the alterations, and says nothing about the omit;sion of the " Black Eubric." It may be, as Mr. Perry supposes,^ that the queen manipulated the new for- mulary after the " Act of Uniformity " had been passed. Doubtless, however. Parliament, conscious of the irregularity of publishing a Prayer-book without the sanction of Convocation, was desirous that it should pass as the authorized Prayer-book of 1552 revived. Perhaps this tendency to minimize the difference between the two books will sufficiently account for the Act's silence on the subject of the " Black Rubric." In The "Orna- ' This was reinserted in a modified form in 1C62. - Terry, Student's English Church History, p. 261. 294 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. ciiAr. the Act the Ornaments prescription takes this form : — '-J— " such ornaments of the Church and of the minister ^3?-^*® „ thereof bhall be retained and be in use as was in this Kubric. Church of England by authority of Parliament in the second j^ear of Edward YI., imtil further order shall he therein taken by authority of the queen's majesty." ^ No further order was taken. That one party in the Church obeyed the prescription, and wore what contemporary Puritans called " the execrable garments of the ungodly mass priests," has been, we think, sufficiently proven.'- An antagonistic and increasing faction hated even the surplice. To press the rubric on these persons would have been impolitic. That minimum of ornament which was enforced by Parker's " Advertisements " of 1566 was at last seldom exceeded. Copes, if not other vestments, were worn in the cathedrals and in the royal chapels. The parish churches did not aspire above the surplice. "Act of The "Act of Uniformity" enforced the use of the ity^- new Pra3'er-book on and after June 24, under penalties f^]."^^®' similar to those of the Act of 1549. But there is no reason to believe that this statute was pressed as the " Act of Supremacy" was. The object of the queen was to ' It has been contended that this clause has in view a future curtailing of ritual. Judged, however, by the contf^xt and by contemporary criticisms, it appears to mean that the queen hoprd to add to the prescriptions on the subject. The Act continues thus : " And also that if there shall happen any contempt or irreverence to be used in the ceremonies or rites of the Church, by the misusing of the orders appointed in this book, the queen's maji sty may by the like advice . . . ordain and publish such further ceremonies or rites as may be most for the advancement of God's glory, the edifying of His Church, and the due reverence of Christ's holy mysteries and sacraments." The Puritan George Withers crtainly regarded the clause about " further order " as dangerous to his party. He laments not only that the ancient ceremonies were "restored under the same name," but "that power moreover, was given to the queen and the archbishop to introduce whiitev^r additional ceremonies they might think proper." He regards the admonition sub- stituting round wafers for the common bread of Edward's reign as issued with this warrant. (See Zurich Letters, 2nd Series, pp. 150, 161.) - See MaccoU, Lawlessness, Sacerdotalit^m, and Ritualism, p. 66 and seqq., and Prefaces to second and third editions. 1559. ELIZABETH. 295 humour religious scruple so long as it did not involve chap. acknowledgment of the Pope. That neither she nor — 1^— - Parker were quite satisfied with the low standard of the ^nd pJ--^" Elizabethan Prayer-book must indeed have been noto- matedecue •^ a nigner rious. The altar in her private chapel, with its crucifix standard. and lighted candles, showed the queen's proclivities. Parker's were expressed by his conduct when called upon to provide a Latin Prayer-book for the college chapels in Oxford, Cambridge, Eton, and Winchester. Instead of translating the new Prayer-book into Latin, he pro- vided a Latin translation of the Prayer-book of 1549. This Latin form of the Prayer-book was even commended to the notice of the parochial clergy, who were authorized to take the dailj' Offices of matins and evensong from this formulary when there was no congregation present. From Parker, too, the universities received a formu- lary to be used "in commendationibus benefactorum." Here that communion between the Church militant and the saints departed which the new Prayer-book had ignored was expressed with sufficient plainness. By such proceedings those who had dreaded that "reformation" now, as in Edward's time, meant "de- catholicizing," were reconciled to Elizabeth's regime} The number of clergy who were deprived for refusing The Marian the oath of supremacy, or for demurring to the English ^^ °^'" Offices, amounted in all to only 189 out of 94U0. This number included, however, no less than fimrteen bishops.^ The episcopal representatives of the Old Learning had almost to a man thrown in their lot with "popery." ' Or in the phraseology of Neal, the Puritan historian, " by this method most of the popis/i laity were deceived into conformity." The *' popish laity " are, of course, those who would not liave tolerated the substitution of a sect for a Catholic Church. Mr. Soames points out that these deluded persons amounted to about two-thirds of the entire population. ^ The bishops were followed by eighty rectors, fifty prebendaries, fifteen masters of colleges, twelve archdeacons, twelve deans, si.\ abbots. The dis- 296 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, '-l^^^y had completely misread Elizabeth's character, and xij presumed that she would not dare to act in defiance of the Holy See. They were convinced that renunciation of the Pope would bring on a revolution. In this case they would side with Philip or Mary Stuart, or any other 2)retender whose cause the Pope should sanction. De Quadra, Bishop of Aquila, a subtle Spanish ecclesiastic, had been sent as ambassador to England for the express purpose of encouraging these anticipations.-^ So strongly had the Lower House of Convocation putation at protested against Elizabeth's invasion of the rio;hts of ■West- ... . . ? minster the Spirituality, that it was deemed advisable to give the Komanist partisans the privilege of defending their cause in a public disputation. Eight divines were selected liom each side to argue in Westminster Abbey on the following questions: — (1) Whether it is against the Word of God and the custom of the ancient Church to officiate and administer the sacraments in a language unknown to the people. (2) Whether every Church has authority to appoint, change, or set aside ceremonies and ecclesiastical rites, provided the same be done to edifying. (3) Whether it can be proved in the Word of God that there is offered in the mass a propitiatory fsacrifice for the quick and the dead. For the Eomanists appeared Bishops White, Bayne, Scott, and Watson, with Cole, Harpsfield, Langdale, and Chadsey. The lleformers were represented by Bishop Scory, with Cox, Home, Aylmer, Whitehead, Grindal, Guest, and Jewel. The Eomanists had agreed that they should speak first, and the Reformers reply. On the second morning of the debate they objected to this arrangement, as giving a palpable advantage to their antagonists. An angry discussion succeeded, in which White and Watson made * P>ou(le, History of England, vol. vi. p. 200, ELIZABETH, 297 themselves particularly offensive. In vain did tlie new chap. lord keeper, Bacon, who presided, and Archbishop Heath v_l^__ who acted as Bacon's assessor, urge the Romanist cham- pions to speak to the question. The lord keeper, forced Aprils, to dissolve the meeting, remarked, "For that ye would not ^^^^' that we should hear you, perhaps you may shortly hear of us." The threat was fulfilled. White and Watson punish- „ . -1 J.1 mentoftwo were committed to the lower tor contempt; tne other bisiiops. Romanist champions were confined for a time to the boundaries of London and Westminster, and had to report themselves daily to the Council. These severities are intelligible when we find that for the sake of this barren controversy the business of both Houses of Par- liament had been suspended. After the passing of the "• Act of Supremacy " it was plain that the malcontent prelates must submit, or suffer deprivation. On May 15 Archbishop Heath, with thirteen nonjuring bishops and other divines, were summoned before the queen in council. To the queen's remonstrances Heath replied by recalling " her gracious sister's zeal unto the holy see of S. Peter's at Rome," and urging that a contrary policy would bring on the realm " perpetual ignominy and curse." ^ The queen, however, denied that Mary's conduct necessarily affected her own policy. " It is," she said, " by diving into and following the pioceedings which have come down to me from a long line of pre- decet^sors that I mean to rule, and I hope that in this my successor will follow my example. To no power whatever is my crown subject, save to that of Christ, the King of kings." The bishops were silenced. Kitchin of Llandaff consented to take the oath of supremacy. The others were deprived, but experienced Nonjming a leniency which contrasts favourably with the treat- deprived. ' See Strype, i. pt. i. p. 207. 298 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. xr. ■with sevei'ity The Coiu-t of High Com- mission. ment of " expulsed " bishops in the two preceding reigns. Heath lived at his own house near Windsor, and was often visited by the queen. The usual plan, however, was to house a nonjuring with a conforming bishop, the host being made responsible for his guest's con- Not treated tinuance in England. Commonly this strange alliance ended in friendship and mutual respect. Bonner, however, the most unfavourable specimen of the Marian episcopate, soon quarrelled with his custodian, the Bishop of Lincoln. He was therefore compelled to occupy a house within the rule or radius of the Marshalsea prison. Watson was found pleaching treason, and was imprisoned for the rest of his life in Wisbech Castle. Before the issue of this conflict with the Romanizing bishops was reached, Elizabeth had armed herself with a formidable weapon by securing parliamentary sanction for the Court of High Commission. Nothing but the queen's own religious principles prevented this new court from being employed in such a way as to sap the foundations of the Church. Its encroachments on the other courts in the reigns following, and their connection with the overthrow of Charles I., are known to every student of English history. The ex- ceptional state of ecclesiastical aifairs in the year 1559 was the only apology for its institution, and when the crisis had passed the extraordinary power delegated to the Crown ought to have been cancelled. The legal sanction for this court was a clause in the " Act of Supremacy," which authoiized the queen and her suc- cessors to appoint a commission " to visit, reform, redress, order, correct, and amend all such errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enoimities, which, by any manner of spiritual or eccle- siastical power, authority, or jurisdiction, can or may ELIZABETH. 299 lawfully be reformed, ordered, redressed, corrected, or chap. amended." Nothing, however, was to be adjudged ^J^,L^ heresy which had not been of old so adjudged in pro- vincial synods or General Councils, or should be so determined by Parliament with the assent of Convo- cation. Under this sanction a body of commissioners visited Thevisita- the dioceses this summer. The leading commissioners dioceses, were Matthew Parker, Edmund Grindal, Thomas Smith, Walter Haddon, Thomas Sackford, Eichard Goodrick, and Gilbert Gerrard. One of these six was to be present at each visitation. They were charged to suspend immoral clergymen, to restore such as had been illegally displaced, to allow pensions to those who refused the oath of supremacy, to report on the true state of churches, and to distribute everywhere a body of " Injunctions,'* compiled probably by the Prayer-book commission.^ . AVe have already observed that few clergymen were de- prived, and that it was the queen's intention that all should be done in a concessory spirit. The intolerance, however, of some of the commissioners far exceeded their instructions, and in certain districts they sanctioned most unjustifiable outrages on what they considered " superstitious ornaments." The churches in London ])articularly suffered. The rood and high altar at S. Paul's were desecrated ; " the rood and Mary and John" at S. Magnus, Fish Street, and at S. Botolph, Billingsgate, were burnt. Churchyard crosses were in some places pulled down.^ The first twenty-eight of the " Injunctions " were The "in- junctions." ' So Strype and Cardwell. Dean Hook remarks, however, that " it is more than doubtful " whether the commission " as a body would have given their assent to all the ' Injunctions.' We may with more confidence attribute them to Parker ftiid Cecil : the latter, we know, revised them." — Archbishops, " Matthew Parker," p. 226. '^ See Strype, Annals, I. pt. i. p. 254. 300 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, based on those published by Edward's Council in 154-' XI. The following prescriptions may be noticed : — II. The clergy are charged not to "set forth or extol the dignity of any images, rehcs, or miracles." (In Edward's " In- junctions " the destruction of images and relics is ordered.) III. The clergy are to preach one sermon in every month, exhorting their hearers to works of mercy and charity, and not to such works " devised by men's fantasies " as pilgrimages, setting up candles, praying on beads, etc. VI. An English Bible and the Paraphrase of Erasmus to be set up in the churches. X. Registers of baptisms, marriages, and burials to be kept in the churches. XVIII. Processions in church or churchyard for- bidden, as engendering contention and strife, " by reason of fond courtesy and challenging of places in the procession." XXII. It shall be taught that no man ought " obstinately and ma- liciously to break and violate the laudable ceremonies of the Church." (The " Injunction " of 1547 had also protested against superstitious abuse of ceremonies : this protest is left out.) XXIII. " Monuments of feigned miracles, pilgrimages, idolatry, and superstition/' such as " shrines . . . tables, candlesticks, trindals, rolls of wax, pictures, paintings," are to be destroyed. XXVII. One of the Homilies to be read every Sunday. XXIX.^ Offence having been given by " lack of discreet behaviour in many ^ ministers . . . both in choosing of their wives and in- discreet living with them," no priest or deacon shall hereafter marry without the consent of the bishop and two neighbouring justices, nor without the good will of the bride's parents or guardians. Masters, deans, and heads of colleges are not to marry without permission from the visitor. XLIV. Clergy are to in- struct the young fur at least half an hour before evening prayer every holiday and every other Sunday, in the Commandments, Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Catechism. XLVII. The church- wardens are to give the visitors an inventory of copes and other ' "Injunctions" XXIX.-LIII. have no counterpart in Edward's "Injunctions," with the exception of XXXIX., the "Injunction" requiring the exclusive use f King Henry's Latin grammar. - This, of course, is merely a testimony to Elizabeth's well-known aversion to clerical marriages. The statute on the subject was still that of 1552, which (pre- sumably by some oversight) had not been repealed in the reign of Mary. altars. ELIZABETH. 301 ornaments, " vestments, plate, and books, and specially of grails, chap. couchers, legends, processionals," etc.^ L. People are to live in — 1.— ^ charity, and not use " convicious words," as " papist or papistical heretic, schismatic, or sacramentary." LI. To stop the spread of "unfruitful, vain, and infamous books and papers," no books are to be published without the imprimatur of the ordinary, and the bishop or archbishop or chancellor of the university. LII. The people are to kneel in time of the Litany and all other prayers, and whensoever the name of Jesus is pronounced "due reverence " is to " be made of all persons, young and old." In an admonition attached to the " Injunctions " The ad- directlons are given for the placing of altars. It will STJJJt^"'^ be remembered that the Act of Edward VI. had aimed at transforming the altars into tables. This Act was now law, since all the religious legislation of Mary had been repealed. The Puritan faction were clamouring for more desecrations. They addressed a petition against altars to the queen. Her Majesty is informed that the " greatest learned men of the world, as Bucer, CEcolampadius, Zninglius, Bullinger, Calvin, etc., etc. . . . have in their reformed churches . . . always taken away the altars; only Luther and his churches have retained them." In the directions att-iched to the " Injunctions " we detect the diplomatic skill of Eliza- beth. To openly pronounce in favour of altais was impossible in the present position of parties. But a modification could be devised such as would protect the ancient use, save only in parishes where tlie incumbent and churchwardens were Puritans. To tliese function- aries was now committed the settlement of the burnino- question. If they did remove an altar, they were to do ' This donbtlrps means that the Church ornaments and devotional literature were to be inspected by the visitors, and not left to the mercies of ultra-Pro- testants, as in 1547-8. The Ronian Offices were, of course, removed Hut the " Injumtion " is no nore to the disparagement of the copes and other vestments than of the Church plate. And about •wa-ier bread. 302 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. so without "riot or disorder." And they were to pro- vide " that the table be decently made, and set in the place ivliere the altar stood; and so to stand but when the Communion should be celebrated. And then it shall be so placed within the chancel as the minister may more conveniently be heard of the communicants, and the communicants in more conveniency arid number communicate with the minister."^ The order for the bread also shows us the direction of her Majesty's sympathies. " For the giving the more reverence to the holy mysteries," such " common fine bread " as was used for sacrament-il bread under Edward VI. is dis- allowed. The bread is to be " of the same fineness and round fashion, but somewhat bigger, as was the usual bread or wafer heretofore named singing cakes, which served for the use of the piivate mass." But it is to be "plain, without any figure impiessed upon it." We must now direct the student's attention to the a primate, j^g^ episoopal appointments. Parker's retiring dis- position had led him to decline the primacy when Bacon fir.«^t communicated with him on the subject. The queen's choice had next fallen on Sir Nicholas Wotton, Dean of Canterbury under Mary. Wotton, like Cardinal Pole, was a Catholic with Reforming pro- clivities. He was conspicuous rather as a diplomatist than a divine, and had been in the Privy Council under Edward and Mar}^ That he declined the offer is probably to be set down to his consciousness of a lack of theological attainments. That the offer was made will convince the reader that the hard and fast line of doctrinal severance which in later times distinguished papist from Anglican was at this date unknown. The queen's next choice is no less instructive. Feckenhara. '■ See Cardwell, Annals, vol. i. p. 201. Choice of ELIZABETH. 303 Abbot of Westminster, had been chaplain to the Bishop chap. of London, the "Bloody Bonner" of Foxe. He was, —J— however, of mild and tolerant disposition, and the queen probably thought he would be a fit exponent of her own conciliatory policy. Feckenham, however, felt himself unable to renounce the papal supremacy.-^ Matthew Parker was again pressed, and the matter was decided before the middle of May. The conge, d'elire was issued on May 18, accompanied probably by a letter missive nominating Dr. Parker. He was elected by the dean and chapter on August 1. In the first commission for his consecration three Matthew of the malcontent bishops were included — Tonstal, c^nSjra- Bourne, and Poole. They refused to act. A second ^'°'^" commission was issued, to seven bishops of Reforming principles. Three are sufficient, according to Catholic usage, to give canonical consecration. A state enact- ment of Henry's reign ^ required four, when the metro- politan was not one of the officiating bishops. The warrant therefore required that " at least four " of the seven should officiate. The four whom the archbishop- elect deputed to this business were all of them men Avho had been raised to the episcopate in the reign of Henry. Their names were Bailow, formerly Bishop of Bath and Wells, and now elect of Chichester; Hodgkins, Bishop-suffragan of Bedford; Coverdale, formerly Bishop of Exeter ; and Scory, formerly Bishop ' See Wood's Athenaj, i. 500. Hook remarks that " it is so unlikely the Puritans would have tolerated such an archbishop that we should probably be correct in saying that he was only ' talked of for the primacy.' " The subsequent career of the last Abbot of Westminster was unfortunate. Having refused the oath of supremacy, he was housed with Home, Bishop of Winchester, with the usual restrictions on his liberty. Being unable to live peacefully with this somewhat narrow-minded prelate, he was transferred to the custody of the Bishop of London. In the disturbances stirred up by the emissaries of Pius V. be fell under suspicio i, and was confined in Wisbech Castle. = Stat. 25 Henry VIII. cap. 20. 304 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Head Fable. of Eocliester, and now elect of Hereford. That all four were canonically consecrated is admitted by all honest Eomanist historians. The consecration of Dr. Parker took place in the chapel at Lambeth on December 17, 1559. The formulary used was the second ordinal of Edward VI., which had been legalized by the recent "Act of Uniformity." The ceremony is described in detail in contemporaneous accounts surviving in the Lambeth register and the manuscripts of Corpus The "Nag's Christi, Cambridge. In 1603, when the hostility of Eomanist and Anglican reached its acme of bitterness, one Christopher Holywood circulated a clumsy fiction, intended to make men believe that the proceedings on this occasion were informal and irreverent. The story is known as the " Nag's Head Fable." It pretends that Scory assembled Parker and all the other newly elected bishops at a tavern in Fleet Street, and there made them members of the episcopate by laying a Bible on their heads. The tale, though proved false by Lord Nottingham, an eye-witness of the consecration in Lambeth Chapel, was eagerly accepted in certain quarters as the only means of assailing the validity of Anglican Orders and the catholicity of our Church. It will suffice to say that it has been given up as a clumsy falsehood by such writers as Lingard, Tierney, and Charles Butler, and only deserves atten- tion as showing to what shifts the assailants of our Church have been driven.^ Eeturning to matters of fact, we notice that no new bishops were consecrated on the same day as Parker. A few days after his own consecration, however, Parker assisted at the consecra- tion of Giindal, Bishop of London ; Cox, Bishop of other episcopal appoint- ments ' A good reanwe of tlie argiiments hy which tliis myth is unmasked may be found in Perry's Student's English Church History, p. 2.sa. ELIZABETH. 305 Ely ; Sandj's, BIsliop of Worcester ; and Merrick, Bishop chap. of Bangor. In January five more were consecrated — . ^,^' . Young to S. David's, Bullingliam to Lincoln, Jewel to Salisbury, Davis to S. Asaph, and Guest to Rochester. The stratagem of disarming a possible leader of Tiie Low- faction by promotion to office sometimes receives illus- element, tration in our own times. It was to this principle of policy that many of the Elizabethan bishops owed their preferment. Puritanism of a mild type found its way to the Episcopal bench : it soon had its repre- sentatives in the Lower House of Convocation. It was only by the firmness of the primate and the queen that this party was kept in restraint. Great at first were the lamentations of Sandys and the other commissioners who had destroyed roods and images, at having to officiate in the queen's chapel at an altar bedecked with lights and crucifix, clad in "popisli vestments."^ The queen replied with an unfeeling threat to restore all the roods to parish churches. In view of such a fearful prospect the aggrieved bishops thought it better to hold their peace. On January 22, 1560, a commission was issued to The New- Parker, Grindal, Bill, and Haddon, to provide a Lee- and tionary, or Table of Lessons. For this work Parker ajj. isei. was already paving the way by a revision of the Calen- dar. The number of holy days before the Eeformation had been excessive, and it was generally felt that their observance fostered idleness rather than piety. The Edwardian Reformers had effected a somewhat precipi- tate expurgation of the Calendar. The Calendar of 1549 retained only what are called red-letter days — those for which Collects, Epistles, and Gospels are appointed. Among these was included S. Mary Mag- ' See the Zurich Letters, i. 63, 66, 67. 3o6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. dalene's Da3^ In 1552 S. George, S. Lawrence, and S. Clement were added as black-letter days to the Calendar, and (perhaps by mistake) the name of S. Mary Magdalene was altogether omitted. In Parker's Calendar, which was published in 1561 by the authority of the commissioners, the red-letter days remained the same as in 1552; a few black-letter days were, how- ever, allotted to each month. Amongst these appears S. Mary Magdalene's Day. Yery little alteration was made in this Calendar at the revision of 1662. The Lectionary of 1561 has also remained almost unaltered till the present reign. It is noticeable that the admo- nition which precedes the " Second Book of Homilies," appears to give the clergyman licence to substitute another lesson at his own discretion when the ap- pointed passage is considered unedifjdng.-^ These two publications had no synodical sanction. Discussion on the matter of the Calendar would probably have raised a storm among the Puritans. Parker avoided the danger by stretching his own authority as jDrimate, and the powers of the newly devised ecclesiastical commission. His action is excusable, but it estab- lished a dangerous precedent. Scarcity of The plagu8 whicli had proved so fatal to the bishops had thinned the ranks of the clergy. The diocesans found it no easy matter to fill the impoverished livings Avith men of learning and social status. Some of the new bishops thought that in such an emergency these qualifications might be disregarded, and did not scruple to confer Holy Orders on mechanics or " artificers " of godly life. Archbishop Parker writes in August, 1560, to Grindal, complaining of this degradation of the holy oftice. " Now," he sa^^s, " by experience it is seen that ' See Cardwell, Annals, i. p. 201, note. ELIZABETH. 307 such manner of men, partly by reason of their former cmap. profane arts, partly by their light behaviour otherwise -J^!l_. and trade of life, are very offensive unto the people • yea, and to the wise of this realm are thought to do great deal more hurt than good, the Gospel there sustaining slander." •■■ The archbishop adopted the x,ay helpers wiser plan of supplementing the clerical force by a con- ^^^°^^^^^- tingent of lay helpers, who were permitted to say the Litany and read the Homilies in the destitute churches, but not, of course, to trespass on those functions that are strictly clerical. The lamentable effects of the queen's extortions, however, were long observable in every diocese. The answers to Parker's circular of 1561 levealed a fearful deficiency of suitable ministers. From the diocese of Norwich more than four hundred benefices are reported as without incumbents. In 1563, of one hundred and eighteen clergy in the archdeaconry of Middlesex, only three are reported as " Docti Latino et Gra3ce ; " forty-three come under the heading " Latine parum aliquid." ^ It may be presumed that the country clergy were not superior to their London brethren. In 1562 a great sensation was caused by the appear- Jewers ance of Bishop Jewel's " Apology," a book which still a^d.°i56s'" ranks among the classical literature of Anglicanism. The writer's personal history had hardly been such as to augur any achievement requiring fixed religious principles. In Mary's reign Jewel had, under intimida- tion, recanted all that could offend the inquisitors ; he repented and fled abroad, to become, like many other refugees, infected with a Pnritaniym which was after- wards discarded. He appears to have reached his ' Parker's Correspondence, p. 120. ' This is in a catalogue of the year 1563, cited by Gibson in a letter to Pepys: Bee Short's History of the Church of England, vol. i, p. 355. 3o8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, unassailable theological position as early as June 18, _^tl:_ 1559, when, in a sermon at Paul's Cross, he declared the true Anglican principle— divergence from Eome only where Eome is mediaeval and not primitive. In this sermon he challenges proof " by the Scriptures, or by the example of the primitive Church, or by the old doctors, or by the eminent General Councils," of some twenty-eight mediseval tenets, and in the ensuing controversy he was in the main successful. The " Apology " undertakes the safer task of disproving such Eomanist allegations as that the Anglican body " had. rebelliously withdrawn from the Catholic Church ; " that " as for the authority of the ancient Fathers and old Councils, we set them at nought : " " that all ancient ceremonies, such as by our grandfathers and gieat- grandfathers, now many ages past, . . . were approved, we had rashly and arrogantly abolished." This defence of the catholicity of our Church was soon translated into almost all the languages of Europe. Harding of Louvain attempted to answer it, taking as his basis the principle which the Council of Constance had disowned — that the Bishop of Eome is infallible. Jewel retorted with a " Defence of the ' Apolog}^' " in 1569. The As early as 1562 the " Bishops' Bible " was in project, ibie.°^^ if not actually begun. The last translation effected in England was that revision of the work of Eogers and Coverdale which had been issued with a preface b}'" Cranmer in 1540, and which was commonly called the " Great Bible." During the Marian persecution the English refugees at Geneva, Mdfh the assistance of foreign divines, had bronght out the " Geneva Bible." ^ This work, which was superior to its predecessors as ' Whittingham, "who had married Calvin's sifter, translated the whole of the New Testament, the most creditable part of tl;e publication. Bible A.D. 1568 ELIZABETH. 309 a translation, was marred by a commentary of an ultra- chap Protestant and levelling tone, wherein the sacred text — ^ was wrested to gratify the animus of party. Parker hoped to prepare a translation more worthy to be the authorized version of the English Church. Fourteen translators were appointed. The fact that most of them were bishops gave their production the name the " Bishops' Bible." ^ The new version came out in 1568. The rule had been that the translators should "make no use of bitter notes of any kind," nor "set down any determination in places of controversy." This was an improvement. The translation itself, however, was inaccurate, and the arrangement of the work was unsystematic and slovenly. The translators did not act in concert, and the time allowed them was probably insufficient. So far the " Bishops' Bible " deserved the hatred with which the Puritans always regarded it. Leicester, their patron, prevented its re- ceiving royal sanction. Archbishop Grindal, Parker's successor, appears to have looked with favour on the Genevan version. The "Bishops' Bible" was not authorized^ till 1004, when about to be superseded by the version now in use. Measures of great importance were passed in the Convocation which met on January 29, 1563. The Pre- cisians obtained, probably through the manoeuvring of some of the bishops, a strung footing in this Convocation. It had seemed advisable to Parker that a code of Articles should be published, laying down fixed limits for pulpit teaching. Eleven Articles had been already compiled to serve this purpose. It * Parker himself translated Genesis, Exodus, tbe two first Gospels, and all the Epistles of S. Paul except Romans and Corinthians. lie is also credited with the Prefaces to the Psalter, to the New restament, and to the whole Bible. - See Canon LXXX. of that year. 3IO ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. was now proposed to secure the sanction of Convocation for a revised edition of Cranmer's Forty-two Articles. Revision of In preparing this edition Parker was assisted by Cox, Forty-two Bishop of Ely ; Guest, Bishop of Eochester ; and Grindal, Bishop of London. The Articles in the course of this revision were reduced to their present number, thirty- nine. We have already noticed the changes made at this time, few of which are of much doctrinal impor- tance. We have also pointed out that the Articles were not intended as a confession of faith, but only as Opposed a barrier to pulpit extravaoiance. The Puritan extreme by the . " Puritans in was the ono addictcd to doctrinal vagaries, and its tion^°'^^ representatives in this Convocation regarded the en- A.D. 1563. forcement of the Articles as a grievous outrage. The prelates of both provinces passed them unanimously. But the Lower House of Canterbury reported that a minority therein refused to sign. It is not clear whether the malcontents submitted on this occasion ; in 1571, when the Articles received a few finishing touches at the hands of Bishop Jewel, every member of Convo- cation had to subscribe, under penalty of expulsion. The Articles were laid before the queen for ratification. She appears to have disliked all such formularies, as tending to narrow the confines of the Church. She detained them nearly a year before she authorized The queen them. When they came back they had undersfone two alters the . t/ o Articles. important alterations. At the beginning of the twentieth Article appeared for the first time the clause " Habet ecclesia ritus ^ statuendi jus, et in fidei contro- versiis auctoritatera." The twenty-ninth Article (that which declares that the wicked do not really participate in the Lord's Supper) was omitted. It was doubtless by the queen's directions that these changes had been ' The original clause does not contain the words slve crremonias. .ELIZABETH. 311 made.^ There were thus two distinct recensions of the crap. Articles. The English version of the Articles, printed ^^- . by Jugg and Cawood at this time, was a third variant. This omitted the clause in the twentieth Article, but also omitted Article XXIX. The copy accepted by The Convocation in 1571 includes both the dis^^uted para- clauses graphs. But it appears that the Act of Parliament f^ ilyi^ which enforced clerical subscription, refers not to this copy, but to an English translation of the Convoca- tional copy of 1563. Thus the opening clause of the twentieth Article did not receive parliamentary recog- nition. Laud was afterwards unjustly attacked by the Puritans as the author of this controverted clause. The doctrinal importance of the variation has been overestimated. Were the clause in Article XX. struck out, the same truth would remain embodied in Article XXXIV. The Articles of 1563 sanctioned the " Second me Book of Homilies" as containing " a godly and whole- Book of some doctrine, and necessary for these times." This ^omiues. work had been previously accepted by Convocation. It appears that it had always been intended that the " Book of Homilies" of 1547 should be enlarged. Cranmer himself gives a promise of more Homilies at the end of the book, and in October, 1552, we find King Edward setting down " the making of more Homilies " in a memorandum of "matters to be considered." Clergy capable of composing sermons were now scarce; the demand for more Homilies was therefore urg-ent. The twenty-one discourses which were sanctioned by the Convocation of 1563 as the " Second Book of Homilies " were probably mainly composed or compiled by Parker ' Bishop Browne remarks, however, that " the clause itself was taken from the Lutheran Confession of Wiirtemberg, from which source Archbishop Parker derived most of the additions which were made in Queen Elizabeth's reign to the Articles drawn up by Cranmer." — Exposition of the XXXIX. Articles, p. 469. 31 i ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, and Jev/el. The Puritanical discourse, "Against peril _^i__ of idolatry " (Homily II.), is noticeable as a concession to the rising faction. It is based upon an earlier pro- duction which Foxe publishes as a " treatise of Master Nicholas Eidley, in the name, as it seemeth, of the whole clergy." That Eidley had anything to do with it is uncertain. It is clearly taken from Bullinger's treatise, "De 0^'igine Erroris, etc." The other Homilies appear unexceptionable. From royalty the Homilies received as tardy a recognition as the Articles. Elizabeth de- tained the book for a whole year before she gave it ratification. Homily XXII., " Against rebellion," was not written till 1570. It was occasioned by the rising in the north in the autumn of 1569. It was added to the Homilies by the Convocation of 1571. A Catechism of a Puritanical tendency, based upon the production of Bishop Poynet, had been composed by Dean Nowell, now the prolocutor of the Lower House. He was extremely anxious to inflict it on the Church as an authoritative formula, and had vainly tried to get Cecil to countenance this narrowing scheme. In the present session of Convocation the Catechism was supported by the Puritan representatives, thirty- three in number, but failed to secure the approval of the House. In 1570 it was accepted by the Low^er House, but did not pass the Upper.^ It appears to have been a favourite contention with the men of this party that Nowell's Catechism had received synodical sanction. ThePuri- The thirty-thrce also presented a scheme of seven tan mani- Ai'iini • • "ii festo in Con- Articlcs, levelled against certain customs retained by our Church. The scheme demanded that several saints' days should be abolished ; that the sign of the cross * Synodus AngUcana, 215. ELIZABETH. j^j in Baptism sliould be disused, as tending to superstition ; chap. that " forasmuch as divers communicants are not able _^i_ to kneel durins: the time of Communion . . . and some also both superstitiously kneel and knock, that order of kneeling may be left to the ordinary ; " that organs should be silen-ced ; that the surplice should be the only dress of the minister in church ; and that out of church the clergy should not wear " caps and gowns such as were customary among the Eoman priesthood." ^ This extraordinary manifesto is to be ascribed almost entirely to the influence of the Low Church bishops and the Puritan court faction. Of the proctors repre- senting the parochial clergy, only fourteen signed it. The remaining nineteen names are those of dignitaries — thirteen archdeacons, a pro-vost, and five deans. A scheme of more insidious character was introduced in the Upper House by Bishop Sandys. He proposed to hand over the discipline and government of the Church to a committee appointed by the queen and working under the control of Parliament. This was just what such courtiers as Leicester desired. It is creditable to the Upper House that Sand}V scheme had not a single supporter. We have already observed that Elizabeth was ex- ^he queen-s tremely averse to the system of irreverent Puritanism ^^^^ which was now infusing itself into the Church. We support of find that she was wont at this time to address the bishops on the subject in petulant and captious tones. Neverth-eless, she would give Parker no assistance in his attempts to introduce a higher standard. This Leicester's demeanour is partly attributable to policy ; but the in- consistency is mainly due to the extraordinary in- fluence of her favourite Leicester. Despite his detest- ' See Pryce, England's Sacred Synods, pp. 5C4, 565. 314 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. able character, this person posed as the champion of the Precisians. To the salutary measures devised by Parker and Cecil Earl of Burleigh, for maintaining Church discipline, he offered a violent opposition. The queen was too frequently induced to side with this unworthy favourite rather than with the well-wishers of the Church. Encouraged by this support, the ultra- Protestant faction assumed a menacing demeanour. Dissenters The benefices of the Church were beino; filled by men take Orders t t ^ • o ,/ in the who had imbibed the spirit of the Calvinistic and Zudnglian systems, and whose views with regard to sacraments and means of grace were utterly at variance with the teaching of the English Church. These persons were advised by their continental friends to feign acceptance of the doctrines embodied in the Prayer-book, with the view of ultimately decatholi- cizing the Church. Thek real sympathies were rather with the horde of " Anabaptists, Arians, libertines, Free-will men, etc.," whose influx into England is deplored dn Parker's letters. Sometimes, as in the case of Dean Turner, the Puritan mind expressed itself in open ridicule of those tenets and practices which distinguished Anglicanism from the sects. Tolerant though Parker was, he was not the man to fawn on the royal favourite, or quail before the clamour of faction. Cranmer, under similar circumstances, had collapsed. Parker, to his lasting honour, maintained the principles of Anglicanism, despite the " civium ardor prava juben- Their tium " and the " vultus in&tantis tyranni." We have in ritual obscrvcd elscwhcre that deep principles have been often Parker a involved in vestiarian or ritualistic controversies of ground^" sccming insignificance. The differences between Anglo- Catholic and Puritan were on this occasion compressed within these narrow confines. The Puritans of set ELIZABETH. 3^5 purpose conducted divine service with slovenly irre- chap. verence. Some would not kneel at Holy Communion ; . ^J- _ many would not even wear the surplice. The queen, roused to anger, admonished Parker that " there was crept and brought into the Church by some few per- sons abounding more in their own sense than wisdom, and delighting in singularities and changes, an open and manifest disorder and offence, specially in the external and decent and lawful rites and ceremonies to be used in the Church." He was ordered to confer with the other ecclesiastical commissioners and the ordinaries, and to proceed by order, injunction, or censure, so that uniformity might be established. Thus Theaueen . evades the much and no more would the queen do for her religion, respon- Policy and the personal influence of Leicester shifted the responsibility of all future proceedings on the archbishop's shoulders. Parker drew up Articles, but had to complain, "if the queen's majesty will not authorize them, the most part be likely to lie in the dust for execution." It appears that at last he decided that his powers as primate were sufficient to warrant the issue of a code of rules which should secure " de- cency, distinction, and order for the time." A book of Parker's "Advertisements" was accordingly drawn up, contain- ments." ing articles ranged under four heads : for doctrine and preaching ; for administration of prayer and sacraments ; for certain orders in ecclesiastical policy ; and for out- ward apparel of persons ecclesiastical. This work was probably published early in 1565, but not generally circulated till March, 1566, when Parker sent it to Cecil for perusal. In his letter he remarks, " When the queen's highness will needs have me assay with mine own authority what I can do for order, I trust I shall not be stayed hereafter." ^ Though originally intended ' Parker Correspondence, p. 272. ii6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAT. XI. Not sanc- tioned by the queen. only as a temporary remedy, the "Advertisements" assumed a less questionable status in the next reign, when they were recognized as authoritative by Canot;. XXIV., which was ratified by the king. There is no reason to believe that they recei-ved royal sanction in the present reign. It need scarcely be said, therefore, that it was never imagined at this period that Parker's "Advertisements" were a "taking of further order" on the part of the queen, with respect to the ornaments prescribed by the rubric. Still less possible is it to suppose that any limitation of the orn-aments sanctioned by the rubric was aimed at in the "Advertisements." Parker's publication was clearly intended only as a bye-law, giving practical shape to a statute hitherto inoperative. To force the Puritan clergy to adopt the ornaments of 1548, according to the strict letter of the rubric, was impossible. Parker wisely drew the line ■ at the surplice and the fair linen cloth for the altar. Thus much he insisted on. To argue from this that he prohibited more, in defiance of the unrepealed rubric, is to pervert all that is known of the man, the measure, and the times.^ ' It will be borne in mind that the vestment controversies of our own day have given the " Advertisements " of Archbishop Parker a somewhat spurious import- ance. The " Act of Uniformity " had enjoined the use of such vestments as had sanction in 1548, "until the queen should take further order." The chasuble, alb, and tunicle were therefore at this time the legal dress of the celebrant, although there is reason to believe that these vestments were seldom worn. Parker's "Advertisements," however, make no mention of any other dress besides the surplice as necessary " at the ministration of the Sacrament in the ordinary parish churches." Nobody who knows under what circumstances the "Advertisements " were published can doubt that the surplice is thus specified in view of Puritan slovenliness, as the minimum that would be tolerated in the way of "apparel for all persons ecclesiastical." In modern times, however, under the pressure of influences which need not be particularized, it has been ruled that "omission is to be considered as prohibition ; " and that tLie " Advertisements," which never received the formal sanction of the Crown, and did not introduce any modification in our Prayer-book's rubrics, were in reality a "taking of further order" on the part of the queen, who, in point of fact, took pains to disown them in 1576. By this manipulation of history the conclusion is arrived at that the Eucharistic vestments ELIZABETH, 317 We notice the most interesting directions in the chap. " Advertisements " tinder the four heads given above : — . ^]' lExcGnots I. Clergy are to excite the people to frequent communion : from the cleroiv who preach on matters tendino; to dissension or " dero- "-A-dvertise- nj 1 o ments. gation of the religion and doctrine received " ought to be re- ported to the bishop or ordinary. II. Common prayer is to be said in such part of the church ^ " as the ordinary shall think meet for the largeness and straightness of the church ... so that the people may be most edified." In cathedrals and colleges Holy Communion is to be celebrated at least once a month : the celebrant to use a cope " with gospeller and epistoller agreeably." At other services the surplice is to be worn. " And any minister saying any public prayers or ministering the sacraments shall wear a comely surplice with sleeves, to be . provided at the charge of the parish." The Communion Table is to be decently covered with carpet, silk, etc., and at time of celebration, with a fair linen cloth. All communicants are to receive kneeling. Basins are not to be used at baptism in lieu of the font. The bell is to be tolled for every " Christian body " who " is in passing. . . . After the time of his passing " only one short peal is to be rung. AY hen fairs or markets fall on a Sunday there is to be no showing of wares till service be done. III. Archdeacons are to " appoint the cnrates to certain taxes of the New Testament, to be conned without book." Church- wardens are to report to the ordinary those " which will not readily pay their penalties for not coming to God^s service." No person is to marry within the degrees set forth in the arch- bishop's table ^ of 1563. IV. Archbishops and bishops are to were prohibited by royal authority in the year 1565-66. Such is the acknowledged basis of tlie " Purclias judgment," which made the use of these vestments penal. Messrs. MaccoU and Parker have exhaustively exposed the fallacies which underlie these assumptions. "Were it not a practical matter, the idea of this "malleus Puritanorum " being dug up to belabour the very party in whose interests it was forged would perhaps provoke a smile. In view, however, of the persecution of the Rubricists for which this decision was the apology, impartial persons must deplore a flagrant miscarriage of justice. ' The Puritiinical had been aggrieved by the occasional use of the chancel for prayers, and would fain have prohibited this use as a relic of popery. * - This table, which has been retained unaltered in our Prayei-books, was drawn up by Archbishop Parker, to counteract the lax tt-aching on the subject which foreign Protestantism was now inttilling into English minds. 3i8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The "Ad- vertis3- ments " illustrated by Cecil's letter. Puritan protests. " use and continue their accustomed apparel." Deans, arch- deacons, doctors of divinity, and otliers are to wear in their common apparel abroad " a side gown with sleeves straight at the hand," and "to wear tippets of sarcenet." The "inferior ecclesiastical persons" are to wear lay gowns and the square cap. The nonjuring clergy are to wear "none of the said apparel . . . but to go as mere laymen till they be recon- ciled to obedience," The necessity of some of these directions is shown by Cecil's summary of the diocesan reports in 1564. Among other marks of disorder are mentioned these : *' Some say [the service and prayers] in a surplice, others without a surplice ; ... in some p)laces the table hath a carpet, in others it hath not ; . . . administration of the Communion is done by some with surjDlice and cap, some with surplice alone, others with none : . . . some receive kneeling, others standing, others sitting." ^ Even the moderate demands of the "Advertisements " were offensive to the Puritan faction. Pilkington, Bishop of Durham, wrote to Leicester for protection against the cap and surplice, urging that " in all Reformed countries the belief and habit of the Eoman Church are dismissed together " and " that the godly in other countries would ... be strangely shocked with these reforms." To like effect wrote Whittingham, who by Leicester's influence retained the deanery of Durham, though not really in Orders. If, he argues, the indifferency of the dress be urged, yet it is undeniable it ought to be to the glory of God, and " How can God's glory be pro- moted by' the equipage of idolatrous worshij^ ? " He pretends to find an analogy in that jealous abstention from the usages of heathens and heretics which was considered necessary in the early Church. Leicester, of course, abetted the aggrieved. Puritans. Their See Strype's Tarker, ii. 9, fol. eJ. ELIZABETH. 