YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDEEWES. sV MEMOIES LIFE AND WOEKS THE BIGHT HONORABLE AND RIGHT REV. FATHER IN GOD LANCELOT AKDKEWES, D.D. LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. EEV. AETHUE T. EUSSELL, B.C.L. op st. John's college, Cambridge, vicar ot whaddoh", cambridgeshire. CAMBEIDGE : Jpritttti) FOE THE AUTHOE BY J. PALMER, SIDNEY STEEET. 1860. (tumbrilrgj : J. PALMER, PRINTER, SIDNEY STREET. TO THE HONOURABLE AND REVEREND HENEY COCKAYNE OUST, M.A., CANON OF WINDSOR, AND RECTOR OF COCKAYNE HATLEY IN THE COUNTY OF BEDFORD, &c. My dear Sir, The following 'pages, designed as a tribute to the memory of one of the most eloquent and munificent Prelates that ever adorned the Church of England, will, I trust, form also no unfitting memorial of my grateful regard for yourself, to whose kindness I was indebted for the second Vicarage which I have held under Her Majesty's Free Chapel of St. George, Windsor. I trust it will be seen by every candid reader that my aim has been to represent the subject of this volume as he was, neither exaggerating nor depreciating his VI DEDICATION. illustrious memory. My object has not been to write with a view to please one or another party, but as a dutiful son and faithful servant of the Church of England to illustrate her history and theology with impartiality, and at the same time with the conviction that to no period can the minds of my brethren in the sacred ministry of Christ's Church more profitably revert than to that of Hooker, Field, and Andrewes. I have long felt that those can never live effec tively for the present, who can find no delight in living much in the past. Our Church may have had, in common with others, her seasons of declension ; she may have, in common with other communities, her trials at the present time : but on many a bright spot, both in the past and at the present day, the hearts of her devoted children may rest with both gratitude and hope, — with gratitude that the hand of God ' hath visibly made use of this Church for the establishing of His pure Word and worship in these realms, and with hope that He will never fail to answer the prayers of those who rejoice in her prosperity. May our good Lord and Saviour be with you, my dear Sir, to support and bless you in the years that yet remain to you. And may these my poor labours add some little enjoyment to your days, beneath the shadow of that noble edifice in which Andrewes and Field both ministered before the same royal patron. DEDICATION. Vll With my constant prayers for the fulness of all grace and heavenly benediction upon yourself and yours, I am happy in subscribing myself Your very grateful friend and servant, AETHUE TOZEE EUSSELL. June, 1860. ERRATA. Page 93. For Gloucester read Windsor. 114. For Worke read Wake. 117. For Northampton read Southampton. AS&-. — Far- Bath ajwl Woils road Worocoter, 258. For Downham Market read Downham. 380. For Francis read Frances. 445. For Montagu read Montaigne. 512. For 5. read ij. Dumlm. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Andrewes at School and at the University — His College lectures on the Deca logue — His doctrines — Faith the foundation of Religion — Of the rule of Interpretation — The reason of the introduction of the New Covenant — Ofthe use of images and pictures in Churches — Of the Eucharist and of the applica tion of sacrificial terms to it page 1 CHAPTER II. Andrewe3 on the Fourth Commandment — Of holy places — Of the Church's deposit — Of Circumcision — Of the fear of God — Of grace — Andrewes goes into the north with the Earl of Huntingdon — Sir Francis Walsingham becomes his patron — He is made Vicar of St. Giles', Cripplegate — Preaches at the Spital in 1588 — His censure of Hgnmindiness — His honourable notice of Augustine and Calvin — Vindication of Protestant munificence — Censure of simony and sacrilege — Of Justification — He preaches before the Queen in 1589 — Is made Prebendary of Southwell and of St. Paul's, and Master of Pembroke College — His Clerum 12 CHAPTER III. , Dr. Andrewes preaches before the Queen in Lent 1689-90 — His Lectures on the Creation and Fall — Udal, the Puritan, 1591 — Thesis on the Oath ex officio — Of the worshipping of imaginations, 1592 — Convocation Sermon, 1693 — — Greenwood and Barrow — The Dearth of 1594 29 CHAPTER IY. The Lambeth Articles, 1595 — Dr. Andrewes' Review of them — He adopts the Augustinian doctrine as modified by Aquinas 48 CHAPTER V. Dr. Andrewes' Sermon on the Love of Souls, Good Friday 1597 — Andrewes refuses two Bishoprics, 1598 — Preaches before the Queen on Ash-Wednesday. Sermon on the Eucharist — On Justification — St. Paul and St. James— On the power of Absolution — On Repentance 63 CHAPTER VI. Andrewes' Sermon on Justification, 1600 76 I X CONTENTS. ^ CHAPTER VII. The election at Merchant Taylors' School, 1601— Andrewes is made Dean of' Westminster — His Sermon on giving to Caesar his due — Oversees West minster School — Preaches before the Queen for the last time in 1602 — Coronation of King James — Sermon on the Plague, 1603 — He is at the Hampton-court Conference — Is appointed a translator — His famous Good- Friday Sermon, 1604, and 1605 — He is made Bishop of Chichester. . page 84 CHAPTER VIII. Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on Christmas Day, 1605 — King James's policy in regard to the Scotch Church — Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on the anniversary ofthe King's Ascension, 1606 — His commendations ofthe King — Sermon on Easter Day — Of Whit-Sunday — On the sovereignty of the Holy Spirif s operations — Sermon at Greenwich before King James and the King of Denmark — His notice of the Jesuits — The Scotch Conference and Sermons at Hampton-court — Bishop Andrewes' Sermons on the right of Kings to call Councils — On 5th November — On Christmas Day — Of the merits of Christ — Sermon on Easter Day, 1607 — On being doers of the Word — Sermon at Romsey on 5th August — Ou 5th November at Whitehall — On Christmas Day on the mystery of Godliness — On Easter Day, 1608 — On Whit-Sunday — At Holdenby on August 5 — Consecration of Bishop Neile — Dr. John King, Bishop of London 155 CHAPTER IX. Plots ofthe Papists against King James — The King treats them favourably — - Duplicity of Pope Clement VIII. — Watson's conspiracy — The Gunpowder Plot — Grounded on the Pope's Breves — The plot referred to the Pope for his opinion — Garnet fearful lest he should encourage recourse to arms — Greenwell and Hall — Garnet — Lingard's plea for Garnets— Concealment of sins not yet perpetrated formerly not allowed under the plea of confession — Martin del Rio — Abstraction of documents from the State Paper Oftice — Abbof s Anti- logia — Not the Jesuits alone to be blamed — Oath of allegiance — The King's Premonition to Christian Princes and States — His Confession of Faith — His dissertation on Antichrist 175 CHAPTER X. Bishop Andrewes' " Tortura Torti" — Of the Pope's deposing power — Of excom munication — Of binding and loosing — The Bulls against Queen Elizabeth — The words of Commission — The Gunpowder Plot undertaken only from blind zeal — Origin of recusancy — Sacrilegious nature of Romish worship — Rome Babylon — Lord Balmerino — The First General Lateran no Council — Pope Innocent III. — Uncertainty of the doctrine of the Papal supremacy — His torical accusations against the Church of Rome — Assassination of Henry III. — Bellarmine's contradictions — Image-worship— Fisher and More 205 CONTENTS. XI CHAPTER XI. 'Andrewes translated to Ely, 1609 — Bishop Heton — Bishop Harsnet — Christmas i ¦ — Easter, 1610 — Andrewes at Holdenby in August — Consecration of the Scottish Bishops — J. Casaubon — Andrewes' Responsio page 230 CHAPTER XII. - Archbishop Abbot — Bishops Buckeridge and Thompson — Isaac Casaubon, Car dinal Perron, and King James — Christmas 1611 247 CHAPTER XIII. The Version of 1611 — Dr. Gell — Bishop Marsh — Luther — Tyndale — Coverdale — Crammer's Bible — Geneva Bible — Dr. Whitaker on the Old Testament — Tregelles — Matthan — Valla's Collations — Complutensiau New Testament — Erasmus — Stephens — His MSS. of the New Testament — Beza 268 CHAPTER XIV. Easter 1612 — Andrewes a Governor of the Charterhouse — His speech concerning Vows — His Whitsunday Sermon — Ordination at Downham — His 5th of November Sermon — And on Christmas-day — Casaubon's Answer to Cardinal Perron— Dr. Collins 350 CHAPTER XV. Casaubon — Daniel Heyn — Andrewes' Comparison of the Churches of England and Rome — Whitsunday Sermon, 1613 — The two Sacraments — The Nullity — Divine Right of Kings — Easter-day Sermon, 1614 — Rev. Norwich Spack- man — The Earl of Northampton — Of the Royal anointing — Of the Jesuits — Archdeacon Wigmore — Andrewes' Sermon on the name Immanuel 364 CHAPTER XVI. Bishop Andrewes with the King at Cambridge, 1615 — His Easter Sermon — Bishop Wren — Andrewes' Sermon on our Lord's Baptism — Dr. John Bois, * Prebendary of Ely — Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on the 5th of November — Dr. Balcanqual — Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on Micah v 395 CHAPTER XVII. Cosin— Drusius— Whitsunday, 1616— The King at Burleigh-on-the-Hill— Andrewes a Privy Councillor — Thomas Earl of Arundel— Amner— Beale— The King's Progress to Scotland — Andrewes at Durham, 1617 424 xii CONTENTS. CHAPTER XVIII. The King's progress to Scotland— Whitsunday 1617— Carey and Laud—.,, Grotius " De Imperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra"— Felton, Bishopi of Bristol page 436* CHAPTER XIX. Andrewes and Grotius, 1618 — Condemnation of Traske — Peter du Moulin — Dr. Preston — Andrewes translated to Winchester — Christmas 1619 — The King at Farnham, 1620 — Consecration of St. Mary's Chapel near Southampton Tilenus 451 CHAPTER XX. Bishop Andrewes preaches at the opening of Parliament 1621 — His Sermon upon Fasting — Upon St. John xx. 17. — Whitsunday — Archbishop Abbofs calamity — -Andrewes befriends Abbot — Entertains Junius and Doublet at Farnham — Dr. Thomas Goad 473 CHAPTER XXI. Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on Hypocrisy— The Archbishop of Spalatro — The King's Letter to Preachers — William Knight — Disputes on Predestination at Cambridge — Junius — Andrewes' Christmas Sermon on the Wise Men. , 481 CHAPTER XXII. Easter, 1623 — Cluverius — Bishop Andrewes foresees the coming dangers — The Isle of Jersey 488 CHAPTER XXin. Bishop Andrewes on Repentance and Fasting — Andrewes and Neile on the King's Prerogative— Merio Casaubon— The death of King James— Modera tion of Andrewes — Fast Service — Richard Montagu — Death of Andrewes 494 THE LIFE OF LANCELOT ANDREWES, D.D. LORD BISHOP OP WINCHESTER. CHAPTEE I. Andrewes at School and at the University — His College Lectures on the Decalogue — Sis doctrines — Faith the foundation of Religion — Of the rule of interpretation — The reason of the introduction of the New Covenant — Of the use of images and pictures in Churches — Of the Eucharist, and ofthe application of sacrificial terms to it. Lancelot Andrewes was born A.D. 1555, in Thames- street, in the parish of AUhallows, Barking, London, of religious parents, who, besides his education, left him a fair estate which descended to his heir at Eawreth, a little village between Chelmsford and Eayleigh.1 His father Thomas in his latter time became one of the Society and master of Trinity House, and was descended of the ancient family of i Morant professes that he was unable to discover what this property was. (Morant's Essex, vol. i. p. 286.) But he informs us that the manors of Mal- greffs or Malgraves, in the parish of Horndon, and of Goldsmiths iu that of Langdon, were in this family. Langdon and Horndon-on-the-Hill are between Billericay and Tilbury. " Anne daughter of Mr. Thomas Andrews, citizen of London, brought it to her husband Thomas Cotton, of Conington, in Cambridge shire." This Anne must have been the bishop's niece. Her only daughter Frances married Dingley Ascham, Esq. (Ibid. pp. 218, 247.) Note in p. iii. Andrewes' Minor Works. (Oxford, J. H. Parker, 1854.) In the register of Newton, near Bury St. Edmund's, there occurs, " Rebecca daughter of William Andrewes, gent, of Bury, was buried 22 Nov. 1582." This family bore the same arms with the bishop. They were dispersed over Hampshire, Suffolk, and London ; and perhaps of this family was Sir Henry Andrewes, of Lathbury, near Newport Pa'gnel, in Buckinghamshire. 2 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Andrewes in Suffolk. Lancelot was early sent to the Coopers' Free School, Eatcliff, in the parish of Stepney. This school was founded in the reign of Henry the Eighth by Nicholas Gibson, grocer, who in 1538 served the office of Sheriff. It was intended for the education of sixty children of poor parents, under a master and usher, and to it were attached an almshouse and chapel. Here Andrewes was placed under Mr. Ward, who, discovering his abilities, per suaded his parents to continue him at his studies and to destine him to a learned profession. His young scholar did not prove unmindful of hi3 kindness, but when raised to the see of Winchester, promoted his son Dr. Ward to the living of Bishop's Waltham.1 At this place, which is a small market-town ten miles north-east of Southampton, the Bishops of Winchester had a residence from the time of Bishop Henry de Blois, brother of king Stephen. This place was the favorite resort of the famous Wykeham. The palace was destroyed in the civil wars.2 From Mr. Ward Andrewes was sent to the celebrated Eichard Mulcaster, then master of Merchant Taylors' School.3 Mulcaster was a strict disci plinarian, having been trained under the stern Udal at Eton. Thence he went to King's College, Cambridge, in 1548, but removed to Oxford, where his learning was so highly esteemed that in 1561 he was appointed the first master of Merchant 1 Dr. Ward was also Fellow of Queens' College, Cambridge, and Prebendary of Chichester. Bishop Andrewes probably collated bim to the latter. 2 "Little now remains but a part of the wall, overgrown with ivy, and the park is converted into a farm. The stews for keeping fish for the use of the house are still in being ; and against a wall near the ruins is an ancient pear- tree, said to have been planted by William of Wykeham, who is said to have expended 30,000 marks in repairing and enlarging this mansion." — Cruttwell's Tour, $c, 1801, vol. ii. p. 162. 3 Bishop Andrewes left his son Peter a legacy of £20. Of Mulcaster Isaacson records that Andrewes ever reverently respected him during his life in all companies, and placed him at the upper end of his table, and after his death caused his picture (having but few other in his house) to be set over his study door. He was of a wealthy family in Cumberland, who, in the time of William Eufus, had the charge of defending the border-countries from the Scots. He was the son of William Mulcaster, Esq., who resided during the former part of his life at Carlisle, and whose pedigree occurs in notices of Surrey Descents, amongst the uncatalogued MSS. of Dr. Rawlinson at Oxford. {Gent. Mag. vol. lxx. p. 420.) THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 3 Taylors' School, which was founded in that same year by the munificent Sir Thomas White. Here Mulcaster con tinued until 1596, and was appointed master of St. Paul's School, from which he was preferred by the Queen to the rich rectory of Stanford Eivers, near Ongar, 1598. In 1609 he was deprived by death of a beloved wife, with whom he had lived happily fifty-six years. He did not long survive, but died April 15, 1611. Amongst Andrewes' contemporaries at Merchant Taylors' were Giles Thompson, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester,1 Thomas Dove, afterwards Bishop of Peterborough,2 and Ealph Hutchenson, who was president of St. John's College, Oxford, from 1590 to his death, January 17, 1605. On his leaving Merchant Taylors' School in 1571, Andrewes was entered at Pembroke College, Cambridge. On 9th September in this same year Dr. Thomas Watts, of Christ's College, Cambridge, (who in 1560 was appointed archdeacon of Middlesex, in the place of the venerable Alexander Nowell,) being then prebendary of Totenhale in St. Paul's, and in 1571 also dean of Booking, founded seven scholarships at Pembroke College, called Greek scholarships.3 The four first scholars upon this foundation were Andrewes and Dove, Gregory Downhall, and John 1 Dr. Giles Thompson was also a native of the metropolis. He was sent from Merchant Taylors' School in 1571 to University College, Oxford, and was elected thence to a fellowship at All Souls in 1580. He served the office of Proctor in 1586, and was appointed Divinity Reader at Magdalene College. Queen Elizabeth made him one of her chaplains, and in 1602 Dean of Windsor. He had a considerable hand in preparing the present version of the New Testa ment, and succeeded Dr. Parry in the see of Gloucester in 1611, but died the following year. 2 Dr. Dove being an eloquent preacher was made Dean of Norwich in 1589, and raised to the see of Peterborough in 1601. There he contmued till his death, August 30, 1630. He was about the same age with Andrewes. 3 Sir John Harrington relates that Sir Francis Walsingham, the same " great councillor of those times who procured Andrewes a prebend in Paul's," gave bim a "liberal exhibition." (Brief View of the State of the Church of England, p. 141. Lond. 1652.) Whether this refers to his own liberality towards Andrewes at the University, or to his having perhaps brought him into the notice of his other patrons, Price and Watts, does not appear. It is most probable that Sir Francis Walsingham contributed out of his own purse to his support at the University. He resided in the immediate vicinity of Andrewes' parents, in Seething-lane, communicating with All Hallows, Barking. b2 .4 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Wilfbrd. About the same time Andrewes was, with Dove, Wilford, and William Plat, appointed to a scholarship in Jesus College, Oxford, at the request of the founder, by Queen Elizabeth. It would appear that he was nominated to a scholarship at Oxford previously to his admission, or at least residence, at Cambridge. He left Merchant Taylors' School on St. Barnabas Day, June 11, 1571, and the royal charter of foundation whence Jesus College dates" its institution, is dated 27 June, 13 Eliz. 1571. By this charter Dr. Hugh Price, or Ap Eice, (LL.D., of Oxford, 1525, and supposed to have been educated at Oseney Abbey), Treasurer of St. David's, was permitted to settle estates on the said college to the yearly value of £160., for the sustentation of eight fellows and .eight scholars, all appointed in the first instance, according to Dr. Price's mind, by Queen Elizabeth.1 " What he did when he was a child and a schoolboy, it is not now known," says his grateful biographer Isaacson, " but he hath been sometimes heard to say, that when he was a young scholar in the University, and so all his time onward, he never loved or used any games or ordinary recreations, either within doors, as cards, dice, tables, chess, or the like ; or abroad, as bats, quoits, bowls, or any such ; but his ordinary exercise and recreation was walking either alone or with some companion with whom he might confer and recount his studies." To the last he took great delight in those meditations that are, as it were, inspired by the beholding of the works of God. His custom was, after he had been three years at the University, (when he took his degree of B.A. in 1574-5,) to come up to London once a year to visit his parents, always about a fortnight before Easter, and to stay with them about a month, never intermitting his studies. And, until he was a bachelor of divinity, he even used to perform these journies on foot. In October 1576 he was chosen to a fellowship at his college, and Dove, the unsuccessful candidate, was continued as a tanquam-soctus by a liberality not unusual in those i Memorials of Oxford, by Dr. Ingram, President of Trinity College. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 5 times. In 1578 he took the degree of M.A.1 In 1580 he was ordained, and the same year his name appears in the College books as Junior Treasurer. In 1581 he was Senior Treasurer, and on July 11 was incorporated M.A. of the University of Oxford, on the same day with William Pember- ton of Christ College, afterwards the incumbent of High Ongar.2 After he had' been some time Master of Arts he was appointed catechist in his college, and read his lectures upon the decalogue at the hour of catechising (three in the after noon) every Saturday and Sunday; and such was his repu tation as a student and a divine, that many came to the chapel, now (since the chapel founded by Bishop Wren) the College library ; and these not only from other colleges, but even from the country. So report both his biographer Isaacson and Jackson the editor of these very lectures. They were put forth from notes in 1642, and entitled, The Moral " Law expounded; and in the same volume were reprinted his Sermons on the Temptation in the Wilderness, and on Prayer. The lectures were a second time edited in 1650, and again in 1675, in a comparatively modern style, and with many enlargements and additions. The edition of 1675 is by no means so accurately printed as that of 1642. Of the sub stance of the work there can be no doubt that it is the j production of our prelate. John Jackson the first editor was probably one of the Assembly of Divines, Preacher of Gray's Inn and of the University of Cambridge.3 Sparke was a Puritan, and has introduced his own likeness in an en graving of Laud's Trial. We have witnessed in our own times an extreme jealousy of all summaries of the Gospel. Not so Bishop Andrewes, ' who, in his introduction to these lectures, observes, in defence of catechising by the help of summaries, that " our Saviour catechising Nicodemus made an epitome or abridgement of the Gospel under one head: So God loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him might not perish, but have everlasting life.,'i 1 In this year Dr. Fulke was made master of Pembroke College. s See Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 219. 3 Hid. p. 279. l p. 4, ed, 1642. p. 5, ed. 1675. 6 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. After an introduction vindicating the practice of cate chising, Andrewes proceeded to speak of the spirit in which the catechized should come to this exercise; and in this, which forms the second chapter, the later is more copious than the earlier edition. But both appear to be taken from notes, and neither can claim to be the original, for 1 each edition possesses its peculiar marks of the style and learning of our author. In the third chapter the catechist proves with great variety of classical and patristical illus tration, that true happiness is to be found only in God. Then he proceeds to shew that the surest way to come unto God is by faith. Nor is there fear of credulity when we believe God, who neither can deceive nor be deceived. Now faith is grounded, says Andrewes, upon the word of God, though published and set forth by man.1 We cannot come to God by reason, for God transcends reason, nor can we know anything of the essences of things. And as to credulity, the endless differences of philosophers upon , the nature of the chief good shew that the uncertainty of the way of reason is most favorable to credulity. And so in the things of common life there is likewise frequent and inevitable necessity for faith.2 But faith doth not exclude reason as corroborative of revelation. So St. Paul appeals to natural reason in the first chapter of his Epistle to the Eomans. And, adds our catechist, " having thus submitted ourselves to belief, and strengthened it with reason, we must look for an higher teacher. For though faith be a perfect way, yet we being imperfect walk imperfectly in it; and therefore in those things which transcend nature and reason, we must believe God only, and pray to Him, that by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit, we may be directed and kept in this way." And " because this inspiration cometh not all at once at the first, we must grow to perfection by little and little, and come up by degrees till it please Him to send it in full measure to us. He that believeth shall not make haste."3 Excellently then does he treat of the proofs of the being 1 p. 20, ed. 1675. - p. 21. 3 ibid, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 7 of a God, especially from the existence of moral sentiments and of a conscience in man.1 Next are summed up the proofs of a particular providence, in which chapter he affirms the principle, that God is his own end, and that he wills all things for his own honour.2 Then follow very elaborate discourses upon Heathenism, Judaism, Mahometanism, and the evidences of Christianity. He then proceeds to treat of the rule of interpretation, and does not, as do some who make use of his name, treat the Scriptures as practically useless until a meaning is assigned to them out of the Fathers or by the Church. He does not refer us either to the one or to the other as the rule of interpretation, but will have us seek the literal meaning of each passage, consult the text in the original tongues, compare Scripture with Scripture, learn the intent of those expressions or idioms that are peculiar to Scripture, as the crucifying of the flesh, the mortifying of concupiscence, &c. ; consider the scope of the passage, as, what was God's intent in setting down the law, in giving a prophecy, in working a miracle, &c, as St. Paul to Timothy reasoneth from the end of the law, against those that made evil use of the law ; and lastly, have regard to • the context. These rules he prefaces with a quotation from St. Augustine, " Let us ask by prayer, seek by reading, find out by meditation, taste and digest by contemplation." It may be observed that in this part of the lectures we meet with a very plain proof that the latter edition was not taken from the bishop's own manuscript, and that it does not deserve the high commendation it gives itself in the titlepage. Thus in p. 54 we read (Eule) 4. " To be acquainted with the phrase of the Holy Ghost, and this is to be gotten by the knowledge of the dialect, idiom, or style of the Holy Spirit, as the apostle speaks, by use to discern it, as the crucifying of the flesh, mortifying the concupiscence, &c, for sometimes the Holy Ghost in Greek sends us to the Holy Ghost in Hebrew." This abrupt transition and incausal connection is not found in the earlier edition, which runs thus : " 4. The knowledge of the Holy Ghost's phrase, i. e. idiom, dialect, or style : for the 1 p. 28, ed. 1675. p. 33, ed. 1642. z p. 33. 8 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Holy Ghost useth divers idioms that are not to be found in other writers ; as, the crucifying of a man's flesh, the mortify ing of his concupiscence, &c. Therefore we must be perfect in these ; and as Heb. 5, ver. last, have our senses exercised, that we may know the Holy Ghost when he speaketh. Often we shall meet with tovt IcttI fiedepfi7jvev6/j,evov, this is being interpreted; the Holy Ghost in Greek referreth us to the Holy Ghost in Hebrew."1 The second editor has endeavoured to incorporate his own with Bishop Andrewes' doctrine. It is to be observed more over, that whereas the larger additions to the author are dis tinguished as such by the editor, he has also inserted glosses and limitations which are indeed put in italics; but neither are these the only additions, for it is owned in the preface that there are some additions left by mistake in the same character with the rest.2 Very remarkable is our author's reason for the introduction of the new covenant ; it is in perfect harmony with the great principle of his theology, that God is all in all : " The reason of this second covenant was, that now Adam having lost his own strength by breach of the first, all power and strength should be new from God in Christ, and all the glory be given to him. For if Adam had stood by his own strength in the first, howsoever God should have had most glory, yet Adam should have had some part thereof for using his strength well and not abusing it when he might, but kept his standing. But that God might have all the glory, he suffered the first covenant to be broken, and permitted man to fall, for which fall he was to make satisfaction, which he could not do but by Christ, nor perform new obedience but by the grace of God preventing us, and making us of unwilling willing, and of unable able to do things in that measure that God will require at our hands."3 He discourses of the order that should be observed in preaching. He will have the law preached first because by it alone men are humbled • then he will have them brought to that covenant by which they can be saved. 1 p. 68. 2 The last page but one in the Preface, ed. 1675 3 p. 60, ed. 1675. p. 72, ed. 1642. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 9 In his ' traces of ihe moral law amongst ihe heathen' he notices their observance of the number seven as the number of rest, and the number most pleasing to the gods, and their practice of mourning seven days, of naming their children on the seventh day, &C.1 Under the exposition of the first commandment are most learnedly and piously treated all the religious affections, faith, hope, love, humility, patience, reverence ; also prayer, thanks giving, obedience, integrity, and perseverance ; and their con traries, unbelief, despair, pride, love of the world, self-love, &c. Under the second commandment he derives the use of pictures in churches from the Gnostics in Irenseus,2 and gives the four causes of the introduction of images, condemning it at the same time as the beginning of great abuses. These causes are the policy of heretics aiming by their imitation of the heathen to conciliate them ; secondly, desire to preserve the memory of the dead; so the people had the likeness of Malesius, Bishop of Constantinople, in their rings, and in their houses. Thirdly, wealth, by reason of which they de sired to please their eyes and to have their churches as rich as themselves. Lastly, the idleness, absence or ignorance of their pastors. "Paulinus, Bishop of Nola in Campania, having occasion to travel into Syria and Egypt, and having none to preach to his people till his return, thought good (because he would have something to teach them in his absence) to paint the whole history of the Bible on the walls of his church, so that their preachers were none other but painted walls. But this is no way to be commended in him, and the effect proved accordingly. For it fell out that for want of better teachers the people became ignorant, and be cause their pastors became but dumb images, therefore dumb images became their pastors."3 Our author charges upon the second council of Nice the paying supreme worship to images themselves. The later 1 p. 66. 2 Hair. B. i. cc. 24, 27. And see Letter 2 (p. 37) of Fhilalethes Cantab., the late Bp. Kaye's Reply to tlie Travels of an Irish Gentleman in search of a Re ligion. 1834. 3 p. 200, ed. 1675. 10 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. editor of his lectures inserts a correction, affirming that the council was misrepresented to the councils of Frankfort and Paris. But the reader will find this point fully treated of in Bishop Stillingfleet upon the Idolatrous Practices of the Bomish Church / and Andrewes fully justified. Under this commandment Andrewes discourses of all the parts of divine worship, preaching, prayer, thanksgiving, sacraments, and discipline. " St. Paul," he tells us, " not only preached, but made it an ordinance of God, to save them that believe."2 Upon the sacraments and discipline the later is far more copious than the earlier edition, which, from its extreme brevity, was probably taken from notes very defective them selves upon these particulars. If this part of the work be our author's, he decides that children are believers " by their godfathers and godmothers and parents who present them and desire to have them baptized in the faith of Christ." The sacrifice of the Eucharist he does not make a repetition of Christ's sacrifice, but an oblation of ourselves to God and a sacrifice of thanksgiving. The only other sense in which our author ever calls the Lord's Supper a sacrifice is as a commemoration of Christ's sacrifice. He disclaims in his Easter-day Sermon for A.D. 1612, the application of the term sacrifice in the strict and literal sense. He saith, " by the same rule that theirs [the passover] was, by the same may ours be termed a sacrifice. In rigour of speech neither of them : for (to speak after the exact manner of divinity) there is but one only sacrifice veri nominis properly so called; that is Christ's death, and that sacrifice but once actually performed at his death, but ever before represented in figure, from the beginning; and ever since repeated, in memory, to the world's end." And a little after, in the same sermon : " So it was the will of God, that so there might be with them a continual foreshewing, and with us a con tinual shewing forth the Lord's death till He come again. Hence it is, that what names theirs carried, ours do the like, and 1 A Discourse concerning the Idolatry Practised in tlie Church of Eome &c. by Edward Stillingfleet, D.D. Lond. 1671, pp. 79—89. * 1 Cor. i. 21. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 11 the Fathers make no scruple at it ; no more need we." We do not find here that theological confusion of language which would lead us to suppose that the Eucharistic elements them selves were a sacrifice available to the forgiveness of sins; a confusion into which those have fallen perhaps unwittingly, yet really, who have sought to make of the Eucharist a real sacrifice and not a commemoration of a sacrifice. These' contend for a real; Bishop Andrewes, Bishop Jewel, Bishop Bilson for a figurative sacrifice, a memorial of Christ's death, in which the offerers were as much the people as the priests ; so Bishop Bilson : " Christ is offered daily but mystically, not covered with c qualities and quantities of bread and wine, for those be neither mysteries nor resemblances to the death of Christ: but by the bread which is broken, by the wine which is drunk, in substance creatures, in signification sacra ments, the Lord's death is figured and proposed to the communicants, and they for their parts, no less people than priests, do present Christ hanging on the Cross to God the Father, with a lively faith, inward devotion, and humble prayer, as a most sufficient and everlasting sacrifice for the full remission of their sins and assured fruition of His mercies." And again, he explains Peter Lombard in his fourth book and twelfth distinction, saying, " Christ is offered in a sacrament," by these words, " that is, his offering is represented, and a memory of his passion celebrated." And so Dr. Field (who has nevertheless been alleged to prove the doctrine of Johnson, Hickes, and their followers) sums up all in this, " The sacrifice of the altar is only the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and a mere representation and commemoration ofthe sacrifice once offered on the Cross."1 Equally careful is Buckeridge, Bishop of Ely, to guard against all idea of a real external sacrifice, denying in plain terms that the Eucharist is an external proper sacrifice.2 1 Field's Book ofthe Church, p. 220. Ed. 3d. Oxf. 1635. 2 Discourse concerning Kneeling, 1618. 12 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE II. Andrewes on the Fourth Commandment — Of holy places — Of the Church's deposit — Of Circumcision — Of the fear of God — Of grace. — Andrewes goes into the north with the Fori of Huntingdon — Sir Francis Walsingham becomes his patron — He is made Vicar of St. Giles' ', Cripplegate — Preaches at the Spital in 1588 — His censure of highmindedness — His honourable notice of Augustine and Calvin — Vindication of Protestant munificence — Censure of simony and sacrilege — Of Justification — He preaches before the Queen in 1589 — Is made Prebendary of Southwell and of St. Paul's, and Master of Pembrolce College — His Clerum. In the sixth chapter our author exposes the excuses of the Eomanists in regard of image-worship, and herein follows the very same course that is taken in the Homily upon Peril of Idolatry. In his exposition of the fourth commandment he observes that men would probably have neglected worship altogether, "if God had not provided a particular day for himself and settled it by a special commandment ; as we see in those that talk of a perpetual Sabbath, who come at length to keep no day at all." His judgment did not suffer him to be led away with the presumptuous folly of those who dis covered that Adam had no need of a Sabbath. He regarded the fourth commandment as partly moral and partly cere monial, which appears to be virtually admitted by Bishop White himself, who says that "the common and natural equity ofthe commandment is moral."1 Andrewes derives the Lord's Day, with St. Augustine, from Holy Scripture- 1 Treatise of the Sabbath Day, p. 90. Lond. 1636. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 13 this is the day that ihe Lord hath made. And so St. Athana sius affirms that " the Lord changed the Sabbath to the Lord's Day."1 " So," observes our author, "though the Sabbath or seventh day from the creation be ceased, yet there is another day still remaining, because the end of keeping a day is immutable from the beginning, to wit, that God might be honoured by a solemn and public worship." But the whole of this subject is more fully considered and more accurately recorded in his Lectures preached in St. Paul's: " Of all the days in the week we shall see the seventh day to be the fittest to retain and keep in memory the commendation of this benefit and work of creation. When God had performed this great work of creation, he took order also, because it was the greatest benefit which as yet the world had or knew of, that the seventh day should be always had in remembrance, be cause he had fully perfected all the work in it ; and the very same reason which made the Jews' Sabbath on the seventh day, doth now also move Christians to keep it on the first day in the week ; for it is God's will that the lesser benefit should surcease and give place to the greater, Jer. xxiii. 7, and that the benefit of creation as the lesser, should yield and give place to the work of redemption, which is the greater benefit."2 But the Sabbath of Sinai, adds our author, had three other accessory ends : first, political, which was bodily rest, Exod. xxiii. 12 ; secondly, ceremonial, that is commemorative of the creation, and typical of Christ's rest in the grave, of our rest from sin, and of eternal rest in heaven: thirdly, an end peculiar to the Jews, the commemorating of their deliverance out of Egypt, Deut. v. 15 ; wherefore the Jews say that they have a double right and interest in the Sabbath. In regard of the sanctification of the day, he condemns all labor, pastimes, journeyings, and such agricultural works as are forbidden in Exodus xxxiv. 21, bounding these rules by that of our Saviour, God will have mercy and not sacrifice. The eighth chapter treats of the duty of fasting, a duty 1 Treatise of the Sabbath Day, p. 78. Lond. 1636. And see Forbesii Theo- logia Moralis, 1. 4, c. 2, § 6. Op. t. i. p. 79. 2 Apospasmatia Sacra, or Orphan Lectures, p. 134. Lond. 1657. 14 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. unhappily for the most part altogether neglected, or magnified as an end instead of a way to an end. Again, if the love of ease will condemn fasting, so the love of money will as easily condemn all care of the house of God as superstitious. But justly does our author satirize this desecrating sort of religion. " The Sabbath is the day of rest, and when we hallow it, we call it the Lord's rest. So Psalm cxxxii. 14, we see the Lord will give the same name to the place, This is my rest; concerning which, as the Apostles took order, as that the exterior part of God's worship might be performed decently and in order; so on the other side, that the place of God's worship should be so homely and so ordered, that the table of the Lord's Supper where, one saith well, the dreadful mysteries of God are celebrated, were fitter to eat oysters at, than to stand in the sanctuary of the Lord ; this is so far from pomp that it is far from decency. And it is a thing that would be thought of: it is not the weightier matter of the law, yet not to be neglected. As our working, travelling, &c. shew that we esteem not that day, so the walls and windows shew that we are not esteemers of his sanctuary."1 From holy things he proceeds to treat of holy persons, and of that power which is in the law of God alone to hold communities together by checking those sins that cannot, from their very nature, be restrained by human enactments ; sins which nevertheless have been the destruction of empires. Here he speaks of the great mischief which the corruption of law and oppressive delays, &c. had brought upon our own country.2 In the later edition, which is much more ample upon the subject of ceremonies than the earlier, having a whole page by way of introduction which that has not, Andrewes calls the Scriptures, the volume of both covenants, the depositum committed to the Church.3 Circumcision he calls here and elsewhere a sacrament affirming that to the sacraments of circumcision and of the passover succeeded baptism and the Lord's Supper.* 1 p. 357, cd. 1642. ' p. 303, cd, 1675. 3 p. 210. « p. 265. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 15 Of the fear of God he saith, " The reason why though we may and ought to obey God out of love, yet it hath pleased him to command fear, is threefold: 1. to overthrow the vain speculation of some erroneous people, that dream of an absolute perfection in this life. The wise man saith, Blessed is ihe man that feareth alway. And either there is no perfection in this life, or fear is superfluous ; he that cannot fall need not fear. 2. Inasmuch as the children of God often feel in themselves a feebleness in faith, a doubt in hope, coldness in prayers, slowness in repentance, and weakness in all the other duties, in some more, in others less, according to the measure of the Spirit communicated to them, as it was in king David ; therefore fear is necessary to recover them selves, and he that loseth it not, his heart shall never be hardened, nor fall into mischief. Though all other duties fail, yet if fear continues, we shall never need to despair. 3. Because the excellent duty of love, the effect of fear, might not fail and grow careless. In the Canticles the spouse fell asleep with her beloved in her arms, and when she awoke her beloved was gone : in her bed she sought him but found him not. So that if there be not a mixture of fear with love, it will grow secure and fall asleep and lose her beloved. Therefore that we may be sure to keep our love awake, when we think we have Christ in our arms, there must be a mixture of fear with it. So for these three reasons fear is necessary, even for them that think themselves in a perfect state. And withal Solomon tells us, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom : so did his father before him. And the same Solomon concludes his book of ihe Preacher with, Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the end of all and ihe whole duty of man. And in another place he saith, The fear of the Lord is ihe fountain of life to avoid the snares of death. As faith is the beginning of Christian religion, as the first principles in every science are of things to be believed, so is fear the first work or beginning of things to be done : and as servile fear is the first work, so a reverend and filial fear is the last work and conclusion of all things."1 i pp. 124, 125. 16 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. He thus speaks of the grace of God. " As Nebuchad nezzar ascribed the building of great Babel to his own power, and made his own glory the end of it ; so, on the contrary, we also say of hope, it makes God the author of all the good it looks for, and makes His glory the end of all. For first, it makes us go out of ourselves and trust only in God, and wholly rely upon Him as the sole efficient cause of good to us. We must wholly depart out of ourselves ; we must not conceive that there is any sufficiency in ourselves, but that all our sufficiency is of God, not so much as to think a good thought, therefore much less to have a will to do it ; but that it is God that works the velle [willing] and consequently the perficere [perfecting] both the will and the deed in us. We must not ascribe any part or help to ourselves : for our Saviour saith, Without Me ye can do nothing. Upon which place St. Augustine noteth, it is " not any great thing, but nothing at all, and not that we can perfect nothing, but do nothing at all. And as it makes God the cause and first beginning, so the last end too, by giving the glory of his graces in us to him : and the reason is plain in the Apostle, That no flesh should glory in his presence, but as it followeth, that he that glorieth should glory in Him. (1 Cor. i.)"1 The same pious doctrine is contained and vindicated very fully in his sermon upon 2 Cor. iii. 5, Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.2 There he saith, " If we begin to do any good thing, it is God who began a good work in us. Phil. i. 6. In consideration of which place Augustine saith of the Pela gians, Audiant qui dicunt, ' a, nobis esse caeptum, a Deo esse eventum,' the beginning is from us, the completion is from God. Here let them learn of the Apostle, that it is the Lord that doth begin and perform the good work." And thus much of his catechetical lectures, the value of which is by no means exaggerated in Jackson's Dedication to Parliament, where they are called and said to have been 1 p. 138, ed. 1675. 2 Nineteen Sermons concerning Prayer. Camb. 1641. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 17 reputed "a very library to young divines, and an oracle to consult at, to laureate and grave divines." From the University Andrewes went into the north on the invitation of Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon and Lord President of the North.1 Whilst with him he is said both by Isaacson and Bishop Buckeridge to have had great success in converting several both priests and laymen to the Protestant religion. "After this," adds Buckeridge in his funeral sermon for our prelate, " Mr. Secretary Walsinghame took notice of him, and obtained him of the Earl, intending his preferment, in which he would never permit him to take any country benefice, lest he and his great learning should be buried in a country church. His intent was to make him Beader of Controversies in Cambridge, and for his maintenance he as signed to him (as I am informed) the lease of the parsonage of Alton in Hampshire, which after his death (in 1590) he re turned to his lady, which she never knew nor thought of."2 In 1583, November 27, Nicholas Felton, afterward Bishop of Ely, and, like Andrewes, one of the most upright and popular prelates of his time, was elected to a fellowship at Pembroke College.3 In 1585 Andrewes took his degree of B.D., and in 1588 appears to have succeeded Eobert 1 Henry Hastings, third Earl of Huntingdon, succeeded his father Francis in the earldomin June 1561, and married Catherine daughter of John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. He died in December 1595. Sir Richard Baker, in his notice of the many illustrious personages who died in the course of this year, notes of the Earl of Huntingdon, that he spent his estate upon Puritan ministers. His nephew Francis, son of his brother George, succeeded to the earldom. He was, says Sir R. Baker, excluded the Queen's favour toward the end of her reign for dealing with sorcerers. The Lord President was the patron and friend of Andrewes, Morton (afterwards Bishop of Durham), and Howland Bishop of Peterborough, whom in 1594 he recommended for the Archbishopric of York, but it was reserved for Dr. Matthew Hutton. — See Willis's Survey of the Cathedrals, Peterborough, p. 506. Our Henry, third Earl of Huntingdon, was Lord-Lieutenant of Leicester and 1 Rutland, one of the peers who had charge of Mary Queen of Scots, and President Jof the North 1572 — 1595. Peck (Desid. Cur. B. 4) has given several of his letters to Chaderton, Bishop of Lincoln. 2 Funeral Sermon, p. 18. 18 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Crowley (Veron's successor in 1563) in the vicarage of St. Giles', Cripplegate. Crowley died on June 18, and was ^ buried in the chancel. ti'< Andrewes, on April 22, 1585, read his Thesis de Usuris as his exercise for the degree of B.D. His Sermons on the Temptation in the Wilderness, first published in 1592, and those on the Lord's Prayer, first published in 1611, were probably delivered, not at Cambridge as a recent editor of Isaacson's Life of Andrewes conjectures, but at St. Giles', Cripplegate. Dr. Hopkins, Bishop of Derry, also published a very valuable series of Sermons on the Lord's Prayer towards the latter end of this century. Amongst other eminent divines who have written upon it, are John Smith, 1609, Dr. John Boys, 1622, Perkins of Cambridge, Dr. Henry King, 1638, Joseph Mede, 1658, and William Gouge. In 1586 appeared A Choice of Emblems and other Devises for the most part gathered out of sundry writers, Englished and Moralized, and divers newly devised by Geoffrey Witney, (fee. Imprinted at Ley den in ihe house of Christopher Plantyn, • by Francis Baphelengius, 1586. Dedicated to Eobert Earl of Leicester, with his arms opposite the dedication. In thet second part, p. 224, Matth. xxiv. To M. Andrewes, Preacher. The Martyrs. " Sic probantur." And under it the Pharisee giving alms and blowing his trumpet at the same time. Others are: p. 217, to Mr. Elcocke, preacher. to Mr. Eawlins, preacher. to Mr. Knewstubs, preacher. to Mr. James Jonson. to Mr. Howlte, preacher. Andrewes, whilst at Cambridge, united, it is said, with the Eev. John Knewstubs, B.D., a native of Westmoreland and fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, Dr. Chaderton, afterwards first master of Emmanuel College, Mr. Culverwell, (Ezekiel Culverwell) of Emmanuel College, vicar of Felstead in Essex, author of a Treatise of Faith, 1633, also A ready Way to remember the Scriptures, 1637 ; also John Carter, 1 See the recent edition of his Posthumous Works, Opusc. Posth. pp. 113 — 150. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 19 A.M. of Clare Hall, and some others, in weekly meetings for prayer and expounding the Scriptures. Mr. Carter, afterwards rector of Belstead in Suffolk, wrote A Commentary of Chrisis Sermon upon the Mount. He died, aged 80 years, February 22, 1634. " At their meetings," says Samuel Clarke in his Lives of Thirty-two English Divines, p. 133, " they had constant exercises : first they began with prayer, and then applied themselves to the study of the Scriptures. One was for the original languages; another's task was for the grammatical interpretation; another's for the logical analysis; another's for the true sense and meaning of the text ; another gathered the doctrines ; and thus they carried on their several employments, till at last they went out, like Apollos, eloquent men and mighty in the Scriptures : and the Lord was with them, so that they brought in a very great harvest unto God's barn." On Wednesday, April 10, in Easter-week 1588, Andrewes preached from 1 Tim. c. vi. 17 — 19, at the Spital.1 This dis course is in many respects inferior to none of the ninety-six sermons with which it is embodied. In all the great and essential features of a Christian sermon it is perfect, and abounds with that fertility of illustration, and that witty and at times satirical wisdom which marked its author. But indeed truth - is a continual satire upon the world; and he who would faithfully portray men's passions and set them before their own eyes must pass for a satirist. But all is here delivered with an affection not less evident than that fearlessness which shines so nobly in this most faithful of preachers. How does he hold up to view all the meanness of pride, all the * 1 The Spital Sermons were preached in a cross in the churchyard of the dl Priory of the Augustinian Canons in Spital Fields. A Bishop, a Dean, and ,a Doctor in Divinity preached on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday in Easter-week. Maunsell (Book Catalogue, p. 96) states that this sermon was Sprinted without the author's consent by widow Butler, 1589. Herbert (edition llstlof Ames' Typographical Antiquities, p. 1348) says that she had license granted firin the following year, Aug. 24, 1590, for a sermon of Mr. Andrewes' called ., ," The Rich Man's Scripture :" license by the Bishop of London. (Rev. James •'Bliss, p. Ix. Appendix B. to Andrewes' Life and Minor Works. Oxford, J. H. .J-Parker, 1854.) c2 20 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. folly of covetousness, all the cruelty and oppression of the proud rich man! How does he urge his authority as a Jjrnessenger from God, upon the rich and the great ! He delivered not an essay but a discourse, written not with a view to reading but to delivery. He therefore raises up and meets the objections of his hearers, and answers to the supposed charge of personality in a manner that those indeed do not need who are always careful to destroy the force of particular precepts by unmeaning generalities. And at least he reminds his congregation that they must one day give an account of the use to which they shall turn that which they have heard at his mouth.1 He calls God to witness that he has delivered his own soul,2 and with all this holy earnestness is nothing but truth in all sobriety and gravity, as it is drawn from the all-searching and all-powerful word of God. After instancing the highmindedness of Nabal, Abner, and Micaiah, he adds, " These were, I dare boldly affirm, highminded men in their generations. If any be like these they know what they are. If then there be any that refuse to be pruned and trimmed by the word of God ; who either, when he heareth the words of the charge, blesseth himselj in his heart and saith, Tush, he doth but prate; these things shall not come upon me, though I walk still according to the stubbornness of mine own heart;3 either in hearing the word of God, takes upon him (his flesh and blood and he) to sit on it and censure it; and say to himself one while ' This is well spoken,' when his humour is served} another while, 'This is foolishly spoken, now he babbleth,' because the charge sits somewhat near him; either is in the Pharisee's ¦case, which, after they have heard the charge, do (as theyj did at Christ) eK/iVKTrjpl^eiv, jest and scoff, and make themrl selves merry with it, and wash it down with a cup of sack and that because they were covetous;* if in very deed the word of God be to them a reproach,6 and they take like delight in both, and well were they if they might never 1 P- 2(5- 2 P- 17. a Deut. xxix. 19. 4 S. Luke xvi. 14. 3 jer ^ 10 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 21 hear it ; and, to testify their good conceit of the word, shew it in the account of the ephod, which is a base and con temptible garment in their eyes, and the word in it and with it, (this is Michal's case) : whosoever is in any of these men's cases, is in the case of a highmind-ed man, and that of the highest degree, for they lift themselves up, not against earth and man, but against heaven and God himself. O be loved, you that be in wealth and authority, love and reve rence the word of God. It is the root that doth bear you; it is the majesty thereof that keepeth you in your thrones, and maketh you be that you are : but for Ego dixi DU estis (a parcel-eommission out of this commission of ours) the mad ness of the people would bear no government, but run head long, and overthrow all chairs of estate, and break in pieces all the swords and sceptres in the world ; which you of this city had a strange experience of in Jack Straw and his meiny,1 and keep a memorial of it in your city-scutcheon, how all had gone down, if this word had not held all up. And therefore honour it,. I beseech you ; I say, honour it. For when the highest of you yourselves which are but grass, and your lordship's glory and worship which is the flower of this grass, shall perish and pass away, this word shall continue for ever. And if you receive it now with due regard and reverence, it will make you also to continue for ever."2 Touching upon the words, the rich in this world, he re marks, " Sure it is thought of divers of the best writers both old and new (I name of the new Mr. Calvin, and of the old St. Augustine,) that this addition is a diminution &c. — for being of this worlcL they must needs savour of the soil ; be as this world is, (that is) transitory, fickle, and deceitful."3 In this sermon he most amply vindicates the Protestantism of the Elizabethan age from the false accusations of the Romanists, who gave out that it was a faith without good works. After commending the liberality of the city of London," he proceeds, " I will be able to prove, that learning, in the foundation of schools and increase of revenues within col leges ; and the poor, in foundation of alms-houses and increase 1 His family, followers. Z! pp. 6, 7. " b p. 8. 22 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of perpetuities to them, have received greater help within this realm in these forty years last past, since (not the starting up of our Church, as they fondly used to speak, but since) the reforming of ours from the errors of theirs, than it hath, I say, in any realm Christian not only within the selfsame forty years (which were enough to stop their mouths), but also than it hath in any forty years upward, during all the time of Popery: which I speak partly of mine own knowledge, and partly by sufficient grave information to this behalf. This may be said and said truly."1 To simony and sacrilege he thus alludes. Treating of the good that might be done to the Church by the rich men of the city whom he likens to Tyre, called a cherub stretching its wings over the ark to signify what protection it should yield to the Church, he says : " And much good might be done, and is not, in this behalf, and that many ways. I will name but one, that is, that with their wings stretched out, they would keep the filth and pollution of the sin of sins (whereof you heard so bitter complaint both these days) of simony and sacrilege, from falling on the ark, and corrupting and putrify- ing it, which it hath almost already done: that seeing the Pope do that he doth (howsoever some have alleged the Papists' great detestation of this sin and of us for this sin, for a motive ; it is all but dissembling ; their hand is as deep in this sin as any man's) ; I say, seeing the Pope doth as he doth, that is, as he hath dispensed with the oath and duty of subjects to their prince, against the fifth commandment: with the murder, both violent with daggers and secret with poison, of the sacred persons of princes, against the sixth ; with the un- cleanness of the stews and with incestuous marriages, against the seventh ; so now, of late, with the abomination of simony against the eighth; having lately (as it is known by the voluntary confession of their own priests), by special and ex press warrant of the see apostolic, sent hither into this land his license dispensative to all patrons of his mark to set up simony, and to mart and make sale of all spiritual livings which they have or can get to the uttermost penny, even (if 1 p. 17. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 23 it were possible) by the sound of the drum ; and that with a very clear conscience (so that some portion thereof be sent over to the relief of his seminaries, which by such honest means as this come to be now maintained). Seeing thus do the Papists, and we (loth to be behind them in this gain of blood) make such merchandize with this sin, of the poor Church and her patrimony, as all the world crieth shame of it: to redeem the orderly disposing them to the Church's good, were a special way for you rich men to do good in these days. Neither as these times are do I know a better service, nor which (I am persuaded) will please God better than this, or be better accepted at his hands." 1 Towards the end he answers the sophism of the Ehemist translators, who from the text would deduce that good works are a foundation. This they insert in a note, without any reason, and to insinuate an untruth, namely, that they are the foundation of justification. "The ground whereon every building, is raised, is termed fundamentum. The lowest part of the building immediately lying on it is so termed too. In the first sense, Christ is said to be the only foundation : yet the apostles, because they are the lowest row of stones, are said to be foundations in the second. So, among the graces within us, faith is properly in the first sense said to be the foundation; yet in the second do we not deny, but as the apostle ealle th them, as the lowest row next to faith, charity and the works of charity may be called foundations too. Albeit the margin might well have been spared at this place ; for the note is here all out of place. For, being so great schoolmen as they would seem, they must needs know it is not the drift of the apostle here in calling them a foundation, to carry our considerations into the matter of justifying, but only to press his former reason of uncertainty there, by a con trary weight of certain stability here : and so their note comes in like Magnificat at matins." Afterwards he thus dis tinguishes : " But if you shall have grace to make choice of God's plot which he hath here levelled for you to raise upon, 0 quantum dignum pretiof that will be worth all the world 1 p. 20. 24 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. in that day: the perfect certainty, sound knowledge, and precious assurance you shall then have, whereby you shall be assured to be received, because you are sure you are Christ s, because you are sure you have time faith, because you are sure you have framed it up into good works. And so shall they be a foundation to you-ward, by making evident the as surance of salvation : not naturd to God-ward, in bringing forth the essence of your salvation."1 On the 19th May, 1589, Lancelot Andrewes was admitted to the prebendal stall of North Muskham, in the church of Southwell, in the place of John Tonge, D.D., at this time Bishop of Eochester. Tonge was B.A. of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, 1551, M.A. 1555, B.D. 1563, and D.D. 1569. On May 3rd, 1564, he was made Prebendary of Cadington Major, in St. Paul's, London, which stall he held until 1579. From a fellowship he was chosen to be Master of his college in the place of Whitgift, that year preferred to the mastership of Trinity College, where he had been educated. On the 26th April, 1572, Yonge was promoted to the 10th stall in Westminster Abbey, in the place of Edmund Freke, Bishop of Eochester. This stall he was permitted to keep in. com- mendam with his bishopric of Eochester, to which he was consecrated March 16th, 1578, on the translation of Dr. John Pierse to Salisbury. He died at Bromley in Kent, the ancient seat of the Bishops of Eochester, in his 72nd year, on the 10th April, 1605, and was buried at Bromley. Dr. Christopher Sutton, the pious author of Disce vivere, &c, succeeded to his stall at Westminster. North Muskham is about three miles north of Newark. This stall was founded probably by Thomas II. Archbishop of York from 1109 to 1114, and endowed with a part of the great tithes of North Muskham, with the great tithes of Caunton (between Newark and Worksop), and with certain temporals in North Muskham and Caunton.2 Andrewes re tained this stall until he was raised to the see of Ely when it was conferred upon his brother Dr. Eoger Andrewes after wards Master of Jesus College, Cambridge. 1 P- 24. 2 Hardy's Le Neve, vol. iii. p. 428. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 25 On the 29th May Andrewes was, on the death of Dr. Thomas Sampson, the Puritan Dean of Christ Church (where he was succeeded in 1565 by Thomas Godwyn), preferred by Grindal, Bishop of London, at the suit of the same patron who had obtained for him his stall at Southwell, Sir Francis Walsinghame, to the prebendal stall of St. Pancras, in St. Paul's, London, which he also held until his translation from Chichester to Ely in 1609, when he was succeeded by his friend and fellow-collegian the very pious and learned Dr. Eoger Fenton, also one of the translators of the Bible with himself and his brother, and afterwards preferred by himself to the parsonage of Chigwell, in Essex. Fenton was regarded in his college as only inferior to Andrewes himself.1 Andrewes acknowledged these favours in a letter to Sir Francis Walsinghame, as follows : "I do in humble manner crave pardon of your Honour, in that I have not myself attended in the re-delivery of the enclosed, to render to your Honour my bounden duty of thanks for the contents thereof. Being, besides mine exercise tomorrow, on Monday morn ing, at the feast of my father's company, to preach at Deptford,2 I promised myself from your Honour a favourable dispensation for the forbearing of my presence till then, what time I shall wait on your Honour, as well in regard of your Honour's great bounty to me these years past, which, while I Hve,- 1 am bound to acknow ledge, as now for the instant procurement of these two prebends, the one of them no sooner ended, than the other of them straight begun. They are to me both sufficient witnesses of your Honour's care for my well-doing, and mindfulness of me upon any occasion. My prayer to God is, that I may not live unworthy of these so honourable dealings, but that in some sort I may prove serviceable to your Honour, and to your Honour's chief care, this Church of ours. What your Honour hath, and farther shall vouchsafe to promise in my name, in this or aught else, shall be, I trust, so satis- fled, as shall, stand with your Honour's liking every way. So recommending to your Honour the perfecting of your Honour's own benefit, with my very humble duty I end. "The Lord Jesus, of his great goodness, grant unto this realm long to enjoy your Honour. Amen. May 24 [1589]. Tour Honour's in all humble duty and service, so most bound, "L. Andeewes."3 1 See Bishop Felton in his Funeral Sermon. (MSS. Univ. Lib. Camb.) 2 The Corporation of the Trinity House holds its annual meeting on Trinity Monday, when they attend service at Deptford. 3 Teale's Lives of English Divines, pp. 12, 13. (From MSS. Harl. No. 699, fol. 96.) 