Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

mentioned in the pulpit under pain of deprivation. This was a vast advance upon the constitution of the kirk.

To obtain a spiritual character superior to the order of presbyters, it was necessary that the bishops elect should be consecrated by some of the same order; for this purpose the king sent for three of them into England, (viz. Mr. Spotswood, archbishop of Glasgow, Mr. Lamb, bishop of Brechen, and Mr. Hamilton, bishop of Galloway) and issued a commission under the great seal to the bishops of London, Ely, Bath, Wells, and Rochester, requiring them to proceed to the consecration of the abovementioned bishops according to the English ordinal: Andrews, bishop of Ely, was of opinion, that before their consecration they ought to be made priests, because they had not been ordained by a bishop. This the Scots divines were unwilling to admit, through fear of the consequences among their own countrymen; for what must they conclude concerning the ministers of Scotland, if their ordination as presbyters was not valid? Bancroft therefore yielded, that where bishops could not be had, ordination by presbyters must be valid, otherwise the character of the ministers in most of the reformed churches might be questioned. Abbot bishop of London,* and others, were of opinion, that there was no necessity of passing through the inferior orders of deacon and priest, but that the episcopal character might be conveyed at once, as appears from the example of St. Ambrose, Nectarius, Eucherius, and others, who from mere laymen were advanced at once into the episcopal chair.† But whether this supposition does not rather weaken the arguments for bishops being a distinct order from presbyters, I leave with the reader. However, the Scotch divines were consecrated in the chapel at London-house, [Oct. 21, 1610] and upon their return into Scotland conveyed their new character in the same manner to their brethren. Thus the king, by an usurped supremacy over the kirk of Scotland, and other violent and indirect means, subverted their ecclesi

*Collier, as Dr. Grey observes, mentions that as Bancroft's opinion, which Mr. Neal ascribes to bishop Abbot. Ed.

Collyer's Eccles. Hist. vol. i. p. 702.

Calderwood, p. 644,

astical constitution; and contrary to the genius of the people, and protestation of the general assembly, the bishops were made lords of council, lords of parliament, and lord commissioners in causes ecclesiastical; but with all their high titles they sat uneasy in their chairs, being generally hated both by the ministers and people.

About ten days after this consecration, Dr. Richard Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury, departed this life; he was born at Farnworth in Lancashire, 1544, and educated in Jesus college, Cambridge. He was first chaplain to Cox bishop of Ely, who gave him the rectory of Teversham near Cambridge. In the year 1585 he proceeded D. D. and be ing ambitious of preferment, got into the service of Sir Christopher Hatton, by whose recommendation he was made prebendary of Westminster. Here he signalized himself by preaching against the puritans; a sure way to preferment in those times. He also wrote against their discipline; and was the first in the church of England who openly maintained the divine right of the order of bishops. While he sat in the high commission, he distinguished himself by an uncommon zeal against the non-conformists, for which he was preferred, first to the bishopric of London, and upon Whitgift's decease, to the see of Canterbury; how he behaved in that high station has been sufficiently related. This prelate left behind him no extraordinary character for piety, learning, hospitality, or any other episcopal quality. He was of a rough, inflexible temper, yet a tool of the prerogative, and an enemy to the laws and constitution of his country. Some have represented him as inclined to popery, because he maintained several secular priests in his own house; but this was done, (say his advocates) to keep up the controversy between them and the jesuits. Lord Clarendon says, "That he understood the church 'excellently well, that he had almost rescued it out of the ' bands of the Calvinian party, and very much subdued the 'unruly spirit of the non-conformists; and that he counte'nanced men of learning." His lordship might have add

* Vol. i. p. 88. ed. 1707.

[ocr errors]

ed, that he was covetous,* passionate, ill-natured, and a cruel persecutor of good men; that he laid aside the hospitality becoming a bishop, and lived without state or equipage, which gave occasion to the following satire upon his death, which happened November 2, 1610, ætatis 66.

Here lies his grace in cold clay clad,

Who died for want of what he had.

