21. A.D. 1606. On July 10th, a proclamation ordered all Jesuits, seminaries, friars, and all other priests to depart the realm before August 1st,120 and on September 26th, Paul V. forbad the taking of the oath of allegiance.1 In November, parliament and convocation met. In that of Canterbury,

121

the primate told the clergy of the king's consent to put a restraint on prohibitions, and declared "to both houses the king's pleasure for singing and organ service in cathedrals." A folio book, in manuscript, was also read by the archbishop's secretary.'

122

22. In parliament, with the exception of one act, no measure passed affecting matters of ecclesiastical cogni

Several bills were, however, brought into the commons touching church affairs. Bills "to direct some proceedings in ecclesiastical courts and causes," ,"124 to "restrain the execution of canons ecclesiastical not confirmed by parliament," 125 to "prevent causeless divorces

120 Strype, Ann. IV. pp. 399, 381; ante, p. 321, § 7. The priests "in hold" were to be sent away too. The object of the proclamation being "to avoid the effusion of blood." See Birch, I. p. 65.

121 Wilk. Conc. IV. pp. 430, 431; Collier, VII. pp. 330-332, 335, 342, 343; IX. p. 365; St. Pap. Dom. James I. XXIII. No. 15; XXVIII. No. 53. The authenticity of the bull being disputed, it was followed, on August 23rd the next year, by another confirming it. See Tierney, IV. pp. 74, 75; Lingard, VII. pp. 47, 49; Flanagan, II. pp. 229, 301; Panzani, p. 77; Spondanus, 111. p. 132; App. R.

122 The contents of the book are unknown. Wake says that it was the one "delivered to be considered of last year," i.e. Overall's book, the first part of which was read and subscribed in the York convocation. The convocations met on November 19th, no business being done at York, unless it were the subscription of Overall's book. Both were finally prorogued to February 10th, 1610. Wake, p. 509; Wilk. Conc. IV. pp. 429, 433, 437; Strype, Ann. IV. p. 408; Card. Synod. II. p. 589; ante, p. 348.

123 Parliament met on November 18th, being prorogued on July 4th, 1609, and thence to February 9th, 1610. The 4 Jac. I. c. 5 provided for the repressing of the odious and loathsome sin of drunkeness, but preserved the ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction. See Can. 109.

124 This was read thrice in the commons and sent up to the lords, where it was read once, as 'an act to direct some proceeding in causes and courts ecclesiastical, touching accusation and the oath ex officio." Journ. H. of C. pp. 326—329, 1005, 1006, 1008; Journ. H. of L. p. 465.

125 It passed the commons and was sent up, with a strong recommendation, to

and separations of man and wife, and to continue the rights of lawful matrimony," 12 against non-residence and pluralities of benefices" 127 and "disorders in ministers," 128 for "the more assured execution of justice in ecclesiastical courts and causes," 129 for "the amortising of lands to poor churches, and for better serving of cures,” 130 and for the "reformation of the abusive suing for tithes in ecclesiastical courts," 131 and for the reformation of the high commission, were presented or read.

132

the lords, where it was read twice and committed. Journ. H. of C. pp. 326, 1005, 327, 1006, 329, 1009, 338, 1012, 1013, 348, 1026, 350, 1029; Journ. H. of L. pp. 485, 489, 503.

126 It was thrown out on the second reading. Journ. H. of C. pp. 328, 1008, 331, 1011.

127 The bill passed the commons and was sent up to the lords, with (like the one for the execution of canons) special recommendation, where it was read once. Journ. H. of C. pp. 342, 1021, 348, 1026, 350, 1028; Journ. H. of L. pp. 485, 489. On May 18th, the House of Commons appointed a special committee of the privy council, who were members of parliament, to consider the course to be taken touching the matter, and also "touching the more free preaching of the gospel." Journ. p. 375.

128 The bill against "disorders in ministers" was brought into the commons on February 26th, and was sent up to the lords on May 12th as "an act for the explanation of the statute of 13 Eliz. touching disorders of ministers in the church and touching subscription." It was read once in the lords. Journ. H. of C. pp. 1021, 346, 1025, 350, 1028, 353, 1031, 366, 1040, 372, 1045; Journ. H. of L. pp. 508, 510; and see H. of C. pp. 302, 304, and the matters debated there. The point was raised that the proceedings for deprivation were coram non judice, and that the bishops were, as the attorney-general confessed, “all in the king's mercy." It was supposed that the repeal of 1 Mar. sess. 2, c. 2 had revived the 1 Edw. VI. c. 2, but the judges held that the 25 Hen. VIII. c. 20 was in force, and that, as being contrary to the 25 Hen. VIII. c. 20, the 1 Edw. VI. c. 2 remained repealed. Rep. p. 8; 1 Eliz. c. 1, §7; 8 Eliz. c. 1, § 2; Wilk. Conc. IV. p. 534; Card. D. A. II. p. 212; Gibson, I. pp. 132, 967.