26 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Sir John Harrington relates that Sir Francis Walsinghame had previously laboured to bring Andrewes to maintain some state points of Puritanism. "But," he adds, "he had too much of the avSpos in him to be scared with a councillor's frown, or blown aside with his breath, and answered him plainly that they were not only against his learning but his conscience." He further mentions that Andrewes' stall at St. Paul's was that of the Confessioner or Penitentiary ; and that while Andrewes held this place, his manner was especially in Lent to walk at stated times in one of the aisles of the cathedral, that if any came to him for spiritual advice and comfort, as some did, though not many, he might impart it to them.1 On the 28th August died Dr. William Fulke, Master of Pembroke Hall, and previously fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. His refutation of the notes appended to the Ehemish Translation of the New Testament forms a storehouse of patristic learning and of sound theology. He was buried at Depden, near Bury, in Suffolk. Andrewes, who was about this time chaplain to Archbishop Whitgift, was chosen to the vacant headship. Strype, in his Life of Whitgift, relates that Andrewes was, for his well-known adherence to ecclesiastical conformity, denied his grace of D.D. in the first congregation of Dr. Preston's admission of him. This Dr. Preston, then Vicechancellor, was not the celebrated Puritan, but Thomas Preston, LL.D., Master of Trinity Hall.2 On this occasion he delivered the thesis ' Decimse non sunt abrogandse,' pub lished in the collection of his posthumous works. On Sep tember 6th he was admitted Master of Pembroke College, and 1 State ofthe Church of England, pp. 143, 144. "Upon his first shewing himself at Cambridge, in his divinity studies, especial notice was soon taken of him (among his abilities and emineneies) as a man deeply seen in all cases of conscience, and he was much sought to in that respect." — Tlie Life and Death of Andrewes, p. 3. Fuller's Abel Redivivus. Lond. 1651. "The life of Bishop Andrewes by the judicious and industrious my worthy friend Master Isaackson." — Fuller's Epistle to tin) Reader. 2 First a fellow of King's College, Cambridge; succeeded Dr. Henry Harvey 1584, as Master of Trinity Hall; died 1598, and was buried in the College chapel. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 27 on taking his degree preached ad Clerum from Prov. xx. 25, It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy; a passage of holy scripture which is altogether disallowed by multitudes as utterly inapplicable under the Christian dis pensation. It was indeed in the time of Charles the First, when almost the whole nation was given to extremes both in religion and politics, a fashionable doctrine with all pseudo- patriots that either sacrilege had ceased to be a sin, or that there was nothing holy, no kind of property of which it could be said that it belonged to God, and was inalienable.1 The bidding prayer was doubtless Andrewes' own compo sition, full of antithesis. " May God," he prays, " preserve to it [the Church militant] his truth so lately recovered from the thickest clouds of error : may he restore it when it shall seem good to him, its unity now well-nigh lost through the dissensions of the Christian world." He begins his sermon with observing that whereas the nine first chapters are evidently connected, the remainder appear to be a collection taken down from Solomon's mouth by others without regard to the order of subject. He touches upon the free-will offerings of the people in the days of David and Saul, 1 Chron. xxvi. 27, 28. This proverb, he notes, might have been the reply of Solomon to some of his courtiers, who like those in Haggai might think that the house of God needed not a roof (i. 4), or who might ask with Judas, ' to what is all this waste?' He remarks, as he might have justly done in our times, " We daily enlist soldiers many, brave and good, but provision for them we find not. We are ever saying much of the diffusion of light, nothing of the supplying of the oil." He then treats — 1. of sacred things, 2. of those who devour them, 3. of their guilt and punishment. Under the first he shews that sacred revenues both by way of oblation and tax are included. The Church both under the old and new covenant had the same liberty granted it of accepting property. This is clear from the last chapter of Leviticus, and 1 In 1646 a translation of this sermon was printed by T. B. for Andrew Hebb, at the BeE in St. Paul's Churchyard. A copy of this translation is in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge. 28 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. from the liberty which the apostles recognized, of the first Christians laying at their feet whatsoever offerings they thought fit. Acts iv. 35. Then as to revenues by way of impost, there is a sacred portion in every man's property. So Abraham the father of the faithful, guided in this (we may not doubt) by the Holy Ghost, and an example wheresoever justly imitable, bound himself to the giving of tithe. The Old Testament Church had a power of taxing itself, (see Nehem. x. 32), and, by parity of reasoning, the Christian. Thus in Acts xxiv. 17, we read not only of alms but of offerings, the offerings being things devoted to religious not to eleemosynary uses. He quotes St. Augustine : le God may thus speak, Thou, 0 man, art thyself mine ; mine is the earth thou tillest; mine the seeds thou sowest; mine the beasts thou makest to labour; mine the showers; mine this heat of the sun ; all are mine ; thou who only puttest to thine hand, deservedst only the tenth, but to thee my servant I give thee nine parts ; give to me the tenth." He notices the unwilling ness of' the people to give as proceeding in no small degree from the springing up of the abuse of impropriations. He refers to the complaints of the Scotch Church preferred to the Parliament in 1565. In speaking of persons he blames the clergy themselves as guilty, through their own negligence and sloth, of being ac cessory to such sacrilegious alienations. The punishment of sacrilege he instances in both profane and sacred history ; in the former, from Cambyses, Brennus, and Crassus ; in sacred history, from the fate of Dathan, Achan, Belshazzar, Athaliah, and Judas. He enlarges upon the sure destruction which sacrilege entails upon the state, and upon its injurious conse quences as discouraging learning in the Church. His biographer Isaacson relates that when he became master of his college, " he found it in debt, being of a very small endowment, then especially, but by his faithful provi dence he left above eleven hundred pounds in the treasury of that college, towards the bettering of the estate thereof." THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 29 CHAPTEE III. Br. Andrewes preaches before the Queen in Lent 1589-90 — His Lectures on the Creation and Fall — TJdal, the Puritan, 1591 — Thesis on the Oath ex officio — Of the worshipping of imaginations, 1592 — Convocation Sermon, 1593 — Greenwood and Barrow — The Dearth of 1594. On March 4, 1590, Ash- Wednesday, we find Andrewes, being now one of the Queen's twelve chaplains, preaching before the Queen at Whitehall, from Psalm lxxviii. ver. 34, When he slew them they sought him, and they returned, and enquired early after God.1 This sermon contains many striking illustrations of the sin and folly of delay in the things of God, and of the power of religion as it is seen in the fears of such as have yet all their life boasted themselves in a fancied independence of God. " They, that a little before, grievously provoked the most high God, with speeches little better than blasphemy : Can God do this 1 Is there a God amongst us f or is there none? And so, instead of quavrebant Deum, quwrebant an Deus, made a question whether there were any to seek: that is, even the very wicked, and (of all wicked the worst) the profane atheists, they sought even at last, they sought. 1 This Sermon is erroneously ascribed to a.d. 1598, in the folio edition of his Sermons. No earlier year will suit the date of Ash- Wednesday, since he was not made one of the Queen's chaplains until 1586. In 1584 Ash- Wednes day (0. S.) fell on the same day, but Andrewes was at that time only a fellow of Pembroke Hall, and M.A. 30 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. This is the triumph of religion: the riotous person, the hypocrite, the atheist, all shall seek."1 Andrewes again preached before the Queen at Greenwich on the following Wednesday, March 11, from Psalm lxxv. ver. 3, The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars thereof; discoursing upon the two pillars of a state, religion and justice, and illustrating his subject ' from the history of Saul and David. He did not with some, who yet feign reverence of his memory, set up prayer against preaching, which he included in the sublime duty of praise, as the proclaiming of God to his creatures; but with the devout George Herbert would have prayer and preaching go hand in hand. " So that not only Moses and Paul by calling on the name of God, but Elias and Jeremie by teaching the will of God (not by prayer only, but by preaching) are, the one an iron pillar,2 the other the chariot and horsemen of Israel in his time."3 He reads 2 Kings xi. ver. 12, with the Vulgate, making the ceremony of the coronation there spoken of to be the " putting not only the diadem imperial, but the book of the law also, upon the King's head," to remind them that " that book should be as dear to them as their crown, and they equally study to advance it."4 Andrewes, on the 6th of April, lost his faithful friend and patron, Sir Francis Walsinghame, who died at his house in Seething-lane, Great Tower-street, about midnight and was buried at St. Paul's the next evening, about ten, without pomp or publicity.6 f On October 13, he preached his introductory lecture at St. Paul's, upon undertaking to comment upon the four first chapters of Genesis.6 These he continued to the 12th Febru- ¦ ary, 1592, upon which day he delivered that upon Gen. iii. 13, And the Lord God said unto the woman, "What hast thou done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and ' p. 176. The 2nd and 4th editions. 2 Jer. i. 48. 3 p. 267. * p. 270. 6 Stow, by Howes, p. 631. Cunningham's Sand-Book of London, p. 671. 6 Orphan Lectures, p. 657. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 31 I did eat. The remaining lectures1 to the end of the fourth chapter were preached in his parish church at St. Giles', Cripplegate, where he resumed them on the 18th June, 1598, and completed them on February 17, 1600. These were published in 1657 with the following title, " Apospasmatia sacra : or, a Collection of posthumous and orphan Lectures : delivered at St. PauVs and St. Giles'1 his Church, by the Bight Honourable and Beverend Father in God Lancelot Andrews, Lord Bishop of Winchester. Never before extant.'1'' It may be observed that our prelate himself did not write his name Andrews as in this titlepage, but Andrewes. Some of these lectures are from very sparing, others from very copious notes. They abound in learning and in pious applications of the / history of which he treats. Here we have the same zeal against sacrilege,2 the same honest denunciation of faction and schism which we find in his convocation sermon,3 the same delight in the works of God which made his solitary walks his most pleasant recreation when a youth, the same familiar knowledge of the Fathers, the same doctrine of the grace of God, sanctifying all that came from' his lips. Treating of the divine rest spoken of in Genesis ii. 2, he saith, " We say then, that he rested not from preserving and governing, though he did rest from making. " Hermes, by the light of reason, could say that it were very absurd to think that God should leave and neglect the things he had made; and God imputeth it as a fault to the ostrich, Job xxxix. ver. 18, 19, to leave her eggs without care and regard in the sands; therefore God himself will be free from that blame and blemish which he condemneth in others. As we say of the Father, so we say of the Son, which is the Word of God, Psalm xxxiii. ver. 9, He commanded and they were made; there is creation : He said the word and they stood fast; which is the second work of preservation 1 These occupy the Orphan Lectures from p. 313 to p. 499. At the end we have some of the Pauline Lectures that had probably not come to hand in time to be published in their proper order ; and lastly three admirable discourses on Genesis iii. 14, 15, preached at St. Giles', Cripplegate. * p. 30. 3 p. 35. 32 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. and guiding. Also Psalm cxlviii. ver. 5, 6, He first made them with his word, which is the first work of creation long since ended, and he gave them a law which they should not break, which is the other work of establishing and governing things made. So Col. i. ver. 17, Paul speaking of Christ, saith, By Him all things have their being, or existence ; and Heb. i. ver. 3, By Him all things have their supportance, and are held up. " If God had his work six days before he rested in creation, and if Adam had his work in the state of innocency, then it is much more meet now, that man should go forth to his labour until the evening, Psalm civ. ver. 23. They which are not in ihe works of men, Psalm 1 xxiii., but lie on their beds imagining mischief, they shall not rest in the Lord, because God made them for good works to walk in them, Ephes ii. ver. 10. " There are a number of superfluous creatures, as one calleth the idle ones, of whom if we should demand, what is thy calling or work? they cannot say, we are exercised in the works of men; neither do they work in the will of God. Therefore if they do anything, they busy themselves in meddling about other men's matters. " It is strange to see how busy we are in taking in hand evil things, and how earnest we are in doing them, and how constant in not giving them over, or ceasing from such works. Judas can watch all night to work his treason ; but Peter and the rest could not watch one hour to pray with Christ. "Husbandmen in their works for earthly things are earnest ; they follow his counsel (Eccles. xi. 6) not to cease sowing from the morning until the evening, but will make an end. But in the works of God we cannot follow his counsel, to do all that thou takest in hand with all thy power and strength. " The last use which we are to make of this is, that which the Apostle gathereth out of the Hebrews (iv. 10). As God did rest from his works, so let us from ours. We must esteem our righteousness and best works as filthy rags THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 33 yea as very dung, Phil. iii. 8, and say as Job did, I feared my own works, Job ix. 28, Vulgate. Thus we must rest from our own works because there is no safety or quietness in them, but leave our own righteousness, that we may rest in Christ and in the works he hath wrought for us."1 These lectures Dr. Andrewes continued at St. Paul's through the months of January, February, April, May, June, July^ August, October, and November, 1591. On January the 8th in that year we find him not only one of the witnesses, but appointed one of the executors of Dean Nowell' s will (most providently made by that venerable man now ten years before his decease). As guard ian of John Dean, in whose education Nowell had been at great expense, Nowell was in the receipt of the interest of £2,600, lent upon bonds to different companies of mer chants in London, of which income, amounting to £135 per annum, it was NoweH's desire that no part should be applied to the emolument of his widow, but the whole laid out in deeds of charity. Of £100, half to be sent to Oxford, half to Cambridge. Of that sent to Cambridge, Dr. Andrewes, master of Pembroke Hall, Dr. Neville, master of Trinity College (tutor to George Herbert, and in 1597 dean of Canterbury), Dr. Tyndale, president of Queens' College, and this same year dean of Ely, and Dr. Chaderton, master of Emmanuel College, were to dispose ; £4. being annually reserved to Alexander Whitaker, scholar of Trinity College, and £4. to his brother Samuel of Eton College, sons of Dr. Whitaker, master of St. John's College, deceased.2 Alexander Nowell was admitted scholar of Trinity College, Cambridge, April 16, 1602s : he was admitted to the degree of B.A. in 1604, and of M.A. in 1608. He was not elected to a fellowship. The registers make no mention of his brother Samuel. Under January 21, 1591, the following register is entered in the registry of St. Olave's, Hart-street : " Master Walter 1 pp. 126, 128. 2 Life of Alex. Nowell, Dean of St. Paul's, by Rev. Ralph Churton. Oxf. 1809, p. 355. 3 Register of Trin. Coll. 34 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Devereux, second son to the Earl of Essex, in my lady Walsinghame's house; Sir Thomas Parrot [Perrot] and Sir William Knollys, Knts., and my lady, the mother, were wit nesses. Mr. Doctor [Andrewes] preached and baptized the child."1 Sir William Knollys, or Knowles, was afterwards treasurer of the household to King James, by whom he was created Baron Knowles, May 3, 1603, Viscount Wallingford 1616, and by Charles I., in the first year of his reign, Earl of Banbuiy. His mansion was Greys Eotherfield, (whence the name of his barony Botherfield) to the west of Henley- on-Thames; a house which in times past Walter Grey the archbishop of York [1216 — 1256] gave freely unto William Grey his nephew, the inheritance whereof by the Baron of D'Eincourt was devolved upon the Lovels.2 In the baptismal register of St. Olave's, Hart-street, is the following, dated January 22, 1591 : " Eobert Devereux Viscount Hereford," (afterward General of the Parliament3) " son and heir of Eobert Earl of Essex, in my Lady Walsing hame's house" (in Seething-lane4) mother to the countess; Sir Francis Knollys and the Lord Eich, with the Countess of Leicester," (daughter of Sir Francis Knollys, and widow of Walter Earl of Essex as well as of Eobert Earl of Leicester, and grandmother to the infant,) witnesses. Dr. Andrewes preached and baptized the child. Sir Francis Knollys was a Knight of the Garter and treasurer to the Queen's household. He had been an exile in Germany in the reign of Queen Mary. He was descended from Sir Eobert Knollys who greatly signalized himself in the wars with France under Edward III. Sir Eobert also assisted in the suppression of Wat Tyler's rebellion, and was of a spirit as munificent as heroic. He contributed 1 Collect. Topog. et Genealog. vol. ii. p. 311. 1835. 2 Holland's Camden, p. 389. 3 The third Earl of Essex of that name. 1 Seething-lane, in Great Tower-street, at the corner of All-Hallows, Barking; it runs north-west from Tower-street to Crutched Friars. Sir Francis Walsinghame lived and died in this lane. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 35 to the building of Eochester-bridge, founded a college at Pontefract, where Constance his lady was born, and was a great benefactor to the White Friars in London, in whose church he was buried in August 1407, being then at least ninety years old.1 The first lord Eich was Lord-Chancellor for five years in the reign of Edward VI. He was well descended and allied in Hampshire, and was much employed under Cromwell in the suppression of abbies; "most of the grants of which lands," says Fuller, " going through his hands, no wonder if some stuck upon his fingers." On St. Matthias-Day, February 24th, Andrewes preached at Greenwich before the queen, from Psalm lxxvii. 20, setting before her the pattern of the divine government, the gentle ness with which the great Shepherd of Israel led his flock. He treated very tenderly, and in the true pastoral spirit, of the value of the flock committed to her royal charge, all alike by nature given to disobedience, but God's flock and people, and the lowest and meanest of them dear to Christ. He quoted those impressive words of St. Augustine upon Inasmuch as ye did ii to the least of these my brethren, ye did it unto me; " Thou hearest the least, and thou despisest them ; hear also these words, my brethren, and, believe me, the saving2 of the least of these is no small glory." He reminded the queen that the office of princes is to lead their people to God, and urged the necessity of a public ministry as well of religion as of civil justice ; the hand as well of Aaron as of Moses. In May Dr. Andrewes was, together with Nowell, ap pointed by archbishop Whitgift to confer with Udal, then in prison. Udal had been convicted under a very large interpretation of the 23 Eliz. cap. 2, which was enacted for the punishment of seditious words against the queen. His offence was a pas sionate invective against the bishops in a work entitled The Demonstration of Discipline which Christ hath prescribed in 1 Fuller's Worthies, Cheshire, p. 179. 2 "Sorum salus. And trust me it is no poor praise to protect this flock, &c." — Andrewes, p. 279. 2nd edit. d2 36 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. his Word, for the government of his Church in all times and places until the world's end. The preface gave especial provocation, and a virulent specimen of it was inserted in the indictment. "Who can deny you without blushing (he writes to the bishops) to be the cause of all ungodliness, seeing your government is that which giveth leave to a man to be anything saving a sound Christian?" and more in a still severer strain. Udal was treated with much injustice, and after a somewhat turbulent trial and much overbearing, was convicted on July 23, 1590 ; but his learning and reputation were such that Whitgift is said to have interceded for him and to have delayed judgment. He was however, in March 1591, brought to the bar at Southwark and condemned to die as a felon. Whitgift is said to have procured his reprieve. In prison he wrote a Hebrew grammar, and was visited by several of his friends. Andrewes conferred with him upon all the points then in controversy between the Church of Eng land and the maintainers of the new discipline, but without success. He appears however to have respected both An drewes and Nowell, and to have been regarded by them with unfeigned sympathy if not esteem. Great efforts were made in his behalf, and his friendly visitants themselves promised him their kind offices, but he was disappointed of all his hopes, and at last died broken-hearted in prison. Great numbers attended his funeral at St. George's, Southwark.1 Andrewes is said to have been a member of a Society of Antiquaries, to which belonged Sir Walter Ealeigh, Sir Philip Sidney, Lord Burleigh, Henry Earl of Arundel, the two Herberts, Earls of Pembroke, Sir Henry Saville, John Stowe, and William Camden. It began in the earlier part of the reign of queen Elizabeth, and its great object was the preservation of MSS. dispersed by the suppression and dissolution of monasteries. They met first at the house of Sir Eobert Cotton, under the patronage of archbishop Parker. So Dr. Moore, p. 2, The Gentleman's Society at Spalding. (Pickering, 1851.) In July 1591, Dr. Andrewes read in the Divinity School 1 See Howell's State Trials, vol. i., or the 2nd edit, folio, vol. i. pp. 178 179. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 37 at Cambridge his Theological Determination upon the law fulness of the oath ex officio on the ground of Scripture. He maintained the affirmative as implied in the very authority of the magistrate, which was over the soul as well as the body, Bom. xiii. 1. If it was lawful in Abraham to make his servant take an oath,1 in the case of Jacob and Joseph,2 and of Jacob and Esau ;3 much more in causes of a weightier kind, and by the authority of greater persons. This power he urged was involved in Exodus xxii. 8, If the thief be not found, then ihe master of ihe house shall be brought unto the judges to see whether he have put his hand unto his neigh bour's goods. He alleged also Numbers v. 19, Levit. vi. 3, and 1 Kings viii. 31. In cases involving the life or death of the party he makes an exception, instancing the case of Jeremiah (xxxviii. 14). But where the public weal is concerned, whether in church or state, recourse may be had to extraordinary modes of discovering guilt. Thus Joshua proceeded by lot, and so Achan was taken and punished. (Josh. vii. 16.) Amongst other reasons and illustrations he adduced Levit. v. 1, and Ezra x. 11. Micaiah answered when thus put upon his oath (1 Kings xxii.), and our Lord himself (Matih. xxvi. 63). Of the limits of an oath or of that which determines its equity, he remarks, that Scripture lays down a threefold rule, (1) " in truth, in righteousness, in judgment" (Jer. iv. 2), that is, " I will speak nothing but the truth in the name of the Lord ; (2) concerning those things which fall within my knowledge (things possible) and according to the require ments ofthe law itself; (3) not hastily, but with deliberation.1 In January and February 1592, Dr. Andrewes proceeded with his lectures on the third chapter of Genesis at St. Paul's, but does not appear to have resumed them until June 18, 1598, and then at his church of St. Giles', Cripplegate. On January 9, 1592, he preached there his sermon entitled Of the worshipping of imaginations, from Acts ii. 42, as one of a series upon the Commandments. Here he refutes 1 Gen. xxiv. 3. 2 Ib. xlvii. 29. 3 Ib. xxv. 33. 4 Opuscula Qtuedam Posthuma, pp. 91 — 110. Lond. 1629. 38 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the pleas of the Puritans pretending in everything to follow the Apostolic model, and yet no man thinks himself bound (says Andrewes) to abstain from eating things strangled and blood. And so of their love-feasts and their celebrating their sacrament after supper. He here defends the reading of the Apocrypha from St. Jude's quoting the apocryphal book of Enoch. He declares for the Apostolic origin of episcopacy, and disputes against that of lay-elders, citing St. Chrysostom, that in his time only the wiser of the presbyters were suffered to preach, the simpler sort to bap tize.1 The distinction between elders and doctors he shews to have had no existence at least in the minds of the antient commentators Chrysostom, Jerome and Augustine. He shews how the Popish mass is an imagination, since, contrary to the text (as the Syriac translates it), in their sacrament there is no breaking of bread, inasmuch as after consecration there is, according to them, no bread to break, and the body of Christ is now impassible. He calls the Eucharist a sacrifice, as it is the renewing of covenant with God in virtue of Christ's sacrifice. The partaking of the bread he calls the partaking of Christ's true body.2 Lastly he animadverts upon the long and extemporaneous prayers of the Puritans, with their tautology and incoherence. This and another are the only two of his many parochial sermons which Laud and Bucke ridge seem to have thought worthy of preservation.3 In the course of this year, 1592, Andrewes' Seven Sermons on the Temptation were first printed, with the following title: " The Wonderful Combat (for God's glxn-y and man's salvation) between Christ and Satan opened, in seven most excellent, learned, and zealous Sermons upon the Temptations of Christ in ihe Wilderness. Seen and allowed. London: printed by John Charlwood for Bichard Smith: and are 1 On 1 Cor. i. 17. * But this he thus explains .- " And again too, that to a many with us, it is indeed so fractio panis, as it is that only and nothing besides : whereas the bread which we break is the partaking of Christ's true body, (and not of a sign figure, or remembrance of it), 1 Cor. x. 16. For the Church hath ever believed a true fraction of the true body of Christ in that Sacrament." (p. 35.) 3 They found notes and portions of many others. See the Preface. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 39 to be sold at his shop at the west door of St. Paul's, 1592. This edition was called in as soon as printed, as appears from a notice of it in p. 1324 in Herbert's Ames. They were reprinted in 4to. in 1627 for J. Jaggard and Michael Sparke ; the latter reprinted them, with Eobert Milbourne, Eichard Cotes and Andrew Crooke, in his edition of Andrewes' Lectures on the Decalogue. The other parochial discourse is from Jer. iv. 2, on the third commandment, and was preached at St. Giles', Cripple gate, on June 11th. He interprets our Lord as designing to free the divine law in his Sermon on the Mount from the false glosses of the Pharisees, not as giving a new law. He observes that an oath may be lawfully made without including an express mention of the name of God. " Howbeit yet the Fathers (well weighing that speech of St. Paul's, 1 Cor. xv. 31, where he speaketh on this wise, By our rejoicing which we have in Christ Jesus our Lord, &c, wherein his oath is not immediately by the Name of God, but by a secondary thing issuing from it,) have thought it not abso lutely necessary that in every oath the Name of God should be mentioned, but sufficient if reductive. It is ruled in divinity, that such things as presently are reduced to God, will bear an oath." This he instances in swearing by the Holy Gospel.1 The first edition of Andrewes' Sermons on the Temptation has an epistle dedicatory to Sir John Puckering, Knt., Lord- Keeper of the Great Seal of England. This volume contains the bidding prayers used by An drewes before his parochial sermons. " Two most excellent Prayers which the preacher commonly used before his exercises. " That the name of God may be glorified by this our assembly, and his holy Word blessed to the end he hath ordained it : let us in all humbleness present ourselves before the mercy-seat of God the Father, in the name and mediation of Christ Jesus his dear Son, through the sanctifying of his Holy Spirit, with our unfeigned humble acknowledg- 1 p. 42. 40 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. ment both of our own unworthiness to receive any of his graces, and unableness when we have received them to make right use of them. And both these by reason of our manifold sundry sins and offences, amongst the rest, of this one (as a chief one) that we divers times have been hearers of his divine and precious Word, without care or conscience to become the better thereby: let us beseech him, in the obedience of the life and sacrifice of the death of Christ Jesus his dear Son, to receive both us and this our humble con fession; to pardon both this and the rest of our sins, and to turn from us the punishments deservedly due unto them all; especially that punishment which most usually he doth exercise at such meetings as this, which is, the receiving of his Word into a dead and dull heart, and so departing with no more delight to hear nor desire to practise than we came with; that so, through the gracious assistance of his good Spirit, inward, adjoined to the outward ministry of his Word at this present, the things which shall be spoken and heard may redound to some glory of his everlasting blessed name, and to some Christian instruction and comfort of our own souls, through Jesus Christ our only Lord and Saviour." This prayer ended he proceedeth again in this manner : " And as the Church of Christ, wheresoever it is at this present assembled and met together, is mindful of us that be here, so it is our parts and duties in our prayers to remember it, recommending unto the majesty of Almighty God the prosperous and flourishing estate thereof: beseeching God the Father, for Christ Jesus his Son's sake, to be merciful to all his servants, even his whole militant church, scattered far and wide over the face of the whole earth : both preserving it in those truths that it hath recovered from the sundry gross and superstitious errors of the form erage, and restoring it also unto that unity (in his good time) which it hath almost lost and daily loseth through the unchristian and unhappy contentions of these days of ours. " And in this Church let us be mindful of that part thereof which most especially needeth our remembrance, that is, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 41 the poor afflicted members of Christ Jesus, in what place, for what cause, or with what cross soever: that it would please God to minister into our hearts the same spirit of compassion and fervency, now in the time of their need, that we would wish should be ministered into theirs in the time of our need, for them to become suitors for us. And let us wish them all from the Lord (in his good time) the same joyful deliverance, and till his good time be, the same measure of patience that we would wish unto our own souls, or would have them entreat and pray for at his hands for us, if ever our case shall be as theirs is at this present. " And forasmuch as those churches or members of churches which enjoy the outward benefits of the Lord, as of health, plenty, peace and quietness, do many times as much and (for the most part) much more need the prayers of Christ his faithful congregation, than those that are under his hand in the house of affliction, let us beseech him for them also, that he will give unto each and every of them a thankful receiving of those his benefits, a sober using of them, and a Christian employing of them, to his glory that hath sent them. " And in these our prayers let us be mindful also of the Church and country wherein we live, yielding first and fore most evermore, our unfeigned and hearty thanksgivings for all his mercies and gracious favours vouchsafed this land of ours : and namely, for our last no less gracious than marvellous deliverance from our enemies, and for all those good signs and tokens of his loving favor which ever since and daily he sheweth towards us. " And together withal let us beseech him, that whilst these days of our peace do last, he will open our eyes to see and in cline our hearts to seek after those things which may make for the continuance and establishing of this peace long amongst us. "And (as by especial duty we all stand bound) let us commend unto his Majesty his chosen servant Elizabeth our Sovereign by his grace, of England, France, and Ireland Queen, Defendress of the Faith, and over all estates and per sons within these her dominions (next and immediately under 42 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. God) supreme Governess : let us beseech God (daily more and more) to persuade her Highness' heart that the advancement and flourishing of this kingdom of hers consisteth in the ad vancement and flourishing of the kingdom of his Son Christ within it; that it may be therefore her Majesty's special care and study, that both her Highness in that great place wherein God hath set her, and every one of us in the several degrees wherein we stand, may be as careful to testify unto the whole world a special care and endeavour that we have for the propaga tion of the gospel of his Son, as Christ Jesus hath shewn himself by many arguments both of old and of late (and that of weight) that he hath carried and still carrieth a special care of the preservation and welfare of us all. " Let us commend also unto God the several estates of the land, for the right honourable of the Nobility and of her Highness' Privy Council, that they may be careful (from the Spirit of the Lord) to derive all their counsels; that so God which sendeth the counsel may send it good and happy success also, and may confound and cast out the counsels of the enemy. " For the estate of the clergy, the right reverend Fathers in God, in whose hand the government of the Church is, and all other inferior ministers, that he will give unto each and every of them sufficient graces for the discharge of their functions, and together (with the graces) both a faith ful and a fruitful employing of them. " For the estate of magistracy, and namely for the gover nors of this honourable city, that they together with the rest, according to the trust that is reposed in them, may be no less careful speedily without delay, than incorruptly without partiality, to administer justice to the people of God. " For the estate ofthe commons, that they all, in a Christian obedience towards each and every of their superiors, and in a godly love, with the fruits and duties thereof one towards another, may walk worthy of that glorious calling whereunto they are called: and that the blessings of the Lord may not only be with us for our times, but successively also be delivered to our posterity, let us beseech God that he THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 43 will visit with the Spirit of his grace the two Universities, Cambridge and Oxford, all schools of learning and places of education of youth; that they being watered with the dew of his blessing, may yield forth such plants as may both serve for a present supply of the Church's need, and also in such sort furnish the generations that are to come that our posterity also may be counted unto the Lord for a holy seed and a Christian generation as we ourselves are. " And thus recommending ourselves unto the prayers of Christ his Church, as we have commended Christ his whole Church by our prayers unto the majesty of Almighty God, reposing our trust and confidence neither in our own prayers nor in the Church's prayers, but in the alone mediation of Christ Jesus our advocate, let us unto him as unto our sole intercessor offer up these our supplications, that he may present them to God his Father for the effectual ob taining of these and whatsoever graces else he knoweth needful for his whole Church and for us, calling upon him as himself in his Gospel hath taught us, Our Father, &c." Isaacson informs us that Andrewes read the lecture at St. Paul's three times a-week in term time. " And indeed," he adds, " what by his often preaching at St. Giles', and his no less often reading in St. Paul's, he became so infirm that his friends despaired of his life." Of his charities in his parish of S. Giles', Cripplegate, Buckeridge says, in his funeral sermon, " The first place he lived on was S. Giles', there I speak my knowledge; I do not say he began — sure I am he continued his charity : his certain alms there was ten pound per annum, which was paid quarterly by equal portions, and twelve pence every Sunday he came to church, and five shillings at every Communion."1 As prebendary of St. Pancras he built the prebendal house in Creed-lane, and recovered it to the church.2 On February 20, 1593, Dr. Andrewes preached the Con vocation sermon at St. Paul's, from Acts xx. 28. He refers to the notice of this passage in the 14th chapter of the 1 p. 20. 2 p. 19. 44 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 3rd book of Irenseus against Heresies, as shewing that he held the distinction of the episcopate and of the presbytery. Towards the beginning of his discourse he reprobates the great abuse of preaching by the idle and unlearned in those times; he also admonishes his audience of the need they have to look well to their flocks, and remarks that the narrow scrutiny of their lives and manners so common amongst the laity is the effect of their remissness in their pastoral charge. Nobly does he urge the consideration that "this congregation which we call the Church and which so many amongst us so lukewarmly and slothfully tend, are, if we believe Peter, partakers of the divine nature, (2 Pet. i. 4) ; if John, citizens of heaven ; if Paul, the future judges of the angels," 1 Cor. vi. 3. Towards the end of this discourse he animadverts upon the boldness of some who at that time ventured to impugn the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Next he speaks, and that in the very strongest terms, of the Eomish emissaries, and of the unaltered spirit of Eome still thirsting for blood. After this he notices the factious spirit of the Puritans, more ready to give laws to the Church than to receive them. He speaks of some who made light of the Sacraments and treated them as superfluous, proscribed the Apostles' Creed, would not use the Lord's prayer, and sought to introduce a state little better than anarchy itself. He predicts that if these evils are not restrained our Sion will soon be turned into Babel. He next faithfully reproves the evil custom of admitting unfit persons to the ministry, men whose lives are a scandal to the Church, and the cause, as he admits, of loud complaint, and that not without foundation. Nor does he spare the bishops themselves, but alludes very openly to the iniquitous and impious practice of that age, of bishops, on their advance ment to their sees, impoverishing their bishoprics by in equitable exchanges of estates for great tithes,1 &c. Indeed, queen Elizabeth first strove to deteriorate by this kind of temptation the whole prelacy, and then punished the natural effect of her own misconduct, the popular contempt that was 1 Opuscula, pp. 40, 41. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 45 cast upon her prelates, and that tended more perhaps than any other cause to strengthen the Puritans. This very year Dr. Marmaduke Middleton, Bishop of St. David's, was sus pended by the High Commission Court. Of the Convocation, Collier relates that, " excepting the grant of two subsidies little or nothing was done. On the 11th of April, the day after the dissolution of Parliament, the Convocation was dissolved by the queen's writ."1 On March 21, Dr. Andrewes, with Dr. Parry, afterwards Bishop of Worcester, Dr. Philip Bisse, Archdeacon of Taun ton,2 and Dr. Thomas White, Prebendary of Mora and Canon Eesidentiary of St. Paul's,3 was sent to Mr. Henry Barrow to exhort him to recant his errors.4 This conference took no effect, and so on April 6th, Barrow and John Greenwood, the one a layman the other in holy orders, were executed at Tyburn. These men, from the enumeration of their delin quencies as recorded by their judges, deserved rather to be sent to Bedlam than to Tyburn. They held that " the Church of England was no true church, and that the worship in this communion was downright idolatry ; that praying by a form was blasphemous, and that all those who make or expound any printed of written catechisms, are idle shepherds." Their more venial offences were the maintaining that every parish should choose its own pastor, that every lay elder is a bishop, with other points of ' schismatical and seditious doctrine,' as their indictment ran. On Friday,6 March 30th, Dr. Andrewes preached before 1 Jer. Collier's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii. p. 637. 2 Installed 23rd May, 1584. He was also Sub-dean of Wells, and probably an ancestor of Dr. Philip Bisse, Bishop of St. David's and Hereford in the last century. He was born in Somersetshire, was elected a demy of St. Mary Magdalene's College, Oxford, 1570, aged 18, was chosen a fellow when B.A. in 1574, M.A. 1577, became a noted preacher in Oxford and London. He suc ceeded Justinian Lancaster as Archdeacon of Taunton in 1584. He died about the beginning of 1608. His son James was rector of Croscombe, near Wells, 1623, on the death of Wm. Rogers. — Wood's Ath. Oxon. ed. Bliss, vol. ii. p. 26. 3 Dr. White died March 1, 1624, and was buried in St. Dunstan's-in-the- West. Being once in trouble, he found a friend in the Lord-Keeper Williams. — Hackef s Life of Williams, p. 88. 4 Jer. Collier's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii. p. 638. 5 By a mistake Wednesday in the folio edition of Sermons. 46 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the queen at St. James's, from St. Mark xiv. 4, 6. Andrewes here uncritically follows the conjecture of St. Augustine that this Mary was Mary Magdalene, and the penitent woman mentioned in the 7th chapter of St. Luke's Gospel. He re flects in this sermon upon the prodigality of that age in sumptuous feasting, in princely apparel, in burdensome reti nues, in magnificent houses. Alluding to the complaint of Judas, To what end is this waste? he says, " The case is like, when they that have wasted many pounds, complain of that penny waste which is done on Christ's body the Church. Or when they that in their whole dealings (all the world sees) are unreformed, seriously consult how to reform the Church." Again he observes, " The kindliest way to have Judas' com plaint redressed, is to speak and labour that Mary Magdalene's example may be followed."1 The following year was a time of dearth, as we find from " The renewing of certain Orders devised by the special com mandments of the Queen's Majestie for ihe relief and stay of the present dearth of grain within ihe Bealm in the year of our Lord 1586, now to be again executed this year 1594, &c, published by Christopher Barker. It was probably for a col lection on account of this dearth that Andrewes preached in the Court at Eichmond, from the parable of Dives and Lazarus, on Tuesday, March 5, 1594.2 This is indeed one of the most profitable of his discourses, and contains many topics and illustrations worthy of special observation. On the following day he preached before the queen at Hampton Court on Bemember Lois wife. He spoke much of the frequency of such relapses, and very ably treated of the peculiar nature and heinousness of her sin and greatness of her punishment. He concluded with a high commendation of the perseverance of the queen as one who had from the beginning of her reign to this time been faithful to the true religion ; one " who (like Zorobabel) first by princely mag nanimity laid the corner-stone in a troublesome time; and since, by heroical constancy, through many both alluring 1 Sermons, p. 294. 2 By a mistake 1596 in the folio edition ofthe Sermons. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 47 proffers and threatening dangers, hath brought forth the headstone also, with the prophet's acclamation ' Grace, grace unto it.'1" In November the queen, to satisfy the complaints of her parliament, issued a commission to examine into the state of the ecclesiastical courts. For the diocese of London, Dr. Eichard Fletcher, bishop of Worcester, Dr. Andrewes, and Dr. Stanhope, a civilian, were appointed commissioners.2 1 Sermons, p. 308. 2 Strype's Whitgift, vol. ii. b. 4, p. 194. Of bishop Fletcher various notices may be found in Britton's Bristol Cathedral, pp. 26 — 28. Fuller's Worthies (Kent), and Dr. Nares' Life of Burleigh, vol. iii. p. 446. He was of Trinity College, Cambridge, Prebendary of Islington, 1572; Dean of Peterborough 1585 ; Bishop of Bristol 1589, and Almoner to the Queen; of Worcester 1593 ; London 1594; died 1596. 48 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE IV. The Lambeth Articles, 1595.— Br Andrewes' Review of them.— He adopts the Augustinian doctrine as modified by Aquinas. The late eminently learned and candid bishop of Lincoln, Dr. Kaye, has observed of St. Augustine, that the high estimation in which his authority was held may be traced equally in the writings of the Eeformers and in the discussions of the theologians at the Council of Trent.1 Of the state of our nature after the fall, he observes, that the framers of our Articles not only adopted the opinions, but in the concluding paragraph (of the 10th Article) have used the very language of Augustine.2 Neither is there any adequate proof that any of the Ee formers departed from the doctrine of St. Augustine, or differed from one another upon the peculiar and essential tenets of that father, whose theology entered even into all the forms of devotion that had been used in our own country and over Western Christendom from the fifth century. It may be seen from the Formula Concordise itself,3 which was promul gated and subscribed in 1579, that the original doctrines of Luther were at that time recognized as the unaltered faith of the Lutheran Communion. Melancthon himself in 1551 subscribed to the doctrine of St. Augustine on Original Sin, which doctrine was affirmed in the Saxon Confession, a Con fession drawn up by Melancthon himself.4 He had previously 1 Charges, p. 256. Lond. 1854. 2 p 257. 3 Pars ii. c. 2 & 11. Francke's Libri Symbolici. Lips. 1847. 1 See Articles 2 and 4, pp. 74 — 82, in Francke's Appendix. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 49 maintained the same in his Apology of the Confession of Augsburg. Yet Weismann and others have claimed Me lancthon as a dissentient from St. Augustine even in the lifetime of Luther. The opinions of Cranmer as early as 1537 are easily discernible in the Institution of a Christian Man, and in his annotations upon the king's proposed corrections of that book, in which it is obvious that the king with Gardiner dissented from St. Augustine.1 Indications are not wanting in the history of the English Eeformation that the same diversity of bias marked the two great parties of that age, the friends of the Eeformation herein adhering to the antient, of the Papacy to the modern church of Eome, even when abroad this mark of severance was not so observable. The year before Cranmer with Eidley drew up the forty- two Articles, since reduced to thirty-nine, and which were placed in the hands of Knox, Grindal, and others previously to publication, he thus expressed himself in his Answer to Dr. Smith: " And yet I know this to be true, that Christ is present with his holy church, which is his holy elected people, and shall be with them to the world's end, leading and governing them with his Holy Spirit, and teaching them all truth necessary for their salvation. And whensoever any such be gathered together in his name, there is he among them, and he shall not suffer the gates of hell to prevail against them. Nor although he -may suffer them by their own frailty for a time to err, fall, and to die ; yet finally, neither Satan, hell, sin, nor eternal death shall prevail against them. But this holy church is so unknown to the world, that no man can discern it but God alone, who only searcheth the hearts of all men, and knoweth his true children from other that be bastards. This church is the pillar of truth because it resteth upon God's Word."2 In the following year appeared the Articles. There can be no doubt respecting the mind of their framers as regards 1 Cranmer's Works, Parker Soc. edit., vol. ii. p. 191. 2 Works, vol. i. pp. 376, 377. 50 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. their interpretation of them. Enough has been adduced to justify the assertion of the late Bishop of Lincoln, that '< if they can be said to have followed the guidance of any unin spired teacher, that teacher was Augustine, who for more than ten centuries had exercised through his writings an unbounded influence over the Western Church."1 That influence con tinued to prevail in both our universities to the time of Andrewes, and after his decease. It is alike visible in the works of Whitaker, and in Andrewes' Judgment of the Lambeth Articles. But Andrewes pleaded for the modifica tion of the Augustinian doctrine which had been introduced by Aquinas, maintaining at the same time that it introduced no essential variation, and did not affect the cause but the order which the Almighty observes in the act of predestining.2 The first indication of a departure from the received doctrine was on the part of Dr. Baro, the Lady Margaret's Divinity professor at Cambridge. He was a learned Frenchman, Peter Baro Stempanus, a licentiate of Civil Law in the university of Bourges, admitted to his professorship in 1575j having the great lord Burleigh for his patron; D.D. of the university of Cambridge 1576. He gave offence to the university by some antipredestinarian opinions delivered1! in his lectures upon Jonah. And upon this occasion Dr. Whitaker drew up the Lambeth Articles in November 1595. That same year, on the 5th May, William Barrett, a fellow of Caius College, was cited to appear before the Heads of Houses for an Act sermon for his degree of B.D. preached! on the 29th April. He had maintained that no man could be assured in this life of his own salvation but by revelation) that the faith of all men could fail, that therefore the assurance of final perseverance was both proud and wicked ; that there was no distinction in faith (such as between a true and living and a dead faith), but in the persons believing ; that no man could or ought to believe that his sins were forgiven; that sin is the first cause of reprobation; that Calvin lifted up 1 Bp. Kaye's Sermcms and Addresses, p. 566. London, 1856. 2 Episc. Winton. de Artieulis Judicium, pp. 32, 33. 1692. (Oxenden Vice- Chanc. of Cambridge.) THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 51 himself above God; adding contumelious language against Peter Martyr, Beza, Zanchius, Junius and others, and calling them Calvinists. He was compelled to read a retractation, but evinced symptoms of unwillingness immediately after so doing ; departed the university, joined the Church of Eome, and returned to England, where, adds Fuller, in his History of the University of Cambridge, he led a layman's life until the day of his death.1 To settle these contentions Dr. Whitaker drew up nine Articles, and these were laid before Whitgift the primate, to whom the university deputed Whitaker and Dr. Humphrey Tyndall, president of Queens' College and dean of Ely, to represent the state of the controversy. Whitaker was ad mitted in his own age to be inferior in learning and acumen to none of his contemporaries. Bellarmine himself so re spected his learning that he placed his portrait in his study. He was born in 1547, the first year of Edward VI., at the manor of Holme in the parish of Burnley. Holme is situated between Burnley and Todmorden, and to the east of Blackburn. Having been first educated probably at Burnley, he was sent for to London by his maternal uncle, that accomplished scholar and theologian, Alexander Nowell, the composer of the smaller and also of the greater Catechism of the Church of England, recently edited both by the present able Eegius Divinity professor at Oxford, Dr. Jacobson, and by the Parker Society. Dean Nowell placed his nephew at St. Paul's School. Thence he was sent to Trinity College, ' Cambridge, and was elected to a fellowship in that noble foundation. He translated his uncle's larger catechism into Greek. He now applied himself to the study of theology, and his voluminous works bear ample testimony to the depth of his patristic and general erudition. He was accordingly appointed at the early age of thirty-three to succeed Dr. William Chaderton, bishop of Chester and afterwards of Lincoln, as Eegius professor of Divinity in his university. When the mastership of St. John's College, Cambridge, became vacant by the promotion of Dr. John Howland to 1 pp. 284—286, Fuller's Hist, ofthe Univ. of Cambridge. Camb. 1840. e2 52 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the see of Peterborough, who was consecrated at Lambeth February 7th, 1585, Whitaker was, by special mandate from the queen, admitted to the mastership on the 25th February, 1586, Howland being permitted to retain the mastership a year after his consecration. Whitgift wrote to Dr. Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York, and formerly a fellow of Trinity (Whitgift' s) College. Hutton hereupon drew up a Latin summary of Predestination, taken especially from St. Augustine. On November 10th, Dr. Fletcher, Bishop of Worcester, and now Bishop elect of London, Dr. Eichard Vaughan, Bishop elect of Bangor, trans lated two years after to Chester, and thence, on Bancroft's promotion to the primacy, to London, and some other divines met Whitaker, Tyndall, and Whitgift at Lambeth, and the bishops agreed upon the Articles after some few alterations. It was designed to enforce subscription to them, but the queen resented it as a violation of her prerogative. In 1651 a brief history of these Articles was published, and annexed to them two minor treatises purporting to be the judgment of Andrewes upon them and his censure of the censure of Barrett. Dr. Andrewes had been for some years chaplain to Whitgift, and was doubtless already known as one of the most learned theologians of the age. In his review of the nine articles he first remarks, " The four first articles are concerning predestination and reprobation, of which it is said by the Apostle, 0 the depth, and by the Prophet, a great deep. (Bom. xi. 33, Psalm xxxvi. 6.)" Here we may observe that Andrewes follows St. Augustine, who in like manner refers that wonderful conclusion of the 11th chapter of the epistle to the Bomans to these mysteries. Then Dr. Andrewes acknowledges that he has followed the counsel of St. Augustine, and abstained from the time of his ordination (sixteen years) from disputing and from preaching upon these points. And considering the great danger of abuse, and that but few of the clergy can skilfully . handle these subjects, and that very few are competent to hear of them with profit, he would advise that silence should be enjoined on both sides. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 53 The first article affirmed that God from all eternity had predestinated some to life, and had reprobated others. Upon this he notes : " That there are in the mind of God, in that his eternal (whether one may call it foreknowledge or) know ledge by which he sees those things which are not as though they were, some who are predestinate, others who are repro bate, I think is beyond all doubt. They are the words of Scripture, before the foundation of the world, that is, that God chose us from eternity, and, when he had chosen, predesti nated us, Ephes. i. 4, 5 ; and that he chose us out of the world, John xv. 19 ; wherefore, he chose not all that are in the world, but some. Otherwise there would be no election." Here we may observe that whereas in the antipredesti- narian sense all are predestinate alike, though to different ends, Andrewes uses the term of the elect alone. Secondly, in John xv. 9, he supposes that Judas was excluded, which is certain indeed, for the words were not spoken until after he had left the Apostles. Thirdly, he applies this place to predestination unto life, in which again he follows St. Augustine, but not so those who here leave that father and accuse him of being tainted with Manichseism. Then Andrewes proceeds to justify from Scripture the use of the term reprobate, but advises that it should be expressed that these are predestinated through Christ, those reprobate on account of sin. And here there has arisen a strife of words, it having been sometimes objected to Calvin and to Augustine that they deny that sin is the cause of reprobation, and resolve all into the mere pleasure or decree of God. The truth is that if there were no sin there could be no rejection; and again it is equally true that if God had determined to include all in the num ber of the elect, there had been no rejection. Both Calvin and Augustine therefore teach that men are repro bated as sinners, and that reprobation follows naturally upon a decree of election. And so Dr. Andrewes adds, " But those whom he chose not and by choosing approved (as the nature of election carries with it) he reprobated. And 54 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. scripture uses the words rejecting (Bom. xi. 2), reprobating (Heb. xii. 15)." The second article is : " The moving or efficient cause of predestination unto life, is not foresight of faith, or of perseverance, or of good works, or of anything that is in the person 'predestinated, but only the good- will and pleasure of God." Dr. Andrewes advised the addition "of God in Christ"; for that first God had respect to his beloved Son, "but not to us first (as some think) and to him last, and that for our sakes. For we could not be predestinated to the adoption of sons but in his natural son, nor could we be predestinated to be conformed to the image of his Son, unless first the Son be ordained to whose image we are to be con formed. Wherefore I would also add to this article ' the good-will of God in Christ' " Next he expresses his disapproval of the separation of the divine prescience from the divine predestination. This indeed sounds to modern ears antipredestinarian ; but let the explanation be received, and the proposition that the will of God includes bold foreknowledge and fore-ordination will be seen to be at once perfectly compatible with the belief of predestination. " Next it may be enquired in the second place, whether this sole will of God's good pleasure includes or excludes his foreknowledge. I at least think that these two, namely foreknowledge and fore-ordination, are by no means to be severed, but to be joined (as do the Apostles). Neither do I here dare presumptuously to advance my own opinion, or to condemn the Fathers, who for the most part affirm that we are elected and predestinated according to fore knowledge of faith, as Beza himself confesses on 11 Bom. 2 ed., ' Here the Fathers are by no means to be heard who refer this to foresight.' But in this (as it always appeared to me) they speak rather of the series and order which God observes in the act of predestinating, than of the cause of predesti nation. But the chain some are wont to form in this way, others in that, as seems best to them. The Fathers seem THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 55 to me to have been of this opinion, that there could be no election if it were not thus connected : first that God loves Christ, then us in Christ; which the Apostle saith, that he accepts us in the beloved (Ephes. i. 6) ; secondly, that he confers on us so accepted grace and faith; thirdly, that he elects us thus endowed and thus differenced (discretos) from the rest; fourthly, that he predestinates us who are elect." " Certainly the nature of election requires this, as it cannot be nor can be conceived, where there is no difference whatsoever between him who is chosen and him who is re jected. So (Ecumenius, after the opinion of the Greeks, p. 323 : When he saith, according to election, he shews that he dis tinguished between them, for no person chooses one from another unless there is some difference in him. So Augustine to Simplician, 1, 2: But election does not precede justification (foreseen) but justification election. For no one is chosen unless already differing from him who is rejected ; whence I cannot see how God can be said to have chosen us before the foundation of ihe world but by foreknowledge. " Nor otherwise the schoolmen : Thorn. 1st, Q. 23, Act 4. ' Predestination presupposes election, and election love.' That is, first he made them to be chosen, then he chose them; he loved them that he might endow them ; he chose ihe gifts that he conferred. And this seems to me to be the opinion ofthe most reverend archbishop of York [Mr. Hutton]. For thus he : ' What did God love from eternity in Jacob when as yet he had done no good thing? certainly that which was his own, that which he purposed to give him.' " Certainly the Apostle himself does not doubt to join in this article the purpose and the grace given, and that from all eternity, since the grace given could only exist in the divine foreknowledge : that is, together with the eternal purpose of God, he foresaw before all time the grace itself also which he would give.1 " Nor does any inconvenience result hence (as I can see) 1 2 Tim. i. 9 : Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not ac cording to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. 56 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. if God, that he may crown his own gifts in us, thus chooses his own gifts in us, to wit the things which he gave first by loving us, that afterward he might choose them thus given. And so both hve, which is the act of grace by which God makes a difference, and election, which is the act of judgment by which he chooses those who are thus dis tinguished, are preserved. And thus election will remain. "For the chain of the modems plainly takes away all election, by which chain God is made to appoint these to salvation and those to eternal perdition by the first act and that absolute together and at once, neither considered as existing together in any similar condition [nee in ulla massa] nor in any way distinguished one from another by his own gifts : after which destination, what place there is for election I cannot understand, or how this destination itself can be called election. " But this whole question, as I said, is rather of the order in which God proceeds, in our conception of things who know but in part, than of the cause as respects the act itself, which is in God one and that perfectly simple; or if of the cause, it ought not to be understood of ihe cause of ihe first act, but of the cause as respects the integral effect in predestinating (as it is called). " It is enquired also whether the integral act (in our conception) is made up of several acts, or whether the first is the sole act? and if they are many and diverse, what is the order, what the chain of acts ? " Predestination, which cannot be without foreknowledge, is not but of good works. (Aug. de Prwdest. Sanctorum, c. 10.) They are elect before the foundation of the world by that predestination in which God foresaw his oion future acts. (c. 17, § 34.)" Here we must remark that the first quotation is equivalent to what goes a little before in the chapter from which it is quoted: ' Predestination is the preparation of grace,' ;'. e. the providing for its being given, ' but grace is the giving itself." 1 Inter gratiam porrd et prsedestinationem hoc tantum interest, quod pra- destinatio est gratia? praparatio, gratia verd jam ipsa donatio. (De Pnedestin. Sanctorum, c. 10, § 19.) THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 57 " Will any one dare to say that God did not foreknow to whom he would grant that they should believe?" — De Dono Perseverantise, 14, § 35, and c. 17 passim. The third article is, that the number of the predestinate is certain, and can neither be increased nor diminished. Dr. Andrewes here only notes that they are the very words of St. Augustine at the beginning of the third chapter of his Book De Correptione et Gratia, and adds to these a passage from Prosper de Vocatione Gentium, but citing it under the name of St. Ambrose, to whom it was sometimes but erroneously attributed. The fourth article is : " Those who are not predestinated to salvation shall be necessarily condemned for their sins." ' He would have the word necessarily as being a new mode of expression changed to without doubt. The fifth article is : "A true, living, and justifying faith and the Spirit of God sanctifying is not extinguished, does not fail and come to naught in the elect either totally or finally." Andrewes remarks upon this : " No one ever said (I be lieve) that faith fails finally in the elect. It does not then fail. But that it does not fail, arises, I think, from the nature of its subject, not from its own ; from the privilege of the person, not of the thing. And this on account of apostates, who ought not to be condemned on the ground of their falling away from a faith which was never a true and living faith. " But whether the Holy Spirit can be taken away or ex tinguished for a time, I think may yet be enquired into. I confess that I am in doubt. "Of Faith. " Thou standest by faith: Be not highminded, but fear ; otherwise thou also shalt be cut off, Eom. xi. 20, 22. Is not this an unmeaning precept, if faith cannot fail ? " 1. Beware lest ye also, being led away with the error ofthe wicked, fall from your own steadfastness, 2 Pet. iii. 17. " 2. Look that no man fail ofthe grace of God, Heb. xii. 15. Ye are fallen from grace who are in the law, Gal. v. 4.1 1 Some of these passages are not quoted accurately. 58 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. " 3. Take not thy Holy Spirit from me, Psalm li. 13. "4. Quench not the Spirit, 1 Thess. v. 19. " On what ground can it be shewn that these prayers and precepts are not a mere mockery, if we can in no way fall from the firmness of our faith, or fail of grace, if the Spirit could in no way be taken away or extinguished? "Although I am not ignorant that this [cannot be lost totally] can be so interpreted, as that it cannot be utterly altogether or entirely, although it may be lost as a whole, that is, so lost as that no room shall be left of returning thither whence they have fallen." Eivetus, who was contemporaneous with the Synod of Dort, thus expressed himself in his thesis on Final Perse verance — that those who once had true faith could not become enemies to God, or utter infidels.1 The same is the explica tion which Hooker gives of the indefectibility of faith, in his second sermon, in which he observes : " Directly to deny the foundation of faith is plain infidelity ; where faith is entered, there infidelity is for ever excluded : therefore by him wliich hath once sincerely believed in Christ, the foundation of Christian faith can never be directly denied."2 The Synod of Dort, if candidly judged by its own admissions, will be admitted to intend no more than that which was affirmed by Hooker, however it may use greater ambiguity of expression when it speaks of the predestinate not falling from the grace of adoption, the condition of justification." 