JUL 16 1924 BX 5199 .A6 08 1894 Ottley, Robert L. Lancelot Andrewes 41 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/lancelotandrewesOOottl LANCELOT ANDREWES MORRISON AND OIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH. V LANCELOT ANDREWES ROBERT L. OTTLEY, M.A. Leaders o"f r&!)o(lon 5" WITH PORTRAIT 36 ESSEX STREET, LONDON, W.C. 1894 the time of trouble He shall hide me in His tabernacle; yea, in t/te secret place of His dwelling sltall He hide me, and set me up upon a rock of stone."— Vs. xxvii. 5 liADS AND PRINTED IH 6BK4T BRITAIN* %a the iltcmory of a lister «. $. tobose life of biobctt sclf-rcnsmation anil unbj£arico charity bias inspireo by bebotion to the (Sngltsb dbttrcb, Catholic att& Jlpostolir, Jltotbcr of faints, this fBook is gcbicaicb. CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE I. BIRTH, EDUCATION, AND FIRST YEARS IN LONDON . 1 tt. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH . . 24 III. ANDREWES AT THE COURT OF JAMES I. ... 40 IV. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 55 V. PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH ... 72 VI. FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS ... 92 VII. ANDREWES THE PRELATE 108 VIII. BISHOP ANDREWES AS A PREACHER . . . .123 IX. THE THEOLOGICAL POSITION OF BISHOP ANDREWES — PART I. 150 PART II 166 X. THE DEVOTIONS 177 XI. A CONCLUDING SURVEY 194 APPENDIX A. — SPECIMENS OF THE POSITIVE TEACHING OF BISnOP ANDREWES ON TOINTS IN DISPUTE BETWEEN ENGLAND AND ROME .... 203 APPENDIX B. — BISHOP WREN'S INSCRIPTION FOR BISHOP ANDREWES* TOMB 207 APPENDIX C. — LIST OF BISHOP ANDREWES' WORKS . 209 APPENDIX D.— LITERARY HISTORY OF THE DEVOTIONS . 212 vi PREFACE The name of bishop Andrewes is so reverently cherished by English Churchmen, that many will probably feel a sense of disappointment in reading the story of his career. The fact is, that he owes his great reputation more to his gift of preaching and to the depth and beauty of his devotional life, than to the part he played in the history of the Church or in public affairs. The sphere in which he moved was but little suited to his temperament. His great literary capacity was spent in controversial encounters which were scarcely worthy of his genius. Indeed, the published work of Andrewes, like other products of English theology, is occasional in character, and the controversy with Bellarmine and Du Perron is important chiefly as throwing light on the bishop's conception of the office and mission of the English Church. It may be said that his life has an enduring interest, as showing the course followed, and the aims pursued, by a loyal son of the Church in a perplexed and troubled age. The controversial works of Andrewes display to us a man of high intellectual gifts, profound learning, lively humour, and broad sympathies. But the Sermons and Devotions reveal a higher order of qualities, — a pure and tender heart, a deep spiritual viii PREFACE insight, and an austere sanctity, which is concealed for the most part under a veil of masculine reserve. Such a character will repay study at a time when very different ideals are popular. In regard to one subject particularly, the controversy with Eonie, there is much to be learned from the breadth of view, and true sense of moral proportion, which distinguishes bishop Andrewes' treatment. The memoir by Isaacson, and other notices that bear upon the bishop's life, have been carefully collected by Mr. Bliss in the concluding volume of Andrewes' works published in the Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology} Mr. Eussell's Memoirs of the Life and Works of Lancelot Andrewes (1860) supply a large and some- what diffuse collection of materials. There are one or two papers of interest in the Bodleian Library, notably the letter to Heinsius describing Casaubon's death. To the Rev. E. B. Eackham I am indebted for kind trouble in revising proofs, and also for a valuable note on the Devotions (Appendix D). E. L. 0. Ascension Day, 1S94- 1 The references are in all cases to this edition. The Minor JVorls, Life, etc., is generally referred to shortly as " Bliss." BISHOP ANDBEWES CHAPTEE I BIRTH, EDUCATION, AND FIRST YEARS IN LONDON Lancelot Andrewes was born in 1555, and died in 1626. He survived by rather more than a year the accession of Charles L, but his career may be said, roughly speaking, to cover the critical period that intervenes between the opening of Elizabeth's reign and the death of James I. It is difficult to describe concisely any epoch of history which marks a transition from era to era, nor need the task be attempted here. It is enough to remember that Andrewes lived in days of vast and significant change — social, intellectual, and religious. At the time of his birth, England had reached her lowest point of internal disorder and humiliation. The reign of Mary had closed in failure and disaster. " Never woman meant so well And fared so ill in this disastrous world." 1 She left her people sullen and dispirited. The 1 Tennyson, Queen Mary, act v. sc. 2. 2 BISHOP ANDKEWES political and religious independence of the nation was threatened by the implacable hostility of Spain ; the resources of the country seemed to be exhausted, and its government discredited. At the death of James (1625) the situation presented a complete contrast. Thanks to the strong and temperate energy of Elizabeth's administration, the nation was now inspired by something Like unity of purpose and sentiment ; the Reformation movement had triumphed; the passion for public liberty was rising to its height, and the Commons stood on the verge of their resolute struggle with the absolutism of the Crown. The active intrigues of the counter-Eeforma- tion had at last ceased to be formidable. The day of England's weakness and fear seemed to be over ; she had entered for good and for evil on the chequered career of a great modern state — a career that was to entail such high and varied duties, such heavy sacrifices, and such splendid achievements. But the social revolution that passed over England during these seventy eventful years is scarcely less remark- able than the change in the political situation. It might be fitly described in the eloquent language of a living historian ■} — " The paths trodden by the footsteps of ages were broken up : old things were passing away, and the faith and life of ten centuries were dissolving like a dream. Chivalry was dying : the abbey and the castle were soon together to crumble into ruins ; and all the forms, desires, beliefs, convictions of the old world were passing away never to return. ... In the fabric of habit which they had so laboriously built up for themselves, mankind were to remain no 1 Professor Froude. BIRTH AND EDUCATION 3 longer." This passage, indeed, reminds us that long before the accession of Elizabeth the causes had been silently at work that were destined to produce this momentous change in the ideas and prospects of nations and individual men. But at the close of James' reign the old world had finally vanished and the new era had begun. In England the very aspect of the country seemed to have undergone a kind of transformation. The age of feudalism, with its baronial castles and soldierly nobility, had dis- appeared ; in its stead had risen a new England — an England adorned with stately manor houses and thriving homesteads. The spirit of mercantile and manufacturing enterprise was awake, and was already producing widely-felt economic results. The general standard of comfort was higher ; there was greater diffusion of wealth, more leisure, and consequently more cultivation. Most striking fact of all — the closing years of Elizabeth's reign had witnessed the birth of a new literary impulse. Shakespeare, Bacon, Spenser, and Hooker had risen to celebrity, one of them at least being included in the circle of Andrewes' intimate friends. But throughout the period the most powerful force making for change in men's habits of thought and life — though not perhaps the most obvious at the time — was the reformation in religion. In an age of transition, " Eeligion naturally became the battle- field of the old and new state of things." 1 The Reformation opened fundamental questions which lay at the very root of individual beliefs, social develop- ment, and national policy ; it introduced endless 1 Creighton, Age of Elizabeth, p. 2. 4 BISHOP ANDREWES possibilities of internal conflict, of collision between different states and different orders of men in the same state. In England, especially, we see the results of the change in religion exhibited on a large scale. The impressive but dimly understood forms of medieval worship had given place to the dignified simplicity of the Anglican rite. The Bible had become the people's book, and was slowly moulding the religious thought and even the language of common men. The free and boisterous merriment of the Tudor period was gradually giving way before the restrained serious temper and moral enthusiasm of Puritan England. Such were the more obvious symptoms of the new order of things which since the close of the fifteenth century had gradually become established in England. The generation to which Andrewes belonged was one which had enjoyed the benefits of strong and settled government ; which had grown up in habits of industry, and had come to realise the true worth of knowledge, the importance and interest of the pursuits of peace — art, commerce, and manufacture. With a rising spirit of independence, however, and a new sense of the value of liberty, was combined a temper of loyalty to the great queen, which lived on in the form of an almost superstitious reverence for monarchy. Majesty was sacred, and was held to be invested with a divine right. But what had hitherto been a pre- judice, or an informal inference drawn from the current conceptions of sovereignty, became under James L a distinct theory of absolutism It would be unreasonable to expect that the churchmen of the Stuart period should be altogether exempt from the BIETH AND EDUCATION 5 prevalent ideas of their age on this subject ; and, as we shall see, there were deeper reasons for the exaggerated deference which they paid to the principle of monarchical government. At any rate, Andre wes grew to manhood in an atmosphere of submissive loyalty, and this became a factor in his career, and determined his special field of work. Politically speaking, England under Elizabeth enjoyed immunity from actual invasion, and the benefits of stable government. But in the sphere of opinion her reign was a period of great confusion, unsettlement, and conflict between new and old habits of thought. It was a condition of things in which leaders were needed in every sphere, in none more urgently than that of religion. It is as a religious leader that Andrewes engages our interest and attention. After Eichard Hooker, 1 he is the most conspicuous ecclesiastical writer of his day ; and it may be claimed for him that of his contemporaries he alone was qualified to meet the peculiar difficulties with which the English Church found herself con- fronted at the close of Elizabeth's reign. If the work of the Eeformation was to endure and to be developed ; if the Church was to hold her own against the steady pressure of Calvinism and the pertinacious vehemence of the Eoman attack, she must find defenders competent to render an adequate account of her anomalous position, and to base her claims on a coherent theory. First in Jewel and Hooker, and later in Lancelot Andrewes, the English Church happily found what she needed. In the ensuing- sketch no attempt will be made to give a complete 1 Hooker was born in 1553, and died in 1600. 6 BISHOP ANDREWES biography of Andrewes — a task for which materials, especially letters, are very deficient. We shall study his career simply with a view to estimating in some degree his importance as a religious leader. Lancelot Andrewes, the eldest of a family of thirteen, was born in Thames Street, in the parish of All-Hallows, Barking, in 1 5 5 5 - 1 His father, Thomas Andrewes, was a member of the commercial or middle class which the policy of Elizabeth did so much to encourage. He had led a seafaring life, and in his later years became one of the masters of the Trinity House. English seamen were already famous for then- restless hardihood and love of adventure; we know what an important part was played by men of the stamp of Drake and Howard in the fierce struggle with Spain which culminated in the destruction of the Armada in 1588. The mariners of that age were distinguished by a strange mixture of unscrupulous daring and religious fervour. As a class they seem to have been passionately devoted to the cause of national liberty, and to the new order of religious beliefs. More- over, the persecutions of Mary's reign had taught men to value their hardly-won privileges, while the sense of national dangers had developed a new seriousness and intensity in the average English character. The parents of Lancelot Andrewes are said to have been " honest and religious," and very careful of the education of their children. At an early age, probably at the suggestion and with the aid of Sir Francis Walsingham, who was on friendly terms with the 1 The exact day of his hirth is unknown. The Andrewes family was connected with Suffolk, but very little seems to he known of its history. BIRTH AND EDUCATION 7 Andrewes family, and resided near them, Lancelot was sent to the Coopers' Free school of Ratcliffe, in Stepney parish, the master of which, Ward, soon discovered the hoy's passion for study, and " obtained of his parents that he should not be a prentice." This discerning kindness was never forgotten by Andrewes. Before long he was transferred to the care of Richard Mulcaster, first master of the newly-founded Merchant Taylors' school. Here he made rapid progress; his diligence was extraordinary ; early and late he was at his studies ; he used to rise at four ; he would work while others were at play, and indeed had to be compelled to take his part in the school games. Mulcaster seems to have been an educationalist of original ideas. He taught the boys Hebrew, Greek, and Latin ; and was careful also to train them in music and dramatic art. " Yeerly he presented sum playes to the court in which his scholers were (the) only actors, . . . and by that meane taught them good behaviour and audacitye." 1 Possibly the founda- tion was thus laid of Andrewes' gift as a preacher. Throughout his life he was much attached to his old school, sometimes attending the annual dinner and election. For Mulcaster he ever retained an affec- tionate regard, treated him always with marked respect and generosity, and after his death " caused his picture to be set over his study door." 2 It was characteristic of him that he never forgot those to whom he felt that he owed a lasting obligation. When he became bishop of Winchester, he gave a 1 Whitelock, Liber famclicus (Camden Society). 2 "Whereas," says Buckeridge {Funeral Sermon), "in all the rest of the house you could scantly sec a picture. " 8 BISHOP ANDREWES living to Ward's son ; and to Mulcaster's son he left a legacy. In 1571, at the age of sixteen, he was sent to Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, as the holder of the first of some Greek scholarships recently founded by Dr. Thomas Watts, archdeacon of Middlesex. 1 Andrewes entered the University of Cambridge at a time when the struggle between the Church and Puritanism was at its height. Whitgift (master of Trinity 1567-77) had lately become vice-chancellor (1570), and was an inflexible supporter of the queen's policy — enforcement at all hazards of the prescribed discipline of the Church. Cambridge bad already become the centre of a determined movement of resistance. The Puritan party had entrenched itself firmly in the university, and could enlist the services of zealous, able, and determined men. Of this party, Thomas Cartwright, fellow of Trinity, was the acknowledged leader. He had been placed in a position of dignity and wide influence by his election to the Lady Margaret professorship in 1569, and he used the professorial chair as a vantage gTound from which to assail with fierce determination the whole system of the English Church. His influence was now nearly at its height, and the effect of his vigorous preaching and lecturing had already become visible in a general unsettlement of the university. Young fellows of colleges and undergraduates crowded to hear him, and eagerly caught at suggestions of in- 1 About the same time he seems to have been nominated a scholar of Jesus College, Oxford, by the founder, Hugh Price, but apparently he did not visit the university before he became an (incorporated) M.A. of Oxford in 1581. BIRTH AND EDUCATION 9 subordination to authority. To some, and to Whitgift especially, Cartwright's conduct appeared a public danger, at a time when the power of Spain was so formidable. The one hope of Church and country lay in general agreement to sink differences on unessential points ; ecclesiastical uniformity seemed to be a safe- guard of national unity ; the intolerance which de- nounced episcopacy and the use of the surplice as abominations equally heinous was a scandal and a positive source of peril. Accordingly, complaints began to reach the chancellor (Cecil, afterwards Lord Burghley) of the disturbance raised by Cartwright in the university. The danger was depicted in exaggerated terms. One head of a house assured the chancellor that the aim of the Puritans was " to overthrow all ecclesiastical and civill governance that now is, and to ordeyne and institute a newly founded pollicie." Grindal, arch- bishop of York, wrote to Cecil in a similar strain. The chancellor was roused ; he wrote to Whitgift, as the head of Cartwright's house, directing him to take prompt measures against the offenders. It would seem that Whitgift himself, after long alliance with the rising party, had now begun to realise the disas- trous effects of their agitation, and as a man of wider sympathies he was disgusted by their rigidity, their narrow vehemence, and ill-proportioned zeal. It is clear, indeed, from contemporary accounts, that Calvinism was at this time not only a force making for political disorder, but that it was also inflicting deep and serious injury on the welfare of Cambridge as a place of learning. The quiet and dignified repose of academic life disappeared ; the time that 10 BISHOP ANDREWES should have been devoted to study was wasted in exciting theological disputes. Dr. Caius, the accom- plished master of the college that bears his name, complains in 1567: "Young men now-a-days be so negligent that they care for nothing." In consequence of the general relaxation of discipline, which was the more perilous in view of the extreme youthfulness of the undergraduates, there was a great deal of insubordination, often tacitly encouraged by Calvinistic seniors. The students became generally extravagant and dissipated in their habits; they despised academic dress ; occasionally even the square cap and surplice in chapel were discarded. Perhaps the general de- moralisation had not reached its lowest point at the time when Andrewes matriculated. But things were bad enough. We find complaints of the rudeness and pugnacity of the undergraduates, their open conflicts with the townsmen, their insolence to strangers, their contempt of authority. Cambridge was fast degenerating into a " storehouse for a staple of prodigal! wastfull, ryotous, unlerned, and insufficient persons." 1 It is curious that the first effects of Puritanism should have differed so widely from the permanent impress which it was destined to leave on the national character. At this time it was clearly a disintegrat- ing force which must be reckoned with, and under Whitgift's drastic regime we see a systematic effort made on the part of the university authorities to enforce order and conformity. Whitgift was, in fact, the chief promoter — first at Cambridge, afterwards at 1 See Mullinger's History of the University of Cambridge, from which the above account is mainly derived. BIRTH AND EDUCATION 11 Lambeth — of a policy which eventually led to a final rupture between Puritanism and the State. His exertions secured in the Elizabethan statutes of the university a new and formidable preponderance of influence for the heads of colleges. But this legisla- tion only aggravated the division between parties ; it produced a split between the younger regents — imbued with the new teaching, and jealous for their rights — and the older men, who were convinced of the necessity of strengthening authority by an accumula- tion of the powers of the university in the hands of the Heads. The struggle was at its height in 1570, and on the eve of Andrewes' admission (September 1571), Whitgift had triumphed: Cartwright was deprived of his professorship and fellowship, quitted Cambridge, and retired to Geneva. It was not until twenty years later that he reappeared and preached in Cambridge, by which time Andrewes himself was master of Pembroke. Meanwhile, Cartwright's departure was hailed with a sense of relief, as likely to promote the interests both of learning and discipline. Lancelot Andrewes entered Pembroke Hall as a scholar, and rose to be its Head. A large proportion of his fellow-students were of the same social rank as himself. According to the arrangements of the time, he would find himself lodged in a simple room shared by two, or possibly three, other students. At this time colleges were overcrowded ; residence in lodgings was rare ; and the number of students was constantly increasing. The conditions of life were thus extremely uncomfortable and unfavourable, as we might think, to systematic study or quiet thought. Andrewes, not being 12 BISHOP ANDREWES one of the poorer scholars, 1 would be exempt from menial duties ; but he probably underwent, during his first term, the rude and sometimes cruel process of " salting," and in any case he would have to wait till he was fellow before he could secure a room entirely to himself. He appears, however, to have set himself courageously to make the best of these unpromising conditions. His passion was for study, and he had, perhaps, undue distaste for the pastimes 2 which were usual at that time. " He never," says his biographer Isaacson, "loved or used any games or ordinary recreation, either within doors, as cards, dice, tables, chess, or the like ; or abroad, as butts, quoits, bowls, or any such." His chief college friend seems to have been Thomas Dove, his contemporary at school and college, who became bishop of Peterborough in 1600. What seems to have distinguished Andrewes was a quiet, contemplative delight in nature ; his favourite recreation was walking either alone or with a friend. " He would often profess that to observe the grass, herbs, corn, trees, cattle, earth, waters, heavens, any of the creatures, and to contemplate their natures, orders, virtues, uses, etc., was ever to him the greatest mirth, content, and recreation that could be ; and this he held to his dying day." 3 Once a year, before 1 His parents ' ' left him a sufficient patrimony and inheritance, which is descended to his heir" (Buckeridge, Funeral Sermon). 