c
Library
of the
University of Toronto
u
SPECIMEN
Offome
ERRORS and DEFECTS
IN THE
Hiftory of the Reformation
OF THE
Church of ENGLAND;
Wrote 'by
GILBERT BVRNET,D.D. now Lord Bifliop of Sarum.
By MTHONY
LONDON,
Printed for Randall Taylor y near
Stationers-Hall. \ 69 3 .
• lamoloi 8
-•'1
lo •iof
lo
( III )
f
SPECIMEN of fpme Errors and defeats in the late Hiftory of the Refor mation of the Church
ngland.
IT ought not to be efteemed any Dif- re/pe£l to the Author of the late Hiftory of the Reformation of the Church of England, now advanced to an eminent ft ation therein, nor any In- d*£Mty offered to tie Work it felf ; if the Errors and Defetts of it be difcoVered and published by others. To examine the Truth of things propofed, is a privi lege common to all men : Nor can this Great Hiftorian juftly take it ill, if the title of Infallible, which he with fo great ftrengtb ofreafon oppofeth in othersy be denied to himfelfy efpecially Jince him- felf hath laid down this excellent Otyle, Hift
that ingenuous perfons ought not to
D A t
A 2 take
) ;
take things on truft eafily, no not from the greateft Authors.
At leaft it mil be allowed, that when a Forreigner ( however eminent and learned) undertaketh to write the Hifto- ry of any Nation, or part of it ; the Natives haVe more than ordinary right to examine the truth, and difcoVer the miftakes of it , left otberwife the honour of their Countrey fbould Juffer any pre judice by afalfe Delation of its Tran- factions. This examination mil he fo much the more neceffary and ferriceable, ly how much the Hi/lory hath obtained the greater reputation in the World : fence where any Hi/lory acquirtfh (as this hath moft deferVedly) fuch an uni- Verfal reception, M to be read, and eftee- med by all at home, to be tranjlated into other Languages abroad, to be accounted iy all moft perfect m its kind; that uni- Verfal reputation will the more effettu- ally contribute to the propagation of the flrrors contained m it; and further fmce
V )
(&$ the Author himfelf not Mainly ima- gins) it is a Work that may live fome time in the World ; tho/e Errors, which tend to the prejudice of truth and difhonour of the 2\ation, . will he perpetu ated, unlefs this remedy, of a pullick detection of them, he allowed.
I do not herehy pretend to detraEl from the honour due to this Hiftory ; nor do 1 prefume Jo much 06 to infinu- ate, what the Hiflorian himfelf is plea- Jed to own , his unfitnefs for fuch a Par. IB&I work, by reafon of his unacquain- Prcf ^8< tednefs with the Laws and Cuftoms of this Nation, not being born in it : however the deftre and encourage-
J o
went of Great tperfom did herein o'Ver- rule his Modefty. I am not fo Vain as to imagin, that I can in the leaft hlaft a reputation jo firmly and fo deferVedly eftabltfred j nor is that any part of my defign. On the contrary, I fhoultl gfte to this Hiftwy thofz praifes, which are due to It j could I induce my f elf to be-
( VI.)
IteVe, that my fuffrage could add any thing to that great opinion^ which the World hath already entertained of it. The only " reafons which haVe drawn me to this Un dertaking, are the loVe of truth, and concern for the honour of the Reforma tion of our Church j winch will receive at lea fl j ome J mall advancement by the difcoVery of any errors committed and believed in the Hiftory of it.
./^Varillas, Le Grand, and others haVe heen fuccefsfully triumphed oVer, ind baffled by the Hiftoriany who haVe al ready publifbed ^{eflettions, Jnimadverji- onsy or Corrections of this Hiftory r being mere fir angers to our Ntft/0;?, and the Hiftory of'ity and defining not in the kaft the difcoVery of truth, or reftaurati- on of Hiftory y but only to grtitfy their private pajjions^ .and to Vilify the honour and juftice of our Reformation : if their attempts haVe fuccecded fo ill, that will not difcourage me, who do not altogether labour under the fame dif advantages with
them,
, " ( VII )
them, and am not con/clous to my fetf ofanyfinifter defegn. Or if they have given to the Hiflonan jnft occajion to treat them withfome {corn and cont 'empty I do not much fear the fame treatment^ which yet if it fhould happen, will not af fright me y nor yet deterr me from en-> quiring further into the truth of thingSy efpecially thofe relating to our Church $ as I {ball haVe leifure and opportunty.
It ought noty nor can it be fuppofedy that I haVe differed, and in thefe Pa pers publifhedy all the Errors committed in this Hiftory : I haVe indeed read the wboky but haVe not had opportunity to examine the truth ef a third part of it. In that fmall part which 1 haVe examined^ 1 haVe detected all the following mi/lakes^ (for which reafon I call it a Specimen) fo that iflhadprefent leifure and means to purfuethe examination throughout y I could fear ce hope to find the remaining fart free from Errors. But I would not beftw too much time upon it j nor if I
would.
( VIII ) ,
would, do I enjoy yet fit opportunity. Tlx <I(efieftions of Varillas, Le Grand, vr any others upon this Hiftory I hctoe not read fince they were firft fublifhed ; and then I had entertainedno thought* of fuch a defign : fo that if any obferVati&b of mine be common to them, it is ly chance. $ut I do not much fear it, ha ting for the moft fart drawn my Qlfer* Nations from <Booh and Records which they never faw.
As for Mr. Fulmari'* Cdrre£liom>y
which the Hiftorian hath publifkedinthe
end ofhisfecond Volwney I haVe not in-
fifted on any mijlakes obfefVed by him$
mlefs where he hath either miftaken him-
/elf, or not fuffiiently cleared tlw matter.
In the whole I have made ufe of the fe-
cond Edition of the Hiftfirfi which (as
the title bear i) hath been corrected.
'.V\;A\ V\ito^
Pars
: * I m\ ' X- i«;« i - ^.'t : Wl4
Pars Prirna.
Page 4. Line 38. *•
" Cardinal Wolfty in the mean while was :e put in hopes of the Archbifhoprick of Toledo.
H E Hiftorian feemeth to have been ignorant, that the Cardinal did for feveral years receive a very large Penfion out of the Archbifhopfick of Toledo. Not many weeks fince I faw an Original Let ter writ with the Cardinal's own hand to Dr. Lee , his Agent in the Emperour's Court; wherein, among other things, he commanded him to expoftulate with the Emperour's Mini- fters for the non-payment of the Penfion refer- ved to him out of the Archbifhoprick. The exadt fumm due to him is therein inferted : but having not then taken any minutes of the Let ter, not fb much as the date of ir, I will not affirm any thing particular of the fumm. Yet to do juftice to the memory of the Cardinal, left he Hiould be thought to have been bribed by any Forreign Prince to aft againftthe inte- reft of his Mafter, I will add, that when Tour- nay was delivered by K. Henry to the French, in ^ettere j; the year 1518, the EmbaiTadour of the K. of Cardinal Spain did privately offer to the Cardinal i ooooo Bifaena Crowns in the name of his Mafter, if he would entr& \f ef~ caufethe Cittadel ofTournayto be demolifhed before the delivery of it : which offer the Car-
B dinal
dinal generoufly refufed,becaufe contrary to the Articles agreed between his Matter & the French King.
Pag. 8. I'm. i.
II. ' " CavenJffis Life of Cardinal Wolfey is cited " out of a Manufcript, ex MSS. Nobilis
This Life hath been twice printed : So that it need not to have been cited with fb much pomp out of a Manufcript: Or .if the written differsfrom the printed Copy, that fhould have been obferved. Jf that long paflage, giving a character of the Cardinal, which the Hiftorian here tranfcribeth, be taken Verbatim out of the Manufcript : We have juft reafon to fufpeft, that the Life contained in this Manufcript was not written by Cavendifr, but by fome other, who enlargeth on his words. For in the printed Copies, that paflage is not to be found ; although fomewhat like to it, in mueh fewer words, may be read therein. Yet I have feen a fair Manufcript Copy of Cavendijtfs Life, written above a hundred years fince, agreeing in all things with the printed Copy.
III. P^£. &.//»• 38. z» marg.
" Cardinal Wolfey exchanged the Biflioprick " ofDurefmfor: the Biflioprick of Wtnchefter, and " had reftitution of the Temporalities of Win* *' chefter 4 Maii^ anno 20 H. 8.
p ^ The day here afligned for the reftitution of
Append. -p. r^e Temporalities of Winchefter, viz. 4 Maii,
tlf falls into the year ijiS. To which Mr. Ful-
wan juftly objqits, that the See of Winchefter
fecms not to have been void before the yth of September this year, for that Fox's Regifter reacheth fo far. To this the Hiftorian anfwers, that he took all thefe dates from the Rolls and rnuft add that he hath often feen caufe to queftion the exaftnefs of Clerks in enrolling ef dates. To put the force of Mr. Fulmans objection beyond difpute, I will add that Fox died not till the 14. of Sept. 1528. So that it cannot be avoided, but that either the Record or the Hiftorian muft be miftaken. - The Hiftorian chargeth it on the Record, and not content with this, brings the' fame charge of falfity againft many other Re cords. He whofeeks to overthrow the Tefti- mony of Records, in the truth of which the honour of a whole Nation is fo much concern ed, ought to be very fure. Notwithftanding his afieveration, I examined the Record, and upon fearch found, that not it, but the Hiftori an, is miftaken. For the Record truly faith, that the Cardinal received the Temporalities of Winchester 6 April 20 H. 8. Which falls m the year 1519, and agreeth very well with8 the time of Fox's death, and Wolfeys inftallation, which was performed by Proxy 15 19. April u, . Mr. Fulman had alfo queftioned the date of the reftitution of the Temporalities of Lincoln ^ affigned to be 4 Martii, 5 H. 8. becaufe Wolfey- was not confecpated till the 16. of March. I know not, whether the anfwer fubjoyned3 That this might he to gi've him a right to the mean frofts by reft or ing the Temporalities before Lady< day, thtf he was not confecrated till the i.6lhi belong to Mr. Fulman, or to the Hiftorian. Bat it provetb, that neither of them "knew the B 2 truff
(4)
true ftate of this matter. For whereas the reftitution of the Temporalities of Lincoln to Wolfey before his confecration, is here repre- fented to have been ( if true ) an extraordina ry cafe, owing to his great favour and power at Court : The truth is, that at that time, and for (everal Ages before, Bifhops received * their Temporalities from the King immediate ly after their Confirmation, even before Con fecration ; and at their Confirmation did of courfe take out a writ from the Archbifhop to the King, fignifying their Confirmation, and in vertue ofitdefiring reftitution of their Tern- .- poralities to be granted to them. Wolfey there- Warkam ^ore ^e'nS provided to the Biflioprick of Lincoln by the Pope on the 6tb of Febr. no wonder, that as foon as his Bulls came into England, and had been allowed by theArchibfhop,hefhould immediately receive his Temporalities before confecration. •V- Pag. 9- I'm. I.
" Even after Wolfey was Cardinal, Warkam " as Lord Chancellor took place of him, as ap- " pears from the Journals of the houfe of Peers, " 7 H. 8. and afterwards (.viz after that Woljey " was made Lord Chancellor) gave him' place ; " as appears on many occafions, and particu- " larly in the Letter written to the Pope 1530. "which the Cardinal fubfcribed before
Many miftakes and falfe confequenccs are contained in thefe lines. For i. if Wolfty in the quality of Lord Chancellor, took place tf War- ham ; it would follow that the Lord Chancel lors, as fuch, ought to precede the Archbi- f (hops
( 5 ).
(hops of Canterbury : The contrary of which is known to be and to have always been true. 2dly. IfWarham, when Lord Chancellor, took place of Wolfey, when Cardinal, in the houfe of Peers; it doth not follow, that at that time he took place of him elfewhere, as theHiftori- an would infinuate. For in the Houfe the Chancellor precedeth all other Peers, and e- ven the Archbifliop of Canterbury among the reft, as being in virtue of his Office Speaker of the Houfe. Nor, could Wolfcy be fo extrava gantly vain as to defire the Great Seal only that he might precede Warham in the Parlia ment. For, as the Hiftorian obferveth, be af-P ^ fefted to govern without Parliaments. And accordingly for many years after he obtained the Great Seal , had no Parliaments, And even after the Seal was taken from him, heftill took place of Warbam in the houfe of Peers. }dly. If in the Letter wrote to the Pope 1530. The Cardinal fubfcribed before Warham\\\z could not do this in the quality of Lord Chan- cellor,as the Hiftorian imagins. For the Great Seal had been taken from him in the prece ding year 1519,0^^- 17. So that fbme other reafbn ofWolfey's precedence muft be enquired. And that reafon is very obvious For WWfy tookfiacGofWarbam, even be fore and after he was Lord Chancellor , as being Cardinal. This is confirmed by the relation of Caven- difi : Who in his Life faith, that Warbam check- CaP- 4- ed him for his preemption in carrying himfelf as his equall ; but that (hortly . after Wolfty ob tained to be made Cardinal, and thereby got the better of Warham in that ppint.
B ? Pa£.
( 6) •
W 'Pag. 9. I in. 4.
" We have nothing on Record, to (hew <f whatafpeakerhe (Cardinal Wolfey) was.
If the word Record be here ufed in the Law- fence of it ; we grant it to be true : But then it is not very pertinent. But if it be ufed in an Hiftoiical fence, it is a miftake. For to pafs by the many Letters, Difpatches, Inftru&ions, &c. Which remain of the Cardinals own writing, and which manifeft that he had a great command of words as well as knowledge of things : We have the affurance of one who ( as the Hiftorian himfelf elfewhere ob- ierveth) knew him <very well, and would not flatter him, that he was much famed for his Cavendi/b Eloquence. His fentences in the -Star-chamber in his Life were ever fo pithy and witty \ that upon all occa- cap. 2. 3. £ms tfcey ajjigmfi fam^ -for tke fiuent eloquence of
his tongue^ to be their expcfitor in all proceedings^ — — -he had an efpecial gift of natural eloquence , and a fylea tongue to pronounce the fame : That he was able therewith to perfuade and allure all men to hispurpojes. From hence it may appear how unhappy the conjedure of the Hiftorian is; who detracting from the prailes of the Cardinal, fuppofeth that he was no better a Speaker than the preceding Chancellors, whom at the fame time he maketh to have been very forry Q- rators:
yi. ?*£• ii.fa.-tf.
" When any See was vacant, the King rccom- ;c mended one to the Pope ; upon which his f: Bulls'W'e expedited ^t Row, andfo by a
( 7 )
" Warrant from the Pope he was confecrated, " and invefted in the Spiritualities of the See.
The Hiftorian here undertaketh to defcribe the way and procefs of making Bifhops in Eng- landy received for above 300 years before the Reformation. In his defcription of it he hath committed feveral miftakes. For , firft, this method was not much ufed in England, until within lefs than 200 years before the Reforma tion. Secondly, It was not even then always ufed : For fbmetimes within that term Bifhops were elefted, confirmed and confecrated, with out confulting the Pope in the leaft, orexpeft- ing any Bulls from him. Thirdly, Even after the method of expecting Papal Bulls, and pro ceeding in virtue of them was fully fetled: thq King did not always recommend, norllid the? Pope always grant his Bulls to the perfbn re commended. But Sometimes the Pope ftaid not for his Recommendation , but granted his Bulls to whom he thought fie : or after he had received tho King's Letters granted his Bulls to fome other, whom hirnfelf liked better, or whom the Archbifliop or fbme powerful! No bleman had recommended. Indeed for about fixty years before the Reformation our Kings had goc the better of the Popes in this matter, and drawn the difpofition of Bifhopricks to themfelves, yet not altogether (for the Popes by their authority and pleafure difpofed of Worcefter at leaft three times together within that term ) and after all, 4thly, the Bifhops were not firft confecrated and then invefted in the Spiritualities of theSee. But the practice
B 4 was
( 8 )
was all along contrary. For they received the Spiritualities of their Sees, immediately up on Confirmation ; and the fentence of their Confirmation was ever accompanied with a decree for their being put in pofleffion of their Spiritualities, and a mandate directed to the Guardian of the Spiritualities to deliver them up to them
Pag. n. I'm. 35.
VII. " Though the Parliament and two or three :c high fpirited Kings, had given fome inter- " ruption to the cruel exactions and other illegal c proceedings of the Court of Rome ; yet that
" Court always gained their defignsin the end.
Not always : For if that were true, our Na tion had indeed been very tame : But I hope the Eng'lifo arenotdefcended of fuch adaftardly generation. Our Anceftors had before the Reformation got the better of the Court of Rome, in many points controverted between them , and thofe of the greateft moment. Further not onely two or three oPoar High-Spi rited Kings had given foms interruption to that Court. Of all our Kings fince the Conquefr, Rkbard II. and Henry VJ. were the fartheft from being high- for it ed. Yet very great, if not the greatefi3interruption was given in their Reigns. Not to fay, that the interruption under Edward III. was not made till the latter end of his Reign, w hen he was nothing lefs than high- ffinted.
VIII. P*£.Il. lin. 5.
" But when this began ( viz,. That Bifliops " receiving their Temporalities from the King,
ihould
( 9 )
" fhould renouncethe benefit of the Papal Bulls " in relation to them, or any Claim to them. " to be derived from thence.) I leave to the " more Learned in the Law to difcover.
I do not pretend to be Learned in the Law: Yet my fmall knowledge in the Antiquities of my Country, enableth me to difcover this, if it is to be called aDifcovery. This Cuftom be gan in theYear i272,when a like Renunciation was required of Robert Kilwardby, collated by the Pope to* the Archbifhoprick of Canter bury. And fhortly after the Papal Bulls of Provifion increafing, the matter was fully fee- led about ihe Year 1500.
Tag. n. I'm. 45. IX.
" In the Days cf King Edgar, moft of the " Secular Clergy being then married, «nd re- " fufing to put away their Wives, were by ^ &c. turned out of their Livings.
The Hiftorian here, and in the following Lines,feemeth to have been Ignorant of the an cient Enghjh Hiftory . Dunflan, Ethelwald, and O/2^^/J,ejed:ed the married Secular Clergy on ly out of two Cathedral Churches, and feme few Monafteries (if the then Poflellbrs of Mo- nafteries .may be called Seculars). They en deavoured indeed to ejeft them out of other Cathedrals and Monafteries ; but could not effect their Defign. As for the great Body of the Secular Clergy, the Parifh-Piiefts ; Dttn- ftan and his Complices were fo far from turn ing moft of them out of their Livings, orv ac-
count of their Marriages ; that they never at tempted it : They declaimed indeed furioufly a- gainft their ufe of Marriage,as finful,and would have perfuaded them from it ; but never for bad it to them by any folemn Sandion, much lefs deprived them of their Livings uponir. All this the Hiftorian might have learned from the Writings of our eminent Divines, at the time of the Reformation ; if he thought himfelf not obliged to read the ancient Hiftories of our Nation. For Bifhop Poynet in his Defence of Priefts Marriages, maintains, that Marriage of Priefts was not forbidden in England before 13. King Henry the Firft. And when Dr. Martin in his Anfwer to Poynet^ exclaimed againft his AfTertion as falfe; the Annonymous Author of the long and learned Defence of Priefts Marria ges •, publifhed by Archbifhop Parker, defended zu* it, and (hewed the truth of it from the antient 5- Hiftories ; proving that Dunftan, Ethehvald, and Ofwald, expelled Secular married Priefts, only Pag. *8o. out Of fome Cathedral Churches. All which ^Ct is more largely and accurately proved by the Archbifhop in his Additions to that Treatife.
X. Yag- ii. fi». 49-
c< There is in the Rolls an Inffeximw of King EJgars, ereding the Priory and Convent of Worcefte r - figned by the King, two <c Archbifhops, five Bifliops, fix Abbots (but " neither Bifhoprick nor Abbey are named) ** fix Dukes, and five Knights ; but there is no •*' Seal to it.
Had this Hiftorian been acquainted with our
"
Inglijk Antiquities, he would have known ; hat this very Charter hath been often and ong fince published in the Monafticon^'m Spel- natfs Councils, and elfewhere ; and would not iave imagined himfelf to have diicovered fbme rare Secret in this Infoximw* Or if he had been acquainted with our Rolls, he would noD have expeded to find in an Infyeximm, the Seal of an Original Charter, enrolled in it : Or if he had been converfant in our ancient Records and Charters made before the Nbr- man times, he would have fpared his Obfer- vations of the want of a Seal to this Charter (although he had feen the Original Charter, and obferved this in irj and of the not naming either Bifhoprick, or Abbey therein. For they who know this co be the Cafe of the far grea ter part of the Inftruments and Charters of thofe times ; would no more have made fuch an Obfervation ; than after having laid that they had feen a Man named T/to,they would have added that he had a Nofe on. his Face.
Pag. ^^. tin. io.
" The, Monks being thus fetled in moft Ca- " thedrals of England. (So alfo p. 187. I'm. 10.) <c King Edgar converted moft of the Chapters " into Monafteries.
This furely was wrote at adventure, Mr. Fulman had before obferved, that the Monks were not fetled in half the Cathedrals pag ofEn^la^.To which Imay add,thatthey were then fetled hi no more than two Cathedrals, Win<;kejhr and Worcefw ; Nor were any more
C i* )
more Chapters converted into Monafteries, in the time of King Edgar. The married Cler gy were then indeed eje&ed out of Ely, and Monks planted in their' Room. But that Church was not a Cathedral until near 140 years after. Afterwards indeed, about the end of the eleventh Age,Monks were fetled infome other Cathedrals, or Epifcopal Sees fixed in Monafteries ; to omit, one Cathedral, (<u/&. that of Canterbury) in which Monks were in troduced in the beginning of the fame Age.But after all/ar from being fetled in mofi Cathedrals, they were fetled in no more than Nine, viz,. Canterbury, Winchefter, Durefw, Worcefter, Ro- chefter, Ely, Norwich, Bath, and Coventry. The Church of Carlifle indeed was poflefled by Regulars ; but thofe were Canons, not Monks.
XII.
e The Monks being thus ferled, gave them- " felves up to idlenefs and pkafure,- having in " their hands the chief Encouragments of " Learning, and yet doing nothing towards it : " but bn the contrary decrying and difpara- " ging it all they could.
This is a very hard Cenfure to pafs upon a whole Order of men, who were once very honourable, but always ferviceable in the Church. On the contrary, after they were thus fetled (viz. by Dunftan,Ethelwaid, and OfwaU, in the Reign of Edgar) they fet themfelves in with great f nduftry to reftore Learning, and root out that univerfal Ignorance which had then prevailed in England : and effectually
per-
performed it. Infomuch, as whereas before that time fcarceany Secular Prieft in England,, %£ could read or write a Latin Epiftle ; within few years (as Elfric a learned Difciple of £- tbehvald boafteth) the face of things was fb changed by the endeavours of D«»/^»,and his Mafter Etbelwald, that Learning was general ly reftored, and began to flourifh. At that time, and long after, the Monafleries were the Schools and Nurferies of almoft the whole Clergy, as well Secular as Regular : For the Univerfities (if there were any) were then very mean Societies ; and the whole Learning of the Nation was then in a manner confined to their Cloyfters. As the Univerfities increa- fed,they gradually decreafed : yet ftill retained and cultivated Learning, till about the middle of the lyb Age ; when the Mendicant Orders arofe,who by their Hypocrifie, jugling Tricks, and extraordinary Induftry, ran down both them and the Secular Clergy. Within two hundred years the Mendicants became con temptible ; and then both the Monks and the Seculars began to recover their ancient Cre dit, and long before the Reformation,had made great progrefs in the Reftauration of Learning. They had all along brought up their Novices in Learning; every Great Monaftery having for that purpote a peculiar Colledge in one of the Univerfities ; and even to the time of theirDiflb- lution,they continued to bring up great numbers of Children at School at their own Charge for the Service of the Church : and immediately before the Reformation, many of the great Monafteries were fo many Nurferies of Lear ning
( '4 )
rung ; and the Superiors of them very Lear ned themfelvesj and Promoters of Learning in others. Such were KidckrrmKfttr Abbot of Winckelcowb) Goldwcll Prior of Canterbury Vo- che Abbot of St. Auftins, Well* Prior of Ely, Holbcach Prior of Womfter, I/tip Abbot of Weft- minfter. WMe Prior of Coventry and many o- thers. I do not hereby Apologize for the Lazi- nefs of the Monks in the middle Ages ; but main tain, that both in the time of Edgar y and fome time after,and immediately before theReforma- tion, they deferved a contrary Character to what the Hiftorian giveth of them ; and that even in the worft times, they were far from being Enemies, and Oppofers of Learning j as lie would have it believed.
