1

external rites and ceremonies, as by law and good usages are provided for, and that none hereafter be admitted to any Ecclesiastical preferment but who is well disposed to common order, and shall formally promise to comply with it"; followed up as this was by the Archbishop's Advertisements, prescribing a dress for ministers, and a set of injunctions which the prelates were to enforce, the ejection of many of the best clergy was fatally insured. Not a few important churches were closed; and when some of the ablest of the silenced ministers began to defend themselves in pamphlets, the liberty of the press was at once restrained by a menacing Order of Council against those who should dare to print anything about these injunctions and ordinances. So great became the scandal, that while Grindal and Pilkington strove to migitate the evil, and Whittingham wrote earnestly to his friend at court (the Earl of Leicester, who always favoured the Puritans), to interpose against the

2

1 Cardwell (Doc. Annals, i. pp. 287-297) gives the text in full of this Book of Advertisements. The clergy were required to subscribe a set of promises as to preaching and apparel, which put them under their Bishops, so as to be at the mercy of the Crown, without any constitutional or legal protection whatever.

2 It has been estimated that the number of those suspended, silenced, or deprived, for "scrupling the habits," or similar offences in Elizabeth's reign, embraced about one-third of the clergy throughout the kingdom. Meanwhile, the blow fell heavily on London. Suspension and sequestration were the lot of the most popular preachers, whose congregations were greatly exasperated. From this time a certain sullen spirit of dissatisfaction descended on certain circles in the metropolis; and the seeds were sown of an acrimonious and hostile disposition towards the hierarchy, which should be reaped many days hence. Among the first sufferers was the good and aged Miles Coverdale, once Bishop of Exeter in the reign of Edward VI., a pioneer in Biblical translation, a Genevan exile, who had been called in on an extremity to assist at the consecration of Archbishop Parker, but now allowed to fall into neglect because "against the habits." From the humble living of St. Magnus, London Bridge, the venerable Confessor was now driven, pauper et peregrinus, as was touchingly said; and dying shortly after, in 1567, at the advanced age of 81, his body was attended by vast crowds to its resting-place, the popular heart responding to his worth, and resentfully marking its sense of the evil usage he had sustained. The venerable John Foxe, the martyrologist, was another sufferer; and though Elizabeth affectionately called him her Father Foxe," and his immortal book of The Acts and Monuments,-which has done more for English Protestantism than any other work, and which was elevated to the special honour of being often placed with the Bible, Homilies, and Prayer Book, in the chancel of the parish Churches,--he too shared in Father Coverdale's disgrace. Dr. William Turner, who had been Dean of Wells, and one of the many early Presbyterians in theory, with Whitehead, who had declined the Archbishopric of Canterbury, and Thomas Lever, the famous preacher, and Dr. Thomas Sampson, the very able and learned Dean of Christchurch, and Dr. Laurence Humphrey, President of Magdalen College, Oxford, and Regius Divinity Professor, were among the victims, with many others, as the Archbishop himself allowed, of the best in the Church.

severities, leaders of the Reformation abroad, like Bullinger and Gualter1 implored their old acquaintances, Bishops Horn, Grindal, Parkhurst, Jewel, Sandys, and Pilkington, to intervene vigorously with her Majesty; and Beza in name of the Genevan and French divines, wrote yet more peremptorily. But it was the Scottish Church, which was now assuming its Presbyterian form, that most honourably distinguished itself with its remonstrances at this juncture.