319 cause had also the support of the Earls of Bedford and chap. XI. Warwick, and of Walsingham, Knolles, and an influ- ential party in the Commons. Parker, however, and the other commissioners were resolved to exert their authority and end the reign of disorder. About a Non-con- hundred and forty refractory London clergy were cited cieSy"" before the commissioners at Lambeth, and required to ^^i^'^iggg make the declaration of conformity attached to the " Ad- vertisements." Some thirty-seven refused, and were consequently suspended or deprived. Sampson, Dean of Christ Church, and Humphreys, President of Magdalen, Oxford, were cited, as also the most flagrant ofiender of all. Turner, Dean of Wells. Turner and Sampson were deprived. Humphreys obtained a respite and ultimately conformed. It appears that the cause of the London Puritans excited much sympathy at Cam- bridge. The students refused to wear surplices, and their insubordination was countenanced by the masters of Trinity and S. John's. The conduct of the opposite faction in 1569-70 gained the Puritans a short-lived and unmerited popularity. The policy of Eome on the accession of Elizabeth has Romanist been noticed. Paul IV. had been succeeded in 1559 by a more sagacious pontiff, Pius IV. Convinced that nothing was to be gained in England by hostility to the throne, Pius made friendly overtures to Elizabeth. AVe have it on good authority that he offered to sanction the Prayer-book of 1559, provided the English Church recognized the supremacy of Pome.^ The pressure of the Puritans rendered it impossible to accept reconcilia- tion on such terms. In 1566 Pius V. became Pope, and this conciliatory policy was discarded. The first ' See Twisden, Historical Vindication of tlie Chuixh of England in point of Schism, p. 17j. 320 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. ciTAP. effect of liis hostility was the rising in the north, under ^]- the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland, in 1569. The insurgents professed a determination to overthrow the Eeformation and re-establish the Pope. The chief agents in this affair were foreign seminarists. In the next year Pope Pius V. took a step which not only drove England to the side of the Protestant powers, but necessitated the prohibition of Eomanism by penal laws. He published a bull .excommunicating Elizebeth, and denouncing her as a usuirper ; her subjects Avere commanded to repudiate their allegiance under pain of excommunication. This bull was found posted on the doors of London House (April, 1570).^ The advanced Catholics in the ranks of the clergy seem to have remained faithful to the throne at this crisis, and the queen's confidence in their loyalty was declared in The her manifesto. The Commons, however, thought fit ArticieT^^^ to subjcct all clergymen to a test of loyalty in a madeatest j.g]^jg,-Qyg p-^rb. Evcrv clerorvman, whether ordained of loyalty. & & j TiJ •> ^ with the present formulary or that in use under Mary, was to declare his assent to the Thirty-nine Articles. Ko one henceforth was to be ordained till he had sub- scribed them. Every incumbent was to read the ' The Romish schism in England dates from this year. Its adherents were at first governed by priests with special commissions from Eome, thea by bishops in jmrtibus. In our own time Cardinal Wiseman introduced the practice of giving these intruders English titles. The backbone of the faction in 1570 was Dr. "William Allen, formerly Prim ipal of St. Mary's Hall, Oxford. lie fled to Louvain on Elizabeth's accession, and devoted his life to a crusade against the Anglican ('hurch. Allen was placed at the head of the seminary at Douay, established at the cost of Philip II. in 1568. He was subsequently made a cardinal. William Persons, a Jesuit, became rector of another seminary at Pome, and similar estab- lishments were founded at Valladolid and S. Omer in Artois. Persons and Campion were at tlie head of the Jesuit propagandists who entered England with the view of effecting the deposition or assassination of Elizabeth. Campion was executed under circumstances of great cruelty. But the emissaries suffered not lor their religion, but their hostility to the throne. Mr. Hallam admits that any man in this reign might have saved his life by denying the Pope's power to depose the queen (Const. History, vol. i. ch. iii. p. 164). ELIZABETH. 321 Articles to his congregation within two months of chap. his induction. The queen did not share in this panic, _^^ and had, as we have already observed, some antipathy to the Articles. The Act was carried in defiance of royal prohibition. When passed, the queen was prudent enough to give way and grant her assent. The Convo- cation which sat at the same time paved the way for the Act by issuing that final revision of the Articles which has been already noticed. Though the Puritans were the party most averse to cartwright subscription, the anti-Roman panic was, of course, turned bridge, to the detriment of the Anglo-Catholics. At Cambridge Thomas Cartwright, Margaret Professor of Divinity, denounced the Anglican system in such terms that Whitgift, the vice-chancellor, was forced to put the statutes in force, and to expel him from his office. ^ His friends in the Commons were not so easily sup- pressed. The matter came to a climax in 1572, when Mr. "Wentworth actually brought in two "Bills of went- Reformation," proposing to reconstruct the Church "Biiisof after the model of the Calvinistic sects. Kow at last S'onT*"^^" the queen interposed. She signified to the Speaker ^'^ '^^'^^' her desire that bills respecting religion should not be discussed until accepted by Convocation. She de- manded Mr. Wentworth's bills, read them, returned them with strong expressions of disa];)proval, and ordered that the matter should drop. Baulked in the House, the faction betook itself to the arena of controversial literature. Five or six of the leading Puritan divines, ' Thomas Cartwright ranks first in learning and ability among the non- conforming Puritans of this reign. The spread of Puritanism at Cambridge was mainly due tc his teaching in the lecture-room and university pulpit. The " Second Admonition" is entirely his work. Whitgift, as primate, behaved with great generosity to Cartwright. It is said that the latter modified his views in later life, and on his deathbed expressed his regret for the trouble he had given to the rulers of our Church. Y 322 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. aided by Cartwriglit, who was now living at Antwerp, composed an elaborate treatise against the Church. The "First It is stvlcd the " First and Second Admonition," and and Second .„ ,.. , ,, , -r-kT Admoni- consists 01 two religioiis theses addressed to Parliament. The doctrine and discipline which these men had hitherto pretended to accept were now bitterly de- nounced, and the Calvinistic principles advocated. The appearance of this work caused a great sensation. The queen, to whose inertness this upgrowth of dissent was mainly due, had the audacity to attribute it to episcopal negligence. She now appointed a body of lay com- missioners, who should assist the bishops in making Tests search for non-conforming clergy. The tests to which suspected suspectcd iucumbeuts were subjected were the three c erg-ymen. ^fterwards applied to all clergymen by Archbishop Whitgift. A declaration was to be subscribed ap- proving of the Prayer-book, Articles, and royal supremacy. Forms of recantation for such as had been hitherto disorderly were provided. The three tests worked a salutary clearance in one diocese where the charge of negligence was indeed well deserved. Park- hurst, Bishop of Norwich, was a notorious fautor of the sectaries. According to Neal, three hundred non- conforming priests were discovered in this diocese and suspended. An answer to the " Admonitions " was written by Cartwright's old enemy, Whitgift. Death of On May 17, 1575, the Church of England lost the Pa^ker^"^ prelate who had so wisely guided her course through this stormy and perplexing period, and whose claims on the gratitude of posterity are enhanced, because he reaped little but hostility and indifference while living. " Almost entirely by his skill," it has been well said, " the vessel he was called to pilot has been saved from breaking on the rock of mediaeval superstitions, or else ELIZABETH. 323 drifting away into the whirlpool of licentiousness and chap. unbelief." ^ Despite his naturally retiring and cautious ^y disposition, Matthew Parker's services as primate place him on a level with the p'ceclara nomina of Canter- bury— with Theodore, Langton, and Laud. Parker's literary performances in connection with the Articles and Homilies have been mentioned. It may be noticed that he was the earliest explorer in the field of Anglo- Saxon literature, his researches in this direction being ever inspired by the conviction that the Church over which he presided was one with the Church of Augustine and Bede and Elfric. Matthew Parker's library, the last and most valuable of numerous bene- factions to his alma mater,- is still the pride of Corpus Chiisti, Cambridge. Parker enjoyed the extreme ill will of the Puritans, because his sound wisdom and large-hearted tolerance had allowed them neither to decatholicize the Church nor to pose as martyrs. Their malignity survived for 3'ears after his death. It at last bad the gratification of insulting his memory, as the Marian inquisitors had insulted that of Bucer, his body being torn up from its resting-place in Lambeth Chapel and cast on a dunghill, in the troublous times of Charles I. The remains were recovered and re- interred by Sancroft. ' Hardwicke, Hist, of the Articles, p, 117, 324 ECCLESJA ANGLICANA. CHAPTER XII. Edmund Grindal primate. lEUjalJcti) — continued. A.D. 1576-1603. Edmund Grindal primate— His Puritanical proclivities — The " prophesyings " — Grindal falls foul of the queen — Grindal under suspension — Comes to terms with the queen — John Whitgilt primate— Disorderly sectaries — The Independ- ents— The Anabaptists — The Familists — Many clergymen Dissenters at heart — Whitgift not intimidated— Whitgift's three tests— The Puritan clergy cannot accept these tests — Their patrons at court try conclusions with Whitgift — Whitgift's twenty-four Articles— Reaction against Puritans — The Marprelate libels— Puritanism in disrepute — State of the Church at the end of the reign — The bishops are becoming despotic — Episcopal courts — Erastian opinions — Hooker's " Ecclesiastical Polity " — The Sunday question — The Predestination controversy — The Lambeth Articles — Not accepted by the Church — Yet Cal- vinistic views still predominate. The Elizabethan Eeformation is so mucli tlie work of Matthew Parker, that the student will not be detained long by the remaining twenty-eight years of this reign. In her choice of a new primate the queen was singularly unfortunate. Edmund Grindal had been chaplain to Bishop Eidley, and in Mary's reign was one of the refugees. He settled at Strasburg, where he is heard of as trying to mediate between the factions which disturbed the peace of the English at Frankfort. He returned in 1558, and was selected on account of his learning to take a leading part in the religious settle- ment. He has been mentioned as one of the royal visitors, and as one of the commissioners who revised the Prayer-book. Grindal entertained a far lower view of the Church than that which guided his friends Parker and Burleigh. He deferred to the opinions of ELIZABETH. 325 Bullinger and other foreigners of inferior attainments chap. to himself, and allowed the Puritan party in his diocese ^.Si— of London to get the upper hand. Archbishop Parker his Pun- . - . /v 1 tanical pro- respected the piety and learning of his suffragan, but cUvities. must often have been grieved by his lax administra- tion. It was, perhaps, to get rid of him that he used his interest to secure Grindal the northern primacy in 1570. In the north Puritan innovations were un- popular. Grindal's " Articles of Visitation " ^ tell us that the primate of the north warred with unnecessary intolerance against certain time-honoured practices and ceremonies which pious minds found iiseful as accessories to devotion. He forbids the custom of praying on beads, and that of making the sign of the cross on entering church ; the priests are not to use gestures not specified by the Prayer-book ; the consecrated bread is not to be put in the mouths of the communicants ; nor are stone altars to be used. That such a prelate was promoted to the vacant throne at Canterbury can only be accounted for by the influence of Leicester and other pretended Puritans at court. Their Puritanism being merely ill will to an institution which they wished to despoil, it was natural this faction should desire a Low Churchman at Canterbury. Grindal became primate of all England on February 15, 1576. His principles soon set him at issue with the queen herself, and the dispute and its results are all we need record of this primacy. The The "pro- Puritanical clergy had for some time delighted in an^ esymgs. exercise which they called " prophesying." They as- sembled from time to time at selected centres for the purpose of discussing a prescribed religious topic. In deference to S. Paul's injunctions in 1 Cor. xiv. 31, the members of these assemblies " prophesied one by ' See Collier, Eccles. Hist., vi. 501. 126 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XII. Grindal falls foul of tlie queen. Dec. 1576. one " — in other words, debated in turn on the text or topic under treatment — and a president, to whom they gave the Presbyterian title " moderator," summed up. The " prophesy ings " are first heard of at Northampton in 1571. They became particularly popular in the Norwich diocese. Harmless enough ostensibly, this exercise was likely to lead to dangerous results in a period of unsettled religious opinion. The temptation to decry tenets and practices which the " Acts of Uni- formity " and " Supremacy " had made sacrosanct would probably be irresistible. So thought the queen and Matthew Parker. The latter succeeded in sujopressing the " prophesyings " even in the Norwich diocese, where Parkhurst's opposition was abetted by four privy coun- cillors. The new Archbishop of Canterbury was rash enough to attempt to revive the objectionable practice. He issued some printed directions for the management of "prophesyings." The queen gave a peremptory order that the exercise should be discontinued. Grindal declined to countenance this invasion of his jurisdiction. He wrote a letter defending the " prophesyings," and complaining of the queen's interference in matters of faith and religion — " things of which nature," he urged, " are to be decided in the Church, and not in the palace." That this was a well-deserved rebuke is un- deniable, whatever our opinion of the merits of " pro- phesyings." The queen, however, was unmoved. She proceeded to write to the bishops herself. She declared that "by setting up unlawful assemblies the people were drawn to places lemote from their parishes, and entertained with disputations upon points of divinity very improper for a vulgar audience;" and "that by this means many of her subjects were carried off to idle- ness and schism." The bishops were commanded not to ELIZABETH. 327 suffer any public religious exercises besides those of chap. the Prayer-book and the Sunday sermon of the incum- . ^"' bent. If the incumbent was not qualified to preach, he was to read one of the Homilies. For his disrespect Grmdai io royal authority Grindal was confined to his house suspension, and suspended for six months. When this period had elapsed, he was urged to make some acknowledgment of his fault to the Star Chamber ; but he refused to be restored to royal favour on such terms. It appears that the queen seriously thought of depriving Grindal. Her Council persuaded her to be satisfied with his sequestration ah officio. What was the extent of this penalty is not plain. Grindal certainly issued charges, and even served as an ecclesiastical commissioner, while under sequestration. In other functions he appears to have been represented by his friend Whitgift, now Bishop of Worcester. The primate's resistance was regarded with approval by a great many of the queen's subjects, and both Houses of Convocation addressed peti- tions to the queen, imploring her to reinstate him. Grindal, on the other hand, who was growing old and blind, was anxious to resign the archbishopric. This the despotic sovereign would not allow. It appears comes to that a compromise was effected in 1582. In that year the'Su^n.^ the writs and instruments again run in Grindal's own name ; and Strype gives a letter of the same date in which the primate tenders a qualified submission. He shortly afterwards received permission to resign on a pension. Before the negotiations on this sub- ject were completed, Grindal had died, worn out by old age and increasing infirmities (July 6, 1583). It appears that the queen became more reconciled to the " prophesyings." In 1585 the Bishop of Chester, in giving directions for their conduct, speaks of them as approved of by her Majesty's Privy Council. 328 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. In her next appointment of a primate Elizabeth was ^"- more judicious. We have already mentioned John Whitgift as taking an active part against Cartwright at Cambridge. "Whitgift was one of the many great divines of this period whose names are connected with Pembroke Hall. He was befriended and patronized by Bishop Eidley, and is said to have been one of his chaplains. In 1555 he became a fellow of Peterhouse, and during the troubles of Mary's reign he was allowed to continue his studies at Cambridge unmolested. Shortly after Elizabeth's accession he was elected to the headship of Peterhouse and Pembroke, and in 1570 became Master of Trinity. His fame as a preacher extending to the Court, he was honoured with marked favour by Elizabeth, and was appointed Dean of Lincoln. The Puritan faction at Cambridge were probably more noisy than numerous. When Whitgift finally left the university for the see of Worcester, in 1576, he was attended by an immense cavalcade of friends and admirers. The appointment of Whitgift as Grindal's successor was extremely popular, and he did not dis- appoint the public expectation. He was the better able to do justice to his high office in that he was a man of large private means, and therefore was less hampered than his predecessors by the impoverishment of the see and the queen's continual exactions. Whit- gift's chief claim to distinction is his success as a dis- Disorderiy ciplinariau. It was at this time absolutely necessary that something should be done to suppress the turbu- lence of the ultra-Protestants, who, during Grindal's primacy, had met with little opposition. The Preci- sians had already gone the length of forming a distinct sect, and in 1573 established their first "presbytery" at Wandsworth. They were rivalled by three other ELIZABETH. 329 sectarian systems — the Brownists, afterwards notorions as the sect of Congregationalists or Independents ; the Anabaptists; and the Eamilists, or Family of Love. The distinguishing traits of the first-named sect were The inde- disintegration and rejection of authority — each congre- ^^"^ ^^*^' gation being allowed to choose its own forms of doctrine and discipline. The principles of Christianity were thus placed at the mercy of the ignorant many. It was taught that private interpretation of Scripture was the foundation of religion ; and that not the wise or learned, but the man who made most show of piety, was the soundest interpreter. What hypocrisy, arrogance, and ignorant bigotry this system engendered was seen in the next century, when the great movement in favour of constitutional government brought the " In- dependents " to the fore and tested their pretensions as friends of liberty. The founder of the sect was Eobert Brown, a Puritan Norfolk clergyman, who disturbed England by rancorous abuse of the Church during the years 1570-1580. It is shameful to record that while two ignorant followers who circulated his scurrilous pamphlets were hanged, the real author of the mischief was repeatedly restored to liberty by the influence of Lord Burleigh, his kinsman. Being at last menaced by the High Commission Court, he retired to Holland, the nursery of Protestant eccentricities. Even here his love of dissidence embroiled him. In Scotland, equally full of religious discord and confusion. Brown got im- prisoned, and he preferred to tax again the mercies of the English Church. His turbulent conduct at Northampton induced the bishop of the diocese to excommunicate him. Shortly after this sentence, he appears to have been pricked with remorse. He recanted, and making his peace with the Church obtained a living, where he died 330 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The Familists. Many clerg^nien Dissenters at heart. at an advanced age, in 1630. But the fire whicli this eccentric person had thrown in sport was not quenched by his conversion. To the Anabaptists we have fre- quently alluded as a most dangerous sect of socialists, whose turbulence from time to time roused the righteous indignation of the secular powers, and made Gallios pose as champions of Church discipline. In the exer- cise of their private judgment these sectaries denied all rights of property and all forms of government. They consecrated incest and adultery by renouncing, on re- ligious^ principles, the customary restraints on sexual intercourse. On the same plea they broke every engage- ment or pledge by which the magistrates bound them to keep the peace. This sect gave the authorities even more trouble than the newly formed Eomish party. The severities of Henry's, Edward's, and Mary's reigns were again found necessary, and the queen insisted that the penalty should be burning, not, as Foxe the martyr- ologist desiied, hanging. The Familist sect was one of the many strange formations which trace their birth to that ultra-Protestant principle which has been termed " Bibliolatry." By dreaming over the text of Scripture the Familists evolved an absurd sj^stem of mysticism. They appear to have denied the fads of the Incarna- tion, Resurrection, etc, while treating the letter of the sacred history'- with a reverence like that of the Jewish Cabalists. These strange enthusiasts were often ex- posed to persecution, because confounded with the other really pernicious sects. They were, therefore, even more hostile to the ultra-Puritans than to the Church. "While such were the leading forms of dissent when Whitgift was appointed to the primacy, the Church itself still contained a traitorous clique, who had taken Orders with the deliberate intention of subverting the ELIZABETH. 331 Anglican system and substituting for the Prayer-Look some such work as Cartwright's " Book of Discipline." Among this party aspirants to the ministry were required to submit to a " call " from a classis or assembly of Puritan clergymen. The call was, of course, regarded as the real sacrament of Orders. For the episcopal system and all Catholic ceremonial these men had a downright hatred. How far this might be disguised for the sake of expedience was a favourite topic of discussion in the classis. When unrestrained, these Puritan clergy would openly deny the efficacy of the sacraments, and rail against the Liturgy. The one religious exercise which they reverenced was their own preaching.^ The work which lay before Whitgift was just such WMtgift T • TT 1 °°* intimj- as suited his abilities. He was not a persecutor, as he dated, has been represented by the Congregationalist his- torians, but he understood the importance of discipline, and could maintain it. He was determined that the Church should no longer be the cat's-])aw of the Puritan clerical " ring " and its self-seeking partisans at court. AVhat Whitgift's boldness was when a righteous cause was to be maintained, may be inferred from the plain-spoken rebuke which he had addressed to the queen before his translation to Canterbury. He did not shrink from telling Elizabeth that the spoliation of the Church which she had sanctioned was a violation of the Great Charter, and a deviation from the practice of Christian rulers.^ The queen probably respected him ' The diocese of Norwich, under the administration of Bishop Parkhurst, had become a hotbed of nonconformity of this type. Complaints of this diocese were made before Convocation, in 1586, "that unworthy persons were ordained and instituted; . . . the Communion not at all, or but in part, usid and observed; . . . the wearing of the surplice refused; . . . the Communion was received by many sitting, and those that conformed to the Church called 'time-servers.'" — Cardwell's Synodalia, vol. ii. p. 565. ^ See the letter in Whitgift's Works, vol. iii. p. xiii. 332 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, the more for this honest expression of opinion. At all - ^"^ events, Whitgiit lost nothing by it. The task of whitgrift's purging the clerical body was made easier for Whitgift AD. 1583. by the queens enforcement of the three tests m 1583. The statutes required, though the bishops seldom ap- plied the test, that the Prayer-book, Articles, and royal supremacy should be acknowledged by all clergymen. The Puritans disliked the Prayer-book, chafed under the doctrinal restrictions of the Articles, and were as opposed to royal supremacy on anarchical principles as the Eomanists were from deference to the Pope. "Whitgift, after consultation with the bishops of his province, drew up some canons, wherein these three tests were set forth as the Church's security against false brethren. The sixth canon, which embodied these tests, runs thus : — " That none be permitted to preach, read, catechize, minister the sacraments, or execute any ecclesiastical function, by what authority soever he be admitted thereto, imless he first consent and subscribe to these Articles following before the ordinary of the diocese." The three Articles are — (1) That the queen has supreme power over her subjects of all estates, and that no foreign " Power, prelate, State, or potentate" has any jurisdiction, power, etc., in this realm. (2) That the Prayer-book and ordinal contain nothing contrary to the Word of Gud, and that the subscriber will use the form of the said book prescribed, in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, and none other. (3) That the subscriber "alloweth" the Book of Articles agreed upon in the Convoca- tion of 1562, and " believeth " them " to be agreeable to the Word of God." The need of discipline can be appreciated when we ELIZABETH. ZZI find tliat these three reasonable tests, which, are in effect still applied to every candidate for ordination, drew from the Puritan clerery a howl of indi^rnation. The The Puri- ^^ . . tan clergry tests were nothing new, but the bishops had hitherto cannot been careless or indifferent, and men who hated the these tests. Prayer-book had taken Holy Orders for the sake of emolument, or with the more traitorous purpose of undermining the Anglican system. Henceforth the bishops were to see that their clergy literally subscribed to the crucial propositions, and the shifty evasions of the Puritan clergy were rendered impossible. Several were deprived. They appealed to their lay patrons at court, Their and the Council, not knowing what sort of man they cJurt^ry* had to deal with, summoned Whitgift with the intention ^^J^^^^°''^ of cowing him. The archbishop replied that he himself whitgift. was the proper person to hear the complaints of the deprived ministers, and that " the matter was not in- cident to that honourable board." The queen was wise enough to express her sympathy with the primate, and the Council thought it better to be silent. Whitgift, who ever blended mercy with justice, showed the greatest deference to individual scruples, and won over many of the malcontents. He was determined, however, that the Church should be thoroughly purged of Dis- senters in clerical disguise, and he supplemented his former publication with a body of twenty-four Articles whiteift's which suspected clergymen might be called upon to f^r'^^^" sign. The Articles were not well devi.scd, and this -^^^^^^^^ proceeding, besides infuriating Leicefeter, Knolles, and the Puritan statesmen, elicited a remonstrance from one of the soundest Churchmen, Cecil Lord Burleigh. A fierce battle was for some time carried on between the two parties. Bills, supported by popular petitions, were moved in the Commons in 1534 and 1587, to the 334 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, effect that episcopacy shoulil be abolished and a Puri- ^"- . tan " Directory " substituted for the Prayer-book. The queen's firm support of Whitgift prevented the anti- Chiirch party from securing any advantage. Soon their own rancour and malignity completely alienated the sympathy of Parliament from the victims of Whitgift's Reaction wholcsomc Severity. " A reaction against the Puritans pSitans. set in, whic1», before the end of the reign, was com- pletely established. They did not again become popular until the mit>chievous policy of the Stuart kings had associated their cause with that of liberty and justice." For now the aggrieved began to have recourse to practices which naturally rendered them odious to all honest Englishmen. The expedient of libelling their opponents in scurrilous anonymous pamphlets had been tried by the ultra-Protestant school in the reigns of The Henry VIII. and Edward VI. In the literature which ubeis. was now published under the name of "Martin Mar- prelate," the clergy and the principles of the Church of England were defamed with an unscrupulous malignity hitherto unparalleled. The attacks were extended to the queen and the statesmen who supported the Church. The "Martin Marprelate" libels emanated from a movable printing press, which was shifted from town to town. It was at last captured at Manchester by the Earl of Derbj'-, and finally suppressed. The parties chiefly implicated in this affair were Throgmorton and Fenner, and two suspended ministers, Penry and Nicholas Udal. Penry, proving impervious to leniency, was executed in 1593. Udal died shortly after his im- prisonment. The guilt of the libellers was heightened by their deliberately choosing for their occasion a period when the Government was harassed by the prospect of the Spanish invasion. The tracts have been reprinted AD. 1588. ELIZABETH. 335 in modern times. They appear to be conspicuous rather chap. for gross and foul invective than facetiousness.^ The ^"•, titles of some of these attacks are — " The Epistle to the Convocation House," " The Epitome," " Bishop Cooper's Admonition," "Ha' ye any work for a Cooper?" "The Protestation of Martin." Thomas Nash replied to the libels in pamphlets sometimes betraying real humour; and Cooper, Bishop of Winchester, was deputed to publish the answers of the several prelates who had been the objects of these foul aspersions, in a more serious work called " An Admonition to the People of England." Public feeling was soon on the side of the Puritanism Church. How completely the libellers had alienated repute. from their cause the sympathy of the Commons is shown by the Act passed in 1593, subjecting such as refused to attend divine service, or impugned the queen's authority in causes ecclesiastical, to imprison- ment, and, in case of persistence, to banishment. The consequence of this measure was that the scurrilous contingent of the Puritan faction found it better to keep quiet, while those who were really actuated by conscientious scruples emigrated. Holland was espe- cially favoured by the emigrants. " Churches were erected at Amsterdam, Arnheim, Middelburg, Leyden, and other places; and probably never in the history of human opinion have so many wild doctrines been broached, and so many strange practices set on foot, as by these expatriated Brownists and Barrowists in their sojourn among the Dutch." ^ The closing years of Elizabeth's reign were marked state of by the growing popularity of the Church. Obvious Stj^e'^in? abuses, however, still lingered. Ever since the fall of °'*^^ " reigru. ' See the resume of choice terms in Heylin's Presbyterians, p. 231, or Perry's Student's English Church History, pp. 333, 33t. » Perry, Student's Eag. Oh, Hist., p. 337. 336 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The bishops are becoming: despotic. courts. the monasteries the episcopal order had maintained an undue predominance in the Anglican system. Again and again the sovereigns in this period had been forced by the non-compliant attitude of Convocation to invest the primate with despotic authority. The pretensions of Canterbury had added dignity to the other diocesans, and the bishopric too often appeared in the light of Episcopal ^11 embryo papacy. The episcopal courts were, more- over, badly managed, and, notwithstanding Whitgift's endeavours to reform them, retained a character for peculation and injustice. A struggle ensued between the secular and the ecclesiastical judges : the former endeavouring to take as many cases as possible out of the ecclesiastical sphere by means of " prohibitions " from the courts of common law. Even the Court of Bigh Commission was subjected to these prohibitions. This antagonism was destined to lead to most serious results in the subsequent reigns. Another consequence of the bishops overriding Convocation was the infusion of Erastian sentiments among the clergy. Many of the earlier Elizabethan divines appear to lose sight of the Catholic claims of our Church, and to base the Anglican system mainly on the authority of the sove- leign to appoint forms of Church government. Even Whitgift seems not to have recognized the weakness of such principles. Bancroft, Bishop of London, how- ever, defended Anglicanism from a more tenable position, and boldly attacked the Presbyterian assumption that bishops were *' unscriptural," in a memorable sermon at Paul's Cross in February, 1589. Adrian Saravia, a foreign divine resident in England, took yet higher ground when he claimed for episcopacy divine origin, on the plea that the primitive Churches in every country had bishops, and that this would not Erastian opinions. ELIZABETH. 337 have been the case had not the Apostles regarded episcopacy as an essential part of the system founded by Christ.^ Saravia's views are qualified in Hooker's Hooker's celebrated treatise on " The Laws of Ecclesiastical asticai Polity," published in 1600. Hooker, as Master of the '^°^^^^-" Temple, had met with violent opposition from the Puritan Travers, who, though not properly ordained, but only " called " to the ministry by a congregation at Antwerp, had himself aspired to the mastership. Disappointed in this aim, Travers in his capacity as afternoon lecturer at the Temple endeavoured to con- trovert the doctrines preached by the Master in the morning. Archbishop Whitgift suspended Travers on the twofold charge of being disorderly and not being properly ordained,^ and to justify his suspension Hooker wrote his famous work. Hooker, of course, holds with Saravia and Bancroft that the episcopal authority is derived from the Apostles themselves. He weakens his case, however, by admitting that in- asmuch as the everlasting continuance of episcopacy was not enjoined, it might be conceivable that the Church should adopt some other system of government, upon urgent cause. The other burning controversies of the day related to The the observance of the Sunday, and the doctiine of q^s'tion. predestination. The features which now distinguish our insular Sunday from that of other nations were almost unknown in Elizabeth's reign, and divines only levelled their censures against buying, selling, and play- ing games during hours of divine service. The spirit in which the day was regarded is illustrated by the order in Parker's "Advertisements" that "in all fairs and * Saravia, De Diversis Ministorum gradibus, published in 1591. * See Strype's Whitgift, iii. 185 ; Hooker's Answer, $ 17. 338 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, common markets falling upon the Sunday there be no _^"- showing of any wares hefore the service he dories The first attempt to confound the Lord's Day with the Jewish Sabbath was made by a Puritan minister, Dr. Bound, in a work published in 1595. His disallow al of such Sunday sports as shooting, fencing, and bowl- ing, caused no less astonishment than indignation, and was set down, perhaps with justice, to a desire to exalt the Sunday at the expense of the fasts and festivals of the Church. The observance of Sunday soon became a party question. Neither side would command the full sympathy of many modern religionists. The one held the views which were afterwards expressed in King James's "Book of Sports" wherein such amuse- ments as archery, leaping, vaulting, morris-dances, etc., are enjoined for Sunday afternoons. The Puritan preachers, on the other hand, argued that "to throw a bowl on the Lord's Day was as great a sin as to kill a man." ^ That modification of the Puritan view which survived, almost unquestioned, through the Hanoverian period and till the present generation, is a memorial of The pre- the administration of Cromwell. The other controversy contro- " shows how strongly prepossessed the later Elizabe- versy. than divincs were on behalf of the Calvinistic views of predestination and election. William Barrett, a fellow of Caius College, when preaching at Cambridge, ap- pears to have decried the doctrines of " assurance," " irresistible grace," and " particular election," in terms which a modern English Churchman would think reasonable and orthodox. The Cambridge doctors were, however, so imbued with Calvinism, that Barrett was called upon by the vice-chancellor and the heads of houses to recant. The matter was eventually brought ' Heylin's Presbyterians, p. 310. ELIZABETH. 339 before Whitglft, and an assembly of divines was con- vened by him at Lambeth. It was actually proposed to commit the Church to the following tenets : — (1) God has from eternity predestinated some persons to life ; others He has reprobated to death. (2) " This moving or effi- cient cause of predestination to hfe is not the prevision of faith, or of perseverance, or of good works, or of anything which may be in the predestinated, but only the will of the good pleasure of God." (3) The number predestinated is limited before, and cannot be increased or lessened. (4) Those not predestinated to life will of necessity be damned. (5) True faith and sanctifica- tion does not fall away, and "does not vanish in the elect either totally or finally.'' (6) A man endowed with justifying faith has certainty of remission of sins, and of eternal salvation. (7) Saving grace is not conferred on all men so as they may be saved if they will. (8) No man can come to Christ unless it is given to him and the Father draws him, but all men are not drawn by the Father. (9) It is not placed in the will or power of any man to be saved. These nine Calvinistic propositions, which are known as the " Lambeth Articles," were particularly offensive to the queen. The university whence the poison had emanated was now to provide the antidote. Barrett's Not ac- views were those accepted by Peter Baro, a learned theChiu-cn. Frenchman who held the Margaret Professorship. Baro preaching before the univeisity, boldly maintained the opposite doctrine to that of the Lambeth Articles. Again the vice-chancellor appealed to the archbishop. But in the interval Whitgift had consulted with his more learned suffragan, Andrewes, and been warned of the Antinomian tendency of the Calvinistic paradox. He may also have allowed due weight to the fact that the queen and Burleigh were both opposed to the Lambeth Articles. He contented himself with ordering Baro not to meddle again with the disputed doctrines, and dominate. 340 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, the Lambeth Articles were not brought before Convo- ^"- . cation. On the death of Whitaker the Calvinist, the queen appointed as Eegius Professor at Cambridge, Dr. Overall, afterwards Dean of S. Paul's and the author of the Catechism on the sacraments. Yet Calvin- Oxford, which produccd no divine of any eminence stiupre-^ during this reign except Hooker, had become, under the patronage of Leicester the chancellor, and the tuition of such divines as Doctors Eeynolds and Hum- phrey, even more Puritanical than the sister university. This tendency at Oxford may to some extent be re- garded as a reaction from the Eomanist proclivities of earlier days. According to Heylin, not only were " all the Calvinian rigours in matters of predestination and the points depending thereupon " now received at Oxford as the doctrine of the English Church, but " the Church of Eome was inveighed against as the ' whore of Babylon,' ' the mother of abominations ; ' the Pope as publicly maintained to be Antichrist or the man of sin ; and that as positively and majestically as if it had been one of the Articles of the Christian faith." ^ ^ Heylin's Laud, p. 51. JAMES I. 341 CHAPTER XIII. A.D. 1603-1625. Character of the reign — The term " Protestant" applied to the Church — The " Mil- lenary Petition " — The Hampton Court Conference — Its results — The Prayer-book of 1604— The Bible of 1611— Its origin and history— Death of Whitgift— Bancroft Archbishop of Canterbury — The ex-animo test — The Canons of 1604 — The Puritan controversy — Folly of Bancroft's conduct — The absolutist theory — Suppres- sion of Romanists — Restoration of episcopacy in Scotland — Abbot Archbishop of Canterbury — Two heretics burnt — The bishops and absolutist principles — Unfortunate position of the inferior clergy — The king's " Book of Sports " — His delegates to the Synod of Dort — The king turns on the Calvinists — The Spanish match — Lord Keeper Williams — His attempt to oust Abbot from the primacy. The accession of a king who liad shown favour to the Scotch Presbyterians was regarded by many faithful Churchmen with feelings of apprehension. The Puri- tans, hoping to gain by the change of dynasty, promptly despatched a message of congratulation to Elizabeth's successor. Dr. Neville, Dean of Canterbury, was sent by the bishops with a similar message. He returned with royal promises of a reassuring character. James " would maintain the government of the late queen as she had left it settled." The king's patronage of Pres- byterianism had really been only a piece of policy, and he had as little sympathy with the Puritans as Whit- gift himself. James had, in fact, learnt from experience that the men w^ho denied prelacy were easily persuaded to disparage monarchy. He accordingly took for his maxim the words, " No bishop, no king." 342 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. King James was well versed in tlieolo2:ical literature, XIII . . — — ^ and took an active part in every religious controversy ofthe^rei^. ^^ ^'^^ reign. His opinions were in a state of constant flux, and his undignified demeanour and utter want of common sense rendered his intrusion on the theological arena matter of regret to sober-minded Churchmen. Persecutors are not always men of fixed opinions ; it is no anomaly, therefore, that in this reign the practice of punishing heresy with burning was resuscitated. The king's vacillation and cruelty were, however, surpassed by his appetite for adulation. Impatient of consti- tutional restraints, he used the bishops as tools to carry out a policy of absolutism ; flatterers and men who pro- fessed to believe in the divine right of kings received ecclesiastical preferments, and the Church of England lost in this reign the allegiance of many lovers of civil and religious liberty who had no real objection to her doctrines. In one respect only the Church gained by the accession of James. A rabid controversialist by temperament, he looked at nonconformity from a more philosophical point of view than Elizabeth, and religious error, if persecuted, was at least tried on its own merits, and no longer confounded with the crime of high treason. Under his rule, therefore, the Erastian opinions so prevalent in the late reign gave place to a higher view of the relations of Church and State. The general tendency of the reign was to emphasize sharply those distinctive features which separate the Anglican system both from Komanism and sectarianism. , . It may be noticed that to indicate this attitude the Trie terna «/ , "Protes- CKnrch had now informally adopted the title " Pro- tanf'ap- " -r»p n/^iT»> plied to the testant," «:ivin2: it the sense of " Eeformed Catholic. This appropriation of the term is sanctioned even by such Anglicans as Andrewes, Ken, and Laud. It is to JAMES L 343 be deplored, as having given rise to much misconception chap. in modern times. Negative terms are seldom instruc- — ,— tive as definitions, and the origin and continental use of this particular term forbade that it should permanently retain the force now claimed for it by the Anglo- Catholics — that of contradistinction both to Eomanists and to English sectarian formations.-^ Yet it does not seem to have been anticipated that these latter, in all their countless varieties, should claim the same or a better right to the designation. Still hoping to secure concessions from the new sove- The reign, some seven hundred and fifty-two Puritanical p^^oS/^ clergymen drew up what they called their " Millenary Petition," detailing their objections to the Anglican system and petitioning for change. The document was temperately worded, and some of the exceptions taken on minor points of order and discipline appear sufficiently reasonable. The subjects of complaint were specified as " offences " concerning which it was humbly prayed that " some might be removed, some amended, some qualified." They were detailed under four heads: (1.) As to the Church service: exception was taken to the interrogatories and the sign of the cross in the Baptismal Office, also to women's admin- istering Baptism in cases of emergency; to the Office of Confirmation ; to the ring in the Marriage Office; to the cap and surplice worn by the clergy; and to the longsomeness of the Sunday service. It was asked that would-be communicants should be examined ; that ministers should not teach the people to bow at the ' The term Protestant occurs in none of the Church's formularies. At the Revolution, however, when our attitude towards Home was viewed mainly in its political bearing?, an oath to maintain tlie " Protestant Refornn.-d religion estab- lished by law " was inserted in the Coronation Service. On the other hand, the sovereign is invested with the ring as " the ensign of kingly dignity and of defence of the Catholick Faith." 344 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, name of Jesus ; that strict observance of the Lord's \ '-' Day should be taught ; that the terms " priest," " abso- lution," be corrected ; and that the Apocrypha should not be read in church. (2.) As to Ministers: it was asked that none, for the future, be admitted but such as will preach diligently ; that such as cannot preach be removed or pensioned ; that non-residency be not per- mitted; that Kiug Edward's statute for the lawfulness of ministers' marriages be revived ; that the only test demanded should be the subscription to the Articles of Eeligion and the king's supremacy. (3.) As to Church living and maintenance : that bishops should not hold benefices in commendam ; that other clergy should not have a plurality of benefices or dignities ; that lay impro- priations should be charged with a sixth or a seventh for clerical maintenance. (4.) As to Church discipline : that excommunication be issued according to Christ's institution, and that it should not proceed from lay persons, chancellors, officials, etc. ; that registrars and others should not put their places out to farm; that the canons for the restraint of marriage at certain seasons be reveised, the longsomeness of suits in the ecclesiastical courts restrained, and the oath ex officio more sparingly used. The petitioners styled themselves " ministers of the Gospel that desire not a disorderly innovation, but a due and godly reformation." They desired a conference between the Puritan and non-Puritan clergy on the topics above specified. Elizabeth had refused the Puritan party this concession. King James was more complaisant, regarding it as a good opp(jrtunity to dis- play his theological attainments. Much excitement was caused by the publication of the petition. Oxford and Cambridge were particularly agitated at the prospect of JAMES I. 345 being mulct of their impropriations. The king quieted this anxiety by announcing that he would give the Puritans a fair hearing, but that he would do so with ^®p^- ^®°2- the object of protecting the Church, of which he de- clared himself to be a loyal member. A conference TheHamp- was accordingly opened at Hampton Court in January, conference. 