3 Its meaning is that God still deals with them as his children; he does not utterly take his lovingkindness from them, but as he did not leave Peter to himself after he had denied him, so neither does he leave them. To say that he sees no sin in them in their departures from him, is not less contrary to the Synod of Dort4 itself than it is to both reason and religion. And thus understood we see that Andrewes himself allowed 1 Fidem etiam amittere et gratia excidere eatenus negamus, ita nimirum ut infideles fiant et Deo hostes. — Synopsis Theologies, p. 417. Lugd. Bat. 1625. 2 Hooker's Works, vol. ii. p. 630. Oxford, 1845. 3 Cat. 6, Canon 6. Niemeyer's Confess. Collect. 4 Canon 5, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 59 the Lambeth article maintaining that the elect never totally fall from grace. And this is clearly consistent with both those exhortations and prayers which are adapted in Holy Scripture to the weakness of our mortal nature, by reason of which we cannot always stand upright, as we confess in the Collect for the Fourth Sunday after Epiphany; a collect derived from Gregory the Great, himself a follower of St. Augustine. If indeed it is but just to admit an opponent to explain his own terms, we may see from Bishop Morton's reply to Dean White in the Conferences concerning Montague's works, that the falling from the grace of justification (itself a sufficiently ambiguous term) was intended to denote, the total and irre versible loss of the divine favour.1 The sixth article was, Of the assurance of salvation: "A truly faithful man, that is, one who is endowed with justifying faith, is certain, with the conviction [plerophoria] of faith, of the remission of his sins, and of his eternal salvation through Christ." Andrewes would have substituted for the assurance of faith the assurance of hope, on the ground that we had not the same certainty of a conditionate as of a purely categorical proposition. To this however may be opposed St. Paul's conviction of security in the approach of death, in the fourth chapter of his Second Epistle to Timothy, Hence forth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness. Neither is less certainty implied in his Epistle to the Philippians, when he writes, I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart and to be with Christ, which is far better, (i. 23.) The seventh article, On the conferring of grace, is as follows : " Saving grace (gratia salutaris) is not given, communi cated, and granted to all men by which, if they will, they can be saved." The observations attributed to Andrewes oppose to this that some previous dispositions are not only offered but con ferred upon all men, and that saving grace would be conferred upon all, were they not wanting to it. And to this effect is cited an earlier work of Augustine upon the Creation against 1 Bp. Cosin's Works, vol. ii. pp. 35, 36. Oxford, 1845. 60 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Manichseans, written in a.d. 390, the year before he was ordained priest. These remarks are in harmony with the known opinions of Andrewes' learned contemporary Bishop J Overall. Bishop Andrewes, in his Whit-Sunday Sermon 1612, thus speaks of the operation of the Holy Spirit : " And this (of blowing "upon one certain place) is a property very well fitting the Spirit. Ubi vult spiral. To blow in certain places, where itself will ; and upon certain persons, and they shall plainly feel it, and others about them not a whit. There shall be an hundred or more in an auditory; one sound is heard, one breath doth blow : at that instant, one or two and no more ; one here, another there; they shall feel the Spirit, shall be affected and touched with it sensibly: twenty on this side them and forty on that shall not feel it, but sit all becalmed, and go their way no more moved than they came. Ubi vult spirat, is most true."1 This certainly is not consistent with these anonymous remarks which long after the death of Andrewes were put forth in his name. The Eemonstrants indeed were desirous of his patronage, and said that they had letters of his which he challenged them to produce.2 He is supposed to have alluded to these strictures on the Lambeth articles in a con- ' versation in 1617, but we know nothing of their history, only that they were published by some person or persons who retained neither the doctrine of Andrewes nor of Overall, but wholly favoured that of the Eemonstrants. The eighth article is : " No man can come unto Christ unless it shall have been given him, and unless the Father shall have drawn him. And all men are not drawn by the Father to come to the Son." Andrewes, or whosoever the author of these strictures is, adds, "not drawn so as that they come"; and would have it added, " that the cause of their not being drawn or so drawn is the depraved will of man, not the absolute will of God." This indeed is in harmony with the remarks upon the seventh article. 1 pp. 602, 603. 2 Birch's James I. vol. ii. p. 47. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 61 The ninth article is : " It is not placed in the will or power of every man to be saved." The suggested form is, " It is not placed in the free will of any man, saving when made free by the Son, to be saved, or in the power of any, unless it be given him from above." Then, after observing that every one will explain the words in his own sense either by addition or subtraction, the writer recommends silence on both sides, and ends by submitting both himself and his opinions to the judgment of the queen. Having now given a full view of the scope of the Judgment of ihe Bishop of Winchester on the Lambeth Articles, I leave it to the reader to decide upon the authenticity of the Judg ment. It is singular that in the preface to these minor treatises of Andrewes and Overall (if indeed they are theirs), no allusion is made to them, no account is given of the manner in which they were transferred to the hands of the editor; only they are annexed to Ellis's Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles ; the theology of which is not even that of Overall, as it observes, and truly according to the doctrine of St. Augustine, that anen, are said to cooperate in respect of subsequent, not of preventing grace.1 The Judgment upon the Lambeth Articles is followed by the Censure of ihe Censure of Barrett. It relates simply to one point, the question whether the justified ought to feel certain of their salvation, or in other words, that they shall persevere to the end. Andrewes probably was not the author of this censure. It is written with a degree of warmth in favour of Barrett which Andrewes was not likely to have evinced. Neither does it embrace more than one of many points for which Barrett was censured. It is ques tionable whether Andrewes would have denied that to some at least the Spirit gave an assurance that he would abide with them for ever. Of his so abiding and working in the soul to the end, he thus speaks in his Whit-Sunday Sermon 1620, above twenty years after the date of these pieces published iu 1600. " How take we notice of the Spirit? How knew they the angel was come down into 1 p. 43. 4th edit. Amsterdam, 1700. 62 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the pool of Bethesda, but by the stirring aud moving of the water? So by stirring up in us spiritual motions, holy purposes and desires, is the Spirit's coming known. Specially if they do not vanish again. For if they do, then was it some other flatuous matter which will quiver in the veins, (and unskilful people call it the life-blood), but the Spirit it was not. The Spirit's motion, the pulse, is not for a while and then ceaseth, but it is perpetual, holds as long as life holds, though intermittent some time for some little space."1 That the Holy Spirit never utterly forsakes the elect, but that they " have that grace which excludeth sin from reigning, and that this grace once had by them is never totally nor finally lost," is affirmed by Field in his Book of the Church, and, after his manner, explained with a clear ness and minuteness that will enable the reader to judge fully of the grounds of his opinion, and to see the working of the more scholastic minds in that age of intense theological investigation.2 Field moreover shews that these are at least no new opinions, but to be found in the works of the cele brated Hugo de Sancto Victore in the twelfth century, and Jn those of John Duns Scotus in the fourteenth. Even some amongst the members of the Eomish communion have con fessed that Calvin and Augustine were substantially agreed, as may be seen in the 399th chapter of the fourth book of John James Hottinger's Fata Doctrina de Pradestinatione et Gratid Dei salutari.2 1 Sermons, p. 742. 2 Book of the Church, pp. 833, 834. Oxford. 3rd edition. 3 Zurich, 1727, p. 421. THE life of bishop andrewes. 63 CHAPTEE V. Br. Andrewes' Sermon on the Love of Souls, Good Friday 1597. — Andrewes refuses two Bishoprics, 1598 — Preaches before the Queen on Ash- Wednesday. — Sermon on the Fticharist — On Justification — St. Paul and St. James — On the power of Absolution — On Repentance. The learned Whitaker on his return from Lambeth took cold which turned to fever and brought him speedily to his happy and peaceful but early end, on the 4th of December 1595, in his forty-seventh year. He was buried on the 10th, Dr. Goad the Vice-chancellor, provost of King's College, preaching the funeral sermon at the university church, and Eobert, afterwards Sir Eobert, Naunton, the Public Orator, delivering a funeral oration in Latin. Dr. John Overall, fellow of Trinity College, was elected to his professorship. Overall had maintained a middle way between the theology of his times and that of the Antipredestinarians. He taught that God vouchsafed a certain measure of grace to all men, but secured salvation to the elect by a still more abundant measure. He taught that some had true faith and grace for a time and then fell away, but that those who are believers, who are included in the divine decree of election, cannot either totally or finally fall or perish, but by a special and efficacious grace so persevere in a true and lively faith, that at length they are brought to eternal life. This he maintained at the Hampton Court Conference.1 He complained that some L Cardwell's Conferences on the Book of Common Prayer. Second edition, p. 186. Oxf. 1841. 64 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. had exaggerated the doctrine of the indefectibility of faith, and had denied that the elect upon the commission of the greatest sins were ipso facto subject to the divine wrath and in a state of damnation until they repented. Overall was neither altogether a follower of Augustine nor of Calvin, but partly borrowed from Ambrose Catharinus, who taught that some were saved by special, others by their right use of common grace. Catharine of Sienna, archbishop of Conza, maintained at the same time in the Council of Trent, and afterwards in his writings, that the righteous might be certain of their justification. He also maintained that the inward intention of the minister was not requisite to the validity of the Sacraments.1 Overall's system has been given from two of the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum, by the Eev. Wm. Goode, in his Effects of Infant Baptism? Overall and others after him have adduced St. Augustine as teaching that some have true faith and grace for a while, and yet fall away, whilst to the elect salvation is secured by the gift of final perseverance. There are a few passages in his works which favour this opinion, but of the principal of these the authen ticity is not universally admitted, and it is certain that in his Tractatus in Joannem and some other of his Treatises he maintains the contrary. The reader may see these passages fully given by Dr. John Forbes, in the 20th chapter of the eighth Book of his Instructiones Historico- Theological." On Sunday April 4, 1596, Andrewes preached before the court at Greenwich. This sermon, from 2 Cor. xii. 15, is upon the love of souls, ' soul-love,' and upon the love of Christ to us. Nothing can excel the fervour, the tender ness, and the truly Christian charity that distinguish this truly apostolical discourse. O that all who profess to admire this venerable father and prelate of our Church would read, and that not once but often, the divine instruction, the paternal charge which he here has left to posterity, a savour of holy love never to fail. He shews how it was the love of Christ 1 See Du Pin. 2 2nd edit. Lond. 1860. pp. 127—133. 1 And see also 1. 8, c. 25, § 16. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 65 that kindled in St. Paul such a love of souls, a love indeed copied from his. This love, a love not to be overcome by unkindness, this he reminds us is the only true Christian love; and what is all to that love of Christ which loved us not as but more than his own life? He hath changed the rule of the law ; no longer is it, Thou shalt love thy neigh bour as thyself, but, as 1 have loved you. " And if St. Paul were loved when he raged and breathed blasphemy against Christ and his name, is it much if, for Christ's sake, he swallow some unkindness at the Corinthians' hands? Is it much, if we let fall a duty upon them, upon whom God the Father droppeth his rain, and God the Son drops, yea sheds his blood, — upon evil and unthankful men?1" On the 14th October died the bishop of Salisbury, Dr. John Coldwell. He was the first married bishop of Salisbury after the Eeformation. His name was also spelt Goldwell. He was B.A. of St. John's College, Cambridge, 1554 ; M.A. 1558, and M.D. 1564. He was in 1571 made archdeacon of Chichester whilst Curteis the late dean was bishop of that see. He resigned this dignity in 1575. On the death of Dr. Thomas Willoughby, dean of Eochester and preben dary of Canterbury, he was preferred to the deanery, and installed 26th September, 1582. After the see of Salisbury had been kept vacant three years, on the translation of Dr. John Piers to York, Coldwell was consecrated to Sarum, December 26th, 1591, at Lambeth by Whitgift, assisted by Aylmer bishop of London, Cowper bishop of Winchester, Fletcher bishop of Bristol, and Under bill bishop of Oxford. Dying October 14, 1596, he was buried in Salisbury Cathedral, in the same grave where bishop Wyville had been buried in 1484. Andrewes de clined the vacant see, as he would not impoverish it. On Good-Friday, March 25th, 1597, Dr. Andrewes preached before the court, from Zech. xii. 10, And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced ; and set forth our Saviour's sufferings in a discourse never perhaps surpassed but by himself. 1 p. 331. F 66 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. There have not been wanting some who have ventured to affirm that our Lord endured suffering equal to what the redeemed would otherwise have endured; that in short he suffered the pains of hell itself. Others again have gone into a contrary extreme, and have explained away our Lord's words on the cross, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? More piously and cautiously our learned and devout preacher : " It is the soul's complaint ; and therefore, without all doubt, his soul within him was pierced and suffered, though not that which (except charity be allowed to ex pound it) cannot be spoken without blasphemy ; not so much, (God forbid!) yet much, and very much; and much more than others seem to allow, or how much, it is dangerous to define." x He was invited to attend the annual election and exami nation at Merchant Taylors' School, but did not go. There was present its venerable patron, Dr. Gabriel Goodman, dean of Westminster. Mr. William Juxon, afterward archbishop Juxon, made a Latin oration.2 Juxon was born at Chichester of a good family. He was the son of Eichard Juxon of that city. From Merchant Taylors' School he succeeded to a fellowship at St. John's College, Oxford. He applied himself to the law, and was a student of Gray's Inn about 1603 ; but afterwards, taking orders, was in 1609 instituted to the vicarage of St. Giles', Oxford, in the gift of his College. Buckeridge was at that time president of St. John's College, and Laud was elected to succeed Buckeridge in that office 10th May, 1611, Bucke ridge being then bishop elect of Eochester. With Laud Juxon contracted an intimate friendship. He was also sometime rector of Somerton to the south-east of Deddington in Oxfordshire, where his coat-of-arms was, if it is not still, in the east window of the chancel. When Laud was made bishop of St. David's in 1621, Juxon was elected president of St. John's on the 29th December, appointed to the deanery of Worcester in 1628, when Dr. Joseph Hall was made bishop 1 p. 337. 2 Dr. Wilson's Hist, of Merchant Taylors' School, vol. i. p. 126. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 67 of Exeter, and in 1633 was bishop elect of Hereford, but consecrated to the see of London. Laud was his friend with the king, who made him in 1632 Clerk of the closet. In 1635 he was constituted Lord High Treasurer. This pro duced great envy amongst the courtiers, as no ecclesiastic had held that office since the reign of Henry VII. He re signed it in 1641. He attended his sovereign on the scaffold, and afterward retired to his manor of Little Compton in Gloucestershire, but close upon Oxford and Worcestershires. He was raised to the see of Canterbury in 1660, and died at Lambeth June 20th, 1663, aged 81. He was a most munificent prelate, of great patience and moderation. Bishop Buckeridge relates in his funeral sermon for Andrewes, that " when the bishoprics of Ely and Salisbury were void, and some things were to be pared from them, some overture being made to him to take them, he refused them utterly. If it please you," adds Buckeridge, " I will make his answer for him, Nolo episcopari, and I will not be made a bishop, because I will not alienate bishops' lands." This was probably in a.d. 1598, when Dr. Henry Cotton was pro moted to the see of Sarum, and not long after Dr. Heton to that of Ely, who in 1609 was succeeded by Andrewes at that time bishop of Chichester. On June 16th Andrewes, as prebendary of St. Pancras, presented Harsnet, also of Pem broke Hall, to the vicarage of Chigwell in Essex. In June he resumed his lectures on the third chapter of Genesis at St. Giles', Cripplegate, after an interval of about seven years. On Sunday, October 1, before the administration of the Holy Communion, he preached at St. Giles', from Isaiah vi. 6, applying the passage as typical of Christ by whom alone our iniquities are taken away, and especially to the Holy Eucharist in which the remission of sins is dispensed ; wherefore, as he observes, in the ancient church at the celebration of the Com munion, the priest stood up and said as the seraph doth here, ' Behold this hath touched your lips ; your iniquity shall be taken away, and your sin purged.'1 And here he does not 1 Posthumous and Orphan Lectures, p. 515. f2 68 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. deny, as do some who speak much of him, the assurance of forgiveness of past sins to those who come with true faith to this holy sacrament. It was his custom to speak most patristically of the Eucharist, but he calls the participation a spiritual feeding.1 On October 15th he preached from Matthew vi. 1, against desire of vainglory. He said excellently, " God hath given us the joys and use of all his creatures, but reserveth the glory of them to himself. Therefore the apostle saith, Do all to the glory of God; for though he giveth us the use of all things, yet, My glory will I not give to another."* On Sunday, December 3rd, he preached from 2 Peter i. 9. In this sermon he thus treats of justification. " At the first the doctrine of faith in Christ was hardly received ; for men thought to be saved only by works : and when they had once received it, they excluded the doctrine of good works. All the difficulty that St. Paul found in the work of his ministry was to plant faith, and to persuade men that we are justified before God by faith in Christ without the works of the law. But St. Peter and St. James met with them that received the doctrine of faith fast enough, but altogether neglected good works. But because both are necessary, therefore St. Paul in all his Epistles joins the doctrine of faith with the doctrine of works. This is a faithful saying, and to be avouched, that they which believe in God, be careful to shew forth good works.3 Therefore with the doctrine of the grace of God, he joins the doctrine of the careful bringing forth of good works. The saving grace of God hath appeared, and teacheih us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly and right eously and godly in this world. The doctrine of grace is not rightly apprehended, until we admit of the doctrine of good works. Wilt thou know, 0 man, that faith is dead without works? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac? Therefore St. Peter saith, that is no true faith which is not accompanied with virtue and godliness of life. It is true that good works have no power to work justification, because they do not contain a perfect 1 Posthumous and Orphan Lectures, p. 521. 2 Ibid. p. 524 3 Titus iii. 8. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 69 righteousness. And inasmuch as they are imperfect, there belongs the curse of God unto them : Cursed is he that con- tinueth not in all things, &c. (Gal. iii.) So far are they from justifying, but yet they are tokens of justification. God had respect unto Abel and to his sacrifice. (Gen. iv.) God first looked upon his person, and then upon his sacrifice. For before the person be justified, his works are not accepted in God's sight. The best works if they proceed not of faith are sin. Our Saviour saith, No branch can bring forth fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine. Therefore if we do any good works, they proceed from our incision and engrafting into Christ, by whom they are made acceptable unto God. " Paul saith, Abraham was justified by faith before works, not when he was circumcised, but when he was uncircumcised. But James saith, Abraham our father was justified by works. To reconcile the apostles we must know, that the power of justification which is spoken of in Paul is effective, but that which James speaketh of is declarative. It was Abraham's faith that made him righteous, and his works did only declare him to be justified. Therefore Paul saith, that albeit good works have no power to justify, yet they are good and profit able for men. For they declare our justification which is by faith ; and by them we make ourselves sure of our calling and election."1 On the Sunday after Christmas-day, December 31, he preached from John viii. 56, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad. From the same words he preached before king James on Christmas-day 1613. Whosoever will carefully compare the two discourses will find that although the earlier is divided similarly with the latter, and some passages are common to both, yet they are far from being the same, and the parochial is by no means inferior to the court sermon, nay has some advantage over it ; although of it we have but notes, those notes however very copious.2 On the Sunday after Epiphany, January 7, 1598, he dis coursed learnedly and with a fertility of illustration peculiarly his own, upon Psalm xlvii. 10, The princes of the people are 1 Posthumous and Orphan Lectures, pp. 544, 545. 2 Ibid. 550 — 555. 70 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. gathered together, even the people of the God of Abraham: for the shields of the earth belong unto God: he is greatly exalted. The Epiphany he calls Christ's second nativity ; " for as he was born at Bethlehem of his mother the Virgin, so hath he another birth foretold by the prophet, I will think of Bahab and Babylon; behold Palestina, Tyrus, and Ethiopia, lo! there is he born, Psalm lxxxvii. 4. " This," he saith, " God hath from all times revealed, that the gate of faith should be opened to the Gentiles to enter into the flock of Christ. This was shewed by Abraham's matching with Keturah a Gentile ; by Moses matching him self with Zipporah a Midianite and a Gentile; by Solomon matching with Pharaoh's daughter; as in the genealogy of Christ's birth Solomon is matched with Eahab, Boaz with Euth, to signify that Christ should save both Jews and Gentiles. The same was shewed by the stuff whereof the tabernacle was made; by the first temple which was built upon the ground of Araunah a Gentile, with timber sent by Hiram a Gentile; and by the second temple which was founded by Cyrus and Artaxerxes, heathen princes." On March 23, 1598, Andrewes succeeded Bishop Bancroft in the eleventh stall at Westminster. On Friday, February 2, 1599, being the festival of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin, he preached at his parish- church of St. Giles', from the history of Hannah, 1 Sam. xxvii. 28. The presentation of Samuel, and Samuel himself, he regards as typical of our Lord; and indeed the great similarity of the song of Hannah and of that of the Virgin, the miraculous birth as of Christ, so in a manner of Samuel, and the meeting of the triple office of prophet, priest, and king in Samuel, together with the singular inoffensiveness and purity of his character, and his love to the unthankful, all most amply vindicate the typical application of this history to our Lord as the fulfilment, the true Samuel of the Israel of God.1 On the following Sunday, being the administration of the 1 This sermon is one of the best of those that are contained in the Posthumous Lectures. See pp. 565—572. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 71 Holy Communion, he preached excellently upon our conflict with the old serpent, from Bev. ii. 7, To him that overcometh will I give to eat ofthe tree of life which is in the midst of the Paradise of God.1 On the 21st of the same month, being Ash- Wednesday, and the time that the earl of Essex was setting out on the Irish expedition, Dr. Andrewes, being one of the Queen's chaplains, preached before her at Eichmond from those most seasonable words, When thou goest out with the host against thine enemies, keep thee from all wickedness? Having treated of the justifiableness of war both offensive and defensive, quoting to this purpose the Septuagint version of the text, and alleging Jacob's war to win from the Amorite with his sword and bow,3 he shewed the folly of trusting in human power, from the defeat in the valley of Achor; he urged the need of the prayer of the prophet and of the priest, from the intercession of Moses whereby Israel prevailed over Amalek; and the utter inconsistency of those who were themselves in rebellion against God going forth to punish rebels. Nor did he fail to point out most plainly how peace was the blessing, war the scourge of God. Towards the end he adduced the exemplary fidelity of Uriah as an ex ample to all in like manner to forbear, now of all times especially, from sin.4 On Friday, August 24, St. Bartholomew's day, he preached at his own church, Cripplegate, on the assurance of hope ; nor can any one who is familiar with his writings fail to recognize him throughout.5 We find him, according to his custom on all holy days, preaching at his parish-church on St. Michael's day, Saturday, September 29, from Bev. xii. 7, 8 ; a sermon displaying, as we have seen in some former instances, his eminent patristic learning. He shews- that Christ cannot be the Michael of the heavenly host, for that he is called ' one of the first princes,'6 but Christ is the King of Kings.' 1 Posthumous Lectures, pp. 672 — 578. 2 Deut. xxiii. 9. 3 Gen. xlviii. 22. * 2 Sam. xi. 11. 5 Posthumous Lectures, pp. 578 — 585. " Dan. a. 13. ' p. 588. 72 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. He notices, and very largely, the conjecture of the Fathers, that the fallen angels would not submit to adore Christ in our nature, and to see our nature exalted above their own.1 He forgets not to remind his congregation of the war in which they themselves ought to be engaged, assured that the enemy shall not prevail over those who faithfully resist him. He touches also upon that reverence we ought to have of the presence of the angels as well in the house of God2 as at other times. On Sunday, October 7, being the celebration of the holy Eucharist, he preached from those most gracious and divine words of our Lord, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me ; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.3 " Howsoever," he saith, " a man may know himself to be a sinner, that is, to have an unclean soul, yet he is not to despair, because Christ, by the confession of his enemies, is such an one as doth not only receive sinners, but eats with them ; yea, he not only receiveth them that deserve to be cast out as unworthy to inherit the kingdom, but doth also wash, sanctify, and justify them in his own name and by the Spirit of God."* Such was the diligence of Dr. Andrewes, that besides preaching on the Festivals and Sundays, he also delivered many of his lectures this year upon Genesis on other week-days. In A. D. 1600, on March 30, Low-Sunday, he preached at Whitehall his well-known discourse upon the power of absolution, from John xx. 23. He maintained from these words a ministerial power of absolution granted to the Apostles, not as apostles but as ministers of Christ, and from them derived to all others ; " yet not so that absolutely without them God cannot bestow it on whom or when he pleaseth ; or that he is bound to this means only and cannot work without it. For gratia Dei non alligatur mediis5 [i. e. the grace of God is not tied to means], the grace of God is not bound but free, and can work without means either of word or sacrament; and as 1 Posthumous Lectures, p. 691. - 1 Cor. 11. 3 John vi. 37. 4 Ibid. p. 596. 5 p. 57, Certain Sermons. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 73 without means so without ministers, how and when to him seemeth good. But speaking of that which ' is proper and ordinary, in the course by him established, this is an ecclesi astical act committed as the residue of the ministry of re conciliation to ecclesiastical persons. And if at any time he vouchsafe it by others that are not such, they be in that case ministri necessitatis non officii, in case of necessity ministers, but by office not so." To shew the previous existence of a like power he refers to Job xxxiii. 23, to the priest's being ever a party in sacrifices, and to the prophet Nathan's being commissioned to declare to David the remission of his sin in God's name. He observes that besides this there are divers acts instituted by God and executed by us, which all tend to the remission of sins, namely, the two sacraments, the Word of God itself, and prayer. The word he interprets of the word preached. He also treats of the need of the key of knowledge to open to men the true nature of repentance and the works of repentance, which is not only sorrow for sin, but a holy revenge upon ourselves for it, with works of restitution, &c. His doctrine of repentance may indeed be most fully and practically learnt from that little volume which alone might have obtained for his name the veneration of all ages of the Church, his Manual for the Sick.1 He is said to have been called upon to explain himself to the Secretary of state in regard of this sermon, his doctrine being unusual for that time and strange in the ears of his audience. It is observable that it is confessedly imperfect, and deals very much in generalities. His quotation from St. Augustine belongs not to private but to public confession, as both Fulke remarks in his Confutation of the Notes in the Ehemish New Testament,2 and also Dr. John Gerhard in his Confessio Catholica.z Fulke farther refers his readers to his Confutation of Dr. Allen's Books, Pt. I., from c. 10 to the end. 1 See the beautiful edition of 1674, A Manual of Private Devotions, with a Manual of Directions for the Sick. 2 London, John Bill, 1617, p. 324. 3 Jena?, 1661, torn. 4, p. 58. 74 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Some would explain the words, Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained, as though they had been, whosesoever sins ye declare forgiven, when ye preach pardon to the penitent, they shall be forgiven; and whosesoever sins ye declare still unforgiven, because of their unbelief, heaven shall con firm your words. Thus, indeed, Jeremiah and the prophets are said to do what they declare shall be done, (Jer. i. 10), See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over ihe kingdoms to root out and to pull down, and to destroy and to throw down, to build and to plant, compared with c. xviii. ver. 7. Andrewes was present on St. Barnabas' Day, June 11th, at the annual election and examination at Merchant Taylors' School, and with three other (London?) clergymen, Dr. Grant of the university of Cambridge, master of Westminster School, and Drs. Montford and Hutchinson of the university of Oxford, was appointed to nominate four persons to the Merchant Taylors' Company for the living of St. Martin's, Outwich. A minute account of the proceedings may be found in Dr. Wilson's History of Merchant Taylors' School, in which he has done ample justice to the memory of Andrewes, and that with no small industry and ability. Dr. Thomas Montford, or Mountfort, was the son of John Mountfort of Norwich. He was of the university of Oxford, was admitted to the rectory of Anstey near Barkway, Jan. 25, 1584. On May 26, 1585, he was made prebendary of the first stall, Westminster, took the degree of D.D. at Oxford July 4, 1588, and on March 24, 1596, was admitted to the stall of Harleston in St. Paul's, and became a canon residentiary on the presentation of the queen. On May 7, 1602, he was collated to the vicarage of St. Martin-in-the-fields by bishop Bancroft, and in 1612 appears to have been also rector of St. Mary-at-hill near St. Dunstan's in the East. He died Feb. 27, 1631, and was buried in the chancel of Tewing near Welwyn, of which also he had (according to Newcourt) been rector. His son John succeeded to the rectory of Anstey on the presentation of Charles I., having before been made pre- THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 75 bendary of Sneating in the church of St. Paul by bishop King, 14 Nov. 1618. He was presented by Trinity College to the vicarage of Ware, Herts. 1633, but held it only for about a year. He was ejected from Anstey in 1643. Dr. Edward Grant was master of Westminster School, prebendary of the sixth stall at Ely 1589, rector of Barnet in Middlesex and Tatsfield near Godstone in Surrey, vicar of 'Benfleet in Essex and Foulsham in Norfolk, prebendary of the twelfth stall at Westminster, 27 May, 1577. He died in October 1601, and was buried in the abbey, but no memorial was erected for him there. Dr. Ealph Hutchinson was archdeacon of St. Alban's. 76 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE VI. Andreioes' Sermon on Justification, 1600. On November 23rd Dr. Andrewes preached at Whitehall1 his celebrated sermon on Justification, for a more copious notice of which no apology will be required. This sermon is a very ample dissertation upon Jer. xxiii. 6, This is the name whereby they shall call him, the Lord our Bighteousness. First he shews how this is the chief of names in the account of God himself. God is salvation and peace, but both these are branches of this name and effects of it. He then remarks that this name is peculiar to our Lord. Others are said to do, he alone to be righteousness. " Nor is this (he adds) a question of names merely. The name of God has virtue in it. By the name of Christ we are Justified, so St. Paul (1 Cor. vi. 11) ; forgiven, so St. John (1 Joh. ii. 12) ; saved, so St. Peter (Acts iv. 12). Now this name is com pounded of three, words, Jehova, Justitia, Nostra. "1. Of Jehova, touching which word, and the ground why it must be a part of this name, the prophet David resolveth us ; / will make mention, saith he, of thy righteousness only. Because his righteousness and only his righteousness is worth the remembering ; and any other's besides his is not meet 1 " Of the royal chapel in Whitehall we know nothing except that it was the scene of various ceremonies in James's reign, as grand marriages and bap tisms. It was burnt with great part of the palace in 1697, and its walls are probably now those of the Treasury or a contiguous building. From the time of the fire it was deserted, and the Banqueting-house converted into a chapel."— Nichol's Progresses of James I., vol. ii. p. 212. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 77 to be mentioned. For, as for our own righteousness which we have without him, Esay telleth us, it is but a defiled cloth, and St. Paul that it is but dung; two very homely comparisons, but they be the Holy Ghost's own, yet nothing so homely as in the original, &c. " Our own then being no better, we are driven to seek for it elsewhere. He shall receive his righteousness, saith the prophet (Psalm xxiv. 5), and the gift of righteousness, saith the apostle (Bom. v. 17). It is then another, to be given us and to be received by us, which we must seek for. And whither shall we go for it ? Job alone despatcheth this point. Not to the heavens or stars ; for they are unclean in his sight. Not to the saints ; for in them he found folly ; nor to the angels, for neither in them found he any steadfast ness. Now if none of these will serve, we see a necessary reason why Jehova must be a part of this name. And this is the reason why Jeremie, here expressing more fully the name given him before in Esay, Immanuel, God with us, instead of the name of God in that name (which is El), setteth down by way of explanation this name here of Jehova. Because that El and the other names of God are communicated to creatures ; as the name of El to angels, for their names end in it ; Michael, Gabriel, &c. And the name of Jah to saints, and their, names end in it ; Esaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah. To certify us therefore that it is neither the righteousness of saints nor angels that will serve the turn, but the righteousness of God and very God, he useth that name which is proper to God alone ; ever reserved to him only, and never imparted by any occasion to angel or saint, or any creature in heaven or earth. " Bighteousness. Why that ? If we ask, in regard of the other benefits which are before remembered, salvation and peace, why 'righteousness' and not salvation nor peace? it is evident. Because (as in the verse next before the prophet termeth it) ' righteousness' is the branch ; and these two, salvation and peace, are "the fruits growing on it. So that, if this be had, the other are had with it." " Jehovah, Bighteousness. For except justice be satisfied, 78 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. and do join in it also [the counsel of salvation], in vain we promise ourselves that mercy of itself shall work our salvation : which may serve for the reason why neither Jehova potentia or Jehova misericordia are enough, but it must be Jehova justitia, and justitia a part ofthe name." " Our. But if he be righteousness, and not only right eousness, but ours too, all is at an end; we have our desires. . . . For if he be, as the Apostle saith, factus nobis, made unto us righteousness, and that so as he becometh ours, what can we have more ? What can hinder us, saith St. Bernard, but that we should ' use him and his righteousness ; use that which is ours to our best behoof, and work our salvation out of this our Saviour.' " And more significant it is by far to say Jehovah our justice, than Jehovah our Justifier. I know St. Paul saith much; that our Saviour Christ shed his blood to shew his righteousness, that he might not only be just, but a justifier of those which are of his faith, Bom. iii. 26. And much more again in that when he should have so said, To him that believeth in God, he chooseth thus to set it down, To him that believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly ; making these two to be all one, God, and the justifier of sinners. Though this be very much, yet certainly this is most forcible, that he is made unto us by God very righteousness itself. (1 Cor. i. 30.) And that yet more, that he is made right eousness to us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. v. 21. Which place St. Chrysostom well weighing, this very word righteousness, saith he, the Apostle useth to express the unspeakable bounty of that gift, that he hath not given us the operation or effect of his righteous ness, but his very righteousness, yea his very self unto us. Mark, saith he, how everything is lively and as full as can be imagined. Christ, one not only that had done no sin, but that had not so much as known any sin, hath God made (not a sinner, but) sin itself; as in another place (not accursed, but) a curse itself; sin in respect of the guilt, a curse in respect of the punishment. And why this? To the end that we might be made (not righteous persons ; that THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 79 was not full enough, but) righteousness itself; and there he stays not yet — and not every righteousness, but the very righteousness of God himself. What can be further said? what can be conceived more comfortable? To have him ours, not to make us righteous but to make us righteousness, and that not any other but the righteousness of God ; the wit of man can devise no more. And all to this end, that we might see there belongeth a special Ecce to this name, that there is more than ordinary comfort in it ; that therefore we should be careful to honour him with it, and so call him by it, Jehovah our righteousness. " There is no Christian man that will deny this name, but will call Christ by it, and say of him that he is Jehova justitia nostra, without taking a syllable or letter from it. But it is not the syllables, but the sense that maketh the name. And the sense is it we are to look unto ; that we keep it entire in sense as well as in sound, if we mean to preserve this name of justitia nostra full and whole unto him. And as this is true, so is it true likewise that even among Christians all take it not in one sense ; but some, of a greater latitude than other. There are that take it in that sense which the prophet Esay hath set down: In Jehovd justitia mea, that all our righteous ness is in him, (Isaiah xiv. 24) ; and we to be found in him, not having our own righteousness, but being made the right eousness of God in him. (2 Cor. v. 21.) There are some other, that though in one part of our righteousness thay take it in that sense, yet in another part they shrink it up, and in that make it but a proposition causal, and the interpretation thereof to be, ' from Jehova is my righteousness.' Which is true too, whether we respect him as the cause exemplary, or pattern, (for we are to be made conformable to the image of Christ) ; or whether we respect him as the cause efficient This meaning then is true and good, but not full enough ; for either it taketh the name in sunder, and giveth him not all, but a part of it alone,1 or else it maketh two senses, which may not be allowed in one name. " For the more plain conceiving of which point, we are to 1 Alone. The common reading is again. 80 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. be put in mind that the true righteousness (as saith St. Paul) is not of man's device, but hath his witness from the law and the prophets ; which he there proceedeth to shew out of the example first of Abraham and after of David. In the Scrip ture then there is a double righteousness set down, both in the Old and New Testament. " In the Old, and in the very first place that righteousness is named in the Bible, Abraham believed, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness: a righteousness accounted. And again (in the very next line) it is mentioned, Abraham will teach his house to do righteousness : a righteousness done. In the New likewise. The former, in one chapter (even the fourth to the Eomans), no fewer than eleven times, Beputatum est illi ad justitiam: a reputed righteousness. The latter in St. John : My beloved, let no man deceive you ; he that doeth righteousness is righteous: a righteousness done, which is nothing else but our own just dealing, upright carriage, honest conversation. Of these, the latter the philosophers themselves conceived and acknowledged; the other is proper to Christians only, and altogether unknown in philosophy. The one is a quality of the party; the other an act of the judge declaring or pronouncing righteous : the one ours by influence or infusion ; the other by account or imputation." Then he proceeds from the context to fix upon the term the forensic and imputative sense, and observes that the tenor of the Scripture touching our justification all along runneth in judicial terms to admonish us still what to set before us. The usual joining of justice and judgment con tinually all along the Scriptures shew it is a judicial justice we are to set before us. The terms of a judge, It is the Lord that judgeth me, 1 Cor. iv. 4. A prison : kept and shut up under Moses, Gal. iii. 23. A bar: We must all appear before the bar, 2 Cor. v. 10. A proclamation : Who will lay any thing to the prisoner's charge? Bom. viii. 33. An accuser: The accuser of our brethren, Bev. xii. 10. A witness : Our conscience bearing witness, Bom. ii. 15. An indictment upon these: Cursed is he that continueih not in all the words of the law to do them, Deut. xxvii. 26. And again, He that THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 81 breakeih one is guilty of all, James ii. 10. A conviction : That all may be guilty, or culpable, before God. Yea, the very delivering of our sins under the name of debts ; of the law under the name of a handwriting ; the very terms of an advocate, 1 John ii. 2 ; of a surety made under the law ; of a pardon, or, being justified from those things which by the law we could not; all these wherein for the most part this is still expressed, what speak they but that the sense of this name cannot rightly be understood, nor what manner of righteousness is in question, except we still have before our eyes this same coram rege justo judicium faciente? " For it is not in question, whether we have our inherent righteousness or no, or whether God will accept it or reward it, but whether that must be our righteousness coram rege justo judicium faciente ; which is a point very material and in nowise to be forgotten. For without this, if we compare our selves with ourselves, what heretofore we have been, or, if we compare ourselves with others, as did the Pharisee, we may take a fancy perhaps, and have some good conceit of our inherent righteousness. Yea, if we be to deal in schools by argument or disputation, we may peradventure argue for it and make some shew in the matter. But let us once be brought and arraigned coram rege justo sedente in solio, let us set ourselves there, we shall then see that all our former con ceit will vanish straight, and righteousness (in that sense) will not abide the trial. " Bring them hither then, and ask them here of this name, and never a saint nor father, no, nor the schoolmen them selves, none of them but will shew you how to understand it aright. In their commentaries, it may be, in their questions and debates they will hold hard for the other ; but remove it hither, they forsake it presently, and take the name in the right sense." Then he adduces the examples of Job, David, Daniel, Isaiah, Paul, and amongst the fathers, of Ambrose, Augus tine, and Bernard. He then touches upon the devotional writings of the school men, and the half admissions of Bellarmine and Stapleton, 82 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. conceding an imputation of the sufferings, but excluding the imputation of the obedience, or as it is sometimes called, the active righteousness of Christ. Next he proceeds upon abstract grounds, the finite nature of our righteousness, its disproportion to our infinite reward, " especially if we add hereunto that as it cannot be denied but to be finite, so withal, that the antient fathers seem further to be but meanly conceited of it ; reckoning it not to be full but defective, not pure but defiled ; and if to be judged by the just judge, districts, or cum districtione examinis (they be St. Gregorie's and St. Bernard's words), indeed no righteous ness at all." Here Bishop Andrewes adduces that remarkable passage from St. Chrysostom, which Mr. Faber has also given at full length in his work upon Justification, from his eleventh homily on the second Epistle to the Corinthians, where that father declares that a justifying righteousness must needs he without spot, and that therefore the righteousness of God by which we are justified is not of works but of grace. Adducing an admission of Stapleton's, that our righteous ness needs indulgence, he observes, " Now indulgence (we know) belongeth unto sin, and righteousness, if it be true, needeth none." Bellarmine is then shewn to destroy his own doctrine by qualifying it first, and next by entirely setting it aside, which, remarks our reverend preacher, "is enough to shew, when they have forgot themselves a little out of the fervor of then- oppositions, how light and small account they make of it themselves, for which they spoil Christ of one half of his name." Then he insists upon the jealousy of God in regard of this name, that He will not give his glory to another. " As we are justified in this name, so we are to glory in it, according to the prophet. For this very purpose the apostle asks, where is boasting then ? as if he should admonish us, that this name is given with express intent to exclude it from us and us from it. And therefore in that very place where he saith, ' He is made unto us from God righteousness,' to this end (saith he) he is so made, ut qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur [that THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 83 he who glorieth might glory in the Lord]. All which I put you in mind of to this end, that you may mark that this nipping at this name of Christ is for no other reason but that we may have some honour ourselves out of our righteousness." Then he gives an instance of this in the confession of Bellarmine, who makes justification to be on the title of merit, because it is more honorable so to receive it than simply on the title of inheritance ; " So that it seemeth he is resolved, that rather than they will lose their honour, Christ must part with a piece of his name, and be named Justitia nostra only in the latter sense: which is it, the prophet after (in the twenty-seventh verse of this chapter) setteth down as a mark oi false prophets; that by having a pleasant dream of their own righteousness, they make God's people to forget his name; as indeed by this means this part of Christ's name hath been forgotten." Such is the doctrine of good and learned Bishop Andrewes : they must be blind indeed who see not at once how unlike and opposed to the teaching of Mr. Newman and his ad vocates, as also of Jeremy Taylor, Archbishop Sharpe, Bishop Bull, Bishop Tomline, and others who have stumbled at this stone, and have, with all their talents, only laboured to ob scure that great and most essential article of Christian faith, which our prelate, believing with his heart, knew so well how to defend. o2 84 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE VII. The election at Merchant Taylors' School, 1601 — Andrewes is made Bean of Westminster — His Sermon on giving to Casar his due — Oversees Westminster School — Preaches before the Queen for ihe last time in 1602 — Coronation of King James — Sermon on the Plague, 1603 — He is at the Hampton-court Conference — Is appointed a translator — His famous Good-Friday Sermon, 1604, and 1605 — He is made Bislwp of Chichester. On St. Barnabas-day, June 11, 1601, we find Dr. Andrewes, with his old schoolmaster Mulcaster, and Dr. Goodman, dean of Westminster, Dr. Hutchinson, president of St. John's College, Oxford, Dr. Eoger Marbeck,1 and Sir Eobert Wroth, knt.,2 attending at the election and dinner at Merchant Taylors' School. It was at this time that Dr. Andrewes first patronised Matthew Wren, afterwards bishop of Norwich and Ely. Wren was born in St. Peter's Eastcheap, 1585. His father Francis was a citizen and mercer of London. 1 Dr. Roger Marbeck was the son of that good confessor and musician, John Marbeck, organist of Windsor, who first printed the Prayer-book with musical notes in 1550. See of him in Burney's History of Music. He was educated first at Eton, then at Christ Church, was Senior Proctor in 1562, Public Orator (the first that was appointed) in 1564, and also was made Provost of Oriel in that same year. In 1565 he was installed Canon of the first stall in Christ Church, in 1566 resigned his Provostship, and in 1567 his stall. He betook himself to the study of medicine and was made physician to the queen, and in 1574 took the degree of M.D. He attended the Earl of Nottingham into Spain, and returning home died, and was buried in St. Giles', Cripplegate, 1605, or thereabout. — Wood's Fasti, and Hist, and Antiq. Univ. Oxon. 2 Son of Sir Thomas Wroth, who for his religion fled to Germany in the reign of queen Mary. Sir Robert died and was buried at Enfield early in 1606, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 85 Wren lost his election to St. John's College, Oxford, upon which Dr. Andrewes procured his admission at Pembroke College, Cambridge, on the 23rd of the same month. This election was the last public occasion at which Dr. Goodman appeared. He died on June 17, and Andrewes was appointed to succeed him as dean of Westminster July 4, and Dr. Adrian Saravia was presented to the stall which Andrewes vacated, and installed on July 5.1 In this year the learned Andrew Willet, prebendary of the fourth stall at Ely (July 22, 1584), in which he succeeded his father, Thomas Willet, M.A., as he did also in the rectory of Barley, Herts., was, amongst many excellent col leagues (ten in number), of whom were Dr. Downame, bishop of Derry (who wrote the most complete work that has ever appeared upon Justification, and also a very learned and elaborate work upon Antichrist), Dr. George Meriton (dean of York in 1617) that famous preacher, and others of no mean note, chosen to answer the Divinity Act in the Com mencement House, Cambridge: "An. 1601, Publicis Comitiis, Eespondente Dre. Willet, Quaast. " Peccatum sola causa damnationis. " Decimse jure divino debentur." Meriton, Downame, Milburne, &c, S.T.P., eodem anno."2 Milburne was B.A. of Queens' College, Cambridge, 1581, elected fellow July 7, 1582, before he had completed twelve terms, and perhaps migrated from Trinity College. He was made M.A. 1585, treasurer of the College, 1589. He was of a Pembrokeshire family, but born in London and educated at Westminster School. He was rector of Cheam in Surrey, and of Sevenoaks in Kent in 1611, chaplain to prince Henry, precentor of St. David's according to Anthony Wood, but his name does not occur in Hardy's Le Neve's Fasti. On the death of Dr. Thomas Blague (by a mistake in Hasted's Kent said to have been master of Clare Hall) he was made dean of Eochester 4th December 1611, and consecrated to the see of St. David's by Abbot, assisted by Andrewes, King, 1 Widmore's History of Westminster Abbey. 2 From T. Baker's Notes, and copy of Willef s Synopsis Papismi. 86 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. bishop of London, Buckeridge, bishop of Eochester, and Overall, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, July 9th, 1615. Thence he was translated to Carlisle on the death of Dr. Eobert Snowden, 11th September, 1621. He died in 1624, and was buried in the churchyard of Carlisle cathedral. Eichard Senhouse, dean of Gloucester, was his successor at Carlisle, as Laud, a previous dean of Gloucester, had succeeded him at St. David's. In the 11th volume of Bishop Andrewes' works, printed at Oxford in 1854, is given for the first time, A Discourse written by Doctor Andrewes, Bishop of Ely, against second Marriage, after Sentence of Divorce with a former Match, the party then living. In Anno 1601. Besides the two copies in the British Museum (Birch MSS. 4149, art. 38, p. 320, and Lansdowne MSS. 958) there is a third in the University Library at Cambridge. This last has been marked probably by its original owner as unworthy of Bishop Andrewes. However, in the Articles of Visitation for the years 1619 and 1625, immediately following the Discourse, the question is asked, "Do any being divorced or separated, marry again, the former wife or husband yet living?" (p. 120.) The author of the Discourse, after giving that interpretation which is usually pleaded in behalf of this view to Matth. xix. 9, Bom. vii. 2, and 1 Cor. vii. 11, alleges the 9th Canon of the Council of Eliberis, the 17th Canon ofthe Council of Milevum, Origen's 7th Homily upon St. Matthew, St. Jerome's Epistle to Amandus (torn i. col. 296 A.), St. Ambrose on 1 Cor. vii. (or rather Hilary the Deacon), Op. torn. ii. Append, col. 133, the Epistle of Innocent I. to Exuperius (§ 6. Cone. torn. ii. col. 1256 C), and to' St. Augustine de Adulterinis Conjugiis, 1. 2, c. 4. The author, towards the conclusion, alleges that otherwise an encouragement is held out to the adulterer, if he is at liberty, having broken his vows, to marry again. He refers to St. Jerome on Matth. xix. 9, and to St. Ambrose on Luke xvi. 1, 8, § 4, though, observes the editor, the meaning appears to be mistaken. The decision of the Eeformers, both English and Continental, was in favour of the validity THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 87 of the second marriage of the innocent and injured party after divorce on the ground of adultery. The Beformatio Legum, a noble monument of the high spiritual aims and apostolic simplicity of Cranmer and his associates in that great work, permitted such marriages. That they but walked in the steps of primitive antiquity is avouched by the authority of the most learned and impartial student of the fathers whom the present century has seen, the late bishop of Lincoln. In his very valuable work upon Tertullian he observes, " that the Eoman Catholic notion of the indissolubility of marriage was then unknown. Tertullian on all occasions affirms that it may be dissolved on account of adultery: and though his peculiar tenets would naturally lead him to deny to either party the liberty of marrying again, yet he admits that such marriages actually took place in the church."1 In 1821 was republished by the late munificent dean of Westminster, Dr. Ireland, Nuptial Sacra, or, an Enquiry into the Scripture Doctrine of Marriage and Divorce, addressed to ihe Two Houses of Parliament. First published in 1801, and now reprinted by desire. In this very able and elaborate treatise, its learned author traces this notion of the indis solubility of marriage to the Shepherd of Hermas. For the history of this apocryphal writing the reader may consult the Dissertation of Ittigius de Patribus Apostolicis, § 55 — 65. Ittigius is opposed to the opinion advocated in Dr. Burton's Lectures,2 that the works bearing the name of Hermas were written by a brother of Pius, bishop of Eome, in a.d. 141 or 142. The late venerable Dr. Eouth observes its con demnation by all the Councils of the Catholic Church, as affirmed by Tertullian de Pudicitid, c. 16. See Eouth's Scriptorum Eccles. Opusc. torn. i. p. 176, Oxon. 1832, and Bp. Kaye's Tertullian, 3rd ed. p. 242. A second marriage, upon divorce on account of adultery, was allowed the innocent party to the time of archbishop Bancroft, who was swayed by some divines in the opposite direction. Amongst these perhaps was Edmund Bunney, 1 p. 380. 3rd edit. Lond. Rivingtons, 1845. 2 On the Eccles. Hist, of the Second and Third Centuries, p. 104. Oxf. 1833. 88 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. who wrote very zealously against such marriages, but did not make good his claim to the general authority of the fathers on his side. This Edmund Bunney added the arguments of the books and chapters to the London edition of Calvin's Institutes in 1576. He was, like Bernard Gilpin the apostle of the north, an indefatigable preacher, travelling about the north of England to supply as far as possible the then great lack of preachers. He was B.D. and fellow of Merton College, Oxford, rector of Bolton Percy, prebendary of Oxgate in St. Paul's, March 20, 1564, subdean of York 1570 ; he resigned the subdeanery in 1575, and was made prebendary of Wistow in St. Peter's, York, October 21, 1575. On July 2, 1585, he was admitted to the first stall in Carlisle, which he resigned in 1603. The village of Bunney, seven miles south-east of Nottingham, took its name from his family. He sometime before his death, which occurred Feb. 6, 1612, gave up his paternal inheritance to his brother Eichard. His effigy and monument are against the wall of the south aisle of the choir in York-minster, near the monu ment of archbishop Lamplugh. But by far the most learned treatise that has appeared upon this subject, is the posthumous work of that prodigy of learning, Dr. John Eainolds, sometime dean of Lincoln and afterward president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, in the reign of James the First. There antiquity is clearly shewn to be far- more in favour of the permission of a second marriage after divorce on the ground of adultery than against it. Heylyn, in his Life of Laud, calls the prohibiting of such marriages the Bomish doctrine. The Greek Church has on the other hand always allowed them. Of the authorities cited in the Discourse ascribed to An drewes, the Council of Eliberis forbids the remarriage ofthe wo man, but makes no mention of the man. Origen, in Tract. 7 in c. 19 Matth., spoke of divorces not granted for adultery, but for lighter reasons after the custom of the Jews : St. Jerome, with Athenagoras and the so-called Apostolical Constitutions, con demned all second marriages : St. Ambrose, on Luke xvi., did not refer to these marriages, but reproved men for marrying THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 89 after they had put away their chaste wives : St. Augustine himself, in his Eetractations, acknowledged his partial dis satisfaction with what he had previously advanced upon this subject : ' Scripsi duos libros de conjugiis adulterinis, quan tum potui secundum scripturas, cupiens solvere difficillimam qusestionem. Quod utrum enodatissime fecerim nescio, imb verb non me pervenisse ad hujus rei perfectionem sentio, quamvis multos sinus ejus aperuerim, quod judicare poterit quisquis intelligenter legit.' (1. 2, p. 83. Lugd. 1563.) To this should be added his concession in his book De Fide et Operibus, c. 19, p. 98, torn. iv. Et in ipsis divinis sententiis ita obscurum est, utrum et iste cui quidem sine dubio adulteram licet dimittere, adulter tamen habeatur si alteram duxerit, ut quantum existimo, venialiter ibi quisque fallatur. It should be borne in mind that for a long time in the Western church, where Scripture was regarded as leaving QBfflgyjf liberty of opinion, there St. Augustine's opinion was received as the rule. St. Chrysostom is plain for the dissolubility of marriage, Horn. 19, in 1 Cor. 7 : " The marriage is dissolved by fornica tion, neither is the husband a husband any longer." This testimony is allowed by Covarruvias in 4 1. Decretal, Part 2, c. 7, D 6. Theophylact, on St. Luke c. xvi., says expressly that our Lord's words here must be supplied from St. Matthew. Bellarmine has recourse to a chapter fathered on the Council of Basle by Pope Eugenius IV. St. Basil's Canons 9 and 21, approved by General Councils (Cone, in Trullo, Canon 2), authorize the man to marry again after divorce from an adulterous wife, and check the custom that would forbid the same liberty to a woman divorced from an adult erous husband. The reader may find many other authorities in Dr. Eai nolds ; he may also consult the 14th chapter of the seventh book of the Theologia Moralis of Dr. John Forbes, and the 2nd chapter of the third part of the second book of Dr. John Gerhard's Confessio Catholica. On November 15th the Dean of Westminster preached at 90 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Whitehall, upon giving to Cassar his due, instancing out of both the Old and New Testament the duty of obedience to princes be they good or bad ; for it is not to Tiberius but to Cassar that the tribute is due, (not to the person but to the office). The gospel recognizes the doctrine that every man must regard his property as belonging of right to God and to Cassar, himself being interested in it but as a third person ; a doctrine consonant enough to reason and revelation, but not very acceptable to the philosophy of covetousness, which would misrepresent it as subversive of the laws of property, whereas it is the only true foundation of them. Certain it is that in proportion to the prevalence of more selfish principles, property has been rendered insecure by the natural revulsion that always follows the oppression of covetousness. Whilst dean of Westminster, Dr. Andrewes frequently superintended the school in person ; but bishop Hacket shall relate in his own words the sedulousness with which -be fostered that school, and the delight which he took in en couraging the studious. In his Life of Archbishop Williams Hacket says : " He had heard much what pains Dr. Andrewes did take both day and night to train up the youth bred in the public school, chiefly the alumni of the college so called. For more certain information he (Williams) called me from Cambridge, in the May before he was installed, to the house of his dear cousin Mr. Elwes Winn in Chancery- lane, a clerk of the Petty Bag, a man of the most general and gracious acquaintance with all the great ones of the land that ever I knew. There he moved his questions to me about the discipline of Dr. Andrewes. I told him how strict that excellent man 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 the 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 pro ficiency ; that he never walked to Chiswick for his recreation without a brace of this young fry; and in that wayfaring THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 91 leisure had a singular dexterity to fill those narrow vessels with a funnel. And, which was the greatest burden of his toil, sometimes thrice in a week, sometimes oftener, he sent for the uppermost scholars to his lodgings at night, and kept them with him from eight till eleven, unfolding to them the best rudiments of the Greek tongue and the elements of the Hebrew grammar ; and all this he did to boys without any compulsion of correction, nay, I never heard him utter so much as a word of austerity among us." Hacket adds, after a rapturous eulogy, that this good and great prelate was the first that planted him in his tender studies, and watered them continually with his bounty.1 It is recorded of Duppa, bishop of Winchester, on his monument in Westminster Abbey, that he learnt Hebrew of Lancelot Andrewes, at that time dean.2 Dr. David Stokes was also at Westminster School at this time. On Ash-Wednesday, 1602, dean Andrewes preached be fore the queen at Whitehall, February 17, from Jer. viii. 4 — 7, a very ingenious and forcible sermon against neglecting and delaying of repentance. Towards the conclusion he notes how the very season of Lent, coming earlier in the year, is an intimation of the duty of an early return to God. On St. Barnabas' Day, June 11, we find him, with his old schoolmaster Mulcaster and Dr. Friar,3 as an examiner at Merchant Taylors' School. On Thursday, March 24, 1603, died queen Elizabeth, the prosperity of whose reign, the wisdom of whose councillors, the security of whose subjects raised her memory upon an imperishable basis, and deeply rooted her name in the af fections of all ranks.4 Her remains were followed to the tomb 1 Life of Archbishop Williams, pp. 44, 45. 