"The Superintendents, Ministers, Commissioners of Kirks within the Realm of Scotland, to their Brethren the Bishops and Pastors in England, etc.:

66

'By word and writ it is come to our knowledge, reverend brethren, pastors of God's word in the Church of England, that divers of our dearest brethren, amongst whom are some of the best learned within that realm, are deprived from ecclesiastical function, and forbidden to preach, and so by you are stayed to promote the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, because their conscience will not suffer them to put on, at the commandment of authority, such garments as idolaters in time of blindness have used in their idolatry. . . . We purpose not at this present to enter into the ground which we hear is agitated and handled with greater vehemency by either party than well liketh us, to wit, whether such apparell is to be counted among things which are simply indifferent or not. But in the bowels of Jesus Christ we crave that Christian charity may so prevail in you, that ye do not to others that which ye would not others to do to you. You cannot be ignorant how tender a thing the conscience of man is."2

But all this pleading was of no avail: the dire and deadly work went on in bitterness and feud.

1 Zurich Letters, i. p. 356.

2 It thus concludes: "From Edinburgh, out of our General Assembly, and third session thereof, 27 December, 1566." The letter was written by Knox, but from politic reasons not signed by himself, but by "Your loving Brethren and fellow preachers, Johne Craig, Robert Pont, Nicol Spittell, David Lindsay, John Wynrame, James Melville, Wm. Chrystesone, John Row, John Erskine, Johne Spotswod."

This letter is given in Knox's Hist. of the Reformation; in Appendix i. to Neal, vol. i; but most accurately of all in Calderwood's History, vol. ii. 332.

"There is at Horningsham, in Wiltshire, an old meeting-house with a large stone in the end wall bearing date 1566. When the stone was put there is not known, and whence it came we cannot learn; but we are informed that, according to tradition, some Scotch Presbyterians, disciples of Knox, came over from Scotland to build Longleat House for Sir John Thynne, in 1566, and that refusing to attend the parish church, they obtained a cottage in which to meet for Divine Service, with a piece of land attached for a grave-yard. This house, turned into a chapel, is still preserved, and is used as an Independent place of worship: the tercentenary of its origin was celebrated in 1866."-Stoughton, Religion in England, vol. i. pp.

THE EARLY SECEDING PRESBYTERIAN PURITANS, 1566–67. So fierce and relentless grew the coercive measures, that there arose anxious deliberations among the deprived and sequestrated ministers as to their future policy. The great bulk of the more learned and distinguished among them resolved to continue in communion with their Church, exercising their ministry as best they could within her pale, and striving for her further reformation. To this they were the more disposed because,-being still at liberty to entertain large theoretic views on the Church's constitution, and not having yet exhausted all lawful means of reform open to them,-they were not without hope of further success by persistent constitutional agitation. The great bulk of the now Presbyterianizing party resolved therefore to maintain their foothold in the Church as by law established, and take advantage of whatever remedies were still within their reach. Some, however, of the ministers resolved on immediate secession. incident is thus recorded by Neal, under the year 1566:-

The

"At length, after waiting about eight weeks to see if the Queen would have compassion on them, several of the deprived ministers had a solemn consultation with their friends, in which, after prayer and serious debate about the lawfulness and necessity of separating from the Established Church, they came to this agreement, that since they could not have the Word of God preached nor the Sacraments administered without idolatrous gear (as they called it), and since there had been a separate Congregation in London and another at Geneva in Queen Mary's time, which used a book and order of preaching, administration of the Sacraments, and Discipline that the great Mr. Calvin had approved of, and which was free from the superstitions of the English Service,-that therefore it was their duty in their present circumstances to break off from the public Churches and to assemble, as they had opportunity, in private houses or elsewhere to worship God in a manner that might not offend against the light of their consciences."

These first SEPARATISTS1 followed the Presbyterian form,

1 The Romanists broke away from the Established Church three years later, when Pius V., on 5th May, 1570, fulminated the Bull of Excommunication against "the pretended Queen of England," his two predecessors, Paul IV. and Pius IV., having held the sentence in suspense, under the vain hope of reclaiming Elizabeth. The Bull not only anathematized her as a heretic, but declared her tenure of the Crown null and void. Parliament at once replied with a double statute, decrceing it high

