Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

and other necessary Circumstances in like Cases usual, especially against one of our Qualitie, as it could not but have bene publiquelie known, if any such Thing had bene put in Execution. This then being true, we leave to the Worlde to judge howe maliciously and injuriously the Author of the said Pamphlet deleth with us, in charging us by so notable an Untruth with a Vice that of all others we do most Hate and Abhorre. And therefore by the manifest Untruth of this Imputation, Men not transported with Passion may easily discerne what Untruth is conteined in the Second, by the which we are charged to have bene acquainted with an intended Attempt against the Life of the said Prince: A Matter, if any such thing should have been by us in tended, must have proceeded, either of a mislyking we had of his Person, or that the Prosecution of the Warres in the Lowe Countries was so committed unto him, as no other might prosecute the same but be.

And First for his Person, we could never learne that he hath at any Time, by Acte, or Speach, done any Thing that might justly breede a Mislike in us towards him, much lesse a Hatred against his Person in so high a Degree, as to be either Privie, or Assenting to the taking away of his Life: Besides, he is one of whom we have ever had an Honourable Conceite, in respect of those singular rare Partes we alwaies have noted in him, which hath won unto him as great Reputation, as any Man this Day Living carrieth of his Degree and Qualitie: And so have we always delivered out by Speeche unto the World, when any Occasion hath bene offered to make mention of him. Nowe, touching the Prosecution committed unto him of the Warres in the Lowe Countries, as all Men of Judgment know that the taking away of this Life carrieth no likelihood that the same shall worke any Ende of the said Prosecution: So is it manifestly knowen, that no Man hath dealt more Honourablie then the saide Prince, either in duely observing of his Promise, or extending Grace and Mercie, where Merite and Deserte hath craved the same: And therefore no greater Impietie by any coulde bee wrought, nor nothing more Prejudicial to our

selfe, (so long as the King shall continue the Prosecution of the Cause in that forcible Sort he now doeth) then to be an Instrument to take him away from thence by such violent Means, that hath dealt in a more Honourable and Gracious Sort in the Charge committed unto him, then any other that bath ever gone before him, or is likely to succeede after him.

Now therefore how anlikely it is, that we having neither Cause to mislike of his Person, nor that the Prosecution of the Warres shoulde cease by losse of him, should be either Authour, or any way assenting to so horrible a Fact, we refer to the Judgment of such as looke into Causes, not with the Eyes of their Affection, but do measure and weigh Things according to Honour and Reason. Besides, it is likely if it had bene true that we had bene any way Chargeable, (as the Author reporteth) the Confessions of the Parties executed, (importing such Matter, as by him is alledged) would have been both produced and published; for Malice leaveth nothing unsearched, that may nourish the Venime of that Humour.

The best Course therefore that both we and all other Princes can holde in this Unfortunate Age, that overfloweth with Nombers of malig nant Spirits, is through the Grace and Goodness of Almighty God, to direct our Course in such sort, as they may rather shewe their Willes through Malice, than with just Cause with Desert, to say ill, or deface Princes, either by Speech or Writing: Assuring our selves, that besides the Punishment that such Wicked and Infamous Libellours shall receive at the Handes of the Almightie for depraving of Princes and Lawfull Magistrates, who are God's Ministers, they both are, and alwayes shall be thought by all good Men, Unworthie to live upon the Face of the Earth.

Given at Richmount the First of October, 1585; and the 27th Yere of the Reigne of our Soveraigne Lady the Queene s to be published.

Imprinted at London by Christopher Barker,

Printer to the Queene of England, Her most Excellent Majestie. 1585.

CONTAINING

SOME PAPERS RELATING TO THE TWO VOLUMES

OF THE

HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION

OF THE

CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

1. A Letter written to me by Anthony Wood, in Justification of his History of the University of Oxford: with reflections upon it, referred to alphabetically.

2. A Letter to Mr. Ausont, which was translated to French, upon his procuring for me a Censure in Writing, made in Paris, upon the First Volume of my History of the Reformation.

3. Some Remarks, sent me by another Hand.

I.-A Letter written to me by Anthony Wood, in Justification of his History of the University of Oxford, with reflections on it; referred to alphabetically.

SIR,

YOUR book of the The Reformation of the Church of England, I have latelie perused, and finding my self mentioned therein, not without some discredit, I thought fit to vindicate my self so far in these animadversions following, that you may see your mistakes, and accordingly rectifie them, (if you think fit) in the next part that is yet to publish.