1604. It was devoid of official pretensions, having been summoned before the king had even been acknowledged by Parliament. This perhaps excuses certain infor- malities in the procedure. Certainly the promise of giving the Puritans a fair hearing cannot be said to have been fulfilled. They were represented by only four divines — Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Sparke from Oxford, and Mr. Knewstubbs and Mr. Chaderton from Cam- bridge ; and these representatives were nominated, not from the Puritan platform, but by the king himself. The Church was represented by Whitgift, eight bishops, and ten learned divines. The king, who undertook to act as moderator, did not conceal his partiality, and replied to the arguments of the Puritans in a tone of offensive sarcasm. A preliminary meeting had been held by the king, the bishops, and five deans, with the lords of the Council, that the king might receive ex- planation on sundry points in the Anglican use. On four topics in particular he sought instruction, viz. Confirmation, Absolution, Lay Excommunication, and Private Baptism by women. To the last-named prac- tice James appears to have been particularly averse. The conference really opened on January 16, and lasted three daj^s. The age and infirmities of Whitgift pre- vented his taking an active part, and the chief spokes- man of the Church party was Bancroft, Bishop of London. The objections of the Puritans were digested under four heads : I. Doctrine ; II. Pastors ; III. 346 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Churcli Government; IV. Eitual and Prayer-Book. vJ-^-L. The nature of the objections may be gathered from the summary of the " Millenary Petition " given above. It appears unnecessary to give a detailed account of the conference. The Puritans expressed themselves satisfied with its results, but probably only because they le- garded the present as precursors of more important its:resuits. changes. The follov^ing is an account of the altera- tions sanctioned: — (1.) "Absolution" was defined by the addition of the words "or remission of sins." (2.) In three cases the Lectionary was altered by the substitution of portions of the Canonical Scriptures for portions of the Apocrypha. (3.) The prayer for the queen and royal family and the corresponding petition in the Litany were now introduced, as also the thanksgivings for rain, fair weather, plenty, jDcace, victory, and deliverance from plague. (4.) Trifling alterations were made in the text of the Gospels so as to adapt it to the text of the received translation. (5.) The rubrics of the Baptismal Office were altered so as not to allow of Private Baptism being performed by any but a " lawful minister." (6.) Confirmation was explained by the definition " or laying on of hands on children baptized and able to render an account of their faith according to the Catechism following." (7.) In view, perhaps, of the Puritan outcry for examina- tion of communicants, a really substantial innovation was made by the addition to the Catechism of the section which treats of the sacraments. This important and valuable composition was the work of Dean Overall, Prolocutor of Convocation, and afterwards bishop. T'^^^J^yer- The new Prayer-book was sanctioned by royal letters. 1604. The proclamation commands all public officers to assist the clergy in carrying out its injunctions, and ad- JAMES I. 347 monishes all persons "not to expect any furtlier altera- chap. tion in the public service." The sanction of Convocation — .-L. was not applied for until 1662. This act of royal encroachment was perhaps considered to be justified by the clause in Elizabeth's " Act of Uniformity," em- powering the sovereign to " ordain and publish . . . further ceremonies and rites," with the advice of her commissioners, or of the metropolitan, in case the Prayer-book of 1559 should be misused. We have yet to notice the connection between this Tiie Bible of 1611 conference and the English translation of the Bible pub- lished in 1611. There were at this time at least three English Bibles in general use. (1.) The " Great Bible," which first appeared in 1539, and which was sometimes called " Cranmer's Bible," because including a preface by that prelate. This still survived in some of the churches. (2.) The "Genevan Bible" of 1560, which had obtained an immense circulation. Eighty editions had been published between 1568 and 1611. It was undoubtedly the best English translation existent. Its renderings, however, sometimes betrayed the animus of the Puritanical jiarty, and this disqualification was still more apparent in its notes. (3.) The " Bishops' Bible " of 1568. This was ill arranged, and, as a translation, was quite unworthy to cope with its rival of Geneva. It had been enjoined, in 1571 and 1587, that all churches should have copies of this Bible, but the clergy betrayed little anxiety about the execution of such orders. At its origin the conference Dr. Reynolds censured certain mis- f^i^'^^^ translations in the current versions. This led the king to express his wish that one version should be eveiy- where established, "to be done by the best learned in both the universities ; after them to be reviewed by the bishops and the chief learned of the Church ; from 348 ECCLESIA AA'GLICANA. CHAP, them to be presented to the Privy Council ; and, lastly, — ^_J_, to be ratified by his royal authority, and so this whole Church to be bound unto it and none other." ^ Ban- croft deprecated the insertion of notes in the new version, and the king admitted that he had noticed in the Genevan Bible " some notes very partial, untrue, seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous and traitorous conceits." This was all that was done at the conference. In July, 1604, we find King James informing Bancroft that he had appointed " certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translation of the Bible." Doubtless many of these began their labours at once. But it was not until 1607 that the revision committee met in conference. Death or resignation had then diminished their number to forty-seven. They were divided into six companies, two of which met at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. Each company had a separate portion of Scripture allotted to it. Each, however, was charged to send every book, when revised, to the other companies, "to be considered of seriously and judiciously." At the completion of the revision at the three centres, two members were chosen from each company to superintend the final preparation of the work. The new version came out in 1611. Its supe- riority to the other versions was at once recognized, and gained for it universal acceptance.^ The recent canon giving legal status to the " Bishops' Bible " at once became a dead letter. The new version survived the proposal to supersede it made in the Long Parliament ' Barton, Sum and Substance of the Conference: see Cardwell, Hist, of Con- ferences, pp. 187, 188. ' It was described as " appointed to be read in churches." But there is no proof that it was ever publicly sanctioned by Convocation, or by Parliament, or by the king in Council. " It gained its currency partly, it may have been, by the weight JAMES L 349 in April, 1653, and has since been accepted as " the chap. XIII Bible " in all English-speaking localities/ It is only — ,_L- in recent times that a more extended research has forced upon the minds of scholars the necessity of producing a more accurate translation for general use. Whatever its failings as a reproduction of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, the simplicity and rhythmical beauty of its diction will always secure the version of 1611 a high place among English classics. A comparison would probably show that for much of this linguistic beauty we are indebted not so much to the editors of King James's version, as to those of the " Bishops' Bible" and its predecessors. The object of the re- visionists, says Dr. Miles Smith in his pieface, was not to " make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad a good one, but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones one principal good one." The words italicized refer to the " Bishops' Bible " autho- rized by the Canon of 1604.^ With the words 'pro ecclesid Dei on his lips, Arch- Death of bishop Whitgift passed away shortly after the close of the Hampton Court Conference. Whitgift claims dis- tinction among the primates as one who presided over of the king's name, partly by the personal authority of the prelates and scholars who had been engaged upon it, but still more by its own intrinsic superiority over its rivals." — Westcott, History of the English Bible, p. 158. The " Bishops' Bible " is, strictly speaking, still the only " Authorized Version " of our Church, though this term is often misapplied to the version of 1611. ' The following are the most celebratad translations of the Bible : — Wyclifs New Testament, cir. 1380 ; Old Testament, cir. 1383 ; Turvey's (a revision of Wyclifs), 1388; Tyndale's i>rinted New Testament, 1525, and Pent^iteuch, 1530 ; Coverdale's Bible, 1535; Matthew's Bible (a compilation from Tyndale's and Coverdale's by Matthew Rogers), 1537 ; the Great Bible (a revision of Matthew's by Coverdale), 1539 ; Taverner's (also a revision of Matthew's), 1539 ; the Genevan Bible (by Whittingham and other refugees), 1560 ; the Bishops' Bible (by Archbishop Parker's committee), 1568; the Douay Bible (a reproduction of Jerome from the Vulgate), 1609-10; the so-called authorized version by King James's translators, 1611. To these we may now add the revision of the New Testament of 1611 issued in May, 1881. 350 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. our Church at a critical period, and by his energy and courage purged her of abuses within, and protected her from hostility from without. He has been unjustly branded with the character of a bigoted persecutor on account of the severe suppression of the sectarian party during his primacy. Those who bear in mind the dangers with which this party menaced the con- stitution, the dastardly expedients to which they had recourse in their attempt to spread their tenets, and, above all, the clemency with which Whitgift ever treated a fallen foe, will regard him in another light. In the words of Mr. Perry, " to Whitgift the Church of Eng- land owes, under God, the pieservation of its order and discipline, and the rescue of its property from the covetous grasp of the queen and courtiers." ^ This is a fair epitome of his work, nor can we find any graver disqualification in this primate than an excusable want of theological attainment. Bancroft Against Bancroft, his successor at Canterbury, may Ajciibishop i^Q levelled with more reason those accusations of bip;oted of Canter- <^ biiry. zeal for conformity with which Puritan writers have en- Dec. 1640. . deavoured to assail the fame of Whitgift. Bancroft was a man of warmer temperament, and he was nominated by James, who now made no secret of his hostility to the Puritans, for the express purpose of suppressing nonconformity with a high hand. Clergymen who had already subscribed Whitgift's three Articles of con- formity were compelled to subscribe them again, then to sign a declaration that they subscribed willingly The ex- and ex animo. Those who refused this test of their animotest. ... ,• n • ,i purpose m signing were practically m the same position as those who refused conformity altogether, save that they were allowed time to change their minds. These ' Student's English Church History, p. 364. JAMES L 351 precautions against insincerity ousted several clergy- chap. XIII men from, their preferments. According to Bancroft — — ^ himself, the number amounted to forty-nine, but the computation of Puritan writers raises it to three hundred. Before the installation of Bancroft the way was paved for this stringent policy by Convocation's acceptance of the important code known as the Canons of 1604. These Canons, though fallen into desuetude, are legally The canons still binding on the clergy, and morally on all professed ° Churchmen. They are one hundred and sixty-one in number, and are divided into thirteen chapters. The first chapter inveighs against the Puritans, and declares all who affirm that the English Church is not a part of the true and Apostolic Church to be %'pso facto ex- communicated. In Chapter II., which treats of Divine Worship, the use of the cross at Baptism, concerning which the Puritans were scrupulous, is defended in a lengthy argument. In the same chapter occur Canons prescribing that the Litany be used on Wednesdays and Fridays; that all make lowly reverence at the name of Jesus ; that Holy Communion be received three times a year at the least ; and that copes be used in cathedral churches. In the third chapter, that on Ministers, occurs the order that Whitgift's three Articles are to be subscribed ex animo by all who are ordained, admitted, or licensed. It will be sufficient to enumerate the titles of the remaining chapters. Chapter IV. treats of Sclioolmasters ; Chapter V. of the Decent Fittings and Ornaments of Churches and their Repair ; Chapter VI. of Churchwardens and Parish Clerks; Chapters VII. to XII. of Ecclesiastical Courts; and Chapter XIII. of Synods. The Canons were compiled by Bancroft himself, from earlier sources. After being accepted by the Convoca- 352 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. xiir. The Puritan contro- versy. Folly of Bancroft's conduct. tion of Canterbury, they were declared binding on the northern province by royal letters patent. The Con- vocation of York thereupon asserted its claim to make its own Canons. The claim was allowed, and the Canons were properly passed in the Northern Convocation. Though sanctioned by the king, the Canons were never ratified by Parliament. Legally, therefore, they are only binding on the laity where they are declaiatory of previous statutes. The effect of Bancroft's rigour was to widen the gulf between the High and Low Church parties. Early in 1605 there appeared a Puritan treatise, entitled the " Abridgment of the Lincoln Ministers," in which the ceremonies of the Church were regarded not meiely as objectionable, but as sinful. The catalogue of alleged abuses in the Church appended to the "Abridgment" is much larger than that in the " Millenar}' Petition." Morton, afterwards Bishop of Chester, answered the " Abridgment " in a feeble treatise, called the " Defence of the Three Ceremonies." The three ceremonies were those which were the special grievances of the Puritans, viz. kneeling at Holy Communion, wearing the surplice, and using the sign of the cross at Baptism. The policy of Archbishop Bancroft was so far crowned with success that non-conformity was driven into concealment, and many Puritan clergy sought the company of the Brownists in Holland, and there devoted themselves to religious jangling and mutual excom- munications. It has often been said that the primate's conduct was -unconstitutional. It must be remembered, however, that it had the sanction of the Star Chamber Court, and that this warrant was in those days legally sufficient. Injudicious, however, it certainly was. The exaltation of the royal prerogative by the enforcement JAMES I. 353 of a test unsanctioned by Parliament alienated from chap xui. the Anglican system many to whom the personal liberty of the subject was more dear than religious uniformity. It has been well observed that in the limitations of civil and religious liberty to which the prelates of James's reign lent their sanction lies the ex- planation of that strange coalition of educated gentle- men and fanatical Puritans which, formed the nucleus of the Great Eebellion. Even in Elizabeth's reign the judges had shown much jealousy of the bishops, and had used prohibitions to stay such suits in the ecclesiastical courts as they regarded as falling under their own cognizance. In the present reign the collisions between the secular and ecclesiastical tribunals were con- tinual. In the Parliament of 1610 the High Com- mission Court was so violently denounced that the House received a rebuke from James himself. The The argument of the courtier prelates was that, the judges theory, being only delegates of the king, he could take causes out of their hands, and transfer cognizance of them to such tribunals as the Court of High Commission. Having a sovereign favourable to the Church, they pressed the theory that the king could do no wrong, and that Parliament met not of right, but by the royal sufferance. So plainly were these doctrines expressed in Dr. Cowell's " Interpreter," that, notwithstanding James's recent admonition, the Houses determined to protect themselves by active measures. They accord- ing proceeded to imprison the author and suppress the work by proclamation. The Romanists were exposed, in this reign, to the suppres- same rigour as the Puritans, but with more show of ^"^^^^g^g justice. A plot had been discovered, shortly after the king's accession, which was held to justify the proclama- 2 A 354 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, tions and raiiiamentary enactments for the banishment ■ ^^l\ of Roman priests and Jesuits published in 1604. Driven to desi^eration, the ^dctims of these severities conceived the iniquitous scheme commonly known as the Gun- powder Plot (1605). Four Jesuits, named Green way, Gerard, Garnet, and Oldcarr, were implicated in this . conspiracy. The two last named suffered the fearful penalties of high treason. The plot inspired the country with a lively detesta- tion of Eomanism, and this form of Christianity was henceforth persecuted under the severe statutes passed in the session of 1605-6. It is melancholy to relate that a sacramental test was now introduced as a means of enfoicing conformity. The statutes referred to re- quired suspected persons to receive the Sacrament according to the Anglican use at least once a year, under pain of fines, extending to the forfeiture of two- thirds of their incomes. They were also required to take the oath of allegiance renouncing the temporal power of the Pope in England, under j)ain of incur ling a prcemunire. The recusants were also disqualified from holding office or practising any profession. These severities gave rise to a controversy between the divines of the two Churches. James, to whom theological disputation was the crowning joy of life, took the lead by publishing an " Apology for the Oath of Allegiance." To this Persons and Bellarmine replied. A wordy warfare ensued, the details of which need not be par- ticularized. Restora- The king's interest in Church matters was expressed episcopacy ^^ ^ more Commendable manner by an attempt to re- iand.°^ establish Catholic organization in Scotland. The first step towards bringing the distracted religionists of the north into conformity with the Church would neces- JAMES I. 355 sarily be a restoration of episcopacy* For this the way chap. was to some extent prepared, for titular bishops had ^^!^ been appointed to the ancient sees, and in 1606 the Scotch Parliament had granted to these functionaries the temporalities of their episcopates. The king urged the Presbyterian divines to suffer the nominal episcopate to be converted into a properly consecrated order of bishops After much pressure, the northern divines agreed to put the bishops in the position of " con- stant moderators " of the Church assemblies, and to give them the power of excommunicating, inducting, and depriving ministers. Oaths of obedience to them were to be taken by those appointed to benefices. The way was now prepared for giving these officers their true ecclesiastical status by consecrating them as bishops. Spotswood Archbishop of Glasgow, Lamb Bishop of Brechin, and Hamilton Bishop of Galloway, were accordingly invited to England to be consecrated. By a remarkable exercise of discretion, the three were raised to the episcopate "per saltum, without being re- Oct. leio. quired to pass through the intervening grades of deacon and priest. In justification of this, Bancroft had adduced from the early ages the cases of Ambrose, and others who had been raised to the episcopate from the lay estate. In the same spirit of discretion it was agreed that neither of the English archbishops should take part in the consecration,^ lest the proceeding should be misconstrued by the Scotch, as designed to reduce their Church to subservience. It only remained that con- formity of worship should be established in the northern Church by the introduction of a Book of Common Prayer. The General Assembly at Perth voted that -^d. leis. such a work shouLl be prepared. National prejudices ' J he Bishops of London, Ely, Rochester, and Worcester oflficiated. 356 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, forbade the introduction of the English Prayer-book, . ^™V . but the five Articles agreed to at this assembly gave promise that the Scotch use would be based on the same lines as that of England. These Articles (1) en- joined kneeling at the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ; (2) allowed private communion in case of sickness ; (3) permitted private baptism in cases of emergency; (4) ordered the exercise of catechizings and confirmations ; and (5) enjoined that holy days and festivals should be duly observed. The service book which the Scotch bishops afterwards drew up was approved of by King James, but he considered that it would be impolitic to introduce it until the nation was more prepared for the innovation. This matter was accordingly deferred. Throughout this enterprise it must be admitted that James exhibited singular wisdom. His conduct con- trasts forcibly with that of his successor, whose pre- cipitate endeavour to bring the Scotch Church into closer conformity resulted in the " extirpation of prelacy" by the instrument termed the " Solemn League and Covenant." In the distracted period which ensued the episcopal succession was lost. It was restored by the agency of the English hierarchy in 1661. Bancroft died in November, 1610. The most popular divine and eloquent preacher in the English Church at this time was Bishop Andrewes. It was commonly sup- posed that he would be appointed as Bancroft's suc- Abbot cesser. The kin2:'s vanity led him to confer the vacant Archbishop . . oi Canter- primacy on a man of a very different stamp, Dr. George Abbot, formerly Master of TJniversit}' College, Oxford, and recently made Bishop of London. Abbot was a sour bigot of Calvinistic principles. He had had little or no experience of pastoral work of any kind. But in a preface to a book he had described the king as JAMES I. 357 " zealous as David, learned as Solomon, religious as Josias," and so forth.. Hence his promotion to the highest place in the English Church. The one satis- factory incident in Abbot's primacy was his courageous refusal to divorce Lady Francis Howard from the Earl of Essex, that she might marry the king's dissolute favourite, Lord Rochester, a refusal which impaired his influence with the king till the end of the reign. The new primate undid the disciplinary work of Bancroft and Whitgift by giving encouragement to the Puritan irregularities of practice. On the other hand, he was as intolerant of error in religious opinion as Calvin himself. This primacy is disgracefully memorable as an era of persecution, for Abbot revived the hateful Two policy of the Marian times by encouraging the king to biimt. punish heresy with death. James, cruel by nature, lent a ready ear to the gloomy Calvinist. To the conster- nation of his subjects, he issued a writ de Jiaeretico com- hurendo to exterminate an ignorant Unitarian, named Bartholomew Legate, whom he had failed to confute by argument. This execution was shortly followed by March and another at Lichfield, the victim beino; Edward Wight- -^p"^' ^^^^^ man. The capital punishment of heretics as such had been unknown for nearly thirty years ; for Elizabeth's victims had mostly suffered as traitors, not for their religious opinions. Great indignation was therefore excited by these cruelties. The king did not dare again inflict capital punishment for religious error, but contented himself with consigning such offenders to perpetual imprisonment. The Church was n(jw hopelessly committed to the Tue cause of arbitrary government, and was incurring such and °^^ odium that patriotism and Puritanism gradually became ^rfncr^ie* synonymous. The political attitude of the prelates of 358 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIII. this period was a natural consequence of the Eeformation settlement. The bishops, who in former ages had been the champions of liberty and the vindicators of the rights of the people, were now entirely dependent on the Crown. In too many cases promotion was secured by truckling, and the favoured ecclesiastic kept his footing at court by arguing from the pulpit and in the House of Lords in behalf of absolute monarchy. The Commons were not slow to express their intolerance of such doctrines, and the divine right of kings frequently received scant consideration from the judges. Neill, Bishop of London, who had argued before the Lords in favour of " impositions " as a royal privilege, was com- pelled to apologize humbly before the Lower House. The king's unrighteous claim to grant commendams to his episcopal favourites (i.e., to give them sujDple- mentary pieces of preferment to be held in commendam with their sees) was the subject of a suit which came before Sir Edward Coke. The judge incurred suspen- sion and dismissal rather than unjustly quash the trial in deference to James's mandate. How unworthy of their high office were some of James's bishops was shown in the celebrated case of Lady Ejsscx. Two bishops were found who were ready to pronounce the sentence of divorce refused b}^ Abbot. On the lower clergy lay the double burden of oppression from their cieri^^"°^ bishops, and increasing unpopularity with the political reformers. Political independence was for them im- possible, and they were compelled to bear the odium of a despotism which pressed, probably, more severely on them than others. The poverty of the clergy was such as to degrade them to the social level of small tradesmen and gentlemen's servants. What protection they re- ceived from the State may be guessed from the case of Unfortu- nate position of JAMES I. 359 the Eev. E. Peacham, a Somersetshire rector. Peacham chap. had refused to contribute to a " benevolence " demanded . '^"^' ■ of the clergy. He was put in prison on suspicion, and when his house was searched, a sermon alleged to be of a treasonable character was found there. The wretched man was examined under torture, and was condemned to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, though the sermon had never been preached. He escaped the execution of this sentence by dying in prison. The king was, as we have shown, in most respects The king's opposed to the Puritan party. He was especially averse sports." to their Sabbatarian notions, and himself published a ^'^' ^^^^' " Book of Sports " for Sunday afternoons. Trask, a Puritan minister who ventured to defend the Sabba- tarian opinions of his party, was promptly set in the pillory, and thence whipped to the Fleet. Of Calvinism, on the other hand, the royal eclectic was, for a time at least, a vehement supporter. When the Synod of Dort was convened in 1618, to settle the dispute between the Calvinists and the Arminians, James, on his own responsibility, sent delegates like-minded with him- self. The persons sent were Carleton, Bishop of Llan- daff; Hall, afterwards Bishop of Exeter; Ward and Davenant, heads of colleges in Cambridge ; and, to represent the Scotch Church, Balcanqual, fellow of Pembroke Hall. The discussion, which resulted in the defeat of the Arminians, bore on the five prominent " points " of Calvinism, and is therefore known as the Quinquarticular controversy. The five Calvinistic de- grees were these — (1) Predestination of some to life eternal and others to damnation; (2) Particular Ee- demption, i.e. the theory that Christ died only for a chosen few ; (3) Original Sin, as involving the total corruption of human nature ; (4) Irresistible Grace, or 36o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIII. The kingrt turns on the Calvinists, the theory that divine grace overpowers the free-will of God's chosen ; (5) Final Perseverance of all who are converted. A few years later, political considerations induced the king to modify his Calvinism, to show indulgence to the Arminian platform, and even to extend tolera- tion to the Eomanists. It was now ordered that no preacher, under the rank of bishop or dean, should discuss the subjects of predestination, election, and divine grace. None was to rail from the pulpit against Puritans and papists. A proclamation was issued ordering the release of such Eoman recusants as were confined in prison. The secret of this change was that James was bent on effecting a marriage between Prince Charles and the Infanta of Spain, and desired the good opinion of the Eoman Catholics abroad. The residence of a Eoman bishop in partihus was actually sanctioned. This concession was as uncalled for by the Papists, as it was offensive to Anglicans, since the Jesuits, from esprit de corps, preferred the rule of their own arch- priest. Great excitement was caused by the change of policy, and Archbishop Abbot addressed a warm remon- strance to the king for thus " labouring to set up the most damnable and heretical doctrine of the Church of Eome." Much to the satisfaction of the nation, the Spanish match was broken off. Scarcely less unpopular, however, was the prince's subsequent engagement to another Eomanist lady, Henrietta of France. King James died on March 27, 1625. Though really attached to the Church of England, his influence had been generally detrimental to her interests. In the character of supreme governor of the Church he had persecuted, from time to time, almost all forms of religious opinion. By filling the episcopate with the JAMES I. 361 pnrtizans of absolutism lie had alienated from the chap. XIII Church the sympathies of patriotic citizens. He had < — ,_L. allowed his favourites and flatterers to accumulate pluralities, while nothing was done to raise the inferior clergy from a condition of abject poverty. His unfor- tunate appointment of Abbot to the primacy has been sufficiently noticed. Great excitement was caused Lord among the lawyers by James's promotion of Dean -w-miams. Williams to the office of lord keeper, now usually filled ^'^' ^^^^' by a layman, and vacated by the fall of the great Lord Bacon. Williams, however, proved himself better qualified to fill the office of lord keeper than to bear that load of clerical honours which made him what Heylin calls " a perfect diocese in himself." Not con- His tent with receiving the bishopric of Lincoln, Williams oust Abbot coveted the primacy, and sought to bring about the primacy, downfall of Archbishop Abbot in rather a singular manner. The archbishop had accidentally shot one of his keepers with his cross-bow, and Williams urged that the homicide constituted an irregularity and con- sequent unfitness for the primacy. It was in great measure owing to the advocacy of Bishop Andrewes that Abbot escaped deposition on this singular charge. 362 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAPTEE XIV. A.D. 1625-1649. A political reformation imminent — The ecclesiastics are pledged to conservatism — Dread of Romanism — Charles's ecclesiastical policy — Laud practically primate — Dr. Mouutague's writings — Abbot now opposed to absolutism — Subservient attitude of Mainwaring and other divines — The " Declaration " attached to the Articles — Intolerance of the Commons — The "Vow" voted — Suspension of Parliament — Laud and Strafford — Courts of High Commission and Star Chamber — Severities of Star Chamber exaggerated— Laud not responsible for these — But for the religious alterations — Laud's reformation of abuses — Laud protects the Holy Tables from desecration — And discountenances extemporary prayers and slovenly services — Laud falsely charged with Romanist opinions — Laud requires the foreign refugees to conform— The Sabbatarian controversy — Arbitrary pro- ceedings on both sides — The war with Scotland — Provoked by precipitate religious changes — The Stony Sabbath — The Solemn League and Covenant— The Short Parliament — The Convocation— The Puritans talie exception to the sixth Canon — The Long Parliament — Its attack on the High Church clergy — The visitation of churches — The Committee of Religion — Assault on episcopacy — The spiritual lords are miibbed — And imprisoned — Inconsistency of King Charles — The civil war — The " Root and Branch Bill" — The Covenant accepted by the Commons — And by the Westminster Assembly — And enforced on all adults— The Directory of Public Worship— Use of the Prayer-book proscribed — The Presbyterian system — Dissolution of the AVestminster Assembly — Archbishop Laud unfairly tried — And done to death — Charles refuses to sacrifice the Church — And is executed — The persecution of the Church — The Committees for Scandalous Ministers — The Committee for Plundered Ministers — The Covenant forced upon the clergy — Terrible sufferings of the clergy — Fate of the bishops— Of the churches — Of the universities. Apolitical LoNG before the reign of James, men had perceived tion that absolutism was out of date, and that it was time for Parliament to take the place of the royal Council. The insurrection of the Lollard socialists, the Wars of the Roses, the reigns of the strong-willed Tudors, the CHARLES L 3^3 Eeformation with its transfer of papal prerogatives to the sovereign, had all conduced to defer the day of political reform. Before the end of Elizabeth's reign, those theories of personal liberty which had been germinating since the time of Magna Charta, had sufficiently ripened to augur a speed}^ alteration in the system of government. James endeavoured to prop up the tottering structure of autocracy by means of the Church. The bishops were to be backed up against the Puritans on condition they guarded the throne against the encroachments of Parliament. In return The for enjoying the rule of a good Churchman the clergy tics are were to preach the divine right of kings. The natural conserva-° result of this alliance was that the Commons coquetted *^^"^" with the sects, and at last became Puritanical on political grounds, this semblance of Puritanism be- coming more and more a real sectarian animus as the Church waned in popularity. A collision, in which Church and throne would share one fate, could only have been averted by the accession of a consummate diplomatist such as Elizabeth, or the promotion of a patriot primate such as Becket. Neither of these con- tingencies occurred. The successor to James was a man of amiable disposition and virtuous life, but utterly devoid of political ability, and educated in a belief that the English sovereign reigned as God's sole vice- gerent like a king in ancient Israel. The administra- tion of the Church full into the hands of a prelate whose many talents were made subsidiary to the cause of absolutism. The fated transition was accordingly inaugurated by a rebellion, in which the principles of the Church were proscribed, her clergy persecuted with fearful severity, and her temples wrecked by spiteful and triumphant fanatics. 364 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. The reign opened badly with the marriage of Charles s — _L. to an uncompromising Eomanist, Henrietta Maria of France, and the consequent importation of a retinue of foreign priests, whose presence aggrieved the Puritans, and was a violation of the statutes against recusants. A secret engagement had been made at the close of the last reign between James, Charles, and the Pope, that this alliance should bring concessions to the Eomanists Dread of in England. But the nation was in no mood to ffrant Eomanisni. ^ such indulgences. The Commons consisted of men who hated popery, and were learniug to distrust pre- Juiys. lacy. It presented to the king a pious petition, praying for the execution of the laws against Roman mis- sionaries and recusants. Charles endeavoured to satisfy Dec. 15. the petitioners by issuing royal letters to the arch- bishops, requiring them to neglect no good means " for finding out and apprehending of Jesuits and seminary priests, and other seducers of his people to the Romish religion, or for repressing popish recusants." But these letters he practically cancelled by secret dispensations. Charles's In his thcological opiuious Charles was quite unlike caipoiicT ^^^ father. He was a pronounced and consistent Churchman, zealous in the interests of Anglicanism, but without intellectual ability to tolerate other systems, least of all the Calvinistic school now popular among the English laity. Abbot had lost favour at court before the death of James. After Charles's accession he was practically no longer primate. The pluralist Williams was equally out of favour. He had fostered the popular hostility against Buckingham, and had taken part in intrigues discreditable to his clerical profession. He was deprived of the Great Seal, and sank into obscurity. He was subsequently tried for subornation of perjury, fined £10,000, and imprisoned. CHARLES I. 365 Andre wes, in all respects tlie most distinguished divine chap. of his day, was probably too moderate a man for v_Jl^ Charles. From the first the snn of royal favour shone Laud full on William Laud, Bishop of S. David's. Laud had primate. ^ been j)i'esident of S. John's College, Oxford, chaplain to King James, and Dean of Gloucester. He became a bishop in 1621. He was regarded with real affection by Buckingham, but seems not to have been much in favour with James. With the public he was unpopular, as havins: been involved in the secret scheme for marrying Charles to the Infanta. Charles had for some time honoured him with his intimacy. Hence- forth in matters ecclesiastical he was paramount. Laud was appointed to act as dean at the coronation. The ceremonial employed on this occasion w^as offensive to the Puritans, and was subsequently alluded to by Prynne in his indictment of Laud. A crucifix was displayed on the altar, and an ancient prayer was resuscitated to illustrate the sacred character of the sovereign's office. Before the coronation, Charles, ignoring the authority of the Primate Abbot, had directed Laud to consult with Andrewes about the business of Convocation. Here Laud's impetuosity and want of discretion had been sufficiently displayed, for he had counselled that the burning questions of the Synod of Dort should be brought forward, and the Calvinistic formularies be rejected by Convocation. The influence of Andrewes prevented this injudicious proceeding. The temper of the nation at this time would have taxed the abilities of wiser rulers than Charles. The deference of the bishops to absolutist policy and the revived dread of Romanism had excited such sj-m- pathy with the Puritan and Calvinistic party, that 366 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. June 14, 1626. " No Arminianism " was as popular a cry as " No popery." The Mountague case well illustrates the prevalent religious prejudice. Dr. Mountague, Rector of Stamford Rivers, had lately written against certain proselj'tizing Jesuits. His " New Gagg for an Old Goose," showing that the Calvinistic tenets they im- puted to the Church of England were not its doctrines, had been censured by Archbishop Abbot. Urged on by Laud, Mountague had answered his censor in a work of similar tendency, but more strongly worded, entitled " Appello Ca3sarem." The Commons of Charles's first Parliament took it upon themselves to examine this production, censure it as not agreeing with the Synod of Dort, and require Mountague to find bail of £2000 for his appearance at their bar in the next session. Laud interceded for Mountague with the king, on the reasonable ground that some of the impugned opinions were " the resolved doctrine of the Church of England," and others such as were fit for learned men to view as they chose. The king intimated to the House that what had been there said and resolved in Mountague's cause was displeasing to him. But in this and other matters Parliament remained uncom- promising. The second Parliament renewed the attack on Mountague, determined that the " Appello Caesa- rem " was " dishonourable to the late king, to many worthy divines, and to other reformed Churches beyond the seas," and prayed that the author should be punished according to his demerits, and the book sup- pressed and burnt. The king, however, by a pro- clamation acquitted his chaplain. The animus of the House was diverted to the case of Buckingham, whose maladministration was made a pretext for refusing supply. To save Buckingham, Charles dissolved the CHARLES I. 367 second Parliament. Mountague incurred no further persecution, and Charles was injudicious enough to make him Bishop of Chichester soon afterwards. The levying of tunnage and poundage without authority of Parliament had already been denounced in the Commons. Charles, however, to raise the sub- sidies which he could not get from Parliament, was induced not only to continue this questionable ex- action, but to raise a forced loan by virtue of the royal prerogative. For refusing to lend, seventy-eight gentlemen were imprisoned by the Privy Council. The Church was persuaded to compromise itself by abetting these proceedings, and the pulpits rang with arguments for royal prerogative. It is creditable to Abbot now Archbishop Abbot that he incurred disgrace for re- absofutism fusing to make his high office the tool of absolutism. A sermon of little merit had been preached by Dr. Sibthorpe at Northampton Assizes, in which it was laid down that the king had power /wre divino to make laws and impose taxes. Buckingham, with the royal sanction, sent this sermon to Lambeth, to be printed by archiepiscopal authority. Abbot refused his im- primatur, urging that several statements in the sermon were likely to give offence, and that its inferences with reference to the customary allegiance of subjects would not stand, seeing that the loan had " neither law nor custom for it." For this he was put, like Elizabeth's archbishop. Grind al, in a state of quasi-suspension, being compelled to retire to his country house for a time. In making Laud practically superior to the primate Charles had at all events honoured a man of real talent, and one whose rule was mainly to the advantage of the Church. But many of the divines whom Charles 368 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. A.D. 1628. The "Declara- tion" attached to the Articles. Intolerance of the Commons. promoted were men of little merit, and the common stepping-stone to preferment was belief in royal pre- rogative. The case of Dr. Mainwaring illustrates the king's principle of action. This divine had preached that "justice intervenes not between prince and people, . . . for justice is between equals;" that his royal will in imposing loans and taxes, though without the consent of Parliament, " must be obeyed under penalty of eternal damnation." When Charles summoned his third Parliament, Mainwaring was condemned in both Houses for these statements, and sentenced by the lords to imprisonment, a fine, and three years' sus- pension. He escaped, however, with a brief incarcera- tion and the disgrace of tendering an abject submission to the Houses. Mainwaring became at once the object of royal favour, and, after Laud's translation, was pre- ferred to S. David's. In retaliation for pulpit politics came another out- burst of House of Commons theology. Laud was of opinion that there would be no chance of peace while the predestinarian dispute was permitted to rage. He therefore caused the Thirty-nine Articles to be re- printed, with a "Declaration" from the king deprecating the strife between Calvinists and Arminians, limiting preachers to the simple and grammatical interpretation of the Articles, and declaring that Convocation was the proper place for the settlement of disputed points of doctrine or discipline. Such a tolerant treatment of the question at issue was not to the mind of the Puritan faction. Dr. Lingard well observes that these men, if the champions of civil, were the fiercest enemies of religious freedom. They were as determined to bring the Church under the bondage of Calvinism as they were to resist the king's encroachments on the CHARLES I. 369 liberties of the subject. The imaginary horrors of chap. Arniinianism and the real grievance of enforced taxation - ^^^/ were associated in all their jeremiads. The " Declara- tion " was assailed by Mr. Eouse, afterwards Speaker, who argued that " an Arminian was the spawn of a papist," and by Mr. Pym, who declared, and probably believed, that the Lambeth Articles had been acknow- ledged to be the doctrine of the Church. The last- named member declared his conviction that Parliament was the proper body " to establish true religion," and that Convocations were bodies " of small importance." In deference to such arguments the Commons voted the The " Vow," in which they " claimed, protested, and avowed ^Jtea" for truth " the Calvinistic sense of the Articles, adding that " we reject the sense of the Jesuits and Arminians and all others, wherein they differ from us." The third Parliament continued uncompromising and unmanageable, notwithstanding concessions on the part of the king. Charles had released the seventy-eight gentlemen imprisoned for refusing the forced loan. He had thrown a sop to Abbot, recently readmitted at court, by encouraging him to hold a convocation of selected clergymen to devise means for rejjressing popery. He even gave unqualified assent to the " Petition of Eight." The House, however, still clamoured about tunnage and poundage, as well as about Laud's pro- ceedings in restoring decent worship and suppressing Puritan irreverence. In these, as in other proceedino-s of this primate, an excellent intention was disparaged by a harsh and arbitrary manner of action. Matters were brought to a climax by Hollis's three resolutions : that whosoever should seek to bring in Arminianism or other "innovations" in religion — or advise or aid the taking of tunnage and poundage — or pay the same 2 B 370 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CUAP. XIV. Suspension of Parlia- ments. AD. 1629. Laud and Strafford. Courts of Higli Com- mission and Star Chamber, — should be accounted a capital enemy to the kingdom. For their share in the disorderly debate which ensued, Eliot, Hollis, and others were fined and imprisoned. The king dissolved his third Parliament, and governed without Parliamentary advice for the eleven years following. The chief ministers during this period were Laud and Thomas Wentworth, who had been won over from the ranks of the opposition and raised to the peerage as Lord Strafford. It is plain that both advocated principles which we should now call unconstitutional, and that both were disciplinarians who did not hesitate to punish offenders with sentences severe, and in modern estimation barbarous. How far such principles and such sentences were reprehensible in those days is by no means so manifest. Both ministers were honest, kind-hearted men, estimable in private life ; both were devout Christians. We shall not err, perhaps, if we impute to such men no greater fault than inability to read the signs of the times. The most unpopular, and perhaps most reprehensible, part of Charles's system was the active employment of the High Commission and Star Chamber Courts. The former, as we have seen, had been established in 1559, to represent the jurisdiction of royalty in matters ecclesiastical. To suppress religious disorder, the com- missioners had been ceded powers of wide scope, and such as might easily be abused. The encroachments of this court on the province of the lay judges have already been noticed. The Star Chamber Court was of more ancient origin. As at present constituted it had the sanction of an Act of Parliament passed in 1487. Its province had been to take cognizance of divers mis- demeanours which it was thought could not be satis- CHARLES I. 371 factorily disposed of by an ordinary jury. Its members, chap. according to the arrangement of 1487, were the chan- _5il_ cellor, treasurer, privy seal, two judges, and one lay and one spiritual lord of the Council. In such a body the king's influence would naturally be paramount, and the Star Chamber had frequently been used as an engine of royal oppression. Charles, on the Commons refusing his unreasonable demand for subsidies, raised money by questionable expedients, and those who made resistance were informed against and sentenced in the Star Chamber. Charles's Star Chamber was severe in severities its sentences, but the cases commonly cited do not chfmb exhibit it as more severe than other courts in the nre- exagger- a,tecl ceding reigns. Dr. Sheifield, recorder of Salisbury, was deprived, imprisoned, and fined £500 for smashing the stained window of a church in a fit of iconoclastic zeal. The judges of Elizabeth's reign would not have treated him less severely. The foul libellers PrNnne, Bastwick, and Burton ^ were sentenced to be fined and imprisoned, to lose their ears and be exposed in the pillory. Dr. Leighton, who reviled the queen and the bishops in terms as strong as can be conceived, was sentenced to be publicly whipped and branded, and ' The most notorious of the libellers, Prynue the lawj'er, was as voluminous as scurrilous. The immediate cause of his troubles was a lengthy work called the His- trio-mastix, in which he inveighed against the queen's predilection for dancing and theatrical exhibitions. He was summoned before the Star Chamber for fresh libels in 1637. The productions of the libellers were chiefly remarkable for their strong flavour. In Zion's Plea against Prelates, by Dr. Leighton, the bisliops are " men of blood," "enemies to God and the State;" the Church is " antichristian and satanical; " the queen "a Canaanite, a daughter of Heth, and an idolatress." Felton, the assassin of Buckingham, is the subject of eulogy. Bastwick a physician by profession, had published a work in which he reviled the bishops as " worse than the devil, rook-catchers, soul-murderers, hirelings, a commonwealth of rats." According to Burton, who was a schoolmaster or tutor in Holy Orders, his episcopal superiors are "limbs of the beast, even Anticlirist," "false prophets," " ravening wolves, factors for Antichrist, antichristian mushrumps." He closes his parody on the Lilany with the words, "From plague, pestilence, and famine, from bishops, priests, and deacons, good Lord, deliver us." Xiaud not responsible for these. 