denied this that they had never promised to dispute, but only to testify, and show why in conscience they could not subscribe: that they had done so, and could do so more sufficiently than they had: that they would not be respondents before their arguments were solved: that, as the matter was already determined and decreed, they would but encumber themselves to no profit by answering. The controversy would therefore have been at an end, but that the challenge of Philpot could not be overlooked.

The final day of disputation, 30 October, was opened by the Prolocutor, who demanded of Philpot whether he would answer in the questions before propounded to the objections of himself and his fellows. He replied that if, as it had been at first determined, they would answer fully but one of his arguments, of which he had a dozen to bring, he would answer their objections. He was told to propound his argument: and thus the order of proceeding remained as it had been hitherto. He put forth the well-known argument of circumscript locality, in syllogistic form. Morgan, who responded, denied his major: and a wrangle followed, in which the weapons of anger and ridicule were used on both sides. Morgan laughing at one of Philpot's allegations, as if disdaining to answer it, Harpsfield stepped in with a replication, and was refuted by Philpot in a syllogism: a digression on the nature of necessity was stopped by the Prolocutor, demanding whether or no Philpot would answer to Morgan an argument or two: but Philpot held to the position that his own arguments had not yet been answered sufficiently. Then Morgan rose again, and asked whether Philpot would be ruled by the universal Church. "Yea," answered the other, "if it be the true Catholic Church : but I would have you declare what the Church is.”

"The Church," said Morgan, "is dispersed and diffused throughout the world."-"That is a diffuse definition," said Philpot; "I acknowledge no church but that which is grounded upon God's Word, upon the Scriptures of God." Were the Scriptures before the Church?" asked Moreman in aid of Morgan: and was answered that they were, being written in the hearts of good men before they were written in paper and ink. "Fie, fie,” said the formerly baffled disputer, not without just triumph, "to say that the Scriptures should be accounted scriptures before they were written! He that saith this hath no learning." Philpot made an angry retort; whereon the Prolocutor told him he would never be answered, that he was fitter for Bedlam than for a learned assembly: and put it to the House whether he should not be forbidden to come among them further. Some of them said yea: but Morgan* interposed on his behalf: and the Prolocutor informed him that he might come as heretofore, lest he should slander them by raising a story of having been denied freedom of speech: "But come habited like the rest of us, in a long gown and tippet: and only speak when I command you."-"I had rather be absent altogether," answered Philpot. In the end the dissentients seem to have been invited to write their sentences on the doctrines under controversy in the journal of Convocation: and it is said, perhaps untruly,

* Morgan said two years afterwards, that Philpot fell on his knees and fell to weeping in the Convocation house. Philpot's Examinations, 116, Park. Soc. Chedsey, one of his other antagonists, said the same. "He was answered in as much as he was able to bring: and when he had nothing else to say, he fell a weeping. I was there present." He added that in Philpot's account of the disputation "there was never a true word." Philpot denied that, if he wept, it was for lack of matter and maintained that his report of the disputation was true. Ib. 63.

+ Collier (App. No. 68) has given (I know not whence) an extract from the perished Journal of Convocation, fol. 83: consisting of the opinions of the four chief disputants of the reformed part upon the

.

that they were dismissed by the Prolocutor with the words, "You have the word, and we the sword."* The disputation was a notable incident, though passion impeded the efforts of reason in the mysteries of religion. The conduct of Weston was overbearing, if the conduct of Philpot was unruly. Private variance and the late public commotion, ministered arms to theology. Philpot beheld in Watson the chaplain of Gardiner. Moreman saw in Haddon the Dean of Exeter. In Cheney and

former of the articles, the Presence in the Holy Eucharist. They are as follows

Sententia Walt. Philippi Dec. Roffen.

In Pane et Vino consecrato fideles vere et realiter et substantialiter fide cordis manducant verum Corpus Christi, quod sedet ad dextram Dei Patris, et ore manducant Sacramentum Corporis Christi,

Sententia Jac. Haddon Dec. Exon.

Corpus Christi realiter adest Sacramentis Corporis et Sanguinis sui vere et ex Christi Institutione administratis. Intellige realiter pro vere et non ficte; Sacramentaliter, non autem carnaliter.

Sententia Ri. Cheyney Archidiac, Heref.

In Sacramento altaris virtute verbi divini a sacerdote prolati, præsens est realiter Corpus Christi conceptum de Virgine Maria.

Sententia Joh. Philpot Archidiac, Winton.

Dico per sacra Cœnæ Dominicæ Symbola ex Institutione Evangelica administrata, vere exhiberi per Spiritum Sanctum Corpus et Sanguinem Christi sumentibus ex fide: adeoque illud ipsum Corpus et Sanguinem in quibus omnem obedientiam Christus pro salute nostra adimplevit, quo primum cum eo in unum Corpus coalescamus, et in bonorum omnium Participatione Virtutem quoque ejus sentiamus.