XIII. ag.^^ m. 31.
6 To fupprefsfbme Monaiteries was thought <c as juftifyable, as it had been many Ages bc- " fore, to change Secular Prebends into Ca- " nons Regialar.
This is not fo accurately expreffed : the verfion of Secular Prebendaries into Canons Regular the Hiftorian fuppofeth to have been made often,and in many Churches. But it was never done fave in one Cathedral Church of England, thaft of Carlt/le. Secular Prebenda ries had in feveral Churches been changed into Monks. But Monks are a diftindl Order from Canons Regular*
XlV.
^c WickUffe was fupported by the Duke of
( 1J )
" Lancafter the Bifhops could not pro-
" ceed againft him, till the Duke of Lancafter " was put from the King ; and then he was " condemned at Oxford.
It might have become Varillas\Qvy well to have wrote this of Wickliffe ; but fuch a mi- ftake is unworthy of an accurate and Reformed 4 Hiftorian, who ought efpecially to take care of doing juftice to the Memory of that Great man. Far from being condemned at Oxford during his own Life,or theLife of theDuke of 'Lancafter, his Peifon was had in great Efteem and Vene ration at that Univerfity to the laft, and his Writings, for many years before and after his Death, were as much read and ftudied there, as of Ariftotle, or the Mafter of the Sentences : Nay, fo much concerned was that Univerfity for his Reputation ; that near twenty years after his Death, hearing that falfe Reports had been fpread abroad in foreign Parts, as if Wick- Vi^s life had been convicted of Herefie in England, joanni* and his Body thereupon difinterred and burnt: fluffi in the Chancellor and Senate of the Univerfity calce. publifhed a Manifefto ; wherein they gave to him a great Character of Learning and Piety, called him a valiant Champion of the Faith ; and declared that he had never been convifted of Herefie, nor his Body difinterred, Abfit . eriim, quod tanta probttfttis virum, &c. Indeed four years after this, the Authority of th£ Pope and King concurring with the reftlefs Endeavours of Archbifliop Arundel^ Several of his Writings were condemned and burnt at Oxford-, and eighteen years after this his Body , was taken up and burned. Tag.
XV
" Many Opinions are charged upon
but whether he held them or not, we fc know not, but by the Teftimony of his Ad- " verfaries.
It feems the Hiftorian knew not any certain means of gaining Information of Wicklifs true Opinions; but when he would include all o- thers in the fame Ignorance of them, we muft defire to be excufed. We have as many of the Works of Wicklife yet extant, as (if Printed together) would make four or five Volumes in Folio. And whether fo many Books be not fufficient to teach us his Opinions, let the Rea der judge.
XVI Pag. a;. //». 1 6.
" Wickliffe tranflated the Bible out of Latin " into Englifi, with a long Preface before it ; in " which he reflected feverely on the Corrup- " tions of the Clergy, condemned the worfhip- "ping of Saintsand Images, &c.
This Preface indeed was publifhed at Lon« Jon, 1550. under the name of Wickliffe, and hath generally patted for his. But after all, Wickliffe did not write it, but the Author of the other old Englifr Tranflation of the Bible. For we have two Tranflations of the Bible made about that time, one by Wickliffe^ the o- ther by an unknown Perfon. In the Preface the Author giveth feveral Specimens of his Tranflation of many difficult places of Scri
pture,
( 17 )
pture, which agree not with WicUifs, but with the other Tranflation. Further, the Author of the Preface inveighs fharply againft the Difcipline arid Members of the llniverfity of Oxford, which it is certain Wickliffe would ne ver have done for Reafons before mentioned. That Wicktiffe condemned praying to Saints, we have only the Teftimony of his Adverfa- ries. I will not affirm any thing at this time ; but I have reafon to fufpetl the contrary.
if. »•**• XVIL
c jFo&fr Braibrook Bifhop of London, then Lord M Chancellor, t>k,. 16 Man, Anno j. Ricardi i*
His name was &?£<?r Braibrook, and he was not Lord Chancellor until the Sixth Year of King Richard.
Pag. 35. I'm. 18. XVilt
''" The two Prelates that were then (ip the * Year 1*03, between February $n& December) " in greateft efteem with King Henry the "]ih " were Warham Archbifhop of Canterbury, and ic Fox Bifhop of Winchefter.
Warham was not tranflated from London to Canterbury, till 1504. January, 23*
Pag. 88. fi». 16. XIX.
£ This (the fmall Allowance made by th£
u King to . Crook his Agent in foreign
w Univerfities) I take notice of, becaufe it is
"faid by others^ that all | the Subfcriptions
" that he procured were bought (So fag. 89-
Gtt, •ltf 179 -^
" in into Margin*. ) No Money not Bribes givea c< for Subfcriptions. {phis to endeavoured to be "farther f roved, fag. 90.)
However it might be then thought neceflary, or ufeful to procure the Determinations of fo reign Univerfities, in favour of the Divorce of King Henry, thereby the better to latisfie the Clergy at home, and to juftifie the Divorce abroad, yet to thofe who know very well,\hac this National Church had fufficient Authority to determine fuch a Controverfie without con- fulting foreign Univerfities, it will not be ac counted a matter of any moment, whether thefe were bribed or not. I will not therefore fcruple to fet down the Teftimonies of two un deniable Witnefles, who lived at that time ; and could not but know the truth of the whole -, T matter. The firft is of Cornelius Agriffa, of P*l- 9*5- w^om ^e Hiftorian himfelf giveth this Cha- rafter. Cbrnelius Agrippa, a man very fa mous for great and curious Learning, and jo^ fa- t is find in the Kings Caufe,that he gave it out that . the thing was clear and indiffut able, for which he was afterwards hardly ufed by the Emperor^ and died in Prifon. If this Great Perfen then had any partiality in this Caufe, it lay on the fide of the King : yet in one of his Books he hath thefe words. Sed & quit credidiffet Theologos in rebw fidei & confcientite9 non folutn amore odio9 invidia perverti, fed nonnunquam etiam fleet i con- *virviis,& munenbiis abdttci a <vero ; nifi ipfi tHiifs feeler is fidem fecijjtn* in Anglkani Matrimdnii damnatione ? Who would ha<ve believed ^ that Di vines in matters of Faith, and Confcknct arc not
only
, r; » rr 1 •* j j
fatjt perverted by Love, Hatred, or Envy, but al fo fometimes bribed by Banquets , or drawn from the truth by Gifts, unlefs tbemfelves had given e- vident Proof of this Vilenefs, in condemning the Marriage of the King of England. The other is Mr. Cavendifo an honeft, plain Gentleman, firft a Servant of Cardinal Wolfey, afterwards highly obliged by King Henry. He in writing the Life of his Mailer the Cardinal, giveth this Cap. 1 5, account of the whole matter. It was thought very expedient, that the King fkould fend out his Commiffioners into allUniverfaies in Chriftendom, there to have this Cafe argued fub ft antially, and to bring with them from thence every -Definition of their Opinions of the fame, under the Seal of the Univerfity. And thereupon divers Commijfio- tiers were presently appointed for this Defign. So fome were fent to Cambridge,/owe f0Qxford/0W£ to Lovaiti,0^er.r te Paris,/ow<? to Orleance, others to Padua : all at the proper Cofts and Charge of the King, which in the whole amounted to agreatSumnt of Money. And /til went out of this Realm, befides the Charge of theEmbaJJage to thofe famous and no* table Perfons of all the Univerfoies'ffpecially fucb at bare the Rule, or had the Cuftody of the Univerfity Seals, were fed by the CommiJJioners with fuck great Summs of Money, that they did eafily con- deft end to their Requefts, and grant their De fires. By reafon whereof all the Commffioners returned with their Purpofe , furnifted according to their Commiffions, under the Seal of every feveral Uxi-
Tag. 107. lin. J. " For then(about the time of Edward\) the J* Popes, not Satisfied with their other Oppref- C 2
" fions, did by Provifions ;' Bulls, and other " Arts of that See, difpofe of Bifhopricks, Ab- " beys, and lefler Benefices, to Foreigners, Car- " dinals, and others that did not live in Eng- "lan'J.
This is a very wide miftake ; For the Popes did not then difpofe of Bifhopricks, and Ab beys, to Foreigners, Cardinals, and others that did not live in England, The Popes did not give any Bifhoprick of England , to any Foreignetohat did not live therein, till about Thirty^years before the Reformation ; when it was not done without the Kings good liking, and in Vertue of fome fecret compaft between them. As for Abbeys, from the firft Founda tion to their Diflblution, the Popes never gave any one to a Foreigner, not refiding. For Car dinal Abbots, there never was any befides Car dinal Wolfey, and of him it is well known, that he had his Abbey from the gift of the King, and lived in England. The matter therefore complained of in the Preamble of the Aft of Parliament, 25 Ediv.I. which the Hiftorian inferreth, was this : That whereas,Bi(hops and Abbots ought to be Elefted by their feveral Chapters, and Convents, and thefe Elections to be confirmed by the King ; the Popes had taken upon them to Annul the Elections of Chapters, and then to fubftitute whomfbever themielves pleafed, without a new Election ; or to difpole of them without expecting any Election (yetftill none of thefe were granted to Cardinals, or to Foreigners, not refiding in England.) Ancfrwhereas the Popes had ufurped
the
( 11 )
the Prefentation of, and given to Aliens, al though not refiding, other Benefices, as Dean- ries, Prebends, and Parfonages, which ought of right to belong to tbeir proper Patrons ; a- gainft thefe Encroachments, a Remedy was de- fired and provided in this Act. Several Fo reigners had a little before this time been pre ferred to Bifhopricks, fuch as Boniface Archbi- fhop of Canterbury ^Adomar us ds LcfignanRifaop ofWinchefter^ Petrta de Aqua-blanca Bifhop of Hereford. But thefe came in by the Election of their feveral Chapters, overawed thereto by the Power and Authority of King Henry III, to whofe Queen they were related by near Kindred, and after all refidedupon their Sees, unJefs when diverted by Employment in the bufinefs of the King or Church. But as for Deanries, Prebends, and Parfonages, the Ufur- pation of the Popes in the difpofal of them was intolerable. Thefe they granted to Cardinals and other Aliens, not refiding, without all Shame. Infomuch, as I remember to have ieen anEpiftle of the Bifliop of Salisbury to the Pope, wrote about that time ; wherein com plaining, that the Advowfbn of his Benefices was taken from him by Papal Provifions, he fends to him a Lift of all the Prebends, and Prebendaries of his Church of Salisbury ; and adding to the name of every one by the Pre fentation of what Biihop, or by the Provifion of what Pope they obtained their feveral Pre bends, demonftrates that more of the then Prebendaries,had come in by Papal Provifion, than by the Prefentation of the»Bifhop the pro per Patron : thatfb, if poffible, he might (ha me C 3 ths
thePopeout of the like Ufurpation for the fu ture. Nor was the cafe of other Churches,parti- cularly of Tork and St. FW/^unlike at this time.
Pag. 1 08. Itn. 46.
.* When Henry the 4th had tfeafonably UT " furped the Crown, all the Bifhops ( Carlifle " only excepted ) did affift him in it.
Many accufations of the Bilhops of may be found in Prynn : But Idare affirm, that a falfer cannot be found in him, That all the Bifhops were affifting to the Treafon of' Hemy IV. except Carhjley the Hiftorian hath no other evidence than this, that none of them, except Carlifle, had the courage to proteft in thehoufe of Lords againft a wicked defign5 then contriving againft the Perfon of the late King , l&cbard. But it doth not hence follow that all the other Bifhops confented to this wicked de- iign, becaufe they madenoproteftation sgainft it ; which would have done no fervice to their injured Sovereign, and cnely expofed their own perfons to the fury of an enraged multi tude. It is not to be doubted that many of the Bifliops of that time retained their Allrigi- ance to King Richard 25 long as the iniquity of the time would permit them, although they cared not to become Martyrs in the caufe. At leaft it is certain that the intereft QfWalden Archbifhop of Canterbury was focloiely linked to his, that there could be no fufpition of his afting againft his Prince; and accordingly the Treafon of Henry the 4th obtaining fuccefs, they Wffe botl; depofs4 together. It is alfo well
Oj )
known, that Scropt Archbifhop diately after took up Arms againft King Henry 9 published a bold Declaration of his Treafon and In jufticc ; and his forces being diffipated loft his head in the Quarell. We are farther aflured, chat both thefe Archbifiiops, with the Biftiops of London , Exeter, Lit cb field and Lan- dafe, attended King Richtrd faithfully in his Marches, after Henry of Lancafler had landed and declared againft him 5 and afllfted him to their utmoft; untill the Commonality running into the Duke of Lane after on all fides, anS the King fleeing for his fafety, they were for ced to give way to the violence of a rapid Re volution.
Tag. no. I'm. 2i,&tth. XXH?
w The firft Letter is to Henry Cbicbley Arch- " bi(hop of Canterbury - it bears date the " fifth day of December 1416. - then fol- (< lows the Appeal of the Archbifhop dated w the 6tb of April 1427. - There is alfb ano- " ther Letter dated the ktb of May, direded " to the Archbifliop. - But the next Letter " is of an higher ftrain. It is directed to the a£wo Archbifhops - this is dated the 8/6 •"dayef December, the IQ//J year of his Pope- " dom
The Hiftory of the proceedings between 3>ope Martin and Archbifhop Lbicbhy in the matter of Provifoes would have been very ac ceptable had not the Hiftorian marred all for want of a littleChronology. He hath hers difpofed matters in a fair Hiitorical feries But C 4 moft
moft unhappily thofe two Letters which he ma- keth to have been wrote at fo great: a diftancq of time from each other ( I mean the firft and laft of thofe here mentioned ) were: wrote, within very few days of each other. This with a little care might eafily have been pern. ceived. For the 8M day of December in the tenth year of the Popedom of Martin,, falls into the year 1416. By this miftake the whole contexture of this narration is over-. thrown. But farther, both thefe Letters were wrote upon the fame day : And the Hiftorian in tranfcribing the Popes firft Letter to the Archbifhop, ( which he hath publifhed in the Collection of Records Pag. 98. hath given a falfe date of it. For whereas it is truly dated J^»/»- to Id. December. He hath changed this into quinto die December. The other Letter alfo which he faith to have been wrote the %tb of December, is in the Manufcript Copy dated as the former, quinto Id. Decembr. anno Pontificate noftri decimo \\z, 14.17. December 9.
XXIII. Tag. ill. I'm. i.
Cf Then follow Letters from the Univerfity cc of Oxford, the Archbifliop of Tort, the Bi- " fhops of London, Durefm and Lincoln to the <c Pope^ — bearing date the iotb and
I did many years fince transcribe out of an Authentick Regifter all the Inftruments of this conteft between the Pope and the Archbiihop here mentioned by the Hiftorian, and as many more relating to the fame matter, which feem
to
to have been wanting in his Manufcript; fo that I am thereby enabled to correct the mi- Hakes of the Hiftorian herein. From the words of the Hiftorian any Reader would ima gine that the Letter of the Univerfity was da ted on the loth and that of the Bilhops on the i$tb of July. But on the contrary the Bilhops Letter is dated July iott> and the Univerfities July 25*6. Then whereas the Hiftorian na- meth onely the Archbifhop of Tork and three Bifhops ; in truth that Letter was written in the name of fifteen Bifhops, that is, of all the Biihops of England except three who were then abfent. For Salisbury and Chichefttr were at that time. void.
Pag in. tin. 17. XXIV.
"The Letter of the Pope to the Parliament " is dated the third ofOttober dedmo Pontifical. " But I. believe it is anerrorof'the Tranfcribcr, " and that its true date was the 13^ of Oclo-
The Hiftorian imputeth this miftake to the vioioufhels of the Copy. , But I fear it ought to be imputed .to .the negligence of the Tranfcri- ber. For in my Copy 'tis truly dated Tertio Id. Oftobris. Inftead of which the Hiftorian renew ing his former error hath in his tranfcript of the Inftrument fubftituted tertio Me Ochbris. To proceed and, joy n all the miftakes of this matter together,, the tranfcript of the Archbifliops fpeech in the Houfe of Commons, which he giveth to us, isalfo falfe. For it reads die Vt-
mrh
( 26 ) 1
»mV , ;o Januarii Ann* Domini milhfimo quar dringentefimo decimo feftimo , Indiftiom fext* , Pontificatus Martini Papa Anno Undecimo, All the concurrent notes added to the year of our Lord (hew that it fliould be ann. mill, quadr. vice/two feptime, and fb I doubt not the Manu- (cript hath it. Laftly ( to fay no more of this matter ) the conclusion of the Archbifhops Ap peal, as it is by him publiftied, manifefts with how little care thefe publick Inftruments have been tranfcribed, for thus it ends : pr#fe»ti*> bus difcretif *viris. M. W. Lyn. Curia Cant, officii, & 7'howa B. Archidiacono fanftarum in Ecclcjit Lyne. Utriufyue Juris Dottoribus. Mow to miftake and report falfly the dates of publick Inftruments is not a matter of light moment. For thefe will necefTariiy betray both Writers and Readers into infinite other miftakes, while they endeavour to adapt things, and the cir- cumftances of them to the fuppofed^ but mi£ taken time of other Adlions. Be/ides alltbis it diminifheth the credit of any Hiftory, fo chat in all other matters the Reader cannot fafely rely upon it, when he knows the negligence of die Hiftorian in any part of it. And as for the Collettwn of Records , which make up one half of each Volume of this Hiftory, they wi!l be of little value, if once there appears jjuft rea- fbn to fufped: the care or fidelity of the Tranf- criber. I have not had opportunity or a .oixio- fity to examine one half of the dates of times ei ther in the Hiftoryitfelf, or in the ColkbHonvf Records ; but do allure the Reader that of thofe which I have examin^U, 1 fouBd«af as many tobefalfeas tru€?.
( 17 )
Tag, 1 1 !.//». 4. XXV,
" The Popes Ufurpations ftill increasing, "thofe Statutes (of Provifo's and Premunire) " lay dead among the Records, and feveral u Cardinals had procured and executed a Le- " gamine Power, which was clearly contrary " to them.
e of the Hiftory of the Englijb Church, would have prevented fb large a miftake. No Cardinals before Wolfey, had procured and executed fuch Legantinc Power in England fmce thofe Laws were made. Cardinal Beaufort of Wincbefter indeed had pro cured it, but could never execute it, being in hibited by King Henry VI, by the advice of Archbifhop Chichley, and forced to renounce his pretended Power : As for the Leganrine Power of the Archbifhop of Canterbury, which was claimed and exercifed by them in Quality of Legati nati ; that was not in the leaft con trary to thefe Laws, nor ever was fo accoun ted ; being annexed perpetually to the See of Canter bury ) ever fmce the Year 1100, and al ways belonging to them, without any new or
Tag. in. /«.«. XXVI
" The old Cardinal of Ravenna was fb jea- u lous, that the Ambafladors of the King were " forced to promife him the Bifhoprick of V Chefler (one of the newBifhopricks,defigned ?' to be ere&ed in the Year 1431.) with which ?• he wa*
If
C z8 )
If in the Promifes made by the Embafla- dors to the Cardinal, the Hiftorian found ex- prefs mention of the new Ereftion of the Bi fhoprick of Chefter promifed to him . we muft fiibmit : Otherwife it is more probable, that the Bifhoprick defired by him, and promifed to him, was the old Biflioprick of LichfieU, which was then commonly called the Bi fhoprick ofCbefler, and which was then likely to be void very fhortly , by the Death of Dr. Blithe an extreme Old man, who died the following Year.
XXVIL P«- 1 18. lm. 34.
" Cranmer s Bulls for. the Archbiflhoprick of "Canterbury, bear date the lift of February,
" 1 533 By a tenth Bull dated the 2d of
:< March, the Pall was fent to him when
n thele Bulls were brought into England, 7'bo- <e mas Cranmer was on the 1 3th of*March con- cc fecrated.
We have here another Inftance of the little Exaftnefs of the Hiftorian in the dates of time. I will not take Notice that the firft Bulls in the the Original bear date the lift of February, 1532. For that is indeed 1533, tothofewho begin their Year on the firft day of January. But the tenth Bull feeding the Pall to Cranmer, is dated the ;d of March, and he wasconfo- crated the soth of March.
XXVIII Pag.- **9* fi*4*-~
" The moft Learned Sir Henry Salman, hath <f in no place of his Collsftions of our Coun-
*' fels, confidered the Conftitution of the twoi " Houfes of Convocation ; and in none of our I " Records have I been able to difcover, of " what Perfons they were made up in the tc time of Popery : and therefore fince we are " left to conjecture, I fhall offer mine to the " learned Reader. It is that none fate in the " lower Houfe, but thofe who were deputed <c by the inferior Clergy ; and that Bifhops, " Abbots, mitred and not mitred, and Priors, " Deans and Archdeacons, fate then in the " upper Houfe of Convocation. To which I " am induced by thefe Reafons, &c.
Sir Henry Sfelman eompleated only the firft Volume of his Councils which reacheth to the Conqueft. Therein he had no opportunity to treat of this matter. For we do not inquire of the Conftitution of Convocations in the Saxon times, but in the time immediately pre- ceding the Reformation. As for the fecond Volume of Councils, which reacheth from the Conqueft to the Reformation, the Colle&ion of it was only begun by Sir Henry Spelman, but eompleated and published by others, without any tollerable Care or Skill. No doubt Sir Hen ry knew very well the Conftitution of our Convocations before the Reformation, and fo do all inquifitive Perfons of our Nation ; however the Hiftorian may think a difco- very herein to be neceffary, to the Infor mation of the Learned Reader. If he knew it not, he may be excufed, as a Foreigner : Or if in none of our Records he were able to difco- ver it, that alfo may be excufed* For neither
are
are all our Records kept at the "Rolls 9 nor did the multiplicity of bufinefs permit the Hifto- rian to attend long to the fearch of them ; but that he fhould proceed to offer his Conjecture* and fuch a Conjecture, as, if he had induftri- oufly fought to do it, he could not have made one more Erroneous. We cannot but wonder fince he had fufficient means of better Infor- . in mation. Mr. Fulman hath obferved, that the
Addend. Conjefture here propofed by the Hiftorian,
t'V3* doth not agree with what he had before deli vered, that Pole as Dean of Exeter was a Mem ber of the lower Houfe of Convocation. This demonftrates the Error of the Hiftorian, but doth notCorreft it. It may be Corrected, and the truth of the whole matter fully dif- covered from the Subfcriptions of the Convo cation held in the Year 1536. publiflied by the
f>. 315. Hiftorian himfelf in the Addenda of this firft part of his Hiftory : wherein all the Members of the upper Houfe fubfcribe apart ; and then all the Members of the lower Houfe fubfcri- bed by themfelves. The Inftrument of their Subfcription is an Original, (which I did many years fmce tranfcribe) and may be infallibly telyed on.