372 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, to have Ins ears cut off and Ms nostrils slit. Sucli was J^t^ the barbarous manner of treating criminals fur years afterwards. Under Elizabeth tlie libellers would have certainly forfeited their lives. When the Puritan faction wished to inaugurate their triumph with the sacrifice of a prelate, the blame of all the Star Chamber pro- ceedings was thrown on Archbishop Laud, and modern writers of the same theological school have tried to represent this primate as delighting in persecution. As a fact Land's influence in the Star Chamber was not greater than that of the other members, and in the trials of the libellers he appears to have taken no part. Butforthe Oi^ the othcr hand, for those proceedings in Church aitSations ^^^ttcrs wMch the Puritans stigmatized as "innova- tions " in religion. Laud may be considered exclusively responsible. These proceedings will be noticed in detail. It must be premised that the theory of abso- lutism entertained by Charles and Laud extended to ecclesiastical as well as civil matters, so that the rights of Convocation were as plainly disregarded now as in the days of Henry aud Edward. Laud might have been styled Charles's vicar-general. " The clergy were simply ordered to carry out the royal will. The king censures bishops for their sermons, ordains by his sole will a body of Canons for Scotland, even sets forth a declaration to interpret the Articles of Eeligion. For these illegal acts Laud was responsible as ecclesiastical adviser, but the clergy, no less than himself, had to pay the penalty." ^ In 1628 Laud had been made Bishop of London. He succeeded to the primacy when it was vacated by the death of Abbot in 1633. Practically, however, he had been at the head of ecclesiastical affairs since the ' Terry, Student's English Church History, p. 415. CHARLES I. 373 beginning of the reign. The influence of the favoured chap. XIV. prelate is apparent in the " Instructions " to the bishops published by the kino; in 1629. This document, if of Laud's , '^ . . . . refonna- questionable authority, is undeniably commendable mtionof its object — the reformation of ecclesiastical abuses and the establishment of a decent and orderly ritual. The bishop is to reside in his diocese, and not injure the estates of the see by cutting down timber and granting leases detrimental to his successors. The office of lecturer or preaching curate is to be more strictly con- trolled ; divine service is to be read before the lecture, and the preicher is to wear a gown and not a cloak. In the afternoon catechizing is to take the place of the sermon. The ministry being discredited by a host of private chaplains who were exempt from diocesan control, it is ordered that chaplains should be kept only by noble- men and certain high officials. These directions would necessarily rouse the hostility of four classes — the non- resident bishops, the puritanical lecturers, the secu- larized chaplains, and the country gentlemen who employed them. A less justifiable proceeding was the suppression of the " Collectors of S. Antholin's," a corporation formed for the purpose of filling the livings with Puritans. This society was dissolved by an order of the Court of Exchequer in 1633, and the livings which it had bought in lapsed to the Crown. Equally open to censure, however commendable in Laud intention, were Luud's provisions with regard to the the Hoiy Sacrament of the Altar. It will be remembered that Jabiesft-om desecra Edward's Council had adopted Ridley's innovation, and *^°°- ordered the removal of the Holy Tables into the middle of the chancels. The innovation had been treated hitherto in the spirit of compromise. Elizabeth's 374 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. "Injunctions," though ordering that the Holy Table was to stand altar-wise against the east wall when not in use, allowed it to be placed in the bodj' of the chancel in an east and west direction when Holy Communion was administered. In some of the churches this ap- pears to have become its permanent position. This usage was undoubtedly conducive to irreverence and to disparagement of the Church's holiest rite. The churchwarden was wont to use the Holy Table when making entries in his account book ; the congregation made it a depository for their hats and cloaks ; it was even used as a post of vantage from which to hear the sermon. In the case of S. Nicholas' Church, Abingdon, which had come before the Court of Chancery in 1628, it had been ruled that the Holy Table should remain " constantly at the upper end of the chancel." An order to the same effect was given by the Council with respect to S. Gregory's Church, London. By his A.D. 1634. authority as primate. Laud issued an order that the Holy Table should everywhere rest altar-wise against the east wall, and that it should be fenced off by rails from the body of the chancel. Since Laud's arrange- ment now obtains in all our churches, we can gratefully acknowledge his services in thus providing against Puritan irreverence and misconception of the Church's means of grace. The informality of the primate's pro- cedure is, however, much to be regretted. The episco- pate— if we except Williams, who resisted from mere captiousness — were sufficiently willing to execute the order of their metropolitan. But the Puritans, of course, discovered popery in Laud's decent provision. Dis- obedience, however, was not tolerated. Here and there churchwardens were excommunicated or imprisoned for resisting the order. Many clergymen ajDpear to have CHARLES I. 375 been suspended for the same cause, especially in the chap. Norwich diocese, the head-quarters of Puritanism. ^^^- . The primate also gave orders that ministers should And dis- confine themselves to the Praj'er-book, and discontinue nances the practice of using extemporary prayers in the pulpit, pora^y Puritan ministers had been wont to interlard these ^^^^^^ extemporary effusions with Calvinistic or political shib- slovenly ^ -> i. services. boleths. That the people might learn to value reverent worship Laud prescribed greater care for the accessories of divine service. Provision was in some places made for ornate services, such as offered a startling contrast to the slovenly " kneeless " cult afiected by the Puritans. In his own cathedral Laud enjoined that the members of the chapter should bow to the altar at their coming in and going out of the choir. In many cathedrals and episcopal chapels the use of the cope was revived. Churches were everywhere restored and beautified. From the ultra-Protestant party, who saw Eomanism i,aud in the doctrines of Van Harmin, Laud's useful labours charged of course elicited a "No popery" cry. The author of J^o^jSanist the " Conference with Fisher," the champion of Angli- opi^io^s. canism whom every papist admitted to be the greatest enemy of Eome in England, hardly needs to be vindi- cated of a charge which merely testified to the ignorance or rancour of the Puritan faction. Laud's noble refuta- tion of this charge of Eomish proclivity, when it was brought forward at his trial, deserves, however, to be quoted. " I have converted," said he, " several from popery ; I have taken an oath against it ; I have written a book against it ; I have held a controversy against it ; I have been twice offered a cardinal's hat and refused it ; ^ I have been twice in danger of my life from a ' On two occasions in 1633 a person came secretly to Laud, and, premising that he acted with the consent of the Eoman court, oEFered him a cardinal's hat. Laud 376 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, CHAP, popish plot; I Lave endeavoured to reconcile the ■ ^^^', . Lutherans and Calvinists; and therefore I have en- deavoured to introduce popery." Laud The congregations of foreign Protestants had ob- requires Gained tolcratiou from Elizabeth, on the plea that they refuses k^^w not sufficient English to join in the services of to conform. i\^q Church. Laud withdrew this concession, and bade these privileged worshippers conform to the Church of the English nation or experience the disabilities con- sequent on excommunication. His conduct in this matter appears at first sight rather harsh. But it could not be expected that these aliens should enjoy in perpetuity religious liberties which were as yet refused to native non-conformity. Laud argued that most of the foreigners were practically Englishmen, because able to conduct business transactions in English. They must therefore be subject to the same laws as Englishmen. Those who were really ignorant of English he allowed to use a translation of our Liturgy, ^j^g It will be remembered that the Sabbatarian con- sabbata- trovcrsv had widened the breach between Churchmen nan con- ^ troversy. and Puritans in James's reign. The Church divines desired such an observance of the Sunday as obtains at the present time among most European nations. When men were not engaged in worship, they were to recreate themselves. Eecreation, in an age when the lower classes could not read or write, took the form of bodily exercise. Such amusements therefore as bowl- ing, dancing, drilling, etc., had been allowed not only by the English divines, but by Calvin, Luther, and the continental Protestants. The Puritan theory, which of course declined it. Tiie notion of there being a Protestant cardinal was then common. But it is more probable that the offer was made by some foe who wished to give a handle to Puritan or Romanist hostility. CHARLES L 377 converted the day of gladness into a day of gloom, chap. • • « • n XIV originated with the Dutch Anabaptists, and was pro- ■ — ,-L- ba"bly exaggerated to accredit pretensions to extra- ordinary sanctity, and to gratify a love of dissidence. The Puritans at this time preached that Sunday recreation was a deadly sin. Chief Justice Eichardson, Arbitrary when attending the assizes in Somersetshire, had taken f^gg q^^ ' upon himself not only to prohibit all Sunday diversions, i^otii sides but to direct that the prohibition should be published by every clergyman in his parish church on certain specified Sundays. Laud administered a severe rebuke to this officious judge, and enforced the Church view of the question by a procedure almost equally inde- fensible. James's "Book of Sports" was republished. To it was attached a notice which not only intimated King Charles's wish for the continuance of Sunday sports, and instructed the justices to see that they were conducted in an orderly manner and without inter- ference, but also directed the clergy to publish the royal intimation in their churches. The issue of such a direction at a time when party feeling ran high was most impolitic. Laud is charged with the graver oifence of punishing, by fine or imprisonment, certain clergymen who, on conscientious grounds, refused com- pliance. As no Parliament existed, the unpopularity of their The war proceedings was not appreciated by the Council. It s^Jotiand. was not till the war with Scotland compelled Charles ■^'■°' "^^^^^ to summon a Parliament that public feeling found an outlet. The war itself was connected with re- ligious changes. James had introduced episcopacy into Scotland Avith all care to avoid oifence. But the jealousy of the Presbyterian divines was roused, and only sought a pretext. In Charles's reign it was easy 378 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, to asperse the bishops as enemies to liberty. The ~Ji!l!— nobility and gentry of Scotland found less difficulty in crediting such charges when Charles injudiciously admitted that he wished to restore the lay impropria- Provoked tions to the Scotch Church. The king was warned by cjitate tiie Scotch bishops that such a scheme would be imprac- reiigious ticable. They were then requested to prepare a distinct changes. -^ ^ r i A.D. 1633. Liturgy for Scotland, which it was hoped might be more acceptable. Charles, however, cut the ground from under their feet by drawing up a body of Canons for the northern Church without consulting the Scotch clergy, and sending it for their acceptance on his own authority. This proceeding caused much dissatis- faction, especially as the Canons were of a High Church and absolutist tendency. The Scotch Liturgy was reviewed by Laud, Wren, and Juxon, and, having been ratified by the king, was appointed to be used at Easter, 1635. Its first appearance was, however, de- layed till July. This procrastination was naturally attributed by the antagonistic party to timidity. Under such auspices it is not surprising that the introduction of the Prayer-book did not commend itself The "Stony to the people of the north. \Kt its first reading in Edin- ju?yri637. burgh Cathedral, on the celebrated " Stony Sabbath," a riot was raised, the bishop and other ecclesiastics being pelted with whatever missiles came first to hand. The agitation was not ephemeral. A Puritan organization had been busy throughout the country disseminating false ideas about the Prayer-book and the episcopal The system, and now a representative committee diew up LeaeiSand "^^^ Celebrated document called the " Solemn League Covenant." g^^^ Covenant." By this they pledged themselves to effect, " without respect of persons, the extirpation of prelacy ; that is, Church government by archbishops, CHARLES I. 379 bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans, chap. chapters, archdeacons, and all other ecclesiastical — .-l— officers depending on that hierarch3\" This work of extirj)ation was to be carried out in England and Ireland, as well as in Scotland. The Marquis of Hamilton was sent to Edinburgh to restore harmony, but the insurgents would not hear of compromise. They clamoured for a " General As^sembly." The re- quest was allowed, and the Assembly proceeded to abolish episcopacy, excommunicate those who favoured it, condemn the Liturgy and Canons, and denounce Arminianism as antichristian. A bloody persecution of episcopalians, or " malignants," followed. The king, compelled to make war, saw that he must The "Short get subsidies by summoning a Parliament. The new ment." House, however, though orderly in point of behaviour, ^^^^'^®*®- pertinaciously refused to treat of supply. A Puritan majority clamoured for the immediate appointment of a committee for religion. Laud's concession that the committee should consist of members of Convocation and members of Parliament in equal numbers was scornfully rejected. Mr. Pym made a long speech, complaining of the introduction of " those superstitious and infirm ceremonies which accompanied the most decrepit age of popery." Altars, bowing towards the east, pictures, crosses, crucifixes, were the special subject of his complaint. With more show of reason he de- nounced the j)unishment of ministers for not reading the king's proclamation attached to the " Book of Sports," and the encroachments of the High Com- mission and the ecclesiastical courts. In similar strains spoke other Puritan members, the upshot being that the House would not consider the question of " supply " till these grievances were redressed. The 38o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIV. House of Lords conferred witli the Commons, and urged compliance with, the king's wishes, but the majority continued refractory. They declared that they would not allow Canons to be passed in Convocation without consent of Parliament, and they detailed seven special grievances: — (1.) The licensing of "popish" books. (2.) Setting the Holy Table altar-wise. (3.) Setting up crosses, images, and crucifixes in cathedrals, churches, and chapels. (4.) Refusing to administer H0I3' Com- munion except at the altar rails. (5.) Enforcement of articles of inquiry at episcopal visitations. (6.) Molest- ing and depriving godly ministers for not reading the " Book of Sports." (7.) Enjoining obeisance to the altar. The king, finding the House impervious to persuasion, followed the advice of Sir Henry Vane and dissolved the " Short Parliament." According to the usual custom Convocation should have been dissolved when Parliament expired. Laud, however, wished to secure subsidies from the clergy, and to legalize the recently impugned "innovations" by ex post facto Canons. The anomaly of continuing the sessions of Convocation was justified by opinions given by the Lord Chancellor and six judges ; and to be quite safe Laud secured a new writ, summoning the May, 1640. clergy to sit in synod. The synod was full of loyalty. It voted the required subsidy for the Scotch war, and resolved that every minister should preach once a quarter on the divine right of kings and on the royal prerogatives. One of the Canons of this synod justi- fied Laud's proceedings with reference to the position and enclosure of the altars. Reception at the altar rail and obeisance to the altar are also enjoined by this Canon. By the sixth Canon a new oath of alle- giance to the doctrine, discipline, and government of The Con- vocation. The Puritans CHARLES I. 38 1 the Clinrcli was to be demanded of the clergy. There chap. was nothing extraordinary in snch a demand, seeing ^^J- that the Scotch had pledged themselves in the Covenant take ex- to extirpate prelacy in England. In fact, the form of the tS sStiT , oath was borrowed from the Covenant. An unimportant ^^^°^" informant}'-, however, in the wording of this test gave a vantage ground to the unscrupulous foe. The oath con- cluded with the words, "nor will I ever give my consent to alter the government of this Church by archbishops, bishops, deans, and archdeacons, et ccetera, as it stands now established." Et ccetera was merely an abbrevia- tion in the draft for "chancellors, commissaries, officials, and such like." The substitution of these words in the printed copy was inadvertently neglected. The Puri- tans at once attached an insidious meaning to the et ccetera oath. From all parts of the country it was protested against. The people were taught to believe that the bishops had some secret design against their liberties. Already there had been riots in the pre- cincts of Lambeth and Westminster. Now a mob in- vaded the High Commission Court sitting at S. Paul's, with the cry, " No bishop ! no High Commission ! " At the close of the year 1640 the successes of the The "Long Scotch compelled Charles to listen to the popular ^enT" demand for a Parliament. The body returned was the notorious "Long Parliament," which met on November 3 of this year, and was not dissolved till March, 1660. The peers at York, meanwhile, concluded a truce with the invaders. By the treaty of Kipon it was arranged that hostilities should cease, and the Scotch army be supported till the points of grievance should be settled by the Parliaments of the two countries. In the new Commons denunciations of the bishops and complaints of the recent proceedings in Convocation at once found 382 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIV. Its attack on the High Church clerg-y. loud utterance. It was voted that the libellers Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick should be compensated in large sums by the primate and the other members of the High Commission Court. Then followed a vote that Dr. Cosin, Prebendary of Duihara, a leading but inoffensive member of the High Church party, was " superstitious and scandalous." An absurd attempt was even made to impeach him for treason before the Lords. Laud had been directly attacked on November 10, on the strength of a petition from a Kentish clergyman, who declared he had been grievously persecuted by the primate. To secure a substantial basis for his im- peachment, the fallen Williams, who had been de- servedly imprisoned for subornation of perjury, was released and urged to take proceedings against Laud. Williams had sufficient sense of shame to refuse. The primate was at last formally impugned in both Houses on December 16. The Commons resolved that the recent Canons of Convocation tended to disparage the king's prerogative and the liberty of the subject, and charged Laud with their authorship. The Lords on the same day heard a charge from the Scotch com- mission, against Strafford and Laud, to the effect that they had forced on the Scotch Church a Liturgy and Canons containing " many dangerous errors in point of doctrine." It was agreed between the Houses that Mr. Holies should impeach the archbishop before the Lords, on the charge of high treason. The primate's warm rejoinder was a pretext for committing him to the custody of Black Eod, and on March 1 he was conveyed to the Tower. Among the bishops. Wren of Ely, and Pierce of Bath and Wells, were selected for attack. Both Avere impeached and required to find heavy bail for their appearance in the House of Lords. CHARLES I. 383 A little later, they were committed to the Tower, where chap. Wren remained for eighteen years. Strafford was im- Ji^I_^ peached in the following spring, as having subverted true religion and the rights of Parliament. It was found impossible to convict him legally of treason. The Commons, not to be baulked of their prey, deter- mined to convict him by a bill of attainder. Charles's timidity impelled him to the crime of ratifying this unrighteous procedure, and the great statesman was May 19, beheaded. The Church was now to make a terrible atonement for its attachment to absolutist principles. Already the Puritan Commons had begun to tout for petitions against Church discipline or against individual clergy- men. The incumbents named in these petitions were summoned forthwith to defend themselves before the House. This was the prelude to an attack which, both in the extent of its range and the pitiless animosity of its procedure, bears comparison with the famous per- secutions of the early ages. These severities will be described in detail hereafter. We shall confine our- selves for the present to those proceedings in Parlia- ment which gave them a show of legality. As early The as January 31 the House of Commons had assumed to ^^on^of itself a right, unsanctioned by precedent, to appoint a diurcnes. commission for the visitation of churches. The pro- ceeding was a kind of parody on the visitations sanctioned by the Crown in 1547 and 1559. The Commissioners thus appointed were to " demolish and remove ... all images, altars, or tables turned altar- wise, crucifixes, superstitious pictures, monuments, and reliques of idolatry " out of all churches and chapels. Such was the authority for that work of Vandalism which was in progress during the next twenty years, 384 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. and whicli has left its indelible memorial in most of our noblest fanes. The House of Lords was so far The "Com- drawn along by the stream of popular opinion as to Religion" appoint a " Committee of Religion " on March 15. This committee consisted of ten earls, ten barons, and ten bishops. It was to inquire into all religious inno- vations introduced since the Eeformation, and, if requisite, to " examine the degrees and perfection of the Eeformation itself." Four bishops only — Williams, Hall, Morton, and Usher — consented to attend the sessions of this committee. Its proceedings were inter- rupted by the sweeping measures of the Parliament. A strong party in the Lower House longed to decatho- licize the Church by a prompt extermination of epis- copacy and a substitution of the Presbyterian system. This procedure was, of course, warmly advocated by the Scotch commissioners. It was opposed, how- ever, as unnecessary, by many who, though they had headed the cry against absolutist principles, had no fault to find with episcopacy judged on its own merits. And to the Independent contingent, afterwards known as the " Rump," such a scheme savoured too little of anarchy. In March a measure passed the Lower House, not ^c^*acy only disabling clergymen from serving as magistrates, but excluding bishops from the House of Lords. This precipitate alteration of the constitution was rejected in the Upper House. The Commons thereupon made an assault on episcopacy, and got as far on June 15 as the abolition of " deans and chapters, archdeacons, prebendaries, and canons." The Presbyterian party were disgusted at the survival of the bishops. The Canons of 1640, that special bugbear of the "Long Parliament," were now utilized as a pretext. An CHARLES I. 385 impeacliment was preferred against thirteen bisliops for chap. their share in passing these Canons. The absurdity of ^IZ:_ this expedient was, however, exposed in the plea drawn up for the bishops by Mr. Chute, their counsel. Popular petitions against episcopal government were then prepared. The Church party, however, responded with signatures of far greater weight, and even of larger number, in behalf of the impugned system. Open violence was next tried. The mob was en- The ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ spiritual couraged to insult and assail the bishops on their way lords are to the House, until they found attendance so perilous that they were forced to absent themselves. Twelve of them signed a protest against all laws, orders, votes, etc., passed during their enforced absence. This procedure caused an extraordinary exasperation in the Upper House. The bishops were at once com- ^^^ ^ ^ ^ imprisoned mitted to the Tower. Ten of them were released after Jan. so, 1642 eighteen days' imprisonment, but on February 6 a bill excluding all the lords spiritual from the Upper House was easily carried. To one quarter at least the episcopate might have inconsis- looked for sympathy and support. The conduct of King Charles, however, towards the victims of his absolutist policy only too painfully illustrated the text, " Put not your trust in princes." The weakest point in the absolutist cause was the present king's utter incapacity even to lead his own part}'. Charles had sacrificed Strafford. In Scotland he had made most disgraceful concessions to the Covenanters, and even ratified a bill which declared that the " government of the Church by archbishops and bishops was repugnant to the Word of God," and that "the prelates were enemies to the propagation of the true reformed Protestant religion." ^ • Collier, Eccles. History, vol. viii. p. 225. 2 c 386 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAR XIV, The civil war. He now assented to the Bill which deprived the English bishops of their seats in the House of Lords. It is supposed that the king's inconsistency was intended for a feat of diplomacy, his object being to break- up the alliance of English Presbyterians and Scotch Covenanters. Its real effect was the discouragement or alienation of the thousands who had petitioned for the maintenance of the present constitution in Church and State. The Parliamentary faction took up arms this summer, and war raged till the surrender of Oxford in June, 1646. Both parties throughout this period legislated on religious matters, but as the king simply cancelled the innovations introduced by Parliament, it will be sufficient to continue our account of the latter. Until the sword was appealed to, the House had been inclined to tolerate an adaptation of episcopacy to Erastian opinions. The definite severance of Churchmen and Puritans, and the urgent necessity of securing the sympathies of Scotland, now made this compromise The "Root impossible. The "Boot and Branch Bill," abolishing episcopacy as " a great impediment to Eeformation " and " prejudicial to the State," was accordingly carried in September, 1642. The reluctance with which this concession to the northern religionists was made was indicated by a provision that the Act should not come into operation for a year. But the success of the king's troops soon surmounted all such scruples. The Scotch alliance had to be retained at all costs, and when the commissioners came from the north they required that the English Sept. 1643. Parliament should accept the " Solemn League and Cove- nant." An Assembly of Divines had been appointed by the Parliament in June, 1643. It consisted of one and Branch Bill The Cove- nant ac- cepted by the Commons. CHARLES I. 387 hundred and thirty-one ministers and thirty lay assessors — ten lords and twenty commoners. Some of the ministers were Puritans in Holy Orders, and to give the Assembly an appearance of respectability, Usher and other eminent Churchmen had been named as members. These persons soon ceased to attend the sessions. The Assembly had already begun to revise the Thirty-nine Articles. It now submitted to the humiliating demands of the Scotch Commissioners, and the ordained Puritans pledged themselves, reluctantly or otherwise, to extirpate the source of their minis- terial powers. The Covenant was subscribed by the Commons, the Puritan Churchmen therein not ex- And by the cepted, on September 25. It was to be read in every minster London church on the Sunday following. A few ^.s^mbiy. months later, it was ordered that every person above enforced on ' ^ v' r all adults. the age of eighteen should renounce the Anglican ^eb. is. system by swearing his acceptance of the Covenant. Such were the tender mercies of the pretended ad- vocates of religious liberty when possessed of civil power. Much has been said of the severities of Bancroft and Laud in enforcing conformity on the clerical body ; but what were these to the outrage perpetrated on tender consciences when all men were summoned to renounce and denounce the religious system under which they had been nurtured. Of course, one result of these proceedings was the flight of thousands of conscientious clergymen from their benefices. These the Presbyterian divines appro^Driated to themselves. In October, 1644, the Assembly of Divines issued a The Directory of Public Worship, which was first sent to of puijUc'^ Scotland for approval, and then sanctioned by the jln!i645. Parliament. In this document certain broad rules 388 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Use of the Prayer- book pro- scribed. Aug 1645. The Pres bjrterian Scheme. were laid down for the conduct of a religious service without liturgy or settled formulae of any kind, the Lord's Prayer excepted. Heads were given for a State prayer which was to include a petition for the " con- version " of the queen. There were also prescriptions for the administration of the Lord's Supper, which was to be received in a sitting posture. The dead were to be buried without prayers or religious ceremonies. The Presbyterian Directory proved, as might have been expected, generally unpopular. But men were not free to revert to the Church's system. Penalties were provided to restrain the use of the Common Prayer in public or in private — viz. for the first offence a fine of five pounds, for the second ten, for the third a year's imprisonment. The Presbyterian scheme provided also for the formation of classes, each representing a certain district. The aspirant to the ministry was first to be elected by a congregation, then to present himself to the presbytery of his classis, who were empowered to examine and ordain him. The authority of the presbyters was, however, subsequently modified by an Act of Parlia- ment appointing "Triers," mostly laymen, who were em- powered to take part in the examinations and elections. Provincial and national assemblies were al«o included in the scheme. For guidance in doctrine, the Assembly put forth a Longer and a Shorter Catechism (the latter intended for children), both of a Calvinistic character, and a Confession of Faith which was intended to super- sede the Thirty-nine Articles. The thirty-three Articles of this Confession are still subscribed by ministers of the Scotch Presbyterian establishment. Dissolution The Presbyterian system, however, was not destined of the "^ J ' ' ^ West- to strike root in Ensjland. To the Erastians and Inde- rainster . Assembly, pendents it had always appeared only as " prelacy " in Bee. 1646 CHARLES I. 389 a new guise. Its progress was stayed by the growing chap. strength of the revolutionary party, who, by the " Self- ^^^- denying Ordinance" of April, 1645, had secured the management of the army. With commendable pre- science the divines of the Westminster Assembly began, early in 1647, to disperse to their new benefices, and the sessions of this celebrated body thus came to an end, without collision with the Independent or anarchical sectaries, and indeed without any formal dissolution. From March to November, 1644, Archbishop Laud Archbishop . Laud had been subjected to a trial on the charge of "high unfairly treason." The indictments were drawn up by Prynne, the martj^r libeller. Against the primate, says his biographer, were arraj^ed " the whole of the Puritans, whether Presbyterians, Anabaptists, Independents, Familists, or Gospellers : the Jesuits, too, had intrigued against him who was the greatest enemy whom Eome encountered since the days of Luther." The trial was a mere farce. The primate never had the same lords present at his afternoon defence as had heard the morning impeachment. He was denied the assist- ance of counsel. His witnesses could not be sworn. His private papers and diary had been seized by Prynne ; they were mutilated and interpolated by his accusers. Spirited and vigorous notwithstanding his three years' imprisonment, the brave old man de- fended himself with an eloquence and ability which won the admiration of Prynne himself. He maintained an even temper throughout, though mobbed and in- sulted by the Puritan fanatics, who were especially irritated by his complete refutation of the charge that he had encouraged " popery." The judges unanimously declared that no act of Laud's was treasonable by any 390 ECCLESIA ANGLIC ANA. known law of tlie land. The same disgraceful expedient, therefore, was adopted as in the case of Strafford. A bill of attainder was brought into the House of Commons, and was passed on November 13. The Lords, unable to arrest the progress of democratic tyranny, were wont, at this time, to absent themselves from the House when any proceedings of extraordinarily unjust character were to be sanctioned. Six peers only could be induced to vote for the bill in the Upper House. The great champion and confessor of Anglicanism was executed on Tower Hill on January 10, 1645. The career of the unfortunate sovereign was soon to be cut short in a similar manner. The fatal blow at Naseby was succeeded by the siege of Oxford, the flight to the Scotch camp at Newark, and the sale of the fugitive to the English Parliament. As a ruler and a politician, Charles had adopted tortuous causes, theciiTirch, ^^ guilt of which is somcwhat emphasized by their un- successful issue ; but when his own safety only was im- perilled, he disdained the use of chicanery and craft. He was a sincere believer in the doctrines of the Church, and he would not save his life by repudiating her. The Scotch vainly urged hi in to secure liberty by sanction- ing the Covenant. The English Presbyterians vainly tempted him to make a cession of the Church estates. The utmost that could be wrung from him was an establishment of Presbyterianism side by side with epis- copacy, on principles of mutual toleration. The jealousy of the Independent faction was roused by this con- cession to the rival faction. The king was carried off to Hurst Castle, and Colonel Pride effectually silenced the less anarchical contingent by purging the House of all members save some fifty Independents. These appointed the court of one hundred and thirty-five June 14, 1645. Charles refuses to sacrifice CHARLES I. 391 commissioners who adjudged the king to be " a tyrant, chap. traitor, murderer, and enemy to the good people of _f:^ZL. this nation," and sentenced him to "be put to death -^^«^ is ■^ executed. by severine: his head from his body." Jan. so, . . . . 1649. The sufferings of English Churchmen during this Theper- period of confusion can scarcely be adequately depicted the church. in such a work as the present. The scene presented is in one respect almost without counterpart in the world's history. The cruelties of the dominant party have, of course, been surpassed in many revolutionary epochs. But never, perhaps, have cruelty and hatred, malice and uncharitableness flaunted so audaciously in the garb of religion, or the depths of Pharisaic hypocrisy been so nearly sounded, as in this era of Puritan ascendency. As early as January, 1641, the Anglican clergy had been assailed with the bitterest invectives in Pailiament, and discontented parishioners had been incited to present petitions against their incumbents. Mr. John White had declared, in the House of Commons, that eight thousand of the clergy were " unworthy and scandalous, and deserved to be cast out ; " and numerous speakers had proved the clergy guilty of " popery, idolatry, superstition, enmity to godliness, malignancy," etc. The gravamen in reality implied nothing more than absolutist tenets and attachment to Church prin- ciples. These charges were, however, made a pretext for supplementing the clergy by a force of lecturers, who would tune the pulpits, and thus prepare men's minds for the attack on Churcli property. No minis- ter could refuse to admit these men into the pulpit without danger of incurring imprisonment or se- questration. ^ Meantime Committees for Scandalous iSttee™or Ministers had been appointed, whose business it was MkSst^S^ * Walker, Sufferings of the Clergy, p. 30. 392 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, to try every clergyman against wliom any sort of ■ ^^7 - charge could be trumped up. These trials resulted almost invariably in the imprisonment and sequestra- tion of the accused. Mr. White, who was the chair- man of one committee, and reaped a golden harvest of fees off the sequestered livings, gives an account of these proceedings in his " First Century of Scandalous Malignant Priests," published in 1643. It is instruc- tive to observe how the writer gravely intermingles the grossest aspersions on character and morals with such charges as " bowing at the name of Jesus " and " neglecting the Parliament fasts." In reality the clergy were punished for their religious and political views alone. Yiciousness of life was, of course, detected by the Puritan inquisitors wherever High Church and royalist principles prevailed. The clergy generally had espoused these principles. They are accordingly represented as " vermin, . . . popish dregs, given over to vile affections, to superstition, ambition, persecutions, covetousness, malignity, and all wickedness," and, as " priests of Baal, sons of Belial, . . . priests of Bacchus, unclean beasts." Similar language was used by the " godly " lecturers who had invaded the pulpits. ,jj^g The war soon paved the way for more extended Committee schemes of Confiscation. On the pretext that the Puri- for Plun- ^ ■•■ dered tanical cler2;v had suffered from the royalist troops, Ministers. . t.^-. • a central Committee for Plundered Ministers was ap- pointed. A great clearance was now made of such clergy as were suspected of " malignant " {i.e. " royalist ") proclivities, their benefices being given sometimes to Presbyterian ministers, sometimes to self-ordained mechanics. Neither bribery nor oppres- sion could always raise anything like a plausible charge against the victims, and the piety of the com- CHARLES I. 393 missioners often laboured to find a stumbling block. " In Cumberland one clergyman was deprived for hunt- ing ; and the charge against another was that he had been seen walking in his garden on a Sunday evening. In Shropshire one was sequestered avowedly for his learning, one of the committee remarking that priests and Jesuits were learned and therefore did the more harm. In Gloucestershire a clergyman's greyhound gave chase to a hare that accidentally crossed his path ; this was termed ' coursing on a Sabbath day,' and cost his master his benefice." ^ After the acceptance of the Scotch Covenant by The Parliament, these pretexts became unnecessary. A fo^Ied^'^ pledge of hostility to that form of government which ^^^ '^^^ had prevailed in the Church since the Apostolic age ^®^- ^®^^- was noAv forced upon the conscience. A clean sweep was made of the clergy who refused to impugn this Catholic essential. Puritans of elastic principles alone survived to share the Church emoluments with the Presbyterians and other sectaries. The sufferings consequent on these ejectments have Terrible not often been surpassed in the annals of religious ofthe^^^^ persecution. It has been estimated that at least seven ^^^^'S'^- thousand incumbents (many of them married) were at once deprived of their livelihood. To these must be added a large number of unbeneficed clergymen, curates, schoolmasters, chaplains, etc. A large pro- portion were relegated to imprisonment, the horrors of which were often intensified by ingenious cruelty. So full were the prisons that the ships on the Thames, and even the pest-bouses, were converted into places of confinement. Three Cambridge heads of houses were among the gang of " fourscore prisoners of ' Sufferings of the Clergy, p. 126. 394 ECCLESIA ANGLIC ANA. CHAP, quality ," who were confined under hatclies on the XIV. Thames, without straw to lie on, and almost with- out air to breathe, their custodians having deliberately stopped up " all the small auger holes and all other inlets which might relieve them with fresh air." ^ Not many cases of violent death are recorded, but it can hardly be doubted that an immense number of lives were cut short by the rigours of such confinements, and in the cases of the unimprisoned by sheer starvation. It will be borne in mind that the families of the ejected clergymen were left without the means of maintenance. The committees of sequestration in 1643 were indeed enabled to grant one-fifth of the benefice to the families of ejected incumbents, but they did not avail them- selves of these powers. In 1647 it was ordered that this allowance should be given. The injunction came, however, after most of the mischief had been done. It was, moreover, clogged by so many provisoes on the part of the commissioners, and was so easily evaded by the usurping preacher, that it rarely brought the victims any relief. Fate of the Of the bisliops Skinner of Oxford appears to have bishops. ^ come oil best. He was allowed to retire to the rectory of Launton, in Oxfordshire, and seems to have used the Prayer-book services there with impunity until the Eestoration. Williams espoused the cause of the Parliament, and died in disrepute in 1650. "Of the whole number," says Mr. Walker, " one was beheaded without any colour of law, and one joined the faction which had ruined his brethren ; eigliteen died in poverty ; only nine survived the confusions and were restored to their sees, and of these one had been im- prisoned for eighteen years." ' See the account in Mercurius Rusticus, chap. xii. universi- CHARLES L 395 To tlie wanton acts of desecration perpetrated by the chap. fanatics hundreds of our churches still hear witness. The .^i^L- iconoclastic frenzy apparently reached its heiofht in the ofthe • ^ ^ " ^ . cliurclies. years 1643-45. In 1644 the notorious William Dowsing records his destruction of crosses, pictures, caryed work, stained glass, and " superstitious inscriptions in brass " in about a hundred and fifty Suffolk churches. A similar work of deyastation was going on in all parts of the country. The uniyersities suffered more especially as of the univ — centres both of loyalty and Church principle. Cam- ties, bridge was made the garrison town of the seyen asso- ciated counties. King's College Chapel became a parade-ground for the rebel forces ; the college bridges were defaced ; the groyes were cut down and sold for timber; the orchards and gardens were laid waste. Libraries, museums, eyen the rooms of students, were ransacked and despoiled. The cliapels were desecrated and defaced by Dowsing and his associates, and each college was charged a fee of forty shillings for the job. In imitation of the yisitation of the monasteries in 1535, an oath of discoyery was put to the fellows and students, binding them to accuse each other of malignancy, etc.^ At the so-called " regulation " of 1543, twelye masters and oyer three hundred and fifty fellows, scholars, and exhibitioners were ejected, and many of them imprisoned. The Earl of Manchester filled up some of these places with his own creatures. But the greater part of the revenues were appropriated to proyide the expenses of the war. In 1649, when the Independents bad gained the ascendency, another "regulation" was authorized, and the "Engagement" was enforced instead of the Coyenant. Oxford had under- gone considerable harassing in 1642-43. Its surrender ' Querela Cantabrigiensis, p. 20. 396 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, in 1646 was succeeded by a formal visitation. So X.IV — ..-L* dauntless was the attitude of the whole university body, that the work of the visitors was not completed till 1649. It appears that almost all the masters and fellows and scholars were depiived, ejected, or im- prisoned for disallowing the authority of the visitors and refusing the Covenant. Some five hundred persons were thus reduced to destitution. In their place came the illiterate rabble described by Anthony Wood. " The generality of them had mortified countenances, puling voices, and eyes commonly, when in discourse, lifted up, with hands laying on their breasts. They mostly had short hair (which at this time was commonly called the committee-cut), and went in cuerjpo, in a shabbed condition, and looked rather like 'prentices or antiquated school-boys than academicians or ministers." Such is the story of nine years of Puritan persecution. Its fury abated about the year 1649, when seemingly no more outrages could well be devised. The clergy had by this time been reduced to a miserable state of destitution, and all ecclesiastical property had been confiscated or profaned. Moreover, the spoilers had begun to wrangle over the booty, and the mutual jealousies of Presbyterian and Independent diverted their attention from their common foe. This respite, however, was destined to be of short duration. The full fierceness of the tempest was yet to be felt ere the horizon cleared. THE INTERREGNUM, 397 CHAPTEE XY. %^t Interregnum. A.D. 1649-1660. Independents in the ascendant — Character of this sect — The " Engagement " sub- stituted for the Covenant— Rise of strange and immoral sects — The Anglicans excluded from toleration — Yet the clergy continue to officiate — Appointment of the " Triers " — Cromwell's unsuccessful overtures — The clergy driven from their employments — The Anglican system kept alive by courageous Churchmen — The period of anarchy — The Restoration. The five years succeeding the execution of King Charles form a period of wild religious anarchy, of which it will be unnecessary to give a detailed account, indepen- The predominant sect was that of the Brownists or^,®'^*^^^ •■■ tne ascen- Independents, deriving its origin from the Elizabethan dant. fanatic Eobert Brown. The anti-Church principles at one time held by Brown had been worked up into a system, which professedly made each congregation a law to itself. Hence the assumption of the titles " Independents " and " Congregationalists." This form of sectarianism had been fostered by the outcry against "prelacy" and " Arminianism " in the reigns of James and Charles. It was distinguished by a ran- corous hatred of all other systems ; and was scarcely less savagely hostile to the Presbyterians and Quakers than to the Anglicans and Eomanists. The Independents, character who had been forced to leave England in the reign ^f °^*^^ss^'=t- James, carried this intolerance with them to Yirgima, /^hm»ld the minority in the settlement. The ecclesiastical tyranny these religionists wiithed under was that of the " I'ilgrim Fathers," or Independent majority. They were subjected to every form of cruelly. The law of 1656 concerning Quakers ordered that every Quaker who landed should be whipped, imprisoned with hard labour, and finally expelled from the colony. The Romanists were also expelled. The Unitarians were executed. The Baptists were harassed by various rigorous statutes. The "sabbath-breaker" was to suffer capital punishment. When we read of three Quaker women being flogged through eleven villages in frost and snow, of ship captains being flogged fur happening to bring Quakers into port, and of numerous colonists being hanged on allegations of sorcery and blasphemj-, we may well hesitate before we associate the cause of the "Pilgrim Fathers" with that of freedom of conscience. (See Curteis' " Dissent in its relation to the Church," pp. 82, 83.) Else of strang-e and immoral sects. THE INTERREGNUM. 399 followers. The least pernicious of the new formations, probably, though the one most disliked by Cromwell, was the Quaker sect, the disciples of George Fox, an enthusiast who taught a doctrine of internal illumina- tion akin to that of the mediaeval mysticists. The best known of the other sects are the Vanists, Fifth Monarchists, Seekers, Eanters, Familists, and Beh- menists. The tendency of the teaching of the sectaries is sufficiently illustrated by an Act passed in August, 1650. This inflicted sentence on all who should pro- fess " that the acts of adultery, drunkenness, swearing, etc., are in their own nature as holy and righteous as the duties of prayer, preaching, or giving thanks to God ; that there is really no such thing as unrighteous- ness or sin independent of conscience and opinion; that there is neither heaven nor hell, etc." ^ The new constitution, forcibly introduced by Crom- The well in December, 1653, classed Anglicans and Roman- ^cfideS^ ists and teachers of licentiousness as undeserving of the toleration toleration extended to every form of religious opinion. Things, however, were in too confused a state to admit of an organized persecution of faithful Churchmen. Many clergy who had signed the " Engagement " had contrived to regain a footing, and now celebrated the rites of the Church without molestation. To secure themselves against the statute of August, 1645, they sometimes repeated the Offices without book, or adopted variations closely resembling the proscribed formulee. At S. Gregory's, near S. Paul's, the Anglican form of Yet the worship appears to have been conducted in the usual f.iergycon- -^ '■ '• tmue to way till Christmas Da}^ 1655, when Dr. Wild delivered officiate, what Evelyn calls " the funeral sermon of preaching." Evelyn mentions a few other churches where ordained ' Collier, Ecclesiastical History, vol. ix. p. 378. 400 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Croni"weirs unsuccess- ful over- tures. clergymen were to be found in the years 1652-53. The first blow struck at this remnant of the priesthood was the establishment of an inquisitorial commission, called " Triers," in March, 1654. The new regime had become hateful, and it was thought wise to " tune the pulpits." An ordinance was accordingly issued, complaining that the ministry contained still many " weak, scandalous, popish, and ill-affected persons." Thirty-five commissioners were named, who were to test both the political views and the spiritual exj)e- riences of all occupants of pulpits. Five Triers were empowered to approve, and nine to reject. One of the most active Triers was a very immoral actor, named Hugh Peters, who professed to have experienced a call, and now conducted himself with intolerable insolence. The state of the soul, the date of "conversion," the " assurance " of the converted person — these and similar secrets of the inner life were to be laid bare before the Puritan confessional. It may be imagined what kind of persons earned its testamur. Severer measures were yet to be inflicted. It appears that about this time the hostile attitude of the Presby- terians induced Cromwell to make some advances to Usher, Brownrigg, and other leading clergy. But the persistent loyalty of the Anglicans to the Stuart cause soon convinced him that a conciliatory policy would be fruitless. The Protector vented his feelings of disap- pointment and anger in the cruel edict of November 24, 1655. This prohibited the employment of all ministers, fellows, or schoolmasters who had experienced eject- ment or sequestration. No such persons were to engage in tuition, serve as chaplains, preach, or administer the sacraments. This vindictive measure was designed to ruin those ejected clergy who had hitherto supported THE INTERREGNUM. 