1559. by the Queen herself, in a letter to Sir Francis Walsingham1, AN. REG.1, then being her resident or Leiger-Embassador in the Court of France; the same confessed by Sanders also in his book de Schismate2. Disputation Westmin requi- ster. points 17. And that the book might pass the better in both of Divines at Houses when it came to the vote, it was thought site that a disputation3 should be held about some which were most likely to be checked at; the disputants to be five Bishops and four other learned men of the one side, and nine of the most learned men, graduated in the schools, on the other side; the disputation to begin on the 30th of March, and to be holden in the Church of Westminster, in the presence of as many of the Lords of the Council and of the members of both Houses as were desirous to inform themselves in the state of the questions. The disputation for that reason to be held in the English tongue, and to be managed (for the better avoiding of confusion) by a mutual interchange of writings upon every point-those writings which were mutually given in upon one day to be reciprocally answered on another, and so from day to day till the whole were ended. To all which points the Bishops gave consent for themselves and the rest of their 112 party, though they refused to stand unto them when it came to 284 the trial. The points to be disputed on were three in number, not any one refusing to come to our churches, during the first ten years us. 1 A. D. 1570. Heyl. Aër. Redivivus, 260, where other authorities to the same purpose are given. Also Eccl. Vindic. Preface. Comp. Andrewes, "Tort. Torti," 130-1; Fullwood, "Roma Ruit," ed. Hardwick, Camb. 1847, Append. p. 317; Wordsworth, Eccl. Biog. iii. 317. 2 Or rather his continuer, Rishton, pp. 291-2. He says, however, that the Romanists at the same time celebrated their own rites in private ; and he adds, “Imo quod magis mirum ac miserum erat, sacerdos nonnunquam prius rem sacram domi faciens, deferebat pro catholicis, quos ipse id desiderare cognoverat, hostias secundum formam ab Ecclesia usitatam consecratas, quas eodem tempore iisdem dispensabat, quo panes hæreticorum ritu confectos, cæteris Catholicæ fidei minus studiosis distribuebat." For the best account of these proceedings, see Cardwell's Conferences on the Common Prayer, cc. i.-ii. AN.REG. 1, that is to say: [1.] "That it is against the Word of God and the 1559. custom of the ancient Church, to use a tongue unknown to the people in Common Prayer, and in the administration of the Sacraments. 2. That every Church hath authority to appoint, take away, and change ceremonies and ecclesiastical rites, so the same be to edification. 3. That it cannot be proved by the word of God that there is in the Mass offered up a sacrifice propitiatory for the living and the dead." And for the disputants of each side, they were these that follow', that is to There is a considerable variety of statements as to the number and the names of the disputants. (i.) A letter of the Privy Council (Cardw. 25-9) states that an offer had been made to Archbishop Heath for a conference of eight, nine, or ten on each side, and that eight was the number fixed on. (ii.) Jewel, in a letter written before the disputation (Zurich Letters, ed. 2, p. 23) mentions nine as the number on each side. He gives the names of the Protestants in agreement with Heylyn, but speaks of five bishops of the other party, (not named) and omits Langdale Hayward, p. 19, agrees with this, but that he does not name any of the Romanists. (iii.) Collier (vi. 207) and Dr Cardwell (25) give eight on each side, omitting Feckenham and Sandys. (iv.) Fuller's list is the same; except that he inserts Sandys and omits Cox (iv. 274-5). (v.) Fox states that the number of each party was eight, but gives nine of each, differing from the statement in the text by the substitution of Oglethorp, Bishop of Carlisle, for Feckenham. Stow (639), Holinshed (iv. 183), Speed (858), and Burnet (ii. 776), have the same list as Fox. (vi.) Camden (in Kennett, ii. 372) omits Scory, and gives both Cox and Sandys. On the Romish side, he omits Scot and Feckenham,- which reduces the number to seven. (vii.) Strype, on the authority of a letter of Cox to Weidner, and of the letter of the Council, says that there were only eight of each party, so that the Bishop of Carlisle on the Papists' side, and Sandys on that of the Protestants, are misadded; though probably they were present at the Conference. And we find that the Bishop of Carlisle was present on the second day; and so was Turbervile, Bishop of Exeter, too, and Abbot Fecknam." Ann. i. 87-8. We might be satisfied with this last statement, were it not that Feckenham's connexion with the Conference does not appear to have been merely that of a witness; for he is mentioned in the letter of the Privy Council, as distinguished from the rest of his party by having been willing to read his arguments. That Fuller was wrong in omitting the name of Cox, appears from that divine's own letter to Weidner (in Cardwell, 93), and from his signature to a paper of arguments, ib. 162. There 1 1559. say, first, for the Popish party, Dr White, Bishop of Win- AN. REG.1, chester, Dr Bayne, Bishop of Lichfield, Dr Scot, Bishop of Chester, and Dr Watson, Bishop of Lincoln, Dr Fecknam, Abbot of Westminster, Dr Henry Cole, Dean of St Paul's, Dr Harpsfield, Archdeacon of Canterbury, Dr Chadsey, Prebendary 1 of St Paul's, and Dr Langdale, Archdeacon of Lewis in Sussex. For those of the Protestant persuasion appeared Dr Scory, the late Bishop of Chichester, Dr Cox, the late Dean of Westminster, Dr Sandys, late Master of Katherine Hall, Mr Horn, the late Dean of Durham, Mr Elmar, late Archdeacon of Stow, Mr Whitehead, Mr Gryndal, Mr Guest, and Mr Jewel; all of which, except only Whitehead, attained afterwards to some eminent place in the sacred hierarchy. 