P. 138. But after he hath set down the instrument, he gives some reasons, &c.

The two first reasons, (if they may be so called)a were put in by another hand; and the other were taken from these three books following, viz. from Dr. Nicholas Harpesfield's Treatise concerning Marriage, &c. which is a fair manuscript in folio; written either in the time of Queen Marie, or in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth, and 'tis by me quoted in my book, in the place excepted against. From Will. Forest's Life of Queen Catherine, written in the raigne of Queen Marie, and dedicated to her. 'Tis a manuscript also, and written verie fairlie in parchment. From An Apologie for the Government of the Universitie against King Henry the VIIIth,

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Written by a Master of Arts Septimo Elizabethe. 'Tis a manuscript also, and hath all the King's letters therein; written to the Universitie about the question of marriage and divorce, with several passages relating to convocations concerning the said questions.

reasons out of mine owne head (as partiall So that by this you see I do not frame those men might) but what other authours dictate to

me

P. 138. Upon what design I cannot easily magine.

No designe at all God-wot, but meerlie for truth's sake, which verie few in these dayes will deliver.

takes pains to purge the Universities of it, &c. Ibid. And as if it had been an ill thing, he

was taken so to be) for a prince by his letters It was an ill thing I think, (I am sure it to frighten people out of their conscience, and by menaces force them to say what must please him. But seeing the masters would not be frightned, and therefore they were laid aside (the matter being discussed by a few old timerous doctors and batchellors of divinity, who would say any thing to please the King, least danger should follow) they ought

d I do not find there was any frightening threatenings; none appear in the King's letters. If he had this from any good authors, he had done well to have quoted them. It is not honourable for the University, as it is not probable, to represent all the doctors and batchelors of divinity, as men apt to be frightened out of their consciences; and that only the masters of arts were impregnable. It is rather to be supposed that the one sort were carried away by faction; and that the others were guided by learning and con

science.

to be commended, or at least justified for keeping their consciences sake.

P. 139. And without any proof gives credit to a lying story set down by Sanders, of an assembly called by night.

Sanders is not my authour, for he says no such thing in his book de Schismate, of an assemblye called by night; my author for this is the Apologie before mentioned, which adds, that, when a Regent of Baliol College (whom they called King Henry), heard that the commissarie, and his company, were going to dispatch this night work, denied the seule with his breeches about his shoulders, for want of a hood. See in Hist. et Antiq. Oxon. lib. i. p. 256. A. The truth is, the meeting was unseasonable, and their actions clancular; as being protested against by, and done without the consent of the regents. And as for Sanders, though I cannot well defend him, yet many things in his book de Schismate, especially those relating to the Universitie of Oxford, I find from other places to be true.g

Ibid. But it appears that he had never seen, or considered the other instrument, to which the University set their seal.

all

The grand collection, or farrago, which Mr. Thomas Masters made, (by the Lord Herbert's appointment) in order to the writing of King Henry the VIIIth's life, I have seen and perused, but could not with my diligence find that instrument (as you call it, yet we, an act, or decree) of convocation; neither in the three great folios, written by another hand, containing materials at large for the said life; neither in any of the registers, records, or papers, belonging to the Universitie. So that for these reasons, and that because the Lord Herbert says, it was blurred, and not intended for the King; and also not under seal, (you say 'twas) neither passed in the house by the majority of votes; therefore did I omit it, as not authentick. I truly believe, or at least have good grounds

e He says it was called clam; that could hardly be, but in the night: so this is no material difference. In the rest you agree with Sanders.

f I see no reason for this. The instrument set forth by the Lord Herbert shews, that the persons deputed had good authority to set the University seal to their determination: and they were not tied to forms, but might have done it at any time.

Yes, such authors as you quote: you say you cannot well defend Sanders. It seems, you would if you could. These are soft words concerning that scandalous writer.

to think, that it was only drawn up, and not proposed; for if it had, it would have been registred: there being nothing proposed, either in convocation or congregation, but is registred, whether denied, or not. And the register of that time is most exactly kept; and nothing thence, as I can perceive, is torn out.

P. 139. There seems to be also another mistake, in the relation he gives: for he says, those of Paris had determined in this matter.

i

I say so from Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, then chancellor of the University; who in his letters thereunto, desires the members, to make what expedition they could, to give in their answer to the King's question, forasmuch as Paris and Cambridge had done it already.. For this I quote the book of Epistles, in Archiv. Lib. Bod. MS. Epist. 197. Yet, I believe, the Archbishop said this, to hasten the University of Oxon the more; tho' probably it was not so. However, I am not to take notice of that, but to follow record as I find it. And that I do follow record throughout all my book, there is not one (I presume) of the Senate of Antiquaries can deny it: and therefore, how there can be many things in my book (of my framing) that are enemies to the Reformation of the Church of England, as was suggested by you to Sir Harbottle Grimston, (who thereupon made a complaint in open parliament, last April, against the said book) I cannot see. Truth ought to take place; and must not be concealed, especially when 'tis at a distance. And if our religion hath had its original, or base, on lust, blood, ruin and desolation, (as all religions, or alterations in governments, have had from one or more of them) why should it be hidden, seeing it is so obvious to all curious searchers into record. This is all from him July the 5th, that studies truth, 1679. Anthony à Wood. shews it was not subscribed; for it is in the name of John Cattisford, their commissary : so it must have been either in the form of a notary's instrument, or must have had the seal put to it, for he calls it an original. Perhaps the blurring of it might either be casual, or when it was brought to court, the King might have made some alterations in it, that it might be renewed according to these corrections. *It might be casual; Lord Herbert says not that it was rased out, &c.