401 themselves as chaplains and private tutors in the chap. royalist households. It also drove from their cures ^^' many who had been restored by the action of their parishioners. The same edict re-enforced the pro- scription of the Liturgy, and altered the penalty from a fine to imprisonment. In every distiict commissioners were appointed to enforce these provisions. This must have been the darkest hour in the whole The period of persecution. Much, however, was done ^^femkept secretly by munificent Churchmen to diminish the^^^^®^^ «/ •^ courageous sufferings of the destitute clergy. Even now such churcii- men as Hammond and Sheldon were securing the con- tinuance of a learned ministry by providing for the education of young men of promise. These obtained ordination from Bishop Skinner at Launton, or Bishop Duppa at Richmond, or from refugee diocesans on the Continent. The services of our Church were now usually conducted in private chambers. Some of the priesthood, however, still openly performed the duties to which they had been ordained, in defiance of un- righteous edicts. As late as Christmas Day, 1657, Evelyn was present at a celebration of Holy Com- munion in Exeter Chapel, London, which was inter- rupted by an invasion of soldiery. The odious rule of Puritanism practically collapsed sept. 3, on the death of Cromwell. The removal of that " iron ^Ife^period hand which had prevented the various sects of fanatics °^ anarchy, from tearing each other in pieces," was succeeded by an outburst of anarchy, which compelled the Presby- terians to range themselves on the side of the loyalists. After Monk's resuscitation of the " Long Parliament," there was a brief period of suspense. The re-establish- ment of Presbyterianism was, of course, desired by this assembly. Its tenets were declared to be the national 2 D 402 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, faith, and it was ordered that copies of the Covenant -^7'. should be hung up in all churches. The nation, how- ever, was thoroughly sick of the hypocrisy and inso- lence of the sectarian systems, and longed for the The Resto- rc-establishment of Church and king. Monk, the pro- fessed leader of Presbyterians, had sufficient sagacity to read the signs of the times. He turned traitor to his party, and undertook to establish Charles uncon- ditionally. The king issued the " Declaration of Breda," promising pardon to those concerned in the rebellion, and toleration " of differences of opinion in matters of religion." A universal ebullition of joy marked the restoration of the constitution, and the re-establishment of the Church in that position from which she had been illegally deposed. ration. Mayl, 1660. CHARLES IL 403 CHAPTEE XYI. ©I^arlcg ft A.D. 1660-1685. The Puritan deputation to the Hague — The petition for alterations in the Church system — Reform of the episcopal system : how far desirable — The Presbyterian proposal on the subject — The " Worcester House Declaration " — Rejected by the " Convention Parliament " — Appointment of the Savoy Conference — The policy of the bishops — Baxter's " Reformed Liturgy "—The " Petition to the Bishops — The eight grievances of the Puritans — The conference fruitless — Jealous conservatism of the Parliament — Convocation charged to review the Prayer-book— Valuable services of Cosin— The revised Prayer-book sanctioned by an " Act of Uniformity " — The Catholic party victorious — The usurping incumbents — " Black Bartholo- mew's "—The Anglican revival — The clergy resign their right of taxing them- selves in Convocation — The political relations of the Church from 1660 to 1672 — And from 1672 to 1685 — Charles coquets with the Dissenters — And rouses the indignation of the Commons — The Acts for repressing nonconformity — The " De- claration of Indulgence " — The Commons co-operate with the Dissenters against the Romanists — The "Test Act" — Persecution of Romanists — James supported by the bishops— Discoveries of plots— Prevalence of immorality — The age of great divines — Rise of the Latitudinarians. The Presbyterian divines were slow to appreciate the The Puri & deputation to the Hague. marked reaction against Puritanism and all its belong- ings. Some ten of their party, including Eeynolds, *°*^e Calam}^ Case, and Manton, had waited on Charles II. at the Hague, and demanded toleration for their system. Charles, with consummate tact, quoted their own principle that the Houses of Parliament were " the best judges what indulgence and toleration was necessary for the repose of the kingdom." When these divines proceeded to press him to prohibit his chaplains from wearing the surplice, he replied that 404 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVI. The petition for alterations in the Church system. Reform of the episcopal system: how far desirable. personally lie claimed the same liberty in matters of religion as themselves. The unpopularity of this party was, however, as yet indiscernible to the king, and he appears to have thought that large concessions would be necessary. To secure its goodwill he made nine of the leading Presbyterian divines royal chaplains. Thus encouraged, the Puritans proceeded to draw up a petition for sweeping changes in the Prayer-book and the ecclesiastical constitution. They demanded that the prayers should be recast in Scripture phrase- ology ; that oaths of conformity should not be required of the clergy ; that such ceremonies as wearing the surplice, signing with the cross at Baptism, and bowing at the name of our Saviour, should be discontinued ; and that communicants should not be required to kneel. Coupled with these stereotyped Puritan requisitions was a less exceptionable demand for a reform of the episcopate. We have pointed out that the Eeformation settlement had so far tended to an undue aggrandize- ment of the first order of clergy, in respect of eccle- siastical powers and social status. The episcopate had been left independent of the priesthood, and was empowered to rule without deference to synods. Its members were too few in number, even for the present population. The bishops might easily become an aris- tocratic caste, devoted to theories of secular policy, rather than to the work of superintending Christ's Church ; " lords over God's heritage," rather than " examples to the flock." A similar exaltation of the episcopate, at the expense of the other clerical orders, has been noticed among tiie abuses of the prse-Reforma- tion period, and indeed lay at the ver}^ root of the mediaeval theory of papal supremacy. The survival of CHARLES 11. 405 a secularized and autocratic episcopate bad given chap. offence in the recent reigns to many^ who had no ^^}' objection to bishops in their legitimate capacity. It was destined to become a stereotyped abuse, and to sap the Church's vitality for many years to come. The Presbyterians proposed a scheme of reform Ti^e Pres- which might well have received more favourable con- p^Jos^ on sideration at the subsequent settlement. They were ^^®^^^^®°*' prepared to acknowledge episcopacy, but the power of the bishops was to be limited by provisions akin to those recently suggested by Archbishop Usher.^ They desired " the true primitive presidency in the Church, with a due mixture of presbyters." They objected to " the great extent of the bishop's diocese ; their de- puting commissaries, chancellors, and officials to act in their stead ; their assuming the sole power of ordina- tion^ and jurisdiction, and acting so arbitrarily in 1 The feeling on this subject is illustrated by Lord Falkland's speech in Parlia- ment in 1641. Falkland defended the episcopal system, but argued that the modern bishops had only opposed the Papacy beyond the seas that they might establish one at home. " If," he continues, " their temporal title, power, and employment appear likely to distract them from the care of, or make them look down upon, their spiritual duty, and the too great distance between them and those they govern will hinder the free and fit recourse of their inferiors to them, and occasion insolence from them to their inferiors, let that be considered and cared for. I am sure neither their lordships, their judging of tithes, wills, and mar- riages, etc., nor their voices in Parliament, are jure divino, and I am sure that these titles and this power are not necessary to their authority," etc. = Usher's scheme of reform is propounded in the interesting tract entitled " Episcopal and Presbyterial Government conjoined," first printed in 1679. This was after the archbishop's death, and it has been questioned whether he intended the tract for publication in its present form. Usher argues that in the early times, " with the bishop, who was the chief president, ... the rest of the dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joined in the common government of the Church." He proposes the re-establishment of the " synodical conventions of the pastors of every parish," under the presidency of suffragan bishops. Besides these diocesan synods, he provides for provincial synods, to which the clergy are to send repre- sentatives. Disputed questions at these synods are to be settled by a majority vote. ^ This allegation may have rested on some misunderstanding of the Anglican use. The Prayer-books of 1549, 1552, 1559, and 1604 all contain the present rubric, which directs that such priests as are present shall join with the bishop in laying hands on the candidate for the priesthood. 4o6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, visitation articles." The remedies suggested were the ■ ^ , '■ . appointment of suffragans, to be chosen by their respective synods, and the limitation of episcopal autocracy by synodical action. Whether any insidious design against episcopacy itself was veiled under these moderate demands, cannot now be ascertained. As they stand, they appear consistent with the theory of ecclesiastical organization accepted in the early ages. Had they been more favourably received, the Church would have, perhaps, escaped the paralj^zing influences of the Georgian period, with its secularized bishops, Erastian opinions, and repudiation of the rights of Convocation. But the recent cruelties of triumphant Presbyterianism still rankled in men's minds, and the hour of restoration was not the time for impugning autocracy, whether royal The or episcopal. Charles, indeed, still overrating the Hous^e ^^ ^' strength of the Puritan faction, ordered Clarendon to Son."'^' draw up the markedly concessory document, known as Oct. 25. w^Q " Worcester House Declaration." This not only promised a large increase of the episcopate, and an admission of priests to certain departments of diocesan jurisdiction, but held out hopes of a review of the Liturgy. For the present it allowed disuse of such prayers and ceremonies of the Prayer-book as indi- vidual ministers might object to.^ It has been sup- posed, however, that Clarendon of set purpose intro- duced into the Declaration more concessions than the Rejected " Convention Parliament " would be likely to allow. At V.^co^ven- Q-iiy rate, it was rejected in the Commons by a majority ment^^^^^^ of twcnty-six. The king, nevertheless, considered it March 25, politic to appoint a commission, to consider the demerits of the Prayer-book, in accordance with the promise of 1 Collier, Eccles. Hist., vol. viii. pp. 412, seqq. CHARLES II. 407 the Declaration. The royal warrant was addressed to chap. XVI. twelve bishops and twelve Presbyterian divines, nine supernnmeraries being allowed on each side. The con- "^3^°^^^ ^j^e ference was to meet at the Bishop of London's lodgings savoy con- ference. in the Savoy. Its sessions might extend over lour months from the day of opening (April 15). The " Caroline " episcopate already included some of its immortal names. Nine bishops had survived the interregnum. Of these the aged Juxon, who had at- tended King Charles in his last moments, was appointed to the primacy, which had been vacant since the death of Laud. Among the newly appointed bishops were Cosin, the celebrated liturgiologist ; Sanderson, emi- nent as a theologian and casuist ; Ganden, who had published the " Eikon Basilike " and " The Appeal to Cromwell ; " and Walton, the laborious editor of the Polyglot Bible. Three eminent Puritans, Calamy, Baxter, and Eeynolds, had also been offered bishoprics, but Eejaiolds was the only one of the three whose conscience permitted him to conform and accept the preferment. All these persons took part in the present Conference.^ The Savoy Conference is important as paving the way for that work of liturgical review which gave our Church her present Prayer-book, and which may be justly regarded as the terminus of the English Ee- formation. Archbishop Juxon was precluded by age and infirmity from taking an active part in the con- ' The commissioners for the Church were Archbishop Frewen and Bishops Sheldon, Cosin, Sterne, Brj-an Walton, King, Gauden, Sanderson, Lanej% Warner, Henchman, Morley. The nine assisting commissioners were Doctors Barwick, Earlo, Gunning, Racket, Heylin, Pearson, Pierce, Sparrow, and Mr. Thorndike. The Puritan commissioners were Bishop Reynolds ; Doctors Conant, Marston, Spen- stow, Tuckney, and Wallis ; and Messrs. Baxter, Calamy, Case, Clark, Jackson, and Newcomen. These were assisted by Doctors Bates, Collins, Cooper, Horton, Jacomb, and Lightfoot, and Messrs. Drake, Rawlinson, and Woodbridj;e. 4o8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVI. The policy of the bishops. Baxter's "Reformecl Ijiturgy," ference or the subsequent sessions of Convocation. Frewen, the northern primate, took his place as president; Sheldon, Bishop of London, however, was the working leader of the Anglican commissioners. What the bishops really desired was a more emphatic assertion of those Catholic principles which one school of Eeformers had always faithfully maintained, and which had been the mainstay and comfort of all faithful Churchmen throughout the period of persecution. This result was actually obtained at the subsequent revision. The bishops were, however, content with the Prayer- book as it stood, provided it was protected against future assaults of Puritanism. Sheldon was not slow to appreciate the strength of his position. He wisely drew the enemy's fire on the first day of the con- ference, by demanding that the Puritans should state their objections to the Liturgy. The first response to this request was made a fortnight later, by the cele- brated Baxter,^ who had spent this his time in composing a " Eeformed Liturgy," in Scripture phrase, which he coolly laid before the meeting as a proper substitute for our Prayer-book. The other Puritan divines were meanwhile occupied 1 This remarkable person had been ordained in 1638, and appointed to the vicarage of Kidderminster. As he declared in 1660 that he accepted all the doctrinal part of the Prayer-book, it must be supposed that he joined the revolu- tionary party from dislike of the Church's ritual. He appears to have been staggered by the overthrow of the monarchy, and expressed his views on the subject somewhat plainly to Cromwell. He kept on good terms, however, with the Piump, and held a chaplaincy in Colonel Whalley's regiment till 1657. At the Caroline settlement he exhibited a more intolerant and uncompromising temper than most of his Puritan brethren. Persisting in nonconformity, he was com- pelled to vacate his living at Kidderminster. He was twice imprisoned under the Acts for suppression of dissent, and both times liberated on an informality. During King James's phase of antagonism towards Dissenters, Baxter was arrested on a charge of sedition, brow-beatrn by Judge Jeffreys, and put in prison for eighteen months. Baxter is distinguished as an author of treatises on religious " experience," and bis "Saint's Everlasting Rest " and "Call to the Unconverted" are still held in estimation. CHARLES 11. 409 in drawing up a less pretentions document, containing a catalogue of definite objections to the Prayer-book.^ This was presented in the form of a " Petition to the The ••T'T IT • " Petition bishops. ' The petition elicited a reply, defending most to the of the points attacked, but also otfering a few con- cessions of small importance. The reply drew more writing from the voluminous Baxter. Time was thus frittered away ; and only ten days were left of the appointed four months, when it was decided that there should be a formal viva voce discussion of the points at issue. The Anglicans wisely maintained the position that it was incumbent on the Puritan delegates to state their case against the Liturgy. Three disputants were chosen on each side, and the Puritans were invited by Bishop Cosin to declare what they considered sinful and what inexpedient in the Church system. The student will probably be satisfied with an enumeration of the eight points which the Puritans denounced as *' sinful" and " contrary to the Word of God." These meeigM were— (1) The surplice; (2) The cross in Baptism; (3) ST™""^^ Calling all baptized persons regenerate; (4) Kneeling ^"^'"^^■ at the Lord's Supper; (5) Administering the Sacra- ment to the impenitent and the sick ; (6) The Abso- lution ; (7) Returning thanks indiscriminately for all departed Christians in the Burial Service; (8) Sub- scription to the Book of Common Prayer and the Thirty-nine Articles. The Churchmen were unable to The regard these things as sinful or unscriptural, and the fruitless. • They urge that as the earlier reformers had made concessions to the " papists," so now the way to conformity ought to be made smooth for Protestants. They object to congregational prayers, saints' days, observance of Lent, the assumption that tlie Church is a congregation of regenerate persons, the use of the term " priest," and the survival in the Epistles and Gospels of some translations differing from the version of 16U. They desire that the minister may be at liberty to sub- stitute prayers of his own composition for part of the Liturgy, also that the Old Testament Apocrypha may not be read : see Collier, vol. viii. pp. 421-425. 4IO ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Zealous conserva- tism of the Parlia- ment. July 9. Convoca- tion charg-ed to 1- evie\y the Prayer- book. Valuable services of Cosin. term fixed for its dissolution having arrived, tlie Savoy Conference closed without practical result. It may indeed be doubted whether the country would have tolerated any important concessions to Puritanism. The new Parliament was in no mood to treat noncon- formist susceptibilities with tenderness. It had for- bidden petitions for alterations in Church matters that had not the sanction of three justices of the peace, and it allowed none but communicants to be members of the House. To provide against possible half-heartedness on the part of the bishops, it now passed an " Act of Uniformity " enforcing the use of the Liturgy of 1604. But a more satisfactory settlement of the Puritan controversy was impending. Convocation had hitherto been occupied with a review of the Canons of 1604 and 1640, and the formation of the offices for the 30th of January and 29th of May. But in October Juxon received royal letters directing that the Houses of his province should proceed to make a review of the Pra3'er- book. Archbishop Frewen received a similar mandate in November. The northern Houses agreed to send delegates to the Canterbury Convocation, and the latter put the business in the hands of a committee of eight bishops,^ whose work was laid before the Houses as it proceeded. For the important and valuable altera- tions now made in the Liturgy we are doubtless in- debted mainly to Bishop Cosin,^ The Puritan Baxter had composed a brand-new Prayer-book in fourteen ' These bishops were Cosin of Durham, Wren of Ely, Skinner of Oxford, Warner of Rochester, Henchman of Salisbury, IMorley of Worcester, Sanderson of Lincoln, and Nicholson of Gloucester. Robert Pory, John Pearson, and Anthony Sparrowe were admitted as delegates fi'om the Lower House towards the close of the proceedings. '^ Mr. Parker calculates that probably " not more than ten out of every hundred " alterations suggested in Cosin's annotated Prayer-book were rejected by the com- mittee.—Introduction to the Revisions, p. ccccxxxvi. CHARLES 11. 411 days ; the less ambitious Cosin had been labouring chap. for forty years in collecting and collating the materials -^J^- . for a revision. His annotated Prayer-Books now sup- plied the reviewers with ample resources. How ex- haustive this review was may be gathered from the fact that the alterations made were no less than six hundred in number. Most of these were of no doctrinal significance. Certainly none of them can be regarded as concessions to the Precisian faction. The import- ance of those which bear on the Offices for Holy Com- munion and Baptism ^ will be appreciated when we recollect what was the Puritan doctrine on the subject of sacramental grace. The new Prayer-book was detained for two months by the king and Council. Some fresh alterations were The now made and submitted to the approval of Convoca- prayer- tion.^ When it had received the final sanction of g ^^^.^ioj^etj royalty, it was submitted to the Lords, who voted that of^^fo^^^ the recent "Act of Uniformity" should be construed as "^i*'''',^ •^ _ Marcli 17, applying to this Prayer-book. Thence it went to the 1662. Commons, where all the alterations were accepted with- out debate. The last "Act for the Uniformity ofM:ayi9. Public Praj^ers and the Administration of the Sacra- ments" was now passed. By this Act every parson, vicar, and curate was ordered to testify his acceptance of the new Prayer-book before S. Bartholomew's Day ' See pp. 237, 238. Besides the important changes there enumerated we may- notice the following features in the revision of 1661-62. The five praj'ers which follow the third Collect in the Morning and Evening Services had stood hitherto at the end of the Litany. These were moved to their present position. The prayers for the Ember Weeks, for Parliament, for all Conditions of Men, and for Restoring Public Peace at Home were now introduced, as also the General Thanksgiving. A few new collects were introduced, and some collects already existent were slightly altered. The Baptismal Service for those of Riper Years, and the forms for the 5th of November, the 30th of January, and the 29th of May, were inserted at this revision. ^ On these alterations see Parker, Introduction to Revisions, pp. ccccxxxiv. seqq. 412 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVI. The Catholic party victorioiis. The usurping incumbents resign. "Black Bartholo- mew's." (Aug. 24), on pain of ejectment. All who had not been properly ordained were to obtain ordination from their diocesans before this date.^ Such was the issue of the struggle that had been raging ever since the accession of Elizabeth. The impolitic conduct of the Puritans had supplied the Anglican party with the weapons which had won them the victory. They had appealed for a final settlement of the Liturgical controversy. The verdict was given when the Caroline Prayer-book, with its concessions to the Auglo-Catholic school, was cheerfully accepted by the Church, the king, and the Parliament. About a thousand of the persecuted incumbents had survived the interregnum, and been restored to their benefices by an Act passed at the beginning of the reign. There still remained, however, a large number of usurping nonconformists of divers persuasions, and these now had to decide whether they would accept the doctrine of the Church wherein they had con- stituted themselves teachers, or resign their benefices. At least eighteen hundred adopted the latter alter- native. Many of them were illiterate tradesmen and artisans. These returned to the secular pursuits they had quitted. Several were allowed to occupy chap- laincies in almshouses, gaols, and noblemen's families. The anniversary of the ejectment of these intruders is, however, commemorated as " Black Bartholomew's " in the Puritan Calendar, and their fate is represented as peculiarly pitiable, because Charles had led them to expect concessions by the Declarations from Breda and Worcester House. To credit Charles with sincerity of ' The Act also demanded an abjuration of the anti-Episcopalian Covenant, and a renunciation of the " traitorous position " that it is lawful to take up arms against the king. CHARLES II. 413 intention is probably impossible. It must be remem- chap. bered, however, that Parliament would not have per- ^^}' . mitted him to show toleration had he wished it. Bear- ing in mind the cruel persecution which the legitimate incumbents had undergone in the day of Puritan triumph, we shall rather be inclined to wonder that a sweeping ejectment of the usurpers did not take place in 1660. The country appears to have borne the retire- ment of the preachers with equanimity, and the new incumbents were generally received with enthusiastic acclamations. The popularity of Puritanism had, in fact, been sapped by the proceedings of the last twenty years. The Church made steady progress in the The affections of the people, and under the rule of Juxon's ^fvaL^ successor, Archbishop Sheldon, a real impulse was given to the cause of Anglo-Catholicism. Here and there slovenly ritual betrayed that the incumbent was a conforming Puritan. Generally, however, decency and order prevailed. The surplice and the clerical dress, if not always worn, were no longer ostentatiously impugned. The altars gradually regained their legiti- mate position in the chancels, and the Church's great act of worship resumed its proper place in the Anglican cult. Even in the see of Norwich, hitherto the foun- tain-head of Puritanism, the Church system recovered popularity. In 1676, according to Dr. Sherlock, all the nonconformists, the Eomanists included, were but a twentieth part of the population. By the Caroline Settlement the doctrinal position of the Church was established, its liturgical aj^paratus completed. Henceforth we have only to sketch the history of the Eeformed Anglo-Catholic institution in its political and social relations. An important modifi- The ciergr cation in the clerical status may first be noticed as rSS^o?^"^ 414 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. introduced in 1664, when tlie clergy were persuaded by Sheldon to resign their ancient right of taxing taxing themselves in Convocation. For this change the way tliemselves _ ... in Con- was prepared by the usurpation of the sectarian divines, vocation, who had placed themselves on a footing with the laity for purposes of taxation. Convocation had, how- ever, voted supplies in the usual way on the accession of Charles, and Sheldon's innovation may, perhaps, be regarded as a device for protecting the Church from the unconscionable exactions of the new sovereign. The alteration was by no means an unqualified bless- ing. It necessarily lowered the dignity of Convocation, and it afforded a pretext for that unrighteous suppression of the Church's representative body which was effected under George I. The first Parliamentary bill for supply in which clerical possessions were included passed in November, 1664. Two subsidies lately voted in Convocation were remitted as a set off, and the statute on the subject disclaims all intention of prejudicing the ancient rights of the Church.^ The clergy henceforth had the same rights as other citizens as concerned voting for Parliament and sitting therein as members. The latter of these rights was most unjustly taken away in the year 1802. For the first twelve years of this reign, the amity of political the Commons towards the Church continued unim- relations of.- T-r»'x c • i. • i thechurcii paired, and luritan nonconiormity was rigorously to°i67J3.^° suppressed by Acts of Parliament. The king's policy was to use both the Anglicans and the Dissenters as his tools. During these years he usually posed as the champion of aggrieved nonconformists, with the two- fold object of establishing a claim to i>>-sue dispensa- tions, and of obtaining relief for Romanism, the M6 & 17 Car. II. c. 1. CHARLES 11. 415 religion to which he secretly inclined. At the close of this period, Charles's pronounced patronage of Eoman- ism compelled the Commons to shift their position, and And from league with the Dissenters on a " no popery " basis, less. The court thereupon again sought the alliance of the prelates. The Church suffered as before for its con- scientious attachment to principles of absolutism. From Charles it experienced nothing but duplicity and ingratitude, and for his sake it impaired its recently recovered popularity. As early as December, 1662, the king issued a De- Charles claration which was a manifest bid for Dissenting with the support. He promised therein to move Parliament to Dec. lees. cede indulgence to nonconformity, so that he might " exercise with moi-e universal satisfaction that power of dispensing which w^e conceive to be in us." The Commons indignantly remonstrated, urging that this And rouses offer contravened the " Act of Uniformity," and was nation ^^ calculated to increase sectarianism and foster popery, commons; The king had to give way. The Commons were determined that Puritanism should not rise from its ashes, and that Church and State should not again be endangered for Stuart theories of absolutism. Among the clergy the Declaration had produced a panic, as obviously calculated to revive the religious disorders of the past. Petitions were presented against " the strange prodigious race of men who laboured to throw off the yoke of government, both civil and ecclesi- astical." Laws were demanded for the suppression of the Anabaptists, and for the exaction of fines for non- attendance at church. The Commons, nothing loth, responded to these requests by passing some rigorous measures against the sectaries. The first " Con- ^he Acts venticle Act" forbade attendance at their nraver- ^"'^ ^®^''®^^" 1 J^ ingnon- 4i6 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVI. conformity. A.I>. 1664. A.D. 1665. A.D. 1670. Tlie "De- claration of Indul- gence." Marcli, 1672. meetings. Not more than five persons, besides the members of the household, could be present at any religious meeting where the Liturgy was not used. A third breach of the law on this subject rendered the offender liable to transportation to the American plantations. The Commons waxed more determined in their policy when it was found that the king was tempting the Lords to sell toleration by waj'' of auc-mentino; the revenue. In 1665 came the "Five Mile Act," prohibiting nonconformist ministers who refused the oaths from coming within five miles of the parish in which they had ministered, till they should be compliant ; the penalty for infringement of the Act to be a fine of £40, and six months' imprisonment. In 1670 a second " Conventicle Act " was passed, more searching and extensive in its scope, but less severe in respect to penalties. The Baptists and the Quakers appear to have been the chief sufferers under these statutes. Actuated by the motives already mentioned, the king persistently espoused the nonconformist cause. Clarendon, " the best of writers, the best of patriots, and the best of men," was disgraced and imprisoned for refusing to sacrifice the Church. The licentious courtiers were encouraged to insult and deride the bishops. At last, in March, 1672, there appeared a royal " Declaration of Indulgence," suspending all penalties against nonconformity, and allowing the con- tinuance of Dissenting conventicles, and the celebration of Eomanist worship in private houses. This mani- festo received scant respect in the House of Commons. It was voted, by a majority of fifty-two, that the " king's prerogative in matters ecclesiastical does not extend to repealing Acts of Parliament," and Charles was forced to submit. CHARLES II. 417 The Declaration was rightly interpreted as meaning chap. that the kino- was under the same religious influences ^V~^ as his brother the Duke of York, and was bent on securing concessions to Eomanistn. This discovery- altered the conditions of the contest. The nonconfor- mist sectary had always been ready to persecute the Eoman Catholic, however clamorous his cry for toleration for his own shibboleths. The Commons, therefore, turned The from the prelates, and began to conciliate the Dis- cc-operate senters, with the hope of securing their co-operation in J^ssenters resistino- the progress of Eomanism. A " Test Act " against the o ID Romanists. directed against the Eomanists obliged all officers, The "Test civil and military, to take the oaths of allegiance and a.d. 1673. supremacy, to receive the Holy Communion according to the Anglican rites, and to make an express declara- tion against transubstantiation. In return for the support given by the Dissenters to the " Test Act," the Commons proposed a bill granting them toleration. This failed to pass the Lords. A bill for the " compre- hension " of Dissenters was prepared by Sir Matthew Hale in 1674, but was stopped by the king, who was now on the side of the Church. The last eight years of this reign further embittered Persecu- the animosity against the Roman Catholics. In 1678 RomaLsts. a conspiracy, real or imaginary, was revealed by the •^•^- ■'^®'^®- infamous Titus Gates, having for its object the resto- ration of popery. Several eminent persons were broTight to the scaffold as involved in the plot, and all adherents of Eomanism were subjected to persecution. Eoman Catholics were forbidden to go five miles from their houses without a licence. Such as were not householders were expelled from London. An Act was passed which excluded all Eoman Catholics from Parlia- ment (30 Car. II. st. 2). The Commons were prorogued 2 E 41 8 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, whilst discussing a " Bill of Exclusion," setting aside . ^^^' . James's claim to the throne. This bill was actually James passed in 1680, but was thrown out in the Lords, where by^th? ^ the bishops, of course, maintained the principle of A$°r680 olivine right. The attitude of the spiritual peers at this crisis completed the restoration of the ancient alliance of court and Church. The Commons, on the other hand, though unshaken in their loyalty to Church principles, were inclined to regard the nonconformists as their natural allies in their campaign against Romanism. Discoveries The example of Titus Gates was an easy one to follow, and the country was now continually dis- turbed by fresh discoveries of politico-religious con- spiracies. The year 1683 disclosed a Presbyterian scheme to murder Charles and the Duke of York. This conspiracy (known as the " Meal Tub Plot ") was probably invented by the Eomanists as a set-off to the disclosures of Gates. The " Eye House Pli)t " appears to have been a genuine conspiracy, devised by Shaftes- bury to effect these purposes. The revolutionary plot which brought Lord Russell to the scaffold pro- posed to upset the Government by less sanguinary measures. The general feeling of insecurity to some extent lessened the antagonism towards James, and on his brother's death he was recognized as the lawful successor to the throne. Such is the political aspect of the Church history of this reign. The Church had resumed its former atti- tude of antagonism to the Commons, and had somewhat impaired its popularity. The prelates M^ere still devoted to the chimeras of divine right and passive obedience — theories which were sadly dis^Daraged by the character of the present sovereign, and were hopelessly CHARLES II. 419 sTiattered by the tyrannical conduct of liis successor. The social aspect of England during this period ap- pears, at first sight, fit to be depicted only in the darkest colours. The influence of a dissolute court, and the Prevalence ofim- reaction from the gloomy Pharisaism of the mterreg- morality, num, combined to lower the standard of public morals throughout the country. Profane swearing and blas- phemy, gaming and duelling, were fast on the increase, and the lives of the clergy were not always uncontami- nated by this widespread infection. Nevertheless, counter- «^ ^ -■■ ^ acting' powerful if unobtrusive influences were operating to influences, counteract this " overflowing of ungodliness." Each of the two religious schools had recently contributed its quota to English devotional literature, and Hammond's " Practical Catechism " and Baxter's " Saint's Ever- lasting Eest " were both widely ciiculated. Missionary zeal expressed itself in the establishment of the first Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and in the assiduous exertions of Mr. Boyle, its president, to pro- cure translations of the Bible of 1611, for difi'usion in foreign parts. Large sums of money appear to have been subscribed for the restoration and embellishment of the churches and cathedrals which had suffered in the period of confusion. Eeligion, if not widely diffused, seems to have gone deeper, and produced more practical results than in many more favourable epochs. Intellectual kept pace and co-operated with religious The age of activity. At the head of the Church there appeared divines. a galaxy of divines of extraordinary ability. Cosin, Sanderson, Gauden, and Walton have been already mentioned. The Caroline episcopate included also Jeremy Taylor, the most learned and eloquent of English writers ; and Pearson, the author of the treatise liatitudina' riaus. 420 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, on the Creed. In its priestliood were Barrow and Son til, the one the most erudite, the other certainly the wittiest of our homilists ; and Bull, the author of the "Defensio Fidei Nicen^e." By these mighty doctors the Calvinism which had tainted the Church since 1558 was exposed in its true colours, and this gloomy parody on Augustinian theology was at last seldom accepted outside the confines of Dissenting sects. Rise of the Side by side with these representatives of orthodoxy, there was growing up a new school of thinkers, the congeners of the modern Broad Church party. The " Latitudinarians " were opposed to the exaction of strict conformity, and professed the most liberal views as to the possibility of salvation. It is the glory of this school that its teaching hastened the extinction of that spirit of intolerance which characterized many of the orthodox Anglicans, and burnt more fiercely in the breasts of the Protestant sectaries. Unfortunately this toleration was often prompted not so much by charity as by haziness of religious principle. To the teaching of these divines must be ascribed those varieties of heresy and unbelief which infected the Church of the eighteenth century. The Latitudi- narians thus exercised a weighty influence, both for good and for evil, on the fortunes of the Church and the religious sentiments of the whole nation. Chilling- worth, a great logician and controversialist, who em- braced Eomanism for a time and wrote " The Religion of Protestants a Safe Way " in 1637, may be regarded as the founder of this school of thought. In the present reign it had several adherents of the highest intellectual capacity. Foremost among these were Stillingfleet, Tillotson, Patrick, and Henry More. JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 421 CHAPTEK XVII. g^amcg 531. to Scorge 3E. A.D. 1685-1714. James promises to support the Church — His liberation of the victims of the " Supremacy Act " — His relations with Rome — The coronation — The new Parlia- ment— James's retention of the Romanist officers — The judges decide in favour of the dispensing power — It is used to restore Romanism — Resistance of the clergy — Dr. Sharp's sermon — The High Commission Court revived — Sancroft excuses himself from attendance — Bishop Compton suspended by the Commission — The " Declaration for Liberty of Conscience " — Elfects of its publication among Church, men — And Dissenters — Tyranny exercised at Cambridge — And at Oxford — Manipulation of corporations and lords-lieutenants — The clergy are to read the " Declaration of Indulgence " — The petition of the seven bishops — The Declaration not read by the clergy — The bishops in the Tower — Acquittal of the bishops — The Commission employed against the non-compliant clergy — The invitation to William of Orange — James in consultation with the bishops — They refuse a declaration of abhorrence — William at Exeter — Is ^V"illiam to be regent or king ? — The Settlement — Enforcement of the oath of allegiance — Deprivation of non- jurors— Ken and other eminent nonjurors — The Government accepted as de facto, not de ja?-e— The Church under William III.— The " Toleration Bill "—The " Bill for Union " — Thrown out by loyal Churchmen in the Commons — The king forced to summon Convocation — The commission of revision— Convocation refuses its sanction — Tillotson's encroachments on the Church's liberties — The Convocation controversy — Convocation again allowed to meet — The Lower at issue with the Upper House — Foundation of the S.P.C.K. and S.P.G. — The Church under Queen Anne — Abolition of the committee for preferments — Restitution of the first- fruits and tenths — Queen Anne's Bounty fund — Convocation — The sacramental test — The "Act against Occasional Conformity " — The "Schism Bill" — The " Church in danger " cry— Dr. Sacheverell — Popularity of Anglican principles — Provision tor new churches — Literary productions of the reign — The negotiations with the German Protestants. On his accession, James assured tlie Council of his James intention to protect the Church, as the bulwark of the to support monarchy and the champion of loyal principles. It was *^^ Church. a well-deserved compliment, for it was the Church's sup- 42 2 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, port of the doctrine of " hereditary right " that had — v—l- caused the collapse of the " Bill of Exclusion " and the " Kegency Bill." The manoeuvre of affecting concern for aggrieved Dissenters to secure concessions to the Romanists had been adopted repeatedly by Charles II. James eventually made this his settled policy. Already he had cemented a friendship with the celebrated William Penn, with the view of uniting the interests of the Quakers and the Roman Catholics, the two His ubera- rcligious parties which refused the oath of supremacy. vTctims ^ The result of this alliance was an order for the release °*supre- ^^ ^^ wl^c> had been imprisoned on this account. ^^^^■^5=*" Some fifteen hundred Quakers and a lar^re number of April 18. ^ ° Romanists thus recovered their liberty. His reia- The accession of the papist sovereign excited little Rome^^*^ enthusiasm at Rome, for James maintained his brother's policy of venal subservience to France, where the Pope was embroiled with Louis XIV. on the subject of the Galilean liberties. Innocent XL saw, moreover, that the doctrine of absolutism was not calculated to reinstate the Roman faith in the affections of England. Through- out the struggle of the next five years, Rome showed no sympathy for James's policy. " Every letter which went from the Vatican to Whitehall recommended patience, moderation, and respect for the prejudices of the English people." ^ The coro- On the secoud Sunday after Charles's death, Mass was nation. . t-it-?! April 23. ostentatiously celebrated m the king s chapel. At the coronation Sancroft was directed to omit the Com- munion Service and the ceremony of presenting the sovereign with an English translation of the Bible. The new Bribery and corruption were used to secure a Commons ' Macaulay, History of England, vol. i. p. 365. In 1688 Innocent's hatred of France induced him to contribute money towards the expense of William's expedition : see Dalrymple, Memoirs, i. 222. 1 JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 423 well affected to the throne. James expressed himself chap. satisfied with the results. A resolution was, however, ^^^L. passed in this new House, expressing fervent attach- ^^^j^" ment to the Anglican system, and demanding the exe- cution of the penal laws against nonconformity. The king's indignation induced the House to withdraw this resolution. It did so with a significant expression of confidence in his majesty's recent promise to protect the Chuich. Monmouth's insurrection received no countenance from the clergy, and Bishops Mew and Fell gave im- portant assistance to the royal forces. Good Bishop Ken was assiduous in relieving the sufferings of the prisoners, and it was owing to the entreaties of the canons of Winchester that Alice Lisle's sentence was commuted. In the regiments hastily levied to resist Monmouth, there were several officers of the proscribed faith. Their case gave the king his first opportunity of overriding the " Test Act." When Parliament met, he Nov. 9. announced his intention of keeping up a large armed retention force, and retaining the Romanist officers. This speech Romanist excited great apprehension. The officers might he em- °^'=®^^- ployed to subvert the constitution in Church and State. The standing army recalled the hateful period of Puritan oppression. Compton Bishop of London, the tutor of the two princesses, spoke boldly againist James's policy, declaring in the name of the whole episcopate that the king's conduct endangered the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of England. So great was the excitement that the king was forced to prorogue Parliament. Compton was deprived of the deanery of the Chapel Royal, and his name was struck off the list of Privy Councillors. James's hopes lay in that romantic doctrine of loyalty 424 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. which had been promulgated by the Tories and High Churchmen of his father's time. The dispensing power of the sovereign was still accredited by many. The king determined first to set this prerogative on an un- assailable footing, and then to use it to re-establish Eomanism. The trial of Sir Edward Hales, an officer who had been converted to Eomanism, was got up with this end in view. His servant played the part of informer, and claimed the penalty of £500 awarded by the statute. Hales pleaded that royal letters patent authorized him to retain his commission. The bench of judges had been previously manipulated by the The judges king. Lord Chief Justice Herbert gave it as the favour of. Opinion of eleven judges out of twelve that the king pen^ne flight lawfully dispense with penal statutes in par- j°^^^i686 *^^^^^i* cases and for special reasons of grave importance. This verdict was utilized as establishing the king's It IS used rio;ht to io;nore the "Test Act." Romanists were admitted to restore " '-' Romanism, to civil, military, and even ecclesiastical offices. Four Roman Catholic peers, and Petre the vice provincial of the English Jesuits, were sworn of the Privy Council. John Massey, a Roman Catholic and a layman, was made Dean of Christ Church. The bishopric of Oxford was given to Samuel Parker, who was at heart a Romanist. Obadiah Walker, a pervert, was allowed to retain the mastership of University College, and to celebrate the Roman rites in his chapel. Piocessions of Roman priests appeared in the streets, and the re- ligions fraternities were re-established. Three vicars apostolic were received as bishops in partihus. A colony of Benedictines was attached to S. James's Chaj)el ; the Jesuits established a large public school at the Savoy ; the Franciscans settled at Lincoln's Inn. Resistance But strong as was their attachment to the principle JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 425 of absolutism, the clergy would not suffer it to be used chap. as a stalking-horse against the Church. A few bishops ^-..-L. mio-ht be found abettino; James's unconstitutional pro- of ti^e & o -i- clergy. ceedings, having received their promotion for that purpose.^ But the parish clergy almost unanimously followed the lead of Ken, Frampton, and Sherlock. The London pulpits rang with denunciations of Eomanism, and the cry was taken up in every part of England. Pamphlets against Popery were issued by thousands at the universities, where the press was free of royal censorship. The king used his power as supreme ordinary to prohibit preaching on controverted points of doctrine. Sancroft consented to issue this royal injunction, but it produced little effect. Dr. Br. sharp's Sharp, Dean of Norwich and Eector of S. Giles-in-the- Fields, delivered a discourse against Romanism which attracted the king's attention. Compton, his diocesan, junei4, received an order from Sunderland to suspend him. He ■'■^®^" courageously declined to do so. He privately requested Sharp not to appear in the pulpit for the present, and reported to the king that the preacher was prepared to give him " all reasonable satisfaction," James's wrath was thus diverted from the priest to the bishop, who was already in ill odour for his speech in the House of Lords. This episode was productive of important conse- quences. It will be remembered that the High Commis- sion Court of Elizabeth had made itself specially odious to the Puritans, and had been abolijshed in July, IC-il. The accession of Charles II. had reinstated such courts spiritual as the Court of Arches, the Consistory courts, ' Parker of Oxford and Cartwright of Chester were pre-eminent as episcopal para- sites. Crewe of Durham and Sprat of Rochester were men of similar stamp. The latter seems to have hoped to get the archbishopric of York. This piece of preferment was kept vacant for more than three years. It is said that James waited for a good opportunity to give it to Petre. 