Therein it appears, that the Bifhops, Abbots and Priors , conftituted the upper Houfe ; and that all Deans, Archdeacons, Proftors of Clergy, and Chapters of Cathedral Churches, fete in the lower Houfe of Convocation. The
J>.3i6. Hiftorian himfelf there fummeth up all the Members of the lower Houfe, who then fubfcri- bed in this manner ; 24 Archdeacons, 4 Deans of Cathedrals, three Deans of Collegiate
Churches,
( 3' )
Churches, i? Procurators for the Clergy, and one Matter of a College, (w&. Provoft of a Collegiate ChurchJ Such an Error could noceafily have been committed by fb accurate an Author, after he had feen and publiflied fuch an Inftrument ; if himfelf had vouch- fafed fo much as to read the Records, which he hath publiflied in his CoMtiotts, and not left them to be perufed and transcribed by fome Under-workmen. I (hould have thought that he faw not this Inftrument, until he had Comppfed and Printed oflFthis part off the Hi- ftory -, if he had pleated in his Addenda to have owned and amended a miftake of fb great Confequence, or if in the Second part of his Hiftory, he had not repeated and confirmed p g< ^ this his erroneous Conjecture touching the^, Conftitution of our Convocations before the Reformation.
If it fhould be fufpeded, that however it might be in the Con vocation of the Year 1536, when the frequent and great Changes prece- difig and accompanying it, might diforder and . change the method and order before received, yet that it was other wife in precedent times; I anfwer,that it might be undeniably demonftra- ted from the Afts of many Convocations, for above 200 years before the Reformation, until that very time, that the Conftitution of Con vocations was all along in this re(pe<3: the fame. For although the Regifters of the Convocati ons be loft ; yet the Adls of many of them re main, and may be found elfewhere. I will give but one Proof of this, but that out of an Authentick Inftrument. In the Convocation
tield
( Ji )
held in the Year 1462, the lower Houfe want ing a (mall Summ of ready Money for fbms flight occafion, refolved to raife it by impofing fmall Mulfts upon all the abfem Membets. To this purpofe a Lift of the names of all the abfent Members of »the lower Houfe was brought in, and they were thefe : the Deans of S 'arum, Lincoln, Wind for, Wellst Chichefler, th<5 Archdeacons of Cokhefter, Wi^cbeft-er^ Sttrry^ Taunt on, Dorfet, &C.
So then the Matter of Fadt is put beyond all doubt ; that all the Bifhops, Abbots and Priors ^ fate in the upper Houfe ; all Deans, Arefc deacons,and Prodlors of the Clergy; in a word , all the Secular Clergy beneath Bifhops, fate ia the lower Houfe of Convocation. But I will farther enquire, how it came to be fetled in this method. 1 1 is notorious that for fome time after the prefent Conftitution of Parliaments, was introduced in the Reign of Henry III. great numbers of Abbots and Priors were fum- moned to Parliament by particular Writs di- r efted to every one. I will not now difpute, whether the fecond and third Eftates, the Lords and Commons, then fate together: but moft certain it is, that the Pares, Proceres & Baronies. Regni, were thofe who were fiimmoned to Par liament by particular Writs : At firft, the King furnmoned by particular Writs all the Ecclefiafticks (w&. Bifhop^, Abbots and Priors) who received their Temporalities from the Crown. At leaft the King fummoned as ma ny of them as he pleafed. Some Abbots and Priors were perhaps excufed from attendance by reafon of their Poverty. Thus Anno 49.^. j.
ther©
c 33
there were fummoned Abbots and Priors ioi. Anno 3 5. Edwardl. there were fummoned 47. Anno. i. £.11. there fummoned 56. .//««0. 4. £.111. there werefummoned 33. Now all the Abbots and Priors, thus fummoned by parti cular Writs, fatG inter Pares, Prcceres & Barc- nes Regni ; and were held apart of the fecondj as well as of the firft Eftate of the Nation re- prefented in Parliament. They were a part of the firft Eftate asEcclefiaftical Prelates, and a part of the fecond Eftate, as receiving their Temporalties, and holding their Baronies of the King For fuch Abbots and Priors the King was wont to fummon, as received their Temporalties from him. Afterwards in the Reign of FJward III. the number of Abbots and Priors fummoned by particular Writs was much reduced ; and fo continued till the Reformation ; only fbmeof the greater Abbots being wont to be fummoned. The number of them was never unalterably fixed^buc received Addition, or Diminution even till the time of Hen.Vll l.But from theReign of Edw.lll. till the Reformation, their number always ex ceeded twenty, and fell fhort of thirty. When the Kings therefore ceafed to fummon partial- larly the lefler Abbots and Priors, they loft their place in the fecond Eftate of Parliament, but ftill continued to be fummoned to the Con vocation by their feveral Bifhops in obedience to the Mandate of the Archbifhop, comman ding them to fummon to Convocation, to be held at fuch a time all within their Diocefs,ha- ving Right to fit therein : When thefe came &p to Convocation, as many of them as re-
D roved
•f
ceived their Teo?poralcies from the King, and had been wont J|rjjherly to be fummoned by him inter Barcne/wgni^and to fit among them, claimed Hill their former place in theConvoca- tion,which was to fit with the Bi(hops,whether yet they fate in oneHoufe with the inferior Cler gy, or whether they had by this time feparated themfelves into adiftinft upper Houfe, as moft certainly they did afterwards. This Claim could not reafonably be denied to fuch Abbots and Priors, and this giveth a clear Account, how all fuch Abbots and Priors came to obtain a place in the upper Houfe of Convocation.
But the great difficulty confifts in the Cafe of Priors of Cathedral Churches. For I find that fbme time before the Reformation, that they alfo fate in the upper Houfe; although none of them received their Temporalties from the King, except the Prior of Coventry. They were of fo great Account, that fome of them had been fummoned by the King to Parliament, although they owed to him no fuch Service upon the account of their Temporalties, which A they received not from him.
Thus the Prior of Norwich was fummoned Anno 1293. but the Prior of Canterbury feveral times, as Anno 49. Hen. 3. Anno 35. E. 1. Anno 21. E 2. and in the Years, 1399, find 1401. This the King might do, either upon extraor dinary occafions with a Salvo to their Rights, : or pretending to the immediate Superiority of their Temporalties ; as he fometimes did, but was caft therein, and at length forced to re nounce that Claim. However, after the Year jjoo, I find none of them fummoned by the
I King,
/ 1 c \
, .^if sri.iiricni 85U!h>iMamT , «•
King, but the Prior of Canterbury, and him
no more than rhefe four times. -But when thefe Priors came to Convocation, fummoned by their Bifliops, they could not but conceive fbme Indignation ; that when fb many Abbots and petty Priors face in the upper Houfe , themfelves fhould be thruft down to the lower Houfe, who in revenue and intereft were e- qual to the greateft Abbots. So that no won der if they tryed all poilible methods to raife themfelves into the upper Houfe, which they at laft effected ; at leaft fome of them did. At what time,and by what Pretences they did effect it, I cannot certainly affirm. But I fuppofe, that whereas fbme of them h^d gained of the Pope, the priviledge of wearing the Pontifi cal Habit at folemn times, viz. Mitre, Paftoral Staff, &c. and had thereupon affumed to themfelves the name of Prelates-, they claimed in vertue of that priviledge, and were admit ted to fit in Convocation among the Prelates : Or that whereas it was thought very indecent, that the Prior of Canterbury, in whom the Arch-Epifcopal Jurifdiclion, during a vacancy, was invefted, and by whom the Convocati ons was fummoned in that Cafe, fhould fit in the lower, and was thereupon removed to the upper Houfe ; his Example might facilitate Admiflion to the Priors of other Cathedrals, and open the way to them.
"
S8.fti.s. XXIX.
Suffragan Bifhops were believed to be the fame with the Cborepifcopi in the Primitive Church ; which continued in the Weftern D ^ « Churcb,
" Church till the ninth Century ; and then " they were put down every where by de- " grees, and now (Anno 1534.) revived in Eng-
If theHiftorian had pleafed to acquaint him- felf with the State of the Church of England, before the Reformation, he could not have been Ignorant, that for about 200 years be fore the Reformation, Suffragan Biihops had Par. i. keen frequent in England, not only in large or Append. p. neglefted Dipceffes (as Mr. Fulmar* imagined^ 4*4- who hath in part noted the Error of the Hi- ftorian; but alfo in frnaller Diocefles,* fuchj as Wells, and in thofe wherein the proper Bifhop did generally refide io Perfon : infomuch .that in many Dioceffes, whofe Records are prefer ved, there appeal a. continued Series orSuc- ceffion of Suffragan, as well as proper Bifhops, and at the time of making this hC^Anno 1.5 54.^ there (eemeth to have been a Suffragan JMhop in every Diocefs of England, fave CarUJle, Ro*. chejter and the Welch Diocefles ; and in fevera] Diocefles more than one. That they were not by this Adi revived in England, after th$ drfcontinuance of fo many Ages, the Hiftori- 157- an might have learned from the very Preface of it, which himfelf relates to begin thus; Whereas Suffragan Rifoops have been accuftotned to be had within this Rcalm^ &C.
" Chancellor More was the moft zealous " Champion the Clergy had ; fo he anfwered *c this Sttpflicrtiw (of the Beggars) by another
"HI
( 37 )
" in the name of the Souls that were in Purga- " tory, representing the miferies they were <e in, &c.
t Sir Thomas More wrote this Supplication of Sauls, before he was Lord Chancellor, in the Year 1529, as the Title of it wknefTeth, being then Privy Councelior. He was then indeed Chancellor of the Dutchy of Lancafter ; buc in this Senie, I fuppofe, the Hiftorian did not here call him Chancellor : Since the Hiftorian hath mentioned this Supplication of the Souls, and hath given an Abftraft of irr whereby he Would feem to have read it ; I beg leave to reprefent to him, that it would- have been very fair in him, if when he related the Tragical Story of the Murder of Richard Hannefo much ?*g- H- tn prejudice of Fitz- James Bifliop of London, & l8' and his Chancellor Doftor Horfey, he would have acquainted the Reader, that nocwithftan- ding the general and violent Sufpitions of theic foul dealing therein , Sir Thomas More, who was thefl an eminent Man, and had certain opportunities of knowing the whole truth of the matter, hath in this . Treatife largely de fended both the Bifbop and his Chancellor ,and acquitted them from all manner of guilt or injuffice therein.
P/*£.i82./i0. 6. XXXI-
tf In Oxford, theQucltion being put (Anno ;.) Whether the Pope had any other Ju- m England, than any other fo- :e reign Bifliop ? it was referred to certain De- •c legates, who agreed in the Negative ; ancj *'ih3 whole Univerfity bsing examined a-
D3
" bout it man by man^ aflented to their De- " termination.
I fear that the Hiftorian had conceived fome difpleafure againft the Univerfity of Cambridge^ for that he allowed) not to them, the Honour of having aflerted betimes the Independency of our National Church upon the See of Rome ; nor thinks fit to take any notice of them in this matter. I am not bound to engage in the private Quarrels of the Hiftorian, and there fore (hall think my felf at Liberty to do Ju- ftice to the Univerfity of Cambridge^ and to oe pubiifh their Determination herein, which" I numb. i. have done; To which I will here add, that the like Determinations feem to have been then made by particular ColJedges in theUni* verfity apart, and to have been fubfcribed , by the Matters and Fellows of them. For I have feen fuch an original Inftrument of one Coliedge. .
XXXII. Pag. iS6.ltn.i%.
'* What the ancient Britifo Monks were ; " and by what Rule they were governed muft " be left to Conjecture. But from the lit- " tie that remains of them, we find they were :c very numerous, and were obedient to the :t Bifhop at Caerhon^ as all the Monks of the " Primitive times were to their Bifhops.
' ;i:'T£^O S13 VST
This is not accurately faid. The Britifo Monks were fubjed not only to the Bifhop of Caerleon, but to their feveral Bifhops, in whole Dioceffes they lived. Indeed after th^t the
Britain
( 39 )
Britains were driven into PFahtj^md ftrled there, "all their Bifliops were fubjeft to the Archbifliop of_Caerleon, and fo by confluence were all the Monks alfb ultimately fubjeft to him. But the Hiftorian fpeaketh here of their immediate Subjection. Befides,that in this place he treatech of the ancient Britijh Monks, which were before the Confufions of the Gothic Wars in Italy &T\d before the times ofBenediff ; when the Britain* were not driven into Wales, nor all their Bifliops fubjefted to him of Caerleon. But there were at that time feveral other Arch- bifliops in Britain, to whom * the Bifliops of their Provinces were as much fubjeft ; as the Bifliops of the Province of Caerleon were to him. •inJJsrh ni-asgl
Pag. 186. fi».4j. XXXIII
:< This Exception of the Abbey of St. Au-> " ftins from the Jurifdiftion of the Archbifhop tc and his Succeflbrs, was granted, that they " might have no difturbance in the Service of ** God. But whether this, vvith many other c< ancient Foundations, were not later Forge* 11 ries, which I vehemently fufpeft, I leave to <f Critickstodifcufs.
..
That this and all other Charters of Exemp* tion from Epifcopal Jurtfdidtion*J granted to Monafteries in England before the Conqueft s were mere Forgeries, is an undoubted truth to all thofe who are not engaged by Intereft ,to defend them. But it is fomewhat extraordinary in any Writer to lay down Principles confeft ftdly falft or dubious,- and then to build upoa P 4 WCJP.
( 40 )
them, and raife confequences from them, as if they were indubitably true.Tfeis feemeth to be done by our Hiftorian in the following Page ; where he layeth down the Exemption of Monks in the ancient Foundations from Epif- copal Jurifdiftion, as one Foundation of their Corruption inDifcipline,and increafe in Riches. The firft Exemption of this kind, really gran* red to any Monaftery of England, was that given by Wittlam the Conqueror to Eat t el Ab-^ bey, newly founded by him; the Example of which prompted the Monks of other places to counterfeit the like ancient Exemptions, or to purchafe new ones from the Court of
187. //».?.
te About the end of the eighth Century, the " Monks had poflefled thernlelves of thegrea- " teft part of the Riches of rhe Nation, (So " alfo P*r.i. Prxfat.pag. 9. I'm. i.) the beft part " of the Soil of England being in fuch ill hands, <l it was the Intered of the whole Kingdom to " have it put to better ufes.
Such high Figures of Rhetorick and Hyper bolical Expreflions are better referred for Ha rangues, and do not well agree with Hiftory. The end of the eighth Century was the Year of our Lord 800, at which times very few Monafleries had been yet founded ; nor had the Monks- then in all appearance gained Pof- Spoil cf the hundredth part of the Riches ot ation. Afterwards indeed they increafetl in Number, Riches, and
C 4> )
ons, efpecialiy in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth Centuries ; Mt after all , upon a juft Account, they will not be found even in Title to have pofleffed above a fifth part of the Na tion : and confidering that long before the Re formation, they were wont to Leaie out their Lands to Laymen, for eafie Fines, and fmall Rents, as Bi(hops,and Deans, and Chap ters now do ; it may be truly faid that they did not in reality poflefs the Tenth part of the Riches of the Nation. Then for that other Charge, that the beft part of the Soil of the Nation being in fuch ill hands, it was the In- tereft of the Nation to have it put to better ufes, it is altogether Erroneous. From the beginning to the end, none ever improved their Lands and Poffeflioiis to better advantages, by Building, Cultivation, and all other methods^ than the Monks did, while they kept them in their own hands ; And when they Leafed them out to others , it was the Intereit of the Na tion to have fuch eafie Tenures continued to great numbers of Perfons who enjoyed them. To this may be added, that they contributed to the publick Charges of the Nation equally with the other Clergy ; and the Clergy did always contribute in proportion above the Laity. So that we cannot find, to what better ufes thefe PofTeffions have been fince put ; fave only that inconfidef able part of them, which remains to Bifhopricks^Cathedrals^and Schools, founded by King Henry VIIL
Pag. 189. I'm. i. XXXV-
;< Th§ Monks became l^wd and dilTolute, '
"and
( 4* )
" and fb impudent in it, that fome of their " Farms were Lett, for bringing in a yearly " Tribute to their Lufts.
God forbid, that any Profeflbrs of Chriftia- nity, much lefs the greateft Pretenders to it, ftiould be guilty offuch monftrous wickednefs, or that any others (hould believe it of them without evident Proof. This Accufation is ta ken from F«//er sChurch-Hiftory,who relateth no more than one Example of this kind, and that of a Convent, not of Monks, but of Ca nons Regular (of Waltham) not upon his own knowledge, but the fingle Teftimony of a moft notorious lying Villain, Sttfhen Marflwl ; and after all isfb ingenuous, that he profelleth him- felf to di'f-believe it. On the contrary our Au thor fup.prefTech his Authority, and brings no other Teftimony ; raifeth the number from one to many, and delivereth a dubious matter as a Truth moft certain. Surely if the Monks had been guilty of any fuch thing, it could not have efcaped the knowledge of their Vifitors, who fearched and divulged all their Faults with the utmoftlnduftry ; nor would it have been unknown to 'Bale, brought up among them, nor omitted by him in his Englifo Vota ries, wherein he hath fet himfelf to defame the Monaftick Order, and the unmarried Clergy with infatiable Malice ; nor would Inftances f)f it be wanting in thofe many Leiger-Books, of theMonafteries ftill remaining, wherein they Regiftred all their Leafts, and that for their own private ufe
(4?
Pag. 189. I'm. 10, XXXVI
«The Orders of BeggingFryersat firft would 51 have nothing, no real Eftates but the ground " on which their Houfe ftood. But after- tc wards Diftinftions were found, for fatisfy- u ing their Confciences in larger PolTeffions.
Hereby U is infinuated, that the Begging Fryers, gained to themfelves and pofiefied o- ther real Eftates, befides the Site oLtheir Con vents. But no fuch thing was done. To the very laft they bad no other real Eftates in England.
. 194. 7/0.47. xxxvn
* The ufe of the Scripture in the vulgar f< Tongue continued for feveral Ages, till the :c ftate of Monkery arofe ; and then it was " not confident with their Defigns, nor with c< the Arts u fed to promote them, to let the " Scriptures be much known.
The Order of Monks is now exdnd in England, fo that whatfoever may be faid a- gainft them,fhere is no danger of a Reply from them. Yet ftill (q much refpedl is owing to the Readers, as not to impofe any thing upon them, which hath riot at leaft the appearance of truth. That, this Accufation will not have to thofe, who know with what Induftry the Monks in many Nations, but more efpecially here in England^ tranilated the Scriptures into the Vulgar Tongue. We have the Names left of feven Englijh Monks, who before the Con- queft t^anflated the Scriptures, or fom^ part
of
( 44
of it into the Saxon Tongue. After the Con- <jueft we do not find fo many Tranflations made ; but of thofe which were made, as ma ny were owing to the Monks as to the, Secu lar Clergy.
XXXVIII.
" Nix filfhopof Norwich died the former
!< Year , tho' Fuller in his flight way, makes him " to fit in the Convocation, held* in the middle
"of the Year. 1 5 ?6.
.
The Hiftorian could not have blamed Ful ler's flight way of writing at a more unlucky moment. . For himfelf hath here committed three mrftakes within the compafe ©f fix Lines. The firfi of them is this concerning the time of Bifhop-M^s Death, who died not the former Year, but on the i4th of January in this Ygar ; nor will the difference in Computation in beginning the Year falve the miftake. For this Hiftorian always begginneth the Year on the firft of January. The other two ruiftakes follow.
'c Nix Bifhop of Norwfcl had offended the King Signally, by fome correfpond«nce with R^,and was kept long in the Marfoatfeapnd was convided and found in a
I fear, that this alfb was wrote at adven- tuive: ^e Hiftorian finding the Bifiiop in- a Prtfwtumre, and in the Marfcalfea, without ft#- tber Engairya would fuppofc, that th« Crime
was
( 45 )
was fbme correspondence with Rome, and fo gave his Conjecture for Hiftory . But had he known the Character of this Bifliop, he would not have thought this fb much as probable. Alexander Nev}'l, who knew him well, de- fcribeth him to have been the moft vitious Clergyman of his time. So that no remaining fcruple of Conference , or fuppofed Senfe of Duty could prompt him at this tioie to bold a- . ny Correfpondence with RQJKC : Nor yet could the hope of advancing his Fortune by it, in Cafe the Papal Power fhould be reftored in Evgltnd, induce him to it. For he was then an extreme old Man, and had been blind ma ny years : But the true Caufe of his Coavi- ftion and Ira$rifonment was this, which I ftall deliver oijt of a Record. The Town of Tfot- Terry Hi ford in Norfolk, had made a Prefentment upon lay ^5-ff Oath before the Kings Judges, touching their %-coram Liberties ; namely ,that none of the faid Town ^e rtft ought tobeCited intoany Spiritual Confiftory, but-only into the Court of the Dean of 1 bet- ford ; and that if any Perfon cited any of that Town inoo another Spiritual Court, he fbould forfeit Six (hillings and Eight pence for the fa me, With this the Cholerick aid Bifhop being ea- ragsd, cited Richard Cocker al^ Mayor of Tbct- ford, and others, into his Spiritual Court, and ^njoyned them under pain of Excommunica tion to call a Jury of their Town before thea?t and forthwith to revoke and cancel the foriBer Prefentment. For this the Bifliop was attain ted in a Prcemtwire, put out of the King's Pro- region , his Perfon imprifoned , his Lands, Goods and Chattels forfeited to the King, .by
40
a Sentence in the King's Bench Court, in the beginning of th£ Year 1534. With part of the Bifhop's Fine and Forfeiture upon this At tainder, theGlafs-windows of Kings-Cd\\GdgQ Chappel in Cambridge are faid to have been bought and fet up. *"
" By the i7th Aft of the laft Parliament "gun ij;6,y«0e 8th, and ended 1536, Ju " 1 8th) it appears that the Biflioprick of Nor- " wicb being vacant, the King had reconrN " mended William, Abbot of St. Bennets to it, " but took into his own hands all the Lands "and Manors of the Biftioprick, and gave " the Bifhop feveral of the Priories in Norfolk c< in exchange, which was confirmed in Par- " liament.
This Aft was made in the preceding Parlia ment, begun 1556, February 4th, and diflblved April 1 4th, and gave to the Bifhoprick of N0r- wich in exchange only the Abbey of St. Eennets in the Holm, the Priory of Hickling in Norfolk, and a Prebend in the Collegiate Church of St. Stephens in Weftmmfter.
n, 20,
" The Abbot ofFarnefe in Lmcolnjlrire,\v\th " thirty Monks, refigned up that Houfe to the " King on the 9th of April 1 5 57.
The Abbey of Fumes was ftated in Lan- cafiire.
Tag.
( 47 )
Pag. 141. //».4J. XLII.
^7 was reprefented to be a little "Sodom, fo was Chrift-Ckurch in Canterbury, " with feveral other Houfes.