* During the aforesaid Parliament there was kept at Paul's church a public disputation, appointed by the Queen's commandment, about the presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar, which disputation continued six days, Doctor Weston being then Prolocutor of the Convocation, who used many unseemly checks and taunts against the one part, to the prejudice of their cause. By reason whereof the disputers never resolved upon the article proponed, but grew daily more and more into contention, without any fruit of their long conference, and so ended their disputation with these words spoken by Doctor Weston Prolocutor. "It -is not the queen's pleasure that we should herein spend any longer time, and ye are well enough, for you have the word and we have the sword." Holinshed.

Aylmer were discerned by Chedsey and Harpsfield the chaplains of the Duke of Suffolk: the chaplains of Bonner were not invisible beneath the learned robes of Chedsey and Harpsfield to the eyes of Cheney and Aylmer.*

In the Upper House, whether communicated to the clergy or not, four Articles were framed and passed, for Communion in one kind, for Transubstantiation, for the adoration and reservation of the Eucharist, and concerning the substance of the Eucharist, the institution and the intention. But considerable intercourse must have been held between the Houses, if there were sufficient foundation for the complaint of one of the clergy concerning

* The account of these proceedings in Cranmer's register and that of Convocation (in the same volume) may now be given. It bears hard on Philpot. "In primo hujus convocationis die post electionem Hugonis Weston in prolocutorem, Episcopus London, præses eam continuavit ad diem Veneris seq. Oct. 20: quo die exhibitæ sunt duæ propositiones disputandæ (de reali Præsentia Christi in Sacramento altaris et de Transubstantiatione) et libellus inscriptus 'Catechismus,' in ultima synodo promulgatus, reprobatus fuit. Quibus articulis subscripserunt omnes præter Walt. Philips decanum Roff, Jac. Haddon, Joh. Philpot, Ri. Cheyney et Joh. Elmer : qui ad diem Lunæ audiendis disputationibus assignatum opponentes erant et Mag. Moreman, Chedsey, Glyn, Watson, Feknam, Morgan, Philips, et Harpsfield respondentes. Horum disputantium vices prolocutor de triduo in triduum mutari voluit, sed opponentes primum electi respondentium partes suscipere expresse recusarunt: ideo penultimo die Octobris mag. Philpot propter ignorantiam, arrogantiam, insolentiam, ac pertinacitatem ad disputandum non est ulterius admissus nisi in causis civilibus: et cessantibus disputationibus opponentes supra nominati fidem et opinionem suam de Sacramento altaris declarare sunt requisiti. Hujus etiam diei actis assuitur catalogus omnium de clero qui Catechismum sub Edw. VI. editum reprobaverunt. Et postquam die 27 Oct. de quibusdam articulis in synodo Tractatum : et convocatio iterum iterumque prorogata fuisset, 13 die Decem. breve a regina ad dissolvendam convocationem introducebatur." Wilkins, iv. 88. This will be seen to differ from Philpot's narrative in some respects. It makes the disputation formal, so far as it went, and only half carried out by the refusal of the opponents to become respondents. It gives the names of disputants of whom Philpot makes no mention. It gives a different version of Philpot's conduct and the censure of it.

the lofty demeanour of the few bishops who remained at large to sit in convocation. "Slavely and bondly they handle the rest of the clergy," exclaimed Turner the Dean of Wells, whom we have met before, "so that ye would say they were the Pope's right shapen sɔns. There sit but seven or eight linen-wearing bishops at the table and if there be three score pastors and elders, they are woolwearers, like so many meek sheep. As long as they tarry in the Bishops' Convocation House, they must stand before their lords, though it be two or three hours: and, be the weather never so cold or the men never so sickly, bareheaded."* On the thirteenth of December the Queen dissolved the Convocation by a mandate sent to Bonner. †

The twentieth of December was the day on which the Act came in ure that forbade the use of the English service. It was heralded by a Proclamation to the same effect, that the service and communion should not henceforth be celebrated in English in any part of the kingdom, that no married priest should officiate thenceforth; ordering the Latin service to be had again, and in

* Strype, v. 73: who gives the Articles in the Latin from the Foxi MSS. from a paper that belonged to Archb. Parker, and adds the remark that from these Articles were framed the questions that were afterwards disputed at Oxford between members of this synod and of the two Universities on the one hand, and on the other Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer. From the second of these articles, on Transubstantiation, the following words may be quoted: Ecclesiæ pastores in Laterano concilio legitime congregati antiquam fidei Catholicæ veritatem novo transubstantiationis vocabulo apte expresserunt ; quemadmodum patres Niceni Filium ejusdem cum Patre substantiæ esse novo consubstantialis vocabulo declaverunt."

+ Fox gives it: iii. 24. The day (of December) was a proclamation through London and all England that no man should sing no English service nor communion after the 20 day of December; nor no priest that has a wife shall not minister nor say mass: and that every parish to make an altar and to have a cross and staff, and all other things in all parishes all in Latin, as holy bread, holy water, as palms and ashes. Machyn, 50.