congregation in Antwerp, and appointed according to the Presbyterian fashion. He was a man of great conceit and stubbornness, as was well known to Whitgift, Travers having been a fellow of Trinity when he was master. No doubt he was an able man, and acceptable to the lawyers at the Temple, who were not concerned about his conformity. But Whitgift, in the midst of his struggle for discipline, could not stultify all his proceedings by allowing the promotion of such an open opponent of the Church, as Travers. He wrote to the queen, giving her the real character of Travers, and recommended for the place Dr. Bond, one of her chaplains. Lord Burleigh, on making his application for Travers, was referred by the queen to Whitgift. On applying to the archbishop, the Lord Treasurer was enlightened by him on the real character of Travers, who, says Whitgift, "was better known to no man than himself." A compromise was made between them. Burleigh withdrew Travers, and Whitgift Bond. This opened the way for the appointment of a divine strongly recommended by Archbishop Sandys-Richard Hooker-the greatest writer of the sixteenth century-the first man who showed of what the English language was really capable-a man who could preserve a philosophical temper and candid spirit in the midst of acrimonious disputes, and who defended the Church by genius and learning, as the archbishop defended it by watchful and vigorous action.1

Its

§ 18. Great things were hoped for by the Puritans from the new Parliament which met in November 1584. The more sanguine among them anticipated nothing less than the legal establishment of their Book of Discipline, which, after various emendations and alterations, had been printed anew at Cambridge this year, with a view to its presentation to the Parliament. acceptance would have involved no less than the abolishing of the Book of Common Prayer, and substituting for it a "Directory of Public Worship," and also the complete overthrow of the whole hierarchy of the Church, and the destruction of all its orders, laws, and ceremonies.2 With the amount of encouragement which such views received in influential quarters, with a number of great men eagerly hungering after the revenues of the Church, and a majority, probably, of the members of the House of Commons, inclined to Puritanical sentiments, the Church at this moment was exposed to a great danger. Her position in the country was saved by the firmness of the queen and the vigour of the Primate. Soon the dangerous crisis passed. A reaction against the Puritans set in,

1 For the early life of Richard Hooker, see Notes and Illustrations. His literary work will be described in a subsequent chapter.

2 Bancroft's Survey of the Holy Discipline, p. 66.

which before the end of the reign was completely established. They did not again become popular until the mischievous policy of the Stuart kings had associated their cause with that of liberty and justice.

§ 19. The plan of the Puritans for influencing the Parliament was first to assail the House of Commons with a number of petitions, and then, when a sufficient impression had thus been made, to bring in a Bill for "Reformation of the Church," and at the same time to offer the "Book of the Godly Ministers" for acceptance by the House. The introduction of the bill was negatived in consequence of the earnest appeals of the queen's ministers, who let it be seen plainly that her Majesty would not allow it to proceed. But the temper of the House was shown to be favourable to it by the adoption of a petition, in which the points contained in the bill were urged upon the Upper House, with a view of being presented to her Majesty,1

§ 20. The petition, although mildly and artfully worded, amounted in fact to a request that those ministers who were un favourable to the Puritans should be ejected, that priests should be put on a level with bishops in the matter of ordination, that no ordination should take place without a call from a congregation, that subscription should be done away with, every sort of inconformity permitted, all Whitgift's disciplinary suspensions cancelled, prophesyings restored, and all dispensations abolished. That such a petition should have been voted by the Commons shows the strong Puritanical spirit which animated the majority of the House.

§ 21. Great hopes were entertained that the petition would be favourably received by the Lords; especially it was hoped that the Lord Treasurer would support it; but Burleigh, who knew well the queen's mind in this matter, at once gave it strong opposition. Archbishop Sandys spoke well and strongly against it. The answer returned by the Lords was that many of the articles were already provided for, and others were unnecessary, that the uniformity of the common prayer had been already enacted by Act of Parliament.2

§ 22. But the Primate, ever vigilant, had done more than oppose this petition in the Lords. He had drawn up a body of canons for the Convocation, which he had placed in the queen's hands on December 15, so that when the petition of the Commons came to the Upper House and was reported to her Majesty, she was able to see that order had already been taken by the clergy upon many of the points raised in it. These canons were passed by the Convocation of Canterbury, and received the royal assent March 23,

1 D'Ewes, Journals of Parliament, p. 339; Strype's Whilgift, b. iii. Strype's Whitgift, b. iii. c. 10.

c. 10.

1585. They touch several points not provided for in the canons of 1576, following mainly the Primate's articles put out in 1583 They provide (1) As to ordination, candidates must have titles in the diocese where they are ordained, must be of full age, graduates, or able to give an account of their faith in Latin; having proper testimonials. The same qualifications to be required for institution.1 Bishops to be protected against suits of law; bishops not observing these rules to be suspended for two years. (2) Penance not to be commuted except in rare cases, with approbation of the bishop. The fine to be used for charitable purposes; the offender to testify his repentance in the church. (3) Licenses for marriage not to be granted save under sufficient bonds that there is consent of parents, and no legal impediment. (4) Excommunication for moral offences to be pronounced by the bishop or some dignified clergyman; for contumacy, by the official, some learned minister being present; absolution under the same laws. (5) Only learned men and preachers to be allowed pluralities. The holder of two benefices to reside in each some part of the year; benefices not to be more than thirty miles apart. Suitable curates to be provided. (6) Only the fees accustomed at the beginning of the reign to be taken; a table of fees to be hung up in the consistory; bishops to receive no fees for ordination. (7) Bishops to inquire yearly as to the learning and morals of their clergy, by whom ordained, manner of life previously, value of their benefices, etc., to report to the archbishop.2

§ 23. The Puritans, vexed with the rejection of their petition in the Lords, brought a number of bills into the Commons, more, it would seem, by way of annoying and traducing the Church than with any hope of carrying them into laws. One of them, directed against pluralities, availed to draw forth a somewhat tragical petition from the clergy in Convocation. The bill was described as one that "impeacheth the prerogative royal, impaireth the resources of the crown, overthroweth the study of divinity, depriveth men of the livings they do lawfully possess, beggareth the clergy, bringeth in a base unlearned ministry, taketh away all hope of a succession in learning." Others were of still more dangerous consequence to the Church, as was pointed out by the Primate in a letter to the queen on March 24, the day after she had ratified the new canons.