2 "The usual pastimes (including those prohibited) were archery, quoits, football (rcciprocatio pilae), bull and bear baitings, and especi- ally dramatic performances. Latin plays were a recognised diversion ; those in English, except by special allowance, were not " (Mullinger, p. 486). 3 Isaacson, Li'fr, p. vi. BIRTH AND EDUCATION Easter, he visited his home, making the journey on foot ; but his stay was limited to a month, and was devoted to hard study. " Against the time he should come up, his father, directed by letters from his son, before he came, prepared one that should read to him, and be his guide in the attaining of some language or art which he had not attained before. So that within a few years he had laid the foundations of all arts and sciences, and had gotten skill in most of the modern languages." 1 Andrewes was by temperament early drawn to the study which absorbed, sometimes with disastrous results, the most promising intellects of his day — the science of theology. But until he took his degree he would conform to the regular curriculum, elementary mathematics and astronomy, which were studied in antiquated text-books ; cosmography, on which the recognised authorities were Plato's Timaeus, Strabo, and Pliny ; rhetoric and logic, the latter subject being regarded as of primary importance. The traditional treatment of logic was at this time being largely modified by the influence of Peter Eamus, whose tragic death in the massacre of S. Bartholomew (August 1572) was one of the exciting and thrilling events of Andrewes' undergraduate life. This regular course would, in the case of an inquiring student, be supplemented by some study of ethics, physics, and metaphysics ; but theology was the science of most engrossing interest to the abler men. In this subject also there were standard text-books, but already the Summa and the Sentences had been super- seded by Calvin's Institutes, the Commonplaces of 1 Isaacson, p. v. 14 BISHOP ANDRE WES Musculus, the writings of Beza and other lights of protestantism. After taking his B.A. degree, Andrewes was in 1576 elected fellow of his college as the result of an examination, in those days a rare event. His un- successful competitor was his friend and schoolfellow, Thomas Dove. His election enabled Andrewes to follow his real bent, and to devote himself systematic- ally to theology. At a time when Hebrew and even Greek were deplorably neglected, Andrewes had, by his unremit- ting diligence, become a student proficient, for those days, in both languages. He applied himself with ardour to the study of Scripture. We hear of his joining a small group of senior men who held weekly meetings for prayer and Bible-reading. To each member of the company was assigned a definite department of study bearing on the subject selected: one busied himself with the text, another with exegesis, another with the doctrinal import of the passage. These exercises seem to have borne good fruit, and helped to foster a common tone of thought and habit of mind among the younger seniors. It is noticeable that one member of the group, Chaderton, afterwards became the first master of Emmanuel college. At this time also Andrewes found scope for his love of teaching, being appointed in 1578 " catechist " of his college. Catechising was at this time a recognised, and much honoured method of religious instruction. It was the ordinary duty of young clergymen in their first pastoral cure. With a view probably to training men for this important branch of their work, Andrewes instituted catechetical lectures in his college-chapel, BIRTH AND EDUCATION 15 delivered on Saturdays and Sundays in the afternoon. Something in his matter or manner seems to have made these lectures very attractive. They were soon crowded, not only by residents, but by young curates from the country. The substance of the lectures was published after Andre wes' death (in 1630), under the title, A Pattern of Catechistical Doctrine, which, supplemented by another series, The Moral Law Expounded (first published in 1642), 1 forms a system- atic exposition of the Decalogue. After his ordination (1580), Andrewes was led by circumstances into a line of reading which he made peculiarly his own. Moral theology seems to have had special attractions for him, and his diligence in this department was stimulated by the fact that he was now engaged in the cure of souls. " He was," says Harrington, " a man deeply seen in all cases of conscience, and he was much sought to in that respect." In an age of noisy controversy, his quiet, unobtrusive goodness and devout temper won him the confidence and reverence of earnest inquirers, and of those troubled in mind or conscience. The result was that Andrewes became closely engaged in the work of spiritual direction, and soon gained the reputation of being a profound casuist. 2 A curious anecdote is preserved, which throws light 1 "It seems probable that his sermons on the Temptation of Christ in tho Wilderness and on the Lord's Prayer, originally published respect- ively in 1592 and 1611, were taken from tho notes of his hearers on these occasions" (Bliss, Andrewes Minor JVorks, Life, etc., p. vi.). 2 We may notice that his exercise for the degree of B.D. (1585) was a "Thesis de Usuris" ; and in 1591 he wrote a theological treatise (" Determinatio "), "On the Lawfulness of an Oath" (Opuscula, pp. 95, 117). 16 BISHOP ANDREWES on Andrewes' method, and the variety of demands made on his time. A stout alderman, we are told, who was wont to fall asleep in church at the afternoon service, and was consequently "preached at" as a reprobate, was so troubled in his mind that he consulted Andrewes. Andrewes said "it was an ill habit of body, not of mind," and advised the alderman to dine lightly on Sundays. In spite of this advice, he again slept in sermon time, and was vigorously denounced by the preacher. " He comes again to Mr. Andrewes with tears in his eyes, to be resolved, who then told him to make his usual hearty meal and take out his full sleep before going to S. Mary's." This plan suc- ceeded, but "Mr. Andrewes was extremely spoken against for offering to assoyle or excuse a sleeper in sermon time. But he had learning and wit enough to defend himself." 1 Such was the career to which the diligent and earnest young student devoted himself, but meanwhile we cannot doubt that he was a keenly interested observer of the theological struggle that had so greatly disturbed and hindered the higher studies of the university. In the actual struggle, however, he took no part. By this time the repressive action of the authorities was beginning to tell, and was producing consequences not less disastrous than those provoked by the fanaticism of the Puritans. Insistance on con- formity, which was the weapon of the Church party, was driving extremists on both sides to retaliatory measures. The founding of Emmanuel college in 1584 marks a defiant recrudescence of Puritan zeal. 2 1 Anecdotes of Distinguished Persons, vol. i. pp. 262, 263. 2 See a description of the college in Lewis' Life of Bishop Hall. BIRTH AND EDUCATION 17 Emmanuel was intended to be a training school for the ministry, but a ministry of the Genevau pattern. From the date of its first foundation, the society was dis- tinguished by an entire disregard of the ordinary usage and discipline of the Church. The college " used its own form of religious service, discarded surplices and hoods, was careless even of the cap and gown, and had suppers on Fridays." The sacrament was administered with gross neglect and irreverence, the recipients being seated during the communion, and behaving as if pre- sent at an ordinary meal. Andrewes must have been disgusted and repelled by such a display of Puritan temper and methods, especially when, as sometimes was the case, dogmatic rigidity was combined with an in- consistent laxity in practice. There was little chance that the attempts which were occasionally made to win him over would be successful. " They (the Emmanuel Puritans) had a great mind to draw in to them this learned young man, who (if they could make [him] strong) they knew would be a great honour to them. They carried themselves antiently with great severity and strictness. They preached up the strict keeping and observing of the Lord's Day, made it damnation to break it, and that 'twas less sin to kill a man. Yet these hypocrites did bowl in a private green at other colleges every Sunday after sermon. And one at the college (a loving friend to Mr. Andrewes), to satisfy him, lent him one day the key of the private back door to the bowling-green, where he discovered these zealous preachers with their gowns off earnest at play ; but they were strangely surprised to see the entry of one who was not of the brotherhood." 1 Meanwhile, though 1 Anecdotes, vol. i. p. 262. 2 18 BISHOP ANDEEWES Puritanism of this type was dominant, another re- actionary party was rising into notice. In numbers it was as yet insignificant, but it was animated by a spirit of implacable hostility to the English Church. The revived Romanism had been driven by the harsh penal measures of the government into open disaffec- tion, and was now become a standing danger to the Throne, if not to the Church. Shortly before Andrewes entered the university, the English college had been founded by William Allen at Douay (1568). In less than nine years the community numbered nearly two hundred students ; it was removed to Rheinis in 1578 ; and in 1580, fathers Parsons and Campion led the first Jesuit mission into England. It is needless to trace in detail the course of the counter-Reformation. It is enough to say that at Cambridge the movement found its sympathisers, if not its open partisans. The dominant Calvinism was not left unchallenged ; and the rising display of Catholic feeling was enough to keep the Puritan party on the alert. Naturally, Andrewes, as a patristic student and casuist, was suspected of leanings towards Catholicism, and his career was doubtless watched from different sides with conflicting emotions. It does not, however, appear that his somewhat unpopular views hindered his advance. It is true that he had some difficulty in obtaining the D.D. degree, which was refused him on his first application. The date of his actually taking the degree is uncertain ; he probably applied for it in connection with his appointment as master of his college (1589). 1 But his own amiable and devout 'His exercises were — (1) "Concio ad clerum" in Prov. xx. 25, translated an 1 published in 1<>46 under the title. Sacrilege a Snare. BIKTH AND EDUCATION 19 character won him many friends and allies, while his solid learning made him a formidable antagonist. Whitgift, at least, was able to measure his worth, and some time after his succession to the primacy appointed Andrewes to be one of his chaplains (about 1586). This event, and the preferment which followed, loosened to some extent the ties which bound Andrewes to Cambridge, and brought him on to a more public stage. He broke his residence in 1586 by a tour in the north in the company of the earl of Huntingdon, president of the North, during which he found scope for his preaching powers, and used the opportunity — not with- out success — for privately reconciling recusant priests and others to the English Church. This was the beginning of a wider and more varied activity. Through the influence of Sir Francis Walsingham, who had interested himself in Andrewes from his boyhood, and was anxious, in spite of some disagreement with his views, to find a conspicuous sphere for his abilities, he was appointed in 1588 to the vicarage of S. Giles', Cripplegate. In the following year he was assigned a prebendal stall at Southwell ; and shortly afterwards (May 1589) the stall of S. Pancras in S. Paul's Cathedral. It happened that this stall was that of confessioner or penitentiary; 1 and, while Andrewes held the office, he not only lectured regularly on some portion (2) " Theologioa Determinatio de Deoimis," translated and published in 1647 ; see Bliss, p. viii. 1 "Thomas Kempe, bishop of London, founded a chantry in 5 Edward IV. for one priest who should be confessor to the bishop of London ; from the time of the endowmont of this chantry, and its annexation to the stall of S. Pancras, the prebendary, on admission to this stall, was admitted also to the office of penitentiary " (Bliss, p. vii.). 20 BISHOP ANDEEWES of Scripture, 1 but he endeavoured to turn to good account the traditions of the stall. It was his custom at stated times in Lent to walk in one of the aisles of the cathedral for the purpose of giving spiritual counsel and comfort to any who might seek it. This perhaps unpopular 2 determination to revive the neglected but important functions of his office is highly honourable to Andrewes. The work was, however, in itself con- genial to him, and there was something about him that could not fail to command confidence and esteem. At a time when self-seeking, luxury, and ambition were com- mon among the more dignified clergy, men were touched and attracted by the simplicity of the laborious and ascetic life which had now become habitual to Andrewes. 3 During his tenure of the canonry in S. Paul's (1591), he, together with the dean, Nowell, was appointed by the archbishop to visit and confer with John Udall, who was lying under sentence of death for a seditious libel on the queen and the bishops. After " many dis- courses " with Andrewes, Udall still persisted in his opinions, but was touched by the forbearance and gentleness of his visitor. He told him " the oftener he came the welcomer he should be," but he refused to make the required submission ; and eventually, though 1 "He lectured on Gen. i.-iv. three times every week during term time, some of the later ones being delivered at S. Giles', Cripplegate. These lectures were published in 1657, with the title Apospasmatia Sacra" (Bliss, p. lxsvii.). 2 The office of penitentiary was ' ' a place notoriously abused in time of popery by their tyranny and superstition, but now of late by a contrary extreme too much forgotten and neglected. " (Harrington, who implies that the cry of "Popery" was sometimes raised against Andrewes' conduct.) 3 He suffered from overwork, and at one time "beeame so infirm that his friends despaired of his life " (Isaacson). BIRTH AND EDUCATION 21 reprieved at Whitgift's request, died in prison. During the same year, Andrewes took part in a similar mission to the fanatical Henry Barrow, 1 but with equal want of success. In August 1589, on the death of William Fulke, Andrewes was recalled to Cambridge as master of his college. He cannot have resided continuously during his tenure of this office (1589-1605), but he found time for the work of practical administration, and his career at Pembroke was marked by a pubhc-spirited disregard of his own personal interests. " He ever spent more upon it than he received by it." In fact, he found his society in debt, and left it with a reserve fund of £1000. Little more needs to be said of Andrewes' Cambridge life. It was not till 1596 that the school of thought to which he belonged made its power felt. In the year 1595, distinct signs appeared in Cambridge of a revolt against the Calvinist theology. William Barrett, a fellow of Caius College, in a Latin sermon preached for the degree of B.D., had handled severely the prevailing doctrines as to assurance and the inde- fectibility of faith. The dominant party was alarmed and indignant, and the regius professor of divinity, Dr. Whitaker, a man of great learning and zeal, drew up nine theses which he presented to the primate, and which became famous as the Lambeth articles. A reluctant retractation of his opinions was forced from Barrett, who, within a short time, quitted the university and became a Bomanist. Meanwhile, a higher authority, Peter Baro, who for twenty years had been Lady Margaret professor, gave his sanction 1 For Androwes' view of the Independents, see Sermons, vol. iv. p. 12. 22 BISHOP ANDREWES to the reactionary movement, and even ventured, in a sermon at S. Mary's, to pass some criticisms on the nine articles. He was cited before the Heads of colleges to answer for his temerity, but the proceed- ings failed, chiefly, it is thought, owing to the fact that Andrewes and other influential men, such as Overall, who succeeded Whitaker in the professor- ship, were known to be in sympathy with Baro's views. The incident is important, as being one of several symptoms of a reaction against a system which was fast becoming a tyranny. Andrewes' own opinion of the Lambeth articles was set down in a paper afterwards published. It must have required some courage in one of the archbishop's chaplains to dispute his theology. In this paper, as might have been anticipated in the case of so reverent and devout a mind, there is little positive contribution to the subject. Andrewes begins by expressing a sense of the greatness of the mystery under discussion : he declares that since his ordination he had carefully refrained from disputing upon these speculative points. 1 He would advise that silence should be enjoined on both sides. What follows is a temperate and free criticism of the articles, sufficiently strong, as we might think, coming from such a man, to deter the archbishop from further proceedings. But Whitgift had already discovered that he was acting in opposi- 1 "Ego certe, ingenue fateor, secutus sum Augustini consilium; mysteria haec quao apcrire non possum, clausa miratus sum, et proinde, per lios sedecim annos, ex quo presbyter sum factus, me neque publice neque privatim vel disputasse de eis vel pro concione tractasse ; etiam nunc quoque malle de eis audire quam dicere . . . Suaderem, si fieri possit, at indicerctur utrinque silentium " {Pattern of Calcchistical Doctrine, etc., p. 294, Oxford). BIRTH AND EDUCATION 23 tion to the queen's wish, and indeed it was sufficiently evident that the religious mind of the country was disinclined to go further in a Calvinistic direction. The dislike of excessive definition, which Andrewes expresses so forcibly in his anti-Koman treatises, was a rooted characteristic of his mind. In connection with such a subject as the divine decrees and man's relation to them, exact formulation of doctrine would seem to him specially disastrous in tendency. Whit- gift appears to have resisted strong pressure when he contented himself with giving Baro a caution to keep silence on the disputed points ; 1 and in taking no further step, he may be thought to have deferred to Andrewes' advice. 1 To the same period, apparently, belongs the Censure of the Censure upon Barrett, which is concerned with the doctrine of Assurance. It is on the whole warmly in favour of Barrett, and supports his conten- tion that " no man ought to be absolutely secure as to his salvation " by quotations from the fathers — some of which almost in terms anticipate what Barrett had actually said. The authenticity of this paper is questioned by Mr. Russell, Memoirs of the Life and Works of Bishop Andrewes, ch. iv. , but not on sufficient grounds. CHAPTEE II THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH Lancelot Andeewes had now advanced on to a wider stage. His appointment to be one of Queen Elizabeth's chaplains (about 1586) 1 introduced him into the life of the court, and brought him into close relations with those who were responsible for the guidance of the English Church during that critical time. The task to which Elizabeth had devoted herself, the consolidation of the English Church, was one forced upon her not by any strong convictions of her own, but mainly by the pressure of political difficulties. This is obviously true of her struggle with the papists. The twenty years intervening between the foundation of the Douay Seminary and the destruction of the Armada had completed the rupture between England and Eome. The Bull of Pius V., deposing Elizabeth and absolving her subjects from allegiance (February 1570), left the English government no alternative but to wage uncompromising war with the secret and declared foes of religious and civil liberty. The events of those twenty years — the Bull of 1570, the massacre of August 1572, the Jesuit mission in 1580, which was part of an organised revivalist movement insti- 1 His first sermon before the queen was preached probably on Ash Wednesday, 1590. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 25 gated by Gregory XIII., the schemes of the Guises to bring about a rising in Scotland, the assassination of the Prince of Orange in 1584, the repeated conspir- acies against Elizabeth's life — combined to produce in England not only a passionate feeling of loyalty to the queen, but a firm conviction in thoughtful minds that Eome was a perfectly unscrupulous enemy of national independence, and was ready to attempt anything in the prosecution of her aims. 1 Indeed, the political history of Elizabeth's reign justifies in a measure the intense moral aversion to the Eomish system that meets us in the Church writers of the period, and explains, partially at least, the violence of the Puritan reaction. The English Church, with its retention of episcopacy and ancient liturgical forms, was hateful to the Puritan party, as holding to a system tainted by popish leaven. At the same time, the bishops appeared to be little more than govern- ment officers, enforcing by legal powers a conformity which was odious to multitudes of earnest men, and which seemed opposed by its very nature to the essential spirit of religion. The appointment of Whitgift to the primacy (1583) marks the point at which the principles of resolute government, with its natural consequences, were put in force. There was, as we have seen, a political danger in the distracted state of religious parties, at a time when Spain, backed by the power of Eome, was threatening the country. 2 But there was also a reli- 1 "Attendite ad transfugas illos, Rornani Lupi emissarios, professos et regni et religionis hostes, tubas et faces et flabella seditionum, per triginta jam annos " (Conv. Scrm. Opusc. Postkuma, p. 47). 2 Cp. Wakeman, The Church and the Puritans, p. 50. 26 BISHOP ANDREWES gious question involved of immense importance. Was the English Church to sink under pressure to the level of a presbyterian sect, or was she to retain episcopacy as a pledge of her continuity with the pre-Eeformation Church ? From 1580 onwards, the Puritan party, which now included the most able and intellectual among the younger clergy, made a systematic effort to secure the enforcement of the Calvinistic discipline. Their weapons were mainly two : internal organisation of the disaffected clergy, and representations to Parliament, with which throughout the struggle they maintained close connections. In the first of these objects they were thwarted by the energy and vigilance of the primate; in the second, by the personal influence of the queen, which kept in check the puritanical leanings of the House of Commons. There was a third weapon — that employed by Nonconformists, who regarded the Church system as incompatible with the sacred rights of conscience — namely, a series of libellous attacks upon the bishops. This weapon was used with such unscrupulous violence that it produced a reaction. The libels themselves were not only furious in their foul and unmeasured invective, but were felt to be symptoms of political disaffection. Bishop Cooper of Winchester, himself unsparingly attacked by the libellers, in his Admonition to the People of England, betrays the fears of grave and sober men. " If this outragious spirit of boldenesse be not stopped speedily, I feare he will prove himselfe to bee not only mar- prelate, but mar-prince, mar-state, mar-lawe, mar- magistrate, and all together, until he bring it to an anabaptisticall equalitie and communitie." 1 1 Moore, History of Oie Reformation, p. 293. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 27 To the period when these disorders had reached their height belongs Bacon's Advertisement touching the Controversies of the Church of England. 1 It is valuable as the judgment of one who stood apart from the contest, and could estimate better than the bishops, who were absorbed in the invidious work of repression, the real lesson of the Mar-prelate libels. It was intended to be a word " spoken in season," to warn the Church of her dangers, and guide her into a wiser course. Bacon appears " in the character, so often wanted, but so seldom welcome, of a peacemaker who has to remonstrate against the conduct of both sides." 2 What Bacon censures in the defensive pamphlets of churchmen is the tendency to underrate the religious needs and principles which might be discerned beneath the scurrility of the libels ; and also the spirit of panic which had found expression even in Cooper's Admoni- tion. We shall see that Andrewes' own view of the struggle was almost identical with Bacon's. To him it appeared that the main duty of the Church was an internal reformation. Meanwhile the immediate effect of the troubles was twofold. On the one hand, the Church was vindicated from the charge of intolerance. It was clear that the Puritan party aimed at nothing less than forcing presbyterianism on the country. Cartwright, indeed, confessed as much. " I deny that upon repentance there ought to follow any pardon of death. . . . Heretics ought to be put to death now. If this be bloody and extreme, I am contented to be so counted with the Holy Ghost." A sober historian goes 1 Apparently it was intended for circulation in manuscript. It was written in 1589, and first priuted in 1640. 2 Bacon's Works, Ellis & Spcdding, vol. viii. p. 73. 28 BISHOP ANDREWES so far as to say, " With the despotism of a Hildebrand, Cartwright combined the cruelty of a Torquemada. Not only was presbyterianism to be established as the one legal form of church government, but all other forms, episcopalian and separatist, were to be ruth- lessly put down." 1 Another consequence of the attack on the hierarchy was that it led to a new and truer view of episcopacy. "The early Elizabethan churchmen regarded episco- pacy mainly as a safeguard against disintegration," says Mr. Moore. 2 They defended the church system on Erastian grounds, as if the will of the sovereign were the real fountainhead of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Systematic vindication of episcopacy on scriptural and historical grounds is a feature of the later years of the sixteenth century. Bishop Bancroft, in 1589, boldly preached at Paul's Cross on the divine right of bishops, and lifted the controversy to a higher level. In 1591 appeared Saravia's Be diversis minis- trorum gradibus ; in 1593, bishop Thomas Bilson's Perpetual Government of Christ's Church. Andrewes, unlike Hooker, took little direct part in the controversy with the Puritans. There are but few allusions in his sermons to the main points in 1 Green, Slwrt History, p. 456 ; cp. Moore, p. 289. "They aimed at nothing less than what they afterwards carried : not a mere change in this or that point, but a substitution of an entirely new idea of the Church for that on which the Reformation in England had been based. Toleration was then on all sides not merely unacknowledged, but condemned. The demand of the Puritan was that nothing should be allowed but Puritanism " (Church, Masters in English Theology, p. 88). On the other hand, Beesly, Queen Elizabeth, p. 228, calls Whitgift "an Inquisitor as strenuous and merciless as Torquemada." 2 History of the Reformation, p. 295 ; cp. Perry, English Church History, 2nd Period, p. 342. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 29 dispute. " He looked," says dean Church, " for pro- ducing his effect on the tone and course of religious thought in England, not by arguing, but by presenting uncontroversially the reasonableness and the attrac- tions of a larger, freer, nobler, more generous . . . system of teaching." 1 There is, however, a passage of a sermon preached at S. Giles', Cripplegate (January 9, 1592), "On the Worshipping of Imaginations," in which he dismisses the presbyterian theory with scant respect. " And this (episcopal government), till of late, was thought the form of fellowship, and never other imagined. But not long since some have fancied another, that should consist of lay elders, pastors, and doctors, and whether of deacons, too, is not fully agreed yet Which device is pressed now upon our Church, not as a form of more convenience than that it hath, but as one absolutely necessary, and of our Saviour Christ's own only institution, which maketh it the less sufferable." 2 He points naturally to the early evidence of episcopal government, but for the most part con- tents himself with exposing the pretension of the Puritan view to a scriptural foundation. This subject he treats in a more formal and argu- mentative manner in his letters to du Moulin. There was nothing to be gained by systematic discussion with the English Puritans on subjects connected with church government. The differences were too radical, the fundamental principles too much in dispute, to make controversy a hopeful task. Andrewes, indeed, only now and then, by a satirical touch, shows his sense of the prevalence and influence of Puritan ideas. 1 Masters in English Tlicoloijy, p. 94. 2 Sermons, vol. v. p. 64. 30 BISHOP ANDREWES Thus be alludes to the passion for sermons : " Hearing of the word is growing into such request, as it hath got the start of all the rest of the parts of God's service. . . . This way our age is affected, now is the world of sermons. For proof whereof, as if all godliness were in the hearing of sermons, take this very place, the house of God which now you see meetly well replenished ; come at any other parts of the service of God (parts, I say, of the service of God no less than this), you shall find it in a manner desolate. And not here only, but go any whither else ye shall find even the like." 1 Men of the stamp of Andrewes, however, men of really spiritual character, capable of appreciating the deepest moral needs and yearnings of their age, in spite of the fact that they were sometimes expressed in such questionable and revolutionary shapes, were keenly alive to the dangers of the Church. For the most part, energy of character, moral enthusiasm, pure zeal for religion, were to be found on the Puritan side. The Church was too much immersed in the disci- plinary struggle to cultivate her own spiritual life or to reform her abuses. 2 The standard of spirituality was low ; the clergy were many of them self-seeking, ignorant, sordid, idle, worldly, supinely enjoying the endowments and privileges of the established system. The Puritan attack was, after all, dictated by " a consciousness of moral superiority," 3 and the " hatred of a professional religion." Indeed, it may be said 1 Sermon on S. James i. 22 [vol. v. pp. 186, 187] ; cp. Hooker, Bk. v. cc. 21, 22. ' Cf. Church, Masters in English Theology, etc. , pp. 98, 99. 1 Waksman, Thx Church and the Puritans, p. 56. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 31 that the curse of the English Church at this time was iudifferentism ; the zealots were to be found in the ranks of her enemies. Logic, system, definite purpose, strong character, readiness of resource, earnestness and enthusiasm, — these were to be found in one or other of the hostile camps. The Church of England held as yet somewhat loosely and with hesitation to the via media. She seemed to be the natural refuge for the lukewarm, the indolent, and the tem- porising spirits among the clergy. The cautious and tentative attitude forced upon her by the circum- stances of the time was one that repressed ardour while it invited attack. A minimum of ceremonial was all that could be insisted on from a clergy so largely disaffected. The leading principles, indeed, of the Reformation movement in the English Church were already clear : the appeal to antiquity, the retention of the ancient orders, the claim to hold what was admittedly catholic in doctrine. But the demoralising and depressing effect of the recent convulsions was already apparent, in the low standard and disorganised condition of the clergy ; nor were there as yet among the bishops men who could be regarded as spiritual leaders. Many were in sympathy with the views and practices they were required to repress ; some of them were half-hearted, willing to conform, but not at all anxious to insist on conformity. They did not at present sufficiently comprehend the merits of the system they were upholding. The main function of the Church as it must have appeared to a conscientious Nonconformist of that day, was the enforcement of law and the repression of zeal. It was clear that " in the England ■11 BISHOP ANDREWES of Elizabeth there was little room for the manifesta- tion of any religious enthusiasm whatsoever." 1 We have evidence that Andrewes was deeply- impressed with a sense of the Church's shortcomings, in his Latin sermon preached in S. Paul's at the opening of Convocation, February 20 1593. 2 It is penetrated by a tone of indignant sorrow at the lax and corrupt state of clerical discipline, and the dis- orders which were turning " our Sion into Babel." He reproves the self - seeking temper which was passively indifferent to the perils and distresses of the Church. He describes the clergy as sitting still, half asleep, lukewarm, tongue-tied, while the tares of strange and portentous error are being sown broadcast, and have reached in some cases their full growth unheeded. He dwells with outspoken sternness on the notorious deficiencies of the men admitted to Holy Orders, and the selfish impoverishment of benefices by their holders. Taking as his text Acts xx. 28, "Take heed to yourselves," etc., Andrewes tells the assembled clergy that they certainly obey the precept. " You do, indeed, take heed to yourselves ; who denies it ? It is the common report that you so do. You take heed verily to the enriching of your sons and daughters. You are so careful for your heirs that you forget your successors." The sermon is full of epigrams, which lose by translation : " Hoclie mvlti cjnscopi malunt esse morosi quam bene morati . . . Majorem fere rationem hdbemus nummorum quam morum." " At the present day," he declares, " it is re- 1 Wakeman, ut sup. p. 49. 2 Opusc. Posthuma, p. 29 foil. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 33 ported of us that we are more concerned with shearing than shepherding the sheep." 1 It is important to notice what Andrewes conceived to be the pressing needs of the Church at the time when this sermon was preached. They may be reckoned as three : — First, definite doctrinal teaching. " Take heed to yourselves and to the doctrine," is his message. The teaching office, he insists, belongs specially to the bishops. " To you," he tells them, belongs primarily and chiefly, " the care of doctrine. It is your deposit ; to you has been committed the duty of charging men that they teach no other doctrine ; of restraining them if they do so." The office of preaching has been degraded by abuse ; ignorance, folly, and fanaticism have usurped the pulpit, and turned the Church into a very barber's shop. 2 Andrewes accordingly insists on the need of wise selection, elaborate pains, and right division of subjects (opOorofielv) in teaching. His own example best illustrates the tone and method of preaching which he commends. Prompt attention, he urges, should be directed to doctrine ; otherwise, there will soon be no authoritative doctrine left to be attended to. Next, he pleads for a higher standard of personal life among the clergy. He plays on the word " episcopi " ; the word may be taken actively or passively : actively, the clergy are " overseers " ; in the passive sense they are " gazed upon," 3 they are 1 "Ut fisco potius quam Christo consulatur, attonsioni gregis potius quam attentioni." 2 "Ecclesia in tonstrinam versa est." 3 ' ' Episcopi estis active, id est, inspectoves ; passive, id est, spcctacula. " 34 BISHOP AXDREWES " spectacles to men " ; all eyes are fixed on them. Laxity, vice, self - indulgence, levity in them are bewailed in Sion, and cause exultation in Ascalon. He meutions definite kinds of misdemeanour which seem to have been common among the clergy. A prophet, he declares, might well say to the clergy what the satirist said to his fellow- citizens — "Quserenda pecunia primnm, Virtus post nummos. " 1 " With us it is something if the Church enjoys, I say not the second or third, but even the last place, in our thoughts." He points to the lawlessness, reck- lessness, profanity, and atheism which had resulted from the relaxation of the old beliefs and discipline of the Church ; the confusions within the Church herself, the ceaseless intrigues of Eome, the fanaticism of the sectaries, the irreverence and frowardness of the common people : in worship, " no kneeling, no sign of reverence while the prayers are going on ; the same gestures and behaviour in church service as in the playhouse." Thirdly, he rebukes the want of a true pastoral spirit in the clergy. How eager they are in pursuing their own private interests ; how remiss and slack in care for the flock, how narrow-minded and short- sighted in their estimate of the sphere of labour committed to them ! He speaks even in a menacing tone of the certain results of continued neglect : " If you attend not to the flock, the flock will attend to you. An unnatural state of things, portentous indeed, that this should come to pass : but you have already experienced it to some extent; 2 while you are neglect- 1 Horat. EpiM. i. 1. 53. 2 In the Mar-Prelate libels. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 35 ful of the people, be sure that the people has its eye on you." One passage of significant warning is not without present importance : "I am sure you have observed that this establishment (status) and order of ours derives its prestige and effectiveness from the con- sciences of men, and unless it be vouchsafed us to commend it to them in the sight of God, and to win for it some inward reverence in them, ... in vain will any law favour or defend us. ... If our doctrine is a derision and our life a scandal, it may be that not in a moment, not in the twinkling of an eye, but gradually, your church establishment will grow old, decay, and tend to vanish away, because of the weak- ness and unprofitableness thereof." 1 "We are struck by the very similar tone of the following passage from Bacon's Advertisement: — " Concerning the occasion of controversies, it cannot be denied but that the imperfections in the con- versation and government of those which have chief place in the Church, have ever been principal causes and motives of schisms and divisions. For, whilst the bishops and governors of the Church continue full of knowledge and good works ; whilst they feed the flock, indeed ; whilst they deal with the secular states in all liberty and resolution, according to the majesty of their calling, and the precious care of souls imposed upon them ; so long the Church is situate as it were upon a hill ; no man maketh question of it, or seeketh to depart from it. But when these virtues in the fathers and leaders of the Church have lost their light, and that they wax worldly, lovers of themselves, 1 OpilSC. Posthuma, p. 39 ; cp. Strype, IVhitqift, ii. p. 142. 36 BISHOP ANDREWES and pleasers of men, then men begin to grope for the Church as in the dark ; they are in doubt whether they be the successors of the apostles or of the Pharisees ; yea, howsoever they sit in Moses' chair, yet they can never speak tanquam auctoritatcm habentes, as having authority, because they have lost their reputation in the consciences of men, by declining their steps from the way which they trace out to others." 1 It is interesting to observe that Andrewes and Bacon were at one in their sense of the real peril that threatened the Church — the violent reaction of outraged conscience. The closing years of Elizabeth's reign were marked by a decided advance towards a more settled state of things. The work of Parker and Whitgift was beginning to tell; there was a growing advance towards uniformity ; and the efforts of the bishops had enforced a sober standard of discipline and doctrine, which imperceptibly exercised an educational effect on the rising generation. Time and firm policy had practically established the English liturgy in the affections of the people. A school of thought had arisen at Cambridge moulded by the teaching of Baro, and preferring the Fathers and Schoolmen to the works of Calvin. Of this school Andrewes was at Queen Elizabeth's death the most prominent repre- sentative, a fact of which the queen herself was probably sensible. She received Andrewes with marked favour, and enjoyed his sermons. 2 She bestowed on him a stall at Westminster in 1597, and 1 Works, Ellis & Spedding, vol. viii. p. 80. 2 His first sermon before the court, on Ps. lxxviii. 34, was preached on Ash Wednesday, 1590. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 37 four years later raised him to the deanery. More than once during this period he was offered a bishopric, but with noble independence declined the promotion, on the ground of unwillingness to accept the inevitable condition, namely, alienation for the benefit of the crown of a part of the revenues of the see. 1 It had been Elizabeth's policy systematically to leave sees vacant, in order to enjoy the revenues. Parker had raised his voice in vain ; but Andrewes' conduct was prob- ably a more effectual protest. He held the deanery five years — a period marked by only two important events. On March 24, 1603, Elizabeth died, and was buried in the abbey. As dean, Andrewes preached the funeral sermon. He also assisted at the coronation of her successor on July 25 — this being the first occasion when the Anglican rite was used. 2 The only other incident of note was the meeting — probably in the deanery — of the Westminster Com- mittee for preparing the Authorised Version of James I. To Andrewes' company was assigned the translation of the Pentateuch and of the historical books, Joshua to 2 Kings. He seems during this time to have drawn close the bonds of connection between the abbey and the school, 3 and himself took a warm and practical interest in the studies and discipline of the boys. 4 When he vacated the deanery, " he left it . . . a place truly exemplarily collegiate in all respects 1 Perry, English Church History, 2nd Period, pp. 272, 322. In his Funeral Sermon, bishop Buckeridge says : " If it please you I will make his answer for him, Nolo episcopari ; and I will not be made a bishop, because I will not alienate bishop's lands." ■ See Stanley, History of Westminster Abbey, pp. 88, 180, who notices the changes in ritual. 3 Ibid. p. 486. 4 See below, p. 95. 38 BISHOP ANDRE WES both within and without, free from debts and arrear- ages, from encroachments and evil customs ; the school-boys, in the four years he stayed there, being much improved, not by his care and oversight only, but by his own personal and other labours also with them." 1 Such was the position of Andrewes at the opening of the seventeenth century. He had qualified himself, so far as diligence, learning, and experience went, for a leadership for which his studious habits and retiring nature made him disinclined. It was natural that Elizabeth's successor should look to him as one exceptionally fitted, by his gifts of learning and char- acter, to assist in repelling the attacks by which the Church and Throne were soon to be assailed. In one of his sermons, preached before the queen (1594), occurs a passage which gives Andrewes' own view of Elizabeth's work for the Church. It contains something deeper than a courtly compliment: it is the utterance of a thoughtful mind and a full heart. He says of Elizabeth that she, " like Zerubbabel, first by princely magnanimity laid the corner-stone in a troublesome time ; and since, by heroical constancy, through many both alluring proffers and threatening dangers, hath brought forth the head stone also with the prophet's acclamation, ' Grace, grace unto it.' . No terrors, no enticement, no care of her safety hath removed her from her steadfastness ; but with a fixed 1 Isaacson, p. xviii. "Among the Westminster scholars at this time were Hacket, the biographer of archbishop Williams, and Brian Dnppa, afterwards bishop of Chichester, who learned Hebrew from Andrewes" (Bliss). George Herbert also entered the school before the dean's removal. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND UNDER ELIZABETH 39 eye, with straight steps, with a resolute mind, hath entered herself, and brought us into Zoar. It is a little one, but therein our souls shall live ; and we are in safety, all the cities of the plain being in com- bustion round about us." 1 The queen's policy of repression failed indeed to accomplish all that its supporters hoped and intended. It left to the English Church a legacy of trouble, fear, and weakness ; it roused a spirit of implacable animosity to the Anglican system, and left behind it bitter memories which were destined to bear fruit in the next century. One thing only it had accomplished. It had handed on unimpaired to a wiser and calmer generation of churchmen the essential framework of ecclesiastical order and tradition by which the continuity of the English Church was to be secured. 2 1 Lent Sermon, no. IV. vol. ii. p. 76. 2 Cf. Wakeman, The Church awl the Puritans, p. 55. CHAPTER III AND RE WES AT THE COURT OF JAMES I The condition, prospects, and policy of the English Church under the first of the Stuarts are not by any means pleasing to contemplate. The most notable feature of the time is the close alliance between the Church and the monarchy. This alliance involved the linking of the Church's fortunes to a system of arbitrary government, of which the rising spirit of English liberty was ere long to make short and decisive work. Within fifty years both monarchy and Church were involved in a common catastrophe. It is worth while, as explaining the position of men like Andrewes, to examine a little more closely the nature of this fateful union. To James the maintenance of the church system in England was a point of political and personal expediency. In the institution of episcopacy, which was menaced by Puritanism, he saw the chief safeguard of his throne. His eyes were opened to the real tendency of the presbyterian claim by the Hampton Court Conference in January 1604 — a conference in which Andrewes took part. The suggestion of the Puritan, Dr. Reynolds, that the prophesyings might be revived under due regulation by a council of 40 AT THE COURT OF JAMES I 41 presbyters assisting the bishop, excited James' fears and roused his temper. He summarily broke up the conference, and thenceforth attached himself entirely to the Church cause. To him " no bishop, no king," was henceforth an axiom of government. His practical experience of the presbyterian system had taught him to see in it instinctively the enemy of absolutism. 1 The bishops on their part, headed by "Whitgift, were encouraged by the apparent success of the system of compulsion. They welcomed, no doubt with undue effusiveness, a monarch who regarded the cause of their order as identical with his own ; but they believed sincerely enough that the only hope of the Church lay in the enforcement of uniformity. It is this belief that justifies the theologians of this period in their mistaken and excessive deference to royalty. In preaching the doctrine of divine right and the duty of submission, they felt that they were strengthening their own position as champions of historical Christianity. By the Reformation, it has been said, " the principle of authority had been most widely shaken,"" 2 and the exaggerated idea of monarchical rights was a substitute for the religious authority of the pope. The personal weaknesses of the Stuarts discredited that authority and rendered it odious to their subjects, but the appeal to the crown appeared at the time the natural safe- guard of church order and discipline. Something, too, must be allowed for the new position in which the 1 Cp. Green, Short History, p. 467. Hallam's account (Constitu- tional History, ch. vi.) of the conference is unduly prejudiced. He speaks of the "abject baseness of the bishops, mixed, according to the custom of servile natures, with insolence towards their opponents." 2 Church, Masters in English Theology, p. 83. 42 BISHOP ANDREWES bishops found themselves at court. Elizabeth had snubbed them, and ordered them about like servants. Under J ames they were raised to a position of dignity ; they were the equals of statesmen and courtiers ; they were trusted advisers of the crown. We must also recollect that many of the bishops must have genuinely admired the attainments of the new monarch. His scholarship was respectable ; his knowledge of affairs considerable ; he was a conversationalist of repute ; to crown all, he was an author. He talked well, and listened well. Indeed, his was the only court where " the profession of learned men was in any degree appreciated." He " loved speculative discourse upon moral and political subjects." 1 Casaubon found him " greater than report — an excellent monarch, who is really more instructed than most people give him credit for." 2 On the sober mind of Bishop Hall he pro- duced the same impression : " A king higher than other princes by the head and shoulders, who in learning and knowledge exceedeth all his one hundred and five predecessors." 3 Thus, on the whole, there is much to explain and palliate the servility of the bishops ; it is easy to censure their failure to comprehend or sympathise with the growing popular movement. But they do 1 Pattison, Life of Casaubon, pp. 295, 314. 2 Ibid. pp. 320, 321. Casaubon gives an account of his being present early in 1011 at court (prandenti affui) ; the king was examining the notes attached to the Douay version, which had lately appeared, all supper time with Andrewes, Montague, and another prelate (Bliss, p. Ixxx.). Andrewes seems to have been greatly attached to the king ; e.g. in Ep. I ad P. Moliii. he says the king has just recovered from an illness, ' ' sed respexit nos Deus ; atque ilium nobis, ac in illo nos nobis reddidit." 3 Lewis, Lift of Bishop Hall, p. 108. AT THE COURT OF JAWS I 43 not appear to have been more blind than their con- temporaries. " It needed a prophet to tell that this close alliance between episcopacy and monarchy, between episcopal discipline and arbitrary government, was the beginning of a rift between the Church and the people." 1 The policy of the bishops was already fixed and traditional when Andrewes appeared at the court of King James. For him it would only have attractions as a sphere in which learning met with a genuine and appreciative welcome. Theological discussion was indeed the passion of the age, and Andrewes was marked out by circumstances as the foremost English theologian of his day. Happily, his character was one capable of standing the ordeal of a life at court. His habitual attendance on the king never robbed him of his quiet simplicity, his gentleness, his independence, his large devotion to learning. We have already noticed that Andrewes was a member of the conference at Hampton Court. He took no part in the discussion, beyond pointing out to the king some patristic authority for the use of the cross in baptism ; but he was, as a matter of course, appointed to serve on the commission for carrying into effect the main point conceded to the Puritans — the new translation of the Bible. Within two years his reluctance to accept a bishopric was overcome : he accepted the see of Chichester, and was con- secrated November 3, 1605, in the chapel at Lambeth by the archbishop (Bancroft) and four assistant bishops. At the same time the dignity of Lord Almoner was conferred on him, together with certain privileges that greatly augmented the value of the office. His eleva- 1 Wakeman, p. 74. 44 BISHOP ANDREWES tion terminated his connection with Pembroke Hall, of which he resigned the mastership on November 5, after about sixteen years' tenure. At this point some description is needed of the new sphere in which Andrewes was now called to move. The materials for a sketch of James L are ample ; indeed, there are few monarchs of whose peculiarities of character and policy we have such minute informa- tion. The situation of James resembled that of Elizabeth specially in one particular, namely, that he had been placed by force of circumstances at the head of the protestant powers of Europe, and was therefore a conspicuous object of Eoman controversial hostility. He had been brought up in the reformed doctrines, but his experience in Scotland of the stubborn and violent temper of presbyterianism had taught him to suspect, and finally to abhor, that system. " Take heed, my son, to such Puritans," he writes in Basilikon Down, " very pests in the Church and commonweal, whom no deserts can oblige, neither oaths or promises bind, breathing nothing but seditions and calumnies, aspiring without measure, railing without reason, and making their own imaginations (without any warrant of the Word) the square of their conscience." 1 What James either could not or would not understand was that in England, at any rate, Puritanism was allied with genuine zeal for the liberties of the people. The majority of the House of Commons and the surviving ministers of the queen were men of Puritan sym- pathies. The king was, in fact, never really in touch with his subjects. He soon betrayed the mingled levity, coarseness, vanity, pedantry, and indiscretion of his 1 Aikin, Memoirs of the Court of King James I. vol. i. p. 36. AT THE COURT OF JAMES I 45 character. It was noted that in his very first con- versation with the French ambassador he talked freely of his matrimonial projects for his children, and sneered at Elizabeth. His chief passion was for amusement, and to hunting especially he devoted many weeks in the year. The court soon became notorious for its senseless idleness and profusion. Large sums were squandered on festivities, revels, and masques, in which the queen with her ladies took prominent and undignified part. Low and brutal sports, such as cockfighting, which Elizabeth had prohibited, were revived. In a letter of the time we have a clever sketch of the arts most likely to win royal favour. " He (the king) doth wondrously covet learned discourse. He doth admire good fashion in clothes, and pray you to give good heed hereunto. The king is nicely heed- ful of such points, and dwelleth on good looks and handsome accoutrements .... In your discourse you must not dwell too long on any one subject, and touch but lightly on religion. Do not yourself say ' this is good or bad/ but ' if it were your majesty's good opinion I myself should think so and so.' . . . Find out a clue to guide you to the heart and most delightful subject of his mind. I will advise one thing : the roan jennet whereon the king rideth every day must not be forgotten to be praised, etc." 1 We can readily understand the ease with which adventurers like Carr and Villiers, with their graceful manners, handsome faces, and obsequious tongues, secured the king's favour. But it was not only the promotion of favourites that scandalised serious men of 1 Court and Times of King James I. vol. i. p. 327. 46 BISHOP ANDREWES affairs. An utter dissoluteness was the prevailing feature of the court. " I will now in good sooth declare to you," writes Sir J. Harrington to a friend, " to you that will not blab — that the gunpowder fright is got out of all our heads, and we are going on here- abouts as if the devil was contriving that every man should blow himself up by wild riot, excess, and devastation of time and temperance." 1 An incongruous sphere as we might suppose for a devout prelate of ascetic life and retiring habits. And yet even Andrewes would occasionally find himself at home in a court which could display a widely different side. The king was a professed patron of learning. 2 Before his accession lie had corresponded with Casaubon, and had assured him that, " besides the care of the Church, it was his fixed resolve to encourage letters and learned men, as he considered them the strength and ornament of kingdoms." 3 But he devoted special attention to theology. He was " so fond of divinity that he cared very little to attend to any literary subject." 4 He read controversial treatises and pamphlets of the day ; he went out of his way to meddle in theological disputes, notably when he sent deputies to the Synod of Dort in 1618; he was interested in the question of a possible reunion of Christendom. Theology was, in fact, the passion of the age, in Europe generally, and not least in England. " The only reading," writes Casaubon, 5 " which flourishes here is theology. The educated 1 Aikin, vol. i. p. 281. 3 Pattison, Life of Casaubon, p. 295. 3 Ibid. p. 299. 4 Ibid. p. 323. 5 Ibid. p. 324. G. T. Voss writes to Andrewes (June 1623) in dis- paraging terras of his own studies (history, rhetoric, and chronology) : AT THE COUKT OF JAMES I 47 men in this part of the world contemn everything which does not bear upon theology." It was this common interest in theology that naturally drew together the king and the leading churchmen. Andrewes, doubtless, felt the attraction. He knew too well what learning meant to regard the king as a first-hand authority in sacred science, but he would feel the admiration for James that a student generally has for a versatile man of affairs — who not only makes some pretension to learning, but is also qualified by experience to pass shrewd judgments on men and things. It is only fair to remember this when we censure the excessive adulation that was customary in those days. 1 In fact, the fault of the clergy was due partly to a habit contracted during the late reign, partly to a genuine admiration of the king's qualities, partly to a sincere belief that majesty was sacred, 2 and that to royalty belonged a right divine. We can well conceive how perilous such a sphere would be to faithful churchmen ; how readily some at least among them might learn to acquiesce in vice, folly, and worldliness of tone ; how quickly they might lose any power of independent judgment. It is to be feared that there was some justice in a remark of Donne's : " The divines of these times are become mere "hoc stadium multum abest a sacrorum studiorum dignitate." In these days, he adds, " veneranda antiquitas vix ullos sui invenit amatores atque adeo solida eruditio non modo despicatui sed etiara odio est" [Ep. xxxvii.). 1 Laymen were sometimes disgusted by the courtly address of bishops. " A main cause of all the misery and mischief in our land is the fearfullest of all flattery of our prelates and clergy" {Court and Times of Kiny James I. vol. ii. p. 392). 2 The title " Sacred Majesty " is applied to Elizabeth in Sermon II. on Repentance (vol. i. p. 324). 48 BISHOP ANDREWES advocates, as though religion were a temporal inherit- ance ; . . . and herein are they likest advocates, that though they be fed by the way with dignities and other recompenses, yet that for which they plead is none of theirs. They write for religion without it." 1 Such was the condition of the court in which Andrewes was called to play his part. He was hence- forth in constant attendance on the king; and for about eighteen years preached regularly in the royal chapel, at least two or three times a year. It is some testimony to the existence of higher interests even in a worldly and corrupt court, that Andrewes was so acceptable as a preacher. " For seventeen years it was he who every Christmas Day expounded to the court of England the doctrine of the Incarnation ; for eighteen, on Easter Day, that of the Eesurrection ; for fifteen, on Whitsunday, that of the Holy Spirit ; for fourteen, in Lent, that of self-deniaL" 2 His influence over James was not without effect, at least on the king's outward deportmenf. James was totally lacking in dignity ; he habitually swore ; his wit was tasteless and sometimes coarse ; he resented contradiction ; his manners were awkward and un- gracious": but the serene simplicity and gravity of Andrewes is said to have kept him in restraint. The bishop's presence acted, in fact, as a check on the levity and indecencies of the court. In a sphere where churchmen were competing for notice and preferment, he remained unambitious, unobtrusive, unworldly : " going in and out as he did among the 1 Aikin, vol. i. p. 422. '- Dictionary of Xational Biography, s.v. Andrewes. AT THE COURT OF JAMES I 49 frivolous and grasping courtiers who gathered round the king, he seemed to live in a peculiar atmosphere of holiness. . . . His life was a devotional testimony against the Eoman dogmatism on the one side, and the Puritan dogmatism on the other." 1 So far as was consistent with his public duties, it was noticed that Andrewes avoided the court ; he shrank from the inconsistency of being at once the preacher of an austere religion, and a competitor for preferments and the honours of worldly station. One anecdote reveals his power of withstanding the corrupting influence of such a life. On one occasion, we are told, the king turned to Andrewes and Neale (bishop of Durham) as they stood behind his chair : " My lords, cannot I take my subjects' money when I want it without all this formality of Parliament ? " " God forbid, sir, but you should," was Neale's ready reply ; " you are the breath of our nostrils." Andrewes was silent, but on being pressed said quietly : " Sir, I think it is lawful for you to take my brother Neale's money, because he offers it." 2 We must be content with a rapid sketch of Andrewes' public career. In 1609 he was translated to Ely, and held that see for nine years ; but so marked was his influence, that it was confidently expected he would have been elevated to the primacy in succession to Bancroft (1610). Nine years later (1618) he was moved to Winchester, and appointed dean of the Chapel Eoyal, which post he held until his death in 1626. 3 1 Gardiner, History of England, vol. ii. p. 120. 2 This anecdote is recorded in Waller's Life; see Bliss, p. xii. 3 In this office he was immediately succeeded by Laud. 4 50 BISHOP ANDREWES Throughout his public life Andrewes was neces- sarily immersed in a wearisome round of secular business and engagements at court. In 1616 he became a privy councillor of England, and in 1617 of Scotland ; but it was remarked that he spoke little at the Board, and would " meddle little in civil and temporal affairs, being out of his profession and element." 