The Hiftorian doth not tell us, by whom they were thus reprefented. For that would have marred all the Hiftory, and have relieved the repfttation of thefe Monafteries. Not by the Vifitors furely ; for the A6ls of their Vifira- t ion of thefe places do not remain. The cre dit of the whole matter refts upon the authori ty of a vile Pamphlet publiflied foon after without a Name , pretending to relate the enormous wickednefles difcovered in the Mo nafteries of England at their fuppreffion. From this Pamphlet Stevens tranfcribed thefe Stories £' into his Apology for Herodotw, and from him 'Fuller took them into his Church Hiftory, from whom our Hiftorian received them. But Ful ler is Co ingenuous, as to own from whence ha took them ; and to add, that he thinks it nofc -v reafbnable to believe fuch hainous ^ccufations upon fo' (lender teftimony/ We have fome rea- fon to reflect upon the complaint which our Hiftorian brings againft Dr. Heylin, that^we- *ver vouched any authority for what he writ, which is nti to be forgiven any who write of Tranfaftions bey ox 3 ptjeir own fiwtf. I fear that upon com putation it will not be found, that our Author hath vouched any Authority for la much as the third part of his Hiftory; and is especially deficient in thoie paifages which tend to de fame the Memories of other men ; in which .above all others Juftice and Charity would re quire
(48 )
quire that fufficienr,- or at leaft fome teftimony be produced.
But to return to Battel Abbey and Cbrift Church in Canterbury ; I am not much concern ed for either. Yet being willing to doe Juftice to all men, I will not conceal that the accufa- tion.appears very improbable to me as far as Chrift Church Canterbury is concerned in it; fince I am well allured, that Dr. GdtFwell the Prior of it, who had governed it for 13 years before the DifTolution, was a learned, grave and religious Perfon: and that when it was founded anew, it is not to be fuppofed, that Archbifhop Cranmer, employed by the King therein, would have taken into the new Foun dation any perfons,fofcandak>ufly wicked, yee twelve Monks were taken into it, which ex- ceedeth the number of juft perfons to be found in Sodom at the time of its Deftrudion.
XLIII. p^£- M& tin. 37.
Fox Bifhop of Hereford died that year, ^/^. 15 38.
Bifhop Godwin indeed faith that Fox died that day. But our Hiftorian pretends not to take things on truft eafily, no not 'from the great eft Authors. The Archbifhop of Canterbury^ did that day take into his hands the Spiritualties of the See of Hereford, void by the death of Fox. Buthisdeath might,andnot probably did, hap pen feveral days before this,
(49
Pag. 263. l'm.%. XLIVc
" The new Bifhoprick ofCbefter was erefted " before any others. For I have feen a Com- " million under the Privy Seal to theBifhop of " Chefter^ to take the furrender of the Mona- " ftery of Hamond in Sbropjlnre, bearing dace " the i4th of Auguft this Year, <*/*&. 1559. " So it feems the See of Chefter was erected " and endowed before the Aft pafled (which " was in May 1539.) though there is among <e the Rolls a Charter for founding and endow ing it afterwards.
From thisPaflage it may appear, howne- ceflary it is for any one who undertaketh to write the Hiftory of our Reformation, to be well acquainted with the State of things before the Reformation, Had this been done, many miftakes would have been efcaped, and other Contradictions, which accompany them, would have been avoided. It is here faid, that the Corrjmiflion to the Bifliop ofCbefter, for the ta king the furrender of Hamond, was dated the 24th of Auguft ; but in H&CoUedricn of Re- pagt cords it is dated the ; ift of Auguft. It is fome- what unlikely, that a Commiffion fliould be given to the new Bifliop of Cbefter to take the fUrrender of a Monaftery in Shropshire, no part of his Diocefs. Who (hould this new Bifliop be? It is incredible, that we fliould have alto gether loft the name and remembrance of a Bi(hop,who adted in fuch a bufie time.Thefirft Bifliop of the new BiGioprick of Chefter, which we can find, was John Bird^ tranflated thither from Banror, And of him we know.that the
£
See of Bangor was not void by his Tranflation
Cranmer.1 to Chefter^ until the beginning of the Year i $41. He therefore could not be that Biftiop of Cbe- fter, to whom the Commifllon was granted in 1559. I cannot Efficiently wonder, that Mr. Fultnan fhould be led into the ferae mi- ftake; who alloweth the new Biflioprick of
p. 41 5. Cbcfter to have bctn erected before the making of this Aft, but to have been afterwards fur- rendred, and founded anew. For from the Hi- ftorian's Collection of Records it appears, that the Monaftery of St. Werburge in Cbefter, (in
Pag. 149. which the new Biflioprick is founded) was not furrendered till 1540. January loth, which alone overthrows all the Conjectures of the Hiftorian and 'Mv.Fulwan. In truth the firft Charter for erecting the new Bifhoprkk of Cbefter, wai$ dated 1541. July 1 6th, but there being fom<i| miftake committed therein, a new Charter of Foundation was granted 1541. Auguft 5th, (The Hiftorian is miftaken when
Pa* 300 ^e puts afterwards Auguft qh.) and ^Wthe firft Biftiop took Pofleffion in the beginning of the following Year. The Commiffion there fore granted to the Bifhop of Chefter, for taking the furrender of Hamond was directed to the Bifhop of LichfieU(\i\ whofe Diocefs it was Seat ed) which Bifhop, until the Divifion of his Diocefs and Ere&ion of a new Bifhoprick at Cbefter, was in writing and in common Speech as often called the Bifhop of Cheftery as of Lich* field ; as is well known to thole who are ac quainted with the State of the Englijh Church before and at the Reformation. .
tin. i. XLV.
" The Popifh parry ufed all the Arts poffi- *rbfe, to infinuate themfelves into the King. *• And therefore to fhew how far their Com- :c pliance would go, Banner Bifhop of London " took a ftrange Comrniffion from the King "on the ilth of November this Year I $39. ? tyhether the other Bifhops tool? fuch Com- " milKofis from the King , I Know not. But I **£m certain, there is none fuch in Cranmers 1cRegifter ; and it is not likely, if any fuch f< hacj '• .fyefcn taken out by him, that ever it *' would have been razed.— —After he had f( taken this Commiffion, Benner might well " have been called one of the Kings Bijhops.
When the Hiftorian wrote this, furcly he pM.t2tin little thought that hefhould publifli in the Ss- Append. cond part of his Hiftory, alike Commiffion /> 90. taken from King Edward VL by Cranmer. For whofoever compareth the two Commiffions, will find that they are not only alike, but the 4dry farrje, mutatis mutandis, only with this difference (as the Hiftorian himfelf, forgetting tchat he had here wrote, is forced to own) ttiat there is no mention made of a Vicar ^General in the Commiffion of Edward VI. to Crantner, as was in that of Henry VIII. to Bon- *mr, there being none after Cromwell advanced to that Dignity. Now it is very injurious to the Memory of Cranmer, firft to reprefent this Aftion of Bonntr, as a vile unworthy Compli ance, and then afterwards to fay, that Cr*»- mer did the fame thing. For what difference is there between taking fuch a Commiffion £ 2 from
( Jl )
from King Henry ^nd taking the like from King Edward ; unlefs it be that it feemeth fome- what more colourable, to take it from a Man than from a Child. Nor can any excufe be raifed from the neceffity impofed by the Aft
Pa. 43. of Parliament made 1547, December 2oth, of which an Account is given afterwards. For Cranmer l\ad taken out his Commiffion on the 7th of Frebruary preceding. But neither is it true, that Cranmer did not take fuch aCom-
Pag. 6.- million from King Henry VIII. For the Order of Council, related by the Hiftorian to have been made in the beginning of the Reign of King Edward VI. plainly implyeth the contra ry, requiring the Biftofs to take out .new Com* mijficns of the fame Form, 'with tbofe they had taken out in King Henry's time ; in obedience to which Order Cranmer took out his Com* miffion before mentioned. If no fuch Commif fion taken by Cranmer from KingHenry be now found in his Regifter, it doth not thence follow, that none was taken by him. For his Regifter is imperfect in many places. Indeed he tpok out luch a Commiffion from King Henry long before * Banner. For in the Colleftions of I>r. Tale (who could not but know the Truth herein, having been in the time of Cranmcr, an eminent Advocate in Doftors Commons, and afterwards principal Regiftrary and Vicar-Ge neral to Archbifhop F^r^r)IfindaTranfcript of this Comrniffion, agreeing exaftly with that of Rcnner pubiifhed by the Hiftorian, mutatis mutandis ; and this nore fubjoyned, Tales licen* tias acceperunt Thomas Arcbiepifcoptts Cantttar. mtnft Owtobri I J 55. Edwardm Ar chief. Eborac.
Johannes
C 53 )
Jobannes Epifcopt/f Lincoln. 1 3. Oftobr. Johannes Epifcop us London. 19. Octobr. 15;?. Stephanus EpifcopasWintcn, eodem Ann^o, Cuth- bertas Epifcoptts Dunelm. 10 Novernb. i'535.&c.
Pag. 168. I'm. 9.
" I will not prefume to determin fo great a "Point of Law., whether the Abbots late in " the Houfe of Lords, as being a part of the " Ecclefiaftical State, or holding their Lands " of the King by Baronages.
It is the known and avowed Conftitution of our Nation, that the Convocation of the Clergy doth conftitute the firft Eftate therein. This being premifed,it is manifeft, that Bifhops, and confequently Abbots alfo, fate in Convo-' cation as a part of the Ecclefiaftical State ; and muft therefore fit in the Houfe of Lords under fome other Quality, which can be no other than that of their Baronage.
P*g-.l68. tin.TLi.
" Generally Coventry and Burton (viz,. theXLVII. V Priory of Coventry , and Abbey of £«r- " ton) were held by the fame man, as one Bi- " (hop held both Coventry and Licbfield^ • 4 though two different Bifliopricks.
I will not take not ice of the Hiftorians over- fight in making Coventry and Licbpeld two dif ferent Bifhopricks : for that Mr. Fulman had before obfe?ved-;, byt of his Error in affirming Coventry and Burton to have been generally " by the fame man. He might with as £ 3 much
C 54 )
much truth have faid, that the Archbifhopricks of Canterbury and Tork were generally held by the fame pnan. What gave occafion to this enor mous miitake, I cannot conceive. Em ton and Coventry were no more related, than any o- ther two Abbeys ; neither was one a Cell of the other ; nor had the one any Dependance upon the other. At the end of the Annals of Burton, Printed fbrne time fince at Oxford^ may be found an exad Lift of the Abbots of that Houfe from the firft Foundation to the Diflb- lution of it. In DugJale's Antiquities of War- ) may be feen a like Catalogue of the
Priors ofCovevtry. If thefe two be compared, it will be found that from beginning to end, they are made up of different Perfbns, not fo much as any one name of the one Catalogue occurring in the other.
XLVIII Pag 300. I'm. 2$.
" Two years after this (o/#,. after £dpt&&» "^rij4i) the Abbey of Ofnej in Oxford, " was converted into a Bifhoprick, a Deanry, " and fix Prebends. And the Monaftery of <e St» Auftim in Briftol, was changed into the <c feme ufe.
The Cathedral Church of O/%grw& foun ded by the Kings Charter, dated I5i42. Sep tember. i. And Paul &ufi Bifhop *$ Rrtftol was confecrated 1542. Jtfne 2jth. So that the Hiftorian ismiftaken,when he referfeththe Foundation of both thefe Bifhoprfcks to th« end of the Year 1545.
( 55 )
Pag. 300. lin. 49. XLIX.
" Then the Priories at moft Cathedrals, " fuch as Canterbury, Wmchefter, Dureffn, Wor- " cejler, Carlifie, Rockefter, and Ely, were alfb " converted into Deanries and Colleges of "Prebends.
If by wop Cathedrals are to be underftood moft of the Cathedrals of 'England, that is noc true. For if to thofe he had added Norwich, he had named all. But if by that Term are to be underftood moft of thofe old Cathedrals, which were founded anew at this time ; then it is trifling. For in all the old Cathedrals which were then founded anew, the Priories were thus changed.
Pag. 301. lin. 4;. L,
" In England when the Bifhoprick of Lin- " coin being judged of too great an extent, the ' Bifhoprick of Ely was taken out of it ; it was " done only by the King with the Confent of " his Clergy and Nobles. Pope Nicholas in- **deed officioufly intruded himfelf into that " matter by fending afterwards a Confirmation " of what was done.
The Ereftion of a new Bifhoprick at Ely, was never thought on till the Year 1 106, and was compleated in the Year 1 109. Pope M- cholas II, died in the Year 1061, and Pope Ni cholas III, obtained the Papacy in 1177. We defirc to know, which of thefe two the Hifto- rian meaneth. Not the former furely. But nei ther did th« latter, any more than the for-' E 4 mer,
mer, concern himfelf in a matter done fo long before his time. It was Pope Pafchal II, whofe Bulls of Confirmation were pretended to have been fcnt immediately after the Eredion of the Bifliqprick. But even thofe feem to have been forged.
LI. Pag. * 1 6. lin. 44.
ie In the time of Popery there had been few " Sermons but in Lent.
If he fpeaks of the ancient times of Popery, it may be true . But for fome time before the Reformation Preaching feems to have been .more frequent, in England. For Dr. Lichfeld Redor of All-Saints in 7'hawes Street, London^ who died in the Year 1447, left behind him 308;. Sermons wrote with his own hand, and preached at feveral times by him. All thefe Sermons could not be preached in Lent. After him we have the Examples of Bradley the Suf fragan Bifhop of Norwich, who died in the Year 1491. after he had ipent many years in - travelling about that Diocefs, and Preaching Jn it : of Dr. Cokt Dean of S.Pauls, who con- ftantly preached or expounded the Scriptures either in his own, or in fome other Church of the City; ofDr.C0///*guW Dean of Lichfield, : who preached in that Cathedral every Sunday for n}any years together. The Practice feera- eth not to have been unfrequent long before this time, and in fome places to have been com manded to all .the Parilh-Priefts. For in the £>onfti tut ions of John 4e Tboresby Archbifhop ma4e about the Y$ar 1560. \ foun4
( 57)
a Command to all the Parochial Clergy to preach frequently to their People, and explain to them the Articles of Faith in the English Tongue ; and an Exhortation directed to the People jo here Goddys Service every Soneday with Reverence and Devocicttn, and fey e devowtly iky Pater-Nofter , &c. and here Goddys Lawe taught in thy Modyr Tonge. For that ts btttyr than to here many MaJJys.
Pag. 328. tin. 37-
" Dr. Lee Dean of Tork, was brought up a- " bout All-iwllow-tide in the Year 1543. and " lent into Kent. (So alfb Append, fag. 292. lin. " 38.) Leijrbton brought in Lee to be a Vifitor " of the Monafteries, but they were of the tf Popifli party, and Lee was Cranmefs Friend. *c He was in Orders, and fopn after (the Vifi- a tation of Monafteries pQrform^d by him ) was "made Dean of Tork.
Lee was never Dean of Tork. For Higdcn who was made Dean in 1516, died in 1 537. - To him fucceeded Dr. Layton (for fo his name is to be wrote, not Leighton, for he was no Scot) who died in the Year 1544, an^ was ^uc" ceeded by Dr.Wctton, who died in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.
•
Pag.^Ain.i^ LIU
" Bell^ that was Bifhop of Worcefter had re-v <(figned his Biihoprick, the former year (viz. " in the Year 1 544) the Bifhop of Rocbtfter^
4t Heath, was tranflated to that See. And
," upon thq Tranflation of Sampfon from Gbi*
cefar
" cefer to LitchfieU , Day was made Bifliop of <c that See.
BfH had refigned his Biflioprick in the Year Cranmcr. 1143. For Heath was Elected to fucceed him December ^^. IJ43- Samffons Tranflation preceded even that of Heath ; for Day was Elefted to Chieefter void by his Tranflation,
LIV. Wag. H7>1'»' 14-
<c None of the Preachers were either Aftors " or Condnters to the murder of Cardinal " Beaton. — — I do not find that any of them ct juftified it.
gave a yfelent Sufpicion of his con- felting to it,and juftifying it; when the Murde rers, being immediately after the murder com mitted befieged in the Cattle, he conveyed feimfelf in among them, and became their Chaplain. The Author of the Hiftory of the Church of Scotland, which pafleth under Knox his Name, extolls the murder, as a Noble and ( Heroical Adion. If Knox were not, yet at leaft one of the Scotch Preachers was, the Au thor of this Wftory. There is no Villany of this kind, fo black, which may not be believed ^^*rf Scotch Presbyterians ; fince they have in our days as inhumanely murdered another Archbifhop of St. Andrews, and juftifyed it, and commended it as a meritorious Action.
59 )
"This leads me to difcover many things {t concerning the Will of King Henry VIII. <e which have been hitherto unknown. I draw "them from a Letter written by Maitlaneidi " Z*#&«£/0#,Secretary of State to the Queen of "Scotland. The defign of it is to clear the " right his Miftrefs had to the Crown of Eng^ "land.- — Therein he proveth King Henrys " Will to be a Forgery,becaufe it was riot fign- " ed with the King's own Hand,but thofeabout ^ him put the Stamp to it? when they law his " Death approaching. For this he appealed <c to the Depofition of the Lord Paget ; and *' delired the Marquefs of IVtnchefter^ 6cc. " Dr. But j, and fome others, might be examf- " ned* Thus it appears what vulgar Errors " pafs upon the World.
f Here the Hiftorian maketh great Oftenfati- 0n of his own performance, imagining that he hath entirely overthrown the Credit of all our Englifl) Hiftories, and conviftcd the Englifo Na tion of a blind credulity. But we beg leave to put in our Exceptions. Mwland^ as Secre tary to the Queen of Scotland, might do well t6 urge any Argument tending to the Service of his Miftrefs, whether true or felfe. But what is allowable to a States-man herein, if not to an Hiftorian. It is manifeft, that Matt* land was ill informed in one Qrcutnftance; and if fo, M the reft may be fufpeded^ as being received from the fame Authority. For he affirms Dr Buts, the Kings Phyfician, to have prefint at his Death ; whisn the Stamp
was
was let to the Will. Now Dr. But* died 1 545 p. ryth. November, as his Epitaph in the Churcl 41 at Fttlham teftifieth. Bur King Henry died no
till the 28th January 154! (not 1 54s, as the Infcription under his Picture, prefixed to thh Hiftory beareth.) So that the whole Story al ^ ledged by MaitlanJ, may be as much a Forgery.
as King Henrfs Will is by ^the Hiftorian faici to be.
i vi
" But if he (Ftjher Biftiop of Rodeftr) had " kept his opinion of the Kings Supremacy *« w to himfelf, they could not have proceeded u farther. He would not do that,but did upon ie feveral Occafions fpeak againft it : fo he was <c brought to his Try al. The Hiftorian doth more than once infift upon this.
1 am very unwilling to deliver any thing .without prefent Evidence., yet I do very well remember, that fome years fince I (aw in wri ting a Complaint of Biftiop Fijker's, declaring the unhandfbme dealing of thofe, who froin time to time were fent by the King to djf- cotrrfe with him in Prilbn: how th4t having urged him to declare his Reafons agairvft the King's Supremacy, and aflured him that in To doing he fhould receive no prejudice ; they obtained of him to doit, and then made ufe offbchhis Declaration to his Deftruftion *, grounding their Teftimony of his Recufancjf
^
Pag. 358. Un. 8. LYiL
« Thus died John Fifher Bifhop of Rocfafar, 11 in the Both. Year of his Age.
G<r0r£<? Lilly , who knew him well, and wrote his Life , faith that he was born in the Year 1459. He was beheaded in the middle of the Year 1535. fo that his Age did not then ?xceed 16 years.
- 356. /*». 49. LVUL
<l -Makerel the Monk, that firft raifed the " Lincolnfoire Rebellion, was with Sixteen more "'indiftedof HighTreafon.
Dr. Makerel rnight have defervcd fome higher Title than that of plain Monk. For he was Abbot of Rarlings^ and had been many years Suffragan Bilhop in the Diocefs of Lin*
Pag. 361. ^.48 LIX
1 This Year , (1540.) Sampfen Bifhop of " Cbichefter was put in the Tower, upon Sufpi* cc cion of Correfpondence with the Pope.
The Hiftorian would have done welJ to have produced his Teftimony, when he char ged the Bifhop with this Crime. Godwin faith, that he was imprifoned for relieving with money the neceffides of fome poor Prifbners, who had been imprifoned for denying the King's Supremacy. The fame alfo Fabian, Hall^ and Stow, affirm in their Hiftories. Now great difference is to be made between holding Cor refpondence
refpondence with the Pope, and relieving o- thers imprifoned for it. The fir ft would have been unpardonable Treachery, after fo mafcy Pretenfions and Engagements to the contrary. But the latter might only have been att effeft of his Chancy to diftrefled Perfbns.
LX» Addenda, fag. 191. tin. i .
"Sanders had faid, that the Kitig (Henry*) " made many write Apologies for what he ie did ; which fome did willingly, being tainted " with Herefie ; others unwillingly, and ifor. " fear, as Gardiner, and TonflalL For this the( " Hiftorian is angry with Sanders, and faith, " that indeed Gardiner was a man like enough " to write any thing that might plea(e the " King ; but Tonftall was a man of greater " probity, than to have done fb unworthy ** a thing upon any Account whatfbever.
When Sanders fpeaks in favour of the Refor mation, he is notrafhty to be disbelieved. I efteem it no fmall Honour to our Caufe, that fo excellent a Perfbn as'Ton/all once wrote in defence of it. I much defired therefore that it might be true ; and upon fearch found it to be DeScrip- ^°- ^or to omit £^e Teftimony of Bale, who tor. Brit, reckons amongft TonftalPs writings, a Book a± f. 714. grinffi the Supremacy of the Pope, I have feen and read a long Sermon of Tonftall's) preached be fore K.FJenry on Palm-Sonday, and Printed Lon- don,i6n, in 4^,in which heinveigheth largely againft the Primacy of the Pope,and theTrea-1 fbn of Reginald Pole then Cardinal. It mould feem that this Sermon was publifhed even in
the:
the time of Tonftalh Life. For I find it cited Pag. 193. by the Author of the Defence of Priefts Mar- riages wrote in the Reign of Qyeen Mary. The Author of Athena Oxonienfes faith, that it was Printed in London 1539. who farther adds, that he wrote a Letter to Cardinal 'Pole againft the Supremacy of the Pope, Printed at Lon don 1560, and 1579. Quarto.
Pag. i\6. Un. if. LXL
" The Abbots writ generally fb ill, that it <l is very hard to read their Subfcriptions : "Some of them I could by no means know u what to make of.
If the Hiftorian intended hereby to Arraign the Abbots of Illiterature; let it be remembred, that himfelf had before faid of KingH^r/, That par. ^ he was the nsofl learned Prince, that had been in p. 10,11* the World for many dges, and yet that he ne ver 'wrote wett) but fcrawled fo that his hand was {caret Legible. But not to make Inferences for the Hiftorian; let us only comlder his own Words.He complains that he could not read all the Subfcriptions of the Abbots by reafbn of the badness of their hands. We are willing to allow any excufe to him, unlefs wherein he reflects upon the Memory of others. For that is not fair. Any one who com^areth his Transcript with the Original, would judge, that neither could he read the Subfcriptions of the Secular Clergy of the lower Houfe of Convocation. For in his Copy many of their Names are miferably corrupted, and mifta- ken. The truth is, all of them might with,
, out
out much difficulty have been read, and e* aftly tranfcribed ; if the Hiftorian had not read, as well (as others fay he wrote) in Poft- haft. I will therefore conclude this Firft Part with fubjoyning the Names of thofe Abbots and Priors, whole Titles the Hiftorian could not read.
Henrictfs Abiaf de Thomas Abbas de Gerenaon, Johannes Prior de Richarduf Abbas de
Pars
Pars Secunda.
Pag, 10. lin. 36. |.
, a moft learned Countreymaii ** of ours.