2 Cassan's Lives of the Bishops of Wincliester, vol. ii. p. 166. 3 Thomas Fryer was Prebendary of Norton Episcopi in the church of Lincoln, and Christopher in that of Llandaff. 4 " Possessed of a vigorous and comprehensive mind, she discerned the true interests of her kingdom, and she steadily promoted them. Admirable as were her talents, she did not trust solely to her own judgment ; but whilst she guided the councils of the nation, she availed herself of the political sagacity, of the acquaintance with human nature, and of the profound knowledge by which 92 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. by fifteen hundred persons in deep mourning, and this a voluntary attendance. Fuller observes, that most of the London and many of the country churches had pictures or models of her tomb. Under these were inscriptions which may be seen in Stow's Survey of London. On St. James's Day, July 25, Dr. Andrewes, as dean, assisted at the coronation of king James. The plague' was meanwhile raging in London, and carried away thirty thou sand inhabitants. Andrewes probably retired to. Chiswick to the prebendal house, and preached in the church there on August 24, from Psalm cvi. 29, 30. Very excellently does he urge that if not a sparrow falleth to the ground without our heavenly Father, much less can such a visitation as the plague be attributed to chance. He inveighs against inventions in religion, and new modes of luxury in common life. He enumerates the causes of plagues (or sicknesses) mentioned in Holy Writ, namely, fornication, the sin of Peer; pride, the sin of David;1 blasphemy, the sin of Babshakeh; and neglect and profanation of the Sacrament, the sin of the Corinthians. Some in our day have, amidst their other superstitious scruples (unscrupulous enough in points of greater moment) been forward to censure the common appli cation of this term ' the Sacrament' to the holy Eucharist. Nevertheless we here find one, who is a giant in comparison of them all, using the term without hesitation, as being in truth not likely to lead men into error, nor inappropriate to that sacrament which is confessedly the highest part of Christian worship. On the 26th of August he was put in a commission with Dr. Eichard Field, archbishop Whitgift, the earl of Nottingham, many of her ministers were eminently distinguished. In every season of alarm and danger, the greatness of her mind and the dignity of her character were strikingly displayed; and although she ruled with absolute sway, — although she pressed severely upon some of her conscientious subjects, who could not conform to the ceremonies which she introduced, or which she retained in the services of the Church, she was beheld with veneration by her people, and regarded throughout Europe as the strenuous defender of the Protestant faith."— Dr. Cooke's Hist, ofthe Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 128. Edinb. 1815. 1 2 Sam. c. xxiv. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 93 Lord Admiral, the bishop of Winchester, Sir John Herbert, Knt, Second Secretary, Sir Thomas West, Knt., Sir Julius Cassar, Knt., a master of Eequests, Sir David Dunn, Knt., also a master of Eequests, Sir Thomas Fleming, Knt., solicitor, Sir Edward and Sir George Moore, Sir Eichard Mill, Sir Eichard Norton, Sir William Uvedale, Sir Benjamin Tytch- borne, Knts., the Chancellor of the bishop of Winchester, the Dean and Archdeacon, and others, for visiting the diocese of Winchester for the punishment of recusancy, nonconformity, fornication, adultery, misbehaviour in the church or church yards,1 &c, &c. On Saturday, January 14, 1604, he was appointed to be present at the Hampton-court Conference, held between the Conformists and the Puritans. The dean of the chapel, Dr. Montague, also dean of Worcester (afterwards bishop of Bath and Wells and then of Winchester), Dr. Thomas Eavis, dean of Christchurch (afterwards bishop of London), Dr. Overall, dean of St. Paul's (afterwards bishop of Norwich), Dr. Barlow, Dr. Bridges, dean of Sarum, and Dr. Giles Thompson, dean of Windsor (afterwards bishop of Gloucester), were summoned with Andrewes, and were in the presence-chamber ; but only Montague, dean of the chapel, Andrewes, Overall, Barlow and Bridges were called in on the first day. Andrewes does not appear to have taken any part, except that on the second day, Monday the 16th, upon the king's making inquiry into the antiquity of the use of the cross in baptism, Andrewes made answer, " It appears out of Tertullian, Cyprian, and Origen, that it was used in immortali lavacro."2 This conference was followed by the appointment of a Com mittee who were entrusted with the preparing the present version of the Scriptures. Both Dr. Andrewes and his brother Eoger, a fellow of Pembroke College, Cambridge, were ap pointed translators, and besides Andrewes, four other Merchant Taylors, Tomson, dean of Gloucester, Perin, who on Novem ber 24th was made a canon of Christchurch, Dr. Eavens, 1 Rymer's Fcedera, vol. xvi. pp. 546 — 551. Lond. 1715. 2 "The life-giving fountain."— Fuller's Ch. Hist. B. 10, p. 17; Cardwell's Conferences on the Book of Common Prayer, p. 198. Oxford, 2nd edit. 1841. 94 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. vicar of Dunmow, Essex, and Spenser, chaplain to the king, and (on the death of the very learned Dr. Eainolds) president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and also a fellow of the Eoyal Controversial College of Chelsea. Andrewes was in that division to which was allotted the Old Testament from Genesis to the end of the books of Kings. Previously to the appoint ment of the Committee of Translators, Dr. Andrewes discovered his wonderful eloquence to the king by a sermon such as hath never been equalled in an age of greater fastidiousness but not of greater strength. On Good Friday, April 6th, he preached before him at Whitehall, from Lam. i. 12, Have ye no regard, 0 all ye that pass by ihe way? Consider and behold, if ever there were sorrow like my sorrow, which was done unto me, wherewith the Lord did afflict me in the day of ihe fierceness of his wrath ? If any discourse could ever be said to be at all worthy of the subject, the unspeakable mystery of the love of Christ in our redemption, this is it. Bishop Home, a great admirer of our prelate, but not for a moment to be put in comparison with him, is said to have delighted in using the substance" of, or preaching this sermon in a more modern style ; but indeed the great simplicity of Bishop Andrewes is amongst his greatest perfections. Bishop Home was too ornate and polished to be powerful, but to Andrewes both the king and the peasant might have listened with unequal, but both with great profit. This passage in Lamentations, and that of Hosea, Out of Egypt have I called my Son, with many more of the like kind, he regarded as typical, and most perfectly applicable to our Saviour ; a rule in accordance with the spirit of scripture and Christian antiquity, and that tends to the more complete understanding of the scripture testimony to Christ — an inter nal evidence of its correctness. In regard of the sermon itself, it is a very full and glowing declaration of the great doctrine of our redemption accom plished in that day of the wrath of God when the innocent suffered for the guilty, the lamb as a sacrifice, who could not justly suffer merely as a lamb. " The cause then in God was wrath. What caused this THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 95 wroth ? God is not wroth but with sin ; nor grievously wroth but with grievous sin. And in Christ there was no grievous sin, nay, no sin at all. God did it (the text is plain), and in his fierce wrath he did it. For what cause ? For God forbid God should do as did Annas the high-priest, cause him to be smitten without cause. God forbid (saith Abraham) the Judge of the world should do wrong to any ; to any, but specially to his own Son, that his Son of whom, with thundering voice from heaven, he testifieth all his joy and delight were in him, in him only he was well pleased. And how then could his wrath wax hot, to do all this unto him ? " There is no way to preserve God's justice and Christ's innocency both, but to say as the angel said of him to the prophet Daniel, The Messiah shall be slain, ibjiSI ve-en-lo ; shall be slain, but not for himself. Not for himself? for whom then? For some others. He took upon him the person of others ; and so doing, justice may have her course and proceed. " Pity it is, to see a man pay that he never took : but if he will become a surety, if he will take on him the person of the debtor, so he must. Pity to see a silly poor lamb be bleeding to death, but if it must be a sacrifice (such is the nature of a sacrifice) so it must. And so Christ, though without sin in himself, yet, as a surety, as a sacrifice, may justly suffer for others, if he will take upon him their persons; and so God may justly give way to his wrath against him. "And who be those others? The prophet Esay telleth us, and telleth us seven times over for failing : He took upon him our infirmities, and bare our maladies: He was wounded for our iniquities, and broken for our transgressions. The chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes were we healed. All we as sheep were gone astray, and turned every man to his own way : and the Lord hath laid upon him ihe iniquity of us all. All, all ; even those that pass to and fro, and for all this, regard neither him nor his passion."1 1 pp. 358, 359. This sermon was printed in 4to. by the king's printer, Robert Barker. 1604. 96 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. The king was from the very first anxious to effect a legis lative union of the two kingdoms of Scotland and England. But the jealousy that arose in consequence of the king's partiality for his Scottish courtiers defeated his intentions, intentions that were commended to the consideration of Parliament as early as May 19, 1603, soon after his accession. We find his very learned and excellent kinsman John Gordon, of the noble house of Huntley, and whom he had made dean of Sarum in the preceding February, preaching before him at Whitehall on the 28th of October, the 21st Sunday after Trinity (the 7th Nov. N. S.) in favour of the Union of Great Britain. This sermon is entitled, Henoticon, or, A Sermon of the Union of Great Brittannie, in antiquitie of language, name, religion, and kingdom. It was printed by Geo. Bishop, London, 1604. This sermon, consisting of above fifty pages, is written in an excellent style, simple, clear, and vigorous, full of sound maxims and sound theology, and abundantly illustrated by examples from history, both civil and ecclesiastical. We are not to look indeed for critical acumen. The legendary account of Joseph of Ari- mathea, and the sway of Lucius over the whole of Britain, are introduced into his account of our early Christianity. For his notices of the dispersion of mankind after the flood he refers to the Anchoratus of Epiphanius,1 a work the principal object of which was indeed to set forth the doctrine of our Lord's divinity against the Arians, and of the Holy Ghost against the Macedonians. Gordon shewed how Divine Providence ever favoured those kingdoms that discountenanced idolatry and maintained the true worship of God. He unreservedly condemned the Eomish worship of the host and of images as Gentilism under the profession of Christi anity. He had in the preceding year, 1603, written : Asser- tiones theological pro verd verai ecclesiai nota, quai est solius Dei adoralio, contra falsoz ecclesiai Creaturarum Adorationem. Theological Theses in maintenance of a true mark of a true Church, namely, the worship of God alone, against the false Church's adoration of the Creatures. Eupell, 1603, 8vo. 1 p. 22. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 97 Gordon was of Balliol College, Oxford, but had first received a very extensive education both in Scotland and France, and especially in the Eastern languages. He derived the names of Britain, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland from the Hebrew, and commented upon them accordingly in his sermon upon Union. He had been gentleman of three Kings' cham bers in France, namely, Charles IX., Henry III. and IV. ; and, adds Anthony Wood, " whilst he was in the flower of his age he was there assailed with many corruptions as well spiritual as temporal, and in many dangers of his life, which God did miraculously deliver him from. At length K. James the first of England did call him into England, and to the holy ministry, he being then 58 years of age, and upon the promotion of Dr. John Bridges to the see of Oxon in the latter end of 1603, he made him Dean of Salisbury in February 1604." 1 Lord-Chancellor Egerton gave him, in June 1608, the rectory of Upton Lovel near Heytesbury, close by the road to Salisbury. On the following Good-Friday, March 29, 1605, Dean Andrewes preached before the King at Greenwich, from Heb. xii. 2. It is difficult to say which is the more in comparable of his three Good-Friday sermons. In this there is not a sentence that could be spared, there is not a passage but deserves to be studied. Truly did he live in the con templation of his heavenly Master's love and in the view of his cross; of looking to which he saith here, "blessed are the hours that are so spent." The reading of these pages makes us regret the loss of those discourses which he most probably delivered either in his college chapel or his abbey church at Westminster upon Christmas and Easter Day. For truly St. Chrysostom himself was, in naturalness and in setting forth the love of Christ, nay altogether as a divine, far his inferior. Here we have not the undue austerity of that age, not the unmeaning pomp of words, not the occasional bursting forth of Christian light ; but the heart speaks from its fulness, of that love which passeth knowledge, which despised both pain and shame, which bowed itself to the death of Wood's Fasti, ed. Bliss, vol, i. p. 312, K 98 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. a slave, a malefactor, a derided person. Here both our love and hope are fed ; as he himself saith, " if either of these will serve us, will prevail to move us, here it is. Here is love, love in the cross ; who loved us and gave himself for us a sacrifice on the cross. Here is hope, hope in the throne: To him that overcometh will I give to sit with me in my throne. If our eye be a mother's eye, here is love worth the looking on. If our eye be a merchant's eye, here is hope worth the looking after. I know it is true, that verus amor vires non sumit de spe. (It is Bernard.) Love, if it be true indeed, as in the mother, receiveth no manner of strength from hope. Ours is not such, but faint and feeble and full of imperfection : here is hope therefore to strengthen our weak knees, that we may run the more readily to the high prize of our calling."1 Early in the reign of James the plague broke out in Oxford, so that although he received Dr. Abbot, Master of University College and Dean of Winchester, Vicechancellor of the university, with the proctors (of whom Laud was one) and several doctors and other members of the university at Woodstock, in September, he did not then venture to visit Oxford. He was presented with the Holy Scriptures in the name of the university, and then promised that when the plague had abated he would visit the university.2 The King however resolved on visiting the university in August 1606, taking in his way Havering-atte-bower to the north of Eomford, where he remained two nights, July, Tuesday 16th and Wednesday the 17th. This Havering had been a royal seat from the reign of Edward the Confessor, and was frequently visited by his illustrious predecessor Elizabeth. Thence he proceeded to Loughton Hall, westward below the east side of Epping Forest, another resort of the late Queen. On Saturday the 20th, the King came to the Earl of Salisbury at Theobald's, a little to the west of Wal tham Abbey. Here he and the Queen remained three days. Theobald's had been the seat of the great Lord Burleigh, where he was often visited by Queen Elizabeth. James received it of 1 p. 370. 2 Nicholl's Progresses of James I., vol. i. p. 258; and Wake, p. 3. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 99 the Earl of Salisbury in exchange for Hatfield, frequently re tired hither, and in 1625 here breathed his last. Charles I. sometimes came to this place, and in 1642 the petition of both houses of parliament was presented to him here; and hence he withdrew to put himself at the head of his army. During the commonwealth the greater part was taken down, and sold to pay the troops. James II. greatly enlarged the park. In 1689 it was given by William III. to the Earl of Portland, whose descendants sold it in 1702 to Mr. Prescot. Every vestige of the ancient palace was removed in 1765, and a new house erected about a mile from the site. On Tuesday the 23rd, the King and Queen went to Hatfield palace, where they stayed three days. Here the Bishops of Ely had formerly a palace, which was conveyed to Queen Elizabeth by Bishop Cox. James, in the fourth year of his reign, exchanged it for Theobald's with Sir Eobert Cecil, whom he had in 1603 made Baron of Essendine in Eutlandshire, and in 1604 Viscount Cranborne in Dorsetshire, and whom, on May 4, 1605, he raised to be Earl of Salisbury. He erected the present noble mansion. Hence he went one day to visit Sir Goddard Pemberton at Hertford Bury,1 of an ancient family in Lancashire, and, some years after, sheriff for Hertfordshire. On Friday the 26th, the king visited Mr. Sandy, afterward Napier, whom in 1612 he made a baronet. He had purchased about this time the capital manor of Luton, with the fine seat and park there called Luton Hoo, from the ancient family of Hoo, and which since came into the hands pf the Marquis of Bute. The Queen went to Sir John Eotheram's, a mansion on Farley Green in the parish of Luton. At Mr. Sandy's Sir George Peryam, of Oxfordshire, received the honour of knighthood. On the same day, Thursday the 27th, the King proceeded to Houghton Bury in the parish of Houghton Conquest, the seat of Sir Edward Conquest, 1 He afterwards removed to St. Alban's, and died there 1615. Of this family was Sir Francis Pemberton, Chief Justice of the King's Bench and after wards of the Common Pleas, from whom are descended the Pembertons of Cambridge and Trumpington. h2 100 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. by whom he was entertained five days. The little that now remains of the mansion is a farm-house of brick and timber. The male line of this family became extinct in Benedict Conquest, esq., father of Lady Arundel (1828). The manor was purchased by the Earl of Upper Ossory in 1741. The Queen was entertained by Sir Eobert Newdigate at Hawnes. The house has been modernised and mostly rebuilt by Lord Carteret, whose family has possessed the manor from 1667. Sir Eoger Newdigate, the last who bore the title, died in 1806, leaving by his will the annual prize at Oxford for the best English verses on ancient sculpture, or painting, or architecture. On the 28th, it being the feast day at Houghton, the King with his court, consisting of the Duke of Lenox, the Earls of Northampton, Suffolk, Salisbury, Devonshire, and Pem broke, the Lords Knowles, Wotton, and Stanhope, and Dr. Watson Bishop of Chichester, his almoner, attended divine service at the parish church. On the 30th the King visited the Queen at Hawnes, and there attended divine service. The rector of Houghton Conquest, the Eev. Thomas Archer, preached from the Song of Solomon, ii. 15, Take us the foxes, the little foxes which destroy ihe grapes, for our vines have small grapes. Some of his MSS. (and amongst them this sermon) were in the possession of a late rector, Dr. Pearce, Dean of Ely and Master of Jesus College, Cambridge. Archer was immediately sworn one of the King's chaplains in ordinary.1 During this visit the King devoted himself to his favourite field sports in the parks of Houghton and Ampthill.2 On Thursday, August 1st, the King went from Houghton to Thurleigh, the seat of Sir Wm. Hervey, between Bletsoe to the west and Bolnhurst to the east, above Bedford. He 1 He preached before the King and Queen at Teddington, July 24, 1608, and before the King at Bletsoe, July 26, 1612. His monument, erected by himself in the chancel of Houghton church, represents him in canonicals in his pulpit, with a cushion and book before him. He died in 1631, aged 75. 2 The noble mansion at Houghton was unroofed and reduced to a shell by Francis Duke of Bedford, in 1794, and most of the materials were used in building the Swan Inn at Bedford. — Lyson's Bedfordshire, p. 96. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 101 had amply deserved the honours to which he afterwards rose, by numerous acts of unparalleled valour in the memorable 1588, and on many subsequent occasions. He had been knighted by Queen Elizabeth, and was made a baronet by James, May 13, 1619, and in 1620 Lord Eoss in the county of Wexford, and finally by Charles I. a baron of this realm by the title of Lord Hervey of Kidbrook in Kent, February 7, 1628. His title became extinct on his death in 1642. He was buried, July 8th, in Westminster Abbey with great solemnity. On the same Thursday, August 1st, the Queen went from Hawnes to the seat of Oliver third Lord St. John at Bletsoe, " the residence in times past of the Pateshulls, after of the Beauchamps, and now of the honourable family of St. John (1610), which long since by their valour attained unto very large and goodly possessions in Glamorganshire, and in our days," says the more ancient editor of Camden, " through the favour of Q. Elizabeth of happy memory, unto the dignity of barons, when she created Sir Oliver, the second baron of her creation, Lord St. John of Bletnesho, unto whom it came by Margaret Beauchamp on inheritance, wedded first to Sir Oliver St. John, from whom these barons derive their pedigree, and secondly to John duke of Somerset, unto whom she bare the Lady Margaret Countess of Eichmond, a lady most virtuous and always to be remembered with praises; from whose loins the late Kings and Queens of England are descended."1 At Bletsoe, overlooking a country of considerable extent to the south around and beyond Bedford, was Lady Margaret the mother of Henry VII. born. Vestiges of the old castellated mansion were discernible some years ago near a farm-house, the remains of the more modern quadrangular mansion of the St. John's. This family held lands in Oxfordshire in the reign of Henry I. Oliver the third Lord, who had the honour of entertaining the king, succeeded to the title in 1596, and died in 1613. His son Oliver, the fourth baron, was in 1624 advanced to the title of Earl of Bolingbroke. The earldom became 1 Holland's Camden, p. 399. 102 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. extinct in 1711. The barony devolved to the posterity of Sir Eowland St. John, a younger son of Oliver the third baron. But the family residence is a few miles northward near Eisely at Melchbourn. In the north aisle of the venerable and cruciform church of Bletsoe, which is the burial-place of the noble family of St. John, is a monument with the effigies of a knight in armour, with his lady, intended for Sir John St. John, father of Oliver the first Lord. This son was created Lord St. John Jan. 13, 1559. His father married Margaret daughter of Sir William Waldegrave, of a noble Saxon family, and by her had two daughters, Margaret who was married to Francis second Earl of Bedford, one of the greatest ornaments of his house. On Saturday the 3rd of August, the King and Queen were received for three days, at the noble mansion of Drayton to the west of Daventry on the borders of Northamptonshire, by Henry Lord Mordaunt. His son was created Earl of Peterborough in 1628. On the following Tuesday the 6th, the King, accompanied by the Queen, renewed the pleasure he had received on his former visit to Sir Anthony (son to Sir Walter Mildmay the founder of Emmanuel College, Cam bridge,) at Apthorp, where he had dined in April 1603, on his way from Scotland to London. Apthorp is in the neighbourhood of Kingscliffe, the resi dence for some months of the truly venerable Archdeacon of Lincoln, the early friend of the late ever to be revered Bishop of that see, Dr. Kaye. Sir Walter Mildmay has been very gratefully memorialized by the eccentric but kind-hearted George Dyer, himself of Emmanuel College, in his interesting History of the University of Cambridge. Sir Walter, fifth son of Thomas Mildmay of Little Baddow below Chelmsford, was a student of Christ's College. Fuller observes of him, " Sir Eobert Naunton, in his Fragmenta Begalia, did leave as well as take, omitting some statesmen of the first magnitude, no less valued by than useful to Queen Elizabeth, as appears by his not mentioning of this worthy knight. True it is, toward the end of his days he fell into THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 103 the Queen's disfavour, not by his own demerit, but the envy of his adversaries. For he being employed by virtue of his place to advance the Queen's treasure, did it industriously, faithfully, and conscionably, without wronging the subject, being very tender of their privileges, insomuch that he once complained in Parliament that many subsidies were granted, and no grievances redressed. Which words being represented ' with his disadvantage to the Queen, made her to disaffect him, setting in a court cloud, but in the sunshine of his country and a clear conscience."1 " Coming to court after he had founded his college," (1584) the Queen told him, " Sir Walter, I hear that you have erected a Puritan foundation." " No, Madam," saith he, " far be it from me to countenance anything contrary to your established laws; but I have set an acorn, which when it becomes an oak, God alone knows what will be the fruit thereof." " Sure I am at this day," adds Fuller (1634), " it hath overshadowed all the University, more than a moiety ofthe present Masters of Colleges being bred therein."2 Sir Anthony was son to Sir Walter. He was knighted by Queen Elizabeth and sent over to France on an embassy to Henry IV. in 1596. " He was at Geneva," says Fuller, " when Theodore Beza their minister was convened before their consistory and publicly checked for preaching too elo quently : he pleaded that what they called eloquence in him was not affected but natural, and promised to endeavour more plainness for the future. Sir Anthony, by Grace coheir to Sir Henry Sherington, had one daughter Mary, married to Sir Francis Fane, afterwards earl of Westmoreland." In Apthorp chapel, within Nassington park, both Sir Anthony and his lady Grace, " one of the coheirs of Sir Henry Sherington, knt., of Lacock in the county of Wilts, who lived fifty years married to him, and three years a widow after him," lie buried. He died September 11th, 1617, and his lady Grace July 27th, 1620. 1 Dyer quotes this secondhand from Lloyd's Statesmen and Favourites of p. 366 ; Dyer's Cambridge, vol. ii. p. 348. 2 Hist. oftU Univ. of Cambridge, pp. 277, 278. Camb. 1840. 104 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. The present mansion, the seat of the Earl of Westmoreland, is neatly built of freestone, and consists of a quadrangle with open cloisters. On the south side is a stone statue of James I., who gave the timber for building the east and south sides. There are chambers still called the King's and the Duke's chamber. Among several good portraits are a quarter piece by Vandyke, in the king's chamber, of the first Earl of West moreland, and a full-length portrait of Frances Howard, Duchess of Eichmond and Lenox, daughter to Thomas Lord Howard of Bindon. In the ceiling are the arms, crest, and supporters of England in fretwork. On the staircase is a full- length portrait of James, created Duke of Eichmond in 1641, May 8th, the faithful friend of Dr. Thomas Fuller, and a faithful servant of Charles I., at whose interment at Windsor he was present. Here are also portraits of the Mildmay family here mentioned, and of Philip and Mary, supposed to have been painted by Holbein.1 The King, after enjoying his favourite sport around Ap thorp, went on Friday the 9th to Eockingham Castle, the mansion of Sir Edward Watson, and the Queen to Kirby, the seat of Sir Christopher Hatton, in the parishes of Gretton and Bulwick, thus going southward on their way to Oxford. Sir Edward Watson had been high-sheriff of Northampton shire in 1591, and was knighted by the King at the Charter house May 12, 1603. He died in 1617. The mansion and castle are now the property of Lord Sondes, descended of Lady Margaret, youngest daughter of Sir Edward's son, Sir Lewis the first Earl Eockingham. Kirby, the seat of Sir Christopher, a godson of the Lord- chancellor Hatton, was celebrated for its gardens.2 Sir Chris topher sold Holdenby to the King in 1608, resided at Kirby, and died in 1619. On Monday the 12th August, the King and Queen visited 1 Nicholl's Progresses of James I., vol. i. p. 97. 2 " The gardens here are beautiful, stocked with a great variety of exotic plants, and adorned with a wilderness composed of almost the whole variety of English trees, and ranged in an elegant order.'' — Bridges' Northamptonshire, vol. ii. p. 34. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 105 Mr. Edward, brother of Sir Thomas Griffin, at Braybrooke Castle. Scarcely any remains of the castle now exist. On the death of Sir Thomas in 1615, he succeeded to the family estates at Braybrooke and Dingley. His son Edward was created Lord Griffin of Braybrooke by James II. in 1688. The title became extinct in 1742, but revived August 3rd, 1784, in favour of John, son of Anne, sister of the last Lord. He took the title of Lord Howard of Walden. The title of Baron of Braybrooke was revived September 5th, 1788, in the person of Eichard Neville Aid worth, esq., on the death of John Lord Howard of Walden. He was descended from the ancient family of Aldworth1 of Stanlakes in Berkshire, and in the female line from the Nevilles of Billingbear near Binfield in Berkshire, contiguous to which is the park with the old mansion of the Lords Braybrooke.2 In the afternoon their Majesties left Braybrooke Castle for Harrowden, the seat of Lord Vaux, some miles to the south west of Braybrooke Castle, and about two miles above Well ingborough. The ancient manor-house has long been de molished. Edward the fourth Lord Vaux succeeded his grandfather William in 1595. The first Lord was Sir Nicholas Vaux, captain of Guisnes in Picardy, created by Henry VIII. Lord Vaulx of Harrowden.3 On Tuesday the 13th, the king and queen visited Castle Ashby, the princely seat of Lord Compton,4 a little to the north 1 From a branch of which proceeded the Viscounts of Doneraile in Ireland. 2 It was granted by Edward VI. to Sir Henry Neville, second son of Lord Abergavenny. Lord Braybrooke added the name and arms of Griffin to that of Neville in 1798. 3 Hubert de Vaulx or de Vallibus was made Lord of Gillesland in Cumber land by Henry II. His shield of arms was cheeky or and gules. His son Robert founded and endowed Llanercost Priory. But the inheritance, after a few years, was by marriage translated to the Moltons, and from them by a daughter to Ranulph Lord Dacre. — -Holland's Camden, p. 786. 4 The Greys, Lords of -Ruthin and Earls of Kent, possessed it for a long time, until Richard, who died in 1503, parted with it to Lord Hussey, who alienated it in the reign of Henry VIII. to Sir William Compton of Compton Wyngates, to the north-east of Shipton-upon-Stour in Warwickshire. The noble mansion here, the birthplace of Compton Bishop of London, is still standing. It was erected by Sir William. 106 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of the road from Northampton to Bedford. The old mansion was enlarged in the seventeenth century under the direction of the famous Inigo Jones. Within the stone balustrade is wrought in open-work in Latin, Except the Lord build ihe house, they labour in vain that build it. Here they remained until Friday the 16th, when the King proceeded to Grafton Lodge, then an honour of the King's, but in the fifteenth century the mansion of the Widvilles or Woodvilles. It was once the residence of the renowned George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland. This heroic and dis interested nobleman died October 30 this same year. But little remains of this venerable mansion. The Queen on the same day went to Alderton, which was annexed to the manor of Grafton. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth it was in the hands of William Gorges, esq., who, dying without issue in 1589, left it to Frances, his only daughter and heir, the wife of Thomas Heselrige, esq. William, the Queen's host, was the son of Sir Thomas, who had been knighted by Queen Elizabeth in 1577, and died in 1600. The son entertained the King at Alderton in August 1608, when he was knighted. He was sheriff for Leicester shire in 1613, knight of the shire in 1614 and 1623, and was created a baronet July 21, 1622. He died January 11, 1629, aged 66. On Tuesday the 20th, the King and Queen passing west ward into Oxfordshire came to Hanwell, within four miles of Banbury, the seat of Sir Anthony Cope, now, like so many more of the mansions they visited, reduced to a shadow of its former greatness. Sir Anthony, who had been knighted by Elizabeth, is said to have been a mirror of integrity and hospitality. His first wife was Frances, daughter of Sir Eowland Litton of Herts. This family, becoming connected with Hampshire in the last century, was seated at Bramshill Park in that county, where the upright Primate Abbot met with that unhappy casualty, July 24, 1621, whilst on a visit there to Lord Zouch. On the same day the King visited Sir William Pope of Wilcote, at Wroxton Park, about a mile nearer Banbury, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 107 "probably," says Warton, "in the old abbey house, where he entertained the King with the fashionable and courtly diversions of hawking and bearbating. As the King was on a visit to Sir Thomas Watton at Halsted in Kent, near Sevenoaks, his granddaughter Anne1 was presented to the King, holding the following humorous epigram in her hand, with which his Majesty was highly pleased. See this little mistress here Did never sit in Peter's chair, Or a triple crown did wear, And yet she is a Pope. No benefice she ever sold, Nor did dispense with sins for gold; She hardly is a sevennight old, And yet she is a Pope. No King her feet did ever kiss, Or had from her worse look than this ; Nor did she ever hope To saint one with a rope,2 And yet she is a Pope. A female Pope you'll say; a second Joan. No, sure; she is Pope Innocent, or none. It is supposed, says Warton in his Life of Pope, to have been written by Eichard Corbet, then a student at Christ church, afterwards Bishop of Norwich. His poems, with a life of him prefixed, were edited with many additions by Octavius Gilchrist in 1807. Wroxton Abbey stood in the garden on the east side of the present house. It was a priory of Augustine Canons, founded early in the reign of Henry III. It was granted by Henry VIII. to Sir Thomas Pope, who bestowed the site and lands, or great part of them, on his new foundation of Trinity, which 1 The King was on this visit June 25th, 1618. Anne was born at Wroxton 1617, and was afterwards mother to Sir Samuel Danvers, of Culworth, Nor thamptonshire, between Banbury and Towcester. Her mother Elizabeth was only child and heiress of Sir Thomas Watson, and wife of Sir William Pope, eldest son of the first Earl of Downe. — See Nicholl's Progresses of James I., vol. iii. p. 483. 2 An allusion to the semi- canonization of Garnet. 108 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. he grafted on to Durham College, a great part of which still remains under the appellation of Trinity College, Oxford. Sir William, the King's host, built from the ground the present mansion. The chapel he caused to be decorated with pamted glass by Van Ling in 1623. Wroxton Abbey is engraved in Skelton's Antiquities of Oxfordshire. Sir William's lady was Anne, daughter of Sir Owen Hop- ton, lieutenant of the Tower, and relict of Henry Lord Went worth, Baron of Nettlestead. She died at Wroxton 1625. On Wednesday the 21st, the King and Queen left Wroxton for their ancient palace of Woodstock, where they remained three nights. Woodstock was a royal residence from the reign of Henry I. The Earl of Dorset, the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, had sent his instructions to the Heads of houses as early as the month of June. On Thursday the 22nd, on which day Philip Stringer, Fellow of St. John's college and Solicitor to the University of Cambridge, M.A. 1571, and some years esquire bedell, pro bably from 1568 to 1591, came to Oxford in the afternoon, bringing with him from the King's Attorney-general a book ready for his Majesty's signature, for the endowing of the regius divinity professorship of Cambridge with the livings of Somersham and Colne in Huntingdonshire ; the Earls of Wor cester, Suffolk, and Northampton, with Lord Carey, were in Oxford surveying the preparations making at Christchurch and elsewhere for the royal visit. Edward Earl of Worcester, descended of Sir Charles Somerset, natural son to Henry Duke of Somerset, was Master of the Horse, and, " amongst other laudable parts of virtue and nobility," is said to have highly favoured " the studies of good literature."1 He was a knight of the garter, and ancestor to his grace the Duke of Beaufort. He was one of the most complete gentlemen of his time, and excelled in those manly exercises, a proficiency in which then constituted so material a part of the character of an accomplished courtier, particularly tilting and horsemanship. He possessed abilities which quali- 1 Holland's Camdzn, p. 579. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 109 fied him for the highest public offices, but avoided politics, and chose to shine at the court and in his own house. He died March 3rd, 1627, aged 84.1 The Earl of Suffolk, on the death of Henry Howard Earl of Northampton in 1614, was elected Chancellor of the Uni versity of Cambridge. He was ever in high favour with the King, who, on his entry into England, made him his Lord-chamberlain and afterwards Lord-treasurer. He erected the once more than royal mansion at Audley End. The Earl of Northampton was a scholar and a man of the world, versed in the art of dissimulation, without honour and principle, an accomplished and successful criminal, im plicated in the darkest tragedy of this period, the death of Sir Thomas Overbury ; but a contemporary speaks of him thus : " Lord Henry Howard, brother to the last Duke of Norfolk, a man of rare and excellent wit, and sweet, fluent eloquence, singularly adorned also with the best sciences, prudent in council, and provident withal."2 Thus wrote Camden of this talented but worthless person. He was born at Shottesham, about eight miles south of Norwich. He was first of King's College, Cambridge, and afterwards of Trinity Hall, where he took the degree of M.A. He was incorporated M.A. of Oxford, April 19, 1568. His learning has procured him a place in Lord Orford's Boyal and noble Authors? He was unable to obtain the countenance of Queen Elizabeth, but sought to rise through the Earl of Essex, paying court at the same time to his inveterate enemy, secretary Cecil, whose correspondence with James passed through his hands, which paved the way for his promotion by that monarch. Though, as Anthony Wood says, a papist,4 he was chosen on Cecil's death to the Chancellorship of the university of Cambridge, in 1612. He died in 1614, June 15th, not long before the full discovery of the crimes that succeeded upon the divorce of his great niece the Countess of Essex with Carr, Earl 1 Nicholl's Progresses of James I., vol. i. p. 162. 2 Holland's Camden. 3 Vol. ii. ed. Park, pp. 148 — 167 ; also Lodge's Portraits of Illustrious Persons. 4 Fasti, ed. Bliss, i. 183. 110 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of Somerset. On his death the king conferred the earldom of Northampton on the Lord Compton. Lord Carey, also called Carew, was called Baron Carew of Clopton, close upon Stratford-upon-Avon, having married into the family that owned the manor of Clopton. He had distinguished himself in 1595 at the siege of Cadiz, was a favourite of Queen Elizabeth, who appointed him president of Munster and master of the Ordnance in Ireland. In 1603 he was made governor of Guernsey, and being now vice- chamberlain to the Queen, was created Baron Carew of Clopton in the county of Warwick, and in 1625 Earl of Totness. He died without issue March 27, 1629, aged 73.1 " He was," says Camden, " a most affectionate lover of venerable an tiquity." Thus a similar taste united these noblemen, the earls of Worcester, Suffolk, and Northampton, and Lord Carey. On Saturday the 23rd, very late in the evening, the Chancellor of the university and Lord- Treasurer of England, the Earl of Dorset, came to Oxford. He was welcomed at Christchurch with an oration, and took up his lodgings at New College. Never was Oxford graced with a more ac complished and unsullied Chancellor. It has enjoyed indeed one unrivalled in the field, but in the arts of peace none ever shone with a serener brightness than this star of the Elizabethan era. Thomas Sackville, Earl of Dorset, was born at Buckhurst in the parish of Withiam in Sussex, 1536. He was admitted of Hart Hall, Oxford, but removed thence, before he had taken a degree, to St. John's College, Cambridge. As a poet he is regarded as the model of Spenser. His life was one of vicissitude although of honour. He was a diligent and eminent student of the law, served in parlia ment for the county of Westmoreland in the reign of Queen Mary, and for that of Sussex in the first parliament of Elizabeth. He suffered a short imprisonment at Eome. On his return he found himself in possession of a most ample fortune by the death of his father, but his magnificence of 1 NichoU's Royal Progresses of James I, vol. i. p. 208 ; Holland's Camden, p, 565. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Ill living brought him into difficulties, from which however he recovered himself, having been wounded by the incivility of an alderman who had greatly enriched himself by his purchases of him, and who kept him sometime waiting, when he was once obliged to apply to' him. His father died in 1566. He was in the following year created Lord Buckhurst, and in 1571 sent ambassador to France. In 1572 he was one of the peers who sat in judgment on the Duke of Norfolk. He was in 1586 one of the commissioners for the trial of Mary Queen of Scots. In 1587 he was sent to the states of Holland upon their complaints of the Earl of Leicester's proceedings, in order to examine that affair and to compose the differences that had arisen out of it. Although he per formed his office faithfully, Leicester's interest with the Queen prevailed so far as that he was confined to his house above nine months. Upon the death of the Earl he was restored to the favour of his sovereign, and soon after made a knight of the garter. Sir Christopher Hatton dying on the 20th November, 1591, Lord Buckhurst was chosen Chancellor of the University of Oxford in preference to the Earl of Essex, who was supported by the favourers of Puritanism. In 1598 he was appointed Lord High-Treasurer of England, and in 1601 Lord High-Steward for the trial of the Earl of Essex, and conducted himself with remarkable candour and humanity towards that nobleman, whose sentence of death he was compelled by his office to pronounce. He married Cecily daughter of Sir John Baker. His son Eobert succeeded to his honours. His daughter Jane married Anthony Viscount Montagu, grandson of Antony Browne who was created first Viscount in the reign of Queen Mary, whose grandmother was a daughter of John Neville Marquess Montacute, from Montacute in Somersetshire, who was slain at Barnet in 1472. His daughter Mary married Henry Neville, seventh Lord Abergavenny. King James advanced Lord Buckhurst to the dignity of Earl of Dorset on March 13, 1604. He died suddenly at the council-table April 19th, 1608, and was buried with great solemnity in Westminster Abbey. He was kind and hospitable, and generous to his tenants. 112 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. His household consisted of one hundred and twenty persons. He was zealously pious, and an unbending upholder of the Protestant religion. On Saturday the 24th, the King removed to Langley, some miles to the west of Woodstock. Some remains of the palace were visible here in the last century. It stood near the village of Shipton-under-Whichwood. Here the royal party continued until their coming to Oxford on the 27th. The Chancellor, Vicechancellor, Dr. Abbot, and the doctors following two by two, attended at St. Mary's, it being St. Bartholomew's Day. The preacher is said to have been a Mr. Gryme or Graham. The church was already prepared for the acts and sermons of the ensuing week with a raised throne to the back of the chancel, double galleries on the north and south sides, seats rising one above another at the west end, and forms in the mid-space of the nave for bachelors in divinity, &c, and masters of arts. Doctor Gordon, who had been recently created doctor in divinity, preached before the court on the following day, being Sunday, and thither went the Chancellor of the uni versity, not to Langley, but to Woodstock. On Monday, at seven in the morning, there was an English sermon at All Saints, and so every morning at the same hour to Friday inclusive. This church, in the twelfth century, was given or confirmed to the Canons of St. Frideswide. Thence it came into the hands of the Bishops of Lincoln, in the 20th year of Edward II. , until Eichard Fleming Bishop of Lincoln, early in the fifteenth century, appropriated it to Lincoln Col lege, of which he was the founder in 1427. The old church was so much injured by the fall of the spire in 1699 as to render the rebuilding of the whole indispensable, which was accordingly done after a design from Dean Aldrich. At eight all public lectures were read in their several schools, and from nine till eleven they continued their disputations on Quod- libets in the schools of arts. These disputations were between masters and bachelors. And in the same schools from one to three disputations were continued by bachelors and sophisters. This day the Earl of Suffolk, Lord Chamberlain and several THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 113 other Earls and Lords came to Oxford, and reviewed the King's and Queen's lodging in Christchurch, and the Prince Henry's lodging in Magdalene College, and dined with the Chancellor in the Warden's lodge at New College, with whom dined also Dr. Abbot the Vice-Chancellor, with some other Doctors and the Bedells. On Tuesday the 27th of August, in the forenoon, all things were performed as on the day before. At one in the afternoon the Vice-Chancellor and Doctors went to the Chancellor at New College, and thence presently to meet the King in the following order. First three esquire Bedells rode on fbotcloths, in fair gowns, with gold chains, in velvet caps, carrying their staves as at other times, but bare-headed, as did the Serjeant of the Mace, who rode next behind them. Immediately after them rode the Chancellor talking with the Vice-Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor bearing back about half the length of his horse. After them six or eight Doctors also in scarlet, two by two upon the footcloths. Then the two Proctors in their civil hoods, upon the footcloths, riding two by two. These were some of them heads of halls, and some of them ancient bachelors in divinity. All these university men did wear square caps. They stayed first at a place called Aristotle's Well, being about a mile from the city. " Aristotle's Well," says Hearne in his Diary, " is in the midway between Oxford and Wolvercote. Before we come to it, is another way called Walton Well, from the old village of Walton now destroyed. I have mentioned both these wells in my preface to John Eowse. Aristotle's well was so called from the scholars, especially such as studied his philosophy, going to it, and re freshing themselves at it, there being an house for these occasions just by it."1 But as it was a narrow place much annoyed with dust, the Lord-Chamberlain sent word to them to come a little forward into a fair meadow, where they all, saving the Serjeant of the Mace, alighted from their horses, and stayed a little while beside the highway expecting the 1 Hearne's Diary, vol. i. p. 391, ed. by Dr. Bliss, 1857. Wolvercote is on the road to Woodstock. 114 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. King. In the meantime the Mayor of the city, twelve alder men in scarlet, and some six score commoners in black coats guarded with velvet and laid on with Bellament lace, passed forward by them some forty score. The Vice-Chancellor and Doctors acquainted the Chancellor with this circumstance, who sent his Serjeant-at-Arms to them, upon which they turned back behind the Chancellor some twenty score. And now the King came up on horseback, with the Queen on his left-hand, and the Prince before them, the Duke of Lenox carrying the sword. Esme Stuart, or (as formerly spelt) Steward, Duke of Lenox, was son to John Lord D'Aubigny younger brother to Matthew Earl of Lenox jipon whom Henry VIII. bestowed his niece. From this marriage with Margaret daughter of King Henry's sister, Margaret Queen-dowager of Scotland by her second husband the Earl of Angus, sprang Henry Stuart Lord Darnley, father of James I. The Chancellor first accosted the King, and kneeled down at his feet with the rest, and kissed the sole of his stirrup. The Vice-Chancellor accosted him with a speech in honour of both the University and the King. As was the custom of that age, it was mixed up with mythological allusions. The speech is given by Sir Isaac W«rke, from which it would appear that Stringer has not recorded the substance of it with exactness. Probably any other uni versity would have rivalled Abbot in his praises of his Alma Mater. Oxford had, some centuries previously, been reckoned inferior only to Paris. But Abbot did not claim absolute precedency for Oxford above every other university. The Vice-Chancellor then presented the King with a splendid and splendidly bound copy of Stephens' New Testament, which the King looked into again and again with evident admira tion, observing that it was a present worthy of the University to give, and of a Prince to receive. Oxford was then famous for its gloves : so the Vice-Chancellor also presented to the King two pairs of Oxford gloves with a deep fringe of gold, the turnovers being wrought with pearl. There were also presented two pairs to the Queen, and one to the Prince. So they went on a little forward, the Bedells preceding the King, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 115 as also after them three Serjeants-at-Arms, and the Duke of Lenox, sword-bearer. So they came next to the Mayor and his brethren in office. The Town-Clerk, in the absence of the Eecorder, made a long speech in English, highly extolling the late Queen and her government, not without dutiful al lusions to the hopes entertained of happiness under her suc cessor. The Mayor meanwhile laid his gold mace at the King's feet, and afterwards presented him, in the name of the city of Oxford, with a gold cup, having £50 of gold in it, another to the Queen, gilt and covered, worth £40, and to the Prince another worth £30; so Stringer; but Wake, who is rather to be followed, speaks only of a richly embossed cup given to the King, a purse adorned with Indian pearls pre sented to the Queen, and a smaller cup with gold coin in it (as was also in the others) presented to the Prince.1 The procession to Oxford was headed by the Lieutenant for the County. After the company that attended him, the royal guard in their glittering habiliments ; then the trumpet ers ; after them the royal herald, called after the most noble order of the Garter ; at his right the Vice-Chancellor, at his left the Mayor of Oxford, then the Vice-Chamberlains of the King and Queen, Lord Stanhope of Harrington, Vice- Chamberlain to the King, and Lord Carey of Clopton, to the Queen: then the most noble the Earl of Dorset, High- Treasurer of England and Chancellor of the University. On his left Thomas, Earl of Suffolk, Lord-Chamberlain to the King: next came the Duke of Lenox bearing the sword; then the King, Queen, and Prince Henry on horseback. Around them the Earls of Arundel, Oxford, Northumberland, Wor cester, Eutland, Cumberland, Southampton, Pembroke, Essex, Nottingham Lord High Admiral, Devon Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, Northampton, Salisbury Secretary of State, Mont gomery, and Perth. Most of these have been already noticed. Thomas, Earl of Arundel, conformed to the Protestant religion in this reign. He was one of the greatest patrons of the fine arts of this 1 p. 16. i2 116 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. period. A part of his collection is still at Oxford.1 Charles created him Earl of Norfolk.2 Henry Vere, Earl of Oxford, whose family was originally from Zeeland in the Netherlands, was the eighteenth of his race in lineal descent. He died at the siege of Breda, 1625.3 Eoger Manners, fifth Earl of Eutland, succeeded his father February 24th, 1588. He was early sent to the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of M.A. He was an eminent traveller and good soldier. In 1595 he visited France, Switzerland, and Italy; was Colonel of foot in the Irish wars in 1598. In that year, July 10th, he was incor porated M.A. of Oxford. He was appointed Constable of Nottingham Castle, and Chief-Justice in Eyre of Sherwood Forest in 1600, and in 1603 was honoured with a visit from the King. He was in that same year made Lord-Lieutenant of Lincolnshire, and was sent ambassador into Denmark to the christening of the King's eldest son, and to invest the King of Denmark with the order of the Garter. He was made Knight of the Bath at the coronation of James in 1603, and that same year Steward of the manor and soke of Grantham. He married Elizabeth only daughter and heir of the famous Sir Philip Sidney. He died without issue June 26, 1612, and was buried at Bottesford. His Countess survived him little more than two months. He was succeeded in his titles and estates by his brother Francis.4 1 Given to the University in 1755 by the Countess of Pomfret. 2 This nobleman was a devoted upholder of the dignity of the aristocracy. He feared the effects of that want of dignity which so unhappily characterized the deportment of James, whom he served faithfully, and who shewed bim more regard than did his son and successor. His character has been severely handled by Lord Clarendon, but vindicated in the Duke of Norfolk's Atiecdotes of the Howard Family. See also Sir Edward Walker's Historical Discourses, pp. 210, 211. 3 This nobleman was charged by Villiers -with treachery, but no proof ap pears to exist that can justify the charge. The Earl treated it with disdain, and replied that 'he neither cared for his friendship nor feared his hatred,' and thenceforth joined with the Duke's enemies to tbe Duke's great disadvantage, for he was of the most ancient and loyal of the nobility. — Clarendon's Hist, of the Rebellion, vol. i. p. 32. * See Sir Egerton Brydges' Memoirs of the Peers of England during the Reign of James I, p. 279. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 117 Henry Percy, the most generous Earl of Northumberland, a great friend to learning and learned men, especially of mathematicians. He died 5th November 1632, and was buried at Petworth in Sussex.1 The famous Bevis, whence Bevis Mount near South ampton, is said to have been the first Earl of Southampton, and the only one until Henry VIII. created William Fitz william, descended from the daughter of Marquess Montacute, both Earl of Southampton and Admiral of England in his old age. He married Mabel daughter of Henry Lord Clifford, but left none to inherit his honours. He was the son of Sir Thomas Fitz-Williams, of Aldwarke near Easingwold in Yorkshire. He was in 1512 made one of the esquires of the body to Henry VIII., and in 1513 had the command of the fleet which fought the French off Brest; and though very severely wounded, distinguished himself in 1514 at the siege of Tournay. After having fulfilled the office of Vice-Admiral in the absence of the Earl of Surrey, and that of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland in 1520, he was in 1537 appointed Lord High- Admiral and Earl of ifethampton, and soon after Lord Privy-Seal, being succeeded in the Admiral- ship by John Lord Eussell. He died at Newcastle as he was on his way to Scotland to assist in the expedition sent against that country under the command of his friend the Duke of Norfolk. Next, Edward VI., in the first year of his reign, conferred the Earldom of Southampton upon Thomas Wriothesley, Lord Chancellor. This the King did not of his own will, but as a minor, Wriothesley being left one of his father's executors ; but he was very early compelled to resign the Chancellorship. He had rendered himself execrable by taking part himself in applying the rack to Anne Askew previously to her martyrdom. 1 He spent the greater part of James's reign in the Tower by a sentence of the Star Chamber, on suspicion of too close a connection with his kinsman Percy, who was engaged in the Gunpowder Plot. He was thus compelled to pay to the King £20,000. He relieved his time in the Tower with the company ofthe most eminent scholars. — See Brydges, p. 8. 118 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. His grandson Henry was now Earl of Southampton. He having taken part with the Earl of Essex in 1599, was brought to trial and found guilty. His life was spared, but he remained in the Tower until his release by King James, April 10th, 1603. On the 21st of July following he was restored to his title by a new patent. He was a nobleman of great courage, and henceforth high in favour with his sovereign and his court. He was a patron of learning. In 1614 Eichard Brathwayt dedicated to him The Scholar's Medley. In 1617 he, with other munificent patrons of learning, contributed to relieve the distress of Minsheu, the laborious author of the Guide to Tongues. He was a great promoter of the first Virginia Company. He was sworn a Privy- Councillor on the 19th August 1619. He made a successful motion against illegal patents in Parliament 1621. 1 At the sitting on the 14th March he had a dispute with the Marquess of Buckingham which was moderated by the Prince of Wales, but was put under restraint for some time after the adjourn ment of Parliament. He did not however desist from serving his country in the Parliament of 1624, but lost his life at Bergen-op-zoom on the 10th November that year, together with his eldest son. His son Thomas was the last Earl of Southampton, the Lord High-Treasurer, whose name has been commended to posterity by the pen of Clarendon. William Herbert, third Earl of Pembroke, was son of Henry Earl of Pembroke and of Mary the famous sister of Sir Philip Sidney. He was born at Wilton xVpril 8, 1580, and was educated at New College, Oxford. He succeeded to his father's title January 19th, 1601, and was made K.G. by James in 1603. In 1604 he man-led Lady Mary one of the three daughters and coheirs of Gilbert Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury. He was in 1610 appointed Governor of Portsmouth, and in 1616 Lord-Chamberlain of the King's household, and that same year Chancellor of the University of Oxford, on the death of Egerton Lord-Chancellor Ellesmere. He was opposed to the Spanish interest. He died April 10th, 1 Lords' Journal, vol. iii. pp. 10.46.62. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 119 1630, at his house, Baynard's Castle, on the banks of the Thames. The Earl of Essex was the restored son of the late Earl who was beheaded in 1601. He was of Merton College, Oxford. He-, after having been appointed Lord-Chamberlain to Charles I., went over to the Parliament. He was sworn of the King's Privy Council in 1641, when indeed the King was endeavouring to make himself popular. The King however foofeall by demanding the six members of the House of Commons to be delivered up to him on a charge of treason, the Lord Kimbolton, Denzil Hollis, Sir Arthur Heselrige, Pym, Hampden, and Strode, on January 3, 1642. These were followed by as unconstitutional acts on the part of the Commons.1 The King now tempted Essex to disloyalty, by requiring of him and the Earl of Holland to resign the staff and key of their offices. So he accepted in the course of this year the command of the Parliamentarian army. The Earl laid down his command on the 2nd April 1644, which was taken up by Sir Thomas Fairfax. He was unwelcome to Cromwell and all the more violent of the popular party; the more moderate lost a firm friend by his death, September 14, 1647. Charles Howard, son of Lord William Howard Baron of Effingham, was born in 1536, and early served at sea under his father. He was highly serviceable in putting down the insurrection in the north under the Earl of Warwick, against the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland. He suc ceeded to his father's title on his death in 1572, having been elected to represent Surrey in Parliament in the preceding year. He was made Chamberlain of the Household in 1573, and K.G., and in 1585 Lord High-Admiral. He signalized himself and did immortal service to his country in the memorable year of the Armada, 1588, and again chastising the Spanish in 1596, he was in 1598 created Earl of Nottingham. He was as humane as he was valorous. In 1590, a time of renewed apprehension from the Spaniards, 1 Hallam's Constitutional Hist. ii. 192. 120 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. he was made Lord-Lieutenant of all England. In 1600 he quelled the insurrection of the Earl of Essex, but shewed his magnanimity by treating the Earl with the greatest kindness possible. He was employed at the Spanish court by James, and received with the greatest respect. He was one of the greatest of that age of great men, and lived to enjoy his honours and the veneration of his country for an unusual period. He died December 14th, 1624, aged 88. Charles Blount the eighth Lord Mountjoy, created after wards Earl of Devonshire, was bom in 1563, being the second son of James Lord Mountjoy. He was of the University of Oxford, M.A. June 16th, 1589.1 He studied also at the Inner Temple. He was early a favourite at court, and was one of the volunteers who engaged in pursuit of the Armada with ships at their own charge. He served in the House of Commons until 1594, when he succeeded to his brother's title of Lord Mountjoy, and was made Governor of Portsmouth. In 1597 he was made K.G., and was employed in the expedition to the Azores. In 1599 he was made Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, which was subdued to order under his government. He was continued in this office by James I., appointed one of his Privy Councillors, and on July 21, 1603, created Earl of Devonshire. He died in the prime of life at the Savoy, April 3, 1606, and was buried with great pomp in St. Paul's chapel in the Abbey. Philip Herbert Earl of Montgomery was younger brother of William Earl of Pembroke. Antony Wood is unsparing in his attacks upon his memory, as one so intolerably choleric, quarrelsome and offensive while he was Lord-Chamberlain to Charles I., " that he did not refrain to break many wiser heads than his own." The Earl of Perth was James Baron Drummond, whom the King had advanced to that Earldom. Drimein Castle, on the banks of the Earn in the old district of Strathern, was the ancient seat of this family, " advanced to highest honours ever since that King Eobert Steward the third took to him a wife out of that lineage."2 1 Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 250, ed. Bliss. - Camden, Scotland, p. 36, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 121 With these noblemen were Lord Knowles Treasurer of his Majesty's household; Lord Wotton Comptroller of his. Majesty's household; Lord Erskine Captain of the yeomen of the guard; the learned Lord Buckhurst son of the Earl of Dorset ; and Lords Monteagle and Haddington. Sir William Knowles (formerly Knolles) resided at Greys Eotherfield, near Henley-on-Thames. He was created Baron Knowles May 3, 1603, Viscount Wallingford 1616, and Earl of Banbury by Charles I. in 1626. He had been of Magda lene College, Oxford. Sir Edward Wotton had been Comptroller of the household to Queen Elizabeth, was of the Wotton family of Boughton Malherb near Lenham in Kent, and had been created by James Baron Wotton of Merlay, or Marley. His son and heir Thomas Lord Wotton died in the sixth year of Charles I., leaving four daughters his coheirs, of whom Catherine the eldest married Henry Lord Stanhope. So the title became extinct. Lord Erskine, originally Sir Thomas Erskine, was second son of Sir Alexander Erskine of Gogar or Gogyr in Edin- burgshire, an ancient parish now included in that of Costor- phine. He was born in 1566, the same year with the King, and was brought up with him from his childhood. The King, who was not insensible to kindly affections, appointed him one of the gentlemen of his bed-chamber 1585. He had charters of Mitchellis, Eastertown and Westertown in the county of Kincardine, 17th October 1594, of Windingtown and Windingtown Hall, June 1st, 1598, and of Easterrow in Perthshire, 15 January, 1599. He was one of the happy instruments in the rescue of the King from the treasonable attempt of the Earl of Gowrie and his brother Alexander Euthven of Perth, August 5th, 1600, and killed Euthven with his own hand. For this signal service he had the third part ofthe Lordship of Dirleton, belonging to Gowrie, conferred on him by charter dated 15th November 1600, and in warran dice thereof the King's barony of Corritown in Stirlingshire. In that charter he is designated eldest lawful son of the deceased Alexander Erskine, Master of Marr. He accom- 122 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. panied the Duke of Lenox in his embassy to France in July 1601. Attending James into England, he was in 1603 constituted Captain of the Yeomen of the Guard in the room of Sir Walter Ealeigh, and held that command until 1632. He was created a Knight of the Bath at the King's coronation, raised to the peerage with the title of Lord Dirleton, and admitted a Privy Councillor. In 1606 he was appointed Groom of the Stole, and created Viscount Fentown or Fenton, 18th May, being the first who was raised to that order of nobility in Scotland. In 1615 he was made K.G., and on March 12, 1619, Earl of Killie, a district of Fifeshire, and formerly called Kellieshire. He had charters of Eycroft 16th July 1622, and of the barony of Eestersrioth May 13th, 1624. He married Anne daughter of Gilbert Ogilvie, of Powrie, esq., by whom he had one son and one daughter. He died in London, June 12th, 1639, in his 73rd year, and was buried at Pittenweem in Fifeshire. His descendants suffered greatly for their loyalty to both Charles I. and II. William Parker Lord Monteagle was eldest son of Edmund Parker Lord Morley, who married the sole daughter and heir of William Stanley Lord Monteagle, fifth son of Thomas . Earl of Derby. Lord Morley lived at a house at Mile End Green, died at Stepney April 1, 1628, and was buried in Stepney church. He had a grant of £200. a-year in land, and a pension of £500. per annum for life, as a reward for discovering the letter that led to the detection of the Gun powder Plot in 1605. On his father's death in 1618 he succeeded to the barony of Morley. He married Elizabeth daughter of Sir Thomas Tresham, by whom he had three sons and two daughters. Catherine married John Savage Earl Eivers, from whom descended George Pitt, created Baron Eivers 1776, who was coheir to the baronies of Morley and Monteagle. However they were not revived in him, but the title of Monteagle was conferred upon the Et. Hon. T. S. Eice in 1839, as a descendant of Sir Stephen Eice, Chief Baron of the Irish Exchequer, created Lord Monteagle by James II. Lord Monteagle died at Haslingbury Morley in Essex, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 123 the residence of the Barons Morley, now called Hallingbury near Hatfield Broad Oak.1 Viscount Haddington had as Sir John Eamsey defended the King in the Gowrie conspiracy. Of the ladies who graced the procession, Sir Isaac Wake is most lavish in his praises of the beautiful and accomplished Arabella Stuart,2 who afterward, as being descended from Henry VII., suffered so severely from the jealousy of King James. Next are recounted Lucy Countess of Bedford, " dear to the Muses." As servants of the Muses both Donne and Daniel have transmitted her name to posterity. She was daughter of John Lord Harrington of Exton in Eutlandshire, to whom and to her mother, brother, and sister she erected a costly tomb at Exton, sculptured by Nicholas Stone, statuary to the King, at the cost of £1020.3 With her are mentioned the Countesses of Suffolk, Not tingham, and Montgomery. The Countess of Suffolk was celebrated for her beauty and also for her rapacity. Pennant, in his Journey from Chester to London, has given an engraved portrait of her from a painting at Gorhambury. The Countess of Nottingham was the Earl's second wife, a young Scotch lady, Margaret daughter of James Stuart Earl of Murray, by Elizabeth daughter and coheir of James Earl of Murray natural son to James V. of Scotland.4 The Countess of Montgomery was the Lady Susan Vere, daughter of Edward Earl of Oxford, the poet, by his first wife Anne the daughter of Lord Burleigh. She was born 26 May 1587, and married to Philip Herbert Earl of Mont gomery on St. John the Evangelist's Day, December 27th, 1604.6 1 Ofthe Lords Morley, see Camden in Norfolk. Hengham, p. 472. 