In this you had a warrant for what you wrote, but I had a better to correct it by.

I do profess I do not remember that I ever mentioned your book to him: and Sir Harbottle himself, when I asked him the question, said, he never heard me speak of it.

1 This is writ very indecently: neither like a divine, nor a Christian.

All that you say here, is only negative authority; but since the Lord Herbert says he saw the original, though it is not in any of these Collections, you must either believe it, or make him a liar: and if it was an original, it must either have been subscribed by the hands of the persons deputed, or must have had the seal put to it. The beginning of it of Worcester's hand.

These words in Italic, are in the Bishop

[blocks in formation]

WHEN I came last to Paris, I was told there was a censure of the first volume of my History of the Reformation, going about in writing. I was glad to hear of this, when I was upon the place, ready either to justify myself, or to acknowledge such mistakes as should be offered to me: for I am ready, upon conviction, to retract any thing that may have fallen from my pen, as soon as I see cause for it, with all the freedom and candour possible. I should be much more out of countenance, to persist in an error, when I am convinced of it, than to acknowledge that in such a multitude of matters of fact, of which my History makes mention, I might have been misinformed in some particulars, and have mistaken others; which I was resolved to rectify, when discovered, in another edition. This made me very desirous to see, what it was that had been objected to me. And I am much obliged to you, for procuring me a sight of it; for which I return you my most humble thanks. When I read it over and over again, I confess, I was amazed to find, that he who censured me so severely, had read my book so slightly; and yet gives way to his passions, with so little judgment, and with less sin. cerity, that, among all the things that he charges me with, there should not be one single particular, that might give me occasion to shew my readiness to retrac what I had written.

What can be expected from a writer, who, after the list I had given, of the many gross errors of which Sanders's History was made up, says, That I have proved, that he has failed in some circumstances, that may seem to aggravate the matter more or less? If any man will be at the pains to read what I have proved, of the falsehoods in that author, and compare it with the mild censure here given; he will see cause to be ashamed of it, and will look for little sincerity, after so false a step made in the beginning. From this he goes on to his main design; and runs out into an invective against King Henry the VIIIth, for his incontinencies, and other violences.

If I had undertaken to write a panegyric, or to make a saint of King Henry, he might have triumphed over me as much as he pleased. But I, who have neither concealed nor excused any of his faults, am no way concerned in all this.

There are only two things that I advance, with relation to that Prince.

The first is, That whatsoever his secret motives might have been, in the suit of the divorce, he had the constant tradition of the church on his side, and that in all the ages and parts of it; which was carefully searched into, and

fully proved: so that no author, elder than Cardinal Cajetan, could be found, to be set against such a current of tradition. And in the disputes of that age, with those they called heretics, all that wrote of the popish side made their appeal always to tradition, as the only infallible expounder of Scripture: and it was looked on as the character of an heretic, to expound the Scripture by any other key, or method. So that King Henry had this clearly with him.

The other particular that I make remarks on, is, that the Reformation is not at all to be charged with King Henry's faults: for, that unsteady favour and protection, which they sometimes found from him, can signify no more to blemish them, than the vices of those princes that were the great promoters of Christianity, signify to cast a blemish on the Christian religion. Let the crimes of King Clovis, as they are related by Gregory of Tours, be compared with the worst things that can be said of King Henry; and then let any man see, if he finds so much falsehood, mixed with so much cruelty, in so many repeated acts, and in such a number of years, in King Henry the VIIIth, as he will find in King Clovis. Nor do we see any hints of Clovis's repentance, or of any restitution made by him, of those dominions that he had seized on in so criminal a manner, to the right heirs ; without which, according to our maxims, his repentance could not be accepted of God. And this was the first Christian king of the Franks.