IF by Countreyman is here to be underftood a Scot, the Hiftorian would never have afler- ted Alcuinm to be his Countreyman, had he not prefumed very much upon the ignorance of the Englijh Nation, and fuppofed that in knowledge of Antiquity we were got no far ther, than we were in the time of Heffor Boe- tbiiis^ when fuch Fables as this, ("that Achaws King of Scotland fent Alcumus> Rabanm Mau- rtts, &c. to Charles the Great,) might be fecure- ly vended. Alcmnus himfelf in his Epiftle to the Emperour Charles, calleth Tork his Couri- trey ; and faith, that he was educated there under Egbert the Arch bi (hop : Date wihi exqiti- fitJorx eruditionis Scholafticx libellos , quales in Mainif4, patria habiti, per bonam & devotijflmam magiflri bur. de md Egberti Archiefifcopi tndztftriam : And in his gefl. Poem concerning the Arcbbifoops and Saint* of**f-° The Church of Tork, hath thefe Verfes,
Pairite t^uoniam wens dicere Jaudes Pag. 703,- Et veteres cunas prefer at proferre parumper, 732s oricrt gratis pr#clar# <verjibus urbis.
Utpote qu# proprium fibi me nutrwit a Itnbttit & primh Htcunqttt verenter flb annis. f
( 66 )
When equal Evidence (hall be produced, that Ahwntt* was born or bred in Scotland ; we (hall allow him to have been the Hiftorian<s Countryman*
II.
" By an Aft made in King Henry the Sth's
cc time, none might hold two Benefices with " out a Difpenfation ; but no Difpenfation <c could enable one to hold three.
The contrary of this appears from the Re gifter of Faculties granted by Archbifhop Par ker : wherein may be found very many Dif penfations of triality of Benefices with cure oj Souls, enabling the Grantee to hold any third Living with two, or any two with one, alrea dy poflefled ; or to hold any three, hereaftei to be obtained.
" While the Abbies flood, the Abbots ak <c lowed thcie, whom they appointed to fern " the Cure in the Churches that belonged t€ <c them, a fmall Stipend, or fome little part oj <c the Vicarage- tithes,
The cafe of Vicars was not fb bad before the Reformation, as after. Before it the Fees qj Sacraments, Sacramentals, Diriges, &c. were very great, fince very inconfiderable. Before the Reformation, Bifhops could from time tc time encreafe their Allowance out of the Tithes of the Benefice , in what proportion they pleafed, even beyond the firft dotation of it. The Biftops indeed have the faniQ right
ftill,
( 67 )
ftitt, as Dr. Ryves hath fully proved ; but the Vicar's interpofition of the Common Law would now Ple*> hinder the execution of it. The Vicars then were not left to the pleafure of the Abbot or Religious Houfe, to whom the Church be longed. But the Bifhops endowed the Vica- H 7 rages with what proportion of Tithes and E- moluments they thought fit; in many places referved to the Vicar one half of all manner of Tjthes , and the whole Fees of all Sacra ments, Sacramentals, &c. in raoft places re* ferved to them, not fome little part of, but all the Vicarage tithes, and in other places appoin ted to them an annual penfion of Money. In (ucceeding times when the firft Endowments appeared too (lender, they encreafed them at their pleafure. Of all which our ancient Re- gifters and Records give abundant teftimony. This was the cafe of all Vicarages. As for thole impropriated Livings, which have now no fettled Endowment, and are therefore called not Vicarages, but perpetual or fbme- times arbitrary Curacies ; they are fuch as be longed formerly to thofe Orders, who could ferve the cure of them in their own perfons, as the Canons Regular of the Order of St, Auftin ; which being afterwards devolved into the hands of Lay men, they hired poor Curates to ferve them, at the cheapeft rate they could, and ftill continue to doe Ib.
'Pag. 25. I'm. 28. IV.
" Ri% cleft of Rocbefter, defigned for that " See by King Henry, but not confecrated till "Seftimfat this Year 1547.
F 2 If
( 68 )
If King Henry defigned Rtdlej to be Bifliop of Rochefter, he could not do it by any aftual Nomination, but only by Prophetical fore* fight ofLongland's Death, and Holbeactts Tran- flation. For the King died i $tf, January i8th. Longland of Lincoln died 1547. May 7th. Hoi- leach tfRocbefter waselefted to Lincoln 9th. Au» guft. So that until Auguft there was no room for Ridley at Rochejler.
V. Pag. 50. lin. 17.
" The Form of bidding Prayer was ufed in "the times of Popery, as will appear by the " Form of bidding the Beads in King Henry the " 7th'$ time ; which will be found in the Col- "leftion.
The Form published by the Hiftorian out of the Feftival, Printed Anno 1509. feerneth by the length of it, and comparing it with another undoubtedly true Form, to have been rather a Paraphrafe or Expofkion of the Form of bidding Beads. 1 fyave therefore pre- -> &nced to the Reader a much fhorter and ancien- ter Form, taken out of an old written Copy, j
VI. Pag. ;i. lin. 13.
" Tonftatt fearching the Regifters of his See, c*found many Writings of great confequence " to clear the Subjedion of the Crown of Scot-
-" land to England. The moft remarkable
tl of thele, was the Homage King wim&m of <c Scotland made to Henry the Second, by which " he granted, that all the Nobles of his Realm
•* " fhould be his Subjects, and do Homage to " him ; and that all the Bifhops of Scotland
fhould
; (houkl be under the Archbifliop of Tort.
' It was (aid, that the Monks in thofe days, :c who generally kept the Records,- were fo ac- l< euftomed to the forging of Stories, and Wri- :t tings ; that little Credit was to be given to !C fuch Records, as lay in their keeping. But " having fo faithfully acknowledged what was " alledged againft the Freedom of Scotland, I <c may be allowed to fet down a Proof on the " other fide, for my Native Countrey, copied " from the Original Writing ye.t extant under " the Hands and Seals of many of the Nobi- " lity and Gentry of that Kingdom. It is a u Letter to the Pope, &c*
The ancient and allowed Laws of Hiftory exclude Partiality, yet this Hiftorian's great Concern for the Honour of his Countrey can not well be called by any other name ; which hath induced him to publifh an Inftrument of the Nobility and Gentry of ScotlanJ9not at all relating to the Hiftory of our Englijh Refor mation. If he thinketh that this Liberty ought to be allowed to him in recompence of the great Obligation he hath laid upon the Englifo Nation . for having fo faithfully acknowledged what was alledged againffi tbeFreedom of Scotland*, we pretend, that all Perlbns converfant in the Hiftory of our Nation,did before this very well know all thefe Allegations, and ten times as many of no lefs weight ; and that either he did not perfectly underftand the Controverfie, or hath not fo faithfully reprefented the Argu ments of our fide. For King William did not herein make any new Grant to King Henry, F 5
( 70 )
but only confirmed and acknowledged the an cient Dependence - and Subjection of Scotland to England ; nor did he then firft fubjeft the Biftiops of Scotland to the Archhifhop of Tork, but engaged that hereafter they fhould be fub- jeft to him, as of right they ought to be, and had wont to he in the time of the former Kings^ofEng- tend.Tbe Bifhops of Scotland had been all along fubjeft to the Archbifhops of Tork ; but having ' about Eleven "years before this obtained an Exemption of thisjurifdidtion by a Bull of Pope Alexander ; the King of Scotland now under took, that they fhould not claim the benefit of that Exemption, but be fubjeft to the Church of England, as formerly ; and the Bifliops of Scotlan d alfb then prefent concurred with the King, and promifed for themfelves: although within a fiiort time after they broke their Faith, and procured a new and fuller Exemp tion from the Pope ; which Dempfter placeth in 'the Year 1178. The Charter of King William before mentioned was made in 117?. But afcer all the Bifhoprick of Galloway conti nued to be fubjed: unto the Archbifhop of York> until towards the end of the Fifteenth Century, when it was by the Pope taken from Tork) and fubjefted to Glafgcw, then newly e- reded into an Archbifhoprick. Now, where as the Hiftorian would invalidate the Autho rity of this Charter , infmuating that it may juftly beftifpefted to have been forged by the Monks> becaufe taken out of their Records, and coming out of their Cuftody ; he .may pleafe to know, that this very Charter may be found entire in'thq Printed Hiftory of
( 71 )
Roger de Hoveden ; who was no Monk, but a a Secular Clergy-man, aDomeftick of this King Henry, attending him in all his Expediti ons. As for the pretence of the Nobility and Gentry of Scotland^ in their Letter written to the Pope Anno 1520. and publifhed by the Hiftorian ; it is not to be wondered, if their, minds being elated with unufual Succefs a- gainft our unfortunate King Edward II. they enlarged their Pretences, and affeded an in dependency from the Crown of England, which their Forefathers never pretended to, nor had themfelvesat any other time dared to arrogate. All the principal Nobility and Gen try of Scotland^ had in the Year 1291. made as ample and authentick an Inftrument of the Subjection of the Crown of Scotland to Eng land , as could be conceived, before Edward had either Conquered, or invaded their Coun- trey : which Inftrument Tonftall taketh notice df in his Memorial; and this was indeed the moft remarkable of all the Teftimonies produ ced by Tonftall ; at leaft accounted by King Ed-ward to be of fb great moment, that he ienc a Copy of it under the Great Seal, to every noted Abbey and Collegiate Church in Eng> land, that it might be fafely preferved, and in- ferted into rheir federal Annals. It may be feen at length in the Printed Hiftory of Mat thew Weftmmfter. Therein it may be obferved, that it was iubfcribed by (bme of thofe very Noblemen of Scotland, who fybfcribed the Let ter to the Pops, published by the Hiftorian ; who may be thought therein to have done no great Honour to his Countrey, by publifli- F 4 ing
( 7* )
ing fuch an Authentlck Teftimony of the In* fidelity of it.
VII- Pag. 47,48, 49.
. " When the Parliament was divided into " two Houfes, then the Clergy made likewife "a Body of their own, and fate in €i Convocation, which was the third Eftate — '* Whether ever the Clergy wer$ a part of the " Houfe of Commons, is a juft doubt.-— Up- " on the whole matter, it is not certain, what :t was the Power or Right of thefe Proftors " of the ( inferior ) Clergy in former times. cc Some are of opinion, that they were only <c Affiftants to the Bifhops, but had no voice <c in either Houfe of Parliament. - But as "•the Claufe 'Pramonfrtes in the Writ, feems to " make them a part of the Parliament ; fo c< thefe Petitions fuppofe that they fate in the " Houfe of Commons anciently. - In a *' matter fb perplexed and dark, I will prefume to offer a Conje&ure, which will not appear
" perhaps improbable. In the i^9th Page of " the former Part, I gave the Reafons that *{ made me think the lower Houfe of Con- " vocation confifted at firft only of the Pro- fc dors of the Clergy. It is generally believed cc that the whole Parliament fate together 1 in one Honfe before Edward the Third's 16 time ; and then the inferiour Clergy were a " a part of that without queftion. But when " the Lords and Commons fate apart , the
- Clergy likewife fate in two Ijoufes.— •
u So that it feems to me moft probable, that
- tjie Proilors of th^ Clergy were both
" in
C 7? >
et in England and Ir eland, the lower Houfe of " Convocation.
I will not here enter into an exaft Enquiry concerning the ancient Conftitution of Parlia ments in England. A queftion, which hath already exsrcifed fo many Learned Pens, can not be difpatched in few words. I will only ob- ferve., that the Hiftorian hath fucceeded very ill in his Conjectures. In the firft place it is a wide miftake to affirm, that after the Divifion of the Houfes, and perfect Settlement of the Conftitution of Parliament, the Convocation was the third Eftate. For it was anciently -accounted , and was really the firft Eftate. Then his Conjefture concerning the ancient Seat of the Prodtors of the Clergy in Parlia ment, deduced with fo much Labour, fb ma ny previous and concomitant Obfervations, is unhappily founded upon two falfe Suppo/1- tions. The firft is, That formerly the lower Houfe of Convocation confifted only of the Proftors of the Clergy. The contrary of this was fully proved in ths preceding Papers ; wherein it was (hewn, that Deans alfb, and Archdeacons, did fit in the lower Houle of Convocation. The fecond falfe Suppofition is, that until Edward the Third's time, the whole Parliament fate 'together in one Houfe, and fonfequently that the feveral Eftates of Parlia ment were then alike fummoned by thfe Kings Writ. Now the contrary of this appears from gn ancient Remonftrance of the Clergy in Con vocation in the Year 1314. found in an Au- jhemick Regifter, ttye fumm and p^cafion of
which
74 )
which I will reprefent in few words, The King had iflued out a Writ to Walter Arch- bifhop of Canterbury, Die 17. Martii^ Anno
Regni Septimo, in this Form. Vobis manda-
rattf) quatentts fit is in proprib perfona veftrA apud We ft mon after mm in craftino Afcenfionis Domini proximo future^ coram fidelibu* no ft r is ad hoc de* putartijtf, ad iraftandum cum eifdem fiddibus wa ft r is fuper competent i auxilio a Clero ¥rofuinci& veftrte Cant, nobis impendendo , pro utilitatt Reipublic*, &c. proutin proximo Yarliamento apud Weftmonafterium habit o, tam fer Clerum, quant per Communitatem regni noflri extitit concorda- turn ; & pr out per prxdittos fideles noftroseritts re- quifoi. Et ad eundem ditm venire faciatis co- ram dittis fidelibw noftru Stiffraganeos veftros^ Decanos, Abbates, &c. & Clerum cujufyue Dio- cejls ejufdem Provincirt per duos Trocuratores fuf- fcientes\ ad trattandum & confentiendum una, VobtfcHm his qtta in pramijfis ibidem contigertt crdinari. In obedience to this Writ, (which is Entituled Litera de Convocations Cleri apttd, Weftm) the Archbifliop fent a Mandate to his Suffragans, &c . in fuch Form, as repeating at length the Kings Writ, he fubjoyned: ®uocir- ta vobis. tenore prtefentittm injungimw & manda mus ; quatentts <uos diftis die & loco inter fiiis^ &c From hence it appears, that the Clergy were even before this called immediately t& Convocation by the Archrbifhops Writ ; and that in thp preceding Parliament the Clergy and Commttnitas Regni fate apart. But this is not all. When the Clergy met upon this Mandate of the Archbifhop, they prefented to him a Remonftrance, excepting againft the
form
( 75 ;,
form of the King's Summons and his Mandate. Contra formam hujufmodi citationis Clents Cant. Provincite propofuit rationes fubfcriptas die Lunee in craftino S. Dunftani apud Weftm. &e. Impri mis, That whereas the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury had not been wont nor ought to be called by the King's Authority : This Man date of the Archbifhop proceeded in virtue of the King's command, as appeared by the Form thereof, which had never before been done. That if this Precedent were allowed without any Contradiction, the King might fend out hereafter like Writs, to the great prejudice of the Church and Clergy. That the King might by the fame reafbn fummon them to meet at fome place out of the Province, which would be prejudicial to the Clergy of the Province, and had been hitherto without Example. That they were herein fummoned to meet at Weft- minfter, locum 'videlicet exemftum aucl ornate Or- dinar ii, ad quern dents Lant, Provincite ante b<sec ttmp&ra wean mdlatertus e$nfuetv-iffet. That whereas Laymen had nothing to doe to inter meddle with Ecclefiaftical caufes and perfons, this Writ {ummoned them to appear cor am di- ie$ii & fidelibus Domini noftri Regis null a atttbo- mate ecclefiaftica, fulfills, contrary to the ufage of all former times. For thefe and many other .Reaibns, they defired that this Writ (hould ba revoked , and themfelves difmifled , and be fummoned again in the ufual and legal form. Accordingly they were difmifled on the tred>~ mfoay following, and were fumrnoned by a new Mandate of the Archbi (hop dated June 6, in Tqch Form as was wont to be heretofore
ufed.
(?*)
ufed, to meet at the Church of St. a&6. don, on the 8th of July. Which Form, muta tis mutandis , agreeth exactly with the Form ufed immediately before the Reformation, and publiflied by the Hiftorian among the Memo rials of the firft Part, On the firft day of De cember the fame year the King fummoned ano ther Parliament to meet at Weftminfter in the Oftaves of Hilary ^ and directed a Writ to the Arcbbifliop to fummon the Clergy to meet dittis die & loco : which the Archbifliop did. 'When the Clergy were met, they protefted ^gainft the Form of the Summons, becaufe ci ted ad curiam Stscularem , f uta Domini Regis Parliament tint , quod in camera ejufdem Domini fuit inchoatum ; that this was contrary to the ancient Form, and that therefore they would not proceed to ad, unlefs they might be aflii- red, that thisftiould not be drawn into a Prefi- dent, and that for the future the old Form fhould be obferved. Which affurance being given to them, the Clergy granted a Subfidy apart to the King, upon Conditions by them mentioned. From this it fhould appear, that before the time of Ed-ward III. the Convocati ons of the Provinces of Canterbury and Tort were not held out of the feveral Provinces, and confequently that the Clergy of both did not meet together, and with the Xaymen confti- tute one Body in one Houfe of Parliament ; that the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury were then fummoned by Writs of the fame Form as afterwards ; that not the King, but the Archbifhop, appointed the time and place; that they never fet at Wtftwinfteri where the
other
( 77 )
other Eftates of Parliament were at that time wont to fit ; that they permitted not Laymen to entermeddle in their Confultations, but fate apart from them, and granted Subfidies apart; and all this, as themfelves alledge, had been done, a tempore cujtts memoria non exiftit.
Vflf
*\«v? Pag. 56. //#. 8. VllL
" The Clerks of Council did not then en- •* ter every thing with that Exaftnefs that is <4 finceufed.
It had been more cautious in the Hiftorian to have faid, that he could not find fuch exadt. Entries made by them. For I find an Order of Council made 1550. ^/>n/'i9th, and en- tred in the beginning of a large Original Book containing the Afts of Council for the laft four years of King Edward 6th, that there jhall be a Clerk attendant upon the faid Council , to Write 3Enter, and Regifter all fuch Decrees 9Deterwi- nations^ and other things^ as he foould be appointed to enter, in a Book to remain always as a Leger, as well for the dif charge of the faid Counsellors^ •touching fuch things as they fhall pafs from time to time, as alfo for a Memorial unto them of their own proceedings. Unto which Office William Tho mas was appointed by the Kings Highnefs, with the advice of his afore faid Council, and in Pre- fence of the fame Council fworn. Accordingly all the Afts of Council are therein entred large ly and with great exadtnefs, the Original hands of thePrivyCouncellors then prefent be ing added to the A-fls and Orders of every fe- veral day. This Book I (hall often mention hereafter.
IX. /*£. 71- K*. i.&tf.
" The next thing Craxmer fet about, was the ""compiling oi a Catecbifa, or inftitution of ?' young Perfons, in the Grounds of the Chri- ^ ftian Religion - — a work which was whol- " ly his own, without the Concurrence of any <c others.
In truth Cranmer only tranflated this Gate-
chifm out of Dutch (at kaft translated it from
the Latin Translation of Juftus Jonas, who
had tranflated the Dutch Catechifm) as both
the Title and the Preface of it might have in
formed the Hiftorian. The Title faith, it was
cverfeen and corrected by the Archbifhop ; and
Cranmer himfelf in another Book fpeaketh of
this Catechifm in thefe words— a Catechifm
>reoffy me tranflated and fet forth. He added indeed
tktocra- a 'arSe E)ifcourfe of his own to the Expofition
*nent,f. of the Second Commandment, and inferted
ioo. (bme few Sentences elfewhere.
brfi "i d sdift^
y- Tag. 89. lin. 19.
c< The people had been more prejudiced a* " gainft the Marriage of the Clergy ; if they " had not felt greater Inconveniences by the " Debaucheries of Priefts ; who being reftrat- " ned from Marriage, had defiled the Beds and "deflowred the Daughters of their Neigh-. " boars, &c.
• ^J3
As for Adulteries and Rapes ("which the Hiftorian infifterh on) it is charitably to be hoped, that they were not fo frequent in the Clergy before the Reformation. But the grea-
teft
( 79 )
teft Scandal arofe by keeping Women in their Houfo under the Name and Notion of Concu bines, and being Licenfed by their feveral Bi- ftops to do it : which abule obtained generally,, and was pradifed openly, throughout the whole Weftern Church immediately before the Reformation. Yet in any cafe to cover the faults of the Clergy,and to excufe them where the caufe admitteth any excufe, not only the refped due to the facred Order, but common Jufticc alfo requireth. Had all thefe Women, thus generally entertained by the Clergy, been no. other than their Concubines ; it would in deed have been inexcufable. But in truth, they were for the moft part their Wives; whom they married fecredy, and kept under the name of Concubines : (ince the Laws and Canons then received, forbad them to Marry openly, or to entertain Women under the name of Wives. This the Bifhops very well knew : and from time to time gave them Lt- cenfes to do it , and tolerated them in it ; not allowing them thereby to violate the Di vine Laws of Chaftit)i| but only in fecret to negled the Ecclefiaftical Laws of Celibacy. Now that this was the cafe of the Weftern Clergy, we are allured by Alvarm Pdagitts* * Planet. ^CaJJander, and others. And left we ftiould i- magine theClergy of England in this pradifeto have Adted, either with lefs Wit or Confidence than the Clergy of other Nations ; we find fe veral Conftitutions of our latter Provincial Councils direded againft the Qandeftine Mar* riages of the Clergy. Thefe Conftitutions were made for (hew ; but were feldom or never exe cuted.
cuted. But the moft exprefs Teftimony, that can be delired herein, is given by Archbifhop Parker ; who publifhing a large and accurate Defence of Trie ft s Marriages^ wrote by an Ano nymous Layman in the Reign of Queen Mary\ hath towards the end of the Book, in fome Copies of it, inferted ten Sheets of his own Compofition, wherein he giveth a full and learned Hiftory of the Marriage and Celibacy . of the Clergy of England, from the firft Re ception of Chriilianity to the Reformation. *n e^s Hiftory he affirms the praftife of the Clergy in Relation to Concubines before men^ tioned, to have continued all along in England^ concluding thus,- And fo lived fecretlye with thetr Friendes , not openly vouched for Wives , but in affedu fororio, amore uxorio, & fide conjugal^ as they ufe the 7'earmes. In which kynde of Lyfe 'there be no fmall Argumente^ that fome ^ffhofpes^ and the beft\of the Cleargiejyvyng within the Me- morie of man^ dyd continue. And in another &*£• 334» P^ace : F°r #$ many of the Clear gie lyved in <Adul* teries, and fome in Vices Sodomitical ; fo dyd di- verje^ whofe Conscience severe better, and in know± ledge wore wife , lyvc d fecretlie with Wives 9 and frovyded for their Children under the Names of Nephews, and other mens Children.—' — — In whick manner lyved Bonifacius Arcbbijhofc of Canter bury, and other Bifyopes of old dayes ; but fome alfo of late days dyd lyve^ though all the World did not barke at the matter.