2 Daughter of Charles Earl of Lenox, younger brother of Henry Lord Darnley, the King's father. 3 SeeWalpole's Anecdotes of Painting, ii. p. 62. A print of it is in Wright's History of that county, p. 57 ; Brydges' Peers of James X, p. 319. There are two portraits of her, one by S. Pass, another by Richardson. 4 Brydges' Peers of James I., p. 190. 5 A long account of these costly nuptials is given both in Brydges' Peers of James I, p. 164, and in Nichol's Progresses, vol. i. pp. 470 — 472. 124 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. And now they approach the suburb of St. Giles, and see, says Sir Isaac Wake, how fitly this ancient city was termed Bellositum, a name however of comparatively modern date, perhaps suggested by the name of the palace of Henry I., Beaumont, the birthplace of the valorous Eichard Cceur de Lion. Camden delights to record the beauty and salubrity of the situation of this venerable and interesting city : " a fair and goodly city, whether a man respect the seemly beauty of private houses, or the stately magnificence of public buildings, together with the wholesome site or pleasant prospect thereof. For the hills beset with woods do so environ the plain, that as on the one side they exclude the pestilent south wind, and the tempestuous west wind on the other, so they let in the clearing east wind only, and the north-east wind withal, which is free from all corruption."1 It was an important city in the times of the Saxons, in fact, one of the chief cities of England. Of fourteen of the present churches, the majority was represented by eight churches before the Conquest, namely, St. Peter' s-in-the-East, St. Mary's, Carfax, St. Aldate's, St. Ebb's, St. Peter' s-le- Bailey, St. Mary Magdalene, and St. Michael.2 There were also formerly several other churches, as another St. Michael, near the South-gate, St. George since represented by the recent church of St. George, an excellent specimen of the decorated or curvilinear style as revived in the nineteenth century, a monument of the good taste of the architect, and of the 1 Holland's Camden, p. 377. 2 St. Michael's South-gate stood on the site of the Professor of Hebrew's lodgings, and was taken down by Wolsey. Ingram's Oxford, St. Aldate's, p. 7. Wood also mentions the Church of Dantesburne or Dantesbourne near South Bridge, given to Godstow nunnery by Ralph Bloet about 1250. Ibid. p. 7. St. Budock's Church was 900 feet to the west of St. Benedict's, which was adjacent to the West-gate on the west side. The Friars de Sacco applied to Henry III. for some ground without the West-gate on the south side of the street leading to the miUs under the castle. But because St. MiehaeVs lately stood there, they were bound to let the cemetery remain. Afterwards, with the aid of the Countess of Warwick, they built a house and chapel out of the ruins of St. Benedict. They diligently resorted to the schools of the Franciscans, who in 1307 had their buildings and lands granted to them. — Dugdale, from Wood's Hist, and Antiq. of Oxford, p. 111. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 125 munificence of the Eev. Jacob Ley, the present incumbent of St. Mary Magdalene's. Add to these St. Budoc's, St. Edward, St. Mildred,1 and St. Frideswide, now the Cathedral. Down to 1771 the North and East gates were still standing, the north joining the old church of St. Michael with its Saxon tower, the east a little to the east of Coach-and-Horses- lane leading to King-street, in which stand St. Alban Hall, Merton, Corpus Christi, and Oriel Colleges. The South and West gates, as also Little-gate, had been removed by the middle of the last century. The West gate stood at the junc tion of St. Ebbe's and Castle-street, in the neighbourhood of the Franciscan Monastery or Grey Friars. In their church was buried the celebrated Eoger Bacon in 1292. Paradise Garden, once the garden of the monks, still remains to the south of the Castle. The site of Little-gate below St. Ebbe's still retains its name. And just below Christ Church Almshouses formerly stood the South-gate, and near it another church dedicated to St. Michael.2 When the royal party entered Oxford by the road to the west of which stand the Observatory and Infirmary, they found the way lined on each side with the students in their several university habits. Now might St. Giles, says Sir Isaac Wake, have looked for the restitution of its ancient honours. For there was a tradition that there was once another church, of which this took the place although nearer or within the city, which had the honour of being the Uni versity Church before that privilege was divided between St. Mary's and St. Peter's-in-the-East.s The whole line of street from St. Giles' to the Bocardo, even to the South-gate, 1 St. Mildred's was in Brasenose-lane. It was taken down probably A.D. 1400, as was also St. Edward's, which was between High-street and Christ Church Gardens. St. Frideswide' s was on the site of Christ Church. 2 "An old distich, quoted by Leonard Hutten and others, thus refers to the proximity of four parish churches in Oxford to the four principal gates — two dedicated to St. Michael, and two to St. Peter : Invigilat portae australi, boreaque Michael ; Exortum solem Petrus regit atque cadentem." Ingram's Oxford, St. Peter ' s-in-the-East. 3 Sir J. Wake's Rex Platonicus, p. 26, ed. 2nd. 1607. 126 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. hard by which the King was to enter Christ Church, was graced with members of the University, Doctors, Bachelors of Divinity, Law, &c, all in their proper habits, all exulting at the presence of their royal patrons. At St. John's College fifty of the members, with the President, Ealph Hutchinson,1 came forth to congratulate their sovereign. Three youths apparelled as three sybils came forth out of the quadrangle, and recited, each having his several part, some Latin verses annexed by their author Dr. Gwynne to his Vertumnus, printed in 4to. 1607.2 These are founded upon the legend of Macbeth and Bancho, who are said to have been met by three sybils, who foretold that Macbeth should be a king, but without any to succeed him, and that from Bancho, who should not be a king himself, should descend a race of Princes. When the King had passed through North-gate and had come to Carfax (Quatre Vois), so called from the four prin cipal streets meeting at that point, where on the east side of St. Martin's stood Pennyless Beach, chiefly known to modem readers by T. Warton's humorous description of it in his Companion to the Guide, and Guide to the Companion. At this point Dr. John Perin of St. John's College, who had the year previously resigned the College living of Wartling in Sussex (not Watling, as in Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 273), but now no longer in the hands of that Society, and who was now Greek Professor and Canon of Christ Church, addressed the King in Greek in a brief and apposite oration. And now the King entered the great gateway of Christ Church, not as yet adorned with that light and lofty tower which now evinces the origi nality of the great classical architect Sir Christopher Wren. Sir Christopher was B.A. of Wadham College March 18, 1650, and afterwards Fellow of All Souls. He erected the tower, with the upper parts of the two turrets which flank the entrance, in 1682. The father of the celebrated Dr. Henry 1 He was also Vicar of Crapthorne, Worcestershire, and Charlbury, Oxford shire. He left the study of medicine for that of divinity, was elected President of St. John's College, Oxford, June 9, 1590, and died January 16, 1605, in his 53rd year, and was buried in his College Chapel. 2 See Nichol's Royal Progresses, vol. i. p. 545. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 127 Hammond was present on this occasion. He was Dr. John Hammond, M.D. of the University of Cambridge, and Phy sician to the King and to Prince Henry. He commended Perin's oration as being in good familiar Greek. The King heard him willingly, and the Queen still more so, as she said that she had never heard that language before. At the foot of the hall stairs thrones were erected for the King, Queen, and Prince, and Mr., afterwards Sir, Isaac Wake made a Latin oration. He was of Merton College, and had been elected Orator in the preceding year. In 1609 he travelled in France and Italy, and on his return became secretary to Sir Dudley Carleton, at that time Secretary of State. He was after wards ambassador to Venice, Savoy, and elsewhere. He was knighted April 19, 1619, before proceeding to Savoy. In 1623 he was elected M.P. for the University of Oxford. Some few years after this Anthony Sleep, M.A., of Trinity College, Cambridge, was Deputy Orator in that University. The King is said to have often remarked upon the two Orators Wake and Sleep ; that Wake had a good Ciceronian style, but his utterance and matter were so grave, that when he spake before him he was apt to sleep; but Sleep the Deputy Orator of Cambridge was quite contrary, for he never spake but he kept him awake, and made him apt to laugh.1 In his oration Wake commended the King as being after Plato's mind, a lover of wisdom,2 whence the title of his very amusing and learned narration of this royal progress, Bex Platonicus. He also took this opportunity of returning thanks as Public Orator for the favour which the King had shewn the Univer sity by conferring upon it the right of sending two repre sentatives to Parliament.3 The King with a benignant smile evinced his readiness to encourage the genial eloquence of the Public Orator, which was followed up by loud and universal acclamations, im ploring long life, glory, and eternal happiness for the King, the Queen and Prince. The King was then conducted to the venerable Cathedral. Before the doors splendid cushions 1 Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 345. Anthony Sleep was M.A. 1609, B.D. 1617. 2 Rex Platonicus, p. 48. a Ibid. p. 49. 128 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. were placed, upon which the King offered his devotions previously to entering in. The royal party proceeded up the nave toward the choir under a rich canopy of crimson taffety, carried on six staves gilt with silver, surmounted with great silver knobs and pikes, borne by six Doctors of Divinity in their scarlet costume. Stringer says that they were six out of the eight canons of the Cathedral. On each side of the nave stood the members of the College in surplices and hoods, and the younger nobility, members of the University, Thomas Lord Wentworth, of Nettlestead to the north-west of Ipswich, O'Bryen Lord Thomond, de scended of the ancient kings of Ireland, the two brothers Somerset, and the two Stewarts, the Seymours and Sack- villes, and the Lords Dudley and Grey.1 Just as the King was about to enter the choir Dr. King the Dean, who was six years after raised to the see of London, presented the King on his knees with a little book of congratulatory verses ; the Latin verses to the King are given by Sir Isaac Wake in his Bex Platonicus? The two other addresses in English he presented to the Queen and Prince. Dr. John Bridges, formerly a Fellow of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, afterward Dean of Salisbury, and with Cooper Bishop of Lincoln a defender of the Church against Martin Mar-Prelate, and now Bishop of Oxford, with the Dean and Canons, assembled with the rest of the procession in the choir, where the King heard divers anthems, probably far superior to the popular adaptations of Mozart, Beethoven and Mendelssohn now in use in our Universities. It was the age of true Church musicians, when the marvellous Dr. Bull3 was the King's chief Organist, and Morley, Dowland, and the gifted family of the Tomkyns, and the brothers Weelkes, and the other madrigalists who celebrated the Triumph of Oriana, were rivalling the continental composers. At this time William Stonard was organist of the Cathedral, some of whose works remain in the Music School at Oxford, 1 Wake, pp. 54, 65. * pp. 60, 61. 3 See Wood's Fasti, ed. Bliss, vol. i. p. 235. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 129 " sent by Walter Porter" (son of Henry Porter of Christ Church, and gentleman of the Eoyal Chapel to Charles I., and Master of the Choristers, Westminster Abbey) " to his kinsman John Wilson, Doctor of Music and the public Professor of the praxis of that faculty in Oxon, to be reposed and kept for ever in the archives of the said school." Stonard composed certain divine services and anthems, the words of some of which are in Clifford's Collection ofiDivine Services and Anthems, 1663. Of Dr. John Wilson, " now," says Anthony Wood, of 1644, " the most noted musician of England," Wood gives an account in his Fasti under that year, from which we learn that by the mediation of Mr. Thomas Barlow, then Lecturer of Churchill, Oxfordshire, afterward Provost of Queens' (his) College at Oxford and Bishop of Lincoln, with Dr. John Owen then Dean of Christ Church, he was made Professor of Music in 1656. He had rooms allowed him in Balliol College, was an industrious composer of music both sacred and secular, and died, aged 78 years, Feb. 22nd, 1674, at his house at the Horse Ferry within the liberty of Westminster. He was buried in the Little Cloisters of the Abbey. At Magdalene College, Eichard Nicholson, B. Mus. and Professor of Music, was organist. He was a madrigalist and a contributor to the Triumphs of Oriana. And now5 after the Dean had officiated in the liturgy, in the course of which other instruments were used in addition to the organ, the King and Queen retired to their lodgings at the Deanery. The Prince was accompanied through the High-street and the Eastgate.to Magdalene College. Thither he was attended by the Earl of Worcester and Lord Knowles, the Earls of Oxford and Essex, William Viscount Cranbome, son and heir to Cecil Earl of Salisbury, Sheffield, Har rington, Howard and Bruce, with the other flower of the nobility, and with his honorary guardian Sir Thomas Cha- loner,1 who had himself been educated at Magdalene College. 1 He was the son of Sir Thomas Chaloner, who died in 1565, and had been ambassador in France from Edw. VI. ; to the Emperor Ferdinand from Elizabeth. Like his son he was a learned author, and wrote a poem in ten books, De Re- K 130 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. At the College gate the Prince was received by Dr. Nicholas Bond, the President, who was Eector of Brightwell, Berks, May 3, 1586, Chaplain to the Queen, and Prebendary of the fifth stall at Westminster, 1582. He was constituted Presi dent of Magdalene College by the Queen, by lapse, against the will of the College.1 He died February 8, 1608, and was buried in the College chapel. The Eev. James Mable, a noted wit and orator, who was afterwards made Prebendary of Wells, accosted the Prince with an elegant oration. Verses were affixed to the walls in honour of his arrival. Thence he was conducted to the cloistered quadrangle, the most beautiful and truly collegiate court of any university. Having surveyed these incomparable structures and the hieroglyphical figures, the statue of Moses whereby is represented Theology, with those of the lawyer, the physician, the schoolmaster, the fool making a mock of learning, the lion, the pelican, indicating the duty of masters and teachers sternly to set themselves against the evil-disposed youth, and to nourish the good as parents, the Prince is conducted to his apartments in the President's lodge. No sooner does the lodge receive him than the College entertains him with the academic fare of scholastic disputations. William Seymour, second son of Edward Lord Beauchamp and grandson of Edward Earl of Hertford, performed the part of respondent. The opponents were Charles Somerset sixth son of the Earl of Worcester, Edward Seymour eldest son of the Lord Beauchamp, Mr. Eobert Gorge son of sir Thomas Gorge by the Marchioness publicd Anglorum instaurandd, which was published some time after his death. The son distinguished himself at Magdalene College by his verses, but before he could take a degree left the University to travel. Elizabeth knighted him in 1691. James on his accession appointed him governor to the Prince, and he made bim his Chamberlain on his becoming Prince of Wales. He in 1584 pub lished A Treatise on the Virtue of Nitre. About the end of the Queen's reign he discovered an alum mine near Guisborough in Yorkshire, where he had an estate. But his family did not enjoy it until 1640, when, being voted a monopoly, it was restored to them. He died in November 1615, and was buried at Chiswick. i See Tlie Proceedings against Magdalene College, printed 1688, pp. 20, 21 ; Baiter's MS. notes on Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 216, ed. Bliss. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 131 of Northampton, two sons of Sir Thomas Chaloner, and Mr. William Borlace son of a Knight; to all of whom, in testimony of his approbation, the Prince gave his hand to kiss. The Prince then returned to the King at Christ Church, in the hall of which a Latin Comedy, entitled Vertumnus, was acted by the students of that College. It began between nine and ten, and ended at one. Its tediousness and other uninviting features are said to have wearied the royal party. But this is on the authority of the Cambridge critic given in Nicholl's Progresses. A more favourable account is given by Sir Isaac Wake, to whom we remit the reader. On Wednesday, the 28th of August, the bell rang at seven to an English sermon at All Saints. About nine the King came in great state to St. Mary's ; the Earl of Southampton was sword-bearer for this day. In St. Mary's the Prince sat on the King's right hand, and on his left Christopher de Harlay Count de Beaumont, ambassador from the court of France, and Nicolo Malino, ambassador from that of Venice. The two theses for the disputants were, Saints and Angels have no knowledge of the thoughts of men's hearts, and, The Pastors of the Church are not bound to visit the sick whilst a pestilence is raging. The respondent was Dr. John Aglionby, Principal of St. Edmund Hall. Dr. Aglionby was of Cumberland, had taken his degrees as a member and Fellow of Queen's College, Oxford, and had been admitted to the Principalship of St. Edmund Hall, April 4, 1601, being at that time chaplain to the Queen. James continued him as one of his chaplains, and appointed him one of the translators of the Bible, for he bore a high character for the vastness of his theological learning. He died Feb. 6, 1610, and was buried in the chancel of Islip church near Oxford, of which church he had been Eector. His son George was educated at Westminster School and at Christ church, where he was entered in 1619. Lord Falkland, when he visited Oxford, especially sought the company of George Aglionby. He was appointed tutor to George the young Duke of Buckingham, after he had taken his B.A. k2 132 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. at Christchurch in 1623. In 1638 he was made a Preben dary of Westminster, and in 1642, whilst attending the court at Oxford, was nominated Dean of Canterbury, but never installed. He died not long after, in November 1643, in his 40th year, and was buried in Christchurch Cathedral, near Bishop King's monument in the south aisle, but without any memorial. The opponents were : 1. Dr. Thomas Holland, who, when Fellow of Balliol Col lege, had been appointed Eegius Professor of Divinity in 1589, on the death of the celebrated Lawrence Humphrey of Magda lene College. He took all his degrees at Balliol College, and was elected Eector of Exeter College on the death of Thomas Glasier, LL.D., late of Christchurch, by virtue of the Queen's letters written in his behalf April 24, 1592. He died March 17, 1612, and was buried in the chancel of St. Mary's, Oxford. Wood says of him, " He was esteemed by the precise men of his time, and after, another Apollos mighty in Scriptures, and so familiar with the Fathers, as if he himself was a Father; and in the schoolmen, as if he had been the Seraphical Doctor."1 He is said by Wood to have been a predestinarian of the higher or supra-lapsarian kind, as was his predecessor Humphrey. In this respect Wood2 distinguishes them from the pious and learned Abbot after ward Bishop of Salisbury, and, like Holland, of Balliol College. In Fuller's Abel Bedivivus he is by a mistake said to have been educated at Exeter College. It is reported of him that when he went any journey, he would call the Fellows of his College together, and commend them to the love of God, and to the hatred of Popery and superstition. He spent all his time in his declining health in fervent prayers and heavenly meditations, and when his end drew near, often sighed out, Come, 0 come, Lord Jesus! I desire to be dissolved and to be with thee. He died in his 74th year.3 2. Dr. Giles Thompson, Dean of Windsor, and in 1611 Bishop of Gloucester. He was B.A. of University College, Oxford, July 5, 1575, and B.D. of All Souls' College, March 21, 1 Ath. Oxon. ii. 111. 2 Ibid. ii. 225. 3 Abel Sedtvima, p. 501. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 133 1591 ; Bp. Andrewes assisted at his consecration to Gloucester June 9, 1611. Andrewes, now Dean of Westminster, came to Oxford, but probably on the Thursday, for Buckeridge relates in his Funeral Sermon, that " when he came to Oxford attending King James in the end of his progress, his custom was to send fifty pound to be distributed among poor scholars."1 3. Dr. Field, Chaplain to the King. He was first entered at Magdalene College, but was B.A. of Magdalene Hall, November 8, 1581, M.A. June 2, 1584, B.D. January 14, 1593, D.D. of Queen's College, December 7, 1596. No divine of his own or of any age rendered a greater theological service to the Church than did Dr. Field, by his comprehensive Treatise on ihe Church of Christ. It first appeared in 4to. A copy of the volume in 4to. is to be seen in the library of Magdalene Hall. The next was a much enlarged edition. The third was published at Oxford in 1635. But as he took a more hostile view of the Church of Eome, and one more agreeable to the faith of his own Church than that of the courtiers in the following reign, his work fell for a while into unmerited neglect. It has been more than once reprinted in the present century, and is a library of itself. James was not insensible to his merits. He admired his preaching, and appointed him Dean of Gloucester 1609, as he had also been previously appointed Canon of Windsor 1603, having had a grant from Elizabeth, 30th March 1602, of the next vacant prebend. He was born at Hemel Hempstead, Herts. He spent his time partly at Windsor, partly on his living in Hampshire. He died November 20, 1626, and was buried in St. George's, Windsor. 4. Dr. John Harding, Eegius Professor of Hebrew, to which Professorship he was appointed whilst Fellow of Mag dalene College, 21 September 1591. He resigned in 1598. and was succeeded by William Thome, A.M., Fellow of New College, 27 July 1598.2 Thome resigned in 1604, and Harding had the Professorship conferred upon him a second 1 p. 20. 2 B.A. New College April 12, 1589 ; M.A. January 18, 1593 ; B.D. July 16, 1600. 134 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. time.1 Harding was Proctor in 1589. He was a native of Hampshire, and succeeded Dr. Bond in the Presidentship of Magdalene College, February 22, 1608. He was one of the translators of the Old Testament. He died in 1610. 5. Dr. George Eyves, Warden of New College December 1599, on the resignation of Dr. Cole or Culpepper, Dean of Chichester and Archdeacon of Berkshire. He held, as did his two predecessors Whyte and Colepepper, the rectories of Staunton St. John's Oxfordshire, and of Colerne (Wilts) near Chippenham. He was preferred to the fourth stall at Win chester, November 17, 1598, on the promotion of Dr. Cotton to the see of Salisbury. He died May 31, 1613, and was buried at Hornchurch, Essex, without any memorial. 6. Dr. Henry Airay, Provost of Queen's College, where he had taken all his degrees. He was born in Westmoreland 1560, and educated under the apostolic Bernard Gilpin, by whom he was sent at the age of nineteen to Oxford. He first , studied at St. Edmund Hall, but removed thence to Queen's College before he took his B.A. which was on June 19, 1583. He succeeded Dr. Henry Eobinson, Bishop of Carlisle, as Provost of his College, March 9, 1599. Laud was con vened before him for his sermon in 1606, in which year he was Vice-Chancellor. He was himself of Puritan tendencies, and wrote against bowing at the name of Jesus. His name still survives as a commentator upon the Epistle to the Philippians.2 He died October 10, 1616, aged 57, and was buried in his college chapel. Christopher Potter, a Fellow of his college, erected a monument to his memory in the old chapel. The old chapel was begun before 1355; the new chapel on February 6, 1714, the anniversary of Queen Anne's birthday. Dr. Airay bequeathed lands in the parish of Garsington, Oxfordshire, to his college. Christopher Potter was much his junior, being B.A. of Queen's College August 30, 1610. He suc ceeded Barnabas Potter (Airay's successor), Bishop of Carlisle, 1 Wood's Fasti, ed. Bliss, vol. i. n. 9, p. 273. 2 In 1621 was published The Just and necessary Apology touching his suit in law for the rectory of Charlton-on-Otmoor, Oxfordshire. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 135 as Provost of his college, June 17, 1626. He was appointed Dean of Worcester 1635, and of Durham 1645, but died the ,3rd of March following, before his installation. He was Eector of Blechingdon, Oxfordshire, which belongs to Queen's College. 7. Dr. Gordon Huntley, Dean of Sarum, who has been previously noticed. He was now actually created a Doctor of Divinity, with the ancient ceremonies of putting on the hood, the square cap, the gold ring,1 the boots,2 the delivering the Holy Scriptures into the Doctor's hands ; then the Vice- Chancellor kisses his son, as the newly created Doctor is styled, and concludes with giving him his solemn benediction. A trumpet is now sounded, and Dr. Holland calls forth the disputants. The respondent proclaims the theses aloud in Latin verse. He then proceeds to maintain the first thesis, quoting 1 Kings viii. 39, Whose heart thou knowest; 1 Cor. ii. 11, For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? and Jer. xvii. 9, 10, The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked.: who can know it ? I the LORD search the heart; I try the reins. That the dead (the saints) have no knowledge of men's hearts, Dr. Field confirms out of St. Augustine, in the 22nd chapter of the Appendix to his third Book. Bellarmine indeed, after the manner of Eomish controversialists, charged Melancthon with falsehood for having asserted in his Loci Theologici, that the papists attributed to the saints the power of knowing the thoughts of men's minds ; yet in his answer to the third argument, in the 20th chapter of his first Book on the Blessedness of the Saints, he himself expressly affirmed such a power, as Dr. John Gerhard shews in his Confessio Catholica.3 Holland, Gordon, Field, and Eyves were the opponents in the first; Thompson, Harding, and Airay in the second thesis. The King himself, with the Scriptures in his hand, took part in these exercises, examining the quotations and com menting upon the arguments. Wake has given his obser- 1 Rex Platonicus, p. 87. 2 p. 88. 3 Lib. 2, pars. 2, art. 10, u. 2, $ 6. 1661. 136 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. vations upon the second thesis, which was maintained in the negative. Bishop Andrewes, in his Parochial Circulars, expressly exempted his clergy from visiting in a time of pestilence. The King answered the passage in St. James, Is any among you sick, let him call for the elders of the church, &c, that those who were called in that age were called not only to pray, but also to heal. Finally, Dr. Abbot the Vice-Chancellor gave his own learned determination upon the two questions. After the King had dined he came again about two, with the Queen and Prince, to hear two disputations in the Civil Law. The questions were, first, Whether in giving judgment a judge is invariably bound by the legal proofs in opposition to the truth, of which he is privately assured ? And secondly, Whether covenants are of the nature of good faith or strict law? The first was affirmed; the second was decided in favour of sincere intention and candid, in contradistinction to legal, interpretation. The moderator was Dr. Alberic Gentilis,1 who, after he had been created D.C.L. at Perugia in 1572, came over to England on account of his religion, and obtained permission in 1580 to reside at Oxford. Queen Elizabeth appointed him Eegius Professor of Civil Law 8th June 1587. His learned writings were all the fruit of his tranquil studies at Oxford. He died in the beginning of 1611, and was buried in the Cathedral. The respondent was Dr. Anthony Blencoe, Provost of King's or Oriel College or Hall Eoyal, for all these names have been applied to Oriel. He had held the Provostship from February 4, 1573, having previously served the office of Proctor in 1571 and 1572. He died January 25, 1618, and was buried in St. Mary's church, which belongs to his college. The opponents were : 1. William Bird, D.C.L., of All Souls' College, son of William Bird of Walden in Essex. He was D.C.L. February 13, 1588, and afterwards principal Official and Dean of the Arches, a Knight, and Judge of the Prerogative Court 1 See Wood's Ath. Oxon. ii. 90. Fasti, i. 217. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 137 of Canterbury. He died without issue, and was buried in Christ Church, Newgate Street, London, 5 Sept. 1624. His nephew, William Bird, D.C.L. of All Souls' College July 4, 1622, was son of Thomas Bird of Littlebury near Saffron Walden, was Master of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, and died on the 28th November 1639, aged 51, and was buried in Littlebury church. 2. John Weston, of Christ Church, the only son of Eobert, who was Chancellor of Ireland, D.C.L. 1590. His father Eobert was D.C.L. of All Souls' July 8, 1556. He con formed to the Protestant religion, and was made Dean of Wells 1570. He was for six years Chancellor of Ireland, died there 20 May 1573, and was buried in St. Patrick's Dublin.1 John Weston was first M.A., and on July 14, 1590, D.C.L. of Christ Church, Oxford. He was installed Canon ofthe sixth stall of Christ Church September 3, 1591, and was eighteen years Treasurer of that church. He died July 20, 1632, being about eighty years old. His epitaph records his virtues worthy of his descent, his Ciceronian eloquence, his aptness in casuistry, his truly Christian life, and the painful disease that carried him to his grave.2 3. Henry Martin, of New College, D.C.L. 1592, being at that time an eminent advocate at Doctors' Commons, as afterwards in the High Commission Court. He became successively Official of the Archdeacon of Berkshire, King's Advocate, Chancellor of London, Judge of the Admiralty Court, twice Dean of the Arches, a Knight Dec. 21, 1616, and in 1624 Judge of the Prerogative Courts. Bishop An drewes left him a mourning ring. He died in 1641, aged 81.* 4. James Hussey of New College, D.C.L. 1600, Principal of Magdalene Hall 1602, having been previously a Fellow of New College and Eegistrary of the University. He after wards became Chancellor of Salisbury, was knighted Nov. 9, 1619, and made a Master in Chancery. He died of the plague at Oxford the day after his arrival, July 11, 1625, 1 See more in Wood's Fasti, ed. Bliss, vol. i. p. 151. 2 See Browne Willis, Oxford, p. 459. 3 See Wood's Ath. Oxon. ed. Bliss, vol. iii. p. 17- 138 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. and was buried late at night in St. Mary's Church without any funeral rites. He died in New College, and shortly after Dr. Chaloner, Principal of St. Alban Hall, who had supped that night with him, died also. 5. John Budden, D.C.L., B.A. of Trinity CoUege, Oxford, Oct. 19, 1586, but M.A. of Gloucester Hall (now Worcester College) June 27, 1589. He was B.C.L. of Magdalene College July 8, 1602. He became Philosophy Eeader at Magdalene College, was made Principal of New Inn Hall June 28, 1609, there being then neither gentleman-commoner nor commoner at New Inn Hall. He was son of John Budden of Canford in Dorsetshire. He was admitted at Merton College at the Michaelmas Term 1582, and thence to a scholarship at Trinity College May 30, 1583. He was D.C.L. 1602 ; in 1611 was appointed Eegius Professor of Civil Law, then Principal of Broadgate's Hall, to which Pembroke College has succeeded. He died there June 11, 1620, and was buried in the chancel of St. Aldate's Church. 6. Oliver Lloyd, D.C.L. 1602, of AU Souls. He was afterwards ChanceUor of Hereford, Canon of Windsor 1615, May, 20, Dean of Hereford 1617, in which city he died in 1625. The second question is thus put in Wake: "Whether a stranger and an enemy detained by contrary winds in an enemy's port beyond the time of an armistice, may be lawfully killed by the inhabitants of that port? The respondent held the negative. The King interposed in this dispute, aUeging the saying of one, that he who judges against his conscience builds for hell. He instanced in the unjust judgment passed upon our Lord himself, and thus, as Wake remarks, con firmed the words of another, who asked, Wliat shall become of the good citizen when the evil spirits shall have carried away the bad man to hell? In regard of the second question the King said, that a prisoner detained unawares should be remitted by the judge to the King, who can and ought to save his life. Alas that the King did not always exemplify his own wise dicta, but forgot both law and equity when he was tempted to THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 139 forfeit the life of a subject, as in the case of Sir Walter Ealeigh. The evening drew on as Gentilis concluded the Act. In the course ofthe Act the scholars gave a,plaudite; the graver men cried out Vivat Bex, and on the King speaking a third time there was a general acclamation. After supper the Ajax flagellifer was acted in the HaU of Christ Church. The stage was varied thrice, and the actors were all clad in suitably antique apparel. The name alone was borrowed from Sophocles. On Thursday the 29th, the Physic Act commenced at nine at St. Mary's, and lasted until noon. The two questions were : 1. Whether the dispositions of nurses were imbibed with their milk? 2. Whether the frequent use of tobacco was good for persons in health? The moderator was Dr. Bartholomew Warner of St. John's College, Eegius Professor of Medicine 1597, and in 1617 superior Eeader of Linacre's Lecture. He died January 26, 1619, and was buried in St. Mary Magdalene's Church, Oxford. The respondent was the munificent Sir William Paddy, M.D. of Oxford and Leyden, President of the College of Physicians, of St. John's College, Oxford, and Physician to the King, whom he attended on his death-bed. He was of the county of Oxford. He was a great, and one of the first benefactors to the Bodleian Library, although by an oversight not mentioned as such in Dr. Ingram's very valuable Memorials of Oxford. He has, however, not omitted to commemorate his bounty to his coUege, where on the south wall of the chapel is his monument, with an epitaph recording his legacy of £2800. (a great sum in those days) for the endowing of the choir, after having provided the college with an organ. He left also £150. for the encouragement of learning. His wiU, says Dr. Ingram, is dated Dec. 10, 1634, in his 81st year, in which year he died. The opponents were: 1. Dr. Matthew Gwinne, B.A. of St. John's College May 14, 1578, M.A. May 4, 1582, Proctor April 17, 1588, B.M. July 17, 1593, and M.D. on the same day. He was 140 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the author of Vertumnus. He was Physician to the Tower of London, the first Professor of Medicine at Gresham Col lege, and a member of the CoUege of Physicians. He died in 1627. 2. Anthony Aylworth, M.D. 1582, of New CoUege, Phy sician to Queen Elizabeth, and Eegius Professor of Medicine in the University of Oxford, 29th June, 1582. He resigned his Professorship to Dr. Warner of St. John's CoUege 1597. He was of an ancient family in Gloucestershire, bom in London, educated at Winchester School and New CoUege. He " died happily in the Lord" April 18, 1619. He had disputed before Elizabeth, in 1592. His two sons, Martin the elder and Antony the younger, survived him. Martin erected a memorial to him in New College Chapel, and was D.C.L. of All Souls' College, Nov. 27, 1621. 3. John Gifford, also M.D. of New CoUege, December 7, 1598, a member of the College of Physicians. " He died in a good old age in 1647, and was buried in the parish Church of Hornchurch in Essex, near to the body of his wife."1 4. Henry Ashworth, M.D. of Oriel College August 13, 1605. He rose to eminent practice in Cat-street, (to the east of the present Eadcliff Library) where his son Francis was born.2 5. John Cheynell, M.D. of Corpus Christi CoUege August 13, 1605. Cheynell extolled the virtues of the ob noxious weed above all others, and with his pipe in his hand suited the action to the word, not however omitting to vindi cate in the sequel the royal aversion to tobacco. Wake, who was one of those serious men who could enjoy if he could not make a joke, has not lost this opportunity of enlivening his narration by ample notes of the King's facetiousness as well as the Professor's. Warner, in his peroration, ex horted both sexes to wreak their vengeance on their pipes by every term of reprobation which he could bring together.3 The Act concluded, the King went to New College, then more faithfully displaying the consummate skill of its munifi- 1 Wood's Fasti, ed. Bliss, i. 279. 2 Wood's Ath. Oxon. iii. 307. 3 Rex Platonicus, p. 135. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 141 cent architect and founder than now, when it has lost so many of its ancient features, and has been enlarged in a more modern style, yet. venerable and majestic, and adorned as much by nature as by art, owing more than can be expressed to its beautiful gardens, the most impressive, although not the most extensive in the University. At New College the noble Chancellor kept open house daily during the King's visit. Verses were attached to 'the walls of the college. Dr. Eyves, the Warden, congratulated his Majesty in a Latin speech, in the name of the Chancellor and of the members of New College, and was on the following day added to the number of the royal chaplains. The King sat in the hall beneath a canopy ; Prince Henry at some distance on his right hand ; the Queen on his left, and at the other end of the table, opposite to the Prince, the two ambassadors. There was a magnificent show of plate, and the Chancellor's private musi cians played during the banquet. But the whole university contributed to this hospitality. The King, before he rose from the table, called the Chancellor to him, returned him his thanks, and bade him drink out of the royal goblet. From the banquet the King returned to St. Mary's to hear the following disputations : the first, Whether gold can be produced by artificial means ? Secondly, Whether imagina tion can produce real effects ? The moderator was Eoger Porter, of Brasennose College. The respondent was Eichard Andrewes, of St. John's College, M.B. June 1, 1607, M.D. June 1, 1608. He improved himself by foreign travel, and was esteemed amongst the literati of that age. The opponents were : 1. Simon Baskerville, B.A. of Exeter College July 8, 1596, Proctor in the year following the royal visit, M.D. 1611, knighted by King Charles. He was of an ancient Herefordshire family. He was eminent in his profession. He died July 5, 1641, aged 68 years, and was buried in the north aisle of old St. Paul's. On the same day with him was the celebrated Eobert Vilvaine, of Exeter College, also created M.D. in 1611. He 142 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. was B.A. of Exeter CoUege May 9, 1597, M.A. July 11, 1600. Vii vain was also a theological author and student. He, with Mr. Eichard Sandy, alias Napier, Mr. William Orphord, and Mr. William Helme, fellow-students, was a benefactor to Exeter College, all assisting in rebuilding the kitchen. At their expense also was the old chapel (superseded by Dr. Hakewill's, the late chapel) turned into a library in 1624.1 He was son of Peter Vilvain, steward of the city of Exeter, was bom in All Saints' parish, Exeter, in Gold smith Street, and was a Fellow of Exeter College in 1599. He resigned his fellowship in 1611, and returned to Exeter. About 1644 FuUer's acquaintance with Dr. Vilvain com menced. They spent much of their time together so long as Fuller remained at Exeter. Dr. VUvain gave a Ubrary to the Cathedral there, and endowments, in the way of ex hibitions, to the Grammar School. He wrote Theoremata Theologica, 1654, 4to., a Compendium of Chronography, 1654, 4to., and some other pieces. He died in his 87th year, Feb. 21, 1663, and was buried in the Cathedral of Exeter. Baskerville attracted the especial notice of the King. After he had disputed, the King, who had himself prolonged the time of his disputation beyond what the Proctor would have granted, said to the nobles about him, " God keep this fellow in a right course ; he would prove a dangerous heretic ; he is the best disputer that ever I heard." 2. Edward Lapworth, M.D., of Magdalene CoUege (where he had been educated) 1611, on the same day with Basker ville and Vilvaine and Clayton of Balliol College, but pre viously of Gloucester Hall. Lapworth was in 1618 appointed the first Professor of Natural Philosophy at Oxford, by the will of the founder, Sir WUUam Sedley, Knt. and Bart. He usually practised in the summer at Bath, where he died May 23, 1636, and was buried in the Abbey church. 3. Thomas Clayton, of Gloucester HaU. He removed to Balliol College, and succeeded Dr. Warner as Eegius Professor of Medicine March 9, 1611. He was the last Principal of Broadgates Hall 1620, and the first Master 1 Gutch, p. 116. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 143 of Pembroke College 1624. In 1607 he had been chosen Professor of Music in Gresham College, which place he re signed November 17, 1610. He died in 1647, and was buried in St. Aldate's church July 13. His son, Sir Thomas, was also Eegius Professor of Medicine, and in 1661 Provost of Merton College. He died October 4, 1693. 4. Eichard Mocket, B.A., of Brasennose College Feb. 16, 1596, M.A. of All Souls' CoUege 1600, B.D. 1607, D.D. 1609, Warden of All Souls' April 12, 1614, domestic Chaplain to Archbishop Abbot, Eector of St. Clement's, East Cheap, London, Dec. 29, 1610, which he resigned in December 1611, when he was Eector of St. Michael's, Crooked-lane. He was Eector of Monks Eisborough, Bucks, and of Newington, Oxfordshire. He died July 5, 1618, aged 40, and was buried in the college chapel, where his relation, Sir Thomas Freke, erected a monument to his memory. His monument was removed into the ante-chapel in 1664. 5. Eobert Pinke, born at Wenslade, Hants, 1572, Proctor 1610, M.B. 1612, B.D. 1619, D.D, 1620, Warden of New College July 17, 1617. James, who gave himself a Latin determination on the first question, admired his disputing. He was seized at Aylesbury for his loyalty in raising the University militia, and was for a time imprisoned in the Gate-house, Westminster. He died November 2, 1647. Dr. Brideoak, Bishop of Chichester, erected a monument to him in his college chapel.1 6. Eobert Bolton, B.A., of Brasennose College Dec. 2, 1596, M.A. July 1602, B.D. 1609. Bolton was bom at Blackburn in Lancashire 1572. He removed from Lincoln College to Brasennose College, of which he was made Fellow. He was brought to true repentance and seriousness of mind by his college tutor, Thomas Peacock, who was B.D. 1608, a native of Cheshire. Peacock died in 1611, and was buried in December in St. Mary's Church. He was incumbent of Broughton in Northamptonshire, and there devoted himself most exemplarily to his duties. He had a fluency and elo quence truly Chrysostomian, with as great energy, so that 1 See also Wood's Ath. Oxon. vol. iii. p. 225. 144 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. his sermons are to this day far from antiquated or unworthy of perusal. He died aged 60 years in 1631. There is an account of him in Fuller's Abel Bedivivus. The King resolved upon hearing a second Act after but a short interval, upon two questions appointed by himself: Whether it be a greater object to preserve than to extend the bounds of a kingdom ? and, Whether the origin of right and wrong is to be sought in law or in nature ? The moderator was Eichard Fitzherbert, of New College, Senior Proctor. He was installed Archdeacon of Dorset August 27, 1620, and died probably some time after 1640. The respondent was William BaUow, of Christ Church. He had been Senior Proctor in 1604. He was created D.D. November 29, 1613, and died in December 1618. He was Eector of Milton Bryant, near Woburn, Bedfordshire, Canon of the first stall at Christ Church January 3, 1615, and dying in 1618 was buried in the Cathedral without any memorial. He is highly commended by Wake as a most polished scholar and of a most courteous disposition. The opponents were : 1. Thomas Winniff, B.A. of Exeter CoUege July 12, 1592, M.A. May 17, 1601, B.D. March 27, 1610, D.D. July 5, 1619. He was born at Sherborne in Dorsetshire, was Eector of Lamborne and Willingate Doe near Chipping Ongar, Essex, Dean of Gloucester November 20, 1624, of St. Paul's April 18, 1631, consecrated Bishop of Lincoln February 6, 1642, but he had no enjoyment of that dignity, but retired to Lamborne where he had purchased both the advowson and an estate, and there died September 19, 1654, in his 78th year. He was raised to the see of Lincoln on account of the blameless- ness and popularity of his character, when Charles sought but too late to conciliate the nation by this and similarly good appointments. 2. Simon Jux, (or perhaps Jukes) D.D. of Christ Church 1618. One probably of the same family was a benefactor to the present chapel at Brasennose College, Eowland Jucks, Esq.1 1 Gi/Mi, p. 373. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 145 3. Eichard Thornton, Vicar of Cassington and Eector of Westwell near Burford, Canon of the first stall of Christ church, July 13, 1596, Prebendary of the ninth stall at Worcester, March 20, 1612. He died January 2, 1615, and was buried on the 6th in the Cathedral at Oxford without any memorial. 4. John King, D.D. of Merton CoUege, July 6, 1615, Canon of the twelfth stall, Westminster, on the death of Dr. Barlow, Bishop of Lincoln 1613, and Canon of Windsor November 23, 1616, on the decease of Murdoch Aldem. He died August 7, 1638, and was buried in St. George's, Windsor. Murdoch (in Wood Mardochay) Aldem succeeded another John King, Fellow both of Peter House and of Exeter College. Dr. King of Merton College was nephew to King of Peter House.1 Dr. King was some time Fellow of Merton College. He was uncle to Dr. George Aglionby, already mentioned as the friend of Falkland, and as designated in 1643 for the Deanery of Canterbury.2 He succeeded Dr. King in his stall at Westminster 1638. 5. William Langton, President of Magdalene College November 19, 1610, on the death of Dr. Harding, already mentioned amongst those who disputed in the Divinity Act. He was born at Langton in Lincolnshire near Wragby, of an ancient and celebrated family. He was as conspicuous for his modesty as for his learning. He died Oct. 10, 1626, aged 54 years. His monument with his effigy, after the manner of that age, is in his college chapel, with an inscrip tion of no common character for its reality and force of expression.3 6. John Barkham, of Corpus Christi College, is said to have applied himself in his earlier years to heraldry, and to have suffered his collections to be published with Gwillim's name as the author. He was born in the parish of St. Mary the Greater, Exeter, in 1572, entered at Exeter College, Oxford, 1587, and removed thence to Corpus Christi College in 1588. He wrote the life of King John published in • John King, Dean of Christchurch in 1605, was B.A. Jan. 26, 1580. 2' Fasti, vol. i. p. 476. 3 See Guteh, p. 330. L 146 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Speed's History, and wholly or chiefly that of Henry II. His account of Becket is supposed to have been designed as an answer to one written by Bolton, a Papist. GwiUim's Heraldry was printed in folio, London, 1610. Barkham was successively Chaplain to Bancroft and Abbot. He was Eector and Dean of Bocking 1615, the other Dean being Dr. Thomas Goad, Precentor of St. Paul's. Of Goad, elsewhere mentioned, a posthumous work appeared, entitled, Stimulus Orthodoxus, sive Goadus Bedivivus. A disputation, partly theological, partly metaphysical, concerning ihe necessity and contingency of events in ihe world, in respect of God's eternal Decree, written above twenty years since by that reverend and learned Divine Thomas Goad, Doctor of Divinity, and Sector of Hadleigh in Suffolk. London, for Will. Leake, 1669, 4to, with a Preface by J. G. He wrote also, Echgce et Musce virgiferai ac juridical. Dr. Barkham was Prebendary of Brownswood in St. Paul's, London, and died at Booking on March 25, 1643. At the conclusion of the Act the King, in a brief speech, engaged to continue, as he had ever been, a patron of learning and of learned men. He promised in particular his patronage and encouragement to the University of Oxford. He bade them continue to maintain the setting forth of the pure Word of God, to fly from and to put to flight all Eomish superstitions, and to avoid and reject all schisms and innovations in religion; to advance in their peculiar studies both in theory and practice, that so their Uves might agree with their profession, God's glory, and his own expectation be fulfilled, himself augmented in honour, and abundant fruit meanwhile redound to themselves.1 The King and nobiUty were attended with acclamations and by torchlight (for the evening had closed upon them) to Christchurch. Others of the nobiUty attended Prince Henry to Magdalene College. He occupied the middle seat at the high table. Down the middle of the hall the noblemen were seated, and along the sides the FeUows and other members of the foundation. The Prince graciously bade them keep their square caps on their heads. He drank their 1 Rex Platonicus, p. 169, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 147 healths, to which they responded, all standing. He more than once caUed Magdalene his coUege, and himself of Magdalene. WiUiam Grey, the younger son of Arthur Lord Wilton, at the command of Dr. Bond the worthy President, presented the Prince with a richly-bound MS., the Apologues of Pandulf Colinucius, the binding set with pearls and enriched with ornaments of gold. Arthur Lord Grey de WUton was son of WiUiam Lord Grey de WUton, a brave soldier, who being Captain of the Castle of Guisnes after the surrender of Calais 1558, was at length obUged to deliver it up and yield himself a prisoner, and afterwards to pay a ransom of 24,000 crowns, which much weakened his estate.1 In 1560 he was made a Knight of the Garter, and died 1562, leaving issue by Mary, daughter of Charles Somerset, Earl of Worcester, a daughter Honora, married to Henry Denny (who had issue by her Edward, created by James L Earl of Norwich), and two sons, Arthur Lord Grey de Wilton and William Arthur, the father of WiUiam at Magdalene College in 1605, died in 1593. Edward, the son of Sir Thomas Chaloner, presented the Prince with a pair of splendid gloves in the name of the whole College, and an illustrious youth, Eichard Worsley, presented him with a volume of verses in various foreign languages. Edward Chaloner was B.A. of Magdalene CoUege July 8, 1607; May 15, 1610, M.A. He removed to All Souls' College, where he was B.D. May 30, 1617, and D.D. November 6, 1619. From his feUowship at All Souls' CoUege he was raised to be Principal of St. Alban's HaU December 29, 1624, and died of the plague July 25, 1625. He had on the evening of 10th July supped with his friend Dr. Hussey of New CoUege, who is supposed to have brought the plague with him from London. He was buried in St. Mary's churchyard. Eichard was second son of Sir Eichard Worsley, the first Baronet of that name, and Frances, daughter of Sir Henry Neville. The farmly took their name from their lordship in Lancashire, Workeseley or Workedeley. 1 Holinshed's Chronicle, 1558. j. 2 148 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. After supper the King and Prince met again at St. John's College, where a comedy, but in tragic measure, says Sir Isaac Wake, representing the revolving year, was acted by the members of that College. The scene was made in the form of the zodiac, with the sun passing through aU the twelve signs. All kinds of aUegories were- introduced into this piece. It began with the sun entering the ram, it ended with the fishes broiled by the heat of the sun. On Friday morning, the day of the King's departure, a pastoral by Samuel Daniel was acted at Christ Church, and was highly applauded. It was published shortly after with the following title, " The Queen's Arcadia, a Pastoral Trago- Comedie, presented to Her Majestie and her Ladies by the University of Oxford in Christ's Church in August last 1605. At London : printed by G. Eld, for Simon Waterson. 1606." A copy of this edition is among Garrick's Plays in the British Museum. It was reprinted in 1611, in 12mo. It is also to be found in the edition of Daniel's Poems in 1620.1 At the same time a Convocation was held at St. Mary's. The Bedell appears at this time to have fulfiUed his office in the old fashion to the letter, making oral proclamation of the Convocation. The nobles began to assemble at eight. The Earl of Northampton was the first that went in with Abbot, Master of University CoUege and Vice-ChanceUor, and sat on his right hand upon a form, for there was but one chair, on which the Vice-Chancellor sat. He went in a black gown and a regent's hood, having been before incorporated there. And first there passed a grace for the Earls of Northum berland, Oxford, Essex, and others, to which consent was asked of the Doctors by the Proctors, and then the Proctors turning to the House gave their consent by general acclama tion, saying Placet; so the Earl was presented, as were most of the nobility, by Sir WiUiam Paddie. Then the Earl was sworn to observe the privileges and statutes of the University. The Vice-Chancellor admitted the noblemen to their degrees standing, but remained seated whilst he admitted the knights and others. Sir John Davies2 presented the knights and 1 See Nichols' Royal Progresses, vol. i. p. 561. * See Ath. Oxon. a.d. 1626. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 149 courtiers, the Prince's servants, and others. Doctors presented the Doctors and Bachelors of Divinity from Cambridge, and Masters of Arts the Masters of Arts. Of Cambridge were incorporated Dr. John Hammond, one of the King's Phy sicians, father of the learned Henry Hammond ; George Euggle, first of Trinity College, then Fellow of Clare Hall, and author of the celebrated comedy Ignoramus ; the Bishop of Oxford, Dr. Bridges, who was of Pembroke Hall, Cam bridge; Alexander Serle, LL.B., Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk ; Eobert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury ; and Dr. Bar nabas Gooch, Master of Magdalene College, Cambridge, and highly regarded by Williams when Lord Keeper. Amongst those who were honoured with degrees were, Esme Stuart, Duke of Lenox, William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke ; his younger brother Philip, Earl of Montgomery ; William Cecil, Viscount Cranbourne, who succeeded his father Eobert Cecil as Earl of Salisbury ; Theophilus Howard, Lord Walden, Earl of Suffolk on the death of his father, the wealthy builder of Audley House; Charles, son of the famous Lord High Admiral ; Thomas West, Lord de la Warr ; Grey Bridges, Lord Chandos, commonly called King of Cotswold from the great number of his attendants when he went to court; William Compton, afterwards Earl of Northampton ; Edward Brace, Master of the Eolls and Baron of |Kinloss in Scotland,1 father of Thomas, Earl of Elgin and Baron of Whorlton in Yorkshire ; Lord Erskine, Sir Henry Neville, Sir Thomas Chaloner, John Egerton, Knight, afterwards Earl of Bridgewater ; Sir Thomas Monson, of Magdalene College, of Burton Hall, near Lincoln ; David Foulis, Knight; George More, Knight;2 John Digby, Esq., of Magdalene College, afterwards Earl of Bristol. About nine the King went to the Bodleian Library, the noble foundation of Sir Thomas Bodley, of the ancient family pf the Bodleighs of Dunscombe near Crediton., He was bom at Exeter March 2, 1545. His father removed with his 1 He died January 14, 1611, aged 62 years, and was buried in the Rolls Chapel, Chancery Lane, London. 2 See Aih. Oxon. 150 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. family to Geneva to avoid the Marian persecution, but returned in 1558 and settled in London. In 1559 or 1560 Bodley was admitted at Magdalene College, whence he removed to Merton College, where he took his B.A. July 26, 1563, and M.A. July 5, 1566. He was chosen to a fellowship, and having studied under the most learned professors at Geneva, he was appointed to read a public lecture on the study of Greek literature in the hall of his College. In 1569 he was Junior Proctor. From 1576 to 1580 he traveUed on the Continent, then returned to Merton CoUege, but was afterwards employed by Elizabeth both at home and abroad till 1597. He afterwards Uved in London or at Parson's Green, Fulham. From 1597 he employed himself in re storing and supplying the University Library. On the 8th of November, 1602, there was a solemn procession from St. Mary's to the Library, for the purpose of opening it and devoting it to the use of the University. More than two thousand choice volumes had been deposited in it by that time. Sir Thomas Bodley was assisted in his noble under taking by Sir Henry Saville and Sir John Bennet. Sir Henry was also B.A. of Merton CoUege, Sir John Bennet of Christ Church. The latter fell under the displeasure of the House of Commons in 1621, was imprisoned for a short time, fined £20,000, and deprived of his office of Judge of the Prerogative Court. He died in the parish of Christ Church, Newgate Street, in the beginning of 1628. The original founder of the Library was indeed Humphrey, the good Duke of Gloucester, son of Henry IV. about 1445.1 Sir Thomas Bodley's work is the eastern wing of the present Library. This was finished in 1613, the year after his death. The western was added between 1630 and 1640. The Divinity School, over which the original Library was built, was founded about 1427, but not completed until 1480. The Proscholium was a part of the work of Sir Thomas Bodley. The remainder of the square rose from 1613 to 1619. The effect was doubtless far superior before the removal of the transoms from the windows of this venerable quadrangle. 1 Ingram's Memorials. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 151 The architect was Thomas Holt of York, who died Sept. 9, 1624, and was buried in Holywell churchyard.1 The King, upon casting his eyes round the Library, expressed his satisfaction upon seeing whence these stores of learning had been drawn which had recently yielded him so much satisfaction, and looking upon Bodley's effigies said, he should rather be called Godly. Amongst other MSS. of that kind he was shewn the Ethiopic version of the Scrip tures, and that monument of impurity under the garb of piety, Gaguinus de Puritate Conceptionis B. M. V. Paris, 1497.2 The King promised himself to become a benefactor to 'tthe Library. The Earl of Salisbury and Charles Lord Effingham, son of the Lord High Admiral, seconded the King's expres sions of good will. The King further said, that were he not king he could have lived as an academician ; and, alluding to the chains with which the books were then fastened to their shelves, added that should it ever be his fate to be led captive in chains, if his choice were given him, he would be shut up in this prison, bound with these chains, and pass his time with these captives for his companions. From the Library the King went into the Divinity School, and visited all the other schools in the quadrangle. Next the King visited Brasenose College, of whose huge brazen nose on the great gate Sir Isaac Wake does not fail to remind his reader. Dr. Thomas Singleton, the Principal, at the head of aU the members of his house, accosted the King. Dr. Singleton had been presented by Lord Keeper Egerton to the Eectory of Whitchurch, Oxfordshire, in 1596 ; he was made Prebendary of Bromesbury in St. Paul's, London, 10th May, 1597. Thomas Powell, B.D. of his College, dedicated to him a sermon upon Exod. xxviii. 34, preached at St. Mary's in 1613. He died November 29, 1614, and was buried in the chancel of St. Mary's ; for, until the consecration of their present chapel, which was founded June 26, 1656, and consecrated November 17, 1686, by the Bishop of Oxford, the Society had only a small oratory over 1 Holt was the architect of the east front ; the rest was designed and com menced in the reign of Queen Mary. 2 Rex Platonicus, p. 171. 152 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the buttery on the south side of the quadrangle. The King entered into discourse with the Principal respecting Friar Bacon, of whose brazen head a tradition went that the prodigious nose aforesaid was a part. Eoger Bacon is said to have lectured in Little University Hall, one of the Halls since swallowed up in Brasenose CoUege, and once occupying the north-east angle near the lane. Adjoining to this was the ancient hostel called Brasenose Hall as early as 1278, whence the CoUege, founded in 15091 by WiUiam Smyth, Bishop of Lincoln, took its name. The brazen head of Eoger Bacon, with its portentous nose, brings to Sir Isaac Wake's mind a pleasant story of Thomas Aquinas and his master Albertus Magnus. Albertus had made an image which, by the help of machinery, could articulate a few sounds, nay words — so the story ; and Aquinas was sent into the room utterly unprepared for his strange companion, whom, when he began to speak, he in his terror broke to pieces with a staff; whereupon Albertus said, Pol, triginta annorum opus uno momento contrivisti; In one moment you have dashed to pieces the work of thirty years.2 The quad rangle of Brasenose was then beautified with flowers and shrubs, (probably in the antique style, as once was that of Peterhouse at Cambridge,) which the King failed not to observe with approbation. His Majesty next visited All Souls' College. There he was accosted by Dr. Eobert Hoveden the Warden, who had been elected to the warden- ship in his 28th year, 12 Nov. 1571. He was Eector of Newington near Oxford, and had been Chaplain to Arch bishop Parker, of whose diocese he was a native. Under Grindal he was made Prebendary of the fourth stall at Canterbury in 1580. The next year he was also Prebendary of Wells, and in 1570 or 1571 of Clifton, in the Cathedral of Lincoln. He wrote the life of Chichely, the founder of All Souls' College.3 He died in his 69th year, March 25, 1615, and was buried in his college chapel. Thence passing down the High Street by the ancient Colleges of University and Queen's, both now replaced by more modem edifices, the King enters his son's adopted 1 Gutch, p. 354. 2 Rex Platonicus, p, 198. 3 See Ath. Oxon. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 153 College of St. Mary Magdalene. There Douglas Castilion made him an oration, probably of the same family with John Castilion, Dean of Eochester in the reign of Charles II. and of Francis Castilion, Knight, who had been created M.A. this same morning. The King thence returned to dinner at Christ Church, where Dr. Edmund Lilly, who had been of Mag dalene College and was at this time Master of Balliol College and Archdeacon of Wiltshire, made another and valedictory oration. His wonderful patristic knowledge made him the admiration of his age. At the stairs' foot, where the King entered into the Court, John Hanmer, of All Souls' CoUege, the Junior Proctor, made a short oration. He rose to be Bishop of St. Asaph 1624. Upon this the Chancellor delivered to the King his Majesty's grant of the Eectory of Ewelme to the Eegius Professor of Divinity, which the King took and returned to the Vice-Chancellor. Then both the King and Queen presented their hands to the Vice-Chancellor and the Doctors to kiss, and bade them farewell, and to leave him to take his departure without farther state. Then the King, Queen, and Prince went all into one coach, and passed through the town, the Mayor and other civic officers of the city in scarlet preceding the King through the town to the farther end of Magdalene Bridge. The Lord Treasurer stayed till Monday next after the King's departure. He sent to the disputers and actors £20 in money, and five brace of bucks ; so he sent to every College and Hall venison and money after this proportion; to Brasenose College five bucks and ten angels; to St. Edmund's Hall four red deer pies and four angels. The King slept the evening of his departure at Eotherfield Grey's near Henley, the mansion of Lord Knowles, and on Saturday, proceeding by Bisham Abbey, the seat of the Hobies, returned to Windsor. On Nov. 3rd Andrewes, who had thrice nobly refused a mitre, was consecrated to the see of Chichester1 on the 1 The King also gave bim the Rectory of Cheam, in Surrey, to hold in commendam. He was admitted to this July 25, 1609. This living had been held successively by his predecessors, Dr. Thomas Bickley and Dr. Anthony Watson. Dr. Watson was born at Cheam, his father Edward was of the county of Durham. He was B.A. of Christ's College, Cambridge, 1571 ; M.A. 154 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. decease of Dr. Anthony Watson. He was consecrated by Archbishop Bancroft, assisted by Dr. Eichard Vaughan, Bishop of London, Jegon, Bishop of Norwich, Dr. Thomas Eavis, Bishop of Gloucester, and Dr. WiUiam Barlow, Bishop of Eochester, afterwards of Lincoln. His elevation was owing to the King's especial regard for him.2 The King also appointed him his Almoner, and at the same time granted, in augmentation of the King's alms, all the goods, &c. of aU who were felones de se, as weU as all deodands in England and Wales, exempting Andrewes also from rendering an account of his receipts from these sources.3 Andrewes re signed the mastership of Pembroke HaU on the 5th, on which day Wren was elected a Fellow of that Society, Andrewes voting for him by his deputy, the President. In his mastership Andrewes was succeeded by a far inferior person, Dr. Samuel Harsnett, who was afterwards compeUed to resign in consequence of the complaints of the Fellows, headed by Wren, who was himself a devoted friend of both Peter House and Pembroke HaU. 1575 ; and B.D. 1582. He was made Dean of Bristol 16th April, 1590, and installed 21st July. He was (in the place of Thomas Manton, M.A., who succeeded Dr. Roger Goad in that preferment,) made Chancellor of Wells, and installed 15th July, 1592, and at the same time made also (in the place of Manton) Prebendary of Wedmore Secunda, in that Church. He was nomi nated to the see of Chichester 1st June, 1596, elected by the Chapter on the 14th, confirmed August 14th, and the temporalities were restored to bim 13£h September. He had been previously consecrated August 15th by Whitgift, assisted by Dr. John Young, Bishop of Rochester; Richard Vaughan, Bishop of Bangor (afterwards translated successively to Chester and London); and Bilson, who on June 13th this same year was consecrated to the see of Worcester, having been previously Fellow of New College, Oxford, and Warden of Win chester College. Bishop Watson lived in celibacy, was Almoner to King James, and died at his house at Cheam 10th September, 1605. He was buried in his church there on the 19th. His .will is in the Prerogative Office, London. He left £100 to Christ's College, Cambridge, where he had been educated, and whence he was chosen to a fellowship at Corpus Christi College. Bishop Hacket was afterwards Rector of Cheam. On March 14th, 1606, Abbot granted a license to Andrewes, now Bishop of Chichester, to demolish sundry ruinated and super fluous buildings attached to the episcopal houses at Chichester and Aldingbourne near Chichester. " Upon the house belonging to the bishopric of Chichester he expended above £420." So his biographer Isaacson. 2 Sir John Harrington's Britf Vine, p. 141. Lond. 1652. 3 Rymer, vol. ii. 143. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 155 CHAPTEE VIII. Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on Christmas Bay, 1605 — King James's policy in regard to the Scotch Church — Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on the anniversary ofthe King' s Accession, 1606 — His commenda tions of the King — Sermon on Faster-Bay — On Whit- Sunday — Of the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit's operations — Sermon at Greenwich before King James and the King of Benmarh — His notice of the Jesuits — The Scotch Conference and Sermons at Hampton Court — Bishop Andrewes' Sermons on the right of Kings to eall Councils — On 6th November — On Christmas Bay — Of the merits of Christ — Sermon on Faster Bay, 1607 — On being doers of the Word — Sermon at Eomsey on 5th August — On 5th November at Whitehall — On Christmas Bay on the mystery of Godliness — On Faster Bay, 1608 — On Whit-Sunday — At Holdenby on August 5 — Consecration of Bishop Neile — Br. John King, Bishop of London. On Christmas Day 1605, Tuesday, our prelate preached before the King at Whitehall from Heb. ii. 16, in the then version : For he in nowise took ihe angels ; but the seed of Abraham he took. In page 5 he observes, " And emergent or issuing from this are all those other apprehendings or seisures of the persons of men (by which God layeth hold on them, and bringeth them back from error to truth, and from sin to grace,) that have been from the beginning, or shall be to the end of the world. That, of Abraham himself, whom God laid hold of and brought from out of Ur of the Chaldeans, and the idols he there worshipped. That, of our Apostle St. Paul, that was apprehended in the way to Damascus. That 156 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of St. Peter, that in the very act of sin was seized on with bitter remorse for it. All those, and all these, whereby men daily are laid hold of in spirit, and taken from the bye-paths of sin and error, and reduced into the right way, and so then- persons recovered to God and seised to his use ; — all these apprehensions (of these branches) came from this apprehension (of the seed) : they all have their beginning and their being from this day's taking, even semen apprehendit" [he took the seed]. " Our receiving His spirit for His taking our flesh. This seed, wherewith Abraham is made the son of God, from the seed wherewith Christ is made the son of Abraham."' Of the word used in the original he notes that it is the same word that was used of St. Peter, when, being ready to sink, Christ caught him by the hand and saved him, and of Lot and his daughters1 in the like danger. " And," he proceeds, " it may truly be said — (inasmuch as all God's promises, as well touching temporal as eternal deliverances, and as well corporal as spiritual, be in Christ Yea and Amen ; Yea in the giving forth, Amen in the performing) — that even our temporal delivery from the dangers that daily compass us about, even from this last [the 5th of November], so great and so fearful as the Hke was never imagined before, all have their ground from this great appre hension, are fruits of this seed here, this blessed seed, for whose sake, and for whose truth's sake, that we (though unworthily) profess, are by him caught hold of, and so plucked out of it." Having set down St. Augustine's reason why more mercy might have been shewn to us than to the angels, that they had no tempter ; and Leo's, that not aU the angels feU, but that all fell in Adam, he adds : "And thus have they travailed, and these have they found why he did apprehend us rather than them. It may be not amiss; but we will content ourselves for our inde nobis hoc — whence cometh this to us ? with the answer of the Scriptures, whence, but from the tender mercies of our God, whereby this day hath visited us? Zelus Domini (saith Esay), The zeal of the Lord of hosts 1 Gen. xix. 6. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 157 shaU bring it to pass. Propter magnam charitatem [for his great love wherewith he loved us], saith the apostle. Sic Deus dilexit [God so loved the world], saith he, he himself. And we are taught by him to say, Even so, Lord, for so it was thy good pleasure thus to do."1 King James set the example to his son Charles of endeavouring to effect a conformity in Scotland to the established discipline and ritual of the Church of England ; nor was the indiscretion of the royal father less than that of the misguided son. In England James was as fulsomely flattered as in Scotland he had been undutifully browbeaten. The boldness of the Scottish clergy was at times rash and intemperate, and could not but have been most offensive to him ; yet to that body did Scotland owe much of its security from the plottings of Eomanism on the one hand, and of civil despotism on the other. Those who can see nothing in the kirk of those days to admire, are as intolerantly blind as those who would condemn them in nothing. But the impolicy and insincerity of James frustrated his own designs, and laid the foundation for those troubles which afterwards feU upon King Charles. It was insincere in him, who had not privately alone, but publicly declared2 for the discipUne of the Kirk, to force upon it episcopacy. His impolicy is repeatedly admitted by one' who has spared no pains for the most part to exculpate him.3 In 1606 James early in the year proceeded to an act of the most consummate injustice in procuring the condemnation of six ofthe Presbyterian clergy upon a false charge of treason.* This took place on the 10th of January. Others were some 'p. 7. 2 Cooke's History ofthe Church of Scotland, ii. pp. 73, 130, 158. 3 Dr. (afterwards Bishop) Russell. See his History of the Church in Scotland, vol. ii. 4 This topic, which is very briefly touched upon by Dr. Russell, is given at more length by Dr. Cooke. The jury were threatened ; to be prosecuted as traitors if they hesitated to bring in the desired verdict. With this threat before their eyes, six out of fifteen — a noble proportion considering the usual self-love and timidity of human nature — declared the ministers innocent. See Cooke's History ofthe Church of Scotland, ii. pp. 160 — 168. 158 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. time hence commanded to London, apparently to hold con ferences, really to be inquisitorially examined and for a while detained, and some of them to be banished from their native land. But we shall find them in London in the month of August ; so we return to our prelate, whom we find, from the 31st March to the 22nd June inclusive, engaged in his par liamentary duties in various committees ; first, on a committee for the repeal of an Act of the 14th Eliz. concerning the length of kersies, which forbade their being made above the length of eighteen yards ; the committee to meet on Thursday, April 3, by eight A.M. in the Little Chamber near the Parnament presence ; and also for the relief of John Eoger, gent, against Eobert, PauL and William Taylor. The House of Commons desired a conference on the 5th of April on the sUencing of ministers, the multiplicity of ecclesiastical commissions, the manner of citations, and on excommunication. The Bishop was one ofthe Lords appointed to confer with them. The conference was appointed to be on Monday the 14th April, at two in the afternoon.1 The day was changed to the 17th. The prelates were Abbot, Andrewes, BUson,^tiU Bishop of Bath and Wells, and Eudd, Bishop of St. David's. Eeport was made on the 28th of April. On Easter Day April 6, he again preached before the King at Whitehall, on Bom. vi. 9 — 11, in a manner worthy of himself. This sermon, indeed, abounds with most pious and profitable passages. In it he cites that saying of Bernard, " Christ, although he rose alone, yet did not aU rise ; that is, we were a part of him. He is but risen in part, and that he may rise all, we must rise from death also." Again, he sets forth the true doctrine of the Church, that Christ's death was an exhibition of Divine justice, and that his person was that' which gave virtue to his sacrifice.2 Of living according to God he saith, "Then live we according to him, when his will is our law, his Word our rule, his Son's life our ex ample, his Spirit rather than our own souls the guide of our actions."3 1 Journal of the House of Lords, vol. i. p. 410, 2 p. 390. 3 p 391 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 159 On the 28th of April he was appointed to meet on a com mittee on the annexation of certain honours, castles, forests, manors, &c. &c, and of certain diadems, jewels, crowns, &c, to the throne of England for ever. On the 5th of May he made report touching the oath ex officio which was appointed to be handled by him in respect of the sickness of Dr. StiU, Bishop of Bath and Wells.1 On the 12th May our prelate was appointed to meet on a BiU read a second time on the 10th of that month, for the more sure establishing and continuance of true reUgion. On Whitsunday, June 8, he preached before the King at Greenwich from Acts ii. 1 — 4. "It pleased Christ," he saith, "to vouchsafe to grace the Church, his queen, with like solemn inauguration to that of his own, when the Holy Ghost descended on him in the likeness of a dove, that she might, no less than he himself, receive from heaven like solemn attestation." Of the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit's operations he saith : " And this (of blowing upon one certain place) is a property very well fitting the^Holy Spirit, He bloweih where he listeth. To blow in certain places where itself will, and upon certain persons, and they shall plainly feel it, and others about them not a whit. There shall be an hundred or more in an auditory ; one sound is heard, one breath doth blow. At that instant one or two and no more, one here, another there, they shall feel the Spirit, shall be affected and touched with it sensibly ; twenty on this side them and forty on that side shall not feel it, but sit all becalmed, and go their way no more moved than they came. Ubi vult spiral [He bloweth where he listeth] is most true."2 When Christern IV. King of Denmark came on a visit to the Queen his sister, Bishop Andrewes preached in Latin before the two Sovereigns at Greenwich on August 5th, the anniversary of the Gowrie conspiracy. His text was the 10th verse of the 144th Psalm. He spoke of the Jesuits as amongst the strange chUdren in v. 11, Their mouth speaketh a lie, their right hand is a right hand of iniquity. " And are not these 1 Journal ofthe Lords, 1606, p. 428. 2 p. 602. 160 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of ours just like them ? Only except what David calls lying they call equivocation." Andrewes alludes in this sermon to their various plots in which, by the use of poisons and powders (not omitting the gunpowder), and of the sword, they had plotted against our own and other Princes. In the latter part he gives a detailed account of the Gowrie conspiracy. This sermon was printed with his posthumous works, and in English in the folio edition of his Sermons in 1661. On September 7th he assisted, with Toby Matthews, the pious and witty Archbishop of York, Dr. Thomas Eavis, the deservedly popular Bishop first of Gloucester then of London, and one of the translators of the Bible, and Dr. William Barlow, Bishop of Eochester and afterwards of Lincoln, at the consecration of Dr. WilUam James, Dean of Durham and President of University College, Oxford, to the see of Durham. He thus succeeded Dr. Toby Matthew both in the deanery and bishopric. He obtained permission to be consecrated within the province of Canterbury.1 William James was a native of Sandbach in Cheshire. In 1559 he was admitted student of Christ Church, and took the degrees in arts. He afterwards entered into holy orders, and became Divinity Eeader of Magdalene CoUege. Thence, being at that time B.D., he was elected to the mastership of University College, Oxford, June 12, 1572. On August 27, 1577, he was admitted Archdeacon of Coventry by Bishop Bentham. Being appointed Dean of Christ Church he, on September 14, 1584, resigned the mastership of University College, On June 5, 1596, he was instaUed Dean of Durham, whence he was promoted to the bishopric. He died on the 12th May, 1617, and was buried in his Cathedral. The reader will find more in Wood's Athenoe Oxonienses and Surtees' invaluable History of Durham. " The commotions," says the late Bishop of Glasgow (Dr. Eussell), "which continued to disturb the Scottish Church, suggested to the King the propriety of holding a conference with the leading members of the two parties. For this purpose he summoned to London the Archbishops of Glasgow 1 Reg. Bancroft. Hardy's Le Neve, vol. iii. p. 295. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 161 arid St. Andrew's, and the Bishops of Orkney, GaUoway, and Dunkeld, to represent the episcopal interest; while, as advocates for the Presbyterian cause, he named the two MelviUes and five others, than whom there were none better qualified both by talent and courage to support the tenets of the Genevan school, whether in doctrine or discipline." To these seven, namely, Andrew and James Melville, James Balfour, William Watson, William Scott, John Carmichael, and Adam Cole, the King addressed a circular letter, ex pressing therein his anxiety to preserve that peace in the Church which had been estabUshed when he left Scotland. He further enumerated the measures which he had taken for that purpose, dwelt upon the opposition which he had en countered from the clergy, opposition which had been such as to compel him to a severity contrary to his inclination, and concluded by telling them that, being influenced by this and various other weighty reasons, he saw good to command them without fail to come to London before the 15th of September, that on that day he might begin with them, and such others of their brethren as he knew to be learned and experienced, and whom he had also ordered to attend, to treat concerning the peace of the Church of Scotland, and to make his constant and unchangeable favour to the members of that Church so manifest, that they might be bound in duty and conscience to conform to his godly meaning. In his usual style he took great praise to himself for his condescension, and plainly intimated what consequences would follow, if the conference did not terminate agreeably to his royal pleasure. The learned and experienced brethren whom they were to meet were the aforesaid Bishops, not that they had been otherwise ordained than themselves. They had the title of Bishops, but they were not as yet canonicaUy consecrated as a separate order. The canonical consecration of the Scottish Prelates did not take place until A.D. 1610. The King had been known, notwithstanding his many public professions of fidelity to the Kirk, to be favourable to episcopacy. In June, 1606, he settled upon his titular Bishops so much of the episcopal estates as had been hitherto 162 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. annexed to the crown, legalizing at the same time the immense plunder of church property which the nobiUty had secured to themselves by way of rewarding their godly zeal for reformation. Very many of the ministers who were favourable to the Presbyterian discipline protested, but in vain, against this attempt to pave the way for another form of church government. The seven whom the King had summoned arrived in London before the end of August.1 " To clear the ground," says Dr. Eussell, "for the amicable contest in which the Scottish champions were about to engage, James had pro vided that they should all go to church and Usten to a series of discourses on the several points at issue." They had warn ing given them to attend at Hampton Court on the 20th. Barlow, now Bishop of Eochester, preached on the superiority of Bishops to presbyters; then followed Dr. Buckeridge, President of St. John's College, Oxford, and afterwards successively Bishop of Eochester and Ely, who handled the King's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, often ranking the Eomanists and Presbyterians together in the matter of rebellion. On Sunday, September 28, Bishop Andrewes preached from Numbers x. 1, 2, upon the King's right to call assemblies, both civil And ecclesiastical, instancing in both the Old Testament and Apocryphal histories, and copiously also from the ecclesiastical history for the first eight centuries from the Christian era. He noticed the inconsistency of those who disputed this power only upon despairing of its being exerted on their side. After him Dr. King, Dean of Christ Church and Abbot's successor in the see of London, preached from the Canticles (chap. viii. verse 11), against the Presbyterian institution of lay-elders. Neither the sermons nor the conference produced the desired effect. So the ministers were now examined relating to pro ceedings which had not been specified in the letter. James Melville had rendered himself especially obnoxious to the King by his opposition to his policy on various occasions. 1 So Dr. Cooke, but in Nichols's Royal Progresses of James it is "the beginning of September." THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 163 He was now, after an exhibition of intemperate zeal, committed first to the care of the learned Dr. Overall, Dean of St. Paul's, and then to the Tower. After about four years he was restored to his liberty, but not to his country ; that he never revisited, but was permitted in 1611 to accept the Divinity Professorship at Sedan, whither he was invited by the Duke of Boulogne. He died in 1621. His nephew James Melville was ordered to reside in Newcastle, but was after wards removed to Berwick, where he died. The rest were detained awhile, but at last suffered to return to such places in Scotland as were specified by the King.1 On 5th November Andrewes preached before the King at Whitehall, from Psalm cxviii. 23, 24 : This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made, let us rejoice and be glad in it. On this the first anniversary of that horrible and all but incredible plot, which the Jesuits of our own day would have the world, if possible, discredit,2 he set forth the plot and the deliverance in language that must have thrilled the hearts of his auditors. The court of Eome had openly rejoiced at the success of the sanguinary plot of Charles IX. against his Protestant subjects in 1572. He did not on this occasion spare either the Church of Eome, which, had this plot succeeded, would, as he observed, have canonized it, nor the Jesuits. Taking up our Saviour's words, he spoke of it as an abomination that was to have brought desolation. " Every abomination doth not forthwith make desolate. This had. If ever a desolate kingdom upon earth, such had this been after that terrible blow. Neither root nor branch left, all swept away. Strangers called in; murtherers exalted ; the very dissolution and desolation of all ensued. "But this, that this so abominable and desolate a plot stood in the holy place, this is the pitch of all. For there it stood, and thence it came abroad. Undertaken with an 1 Cooke's History ofthe Church of Scotland, ii. p. 190. 2 "It is on this day that the pretended attempt to blow up the Parhament House by Guy Fawkes is celebrated in England." — Catholic Annual, p. 310. Keating and Brown, Lond. 1830. m2 164 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. holy oath; bound with the holy sacrament (this 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 (ihe Jesuits), gave not only absolution 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 wants glorifying, because the event failed, that is the grief; if it had not, glorified) long ere this, and canonized as a very good and holy act, and we had had orations out of the Conclave in commendation of it."1 Let the reader but peruse this discourse and carry himself back to the day when it was delivered, the audience assembled to hear it, the presence of the King who was to have been, with all the flower of his own house and of his kingdom, so ruthlessly destroyed, and he will receive an impression, it may be hoped, indelible, of that truly marvellous interposition of the Almighty in behalf of our religion and nation. He wiU, too, feel that so memo rable an occasion could not have been left in the hands of a more eloquent divine than our prelate. Ungrateful indeed and insensible must have been the heart of James, who, in spite of even that deUverance, could not rest until he had endangered the stability of his throne and unsettled the affections of his subjects, by seeking to unite his son, his ill-fated son, to a Eomish family. On the 14th November Andrewes preferred to the vicarage of ChigweU one of the greatest ornaments of his own coUege, Eoger Fenton, B.D., Eector of St. Stephen's, Walbrook, and Prebendary of St. Paul's, and one of the translators of the Bible. He was the friend of Thomas Fuller, Eector of St. Peter's, Aldwinckle, and father of the famous Thomas Fuller, and of the excellent Dr. Felton, Andrewes's successor in the see of Ely. He died January 16, 1616, and was buried in St. Stephen's, Walbrook.2 On 24th November Andrewes was on a committee upon i p. 894. 2 See Memorials of Thomas Fuller, D.D., by Rev. A. T. Russell, pp. 10—13. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 165 the Union, and again on 8th December, to restrain the multi tude of inconvenient buildings in and about the metropolis. On Christmas-day, Wednesday, our prelate preached before the King at Whitehall, from Isaiah ix. 6, vindicating this illustrious prophecy from the forced interpretation of the Jews who apply it to Hezekiah, the vain subterfuge also of modern Unitarianism. But, as Bishop Andrewes remarks, " how senseless is it to apply to Hezekias that in the next verse, Of his government and peace there should be none end ; that his throne should be established from thenceforth for ever ; whereas his peace and government both had an end within few years." Here, as elsewhere, he does not confine the mediatorial character and saving merits of our Lord to the time and works of his public ministry, but includes therein all that he did and all that he suffered. " If the tree be ours, the fruit is ; if he be ours, his birth is ours ; his life is ours ; his death is ours ; his satisfaction, his merits, all he did, all he suffered is ours."1 Bishop Andrewes served on various committees of the Lords in February and March, 16&7. On Tuesday, March 24, being the anniversary of the King's accession, Andrewes preached before him at Whitehall, from Judges xvii. 6 : In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was good in his own eyes. He spoke of the excellence of an hereditary monarchy, as leaving no interregna, no seasons of confusion. He urged the duty of kings, to whom God gives commission (I said ye are gods) to take under their charge the things of God, to put down idolatry, and to provide right instruction for their subjects. He animadverts upon the disposition of many of the laity in his time to intermeddle with ecclesiastical things and persons, the people that strive with the priest. Hos. iv. 4.1 Andrewes appears too courtly in this discourse. Was it altogether true of James that he was the opposite to Andrewes's picture of Eehoboam, one that was full of great words, but so faint-hearted as not able to resist ought?3 1 Sermons, p. 15. 2 p. 121, Certain Sermons, §c. 3 p. 127. 166 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On April 5, Easter-day, he preached before the King at Whitehall, from 1 Cor. xv. 20, observing how our Lord's resurrection was the day of the feast of first-fruits.1 Very felicitious is his observation in p. 400 : " There was a statute concerning God's commandments, Qui fecerit ea, vivet in eis, He that observed the commandments should live by that his obedience. Death should not seize on him. Christ did observe them exactly, therefore should not have been seized by death ; should not, but was ; and that seizure of his was death's forfeiture." Towards the end of this sermon, as elsewhere, he speaks in general terms of baptism as our regeneration in which we receive the first-fruits of the Spirit, and of the constant renovation of grace and of pardon in the Lord's Supper; and here he does not introduce the quasi-Bomanism of some who (like the Pharisees in regard of the prophets) speak much of him, but do not teach the same doctrine. He does not tell his hearers that there are but two times of absolute cleansing, baptism and the day of judgment.2 It was in this year, and probably on May 10th, the fifth Sunday after Easter-day, when the text occurs in the epistle for the day, that our prelate preached before the King at Greenwich one of his best and most ingenious discourses upon the " doing of the Word," from St. James i. 22 ; noting ODe of the great diseases of his day, the placing of all religion in the going to hear sermons, and at the same time neglecting to be so much as present at the prayers. And in exposing this absurd kind of religion (so to call it), he does not with some vilify preaching, nor teach with these that the hearers should equally follow whatsoever they are taught from the pulpit. He would have all that is heard to rest on the authority and to be tried by the rule of holy Scripture. He notes that " not so few as twenty times in the Gospel is the preaching of the word called the Kingdom of Heaven, as a special means to bring us thither. It is that of which St. 1 Levit. xxiii. 10, and Rom. xi. 16. 2 " There are but two periods of absolute cleansing, baptism and the day of judgment." — Dr. Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, p. 93. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 167 James in the verse before saith, It is able to save our souls; the very words which the angel used to Cornelius, that, when St. Peter came, he should speak words by which he and his household should be saved." 1 On Whit-Sunday, May 24th, Andrewes preached before the King at Greenwich a sermon erroneously assigned to the year following in the foUo edition. This, which is the second of the Whit-Sunday series, abounds more in the faults of his style than most of his discourses. He does not proceed far before he pours out his wit upon the Puritans. " I wish it were not true this, that humours were not sometimes mis taken, and mistermed the Spirit. A hot humour flowing from the gall, taken from this fire here, and termed, though untruly, the Spirit of zeal. Another windy humour proceeding from the spleen, supposed to be this wind here, and they that [are] filled with it (if nobody will give it them) taking to them selves the style of the godly brethren. I wish it were not needful to make this observation, but you shall easily know it for an humour : non continetur termino suo, its own limits will not hold it. They are ever mending churches, states, superiors ; mending all save themselves ; alieno non suo is the note to distinguish an humour."1 Observing that the gifts for which we are to thank God on our celebration of this day are the pastors of his church, he says, " Must we keep our Pentecost in thanksgiving for these ? are they worth so much, I trow ? We would be loth to have the prophet's way taken with us (Zach. xi. 12) that it should be said to us, as there it is, If you so reckon of them indeed, ht us see the wages you value them at; and when we shall see, it is but eight pound a year, and having once so much, never to be capable of more. May not then the prophet's speech there well be taken up ? A goodly price these high gifts are valued at by you. And may not he justly (instead of Zachary and such as he is) send us a sort oi foolish shepherds; and send us this senselessness withal, that, speak they never so fondly, so they speak, all is weU ; it shaU serve our turn as weU as the best of them all ? Sure, if this be a part of our duty this day 1 p. 133. 2 p. 610. 168 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to praise God for them, it is to be a part of our care, too, they may be such as we may justly praise God for. Which whether we shall be likely to effect by some courses as have of late been offered, that leave I to the weighing of your wise considerations."1 On 12th July he, with Dr. Eavis, Bishop of London, and Dr. Barlow, Bishop of Eochester, assisted Archbishop Ban croft at the consecration of Dr. Henry Parry, Dean of Chester, to the see of Gloucester, then vacant by the translation of Dr. Eavis to London. Dr. Parry was the son of Henry, son of WiUiam Parry, gentleman, of Wormbridge, about ten mUes south-west of Here ford, but was himself a native of Wiltshire, 1561. He was a scholar of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, 13th Nov. 1576, and Fellow and Greek Eeader in that college. He was Eector of Bredon in Worcestershire, Chaplain to Queen Elizabeth, instaUed Dean of Chester 1st August, 1605, wliich he resigned on his consecration at Croydon to the see of Gloucester. He was translated to Worcester 13 July, 1610, died 12 December, 1616, and was buried in the Cathedral there. He was as a preacher an especial favourite with King James. The King of Denmark gave him a very rich ring for a sermon preached before him and James the First at Eochester in 1606. He was very charitable to the poor. He built the pulpit that was standing in the nave of Gloucester Cathedral in the last century, but has since been removed. He pub lished two Latin discourses, translated into EngUsh ; The Sum of a Conference between John Bainolds and John Hart touching the head and faith of the Church, Oxford, 1619, folio ; and translated from Latin into English a Catechism of contro verted questions in Divinity, Oxford, 1591, 8vo., which was written by Zachary Ursinus, a Silesian, and Caspar Olevian, commonly called The Heidelberg Catechism.1 In August Bishop Andrewes was with the King at Eomsey in Hampshire, probably at Broadlands near Eomsey. His 1 p. 615. 2 See Niemeyeri Collectio Confess, in Eccles. Reform. Publicatarum. Lips. 1840, pp. 390—461. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 169 Majesty's host there appears to have been Edward St. Barbe, Esq., who, being previously of Ashington near Ilchester, Somersetshire, married Frances, daughter and heiress of William Fleming, Esq., of Broadlands, who died in 1606. Edward was grandfather of the first baronet of his name. Here Bishop Andrewes preached before the King on the 5th of August, the anniversary of the Gowry conspiracy, from 2 Sam. xvin. 32 ; shewing that it was not for Jews only, but for Christians also, to denounce and curse the enemies of God, of mankind, and of the church. In this sermon he noticed the rise of the Independents, and the levelling prin ciples of the Anabaptists of those times. " Of the first sort of these risers (against kingly power) are the Anabaptists of our age, by whom all secular jurisdiction is denied. No lawmakers they but the evangelists : no courts but. presbyteries : no punishments but church-censures. They rise against the very state of kings : and that should they find and feel, if they were once grown enough to make a party. "A second sort there be (the Independents) that are but bustUng to rise ; not yet risen, at least not to this step ; but in a forwardness they be ; proffer at it, that they do. They that seek to bring parity not into the commonwealth by no means, but only into the church. AU parishes aUke, every one absolute, entire of itself. No dependency, or superiority, or subordination. But, this once being had, do we not know their second position ? — have they not broached it long since ? The church is the house, the commonwealth but the hangings. The hangings must be made fit for the house, that is, the commonwealth fashioned to the church, not the house to the hangings. No, take heed of that. And when they were taken with it and charged with it, how sleightly in their answer do they slip it over ! These, when they are thus got far may rise one step higher ; and as Aaron now must not, so perhaps neither must Moses then exalt himself above the con gregation, seeing that all God's people are holy no less than he." On the 8th October Andrewes, as one of the residentiaries of St. Paul's, presented the erudite Arabic scholar, WiUiam 170 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Bedwell, to the Eectory of Tottenham, Middlesex. He was one of the translators of the Bible, and had been educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where"^ he was B.A. in 1585, and M.A. in 1588. In 1601 he was made Eector of St. Ethelburga, London. He was Chaplain to Sir Henry Wotton in his embassy to Venice, where he is said to have assisted Father Paul in his history of the Council of Trent. He published Kalendarium Viatorium Generale, The Traveller's Kalendar, serving generally for all parts of the world, 8vo. 1614. Also Mohamedis Imposturai: that is, a Discovery of the manifold Forgeries, Falsehoods, and horrible Impieties of the blasphemous seducer Mohammed; vnth a demonstration of ihe Insufficiency of his Law, contained in the cursed Alkoran. Delivered in a Conference had between Two Mohametans on their Betumfrom Mecha. Written long since in Arabiek,and now done into English by William Bedwell. Whereunto is annexed ihe Arabian Trudgman, interpreting certain Arabic Terms used by Historians : together with an Index of the Chapters of the Alkoran, for the understanding of the con futations of that Book. London. Imprinted by Bichard Field, dwelling in Great Wood-street, 1615. It purports to be a translation of a work at that time 600 years old. Mr. Gough says that Bedwell translated the Koran into English. He was an early friend and patron of Henry Jacob, son of Henry Jacob, one of the earliest Independents. He recommended the younger Jacob to the notice of William Earl of Pembroke, at whose recommendation he was admitted B.A. of Oxford, 1629. He found a patron in Laud, and adhered to him in his troubles. He was intimate with Selden, who befriended him in his own troubles. He died 1652. Bedwell also published A Brief Description ofthe Town of Tottenham High Cross, 4to. 1631. In this he gave a copy of a very ancient ballad, The Tournament of Tottenham; or, the Wooing, Winning, and Wedding of Tibbe the Beve's Daughter. This poem, says Warton, in his History of English Poetry, is a burlesque on the parade and fopperies of chivalry. It was reprinted in Percy's Beliques of Antient Poetry, in Eobinson's THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 171 History, &c, of Tottenham, 1828. He died May 5, 1632, aged 78, and is buried in Tottenham Church.1 On 5th November he preached before the King at White hall, from the first four verses of Psalm cxxvi., enlarging upon the greatness of that wonderful deliverance which is com memorated on that day. On Friday, Christmas-day, he again preached before the King at the same place, upon the mystery of godliness, and its manifestation in our Lord's incarnation, discoursing excel lently upon the great humiliation and love by which this manifestation of God was distinguished. On Easter-day, March 27, 1608, Bishop Andrewes preached most eloquently upon the history of our Lord's resurrection, from St. Mark xvi. 1 — 7, at Whitehall. On April 17 he assisted at the consecration of the truly noble Dr. James Montague to the see of Bath and Wells. On August 5, the anniversary of the Gowry conspiracy, we find Bishop Andrewes preaching before the King at Holdenby,2 the once magnificent but now ruined mansion first of Sir Christopher Hatton. His sermon, full of his usual ingenuity, was upon David's most noble and pious answer to Abishai when Abishai counselled him to put Saul to death. The King on the same day rode to Bletsoe, the seat of Oliver Lord St. John, whose third and fourth sons, Antony and Alexander, he there knighted, as also Sir Thomas Tresham, of Newton in Northamptonshire. On August 6 he knighted Sir Eichard Harpur of Derbyshirej of a family now represented by Lord Crewe.8 1 "I understand from Smyth's MS. he left many Arabic MSS. to the University, with numerous notes of his own upon them, and a set of types for printing them."— George Dyer's History of the University of Cambridge, vol. ii. p. 291, London, 1814. In Carter's History of the University Bedwell is placed under St. John's College as having been a Fellow there. The MSS. are: An Arabic Copy of St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, with a Latin Translation and short Scholia per Gul. Bedwell Stortfordiensem, dedicated to Bancroft, then Bishop of London. Lexicon Arabico-Turcicum, 7 vols, folio. Lexicon Arabicum Bedwelli, 2 vols. 4to. Alcoran, Arabice. 2 North-west of Northampton. 3 Nichols' Progresses of King James, vol. ii. pp. 204, 205. 172 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On October 9 Bishop Andrewes with Dr. Thomas Eavis, now Bishop of London, and Dr. James Montague, the truly munificent Bishop of Bath and Wells, assisted Archbishop Bancroft at Lambeth Chapel on the consecration of Dr. Eichard Neile, Dean of Westminster, to the bishopric of Eochester. Dr. Neile owed his rise to the great Lord Bur leigh and to his son Eobert Earl of SaUsbury, to both of whom he was successively Chaplain. He was himself the great patron of Archbishop Laud, whom this year he made his Chaplain, and in 1609 introduced him to the notice of the King, before whom he preached at Theobalds. On November 5, Dr. John King, Dean of Christ Church, who appears as a preacher to have been esteemed next to Andrewes, preached before the King at Whitehall.1 His text was Psalm xi. 2 — 4. " Cruelty," he truly said, "is the ensign and badge of that Church" [the Church of Eome]. " The habit of the harlot is according to her heart, scarlet and purple; her diet the diet of cannibals. ' I saw her drunken] saith the Apostle, ' with the blood of saints' I wondered to see her so wonderfully drunk [davfta fJ See also Criminal Trials before the High Court of Justiciary, ii. 146—332, 4to. Edinb. 1830. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 175 CHAPTEE IX. Plots of the Papists against King James — The King treats them favourably — Buplicity of Pope Clement VIII. — Watson's con spiracy — The Gunpowder Plot — Grounded on the Pope's Breves — The plot referred to the Pope for his opinion — Garnet fearful lest he should encourage recourse to arms — Greenwell and Hall — Garnet — Lingard's plea for Garnet — Concealment of sins not yet perpetrated formerly not allowed under the plea of confession — Martin del Rio — Abstraction of documents from the State Paper Office — Abbot's Antilogia — Not the Jesuits alone to be blamed — Oath of allegiance — The King's Premonition to Christian Princes and States — His Confession of Faith — His dissertation on Anti christ. Before the accession of King James1 in 1603, Pope Clement VIII. had put Garnet, the superior or head of the English Jesuits, in possession of epistles or breves directing the 1 In 1594 the Jesuit Parsons, " a subtle and lying Jesuit" (to use the words of Hallam in his Constitutional History of England), "published under the name of Doleman a treatise entitled Conference about the next Succession to the Crown of England. It is written, says Mr. -Hallam, "with much art to shew the extreme uncertainty of the succession, and to perplex men's minds by multi plying the number of competitors. This, however, is but the second part of his Conference, the aim of the first being to prove the right of commonwealths to depose sovereigns, much more to exclude the right heir especially for want of true religion. He pretends to have found very few who favoured the King of Scots' title, an assertion by which we may appreciate his veracity." " Mr. Butler," observes this writer, " is too favourably inclined towards a man without patriotism or veracity." — Constit. Hist. 3rd ed. vol. i. p. 389. King Philip II. secretly aimed at bringing in the Infanta ; Pope Clement VIII. and the English Roman Catholic gentry were for Arabella Stuart, daughter of the Earl of Lennox. 176 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Eoman CathoUcs to prevent the accession of James, or of any but a Eoman Catholic, whenever the demise of Queen Elizabeth should occur. The Eomish historian, Dr. Lingard, himself acknowledges that Garnet had these breves; that in 1602 Thomas Winter, afterwards one of the Gunpowder conspirators, had arranged with the ministers of PhiUp ni, King of Spain, a plan for the invasion of England,1 that the death of Elizabeth disconcerted the project, and that " Garnet had thought it prudent to bum the breves in favour of a Catholic successor."2 Thus did the court of Eome and the Jesuits plot against James even previously to his accession, but opportunities did not favour their schemes, and so they did what they could to conceal them. Dr. Lingard says that the Catholics (or, as they are more appropriately designated, Eomanists) almost unanimously supported the right of James ; and, but for their religion, their loyalty probably would have been unanimous ; and Dr. Lingard admits that the King felt inclined to grant them some partial indulgence. The open toleration of their religion the country would not have en dured. Thousands were still alive who remembered that reign of horror which some of their degenerate posterity have taken such pains to bury in oblivion. The nation was imbued with too deep a spirit of unfeigned attachment to the great truths of Christianity itself, to look upon Eomanism with the lukewarmness of the present age. It was therefore boldly impoUtic in the King to shew them so much regard as he is acknowledged to have done. He invited them to frequent his court; he conferred on several the honour of knighthood ; and he promised to shield them from the penal ties of recusancy, so long as by their loyal and peaceable demeanour they should deserve the royal favour. This benefit, though it feU short of their expectations, they ac- 1 See of this plot, Criminal Trials, vol. ii. pp. 138—140. Lond. Chas. Knight, 22, Ludgate Street, 1835. This work sanctions, though not .the Gunpowder Plot, yet the insurrections of the Romanists of those times. ' " The political situation of ike Catholics, &c, were sufficient motives to insurrection." Criminal Trials, Gunpowder Plot, vol. ii. p. 185. 1 Dr. Lingard's History of England, vol ix. p. 8, 4th ed. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 177 cepted with gratitude.1 By most it was cherished as a pledge of subsequent and more valuable concessions ; and the Pontiff Clement VIII., now that Elizabeth was no more, determined to cultivate the friendship of the new King. Thus Dr. Lingard would, as it were, introduce his reader to Pope Clement VIII. ; but it is well inserted, " now that Elizabeth was no more," for had her life been spared, the Pope's breves in the hands of Garnet were to have operated to the depriva tion of King James of his right. Dr. Lingard gravely informs his reader that the Pope also sent strict commands in two breves directed to the arch-priest and the provincial of the Jesuits, to the intent that the missionaries (for this is the name given by the Eomish Church to her clergy in this most benighted kingdom) should confine themselves to their spiri tual duties, and discourage every attempt to disturb the public tranquillity. These breves he should have sent earlier, for he knew full well that his missionaries were used to such plots and conspiracies as those which had so often endangered the life of Elizabeth. These breves too were sent to Garnet, the same to whom had been entrusted those treasonable breves to keep James out of the throne of this kingdom. Already one plot had been discovered in which two priests were engaged, one of whom confessed that the Jesuits who betrayed him, and that when he and they were in a state of mutual hostility, had first led him into the crime. The priest Watson,1 at the gallows, aUuding to the former disputes 1 Accordingly "the fines for recusancy were actually remitted for the first two years of James's reign." — Criminal Trials, vol. ii. p. 19. London, 1835. (Charles Knight, Ludgate Street.) The King's accession was on March 25, 1603 ; the Powder Plot was conceived at least by Lent 1604. So much for the grati tude of the Romish party, and the usual palliations of heavy fines for recusancy. See Lingard's History, ix. p. 32, note. He would lead his readers to imagine that no such leniency was shewn. Under 1604 he inveighs against the enforce ment of the fines for recusancy in the body of his history, whilst in the notes he passes over that year in silence. " From the Book of Free Gifts I find that James gave out of the goods of recusants, in his first year, £150 to Sir Richard Parson; in his third (1605), £3,000 to John Gibb." Of 1604 nothing is said, yet more than enough in the text. 2 " Watson the priest devised oaths in writing, by which the parties were bound to conceal their treasons." — Stow's Chronicle, Reign of James I. p. 829, 178 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. between himself and the Jesuits, said, " he forgave and desired to be forgiven of all, namely, that the Jesuits would forgive him if he had written over-eagerly against them ; saying also that it was occasioned by them, whom he forgave, if they had cunningly and covertly drawn him into the action for which he suffered.1 Watson himself had his accomplices, of whom it is not clear that aU were brought to justice. So did Eomanism attempt to overturn the government when the King had been scarcely three months upon his throne. Thus rendered insecure by those who turned reUgion into rebellion, and faith into faction, his person and kingdom were guarded in his first ParUament by additional fences to protect our country against the insidious policy of Eome. Fresh cautions were framed against the missionary-priests, and legal disabilities were attached to those who studied in the foreign universities.2 The second plot was that of 1605, which the reader may find palliated in Dr. Lingard's History, who is followed to some extent by the anonymous continuator of Sir James Mackintosh's History of England? On May 1, 1604, the five Gunpowder conspirators, Eobert Catesby, Thomas Winter, Thomas Percy, a distant relation and steward to the Duke of Northumberland, John Wright, and Guido Fawkes, after having sworn each other to secresy, received the host at the hands of John Gerard a Jesuit. The only two who survived (for Catesby, Percy, and Wright were slain resisting their pursuers) declared that Gerard had no continued by Edmund Howes, gent. Very probably the oath of secresy in the Gunpowder Plot was made by the Jesuit priest after this precedent. ' Ibid. p. 831. Watson and Clarke confessed that when they communicated their counsels to the Jesuits then living in England, and desired them to be partakers with them in so noble an enterprise, they received this answer, that the Jesuits could not join them, forasmuch as they had a business of their own in hand which should be famous to all ages, and which, in due time, would take eject. " Ut qui suam quoque ipsi parilem telam orsi, memorabilem in tevum texturam pararent, tempore opportuno exitum habituram."— Casauboni Ep. ad Frontonem Ducceum, Ep. 7, Julii 1611, p. 188, ap. Discourse of tlie Powder Plot, p. 14. Lond. 1674. 2 p. 28. 3 See Lathbury's History of the Gunpowder Treason. Lond. 1839, p. 51. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 179 knowledge of the conspiracy. This was but a pretext. Their assembling was itself an extraordinary proceeding. Catesby and Winter were well-known agitators. After Catesby had once escaped the block, he attached himself, says Dr. Lingard, to the Spanish party amongst the Eomanists, and bore a considerable share in their intrigues to prevent the succession of the Scottish monarch.1 Such were the communicants ; no wonder that they made choice of a Jesuit for their celebration of these mysteries. We have heard Dr. Lingard in one place speaking of the pacific disposition of Pope Clement VIII.;2 in another, he owns that Catesby, the originator of the plot, defended it to Garnet on the ground of the two breves of Clement VIII. for the exclusion of the Scottish King from the succession. "If," he argued, "it were lawful to prevent James from coming in after his promise of toleration, it could not be wrong to drive him out after his breach of that promise." Thus does Dr. Lingard himself bear witness to the Pope's duplicity. It is observable, too, that Garnet, instead of condemning the conspirator on the simple ground of the atrocity of his design, opposes to his plans two letters of the Pope advising him (Garnet) to discourage all attempts against the state ;3 letters, the sincerity of which Catesby, no inex perienced poUtician, could appreciate at their real value. But the guilt of both parties is sufficiently clear from the result of their most conscientious conference. In conclusion, a sort of compromise was accepted, that a special messenger should be despatched to Eome with a correct account of the state of the EngUsh Catholics, and that nothing should be done on the part of the conspirators till an answer had been received from the Pontiff."4 Thus the Jesuit and the con spirator were both agreed that the plot might proceed with the Pope's permission. Nay, Garnet himself, who had just pleaded the Pope's pacific letters, was (according to Dr. Lingard) fearful that his Holiness would countenance the plot. If he had not such apprehensions, why should he secretly add ' Vol. ix. p. 33. z p. 21. 3 pp. 44, 45. 4 Dr. Lingard, ix. p. 45. n2 180 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. a request that the Holy Father would prohibit under censure a recourse to arms?1 Such was the casuistry of the Pope and of Garnet. Garnet was but an ill teacher of loyalty who had been judged by such a Pope traitor enough to be the keeper of breves denying the right of James to his crown. Dr. Lingard concedes that his martyr Garnet, who he says was only guilty of misprision of treason, constantly practised equivocation and falsehood when examined touching the conspiracy, nay, even justified the confirmation of equivo cation by the taking of oaths, or by the receiving of the sacrament.2 Bates, Catesby's man, was sent to a Jesuit by name Tesmond,3 and revealed to him the whole plot in confession. Tesmond highly applauded the design, and gave him the host to confirm him in his purpose. So Bates confessed, as Bishop Andrewes has recorded in his Tortura Torti? Our prelate appears to affirm that Gerard himself administered to the five conspirators the oath of secresy.5 A third Jesuit, Oldcorn (alias HaU), after the detection of the conspiracy, justified it.6 Twice was Garnet consulted with respect to the guilt of involving the innocent in any fatal calamity in a case of necessity when some great end called for it. Dr. Lingard notices but one such occasion.7 On the first occasion Green- well (Dr. Lingard's Greenway) was present with Catesby. The second time the same question was put on Moorfields,8 1 Dr. Lingard, ix. p. 45. * p. 67. 3 Alias Greenwell. So Tortura Torti, p. 281, but Dr. Lingard calls this same individual Greenway, and upon his veracious authority builds his own ex-parte statements. He is Mie Oswald Greenway called, with Gerard, by Dr. Lingard himself the familiar acquaintance of the conspirators. (History of England, ix. p. 31, note.) He was sent as a conspirator to Spain to stir up the King of Spain against England in 1602. Antilogia, p. 161. 4 p. 280. D " Gerardus — qui uno eodemque tempore quinque simul viris, de conspira- torum numero, juramentum taciturnitatis, detulit." — p. 280, and State Trials, 2nd ed. 1730, vol. i. p. 233. « Ibid. p. 280. i See Hht. of England, ix. p. 39. 8 Dr. Robert Abbot's Antilogia (being a refutation of Joannes Eudoemon), u. ix. p. 137. Londini, 1613. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 181 and a more direct answer returned, " that^ the innocent might lawfully be blown up with the guilty, and that it would be highly meritorious if it should bring any great advantage to the Catholics."1 Garnet confessed that from Catesby he knew that a plot was in agitation before he knew it in detail, and that he was guilty both for concealing it and not preventing it.2 Nay, Garnet said prayers and offered up masses for the success of the plot,3 and an order was issued to all the Jesuits to use certain special prayers for the furtherance of an object that was in the mind of their superior (Garnet), and which was to be a great benefit to the Catholic cause. Scarcely four days before that memorable one in which the plot was to have been executed, Garnet was at Coughton in Warwick shire (the very place whither the other conspirators were to have gathered to him, if the plot had not failed), and there enjoined his auditors to pray for the success of the act which was then about to take place.4 So much for the innocence of Dr. Lingard's and his Church's martyr, Garnet. 1 Tortura Torti, p. 282. 2 Ibid. p. 283. 3 " Then were the two witnesses called for, both of them persons of good estimation, that overheard the interlocution betwixt Garnet and Hall the Jesuit, viz., Mr. Fauset, a man learned and a justice of the peace, and Mr. Lockerson. But Mr. Fauset was sent for to appear ; and in the meantime Mr. Lockerson, who, being deposed before Garnet, delivered upon his oath that they heard Garnet say to Hall, ' They will charge me with my prayer for the good success of the great action in the beginning of the Parliament, and with the verses which I added in the end of my prayer : ' Gentem auferte perfidam Credentium de finibus, Ut Christo laudes debitas Persolvamus alacriter.' " — State Trials, i. p. 250. * Tortura Torti, p. 284. Very remarkable were the words of the prayer taught to some of the Romanists, for the furtherance of the great design : " Prosper, Lord, their pains that labour in thy cause day and night. Let heresy vanish like smoke ; let the memory of it perish with a crack, like the ruin and fall of a broken house." — Rev. Henry Foulis' History of Popish Treasons, p. 514, b. x. c. 2, 2nd ed., 1681. Parsons, the Rector of the English College at Rome, ordered the students to pray for the intention of their father-Rector. Some deserted the College when they learnt what this intention was. — Ibid. p. 609. 182 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. The excuse that Dr. Lingard urges and that Bellarmine urged in his behalf was, that he had only kept that secret which had been delivered under the seal of confession; but the Eomish historian admits that Garnet was brought to some concessions even on this point, only after his trial.1 Dr. Lingard does not enlighten his readers by telling them that the excuse of the seal of confession was one that would not have been allowed in France, and one on which there existed a diversity of opinion at least at that time in his own com munion. It is true indeed that in Ireland, if not in England, this profane doctrine of the inviolability of treason when communicated in confession is maintained by the Eomish priesthood, a proof that Eomanism is as little to be trusted now as in the darkest ages of its supremacy. Cardinal BeUarmine, whose pen was equally ready to write books of devotion and treatises of rebelUon, affirmed that his Church did not permit any other conduct than that of the holy and incomparable martyr Garnet, for so this traitor was esteemed at Eome. Bishop Andrewes adduces various examples of the revealing of treason communicated in confession by priests in France.2 He remarks that Bellarmine says truly, ' permits not,' for that it is certain that formerly it did permit such disclosures. "Who," asks Bishop Andrewes, " is ignorant of that verse, Hozresis est crimen, quod nee confessio cailat?" Heresy is a crime which not even confession conceals. The secresy for which Bellarmine pleads, and which Dr. Lingard does not condemn, is disapproved by Alexander de Hales, the master of whom both Bonaventura and Aquinas learnt. It is also disclaimed utterly by Angelus a Clavasio, an Italian who lived about A.D. 1480. He affirms that the priest is bound to reveal any evil that is in meditation against the state and that he shall have heard in confession. The same is the equally decided opinion of Sylvester Prierias, master of the Pope's Palace, who wrote against Luther. Nicholas of Palermo, one of the greatest canonists of the 1 Dr. Lingard's History of England, ix. p. 66; and see Tortura Torti, p. 285. 2 In the reign of Francis. Bodin. de Repub. lib. ii. cap. 5 ; and Hist, de Paris, pp. 144, 307. Tortura Torti, p. 393. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 183 15th century, reports also that the same was the opinion of Pope Innocent the Fourth, who died in 1254. And so Domi- nicus a Soto, confessor to the Emperor Charles V., and present at the Council of Trent in 1545.1 But a new doctrine arose after the time of the Eeformation, and probably only with a view to its extinction and to the concealment of the multi plied conspiracies by which Protestant princes were assailed, at the instigation more especiaUy of the still tolerated and flourishing order of Jesuits. Garnet equivocated not only in regard of facts but of doctrine. Upon his trial, defending himself upon the ques tion of the Pope's deposing power, he who had been the keeper of breves to prevent the accession of King James, pretended that although the Pope had power to depose Catholic princes, he made a difference in the matter of excommunicating and deposing of princes, betwixt the con dition and state of our king and of others, who having sometimes been Catholics, did or shall afterwards fall back.2 Afterwards the Earl of Salisbury put the question to him, Whether in case the Pope, per sententiam orihodoxam, should excommunicate the King's Majesty of Great Britain, his subjects were bound to continue their obedience? To this Garnet denied to answer.3 The Attorney-General observed that Garnet might and ought to have discovered the mischief for preservation of the State, though he had concealed their persons.4 It may be added that he might have both done this and secured the Uves of the conspirators, who, upon timely warning, might all have fled, and would certainly have been protected by the King of Spain in his dominions, the fomenter himself of rebellion and treason. Dr. Lingard must have been aware of this, who yet evidently sympathizes with these incen diaries. Garnet died a true Eomanist, imploring the Virgin Mary 1 See Tortura Torti, pp. 294, 295. 2 State Trials, vol. i. p. 249, 3 Ibid. p. 252. * Ibid. p. 262. 184 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to receive him at the hour of his death, using these words of their idolatrous hymn — " Maria mater gratiae, Mater misericordise, Tu me a malo protege, Et horil mortis suscipe." 1 The atrocity and almost incredible viciousness of Garnet's private life is set forth by Dr. Abbot (afterwards Bishop of Salisbury) in the preface2 to his Antilogia. Bishop Andrewes alludes in plain terms to his unlawful attachment to the female who was permitted to converse with him when in the Tower. Such was the man whose piety is commended by Bellarmine, and who was regarded by some of his own communion as a martyr, and one whose innocence was attested by a miracle.3 In 1674 appeared A Discourse concerning the Original of the Powder Plot, together with a Belation of the Conspiracies against Queen Elizabeth, and the Persecutions ofthe Protestants in France to the Death of Henry the Fourth, &c. This work consists of two parts, the first by the editor, the second a translation from De Thou of his account of the Parisian massacre in 1572, and of the Gunpowder Plot. The author observes that " this was not the first time that 1 State Trials, p. 301. 2 Or 'Epistle to the Reader.' Garnet's character is defended by the author of the second volume of Criminal Trials, vol. ii. p. 197, but he omits to notice that Dr. Abbot in his Antilogia appeals to Bishop Bilson who presided over Winchester College whilst Garnet was there. 3 See Abbot's Antilogia, c. xiv. pp. 194—201. "If he had any learning, he had it to himself; for he savoured certainly more of Bacchus than of Apollo." —Tortura Torti, p. 228. And see the Interlocution of Garnet and Hall, 2nd March, 1605. " And then Garnet confessed himself to HaU, which was uttered much more softlier than he used to whisper in their interlocutions, and but short : and confessed that, because he had drunk extraordinarily, he was fain to go two nights to bed betimes."— Criminal Trials, vol. ii. p. 224. "It was known to very many," writes Bishop Andrewes, "how often he was not sober, which you, but for that you had made proclamation of his incomparable sanctity, would never have heard from me. But be silent henceforth as to his sanctity, lest you should hear yet again more from us that you would not hear." — Tortura Torti, p. 228. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 185 this means hath been proposed by confederates of that party, for the destruction and murder of our princes, for it had been long before proposed by one Moody to be laid under Queen Elizabeth's bed and secretly fired."1 But there is a passage of the Jesuit Martin Del Bio (otherwise Delrius) in his Disquisitiones Magica}, printed about five years before the conspiracy, in which it is actually anticipated and resolved that, being revealed in confession as a thing not yet executed but resolved upon, it is most agreeable to the sanctity of confession that it should not be revealed. And for this resolution of this case of conscience the Jesuit refers to the opinion of the then Pope, Clement VIII, the same who conspired against the accession of King James by sending breves to England with a view to raise to the throne Arabella Stuart. This book of the Jesuit Del Eio, printed about five years before the plot was discovered, may be seen in the Bodleian Library, and after the discovery of the plot the book was reprinted in 1617 with the same passages retained.2 The opinion that sins deliberately in tended to be committed should be revealed by the priest 1 Camden's Annals, 1587. 2 Lib. vi. c. 1. § 2, pp, 911, 912. Moguntiee, 1617, 4to. It was first pub lished in 1600 at Louvain, and again in 1603 at Mentz. The edition of 1617, Mentz, is in the University Library of Cambridge; and the author of the Discourse concerning the Original of the Powder Plot notes in p. 16, that Del Rio's judgment of the plot may in some sort be understood by his esteem of Garnet, whom he compared with St. Dionysius the Areopagite in his Vindieatio Areopag. cap. xxvii. p. 104. Del Rio died at Louvain (the resort of some of the con spirators) on Oct. 19, 1608. The author of the Discourse with great probability conjectures that this was purely a Jesuit plot, not detailed to the seculars or common priests, between whom and the Jesuits there were about this time very great animosities. The author of the second volume of Criminal Trials (1835, Chas. Knight, Ludgate Street), inserts the passage here alluded to, and observes, "It is natural to suppose that a contemporary treatise upon a subject of doctrine, written by a Jesuit, would be in bis (Garnet's) hands. It is probable, indeed, that Delrius's book was at this time well known to the English Catholics, and Sir Everard Digby possibly referred to it in his letter to his wife, when he says, " I saw the principal point of the case (the lawfulness of the plot) judged in a Latin book of M. D." (Martin Delrius). — Digby's Letters appended to the Bishop of Lincoln's History of the Gunpowder Plot, p. 249, edit. 1679. Criminal Trials, vol. ii. p. 372. 