« 이전계속 »
the King, “never speak more to that point, how far you are to obey the orders of the Church.”
The four Puritans who were present at the conference appear to have expressed their concurrence in 5 the decisions of the King as they were severally delivered, and at the close to have promised obedience to the future injunctions of the Church. Sincere and conscientious men, and some of them possessing no
common amount of learning and talent, they could 10 not be insensible to the forcible reasoning of their
opponents, and were probably oppressed by their sense of the august presence and the high spiritual authority arrayed against them. But to their brethren
without, less capable of forming a correct judgment, 15 and less likely to be influenced by reverential feeling,
the result of this conference was the occasion of disappointment and remonstrance.
“ Matters,” said a contemporary writer°, “ were well calmed by the King's moderation, if no after tempest 20 should arise.” But the tempest had never ceased: it
had only abated, as if to gather strength for more desperate encounters. In the following year was presented to the King a petition from ministers in the
diocese of Lincoln, in which, so far from acknowledg25 ing the benefits of the recent examination, they seem
to have increased their demands in proportion to their disappointment. Charging the Book of Common Prayer with fifty gross corruptions, and ceremonies
notoriously abused to superstition and idolatry, they 30 called, in strong and peremptory language, for its total
abolition. And this was the beginning of many
• Fabric of the Church, by W. Tooker, Pref. 3.
It has been observed by an able historian P,
66 that there is no middle course in dealing with religious sectaries, between the persecution that exterminates and the toleration that satisfies.” Now whatever may be the case in such a frame of society as might certainly, be conceived, but has never yet been realized; or, again, whatever may actually be the case in some communities where religion has ceased to be a conviction or a principle (and for such cases it is unnecessary to contend), it is evident that during the whole period of the puritanical controversy in England, no method but one professing moderation on the part of the government was either expedient or even practicable. It was as much a matter of conscience on the one side to preserve what the Church had ordained, as it was on the other to reject what their own private judgment had condemned. It might be deemed as sinful for the one party to retain a creed after their own peculiar tenets had been expunged, as it would be for the other to use the same creed with such tenets contained in it. With antagonists so opposed to each other, no persecution could be carried far enough to exterminate either of them, and no toleration could completely satisfy both. The only method remaining, and one which has also positive reasons in its favour, was to secure, by mild and temperate measures, the concurrence and co-operation of the middle classes of men, of those who are always respectable for their numbers and their character, and are always reinforced, and more especially at a time of danger, from the adverse parties
25 CHAPTER IV.
30 on either side of them.
p Hallam, Const. Hist. vol. i. p. 219, 4to.
Documents connected with the revision of King James I.
I. A Proclamation concerning such as seditiously seek reformation in Church matters. Wilkins' Conc. vol. iv. p. 371.
II. The opinion of Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York, touching certain matters, like to be brought in question at the Confer
Strype, Whitgift, vol. iii. Pp. 392–402. III. King James to some person unknown in Scotland, concerning the Conference at Hampton Court. Cott. Libr. Vespasian,
IV. A letter from Court by Toby Matthew, Bishop of Durham, to Archbishop Hutton, giving an account of the Conference. Strype, Whitgift, vol. iii. pp. 402—407.
V. The sum and substance of the Conference at Hampton Court, contracted by William Barlow, D.D., Dean of Chester.
VI. A letter from Patrick Galloway to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, concerning the Conference. Calderwood's Hist. of the Ch. of Scotland, p. 474.
VII. Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi et aliis pro reformatione Libri Communis Precum. Rymer, vol. xvi. p. 565.
VIII. A Proclamation for the authorizing of the Book of Common Prayer to be used throughout the realm. Wilkins' Conc. vol. iv. p. 377
happy and long peace in the politic state, which two things, the true service of God, and happiness of the state, do commonly concur together; so are we not ignorant, that time may have brought in some corruptions, which may deserve a review and amendment, which if by the assembly intended by 5 us we shall find to be so in deed, we will therein proceed according to the laws and customs of this realm by advice of our council, or in our high court of parliament, or by convocation of our clergy, as we shall find reason to lead us; not doubting, but that in such an orderly proceeding we shall 10 have the prelates and others of our clergy no less willing, and far more able to afford us their duty and service, than any other, whose zeal goeth so fast before their discretion. Upon which our princely care, our pleasure is, that all our subjects do repose themselves, and leave to our conscience, that which 15 to us only appertaineth, avoiding all unlawful and factious manner of proceeding; for that hereafter if any shall either by gathering the subscriptions of multitudes to supplications, by contemptuous behaviour of any authority by the laws resting in ecclesiastical persons, by open invectives and inde- 20 cent speeches either in the pulpit or otherwise, or by disobelience to the processes proceeding from their jurisdiction, give us cause to think, that he hath a more unquiet spirit, than becometh any private person to have toward public 25 authority, we will make it appear by their chastisement, how far such a manner of proceeding is displeasing to us, and that we find that these reformers under pretended zeal affect novelty, and so confusion in all estates, whereas our purpose and resolution ever was, and now is, to preserve the estate as well ecclesiastical as politic in such form, as we have found it 30 established by the laws here, reforming only the abuses, which we shall apparently find proved, and that also to do by such mature advice and deliberation, as we have above mentioned. Wherefore we admonish all men hereby to take warning, as they will answer the contrary at their peril. 35 Given under our hand at Wilton the 24th day of October, of our reign of England, France, and Ireland the first, and of Scotland the thirtieth and seventh year, anno Domini mdcuI.
The opinion of Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York, touching
certain matters, like to be brought in question before the King's most excellent Majesty, at the Conference at Court. Written October 9. 1 mo Jacobi, to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
QUESTION I. First, Concerning the appropriations : Whether they be to be given over to the ministers of the gospel, or may continue, &c.
This question dependeth of another; viz. Whether tithes 10 now in the time of the Gospel are to be paid jure divino, or jure positivo.
Respons. My opinion is with Peter Martyr, 19. Judicum, That he that laboureth is worthy of his hire, and that the
preachers of the word must have a competent portion to live 15 of; but not precisely of tithes.
To make the matter more plain, we must understand, that the Law of Moses was divided into three parts, moral, ceremonial, and judicial: and that these three laws were (as it
were) three adjuncts unto the subjects, (to speak after Ramus 20 his logick.) The ceremonial law was tied to the priesthood of
Levi. Which being taken away and abrogated, the whole law also is abrogate, as St. Paul saith, Heb. vii. “Mutato sacerdotio, necesse est ut legis mutatio fiat.” The judicial
law was annexed, and given to that nation, or people, and 25 that government; which being cast off, and that government
ceasing, the judicial law is abrogate : but not so as the ceremonial law is, but made not necessary for any state to be tied unto. (Albeit, Struthius and Monetarius, two notable
hereticks of late times, would have all the world to be 30 governed by the judicial law of Moyses.) For kingdoms and
commonwealths may retain some, and alter some, as in wisdom shall be thought convenient. Theft by that law was punished by restitution. In this land, and (almost) in all countries, it is punished with death. As for the moral law,