Before I difmifs this matter, I will add fome- what concerning the Attempt - made for the open Reftitution of Marriage to the Clergy in the times of Henry 8th, of which our Hiftori-
an
an is altogether filent. The Anonymous Au thor r f rhe Defence of Priejh Marriages before, Pa& T7^- mentioned, rekteth, that after it had been en- I97) ^ acted by Statute 17 H. 8. That all Licenfes, Difpenfations, and Faculties obtained of the* ArchLLfhop of Canterbury^ in matters not re-, pugnant or contrary to the Holy Scripture^ and Laws of God, fhould ftand in full Autho rity and Strength, without any repeal to be hereafter had of any fuch Licenles ; divers Prieils obtained Difpenfations of Marriages ; fome of which were corroborated by theKing's ^ , Broad Seal, and fome by the Archbifhop's Seal only. Afterward* the King understanding, that certain in his Realm 'were married^ as well Regu lars as Seculars^ without Authority and Common Laws, did (through the inftigation of the Po- pifti party) make an open Proclamation (which N*/w. ?. may be found in the following Colleclionj in the ^Qth Tear of his Reign ; wherein he did but for afterward charge , that no man jhould attempt the fame again ; and did not dijjolue thofe Mar* riages being jo privately contracted. In the fol lowing year indeed (the Popifh party Hill pre vailing more at Court) the^Six Articles were enacled ; by which fiich Marriages were dif- folved, and many Per fans fo married were di vorced. But after all the King knew by Infor mation of a good number from time to tiwe\ and yet did both tolerate the Jame , which Were ufed fecretly ; and fuch as were ofenly known did not feyarate them^ but commanded them to be refuted as Lay-'?erfQn$f~~~~ancL wottld have granted Liberty to all in bis days-) but for fome &talotts GounctUon \ as was not unknown
G 19
( 82 )
to divers, who heard him oft freak of that matter. XL Pag. 90- It*, ij.
" Many great Bifhops in thefe times (the " fourth and fifth Ages) lived ftill with their " Wives, and had Children by them ; as name- " ly Naz,ianzfen)s, and Bajil's Fathers ; and " Hilary of Poiftiers, when very old, writing " to his Daughter Abra, bid her ask her Mo- " ther, &c.
>iU
Father was certainly a Bifhop, and begat him after his Confecration. But that Bajlh [Father was a Bifhop, appeareth not. Some later Writers indeed have affirmed it, without any ground from ancient Writers ; but that he ilili lived with his Wife, and had Children, neither later nor ancient Writers mention. The like may be faid of Hilary. The Epiftle to his Daughter Abra , the only foundation of his fuppofed Marriage, is gene rally allowed by Critics to be fpurious. The Hiftorian may here perhaps defend himfelf by alledging, that he doth not inrhis place propofe his own arguments^ but only the reafbns upon which our Reformers proceeded in reftoring Marriage to the Clergy. I do acknowledge, that thefe miftakes are found in moft of their Writings concerning the Marriage of the Cler gy publifhed at that time. But then ^ we have juft reafbn to complain, that it is injurious tf> the Honour of our Reformers to choofe, from among fo many irrefragable arguments and au thorities propofed and urged by them in this caufe, fuch as are miftakes, or at leaft liable to exception. Pag.
PJ£. 90. I'm. 21.
" Htiiodorus Bifhop of Trica did firft move, " that Clergymen Ihould be obliged to live " fingle
The Hiftorian is too well conversant in the Hiftory of the ancient Church, not to know, that (long before the time of Hdiodonti) fome Bifhops moved in the great Council of Nice, that BiPnops, 'Priefts and Deacons fhould be obliged to perpetual continence, and had fuc- ceeded in it, had not Pafbnutim vehemently oppofed the motion, andfliewn the unreafona- .blenefs and danger of fiich an impofition. This is related by all the Ecclefiaftical Hiftori- ans of that time, and is a matter well known, however impudently denied by fome Writers of the Church of Rome. Even before the Council of Nice, Euflatb'ws Bifhop of Sebaftea had endeavoured to impofe the like neceflhy of perpetual continence upon the Clergy ; which endeavour of his was condemned in the Council of Gangra. About fouffcore years after the Council of Nice, Hdiodonts introduced a total abftinence of the Clergy from their Wives in the Province ofTh&J]aly, whore he was Bifhop. The Hiftorian feems to have be lieved, that he firft made the motion in the Council of Nice. This miftake (as far as I can find) is purely his own. For although I have read all the Treatifes in Defence of Priefts Marriage, publifhed by our Reformers ; I do not remember to have obferved this in any of them.
( 84 )
XUI. -'<:i*9° I**- ?8.
" It \s true, that m (the fourth Age) they tc began to make Canons agalnft the Marriage " of thofe who were in Orders, efpecially in ? the Roman and African Churches.
It was forbidden to thole who were in Or ders to contract Marriage, by the Apoftolical Canons and Confutations , received in the Eaftern Church long before. It was forbidden alfo by the Council of Ncoctefared, and in part by the Council of Ancjra. But if by Canons wade againft the ^Marriage of thofe in Orders, the Hiftorian underftands the life or Enjoy ment of Marriage, whether contracted before or after Ordination ; he hath then committed a great miftake in joyning the African to the Roman Churches. The Church of Africa did all along fignally oppofe *and baffle the At tempts of the Popes of Rome for the Eftablifh- ment of Celibacy therein ; and retained to her Bifhops the ufe of Marriage long after it had been generally difufed by other Bifliopsboth of the Eaftern and Weftern Churches : infomuch as the gyifttfixt Council in the Year 692. im- n. pofmg perpetual continence upon all Bifliops, in purfbance of the Cuftom which had long fince generally prevailed in the Church, took notice of the different praftice of the Bifhops of Africa herein, and by a particular Claufe obliged them to conform tbemfelves tothepra- dlice of the reft xDf the Catholick Church in this matter. This miftake alfo is peculiar to the Hiftorian ; I do not find any Footfleps of ic in the Writings of our Reformers.
Tag
, 9 !.//'». 6. XIV.
" Refttutfis Bifhop of London lived openly * with his Wife.
Whether Re ft it ut us were married or not, we know no more, than whether the Wife Men of the Eaft were married. Bale indeed affirms it; and from him Parker, Godwin , Spelean, and o- thers have taken it. But Bale is fcarce to be believed when he relateth a matter upon his own knowledge, much left when hedelivereth any thing at 1100 Years diftance without any Authority. The like may be faid of Richard Bifhop of Chicefter, who in this fame Page is affirmed to have been married. The falfe Opi nion of his Marriage feemeth to have arofe, either from the hafty Inadvertency of that Re formed Writer, who firft reported it ; or from a double Error of the Prefs, fubftimting Ri chard Bifhop of Chicefter inftead of Robert (l>tche) Bifhop of Cbeflerjf
Pag.yi.l'm. 17.
** Lanfranc Archbifhop of Canterbury did "not impofe Celibate on the Clergy in the "Villages, but only on thofe. who lived in ic Towns and on Prebendaries.
This miftaks is wholly the Hiftorians own. Our Reformers underftood the Hiftory of the Engtiflj Churqh too well, to lead the way m fuch an Error. Lanfranc impofed Celibacy on Prebendaries ; but allowed to the Clergy living inTowns and Villages the ufe of their Marriage already contracted. His Conftitution was conceived in thefe words. Nuttxs Canonict/sux-
G 5 crem
( 8*
'3dfmsM « aswWw 0w» babeat. Sacerdetttm vero i» Cajlell& & in iticis habitantium habentes uxores non cogantur uf dimittant) non babentes inter die antur ut habeant. Our Reformers who wrote of the Marriage of the Clergy ,reprefented this Confutation a- fag. 279. r^t. So Archbifhop Parker^ who havingre- 'lated his prohibition of Marriage to Preben daries, adds, But yet he moderated fo the matter, that he made a Decree that fitch Priefts as dwelt in Towns and Villages ^be'mg married, fliould not be fefarated, but continue with their Wives in their Miniftration Ecckflaftical.
XVI. P*?.9*« &>•!?•
c The Legate, that in King Henry the Se- " cond's time got that fevere Decree made, " that put all the married Clergy from their 6 Livings, was found the very Night after in "Bed with a Whore.
This miftake alfo is altogether owing to the Hiftorian. Our Reformers, confonantly to the Teftimony of all our ancient Hiftories, relate this misfortune to have happened to Johan nes de Crema, the Pope's Legate in the Year /c 1125. in the JReign of King Henry the Firft. i ' /.r'And the Annals of ^/W^r3lately publifhed, 298. relate another like mifcarriage of the fame L e-
sate in the fame Year.
o iibiiiiQj 3fi floinwf •
*$
pagm 93. fan. 13.
" I have feen no Remains of this Con voca- " tion (which reftored Marriage to the Clergy *' in the Year 1548 ) or of any the other Cori- " vocations that came afterwards in this Reign.
Arch-
( 87 )
Archbifliop Parker, who was a Member of, and prefent at this Convocation, hath In his Additions to the Anonymous Defence ofPriefts Marriages publifhed by him, given afhort Re- Pa& lation of the Tranfaftions and Determination of the Convocation in this Affair ; which (be- caufe the Book is very (carce)I havetranfcri- bed and put into the following Collection. To it the Arthbifliop fubjoyned the Opinion of Dr. Redman^\v\\\c\i (however publifhed by the Hiftorian in his Collection) I would not dif- joyn ; efpecially fmce the Hiftorian, or his Scribe, hath omitted and changed many words of moment in it.
Pag. 128 tin. ;. XVIH.
" Eonner was looked on generally as a Man " of 'no Principles. All the Obedience he gave " either to the Laws, or to the King's Injun- c< ftions, was thought a Compliance againft his " Confcience extorted by Fear.
The Hiftorian perhaps may be able to re* concile thefe rwo Periods ; although it be ge nerally fuppofed that where no Principles are, there can be no Confcience ; fince Confcience ever proceeds upon fbme Principles,eithertrue or falfe. But it feems after a frriCt Enquiry he hath difcovered one Principle in Bonner, to •which he conftantly adhered : that was his Love of Pears and Puddings ; a matter which will, no doubt, refkd: as great Infamy upon the Memory of Eonmr^ as Honour upon the Hiftorian for the Acutenefs of the Obferva* tion, He was aware that it would be thought
G 4 dif
( 88 )
difingenuous ta '"Print fab Letters, being the Pri vacies of Friendjliip which ought not to be made pMick ; but forgat that it was beneath the Ma* jefty of Hiftory to infert fuch trifles in it.
Pag, 149. /. ult.
cc Ridley was pitched on to be the man who " fliould fill the £ee of London. So on the ^ \ . "of February (1550) he was writ for, and on " the 24th he was declared Bifnop of London " and Wejtminfttr.
It might then be refolved to make RiJley Bi- (hop of Weftm'mfter upon the intended Tran- flation of Tbwieby : But he could not then be declared Bifhop of that See, fince it was not void till April following, in the beginning of Crammer-1 which Month Thirkby was tranflated to -Nor wich. King Edward's Journal therefore faith, that Ridky was made Bifhop of London on the ;d of 4pril9 and Thirkby tranflated th^ fame day from Weftminfter to Norwich.
^-IJO. //».}$.
:c The Lord Treafurer, &c. were fent to " Gardiner (Fox faith that i this was on the 9th "of July, but there muft be an Error in
" that^ it muft have been in November
* c the former Year.) They brought him a Pa- :c per, tc which they deiired he would fet his ft hand.
In the Original Council-Book of King Ed* ward the Sixth, beforer mentioned, all the Or- Meffages, Papere, Articles and Anfwers
relating
) -
relating to Gardiner, are at length infertecL From thence I (hall correct the Hiftorians Ac count.^ On the 8th of June 1550. it was re- folved in Council, Candying the long Iinprifon^- ment the Biflwp of Winchefter h#th ju]tainedr that be fooutd be jpoken withal ; Anil agree J, that if he repented hu former Qbftinacy^ and would thenceforth apply himjelf to advance the Kings Majefties preceedings, his Higbnefs in this cafe would he bis geod Lord, and remit all his Errors paj]ed. Other wife his Majcfty was .refolded t$ proceed again ft him as bis.QbJiinacy and Contempp required. For the Declaration whereof \ the Duke of Somerfet, Lord Treafyrer, &C were appoint ed the next day to repair unto him. June lath. Report was mack by the Duke of Somerfet, and the reft ftnt to the Biflwp of Winchefter, that he defired to fee the Kings Book of Proceedings, upon the fight whereof he would make a full Aufwtr ; feewing to be Willing in ail things to conform btm- felf thereunto , and prowijing that in cafe any thing offended his Conjciwce, he would open it to none but the Conn fail. Whereupon it was agreed ^ that the Book fhould he font hit%y to fee his Anfoer^ that bit Cafe may be re- folded on. And that for . the mean tim*^ he faould have tb« liberty of the Gallery and Garden in the Tower, -when the Duke 0f Norfolk were abftnt. June l$tb. the Lieute nant of the Towcrj who before was appointed to. deliver the Kings Book to him, declared to the Counfail, that the Biftwp having refufed it, fa.id ywto him, He could make no direff Anfwer^ unlefs be were at LiMity\and jo bting, be would fay bis Confcknce. Whereupon the. Lords^ and others^ b#d been with &W the other d#y, were a$*
fointed to go to him again y to receive a dire ft An- fiver ; that the Conn/ail hereupon might determine further Order for him. July %th the Bfyop of 'Winchefter'j Cafe 'was renewed. Then was the Lord Treafurcr, &c. fent to him with the Me f- fage, of which the Hiftorian here fpeakerh. Together with the Articles, the Council fent a Letter to him, blaming his Obftinacy, and perfuading him to conform. Fox giveth a true Account of the Articles, and his Anfwer to them. Only hath erroneoufly put the 9th for the 8th of July. Although he might rpean, that the Commiffioners went to him on that day : which feems to have been true. For on the loth of July the Commiffioners reported his Anfwer in Council, related by Fox, and from him by the Hiftorian. And that thefe Commiffioners went indeed to the Bifhop on the 9th of July, King Edward teftifyeth in his Journal, publifhed by the Hiftorian himfelf.
Pag. i $ I. tin. 7.
<e Herbert and Petre came to hiiji fome time <c after that, but how foon it is not clear, and " prefled him to make the Acknowledgment <e without Exception.
The Council-Book fixeth the time of this Mefiage, and cleareth a miftake of the Hifto rian. July 1 1 th. Ibis day the Bifiop of Win- chefterV Cafe was debated ; and becaufi it ap pears that he fticketb upon theSubmiJJlon, which ts the principaleft Point , confidering his offence that the new goeth about to defend, to the intent that hefaould have no juft cauje to fay that he was not
Mercifully
9' )
mercifully handled -, it was agreed, that the fter of the Horfe, and Mr. Secretary Petre /i repair unto him again with the fame Submijfion : exhorting him to look better upon it ; and in cafe the words fcem too fore, then to refer unto him- felf, in what fort, and in what words he faould de- 'vife to fubmit him ; that upon the acknowledg ing of his fault, the Kings Highnefs might extend his mercy and liberality towards him, as it was determined. On the 1 3th of July, his Anfwer was reported in Council, which was. That he ftoed precijefy in Juflif cation of himfelf, that he had never offended the Kings Majefty : where fore he utterly refufed to make any SubmiJJion at all . For the more furety of which Denial, it was agreed, that a new Book of Articles jlwuld be de- '•vifed ; wherewith the faid Mafter of the Horfe, and Mr, Secretary,foould repair to him again ; ana* for the more Authtntick proceeding with him, they to have with them a Divine ana1 Temporal Lawyer , which were the Biflwp of London and Mr. Goo- derick. The HiHorian nameth only Ridley. Then folio weth a Copy of the Articles fent to the Biflwp of Winchefter ; the Summ of which is truly related by Fox and the Hiftorian. July 1 5th, the Bilhops Anfwer was reported in Council ; whereupon it was agreed he fhould be lent Jfor by the Council, and be examined before them ; which being donejuly 1 9th, and the Articles read to him, and his Subscription peremptorily required, he made this (hort An fwer : That in all things that his Majefty would lawfully command him, he was willing and moft ready to obey. But forafmuckas there were divers thinrs required ofhi'tn^whuh his Conference would ftW • • £ • not
bear, therefore be frayed them to have him . Whereupon the Sentence of Seque- ftration was read, and Denunciation of Depri vation, in cafe he did not conform within three Months. Nevertheless upon divers good Confide- y at ions, and especially in hops he might within this time be yet reconciled, it was agreed, that the f aid Btfhops Houfe and Servants fooald be maintained in their frefent Eft ate, until the time, of this in timation jhsuld expire ; and the matter for tht wean time to be kept private . There is fome little difference between the Council.Bookand King Edwards Journal, in fixing the days of thefe two MeHages.
Pag. 151. //».?!.
XXII. « On the third of July this Year (i $50.) " Hooper was by Letters Patents appointed to " beBifhopof Glocefter.
The Council-Book faith, on the >i$th of ''May9 Mr. Hooper was constituted Biflwp of Glo- cefter : King Edward's Journal faith, July aoth, Hooper WAS made Bifoop of Glocefter : The firft may relate to his Nomination, the fecond to the Signing of his Patent.
SS- »• 19-
" Cranmer wrote about this difference, (rai- <c fed by Hoofer about wearing the Epifcopal " VeftmentsJ to Bucer, reducing it to thefe <c two plain Queftions, Whether it was lawful " to ufe thofe Garments, &C.*— - And whether l< he that affirmed that it was unlawful, or on that ** Account refufid to ufe tbofe Veftments>did not Jin fagainftGod, The
The latter part of the Queftton put byC mer Was this, An is <\ui affirwaverit mfas effe, aut recufarit, bis tjeftibus #£/, peccet in Deumy a} tit a immttndiim ej]e dicit quod Dens favflifaavit, & in IMagiftratm, quod violet ordinem Politicunt. The Hiftorian therefore hath negligent^ tran- flated it, and in part changed the State of the Queftion, by adding thefe words on that Ac count , which make the refufal to proceed wholly upon a Suppofition that the Thing com manded was unlawful by the Law of God, whereas Cranmer put the Queftion more gene- nerally in thofe words aut recufarit^ (b as to in clude a refufal to obey the Command of the Magiftrate out of wiifulnefs, or for any other caule, befide pretence of unlawfulnefs by the Law of God, which is taken away by the an- fwering to the firft part of the Queftion.
Tag. 154. lin. 29. XXIV-
" Cranmer wrote back, that he could not " difpenfe with the ufe of Epifcopal Garments " at the Confecration of Hoofer, without in- <£ curring a Prxmunire. So the King was moved " to write to him, warranting him to do ir. " But though this was done on the 4th of Aug. <l yet he was not confecrated till March ne*c " year, and in the mean while he was fufpend- " ed from Preaching.
The King and Council rejected the Puri tanical nicenefs of Hoopers Confcience, much further than all this amounts to : which Affairs I will relate from the Council-Book. In Coun cil 1550. O<flober6th. A Letter to the Bijhop of London, that where thsre hath teen fotne dif ference
( 94 )
ference between him and the Eldt Bifltfp e/G!o- cefter, upon certain Ceremonies belonging to the waking of a Bifljop, wherein their Lordfaips dejtre is, becaufe they would in no "wife the_ftirring up of Controverfas between men of one Profejjion, didfenjLfor him, willing him to ceafe the occasions ofcu '
thereof*, who humbly defaed that he might for De claration of hts doings put in writing fuch Argu ments as moved him to be of the Opinion he held; which thing was granted, and was by their Lord- Jhips commanded to beat the Court on Sunday next, bringing with him, that he fhall for an Anfwer have thought convenient 1551, January I ;th. Mr, Hooper Bifiop Elett of Glocefter, appeared before the Council touching his old Matter , of de nying to wear fuch Apparel as other Bfoops wear ; and having been before commanded to keep his Houfe, unlejs it were to go to the Archbifoop of Canterbury, Bijbops of Ely, London, or Lin coln,^??* fatisf action or Cowjail of his Conference in that matter ; nor further, neither to Preach, nor Read, until he had further Lie en fe from the Court* cil:it appeared both that he had not kept his Houfe^ and that he had alfo written and Printed a Book, wherein was contained matter that he Qiould not have written. For the which, and for that alfo ke perfevered in his former tyiniw of not wearing the Bifoops Apparel, he was now committed to tke Archbijbop of Canterbury '/ Cuftedy, either there to be reformed, or further to be puniflied&s the Ob- fiinacy of his cafe required. January 17th. Upon a Letter from the Archbishop ^/Canterbury, that., Mr. Hooper cannot be brought to any Conformity ', but rather perfevering in his Qbftinacy, coveteth to prefcribe Orders and mcejjary Laws of bis head,
it
( 9? )
it was agreed, he fljould be committed to the Fleet upon the occafion afore faid. A Letter to the War den of the Fleet, to receive the faid Mr. Hooper, And to keep him from Conference of any Per (on, facing the Miniftery of that Hottfe. On the 8th of March following ne was confecrated. Now all this was done after the King's Letter wrote in his behalf to Cranmer ; fb that in all appea rance he was forced to reconcile his fqueamifh Conscience to the Epifcopal Habit, in order to obtain his Biihoprick.
Tag. 1 54. lin. 3 6. 6- 48. XXV.
<: This Summer John aJLafco, ^With a Con- " gregation of Germans, was allowed to hold " his Aflembly at St.^#/*»'s in London — — P0- " lidcr Virgil defired leave to go out of £»£- <( land, which was granted to him on the id " of June this Year 1550.
To this I will add, that on the i9th of No- vernier i <tfi. the Council ordered a Reward of an 100 Pounds to be given to John Alafco. And that Polidor Virgil went not out of Eng land before the end of the Year 1551. For I find an Order of Council 1551. OfiW. 14. to deliver to Ttlidor Virgil, in way of the King's reward, the Summ of One hundred Marks, and another Order 1551. N<w. 9. to pay to to Plidor Virgil in way of the Kings Majefttes reward the Summ 0/300 Grownr9 after Five fallings the Crown.
Tag.
XXVI, Pag* 15*. I'm. 1.
" On the 26th of June 1550. Voynet was dc- " clared .Bifhop of Rccbefter. *
The Council* Book faith, that 1550. A/*/ nth, Mr. Pay net- was appointed Bijhop of R.O chefter. King EJwaf£& Journal, Jam 3oth. John Poynet made Jtifap of Rochefter, andrc- rec'wed his Oath. ThU latter is to be underftood of the receptiop of his Ternporalties from4 and doing Homage to, the King. For he was confecrated June 29th,
XXVII.' Pag. 156. tin. 19.
" Bucer wrote a Book, Entituled, Concern- IC ing the Kingdom of Cbrip. In it he corn- " plains much of Pluralities and Norr-Refidence, cc as a Remainder of Popery, fo hurtful to the ct Church, that in many places there were but " one or two,or few more, Sermons in a whole "Year.
The Hiftorians affeftion to the prefent Con- Pag. 12. ftitution of our Church in relation to Plurali ty of Benefices is -well known. He had be fore (aid in his Preface, that fhe prefent ufeof Pluralities of England was aRelique of Popery, a fcandal of a crying Nature, which may juftly wake M'Uttfiy. But he will never be able to adapt Bttcer's words to fuch Pluralities, as are now allowed and praftifed in this Church. • Do Regno. The words of Bucer are thefe, 3%uot reperias$ Chrifti, qn\ liCtf manifefto & horrendo Sacrileglo fluriunt ' ItC< J' Parocbiiirum emolument a abfumant tamen ne uni debit urn ifftpenJtre m'wifterwrtt) vel per
Juo*
(97 )
fttos mercenaries, taceo per feipfos, dignetur ? Si enimhi inlocis Splendidis & frequentioribtts unam & alter am vel paulo plures in anno condones ba- buerint, exiftimant fe fuo munere prceclare effe dt- funftos ; reliquum omm tempus otto, luxai-, pom- p<e mundana imptndunt. Wherein he blamed thofe who received the Profits of many Bene fices with Cure of Souls, and yet ferved not the Cure of any one of them, either by Cu rates or their own Perfbns, whereas it is noto rious, that at this time none is permitted to hold above two Benefices, and both are con- ftantly fupplied by the Beneficiary either per- (bnally, or by Curates ; and Sermoris prea ched 'in either every Sunday : whereas alfo thofe, whom B»cer complaineth of, thought they latisfied their Duty if they preached two, three or more Sermons in a year, in fome po pulous and eminent places, which the Hi- ftorian by miftake interprets of thcii- own Pa- rifhes. I find but one remarkable thing con cerning Pluralities during the whole Reign of Edward VI. and that is an Order of Council 1550. June 28. That upon Confederation Mr.Poy- net now Elett Bifiop of Rochefter bath no Houfe to dwell on, and his Living fmaUy it was agreed befjould enjoy bis Benefice in Commendam. But from henceforth it is decreed, that no Bifoop jhatl keep other Benefice than his Bifooprick only.