18. The day being come, and the place fitted and accommodated for so great an audience, the Lord Keeper Bacon takes the chair as Moderator,-not for determining anything in the points disputed, but for seeing good order to be kept, and that the Disputation might be managed in the form agreed on. When, contrary to expectation, the Bishops and their party brought nothing in writing to be read publicly in the hearing of all the auditors, but came resolved to try it out by word of mouth, and to that end appointed Cole to be their spokesman. For which neglect being reproved by the Lord Keeper, they promised a conformity on the Monday following, being the second day of April; but would not stand unto it then, because they would not give their adversaries so much leisure as a whole night's deliberation to return an answer. Desired and pressed by the Lord Keeper to proceed according to the form agreed on, for the better satisfaction and contentment of so great an audience, it was most obstinately denied ; Watson and White behaving themselves with so little reverence (or so much insolency rather), as to threaten the Queen with excommunication in that public audience2; for which they were are seven other names attached to the paper, that of Sandys being the one which does not appear. On the whole, there seems to be good ground for believing that eight was the number on each side; and of the names mentioned in the various lists, we may perhaps do best by omitting Sandys of the Protestant party, and Oglethorpe and Langdale of the Romanists. 1 Edd. 1, 2, "Prebend." 2 They were disposed to excommunicate her (Camd. 29, ed. 1615); but it does not appear that they uttered any threat at the Conference, although they behaved violently. U [HEYLYN, II.] 1559. AN.REG. 1, committed to the Tower on the fifth of April. The rest of the Bishops were commanded to abide in London, and to give bond for their appearance at the Council-table whensoever they should be required. And so the whole assembly was dismissed, and the conference ended before it had been well begun,-the Lord Keeper giving to the Bishops this sharp remembrance, Since," (said he) "you are not willing that we should hear you, you shall very shortly hear from us." Which notwithstanding produced this good effect in the Lords and Commons, that they conceived the Bishops were not able to defend their doctrine in the points disputed; which made the way more easy for the passing of the public Liturgy, when it was brought unto the vote. Two speeches there were made against it in the House of Peers, by Scot and Fecknam, and one against the Queen's supremacy by the Archbishop of York; but they prevailed as little in both points by the power of their eloquence, as they had done in the first by their want of arguments. 19. It gave much matter of discourse to most knowing men, that the Bishops should so wilfully fall from an appointment to which they had before agreed, and thereby forfeit their whole cause to a condemnation. But they pretended for themselves that they were so straitened in point of time that they could not possibly digest their arguments into form and order; that they looked upon it as a thing too much below them to humble themselves to such a conference or disputation, in which Bacon, a mere layman and of no great learning, was to sit as judge; and finally, that the points had been determined already by the Catholic Church, and therefore were not to be called in question without leave from the Pope 2. Which 113 last pretence if it were of any weight and moment, it must be 285 utterly impossible to proceed to any Reformation in the state of the Church by which the power and pride of the Popes of Rome may be any thing lessened, or that the corruptions of the Church should be redressed, if it consist not with their profit. For want of time they were no more straitened than the opposite party,-none of them knowing with what arguments the other side would fortify and confirm their cause, nor in what forms they would propose them, before they had perused their reciprocal papers. But nothing was more weakly urged 1559. than their exception against the presidency of Sir Nicholas AN. REG. 1, Bacon, which could not be considered as a matter either new or strange. Not strange, because the like presidency had been given frequently to Cromwel, in the late reign of King Henry the Eighth, and that not only in such general conferences, but in several convocations and synodical meetings1. Not new, because the like had been frequently practised by the most godly Kings and Emperors of the Primitive times; for in the Council of Chalcedon the Emperor appointed certain noblemen to sit as judges, whose names occur in the first action of that Council. The like we find exemplified in the Ephesine Council, in which, by the appointment of Theodosius and Valentinian, then Roman Emperors, Candidianus3, a Count Imperial, sat as Judge or President, who in the managing of that trust over-acted anything which was done by Cromwel, as Vicar-General to that King, or Bacon was empowered to do as the Queen's Commissioner. No such unreasonable condescension to be found in this as was pretended by the Bishops and the rest of that party, to save themselves from the guilt and censure of a tergiversation; for which and other their contempts we shall find them called to a reckoning within few months after. in Convoca 20. In the Convocations which accompanied the present Proceedings Parliament there was little done, and that little which they did tion. was to little purpose.. Held under Bonner, in regard of the vacancy of the see of Canterbury, it began without the ordinary preamble of a Latin Sermon, all preaching being then prohibited by the Queen's command. The Clergy for their Prolocutor made choice of Doctor Nicholas Harpsfield, Archdeacon of Canterbury, a man of more ability (as his works declare) than he had any opportunity to make use of in the present service. The Act of the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the Eighth and his successors Kings of England, had been repealed in the first year of Queen Mary, so that the Clergy might have acted of their own authority, without any license from the Queen; and it is much to be admired that Bonner, White, or 1 Sup. i. 10. 2 Concilia Maxima, edd. Labbe et Cossart, iv. 78. 3 Baronius, v. 587, 593, ed. Antverp. 1658. * Comp. Sarpi, 136; Heylyn's Tracts, 43; Field "Of the Church," b. v. c. 53. • Wilkins, iv. 179. Fuller, iv. 169. See p. 108, note 2. |