Germany, to divert them from assisting the prince of Conde; assuring them, that he himself was very moderate in the points of religion, and had very favourable thoughts of the Augsburgh confession: he studied also to persuade the queen, that the war which was then breaking out in France was not for religion, but was a conspiracy against the government; which he hoped she as a queen would not assist. At the same time the queen of Scotland sent the queen a present of a diamond of value, with some very fine verses made by Buchanan, then in her court. She also in her letters vowed a perpetual friendship with her, and wrote that she would pass through England. Yet the queen saw through all this, and was not diverted by it from assisting the prince of Conde. Upon this the duke of Guise did openly charge all the disorders in France on her, as the principal author of them: by this the mask was thrown away, and these jealousies broke out into an open war. Jewel wishes the queen had begun it sooner, and that the princes of Germany would follow her example, now that she was engaged, and had sent one to engage them likewise. By that time, the queen of Scotland had got by sea into her kingdom: she alone had her mass, which was put down all the kingdom over. There was this year an extraordinary bad season through every quarter of the year, and perpetual rains. There was also much talk of many monstrous births, both by women and beasts, hogs, mares, cows, and hens: some births were without heads, or heads of a strange form; and some without arms, or legs; very probably things of that sort were magnified by those who reported them; and, no doubt, they were made the presages of some dismal events to be looked for; it being ordinary in all great changes to enlarge, and even to forge stories of that sort, on design to alarm people with the apprehensions of some signal judgments to follow after such unusual warnings. This last letter being written some time after the great convocation that settled our Reformation, is mentioned here out of its place, to finish a matter to which I have nothing here to add. But now to return to give an account of that famous meeting of the clergy. I must first lament, that here there is another total stop in the correspondence with Zurick, that has hitherto furnished me with so many particulars. I cannot think but that there were copious accounts of the progress of matters in it given to them, if not during the convocation, in which the bishops were no doubt much employed, yet at least soon after the prorogation, which was VOL. III, PART I. ΣΙ in the beginning of April: but in all the volume of letters that is sent me, I find not one, either during their sitting, or after it was ended, till that I mentioned last, which is of the 14th of August. Being then destitute of those authentic vouchers, I must gather up what remains I could find, to give a clear account of the great transactions then on foot. The imperfect abstract which I have often vouched, gives us but a very defective account of their proceedings. Their first session was on the 13th of January. Day, provost of Eaton, preached. Parker told them, they had now in their hands an opportunity of reforming all things in the church. The queen did earnestly desire it, and so did many of the nobility. He sent them to choose a prolocutor, and recommended Nowel, dean of St. Paul's, to them. They chose hin upon that; and on the 16th of January, Parker exhorted them to consider against the next session what things wanted a reformation. On the 19th, he sent for the prolocutor, who came up, with six of the clergy. He said, they had before them some sheets of matters to be offered for a reformation, which were then referred to be considered by a committee. He also said, that the Articles set forth in a synod at London, in King Edward's time, were likewise before a committee to be considered; and, if need was, to be corrected by them. On the 20th, the archbishop and bishops were for the space of three hours consulting secretly about those Articles. On the 22d, they were again for three hours considering the same matter. On the 25th, they were two hours. And on the 27th, they were for three hours more upon the same matter. And on the 29th of January (1562), all in the upper house agreed unanimously in settling the Articles of Religion, and they subscribed them. The differences between these Articles, and those set forth by King Edward, are very particularly marked in the Collections, added to my second volume. The most material is the leaving out that express declaration that was made against the corporal presence of Christ in the sacrament, which I then thought was done in compliance with the opinion prevalent among the people of the popish persuasion, who were strangely possessed with the belief of such a presence; but I am convinced, by the letters sent me from Zurick, that in this great regard was likewise had to the Lutheran churches, with whom a conjunction was much endeavoured by some: so that perhaps this was one consideration that made it be thought convenient to suppress the definition then made in this matter by the convocation: but it does no way appear to me, whether these words were suppressed by the consent of the convocation; or whether the queen ordered it to be done, either by a direct command, or by denying to give her assent to that part of the Article. I must also add, that the Homily against wilful rebellion, for that is its true title, was not drawn up till some years after this convocation had settled those Articles; in which the title of the Homilies is set forth, though it is added in the manuscript to the rest, with the title against rebellion. It is plain, both by the body of the Homily, and by the prayer at the end of it, that it was penned after the rebellion that was raised by the earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland many years after this; and while there were wars abroad on the account of religion. This I do not write as disagreeing in any part from the doctrine delivered in that Homily, but only as an historian, in order to the setting matters of fact in a true light. But now I go on as the minutes, or rather the abstracts, lead me. When the great matter of the Articles was settled, the bishops of London, Winchester, Lincoln, and Hereford, were appointed to draw articles of discipline. On the 3d of February, the archbishop and bishops were in a secret conference for the space of three hours. On the 5th of February, a committee was appointed to examine the Catechism. Then the prolocutor, with six of the