12

129 This was read twice in the commons. Journ. pp. 345, 1023, 374, 1045. 130 It was read twice and committed. Journ. H. of C. pp. 373, 1044, 374, 1045.

131 This was read once only. Journ. H. of C. p. 374; see Burn. III. p. 750, ed. 1848; Fulbecke, II. p. 8; Degge, pp. 368—407.

132 The bill was read once on June 25th, and committed the next day to all the privy council and civil and common lawyers in the house. Journ. H. of C. pp. 387, 1054. On March 17th, 1605, the commons had complained of two high commissions. But the commission of February 9th, 1605, extended to the united kingdom, Scotland excepted. Ante, p. 343, § 15, n. 85; Journ. H. of C. p. 286. The power to fine and imprison was disputed and objected to. Fuller, a bencher

A petition to the king (read on June 18th), "containing matters of grace, satisfaction, and respect to the house," besought him

1. To command the civil and ecclesiastical judges to a more full execution of the laws against recusants, "Jesuits, and priests, the authors of the separation, the forgers of conspiracy, and firebrands of sedition and separation." The bishops to be commanded to ease the church of ignorant curates and ministers, and to close the doors against the entry of the like hereafter, as well as those whose scandalous and offensive lives and impiety were not only a stain on their calling but a blot to religion.

2. That non-residence be discountenanced and discouraged.

3. That dispensations for plurality and commendations be restrained.

4. That to meet the want of preaching ministers, the late deprived, suspended, and silenced ministers may be restored to the use of their ministry.

After reading, it was resolved to "contest no more with the king," but to let the petition "sleep." 133

23. A.D. 1607. On May 7th, Bancroft inhibited certain. unlicensed schoolmasters at Torrington,134 and on September

of Gray's Inn, had argued, in the case of Richard Maunsell, his client, that the commissioners had no power to imprison, but was locked up, by Bancroft, for life, for his pains, as an example and warning to others. He died in prison in February, 1619, at the age of 76, leaving behind him "the reputation of an honest man." Birch, I. p. 69; Neal, I. p. 419; Fuller, Ch. Hist. x. pp. 55, 56; see 4 Inst. pp. [325-335].

133 Journ. H. of C. pp. 375, 382, 384, 385, 1053; ante, n. 124. Report was made, on June 9th, of the labour of the committee of May 18th, and a draft petition was delivered. On June 16th, the speaker said the king had taken notice of the petition, and said he would ever be most careful to execute those laws; that it was a matter merely belonging to himself, and that it shall be needless to press him in it. This message was looked on as a wound to the gravity and liberty, and as an arrest, of the whole house, and it was urged that the petition be read. The speaker, however, replied that there were many precedents in the late queen's time where she restrained the house from meddling in petitions of divers kinds. It was, however, read with the king's consent on June 18th. In the course of the debate it was said that there were 400 Jesuits and seminaries in England, and "40 simple people converted in one year by one Jesuit"; and that out of 8000 parish churches there were not 2000 resident preaching ministers, and not 1000 that preached once a month, and not 500 single beneficed, whilst 300 were deprived, suspended, or silenced. See Collier, IX. p. 362; ante, p. 342, n. 82.

134 Wilk. Conc. IV. p. 430; see Card. Synod, II. pp. 712, 713; Can. 77, 78;

18th, Bellarmine wrote to Blackwell, the archpriest, sharply rebuking him for having taken the oath of allegiance.135 This year, too, Babington visited his diocese, 136 and Cowell's "Interpreter" was published.137

24 A.D. 1608. On July 24th, the king wrote to the Bishop of London, requiring him to see to the repair of St. Paul's Church." 138 He is also said to have

"had two or three conferences of late with the judges about prohibitions, as well touching the clergy and high commission, as the courts of York and Wales, which prohibitions he would fain cut off, and stretch his prerogative to the utmost. The judges stand well yet to their tackling; but finis coronat opus.” 199

25. A.D. 1609. In January, Bancroft visited his diocese, and set forth a set of injunctions for his cathedral. The two first prescribed,

1. "That the epistle and gospel be every Sunday and holy day

Strype, Whit. App. p. 226; 1 Salk. p. 105. One reason for the strict watch kept over schools was that the alien priests sometimes took upon themselves the guise of teachers.