Pag. 1 60. an. 1 8.
<c The Duke of Limenburg had offered the "King i oooo men to his AMance, and defi- u red to enter into a Treaty of Marriage for " the Lady 'May*
H
The Council-Book faith it was the D. of Bran* denburgb who propofed to treat of a Marriage with the Lady Mary, and that the Embalfador, who came to propofe it, had Two hundred pounds given to him by way of Gratuity. King Edwards Journal indeed relateth it of the Duke
XXIX. ^aS- l^$' **n- 1'
"Gardiner was fbon after (February 1551,)
" put out. There was a Commiffion iftued out " to the Archbifhop, &c. - He put in a *e Computation. - Upon this many Witnef- " fes were Examined. - His Judges on the " i8th of dprily gave Sentence againft him, by *J which they deprived him of his Bifhoprick.
I find in the Counci!-Book,that the Bifhop of WmcheftersCz&wzs firft renewed after theSe- queftration, 1550. Nov. 13. when it was agreed in Council, that the Bifhop of Ely, Secretary ?£fr^Dr.A%,and Dr.G/^»,fhould confer on the matter, and on Tuefday following fhould certifie to the Council, what was to be done by the Order of Law in that cafe. What was their report doth not appear. But Decemb. 14. the Council ordered, that the Lieutenant of the To-we r fhould carry him to Lambeth, before the Archbifhop and other Cornmiffioners con- ftituted in his Caufe on Monday following, and after that, when and as often as he, (hall be by them required. Decemb 16. The Commiffio- ners having allowed Council to Gardiner, this was approved by the King's Council, and the Perfons by him named were Licenfed to repair
to
(-99 )
to the Tower to him, and that although one of them was the King's Chaplain. January I9th. Two of his Servants came to the Privy-Coun cil, and defired that certain of them might be fworn upon certain Articles, as WitnelTes iri behalf of the Bifliop. The Privy Councilors offered to Anfwer to thofe Articles upon their Honour, but would not be fworn. February i5th. Ic was ordered in Council, That foraf- much as ths Bifrop had at all times before the Judges of his caufe, ufed himfelf unreverently to the Kings Majefty, and very flanderoufly towards his Council , and especially y eft er day being the day of hi* Judgment given againft him (fo that he was deprived on the I4thof February) he called the Judges Hereticks and Sacramentaries^ thefe being there the Kings Commiffioners, and of his HighnejJ'es Ccunfailyhefl)ould be removed from his prefent into a meaner Lodging in the Tower, and have but one Servant to wait on him ; that his Books and Pafers be taken from him, and that from henceforth he have neither Pen, Ink nor Pa per, but be fecjuepred from all Conference^ and, from all means that may ferve him to prattife any 'ways. King Edward's Journal faith, that the Bifhop after long Tryal was Depofed, Fe bruary ijth.
Pag. 165. /w.4?.
" Eight days after, Con the 26th of Afrtt) " Poynef was tran dated from Rocbefter to Win- « cbejter.
That the See of Winchefter was Void by the Deprivation of Gar diner > before the i8th of
H 2
jjpril, the Hiftorian might have learned from 24- King Edward's Journal publiflied by himfelf ; wherein it is faid, that April the 5^,Poynec £*- j%*0/Rochefter received bis Oath for the Btfoo- frick of Winchefter, viz. then he received the Tem poralities <>/ Winchefter. The Council-Book faith that February 8th. This day by the Kings own Appointment Dr. Poynet Bijhof of Rochefter, was appointed and admitted Btjhop o/Winchefter. And April the 9th, A Letter was writ to the Treasurer of the Fir ft fruits in favour of Air. Skorie appointed Bifoop of Rochefter.
XXXI. Pag. 1 66. tin. i. ^nocft.
"Ptyfij Biftiop of Exeter did alforefign, pre- e< tending extream old Age ; but he had referved " a Penfion yearly for himfelf during Life, out " of the Lands of the Bifhoprick, and almoft " all the reft he had baiely alienated, taking " care only for himfelf, and ruining his Sue- " ccflbrs.
' :£W
The Memory of Veyfcy fufFers upon this Ac count on all hands. The cafe of his Biihoprick indeed was very deplorable, which from one of the richeft in his time, became the pooreft of all the old Englifi Biftiopricks, But had any Bifliop of England fate at Exeter at that time , he muft have done the fame thing, or have been immediately deprived. For Veyfey alie nated no Poifeffions of his See,, but upon ex- prefs Command of the King, directed to him under the Privy Seal in favour of certain No blemen and Courtiers. All the Bifhops at that time were fubjefted to a like Calamity. Even
tranintr
( 10! ) -
Cranmer was forced to part with the better half of the Pofleffions of his See, and Ridley fbon after his Entry into London^ was forced to give away the four Left Manners of his See for ever in one day Thefe two were the greateft Favourites among all the Bilhops in that Reign. Others were yet more feverely dealt with. The common Pretence was to exchange fbme Lands of their Bifhopricks with others of Religious Houfes remaining in the King's hands fince their Suppreflion. Even then it was fuch an exchange, as Diomedes made with Ajax. But to Veyfey no other re- compence was made, than the Promife of the Kings Good- will and Favour, afTured to him in the conclufion of all thofe Mandates, in cafe of Compliance with them; the effed of which Promifes was, that after he had com plied with them to the ruin of his See, he was forced to refign it, per met ttm & terror em, as himfelf afterward alledged. All he could do was to Enregifter at length all thofe Privy- Seals for the Vindication of himfelf to his Suc- ceflbrs for ever ; which he hath carefully done.
Pag. i66.lin. 4. XXXII.!
" Miles Covtrdale was made Bifhop of Exeter
" the bufinefs of Hooper was now alfo fet-
€C led ; fo hs was confecrated in March 1551.
The Hiftorian hath inverted the true Order of their being made Biftiops. For Hoofer was confecrated 1551. March 8th, and Cover dale on the gothof Auguft following, being nomi- Regift, nated on the i?th of-^^»/, according to King Cransur- Edward's Journal. H j
( I OX )
XXXIII*
ft This Year 1551. there were Six eminent " Preachers chofen out to be the Kings Chap- " lains in Ordinary, two of thefe were always €' to attend the Court, and four to be fent o- "ver England to Preach in their Courfes, <e - Thefe were Bill, Harley, Pern, Gr'tndal> c( Bradford, the Name of the Sixth isfo daihed " in the King's Journal, that it cannot be " read.
It might be guefTed from fome PafTages in the Council-Book, that the Sixth Preacher was Knox. For 1551. Qftober 21. A Letter was lent from the Privy-Council to Mr. Harley, Bill, Horn, Grindal, Pern, and Knox, to confider, cer tain Articles exhibited to the Kings Majefty, to be fubfcribed by all fuch as foould be admitted to be Preachers or Minifters, in any fart of the Realm , and te make report of their Opinions of the fame. Shortly after to Mr. Knox Preacher in the North, Forty pounds were given by way of Gra tuity. And 1551. December 9ttu A Letter to the Lord Wharton in recommendation of A/r.Knox. And 1553. February 2. A L&tter to the Archbifaop of Canterbury in favour of Mr. Knox, to be frefented by him td the Church of All-hallows in Breadftreet London. Laftly 155;. June ^. A Letter to the Lord Ruflel, and the juftices of the Peace in Buckinghamfhire, in fa vour of Mr. Knox (be Preacher. The Author alfo of the Hiftory of the Church of Scotland a'ftri- bed tohim,relateth, that he was firft appoin ted Preacher to Barwick, then to Newctftle, and was at length called to London, and tothe
South
South part of England. To the Life of Ber nard Gilfiny wrote by Bifhop Carhtonr is added a Letter from him to his Brother, wherein he faith of himfelf, that Secretary Cecil obtained for him from King Edward a Licenfe eonfti^ tuting him a general Preacher throughout the Kingdom, fo long as the King lived. But af ter all, I rather think, that the Name of the Sixth Preacher was Tbexton. For I did near Twenty years fince fee, in the hands of a wor thy Clergyman descended from him, an Ori ginal Commiffion under the Kings Seal, given to him, whereby he was Authorized by him to Preach in the North-Baft parts of England. I do not at fo great diftance of time fully re member the Contents of the Commission, but I think it to have been fuch, as agreeth well with the Time and Office of thefe fix Preachers.
Tag. 171 &c. XXXIV,
" The Bufmefs of the Lady Mary , was " now taken up with more heat than formerly,
« The Council finding that , her Chap-
" lains had faid Mafs in one of her Houfes,they " ordered them to be pi oceeded againft. Upon " which in December && 1 aft Year (viz,.i$i&.) <c (he writ earneftly to the Council to let it
u fall. —The Council writ her a long
''Anfwer.— — So the Matter flept till the
" beginning of May 1551. In July thq
<e Council fent for Three of her chief Officers, " and gave them Inftrudlions to (ignifie the " Kings Pleafure to her} and to return with an
-c Anfwer. In JMguft they came back
£ *ind Taidj that (he charged them not to deli- H 4
8
(f 104 )
ct ver their Meffage to the reft of the Family, <c in which they being her Servants could not
difobey her - Upon this they were fent to " the Tower. The Lord Chancellour, &c.
were next fent to her with a Letter from " the King, &c
There being fbme miftakes in this Relation, I will amend them, and add (bme farther light to the account, out of the Council-Book, The Emperour's EmbafTadours prefled the Council 1551. Febr. 16. to obferve their pro- mife made to him for permiflion to the Lady Mary of the exercife of her Religion, till the King fliould come to age, March 18. The King relateth in his Journal, that he fent for her to Weftmmfttr^ and told her he could not any longer bear her praftife. Upon this next day the Emperour's Embafladour decla red War to the. King, i£ he continued not to her the liberty of her Religion. Thereupon Mar. 12. Cranmer, Ridley, and Poynet dilcourfed with the King about the lawfulness of the per miflion. h.n& March ^;l>. the Council decreed to fend Wotton to the Emperour ( who was not difpatched till the ioth. of^pr//) and in the mean time to puniili the offenders, firft of the King's Servants that heard Mafs, next of hers, March 24. Sir Anth, Brown, and Serge ant Morgan were fent to the Fleet for hearing Mafs. Thus King Edwarfo Journal, which I have obferved to be often falfe in the days$ and efpecially in this place. For in the Coun cil-Book it is (aid March i8th. the Emperovr's JLmbaffadour had accefs to the Council. What Was faid by him, or anfwered to him doth not
ap-
appear; it being probable that for more fe- crecy the Clerk was then excluded, March 19. Serjeant Morgan was committed to the Fleet , and March 2^. Sir Antb. Brown for hearing Mate in her company, when by the King's order he attended her from EJJcx to London. Now all this, relating to the Emperour's de nunciation of War, to the King's Confultatfc on with the Bifliops, to the Councils debate thereon, and the fending of Dr. Wotton, is erroneoufly placed by the Hiftorian before December 1550. It is alfo a miftake that the profecution of the Chaplains kept from De cember 1550, to May 1551. For it was not begun till December 15, and March i;. (ac-r cording to the King's Journal, I think rather the i%th.) it was refolved to punifh her Ser vants hearing or faying Mafs : Accordingly in the Council-Book, I find that March i%> her Comptroller Mr. Rechefter was examined how many Chaplains (he had, who anfwered, four, VIZ Mallet, Hepton, Ear her and Ricardes, A- pril 19. (the King's Journal faith falfly the ^^th.) Dr. Mallet was brought before the Council, and being examined, what he meaned, that after . he had been once forgiven, he would again wil~ offend the Kings laws in faying of Mafs+ other like, could not deny bnt be had done info doing* He therefore was committed
to the Tower. So that Mallet was now impri- foned for a (econd offence, not ( as the Hiftq- rian faith ) becaufe he could not be before this apprehended fmce his firft profccutioiv yfc%, and Brown, and Morgan, upon theu: fubmiffion wer^ difcharged irom ;hcjr }
( rod )
fonmcnt. Nothing further was done in this matter till Aug . 9. when it was refolved in Council to fend for the chief Officers of the Lady Afarfs Houfe,and to give them in charge not to permit Mafs to be faid in her Houfe, or to hear it, and to give the fame charge to her Chaplains and other Servants. The fame day it was refblved not to permit the ufe of Mafs to the Emperour's Ambaffadour, fmce he would not permit the Englifk Ambafladour re- iident in his Dominions the ufe of our Litur gy. So that now the Council began to be left in fear of the Emperour, not before the End of thelaft Year, as the Hiftorian hath it. Ang.n. a Warrant was ilgned for the appearance of the Lady Mary's Officers. Aug. 14. there ap peared Robert Rocbefter, Edward Malgr&ve, and Sir Francis EnglefalJ, her three chief Of ficers, and were ftriftly charged, not tofigni- fie the King's pleafure to her to have the new Service in her Family, and to give the like charge to her Chaplains and all her Servants, ( as the Hiftorian relatcth,) but only to charge the Chaplains not to fay Mafs in her Houfe, or elfewhere, and the Servants not to hear it, and themfelves to conform to the fame Or der, and to take care that the others did it. Aug. 22. ( the King's Journal faith the 2 ;d. ) the Officers returning reported to the Coun cil, that having firft related their Inftruftions to her Grace ( which they had not been com manded to do ) {he 'bad abfolutely forbidden them to deliver their charge to the Chaplains and Servants. They alfo brought with them i Letter wrote by her to the King, which I
have inferted in the following Collection. Upon which the Officers were (not immedk Numb. diately lent to the Tower, as the Hiftorian writeth, but) called before the Council next day, and reproved for not having executed their former Inftru&ions, but troubling her Grace with the opening their MejJ'age to her con* trarpto the Order and Charge preferred to them\ wherefore each of them by himfelfy and a*p0& was 'commanded to return to her Grace* Houfa 'and execute the f aid Charge apart, .m/uch fort as the Order wat given to them on the I4th'. >>fo£, 7 he which thing they all refufed to do ; albeit they were enjoined to do the fame in vertme of their Allegiance. Thereupon they were com manded to attend continually, till they fhould know the Councils farther pleafiire. It was alfo decreed that the Lord Chancellour, Se cretary Petre, and Sir Anth. Wmgfield flaould repair to the Lady Mary with a Letter from the King, and large Inftruftions from the Council, which were fent to them being then in Effex. The Letter I have put into the Collection. The Inftrudions contained a Cdriimand, to declare to her the King's pe- remptory refolution, not to permit to her a- ny longer the u(e of the Mate, the realbns which induced the Council to fend a Charge to her Chaplains and Houfhold by her own Servants ( which (he had extremely refented ) the negligence of her Officers in not executing that Charge, to juftifie the King's proceed ings to her, and laftly calling her Chaplains and Servants before them, to charge them ftriftly not to fay or hear Mafs. Aug. 29. the
Com-
»o8
Gommiffioners being returned, made report in Council of the Execution of their Charge, and of the Lady Marys Anfwer, whom they had attended on the i8th. The Report is large, the fubftance of which is rightly given by the Hiftorian. When their Report was ended, an Order was made that Rocbefter, In gle field and Walgrave fhould be conveyed from the Fleet) ( to which they had been com mitted the day before ) to the Tower': Next year on the 14^. of April they were fetat liberty, and commanded to return to their Lady, and attend,^ her Service as (he had re- quefted. ' siusO
*w
VYYV Paf- !77- #»• 3*-
The Englifh Embartadours in France 15 j i.
* moved for the Daughter of France (to be
*' given in marriage to King Edward) yet this
e never taking effeft, it is needlefs to enlarge
c farther about k, of which the Reader will
' find all the particulars in King Edwards
" Journal.
This Treaty of Marriage had a confidera- ble Effedt, not mentioned in the King's Jour nal. For it is faid in the Council- Book, that 30. Dec. I'JJI. This day the Lord Admiral be ing returned out of¥rance9atelitvereal to tbe Lords the Ratification of the Marriage, between tbe Kings Majefty and the Lady Elizabeth, the French Kings Daughter, under the Great Seal of France. And it was accorded that the fame Treaty jhoula1 be delivered to the Lord Treasurer, ?a fa by him refofed in the Treafury of the
, to remain there of record fa fafe ing.
Pag. 194. tin. 4$. XXXVL
* Tonftall Bifliop of Durefm was, upon fome " complaint brought againft him of Mifprifion " of Treafbn, put into the Tower about the ;c end of December laft year, was. 1551. Whac " the particulars were I do not find
.
King Edward's Journal placeth his Impri- fonmenton the loth, of December 1551. and fo doth the Council-Book, which relateth the Caufe of it in thefe Words. Whereas the Biflup of Durefm, about July in Anno 15:50, war charged by Ninian Menvile to have confented to a Confpiracy in the North, for the raijing of a Rebellion ; as by the fame, accusation in writing^ the Bifiop's Anfoer thereunto^ and MenvileV Replication to the fame, may at length appear. For as much a-s for want of a Letter written by the f aid \Btfljop to Menvile, whereupon depended a great 1'rial of this matter, the Determination thereof was hitherto flayed ', and the Bijhop only commanded to keep his Houfe, untitt he faould be called to further Anfwer, which Letter being lately come to light, found in a Cask of the Duke of Somerfets after bis laft apprehenfion ; the Bifliop was now Jent for, and this day mads his appearance before the Lords, by whom be ing charged with this matter, and bis own Letter f reduced againft him, which he could not deny but to be of his own hand, and unable to make any further Anfwer thereto than he had done before by Writing he wot, for that the fame famed not a
ftifficient
fufficient Anfwer, committed by tie King's Com mandment to the Tower of London, to abyde there, &c. He had been accufod by Menvile rAnglJ$Acr. before 1550. For the Hiftory of the Bifhops Par. i.f. Of Durham, lately publifhed, affirmeth, that 782* Dr. Whitthead Dean of Durham^ being toge ther with the Bifhop and his Chancellor Hind- marjh accufed by Mswvilc, was forced to goe to London where^hc died in 1548. Whofbeverfuc- ceeded him in the Deanry, feemeth for fbme time to have been an Adverfary of the Bifhop. ttif' in the Council- Book itisfaid 15^1. May 10. The feijhop of DUrefm upon hearing the matter be tween him and the Dean of Durefm, was commit- ted to bis HJufe. On the 8th. July following, the Council ordered the Dean of Durefm to An foe? m Writing unto Matters as he was charged with at his being before the Council , and in fuch jort as he will ft and to at his peril, Aug. 2 The Bifhop had Licenfe granted to him to walk in the Fields. Oftoher 5. A Letter was wrote by the Coun- lijV til to the Lord Treasurer, Lord Chamberlain t Se cretary Ctc\\yand Mr. Mafbn, to hear and exa mine tbe'-Blfliof and Dean o/'DurefhieV Cafe^and to make them report of the fame ; and if they fljall fo think convenient^ to (end for them and their Accufer, together or apart, as jhall feem befl un to them. So that by this time the Bifhop and Dean were involved in the fame Caufe. November 3. The Dean of Durham was bound by the Council in a Recognizance of Two hundred Pounds to appear before the Athen Council on the firlt day of the next Term. He^ Oxon.' was rhen very fick and feemeth to have died' P*r. i. within few (Jays after. For the King granted
the
( Ml )
the Deanry to Dr. Horn 1551. l$o<wtvier la. The name of the Dean intervening between Whiteheadzn&Horn, I cannot recover, and am ready to fufped, that the time of Wbitehtatf* Death is falfly related in the Hiftory of Dur ham ; and that the Order of Council of the 26th of May was not well worded by the Clerk. For Horn is by many affirmed, to have fucceeded immediately to whitehead, and to him the Council 1552. February i8th. granted a Letter directed to the Prebendaries of Dur ham, to conform themfelves to fucb Orders in Re ligion and Divine Service, ftanding with the Kings proceeding, as their Dean Mr. Horn JW/ fit forth ; whom the Lords require to receive and ufe 'well, as being fent to them for the weal of the Country by his Majefly. To return to Tonftall ; while he lay in the Tower in the Year 155 r. he wrote his Book De veritate cor forts & fangtti- nis Domini in Ettchariftia, in the 77th. Year of his Age, which was Printed at Paris, 1554.
xxxvfl
Pag. 196. tin. 18.
" On the Firft of November laft Year (viz,. " 1551.) a Commilfion was granted to Eight " Perfbns to prepare the Matter (a Reforma- " tion of the Ecclefiaftical Laws) for the Re* " view of the Two and thirty.
Qn the 6th of October i^i. the Council had directed a Letter to the Lord Chancellor, 7*o make out Commijjlon to Thirty twoPerfctnj(vfa,i Eight Bifhops, Canterbury \ London, Winchefter^ Ely, Exeter, Glocefter, Bath , Rochefter : Eight Divines, Taylor of Lincoln, Cox, Parker, Latimer,
Cook,
Cook, Martyr, Cheek, Mafco : Eight Civilians, Tetre, Cecitt, Sir Tho. Smyth, Taylor of Hadley, May, Traheron, LyeU, Skinner : Eight common Lawyers, Juftice Hales, Juftice Bromley, Goede- rick, Go[nald) Stamford, Carrell, Lucas, Brook,) To authorize them to Ajjemble together*, and to refolve upon the Reformation of the Canon Law : Eight of thefe to rough low the Canon Law, the reft to conclude it afterwards. On the 9th of November 15 j i. a new Commiffion was or dered to thofe Eight Perfons mentioned by the Hiftorian, For thefirft drawing and ordering the Canon Law, for that fome of thofe before appoin ted are now thought meet by the King to be left out. The Comrniflion was Sealed November 1 1 . as appears by the Re for mat io legum Eccl. Printed at London 1571, 1640. Next Year, viz,. 1552. February 2. it was ordered that the Lord Chan cellor make out a CommiJJion to the Archbijko-p of Canterbury, and other Bijhops, Learned men, Civilians and Lawyers of the Realm,for the EJla- Wijhment of the Ecclefiaftical Laws, according to the Aft of 'Parliament made the laft SeJJions. The granting of this Commiffion King Edward placetb in the loth of February ^ and giveth a Lift of the Commiffioners Names ; but among the Civilians hath omitted Huffey, principal Regiftrary of the See of Canterbury, whofe Name I find added to this Lift, in fome Pa pers of Archbifhop Parker, wherein alfo in-
itead of Mr, Red the Name of Holford
occurs.
Pag.
Pag. to ;. lin. <$.• XXXVII!
c This Year 1551. Day of CbtcbefterfNtt put
" out of his Bifhoprick. Whether he re-
" fufed to fubmit to the new Book, or fell into
"' other Tranfgrel^ons I do not know.* *•,
u His Sentence is fbmething ambiguoufly e#- " prefled in the Patent that Story had to fuc-' " ceed him, which bears Date the 24th of :c May.