426 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Sancroft excuses liimself fi'om attendance. Sept. 3, 1686. Bishop Compton suspended by the Commis- sion. and the archidiaconal courts, but had declared this notorious engine of royal oppression incapable of exist- ence (13 Car. II.). James, in defiance of this Act, now announced that he had entrusted the government of the Church to seven commissioners, who were directed to use the seal of the old court. They were furnished with the largest powers for purposes of visitation. Their jurisdiction was to extend not only to the dioceses and universities, but to every college and school in the kingdom. At their head was the detestable Jeffreys, the Lord Chancellor, whose presence and assent was declared to be necessary in all proceedings. Three episcopal names were included in the Commission — Sancroft, the primate ; Sprat, Bishop of Rochester ; and Crewe, Bishop of Durham. Sprat and Crewe were notorious as parasites who would do all that royalty required. Sancroft, on the other hand, though a devoted loyalist, was a more devoted Churchman. He had thought it right to execute the king's order in the matter of the " Injunctions." But even his overstrained loyalty could not accept a tribunal illegal by origin and manifestly designed to compass the ruin of the Church. It is disappointing to find that he did not openly denounce the Commission. He merely begged to be excused attendance on the plea of ill health and nume- rous engagements. The hollo wness of the pretext was sufficiently discernible. James relieved the primate from attendance at the Privy Council, and afterwards made Cartvvright a Commissioner. Compton was cited before the six commissioners. It was found difficult to prove, even in a court which had Jeffreys for president, that the bishop had in any way transgressed. Three voted for an acquittal, and it was only by menacing the lord treasurer with deprivation that the king at last JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 427 secured a majority. The recalcitrant bishop was sus- pended, and Sprat and Crewe were empowered to administer his diocese. Baulked in his hopes of using the loyalist clergy as his tools, the king made up his mind to eifect a great coalition of Eomanists and Dissenters. In January, 1687, concessions were made to the Presbyterians of Scotland. In March the Council were apprised that a full indulgence was to be given to all kinds of religious opinions. Hitherto the most remorseless of persecutors, the king now professed to believe that all statutes to enforce conformity were opposed to the spirit of Christianity. In April these new opinions were pro- ^he claimed in the celebrated " Declaration for Liberty of ^'.^^J^^^'^' Conscience." The kins; herein expressed his wish that 1-it.erty . "... . of Con- all his subjects were Eomanists. This being impossible, science." the attitude of all religionists was to be one of mutual les?. toleration. The Anglican clergy were merely to be maintained in the enjoyment of their possessions and free exercise of their religion. All assemblies for wor- ship were to be tolerated, all penal laws bearing on religion suspended, all tests — not excepting the oaths of supremacy and allegiance — dispensed with. Such per- sons as had incurred penalties in the matter of religion were pardoned. This Declaration was issued by virtue of the dispensing power. The king affected to make no doubt of the concurrence of the two Houses of Parliament, " when we shall think it convenient for them to meet." It is singular to find the nineteenth-century theory of religious toleration forestalled b}^ a ruler so cruel and unprincipled as James II. But that the principle of the Declaration has survived neither proves that it was a proper measure for the year 1687, nor palliates 428 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Effects of the publi- cation among' Church- men. And Dis- senters. Tyranny exercised at Cam- bridge. Feb. 1687. the illegality of tlie king's procedure. The Declaration was odious, both as assuming a royal power to cancel the legislation of Parliament, and as a transparent device to fill the offices of state with Romanists, and so secure the restoration of Popery. Charles had been forced to relinquish a scheme of toleration of far nar- rower scope. It is not surprising that the Declaration roused the country to a paroxysm of indignation. The court party vainly tried to get up addresses of thanks from the clergy. Five obsequious bishops expressed their gratitude for his majesty's promise to protect the Church. But the parish priests, almost to a man, refused to sign such manifestoes. The Dissenters, how- ever, with a few notable exceptions, gladly abetted the king's policy. Some sixty addres^ses came from the nonconforming congregations, filled with the most ardent expressions of loyalty. " Anabaptists, Presby- terians, and Quakers promiscuously crowded the royal presence. . . James was compared to Cyrus, to Moses, to several other deliverers of the people of God in the ancient world ; his piety was praised, his moderation extolled, his magnanimity raised to the skies." ^ With more consistency Baxter, Howe, Kiffin, Bunyan, and a few other eminent Dissenters, denounced the Declaration as insidious and illegal. Meantime the commissioners were facilitating the aggressions of royalty at the universities. To Cam- bridsfe James had sent a Benedictine monk named Allan Francis, to be admitted a Master of Arts. The Acts of Parliament required that none should proceed to this degree without taking the oath of supremacy and a similar pledge termed the oath of obedience. Francis's religion forbade him to accept this requisition. The ' Macpherson, 1. 436, 437 : see also Kettlewell's Life, 62, 63. JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 429 academical body respectfully submitted to the king that chap. it would be illegal to confer the degree. For this Dr. /^^"' . Pechell, the vice-chancellor, was summoned, with eight repiesentatives of the senate, before the High Commis- sion. Jeffreys conducted the trial with his wonted inso- lence and injustice. Dr. Pechell was deprived of the vice-chancellorship and suspended froni the emoluments of his mastership. The eight representatives, one of whom was Isaac Newton, Professor of Mathematics, were di8mis>ed with the admonition, " Go your way and sin no more," etc. Magdalen College, Oxford, was And at. dealt with in similar fashion. On the death of their °^°^^ presiident, the king sent a letter to the collegiate body recommending the election of Anthony Farmer, a Cambridge man of disreputable character, formerly a Dissenter, and now of the Eoman Communion. The law forbade the appointment of a Eoman Catholic. The college statutes required the master to be a member of Magdalen or New College, and a person of good moral character. On these grounds the fellows begged the king to select some other nominee. No notice was taken of the request. The fellows met and elected Dr. Hough. They were summoned to Whitehall, where Dr. Fairfax was deprived of his fellowship for express- June, i687. ing a doubt as to the validity of the Commission. For Farmer the king now substituted a more respectable nominee in the person of Bishop Parker. But Parker was also ineligible as not belonging to New or Magda- len. The fellows declined to rescind their nomination of Hough. James himself visited the college, and employed Penn to urge the duty of submission. But neither king nor courtier could persuade the fellows to violate their statutes. A special commission was accordingly appointed to effect a visitation at Magda- 430 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVII. Nov. 16, 1687. Manipula- tion of corpora- tions and lords-lieu- tenants. Dec. 12, 1687. The clergT are to read the "De- claration of Indul- gence." May 4, 1688. len. All the fellows but two were expelled, and their fate was shared by a number of the demies. Parker died soon afterwards, and the college was forthwith turned into a Eoman seminary, under Bonaventure GifPard, Bishop of Madura. In other quarters there was similar aggression. A committee of seven Privy Councillors was appointed to "regulate " those municipal corpoiations which returned members. A proclamation announced the king's inten- tion to retain only such magistrates and lords-lieutenants as should support his policy. The latter received orders to supply the king with a list of such Romanists and Dissenters as appeared qualified for the bench and for militia commands. Half the lords-lieutenants refused compliance, and were at once dismissed from office. The crisis was precipitated by the memorable events of May and June, 1688. On May 4 the notorious "Declaration of Indulgence " reappeared, prefaced by an order that the Church should give it publication. Every incumbent was to read it at the time of divine service on Sunday. In London and the suburbs it was to be read on May 20 and 27; in the provinces on June 3 and 10. The bishops were to distribute it, and see that their clergy complied with the requisition. The object of this proceeding was to crush and humiliate the chief antagonists of Eomanism. The clergy who refused to read might be legally proceeded against by their diocesans. Those who read would appear to recognize its validit}^ and approve of the king's designs. Every- thing depended on the attitude of the bishops, and seldom has the Church of England received such good service at the hands of her first order. Not even the loyalty of Sancroft could find excuse for compliance. Despite his theories of passive obedience, the primate JAMES 11. TO GEORGE I. 431 stood forward unliesitatingly as the champion of the chap. outraged Church. Meetings of his suffragans and the , ^^]^' _ . leading London clergy were at once convened at Lam- beth. It was agreed that it was not expedient that the clergy should read the Declaration. A petition was May is. drawn up, stating that the "Declaration of Indulgence " was " founded on such a dispensing power as hath been often declared illegal in Parliament," and that the bishops could not, " in prudence, honour, or conscience so far make themselves parties to it, as the distribution of it all over the nation and the solemn publication of it over and again even in God's house must amount to." Bancroft wrote the petition in his own hand. After his The signature appear the autographs of W. Asaph. (Lloyd), the^seven^ Fran. Ely (Turner), lo. Cicester (Lake), Tho. Bath and ^^isnops. Wells (Ken), Tho. Petriburgens (White), Jon. Bristol (Trelawney). Six^ other bishops, who had not been present, appended their " approbo " in the course of the following week. "But it was necessary to act on the spur of the moment. The petitioners ^ made their way that night to Whitehall, and put the document in James's hands. The king was no less astonished than irritated. Accustomed to regard the Church as the vindicator of absolutism, he characterized the petition as "strange words," such as he did not "expect from the Church of England." But the bishops were unmoved. Sunday, May 20, came, the day when the London clergy were to read the Declaration. Four incumbents only in the City complied. Bishop Sprat, Dean of Westminster, The read it, but the abbey was emptied ere he had finished. tionnoT The country clergy followed the good example of their ^^eadbytiie ' Those of London, Norwich, Gloucester, Salisbury, Winchester, and Exeter. "^ Bancroft did not accompany them. He had not had access to the royal presence since his declining to serve on the High Commission. Ken and Trelawney appear to have been the chief spokesmen. 432 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, The bisliops in the ToAver. June 29. Acquittal of the bishops. ThelCom- mission employed ag-ainst the non-com- pliant clergy. London brethren when their day of trial came. Not more than two hundred incumbents in all complied. James, however, was not convinced of the futility of his policy. He resolved to revenge himself on the bishops. Acting on the advice of Jeffreys, he made their petition the ground for an action for libel. The bishops pleaded their privilege as peers, and refused to enter into recognizances. They were thereupon com- mitted to the Tower. The public excitement at this juncture was intense. The river banks were thronged by a sympathetic crowd, and the barge which conveyed the bishops was hailed with vociferous cheers and prayers for their lordships' welfare.^ Their prison was attended like the presence-chamber of royalty, and the trial at Westminster is said to have been witnessed by half the nobility of England. The absurdity of calling the bishops' petition a malicious libel must have been patent to all unprejudiced minds. Nevertheless, two of the four judges had the audacity to decide against the accused, and three of the jury stood out for a conviction so obstinately that the verdict of "Not guilty" was not brought into court till ten o'clock the next mornino-. Ere the close of this memorable day, a formal invita- tion was despatched to William of Orange. Among the seven names attached to it was that of Bishop Oompton. The universal rejoicing which followed the acquittal of the bishops might have warned James of his danger. He was still bent, however, on punixhing the contu- macious clergy. The Court of High Commission received orders to collect the names of all who had neglected to read the Declaration. The chancellors, archdeacons, etc., were charged by the court to give information. But scarcely one of these ofiScers sent ' Burnet's Own Times, p. 469. JAMES II. TO GEORGE L 433 in a return. Bishop Sprat foresaw the impending chap. catastrophe, and resigned his place on the Commission. . ^^^^' . In September the king's eyes were rudely opened by The invita- information of the overtures to William. The emer- ^^fam of gency drove him to seek assistance where he had least ^^^^^®' right to expect it — in the Anglican episcopate. Despite the wrongs inflicted on the Church, the bishops, with few exceptions, still maintained the principle of divine right. They were prepared to accept William's co-ope- ration in restoring the national liberties should the king continue his hateful policy. But to the last they scouted the idea of dethroning the unworthy sovereign. Probably Compton himself had as yet no thought of raising William above the rank of regent. By the James in advice of the bishops, James dissolved the High Com- tiSfwim mission Court, restored the ejected fellows of Magda- bishops, lene, and reinstated the disfranchised corporations. He even issued a proclamation promising to protect the English Church, and maintain the Act of Uniformity. But the time for conciliatory policy was past. William's manifesto was put into the king's hands. It asserted that he came at the request of the lords spiritual and temporal. Sancroft and other bishops indignantly vindicated the loyalty of the bench ; Compton contrived to satisfy the king with an evasive answer. James They required a counter manifesto asserting the bishops' deSlration "abhorrence" of William's design, but the demand was °^^''^°^- not complied with. Every hour enhanced the gravity of the situation, and the only effect of these consulta- tions was to prejudice the populace against the bishops. They wisely declined further responsibility, and refused to give counsel without the co-operation of the temporal peers.^ On November 5 William landed at Torbay. • Clarendon Correspondence, ii. 501. 2 F 434 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. He marclied unopposed to Exeter, and held a tlianks- . ^^}^' giving service in the cathedral. Bishop Lamplugh and ■William at the Cathedral dio;nitaries discreetly absented themselves ; Exeter. ° "^ . but Burnet was equal to the occasion, and himself read Dec.:ii. the prince's declaration. James's flight paved the way for a convention of the lords spiritual and temporal. The mediation of the Prince of Orange was here unanimously accepted. An address was drawn up re- questing him to take steps for calling a free Parliament, wherein measures should be taken for the defence of law, liberty, property, " and the Church of England in particular, with a due liberty to Protestant Dissenters." ^ Is William Sancroft and the ultra-loyalists urged that James rege^nt or ouglit to be treated as intellectually incapable, and the kme? Prince of Orange nominated as his custos regni. But public feeling ran in favour of deposition. The Con- jan. 22. vcntiou Parliament assembled to decide this issue. 1689. Sancroft absented himself. The regency had the sup- port of twelve bishops, and narrowly escaped passing in the House of Lords. Two bishops only, Trelawney and Compton, voted in the majority which declared the throne vacant. The future confines of kingly prerogative were now determined by the " Declaration of Eights," an instrument which expounded the principles of the constitution in terms fatal to the absolutist doctrine, The The sovereignty was definitely settled on William and Settlement. Marv, and all who held benefices and academical offices Feb. 1689. «^ ' were required to take a new oath of allegiance. It is not surprising that this precipitate settlement was a stumbling-block to many consciences, and that several clergymen who had no love for James doubted whether the transfer of allegiance was justifiable. The Enforce- Convention Parliament, however, insisted on the oath. ment of ^ Kennet, iii. 500 ; Echard's Revolution, 214. JAMES II. TO GEORGE I, 435 It was to be taken by August 1, under penalty of a six chap. months' suspension, to be followed, if the oath were ^^I^L. still refused, by a summary deprivation. In March, the oath of 1689, two bishops had taken the oath in Parliament; Sancroft and eight others ^ had refused it. Thomas, Lake, and Cartwright died before the term of grace expired. Tlie remaining six were of the same mind on the fatal February 1, and suffered deprivation. Four . . Depriva- of the immortal seven, who had so nobly maintained tion of the Church's liberties in the summer of 1688, were thus Feb 1690. relegated to poverty and disgrace. Four hundred incumbents shared their fate. Many of them were men of great ability. Of their earnestness the sacrifice of their emoluments for conscience sake is an unassailable proof. It may be fairly said that the Church was thus deprived of the very pick of her clergy. They became the backbone of a " Jacobite " faction, and the founders of a politico-religious schism, which lasted for a hundred years. The course adopted with the nonjurors was mainly attributable ^ to the influence of the Dissenters. They had themselves leagued with the Eomanizing James, and left the bishops and clergy to defend the cause of the Reformation. They now, however, assumed to themselves the merit of the Revolution, and auda- ciously attributed the conscientious scruples of the defenders of the faith to " Popish " influence. They were activel}'^ abetted by Burnet. The greatest loss to the Church was Ken, Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Ken and most able, devout, and popular 23relate of bis generation, emin^ent He was given an extra year of grace, but continued ^°"-'^°^^- unable to reconcile his conscience to the new view of monarch}^, and was accordingly ejected in 1691. Beve- ' Ken, Turner, Frampton, Lloyd, White, Thomas, Lake, and Cartwright. * Evelyn, ill. 281. XYII. 436 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, ridge refused to accept a see thus improperly vacated. Kidder reluctantly consented to take it. Ken contented himself with issuing a protest against the intrusion of his successor. To the nonjuring schism, fostered by Turner, Lloyd, and White,^ he gave no countenance. Archbishop Sancroft at first accepted his fate with less equanimity. He ceded a commission to three suffragans to consecrate Burnet. He refused, however, to quit Lambeth Palace till removed by legal process. He then retired to his native place in Suffolk, and there lived contentedly on fifty pounds a year, having dele- gated his archiepiscopal powers to Lloyd, a more active nonjuror. He died in 1693. In the second order of clergy the four most eminent victims were Jeremy Collier, the Church historian ; Leslie, the great contro- versialist; George Hickes, Dean of Worcester, afterwards consecrated by the nonjuring bishops to the see of Thetford; and John Kettlewell, a scholar and divine of some repute. Dr. Sherlock, the master of the Temple, who had advocated the doctrine of passive obedience in his " Case of Resistance," deserted the nonjurors after a short suspension. His apology for accepting the de facto Government was published under the title " Case of Allegiance due to a Sovereign Power." The lay nonjurors numbered in their ranks Henry Dodwell, the Camden Professor at Oxford; and the devout ' These three bishops consecrated Hickes and Wagstaffe as bishops of Thetford and Ipswich in a.d. 1694. The numbers of the nonjurors were kept up by the senseless policy which forced on the clergy the " abjuration oath," declaring William king de j'wre, a.d. 1701. In a.d. 1713 Hickes and certain Scotch bishops consecrated Jeremy Collier and two others. A schism broke out among the non- jurors in A.D. 1718, owing to Collier's attempt to restore the First Prayer-book of Edward VI. Collier's party were called " Usagers," a word akin to the modern term " Ritualists." Reunion was effected in a.d. 1733, but fresh schisms occurring the nonjurors dwindled in numbers, and were extinct before the end of the cen- tury. William Law appears to have been the last eminent person belonging to the nonjurors. JAMES 11. TO GEORGE L 437 Robert Nelson, the author of the " Fasts and Festivals." In justice to the Government it must be remarked that care was taken to make the oath palatable to these The weak consciences. Nothing was said about the title of jnent ac- the new sovereigns. The form was simply, " I, A. B., ?®^e fac^to," do sincerely promise and swear to bear true alleo^iance '^°* ''^® '' ^ . ^ jtire." to their majesties King William and Queen Mary." ^ The clergy who took the oath in 1689 could justify the proceeding on the ground taken by Nicolson, afterwards BishojD of Carlisle : " Whenever a sovereign de facto is universally submitted to and recognized by all the three estates, I must believe that person to be lawful and rightful monarch of this kingdom, who alone has a just title to my allegiance." '^ The two succeedine: reigns are less interestins: to The church ^ , . . under the student, and may be quickly passed over. William •wmiam III. was a Presbyterian, and had the prejudices of a Puritan in matters of Church ritual. His knowledge of the Church of England was derived from Gilbert Burnet, an intriguing politician of Latitudinarian views, who had retired to the Continent on the accession of James, and become chaplain at the Dutch court. He was now raised to the see of Salisbury. The new king's declaration had promised to " endeavour a good agree- ment between the Church of England and all Protestant Dissenters," and he answered the addresses of Dis- senting delegates by undertaking to attempt a union of his Protestant subjects " on those terms wherein all the reformed Churches agree." This object he tried to secure by measures necessarily displeasing to faithful Churchmen. So far indeed as toleration was concerned, men's minds were gradually approaching that view of ' The old oath of allegiance bound the subject to the sovereign as " true and law- ful " king or queen. - Nicolson, Epistolary Correspondence, ii. 337. 438 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVII. The "Tolera- tion Bill.' March, 1689. religious differences whicli is now generally accepted. Throne and Commons had each been driven into alliance, now with the Nonconformists, now with the Eomanists. The Church itself had received occasional assistance from the anti-Papal animus of the Puritans. There was a general feeling that religious difference was only intolerable when it tended to foster the cause of disloyalty or of tyranny. A " Toleration Bill," therefore, passed both Houses easily, and was con- sidered satisfactory by the staunchest Churchmen. This bill relieved Dissenting laymen from the pressure of those Acts which had made absence from divine service a crime. It provided that such Acts should not be enforced where the nonconformist would testify his loyalty by accepting the oaths of supremacy and allegiance, and his Protestantism by signing the de- claration against transubstantiation. The arrange- ment for extending toleration to the Dissenting ministers is, to modern thinking, an anomaly. No minister was to be prohibited from exercising his functions, provided he signed the greater part of the Thirty-nine Articles. The portions he was allowed to demur to were those which asserted the power of the Church to regulate ceremonies, the soundness of the Book of Homilies and the Ordination Service, and the efficacy of Infant Baptism. For the Quakers there was a special proviso of indulgence. These sectaries were to be undisturbed, provided they signed a de- claration against transubstantiation, promised fidelity to the Government, and professed a faith in certain prominent doctrines of Christianity — the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Ghost, and the inspiration of Scripture. Such were the conditions on which the sects secured toleration. They were usually accepted JAMES II. TO GEORGE I 439 witli cheerfulness, and the concession appears to have given no offence to Churclinien. But with the " Toleration Bill " came a measure which The "Bin could not be regarded so complacently. The " Bill for ^°^ "^^^o^- Union" was designed by the Whigs to revolutionize the Anglican system, on the pretext of giving Noncon- formity further indulgence. For subscription to the Articles this bill proposed to substitute the following confession: — " I do approve of the doctrine and worship and government of the Church of England by law established, as containing all things necessary to salva- tion, and I promise in the exercise of my ministry to preach and practise according thereunto." Having made this confession, any Presbyterian minister was to be capacitated for holding Church preferment, provided he submitted to a bishop's imposition of hands. By another clause, the sign of the cross in Baptism, the employment of sponsors, and the practice of kneeling at the Eucharist were to be made optional. Finally a commission was demanded of thirty divines of royal appointment to revise the Liturgy, the canons, and the constitution of the ecclesiastical courts. This bill received the support of Bishop Compton in the Lords, and was there carried by a small majority. It was to the House of Commons that the Anglican system owed its preservation at this crisis. The nonconforming members may have been convinced, as Lord Macaulay urges, that their ministers were better off as blatant leaders of separatists than as unobtrusive pastors in poor benefices. But this does not account for the rejection of the bill, for the majority of the members were not Puritans. It was thrown out by the loyal Thrown out Churchmen in the House, the men who, as Bishop churchmen Burnet says, " were much offended with the bill, as — ^^ fusal to renew the licence for its conveDtion gave this prorogation the effect of an act of suppression. Its creditable denunciation of Hoadly was the last act of the eighteenth-century Church in council. Not till a hundred and thirty- seven years had lapsed was Con- vocation even allowed to debate. The impugned prelate, after holding the see of Bangor six years with- out once entering the diocese, was translated first to Hereford, then to Salisbury, and died as Bishop of Winchester in 1761. Wake's ne- It appears strange to find in so eminently Protestant with the a reign as that of George I. the last record of peaceful cSuJch.^ negotiations with the Roman Catholic body. Arch- bishop Wake, however, was a man of different calibre from the typical Georgian prelates; one who could sympathize with the Gallican body — the Church of Bossuet, Pascal, and Fenelon — in its struggle to gain an independent footing as a national Church. Wake had already distinguished himself by his defence of the Anglican position in a literary war with Bossuet. Letters passed in the year 1717 between the primate and Du Pin, head of the theological faculty at the Sorbonne, with a view to the union of the Anglican and Gallican bodies. The scheme would doubtless have had the good wishes of many an English Churchman, but at no time was there less hope of its succeeding. The deaths of Du Pin and De Gerardin put an end to the negotiations. In France papal absolutism gained the day. In England the vulgar prejudice against Eoman Catholicism gained in intensity, and was humoured by severer disabling Acts. When in the year 1778 it was proposed to render these less rigorous, a storm of fury broke out in Scotland, spread to England, and culminated in the Gordon riots. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 455 Hoadly's sermon was attacked and defended in the chap. innumerable pamphlets of the " Bangorian Controversy." xviii^ The chief writers on the Church side were Bishop The "Ban- Sherlock and the celebrated noniuror William Law. go^i^n •J Contro- Five of the royal chaplains incurred dismissal for versy." impugning the doctrines of the Erastian prelate. Controversies of more vital importance were soon agi- tating the public mind. The influence of the Latitu- dinarians under William has been already noticed. Their lukewarmness in Church matters restored this party to favour and importance on the accession of George I. It had been drifting meanwhile first to the tenets of the Arians and Unitarians, and then to that absolute negation of divine interposition which was called Deism. As far back as 1685 the spread of unsound views on the doctrine of the Trinity had evoked Bull's famous defence of the Nicene Creed. Chillingworth had gone perilously near Arianism, and Locke and Newton both inclined to this form of heresy. But the first notorious impugners of the The doctrine of our first Article were William Whiston ofth"^^ and Dr. Samuel Clarke.^ Dr. Clarke's " Scriptural ^^^^*y i°^- ^ pugned. Doctrine of the Tiinity " was censured by tbe Lower House of Convocation in 1714. Its author's quali- fied recantation saved it from incurring the same fate in the Upper House. It has been styled the text- book of modern Arianism. It now secured " the great Dr. Clarke " a considerable rejoutation in the upper ' Clarke had been chaplain to Moore, Bishop of Norwich, and Boyle Lecturer two years consecutively. He had been promoted under Anne to a royal chap- laincy and the rectory of St. James's, We!^tminster, and had distinguished himself in a controversj^ with the elder Dodwell, AVhiston had also been chaplain to Moore, who gave him the living of Lowestoft. He succeeded Newton as Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, but was subsequently expelled the university. His credulity in the matter of the Apostolical Constitutions was characteristic : " He believed in everything except the Trinity." 456 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, classes, and the favour of Caroline, the queen of ^IJ^J' George II. It was only characteristic of this unhappy era that, some years later, Clarke's Arian Prayer-book A.D. 1747. received the approval of a primate — Archbishop Herring. Dr. Clarke was answered by Dr. Wells, Bi.vhop Gastrell, Mr. Nelson, and Dr. Waterland. The last named not only demolished Clarke, but left to posterity the A.D. 1719. clearest and most able exposition of the doctrine of the Nicene Creed that had ever been published. This did not prevent a fresh outbreak of controversy on the doctrine of the Trinity at the close of the century, when Dr. Priestly, a great natural philosopher, who had embraced Socinianism, was confuted by Archdeacon (afterwards Bishop) Horsley in the " seventeen letters." hereby ° Among the Dissenters these new forms of unbelief Dissenters Spread with fcarful celerity. Dissenting synods at Exeter, and at Salter's Hall in London, had split on the question of rejecting our Church's first Article. The The literary warfare which succeeded was known Hau Con- amoug Disscuters as the " Salter's Hall Controversy." roversy. gpo^^j-^^j-y^ ^ popular prcachcr, headed the orthodox party. A form of Socinianism appears to have been the type of heresy adopted by the impugners of the Article, who came for the most part from the sect of Presbyterians. Whole congregations not unfrequently became Socinian, and transferred to the new com- munion their chapels and endowments. In less than half a century " the doctrines of the great founders of Presbyterianism could scarcely be heard from any Presbyterian pulpit." ^ In connexion with this con- "Reg-ium trovcrsy may be noticed the Begium Donum, or bribe Donvim." ^^^ political support, which the Presbyterians secured from Walpole in 1723, and received for more than a ' StougMon, Religion in England, i. 117. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 457 century and a quarter. Similar grants had been made chap. by Charles IT. and William III. It now took the form ^llifL of a douceur to Edmund Calamy, on his dedicating a volume of Salter's Hall polemics to the King. It con- tinued to increase throughout the century, and was £39,746 when it was abolished in 1863. But the wave of heterodoxy, where not stemmed by The so- the bulwark of Catholic principle, swept away far f.^eists." more than the doctrine of the Saviour's Divinity. The Latitudinarians proceeded to attack the credibility of the miracles and the possibility of a Divine revelation. It was plausibly urged that the New Testament was only Church literature such as Protestantism had repudiated. Christianity was denounced as unphilo- sophical or demoralizing, or as at best effete and unnecessary. Assailants of this kind were usually, though inaccurately, denominated " Deists." Already Their clii6f something akin to Deism had been advocated by Lord writers. Herbert of Cherbury and Thomas Hobbes ; and in 1696 Toland's " Christianity not mysterious " had been pre- sented by the grand jury of Middlesex, and burnt by the hangman in Dublin. Shaftesbury had followed with his " Characteristics of Men and Manners," a more a.d. 1713. insidious publication, which sapped the foundations of Christianity while recommending its retention on utilitarian principles. About the same time Anthony Collins published the " Discourse of Free Thinking," a work which caused the greatest excitement. Swift, Berkeley, Bentley, Whiston, and Hoadly all entered the lists against Collins, who, far from being silenced, produced an elaborate attack on the evidence from Old Testament prophecy, entitled a " Discourse on the a.d. 1724. Grounds and Eeasonableness of the Christian Religion." Woolston in his " Six Discourses on the Miracles " 458 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The opponents of the Deists. assumed the role of a moderator between an infidel — Collins — and an apostate — the Church of England. The literal interpretation of the miracles was here ridiculed in the coarsest terms, and a crazy system of mystical interpretation substituted. Woolston was the only Deist who suffered persecution. He was fined £100, imprisoned, and required to find securities in large sums. The securities were not forthcoming, and the Deist confessor lingered in prison till his death in 1731. Dr. Tindal may be regarded as the chief exponent of real Deism. In " Christianity as old as the Creation " he argues that natural conscience had practically anticipated Christianity. A revelation was thus unnecessary and was not even to be considered possible. The same ground was taken by Dr. Morgan in the "Moral Philosopher," and by Thomas Chubb, in a number of tracts and essays written for the lower orders. Another important publication of the Deist school was Bolingbroke's posthumous " Philosophical Works." The " First Philosophy " sweeps away every part of Christianity but its moral teaching. It leaves " a God Omnipotent and all-perfect, but inconceivable. . . . No particular providence, no future state, no imma- terial soul." ^ In the next generation " Deism " took the form of sneering unscientific scepticism. Of this school the chief representatives are Hume, Gibbon, and Paine. Hume was too much of an unbeliever to be even a Deist, and indignantly disclaimed the title. The answers to these writers came to a large extent from the episcopal bench, and the achievements of the eighteenth-century dignitaries in this regard to some extent counterbalance their laches in other departments of clerical work. The most popular publication of ' Cooke's Memoirs of Lord Bolingbroke, ii. 152. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 459 this kind was probably Bishop Sherlock's " Trial of chap. the Four "Witnesses." The general credibility of the 3Z^^i. gospel history was also ably maintained by Lardner the Socinian. Able replies to Shaftesbury were written by Dr. Wotton and Dr. Balguy. Collins was well op- posed by Dr. Chandler and Dr. Sykes ; Woolston by Bishops Gibson, Smalbroke, and Zachary Pearce. Among the hundred and fifteen answers evoked by Tyndal, Dr. Conybeare's is conspicuous for ability, pre- cision, and dignity. But the most important production was the immortal " Analogy " of Bishop Butler. This a.d. 1736. also was designed as an answer to Tindal's book, though it is far more extensive in its scope. High rank must also be given to Bishop Warburton's "Divine Legation of Moses," a voluminous work of great learn- ing and enormous range, and the more readable " Alci- phron" of Bishop Berkeley, written in dialogistic form. Paley's " Evidences " and " Natural Theology " were a.d. 1794. the answer to the later generation of sceptics, and in point of merit almost rival the " Analogy." Bishop Watson wrote against the same school as Paley, and was acknowledged by Gibbon to be a worthy anta- ffonist. Thouo;h the Deists were beaten in arsrument, this sermons on ^ , , , , . . the reason- controversy exercised directly and indirectly a pernicious abieness of influence on the religion of the century. The apolo- ity. gists found imitators in innumerable pulpits, and the "reasonableness" of the Christian religion became the favourite topic for preaching. Christianity was accused every Sunday in being excused. The stock of Augus- tine's planting was as little likely to flourish under such treatment as a tree which is being continually pulled up by the roots, nervously examined, and re- placed. The "reasonableness " of religion is, after all, 46o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, an incentive of little force in a scheme intended to > — ^-I' include the unreasoning many. In theory — as an intel- lectual creed, as a proven moral system — Christianity held its own. But the appeal was ever to the head instead of the heart. Christianity was not exhibited as an influence on the emotions, nor as the root of spiritual affections. To regard it in this capacity was to be guilty of " enthusiasm." The practical result was that those who did believe lived much as those who did not. Hatred Emotioual religion was perhaps somewhat discredited sfasm.^"^' ^y *1^® influx of the " Camisards," or " French pro- phets," who had flocked into England after the revocation A.D. 1706, of the Edict of Nantes, bringing with them a strange system of fanaticism, in which may be detected the origin of some of the vagaries of Methodism. Less open to the charge of enthusiasm was the teaching A.D. 1686- of the great nonjuror pietist William Law, whose 1761. 4 4 Serious Call," perhaps, did as much for practical Christianity as all the writings of the apologists. Yet Law also appears to have been infected by the questionable systems of such mystics as Tauler and Jacob Behmen. Enthusiasm, however, was not the predominant vice of those who held similar political and ecclesiastical views to Law. Here, as elsewhere, the tendenc}'' was to make religion subservient to political principle. After the deaths of Bull, Beveridge, Ken, and Nelson, High Churchmanship rapidly degenerated into ecclesi- astical Toryism,^ and the religious life of the party was infected by the general blight of apathy and in- differentism. The sects as The Nonconformist sects which had contributed so ' English Church in the Eighteenth Century, i. 136. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 461 largely to the ranks of infidelity were, as might be chap. ex]3ected, even more devoid of vitality and earnestness v — ^1^ than the Church. In 1740, Mosheim writes, "those who stagnantas the Churcli, are best acquainted with the English nation tell us that the Dissenting interest declines from day to day." He regards this as the effect of the lenity and mode- ration practised by the rulers of the Church. It would appear, rather, that the distinctive doctrines of the Church were so toned down by the Georgian prelates that there was not much left to dissent from. Ela- borate schemes for levelling down to the plane of Nonconformity were broached from time to time with the approval of bishops. The ministries, however, mindful of the effect of the " Church in danger " cry in 1710, declined to meddle in such matters. The question of '■ comprehension " was happily shelved. The limits of this work preclude a detailed account Prevalence of a period of religious indifferentism to which, despite enusm. its controversial productions, the earnest Anglican re- verts with shame and sorrow. It is easy to conceive how the State policy which silenced the Church's representative body, and gradually deprived her of a working episcopate, in time extended its paralyzing influences throughout priesthood and laity. Under the frown of ministries and bishops the fervent Cliurch- manship of the preceding period withered and passed away. We find it surviving in old-fashioned Tory households, or in the seclusion of country parsonages, in good Bishop Wilson's insular and unremunerative see, or in a handful of obscure guilds. If we search for it in high places, in important livings, in cathe- dral towns, in spheres which are supj^osed to be filled by the worthier sons of the Church, we search in vain. The " Establishment " had become the very upas tree of 462 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Anglicanism. Only in the departments of controversy ^vni^ and party politics was the influence of the Church felt. The It is in view of this condition of Christianity that movement. ^^® Metliodist movement must be judged to be rightly understood. The Methodist sects at the present day are religious bodies distinctly severed from the Church, albeit not regarding her with the rancour of the political Dissenter. Their great founder, on the contrary, lived and died a Churchman. Under protest, indeed, and to save his excellent system from perishing beneath the paralyzing influences of the State Church connexion, he committed himself to acts of a distinctly schismatic character. Persecuted and misunderstood, he allowed certain of his followers to become sectarians until the authorities should allow them to be Churchmen. The Church awoke from her lassitude to find that the joim rupture was irreparable. John Wesley was born at Wesley. Epworth Ecctory in 1703. His parents were loyal Anglicans, and opposed to the Low Church dynasty. His talents To remarkable eloquence and extraordinary energy and tern- j^^ Ecformcr joined a capacity for administration and organization that has perhaps never been equalled. These great gifts were marred by masterfulness, im- pulsiveness, and a tendency to puerile superstition, not uncommon among good men of his day. He be- lieved in dreams, directed his movements by the first text in an opened Bible, and discovered miraculous interpositions where more sober Christians saw only the orderly system of Providence. Always a devout person, each new phase of his religious life brought him to regard the period preceding as one in which he knew not God. As in the cases of Dr. Johnson and Bishop Wilson, the seed sown in a pious home was stimu- lated by William Law's " Serious Call " and " Christian THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 463 Perfection." From equally unexceptionable sources came the system which secured for the Wesleys and their coterie at Oxford the name of Methodists. Eeligious 2trS)u-^ o;uilds of more or less austere character had been set t^bieto on foot in London and other large towns by Horneck, catholic . /» 1 -n influences. Be vend ge, and others about the time or the Kevo- lutioD. The "Holy" or "Methodist" Club was a The Oxford guild whose members practised a life of great self- dists. denial, and were frequent communicants — a feature so strange in those days as to provoke the additional sobriquet, " Sacramentarians." Wesley was ordained in 1725. His first independent enterprise was a mis- The sionary expedition to Georgia to convert the Indians. Georgia. Despite his self-denial and devotion, this mission was a failure, and he contrived to make enemies with the colonists by acts of sino;ular indiscretion. This enter- „ «^ r . . Moravian prise is notable as bringing Wesley in contact with influences, some Moravian missionaries, whose peculiar opinions were henceforth to be a powerful agency in his minis- terial work. The most striking features in their scheme of theology were the doctrines of " instantaneous con- version" and an accompanying "assurance" of sal- vation. On Wesley's return to England he made the acquaintance of Peter Bohler, a Moravian minister, who riveted the impression made by the missionaries. He conceived himself to be "converted" in May, 1738. Meanwhile a somewhat similar experience had be- oeorgp fallen another Oxford Metliodist, George Whitefield. Far inferior to Wesley in birth, intellect, and culture, Whitefield was possessed of an oratorical talent which afterwards made him the most persuasive preacher Eng- land has ever produced. His taste was execrable and his mind narrow, but his sincerity and zeal are undeni- able. His pious labours in Gloucester gaol had induced Whitefield. 464 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Sensa- tional sermons. Open-air preacihing- Bishop Benson to ordaia liim at tlie early age of twenty-one. Whitefield learnt from the French re- fugees in London an emotional religion akin to that of the Moravians. But he added what Wesley's superior intellect always spurned — those Calvinistic dogmas which open the gates of merc}^ only to a predestined few. The two great "Methodists" soon provoked atten- tion and antagonism by an enthusiastic style of preach- ing markedly contrasting with that in vogue. Some disgraceful disturbances ensued, resulting in their exclusion from the churches of their brother clergy. The expedient of open-air preaching was now resorted to. A mission was begun at Kingswood, near Bristol, which drew enormous congregations. This was the precursor of an evangelizing scheme carried out in every part of these islands, and extended to America. It was a work unlike anything since the mission of the Friars in the thirteenth century. Thousands whom the emasculated State Church system had neglected or failed to influence were now affected by the zeal of the Methodists, and professed to have realized the comfort of the Gospel. The sincerity of this profession is undeniable in many, perhaps in the majority of cases. The flaws in the emotional system are, however, sufSciently obvious, and our own experience of American revival- ism may lead us to credit the charge that self-deception Theciiurcii largely predominated. It is plain also that the con- Method- vulsions which Wesley attributed to supernatural ^' agency were merely marks of that infectious hysteria which had so often appeared in the Middle Ages in con- nexion with sensational preaching. But however im- perfect the system, taunts came ill from those who had neglected to teach the lower orders a better way. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 465 " It was STirely better that the heathens of Kingswood chap. should be thus evangelized than not be evangelized at ^^L^ all." The Church dignitaries, however, thought other- wise. The movement was regfarded throug-hout with indifference or ill-will. Their conduct in this matter The Metiio- appears the more shameful when we reflect that the chiircii- Blethodists were staunch Churchmen, wholly averse ™®^' to schism. The Wesley s were far more devoted to the Anglican system than the majority of the bench, and as free from heterodox opinion. The worst charge against the Methodist preachers was that their deep faith in Divine Providence led them to dogmatize unnecessarily on the operations of the Holy Spirit. Their doctrines of " conversion " and " assurance " con- fined within a Procrustean frame — narrow as that of ultra-Eomanism — those gracious influences which the Saviour Himself depicted as free as the winds of heaven.^ But numbers of Catholics have held these doctrines, and overestimated them as much as the Methodists did. A schismatic John Wesley was not. Kone better appreciated the true spirit of Puritan Dissent. " We are not seceders," he writes, " nor do we bear any resemblance to them. The seceders laid the foundation of their work in judging and condemn- ing others. We ... in judging and condemning our- selves. They begin everywhere by showing how fallen the Church and ministers are; we . . . with showing our hearers how fallen they are themselves." The insubordinate and anti-sacramental tendencies course of of the Moravians soon repelled both Wesley and ^^^t^o^e"" Whitefield (1740). In the following year the Cal- "^®^*' ' In later years Wesley qualified these shibboleths. " When, fifty years ago," he writes, " my brother Charles and T told the good people of England that unless they knew their sins were forgiven they were under the curse of God, I mai-vel they did not stone us. The Methodists, I hope, know better now." 2 H 466 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, vinism of Whitefield was found to necessitate a riip- «5Z^^ ture between the two friends. A reconciliation took place nine years later, but Methodism continued to flow in two distinct channels — the Arminian and the Calvinistic ; the one directed by the brothers Wesle}^ the other by Whitefield and the Countess of Hunting- don. During Wesley's lifetime one section at least of the Methodists was kept within the bounds of system and discipline. The converts of the different regions were grouped in "societies" or "circles." These were sub- divided by means of " classes " and " bands." All this machinery was still professedly subsidiary to the A.D. 1744. Church. The first Wesleyan Conference proclaimed that the peculiar tenets of Methodism were these ; viz. that justifying faith is a conviction of personal sal- vation ; that no person can be justified and not know it ; that inward conviction is the proof of faith. This Conference also decided that bishops and Church canons were to be obeyed as far as possible. But the bishops persistently refused their sj'mpathy. The clergy were encouraged to close their churches against Methodist missionaries in Holy Orders. Those not ordained sought ordination in vain. We cannot wonder that in 1750 the question of secession from the Church was mooted. In 1755 the Conference took no higher ground than that of expediency^ in prohibit- ing unordained preachers from administering the Holy Communion. In 1760 the society at Norwich infringed Thecal- tliis regulation. In the year 1781 some litigation vinistic Methodists with rcspcct to the legal status of Lady Huntingdon's Eeives ^^ chapels compelled the Calvinistic Methodists to register them as Dissenting places of worship. They reluctantly called themselves " seceders." It was not long before they cheerfully owned themselves Dissenters. seceders. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 467 The pretext for the Wesley an secession was afforded chap. by Wesley's conduct in the matter of the American v ^J^ consecrations. Even here, if we condemn Wesley's Lesley's *^ mock con- precipitation, the chief blame must fall on the national secration. prelates. For upwards of a century the colonists in America had been petitioning the mother country to send out bishops, to superintend the Transatlantic offshcTot of our Church. It seems scarcely credible that this demand was considered preposterous — that its 8upj)orters were assailed by statesmen, and even by prelates with denunciation and rebuke. Episcopacy might be tolerated, but that a distinctively Catholic accessory should be esteemed and extended was in- tolerable to the Georgian Latitudinarians. John Wesley saw that, whatever the issue of this struggle,^ it would be hopeless to ask that Methodist bishops should be consecrated or Methodist pastors ordained. Yet must his American societies have that machinery for supervision which has never been wanting in any branch of the Catholic Church. He chose what he considered the less of two evils, and, to the horror of numerous friends and followers, himself appointed two English clergymen as " superintendents," and two •^•^- 1784. laymen as " presbyters," by laying on of hands. It was a precedent which boded ill for the future of Metho- dism. The way was paved for secession and its con- sequence, sectarian dissidence. Both followed directly the master mind of Methodism ceased to exercise con- ^ , W^esley trol. "In God's name, stop there. Be Church of dies dep: e- England men still. Do not cast away the peculiar cession. ^ It is remarkable that the battle was practically won before the close of the year which witnessed Wesley's mock consecration. Dr. Scabury was consecrated as Bishop of Connecticut by the Primus of Scotland in November, 1784. In 1787 all difficulties were overcome in England, and two more bishops were consecrated by Archbishop Moore. 468 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XVIII. But his follo^w■ers split into sects. The Evange lical revival. A.D. 1775- 1820. Its cha- racter. glory wliicli God liatli put upon you." Such, was bis final charge on the subject to his preachers. But he spoke in vain. Four years after his death the " Plan of Pacification " gave the preachers authority to ad- minister the Lord's Supper (1795). Henceforth the Church had to regard the "people called Methodists" not as a loyal and persecuted ecclesiastical guild, but as an antagonistic and powerful congeries of sects.-"^ A happier consequence of the Methodist movement, was the rise of the " Evangelical " school within the Church. Its members were pietists of the Whitefield type. They held a lower view of the Church than Wes- ley, and were mostly Calvinists. It was not always plain why they belonged to the Church rather than to the Methodist sects. They ignored the objective side of religion altogether, were weak on the point of bap- tismal regeneration, cared nothing for the decencies of worship, and transferred to the pulpit the dignity of the altar. They divided their hearers into two classes, "be- lievers " and " unbelievers," and holding that a sudden conversion was essential to salvation, preached to eifect it. Luther's doctrine of imputed righteousness was the key-note of all their sermons, which were of fearful length, and varied mainly in the amount of Calvinism superadded. They inveighed fiercely, not only against ' The following details are taken from Mr. Curteis's Dissent in its Relation to the Church : — " Two years later, a large secession took place (1797), under a minister named Kilham, on the question of admitting lay representatives to the annual Conference ; and the Methodist New Connexion was formed. In 1810 the question of open-air preaching and of ' revivals ' caused another schism, and the Primitive Methodists broke away from the parent body. In 1815 the Bible Christians seceded. In 1835 a quarrel broke out on the proposal to establish a Theological College, and an eminent minister. Dr. Warren, . . . was expelled." His supporters founded the Wesleyan Methodist Association. In connexion with the same cause the Wesleyan Methodist Reformers sprang into life in 1849. Other branches living and dead may be mentioned — all boasting the High Churchman Wesley as their parent stem. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. 469 tlie stage (at that time hopelessly degraded), but chap. against many innocent diversions. From these the ^I^^L* converted were debarred. With this exception, they had no " guidance " for the soul, believing that sufficient was to be found in St. Paul's Epistles. They dared to stigmatize practical exhortations as " not the Gospel." Even this bald, mutilated form of theology was a vast improvement on the lifeless system hitherto pre- valent. Its professors were pious, hard-working parish priests, strict, to the verge of prudery, in their manner of life, yet enthusiastic and sympathetic on the one point of religion. Under the influence of the Metho- dist and Evangelical movements, the Church here and there recovered vitality. There was a reaction against profligacy and scepticism. Many philanthropic schemes were successfully carried out. But it was ever the inspiration of detached units, not of the mass. For corporate action the Evangelical system ofiered no scope. It was a purely subjective religion, one based on feelings, to the exclusion of creeds and means of grace. Its view of the Christian gathering was funda- mentally at variance with the congregational system of our Prayer-book, and it attached no value to ac- cessories of worship. Naturally the services continued as slovenly, and the fabrics as uncared for, as during the period of religious apathy. For the Evangelical as for the Methodist movement its the Church was indebted to the priesthood. The Sln°th? episcopate remained averse to " enthusiasm." Bishop JSSi^'^ Porteus and Dean Milner were the only Evangelicals who got high preferment in the eighteenth century. The fathers of the Evangelical school were Fletcher of Madeley, Venn of Huddersfield, Toplady of Broad- hembury, Berridge of Everton, Hervey of Wellyn, 470 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. Eomaine of London, Newton of Olney, and Eowland 31^^^ Hill, who eventually established a religion of his own at Surrey Chapel. Later came Cecil, Conyers, Scott, Venn of Clapham, and Simeon. The most eminent Evangelicals among the laity were William Wilber- force, Lord Dartmouth, Lord Teignmouth, the two Thorntons, and Hannah More. Its institu- Perhaps the most valuable result of the Evangelical tionsvoid revival was the institution of Sunday schools. They of system. '' . *^ A.D, 1781. were first introduced at Gloucester by Eobert Eaikes, a printer, and Mr. Stock, a clergyman. They were soon extended in every direction. The distinctive teaching of the Church was not inculcated in these earlier Sunday schools. A similar disregard for system is noticeable in the four societies which owe their birth to the Evangelicals — the Church Missionary Society, the Eeligious Tract Society, the Bible Society, and the British and Foreign School Society, ^j^g It is perhaps a proof of the capacity of the Angli- churchnot ean system to satisfy minds of every type, that the stimulated *^ "^ i i i t-w- bytiie leading Evangelicals did not largely lapse to Dissent,^ faj^ove- nor often canvass for alterations in the Prayer-book, ment. j^ jg certainly impossible to believe that these re- formers owed much to the Church. There was truth in the apophthegm of a famous Dissenting preacher who described them as would-be Dissenters who had lost their way. The Church system, in fact, became more and more vitiated throughout the reign of George III. The literary bishops gave place to hangers-on of the aristocracy. Younger sons and con- nexions of peers, or private tutors in the families of ' Their converts only too often accepted Antinomian schemes akin to those of the earlier Puritans : Scott, who succeeded the celebrated Newton at Olney, found the parish brimful of Antinomians and Dissenters. The later phase of the Evan- gelical movement was especially conducive to dissent. THE GEORGIAN PERIOD. \li noblemen and statesmen, filled nineteen out of twenty- chap. six bishoprics in tbe year 1815. The episcopal reve- v — ^J^ nues were at this time enormous, yet the bishops did J^® •^ ^ bishops. not blush to provide for their own by bestowal of canonries, rectories, etc. When not engaged in affairs of state, they commonly spent all their hours in lettered ease. Such episcopal duties as confirmation, and examining for orders and conferring orders, were neglected, or performed in a slovenly, perfunctory fashion. The clergy were also often non-resident, but with more excuse. The clerical status had altered, The clergy, but nothing had been done to provide residences fit for persons who now ranked as gentlemen. In numberless parishes a ruinous cottage betokened the site of the ancient parsonage, and there was no means of securing a better accommodation. Livings were therefore amal- gamated. Not unfrequently two or more churches were served on Sunday from the nearest town,^ and this was all the parishes saw of their incumbent. Fifteen churches in the Norwich diocese were served by three brothers as recently as 1837. "Hannah More speaks of thirteen contiguous parishes without even a resident curate. A clergyman of the diocese of Norwich wrote : ' When first I came here in 1837, out of twenty-eight parishes, five churches only were open for divine ser- vice twice on the Lord's Day.' " ^ The state of the The fabrics defies description. Church restoration was not ^^"^*^^®^' thought of. It was rarely that new churches were built to meet the wants of the increasing population.^ ' This appears to have been almost invariably the case with the parishes round the university towns. There are few country parsonages within seven miles of Cambridge that are more than forty years old. - See Hore's Eighteen Centuries of the Church of England, p. 545 and seq. ^ Bishop Porteus, an Evangelical, held the see of London from 1787 to 1808. During that time not one church was built in London. Bishop Blomfleld during the years 1828-1856 consecrated nearly two hundred. 472 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, CHAP. The Holy Communion was administered yearly to a few ^Zifil' aged persons. The young generation grew up utterly ignorant of Churcli doctrine. Mr. Gladstone in 1874 thus describes the condition of our English churches " fifty and forty years ago," i.e. after a full half cen- tury of the Evangelical system : " The actual state of things as to worship was bad beyond all parallel known to me in experience or reading. Taking to- gether the expulsion of the poor and labouring classes (especially from the town churches), the mutilation and blockages of the fabrics, the baldness of the service, the elaborate horrors of the so-called music . . . and, above all, the coldness and indifference of the lounging and sleeping congregation, our services were probably without a parallel in the world for their debasement ; and as they would have shocked a Brahmin or a Buddhist, so they hardly could have been endured in this country had not the faculty of taste and the per- ception of the seemly or unseemly been as dead as the spirit of devotion." ^ ' " Ritual and Ritualism," Contemporary Review, October, 1874. THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DA Y. 473 CHAPTER XIX. Z^t ©l^ucci) of ti)c ^rc^cnt Sag. A.D. 1820-1881. Evangelical zeal fused with the Church's system — The Tractarians — The revival begins at Oxford — And spreads throughout the country — Resentment of the domi- nant factions — The " Surplice Riot "—Secessions to Rome — Encouraged by the Gorham Judgment — Yet the Latitudinarians lose ground — And the Evangelicals have to go with the tide of Anglicanism — Convocation allowed to deliberate — The colonial episcopate extended — New English bishoprics — Sunday schools subsidiary to the Church's system — Church seats made free — Other beneficial results — League of unbelievers and political Dissenters. — Anomalies in the State connexion — Spoliation and encroachments — Prospect of disestablishment — Per- secution in matters of ritual — The Privy Council Committee made Supreme Court of Appeal — This arrangement at variance with the Reformation settle- ment— Rise of the " Ritualists " — The Puritans harass ritualistic clergymen in the new court — Questionable decisions — The " Public Worship Regulation Act " — Three aggrieved parishioners — The new tribunal not acknowledged — Present results of the contest — Decisions of the Privy Council Committee. The period of ecclesiastical stagnation coincides ap- Evang-e- proximately with the era of the four Georges. The fussed with teaching of such men as Cecil and Simeon had doubt- ch^urcii's less done much to promote " seriousness," and to enlist ®y^*®°^- the sympathies of earnest men in the cause of phi- lanthropy. But the Evangelical system was at best an exaggeration of one part of the Catholic scheme. One- sided and narrow, it was capable of producing a limited number of ascetics and devotees, but utterly unable to leaven society. Evangelical zeal had to be diverted into riaus. 474 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIX. other channels ere the Church could be roused from her ^j^g ^ lethargy. This diversion was effected by the " Trac- ^.^acta- tarian" movement, a revival which has been well de- scribed as " not antagonistic but supplemental " to its precursor, " holding quite as strongly the necessity of conversion, justification by faith, and the supremacy of the Scriptures ; but also bringing into prominence those doctrines which the Evangelicals had under- valued— the doctrine of the sacraments, of faith show- ing itself by works, of Church authority, and the Apostolical succession."^ The first sign of this great A.D. 1827. Therevivai revival was the publication of Keble's " Christian Oxford. Year." The extraordinary influence of this book — now probably the most widely read of all devotional works ■ — was fitly augured by the rage it excited in Low Church and Latitudinarian circles. It was not long before the " Christian Year " was publicly burnt at Oxford. Six years later came Keble's celebrated A.D. 1833. gerjjQQjj Qji u J^ational Apostacy," immediately followed by the first meeting of the Oxford " Tractarians." The two special objects which these great reformers set before them were the maintenance and assertion of Catholic doctrine, especially the doctrine of the Apos- tolical succession, and the preservation of the Praj^er- book in its integrity. The leading names were Keble, Newman, Percival, William Palmer, Isaac Williams, Hurrell Froude, and (after 1836) Dr. Pusey. The *' Tracts for the Times " made their first appearan<3e in 1883. The series was closed in 1841, with N^ew- man's celebrated No. 90. Meanwhile the sister uni- A.D. 1838. versity had caught the inspiration, and given birth ^'^^ to the Camden Society. A stranore vitality was soon spreads -^ o ./ ' Eighteen Centuries of the Church of England, p. 551. To this excellent work we are indebted for several details in this Chapter. THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DAY. 475 discernible in the long-neglected parishes. The doc- chap. trinal and practical teaching of the Prayer-book was v-^^J-^ a^"ain tau2;ht from the pnlnit ; the sacraments were tiiroug-iiout . . . . the *' rightly and duly administered ; " services were cele- country, brated on saint's days, and even daily ; new churches rose to meet the requirements of the increasing town population ; parsonages were built in the country parishes ; the ancient fabrics were purged, restored, and beautified ; music was again made the handmaid of devotion ; every accessory of worship was once more instinct with life and meaning. Above all, " to the poor the Gospel was preached," and no longer in the stereotype of Evangelicism. Every year Anglicanism became a stronger religious force, winning over Evan- gelicals and Dissenters, opening wide the purses of the rich, hallowing the daily toil of the busy, cheering the life of the suffering and indigent. The Low Church svstem was manifestly doomed. But it did Resent- . T . " . T . , T • T ment of the not die without a struggle. It is not pleasant to dominant record that the restoration of life to the dry bones of the Establishment was resented not only by Dissenters and indiflferentists, but also by many Evangelicals. If to the former it was a defiance, to the latter it was a reproach. Warm controversies and disgraceful agita- tions ensued. A striking and instructive instance of The senseless Puritanical furore was the (now forgotten) mJi^ ^^^ " Surplice Eiot." ^ For a time the issue was doubtful. ^'^ ^®^^' * The happiest omen for the perf5ecuted Anglicanism of the present day is to be found in the complacent and almost universal acceptance now of the ritual as- sailed forty years ago. Mr. Gladstone records the instructive case of a devoted clergyman who was persecuted out of his benefice " for the offence of having preached the morning sermon in the surplice, read the Prayer for the Church Militant, and opened his church for divine service, not daily, but on all festivals." He wisely remarks that the inference to be drawn from this change of feeling is "not an inference of self-laudation . . . but an inference in behalf of a little self-mistrust." Other and equally Important lessons are to be learnt from the 476 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIX. Secessions to Rome. En- couraged by the Gorham judgment. A.D. 1865. Yet the liatitudi- narians lose ground. The Church dignitaries long treated the Anglican, as they had treated the Methodist movement, with in- difference, suspicion, or open hostility. Not until the second order of clergy had won the attention of a large section of the upper classes did the bishops find a good word for it. Meanwhile Newman had been harassed out of the Anglican fold. In March, 1850, the Privy Council Committee made its appearance as a theological faculty, and the country was startled by the Gorham Judgment. The true value of such sentences was not at that time appreciated. A section of the Oxford party argued that the Church was hopelessly com- mitted to Erastianism. The secession of Manning, Dodsworth, the two Wilberforces, and Allies followed. These disasters gave a plausible a23pearance to the " No Popery " cry of the opponent faction, although almost all the seceders had begun life as Evan- gelicals. The sanction given to denial of baptismal grace was followed by the exculpation of the contri- butors to " Essays and Reviews," and the reinstatement of Bishop Colenso. In both cases judgments of bishops and Convocations, and the opinions of the clerical body at large, were overridden or disregarded. It was expected that these triumphs of Erastianism would sap the very foundations of Anglicanism. Really they have rather helped the Church's cause by rousing men's minds to the meaning and value of Catholic dogma. It is recognized that the Church's formularies are only impugned because not speaking with Act of Parliament precision, and that (out of law courts) the interpretation which is at variance with common sense is also dishonest. This silent influence reproduction in modern Congregational chapels of Gothic architecture, stained ■windows, organs, and surpliced choirs, if we bear in mind that the fathers of the sect discovered in such accessories of worship a pretext for leaving the Church. THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DA V. 477 of public opinion and their own inherent lack of pro- chap. feelytizing zeal has prevented the Latitudinarian doc- ^.^^ trinaires from doing appreciable mischief within the Church's pales. If the Broad Church party was power- less to arrest the Anglican revival, much more so was And the the Evangelical. One by one the practices and the doc- ncaishave trines formerly stigmatized as " Puseyite " have been Jjf °i^^of accepted by the clerical disciples of Simeon, sometimes Angiican- spontaneously, sometimes at the instance of their con- gregations. It is hard to say where we should now find an Evangelical service of the old type. In view of fundamental principles, the Anglican, the Evangelical, and the Broad-Churchman must always remain slightly dissevered as types of three distinct casts of mind. But each now wisely recognizes that the other has his sphere of work, and that the Church is wide enough for all. In so speaking we of course except the few un- happy bigots — Puritans of the seventeenth-century type rather than Evangelicals — who have joined with the Church's foes to persecute what they call " Eitualism." Our readers must be contented with a very terse and convoca- . . . tion jejune summary of the great results which attended auowedto the revival of Anglicanism. First we notice the a.d. i85i,* reinstatement of Convocation as the Church's delibera- tive body. Much opposition was encountered from prelates as well as lay statesmen ere Convocation was a.d. issi- allowed to meet according to ancient usage. Step by step it has since won its way to a status which bodes well for the future. It has already acted in the matters of the new Lectionary and the shortened services. Keorganized so as to ensure a fair repre- sentation of the parochial clergy, it will doubtless one day be summoned to act as the Church's Parlia- ment. The representative principle will, we hope, 478 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. The colonial episcopate extended. Ne-w English bishoprics. Sunday- schools subsidiary to the Church's system. Church seats' made free. Other beneficial results. then be further deveh:>ped in the form of true synods, limiting episcopal autocracy in the dioceses, in accord- ance with the intentions of the sixteenth-century reformers. The extension of the colonial episcopate is another valuable result. Prior to 1825 there were only five colonial bishoprics : they now number sixty- one. Six additions to the home bishoprics have been sanctioned quite recently — S. Alban's, Truro, Liver- pool, Newcastle, Southwell, and Wakefield. Many more ought, of course, to be made, but the Church is hampered in this matter by her connexion with the State. The institution of the annual Church Congress has proved a happy expedient for bringing men of all parties together with a view to temperate discussion. Every year its sessions excite a deeper interest. Our Sunday school organization, though not originating with the Tractarian movement, like every other department of Church work, received from it a mighty impulse, affecting the quality of the teaching as well as the quantity of the scholars. In former days every strange type of Nonconformist doctrine struck root in the intellects of the lower classes as on virgin soil. The Anglicans have counteracted this popular ignorance as much by the substitution of Church doctrine for vague generalization in the Sunday school, as by the throw- ing open of churches to rich and poor alike. Nowhere have they laboured more successfully than among the working classes of our towns. For the recovery of the lower-middle class, which formerly hovered between a very unpractical Evangelicism and Dissent, Canon Woodard's magnificent scholastic scheme is in opera- tion. Guilds, sisterhoods, colleges, choral associations, and numberless other institutions in connection with THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DA V. 479 religion, philanthropy, and culture, have sown them- chap. selves in every part of the land. The money spent > ^1^ on church, building and restoration alone amounted for a considerable period to nearly £1,000,000 a year. We turn now to the less sunny side of the Church's fortunes. If her influence has seldom been so deeply felt, hardly ever has it been so bitterly opposed as in this generation. The Deism of the eighteenth century finds its counterpart now, outside the Church, in a degrading materialism, advocated by men of the highest intellectual calibre. The pious Nonconformist, the i3re- i^eagne of ••• _ ^ unbe- text for whose Dissent was often the indolence or the iievers and incapacity of the incumbent, has given place to the Dissenters. " political Dissenter," linked in unholy alliance with those who repudiate Christianity altogether. The object of their attack is the time-honoured alliance of Church and State. That this alliance presents in many ways an anomalous aspect in view of modern constitutional changes is plain enough. The grievance however, is not the non-Churchman's, but the Church- man's. The admission of Dissenters, Eomanists, Jews, ■^?™!;l^®f ' . J 7 mtlie state Deists, etc., to full rights of citizenship has been connexion, ceded.i But no proviso was added protecting the Church's interests. The Prime Minister now has the appointment of our bishops and deans. He may be a Dissenter, and need not be a Christian. The House of Commons, again, now represents Ireland and Scotland as well as England. It must contain a quantity, and often a majority, of men alien to our ■ national communion. Yet it is to the Commons the Church must apply before she can even increase the number of her bishops. Anomalies of this kind affect ' The disabilities of Dissenters were removed in 1828, those of Romanists in 1829, those of Jews in 1858. 48o ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. all the mutual relations of Churcli and State. The instance most familiar, perhaps, to the country clergy- is the continued interference of Dissenters at meetings for election of churchwardens, while claiming absolute exemption from all charges for the maintenance of the Church's fabrics or services. Spoliation ^J ^^^ ^i^ of fraudulent statistics,^ however, the sects croach- have represented themselves as all but a majority, ment. g^g downtroddcu by reason of their social status, and as groaning under the hardship of exclusion from " State endowments." In the Commons, as now constituted, this form of misrepresentation will of necessity often find favour. Admission to such Church benefices as lay fellowships at the universities was ceded in 1871, and a sweeping diversion of those intended for men in orders is impending. The sanction of all kinds of "Christian" ministration in the churchyard (time Prospect of out of mind the parson's freehold) was secured by SSrmSt. t^e Burial Laws Amendment Act of 1880. Disestab- lishment and disendowment may at this rate soon be brought within range of vision. The Irish Church has already experienced this fate. Neither the pretext nor the result can be at all similar in this country, but it is an issue for which faithful Anglicans will do well to prepare. That it would for a time terribly impair the religious life of England, especially that of country districts, is certain. On the other hand, it would probably free the Church from " perils among false brethren," ^ The disgraceful frauds by which the religious census of 1851 was made to produce a result of forty-eight non-Anglicans per cent, have been sufiBciently exposed. Churchmen have since repeatedly appealed for a genuine religious census, but the Dissenters have thought fit to decline the challenge. It is computed in Raveusheim's Denomination Statistics that "the proportion of Dis- senters of all kinds, Jews, Eoman Catholics, and Secularists, amounts to twenty- two per cent, of the population of England and Wales." The figure is raised to about twenty-seven, if we judge only by army, school, and workhouse returns. THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DAY. 481 give her an episcopate more at one with the parochial chap. XIX. clergy, ensure her the blessing of self-government, and abolish numerous anomalies which now impair her vitality and cripple her powers of action. Probably nothing has so much tended to depreciate Persecu- the value of the State connexion as the episode of the matters of Ritual prosecutions, with a brief account of which we close this history of our Church's fortunes. The subject involves a fuller account of the tribunal alluded to in connexion with the Gorham Judgment. In 1832 the old Court of Delegates was abolished. It was intended ThePrivy to leave ecclesiastical causes in the hands of the whole comSittee Privy Council, as including; lords spiritual as well as ^^^^ ^ •^ ox Supreme temporal. But an Act of 1833, bearino; on tlie readiust- court of ^ . . ^ "^ Appeal. ment of admiralty and colonial appeals, was, by a draughtsman's blunder, made to include ecclesiastical as well as other causes. These were thus accidentally transferred to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, a quorum of laymen, all of whom but two might be Dissenters. The scandal was met by some provision for the presence of bishops at the hearing of cases, and this presence was " unduly embellished with the name of assessorship." ^ The constitution of the court provoked much attention at the time of the Gor- ham case. It was denounced by many statesmen, and t^is the present Prime Minister regarded it as " an injurious men?fr and even dan&'erous departure from the Eeformation "^^^'^^^^e '-' ■' ■with the settlement." - But none foresaw the full extent of the i^eforma- peril. Only four cases of doctrine or discipline had ment. been brought before the Court of Delegates in the period 1690-1832, though that period comprised a cen- tury full of heterodoxy and clerical malpractice. It ' Gladstone, The Royal Supremacy, 1850. * See ibid., Preface to third edition, 1877. 2 I 482 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP, might well have been expected that the offices of the XIX. new court would be seldom required. The operation of the new machinery was, however, only too truly augured by the Goiham Judgment. Meanwhile Trac- tarianism was developing what is vulgarly called Rise of the " Eitualism." Direct appeal to the soul was seconded ists." by an elaborate system of accessories, affecting the religious instincts through the medium of the senses. The influence of such a system will necessarily depend largely on the physical and mental organization of the individual worshipper, and on the degree of culture attained or attainable. Its limits must ever be to a large degree a question first of discretion, then of good taste. The " Eitualists " proceeded cautiously, training men's minds to the significance of the objec- tive side of worship, especially in the Eucharist service. Usually no new ritual was introduced till it com- mended itself to a majority of the communicants. The result was that their churches were attended by The crowds of earnest and reverent worshippers. The h^asT^ factious Puritanism which had inspired the " Surplice Ritualistic Eiots " soon vcutcd its splccn on the " Ritualistic " clergsonen . in the new congregations, and the anomalous condition of the ecclesi- astical tribunal offered a good opportunity for harassing litigation. Once only was the true point at issue, the real Presence in the Sacrament, directly attacked. The verdict given grudgingly acquitted the very highest form of sacramental t< aching. It might reasonably be urged that, if a doctrine is unimpeachable, its embodi- ment in the form of ritual must be left to the discretion of the minister and congregation. The Puritans, how- ever, sunk the main issue and wreaked their resentment on external minutiae. Technical knowledge on such points was hardly to be expected in the modern High THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DAY. 483 Court of Appeal, and the subject had not at that time chap, been fully investigated. Several decisions were gained > — ^ adverse to the Eitualists, but adverse also to the Question- opinions of high legal authorities,^ which opinions have decisions, received substantial confirmation from the subsequent researches of antiquarians and experts. Hence a fresh cause of dissatisfaction. It was felt that the court was not only illegitimate by origin, but was also unable to give the points at issue full and impartial con- sideration.- The climax came in 1874. The Puritans, by the aid The P . p 1 . "Public 01 certain 01 the episcopate, secured a " Public Wor- worship ship Eegulation Act," transferring the work of the Act." Privy Council Committee to a lay judge, who was also to combine the functions of the Dean of Arches and the Auditor of the Chancery Court of York. The bill was passed in defiance of Convocation, and fairly crowned the injustices of the past forty years. The Premier ingenuously confessed that it was an Act for " putting down Eitualism," meaning excess of ritual.^ In unconscious imitation of the anti-Church procedure of 16-il, the Act placed every Eitualistic clergyman at the mercy of the malice or ignorance of Three three " aggrieved parishioners." This fraction of the parish- ^ congregation was empowered to hale its pastor before ^°'^®^^- the lay judge for excess of ritual, the limits being measured by the recent questionable decisions of the ^ Notably in the case of the Ridsdale Judgment, which Sir Fitzroy Kelly did not hesitate to denounce as containing "much of policy rather than of law, though perhaps unconsciously to themselves In the majority of judges." ^ Mr. Gladstone urges " the primary importance " of such proceedings not " giving rise to judgments which are founded (however unconsciously) on motives of policy more than on a dry, unbiased consideration of the law, and which thereby suffer loss in their moral claim to respect." — Royal Supremacy, Preface, 1877. ^ As every one who kneels in prayer is a Ritualist, and nearly every rubric of the Prayer-book is a piece of Ritualism, it may be asked, why should excess be punishable by Act of Parliament rather than defect ? 484 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. CHAP. XIX. The new tribunal not ac- kno^v- ledged. Present result of the contest. Decisions of the Privy Council Committee, Privy Council. The three need not be communicants, may be men of bad character, and certainly in all past cases have in no way represented the feelings of the congregation. A Puritan Association with a capital of £50.000 at once set to work to find three men of straw in the parishes where high ritual prevailed. The Anglicans, on the other hand, decided that the limits of obedience to the powers that be would be overstepped by submission to the new tribunal. The English Church Union and the Church of England Working Men's Society pledged themselves to the supj^ort of such clergymen as have introduced high ritual with the consent of their congregations. The contest is still impending. Hitherto its effect has been to show Puritanism in the darkest colours, and vastly augment the popularity of the Eitualists, four of whom have preferred imprisonment to sacrifice of principle. But above all, it has induced a conviction that a large and active body such as the Anglican Church can no longer be fettered by the caprices of aliens or indifferentists, but must at all hazards recover those rights of self- government which are now claimed by all other insti- tutions, and which were hers before they were theirs, and are theirs because they were hers. We append a brief summary of the most noted de- cisions of the Privy Council Committee. Oorliam v. Bisliop of Exeter, 1850. Euled that ''he doctrine of baptismal regeneration might he openly denied by a clergyman. Liddell v. Westerton and Liddell v. Beal, 1857. Euled that an altar and a cross attached to the altar was illegal ; that a credence table was lawful as an adjunct to the altar ; that embroidered linen and lace might not be used during the ad- ministration of the Holy Communion. THE CHURCH OF THE PRESENT DA Y. 485 Williams v. Bishop of Salisbury and Wilson v. Fendale, 1864. chap. Ruled that a clergyman might deny the inspiration of any ^^^1, single part of Holy Scripture, might speak of the merits of the Saviour being transferred to man as " a fiction," and might express a hope of the nltimate pardon of the damned. Martin v, Mackonochie, 1868-70. Ruled lighted candles on the altar to be illegal when not required for the purpose of giving light. Suspended a clergyman for kneeling during the Prayer of Consecration, and elevating the paten above his head. Hehhertv. Purchas, 1871. Ruled that a j)arish priest infringes the law by administering the Holy Communion in the vestments prescribed by King Edward VI. 's First Prayer-book, viz. cope, chasuble, alb, and tunicle, but that " a cope is to be worn in administering the Holy Communion on high feast days in cathe- dral and collegiate churches ; " that wafer bread is illegal ; that public mingling of water with the sacramental wine is illegal ; that eastward celebrations are illegal when the people cannot see the act of breaking the bread. Sheppard v. Bennett, 1871. Acquitted a clergyman who taught that " there was an actual presence of the true Body and Blood of our Lord in the consecrated bread and wine, without or external to the communicant, and separately from the act of reception ; " that " the Communion table is an altar of sacrifice ; " that " adoration is due to Christ present upon the altar." Jenkins v. Cook, 1876. Ruled that a clergyman infringed the law in refusing the Sacrament to a parishioner on the ground of his denial of the eternity of punishment, and of the per- sonality and existence of the devil. Ridsdale v. Clifton. Appeal from Lord Penzance's Court, May, 1877. Ruled that it was illegal to celebrate Holy Com- munion without a congregation ; that a crucifix on a chancel screen, and coloured mural reliefs representing the stations of the Cross, were illegal ornaments : confirmed the decisions on other points in Eebhert v. Purchas. ( 487 ) INDEX. Aaron. Aaron, the British Martyr, 7 Abbot, Arcbbp. of Canterbury, an un- satisfactory appointment, 357 ; revives the capital punishment of heretics, 357 ; guilty of manslaughter, 361 ; his influence ceases with death of James I., 364 sq. ; refuses his imprimatur to Sibthorp's sermon, and is suspended, 367 Absolution explahied to James I., 345 Absolutism, theory of, 353 ; maintained by the bishops of James I., 357 ; impugned before the Reformation, 362 ; unfortu- nate support of, by clergy of Charles I., 363 ; the Revolution its death-blow, 434 ; attempted revival of, under Anne, 447. Addison, good influence of his writings, 449 Adrian, friend of Theodore, 34; his ser- vices to literature, 38 Advertisements, Archbp. Parker's, 315 sq. ; intention of, 316, and note ; summary of, 317, 318 Agatho, Pope, orders the reinstatement of AS^ilfrid, 40 Aggrieved parishioners, 391, 483 Aidan, mission of, 30 Alban, St., 7 Alb ric, Papal legate, his intrusion on England, 79 Albigenses, the, 87 and note Alcock, Bp. of Ely, 171 Alcuin, Egbert's librarian, 39 ; fame as a scholar, 38 ; life of, 49 Aldhelm, the poet-preacher, 49 Alfred, King, 54 Altar, converted by Ridley into a table, 226 ; the innovation sanctioned by Edward's government, 226 ; Elizabeth treats it in a spirit of compromise, 301, 3'j2 ; Laud enforces ancient position, 373, 374 ; this is made a Puritan gravamen, 380 Altar lights, ordered in 1548, 225 note Andrewes, Bp. of Winchester, consulted by Whitgift, 339, 356 ; saves Archbp. Abbot from deposition, 361 Anglo-Saxon Canons, 36, 44-46, 62 ; uses, 45, 46, 53 Annates, 117, 118 ; prohibition of, 159 Avignon. Anselm, Archbp. of Canterbury, at issue with William II., 77 ; leaves England for Rome, 77, 78 ; embroiled with Henry I. on Investiture question, 78, 79 Antholin, S., collectors of, suppressed by Laud, 373 Apology for the oath of allegiance, James l.'s, 354 Appeals, growth of, 69-71 ; resisted, 102, 103 ; statute for restraint of, 160 Ap-Rice, Cromwell's inquisitor, 172 Archbps. confirmed by the Pope, 114, 154 Ariaii, controversy, 8; party in Georgian clnirch, 455, 456 Ariminum, Council of, 8 Aristobulus, legendary British bishop, 5 Aries, Council of, 8 Arnold of Brescia, 87 Articles, the ten, 182-184 ; the six, of Henry VIII. , 194; the eleven, 309; the forty- two drawn up by Cranmer, 231 ; the thirty-nine, a revision of the forty-two, 232 ; intention of, 232 ; comparison with the forty-two, 232-234 ; account of their final settlement, 310 ; disputed clauses in them, 310; made a test of loyalty, 320; Lambeth's, the, 339 Arundel's Constitutions, 129 Atonement, subjective conception of, 139, 468 Atterbury, Bp. of Rochester, defends the rights of Convocation, 442 ; proposes to proclaim the Pretender in 1714,451; banished, 451 note Augustine, S., sent by Gregory, 21 ; con- verts Ethelbert, 22 ; receives instructions from Gregory, 24 ; and a pall, 25 ; his ultimatum to the British bishops, 26; his work overrated, 27 Augustinian monks, the, 74 Augustin's Oak, council at, 26 Autocracy, episcopal, growth of since Re- furmation, 335, 336; Laud's administra- tion a!i instance of, 372 ; reasonableness of Presbyterian proposal for its modifica- tion, 404-4(j6 ; Tillotson's primacy, a flagrant case of, 441 ; the principle de- veloped so as to extinguish Convocation, 452, 453 ; its modification by means of synods much to lie desired, 477, 484 Avignon, migration of Popes to, 1C3, 112 488 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA, Balcanqtial. Balcanqual, delegate to Synod of Dort, Bilo, chaplain to Bp. Poynet, 224 B Uguy, Dr., answers Lord Shaftesbury, 459 Bancroft, Archbp. of Canterbury, his ser- mon at Paul's Cross, 336 ; the leading Churchman at Hampton Court Con- ference, 345 , succeeds Whitgift, 350 ; deals severely with the Puritans, ih. Bangor Iscoed, monks of, 16 ; massacred, 27 Baptism, British administration of, 18, 26 ; Augustine enforces Roman use, 26 ; Elfric's canon on, 61 ; Ten Articles on, 183; Office of, in Prayer Books of 1552, 1559, 1662, 237 ; lay, sanctioned till 1604, 236 note ; by women, 345 ; denial of re- generation in, exculpated, 476, 484 Baptism, Infant, Wall's history of, 449 Barlow, Bp. of Chichester, a violent re- forming preacher, 210 ; assists at Par- ker's consecration, 303. Barnes, a Lutheran, burnt, 198 Baro, Peter, an Arminian, 339 Baronial tenure of bishops, 72 Barrett, William, an Arminian, 338 Barrow, Dr., Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, 420 Bnrton, Elizabeth, her revelations and death, 164 Basie, Council of, 133 Bastwick, the li'beller, 371 ; compensated, 382 Baxter, the Puritan, declines a bishopric at the Restoration, 407 , a delegate at Savoy Conference, 407 note ; his Reformed Liturgy, 408 note ; his Saint's Everlasting Rest, 419 Becket, Thomas, his career as a courtier, 81 ; made Archbp. of Canterbury, 82 ; beads the Church party, 82 ; the champion of Constitutional Government, 83 ; coerced to sign the Constitutions of Clarendon, 84 ; his six years' contest with Henry II., 84, 85 ; his murder, 85 ; his shrine in- sulted by Henry VIIL, 179 Bede, the Venerable, 38, 39 ; his life, 47, 48 Bellarmine's description of 15th century Church, 134 Benedict Biscop, 39 Benedictine monks, the, 51 ; restored at S. James Chapel, 423 Bennett, Shepherd ver&us, 1871, decision in, 482, 485 Benson, Bp. of Gloucester, ordains White- field, 463 Bentley, Master of Trinity, writes against Collins, 457 Berkeley, Bp. of Cloyne (1733), writes against Collins, 457 ; the Alciphron, 459 Berridge of Everton, Evangelical clergy- man, 469 Beveridge, Bp. of S. Asaph (1704), declines to succeed Ken at Bath and Wells, 436 ; one of tlie great divines of t^ueen Anne's reign, 449, 400, 463 Breakspear. Bible, translations of : Bede's, 48 note ; Wyclifs, 123 ; Sir T. ]\Iore on earli. r versions, 123 note ; Wyclifs suppressed, 129 ; Tyndal's, 165 ; Matthew's, 187 ; set up in the churches, 187, 198 ; Cran- mer's, 198, 199 ; the Genevan, 308, 309, 347 ; the Bishops', 308, 347 ; those in use on accession of James I., 347 ; summary of English translations of, 349 note ; the Bible of 1611, its historj"-, 347, 348 ; cir- culation of, 419, 470, 88 note Bigod, Roger, at Council of Lyons, 98 Bingham, Joseph, his Antiquities of the Christian Church, 449 Bird, Bp. of Chester, deprived, 252 Birinus, missionary, 31 Bishops, numerous in British Church, 15 ; Anglo-Saxon, preside in county courts, 43; popular election of, 62; in conflict with the monks, 88 ; become autocrats, 336; the ten, mobbed and imprisoned, 385 ; the seven, imprisoned, tried, and acquitted, 431, 432 Bishops in partibus, numerous in 13th century, 104 ; Romish, in England, 320 note ; established by James II., 424 Bishop's Book, see " Institution, etc." Bishoprics, Anglo-Saxon, organisation of, 36, 37 Black Bartholomew's, 411, 412 Blackball, Bp. of Exeter, preaches passive obedience, 447 Blomfield, Bp. of London, 471 note Bocher, Joan, heretic, burnt, 229 Bohler, Peter, Moravian missionary, 463; influence of, on Wesley, ib. Boleyn, Anne, Henry's marriage with, 149, 150 Bolingbroke's posthumous works, 458 Boniface, S., instigator of the Synod of 747, 42 ; the apostle of Germany — encourages Papal encroachment — his death, 50 Boniface VIIL, Pope, 102, 103 Bonner, Bp. of London, protests against tlie injunctions and homilies, 213 ; is im- prisoned and released, 214 ; is ordered to preach against the rebels, 225 ; is impri- soned again, 226 ; is released, 2.13 ; takes a leading part in the Marian persecution, 266 ; housed with Bp. of Lincoln, 298 ; placed within the rule of the Marshalsea prison, 298 Book of Sports of James L, 359 ; republica- tion of, 377 ; to be sanctioned by the clergy, 377 Bountj^ Queen Anne's, institution of, 444 Bourne, one of Mary's chaplains, 244 ; re- fuses to help in Parker's consecration, 303 Boyle, Mr., president of a society for the propagation of the Gospel, 419 Bradbury, Mr., dissenting preacher, 456 Bradford, reformer, imprisoned, 255 Bray, Dr., a founder of the S. P. C. K. and S.P. G. 443 Breakspear, Nicholas, the only English Pope, 80 INDEX. 489 Bristol. Bristol, bishopric founded at, ITS Bristol, the I\Iethodist pn achers at, 464 British Church, see Celtic British and Foreign School Society, the, 470 Brooks, Bp. of Gloucester, Papal commis- sioner to try Cranmer, 2(59 Brown, Robert, founder of the Independents, 329 Brownists, see Independents Bruys, Peter de, 87 Bucer, a foreign Protestant at Cambridge, 214 ; his remains insulted, 276 Bull, Bp. of St. David (1705), author of " Defensio fidei Nicenne," 420, 453 Bulls, Papal, prohibited, 117, 155 Bunyan denounces the declaration for liberty of conscience, 428 Burial Laws' Amendment Act of 1880, 480 Burial of the dead, office for, in the several prayer books, 238 Burnell, Bp. of Bath, author of " Statute of Mortmain," 100 Burnet, Gilbert, Bp. of Salisbury, at Butch Court, 437 ; reads William's Declaration, 434 ; consecrated by a commission of Bancroft's appointment, 436 ; a Latitu- dinarian, 437, 441 ; opposes rights of Convocation, 442 ; opposes Act against Occasional Conformity, 446 Burton, the libeller, 371 ; compensated, 382 Bush, Bp. of Bristol, deprived, 252 Butler, Bp. of Durham, his Analogy, 459 Cadoc, Welsh missionary, 12 Caedmon, 48 Caerleon, Welsh archbishopric, 6, 8, 15 Calamy (elder) the Presbyterian, 403, 407 Calamy (younger) the Presbyterian, 457 Calcuith, Council of, 42 Calendar, the, of 1549, 305 ; of 1552, 306; of 1561, 306 Calne, Council at, 60 Calvin, the reformer, 139 ; advises So- merset to execute heretics, 229 Calvinism of later Elizabethan Churchmen, 338-340 ; James's support of, 359 ; five points of, 359 sq. ; is successfully im- pugned by the Caroline divines, 420 ; of ^\'hiteficld, 464, 465 ; of the Evangeli- cals, 468 Cambridge University harassed by James II., 428, 429 Camden Society at Cambridge, 474 Camisards or " French Prophets," 460 Campeggio, Cardinal, 143 Canons, the, of 1604, 351 ; of 1640, 380, 384, 3S5 Canute, 61 Caractacus, 5 Carleton, Bp. of LlandafF, sent to Synod of Dort, 359 Caroline books, the, 49 Caroline divines, celebrated for intellectual ability, 407, 419, 420 Cliristcliiireli. Carthusian monks, 74 Cartwright, Bp. of Chester, refuses the oath to William III., 435 Cartwriglit, Margaret Professor, 321 ; his first and second admonition, 322 " Case of Allegiance due," &c. Sherlock's, 436 " Case of Resistance," &c. Sherlock's, 436 Case, the Puritan, 403, 407 Castro, Alphonso de, chaplain to Philip II., 266 sq. Catharine of Aragon, see Henry VIII. Cathedral Chapters remodelled* by Dunstan, 60 ; by Lanfranc, 74 ; by Henry VIII. 178 Catliedrals, Norman, 75 Cecil, Mr., the Evangelical, 470 Cedda, 30, 31 Celibacy, clerical, a theory rather than a practice in Anglo-Saxon Church, 46 ; measures taken to enforce, by Odo and Dunstan, 58, 59; ordered by Council of Winchester, 76 ; the rule evaded in Anglo-Norman Church, 76, 77; enforced by the Six Articles, 195; nearly being reinforced under Edwa d VI., 218, 219 ; denounced by the imprisoned divines in 1554, 255 ; established by Mary, 252, 253; prejudice in favour of, 219, 300 Celtic Church, 1-19 ; peculiarities of, 13-16 Centralising system, Roman account of, 63, 64 Chad, consecration and deposition of, 35 Cliaderton, Mr., the Puritan, 345 Cliandler, Dr., writes against Collins, the Deist, 459 Chantries, appropriation of, under Edward VI., 209 Characteristics of Men and Planners, Shaftes- bury's, 457 Charles I., his character and principles, 363 ; his ecclesiastical policy, 364 ; at issue ■with Parliaments, 366-370 ; governs with- out parliament, 370-372; his absolutism in Cliurch matters, 372 ; his republication of the Book of Sports, 377 ; sends canons to Scotch Church, 378 ; his Short Parlia- ment, 379, 380 ; his Long Parliament, 381 sq. ; his half-hearted policy with regard to the Church, 385, 386 ; his self-sacrifice on the Church's behalf, 390, 391 Charles II., receives Puritan deputation at the Hague, 403; issues the "Worcester House Declaration, 406 ; summons the Savoy Conference, 407 ; his policy, 414, 415; offers indulgence to dissenters, 415, 416; really wishes to get concessions for Romanism, 414, 417 ; effects of the reign, 418-420 Charter, the Great, 91 Cliester, bishopric founded at, 173 Chicheley, Archl)]). of Canterbmy, 171 Chillingworth, AVilliam, a Latitudinarian, 420, 455 Christchurch, Canterbury, monks of, clahu to elect Primate, 88, 89 490 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Christianity. " Christianity as old as tha Creation," Tin- dal's, 458 Christianity, decline of, at close of 15th cent., 134; and in the Georgian period, 459, 460 Chubb, Thomas, the Deist, 458, 459 Church and State, set at variance in Anglo- Norman period, 66 &q. ; mutual relations of, 212 ; how far affected by modern con- etitutional changes, 68, 479 Church Association, the, 483 Church, continuity of, 1 and note, 141, 142, 279-285 Church Missionary Society, the, 470 Church of England Working Men's Society, 484 Church rates in Anglo-Saxon Church, 44 Church restoration, in reign of Charles II., 419 ; not thought of during the Evan- gelical movement, 471 ; inspired by the Tractarian movement, 475, 479 Circumspecte Jgaiis, the, 101 Cistercian monks, the, 75 Clarendon, Constitutions of, 82, 83 Clarendon, Lord, 416 Clarke, Dr. S., his writings censured by Convocation, 445, 455 ; career of, 455 note ; his Arian Prayer- Book, 456 Claudia and Pudens, legend of, 5 CLomens Romanus on S. Paul's mission to the West, 4 Cl?rgy, immunities of, 80 sq. ; scarcity of under Elizabeth, their degradation, 306, 307 ; state of, under James I., 35s ; under Anne, 444 ; under the Georges, 471 Clericis Laicos, the, 102 Cloveshoo, meeting place of the yearly synod, 36 ; synod of 747, 42 Cluniac monks, the, 74 Cobham, Lord, 128, 129 Coelestine, Pope, sends Palladius and Patrick to Ireland, 11, 12 Colchester, Colonel, a founder of the S.P.C.K. and S.P.G., 443 Colenso, Bp. of Natal, 476 Colet, the reformer, 135, 147 Collier, Jeremy, the Church historian, a Non-Juror, 436; consecrated by Hickes and Scotch bishops, heads the party of "Usagers," 436 note Collins, Anthony, the Deist, 457, 458 Colman, the Celtic bishop, 32 Colonial Episcopate, disallowed by the Georgian ministries, Wesley's, 467 ; Dr. Seabury consecrated in Scotland, 467 note ; extension of, since 1825, 478 Columban, S., mission to Scotland, 12 Commendams, action about James I.'s claim to grant, 358 Commendone, Papal envoy to England, 245 Commission of search for Church property, 1552, 240 Committee for preferments, William III.'s, 443 Committee of religion, the Puritan, 3S4 Convocation. Committees for scandalous ministers, 391, 392 ; for plundered ministers, 392 Commons, House of, its modern formation hostile to the Church's interests, 479, 480 Communion, controversy about, under Ed- ward VI., 215 ; Cranmer's views of, 215 ; in both kinds allowed, ib. ; sacrificial character of, emphasised in Missal of 1548 more than in subsequent offices, 216 note ; controversy at Oxford on, 220 ; office for, in Prayer-book of 1552, 235 ; office for, in Prayer-book of 1549, 236; office for, in several Prayer-books, 237 Compton, Bp. of London, denounces policy of James II., 423 ; declines to suspend Dr. Sharp, 425 ; suspended by the High Commission Court, 426 ; signs the invita- tion to William, 432 Confirmation, British office of, 18 ; office in the several Prayer-books, 238 ; explained to James I., 345 Conge d'Elire, in the prje-Reformation period, 161 ; suppression of, 208 and note ; its re-establishment, 253 Congregationalists, see Independents " Connection of Sacred and Pagan History," Humphrey Prideaux's, 449 Constance, Council of, 133 Constantino's donation, 57 Conventicle Act, 1st, 415 Conventicle Act, 2nd, 416 C invention Parliaments, the, 406, 434 Convocation, the Church's tax-paying agency, 95 ; but difficult to distinguish from Parliament, 96 ; its ancient organ- isation still survives, 96, 97 ; Wolsey pro- poses to amalgamate the Houses of, 145, 146 ; a verdict on the Divorce question wrung from, 153 ; acknowledges the royal supremacy with a qualification, 156 ; unjustly fined by Henry VIII., 156, 157 ; petitions against Annates, 159 ; suggests the severance from Rome, 159 ; Cromwell presides at, 182 ; accepts the Ten Articles, 183 ; disallows the Pope's power to sum- mon a council, 184 ; its connection Avith the "Bishops' Book," 185, 186; sanctions Henry's Six Articles, 194, 195 ; sanctions the " King's Book," 200 ; overridden by Cranmer, 212, 232 ; sanctions Prayer- book of 1549, 217 ; but not the Prayer-book of 1552, 218 ; reactionary on the accession of Mary, 251 ; absolved by Pole, 261 ; pleads vainly for restoration of Church property, 261 ; its petition in 1558, 277 ; prejudiced against reformatory measures, 291 ; Prayer-book revised without its sanc- tion, 292 ; its Puritan members oppose the Thirty-nine Articles, 310 ; they wish to authorise Nowell's Catechism, 312 ; and petition against Church's ritual, 312, 313; overridden by the 16th cent, primates, 336 ; does not sanction the Praj'er-book revision of 1604, 346, 347; passes the Canons of 1604, 351, 352 ; exculpates Laud as a Synod b.y the Canons of 1640. 