articles of subscription shall be willingly and ex animo subscribed by all who are ordained, admitted, or licensed. A strict oath against simony is introduced; a form of bidding prayer given; ministers are to catechise every Sunday, and confirmation is to be performed by the bishops once in three years. The restrictions as to marriage are inserted; clergymen are to visit the sick, and not to delay baptism or burial, and duly to keep their registers. Chapter 4 treats of Schoolmasters. Chapter 5 of The decent Fittings and Ornaments of Churches, and their repair. Chapter 6 of Churchwardens and Parish Clerks. Chapters 7 to 12 of Ecclesiastical Courts. And chapter 13 of Synods. § 19. These canons, passed only by the Synod of Canterbury, were confirmed by the king's letters-patent, without any reference to York. But York, in order to save its independence, desired the king's license to make canons, and having obtained it, accepted and passed the canons which had been before agreed upon by Canterbury.1 § 20. The Convocation of Canterbury was prorogued July 9, and on the 16th came forth a proclamation warning all to be ready to conform before the last day of November, or to take the consequences.2 § 21. On December 4 (1604), Bancroft, Bishop of London, was appointed to the primacy in succession to Whitgift. Some had thought that Toby Matthews, Archbishop of York, would be selected, but Bancroft was avowedly chosen as the most ready and able to enforce that vigorous discipline against the Puritans which had been determined on.3 § 22. For this work, so far as vigour and courage went, Bancroft was eminently suited, but it may well be doubted whether the policy now adopted and zealously carried out, were justifiable, or whether it was not stretching the requirements of conformity beyond all measure. For now it was determined not to be content with Whitgift's test of the subscription to the three articles, but to exact of the clergy a declaration that they made the subscription willingly and ex animo. Many men who did not altogether like the Prayer-book, nor the subscription test, might yet be willing to accept it for the sake of peace, and in order that they might not be parted from their flocks. All such men were met by this new device, which obliged them to say that they took the test willingly and with full approval of it. This was hard measure. Again, those who had previously subscribed, and who were living in peace in their parishes, were to be called upon to subscribe again in this more pronounced sense, and this offended many. For it was argued that the intention of the Church in exacting subscription 1 Wake, State of the Church of England, p. 507. Sir J. Harrington's Brief Survey of the Church of England, p. 11. I must be regarded. "I have four times subscribed," writes a Puritan divine, "to the Book of Common Prayer, with limitation and reference of all things therein contained to the purpose and doctrine of the Church of England; but I cannot again subscribe, inasmuch as the purpose, if not the doctrine, of our Church seems to be varied by the late proceedings from what I had taken it to be."1 § 23. The archbishop, immediately after his confirmation, sent orders to his suffragans to enforce the new subscription test. "His Majesty expecteth," he said, "where advice prevaileth not, authority shall compel, and that the laws shall be put into execution where admonition taketh not effect." He instructs the bishops that, with regard to the ministers who were already placed, who were to be called upon to subscribe, those who utterly refused were to be at once silenced and deprived under the Act of Uniformity. Those who were willing to promise conformity, but were unwilling to subscribe again, were to be "respited for some short time." But all were ultimately to subscribe, or be compelled to quit their benefices, two or three months' grace being given to them in order that they might find another house.3 § 24. As some doubt was felt as to the power of thus summarily depriving men of their freeholds, the judges were consulted. They reported that the king had power without Parliament to make orders and constitutions for the government of the clergy, and. to deprive them if they obeyed not, and that he had also the power to delegate this ecclesiastical prerogative to commissioners. Being also asked whether it was an offence to petition the king against the use of this power, they declared that it was an offence, "fineable at discretion, and very near treason and felony." The ecclesiastical supremacy, supported by the Court of High Commission, could thus be worked so as to put the clergy completely in the king's hand, without any rights or means of redress." § 25. Happily the judges were soon of another mind, but a large number of deprivations took place through the exercise of this arbitrary power. The number is estimated by the Puritans as 300. The archbishop only acknowledged 49. It is difficult to account for this great discrepancy. 1 Rogers On the Articles, preface, p. 29 (ed. Parker Soc.) 2 It does not appear how this Act authorised immediate deprivation, but Bancroft says that the Lord Chief-Justice and Attorney-General declare that it does. That this law, however, was not good, may be inferred from the consultation of the judges which took place. 3 Cardwell's Doc. Annals, ii. 69 sq. 4 State Papers of James I. (Domestic), iii. 82. 5 The three articles of subscription were all supported by statute law. But the ex-animo test was only grounded on the canons. "Heylin's Presbyterians, p. 376. § 26. Vigorous protests were naturally forthcoming against this increased strictness. The Abridgment of the Lincolnshire Ministers, published early in 1605, took a stronger line against the ceremonies than had been taken by the earlier Puritans, and even by the Millenary Petition. It is contended that they are unlawful and sinful, and that, above all, they are dangerous. The ministers desire to have the ceremonies abolished because the people attach so much value to them. "Many of the people in all parts of the land are known to be of this mind, that the sacraments are not duly administered without them, and such as omit them are called Schismatics and Puritans." "The surplice is known to be esteemed by many in all parts of the land so holy a thing, as that they will not receive the sacrament from any but such as wear it." Of the cross they say "The common people in many parts of the land are known not only to maintain the superstitious use of it (blessing themselves, their breasts, their foreheads, and everything they take in hand by it), but also to hold that their children are not rightly baptized without it." This is a remarkable testimony, the truth of which cannot be disputed, of the growth of