and were known to assemble secretly for worship in private houses, in the fields, or in ships on the river. They administered the Sacraments, ordained elders, and maintained discipline among themselves according to the order of the Geneva Service Book. The Queen threatened all such offenders with her extreme displeasure, even to excommunication. The Bishops desired to proceed by statutory enactments, going the length of embodying the Convocation-work of 1562-3 in a Bill before Parliament (5 December, 1566); but the Queen was extremely angry, and stopped the measure in the House of Lords. She wanted no statutory measures, but was bent on governing Bishops and Church by her own royal prerogative and the Ecclesiastical Commission. The chief leaders of the Separation were Messrs. Colman, Button, Halingham, Benson, White, Rowland, and Hawkins, who had all been beneficed clergy in the diocese of London; and their followers among the laity seemed to be even more vigorous and pronounced than the ministers. Waxing strong in courage and numbers, they hired the Plumbers' Hall, in Anchor Lane; and it was there, on 19 June, 1567, the assembly of worshippers, to the number of 100, was invaded and broken up by the Sheriff, who was instructed to lodge them in the Fleet and other prisons. Next day a few of them were brought before the Lord Mayor, Grindal Bishop of London, and other Commissioners. A long and vehement discussion ensued, in which Grindal felt himself evidently in a false position when he and his colleagues had to commit twenty-four men and seven women to the durance of Bridewell for a year, whence they were however released at last by his own intercession with the Council. While yet in prison, they had, by circular letters, appealed for sympathy and approval to their Puritan brethren at home and abroad. Foreign reformers withheld their sanction-Knox in Scotland, Beza in Geneva, and Bullinger in Zurich deeming their step of separation impolitic and unwise in the circumstances. It is interesting to think

treason for any subject to "declare the Queen a heretic or usurper of the Crown," and a like crime to introduce or publish any Papal Bull in England.

It is given at length in Brooks' Puritans, vol. i. pp. 133-148, under the name Robert Hawkins. See also Strype's Grindal, p. 135.

of these heroic and suffering admirers of the Book of Geneva communicating with one of its authors, John Knox; but unfortunately his two letters to the prisoners have never been found. We know they were "tender, comfortable" epistles; but his judgment was against their action, as too hasty and inconsiderate; the correspondent who acknowledged one of his communications, saying: "Our brethren do give hearty thanks for your gentle letter written unto them; but to be plain with. you, it is not in all points liked." While the venerated Reformer of Scotland, however, soothed and cheered the persecuted prisoners, and while his old Frankfort friend, Thomas Lever, the representative English Puritan, did not hesitate to visit and refresh them, "not ashamed of their chain," neither one nor other could approve the secession policy. In fact, both Lever and the equally advanced Dr. William Turner, as well as others, wrote learnedly on the subject. For, as Neal observes:

"Most of the Puritans were unwilling to separate from a Church where the Word and Sacraments were truly administered, though defiled with some Popish superstitions. Of this number were Humphrey, Sampson, Foxe, Lever, Whittingham, Gilby, and others, who continued preaching up and down as they had opportunity, . . though they were excluded all parochial preferment."

.

All this rigour was a sudden and recent freak of authority. For years past Elizabeth had followed largely in the wake of Edward VI., and had shown something of a wise and tolerant spirit. Was it too much to hope that this older and milder policy would ultimately prevail?

But whatever course might be followed by Government, the group of Secessionists did not as yet contain men of much standing or weight among their brethren; and if the leaders of the older generation of Puritans counselled against separation, the ablest men of the rising generation-Field, Wilcox,

1 Lorimer's Knox, p. 231.

2 A copy of Dr. Turner's Examination of the Proposition that no parishioner ought to hear the preaching of his pastor or other common preachers that keep any abrogated ceremonies or use any several kind of garments which Popes and other superstitious men have brought into the Church, etc., is preserved in the Second Part of a Register, among the Morrice Papers, in Dr. Williams's Library, together with a copy of Lever's Writing delivered to the prisoners of Bridewell, 1567.