clergy, brought up the Articles of Religion, that had been sent by the archbishop to the lower house many had already subscribed them; but he proposed, that such as had not yet done it, might be required either to subscribe them in the lower house, or to do it in the presence of the bishops. Upon this the upper house ordered, that the names of those who had not subscribed them might be laid before them next session. On the 10th, the prolocutor, with eight of the clergy, came up and told the bishops, that many had subscribed since the last meeting: upon that the bishops renewed their former order. On the 13th, there was some treaty concerning the subsidy; but on that day, and it seems on some days following, there were very warm debates in the lower house, of which I shall give a particular account, from a copy taken from the minutes of the proceedings of the lower house, which will be found in the Collection (No. Ixxiv). On the 13th day, six articles were offered to the house, which follow:-First, "That all holy-days, except Sundays, and the feasts that related to Christ, should be abrogated. Second, That in the Common Prayer, the minister should always turn his face towards the people, so as to be heard by the people, that they might be edified. Third, That the ceremony of the cross in baptism may be omitted, as tending to superstition. Fourth, That forasmuch as divers communicants were not able to kneel during the time of communion, for age, sickness, and other infirmities; and some also do superstitiously both kneel and knock*; that the order of kneeling may be left to the discretion of the ordinary within his jurisdiction. Fifth, That it be sufficient for the minister, in time of saying divine service and ministring the sacraments, to use a surplice; and that no minister say service, or minister the sacraments, but in a comely garment, or habit. The sixth and last is, That the use of organs be removed." The words are strictly as I took them from the copy of the journal. but the sense of the fifth is not clear, except we suppose the word once to have come after the minister; so that it was proposed that it should be sufficient once to use the surplice. : There arose great disputes concerning these propositions; some approving and others rejecting them and it was proposed by some, to refer the matter to the archbishop and bishops. Many protested, that they could in no manner consent to any one of them; since they were contrary to the Book of Common-Prayer, that was ratified by an act of parliament nor would they admit of any alteration of the orders, rules, rites, or regulations, already settled by that book. There were public disputations between learned men, some approving and others condemning the propositions. Thirteen persons were named as the disputants. In conclusion, the house was divided, and counted fortythree voted for the propositions, and thirty-five voted against them, and that no change should be made in the Book of Common-Prayer then established. But when the proxies were counted, those who were for the propositions were in all fifty-eight; and those who were against them were fifty-nine. So that they were agreed to by a majority of eight of those who were present, and who had heard the disputations; yet those were out-voted by a majority of one vote, by the proxy of an absent person. All their names are set down in the paper. One thing observable is, that in this minute it is added, that those who rejected the Articles seemed to go chiefly on this ground; that they were contrary to the authorized Book of Common-Prayer: as if this had been the assuming an authority to alter what was settled by the legislature. It is not to be imagined, but if the affirmative vote had prevailed, that it could not be intended to have any other effect, but to make an address to the parliament to alter the book in those particulars. I have represented this matter as 1 found it, and will not make any * A practice common among papists, of knocking on their breasts, saying culpa mea, at the elevation. judgment upon it, either on the one side or the other; but will leave that to the reader, and go on with what remains in the abstract. This debate in the lower house put a stop to the business of the convocation for six days, in which they only treated of the subsidy. On the 19th of February, some articles were communicated to the lower house; and they were ordered to bring them back, with their observations on them. These seem to relate to benefices and dilapidations. And they were ordered to inquire how many benefices were then vacant. On the 22d the subsidy was agreed to. On the 24th, the prolocutor being absent, his surrogate, with the clergy, were called up; and the ingrossed bill of subsidy was read to them, and they all unanimously agreed to it. On the 26th, a Book of Discipline was brought to the upper house, by the prolocutor, with ten of the clergy; to which, as it was said, the whole clergy did unanimously consent. This was referred to the archbishop, with the bishops of London, Winchester, Chichester, Hereford, and Ely. On the 1st of March, the prolocutor brought up some additional articles, which they desired might be added to the Book of Discipline, that they had formerly brought up. The archbishop gave them the book back again; and ordered them to bring it back, together with the additions they had made to it. On the 3d of March, the prolocutor brought up the Catechism; to which, he said, the house did unanimously agree: the considering of it was committed to the bishops of Winchester, Hereford, Lincoln, and Coventry. (This seems to be the Catechism drawn by Nowel, dean of St. Paul's.) After that, there was a conference among the bishops for the space of two hours. On the 5th of March, the prolocutor brought up the Book of Discipline, with some additional chapters one only is named, of Adultery, with an &c. On the 10th, there was a conference among the bishops for two hours; and on the 12th, for two hours more; and on the 16th, for other two hours; and on the 19th, for two hours more. After that, nothing is marked, but several prorogations, till the 10th of April, that the royal writ came for the prorogation. And this is all that remains of this great convocation. It does not appear what that Book of Discipline was. In one of the Zurick letters, as shall be told afterwards, it is said, that some things agreed to in this synod were afterwards suppressed. This, I suppose, relates to that Book of Discipline but whether this was the reformation of the ecclesiastical laws, prepared by Cranmer and others; or : |