* Fuller, and after him Dr. Grey and Dr. Warner, vindicate the character of archbishop Bancroft from the charges of cruelty and covetousness; "which, when they are examined into," says Dr. Warner, "appears not to deserve those opprobrious names in the strictest accepta❝tion." On the other hand, the author of the Confessional calls him, the fiery Bancroft: and Dr. Warner sums up his account of him in a manner not very honourable to his name. "In short," says he, "there 'have been archbishops who have been much worse than Bancroft, who by their good-humor and generosity have been more esteemed when living, and more lamented at their deaths." Eccles. Hist. vol. ii.

P. 497. ED.

CHAP. II.

From the Death of Archbishop BANCROFT to the Death of King JAMES I.

BANCROFT was succeded by Dr. George Abbot, bishop of London, a divine of a quite different spirit from his predecessor. A sound protestant, a thorough Calvinist, an avowed enemy to popery, and even suspected of puritanism, because he relaxed the penal laws, whereby he unravelled all that his predecessor had been doing for many years; "who, if he had lived a little longer," says lord Clarendon,*" would have subdued the unruly spirit of the 'non-conformists, and extinguished that fire in England 'which had been kindled at Geneva; but Abbot (says his lordship) considered the christian religion no otherwise 'than as it abhorred and reviled popery, and valued those 'men most who did that most furiously. He enquired but little after the strict observation of the discipline of the 'church, or conformity to the articles or canons established, and did not think so ill of the [presbyterian] discipline "as he ought to have done; but if men prudently forbore a 'public reviling at the hierarchy and ecclesiastical govern'ment, they were secure from any inquisition from him, and were equally preferred. His house was a sanctuary 'to the most eminent of the factious party, and he licensed their pernicious writings." This is the heavy charge brought by the noble historian against one of the most religious and venerable prelates of his age, and a steady friend of the constitution in church and state. If Abbot's moderate measures had been constantly pursued, the liberties of England had been secured, popery discountenanced, and the church prevented from running into those excesses, which first proved its reproach and afterwards its ruin.

The translation of the bible now in use, was finished this year [1611 ;] it was undertaken at the request of the puri

*Book i. p. 88.

tan divines in the Hampton-court conference; and being the last, it may not be unacceptable to set before the reader in one view, the various translations of the bible into the English language.

The New Testament was first translated by Dr. Wickliffe out of the vulgar Latin, about the year 1380, and is entitled, The New Testament, with the lessons taken out of the Old Law, read in churches according to the use of Sa

rum.

The next translation was by William Tyndal, printed at Antwerp 1526, in octavo, without a name, and without either calendar, references in the margin, or table at the end; it was corrected by the author, and printed in the years 1534 and 1536, having passed through five editions in Holland.

In the mean time Tyndal was translating several books of the Old Testament, as the Pentateuch, and the book of Jonas, printed 1531; the books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, the two books of Chronicles, and Nehemiah. About the same time George Joy, sometime fellow of Peter college, Cambridge, translated the Psalter, the prophecy of Jeremiah, and the Song of Moses, and printed them beyond sea.

In the year 1535, the whole bible was printed the first time in folio, adorned with wooden cuts, and scripture references; it was done by several hands, and dedicated to king Henry VIII. by Miles Coverdale. In the last page it is said to be printed in the year of our Lord 1535, and finished the fourth day of October. This bible was reprinted in quarto 1550, and again with a new title 1553.

Two years after the bible was reprinted in English, with this title, The Holy Byble, which is all the Holy Scripture, in which are contayned the Olde and Newe Testament, truelye and purelye translated into English by [a fictitious name] Thomas Mathew, 1537. It has a calendar with an almanack; and an exhortation to the study of the scripture, signed J.R. John Rogers; a table of contents and marriages; marginal notes, a prologue; and in the Apocalypse some wooden cuts. At the beginning of the prophets are printed on the top of the page R. G. Richard Grafton, and at

« AnteriorContinuar »