1 He would say when he came to the council table, " Is there anything to be done to-day for the Church ? " If they answered " Yea," then he said, " I will stay ; " if " No," then he said, " I will be gone." He had not Laud's talent for the exercise of power. But he conscientiously discharged duties he could not escape ; attended the king on his progresses, and was present at functions of state, such as the creation of the Prince of Wales. 2 He sat on various commissions, not always concerned with ecclesiastical matters, and occasionally in the High Commission Court. With purely political affairs he concerned himself little, but in 1617 we find him signing a joint letter to the king on the retrenchment of his expenses. In 1621 he was one of the peers who waited on the disgraced chancellor (Bacon) to ascertain his acknowledgment of the confession lodged in his name with the House of Lords, and a few days later was present at the delivery of the great seal to Williams, dean of Westminster. We know nothing of Andrewes' inner thoughts of Bacon's fall ; but to the public shock and scandal must have been added the pain which only an 1 Buckeridge, Funeral Sermon. 2 Sucli a "creation" took place twice in Andrewes' lifetime: in 1610 (Prince Henry), and in 1616 (Prince Charles). AT THE COUET OF JAMES I 51 intimate friend of Bacon and a sincere admirer of his genius could experience. In February 1G23 he served on a commission of grievances, and on July 20 of the same year was present at the ceremony of the king's solemn assent to the articles of the Spanish match 1 — a treaty which so soon fell to the ground. Whatever may have been the line publicly adopted by the bishops, there is no doubt they were much con- cerned as to the projected alliance of Prince Charles with the Spanish princess. This is clear from the well-known statement of Matthew Wren (afterwards bishop of Ely), who in 1623 returned with Charles and Buckingham from Spain, having accompanied them as chaplain to the prince. Wren's account is as follows. He had recently returned to London, when he received a sudden and urgent request from bishop Andrewes to attend at Winchester House. On obeying the summons, he found Andrewes, and with him Laud (now bishop of S. David's) and Neale of Durham in anxious deliberation. The bishops were anxious to hear from Wren what treatment the Church might expect at the hands of Charles. They asked " how the prince's heart stands to the Church of England, that when God brings him to the crown we may know what to hope for." Wren replied : " I know my master's learning is not equal to his father's ; yet I know his judgment to be very right ; and as for his affections in those particulars which your lord- ships have pointed at, for upholding the doctrine and discipline and right estate of the Church, I have more confidence of him than of his father." Some discussion followed, during which Andrewes kept silence ; but at 1 See below, p. 83. 52 BISHOP ANDREWES last, addressing Wren, he said : " Well, doctor, God send you may be a true prophet concerning your master's inclinations in these particulars which we are glad to hear from you. I am sure I shall be a true prophet. I shall be in my grave, and so shall you, my lord of Durham. But, my lord of S. David's, and you, doctor, will live to see that day that your master will be put to it, upon his head and his crown, without he will forsake the support of the Church." 1 The breaking off of the negotiations with Spain was welcomed by the nation as a timely deliverance ; the narrative of Wren shows that even the king's adherents were apprehensive of the effect on the English Church of alliance with the foremost Eoman Catholic power of Europe. When, in 1624, the Spanish policy of the king finally collapsed, new measures were adopted to check the growing boldness of the Eomanists. Andrewes was a member of the royal commission for banishing Jesuits and seminary priests, and he probably shared in the general irritation and alarm that was felt at the startling aggressions of the papist faction. The appointment of this commission was the expiring effort of a repressive policy which had never been consistently applied, and for the failure of which the king alone is responsible. His high station inflicted on Andrewes irksome personal duties to the king. Besides attending him on his progresses and at the opening of parliament, he was present when the king visited Cambridge in 1615, and accompanied him to Scotland in 1617. He was at the king's side at Eoyston during a short 1 Wren, Parenialia, p. 45. AT THE COURT OF JAMES I 53 illness in 1619, but was prevented by ill-health from giving him the sacrament on his death-bed. On one important occasion, when the relations between king and parliament were becoming greatly strained, Andrewes preached before the Lords in Westminster Abbey (January 30, 1621), the Commons attending a sermon in the Temple Church. His sermon was an earnest and practical one on Psalm lxxxii. 1, but he made no allusion to the critical state of public affairs. "We may regard his silence as a tacit protest against the growing tendency of churchmen to engage in politics and serve in secular offices, which brought such odium on Williams, 1 and afterwards on Laud. In another chapter will be found a brief account of the purely ecclesiastical affairs in which Andrewes took part. The present chapter will have given some idea of the sphere in which Andrewes was called to move, and in which his simplicity and holi- ness must have often been severely put to the test. There is ground for satisfaction that he was not called to succeed Archbishop Bancroft in the primacy at the close of 1610. The bishops seem to have been generally anxious that he should be appointed, but the king had already promised his former minister, the earl of Dunbar, to raise Abbot to the vacant throne. Abbot had been chaplain and adviser to the earl, and was personally known to the king. He had only recently been translated from 1 It is fair to say that Williams filled his office respectably, and used his patronage liberally and wisely ; but the lawyers as a body naturally regarded the precedent as dangerous and inconvenient, and the appointment excited a natural suspicion and jealousy of the growing influence of the clergy. 54 BISHOP ANDREWES Lichfield to London (January 1G10). In many ways the appointment was unfortunate, but we may well doubt whether Andrewes, great as were his qualifica- tions, possessed the necessary force of character, independence of mind, and power of statesmanship to guide the Church safely through the anxious and critical times that were impending. It is most probable that the energetic and restless spirit of Laud would have given him a dangerous ascendancy over Andrewes, and precipitated the collision between people and monarch, which was to involve his own ruin. CHAPTER IV THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY The period between 1605 and 1610 is that of Andrewes' greatest literary activity, and the occasion of his controversial work is such as needs a separate treatment. The policy of King James towards the Eoman Catholics had commended itself to no class among his subjects. He had given hopes, before his accession, of improvement in their position, which under the recus- ancy laws of Elizabeth had become scarcely tolerable. Roman Catholics were heavily fined for non-attendance at church, and to be present at Mass was punishable with death. On his accession (1603) James promised some of the leading Romanists that the fines should be no longer exacted. They were accordingly re- mitted, and the penal laws enforced only against priests. The natural consequence was that the number of recusants largely increased. James was frightened, and within nine months of the remission of the fines issued an order for the banishment of priests ; and presently confirmed by statute all the penal laws of Elizabeth, though without apparently intending to bring them into active operation. In February 1605, however, he took further action ; the recusancy fines 55 56 BISHOP ANDRE WES were enforced, and it would seem that this step, coupled with a proclamation for the banishment of priests, drove the Eomanists to desperation. The gunpowder plot was set on foot, and was ripe for execution in November 1605. This attempt may be regarded as the culminating effort of the papists to reconquer England for the papacy by violent means. Since the death of Philip II. of Spain (1598), the war with English independence had entered on a new and less dangerous phase. There was an invasion, it has been truly said, " not of force, but of opinion." The newly-founded order of Jesuits endeavoured to gain their objects by a war of books and pamphlets. This method had been already dexterously used by Parsons, who in 1594 published, under a pseudonym, a treatise on the succession to the English crown, the aim of which was " to show the extreme uncertainty of the succession, and to perplex men's minds by multiplying the number of competitors." 1 The gunpowder plot, while it produced a strong anti-Catholic reaction in England, and probably put an end to the policy of violence, roused an army of Roman Catholic pamphleteers on the Continent. These writers made it their foremost object to excite sympathy for the conspirators, and especially for Henry Garnet, who had been tried and executed for his share in the plot, May 3, 1606. The liomanist partisans abroad industriously represented Garnet as a martyr, who had suffered death in defence of the sanctity of the confessional. The real degree of his complicity is not very clear, but the result of his trial (March 1606) was a foregone conclusion. To most Englishmen it 1 Hallaru, Constitutional History, ch. vi. vol. i. p. 285, note. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 57 presented itself as " an opportunity which had at last been gained of striking a blow against that impalpable system which seemed to meet them at every turn, and which was the more terrible to the imagination because it contained elements with which the sword and the axe were found to be incapable of dealing." 1 There can be no doubt that Garnet gained knowledge of the details of the plot under seal of confession, but the Government shrank from taking their stand " on the moral principle that no religious duty, real or supposed, can excuse a man who allows a crime to be committed which he might have prevented." Garnet was with some difficulty convicted, and he persisted to the last in his denial " that he had had any know- ledge of the plot except in confession, though he acknowledged that before that he had had a general and confused knowledge from Catesby." 2 He did not deny that he had prayed for the success of the enter- prise. Such were the facts, supported by the supposed miracle of "Garnet's straw," on which Roman con- troversialists based their contention that Garnet was a martyr. But the subsequent steps taken by the English government raised a new issue. After the detection of the plot, an oath of allegiance was imposed in England, expressly repudiating the tenet that princes excommunicated by the pope might be deposed or murdered by their subjects. The arch-priest, George Blackwell, deemed it permissible for English Roman Catholics to take this oath. But at this point Rome 1 Gardiner, History of Ewjland, vol. i. pp. 277-282. - "In all probability," says Professor Gardiner, "this is the exact truth ; " up. Bright, History of Enyland, 2nd Period, p. 591. 58 BISHOP AXDREWES interfered. In a breve issued September 1606, the pope Paul V. condemned the taking of the oath, thus making the position of English Catholics one of perplexing difficulty. Blackwell even ventured to disregard the breve as a forgery. A year later the pope issued a second breve, peremptorily confirming the former document, and censuring those who had disregarded it. At the same time Cardinal Bellar- mine wrote to Blackwell (September 28, 1607), complaining of his conduct, and stating the view of the Boman curia. " Most certain it is that in whatso- ever words the oath is conceived by the adversaries of the faith in that kingdom, it tends to this end, that the authority of the head of the Church in England may be transferred from the successor of S. Peter to the successor of King Henry VIII." Blackwell is rebuked for his failure in moral courage, " whether it be owing to the suddenness of his apprehension, the bitterness of his persecution, or the imbecility of his age." He is finally exhorted to " gladden the Church which he has made heavy, and to merit not only pardon at God's hands, but a crown." To the contention of Bellarmine that the oath of allegiance was in itself unlawful, King James himself replied in his Apology for the Oath of Allegiance} Bellarmine's answer was put forth under an assumed name, Rcsponsio Matthaei Torti ad librum inscriptztm, Triplici, etc. (1608). The king replied by a reissue of his former pamphlet, adding to it a Premonition 1 Full title, Triplici nodo Triplex Cuncus ; or, An Apologic for the Oath of Allegiance against the two breves of pope Paulas Quintus and the late letter of cardinal Bellarmine to G. Blackwell the arch-pricst. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 59 to all most mighty Monarchs, Kings, Free Princes, and States of Christendom, in which he diverges from the main point in dispute to the question of Garnet's complicity. 1 At the same time Andrewes was directed to prepare a more solid answer to Bellarmine. Chamberlain writes on October 21, 1608, to Carleton: "They say that the bishop of Chichester is appointed to answer Bellarmine about the oath of allegiance, which task I doubt how he will undertake and perform, being so contrary to his disposition and course to meddle with controversies." The king was very urgent, and tempted Andrewes with troublesome suggestions. In March 1609 the book is reported by Carleton to be done, and " much hearkened after." By June it was in the press. "The bishop of Chichester's book is in the press, whereof I have seen part, and it is a worthy work ; only the brevity breeds obscurity, and puts the reader to some of that pains which was taken by the writer." 2 Before the end of the year the book appeared, with the title Tortura Torti ; but Andrewes' uncongenial 3 task was not yet finished. Bellarmine published in his own name a somewhat lame reply to the king's 1 The Premonition is also interesting as containing James' confession of faith. He calls himself a "Catholic Christian." He accepts the three creeds, and first four councils, and the fathers of the Christian Church. "Whatever the fathers for the first 500 years did with an unanime consent agree upon to be believed as a necessary point of salvation, I either will believe it also or at least will be humbly silent, not taking upon me to condemn the same." In judging of patristic opinions he follows S. Augustine, and makes Scripture the standard ( Works of King James I. p. 301). - Carleton to Edmoudes, June 8, 1609. 3 " Scias me xai lx qvaiu; xm lx nfcaifwiu; pacis semper studiosum fuisse " (Andrewes' Ep. 1 nd P. Molin. s. fin. ). 60 BISHOP ANDRE WES Premonition, An Apology 1 for the Rcsponsio Torti. In this book he avowed the authorship of the former work; and Andrewes lost no time in setting to work to write another elaborate reply to the cardinal, which was published at the end of 1610, after having been submitted to Casaubon, who had lately arrived in England. This work, together with the reply to cardinal Perron, may be regarded as embodying Andrewes' final and deliberate judgment on the questions at issue between England and Pome. This will form the subject of study in another chapter. Our present task will be to review the general line of defence which Andrewes adopts in Torticra Torti against the main contentions of his Poman antagonist, especially in regard to three points — 1. The oath of allegiance and the royal supremacy. 2. The papal claim to depose sovereigns, and to release from oaths. 3. The circumstances of the conspiracy. 1. The purport of the oath was industriously mis- represented by Bellarmine. It was declared to be an invasion of the spiritual authority of the pontiff. Andrewes, on the contrary side, maintains that there is a wide distinction between an oath of supremacy and an oath of allegiance. These two species of oath Pellarmine confused. The oath of allegiance was defensible as a protective and precautionary measure. The king, says Andrewes, claims the right of protecting himself against insidious and unscrupulous foes. He 1 Andrewes did not think much of this Apology. "The bishop of Ely is set to reply to cardinal Bellarmine's Answer to the king's book, whereof I perceive he makes no great account, but thinks that either the man is much crazed from what he was, or else that he did it with a contemptuous negligence" (Chamberlain to Winwood, February 13, 1610). THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 61 assumes no spiritual primacy. The very title of the oath shows it to be a necessary measure of self-defence against traitors ; its aim is merely the detection of disloyal and disaffected subjects. There is no claim on the king's part to be " supreme governor of the Church." The matter of the supremacy is, in fact, untouched by the oath. A question, however, is raised by the contention of Bellarmine himself, who insists that the oath necessarily infringes the divine rights of the pontiff. 1 What, then, is the nature — what are the limits of the royal supremacy over the Church ? Andrewes appeals in answer to Scripture and to history. He points to the position of Charlemagne as illustrating the independence of papal control rightfully claimed by sovereigns; but after all, the scriptural ground is the strongest; the New Testament expressly enjoins obedience to civil authority, and the limits of royal control over the Church are illustrated by what is recorded of Jewish kings in the Old Testament. There kings are frequently described as regulating ecclesiastical affairs, initiating reforms in the Church, deposing unworthy high priests, destroying emblems of idolatry, publicly renewing the covenant between Jehovah and His people. Nor are any of these actions regarded as usurpations of spiritual power or invasions of the priestly functions. Scripture, 1 The oath ran : "I, A. B., do truly and sincerely acknowledge, profess, testify, and declare in my conscience before God and the world, that our sovereign lord, King James, is lawful and rightful king of this realm . . . and that the pope, neither of himself nor by any authority of the Church or See of Rome, . . . hath any power or authority to depose the king . . . or to discharge any of hissubjects of their allegiance and obedience to his majesty, etc." 02 BISHOP ANDREWES in fact, gives us ample warrant for assigning to princes a certain regulative jurisdiction over the Church and the hierarchy. But although this is no newly- founded claim on behalf of the monarch, it needs to be guarded against the perverse misconceptions of con- troversial opponents, liightly understood, the royal supremacy involves (1) no claim to impose new articles of faith or modes of worship, (2) no right to exercise sacerdotal functions, or touch sacred things; (3) but only the right to order the external affairs of the Church as we see them ordered by godly kings in the Jewish Church, and by Christian monarchs like Charlemagne, who was styled by the Council of Mainz verae religionis rector} 2. The next point raised is that of the pope's claim to exercise deposing power ; and when we take into account what this claim really involved, and its " fatal bearing on the primary conditions of human society," 2 we can understand the tone of indignation and scorn that pervades the ToHura Torti, underlying the brilliancy of wit and readiness in retort, which give vivacity and brightness to the treatment of a wearisome subject. According to Bellarmine, the deposing power of the pontiff is an "universally acknowledged fact" {inter omnes convenit). Popes may lawfully depose heretical kings, and absolve their subjects from allegiance. Andrewes makes short work of the " universally admitted fact." He advises Tortus to use the phrase more cautiously in future. In the present instance, he shows that the " fact " is not one on which even the Jesuits themselves are agreed. The papal epistles which support the tenet are in 1 See Tortura Torti, esp. pp. 466-469. 2 Church, Masters in English Theology, p. 92. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 63 some cases, at least, admittedly spurious ; 1 and the canons of thirteenth century councils cannot avail to prove an immemorial doctrine of the Catholic Church. At the best they arrogate for the pontiff, but cannot confer, this pretended power. 2 It is abundantly clear that the deposing power is, at any rate, not de fide. Andrewes takes a different line, but an effective one, when he appeals (the idea is characteristic of the thinkers of that age) to the law of nature. " This," he says, " is a theological certainty and agreed on by all, that Christ did not come to invert or displace the order either of nature or of society ; rather He came to give His sanction to it — nay, to add sanctity to it. He does not loose the bonds of nature." 