135 St. Pap. Dom. James I. XXVIII. No. 53; Collier, vII. pp. 344-349, IX. p. 367; Tierney, iv. p. 75, pp. cxlviii. clvii. Blackwell was deposed by the pope on February 1st, 1608. Bellarmine wrote against the oath under the name of Tortus, and Bishop Andrewes wrote the "Tortura Torti" in reply. Halliwell, 11. p. 115; Birch, II. pp. 77, 81. It was put in the Index. Ante, n. 121.

136 Babington asks, Art. 3, "whether is the prescript form of divine service used.. according to the book of common prayer, and whether doth your minister duly observe all the orders, rites, and ceremonies prescribed in the said book of common prayer, as well as in reading public prayers, the litany, as also in administering the sacraments in such manner and forme, wearing the surplice, as by the book of common prayer by law now established, is enjoined."

Art. 17. "Whether doth your minister wear the surplice whilst he is saying public prayers and administering the sacraments, and if he be a graduate . . . such a hood as by the order of the university is agreeable to his degree, according to the 58th Canon." Rit. Com. Rep. II. pp. 453, 454.

137 The book was suppressed and, in 1610, by a proclamation, denounced and called in as a pernicious work made against the honour and prerogative of the crown and the dignity of the law, the author being imprisoned. It was not published again until 1637. See the work, s. v. "King," 'Parliament," "Prerogative"; St. Pap. Dom. James I. LIII. Nos. 39, 130; Neal, 1. p. 441.

99 66

138 Wilk. Conc. IV. p. 433. £60,000 was wanted. Ellis, III. p. 221 (1st ser.) 139 Birch, I. p. 8o.

read, according to the book of common prayer, in some convenient place near the communion table, and in copes."

2. "That upon solemn feast days the sermon be made before the communion, the moveable pulpit being placed either in the presbytery or in the quire, and every afternoon on such days there be a sermon for the city in the ordinary place."1

99 140

Later on a commission of review went to Sir J. Croke and others to examine a pretended contract of marriage.141 The

140 We have in the first injunction not only an authoritative explanation (by the framer) of part of the 24th canon, but the interpretation put upon it is also enjoined and enforced, as law, at his visitation. Now, the first book of Edward VI. said nothing of "the gospeller and epistler," but ordered "albs with tunicles" (not copes) for those priests or deacons who were "to help the priest in the ministration as shall be requisite," the priest, or he that is appointed, having to read the epistle, and either "the priest or deacon" the gospel. The Advertisements altered all this, directing that "in cathedral and collegiate churches the principal minister shall use a cope with gospeller and epistler agreeably," i.e. that in addition to the one cope ordered for the minister, two were to be worn by his assistants. The canon adopts this new order, and to prevent mistakes as to the source and authority, the words "according to the Advertisements published anno 7 Eliz." are added. (See ante, p. 327, l. 19, where, instead of "epistoler, agreeably to the Advertisements," it should be "epistoler agreeably, according to the Advertisements published anno 7 Eliz.") The certificate mentioned by Strype (ante, p. 234) must thus have been given in after the setting forth of the "ordinances accorded by the Archbishop of Canterbury in his province," seeing that the use of copes for the "pisteler and gospeler was no where else then ordered or required. The order of the first book, and of the proviso and rubric, was thus, in 1565—6, varied and set aside, and, in 1604, deliberately adopted and affirmed by Bancroft, the bishops, and convocation, although in direct conflict and wholly inconsistent with, both act and rubric, They thus recognised, enforced, and sustained the order of the Advertisements as the law of the church in the matter. There is here no possible question of a maximum or minimum of observance, and there is no escape from the inevitable conclusion. Neither the first book of Edward VI., nor the Advertisements or canon, specified the kind of cope to be used, the canon merely prescribing a "decent" one. It was not an eucharistic vestment at all, and if the out-door or processional cope be, as it would seem, the one meant and ordered, they were worn by laity and clergy alike on occasions of state and ceremonial. Laud was charged with introducing "gaudy Romish copes into his chapel (never used in his predecessors' times)," these "gaudy copes" being directly derived from the papists' wardrobes. He defended himself by quoting "the 24th canon of our church, anno 1603." Wilk. Conc. IV. p. 436; Prynne, Cant. Doom. p. 64; Hierurg. Ang. pp. 138-173; ante, p. 331, n. 54, and post, n. 241. The pulpit preserved in Westminster Abbey, said to have been used by Cranmer, is an example of a "moveable" one. The case was

141 On August 30th. St. Pap. Dom. James I. XLVII. No. 102.