further, was to address the Queen with an offer to maintain by disputation, that the platform of the puritans was absurd in divinity, and dangerous to the state; which the non-conformists would willingly have debated, but the others knew the Queen and council would not admit it.

The press was in the hands of the archbishop, who took all possible care to stifle the writings of the puritans, while he gave liceneet to Ascanio an Italian merchant, and bookseller in London, to import what popish books he thought fit, upon this very odd pretence, that the adversaries arguments being better known by learned men, might be more easily confuted. But was it not a shorter way to confute them in the high commission? Or might not the same reason have served for licensing the books of the puritans? But his grace seems to have been in no fear of popery, though this very year another assassination plot was discovered, for which Ballard a priest, and about 12 or 14 more, were executed. Remarkable are the words of this Ballard, who declared upon examination to Sir Francis Knollys, treasurer of the Queen's household, and a privy counsellor, "That he would desire no better books to prove his doctrine of popery, than the archbishop's writings a'gainst Cartwright, and his injunctions set forth in her ma'jesty's name. That if any men among the protestants lived virtuously, they were the puritans, who renounced their ceremonies, and would not be corrupted with plural'ities. That unlearned and reading ministers were rather a furtherance than a hindrance to the catholic cause. That though the bishops owned her majesty to be supreme governor in causes ecclesiastical, yet they did not keep their

†This licence was not absolute and unlimited, but restrained the importation to a few copies of every such sort of books, and on this condition only, that any of them be not shewed or dispersed abroad: but a delivery of them was to be made to one of the privy council, or to such only as they or some of them should judge meet to have the perusal of them. Ascanio was obliged to enter into strict bonds to perform these conditions. This method of licensing popish books was not so inconsistent with the restraint laid on the liberty of the press, and on the circulation of the books of the puritans, as our author represents it, and appears to have conceived of it. Maddox's Vindication, p. 350.

* Life of Whitgift, p. 268.

‡ Ibid. թ. 265.

ED.

courts in her majesty's name: and that though the names and authority of archbishops and bishops, &c. were in use in the primitive church, they forgot that they were then lords or magistrates of order only, made by the prince, and not lords of absolute power, ruling without appeal.” This was written by Mr. Treasurer himself, Oct. 15, 1586, upon which Sir Francis advised in council, "That special 'care should be taken of popish recusants; and that the absolute authority of private bishops, without appeal, should be restrained; that they might not condemn zealous preachers against the pope's supremacy, for refusing to subscribe unlawful articles, nor without the assembly of a synodical council of preachers, forasmuch as the ab'solute authority of the bishops, and their ambition and 'covetousness, had a tendency to lead people back to po'pery." But how much truth soever there was in these observations, the Queen and archbishop were not to be convinced.

The puritans being wearied out with repeated applications to their superiors for relief, began to despair, and in one of their assemblies came to this conclusion; that since the magistrate could not be induced to reform the discipline of the church, by so many petitions and supplications, (which we all confess in the liturgy is to be wished) that therefore, after so many years waiting, it was lawful to act without him, and introduce a reformation in the best manner they could. We have mentioned their private classes in Essex, Warwickshire, Northamptonshire, and other parts, in which their book, entitled, The holy discipline of the church, described in the word of God, being revised, was subscribed by the several members in these words, according to Mr. Strype, which are something different from the form at the end of the book in the appendix. "We

acknowledge and confess the same, agreeable to God's 'most holy word, so far as we are able to judge or dis'cern of it, excepting some few points, [which they sent 'to their reverend brethren in some assembly of them, for their further resolution] and we affirm it to be the same 'which we desire to be established in this church, by dai. ly prayer to God, which we profess (as GoD shall offer 'opportunity, and gives us to discern it so expedient)

by humble suit to her majesty's most honorable privy council and parliament, and by all other lawful means to further and advance, so far as the law and peace of the present state of our church will suffer it, and not to enforce the contrary. We promise to guide ourselves according to it, and follow the directions set down in the 6 chapter of the office of the ministers of the word. We promise to frequent our appointed assemblies, that is, every six weeks classical conferences, every half year provincial assemblies, and general assemblies every year."†

† Among those that subscribed or declared their approbation of the book of discipline, were the reverend

and others, to the number of above 500, all beneficed in the church of England, useful preachers, of unspotted lives and characters, and many of them of the university of Cambridge, where they had a strong and powerful interest.