3 The claim of kings to allegiance is, in fact, like the parental right — an element in the natural order of the world. A king does not forfeit this right even by infidelity, 4 still less by excommunication. Theodosius, when under the censure of Ambrose, did not thereby forfeit his claim on the obedience of his subjects. If Bellarmine's theory be correct, a heretical king would be worse off even than a heathen. But Bellarmine is not even consistent. He denies that James is to be called a Christian at all, yet he contends that the pope is not Judex regum save in so far as they are Christian. 5 The pope, therefore, says Andrewes, has no right to take cognisance of 1 Tort. p. 197. 2 Ibid. p. 251. " Arrogatur hie quidem pontifici jus, non datur ; et praesumitur quod fuerat ante in praxi, non decernitur." 3 Ibid. p. 54. 4 Cp. Sermons, vol. iv. p. 57. 5 James had urged the same point : either the king's cause was alienum ab Ulvus (Papae) foro ; or non alienum, in which latter case he ought to have been warned before being deposed (Tort. p. 109). 64 BISHOP ANDREWES James' supposed offences. Even granting that he has the right, the proper penalty would be, not deprivation of kingly rights and possessions, but excommunication. Tortus is reminded of Bernard's injunction to pope Eugenius : " Your power relates to crimes, not to possessions." 1 This confusion of spiritual jurisdiction with secular or material power, in fact, reduces a Christian king's position to an absurdity. " The king will be in worse case than his meanest subject. The heir [to the throne] who has never sinned is punished. The power entrusted to the pontiff for edification is used for destruction." 2 Thus the pope, who claims to be Peter's successor, ignores the charge, " Feed My sheep;" he prefers to act on the injunction, " Arise, Peter, kill and eat." 3 Andrewes, in fact, treats the dejiosing power (which in this case involved active connivance at plots against the king's life) with raillery. Bellarmine's contention is not worth serious argument. It caunot be consistently defended. " When any complaint is made of the pontiff's action as judge, we are told he is a shepherd tending his flock and protecting them from poisonous pastures. The cardinal suddenly transforms the pontiff from a judge into a shepherd, in order that he may accom- plish as pastor what he was unable rightfully to perform as judge." 4 In any case the right of exconi- 1 Bern, de Consid. i. 6. " In ciiminibus, non in possessionibus potestas vestra." 2 Tort. p. 57. 3 " Potestas qua reges simul de tlirono siniul de vita dejicitis nihil ad pastoralem. Laniorum ilia potestas, non pastorum est" (p. 108). 4 Tort. p. 111. " Pontifiecm subito de judice transnmtat in pastorem ; ut quod facere non potuit ut judex, saltein faciat ut pastor. " THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 65 munication involves no right of deposition; " a spiritual ruler cannot impose other than spiritual peualties." 1 The bishop then turns to the pope's absolving power — his right to dispense with oaths and to release subjects from allegiance to their lawful monarch. Bellarmine had contended that our Lord's charge to S. Peter involved the papal right to absolve not only from sins, but from penalties, censures, oaths, and vows, when it may be expedient for the glory of God and the good of souls. 2 Andrewes replies that no power can release men from moral duty or obligation. They cannot be absolved from the moral duty of allegiance, which is implied in the act of taking an oath of allegiance. 3 To release from the bondage of sin is indeed to use the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; to loose the bond of law is to have recourse to the keys of hell. Indeed, says Andrewes, this is the reason why Jesuits are hated even by the secular clergy of their own communion, that by their doctrine of equivocation they relax the very bonds of human society. "This power," he says, "ought not to be called the absolving power ; it is rather a method of dissolving all things, even the very fabric of the world." 4 No one can be dispensed from the laws of nature or of God, and the law of allegiance is a law of God implied in the fifth commandment, and having even the higher sanction of being an evangelic law : " Be ye subject to the king as supreme, for this is the 1 "Haeresis causa spiritual is ; excoiuniunicatio poena spiritualis. Plectere vult, cum spiritualis rector sit, crimen spirituale ? Plectat vero sed poena spirituali ; sistat ibi modo " (p. 249). s Tort. p. 66. 3 Ibid. p. 67. J Ibid. p. 68. See a passage of most outspoken severity in Sermons, vol. iii. pp. 254, 255. 5 BISHOP ANDBEWES will of God" (1 Pet. ii. 13-15). To set this precept aside is to put Paul Y. on a level with Peter the apostle. The Church cannot loose where she does not bind. Laxet nodos ecclesia quos ipsa nexuit. 1 In general, therefore, oaths cannot be remitted except when, like Herod's vow, they are rash (temeraria). An oath to commit sin is not binding. Indeed, " the swearer is bound not to keep it," says Aquinas. Thus the pontiff ought to have released the gunpowder conspirators from their oath. 2 Finally, the writer points out that the very nature of the oath (being assertory not p?vmissory) made it one that could not be dispensed with. 3 3. With regard to the circumstances of the con- spiracy, Andrewes complains of Bellarmine's vague expression that he " deplores " the event. What does this mean ? Possibly Bellarmine " deplores " its ill- success, just as Sixtus V., speaking of the death of Henry III. of France, called it a " providential and memorable deed." 4 If the Roman curia " execrates conspiracies," why are the accomplices of the plot, G[reenway] and G[erard], welcomed at Pome ? Why is Garnet glorified as a martyr ? Why is the fiction of Garnet's straw so assiduously cherished and cir- culated ? Bellarmine had called Garnet " a man of incomparable sanctity of life." He suffered only for refusing to reveal what his conscience forbade to reveal. Andrewes answers that he was a man of notoriously bad 1 Tort. p. 70. 2 Cp. Andrewes' Speech in the Star Chamber concerning Vows. 3 A. quotes Aquinas (Siimma, 2. 2; 89; 9). "Materia juramenti assertorii quod est de praeterito vel praesenti in quandam necessitates jam transiit et immutabilis facta est" (p. 81). 4 Tort. p. 96. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 67 habits. 1 And as to the plot, he did know from many quarters what was intended. Even were it admitted that he only knew under seal of confession what was intended, there were several courses open to him : He could have divulged enough to avert so great a crime without mentioning names. He might have given private information to the pope. He might have urged the person confessing to abandon the crime and induce others to do so, under threat of divulging the plot if the penitent refused compliance. He might have warned those whose lives were imperilled. He did none of these things ; his sentence therefore was just. 2 As a fact, however, Garnet confessed to having sinned by concealment of his knowledge. 3 The plot is indeed excused, on the ground that the Catholics were driven to desperation by the harsh measures of the king. 4 " He would have been safe," it was contended, " if he had granted to the Komanists liberty of worship." To this Andrewes replies by pointing to the case of Henry III. of France. Henry had granted freedom to his Catholic subjects, but that did not protect him from assassination. In England, moreover, the measures taken against recusants were rendered necessary by the fact that conspiracies (e.g. 1 " Bacchum certe magis redolebat quam Apolliiiem " (p. 272). 2 Cp. pp. 272, 355-357, 361. 3 Pp. 350, 351. Cp. Rcsponsio, p. 436 : " Quam facile factu hoc, viani in- ire de re sine personis revelanda, nee ullo cum periculo suo, si in Garnetto bona mens. . . . si non confectam rem quam detectam tnaluisset." It is also important to observe that the question whether intended crimes communicated to a priest in confession should bo revealed, was one by no means finally settled in the negative. Andrewes cites various authorities who were in favour of a contrary view — e.g. Alex, of Hales, and others (Tort. pp. 356, 357). i Tort. p. 98. 68 BISHOP ANDEEWES that of Watson and Clarke) had been formed in the very first year of the king's reign ; and further, in the enforcement of the penal laws, the king's lenity had been most conspicuous. 1 Andrewes points out a circumstance which is now historically clear, namely, that it was the policy of the pope that had actually driven the English Catholics to desperation. The crime of recusancy is to be traced to the bull of Pius V. deposing Elizabeth (1570). Before that date the term "recusant" was unknown to the law, and those who declined to conform were few. The papal bull turned men first into recusants, then into traitors. This had been urged by Coke in Garnet's trial. " Truly most miser- able and dangerous was the state of Eomish recusants in respect to this bull ; for either they must be hanged for treason in resisting their lawful sovereign, or cursed by the pope for yielding due obedience to her majesty." 2 The expectation of its being issued encouraged the rebellion in the North (1569). 3 The laws subsequently enforced were directed, not against a particular form of religious belief, but against dis- loyalty, concealing itself beneath the mask of religion. 4 Nor was there any display of undue severity under James. Blackwell, for instance, had only been impri- soned, 5 when harsher measures might have been adopted. We may notice, in concluding, that a good deal is said in the Tortura Torti in defence of James' action, which bears on points of Anglican theology. James had been compared by Bellarmine to Julian ; 1 Tort. p. 201. 2 Criminal Trials, ap. Russell, p. 208. 3 Tort. p. 154. Cp. Green, Short History, p. 382. 4 Ibid. p. 155. 6 Ibid. p. 159. THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 00 but Andrewes iusists that not only is he no apostate ; he is not even heretical. He is a Catholic, and adheres to the Catholic faith. The name Catholic is not the peculiar prerogative of Eome. Nor is it opposed to " heretic," a term of which the proper contradictory is " orthodox." 1 The theological questions, however, which are raised in the Tortura will meet us in another connection. On a survey of the whole book, the most interesting points are two — (1) The appeal to history for the settlement of the question of papal claims ; (2) The appeal to great moral considerations with which Andrewes confronts the Eomanist appeal to the authority of the Church. There are parts of the Tortura which, no doubt, are somewhat disfigured by the controversial tone ; but we must remember that the questions in dispute, though obsolete now, were then of vital interest, and the provocation which inspired an English writer in his treatment of the subject was such as we can scarcely measure now-a- days. Allowance must also be made for the haste and pressure under which Andrewes' work was com- piled. The book is to be regarded as a large pamphlet — witty, pungent, learned, and skilful in retort ; but it has an enduring value in so far as Andrewes, by the breadth of his treatment, lifts to a higher level the serious subject in dispute — the relation of the civil to the spiritual power. On this point professor Gardiner makes an interesting remark : " As far as they were builders of systems, the men of the seven- teenth century failed. . . . Yet it would be wrong to pour upon these systems the contempt with which they 1 Tort. pp. 368-374. 70 BISHOP ANDREWES sometimes meet. . . . There was that in them which would live — the belief in the paramount claims of duty ; the faith in a divine order in political, in social, and in domestic life, which has stamped itself indelibly on the English mind." 1 Andrewes was not only capable of meeting his opponents on the ground of historical knowledge and controversial skill ; he had an incom- parably deeper sense than they of the supremacy of moral over merely technical considerations. Behind the claims of Eome, and overshadowing them, stood the New Testament. The pretended traditions of the Eoman Church were confronted with the acknowledged laws of Christ's kingdom. 2 We may conclude this chapter by quoting a pas- sage winch, as giving Andrewes' own impression of the gunpowder plot, is worth recording. On the first anniversary (November 5, 1606) he preached before the king at Whitehall, and dwelt on the circum- stances that had made the plot so revolting to the religious and moral sense of Englishmen. He speaks of it as an " abomination of desolation standing in the holy place." " Undertaken with a holy oath ; bound with the holy sacrament (that must needs be in a holy place) ; warranted for a holy act, tending to the advancement of a holy religion, and by holy persons called by a most holy name, the name of Jesus. That these holy religious persons, even the chief of all religious persons (the Jesuits), gave not only absolu- tion, but resolution, that all this was well done ; that it was by them justified as lawful, sanctified as meritorious, and should have been glorified (but it 1 History of England, vol. iii. p. 240. 2 See esp. Sermon VII. on the Gunpowder Plot (vol. iv. p. 336 foil.). THE ROMAN CONTROVERSY 71 wants glorifying because the event failed ; that is the grief ; if it had not, glorified) long ere this and canon- ised, as a very good and holy act, and we had had orations out of the conclave in commendation of it — [this is the pitch of all]. . . . This shrining it, such an abomination, setting it in the holy place, so ugly and odious ; making such a treason as this, a religious, missal, sacramental treason, hallowing it with orison, oath, and eucharist ; this passeth all the rest." 1 These words contain the justification of some passages in the Tortura that seem exaggerated and over vehement in tone. What to the world seemed no more than a pressing political peril, was by Andrewes chiefly regarded in its religious light as a portentous example of hypocrisy. 1 Vol. iv. pp. 213, 214. CHAPTER V PUBLIC LIFE LAST YEARS AND DEATH As we have noticed, Andrewes had none of that aptitude for business and love of management which to Laud was so congenial. There were, however, occasions which brought him out, and no sketch of his life would be complete without some special refer- ence to the more critical incidents of his tranquil career. Perhaps the most important social event which occurred while Andrewes was bishop of Ely was the affair of the Essex divorce in 1613. This was one of those rare occasions which test the weak places of character, and sometimes mark the turning-point of a life. Unfortunately, we know so little of the motives which determined the bishop's conduct, and of the way in which the case presented itself to his mind, that it is impossible to give a satisfactory account of the proceeding. It is difficult to explain what seems on the surface to be an unhappy lapse in a blameless and beautiful career. The difficulty is increased by the fact that no record remains to show that Andrewes felt distress or compunction at the part he had played. Yet we might have been led to expect this by the conduct of Laud under somewhat 72 PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH 73 similar circumstances. 1 We are forced to the con- clusion that there are some circumstances in the case unknown to us, which seemed to Andrewes sufficient to justify the course he eventually took. The facts of the case may be briefly recalled. The earl of Essex had been married in 1606, at the age of fourteen, to the younger daughter of the earl of Suffolk. During her husband's prolonged absence abroad, Lady Essex had attracted the notice of the king's favourite, Eobert Carr ; and, soon after the earl's return, according probably to an arrange- ment already made with Carr, she applied for a divorce. The king displayed unseemly eagerness on behalf of the countess. A commission was appointed for the trial of the case, consisting of the primate (Abbot), bishops King, Andrewes, and Neale, and six laymen, three of whom were legal dignitaries. From the first, Abbot was dissatisfied with the statements of Lady Essex, and resolutely opposed her application for a divorce. He would have preferred that even at this stage there should be a reconciliation between the parties. After sitting for some time, the com- mission found itself divided in opinion. The archbishop appealed to the king to release him from a position which was intolerable to his rigid con- scientiousness. Ultimately, James, under the combined influence of Carr and the family of Lady Essex, resolved to add to the commission two bishops on whom he could rely as supporting his view of the case — Buckeridge of Eochester, and Bilson of Winchester. At the final meeting of the commission 1 Sec the references in Laud's Diary to his share in bringing about the marriage of the carl of Devonshire with the divorced Lady Rich. 74 BISHOP ANDREWES (September 25, 1613), seven members voted for the divorce ; five, headed by the archbishop, dissented. By express command of the king, no reasons were given beyond the one originally pleaded by the countess : latens et incurabile impcdimentum. On this disgraceful case, as it appears to us, public opinion was strongly expressed : the courage and uprightness of Abbot gave him a transient popularity. Bilson came in for a main share of the ridicule and opprobrium. But how are we to estimate the course adopted by Andrewes ? Before the sittings of the commission he had pronounced decisively, and even vehemently, against the divorce ; but soon after taking his seat he changed his view. It was noted that, in spite of his deep knowledge of canon law, he remained silent during the whole course of the proceedings. No utterance that might have explained his conduct is recorded. It would seem, in default of further light on the subject, that he was unable to resist the pressure of the king. He may have feared that the countess, if her design was thwarted, would make some attempt on her husband's life. But this suggestion does not avail to palliate the sacrifice of an obvious religious duty to ex- pediency. Perhaps the most equitable view of Andrewes' conduct is that of professor Gardiner. " Against such a man," he says, " it is impossible to receive anything short of direct evidence ; and it is better to suppose that he was by some process of reasoning, with which we are unacquainted, satisfied with the evidence adduced, though he must have felt that there was that in the conduct of Lady Essex which prevented PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH 75 him from regarding the result of the trial with any degree of satisfaction." 1 It is only too probable, as Mr. Eussell points out, 2 that the conduct of the episcopal assessors in this case " tended to confirm in their disaffection to the Church such of the laity as were inclined to be Puritans, and was a great stumbling- block in the way of the more thoughtless and irreligious of the courtiers." The next prominent event in which Andrewes figures took place in 1617, when, together with Laud, now dean of Gloucester, and Hall, dean of Worcester, he accompanied the king on his long-projected visit to Scotland, the real aim of which was to force upon the Scotch the English ecclesiastical system. Epis- copacy had been already established. In October 1610, Andrewes had, after some hesitation, assisted at the consecration of three prelates, Spottiswoode, Hamilton, and Lamb. He had, indeed, felt uneasy as to the previous ordination of the three divines, which had been performed by presbyterians. It is not quite certain whether Bancroft insisted that ordination by presbyters was in case of necessity lawful, or whether he held episcopal consecration to 1 Gardiner, History of England, vol. ii. p. 174. Dean Church takos a more decided view : "In those troubled days, when men were reaping the penalties of the sin of many generations, and when the rebound from superstitious submission to the pope had created the superstitious faith in the divine right of kings as the only counterpoise to it, there seemed to be a fate which, in the course of a churchman's life, exacted at one time or other the tribute of some unworthy compliance with the caprice or the passions of power ; and the superstition must have been a strong one which could exact it from such a man as Andrewes to such a man as James" {Masters in English Theology, pp. 69, 70). 2 Life of Bishop Andrewes, p. 380. 76 BISHOP ANDREWES include the minor orders. 1 At any rate, Andrewes was satisfied with the archbishop's view, and took part in the consecration. The king now desired to introduce into Scotland the Anglican rite, and the jurisdiction of the High Commission Court. After some prepara- tions in 1616, which betrayed his purpose and drew an expostulation from the Scotch prelates, James arrived at Edinburgh on May 16, 1617, and on the following day divine service was held after the Anglican fashion in Holyrood Chapel. Not satisfied with this display, James ordered that all bishops, nobles, and privy councillors should receive the sacrament kneeling on Whitsunday. 