380 ; INDEX, 491 Conybeare. resigns its powers of self-taxation, 414 ; ignored by William III.'s government as long as possible, 440; Tillotson's suppres- sion of, provokes the Convocation contro- versy, 441, 442 ; the Lower at issue with the Upper House, 442, 445 ; business done in 1711, 445; suppression of, under George I., 452-454; revival of, in the present reign, 477 Convbeare, Dr., answers Tyndal, the Deist, 459 Conyers, Mr., the Evangelical, 470 Corporate action of Anglo-Saxon clergy, 41, 42 Cosin, Bp. of Durham, declared superstitious and scandalous, 382 ; raised to the episco- pate, 4U7 ; at Savoy Conference, 407 ; one of the committee for review of Prayer-book, 410 ; the Prayer-book adapted in accordance with his sugges- tions, 410, 411 Courtenay, Archbp. of Canterbury, 122 Court of Delegates, the, 481 Courts, ecclesiastical, 72-101 Coverdale, Bp. of Exeter, imprisoned under Mary, 249 ; assists at Parker's consecra- tion, 303 ; his Bible translations, 349 note Cowell, Dr., a Puritan author, 353 Cox, Bp. of Ely, 290, 304 Cranmer, rise of, 152 ; made Archbp. of Canterbury and divorces Henry VIII. from Catharine, 153, 154; gets a Papal Bull for his consecration, 155 ; examines Elizabeth Barton, 164 ; acquiesces in the visitation of monasteries, 173; helps to compose the Ten Articles, 182 ; con- demns Lambert, 193; his Bible, 198, 347 ; unpopularity of, 204 ; is indifferent to Somerset's spoliation, 206 ; inclines to the doctrine of consubstantiation, 206 ; modification of his religious opinions, 207 ; morally weak, 207 ; his two great principles, 208 ; gets a licence from Edward VI. ; secures the abolition of the '■ Conge d'Elire, 208 ; vindicated from Eras- tianism by Dean Hook, 2o9 ; influenced by the foreign Protestants, 214, 232 ; view of communion modified, 215 ; unfair treat- ment of Bp. Gardiner in controversy, 221 ; his connection with the lltjormatio Leg urn, 239 ; joins in Lady Jane's con- spiracy, 242 ; is ordered to keep his house, 244 ; refuses to fly, 248 ; his in- discreet manifesto, 248 ; is imprisoned, 248 ; bis share in Henry's divorce ex- posed, 250, 251 ; moved to Oxford and compelled to dispute, 254 ; disowns tran- Bubstantiation, 254 ; condemned, 255 ; appears before Bp. Brooks, 269 ; con- demned by the i'ope and degraded, 273 ; induced to recant, 274; renounces his re- cantations, 274, 275 ; burnt, 275 Crewe, Bp. of Durham, 124 note ; one of the High Commission Court, 426 Criminals, clerical, tried in Anglo-Saxon Civil Courts, 43 ; but in Ecclesiastical Brake. Courts under William I., 72 ; consequent disputes in the reign of Henry II., 80, 81 Crome, the Reformer, 255 Cromwell, Oliver, his Protectorate, 399 ; his persecution of Churchmen, 399 sq. ; his overtures to the clergy, 400 ; ejects se- questered clergy from tuitional offices, 400, 401 Cromwell, Thomas, rise of, 167,168 ; becomes Vicar-General, 163 ; his visitation of monasteries, 168-178 ; presides at Convo- cation, 182-185 ; encourages di orderly Protestantism, 191 ; his fall, 197 Davenant, delegate to Synod of Sort, 359 David, S., 12 Day, Bp. of Chichester, imprisoned under Edward VI., 227 Declaration attached to the Articles, 368 ; by Charles I. Declaration of Indulgence, Charles II. 's, 416 Declaration of indulgence, James 11. 's, 427 ; to be read in the churches, 430 Declaration of Rights, the, 434 Decretals, the false, 56, 57 " Defender of the Faith," title of, 149 De Hsereticis Comburendis, the, 127 D ists, the so-called, 457-459 Deprivation of bishoi^s and clergy, 295 De Religiosis, the, 100, 101 Desecration of church ornaments, 211 Di Unitate, Pole's, 198, 245 note Deusdedit, Archbp. of Canterbury, 34, 35 D rectory of public worship, the, 387 Disputation at Westminster, 1559, 296, 297 DiSsenters, take orders, 314 ; fall into sec- tarian formations, 328-330; Charles 11. coquets with, 415, 416 ; number of, in 1676, 413 ; James II. wins, by offers of Indulgence, 422, 428; William HI. gives immunity to, under certain limi- tations, 438; statutes against, under Anne, 446 ; indulgence of, under George I., 452, 456, 457 ; freed from all restrictions, 479 ; harass the Church, 479 sq. ; numbers of, conjectured, 480 note Di.'ine right, doctrine of, under James I., 358 ; maintained by Laud and other di- vines, under Charles I., 363, 367, 368 ; under Charles II., 418 ; maintained by a few bishops under James II., 424 ; revived by the Tories under Ijueen Anne, 447 Divorce, Henry tlie Eighth's, 149-154; Cran- mer's part in, exposed, 250, 251 Do ^trines in Anglo-Saxon Church, 46 Dodwell, Henry, Camden Professor, a Non- Juror, 436 Do uinicans, the, 107-109 Do iiinick de Guzman, 106 Do t, the Synod of, 359, 360 Do A sing, ^Villiam, in the eastern counties, 395 Drake, Dr., his " Memorial of the Church of England." 447 492 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Dunstan. Dunstan, Archbp. of Canterbury, his early history, 59 ; career at court, ib. ; primacy, ousts the secular clergy, 60 Du Pin, correspondence with Archbp. Wake, 454 Duppa, Bp. of Exeter, ordains at Eichmond, 401 E Eadbald converted, 23 Eanfleda, Queen of Oswy, observes the Continental Easter, 32 E ister, British computation of, 17, 26, 32 E clesiastical laws of William I., 68 E -kart, the mystic, 126 E Idius, account of Wilfrid, 40 Eiward the Confessor, extolled by monks; unpatriotic administration of, 62 Edward I., ecclesiastical policy of, 99-103 Edward VI., precocity of, 205 ; the bishops take licences from, 208 ; maladministra- tion of his government, 222 sq.\ evil effects of his reign on religion, 208, 224, 240 Egbert, Archbp. of York, 46, 48 Eleutherius, mission to Britain, 6 Elfric, the homilist, 56, 60, 61 Elizabeth, Queen, under restraint in Mary's reign, 256 ; religious status at accession of, 279 sq. ; her religious opinions, 281 &q. ; her coronation, 287 ; claims only to be " Supreme G-overnor," 289 ; reclaims first-fruits and tenths, 290 ; desires a higher standard of ritual, 295 ; estab- lishes Court of High Commission, 298 ; her injunctions, 299-301; her ai)pointment of a Primate, 302 &q. ; her treatment of the Puritan divines, 305 ; her modifica- tions of the thirty-nine Articles, 310 ; her half-hearted support of the Church— due to Leicester's influence, 314, 315 ; gives no sanction to the Advertisements, 316 ; her suspension of Archbp. Grindal, 326, 327 ; receives a rebuke from Whit- gift, 331; supports Whitgift as archbp., 334 Engagement, the Independent, enforced, 395, 398 English Church Union, the, 484 Episcupacy, attacked in Parliament, 384 ; abolished, 386 ; wise reform of, suggested by Puritans, 404 Episcopate, extension of, a necessity, 162, 478 Erasmus, 148 Erastianism, Cranmer's inclination to, 209 ; growth of, under Elizabeth, 336 Erigena, John Scotus, 54, 55 " Erudition of any Christian Man," 199, 200 E-says and Reviews, exculpated, 476-484 E^sex, conversion of, 23 sg. Etca^tera, oath, 381 Etlielbert, conversion of, 22, 23 Ethelburga converted, 28 Eusebius's account of Christianity in Britain, 3 Evangelical movement, the, 468 472; its Frithona. great names, 469, 470 ; its institutions, 470; its failure to stir the Church, 47u- 472 ; some of the party join in the Puri- tan persecution of Tractarians, 475 ; and of Ritualists, 477 ; but most learn to sym- pathise with the revival of Anglicanism, 477 Exclusion, Bill of, 418, 420 Excommunication, lay, explained to James I., 345 Pagius, Paul, a Protestant at Cambridge, 214 ; his remains insulted, 276 Fairfax, Dr., Fellow of Magdalene, Oxford, deprived, 429 Falkland's opinion of episcopal autocracy, 405 note Familists, the, 329, 330, 399 Farmer, Anthony, nominated by James II. to be president of Magdalene, Oxford, 429 Fasting, declared not meritorious under Edward VI., 220 Feckenham, abbot of Westminster, talked of for the primacy, 303 and note Felix, the missionary, 31 Fell, Bp. of Oxford, "helps to suppress Mon- mouth's insurrection, 423 Feuner, the marprelate libeller, 334 Ferrar, Bp. of St. David's, deprived, 252 ; burnt, 268 Feudal tenure of bishops under AVilliam I., 72 Fifth Monarchists, 399 First-fruits and tenths, restored by Mary, 275 ; taken back by Elizabeth, 290 ; ceded to the Church by Anne, 444 Fisher, Bp. of Rochester, educational re- former, 148 ; opposes the divorce, 151 ; averse to royal supremacy, 163 ; made cardinal, 165 ; done to death under Treason Act, 157, 165 ; career of, 166, 167 Fitzjocelyn, Archbp. of Canterbury, 77 Fitzralph, Archbp. of Armagh, 118 and note Fletcher, Mr., of Madeley, the evangelical, 469 Fox, Bp. of Winchester, 148 Frampton, Bp. of Gloucester, preaches against popery under James II., 425 ; deprived as a Non-Juror, 435 note Francis, S., of Assizi, 106 Francis, Allan, sent by James II. to Cam- ))ridge, 428 Franciscans, the, 106-109 Frederick I., his negotiations with the English Church, 449, 450 Freedom of Church guaranteed by the Great Charter, 91 Frowen, Archbp. of York, 410 Friars, the mendicant, revival of religion by, 105, 106 ; their success in England,107 ; they become demoralised, 108 ; and end as university pedants, 109 " Friends of God," the, 126 Frithona, see Deusdedit INDEX, 493 Froude. Fronde, Mr., the Tractarian, 474 Frvtb, the Lutheran, 166 ; burnt by More, iii2 Fursy, the missionary, 31 Or Grardiner, Bp. of Winchester, a leader of the old learning party, 181, 204 ; not in- cluded in the council, 205 ; pleads for the retention of images and holy water, 210, 211; maintains the liberties of the Church, 212, 213 ; is imprisoned and deprived, 213 ; refuses to sign a con- fession of guilt, 227 ; released from prison, 243; becomes privy councillor under Mary, 243 ; a commissioner to try heretics, 263 ; resigns the post, 268 Garentin, monk, a Lollard martyr, 12S Gastrell, Bp. of Chester, 1714, answers Dr. Clarke, 456 Gauden, Bp. of Exeter, 407 and note Gaul, Church of, its connection with British Church, 6 Gaunt, John of, patronizes Wyclif, 120 sg. Gerard, a Lutheran, burnt, 198 Gerhard, Walter, leader of the Publicani, 86 Germanus in Britain, 10 Gerson, the mj-stic, 126 Gibbon, the sceptic, 458 ; answered by Bp. Watson, 459 Gibson, Bp. of London, writes against Woolston, the Deist, 459 Giffard, Bonaventure, Bp. of Madura, placed at Magdalene, Oxford, 430 Gildas, Welsh missionary, 12 Gladstone, Mr. W. E., on the Church of furty years ago, 472 ; on persecution of Kitualism, 475 note ; on the new Supreme Court of Appeal, 481 ; on proceedings in ecclesiastical cases, 483 note Glastonbury, Legend, 5 ; the school at, 59 ; Dunstan's Benedictine Monastery at, 59 Gloucester, bishopric founded at, 178 Goodrich, Bp. of Ely, 181 Gorham judgment, the, 476, 484 Gostwick, Sir John, accuses Cranmcr, 204 Greek, revival of, 134, 135 Gregorian chants, 74 Gregory I., sees Anglo-Saxon boys at Home, 20 ; sets out on a mission to Eng- land, 2l; sends Augustiu. , 21 kings by prelates, 78 sg. " Homilies of Elfric," 60 " Humilies, First Book of," 202 ; enforced by the injunctions of Edward VL, 211 ; second book of, sanctioned by Convoca- tion, 311, 312 Hook, Justice, a founder of the S. P. C. K. and S. P. G., 443 Hoolcer, master of the Temple, 337 ; his " Ecclesiastical Polity," 337 Hooper, an admirer of Northumberland, 224 ; made Bp. of Gloucester, 230 ; his Puritan objections to the episcopal vest- ments, ih. ; imprisoned by Cranmer and submits, and is consecrated, 231 ; im- prisoned under Mary, 249 ; deprived, 253 ; burnt, 26S Horsley, Bp. of St. David's, etc., answers Dr. Priestly, 456 Hough, Dr., elected President of Magdalene, Oxiord, 429 Howe, the dissenter, 428 Hume, sceptic, 458 ; answered by Dr. Paley, 459 Humphreys, Dr., the Puritan, 319 Hunn, Richard, a disorderly Protestant, 190 sg. Huntingdon, Coimtess of, a patroness of Whitetield, her cunnexion, 466 Hy, monastic college at, 13; missionaries sent from, 30 James II. Imag-es, controversy on use ot, 52, 53; Alfred's view of, 54 ; the Ten Articles on, 183 ; the Injunctions of 1538 on, 188 ; defended by Gardiner, 210 ; destroyed by Somerset, 211 ; destruction of, by the Com- mission of 1559, 299 ; Elizabeth's use of, 305 Impropriations, lay, sanctioned by Cardinal Pole, 262 Ina, founds English College at Rome, 53 Independents, the, origin of, 329 ; in the ascendant, 397 ; intolerant character of, 397, 398 Indulgences, traffic in, 110, 111 Injunctions, the first of Edward VI., 211 ; the second of Edward VI. , 225 ; IMary's, 245 ; Elizabeth's, 299-301 Innocent III., Pope, extends papal assump- tions, 92, 93 Innocent XL, Pope, gives no support to James II., 422 " IniKA'ations," Laud's religious, 372 sq. Inquisition founded, 88 ; system of, imported by Philip II., 264 &q. " Institution of a Christian Man," 185, 186 Interregnum, the, 397-402 Investiture of bishops, 62; controversy about, 78 lona, see Hy Ireland, Welsh mission to, 12 Isidore's decretals, 56 Jablouski's negotiations with the iuiglish Church, 449 Jacobite proclivities of the clergy, 451 sq. James I., his dislike of tlie Presbyterians, 341; his character and views, 3-i2; be- haviour at tlie Hampton Court Conference, 345 ; suggests the Englisli Bible of 1611, 347 ; appoints translators, 348 ; favours the theory of Absolutism, 353 ; his apologies for the oath of allegiance, 354 ; restores episcopacy to Scotland, 355, 356; appoints Abbot to the Primacy, 356, 357 ; burns tv/o heretics, 357 ; his Book of Sports, 359 ; sends delegates to the Synod of Dort, ih. ; extends toleration to the Romanists, 360 ; bad effects of his reign, 361 James II., indebted to the clergy for his accession, 418, 422 ; alliance with Penn, 422 ; not supported by Rome, ih. ; his coronation, 422, 423; announces inten- tion of retaining Romanist officers, 423; relies on loyalty of clergy, 424 ; gives Church preferment to Romanists, 424 ; revives High Commission Court, 426 ; suspends Bp. Compton, 426 ; issues the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience, 427 ; extolled by the dissenters, 428 ; his aggressions at the Universities, 428-430 ; INDEX. 495 Jaye. dismissal of lords lieutenants, 430 ; orders the declaration to be read in Churcli, 430 ; is disobeyed, 431 ; sends the bishops to trial for libel, 432 ; seeks coimsel of the bishops, 433 Jaye, George, author of a Primer, 201 Jeffreys, Lord Chancellor, 426, 429 Jenkins v. Cook, 485 Jerome, a Lutheran, burnt, 198 Jewel, Bp., his "Apology," 307, 308 John, King, pprsecution of the Church, 90 s^. Joseph of Arimathea, legend of, 5 Julius, supposed martjT, 7 Ji;lius, ni.. Pope, negotiates with Mary, 245 ; secretly appoints Pole legate to England, 246; his bargain with Mary, 257 Justin jMartyr, account of Christianity in Britain, 3 Justus, Bp. of Rochester, 23 ; Archbp. of Canterbury, 23 Juxon, Archbp. of Canterbury, at Savoy Conference, 407 ; receives order for review of Prayer-book, 410 Keble, j\Ir. a Tractarian, his " Christian Year," 474 Kempis, Thomas a, 126 Ken, Bp. of Bath and AVells, denounces Romanism under James II., 425 ; one of the Seven Bishops, 431, 432 ; refuses the oath to William, 435 ; receives a year of grace, ib. ; retires under protest, 436 Kent, conversion of, 22 sq. Kettlewell, John, the Xon-Juror, 436 Kiffin, the dissenter, 428 "King's Book," see " Necessary Erudition " Kitchiu, Bp. of Llandaff, takes the oatla of supremacy, 297 Knewstubbs, Mr., the Puritan, 345 Knox, a Scutch Reformer, inveighs against Edward Vl.'s government, 2o6 Iiake, Bp. of Chichester, one of the Seven Bishops, 431, 432 ; a Non-Juror, 435 Lamb, Bp. of Brechin, 355 Lambirt, burnt by Cranmer, 193 Lamplugh, Archbp. of York, conduct at Exeter, 434 Lanfranc, Archbp. of Canterbury, Abbot of Bee, 68 ; oppresses the Anglo-Saxon clergy, 74 ; imitates William's policy as regards Rome, 73 Langland, autlior of "Piers Ploughman's vision," IIH, 119 Langton, Archbp. of Canterbury, favourite of Innocent III., 90 ; leads the patriot party, 90, 91 ; suspended by Innocent 111., 92 ; holds his own against Rome, 92, 97 Lasco, John a, a foreign Protestant in Lon- don, 214 ; his formula} incorporated in our Communion office, 235, 236 Luther. Lateran Council of 1215, 92 Latimer, Bp. of Worcester, 181 ; resigns when the Six Articles are enforced, 194 ; a true reformer, denounces Edward's government, 224; compelled to dispute at Oxford, 253, 254 ; is condemned, 255 ; and burnt, 270 ; biography of, 272, 273 Laud, Archbp. of Canterbury, a favourite of Prince Charles, 365 ; raised to bishopric of St. David's, 365 ; is practically primate, 363, 365 sq. ;- officiates at the Coronation, 365 ; wants the Church to disown Calvin- ism, 365, 368 ; account of his administra- tion, 370; becomes Bp. of London and Primate, 372; not really a persecutor, 372 ; but a great religious reformer, 372 account of his proceedings, 372-376 falselj' charged with Romanism, 375 attacked by the Long Parliament, 3S2 sent to the Tower, 3s2 ; his unfair trialj 3S9 ; condemned by Bill of Attainder and execiited, 390 Laurentius, Archbp. of Canterbury, 27 Law, William, a Non-Juror, 436 ; his " Seri- ous Call " and " Christian Perfection," 460, 462 ; his tendency towards mysti- cism, 460 ; influence of, on John Wesley and othei's, 462 Lawyers, clerical, 104 Lay Helpers in Elizabeth's reign, 307 Lee, Archbp. of Y'ork, leader of the old learning party, 181 Legate, Bartholomew, burnt for heresy, 357 Legate, the English Primate, legatus natus, 37 note, 113, 114 Leicester, Earl, a professed Puritan, 313 sq. Leigh, Cromwell's inquisitor, 172 Leighton, Cromwell's inquisitor, 172 Leighton, the libeller, 371 Leslie, Charles, the controversialist, a Non- Juror, 436 Lessons, the Table of, 1561, 305 Libellers, the Marprelate, 334, 335 ; the Puritan, pmiished by the Star Chamber, 371,372 Lichfield, archbishopric of, 42, 51, 52 Liddell v. ^Vesterton, and Liddell v. Beal, 484 Litany, the English, 200 Lloyd, Bp. of St. Asaph, one of the Seven Bishops, 431, 432 ; deprived as a Non- Juror, 435 note; heads the schism, 436 and note Lollard movement, the, 125, 126 ; its disor- derly character, 125 ; legislation against, 127-129 London, Cromwell's inquisitor, 172 Long Parliament, 381 sq. Lords Lieutenants dismissed by James II., 430 Lucius, British king, mission to, 5 Lupus, Bp. of Troyes, 10 Luther, protests against Roman abuses, 138 ; character of his system, 140 ; dog- matises on relative value of Scriptures, 140 ; answered by Henry VIII., 145, 149 49^ ECCLESIA ANGUCANA. Lyons. Lyons, Council of, 98 Lyons, Poor men of, 87, 83 Mackworth, Sir H., a founder of the S.P.C.K. and S.P.G., 443 Magdalene College, Oxford, severities of James IL at, 429, 430 Maintenance of clergy, Anglo-Saxon, pro- visions for, 44 Mainwaring, Dr., preaches in behalf of Absolutism, 368 Manning, Cardinal, and others, secession of, 476 Manton, the Puritan, 403 " Martin :\Iarprelate " libels, the, 334 s^. Martin v. Maekonochie, 484 Martyrs, British, 7, 8 Mary, Queen, persecuted under the reign of Edward VI., 228; and passed over by Edward's will, 242; Lady Jane Grey's rebellion against, 242 ; is enthusiastically received in London, 243; suppresses all preaching, 2(5; Wyatt's rebellion against, 251; her injunctions to the clergy, 215, 252 ; deprivation of married prelates, 252 ; and married clergy, 253 ; married to Philip, 256; her negotiations with Pope Julius, 258 ; reception of Pole, 258, 259 ; her establishment of religious persecu- tion, 264 sg. ; refuses to spare Cranmer, 274 ; restores first-fruits, 275 ; dies, 278 Masses for the dead, esteemed by Cranmer In 1547, 206; impugnedby Somerset when the chantries are to be plundered, 210 Massey, John, lay Dean of Christ's Church, 424 JIatrimonial restrictions, Anglo-Saxon, 46 Matrimony, office for, in the several Prayer- books, 238 Meal Tub Plot, the, 418 Melancthon, the reformer, 139 Mellitus, Bp. of London, 23; becomes archbp., 28 Memorial of the Church of England, Dr. Drake's, 447 Mendicants, see Friars Methodist Church guild at Oxford, the, 463 ; name applied to Wesley, White- field, and their followers, 466 ; history of the movement, 462-468; of the post- humous sects, 468 note Mew, Bp. of Winchester, helps to suppress Monmouth's insurrection, 423 Millenary petition, the, 343 Milner, Rev., the evangelical, 470 IMissal, the Latin, English of 1548, 216 Mixed Chalice, not ordered in Prayer-book of 1552, 237 ; prohibited by Purchas judgment, 485 Monasteries, numerous in Britain, 16; Saxon, 58 ; Anglo-Norman, 70 ; how utilised by the Pupe, 58, 70 ; new varie- ties of, 74, 75 ; growing pretensions of, in 12th cent. 88, 89 ; supplanted by the uni- Ooeasioaal. versity system, 101 ; theory of life in, 105 ; Cromwell's scheme for spoiling, 168; pretexts, 169, 170; precedents, 170, 171 ; detailed account of proceedings, 171- 176 ; consequences, 176-179 Monk, summons the Long Parliament, 401 ; declares for Charles, 402 Monks, new orders of, come in with the Normans, 74, 75, see "Monasteries" and Regulars More, Hannah, Evangelical, 470 ; account of the Church, 471 More, Henry, Latitudinarian, 420 More, Sir Thomas, educational reformer, 148; succeeds Wolsey as Chancellor, 151; assailed by the Treasons Act, 157 ; cannot accept Royal Supremacy, 164 ; and is bo- headed, 165 ; career of, 165, 166 ; account of the suppression of Wyclif's Bible, 123, 130 notes Mortmain, Statute of, 100; suspended for twenty years under Mary, 262 ; modified under Anne, 444 Morton, Archbp. of York, Reformer, 134 Mountague, Dr., his writings, 361 ; censure of, in Commons, 366 N Nagr's Head fable, the, 304 Nelson, Robert, a Non-Juror, 437 ; eminent as a devout High Churchman, 437, 460 ; writes against Dr. Clarke, 456 Neville, Dean of Canterbury, 341 New Learning at Oxfoi'd, 134, 135 ; en- couraged by Wolsey, 144 ; the partisans of, 181 ; how disparaged, 182 Newman, Cardinal, a Tractarian, 474; secedes to the Roman Communion, 476 Newton, Sir Isaac, a Cambridge representa- tive before the High Commission, 429 ; inclined to Arianism, 455 Newton, Mr., of Olney, the Evangelical, 470 Nicsea, Council of, 8 Nicolson, Bp. of Carlisle, on the oath of allegiance, 437 Non-Jurors, the, 435-437 ; subsequent his- tory of, 436 note Norfolk, Duke of, opponent of Cranmer, 204 ; a privy councillor under Marj', 243 Northumberland, Duke of, his administra- \ tion under Edward VL, 224; imprisons ! Bp. Tonstal, 227 ; persuades King Edward to appoint Lady Jane Grey his successor, 242 ; is imprisoned and executed, 243 Northumbria, conversion of, 28; Chris- tianity restored in, by Oswald, 30 Norwich, diocese, hotbed of Puritanism, 331, 375, 413 N jwell's Catechism, 234, 312 Oates, Titus, reveals a Romanist con- spiracy, 417 Occasional conformity, account of, 445, 446 ; Act against, 446 ; repealed, 452 INDEX, 497 Oehin. Ochin, Bernard, a foreign Protestant and polygamist, 214 Odo, Archbp. of Canterbury, 58; his measures of reform, 59 OfFa, King, founds the Lichfield arch- bishopric, pays Peter's Pence, 51, 52 Oldcastle, Sir John, 128, 129 Old Learning party, 180, 181 ; harassed under Edward VI., 221, 222 ; reaction in favour of, 243, 246, 257, 258 Orders of clergy, the seven, 61 Orders, Anglican, their validity admitted by Cardinal Pole, 263 note ; their continuity, 280-285 Ordinal of 1550, 218 Ordinals, in the several Prayer-books, 238 Origen, account of Christianity in Britain, 3 Ornaments, church, desecration of, 211 ; ornaments rubric, and prescription, 294 and note Oseney, bishopric founded at, 178 Osmund, Bp. of Sarum, 76 Oswald's Law, 60 Oswy, King of Northumbria, keeps British Easter, convinced by Wilfrid at Council of Whitby, 32 ; appointment of bishops, 34, 35 Overall, Bp., author of Catechism on Sacra- ments, 340 Oxford, harassed by James IT., 429 ; Trac- tarian revival begins at, 474 Paine, the sceptic, 458 Paley, Dr. William, rector of Bishop- Wearmouth : his Evidences and Natural Theology, 459 Pall, the, sent to Augustine by Gregory, 25 ; sent to Archbp. of Lichfield, 52 ; declared necessary for ofiice of metropolitan, 50, 113 -, secured by Cranmer, 154 Palladius in Ireland, 11 Palmer, Sir William, a Tractarian, 474 Pandulph, Papal nuncio, 90 Papal pretensions at close of Saxon period, 63, 69 ; their growth, 113-118 Pardoners, Papal, 110 Paris, George von, a heretic, burnt, 229 Parker, Bp. of Oxford, parasite of James 11., 424 note ; made President of Magdalene, Oxford, 429, 430 Parker, Matthew, Archbp. of Canterbury, early history of, 2s7, 238 note; his re- ligious opinions, 288 ; his consecration, 303 sg. ; revises the Calendar, and helps to provide a lectionary, 305, 306 ; his share in the Bishops' Bible, 308, 309 note ; issues the advertisements to suppress Puritanism, 315 s^. ; summary of his work, 322, 323 ; his remains insulted by the Puritans, 323 Parochial system existent before Theodore's primacy, 37, 45 Passive obedience, see "Divine right." Pole. Patrick, S., mission of, 11; his work not permanent, 12 Patrick, Bp. of Chichester, a Latitudinarian, 420, 440 Patronage, Papal usurpation of, 113-115 Paul, S., supposed mission to Britain, 4 Paul III., Pope, makes Fisher a cardinal, 165 ; excommunicates Henry, 179 Paul IV., Pope, recalls Cardinal Pole, 277 ; insults Queen Elizabeth, 286 Paulinus, missionary to Northumbria, 27, 23 ; tiis see at York — his work upset — becomes Bp. of Rochester, 29 Peacham, Rev. E., victimised imder James IL, 359 Pearce, Zachary, Bp. of Rochester, writes against Woolston, the Deist, 459 Pearson, Bp. of Chester, 419 Pechell, Dr., Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge, punished by High Commission Court, 429 Peckham, Archbp. of Canterbury, 96, 100 Pecock, Bp. of Chichester, an eclectic of Romanising tendencies — his career — punished for exalting the Pope, 130-132 Pelagius, the British heretic, condemned at councils — influence in Britain, 12 Penitential system, Anglo-Saxon, 46, 47 Penn, the Quaker, patronised by James II. , 422 ; urges the Fellows of Magdalene to submit, 429 Penry, the Marprelate libeller, 334 Percival, Mr., a Tractarian, 474 Persecutions, religious, in 12th century, 87, 83 ; in 15th century, 127-132 ; under Henry VIIL, 189-196, 198; under Ed- ward VI., 222 &q. ; under Mary, 263 sg. ; under James I., 357 ; by the Puritans, 393 sg. ; in the present reign, 482 Perth, general assembly at, 355, 356 Peter Jlartyr, a foreign Protestant, at Ox- ford, 214, 234 Peters, Hugh, the Puritan, 400 Peter's Pence, originates with OfFa, 52 ; paid by William I., 73 ; subsequent history of, ih. note. Peterborough, bishopric founded at, 178 Peto, friar, appointed legate, 277 Petre, Father, in the Privy Council of James II., 424 Philpot the reformer, imprisoned, 255 Pierce, Bp. of Bath and Wells, imprisoned, 382, 3s3 Piers Ploughman on Bishops in partibus, 104; on the ilendicants, 109; on abuses in Church, 118 ; his imitators, 118, 119 Pilgrimage of Grace, 174, 175 Pilgrimages, 50, 51, 110 Pilkington, Bp. of Durham, 318 Pisa, Council of, 133 Pius IV., Pope, offers to sanction our Prayer-book, 319 Pius v., Pope, his bull against Elizabeth, 282, 320 Plan of Pacification, the Methodist, 468 Pole, Reginald, denounces Henry VIII. — is made cardinal — his mother executed, 2 K 498 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Poole. 193 ; is made legate to England, 245, 246 ; short account of, 245 note ; returns to England, 257 ; absolves the nation, 258- 261 ; and the clergy, 261 ; his concessions, 263 ; becomes priest and archbp., 275 ; forced to head the Marian persecution, 276 ; his legative commission revoked, 277 ; dies, 27^8 Poole, Bp., refuses to help in Parker's con- secration, 303 Porteus, Bp. of London, an evangelical, 469 ; his work conti-asted with Bp. Blomfield's, 471 note Poynet, Bp. of Winchester, an immoral ultra-Protestant, 213 ; his Catechism, 234 Practical Catechism, Hammond's, 419 Prcemimire, the statutes of, 117 ; Wolsey assailed by means of, 147 ; clergy un- justly menaced by, 147, 155 sq. ; laity escape, 158; those of Henry VIII. abo- lished, 251 ; clergy ask to have explained, 261 Prayer-book of 1549, 216; prepared by a committee of divines, 217 ; sanctioned by Act of Uniformity, ib. ; satisfies no- body, 218 ; of 1552, 234 ; the Communion Office of, 235 ; never came into use, 236 ; abused by the foreign Protestants, 239 ; of 1559, 292 sq. ; its informal revision at the Hampton Court Conference (1604), 346; use of, proscribed, 388; of 16G2, account of its compilation, 410, 411 ; com- pared with the earlier Prayer-books, 236- 238, 411 note Precisians, see Puritans Predestination controversy, the, 338 sq. Presbyterian, Hampton Court Conference (1604), 236 note, 346 ; Covenant cruelly enforced, 387 ; Directory and Classes, 388 ; system too orderly for the rebels, 388, 389 ; deputation to the Hague, 403 ; proi^osal to modify the autocratic episcopacy of modern times, 404, 405 ; James II. makes concessions to, 427 ; sect largely infected by Socinianism, 456 Prideaux, Humphrey, Dean of Norwich, his Connection of Sacred and Pagan History, 449 Priestly, Dr., the Socinian, confuted by Archd. Horsley, 456 Primer, the Iving's, 200 ; other Primers, 201 Privy Council Committee " regulates " the municipal corporations, 430 ; takes the place of the High Court of Delegates, 476, 481 ; Ritualists tried by, 482 ; deci- sions of, 484, 485 Propliesyings, the, 325 Protestant, tlie term applied to our Church, 342, 343, and note Protestants, foreign, enter England under Edward VI., 214 ; their influence on the Church, 214; their insolence, 214 note; their flight at Mary's accession, 247, 232 Protestantism, its origin, 138 ; its principles, 139; its schismatic tend'^ncy, 140; its relation to the lieformation. 141 ; how Reformation. treated by Henry VIII., 145, 182; its disorderly character, 191 ; some of its mar- tjTS, 192, 193; Edward VI. 's reign more propitious to, 214 ; espoused by North- umberland, 224 ; reaction against, 223, 224, 246 sq. Provision, of benefices, 97 ; protested against, 103; of bishoprics under Martin V., 116 Prynne the libeller, 371 ; compensated, 382 Public Worship Regulation Act, 483 Publicani, the, 86 Pudens and Claudia, legend of, 5 Purgatory, doctrine of, 61, 184 Puritans : Hooper,the first Puritan confessor, 230, 231 ; position of the faction on the accession of Elizabeth, 280 ; their pre- judices humoured, 233; object to the XXXIX Articles, 310; supported by Leicester, 313 ; often dissenters at heart, 314 ; Parker coerces them by means of the Advertisements, 315 sq. ; encouraged by Grindal, 325 ; become sectarian, 328 ; are subjected to Whitgift's three tests, 332 ; issue the Marprelate libels, 334 ; draw up their millenary petition, 343; appear at the Hampton Court Conference, 345 ; are severely treated by Bancroft, 350 ; their " abridgment of the Lincoln ministers," 352 ; encouraged by Abbot, 357 ; their Sabbatarianism hated by James I., 359 ; gain popularity because opposed to absolutism, 361, 363," 366 ; the Puritan libellers, punished by the Star Chamber, 311 sq.; their irreverent prac- tices, 373-375 ; they try to enforce Sabba- tarianism, 377 ; they persecute the clergy, 382 sg.,400 sq.; and desecrate the churches, 395; Puritans at the Universities, 395, 396 ; they persecute the High Churchmen of the present reign, 482 sq. Pusey, Dr., a Tractarian, 474 a Quakers, liberated by James II., 422 Quarto-deciman observance of Easter, 17, 18 Queen Anne's Bounty, institution of, 444 Quia Emptores, the, 100 Quinquarticular Controversy, 359, 360 R Rabamis Maurus, opponent of Tran- substantiation, 55 Raikes, Robert, printer, introduces Sunday- schools, 470 Ranters, the, 399 Real Presence, doctrine of, distinct from Transubstantiation, 55, 56, 207, 254, 482, 485 " Reformatio Legum," produced by Cran- mer's committee, 239 ; never authorised, ib. ; amount of, 239, 240 Reformation, English, much needed, 134, 135 ; how aifected by Protestantism, 141 ; disgraced by thf leading; men of Edward VI. 's reign, 207 sq. ; and by sectarinn ten- INDEX, 49? Heformation. dencies, 214 ; its mismanagement causes an insurrection, 223 Reformation Parliament, 154 s^. " Reformed Liturgy," Baxter's, 408 Reformers, in the 14th cent., 118 sg. ; in the 15th, 134 ; in the 16th, 147 liegiiim JJvnum, the, 456, 457 Regular clergy, conflict with secular, 57 sq. ; Papal tools to weaken the national Church, 58,70 ; oust the secular chapters from cathedrals, 74 ; growing pretensions of, in 12th century, 88, 89 ; resisted by Grosse- teste, 98, 99 ; weakened by use of the universities, 101 ; of little use as pastors, 104. 105 ; swept away under Henry VIII., 168-179 ; chapters of, at cathedrals, re- organised, 178 ; restored by Mary, 252, 253 ; by James II., 424, 425 Regulation of the universities, 395 Eeligious Tract Society, 470 Renard, the Imperial Ambassador, 245 Reservation of Benefices, 97 ; protested against, 103 ; of the English Primacy, 114 ; of Bishoprics, 115, 116 Revision of Prayer-book in Low Church interests attempted, 440 RejTiolds, Ep. of Norwich, a Puritan dele- gate to the Hague, 403 ; and to the Savoy Conference, 407 ; made a bishop, 407 Rich, Edmund, Archbp. of Canterbury, 98 Richard, Archbp. of Canterbury, 86 Richardson, Chief Justice, 377 Ridley, preacher at Paul's Cross, 210 ; made Bp. of London, 226 ; illegally substitutes tables for altars, 226 ; his low view of the Holy Communion, 235 ; .joins Lady Jane Grey's faction, and is imprisoned, 243 ; compelled to dispute at Oxford, 253, 254 ; is condemned, 255 ; and burnt, 270 ; biography of, 271 Ridsdale v. Clifton, 485 Ritualism in modern dissenting'chapels, 475 note Ritualists, the, 482 ; persecution of, 482-485 Rogers, the reformer, 255, 268 RoUe, Richard, translates the Psalter, 123 note Romatne, Mr., the Evangelical, 470 Ptoman Catholic Disabilities, 334, 417, 454, 479 note. Roman Encroachment, early, 54, 63, 64 ; growth of, 69, 70, 73, 79, 97 ; resisted under Edward I., 100, 101, 105 ; in bishoprics, 114, 115 Rome, separation from, 154-161 Root and Branch Bill, 386 liouse, Mr., a Puritan M. P., 369 Rubric, the Black, 293 Rye House Plot, the, 418 s Sabbatarian Controversy, see Sunday question Sacheverell, Dr., his sermon, trial, sentence, Sherlock. and subsequent preferment, 448 ; causes the overthrow of the Whigs, 444, 449 Sacramental test, the, 354 " Saints' Everlasting Rest," Baxter's, 419 Salter's Hall Controversy, the, 456 Sampson, Dean, a Puritan, 319 Sancroft, Archbp. of Canterbury (1677), or- dered to abridge Coronation Service, 422 ; issues royal injunction prohibiting con- troversial preaching, 425 ; declines to act as a High Commissioner, 426 ; refuses to circulate, the Declaration of Indulgence, 431 ; committed to the Tower, tried, and acquitted, 432 ; loyal to the last, 433 ; willies William to be cnstos regni, 434 ; refuses the oath of allegiance, 435 ; his deprivation, 436 Sanderson, Bp. of Lincoln, 407 Sandys, Bp. of Worcester, 305 ; proposes to Erastianizs the Church, 313 Saravia, Adrian, his defence of Episcopacy, 336 Sardica, Council of, 8 Sarum, Use of, 76 Savonarola, the reformer, 134 Savoy Conference, the, appointment of, 407 ; Sheldon's management of, 408 ; proceed- ings in, 409, 410 Sawtry, William, a Lollard martyr, 127 Schism, the Romish, 320 note Schism Bill, the, 446 ; repealed, 452 Scory, Bp. of Chichester, publishes Cran- mer's manifesto without leave, 249 Scotland swears fealty to Rome, 91 note; restoration of Episcopacy to, 354-356 ; canons for, drawn up by Charles I., 378 ; liturgy for it, 378 Scott, Mr., the Evangelical, 470 Seabm-y, Dr., consecrated Bp. of Connecti- cut, 467 Sects, Puritan, during the interregnum, 399 Seekers, 399 Sees, Episcopal, plundered under Edward VI., 222, 227 Selsey, Bishopric at, founded by Wilfrid, 40 Sententiarii, the, 109 Sequestered clergy, provision for families of, 394 Seventy Years' Captivity, the, 103 Shaftesbury's " Characteristics," 457 Sharp, Archbp. of York, his sermon against Popery at his Church of St. Giles, 425 ; Compton declines to suspend him, 425; preferred under William III., 441 Shaxton, Bp. of Salisbury, 194 Sheldon, Archbp. of Canterbury, maintains Anglicanism during the interregnum, 401 ; made Bp. of London and the Savoy Conference meets at his house, 407 ; skil- ful conduct of the debate, 408 ; his pri- macy aids the revival of Anglicanism, 413; persuades the clergy to resign right of self-taxation, 414 Sheppard v. Bennett, 485 Sherfield, Dr., the Puritan, 371 Sherlock, Dean of St. Paul's, calculation of 500 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. Sherlock number of dissenters in 1676, 413; de- nounces Komanism under James II., 425 ; writes the "Case of Resistance" as a Non-Juror — leaves the Non-Jurors and writes the " Case of Allegiance," 436 Sherlock, Thomas, Bp. of London, author of the " Trial of the Four Witnesses," 459 Short Parliament, the, 379, 380 Shower, SLr Bartholomew, author of " Letter to a Convocation Man," 442 Sibthorpe, Dr., preaches in behalf of Abso- lutism, 367 Simeon, Mr., the Evangelical, 470 Six Articles, the, repealed, 210 Skinner, Bp. of Oxford, uses the Church services at Taunton, 394, 401 Smalbroke, Bp. of Lichfield, writes against Woolston, the Deist, 459 Smalridge, Bp. of Bristol, promotes the negotiations with Dr. Jablouski, 450 Society for the Promotion of Christian Ivnowledge, foundation of, 443 Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, its precursor in reign of Charles II., 419 ; its foundation, 443 Socinianism, spread of, among the dis- senters, 456 Solemn League and Covenant, the, 378 ; accepted by Parliament and forced upon the country, 387 ; and clergy, 393 Somerset, Duke of, becomes Lord Protector, 205 ; an ultra-Protestant, 205 ; plunders the Church, 205 ; demolishes churches in London, 206 ; confiscates the revenues of the Chantries, 210 ; is disgraced, 224 ; his heresy commission, 229 Soto, Pedro de, Spanish ecclesiastic, 266 South, Dr., 420 Spanish ecclesiastics in England, 265 ; establish the Marian persecution, 266 sq. Spanish Match, the, of Mary's reign, 251, 256 ; of James I.'s reign, 360 Sparke, Dr., a Puritan Delegate, 345 Spires, Diet of, 138 Spotswood consecrated Archbp. of Glasgow, 355 Sprat, Bp. of Rochester, 424 note ; one of the High Commission Court, 426; reads the declaration in Westminster Abbey, 431 ; leaves the Commission, 433 Star Chamber Court, severities of, 370-372 State connection, modern anomalies in, 479 Statesmen, clerical, in 13th cent., 95, 104 Stigand, Archbp., anoints Edgar Atheling, 62 ; is deposed as an irreconcilable, 62, 68, 71 Stillingfleet, Bp. of Worcester (1689), a Latiti;dinarian, 420 Stock, Mr., introduces Sunday-schools, 470 Stokesley, Bp. of Durham, a leader of the old learning party, 181 Stony Sabbath, the, 378 Submission of the clergy, 158 Sudbury, Archbp. of Canterbury, murdered, 122 Tonstal. Sufferings of the clergy in the Puritan per- secution, 393 &q. Sunday, the, question in Elizabeth's reign, 337, 338 ; in James I.'s reign, 344 ; under Charles I., 376 Sunday Schools, origin of, 470 ; made sub- sidiary to the Anglican revival, 478 Supplication of Beggars, the, 166 "Supplication of Souls," Sir T. More's, 166 Supremacy, Royal, Act of, 62, 73, 155 ; how accepted by Convocation, 156 ; its repeal, 157 ; under Elizabeth, 289 Surplice riot, the, 475 Sussex, conversion of, 40 Swift, champion of ecclesiastical toryism, 449 ; writes against Anthony Collins, 457 Synods, desirable as a check to episcopal autocracy, 405 and note, 406, 477, 484: (see Autocracy) T Tanquelm, 87 Tauler, the mystic, 126, 460 Taxation of clergy apart from laity, 95, 96, 414 Taylor, Jeremy, Bp. of Down and Connor, 419 Taylor, reformer, Bp. of Lincoln, 253, 255 Taylor, reformer. Dr. R., burnt, 263 Taylor, William, Lollard martyr, 128 Temporalities, Churcb, confiscated by Henry VIII, 168-179 ; and by the Govern- ment of Edward VI., 205 sg. ; the laity averse to their restoration, 256, 257 ; the Pope allows their retention, 262 Tenison, Archbp. of Canterbury, 442 Tertullian, account of Christianity in Britain, 3 Tests of Conformity, under Elizabeth, 322 ; those of Charles II., 417 ; modified, 452 ; repealed, 479 Thadiocus, Archbp. of York, 14 Theodore of Tarsus, Archbp. of Canter- bury, sent from Rome, 34 ; deposes Chad, 35 ; breaks up the large dioceses, 36 ; supposed founder of the parochial sys- tem, 37 ; father of Anglo-Saxon litera- ture, 38 ; and of our diocesan organisation, 37, 41 ; his independence of Rome, 39 Theonas, Bp. of London, 14 Thirleby, Bp. of Ely, 273 ; persuades Cran- mer to recant, 274 Thorpe, William, the Lollard martyr, 128 Throgmorton, the Marprelate libeller, 334 Tindal, Dr., the Deist, 458 Tithes, 53 Toland's " Christianity not mysterious," 457 Toleration, growth of, 420, 437 ; and Bill of, under William III., 438. Tonstal, Bp. of Durham, a leader of the old learning party, 181 ; excluded from the Council, 205 ; his estates coveted by Northumberland, 227 ; is imprisoned, ib. ; INDEX. 501 Tonsure. released, 243 ; refuses to help at Parker's consecration, 303 Tonsure, British, 18 Toplady, Mr., the Evangelical, 469 Tract No. XC, 474 Tractarian movement, 473 sg. Transubstantiation, origin of the dogma, 55 ; not accepted by Anglo-Saxon Church, 56 ; declared an article of faith in 13th century, 56 ; rejected by Wyclif, 124 ; sanctioned by ten Articles, 183 ; by the six Articles, 195 ; Cranmer confounds with trans-accidentation, 221 and note ; disowned by Cranmer at Oxford, 254 ; de- nounced by the imprisoned divines in 1554, 255 Trask, the Puritan, 359 Treasons Act, Henry VIII. 's, 165; repealed under Mary, 251 Trelawney, Bp. of Bristol, one of the Seven Bishops, 431 note, 432 Trialogue, Wyclif's, 122, 123 Triers of candidates for the ministry, 388, 400 Trinoda necessitas, the, 43 Turner, Dean, a Puritan, 31 9 Turner, Bp. of Ely, one of the Seven Bishops, 431, 432 ; deprived as a Non-Juror, 435 ; heads the schism, 436 and note Tyndale, his Bible translation, 165, 166, 349 ; assailed in Sir T. More's " Dialogue," 166 u XJdal, Nicholas, Marprelate libeller, 334 Unam Sanctam, the, 102 Uniformity, Acts of, enforcing Prayer-book of 1549, 217 ; enforcing Prayer-book of 1552, 236 ; enforcing Prayer-book of 1559, 294 ; enforcing Prayer-book of 1662, 411 Union Bill of William III., 439 Unity of Church precedes Unity of State, 41 Universities, friars at the, 108, 109 ; judg- ment on Henry VIII.'s divorce case wrung from, 152, 153; plundered under Edward VI., 222 Urban II., Pope, 77 Usher, Archbp. of Armagh, 384 ; his scheme for limiting episcopal autocracy by means of synods, 405 note. Usurping incumbents forced to resign, 411, 412 « Utopia," Sir T. ]More's, 148 Vanists, 399 Venn, Rev., of Huddersfield, Evangelical, 469 Venn, of Clapham, Evangelical, 470 Vermigli, alias Peter Martyr, 214 Vestment rubric in the several Prayer Books, 238 Vicars, monastic, 105 Villagarcia, Juan de, Spanish ecclesiastic, 266 Whitgiffc. Visitation of Monasteries, see Monasteries Visitation of the Sick, Office for, in the several Prayer-books, 238 Vow in favour of Calvinism, the parlia- mentary, 369 W Wafer bread, injunctions and rubrics on, 237 ; ordered by Elizabeth, 302 WagstafFe, the Non-Juror, consecrated Bp. of Ipswich, 436 note ; opinion of the bishops of the establishment, 452 Wake, Archbp. of Canterbury, answers the "Letter to a Convocation Man," 442 ; corresponds with Bossuet, 454; receives letters from Du Pin as to union with the Gallican Church, 454 Waldenses, the, 87 note, 88 Wales, accepts Anglo-Saxon usages, 42 Walker's "Sufferings of the Clergy," 393, 394 Walker, Obadiah, the Piomanist, 424 Wall, William, Rev., his " History of Infant Baptism," 449 Walton, Bp. of Chester, 407 Warburton, Bp. of Gloucester, his " Divine Legation of Moses," 459 Ward, delegate to Synod of Dort, 359 Warham, Archbp. of York, 135, 148, 164 Waterland, Dr., answers Dr. Clarke, defence of the Church's creed, 456 Watson, Bp. of Llandaff, writes agauist Gibbon, 459 Waynfleet, Bp. of Winchester, 171 Wells, Dr., answers Dr. Clarke, 456 Wentworth, Mr., his bills of reformation, 321 Wesley, John, character, 462 ; work of, 462, 463; badly treated by the Church, 465; a sound Churchman, 465, 467; his mock consecration, 467 ; history of his followers, 468 note Westminster, council at, 82; made a bishopric by Henry VIII., 178 ; its abbey threatened with destruction by Somerset, 206 ; disputation at, in 1559, 296 ; Feckenham, last abbot of, 303 Westminster Assembly, the, 387, 389 Whiston, Dr. AVilliam, censured by Con- vocation, 445; account of, 455 ; writes against Anthony Collins, 457 Whitaker, Dr., Calvinist, 340 Whitby, Council of, 19, 31, 32 White, Bp. of Peterborough, one of the Seven Bishops, 431, 432; deprived as a Non-Juror, 435; heads the schism, 436 and note Whitcfield, George, a Methodist at Oxford, his talents, 463; his work, 464; severs from Wesley, 465 ; his followers become "seceders," 466; the "Evangelicals" of the same type as, 468 Whitgift, Archbp. of Canterbury, suppresses Cartwright at Cambridge, 321 ; appointed to succeed Archbp. Grindal, 328; sup- presses disorderly Puritanism, 331 ; his three tests, 332 ; his Twenty-four Articles, 502 ECCLESIA ANGLICANA. ^Whiting . 333 ; at Hampton Court Conference, 345 ; the Church greatly indebted to him, 349, 350 Whiting, Abbot, executed, 176 Whittingliam, translator of Genevan New Testament, 308 note ; lay Dean of Dur- ham, 318 Wi2;hard, selected to be Archbp. of Canter- bury, 34 Wightman, Edward, burnt for heresy, 357 AVilberforce, Wm., Evangelical layman, 470 Wild, Dr., his " funeral sermon of preach- ing," 399 AVilfrid, at Council of Whitby, 32 ; conse- crated abroad, 35 ; Chad appointed to his Bee in his absence, 35 ; Theodore rein- states Wilfrid, 35 ; but breaks up his diocese, 36 ; his appeals to Rome, 40 ; his mission to Sussex, 40 ; is reinstated at Hexham, 41 ; his services to literature, 39 William I., condition of Church at acces- sion of, 66-68 ; his ecclesiastical laws, 72 ; refuses homage to the Pope, 73 ; com- pared with Henry VIII., 73 AVilliam II., despoils the Church, 77 ; con- flicts with Anselm, 77, 78 Williams, Dean, made Lord-Keeper and Bp. of Lincoln, 361 ; disgraced and im- prisoned, 364 ; invited to impeach Laud, 382 Williams, Isaac, a Tractarian, 474 Williams v. Bp. of Salisbury, 484 Wilson V. Fendale, 484 Winchelsey, Archbp. of Canterbury, 102 Winchester, Synod at, forbids clerical mar- riages, 76 Winchester, Marquis of, abets the Marian persecution, 267 Winifrid, see Boniface Wolsey, Cardinal, under - estimated, 142; his rise, 143 ; his administration in Church and State, 137, 143-146; dis- creditably implicated in the Divorce Zwingle. intrigue, 146 ; his downfall, 147 ; his religious toleration, 191, 192 Wood's account of the Puritan students at Oxford, 396 Woodard, Canon, his middle-class schools, 478 Woolston, his "Six Discourses on the Miracles," 457, 458 ; the first Deist con- fessor, 458 ■Worcester House Declaration, rejected by the Commons, 406 Worms, Diet of, 138 Wotton, Dr., answers Lord Shaftesbury, 459 Wren, Sir Christopher, his churches in London, 449 Wren, Bp. of Ely, 382 ; imprisoned, 333 Wriothesley, Lord Chancellor, excluded from the Council, 205 Wykeham, William of, Bp. of Winchester, 120 Wyclif, John, reformer. Master of Baliol, 119; inveighs against Prelate-Statesmen — supported by Duke of Lancaster — his mission to Bruges, 120 ; his attacks on the i'ope — summoned to St. Paul's — de- nounced by the Pope, 121 ; unwittingly encourages socialism, 122 ; his disgrace and retirement, 122 ; his religious sys- tem, 123, 124 ; how dangerous, 125, 126 ; his Bible suppressed, 123, 129, 130 and notes Ximenes, Cardinal, the reformer, 134 York, Archbishopric of, 29, 37 note, 39, 75 and note Zwing'le, the reformer, 139 Date Due 1 MY 2 9 '50 JA2b'5' \ K£ 9 '53 FE 23 '53 ^ BW5020 .J54 Ecclesia Anglicana : a history of the 1 inip nnn^5 7378