:

I do not comprehend what his design could be, in justifying Pope Gregory the VIlth's proceedings, against the Emperor, Henry the 1Vth, with so much heat. One that reads what he writes on this subject, can hardly keep himself from thinking, that he had something in his eye, that he durst not speak out more plainly but that he would not be sorry, if Innocent the X1th should treat the great monarch, as Gregory the VIIth did the Emperor, and as Paul the IIId did King Henry the VIIIth. But whatsoever his own thoughts may be, I desire he would not be so familiar with my thoughts, as to infer this from any concession of mine: for I allow no authority to the bishops of Rome out of their own diocese. The additional dignity that they came to have flowed from the constitution of the Roman empire: and since Rome is no more the seat of empire, it has lost all that primacy, which was yielded to it merely by reason of the dignity of the city. So that as Byzance, from being a small bishopric, became a patriarchal seat, upon the exaltation of that city; by the same rule, upon the depression of Rome, the bishops of that see ought to have lost all that dignity, that was merely accidental. But suppose I should yield, according to the notion commonly received in the Gallican church, that the Pope is the conservator of the canons; that will signify nothing, to justify their deposing of princes; except

he can shew what those canons were, upon the violation of which princes may be deposed. If he flies to the canons of the fourth council in the Lateran, those being made about 150 years after Pope Gregory's proceedings against the Emperor, will not justify what was done so long before these were made. When he thinks fit to speak out more plainly upon this head, it will be more easy to answer him.

As for the supremacy that King Henry the VIIIth assumed in ecclesiastical matters, he should not have condemned that so rashly as he does, as a novelty, till he had first exa. mined the reasons upon which it was founded, not only those drawn from the Scriptures, but those that were brought from the laws and practices, both of the Roman emperors, and of the kings of England. His thoughts or his pen run too quick, when he condemned the following those precedents, as a novelty, without giving himself the trouble of inquiring into the practices of former ages.

He charges me with flying to the rasure of the registers in Queen Mary's time, and to the burning of others in the fire of London, for proving several things, for which I could bring no better vouchers; and for relying so often on a passionate writer. I suppose Fox is the person hereby pointed at.

When he applies the general censure to any particular in my work, I will then shew that it amounts to nothing. I often stop, and shew that I can go no further, for want of proof: and when I give presumptions from other grounds, to shew what was done, I may well appeal to the rasure, or loss of records, for the want of further proof. But this I never do upon conjectures, or slight grounds. And as for Fox, I make a great difference between relying upon what he writes barely upon report, (which never do) and relying upon some registers, of which he made abstracts. For having observed an exact fidelity, in all that he took out of such registers as do yet remain, I have reason to depend on such abstracts as he gives of registers that are now destroyed. He might be too credulous, in writing such things as were brought him by report; and in these I do not depend on him but he was known to be a man of probity, so I may well believe what he delivers from a record, though that happens now to be lost.

answer for, though I may be defective in the other: but I leave it to you to judge whether the defect was in his sincerity, or his judg ment, when he does not bring any one particular against Cranmer, but what he takes from me. So if I have confessed all his faults, and yet give a character of him that is inconsistent with these, I may be justly charged for want of judgment; but my sincerity is still untainted. When he reckons up his charges against Cranmer, he begins with this, that he was put out of his College for his incontinence. He was then a layman, under no vows, only he held a place, of which he was incapable after he was married; now what sort of crime can he reckon this marriage, I leave it to himself to make it out. His next charge is, that though I say he was a Lutheran, yet he signed the Six Articles, which he says, proves that he valued his benefice more than his conscience.

He wrote this with too much precipitation, otherwise he would have seen that Cranmer never signed those Articles. He disputed much against them before they passed into a law: nor could he be prevailed on, though the King pressed him to it, to abstain from coming to the Parliament while that act passed. He came and opposed it to the last; and even after the law was made, he wrote a book for the King's use against these Articles. There was no clause in the act that required that they should be signed. Men were only bound to silence and submission. If he was at all faulty, with relation to that act, it was only in this, that he did not think himself bound to declare openly against it when it was published. From this, he goes next to charge him for consenting to the dissolution of King Henry's marriage with Anne of Cleve, upon grounds plainly contrary to those upon which his first marriage with Catherine of Spain was dissolved. Since one pretence in the divorce of Anne of Cleve was, that it was not consummated, though in the other it was declared that a marriage was complete, though not consummated. Whatever is to be said of this matter, the whole convocation was engaged in it. Gardiner promoted the most of any. So the bishops, who were so zealous for popery in Queen Mary's time, were as guilty as Cranmer. I do not deny that he shewed too much weakness in this compli The censure is next applied to Cranmer's ance. He had not courage enough to swim character. He observes great defects in my against the stream: and he might think that the sincerity, and (to let me see how civilly he dissolving a marriage, the parties being conintends to use me, he says he will not add) tented, was not to be much withstood. But my want of judgment. I am sure he has my censurer is afraid to touch on the chief shewed a very ill judgment in charging me so ground on which that marriage was disseverely in so tender a point as sincerity, solved; which was, that the King gave not and using a reserve in another point, that a pure inward consent to it; for this touches does not touch me so much. I am account- a tender point of the intention of the minister able both to God and man for my sincerity: in the sacrament; on which I did not reflect but I am bound to have no more judgment when I wrote my History. By the doctrine than God has given me; and so long as I of the church of Rome, the parties are the maintain my sincerity entire, I have little to ministers; so if the intention was wanting,

« ZurückWeiter »