2 The order was only partially successful, but was repeated with more effect. On June 17 the king opened the Scottish parliament with one of his offensive speeches. He referred to his countrymen as "a barbarous people." He advised them to adopt the good customs of their southern neighbours. The parliament deeply resented the tone of this address, and proved refractory. The act which was first proposed was withdrawn, but only to make way for a high-handed declaration of the absolute right of the crown in matters of church government. The clergy were required to assent to five articles insisting on the practice of kneeling at communion, episcopal confirmation, observance of great festivals, private baptism, and communion of the sick. James returned to England bent on enforcing these articles, and left them to be discussed at an assembly 1 See Hoylin, quoted in Bliss, Andrewes' Minor Works, Life, etc., p. xi. 2 This praotice apparently had not as yet received the support of any party in the Scottish Church. PUBLIC LIFE-LAST YEAES AND DEATH 77 which was summoned to meet at S. Andrews. At this meeting the consideration of four of the articles was postponed. In a subsequent meeting, however, held at Perth (August 1618), the articles were accepted by a large majority, and finally enforced. Throughout these proceedings, while the clergy as a body were recalcitrant, and only yielded to threats, the laity were not averse to change. " The powerful aristocracy, the lawyers, and part at least of the growing middle class, had been alienated by the harsh and intolerant spirit of the clerical assemblies now silenced." 1 We can hardly think that men like Andrewes and Hall were in sympathy with the harsh coercive policy of the king, whatever may have been the case with Laud. Andrewes preached one of his beautiful sermons 2 on the Holy Spirit before the court on Whitsunday, and possibly makes some reference to the task which the king had set himself, when he dwells on the guilt of assuming the ministry without a commission received. He also speaks strongly of the necessity of studying the usage of the ancient Church. In the ancient fathers and lights of the Church, he says, " the scent of this ointment was fresh and the temper true ; on whose writings it lieth thick, and we thence strike it off and gather it safely." The keynote of the sermon is " Unction, Mission, Submission," as the essentials of a duly-ordaiiied 1 Gardiner, iii. 220. " On the other hand, it is fair to remember that Scotland owed to the boldness of the clergy much of its immunity from popish plots and civil despotism " (Russell, Life of Andrewes, p. 157). 2 On S. Luk« iv. 18, 19 (vol. iii. p. 280). 78 BISHOP ANDREWES ministry. We are led to think that in regard to the king's policy in this and other matters, Andrewes fell back on a maxim which meets us more than once in his writings — Aliud est quod docemus ; aliud quod sustinemus. Another noticeable occurrence in Andrewes' career was the misfortune that befell archbishop Abbot in October 1621. The archbishop was fond of hunting, and once, when pursuing this pastime in the park of his friend, Lord Zouch, in aiming at a buck with a cross-bow, he struck a gamekeeper, who died of the wound. The incident was startling and without precedent. By common law the archbishop had incurred the forfeiture of all his goods to the king ; but James, indulgent to his favourite sport, remarked, on hearing of the mishap, that " an angel might have miscarried in that sort," and followed up the observation by sending a con- solatory letter to the primate. In canon law, how- ever — and this was an age in which Canonists and Schoolmen were still diligently studied — the case was a serious one. The archbishop was ipso facto irregular, and suspended from all ecclesiastical functions until restored by some ecclesiastical superior. The lord keeper (Williams) was probably sincere in raising difficulties. " I wish with all my heart," he wrote to Buckingham, " his majestie would be as merciful as ever he was in all his life ; but yet I hold it my duty to let his majestie know by your lordship that his majestie is fallen upon a matter of great advice and deliberation. To add affliction to the afflicted, as no doubt he is in mynde, is against the king's nature ; to leave virum sanguinum, or a man of blood, primate PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH 79 and patriarke of all his churches, is a thinge that soundeth very harshe in the old councells and canons of the Church. The papists will not fail to descant upon the one and the other. I leave the knot to his majestie's deepe wisdom to advise and resolve upon." It was, in fact, a perplexing case, and is even said to have been debated by the doctors of the Sorbonne, who voted it to amount to a full irregularity. Further, Abbot's morose disposition had done little to con- ciliate his episcopal brethren. 1 Andrewes was sum- moned to the commission, consisting of six bishops and four laymen, to which the archbishop's case was referred. On the question of irregularity, Andrewes voted with the laymen in favour of the primate. All were agreed that restitution might be granted by the king. Finally, the archbishop was " assoiled " by letters under the great seal, and released from canonical disabilities. Fuller points out that " the party whom the archbishop suspected his greatest foe proved his most firm and effectual friend." Andrewes had little in common with Abbot, and differed from him widely in feeling and policy. But on this occasion he used all his influence on the archbishop's behalf. " Brethren," he said to the other bishops who were pressing the severe view, "be not too busy to condemn any for uncanonicals according to the strictness thereof, lest we render ourselves in the same condition. Besides, we all know 1 "He was painful, stout, severe against bad manners, of a grave and a voluble eloquence, very hospitable, fervent against the Roman Church, and no less so against the Anninians. ... He was wont to dis- sent from the king as often as any man at the council board " (Hacket, Life of Williams, p. 68). 80 BISHOP ANDREWES eanones qui dicunt lapsos post actum pocnikntiam ad clcricatum non esse rcstituenalos, ale rigore loquimtur disciplinac, non injiciunt desperationem indidgcntiac." 1 Andrewes' conduct seems to have been dictated, not, as Heylin has suggested, by any fears of Williams' succeeding to the primacy, but by the goodness of his own heart. It is noticeable that he took a view which the more scrupulous mind of Laud was unable to follow. Both he and Williams implored the king that they might not wound their consciences by accepting consecration 2 at Abbot's hands, a request to which the king yielded. We are struck by the Christian sense and magnanimous simplicity of Andrewes' conduct. It was characteristic of him that he always found a rigorist policy uncongenial. The bishop's position involved him in other encounters besides those with Eoman controversialists. Two of his speeches in the Star Chamber are preserved — one, delivered in 1619, relating to the case of John Traske, who had been teaching for some time a curious system of revived Judaism. 3 The speech of Andrewes is rather a heavy piece of artillery to bring to bear on a pitiful fanaticism. Traske was severely dealt with, but finally recanted. The other speech, " concerning vows," relates to the case of the countess of Shrewsbury, 4 who had obstinately refused to make any answer to the lords of the Council respecting the 1 Fuller, x. 5 and 16. 2 Laud was bishop-elect of S. David's, Williams elect of Lincoln. 3 Whether Traske was ordained or not, is uncertain. He taught the strict observance of the Jewish Sabbath, abstinence from swine's flesh, etc. ; and even claimed to bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost ; see Bliss, Andrewes' Minor Works, Lift, etc., p. 81. 4 Ibid. p. 95. PUBLIC LIFE-LAST YEARS AND DEATH 81 marriage of her niece, Lady Arabella Stuart, and had in the last resort alleged that she had a vow upon her. These speeches are marked by the same conscientious thoroughness and pointed exactness which appear in the sermons. The last mentioned of the two displays the strong sense of moral proportion that is character- istic of Andrewes' controversial writings. He quotes Amos v. 24, " Let judgment run down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream," and then applies the text to the conduct of the countess. " You stop the course of justice'' he says ; " with this vow of yours it cannot ' run.' Let justice have her course, and let that be the breaking-off of your vow. If you will needs have it a vow, let it be but the Nazarite's vow, but for a time ; let it expire, it is more than time it so did." 1 In 1622 the bishop's health began to show symptoms of failing. He preached in that year before the court (August 5), but not with his former vigour. " His voice," writes Chamberlain, " grows very low, but otherwise he did extraordinary well, and like himself. I dined with him that day, and could not leave him till half an hour after five o'clock. The weather was so very hot, and he so faint and wet, that he was fain to go to bed for some little time after he came out of the pulpit." 2 He recovered, however, soon enough to permit of his welcoming the king at Farnham later in the same month. James had once before paid the bishop a passing visit (August 1620); but on this later occasion he made a stay of several days, and was magnificently entertained, at a cost to Andrewes of some £3000. 1 Op. cit. p. 105. 2 Chamberlain to Carleton, August 10, 1622. 6 82 BISHOP ANDREWES During the next year (1623) the bishop took his usual part in affairs. One matter in which he was concerned throws light on the relations then existing between Eome and England. On March 30, we find the bishop, together with the archbishop and three other prelates, sitting on a commission appointed to deal with the case of Antony de Dominis, archbishop of Spalato, in the state of Venice. This ecclesiastic had come to England in 1610, having left Italy in conse- cpience of a personal grievance against the pope Paul V. He had made overtures to the English ambassador at Venice as to the possibility of his joining the English Church. In England he was not unnaturally welcomed by the bishops, and was entertained at Lambeth. A contribution of £600 was raised for his maiutenance by agreement among the bishops. He was flattered and made much of, and was even allowed to take part in ecclesiastical functions. 1 But his restless and avaricious temper led him into intrigue. He made overtures to the Roman curia without the king's knowledge, and received an offer of a large sum if he would return to the communion he had abandoned. It was the discovery of these secret negotiations that led to the appointment of a com- mission. Ultimately, de Dominis was ordered in the king's name to leave the kingdom within twenty days, and never to return. Probably Andrewes never trusted this specious convert, whose impressionable 1 E.g., a consecration of bishops, December 14, 1617. Bacon records the anecdote : ' The lord bishop Andrewes was asked at the first coming over of the archbishop whether he were a Protestant or no ? He answered, ' Truly I know not, but I think he is a Dctcslant ' (that was of most of the opinions of Rome) " (Bliss, p. liv. ; cf. Perry, English Church History, vol. ii. p. 401). PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEAKS AND DEATH 83 but unstable character made his adhesion rather a source of weakness than strength to the English Church. 1623 was a year of great public anxiety as to the probable issue of the king's negotiations with Spain. In July, Andrewes took part in the ceremony already alluded to — the swearing of the king to the articles of the projected Spanish match. It fell to the bishop's lot to administer the oath, which the king took on his knees in the presence of the ambassadors. It was in the autumn of this year that the interview between Andrewes, Neale, Laud, and Matthew Wren took place, of which an account has been already given. 1 During 1624 he appears to have been less able to discharge his public duties, and in the course of the year he became very much out of health. He suffered from severe pain in his left side, and complete loss of appetite. A brief interval of restored vigour followed ; but early in 1625 a fresh attack of illness prevented him from attending the king in his last sickness, and gratifying James' wish to receive the sacrament at his hands. The death of the king, which took place on Mid Lent Sunday, March 27, 1625, could not fail to affect Andrewes' position at court. Charles' accession brought Laud at once to the front, who, however, in spite of his independent spirit, and the fact that he was virtually the leading spirit of the Church, showed an evident desire to maintain close connections with Andrewes. A few days after James' death, we find him consulting the bishop, and evidently setting much store by his view of affairs. In June the two prelates met near Bromley, at the country seat of 1 See p. 51. 84 BISHOP ANDREWES bishop Buckeridge, and within a few months of Andrewes' death they served together on various commissions. But Andrewes felt that his work was over. He took his part in business of state with increasing difficulty, and in November 1625 was again lying on a sick-bed. He writes to secretary Conway a pathetic letter on the subject of an office in his own gift — that of confessor to the royal household. He pleads that the present occupant of the place, who is incapacitated by ill-health, may continue to hold the office till his death. 1 " I beseech your lordship," he continues, " to bear with me, and to support this very imperfect manner of writing, who hath been under the hand of God sick of an ague these seven weeks, for the most part forced to keep my bed, where your letter found me." On December 8 he excuses himself from obey- ing an order of Council, and asks for respite. " My lords, I would my body were to my mind, and wish with all my heart that for the present state of my health I were as able to perform this service as I shall ever be found willing to obey and to execute any of his majesty's commands, or your lordship's letters, to the uttermost of my endeavours. But at this present, God hath laid upon me the ague, the stone, and the gout all at once." There is, however, one other matter of political importance in which Andrewes was concerned. At the beginning of 1626 we find him taking part in an inquiry into complaints which the House of Commons had preferred against Bichard Montague, 1 It would seem that Andrewes' patronage was threatened with invasion, under sanction of the king. PUBLIC LIFE — LAST YEAKS AND DEATH 85 rector of Stamford Eivers, who, in 1624, had scandalised Puritan feeling by his tract, " A New Gag for an Old Goose," written in answer to a Jesuit pamphlet attacking the English Church, entitled " A New Gag for an Old Gospel." This book provoked a protest from two Ipswich ministers, Samuel Ward and John Yates, to whom the writer replied by addressing an appeal to the king (Appcllo Caesarem, a Just Appeal from Two Unjust In- formers). The case was brought under the notice of the House of Commons before the close of the late reign. The main offence of Montague in the eyes of the Commons was that he had made admissions in favour of the Eoman Church, while claiming an equal catho- licity for the Church of England. " Although," he said, " this present Eoman Church hath departed in no small degree, not only in regard of purity of manners and discipline, but also in regard of uncorruptness in doctrine, from that antient Church whence it arose and was derived, yet it hath ever stood firm upon the same foundation of doctrine and of the sacraments instituted by God, and recognises and keeps communion with the antient and undoubted Church of Christ. Wherefore it cannot be another and a different Church from that, however unlike it in many respects." 1 Such language ran counter to the prejudices of the popular theology which was so strongly represented in the House of Commons. The case was, however, left to be dealt with as an ecclesiastical offence, and the archbishop (Abbot) was asked to admonish the offender ; but Montague relied on the favour of the king, who, 1 Quoted by Russell, Life of Andrewes, p. 516 ; cp. Wakeman, The Church and the Puritans, p. 113 foil. 86 BISHOP ANDREWES naturally regarded with approval a line of argument which experience had shown to be so effective in deal- ing with the Eoman controversialists. The new reign had scarcely opened before the Commons renewed the attack. A parliamentary committee was appointed to examine Montague's opinions ; he was further charged with having committed a breach of privilege, in publishing a second work while the inquiry into the first was still pending. At this point King Charles unwisely interfered, and claimed the cognisance of Montague's offence as a chaplain of his own. In this course he was supported by Laud and other pro- minent churchmen, who indignantly resented the claim of parliament to decide a matter which involved points of doctrine. They were, moreover, genuinely anxious to leave defenders of the Anglican position, like Montague, a free hand. " We have some cause," so they had written to Buckingham in the preceding year, " to doubt this may breed a great backwardness in able men to write in the defence of the Church of England against either home or foreign adversaries, if they shall see him (Mr. Montague) sink in fortune, reputation, or health, upon his book occasion." 1 The king resolved to refer the matter to a small commission of bishops, and to follow their guidance. The bishops met at Winchester House, probably owing to Andrewes' infirm state, and reported (January 16, 1626) as follows : " Mr. Montague in his book hath not affirmed any- thing to be the doctrine of the Church of England but that which in our opinion is the doctrine of the Church of England, or agreeable thereunto. And for the preservation of the peace of the Church, we, in 1 Collier, Eccl. Hist. vol. viii. p. 5. PUBLIC LIFE-LAST YEAES AND DEATH 87 humility, do conceive that his majesty shall do most graciously to prohibit all parties, members of the Church of England, any further controversy of those questions, by public preaching or writing or any other way, to the disturbance of the peace of the Church, for the time to come." 1 In this letter we can detect the influence of Andrewes, and the suggestion made is characteristic of him ; but unhappily this summary treatment of the case was not calculated to conciliate the Commons, nor did the matter rest at this point. The king's final response to the complaints of parliament was the elevation of Montague to the bishopric of Chichester (1628). This act of defiance was probably suggested by Laud, and was destined to bear bitter fruit ; but before the promotion took place, Andrewes had been removed from the scene. On February 2nd of this year (1626), he was able to take official part in the coronation of Charles, and this seems to have been his last attendance at a public ceremony. The lustre of the coronation was dimmed by presages and omens of impending disaster. The dean (Williams) was in dis- grace, and Laud, as a prebendary of Westminster, was appointed to take his place. The king appeared in white satin instead of the usual robe of purple. " The left wing of the dove was broken on the sceptre staff." The text of the sermon, preached by the bishop of Carlisle, was " as if for a funeral sermon, ' I will give thee a crown of life,' and a slight shock of earthquake was felt during the ceremony." 2 It would be interest- ing to know the impression of the event left on 1 Russell, Life, etc., p. 512. 2 Stanley, Memorials of Westminster Abbey, p. 89 foil. 88 BISHOP ANDREWES Andrewes' mind. Laud had already had forebodings of " a cloud arising and threatening the Church of England." "We naturally wonder whether at this late hour of his life, Andre wes recognised the mistake that the English Church had made in leaning so heavily on a system of government which had outlived the sympathies of the English people, and had brought both Church and Throne into disrepute and odium. We cannot claim for Andrewes that he possessed the firmness of character that might have made him a wise upholder and counsellor of royalty in the crisis of its fate. We seem to see in him an increasing tendency to compliance with the arbitrary will, and even the caprices of the sovereign. Occasions were constantly arising when a man of stronger mould might have spoken a courageous word in season; might have made a timely protest against evils, the pressure of which on the people was rapidly becoming intolerable. The gentleness of Andrewes too often degenerates into weakness, or at least the temper of indulgence ; and we must acknowledge that in his degree he shares the responsibility of the knot of time- servers, flatterers, and worldlings who surrounded the throne, and hindered the intrusion into the royal presence of unpalatable facts — national discontent, the grievances of outraged conscience, and the rising passion and righteous jealousy for liberty and law. Andrewes must have fallen ill again shortly after the date of the coronation, for in May he is described in a letter of Mede's as being " very ill, and hath long been sick." There are but few notices of the last few months. Isaacson tells us that "of his death he seemed to presage himself a year before he died ; " PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH 89 and in a previous illness at Downhani, in 1612, "he seemed to be prepared for his dissolution, saying often- times in that sickness, " It must come once, and why not here ? " The death of his two brothers, Thomas and Nicholas, which took place shortly before his own, deeply affected him. " He took that as a certain sign and prognostic and warning of his own death, and from that time till the hour of his dissolution he spent all his time in prayer ; and his Prayer-Book, when he was private, was seldom seen out of his hands ; and in the time of his fever and last sickness, besides the often prayers which were read to him, in which he repeated all the parts of the Confession and other petitions with an audible voice, as long as his strength endured, he did — as was well observed by cer- tain tokens in him — continually pray to himself, though he seemed otherwise to rest or slumber ; and when he could pray no longer voce — with his voice, yet oculis et manibus — by lifting up his eyes and hands he prayed still ; and when both voice and eyes and hands failed in their office, then corde — with his heart — he still prayed, until it pleased God to receive his blessed soul to Himself." 