§ 24. Now that all that was needful for the working of the Church was in fact provided, the archbishop suggested that all this irregular legislation ought to be stopped,3 The queen agreed with

1 This provision would serve gradually to rid the Church of unlearned ministers, without the injustice of an immediate expulsion.

* Cardwell, Synodalia, i. 139; Strype's Whitgift, Appendix iii. xiv: 3 Strype's Whitgift, b. iii. c. 11.

this view, and soon afterwards dismissed the Parliament with a severe lecture on their attempts at legislating for the Church. "There were some fault-finders," she said, "with the order of the clergy, which so might make a slander to herself and the Church, whose overlooker God had made her, and her negligence thereof could not be excused if schisms or errors heretical were suffered. Some faults and negligences might grow and be (as in all other great charges it happened), and what vocation without?" Thus much for the Puritanical members; but her Majesty could not forego the opportunity of reading a lecture to the bishops, to whose negligence she attributed all the troubles. "If they (the lords of the clergy)," she said, "did not amend, she was minded to depose them, and she bade them henceforth look to their charges. All might be amended without needless and open exclamation. She would not animate Romanism, but neither would she tolerate newfangledness. She meant to guide both by God's true rule." The campaign of the Puritans against Whitgift's disciplinary measures had thus proved ineffectual, in spite of the secret assembly of their chief ministers, which was sitting all the time of the Parliament in London, and directing the policy of the members favourable to them.

§ 25. This Convocation was allowed to continue its sittings after Parliament was prorogued. It was busily occupied, in addition to voting the canons, in trying two clerks for ecclesiastical offences, and in drawing up regulations for clerical studies, which provided that each clergyman should comment upon a chapter in the Bible weekly, and once a quarter write a Latin essay upon some commonplace in divinity, the exercises to be submitted to the ordinary.3

§ 26. At this time a project was on foot for the re-valuation of all clerical incomes, with the view of raising the value of the tenths and first fruits for the benefit of the Crown. It appears that a full valuation had been made in 1574,3 and another was not needed, nor were the clergy in a condition to bear any increase of burdens. The archbishop warmly defended their cause. He wrote to the Lord Treasurer:-" It will be a sore burden to the poor clergy if their valuations are increased. The temporal lawyer, whose learning is no learning anywhere but here at home, doth easily, by his barbarous knowledge, get a thousand a year or more, but the poor divine, labouring all his life in true learning, in the liberal sciences and the study of divinity, cannot be suffered to enjoy what is already prepared for him, and both by God's law and man's law belongeth to him and not to others. Temporal men are only valued to the

1 Strype's Whitgift, b. iii. c. 11.

2 Tb. c. 12.

3 The particulars occupy three volumes in the State Papers of Elizabeth (Domestic). vols. c. ci. cii.

tenth of their income; the divine is valued to the full extent of his income in all payment of dues. I trust Julianus the apostate hath no scholars at court, for he, taking away the rewards of learning, sought utterly to extinguish it, and so consequently Christianity." i This spirited letter seems to have overset the scheme; in fact the Church of England owes to Whitgift not only the preservation of her formularies from Puritan remodelling, but also the preservation of at least some portion of her revenues from sacrilegious invasion. § 27. The enemies of the Primate continued to use every means to overthrow his influence. Lord Leicester tried to accomplish this by craft. Having presented Mr. Cartwright to the wardenship of an hospital which he had founded at Warwick, he assured the Primate of Cartwright's willingness to conform and live peaceably, and endeavoured by these representations to obtain for him from Whitgift a preaching license. Had the archbishop yielded he would probably have much impaired his influence with the queen; but he prudently declined. He was ready "to be at peace with Mr. Cartwright so long as he lived peaceably, yet did his conscience and duty forbid him to give him any further approbation until he might be better persuaded of his conformity." Another attempt was made by Leicester to damage Whitgift with the queen, by asking him to give his opinion as to the fitness of assisting subjects rebelling against their rulers. It had been determined by the queen and her advisers to aid the Protestants struggling in the Low Countries against the tyranny of the Spaniard. It was thought, probably, that a prelate of Whitgift's views would give a strong opinion against any favouring of rebellion, and thus he might be represented as running counter to the queen's policy; but the Primate replied that such matters were better left to the Council, and from what he had heard he believed the thing had already been decided on.

"2

§ 28. Walsingham, however, was able by skilfully judged representations to induce Whitgift to abate somewhat of the strictness of his subscription test. At his request the Primate consented not to require subscription to the three articles of incumbents already in possession, but only of those who were to be instituted and of those newly ordained. For the others, it would suffice if they made a declaration in writing "that they would observe the Book of Common Prayer and the orders of the Church by law set down." This concession was more apparent than real. The test

1 Strype's Whitgift, b. iii. c. 12. This project of re-valuation must be taken in connection with a project of farming these clerical payments, which would probably have pressed hard upon the clergy, and which was also de feated by the archbishop's care. 2 Ib. b. iii. c. 13.