Bishop Maddox triumphs in the representation of Mr. Neal that 500 who subscribed the holy discipline were all beneficed in the church, as a proof of the lenity of government. Mr. Neal, in his reply, adds, "that there were more than twice five hundred clergymen who made a "shift to keep their places in the church." But, when at the same time, they were continually exposed to suffer from the rigor of government; when, as Dr. Bridges declared, a third part of the ministers of England were covered with a cloud of suspensions ;-when many smarted severely for attempting a reformation, for which they all wished and prayed;-when Cartwright, Travers, Field, Johnson, Cawdrey, Udall, and other leaders of the puritans, were suspended, imprisoned, and frequently in trouble, not to say dying under the hand of power; the reader will judge with what propriety his lordship exults over our author. See Mr. Neal's Review, p. 872, 873. ED.

Besides the puritans already mentioned, as suffering this year, the learned Dr. John Walward, divinity professor at Oxford, was enjoined a public recantation, and suspended till he had done it, for teaching, that the order of the Jewish Synagogue and eldership, was adopted by Christ and his apostles into the christian church, and designed as a perpetual model of church government.* He was also bound in a recognizance of 1001. for his good behavior.-Mr. Harsnet, of Pembroke hall, was imprisoned at the same time for not wearing the surplice.--Mr. Edward Gillibrand, fellow of Magdalen college, Cambridge, was forbid preaching, and bound in a recognizance of 1001. to revoke his errors in such words as the commissioners should appoint. His crime was speaking against the hierarchy, and against the swelling titles of archbishops and bishops; for which Whitgift told him, he deserved not only to be imprisoned and suspended, but to be banished the university. -Mr. Farrar, minister of Langham in Essex, was charged with rebellion against the ecclesiastical laws, and suspended for not wearing the habits. Bishop Aylmer told him, that except he and his companions, would be conformable, in good faith he and his brethren the bishops would, in one quarter of a year, turn them all out of the church.-Sept. 11th, Mr. Udall, of Kingston upon Thames, was suspended and imprisoned, for keeping a private fast in his parish. In the month of January Mr. Wilson, Mr. More, and two other ministers, were imprisoned, and oblig. ed to give bond for their good behavior.

In the month of May the Rev. Mr. Settle was summoned before the archbishop at Lambeth, and charged with denying the article, Of the descent of our Saviour's soul into hell, or the place of the damned. Mr. Settle confessed it was his opinion, that Christ did not descend locally into hell, and that Calvin and Beza were of his mind; which put the archbishop into such a passion, that he called him ass, dolt, fool. Mr. Settle said, he ought not to rail at him, being a minister of the gospel. What, said the archbishop, dost thou think much to be called ass and dolt? I Ibid. p. 800, 805.

* MS. p. 798.

have called many of thy betters so. True, said Mr.Settle; but the question is, how lawfully you have done so? Then said the archbishop, thou shalt preach no more in my diocese. Mr. Settle answered, I am called to preach the gospel, and I will not cease to do it. The archbishop replied with a stern countenance, Neither you, nor any one in England, shall preach without my leave. He then charged Mr. Settle with not observing the order of the service-book; with not using the cross in baptism; with disallowing the baptism of midwives; and not using the words in marriage, With this ring I thee wed. The dean of Winchester asked him, if he had subscribed. Settle answered yes, as far as the law required; that is, to the doctrines of faith and the sacraments, but as touching other rites and ceremonies, he neither could nor would. Then said the archbishop, thou shalt be subject to the ecclesiastical authority. Mr. Settle replied, I thank GOD you can use no violence but upon my poor body. So his grace committed him to the Gate-house, there to be kept close prisoner.*

Sandys archbishop of York was no less active in his province; I have many of his examinations before me; he was a severe governor, hasty and passionate; but it was said in excuse for him and some others, that the civilians by their emissaries and spies turned informers, and then pushed the bishops forward, to bring business into the spiritual courts.

About this time Dr. Bridges, afterwards bishop of Oxford, wrote against the puritans, and maintained that THEY were not grievously afflicted, unless it were caused by their own deserts. The doctor was answered by Mr. Fenner, who appealed to the world in these words: "Is it no grievous affliction, by suspension to be hung up between hope and despair for a year or two, and in the mean time to see the wages of our laborers eaten up by loiterers? Nay, 'our righteous souls are vexed with seeing and hearing the ignorance, the profane speeches, and evil examples, of those thrust upon our charges, while we ourselves are 'defamed, reproached, scoffed at, and called seditious and rebellious; cited, accused, and indicted, and yet no redress