1 Isaacson describes him as giving vent to " restless groans, sighs, cries, and tears ; his hands labouring, his eyes lifted up, and his heart beat- ing and panting to see the living God, even to the last of his breath." The end came on Monday, September 25, 1626, about four o'clock in the morning, at Winchester House, South wark. On November 11 he was interred with great solemnity in the parish church of S. Saviour ; the funeral being arranged and conducted by the officers of the Heralds' College, 1 Buckeiidgc, Funeral Sermon. 90 BISHOP ANDREWES the bishop of Durham being chief mourner, and several of Andrewes' nephews being present. The epitaph 1 on his tomb was written by bishop Wren, formerly his chaplain, to whom the bishop had been a constant benefactor. In 1830, during some alterations to the church, the bishop's tomb was opened, and the coffin discovered in a good state of preservation. It was removed, and replaced in the tomb which was newly erected in the Lady chapel behind the altar screen. The obituary sermon was preached by bishop Buckeridge of Eochester, on the words, " To do good and to distribute forget not, etc." (Heb. xiii. 16). A fort- night later died Nicholas Felton, bishop of Ely. Each prelate was distinguished by being made the subject of an elegy composed by the youthful Milton, who had recently gone up to Cambridge, and had not as yet developed the strong anti-ecclesiastical opinions of his mature life. Two lines of the boyish production on Andrewes' death are worth quoting, as embodying what was probably the common impression in his old university as to the bishop's career — that it was above all else a life of unsparing toil. The departed soul is met by a heavenly band, and thus addressed — "Nate, veni, et patrii felix cape gaudia regni ; Semper abhinc duro, nate, labore vaca." 2 Andrewes himself could not have desired a more terse summary of his long career. In his third sermon on the Passion, he speaks of the lesson taught by our Lord's word, Consummatum est : the duty of not fainting " though the time seem long and never so tedious." " Glory and rest," he continues, " are two 1 See Appendix B. 2 Another elegy speaks of him as " that rare industrious soul." PUBLIC LIFE— LAST YEARS AND DEATH 91 things that meet not here in our world. The glorious life hath not the most quiet, and the quiet life is for the most part inglorious. He that will have glory must make account to be despised oft and broken of his rest. Here, then, they meet not ; there our hope is, they shall even both meet together, and glory and rest kiss each the other ; so the prophet calleth it a glorious rest." Andrewes' toils were for the most part not of his own choosing ; but he was resolved that He alone who had appointed him his work should take the burden from his shoulders, and so answer his nightly prayer, " To my weariness vouchsafe Thou rest." There is a reference to Andrewes' tomb in some beauti- ful lines of Isaac Williams {The Cathedral, p. 183) — " Still praying in thy sleep With lifted hands and face supine ! Meet attitude of calm and reverence deep, Keeping thy marble watch in hallowed shrine. " Thus in thy Church's need, Enshrined in ancient liturgies, Thy spirit shall keep watch and with us plead, While from our secret cells thy prayers arise. " Still downward to decay Our Church is hastening more and more ; But what else need we but with thee to pray That God may yet her treasures lost restore ? " 1 Nearly sixty years have passed since the writing of the last verse, which reflects the depression of a devout spirit in troubled and dark days. That the words could not be truthfully written now may well lead us to the belief that Andrewes' constant prayer for the English Church has been answered. 1 " For the British Church, That what is wanting in her may be sup- plied, that what remains in her may be strengthened " {The Dcvoticms). CHAPTER VI FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS Andrewes was one of the few English theologians whose name was known and respected by foreign scholars. The age of the Stuarts was not one in which English theologians visited in person the uni- versities of the Continent. There seems to have been, after the return of the Marian exiles, a disposition to withdraw from the intimate connections that had been formed between English churchmen and the lights of foreign protestantism. But though con- tinental scholars did not have many opportunities of welcoming English students, it was not uncommon for them to visit England, and they were almost certain to enjoy, sooner or later, a warm reception at the English court — the only court, it has been observed, " where the profession of learned men was in any degree appreciated." 1 Judged by the standard of those days, Andrewes was a prominent man of learning ; the least that can fairly be said of him is, that he was well qualified to judge of learning when he met with it. His own 1 Pattison, Life of Casanbon, p. 296. FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS 93 habits had always been those of an indefatigable student. He allowed nothing to interfere with regular hours of reading. He refused to see visitors before noon (the dinner hour). When he was intruded upon, he would say " he was afraid he was no true scholar who came to see him before noon." For languages he had an astonishing aptitude, and is said to have had a competent knowledge of fifteen tongues. It is, of course, probable that his knowledge was overrated in days when competent critics were scarce, and we cannot forbear to smile at the verdict of his contem- poraries. " The world," says Fuller, " wanted learning to know how learned he was ; so skilled in all (especially Oriental) languages, that some conceived he might, if then living, almost have served as an interpreter - general in the confusion of tongues." According to Hacket, he was " of such a growth in all kind of learning, that very able clerks were of a low stature to him : Colossus inter icunculas." 1 The most solid testimony, however, to the range and depth of Andrewes' attainments, is the respect and veneration with which Casaubon especially, and some other foreign scholars, regarded him. His classical learning was considerable. He was once charged by a Jesuit pamphleteer with having obtained a bishopric by reading Terence and Plautus — a charge against which his friend Casaubon, in his Epistle to Fronto Ducaeus, perhaps with needless vehemence defends him. " In the last thirty years he has rarely had Plautus in his hands, Terence never once. Whatever traces of ancient learning are to be found in his 1 " Scientia magna, mcmoria major, judicium maximum, industria infiuita," is the verdict of Buckeridge {Funeral Sermon). 94 BISHOP ANDREWES writings are to be set down to his excellent memory." 1 The fact is, that a divine of that period had no ambition to display his classical attainments. The absorbing problems of the time were theological, and on this ground appeal could only be made to the writers of Christian antiquity. Of the Fathers, Canonists, and Schoolmen, Andrewes had a deep and accurate knowledge. These had been his main subject of study during his Cambridge life. But he took an enthusiastic interest in many other departments of learning. His intellectual sympathies were broader, perhaps, than those of any Englishman of his day. He was one of the learned antiquarian circle of which Selden and Camden were distinguished ornaments, and was at one time a member of their society. 2 He had the rare courage to express approval of Selden's History of Tythcs, an historical inquiry which roused passionate hostility among the dignified clergy, who even induced the king to forbid Selden any right of reply to his critics, and to pro- hibit the sale of the book. 3 But perhaps even more honourable to him was his friendship with Bacon, with whose aspiring genius and patient toil in observation his own love of nature gave him a genuine sympathy. 4 Andrewes, then, was a man of learning himself, and had a gift for kindling the love of learning in others. As a young fellow of Pembroke Hall, and afterwards 1 The authors most frequently alluded to or quoted in the Rcsponsio are Terence, Plautus, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Juvenal, Lucan, Homer, and Demosthenes. 2 See his letter to Hartwell, Bliss, p. xli. 3 Gardiner, History of England, vol. iii. pp. 255, 256 ; Aikin, vol. ii. p. 270 ; Pattison, Life of Casaubon, p. 326. 4 See the passage from Isaacson, quoted p. 12. FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTION 95 as dean of Westminster, his passion for teaching found ample opportunities. Hacket, an old Westminster boy, used to tell his patron Williams " how strict that excellent man (Andrewes) was to charge our masters that they should give us lessons out of none but the most classical authors ; that he did often supply the place both of head schoolmaster and usher for the space of an whole week together, and gave us not an hour of loitering time from morning to night. How he caused our exercises in prose and verse to be brought to him to examine our style and proficiency. That he never walked to Chiswick for his recreation without a brace of this young fry, and in that wayfariDg leisure had a singular dexterity to fill those narrow vessels with a funnel." Occasionally the dean would send for the elder scholars, sometimes as often as three times a week, and would keep them from eight in the evening to eleven, teaching them Greek and the elements of Hebrew, and " all this he did without any compulsion of correction ; nay, I never heard him utter so much as a word of austerity among us." 1 At a later time his position enabled him to become a generous patron of learning. He befriended rising scholars, and encouraged their studies by his munifi- cence. Bishop Wren speaks gratefully of Andrewes' interest in him at Pembroke. Laud, Peter Blois, Nicholas Fuller, Eoger Fenton, Cosin, and others, were indebted to him. He sent the Oriental scholar, William Bedwell, afterwards one of the translators of the Bible, to Leyden at his own cost to study Arabic, and after- wards gave him a living. 2 To John Boys, the learned 1 Hacket, Life of Williama (od. 1693), p. 45. 2 Casaubon, in introducing Bedwell to Heinsius, says : "His only cause 96 BISHOP ANDREWES student of the Vulgate, he assigned a stall at Ely. 1 His generosity to foreigners was unequalled. Casaubon was his attached friend and sincere admirer ; Voss, Junius, Cliiver, Du Moulin, Grotius corresponded with him, and in some instances were indebted to his bounty. For the history of Andrewes' tender and beautiful friendship with Casaubon, we have ample materials. Their intimacy lasted without break for the last four years of the great French scholar's life. Casaubon reached England in October 1610, shortly after the assassination of his patron, Henry IV. He had already been fascinated by the unusual spectacle of a Church which, in its controversy with Eome, resolutely carried its appeal to the fountain-head of church antiquity. He accordingly accepted the invitation of archbishop Bancroft, who had offered him a prebendal stall at Canterbury, and eagerly availed himself of the opportunity thus offered to study more intimately the system and theory of the English Church. Casaubon, on his arrival, was kindly welcomed by Overall, dean of S. Paul's, and was before long sum- moned to court, where he met Andrewes. He was at once attracted to the bishop, not only by his erudition and personal charm, but also by the sense of common sympathies and tastes. As early as October 26, he notes in his diary a prolonged visit to " the most wise for undertaking this journey is the exhortation of the bishop of Ely (rov Taw Eliensis), who is anxious to spare no expense in forwarding the interests of learning." 1 It was under Andrewes' direction that Boys compiled the Vctcri intcrprctis cum Bcza collatio, published 1655 (Bliss). FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS 97 and learned bishop of Ely ; " and adds, " I acknowledged his extraordinary courtesy and kindness towards me." From that day forwards the diary constantly refers to Andrewes — his learning, his acuteness, his goodness, his courtesy. 1 " He is a man," he writes to his friend de Thou, " whom if you knew you would take to exceedingly ; we spend whole days in talk of literature — sacred, especially — and no words can express what true piety, what uprightness of judgment, I find in him." " I am attracted to the man," he says to Heinsius, " by his profound learning, and am charmed by a graciousness of manner not common in one so highly placed." Soon after Casaubon's arrival (November 1610), the bishop submitted to him the Responsio, which was approaching completion, and adopted some of the great scholar's suggestions. " He did not overlook my notes," says Casaubon ; " nay, he rated them at more than their worth." Casaubon's mature impression of Andrewes' work is given in a letter to bishop Montague (November 21, 1610), which it is worth while to quote: — " I have read, and am daily reading, a work in which sincere piety, combined with varied learning, so contends for mastery with a captivating elegance of style, that I find it difficult to say what is to be selected for praise and admiration. Unhappy cardinal ! thus in effete old age to have encountered an antagonist who, in range of genius, in depth of erudition, in faculty of expression, is at the very zenith of his powers, and in 1 E.g. Dec. 1610. "Apud episcopum Eliensem pransus totum fere diem cum illo egi. 0 doctum ! 0 liumanum virum ! " Another entry in 1611 says, "0 Domine, quantae doctrinae, quanta humanitatis hospitem sum nactus ! " 7 98 BISHOP ANDKEWES all qualities requisite for this kind of controversy is so vastly superior to his rival. Certainly, if the cardinal retains a spark of modesty, he will not, I think, ever venture to enter the lists with this adversary; assuredly he will find that he is impar congressus Achilli. Pray let his majesty know that I have dealt in this affair as becomes a truth-loving and candid scholar ; for, though I esteem the bishop of Ely so highly, and have such an immense admiration for him, I have read all that he has written, and carefully weighed it, as though I owed no favour to the writer. . . . Would, my lord, that our Gallican theologians would imitate the bishop of Ely. I dare to affirm that they would reap a most plentiful reward of their moderation." But Casaubon himself was soon immersed in the waves of controversy. At the king's wish he undertook his Epistle to Fronto Ducaeus, 1 in which he examines at length the history of the plot of 1605. In this letter he takes occasion to vindicate Andrewes warmly against the attacks of Eudaemon Johannes (the Jesuit l'Heureux). 2 Shortly after the letter was finished (July 1611), Andrewes carried Casaubon off to his manor at Downham, in Ely diocese, where he was usually engaged in pastoral work for three months during the summer. For about six weeks Casaubon stayed with the bishop, and greatly enjoyed his experience of English country life and manners. He accompanied the bishop in his progress through the diocese, 3 and was par- ticularly impressed by the simplicity and dignity of the 1 Epist. 730. 2 He refers to the bishop as one "de cuius alta doctrina in omni genere disciplinarum quiequid dixero minus erit." 3 On one occasion, crossing a ford near Wisbeach, the bishop's life was in danger. FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS 99 English services. Iu the following year (August 1612), the bishop writes to Casaubon, now busy with the Excrcitationes in Baronium, begging him to pay another visit to Downham, which he says is so much cooler than London, as a proof of this declaring that he is suffering from a fever contracted in consequence of " an evening chill." In this letter he begs Casaubon not to spend too much time on chronological minutiae, but to devote his attention to more important matters ; he urges him not to be dis- tracted by the attacks of petty controversial litera- ture from his great task of dealing with Baronius, and "shedding a true light on sacred history." "Suffer not yourself to be distracted even for a moment; spurn them out of your way like barking dogs, and pass them by ; pursue the course you have entered on with the favour of God and men." After mentioning his own correspondence with du Moulin, and his weari- ness of controversy, he ends by again pressing Casaubon to come and see the Stourbridge fair — nundinas tota Anglia ccleherrimas ; tries to tempt him with a MS. (S. Matthaei exemplar hciraicum qtcod hie asservatur in bibliothcca Corp. Christi) ; implores him to come if only for a few days ; he shall return to town when he pleases. A little later (September 8, 1612) we find him, in another letter, repeating his injunction to Casaubon not to be drawn aside from his purpose. Let him in a single preface crush Puteanus 1 and all the other assailants ; let him spend all his efforts, all his diligence and learning, on a work of real value to the Church. " I am sure," he says, " I shall find infinite pleasure in reading what you write; though old, I shall learn much. 1 Erycius Puteanus, author of Slricturac in Casaubmium. 100 BISHOP ANDREWES I shall owe to you the reminiscence of many things I have forgotten, the knowledge of many which I have overlooked." On several occasions in 1613 the friends were together. In April, Casaubon introduced Grotius to Andrewes. On May 1, 1614, Casaubon's son Meric was con- firmed by Andrewes, and with his father received the sacrament at the bishop's hands. Two months later, Andrewes attended the death-bed of his friend, an occasion of which he writes an account to Heinsius. After courteously offering hospitality to him during his projected visit to England, he tells him the circum- stances of Casaubon's death. "He died on Friday, July 1 (old style). That morning he received the Holy Eucharist at my hands, having begged this favour of me three days previously. After receiving, he asked that the Nunc Dimittis might be repeated, following the recita- tion with a low voice, not without effort. Nothing escaped him but what was religious, pious, worthy of a Christian man, and of Casaubon, not even while he was in greatest agony. Next he gave his blessing to his children and his whole household. Then he composed himself to sleep, and thenceforward said but little, and that unwillingly. About four hours later he rendered to God a spirit which, I doubt not, found acceptance, a spirit always devoted to the cause of truth and peace. Stop the mouth of that pestilent Jesuit, 1 who does not scruple even after Casaubon's death to lie, as if he had wavered in the faith. He (Casaubon) never at any time wavered. He died in the faith in which he was born 1 Heribert Rosweyd, who had circulated a rumour that Casaubon had promised to rejoin the Roman Church. FRIENDSHIPS AND LITERARY CONNECTIONS 101 and brought up. For ten days before his death he had said farewell to human affairs, had signed his will, and gave himself wholly up to God, and to heaven. . . . He is buried at Westminster before the chapel where our kings' monuments are visited." Such was the fitting close to a friendship of more than usual tenderness. 1 Other distinguished men to whom Andrewes showed kindness, were F. Junius and George Doublet, both kins- men of G. T. Voss. He entertained them hospitably at Farnham in 1621. Gerard Voss, at this time director of the theological college at Leyden, was a scholar of the bishop's own mould ; a man with a rooted distaste for controversy, and so moderate in views and temper as to become suspected of heterodoxy by the vehement con- troversalists of his university. His kinsman, F. Junius, came to England in 1620, his special line of study being Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic philology. Voss writes with great gratitude to the bishop (Oct. 25, 1621): "I have often heard from Junius ; no letter but speaks in high terms of his happiness in being acquainted with you — a man endowed with so many gifts, so kindly disposed towards him, so concerned for his welfare, that he can only speak of your regard for him as paternal. It is, moreover, a delight to me to hear from him and G. Doublet of your very kind disposition towards me. To me your regard is preferable to gold. . . . The habit of beneficence is with you a second nature." 2 Again (Sept. 13, 1622) he writes: "Junius con- 1 Casaubon, in one passage of Iris diary, says: "Reddat illi (Elicnsi) Deus suam erga me