Church feeling among the laity. The ministers argue further against the threatened conformity" As there is danger in the use of these ceremonies in all congregations, so specially if they shall be brought back again into these when they have been long out of use, and received by such ministers as are known to have received them heretofore. For this cause great divines have judged that the receiving of them again into such congregations can with no colour of reason be received as an indifferent thing, but must needs be held wicked and unlawful." To the Abridgment is appended a table of such things as were considered unlawful by the Puritans, which is a much longer catalogue than that which appears in the Millenary Petition. § 27. Morton, afterwards Bishop of Chester, answered the Abridgment in a treatise called A Defence of the Three Ceremonies. He assumes that the objections of the Puritans are mainly on three ceremonies-viz. kneeling at the holy communion, the cross in baptism, and the surplice. To their argument that everything not expressly commanded in God's Word is forbidden, he answers :— "Some ceremonies are mera, merely ceremonies; some mixta, mixed. They that are merely ceremonies need no special warrant from Scripture, but are sufficiently warranted by the general approbation of God's Word, which giveth a permission and liberty to all the churches to make their own choice of ceremonies according to the rules of order and decency; but the mixed ceremonies, whereunto the imposers, or the generality of observers of them, annex some superstitious and erroneous opinion (whether it be of merit or of inherent holiness, efficacy, or real necessity), do in this case change the nature and become doctrinal, and in this respect are condemned as being not only beside the warrant, but plainly against the precept of Holy Scripture." 1 The bishop by this argument seems to furnish a ready answer to his opponents, who, no doubt, would hold that the ceremonies to which they objected came under the latter class. § 28. The Primate, however, was not inclined to wait for the results of controversy. He continued to press his subscription test; and many ministers, rather than wait to be ejected forcibly, now resigned their preferments and passed into Holland to join the Brownists, where unnumbered extravagances, wranglings, and mutual excommunications prevailed. No doubt, also, many put a strain on their consciences by signing the new test, though not really ex animo, for the better of the Puritans still greatly dreaded the sin of schism; and thus under Bancroft an amount of conformity was reached such as had never been seen at any time under his predecessors. It is possible, indeed, that this result was bought at too dear a price; that it is to Bancroft's action in thus invading the domain of the conscience, and refusing to be satisfied with that outward conformity which had satisfied Whitgift, that the commencement of the unpopularity of the Church with the laity is duethat unpopularity which afterwards made the gentlemen of England appear as allies of a Puritanism which in their hearts they despised. § 29. The apparent success of the Primate's strictness is well attested. "Dr. Bancroft," says Lord Clarendon, " that Metropolitan who understood the Church excellently, had almost rescued it out of the hands of the Calvinian party, and very much subdued the unruly spirit of the Nonconformists. If he had lived, he would quickly have extinguished all that fire in England which had been kindled at Geneva." 3 § 30. "By the punishment of some few of the principals," says Heylin, "he struck such terror into the rest, that nonconformity grew out of fashion in a less time than could easily be imagined. Hereupon followed a great alteration in the face of religion: more churches beautified and repaired in the short time of his government than had been in many years before; the liturgy more solemnly officiated by the priests and more religiously attended by the common people; the fasts and festivals more punctually ob 1 Defence of the Three Ceremonies, p. 18, ed. 1619. Morton was answered by a tract called The Three Nocent Ceremonies, and this was replied to by Dr. Burgess, who had been deprived for nonconformity, but afterwards conformed. Heylin's Presbyterians, p. 379. 3 Clarendon, Hist. Rebellion, p. 36 (ed. 1843). served by both than of later times; copes brought again into the service of the Church; the surplice generally worn without doubt or hesitancy; and all things in a manner reduced to the same state in which they had first been settled under Queen Elizabeth, which, though it much redounded to the honour of the Church of England, gave no small trouble to some sticklers for the Puritan faction, expressed in many scandalous libels and seditious railings, in which this reverend prelate suffered both alive and dead." 1 1 Heylin's Presbyterians, p. 376. NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. (A) THE MILLENARY PETITION. Church service; that the cross in baptism, away; baptism not to be ministered by "Most gracious and dread Sovereign-firmations, as superfluous, may be taken Seeing that it hath pleased the Divine Majesty, to the great comfort of all good Christians, to advance your Highness, according to your just title, to the peaceable government of this Church and commonwealth of England; we, the ministers of the Gospel in this land, neither as factious men affecting a popular parity in the Church, nor as schismatics aiming at the dissolution of the State Ecclesiastical, but as the faithful servants of Christ and loyal subjects to your Majesty, desiring and longing for the redress of divers abuses of the Church, could do no less in our obedience to God, service to your Majesty, love to His Church, than acquaint your princely Majesty with our particular griefs; for, as your princely pen writeth, the king, as a good physician, must first know what peccant humours his patient naturally is most subject unto, before he can begin his cure;' and although divers of us that sue for reformation have formerly, in respect of the times, subscribed to the book some upon protestation, some upon exposition given to them, some with condition rather than the Church should have been deprived of their labour and ministry-value of their livings, to maintain preachyet now we, to the number of more than a thousand of your Majesty's subjects and ministers, all groaning as under a common burden of human rites and ceremonies, do with one joint assent humble ourselves at your Majesty's feet to be eased and relieved in this behalf. Our humble suit, then, to your Majesty is that these offences following, some may be removed, some amended, some qualified:-(1) In the ers. That non-residency be not permitted. 1 |