The Council Book giveth a large account of this matter 1550. October 7. The Council ordered Dr. Cox to repair into Suffex, to ap- petfe the people by his good Doftrine, which arc now troubled through the J edit iotts f reaching of the Bifropof Chichefter and other ^November 8. The Bifhop of Chicefler appeared before the Coun cil, to Anfoer the things objected to hint for Preaching. And becauje he denied the words of his Accufation, he was commanded within two days to bring in writ ing what he preached. No vember 56. The Duke of Somerfct declared in Council, thaf the Bifhopof Chichefter ^ coming to him two days before, had (hewed him, that whereas he had received Letters from the King and Council (a Copy of which may be found in the Council-Book) commanding him to take down all Altars in the Churches of his Diocefs, and in lieu of them to fet up Tables in fome convenient place of the Chauncels, and to caufe the Reafonablenefs of it to be de clared to the people in Preaching, He coitld not cenform his Cenfcitnce to do what he was b} the fata Letter commanded, and therefore prayed to be €xcnfed. Upon this the Bifliop was commanded
I to
( "4
to appear the day following, which he did, and being asked, what he faid to the King's Letter, he anfwered, that he could not conform hit Confidence to take down the Altars m the Church^ and in lieu of them to fet up Tables, of the Letter appointed, for that he feemed for his Opinion^ the Scripture, and the Confent of the Do lors and Fathers of the Church, and contrariwife did not perceive any flrength in the Six Reafons, which were fet forth by the Bijhop of London, to perfuade the taking down of Altars and Erection of Tables. And then being demanded, what Sen- ptures he had, he aUedged a faying in Efay, which flace being conjidered by the Archb'ifyop of Can terbury, the Bifoop of London's, and the Lords in the Council, was found of no purpofe to main tain his Opinion. Then the Archbifliop and Bifhop of Ely argued the Lawfulnels and Rea- fonablenefs of the thing, after whigh he was commanded by the Council to conform, which he ftill refufing, becaufe contrary to his Con- fcience, he was ordered to re fore to theArch- bifiiop of Canterbury, the Biflipps of Ely and Londcn, to confer with them for fatisfying his Confcience and to appear again the 4th of De cember. When he then appeared, being de manded, he ftuek to his former Refolution, and entred into a Diipute with the Archbifliop about the merits of the Caufe,andalledged the former place out of Efaiab,and a place out of the laft Chapter of the Epiftle to the Hebrews. Which the Archbifliop and Bifliop of Ely an- fwered, and fhew from O/£e«,that in the Primi tive Church Chnftians had no Altars,and urged the neceffity of reforming the abufes of Altars :
But
fng the naming tic Tails an Altar jit was -1fWjn£ffifrenl ri fa \n\ >$ 1 i vxmz ft becanfe and- 'cni Jfrittrs (otiniifccjcaQ that Table an Altar. •Ndftyit'hftaifflirig tfte:Br{liop perfevering in his iReTolutibn, altfrnugh 'lie was now again com manded en hi$ Allegiance to comply , the •CouhdiFordered him to appear a^ain onSttk- Jay, ahd the a to give his final Anfwer. Which ;he dii!,' and -anfwered that plainly be could not do it facing bis Conscience, and that hv determined rather to lofe all that ever he had. Hereupon two days morq were given to him to deliberate. But on the nth of December, perfifting and praying them to do -with him whht they thought cvnnt'vientjtir hsweuldne'Vtr obey to do this thingj -ititi&fag ittikfs evil to fuffer the Body to perifljy than to corrupt the Soul, be was committed to the Fleet. On the 9th of June 1551, an Or der was fen t to the Warden of the Fleet, to fuffer fihe Bifhop of 'tihichefter to have Jucb vtrmber'toattttid oft lint, and to be ordered as thofe who atttnd on the Bifljop of Wof cefter. In SepttttoHer a<I)ommiffion was given to examine and judge him. On the 24th of O Sober 15510 an Order was made for feizing into the Kings hands the Temporalties of the Bifliopricks of Chkhefler and IPbrcefterJat elj given to his High- tiefs by the Judgment given by the Commiffioners$ "Irately Appointed for the hearing ofihefaidBifiofs Cavfcs "i JJi. June 15. A Letter was wrote tor the Lord Chancellor ; Signifying to him, that Dr. Day late Bifiop of Chichefter, is fent to bin* fyths Kings A^Gintintnt^Q be ufed of his Lord- '•JKfr asitiChriftian Charity (hall be moftfeemly* •Alikd tiitiK ^Vfie^lenc t6 the Bithop of
I i
( IKS )
London, for the receiving of Dr. Hetle late Bi- fhop of Worcefter, and an Order to the War den of the Fleet to deliver them both to the Biftiops appointed to receive them. The Arch- bifhop feized the Spiritualties of the See of Chichefter,\Q\& by theDeprivatian of Day 15 J I. November ;. Stow faith, that the Sentence of his Deprivation was pronounced ij$i.0#0£ir i o.KingE^Ws Journal plareth it on the 5th of O&ober.
XXXIX.
1 This Year 1^52. Heath " was put out of his Bifhoprick. He had been u put in Prifon for refufmg to Confent to " the Book of Ordinations. He was after- " wards deprived.
The Council- Book reports, that at a Coun cil held at Cbelfy 1551. September £2. Nicholas -Bifiop ef Worcefter wai/entfor, to whom was repeated the Caufe of his Imprifonment to be for that he refufed to fubfcrib* to the Book Jevifed for the form of making Biffiops, Priefts and Dea cons, being authorised by Parliament. At t^e time of which refttfal, being not only gently re- tjuiredtofubfcribe^ but alfo being manifeftly taught by divers other Learned men, that all things con tained in that Book were good and true, and that the Book was expedient and allowable j the jaid jBifocp declared himfelf to be a very obftwate Man, and for that his doing it was now foewed to him, that he deferred longer Imprifonment . Nc- verthelefs he was now offered to recover the Kings favour, if be would fubfcribe to the Book. He
anfwcred^
( H7 )
anfwered, Confejfing he took the Caufe of his Imprifonmevt to be as was aEedged, and that alfo he was very gently ufed, rather like a, Son than a Subjetf. Neverthelefs that he remained in the fame mind, not witting to fubfcribe it, although he would not difobey it : And although he was reasoned withal I by every of the J'aid Council (there were prefent only Six Laymen) in dif- proving hts manner of Anfwer ; being every thing in the {aid Book true and good, and being devifed by Eleven other Learned men, to the which he was jeyned as the Twelfth, and received of all the Realm ; agreeing alfo that he would obey it, but not fubfcribe it, which contained a Contradi- fticn of Reafon. Tet he ft ill refufed to fubfcribe it. Whereupon he was offered to have Conference with Learned men, and to have time to confider the matter better : Whereunto he &id,T)to he could have no better Conference than he had heretofore, and well might he have time, but of other mind he thought never to be. Adding,that there be many otfyr things, whereunto he would not Confent, as to take down Altars, and fet ttp Tables. He was then exprefly charged to fublcribe before Thurf- da,y following, before the 14th of September, upon pain of Deprivation. Next follow the Orders of the i4th of Oftober 1 5 j i, and i f th of June 1552. related in the preceding Article. King Edward in his Journal noteth, that hq was deprived for Contempt i$$i.Offober 5. The Regifter of Archbifhop Cranmer, affirmeth him to have been deprived 1551. Offober 10, which i^chiefly to be relied on, as being a Re-
§rd yvicji which alfo Stow agreeth,adding that sfame day he was committed co che Fleet. He. •'••' * » L J
1 3 had
( -uu8 ))
had been imprifoned 'in the -f/rtf beforfc 'this Day. For the Council- Book after^the Relation of his Examination, and -Anfwer on. the of September addeth, that as -a he wasrtittrned to the Fleet.
XL.
" This Year the Biftioprick of "Shuffler :
" quite fuppreffbd,and f&o/w was made Bifhop. " of Worcefter. In December before WtotefltriitA ' " Glocefter had been united . So they ;- were- ta Ci be ever after one Bifhoprick with t%% Title?. ffc But now they were put into another; ttfcftrhofl, <c atid theBifhop was to be called only|h.(li^)^t " Worcefter. (So alib P0g.$<)6sUp. ':$wtili. ) Hooper " had not two Bifhopricks, :but one that " been for fome years divided into two.He " enjoyed the revenue of Gloeefter ; for IVor . .^£ was entirely fuppreffed.
The Hiilorian would have obliged us, if he had pleafed to acquaint us by wtfat AuthoHty all this was done. It fhould feern that Hboper had Pbfleffionof the Revenues of ffircefter (I mean as much of it as the greedy Courtiers
'Kings Majcfy. Now Hovper had
crated Biftiop of Glocefter 'in the beginrurig of
tjte Year 1551. and therefore could '• rimviil
f 1-19 )
be called Biffeop Eleftonly in refpe&of Worcefter Nor could he now be charged with Firft-fruits, and Tenths, on any other Account, than of the Temporalties of Worcefter newly received by him. Nor could he have patted away any of the Lands of Worcefter to the King, if he had not once Poileffion of them. But to put the matter paft all Difpute : I will alledge an Order of Council fully proving, that Hoofer did enjoy the Revenue of Worcefter. For 1552. September 24. the Council directed a Letter to the Dean <?/ Worcefter, to caufe the Rent-Corn of the Bijboprick to be neferved to the Eijhop, notwithftanding Hethe'.? Claim to, the fame.
Tag. 116. /*». ij. XLI.
" How Tonftall Bifhop of Durefm was de- " prived I cannot underftand. It was for " Mifprifion of TrCdfon, and done by Secular cc men (in the Year 155;.)
What was done in theCafe of Tonftall till the end of the Year 1551. was before related out of the Council- Book. I will here add out of the fame Book, what afterwards occurs relating to him 1552. September ^l. A Letter unto the Chief Juftice , f&ntffm& unfo him^ that there is freftntly few to him the CommiJJion addreffed to him, and others, for the Limit atiori9 and Determination of the Biflwp cf DurefmV Cafe ; with alfo eight Letter.^ and other Writings touching the fame, ivliich he is willed to confider% and froceed to the hearing and ordering of the Matter i as foon as be may get the reft of his Gottegues to him, By thefe Commiffionsrs Tonftall I 4 am
( IZO )
was deprived on the i lib. ofOftober 15^2. ag- cprding to King Edwards Journal. On the 31. ofO#. following it was ordered in Coun cil, that Sir John Mafbn foould deliver to the ufe of Dr. Xonftall remaining Prifonsr in the Tower fuch Money as ficuld jer^e for his necejjl- ties, until I fuch time as farther Order jhall be ta ken touching the Goods and Money lately apper taining to bim ; and that the Lord Wharton caufe the ACCOM ft s of the Revenues of the Bifooprick of Durefm, as well for thefecond and third Years of the late Biflwps entry into the fame, as for two Tears laft p#ft, to be fearchsd for, and fent hither witbfpeed. '
XLII. Pag. ii 6. I'm. 8.
" ^^/? as hjmfelf writes in one of his Letters, was named to be Bilhop of refine, but thp thing never took efFeft.
"
It fo far took effefr, that Ridley was aftual- ly tranflated from London to Durham. For in theinftrument of the reftitution of Bonner to the See of London in the beginning of Queen Marys Reign, it is alledged that the See of London, was then void by the Removal of Rid ley to Durham, made by King Edward after the Deprivation of Tonftall, and Bonner was thereupon re-inftated in London without pro nouncing Ridley deprived of the See of Lon don -7 but on the contrary Ridley is in the Re- gifter declared to have been deprived of the Biflioprick of Durham, for Herefie and Sedi tion.
t ; -.-• '
fas-
( 121 )
^dol5O '
Pag. 142. lin. 39. XLIEU
" June iff;. the Seal was on the 1 3th. of " Augttft given to Gardiner, who was decla- " red Lord Chancellour of England. •
Stow, who is very exaft in denoting the times .of things falling within the com pals of his own obfervation, faith that the Seal was delivered unto Gardiner ^on the 2 sd. of Aug. His Patent for the Office of Lord Chancellour bears date on the lift, of September, accord ing to Sir William Dugdatis accurate Cata logue of the Chancellours, &c. of England. With Stow agreeth Graft on herein.
Pag. 247. lift. 5. Pag. 248. lin. $ J. XLIV*
" The Commilfion for reftoring Banner, " bearing date the 2 id. of Aug. was dire- " dedto fome Civilians - who pronounced *- his former Sentence of Deprivation void. u Thus he was reftored to his See on the 5th. > I f of September 1555. nssuf) lo §nin(
Stow, and Gr^fton affirm, that Bonner was . reftored to his Bifhoprick in the beginning of Augufl, and that hecaufed theufeoftheMafs /and other Roman Ceremonies to be renewed in his Cathedral Church on the 2710. of AH- .
Pag. 149- I'm. 17- P- SH. /• }6' P- H8 '• 38. XLV
4C Cranmer protefted that the Mafs was not " fet up at Canterbury by his Order, but that " a fawning hypocritical Monk ( this was
I Thornton
" Thornton Suffragan of Dover ) had done it
" Anno 1553, without his knowledge > -
" Thornton Suffrsgati of Dc*utr refolved to fhew
c his zeal (for Popery, Anno 1555. ) This
"c Thornton had from the firft Change made by
" King Henry, been the moft officious and for-
<l ward in every turn ----- In the Month of
June i Jn- Fourteen Proteftants were de-
€t ftroyed in two days by Thornton and Harpf-
There was but one Suffragan Bifhcp iri the Diocefs of Canterbury, of the Name of Thorn- ton. He was Suffragan to Archbifhop War- ham in the Year 1508. and had his Title not from Dover, but in fartibus Infdelium, and died long before Cranmer $ time. The Suffra gan under Cranmer and Pole was Richard Thornden^ fometimes Monk, afterwards upon the Suppreffion of the Priory, firft Prebendary of the Chyrch of Canterbury. He died in the end of year 1557, or rather in the beginning of 1558.
XLVI. Pag.2io.lin. 8.
" On the I :$th, of September, Latimer and <: Cranmer were called before the Council, La- " timer was that day committed, but Cran- " mer was refpited till next day, and then he " was fent to the Tower.
If Stow may be believed Latimer was fent to the Tow(jp on the I4th, and Cranmer on the ijtlj. of Scftaafa 1553.
:>3ni 1?
Pag. 250. //». 17. d" 24. XLVII.
•4< There was an Orderfefit to j^fc <?!,#/- w <?0, and ;his Congregation to be gofte. A- " /<2/c0 after a long and hard paffege arriving " at DtnwarR.) was ill received there, From lt thence they went firft to Lufack, then to " Wijmar and Hamburgh^ and at 4fuft planted " themfelves in
A fnoft exact account of the Foundation and Diflblution of this Gerwcv Congregation in England, \fith their fubfeqaent Rerhovals, was itom&hty'-VtwhQ'vms one of the Minifters, ac the defire of the G^ngregation, and is prin ted at Bafil 1560, £6. with this Title. Sim* flex & fidelit Narratio de in ft it Mi <* & dsmum flif- fipat* Dclgarum Mwrumt] ; ~Peregnnornm in An- glta.Ecckfia, per J'ehzKnem Utenhcviwn* Gandz* *vtim^ beingapproved by Jchn a Lafco, andthq refr, as a true account. *From this Narration k appears, that although feme of the Compa ny went to Hamburgh, Lubeck, Wifmary &c. Yet that Alafco. hrmlelf went not thither with them. He left Denmark on the isth. cf Na- veMer, puffed through Hvlfatia^ and arrived at Efiikden the 4tlj. of ! December. He was ac- vcompanied wi,th 'a Servant of the King of D^- mtifk^ by whom, he fent b^ck a fevcre or ra ther unmannerly tetter to the King. In this fame .Relation of Utetihovius ^ is printed at lar;gfe the Charter given by King Edward to John a :Lafco and his Congregation ; which p**' the Hiftorian had before mentioned, and put it into his Colledlion? for the Curiofity of the
thing,
( 1
thing, as himfelf faith : It was alfb publifhed P^. 394, by Mr. Prynn in his Tryal of Archbifhop Laud. I will further add, that it is more correft in Utenhoviw, than in the Tranfcript; which is the Cafe of all the Inftruments and Memorials publifhed by him, which I have had occafion to compare either with the Originals, or with other Copies.
XLVIII. P«£- M i •tin. 2.
" Cox w*s without any good colour turned [C out both of his Deanry otChrift-Cbtrcb, and " his Prebendary at Weftminftcr. He was put !< into the JMarfoalfea, but on the 1 9th of Au- " guft 1555. was dilcharged.
.
Cox had no Prebendary (the Hiftorian would have faid Prebend) at Wejtminfter:% but befldes h?s Deanry of'Cbr$*Cliurc6 Oxford, was Dean of Wefcmmft-ert and Prebendary of Windfor ; of all which he was deprived about this time. The caule of his Deprivation, was probably iuppofed to have been, that he had afted in favour of Queen Jane. For being a confide- rable Perfon in King Edward's Court at the time of his Death, and having been much em ployed even in State Affairs, he could not well avoid to be concerned in that matter, ifl^ were then prefent at Court. He was married indeed at this time. But I do not think that was alkdged a$ a Caufe of his Deprivation. For they did not yet proceed to deprive the married Clergy, until fome Months after
£^v.^/xc:»u., rg
tet
' • v
( i *5 )
fliififlii
t* W j>A A * LJiJOl M^r*»**jiu •'*•»- V t^ -w
- ag. 152. tin. 28. XLlA.
"On the Fourth of Qttober 1553. Holgate " Archbifhop of York was put in the Tower^ "nocaufe being given, but heinous Offences <e only named in General.
I fear that Holgate by his imprudent Car- ...c riage, if not by worfe A&ions, had brought a Scandal on the Reformation. Moft, if not all the Perfbns highly inftrumental in the Re formation, were eminent for Vertue, but the pwbtty of Helgate may juftly be fufpe&ed. For in the Council-Book of King Edward^ I find this Order made on the i;d.of November, 1551. A Letter to the Archbifliop of York, to flay his coming up hit her till the Parliament. Alfo a Litter to Sir Tho. Gargrave, and Mr. Char loner, and Dr. Rouksby, to fearch and examine the very truth of the matter between the Archbi- fjopef York, and one Norman, who claimeth the faid Archbifap's Wife to be his IVife, to which end the Supplication of the (aid Norman, is fent ty.them endofed. It is to be lamented indeed, that fuch occafions of Scandal were given by any eminent Perfonsofour Church (although to fay the truth Holgate a&ed very little in the Reformation) but when they are given, they ought not to be dilfembled by an Hiftorian, out of favour or affection to any Party. To reprefent only the laudable Actions of men, is ,to wrjte an Elogy,or Apology, or Panegyrick, or whatever other Name it may a/fume, the name of Hiftcry it ought not to claim. And after all fuch Scandals(if indeed this were juftly fo) are no more prejudicial to1 the Honour of
the
the Church of England, .at and llnce the Re formation, than the fcandalous Impurities 'of Walter Bifhop of Hereford^ 'Stank Bifhop 6f £//, and many others, were to the Honour of the fame Church before the Reformation. I know^w hither the learned Author of the De- fence of fneft- Marriages, publiChed by Afch-
* J bifliop Parker intends the Cafe of '.Holgrit, when he faith, / mean not to.juftifa the urivutffal Ion of the married ttifoofsfcand Rrtdfif M all their light and dijjolvte tieha-Qitut •, &fa$ftyfr it hath been in anj of them from the higheft to the ~hwcft.— — ~<1 think, that I may fteak it' of the Conference of fame married Bijkops and Priefts in England, that they do as much lam'ent the' light HehavJoiir) fie wed and cfcafed by fome ofthem^ in the Liber tee that WM granted them of Law and Parltawent, as they 'that be moft angry and cut
of patience with them." -and b*fide%forfh be*-
i wail the.dijjvluie Behaviour of a great* me any of their beft beloved^ and wife as hartely all rfffen- dicles and .SldunJers rooted out both fortes of the Clergie. It fhoirid feem that in the Imprifon- menc of Hofgate, this was alledged as €«ie of thofe kainow Offences, which Were the preten ded caufe of it. For in the Iriltrument of his Deprivation it is (aid, that \\t was for his Mar- riage committed to the Tower and deprived.
L,
"On the 3d. of November ijf;. Arcrrbi- fhop Cranmer, with others, were brought t6 their Try aL
He
He was Arraigned and Condemned of Treafbn at Guild-Hall London, on the 13 th of November, according to Stow and Grafton.
Pag. 157. Im. 28. Lt
" And now, (after his Attainture) Cranmer :< was legally devefted ot his Archbiftioprick,
" which was hereupon void in Law.
" But it being now defigned to reftore the EC- " clefiaftical Exemption and Dignity to what " it had been anciently, it was refolved, that ' he mould flill be efteemed Archbifhop, till tc he were folemnly degraded according to the " Canon Law (which was done in the middle " of February 1556.) So that all that followed u upon this againft Cranmer, was a Sequeftra- ;e ti«n of all the Fruits of his Archbifhoprick ; <c himfelf was ftill kept, in Prilbn.
This, if true, would be a matter of great moment, and make a confiderable change in the Hiftory of our Church. But really it is a meer Fiction. For immediately after his At tainture, the See of Canterbury was declared void, and the Dean and Chapter of Canter bury thereupon aflumed the Adminiftration of the Spiritual Jurifdiftion of the Archbifho- prick, as in other Cafes of Vacancy. The Attainture was compleated in the middle of November 1555 and on the i6th of December following, the Dean and Chapter of Can terbury , gave out Commiifions to feveral Perfons for the Exercife of the Archiepifcopal Jurifdidlion in their Names, and by their Au thorities, The Chapter continued in Pofleffion
of
6f this Juriicliftion, till the Publication of Car dinal Poles Bulls of Provifion to the Archbifho- prick*, w&. till the beginning of the Year 1556. and during that time gave Commiffions to the feveral Officers and Judges of the Courts of the Archbiflioprick, had the ipiritual JuriA didtion of all vacant Biftiopricks, gave Inftitu* tion to all Benefices in them, and in the Dio- cefs of Cunterbury^ gave Commilfions for the Confecration of Bidiops, &c. of all which Ads done a peculiar Regifter was made, Entituledv Vacatio fedis Metropolitica Chrifti Cantuar. poft depofitionem 1'bomx Cranmer nuper Archiepijcopi Cantuar. primo de crimine l<efe Majeftatts Autko- ritate Parliaments convtfH, & deinde ob euanas brtrefes Authoritate fedis Apoftolica depojitiy degra- dati. Secular i bracbio traditi, & poftrerrtb in aim ft Univerfitate Oxonienfi igne ccnfumpti, fub anni Domini^ 1553,1554, d^I55$. regnorum <uero Philippi & Maria Regum, &c. During this time, all Ads and Inftruments begin with theffe words : NocholaM Wotton utriufque juris Do ft or. Die anus Ecciefirt Cathedralis, & Metropolitices ChrijhCantttart& ejufdem Ecclefia Capitulum^ad quern ,& quosyomnis & omnino dajurijdiffio Spiri- tualis & Ecclefiafticay qua ad Archiepifcopum Cantunenfem, fede plena, penmiiit^ ipfa Jede jam per Attinfturam 'ihoma Cranrner, ultimi Ar- chiepifcopi ejufdtm^ de aha proditione atttnfti & adjudicati , vacante, notona dtnofcitur pertinere. Thus in particular beginneth the firft Inftru- ment of the Regifter, Dated 1555. December 16. Long before his Degradation al(b,the Pope had folenmly Excommunicated and Depofed Granmer for Herefie : for it did not concern
him
him to take notice of the Pretence of High™ Treafon. In the Bull of Provifion to Cardinal P0/*,to the Archbiftloprick of 'Canterbury , dated