186 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Del Eio condemns as dangerous and tending to withdraw men from confession ; and therefore he concludes that tie contrary opinion is altogether to be followed, that it is not lawful to detect even treason against the State. He puts the case, " A malefactor confesses that himself or some other hath put powder or something else under such an entry (or groundsel), and except it be taken away the house will be burnt, the Prince destroyed, and as many as go into or out of the city will come to great mischief or hazard ;" and then resolves for the negative, that the priest ought not to reveal this confession, owning that herein he differed from others of his communion, but alleging that this seems to be the mind of Pope Clement VIII. himself. Then he proceeds to justify the concealing of such crimes by equivo cation and falsehood ; nay, he must not reveal such even to the Pope. This carries with it a great air of consistency. And here it may be observed that the Eomish religion itself is a religion of subtleties, equivocations, and evasions. Thus both Bishop Andrewes, and after him Bishop Abbot, in his Antilogia, expose the shuffling of Bellarmine with respect to the Pope's deposing power over princes.1 Thus the Eomish distinctions respecting image-worship, and the mediation of Christ and of the saints, and the higher and inferior worship, the one due to him, the other to them. Garnet was not the first equivocator ; it had grown into a system and had been frequently practised by others before him. And not only the Jesuit Garnet, but Blackwell, the head or arch-priest of the secular or parochial clergy of that communion in England, sanctioned a book recommending equivocation.2 1 Ad Matth. Tort. Responsio, pp. 26, 27. Antilogia, p. 11. 2 See Antilogia, p. 13. This book was found in the desk of one of the conspirators (Tresham) after his death. He had so learnt its contents, that, whereas he had before accused Garnet, on his death-bed he retracted this accusation ; and yet, says the recent historian of the plot, in the second volume of Criminal Trials (Library of Entertaining Knowledge, Knight, 1835), "there is no doubt that this dying declaration was wilfully false."— p. 102. This writer adds, that whilst " there is no evidence in support of the imputation," "it is common with Catholic writers to asoribe the death of Tresham to violence or poison." — p. 103. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 187 The second volume of Criminal Trials, published in 1835 in the Library of Entertaining Knowledge, and printed by Charles Knight, Ludgate Street, is entirely occupied with the Gunpowder Plot, and is the fullest account of it that has hitherto appeared. It professes to be for the most part taken from the collection of original documents respecting the plot, preserved in the State Paper Office, and arranged and indexed some years ago by Mr. Lemon. The writer of the preface observes that, " although it was not thought expedient by the Privy Council of James I. to publish to the world much information respecting the plot, it is clear from the existence of this mass of evidence, that they were in possession of full knowledge of its minutest details. Perhaps no conspiracy in English history was ever more industriously inquired into. For nearly six months the inquiry almost daily occupied the earnest attention of the commissioners appointed by the King to examine the witnesses and prisoners, during the whole of which time their labours were zealously aided by Chief Justice Popham, Sir Edward Coke, Sir Francis Bacon, and several others of the most acute and experienced lawyers of the day. More than five hundred depositions of witnesses and real or sup posed confederates were taken, a large proportion of which, together with numerous contemporary letters and papers relating to the transaction, are stUl in existence at the State Paper office." This writer informs us, in the next page that, " for many years previously to the passing of the Catholic Belief Bill, whilst the propriety of that measure was the subject of animated discussion in every session of Parliament, proposals for the publication of these papers were discouraged from just and laudable motives, under a reasonable apprehension that such a publication, sanctioned as it must have been in some measure by the Government would have tended to prejudice that great question." The writer who can justify such conduct may at least be trusted in the witness which he unwillingly bears to the reasonableness of the remaining prejudices of his 188 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Protestant fellow-countrymen, and such witness this publi cation does bear. But a little after this he adds that the papers of this collection most materially concerning Garnet and the Jesuits are now missing. " Although the documents upon the subject of the Gunpowder Plot preserved at the State Paper Office are very numerous, and constitute a body of evidence of incalculable value to the historical inquirer, the collection is not by any means complete. Many important papers, which were par ticularly mentioned and abstracted1 by Bishop Andrewes, Dr. [afterwards Bishop] Abbot, Casaubon, and other contemporary writers, and some of which were copied by Archbishop Sancroft from the originals so lately as the close of the 17th century, are not now to be found. It is remarkable that precisely those papers which constitute the most important evidence against Garnet and the other Jesuits are missing ; so that if the merits of the controversy respecting their criminal implication in the plot depended upon the fair effect of the original documents now to be found in the State Paper Office, impartial readers might probably hesitate to form a decided opinion against them." The advocate of the Jesuits, Dr. Lingard, is silent upon this most remarkable incident. Our author proceeds: " The papers of particular importance upon this part of the subject are the minutes of an overheard conversation between Garnet and Oldcorne in the Tower, dated the 25th February, 1605-6; an intercepted letter from Garnet addressed to "the Fathers and Brethren of the Society of Jesus," dated on Palm Sunday, a few days after his trial ; and an intercepted letter to Greenway [Greenwell], dated April 4, 1605-6. That all of these papers were in the State Paper Office in 1613, when Dr. Abbot wrote his Antilogia, is evident from the copious extracts from them published in that work; and a literal copy of the first of them, made by Archbishop Sancroft many years afterwards from the state papers, is still in existence. The originals of these documents, and many others mentioned by Dr. Abbot and Sancroft, are, however, not to be found in 1 I.e. made abstracts of them. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 189 the proper depository for them; and it is undoubtedly a singular accident that, amongst so large a mass of documents, precisely those should be abstracted upon whose authenticity the question so hotly disputed between ihe Catholics and Protestants mainly depended."1 Dr. Lingard builds considerably upon three Jesuits, two of them, if not aU three, friends of as well as to the conspirators, Gerard, Greenwell,2 and a third who wrote under the name of Eudsemon.3 The author of the account in Knight's Criminal Trials (Mr. Jardine) notices that his real name was L'Heureux, that he was a native of Candia, and a very learned Jesuit who taught theology at Padua, and was appointed by Pope Urban VIII. Eector of the Greek College at Eome.4 And the controversy to which this Eudsemon gave occasion, affords us an incidental proof of the authen ticity of the papers now missing. For, says our author of Abbot — who undertook his Antilogia in 1613, in answer to Eudaemon-Joannes (who, having first been answered ably and candidly by Isaac Casaubon in his Epistle to Fronto Ducseus in 1611), rejoined in 1612 that " it is manifest from the contents of this work (the Antilogia) that during its composition Dr. Abbot had free access to all the docu mentary evidence against Garnet which was in the pos session of the government. This he would readily obtain through his brother the Archbishop of Canterbury ; and indeed there is a memorandum still existing in the State Paper Office, which records that on the 9th of October, 1612, a great number of the documents relating to the plot, together with the Treatise of Equivocation found in Tresham's desk, 1 Preface, pp. x., xi. 2 "According to his statement, the men who contrived this monstrous and cruel treason were the gentlest, the most benevolent, and the most pious of the human race." — Preface, pp. xi., xii. This most veracious Jesuit was appointed Penitentiary to the Pope, and is said to have enjoyed during the remainder of his life the full favour and confidence of Paul V. — Ibid. p. xiii. 3 See Lingard's Hist. vol. ix. pp. 31, 34, 35, 37—53, 55, 57, 59, et seq. * He was also Censor or Qualificator of the Inquisition. When Cardinal Francis Barberini was sent legate to the French Court he took him with him. He died at Rome December 24, 1625. See Dod's Church Hist., part v. p. 394, vol. ii., Brussels, 1739. 190 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. were delivered to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that on the 1st of July, 1614, they were again returned by him to their proper depository."1 On the night ofthe 5th of November there was to be a general meeting of the friends of the conspirators at Dunchurch in War wickshire, under the pretence of hunting on Dunsmoor Heath, from which place, as soon as they received notice that the blow was struck, a party was to be despatched to seize the Princess Elizabeth at the house of Lord Harrington, near Coventry.2 With a view to this arrangement Sir Everard Digby (one of the conspirators) removed Lady Digby and his family, and with them Father Garnet, to Coughton Hall, near Alcester, in the same county, which then belonged to Mr. Thomas Throckmorton.3 On Saturday the 26th of October the plot was discovered by the letter to Lord Monteagle. On Sunday the 3rd of November Sir Everard Digby rode from Coughton to Dunchurch. Some of the conspirators were at Ashby St. Legers, the residence of Lady Catesby, mother of Catesby the conspirator.'1 About six o'clock in the evening, just as the conspirators Eobert Winter and his companions were about to sit down to supper with the lady of the mansion, Catesby, Percy, the two Wrights, and Eookwood, fatigued and covered with dirt, arrived with the news of the apprehension of Fawkes and the total overthrow of the main design of the plot. After a short conference, the whole party taking with them all the arms they could find, rode off to Dunchurch. There they found the house (Coughton Hall) filled with a large party of anxious and excited guests ; for, though only a few were informed of the specific nature of the intended atrocity, all 1 Gunpowder Plot, Criminal Trials, vol. ii. pp. 366, 367, ed. Knight. 2 Criminal Trials, Gunpowder Plot, p. 66. 3 Ibid. p. 80. Here, too, was the Jesuit Greenway.— p. 82. 1 "Catesby perished at Holbeach House when it was surrounded by the attendants of Sir Richard Walsh, the Sheriff of Worcestershire. Feeling himself mortally wounded, he crawled into the house upon his hands and knees, and seizing an image of the blessed Virgin which stood in the vestibule, clasped it in his arms and expired."— Greenway1 s MS. (We must remember that Greenway makes all the conspirators very pious men.) See Criminal Trials, ii. p. 87. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 191 were aware that some great and decisive blow was about to be struck in London for the Bomish cause, the intelligence of which they were that night to receive.1 Thus, besides the conspirators, many there were that consented ; and what were the consciences of this large party of anxious and excited guests ? and in what rank and condition of life were they? Gentlemen, as was the boast of Fawkes and Greenway.2 And there is little doubt but that the conspirators would have been joined by many, if the plot had not so suddenly and providentially failed. But where they expected to be received they were, after the detection of their schemes, repulsed for having brought ruin on the cause they had purposed to restore.3 We are told that the Eomanists as a body abhorred the plot ; yet we find one conspirator, Greenway or Greenwell, in favour with the Pope, and others safe under the protection of Eomish Sovereigns. " Baldwin, a Jesuit in Flanders, and Hugh Owen had been implicated in various previous plots against the English government, and the suspicions of their acquaintance with the Powder Plot were confirmed by the statements of Fawkes and Winter. A requisition was therefore made to the Archduke in Flanders to deliver up these individuals to the English government, and also to secure the person of Sir William Stanley, upon which much negotiation and correspondence passed through Sir Thomas Edmondes the English ambassador at Brussels ; and Lord Salisbury states to Sir T. Edmondes that the object was to confront them with the other conspirators, whose trials were delayed for that purpose. Eventually the Archduke, after referring to the King of Spain, refused to comply with the requisition.4 Such was the spirit of Eomanism that it led foreign princes 1 Criminal Trials, ii. p. 80. 2 Ibid. pp. 39, 44. Many of the conspirators were men of large possessions. How then were they influenced to such a crime ? " By religious notives," is the solution of the writer himself, who, with considerable ability has detailed the plot in the second volume of the Criminal Trials. See pp. 186, 187. 3 p. 83. » p. 112. 192 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to shelter this conspiracy and to open their arms to these men of blood, to become partakers of their guilt, and, by withholding from James the means of detecting the con spirators, proving to the world that their religion sanctioned every kind of injustice towards those who did not embrace it. In like manner one and another of the English Eomanists secreted the Jesuit Greenway, and thus gave him oppor tunities of escape from justice.1 There was abundant testi mony that both Greenway and Garnet, with full knowledge of what had happened in London, joined the conspirators at Haddington while they were in arms against the government.2 The author of the second volume of Criminal Trials regards the plot as a purely Jesuit plot. He writes, "It ought to be remembered that all the avowed conspirators belonged to the Jesuit faction."3 But this little avails to clear the character of the Eomish laity. The Treshams, the Winters, William Lord Vaux of Harrowden, the Abingdons, and others, are incontestable indications of the facility with which the Eomish religion enables her priesthood to corrupt the loyalty of her laity. The Eomish faith was in truth practically indebted to the Jesuits, and hence, as it owned 1 p. 196. 2 p. 194. Haddington, a few miles north-east of Worcester. 3 p. 188. Accordingly we find them all schooled in equivocation and lying. " The private letters of Sir Everard Digby, published in 1679, fully shew that it was a matter of conscience with the principal conspirators to deny all know ledge of the priests as parties to the plot." — p. 192. We may note that this would have been a very needless precaution if no priests were in the conspiracy. Dr. Lingard himself would take advantage to defend Garnet from his very equivocation. Thus he supposes his account of Baynham's mission to be one of his many intentional falsehoods. Certain it is that by it Garnet, if he equivocated, most completely entrapped himself. See Lingard, vol. ix. p. 45, note. The Earl of Salisbury made him answer, ' I must now remember you, how little you make for your purpose, when you would seek to colour your dealing with Baynham by professing to write by him to Rome, to procure a prohibition of that and all other conspiracies ; and yet you know that Baynham was sent at such a time that he was only at Florence in October ; and do you not think he had need to be well horsed to go from thence to Rome, get a prohibition, and return to England before the 5th of November? If this be likely, I leave all the world to judge.' To which Garnet made no great answer, but let it pass." — Criminal Trials, vol. ii. p. 292. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 193 them, it unavoidably partook, and ever will partake, of their disgrace. The very fact of the recognition of a body who justified doing evil that good might come, who taught a system of equivocation and perjury, and solemnly maintained the piety of such practices, has branded the Eomish Church with a stigma that can never be erased. This was the true cause of the severe enactments touching recusancy, resorting to Popish worship, harbouring seminary priests, &c- The state was never safe whilst there were Jesuits in the country. And as every kind of disguise was resorted to by them, it only remained for the state to treat with suspicion every individual who taught, and to watch narrowly every individual who professed, the Eomish religion. But, on the other hand, the whole blame of treason and disloyalty must not be laid upon the Jesuits. They have truly said in their own behalf, that the doctrine of the Pope's power of deposing princes, and if so, by consequence, the papist's duty to rebel against the deposed, was not peculiar to them. They were the deepest politicians, the most unscrupulous, the most conscientiously unconscientious ; but the religion itself, which, in not disavowing the Popes who were the authors of these treasonable doctrines, gave them advantages in promulgating it, the religion itself is to blame. Since the publication of the second volume of Criminal Trials another edition of Dr. Lingard's History has appeared,1 in which he admits the genuineness of the letter of Garnet ' to his beloved fathers and brethren.' This letter Dr. Lingard had previously declared a forgery, but fresh light has broken in upon him. In this letter he confessed to his beloved fraternity that he had implicated Greenwell or Greenway, which he should not have done, but that he understood that he was safe upon the continent. It was well for Dr. Lingard to withdraw his attack upon this letter, for he had given to his readers a misrepresentation of the contents of 1 Criminal Trials, vol. ii., The Gunpowder Plot, Lond. 1835. The fourth edition of Dr. Lingard's History of England appeared in 1838, corrected and considerably enlarged. 194 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the letter itself, which was detected by the author of this second volume. " Garnet is made to say," says Dr. Lingard 'that had he not known that Greenway was in the tower, he would have invented some other fiction.' What Garnet is really represented to have said is the reverse of this."1 Other misconceptions (to call them by no severer a name) Dr. Lingard has continued to indulge, misconceptions most ably removed by the author just cited in the concluding pages of his most interesting volume. This author bears impartial testimony to the fidelity and ability both of Bishop Abbot's Antilogia and of Bishop Andrewes' Tortura Torti.2 A most remarkable circumstance it is that two men could have been found zealous to palUate a traitor such as Garnet, one a layman, the other a clergyman of the Church of Eome, Mr. Butler and Dr. Lingard. Both of these could not but be aware that if Garnet had but for one week instead of for five months a previous knowledge of the plot, he might have given notice of it, and by so doing have gained as great a reputation for that most plotting of aU societies, as now he has obtained for them an infamy which they will never survive. How little sympathy with true patriotism can be tolerated by the Eomish communion, or can consist with a zealous adherence to that system, may be seen from the fact that in the Circle of the Seasons — a work full of interest in a variety of points, and recommended to the general reader by the most plentiful interspersion of poems and quotations — it is more than insinuated that there was no such plot as that of 1605.2 1 Criminal Trials, Gunpowder Plot, vol. ii. p. 328. 2 Ibid. pp. 364 — 367. He characterizes Butler's remarks on the question of Garnets guilt, in bis Memoirs of tlie English Catlwlics, as "partial and superficial in the extreme." — p. 368. 3 " It is on this day that the pretended attempt to blow up the Parliament House by Guy Fawkes is celebrated in England by children, who dress up a figure like a large doll, and call it Guy Fox. This image is burned at nio-ht in a bonfire, a very wicked spirit to encourage in children, but perfectly con sistent with the immoral age in which it originated." — Circle of the Seasons and Companion to the Calendar and Almanack for the year of our Lord 1829. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 195 King James, notwithstanding this fresh proof of the insecurity to which he and his kingdom stood exposed, was inclined to lenient measures. Doubtless the firm adherence of his royal mother to the Church of Eome was the ground of that undue regard for the Eomanists which he evinced to the very last, to the loss of his popularity, and to the ruin of his posterity. But the kingdom, more than ever awake to the true character of the Church of Eome, which now looked upon Garnet as a martyr whose innocence was attested by miracles, demanded that the public security should be protected by greater restraints tupon the Eomish party, and amongst these restraints was the new oath of allegiance. " That James," writes Dr. Lingard, " in the proposal of the last measure, had the intention of gradually relieving one portion of his Catholic subjects from the burden of the penal laws, is highly probable ; but whether those to whom he committed the task of framing the oath, Archbishop Abbot and Sir Christopher Perkins, a conforming Jesuit, were ani mated with similar sentiments, has been frequently disputed. They were not content with the disclaimer of the deposing power ; they added a declaration that to maintain it was impious, heretical, and damnable." And why, it may be asked, should Dr. Lingard object to this ? What should hinder the Pope's making use of the deposing power, if that power was lawful and admitted to be so on religious grounds ? But if every soul is to be obedient to the higher powers (the civil magistrate), and that by the Word of God, why should a Christian believe other of the Pope's assumed deposing power, than that it is damnable in him to exercise it, or in others to give heed to it? What worse heresy than that which merges all power in the ecclesiastical; a heresy that would represent the religion of nature and of revelation as diametrically opposed? What more impious than thus to set the ministers of the Church above the Word of God ? There was moreover an especial reason for framing the Second edition enlarged, p. 310. London: published by Messrs. Hookham, Bond Street ; Keating and Brown, Duke Street ; and sold by H. Guy, Chelms ford ; Cumming, Dublin ; and by all Booksellers in town and country. o2 196 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. oath in such decided terms. The Eomanists were taught that although equivocation was a duty when priests were to be screened and other good ends maintained, it was not lawful to deny the faith. Thus Satan, even as a teacher of falsehood, was careful to appear as an angel of light. But it would have been a denial of their faith for the Jesuits and those of the Eomanists who thought as highly as they did of the Pope's authority, to have declared that the exercise of that power or the admission of it to the deposing of princes was impious, heretical, and damnable. Of these fresh restraints and of this oath King James himself thus speaks in his Premonition to all Christian Monarchs, Free Princes, and States : " The never enough wondered at and abhorred Powder Treason (though the repetition thereof grieveth, I know, the gentle-hearted Jesuit Parsons), this treason, I say, being not only intended against me and my posterity, but even against the whole House of Parliament, plotted only by Papists, and they only led thereto by a preposterous zeal for the advancement of their religion, some of them continuing so obstinate that even at their death they would not acknowledge their fault, but in their last words, immediately before the expiring of their breath, refused to condemn themselves and crave pardon for their deed, except the Eomish Church should first condemn it : and soon after, it being discovered that a great number of my Popish subjects of all ranks and sexes, both men and women, as well within as without the country, had a confused notion and an obscure knowledge that some great thing was to be done in that Parliament for the weal of the Church, although, for secresy's cause, they were not acquainted with the particulars ; certain forms of prayer having likewise been set down and used for the good success of that great errand ; adding hereunto, that divers times, and from divers priests, the archtraitors themselves received the sacrament for confirmation of their heart and observation of secrecy ; some of the principal Jesuits likewise being found guilty of the foreknowledge of the treason itself, of which number some fled from their trial, others were apprehended THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 197 (as holy Garnet himself and Oldcorne were) and justly executed upon their own plain confession of guilt ; if this treason now, clad with these circumstances, did not minister a just occasion to that Parliament House, whom they thought to have destroyed, courageously and zealously at their next sitting down, to use all means of trial, whether any more of that mind were yet left in the country ; I leave it to you to judge whom God hath appointed his highest .depute judges upon earth : and amongst other things for this purpose, this oath of allegiance, so unjustly impugned, was then devised and enacted. And in case any sharper laws were then made against the Papists, that were not obedient to the former laws of the country, if ye will consider the time, place, and persons, it will be thought no wonder, seeing that occasion did so justly exasperate them to make severer laws than otherwise they would have done. The time, I say, being the very next sitting down of the Parliament after the discovery of that abominable treason : the place being the same where they should all have been blown up, 'and so bringing it freshly to their memory again : the persons being the very Parliament-men whom they thought to have destroyed. And yet so far hath both my heart and government been from any bitterness, as almost never one of those sharp additions to the former laws have ever yet been put in execution. "And that ye may yet know further, for the more con vincing of these libellers of wilful malice, who impudently affirm that this oath of allegiance was devised for deceiving and entrapping of Papists in points of conscience ; the truth is, that the lower house of Parliament, at the first framing of this oath, made it to contain that the Pope had no power to excommunicate me, which I caused them to reform, only making it to conclude that no excommunication of the Pope can warrant my subjects to practise against my person or state, denying the deposition of kings to be in the Pope's lawful power, as indeed I take any such temporal violence to be far without the limits of such a spiritual censure as excommunication is. So careful was I that nothing should 198 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. be contained in this oath, except the profession of natural allegiance and civil and temporal obedience, with a promise to resist all contrary uncivil violence. The oath was as follows : " 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 king of this realm, and of all other his Majesty's dominions and countries : and that the Pope neither of himself nor by any authority of the Church or see of Borne, or by any other means with any other, hath any power or authority to depose the King, or to dispose of any of his Majesty's kingdoms or dominions, or to authorize any foreign prince to invade or annoy him or his countries, or to discharge any of his subjects of their allegiance and obedience to his Majesty, or to give license or leave to any of them to bear arms, raise tumults, or to offer any violence or hurt to his Majesty's royal person, state, or government, or to any of his Majesty's subjects within his Majesty's dominions. Also I do swear from my heart that, notwithstanding any declara tion or sentence of excommunication, or deprivation made or granted, or to be made or granted, by the Pope or his suc cessors, or by any authority derived or pretended to be derived from him or his see, against the said King, his heirs or suc cessors, or any absolution of the said subjects from their obedience ; I will bear faith and true allegiance to his Majesty, his heirs and successors, and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my power, against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their persons, their crown and dignity, by reason or colour of any such sentence or declaration, or otherwise, and wiU do my best endeavour to disclose and make known unto his Majesty, his heirs and successors, all treasons and traitorous con spiracies which I shall know or hear of to be against him or any of them. And I do further swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure as impious and heretical, this damnable doctrine and position, that princes which be ex- 1 King James's Works, fol. pp. 292, 293. London: Robert Barker and John Bill, Printers to the King, 1616. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 199 communicated or deprived by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subjects or any other person whatsoever. And I do believe, and in conscience am resolved, that neither the Pope nor any other person whatsoever, hath power to absolve me of this oath, or any part thereof, which I acknow ledge by good and full authority to be lawfuUy ministered unto me, and do renounce all pardons and dispensations to the contrary. And all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear, according to these express words by me spoken, and according to the plain and common sense and understanding of the same words, without any equivo cation, or mental evasion, or secret reservation whatsoever. And I do make this recognition and acknowledgment heartily, willingly, and truly, upon the true faith of a Christian. So help me God."1 This oath was condemned by the Pope (Paul the Fifth)> who in his bull dated at Eome ' at S. Mark, under the sign of the fisherman, the 10th of the calends of October,2 1606, the second year of our Popedom,' 3 decided that such an oath could not be taken without hurting of the Catholic faith and the salvation of souls, " seeing it contains many things which are flat contrary to faith and salvation. Wherefore we do admonish you that you do utterly abstain from taking this and the like oaths," &c. The English Eomanists not being all of the mind of the Jesuits, were divided respecting this bull. Many of them treated it as a forgery, and amongst them Blackwell, the head or arch-priest of the seculars.4 Upon this the Pope drew up a second brief or bull, dated the 10th of the calends of September,5 1607. This disobedient spirit the Pope in this brief attributed to the suggestions of the Devil, to the "subtlety and craft of the enemy of man's salvation;" and he assured them that it was not without mature deliberation that he wrote to them his first letter.6 And now the disloyalty of the English Eomanists being 1 King James's Works, 1616, pp. 250, 251. 2 October 23rd. 3 King James's Works, p. 252. 4 Ibid. p. 257. 6 September 22nd. 6 King James's Works, p. 258. 200 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. thus tested, many of them bade adieu to their native country sooner than deny this article of their faith, that the Pope is supreme over kings and princes, to set up and to pull down at his pleasure. Some indeed would rather dare the Papal fulminations than commit themselves to his treasons. The missionaries (so Dr. Lingard calls the Eomish priesthood in this country1) were divided in opinion. Some followed Blackwell, some the Pope. The Jesuits in general condemned the oath.2 And now observe the effect of that servile submission of the understanding which is the very foundation of the Eomish faith: a priest, by name Drury, thought the oath admis sible, but "dared not prefer his private sentiments before those of the Pope," and would rather be executed than take the oath. If such was the effect of this Papal impiety upon a priest, what probably would be its effect upon the laity? Dr. Lingard all but canonizes Drury, and would seem to intimate that the disloyalty of the priesthood was very general. Drury " dared not prefer his private sentiments before those of the Pope, and of many among his brethren, and chose to shed his blood rather than pollute his conscience by swearing to the truth of assertions which he feared might possibly be false."3 Thus jesuitically does this acute his torian write about conscience. One can plainly perceive that Eomanism is not yet purified from the subtlety of Garnet and his brethren. To Blackwell Cardinal Bellarmine addressed a long and laboured epistle, expostulating with him for his loyalty in regard of the oath, and pretending that the oath struck at the Pope's spiritual supremacy." In 1608 the King published his Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, against ihe two Breves of Pope Paulus Quintus, and the late Letter of Cardinal Bellarmine to G. Blackwell ihe Arch-priest. To this was afterwards prefixed A Premonition to all most mighty Monarchs, Kings, Free Princes, and States of Christendom.6 1 Hist, of England, ix. p. 75. s xbid. p 75 3 Ibid. p. 77. 4 King James's Works, 1616, pp. 260—262. * Ibid. pp. 247—346. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 201 Bellarmine had in his letter affirmed, with the usual effrontery of Jesuit controversialists, that " from the beginning of the Church's infancy even to this day it was never heard that ever a Pope either commanded to be killed, or allowed the slaughter of, any prince whatsoever, whether he were an heretic, an heathen, or persecutor." The King reminds Bellarmine of the panegyrical oration made by Pope Sixtus ihe Fifth in praise and approbation of the friar that murdered King Henry the Third of France ; and " besides that vehement oration and congratulation for that fact, how near it scaped that the said friar was not canonized for that glorious act, is better known to Bellarmine and his followers than to us here."1 " But sure I am," adds the King, " if some Cardinals had not been more wise and circumspect in that errand than the Pope himself was, the Pope's own calendar of his saints would have sufficiently proved Bellarmine a liar in this case. And to draw yet nearer unto ourselves, how many practices and attempts were made against the late Queen's life, which were directly enjoined to those traitors by their confessors, and plainly authorized by the Pope's allowance. For verification whereof there needs no more proof than that never Pope either then or since called any churchman in question for meddling in any of these treasonable con spiracies; nay, the Cardinal's own S. Sanderus, mentioned in his letter, could Well verify this truth if he were alive; and who will look (into) his books2 will find them filled with no other doctrine than this. And what difference there is between the killing or allowing the slaughter of kings, and the stirring up and approbation of practices to kill them, I remit to Bellarmine's own judgment."3 Then follows a curious list of Bellarmine's theological contradictions, the King observing that it is the less surprising that he should contradict himself in matters of fact, who contradicts himself so frequently in matters of doctrine. In 1 An Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, p. 270. 2 Sanders de Visibili Monarchia, lib. ii. u. 4, and De Clavibus David, lib. v. c. 2, 4. See the King's Apology, p. 282. 3 King James's Works, p. 271. f 202 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the latter part of his Apology the King exposes BeUarmine's anarchical positions respecting the regal authority, as that obedience due to the Pope is for conscience' sake, but the obedience due to kings is only for certain respects of order and policy; people may for many causes depose kings, but no flesh hath power to judge the Pope ; and that the obe dience of ecclesiastics to princes is not by way of any necessary subjection, but only out of discretion and for observation of good order and custom.1 In the Premonition the King notices the answers of the Jesuit Parsons and of BeUarmine (under the name of Mat- thaius Tortus) to his Apology, and having animadverted upon Parsons in a style sententiously suited to his deserts,2 returns to Bellarmine, and lays before his readers the insolence and scurrility of that unprincipled advocate of the Papal su premacy.3 He then shews the authority which the earUer Christian kings and emperors exercised over the Popes. The Popes depended upon the emperors for their confirm ation, and were in a manner tributary to them to about the end of the seventh century.4 The Emperor Otho deposed Pope John XII. for divers crimes, and especiaUy for impurity.6 The Emperor Henry the Third in a short time deposed three Popes, Benedict the .Ninth, Sylvester the Third, and Gregory the Sixth, as weU for the sin of avarice as for abusing their extraordinary authority against kings and princes.6 The King proceeds with the history of the right of investiture : " As Walthram testifieth that the Bishops of Spain, Scotland, England, Hungary, from ancient insti tution till this modern novelty, had their investiture by kings, with peaceable enjoying of then temporalities whoUy and entirely." He mentions how the Queen his mother would not have i King James's Works, p. 285. 2 ibid p 293 3 ibid. pp. 294, 295. , aid p; 297; * Luitprand, Hist. lib. vi. u. 10, 11. R/wgino ad an. 963. Platina in Vit. Joan. 13. " King James's Works, p. 298, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 203 the ceremony of spittle used at his baptism, and the last message she sent to him, that although she was of another religion than that wherein he was brought up, yet she would not press him to change except his own conscience forced him to it.1 The King next clears himself of the charge of heresy. " I am such a Catholic Christian as believeth the three Creeds, that of the Apostles, that of the Council of Nice, and that of Athanasius, the two latter being paraphrases to the former. And I believe them in that sense as the antient Fathers and Councils that made them did understand them, to which three Creeds all the ministers of England do subscribe at their ordination. And I also acknowledge for orthodox all those other forms of Creeds that either were devised by Councils or particular Fathers against such particular heresies as most reigned in their times. " I reverence and admit the first four general Councils as catholic and orthodox. And the said four general Councils are acknowledged by our Acts of Parliament, and received for orthodox by our Church. " As for the Fathers, I reverence them as much and more than the Jesuits do, and as much as themselves ever craved. For whatever the Fathers for the first five hundred 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. But for every private Father's opinion, it binds not my conscience more than Bellarmine's, every one of the Fathers usually contradicting others. I will therefore in that case follow St. Augustine's rule in judging of their opinions, as I find them agree with the Scriptures. What I find agree able thereunto I will gladly embrace, what is otherwise I will (with their reverence) reject." To the Virgin Mary the King yields the title of Mother of God, " since the divinity and humanity of Christ are inseparable." " And," he adds, " I freely confess that she is ' King James's Works, p. 301. 204 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. in glory both above angels and men, her own Son (that is both God and man) only excepted."1 The worship of reliques and images the King calls without reserve " damnable idolatry." The Jesuits he calls Puritan-Papists, and declares that for himself he was always inclined to episcopacy. And whatsoever protestations of fidelity to the discipline of the Kirk the King ever made, he probably spoke the truth when he affirmed that his heart was at least Episcopalian ; and he appealed to his erecting of bishoprics in 1584, and to his Basilicon Doron, especially to the preface to the second edition of that work. The remainder of the Premonition is for the most part taken up with a dissertation proving that Borne is the Babylon and the Pope the Antichrist of the Book of Revelation ; thus also applying St. Paul's prophecy in the second chapter of his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. The Church of Eome he describes as " full of idolatries," and " so bloody in the persecution of the saints, as (that) our Lord shaU be crucified again in his members."2 The two witnesses clad in sackcloth the King inclines to interpret of the Old and New Testament. " And now whether this book of the two testaments or two witnesses of Christ have suffered any violence by the Babylonian monarchy or not, I need say nothing. The thing speaks for itself. I will not weary you with recounting those commonplaces used for disgracing it, as calling it a nose of u-a.v, a dead letter, a leaden rule, a hundred such-like phrases of reproach. But how far the traditions of men and authority of the Church are preferred to these witnesses doth sufficiently appear in the Babylonian doctrine. And if there were no more but that little book [by Cardinal Perron] with that pretty inscription, Of the Insufficiency of Holy Scripture, it is enough to prove it."3 1 Premonition, pp. 302, 303. a p. 310. 3 p. 316. But Du Pin asserts that this little book was thus entitled and put forth by a Protestant antagonist. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 205 CHAPTEE X. Bishop Andrewes' "Tortura Torti" — Of the Pope's deposing power — Of excommunication — Of binding and loosing — The Bulls against Queen Flissabeth — The words of commission — The Gunpowder Plot undertaken only from blind zeal — Origin of recusancy — Sacri legious nature of Bomish worship — Rome Babylon — Lord Bal- merino — The First General Lateran no Council — Pope Innocent III. — Uncertainty of ihe doctrine of the Papal supremacy — Historical accusations against the Church of Borne — Assassination of Henry III. — Bellarmine' s contradictions — Image worship — In 1609 Bishop Andrewes followed the King in his con troversy, and replied to Bellarmine's Matthwus Tortus in his Tortura Torti. Our author adduces a multitude of Eomanists who denied the Pope's deposing power; John of Paris, James Almain, Johannes Major, Cardinal Zabarella, Alberic de Eosate, Antony de Eosellis,1 the Doctors of the Sorbonne in 1561 and 1591, the Jesuit James Bosgrave, Blackwell the arch-priest, and others.2 He follows Bellar mine through all his evasions, as that the Pope cannot as Pope by his ordinary jurisdiction depose princes, but as a spiritual prince. He refutes Bellarmine's pretence that to deny the Pope's deposing power is to deny his power to excommunicate. The former is not included in the latter, and so not one with it. Theodosius was under the censure of Ambrose eight months, but none of his subjects withheld their allegiance to him on that account.3 Henry the Fourth 1 Tortura Torti, p. 23. 2 Ibid. pp. 24, 25. 3 Ibid. p. 40. 206 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of France had been lately crowned, and the oath of allegiance taken by his subjects, whilst he was under the Pope's excom munication.1 By the greater excommunication«instituted by Christ in those words, " If he hear not the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen man," (Matt, xviii.) that power is en trusted to the Church, not to St. Peter only.2 "As an heathen man " has its Umits. It is not lawful to despoil an heathen of his goods, or to disinherit him, much less to take from his crown. Heathen kings are certainly exempt from this power of deposition, but it is absurd that Christian princes should be in a worse condition.3 Church censures are founded on the law of charity, and must not be destructive of it. Many, too, are the exceptions aUowed amongst Eomanists by which the Papal excommunication itself is nullified. So the Venetians took no notice of the Pope's censures, and the Council of Tours in 1510 cleared King Louis the Twelfth of them.4 As to the threefold command to Peter, " Feed my sheep" both Cyril and Augustine teach that the intent of our Lord appears to have been, by Peter's threefold confession, to wipe off as it were the stain of his threefold denial.5 Nor is it safe to insist upon the Pope's succession from St. Peter ; neither was the office of feeding Christ's sheep committed to him alone. The form of election, too, has been repeatedly varied, and is not sanctioned by Christ himseU.6 And certainly " Feed my sheep" is not the same as "slay the leaders of my sheep, drive my sheep out of the fold, scatter my sheep, let their pastures be trodden down and their waters troubled." ' Eeceive the keys of the kingdom of heaven,' and with them shut out from the kingdoms of the earth ' whatsoever thou shalt bind,' that is, whatsoever part of guUt or of treason thou shalt bind the more closely ; ' whatsoever thou shalt loose,' that is, whatsoever bond of law, duty, faith, and oath thou shalt loosen. There is a great gulph betwixt these.' Our prelate then shews the inconsistency of the Cardinal, i Tortura Torti, p. 40. 2 ibid. pp. 41 — 43. 3 Ibid. p. 47. ¦" Ibid. p. 49. - Ibid. pp. 50, 51. s Ibid. p. 52. ^ Ibid. p. 52. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 207 who in one place denies that King James is a Christian, and in another affirms that he belongs to the Pope's fold, for neither is he a judge of kings, says Bellarmine, but as they are Christians.1 From the Pope's binding he proceeds to the Pope's loosing power,2 that is, as the Cardinal himself has it, his power of dispensing with censures, laws and oaths, vows, sins, and punishments. And here again he wittily exposes his con fusion of words and things. " For sin, censures, and penalties are wont to be loosed, but laws, oaths, and vows to be bound, and to be more closely bound ; and if the Pope looseth these also, what is it that remains for him to bind? Men have no need to be loosed from their duty, nor from the bond of their duty; but they are loosed from their duty when they are loosed from law, and from the bond of their duty when they are loosed from their oath. Nay, what is more wonderful, he looses in the same way the law itself and offences against the law, and both with the like facility. Be it law or be it an offence against the law, it is all one with him. It is as easy a thing with the Pope to loose laws as sins. But it can scarcely be that with one key both these doors, the door of the commandment and the door of sin, can be opened. Perchance then there are two keys ; one for opening sins, penal ties, censures ; the other for opening laws, vows, oaths. But certainly both these cannot be the keys of the kingdom of heaven. But if the keys for the loosing of sins are the keys of the kingdom of heaven, it behoved that the keys of hell were given for the loosing of laws and the commandments of laws."3 So no man can be under any obligation either to God or man, but the Pope may forthwith loose him from it ! " On this ground what shall be sure upon earth ? what shall become of all compacts, treaties, bonds of society whatsoever ? how shall we ever be hereafter sure of any man's faith or promise?"4 Then with a pun does Bishop Andrewes loosen the whole fabric of Jesuitical casuistry, saying, " Potestas hsec quidem solvendi dicenda non erat, sed dissolvendi 1 Tortura Torti, p. 53. 2 Hid. p. 54. 3 Ibid. pp. 54, 55. i Ibid. p. 55. 208 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. omnia."1 " But surely Bellarmine," says Bishop Andrewes, " intended to limit the Pope's power of loosing laws. He did not intend a power to loose the laws of nature upon which yet the duty of civil obedience is founded ; nor the laws of the ten commandments, which are, according to Aquinas, indispensable ; nor yet the evangelical laws, of which that of St. Peter is one, Be ye subject to the King as supreme: for this is the will of God. What does your Pope in this case ? Does he loose this law of Peter, and say, ' Be not subject to the King, although he is supreme ; for this is the will of the Pope'? I conceive not. He wiU not put Paul the Fifth on a par with Peter."* " But as to oaths David said, I am sworn and am steadfastly purposed to keep Thy righteous judgments. Peter, if he had lived at that time, could he have absolved David of this oath ? Suppose any one binds himself by oath to keep the seventh commandment, not to commit adultery, can any Pope absolve him of this oath ? But if a man in Uke manner bind himself under the fifth commandment to civil subjection, what power has the Pope to absolve him in the one case more than in the other?3 The Popes dissolve obUgations to fealty, but not to treason ; they loose what ought to be bound, they bind what ought to be loosed. They acted the part of jugglers in Queen Elizabeth's reign, playing fast' and loose with their own bulls. In the eleventh year of the Queen's reign Pope Pius the Fifth published a bull excom municating and deposing the Queen, and cursing all those who should yield any obedience to her. Before that time the Eomanists had attended the Protestant service, but now they absented themselves, and open rebellion broke out in the northern counties. 'Now truly,' said Sir Edward Coke at the trial of the traitor Garnet, ' most miserable and dangerous was the state of Eomish recusants in respect of 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. But of this Pope it was said by some of his own favourites, that he was a holy and 1 Tortura Torti, p. 56. 3 Ibid. p. 57. 3 Ibid. p. 58. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 209 learned man, but over-credulous, for that he was informed and beUeved that the strength of the Catholics in England was such as was able to have resisted the Queen. But when the bull was found to take such an effect, then there was a dispensation given, both by Pius Quintus himself and Gregory the Thirteenth, that all Catholics here might procure quiet and peace by shewing outward obedience to the Queen, but with these cautions and limitations ; firstly, ' Bebus sic stan tibus] things so standing as they did ; and secondly, ' Donee publica bullce executio fieri posset,' that is, until they should grow into strength and become able to resist and overcome."1 "A wonderful workman" (says Bishop Andrewes of Pope Gregory the Thirteenth), "with one and the same bull he binds and he does not bind. He binds heretics, he binds not the Catholics ; and the Catholics he binds not, and yet he does bind. Of a truth the Pope did not redeem the souls of men, who by perjury makes such a sport of them."2 But Bellarmine fences round this power with " when it is expedient for the glory of God, or for the salvation of souls." Then consult history and see whether the theory and the practice agree. " This power is exercised not when souls are hazarded, but when tenths are refused, provision made against ' provisions] and sales of indulgences forbidden. This power is exercised when the Pope's revenue is to be increased, whilst so many grosses are paid for such a vow solved, so many florins for such an oath broken, so many gold pieces for such a law transgressed ; in all which not the glory of God, but the dishonour of princes ; not the salvation of souls, but the wasting of their substance is the aim. So long as his interest is consulted, the glory of God, the salvation of souls may go where they please."3 Our prelate then returning to the words of commission, interprets Matt. xvi. "by John xx., Whosesoever sins ye remit, &c4 This interpretation he supports by Augustine, Theophy- lact, Pope Adrian the Sixth, Cardinal Hugo, Anselm, Drith- mar, and Duns Scotus.5 The promise in Matt. xvi. was 1 Criminal Trials, vol. ii. pp. 245, 246. 2 Tortura Torti, p. 69. 3 Tortura Torti,?. 60. 4 Ibid. p. 61. 5 Ibid. pp. 62, 63. 210 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. fulfilled in the grant in John xx. Secondly, the promise was to Peter, not for himself but as representing the Church. So Origen on Matt, xvi., Jerome in his first book against Jovinian, Augustine on the 12th chapter of St. John, as also in other parts of his works, Ambrose on ihe Dignity of the Priesthood, Leo the Great in his third sermon on the assump tion of the Blessed Virgin, Euthymius Zigabenus1 on St. Matthew, Babanus Maurus in the Catena of Aquinas on Matthew, and Hugo h Sto Victore on the Sacraments, with others of more recent date.2 But as to the oath of allegiance it did not enter upon the general question of the Pope's power to dispense with oaths ; it confined itself to his power of dispensing with this particular oath.3 From the nature of the oath, which is not for the most part promissory but assertory, it is plain that he has no power over it. Add to this the inherent voidness of absolution from civU obedience, as had been before made manifest.4 He then exposes the sophistry of BeUarmine in his attempt to shew that the taking of the oath involves the denial of the Pope's spiritual supremacy,5 and animadverts upon the assertion in the Pope's first buU, ' that the oath contained many things plainly contrary to faith and salvation.'6 He then shews the dishonesty of Bellarmine in mixing up the oath of supremacy imposed by Henry VIH. with this oath of King James.7 Bellarmine professed { not to excuse' the conspiracy : ' to accuse' Bishop Andrewes observes would have been too severe a word for the Cardinal to use. But how does execration of the conspiracy consist with sheltering of the conspirators G. and G.?8 (Greenway and Gerard). This question neither Bel larmine could then, nor can Dr. Lingard answer now, and yet the palliator of the Jesuits and of the plot need not be believed to execrate it more than BeUarmine. Both Lingard and Bel larmine in some measure justify the exasperated feelings which they say led to the plot, by representing the Eomanists as 1 About A.D. 1120. 2 Tortura Torti, pp. 63—65. 3 Ibid. p. 66. * Tortura Torti, p. 67- ° Ibid. p. 68. « Ibid. p. 70. ' Ibid. p. 71. s Ibid. p. 75. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 211 disappointed by the King and as enduring heavy persecution. "But the King would be safe if he only tolerated the Eomanists." That was by no means certain. Henry the Third suffered all his subjects to enjoy the free exercise of the Eomish religion, and yet he was assassinated.1 ' No one can deny,' said Bellarmine, ' that occasion of desperation was given.' ' With what intent,' replies Bishop Andrewes, ' was this said by you, but to excuse it ? But what though occasion had been given ? You know what your master saith, " Occasion doth neither physically nor morally work anything."2 With him, God ministers occasion of sinning, but not thereby of excusing sinners. He exposes the hypocrisy of Clement VIII.,3 which has before been pointed out. As to the occasion of desperation he proves that there was none. The plot was contrived in the % very first year of King James's reign.4 No fines were levied for recusancy until the fifth month of the second year. No man suffered death, or the loss of all his goods. Tet before the King was crowned, the priests Clarke and Watson conspired against him, and the latter on his execution affirmed that the Jesuits had then acknowledged that they had a great design of their own on foot, no other than that famous plot of 1605.5 The fines for recusancy began to be gathered in July, 1604. But in the following November, when some ofthe Eomanists presented a complaint to the King, that at the beginning of his reign, before his royal intention o£ not demanding the fines due in Elizabeth's reign was known, heavy contributions had been levied upon them, the King ordered that those sums should be returned to them by the same persons who had collected them, and so they recovered to the amount of 52,000 florins ;6 and yet in the very next month were the conspirators engaged in digging under the walls of the parliament-house.7 The reader must not expect to find such facts recorded by 1 Tortura Torti, p. 79. 2 De Amiss. Gratiot, lib. ii. c. 13. Bellarmine's own work. Bishop An drewes addresses ^Bellarmine as Bellarmine's chaplain, the pretended author of Matthaeus Tortus. In p. 189 he proves that Bellarmine himself is the author. 3 Tortura Torti, p. 83. ' Hid. ' p. 84. "> p. 85. " p. 86. si 212 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the veritable historian who has in our day so elaborately pleaded for the pseudo-martyr Gamet. Again, the confessions of the conspirators had attested that in some it was zeal, in others private friendship, that induced them to act their detest able part.1 Some learned men beyond sea had filled them with the idea that their design was " not only pious, but (as you are wont to caU it) meritorious." As for the oath of al legiance, it was expressed in the very preamble that it was for the 'detecting of those who were in heart disloyal and ready to join in such plots and conspiracies.2 The bull was false in charging persecution upon the King -and representing the Eomanists as martyrs.3 It was a mis nomer to speak of Apostolical Briefs. He might as well have called the ink with which they were written, apostolical ink, or the lead with which they were sealed, apostolical lead? Bishop Andrewes returns to speak of the insincerity of the Popes. They do not desire to cause disobedience to princes, but they will not suffer men to be bound to obedience. But Paul the Fifth is willing that obedience should be rendered to princes according to the Holy Scriptures :5 " where, if Matthew [Tortus] speak truth, there is good hope. For this is a new thing in the Pope, that he should define the Holy Scriptures to be the rule of obedience." Our wish it is that all these questions should be referred to this rule, the questions of the Pope's deposing power, &c6 With great force does he afterwards observe that this power leaves all princes in pos session of subjects who are only l hypotheticaUy faithful." He shortly after lays before the reader the penal laws enacted in the parliament immediately after the Gunpowder plot.8 He then relates that in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign there were not many besides some of the Eomish clergy who absented themselves from our worship and sacraments. They were so few that the term recusant was not then known, nor did the law recognize it for ten years. Hence it was plain that the bull of Pope Pius the Fifth was the cause oi recusancy? 1 Tortura Torti, p. 86. 2 p. 88. s pp 96 97 * P- 97- 6 P- 98- • p. 99. ' " 7 P- 103- 8 PP- 122—129. 9 p. 130, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 213 Hitherto they had been of the same religion as now, when of a sudden they became recusants, or refused to attend the established worship. It was not then a matter of religion, or why did they not absent themselves from the very first? Why then did they cease in the eleventh year of the Queen from attending our worship ? But what was the effect of the bull? It introduced at once and in one mass, treason and recusancy, and gave occasion to the state to regard them as identical. And the effect of the bull was manifestly both. For now came both recusancy and the northern insurrection. Not before faith was discovered to be mixed up with perfidy, < were any penal laws devised ; laws rather fines than punish ments.1 It is plain then that the laws and fines appointed for recusancy are not purely laws touching religion, but of a mixed nature; touching religion mixed up with disloyalty towards the prince, touching persons whose civil obedience is determined by ihe Pope's bulls. Such recusants were in the eye of the laws, and surely without any injustice such might be punished.2 The Eomanists complained of these laws, but Bellarmine might soothe himself, and answer his own enquiry, ' what greater punishment can be conceived ?' if he would call to mind the variety of deaths, even burning to death by slow fires, which were inflicted in the reign of Queen Mary.3 " But with what colour of truth could you call our sacred rites sacrilegious? In them is nothing sacred taken away. Look to it, that that term suit not yours rather, in which the letter part ofthe sacred prayers, namely, the mind and under standing of ihe person praying, and the sacred cup, to wit, the half of the Eucharist, is by a sacrilegious daring taken away ; in which a part of divine honor and that which is sacred to 1 Tortura Torti, p. 132. 2 p. 133. He reverts to the topic of the penal laws in p. 148, and shews from the gradual imposition of them that they were made not for persecution but for policy. In p. 149 he contrasts with them the Marian persecution, in which a poor woman was committed to the flames in a state of pregnancy, and the infant itself was piked and thrown into the flames, " et cum matre, (barbaro et execrabili exemplo) ibi exustus est." — p. 149. 3 p. 135. 214 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. God is given to a wooden image, and stamped bread is, not without the height of sacrilege, adored for God."1 How must Tortus have writhed beneath this ecclesiastical scourge! "And equally absurd it is in you to call it an oath of perfidy, which was made as well for the branding of past as for the providing against future perfidy ; which is at this time administered against perfidy, and which will be both in books and in our laws an eternal memorial to perfidy, and to the perfidy of your men who bound themselves by a double obligation to perfidy against their country itself, and against the father of their country. But ye who dissolve faith, and oaths the bonds of faith, to the end that men may be per fidious ; ye who say that faith is not to be kept, that is, that perfidy is lawful and right, do ye dare mutter anything about perfidy, or even to name the word to your own disgrace?"2 To the objection of Queen Elizabeth's supremacy he re turns the spiritual jurisdiction of the abbess, which is more strictly ecclesiastical. Nay, Aquinas did not confine the exercise of the power of excommunication to the priesthood.3 The mendacious Sanders, whom Bellarmine had highly lauded, had the shamelessness to publish to the world that Queen EUzabeth exercised the ministerial calling.4 But nothing was too mendacious for the Church of Eome. There was published an account of the (fabled) persecution in England, in which it was affirmed that the Catholics were sown up in the skins of beasts and given to be devoured by dogs ; others were represented as bound to mangers and left to feed upon hay, others as having their entrails eaten out by dormice.5 It was fit that a doctrine of devils should be maintained by such devilish means, and that false miracles should be ac- 1 "Sacra vero nostra sacrilega, qu§, fronte dixisti? Nihil ibi saeri tollitur; vide ne vestra potius dicenda sint, in quibus saerarum orationum pars inelior, mens orantis scilicet et intellectus, in quibus sacer calix altera nempe eucha- ristise pars ausu sacrilego tollitur : in quibus divini et Deo sacri honoris pars similitudini lignese defertur, et crustaceus panis pro Deo, non sine, saerilegio summo adoratur. En tibi sacrflegium ; porro si fuisset in nostris tale quicquam, " ssignasses, scio." — p. 135. 2 Tortura Torti, p. 136. 3 p. igi. 4 Keys of David, B. 6. 5 p- 152. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 215 companied with false legends. Bishop Andrewes cites in allusion to them the second chapter of St. Paul's Epistle to the Thessalonians, that God had sent upon them strong de lusion that they should beUeve lies.1 In order to vindicate the turbulence and anarchy which must needs follow the Pope's deposing power, Bellarmine had ventured to represent Gregory the Great as yielding but a forced submission to the Emperor Maurice. Our prelate shews that Gregory taught another and a better doctrine,2 and severely animadverts upon the opposition of these Papal prin ciples to those which ennobled the sufferings of the Primitive Church.3 Cardinal Bellarmine was possessed of the same measure of controversial integrity with Dr. Wiseman and the Jesuit Harding. This the reader may gather as from his larger works, so abundantly from his Matthew Tortus.* Our prelate quotes at full length from the acts of the various Councils5 convened by Charlemagne, and appealed to by King James in his ' Apology,' and adduces the submission of Pope Leo the Great (in the point of convening Councils) to the Emperors Theodosius, Valentinian, and Martian.6 He refutes Bellarmine by himself, convicting him of alleging an epistle to Damasus from the Second General Council, which epistle Bellarmine had, in his Becognitio or Censure of his own books, admitted to be spurious.7 When the Pope's power waxed great, then were General Councils held in Italy, but no General Council until nearly the completion of eleven cen turies. BeUarmine thought no authority too great for the Pope. He openly avowed that he could make articles to be received "with Catholic faith."8 Bellarmine would have Eome Babylon sooner than not i Tortura Torti, p. 153. 2 p. 160. 3 p. 162. ? See Tortura Torti, p. 163. 6 pp. 164, 165. » p. 167. n p. 168. 8 " Serio nobis narras (p. 67) si per artieulos fidei significcntur queeciiAique dogmata, quee fide Catholicd credi debent (nee nobis hie alia significantur) tum verb non dubitare vos, quin a, Pontifice vestro multi Jidei articuli condi possunt." p. 179. And see pp. 230-232. 216 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. have a scripture-proof that St. Peter had been there. Bishop Andrewes retorted that he might as well have made Mark an allegorical person as Babylon an allegorical place.1 He then proceeds at some length to shew that Borne is the Babylon of the Apocalypse.2 This and the whole question of Anti christ he discusses at large in his Answer to Bellarmine's Apology. Cardinal Bellarmine was not afraid to affirm that the breves entrusted to that very innocent and holy martyr Garnet, were rather favourable than unfavourable to King James.3 Bishop Andrewes remarked that Garnet knew other wise.4 Indeed, had they been for the King, they would have been boasted of by him and his fraternity. But, said Bel larmine, the Eomanists had hope of King James. This was not enough for the Pope, who in his breves forbad the Eomanists to advance the cause of any but of such as would not only tolerate but promote with all possible earnestness the cause of their religion.5 BeUarmine appealed to the King's correspondence with the Pope. This was answered by the " Declaration and Confession of the Lord Balmerino, one of his Majesty's Privy Councillors, concerning some letters which he caused to be sent without the King's knowledge and as in his name, to Eome, to Pope Clement the Eighth, 1598.6 A question has been raised whether the King was not insincere in this business, sacrificing his secretary to screen himself.7 Our author gives his reason for suspecting the Council called the first General Lateran Council, a.d. 1215, to be a forgery. Cochlseus was the first who published it, and that not before 1538, ' from an old manuscript,' but without adding a word touching the way in which it came into his hands, or anything to establish its authority. In 1535 James Merlin published the Councils, but not a word of this. A Council was indeed caUed; nothing was decreed at it. Pope Inno- 1 Tortura Torti,?. 183. See 1 Pet v. 13. » pp. 183-188. 3 P- 189- 4 P- 198- 5 P- 189. 6 pp. i9i_i94. ' See Dr. Cooke's Hist, ofthe Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 213-215. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 217 cent himself condemned the book of Abbot Joachim; he himself condemned Almeric, and so Matthew Paris.1 Bishop Andrewes writes satirically of Pope Innocent ex communicating King John and robbing him of his kingdom, " 0 virum sanctum ! 0 speculum innocentise !"2 Mr. F. W. Faber has appeared too late in the world to chastise the good bishop's irreverent treatment of the holy Father. " We read the history," says this writer, in a spirit worthy of Bellarmine, " we read the history of John and his Barons ; and, while we think we are carrying away a clear view of the bigoted, haughty, secular prelate, how unlike the original is the rude image we have hewn from the coarse materials of Protestant history."3 Holy man, he is cursing and anathematizing, and tumbling the world upside down ; but, good reader, look into his soul; it is as clear as the azure vault of heaven. Only a cloud of penitential sorrow is seen to pass across the surface of that heavenly breast. He is taking away that which is another's, and stirring up bloodshed and confusion, but at the same time (it is Mr. Faber who writes it) he is " full of godly fear lest his height should make him proud ; and so, as a penitential safeguard, composing a book on the seven penitential psalms "! How admirable a piety ! behold him breathing out his threats against the King, and with the same breath uttering holy meditations ; spoiling a monarch of his crown, and glorifying the heavenly grace! This encomium of Pope Innocent (with whom Laud is deemed worthy to be placed) was written by one who has, since he penned the praises of Innocent, gone over wholly to Eome. Let him erase with his tears, if he can, the 219th and 220th pages of the Tortura Torti. There he may read of the Papissa, John the Eighth, a history, be it remembered, not of Protestant but of Eomish origin, and attested by monuments, memorials, .and traditions still extant. Bishop Andrewes shews, and principally from Bellarmine's own writings, the uncertainty of the doctrine of the Papal 1 Tortura Torti, pp. 212-214. » p. 216. 3 Autobiography of Archbishop Laud, Pref. xx. Oxford, 1839. 218 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. supremacy, and that it is hypothesis upon hypothesis.1 He observes of the very first link in the succession, " As though God would not have us to depend upon your succession, he determined that the subject should be uncertain concerning the first succession of all, concerning the very first successor of Peter. You yourself know that was made twelve hundred years and more upon Clement, Nutat adhuc mundus, sit quartus, sit ne secundus? Consider the schisms and heresies of the Popes (as honest Fuller says, three sitting down at once, Peter's chair was like to have been broken). Alphonsus a Castro saith, Although we are bound to believe of faith that Peter's true successor is the supreme pastor of the whole Church, yet we are not bound to believe with the same faith that Leo or Clement is the true successor of Peter, since we are not bound to believe with Catholic faith that any one of them was rightly and canonically elected."3 One Pope, John Picus Mirandula teUs us, doubted the immortality of the soul.4 It was weakness in BeUarmine to provoke a contest which should call forth the testimony of history. Protestant con troversialists had only to renew the attacks of Jewel in his Apology and Defence of his Apology, and Eome at once stood unmasked as the universal traitor, the conspirator as well against the thrones of the kingdoms of this world as against truth, the throne of the eternal kingdom o,f God. He that will now speak with contempt of Jewel (much more easy it is to revile him than to refute him) must also enter the lists with Bishop Andrewes, who follows in his track, and verifies his historical accusations of the Church of Eome.5 Most admirable is our prelate's exposure of Bellarmine's sophistry, by which he would even commend the oration (panegyrical) of the assassination of Henry the Third of i Tortura Torti, pp. 233—238. 2 Ibid. p. 238. 3 Adv. Heer. lib. i. c. 9. 4 nid p 239. 5 Of the Emperor Henry IV. see pp. 240, 241, 261, 262. Of Frederic Barbarossa, pp. 262—264, 267, 268. Hemy VI. pp. 264, 265. Philip and Otho, pp, 265, 266. Frederic II. pp. 266, 267. Henry II. of England, pp. 269, 270. The alienation of the kingdom of Navarre by Pope Julius II. pp. 271, 272. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 219 France. This controversial king-killer asks, "And what will you find in it (the Pope's speech) but praises and admiration of the wisdom and providence of God?"1 " And what," retorts Bishop Andrewes, " is that work of wisdom which he so singularly admires? That a simple monk in his usual habit, armed with neither sword nor shield, should have found free access to the King. But this surely is not so very marvellous. It would have been more so if the monk, being armed with sword and shield, had found his way to the King. For in that he was unarmed he excited no suspicion ; had he been armed I do not believe that he would have found his way so readily through the midst of the King's attendants. There was nothing in this wondering of Sixtus worthy of admiration."2 Bishop Andrewes asks, "If it was admiration of the divine retaliation upon the King, why, if God so avenges the death of Cardinals, was no assassinator raised up against Pius the Fourth, who ordered Cardinal Caraffa, and him a most near relation to Paul the Fourth, to be strangled in prison? or against Urban the Sixth, who had five cardinals put into a sack and drowned in the sea, and the bodies of two more whom he had ordered to be slain, dried in a furnace and placed upon mules, and so borne in procession on his journies, with the paraphernalia of their dignities?"3 Several pages are ably expended on an exposure of Bellarmine's theological contradictions, which were but pointed out in the King's Apology. 1. Of justification, where our author justly complains of his ' wretched wavering.' 4 Bishop Andrewes contends that Bellarmine's doctrine of justification by an inherent, will not stand with justification by an imputed righteousness. 1 Tortura Torti, p. 241. 2 p. 241. 3 Ibid. p. 243. 4 p. 246. Bellarmine's inconsistencies may be seen in Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on " The Lord our Righteousness." Dr. Pusey has ventured tacitly to condemn Bishop Andrewes of uncharitableness in p. ix. of his Preface to the Eourth Edition of the Letter to the Bishop of Oxford. This is not surprising when it is considered that Dr. Pusey himself is an advocate of the substance of the doctrine of Bellarmine and of the Church of Rome on this point. 220 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Herein he is opposed by the pseudo-patristic divines of our own age, but with as little discretion as consistency. He calls the Eomish teachers of justification by Christ's presence manifested in us, and of the identity of justification and sanctification, false prophets. They tell us, tacitly charging falsehood upon our prelate, " Truth as well as charity require us to be veiy careful how we cast suspicion on others [pious Bomanists, such as the most pious and veracious Bellarmine] in this point, in which the Church Catholic has not authori tatively pronounced, lest we be found false witnesses against our brethren."1 It is nothing to writers of this kind that the Church of England has authoritatively pronounced upon this point. What the Scriptures have been made in the Church of Eome, the Thirty-nine Articles are made in our own, a nose of wax. Hence "justification by faith" is made to stand for justification by obedience, and justification by Christ's merits for justification by Christ dweUing in us, and justification by Christ's name for justification by the Holy Ghost, and justification for double justification. Such are the lucid explanations, or rather casuistical wrestings, of Mr. Newman in his Lectures on Justification. Bellarmine, in his book upon the Loss of Grace and State of Sin, had fallen into a flat contradiction, affirming first, " God does not move or incline to evil morally ;" then, " God does move or incline to sin morally." This could only be reconciled by being explained away, as indeed BeUarmine found, for so he explains himself: "God does not move to evil morally, that is, by commanding ; he moves to evU morally, that is, by ministering the occasion to it." He should have said, as Bishop Andrewes remarks, " God does not move by commanding." As it is, he in the first place applies that to the genus "to move," which is true only ofthe species " by commanding."2 His third contradiction was doubtless to secure the Papal primacy. First, in his book De Clericis he admitted " that bishops succeed the apostles, and priests the seventy disciples ;" 1 Dr. Pusey's Preface, p. ix. 2 Tortura Torti, pp. 246, 247. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 221 but when he comes to treat of the supreme ecclesiastial power in his church, then "bishops do not properly succeed the apostles." But if it were so, it would not make the more for the Pope, for neither does he succeed the apostles as an apostle, going throughout the world to preach the Gospel, writing canonical books, working miracles, more than other bishops.1 The fourth contradiction is, "Judas did not believe;"2 but in the 14th chapter of his third book on Justification, "Judas was just and certainly good." To this Bellarmine replied, " Make a distinction of the times." Bishop Andrewes retorted that there was no need to do this if Judas never believed. But so affirmed St. Chrysostom on those words of St. Peter, " For we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. When Peter had said, And we have believed, Christ excepts Judas from that number." And so verse 64 of the 6th chapter of St. John, For Jesus knew from ihe beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. " Our Alcuin," saith Bishop Andrewes, " clearly expresses it in these his words upon this place, " Judas was one of the twelve not in faith but in number, not in truth but in hypocrisy."3 The fifth contradiction was a similar absurdity with the second. The substance of a work is its moral quality, as in alms, that we should give our own, that we should give to him that needeth, that we should give from the motive of compassion. Tet Bellarmine had improperly said that a man might perform the substance of a commandment, and yet with sin ; a manifest contradiction.4 The sixth is that Peter never lost a saving faith, and yet fell into deadly sin. The seventh is, Antichrist shall be a magician and shall secretly worship the devil, and yet he shall hate all idolatry and rebuild the Temple. This, as he observes, can only be reconciled by equivocation. "Perchance the Fathers of 1 Tortura Torti, pp. 247, 248. 2 Bellarm. De Pontif. 1. i. c. 12. 3 Tortura Torti, p. 249. l Ibid. p. 250. 222 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Society [the Jesuits] thus say, Odi diabolum, that is, I feign that I hate him."1 The eighth is, "The oblation is made by the words of consecration," yet not by them but by the oblation of the thing itself. The oblation is to be understood here of the act of oblation, not of the thing offered ; of the act of sacrificing, not of the thing sacrificed. The true action of offering is in the words of consecration ; that is the first proposition. The placing upon the altar ; that is the second. But the second is not done until after the completion of the first.2 The ninth is, that the end of the world cannot be known, but that after the death of Antichrist there shaU be but five-and-forty days to the end of the world.8 Here Bellar mine was so bold as to reply, " If this be a contradiction, it is in Holy Scripture itself, for both are found there." "The words," said Bishop Andrewes, " are perhaps in the Apocalypse, the meaning is in the Apocrypse of your brain. For he revealed not that to the servant which he revealed not to the Son; nor doth John contradict Christ."4 He proceeds to quote against him the Jesuit Blaise de Viegas on the 13th chapter of the Book of Eevelation.5 The tenth is, that the ten kings shaU burn Eome, the mystic Babylon ; but that Antichrist shaU hate Eome, and fight against, and burn it. But it is not so, not Antichrist, but God shall put it into their hearts.6 The eleventh is a denial that all bishops are only the Pope's vicars, foUowed by the affirmative, that aU their ordinary jurisdiction is from him immediately, and in him, and so derived to them.7 In a later stage of the work our prelate very ably discusses the guilt of Garnet and of the other Jesuits as respects the Gunpowder Plot, beginning with the arch-incendiary, the Pope himself, who, he observes, cannot but be suspected, together with Claud Acqua Viva, of being long privy to the plot.8 1 Tortura Torti, p. 253. " Ibid. pp. 253, 254. 3 Ibid. p. 255. 4 Ibid. p. 255. 3 Ibid. p. 256. « Rev. xvii. 17. ' Tortura Torti, pp. 258, 259. s md. pp. 279—300. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 223 There are some who tell us that the abuses of image- worship have lessened in the Eomish Church. In this instance as in others false liberality is but the charity of ignorance. So long as the Eoman breviary remains, so long will the worship of images be countenanced by the Church of Eome. Then we have speaking and wonder-working images recorded, and doubtless for no other end than to uphold a superstitious and idolatrous veneration of them. The Church of Eome professes to be unchangeable. Hear, then, how by the mouth of her greatest oracles she vindicates and covers the guilt of idolatry, and unblushingly makes God a liar. " They are not idolaters," said Bellarmine, " they do not worship idols, because they worship images of things that exist ; but those images are not idols, for an idol is only the image of a thing nowhere existing." Bishop Andrewes does not omit to point out to him how plainly he contradicts God, and commands that to be done which God threatens to punish. " According to the novel theology of Tortus, pro vided only a thing has existence in heaven, in earth, in the waters, or under the earth, though it be an evil demon, a man can bow himself before it and worship God in it."1 Thus Bellarmine went about to prove King James nearer to Julian2 the apostate than was his own communion, a communion which, had it not been content to patronise blasphemy, would never have tolerated such a patron of idolatry. Alluding to the excuse that their missionaries indeed came over into this country, though forbidden by law, to preach 1 Tortura Torti, p. 312. 2 Bellarmine's scandalous comparison of James with Julian was the ground work of Dean Gordon's "Anti-Torto Bellarminus, sive Refutatio Calumniarum, Mendaciorum et Imposturarum Laico-Cardinalis Bellarmini, contra Jura omnium Regum, et sinceram illibatamque famam Serenissimi, Potentissimi Piissimique Principis Jacobi, Dei gratid Magna Britannia, Prancice, et Hibernia Regis, Fidei Catholica Antiques defensoris et propugnatoris : Lond. 1610. This work consists of a poem in hexameters and pentameters, with notes, altogether making thirty pages, including a dedicatory epistle in the same metre to the King. This is followed by some verses upon the author's anagram on the names Robertus Bellarminus, Errorum tabens Bullis, with which the lines themselves begin. 224 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Gospel, Bishop Andrewes reminds them that they came not to preach Christ, but to set up as the chief article of the faith the power of the Pope ; hence their need of going in disguise that in their doctrine they might mix up sedition, and in religion find a hiding-place for treason. " Your gospel is not the gospel of peace ; yours is not the conversion but the perversion of the Gentiles ; nor is it so much the edification ofthe Church as the laying ofthe State in ruins."1 In this work, a very storehouse upon the subject of the Pope's supremacy, our prelate argues at considerable length from the Epistles of Gregory the Great, removing aU the cavils of the Jesuitical Leviathan.2 He afterwards proceeds to shew that the four later as well as the four former General Councils were convened by Emperors independently of the Pope.3 The King in his Apology had singled out for reprobation the mutilation of the eucharist, private masses, and the imper fection of the words of consecration, which are not in the canon of the mass taken from St. Luke and St. Paul, where alone they appear in a complete form, but from the other Evangelists, thus neglecting altogether our Lord's words, " given for you."* The King animadverted upon three points. Bellarmine, by a summaiy method of proof, would conclude the King to be in error in aU three points by proving him so only in one ! 5 Bellarmine had in his letter to BlackweU reminded him that Fisher and More died martyrs for this one head of doctrine, the Pope's headship. Bishop Andrewes draws a comparison between John Fisher and John the Baptist. The one said to Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have her (his brothers wife) ; but Bishop Fisher said the reverse, ' It is lawful for thee to have her.'6 In the course of treating upon 1 Tortura Torti, p. 327. s Ibid. pp. 329—339. 3 Ibid. pp. 346—354. i Ibid. p. 358. = Ibid. p. 357. " Poteratne martyrum suorum causae magis incommodare ? Sed fatale hoc Torto malum ; nihil ut ab eo torqueri contingat, quod multo in ilium magis non possit retorqueri. — p. 361. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 225 the cause of the deaths of Fisher and More, he discovers the number of the beast out of PaVLo V. VICe Deo.1' In the remainder of this very able volume, and one that so truly answers to its title, Bishop Andrewes accurately states the doctrine of the ecclesiastical prerogatives of Christian princes, and repUes to the objections of the Eo manists. Nowhere can the reader find this topic more clearly illustrated. Our prelate concedes to the sovereign whatsoever power was exercised by the Jewish Kings in the Old Testament, agreeably to the Divine will, for the reformation and mainte nance of true religion. " Quodcunque in rebus religionis Eeges Israel fecerunt, nee sine laude fecerunt, id ut ei faciendi jus sit ac potestas. Leges auctoritate Begia ferendi, ne blasphe- metur Deus, non negabitis, fecit Eex Babel (Dan. iii. 29) ; ut jejunio placetur Deus, fecit Eex Ninive (Jon. iii. 7) : ut festo honoretur, fecit Ester, cum Purim, Machabseus cum Encaenia promulgaret (Est. ix. 26 ; 1 Mace. iv. 56, 59). Denique iis omnibus rebus de quibus in Codice, in Authenticis, in Capitu- laribus a Constantino, Theodosio, Justiniano, Carolo magno, leges latse leguntur. " Tum delegandi, qui de lege sic lata judicent quod Josaphat (2 Chron. xix. 8). Tum subditos, ne sic latam violent, jura- mento obstringendi, quod et Asa (2 Chron. xv. 14) et Josias (ibid, xxxiv. 32). Quod si qui in leges ita latas committant, etsi, religionis ea causa sit, sive pseudo-prophetse crimen est (Deut. xiii. 10), sive idololatrias (ibid. 15) sive blasphemi (Levit. xxiv. 23) sive sacra polluentis (Num. xv. 35), in eos auctoritate regia animadvertendi. " Conventus auctoritate sua indicendi ; etiam de area redu- cenda et figenda loco suo, quod fecit David (1 Chron. xiii. 3) : etiam de populo ad Dei cultum revocando, quod Josaphat (2 Chron. xix. 4) : etiam de templo dedicando, quod Salomon (1 Beg. viii. 64) : collapso instaurando, quod Joas (2 Chron. xxiv. 4) pollute purificando, quod Ezekias (ibid. xxix. 5). Quanquam vero non frustra sibi prseceptum putet a Deo, ut describat sibi legis exemplar, secum habeat semper, legat 1 DC.LW.VI. 666, " nota ipsa et numerus Antichristi." — p. 361. 226 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. sedulo, dies noctesque meditatur (Deut. xvii. 19 ; Jos. 1. 8), condiscat inde, cultum Dei vel ad ipsas usque ceremonias ; nee hoc illi dictum, ut totus ab alieno ojge pendeat ipse, qua a se, nihil plants dijudicet : in his tamen os Eleazari non invitus consulet (Num. xxvii. 21),1 et requiret legem ab iis, quorum labia scientiam custodiunt (Mai. ii. 7) : adhibebit in sacris legibus ferendis, quos adhibere par est, quosque ratio suadet, rerum illarum consultissimos, deque iis optime respondere posse. Et in his quae ad Deum pertinent Amariam sacerdotem, non Zabadiam ducem, jubebit prassidere (2 Chron. xix. 11). " Quoad personas. Omnibus omnium ordinum jus dicendi : qui sit (dicam stilo Scripturae) caput tribus Levi (1 Sam. xv. 17) non minus quam caeterarum, nee minus clericorum quam laicorum Eex: Contra Abiathar si quis superbierit, decreto suo compescendi (Deut. xvii. 12 ) ; etiam Abiathar ipsum, si ita meritus, pontificatu abdicandi (1 Beg. u. 27). " Quoad res. Excelsa diruendi ; id est peregrinum cultum abolendi ; nee modo vitulum aureum ab Aarone conflatum, quod Moses, sed et serpentem mneum a Mose erectum confrin- gendi quod Ezechias ; et sive in idololatriam abeat vitulus aureus, sive in superstitionem serpens census, utrumque com- minuendi. " Nam de rebus quas ad decorem domus Dei spectant, quae dici solent adiaphora, statuendi quod Joas (2 Chron. xxiv. 12) et quae materia schismatis esse assolent, futiles et inutiles qussstiones, auctoritate sua compescendi, quod Constantinus (vid. Const. Ep. ad Alexandr. et Arium, Soc. H. E. 1. i. c. 7, pp. 16 — 18, Cant. 1720), ne vos quidem ipsi negatis jus esse. " Postremo ; si de Christianis exemplum malitis, id postulat, ut episcopus sit rwv . 23, § 8. He acknowledges no other kind of necessity than that wliich St. Augustine owned, to whom he there refers. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 233 On November 9, 1605, he had been appointed Master of Pembroke CoUege, Cambridge, and retained the mastership with his see until 1616, and then resigned, owing to the complaints and opposition of that society, headed by Dr. Wren, then a Fellow of that College, and in the next reign Master of Peterhouse and successively Bishop of Hereford, Norwich, and Ely. On the death of Bishop OveraU Harsnet was translated to Norwich in 1619, and thence, on the death of Dr. George Mountaine, to that of York. He died in 1631, and was buried at Chigwell under a monumental brass that has survived the spoliation of that century. On Christmas-day Bishop Andrewes preached a sermon before the King at Whitehall, that is reported to have given him especial satisfaction. Mr. Chamberlain wrote to Sir Ealph Winwood, " The King with much importunity had the copy delivered to him on Tuesday last, before his going towards Eoyston, and says he will lay it still under his pillow."1 This sermon is from Gal. iii. 4, 5: " When the fulness of time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that he might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adop tion of sons. Here he saith that Christ was made under the law to become our surety,2 made under the law when he was circumcised. Then, as St. Paul saith, he became a debtor to the whole law ; then was his name of Jesus given him, St. Luke ii. 21. To get us from under the law it was not a matter of intercession but of redemption.8 So were verified as in a double sense his words at his passion,4 If you lay hold on me, if I must discharge all, let these go their way, let the price I pay be their redemption, and so it was."5 1 Winwood's Memorials, vol. iii. p. 117, ap. Nichols's Progresses of King James, vol. ii. p. 266. In another letter to Dudley Carleton (wrongly dated December 13, 1609,) in the recently and inaccurately edited volume, The Court and Times of James I, Lond. 1848, p. 102, he observes that our prelate preached with great applause, being not only sui similis, but more than himself, by report of the King and " all his auditors." 2 p. 28. 3 p. 29. 4 John xviii. 6. 5 p. 30. 234 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. So let us rejoice with fulness of joy, "with the joy of men that have come out of prison, have 'scaped the law, with the joy of men that have got the reversion of a goodly heritage."1 Well worthy indeed is this joyous discourse of that most joyful occasion which it celebrated out of so cheerful a heart. But what an Easter2 followed, when our good prelate descanted so fervidly upon Job's gospel, upon his triumphal monument, and on death's epitaph : " I am sure that my Bedeemer liveth, and he shall stand the last on the earth, (or, and I shall rise again in the last day from the earth). And though after my skin worms destroy this body, (or, as in the Liturgy of King James, and shall be covered again with my skin,) I shall see God in my flesh, whom I myself (or for myself) shall see, and mine eyes shall behold, and none other for me, though my reins are consumed within me (or, and this hope is laid up in my bosom)."3 So, he observes, St. Jerome himself applies this place as a plain prophecy both of Christ's and of our resurrection. Do we ask how Job came by this knowledge ? " We shaU not need to trouble ourselves to know how he knew it ; not by any Scripture. He had it not from Moses, but the same way that Moses had it ; he looked in the same mirror Abraham did, when he saw the same person and the same day, and rejoiced to see it."4 ' Shall stand.' He notes, "It is well known it is the proper word for rising and not standing. The LXX. so turn it ; the Fathers so read it. Nee dum natus erat Dominus (saith St. Jerome) et athleta ecclesiai redemptorem suum videt a mortuis resurgentem. He was not yet born, and the Church's champion Job saw his Eedeemer rising from the dead."6 Whoso will meditate upon mortaUty and immortality, and seek to rekindle his faith and his hope, let him come hither for comfort, and keep this Easter with Bishop Andrewes. On June 4th he was commissioned to be present at the creation of Henry Prince of Wales, which took place in the House of Parliament on that day. On the preceding Sunday 1 p. 31. 2 April 8, 1610. s p. 423. 4 p. 430. s p. 428. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 235 there was a creation of Knights of the Bath, and that was preceded on the Saturday by an aquatic spectacle, all which the curious reader will find amply detailed in the second volume of Nichols's Boyal Progresses of James I. Within little more than two years was this noble Prince taken away. He died in December 1612, our prelate being present at his funeral on the 7th of December. Thus was our country to learn wisdom through the severe struggles of the next half century, in which the principles of arbitrary misrule on the one hand, and the dangers of a military despotism on the other, were to pave the way for the more constitutional government and the more stable and decided Protestantism which succeeded. In singular harmony with his Easter was his Whitsuntide, full of ' holy comfort.' Then at Whitehall, on May 27, he preached upon our Saviour's promise, his covenant, and con dition: If ye hve me, keep my commandments, and I will pray ihe Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.1 He who could lay open their graves to the rich, and compel them to look down and learn from Dives on his bed of fire to avoid that place of torment, could as tenderly revive the disconsolate, and as affectionately animate men to the love of Christ. But at all times a spirit of holiness shewed in his discourses, as the good George Herbert directs in his Priest for the Temple. Thus Bishop Andrewes : " As Christ is our witness in heaven, so is the Spirit here on earth, witnessing with our spirits that we pertain to the adoption, and are the children of God; evermore, in the midst of the sorrows that are in our hearts, with his comforts refreshing our souls ; yet not filling them with false comforts, but, as Christ's advocate here on earth, soliciting us daily, and calling upon us to look to his com mandments and keep them, wherein standeth much of our comfort, even in the testimony of a good conscience."2 On August 5th Bishop Andrewes preached at Holdenby in Northamptonshire, upon the divine right of kings, from Touch not mine anointed? animadverting upon BeUarmine i xiv. 15, 16, p. 617. ' p. 625. 3 1 Chron. xvi. 22. 236 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. and Mariana, and noticing the late assassination of Henry IV. of France.1 He observes that " the Pope saith he can make the Christ the Lord himself: if he could do so indeed, it were not altogether unlike he might make the Lord's Christ," — set up kings who can make the King of kings.2 Hitherto episcopacy had in Scotland been upon a parity with the presbyterate in regard of ordination. The King had already restored to the Bishops their civil jurisdiction, which after the Eeformation had been transferred to the supreme court of justice. He now determined to bring them nearer to the model of the English Church, and on the 15th of October summoned Spottiswoode, Archbishop of Glasgow, Lamb, Bishop of Brechin, and Hamilton, Bishop of GaUoway, to London, and appointed Dr. Abbot, Bishop of London, Andrewes, Bishop of Ely, Dr. Henry Parry, Bishop of Worcester, and Montagu, Bishop of Bath and Wells, to give them episcopal consecration. The consecration took place in the chapel of London House on the 21st of the same month. Andrewes stated the necessity of ordaining them deacons and priests before they should be elevated to the episcopate, on the ground that they had not been canoni- cally admitted to holy orders in Scotland. Spottiswoode relates that Archbishop Bancroft, who was present, main tained that this was not requisite, because where there were no bishops, ordination by presbyters must be esteemed valid ; and that otherwise it might be doubted whether there was any lawful vocation in most of the reformed churches. Our prelate acquiesced in this answer, and so the consecration proceeded. Isaac Casaubon had arrived in this country not long before, and was present at this ceremony.3 Heylyn asserts that Bancroft overruled the objection of Bishop Andrewes by reminding him that the higher order included the lower, and that there were instances of bishops being made by one single ordination; and herein he is followed by Bishop Skinner, and CoUier incUnes to him. But Bishop Eussell, in his History of the Church in Scotland, ' P- 8°7- » p. 801. 3 Casauboni Epist. Roterodami, 1709. Fit. p. 52. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 237 very impartially remarks that the authority of Spottiswoode on this occasion cannot be set aside, as he was not only present, but deeply interested in the discussion.1 In the course of this year appeared our prelate's Besponsio ad Apologiam Cardinalis Bellarmini quam nuper edidit contra Prafationem Monitoriam Jacobi Dei gratid M. Britannia etc. Begis. He observes that Bellarmine's zeal for the Pope's deposing power had only made the foreign princes jealous of his principles and of his works,2 and that he had now found it convenient to come down from this high ground, and to fiU his book with patches of his commonplaces, already before the world in a controversial and theological form; and accordingly we find the Bishop's Answer assuming through several chapters the character of theological theses. In the first chapter he shews with various illustrations the uncertainty of the worshipping of the host, and refutes the answers of Eomanists who defend, as he says, a hypothetical worship. Formerly it was always provided that the condition was understood, ' If 'thou art Christ I adore thee;' but faith is not an hypothesis but an hypostasis, not a supposition but a substance. He shews that there was a time when con- substantiation was allowed in the Church of Eome. Thus he quotes with approbation the words of Biel on the Canon of the Mass, who says that the canon of Scripture does not define whether the body of Christ is in the Eucharist by transubstantiation or by consubstantiation. To the same effect he brings in Durandus, Peter de Alliaco, Cardinal of Cam bray, and John Picus Mirandula, who was nevertheless cleared from all imputation of heresy by Pope Alexander the Sixth himself. /The mode of the mystery we do not, says Bishop Andrewes, presumptuously define. We leave it with the mystery of the Incarnation. /We shall hear him again speak more explicitly on this topic. Bellarmine had alleged the mendacious authority of Maurice Cheneys, who wrote of The Life and Martyrdom of 1 Vol. ii. pp. 99, 100. And so Dr. Cook's History ofthe Church of Scotland, vol. ii. pp. 244 — 246. See Jer. Collier, vol. ii. p. 702. Bishop Russell refers to Spottiswoode, p. 514, and to Heylyn's History of Presbytery, pp. 387, 388. 2 p. 9. 238 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Carthusians, and had aspersed the Lord Protector Crom well. Bishop Andrewes vindicates his memory, and eulogizes his great judgment and abilities.1 He proceeds to give a sample of the lying legends of the Carthusian. He checks and overthrows the Cardinal's boast of the universaUty of his Church, and of the multitudes of converts made especially in America, referring him to Acosta. Of the converts of the Jesuits in Japan, he says that they are only made hypocrites twofold more the children of hell than themselves.2 Touching upon the Scotch reformation, he highly lauds the memory of the martyrs Hamilton and Wishart, but with King James withholds all commendation from John Knox and those who acted with the same uncourtly spirit.3 As to the intercession of saints, he quotes Origen who places it amongst the hidden things of God, a thing probable but uncertain.4 Thence to nearly the end of the chapter our prelate discusses the arguments and authorities adduced by Bellarmine for the invocation of saints. The second chapter proves that the cause of the King contending against the Pope in regard of the duty of his subjects to swear to him civil aUegiance, is not one peculiar to him but equally affecting the interests of aU CathoUc and orthodox princes. In the third he returns to treat of Papal power, opposing St. Paul's What have we to do to judge them that are without? to Thomas Aquinas, who attributes to the Church a power of deposing infidel sovereigns.6 In the fourth chapter he overthrows Bellarmine's com parison of kings and cardinals. The priest blesses the king, the king benefits the priest. Which is greater, a good word or a good deed ? David and Solomon blessed the whole Church, in which the priesthood himself was included, whom Hezekiah called his sons. The King in holy writ deposed the high- priest, not the high-priest the king. He gives the- history of the rise of the Cardinals, and eveiywhere lays open the unfaithful manner of Bellarmine in ecclesiastical history. 1 pp. 22, 23. 2 p. 28. 3 p. 33. * p. 37. In Cant. Horn. 3. Rom. ii. * p. 77. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 239 In the fifth chapter he vindicates his Sovereign from the various charges of Bellarmine. Bellarmine had not been altogether misinformed respecting the partiality of King James for his Eomish subjects in Scotland. It is true indeed the insurgent lords were in 1594 banished the kingdom and their houses destroyed, but they would not have had oppor tunity to rise in arms and to renew their treasons had not the King shielded them in the preceding year from their just deserts.1 Bishop Andrewes speaks with the utmost candour of the Puritans, and in a language and spirit wholly unknown to Wren, Laud, Montagu, and Heylyn. With him they are not men more in error than the Eomanists, as a living divine writes of those whom he calls Zuinglians, that they are in greater error concerning the Eucharist than those who believe transubstantiation. " Puritanorum ea religio non est, quorum nulla est religio sua atque propria: disciplina est. Quod ipsum tamen de Puritanis generatim dictum volo, deque iis inter eos, qui praeterquam quod disciplinai suae paulb magis addicti sunt, caitera sobril magis sapiunt ; qui, quantumvis formam illam perdite depereant, in reliqud tamen doctrind satis orihodoxi sunt. Nee enim nescius sum, censeri, adeoque esse, eo in numero (non minus quam in societate vestra^,) cerebrosos quosdam, pronos in schisma nimis. Etiam non deesse, qui quoad religionis capita quasdam, vix per omnia sani sunt. Quos ego hie, quos ubique exclusos volo. Mihi ab exteriori regiminis formal Puritani sunt, non autem a religione, quai eodem et est et esse potest, ubi facies externa non eadem." "The King (in his Basilicon Doron) does not mean there the religion of the Puritans, for they have no distinct and peculiar religion, but discipline. And this I would have applied (not to the Scotch only but) to the Puritans generally, and to those among them who, except that they- are too violently addicted to their order of church government, are in other things sufficiently sober-minded ; and these, however infatuated in their devotedness to their 'platform,' are yet 1 Resp. ad Bellarm. p. 122. Cook's Church of Scotland, ii. c. 8. 240 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. sufficiently orthodox in the rest of their doctrine. For I am not ignorant that there are numbered, and indeed are amongst them, some unreasonable men (as in your society) over- inclined to schism ; nay, that there are not wanting some who are scarcely sound in all things as regards some points of religion. And these I would exclude in this my mention of them here and in every other place. But with me they are Puritans from their exterior form of discipline, but not from their religion, which both is the same and can be, where the external face of discipline is not the same."1 In the sixth chapter he vindicates the historical passages of his Tortura Torti, and defends Eufus in the case of Anselm, and Henry the Second in the case of Thomas a Becket? He denies the saintship of St. Hugh of Lincoln, who opposed the raising of money to aid Eichard the First. St. Augustine's De Mirabilibus Sacros Scriptural is by BeUarmine, in his book of ecclesiastical writers, on the authority of Aquinas, denied to be his. Bishop Andrewes referred to it to prove out of Augustine that that Father placed the Maccabees amongst the Apocryphal books.3 The passage is as follows : " In Machabaeorum Ubris etsi ad miraculum numero inserendum [aliter etsi aliquid mira- bilium numero inserendum] conveniens fuisse huic ordini inveniatur, de hoc tamen nulla cura fatigabimur, quia tantum agere proposuimus, ut de divini canonis mirabilibus exiguam quamvis ingenioli nostri modulum excedentem historicam ex- positionem ex parte aliqua tangeremus." — 1. ii. c. 34, p. 1001. Op. torn. 3, Lugduni, 1562. Erasmus indeed early ranked this work with those that had been erroneously ascribed to St. Augustine, and it has accordingly been placed amongst the spurious works that go by his name in the Benedictine edition, and in the 47th section of the 4th chapter of Walchii Bibliotheca Patristica, p. 275.4 Bishop Cosin has, in his Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture, reprinted at the Clarendon Press, fully met all the pleas deduced by the Eomanists from the writings of i Rcsp. ad Bellarm. p. 123. 2 pp 149 igg 3 P- 158- * Jena, 1834. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 241 St. Augustine in favour of the First and Second Book of the Maccabees and the other Apocryphal books retained by their Church. Certain passages of St. Augustine appear at first sight to favour their cause, and are always alleged by them for the sake of proving the equal authority of the Apocryphal with those books to which modern usage restricts the term canonical, a term formerly applied more indefinitely than at present, and so applied, it is admitted, by St. Augustine himself, in these passages, namely, in the 8th chapter of his second book De Doctrind Christiand, and in the 36th chapter of his 18th book De Civitate Dei. But it is evident from other passages in his works that as the Canon Fidei, the Bule of Faith, St. Augustine allowed only the Jewish canon. Thus, in one of his treatises against the Donatists, his second book against the Epistle of Gaudentius (c. xxiii), he says : " Et hanc quidem Scrip- turam quas appellatur Maccabaeorum, non habent Judaei sicut legem et Prophetas et Psalmos quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus, suis dicens, Oportebat impleri omnia quai scripta sunt in lege et Prophetis et Psalmis de me: sed recepta est ab ecclesia non inutiliter, si sobrie legatur vel audiatur, maxime propter illos Maccabaeos qui pro Dei lege, sicut veri martyres a persecutoribus tam indigna atque horrenda perpessi sunt," &c. — Op. torn. vii. Pars Prior. p. 436, Lugduni, 1562. " And this Scripture which is called (the book of) Maccabees, the Jews regard not as the law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, to which the Lord bears testimony as to his witnesses, saying, All things must be fulfilled which were written in the law and in the Prophets and in the Psalms concerning me (Luke xxiv. 44) ; but it is received by the Church not unprofitably if it be read or heard with caution, especially on account of those Maccabees who endured such undeserved and dreadful sufferings at the hands of their persecutors, as true martyrs for the law of God." So in citing Ecclesiasticus he says, " Quas non tant& firmitate proferuntur quae scripta non sunt in canone Judasorum." — De Civ. Dei, 1. xvii. c. 20. " Which passages are not brought 242 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. forward with such a weight of authority, not being in the Jewish canon." Besides Bishop Cosin's Scholastical History of ihe Canon of Scripture, the reader may refer to the first chapter of the second book of Dr. John Gerhard's Confessio Caiholica, Dr. John Eainold's Censura Apocryphorum Vet. Test. 1611, 2 vols. 4to., Dr. Field's Book of ihe Church, book iv. c. 22, 23, 24, and the Preface to the third part of L. Joh. Gottleb Carpzov's Introductio ad Libros Canon. Vet. Test. Lips. 1721. That laborious collator of manuscripts, but most dogmatical judge of them, Dr. TregeUes, in his Account of the Printed Text of the Greek Testament1 a work extremely superficial in its notice of the history of the textus receptus, affirms amongst other paradoxes that "we reject the Apocrypha in spite of tradition." There is no one article forced upon the Church of Eome more clearly in opposition even to her own tradition, than the reception of the Apocryphal Books into the Old Testament canon. Upon this ground we stand. In consequence of the tradition of the Jewish Church, con firmed by our Lord himself; in consequence of the tradition of the Primitive Church ; in consequence of the tradition of the whole Church to the Council of Trent, we reject the Apocrypha. But of all such evidence as must needs enter into such questions, Dr. Tregelles has proved himseU a most incompetent judge from the uncritical and inconsistent decisions he has in so many instances affirmed in his critical works. In these he con stantly selects his evidence, passes over numerous and weighty- allegations of his predecessors in the field of sacred criticism, and commends the most improbable, and those not always the most ancient, readings, by way of illustrating Bengel's rule, which is accordingly given in the larger and more inelegant type of the most modern printers, uproclivi scriptioni prastat arduum."2 Griesbach, however, more fearlessly followed out his own rule than Dr. Tregelles has had the boldness to do. Our prelate defends the Protestant interpretation of the words of institution in the Eucharist. Bellarmine had said 1 London: S. Baxter, 1854. p. 187. * p. 221. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 243 that they (the Protestants) involved the words This is my body in a thousand figures. He retorts after the usual, and indeed unanswerable manner, that neither can the Eomanists without a figure reconcile to their interpretation the words, This is the cup which is poured out. In the eighth chapter he unfolds the legendary impiety of Eome respecting the mother of our Lord. He urges against the Jesuitical Bellarmine the hymns that are sung to her; he returns to the topic of the invocation of saints ; he treats of the innovation of private masses and of the mutilation of the Eucharist; he exposes the folly of the Cardinal's evasions, one of which is, that St. Luke in the Acts only speaks of breaking of bread, therefore they took (he argues) the Lord's Supper only in one kind. So then, when in the 14th chapter of his Gospel he relates that our Lord went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees (according to the Hebrew idiom) to eat bread, we must suppose that they drank nothing.1 But subterfuge and dis honesty of every kind are allowed to Eomish controversialists, who are always understood to wage war upon the human understanding. Hence Bishop Andrewes proceeds again to transubstantiation2 and its concomitants, adoration and pro cession. He points out the absurdity of the very term works of supererogation, when applied to those who have not paid to God that entire and unsinning obedience which they owe to Him.3 He suffers not Bellarmine to escape touching the baptism of bells. Nay, they are blessed, not baptized, says Bellarmine. Not so Stephen Durantus in his book of the Bites of the Church then lately published at Eome ; there we read they are " baptized but not for the remission of sins." It is a holy dedication, which, as Bishop Andrewes observes, is also the end of baptism. But in the Pontifical the bell is exorcised. No, he was too great for BeUarmine the pious Cardinal, the admiration of the more moderate and enlightened children of the Church in England. " But if in any places," writes BeUarmine, " it is called baptism, it is from this that names are given to the bells." More than this, we have in the i p. 189. 2 p. 192. ¦' p. 196. r2 244 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Pontifical, tinctum in aqua — washed in water. The water is hallowed. It is said, " this commixture of salt and water is made a salutary sacrament in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." But in the new Pon tifical of Clement VIII. the words " efficiatur salutare sacra- mentum" are omitted, and in their stead is read, " pariter fiat;" " quid autem fiat," continues Bishop Andrewes, "cogi- tandem relinquitur."1 Nay, there are even sponsors on this solemn occasion ; and as a child, so is the bell clad in robes of white : " nugae quidem sed preciosae sunt has : calumniai non sunt. Neque nugae tamen ; vera enim gravamina Ponti- ficis legato in Comitiis Norimbergae, 1522, exhibita : Pontifici quoque ipsi transmissa, Germaniae totius nomine." From the baptism of bells we return to the worship of images. Bishop Andrewes reminds Bellarmine that Hezekiah himself was an iconoclast. Hence we pass on to Purgatory, which Bellarmine finds at least implicitly contained in Genesis, where it is written, "surrexit Abraham a facie mortui" (in the Vulgate " ab officio funeris"2), from the Burial office, that is, from prayers for the good of her soul now in Purgatory.3 Thus was Scripture not only called, but treated as a nose of wax. Bellarmine waxed warm upon Purgatory, and roundly affirmed that hell awaited those who believed not purgatory. " This," replies our prelate, " savours more of Tm-tus, and is a more fit speech for some evil Tortus than for a holy cardinal, and one in which is much less of charity than of faith." " There is juster reason that no purgatory should remain for them that believe it not ; but that as they believe in heaven, so they should prepare for that place ; as they beUeve a hell, so they should seek by all means to avoid it. But they that believe a purgatory, let them very carefully take heed lest, being deceived by the position of the ways, they should go to hell instead of purgatory ; for they are places very near each other, if we believe the Cardinal. The Pope, whilst he deludes many of your religion with his indulgences, with the hope of going only to purgatory, hath brought them to hell, who, perchance, if they had feared only hell (and they would 1 p. 197. 2 Gen. xxiii. 3, stood up from before his dead. 3 p. 209. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 245 have feared if that expectation had not utterly blinded them), might have avoided it."1 The remainder of this chapter consists of a most able refutation of the Pope's supremacy— the pride, as purgatory embodies — the avarice of Eome. From the ninth to the end of the twelfth chapter our prelate treats of the prophecies in the New Testament relating to Antichrist; first, in the second chapter of St. Paul's Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, then in the Book of Eevelation. Bishop Andrewes all along regards the Pope as Antichrist, Eome as Babylon ; the name of Antichrist he, following Irenasus, conceives to be Latinus. How pitifully did Mr. Newman deal with the memory of Bishop Newton, because, with Bishop Andrewes, he maintained a view of Antichrist so little in accordance with the system he then favoured.2 Bishop Andrewes vindicates Wicliff and his followers from the charge of sedition, and imputes to the calumnious spirit of his opponents the anarchical doctrines ascribed to him.3 Thus did he differ in spirit from that zealous reformed Catholic De Heylyn, who all but anathematizes Wicliff as an uncatholic heresiarch. Our prelate proceeds to vindicate Luther from similar charges. I know not what to say to our prelate's words, " But no man sought the life of the King in Scotland." Certainly his own words at another time appear the contrary to these. In his first sermon on the Gowrie Conspiracy he describes the actors as bloody-minded, and as no better than assassins. " Said not Absalom to his assassins, When I give you a sign, see you smite, kill him, fear not, have not I commanded you ? Said not they the same to him whom to that end they had armed and placed to do that wicked act?"4 Here then he must needs acquit that conspiracy of the intent of assassina tion. Yet in his sermon four years after the publication of this work, when in 1614 he preached the anniversary of the 1 p. 209. 2 See the October No. ofthe British Critic for 1840. 3 p. 229. 4 Resp. ad Bell. p. 300. Sermons, pp. 782, 793, a.d. 1608. 246 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Gowrie Conspiracy again, after an interval of four years, he attributed to the conspirators the design of no less a hurt than the loss of his Majesty's life.1 I fear there was in the mind of our prelate, whilst at this point of his controversy, some subtle distinction that would have fitted rather BeUarmine than his own candour and simplicity. Most worthy of him indeed are these golden words : " Thus is the Church the pillar of truth, not as that on which the truth rests, but which herself rests upon the truth. But this pillar does not hang in the air ; it has a base and a foundation, and where but in the Word of God ? When it sets forth that (Word) unto us, we know that it hath a good foundation, and rest upon it fearlessly and with a willing mind."2 The remainder of the Besponsio is a confirmation of the charges which the King had brought against BeUarmine, of falsifications of history, &c, a minute and detaUed account of which would of itself form a volume. In October Isaac Casaubon came to England. He was born at Geneva February 18th, 1559, where he was made Professor of Greek, and married Florence, daughter of Henry Stephens, the celebrated printer. He removed to MontpeUer as the Greek Professor there, and in 1603 was made Librarian to Henry IV. After the assassination of his Prince, he on the 16th October this year arrived here with Sir Henry Wotton. James had previously invited him to England, and became his cordial patron. On October 26th he spent some hours, to his great delight, with Bishop Andrewes.8 1 p. 823. 2 p. 331. 3 Epliem. Oxon. 1850. pp. 790, 791. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 247 CHAPTEE XII. Archbishop Abbot — Bishops Buckeridge and Thompson — Isaac Casau bon, Cardinal Perron, and King James — Christmas 1611. On the death of Archbishop Bancroft, November 2, 1610, Dr. George Abbot, who had sufficiently proved his learning by his works and by his sermons at Oxford, where he was elected Master of University College in September 1597, and had been made Dean of Winchester in 1599, Bishop of Lich field and Coventry 1609, and of London January 20th this same year, was raised to the see of Canterbury in consequence of the King's promise to his late able and energetic minister and favourite, the Earl of Dunbar. This motive is assigned as the ground of Abbot's promotion in a letter from George Calvert (afterwards Lord Baltimore) to Sir Thomas Edmunds, March 10th, 1611. The King at the same time bore testi mony to Abbot's learning, wisdom, and sincerity. It has been surmised that had Andrewes succeeded Bancroft, the Church of England would have been saved the storms that foUowed. But both Abbot and Andrewes lived to be super seded by Laud, whose ambition was as unrivalled as his impetuosity, and whose secularity predominated above that of all his contemporaries. Andrewes had not the firmness of Abbot, whose integrity appeared in repeated instances, to the honour of the age in which he lived and of the Church over which he presided. He nobly stood forth on the side of justice against the suit instituted by the Lady Frances Howard for a divorce from her husband the Earl of Essex. 248 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. This first brought upon him the King's displeasure. His influence declined as that of Villiers and Laud increased. In 1618 he would not suffer the Book of Sports to be read in his parish-church of Croydon. To the last he promoted the Protestant interest. In the summer of 1627 he again nobly withstood the unconstitutional course of his sovereign, by refusing to Ucense Dr. Sibthorpe's sermon, preached at North ampton, in vindication of the compulsory loan. This led to his being most illegaUy deprived of his power, which was handed over by a commission to Laud and four other prelates. While living in forced seclusion in his house at Ford, which, with Lambeth, Croydon, Bekesbourne, and Canterbury, alone at this time remained to his see, (the other twelve had been taken from it since the Eeformation,1) about Christmas he was released from restraint and invited to court, but only to suffer hereafter further indignities, Laud stiU reigning supreme, and being selected in his stead to baptize the infant Prince, Charles IL, in May 1630. He died in his seventy-first year, at Croydon Palace, August 4th, 1633. Dr. Hook has taken from FuUer whatsoever makes against Abbot as to the charge of undue severity toward the clergy, and omitted all that Fuller added in his commendation. He has however survived the censures of Clarendon himself; neither wiU his memory suffer from the more recent attack of that abortive undertaking, the Biographical Dictionary of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, in which he is described as " a zealous Calvinist and a furious Protestant." Of the intemperance of his zeal, or of any indication of his furiousness, history is silent. Antony Wood himself, the historian of his University, is more just to his character. In answer to the charges of remissness brought against Abbot, the testimony of Hacket, in his Life of Williams, may suffice. He says that with regard to the High Commission Court the Lord Keeper was not satisfied in two respects • first in the multiplicity of causes brought into it, secondly in the 1 Wrotham, Maidstone, Otford, Knoll in Sevenoaks, Charing, Aldington, Saltwood, Tenham, Gillingham, and Wing-ham, in Kent; and Mayfield and Slindon in Sussex. — Hasted's Kent, vol. xii. p. 524. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 249 severity of its censures. Archbishop Abbot was rigorously just, which made him shew less pity to delinquents. Sentences of great correction, or rather of destruction, have their epochs from his predominancy in that court. And after him it mended, says Hacket, like sour ale in summer. It was not so in his predecessor Bancroft's days, who would chide stoutly, but censure mildly. He considered that he sat there rather as a father than as a judge. On November 13 Andrewes was, for the first time since his translation to Ely, included in a committee, with all their lordships then present, for a conference with the Commons on the following day at 3 p.m. in the Painted Chamber. We return to Casaubon. On Wednesday the 14th No vember Casaubon, with Overall, Dean of St. Paul's, with whom he was taking up his abode at this time, dined with our prelate, probably at Ely Palace in Holborn. The Bishop had not yet published his answer to Bellarmine. Andrewes read his work to his guests, and had Casaubon with him again on the 15th and 17th, and on the Monday and Tuesday following. On the Monday he again consulted with Casau bon on his forthcoming treatise. Andrewes entrusted him with the manuscript to peruse at his leisure. He commends the Bishop's learning and his agreement with Christian antiquity, and expresses his wish that his method and spirit were followed by the divines of his own native land, in a letter to Mountague, Bishop of Bath and Wells.1 On Tuesday, December 25th, Christmas-day, Andrewes preached before the King at Whitehall from the gospel for the day, Luke ii. 10, 11. He speaks of the angels' sermon, and after that the hymn Glory be to God on high. It was the custom after the Eestoration, if not before it, to have a second anthem after the sermon. It might be that this might suggest to Andrewes his remark, "the whole service of this day, the sermon, the anthem, by angels all." The anthem thus concluded both the morning and evening service at St. Paul's, according to the Eev. James Clifford's Divine Services and Anthems. This little manual was published in 1660, the 1 Ep. 598, p. 366. Roterd. 1709, ap. Andrewes' Minor Works, p. lxxviii. 250 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. second edition in 1663, another in 1664, being compUed by the Eev. James Clifford, a Minor Canon of St. Paul's, who died in 1700. The order of the Cathedral service as there observed is extracted from this rare and interesting little volume in the Preface to the Eev. John Jebb's second volume of Choral Besponses and Litanies of the] United Church of England and Ireland. This very valuable collection contains two sets of Preces by Amner of Ely, whom Andrewes ordained deacon, with a large body of Cathedral music composed by Henry Molle, Eobert Eamsay, and Loosemoore, the incom parable organists of Peterhouse, Trinity, and King's CoUeges about 1630. The common Cathedral chants in use in Clif ford's time are given in the Appendix,1 and in the earlier and more ancient part of the volume are several elaborate chants, the memorials of a more noble, enriched, and varie gated kind of chant in use before the Eestoration, far worthier of the divine compositions to which they were so carefully and appropriately adapted. To return to our prelate. His genuine piety shines forth conspicuously in this sermon upon the need and nature of salvation, and the universal neglect of it. There is indeed in his sermons very generally, although there are occasional exceptions, the same glow of devotion wliich has made his Prayers so valuable, prayers which have, after the Liturgy, perhaps met with more general acceptance than any others. That his sermons should be in some measure open to the exceptions of such critics as the late Archdeacon Hare, is only what might be expected from a mind so fancifully exuberant as that of Andrewes. We may, however, be justly thankful for the late Arch deacon Hare's vigilance in regard of the recent edition of our prelate's Sermons. But in his remark in p. 499 of the Notes to his Mission of the Comforter he was not aware that in the second edition we have the reading of which he doubted " in the very next words." Archdeacon Hare indeed, as a theo logian, was not the best qualified to sit in judgment on Bishop Andrewes. Hare's note on Inspiration, written in a flippant 'pp. 200, 201. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 251 spirit and throwing no light upon the subject, but rather heightening its inevitable mysteriousness, is but one of various symptoms that Archdeacon Hare was at times led away with a love of bewilderment, the not unnatural effect of his foreign predilections. On January 17th, 1611, Isaac Casaubon was, upon the death of Dr. Nicholas Simpson, of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, (whose son John was of the same CoUege and Preben dary of the seventh stall in 1614,) preferred to the eighth stall in Canterbury Cathedral ; he was a layman at this time. After this the King granted him, on the 19th, a pension of £300 per annum during pleasure.1 His son Meric, who was confirmed by Bishop Andrewes, was born at Geneva 1599. He was educated at Christ Church, Oxford. Bishop An drewes preferred him to Bledon in Somersetshire. He was afterwards Vicar of Minster and Monkton in the Isle of Thanet, the latter of which he resigned for the rectory of Ickham, a few miles to the east of Canterbury. He was made Prebendary of the ninth stall there June 19, 1628, survived the Eestoration, and died July, 1671, aged 75 years, and was buried in the newer south transept. On Easter-day, March 24, 1611, Bishop Andrewes preached again before the King at Whitehall, from Psalm cxviii., The stone which the builders refused, the same stone is become the head of the corner. The latter part of this sermon has been largely quoted for its quaintness f the former and more excellent has been suffered to rest in the foUo edition. It abounds indeed with beauties, but the pun ning upon the text, and the making the King the head, not of one angle but of three, England, Scotland, and Ireland, is but little suited to that whereto it is annexed. Admirable, however, as are very many passages in this discourse, it is not as a whole comparable to that upon the same occasion in the preceding year, nor is that in point of eloquence equal to those that treat of the narrative of the resurrection. i Rymer's Fcedera, vol. ii. pp. 707, 709, 710. See Hasted's Kent, vol. xii. pp. 88, 89. 2 In Nichols's Royal Progresses of James II. pp. 409, 410. 252 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. And so his Whitsunday sermon for this year, had it been less diffuse and less singular in its illustrations, which to our ears at least sounds sometimes trivial, sometimes jocular, would have deserved very considerable commendation. But there are passages in it that should scarcely be quoted, and which are only equalled for impropriety in his sermons upon the Temptation in the wilderness, where presumption is likened to gunpowder. This sermon, upon the Sending of the Holy Ghost, was preached before the King at Windsor on Whit sunday May 12. On June 9th Bishop Andrewes assisted at Lambeth at the consecration of Dr. Buckeridge to the see of Eochester, and of Dr. Giles Thompson, his old schoolfeUow at Merchant Taylor's, to that of Gloucester. Dr. Buckeridge was born at Shinfield, near Beading, was President of St. John's College, Oxford, 1606, where he was succeeded by Laud in 1611, Eector of North Fambridge near Maldon, and of North Kilworth, Leicester shire (near Eugby), Vicar of St. Giles' Cripplegate, Preben dary of Eochester 1587, of Hereford, and Archdeacon of Northampton on the same day, March 23, 1604, Canon of Windsor 1606. On the death of Bishop Felton he was translated from Eochester to Ely, April 17, 1628, having meanwhile preached Bishop Andrewes' funeral sermon in 1626. He died May 23, and was buried May 31 in Bromley church, Kent, without any memorial. Giles Thompson was born in London, educated at Merchant Taylor's School, an exhibitioner of University College, Oxford, 1571, Fellow of All Souls' College 1580, Proctor 1586, Divinity Eeader at Magdalene College, Chaplain to Queen Elizabeth, Canon Eesidentiary of Hereford May 23, 1594, Eector of Pembridge, Herefordshire (near Leominster), Dean of Windsor February 2, 1603. He died the year following his consecration, without ever having visited his diocese, June 14, 1612. He was buried in St. George's Chapel, Windsor. He was one of the translators of the Bible. On June 22 Andrewes was appointed one of the first Governors of the Charterhouse.1 1 Dr. Bearcroft's Historical Account of Thomas Sutton, Esq. p. 72. London : 1737., 8vo. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 253 Casaubon had very favourably represented to the King the learning of Cardinal Perron, and had presented him with some of the Cardinal's poems. This favour Perron acknow ledged in a letter to Casaubon, in which he artfully laid the ground of the controversy which now forms the second volume of his works. He withheld from King James the name of Catholic, upon which Casaubon replied in the King's name that his Majesty was much surprised thereat, seeing that he believed all that the ancients believed with unanimous consent to be essential. To this Perron replied in a long and laboured epistle dated Paris, July 15, 1611. This letter is prefixed to his longer controversy, and is to be found in the translation of the first four books of the Cardinal's Beply, printed at Douay in folio, by Martin Bogart, 1630, and dedicated to ' Henrietta Maria of Bourbon, Queen of Great Britain.' Casaubon was appointed by the King to answer Perron's letter of the 15th of July, and to give in Latin the mind of the King himself upon it. Casaubon's Answer was put into the hands of Andrewes and Overall, then Dean of St. Paul's, if not also of Morton, then Dean of Winchester, and Montagu, Bishop of that see. Isaacson, Bishop Andrewes' secretary, appears to have acted as Casaubon's amanuensis.1 Soon after Casaubon had completed his Epistle to Fronto Ducmus, he accompanied Andrewes out of town on the 20th June. They returned together to town on the Saturday, and on Sunday, June 30th, were honoured with an invitation to the King. On July 3rd Andrewes, Overall, Casaubon, and others dined with the Lord Mayor. On the 16th Andrewes set out for Cambridge with Casaubon. After halting probably at Eoyston or at Ware for that night, they arrived on Wednesday the 17th at Cam bridge, and were lodged at Peterhouse by Dr. John Eichard- son the Master. The Master's lodge at that time consisted of several apartments between the library built by Dr. Peme, and the hall, which then retained a handsome oriel, with a 1 See Ep. to Bp. Andrewes without a date, and to Morton (afterwards Bishop of Durham) 18 August, p. 446. Casauboni Epistolce. Roterodami : 1709. 254 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. high-pitched roof and lantern. The present lodge on the opposite side of Trumpington-street belonged to Dr. Charles Beaumont, FeUow of Peterhouse, and son of Dr. Joseph Beaumont, Eegius Professor of Divinity in the place of Bishop Gunning, and Master of Peterhouse 1662, in the room of the pious and munificent Bernard Hale, Archdeacon of Ely. Dr. Charles Beaumont, his son, dying March 17, 1726, left this house to the Masters of the CoUege for ever. He left also a large sum for the purchase of advowsons, and many valuable MSS. to the library. Dr. John Eichardson was born at Linton on the south confines of Cambridgeshire, bordering upon Essex. He was brought up at Clare HaU,1 of which College he was B.A. in 158|, or, as we write, 1582. He was thence elected to a fellowship at Emmanuel College, where he proceeded M.A. in 1585, and D.D. 1597. He succeeded Dr. OveraU as Eegius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge in 1607. He was ap pointed one of the translators of the Bible in the same class with Lively, Chaderton, DiUingham, Andrewes, Spalding, and Bynge. To these were deputed the historical books from 1 Chronicles inclusive, and the Hagiographa, namely, Job to Ecclesiastes inclusive. In 1609 he was made Master of Peter house, having been previously made FeUow of Emmanuel College by the founder himself, Sir Walter Mildmay. On Saturday, May 27th, 1615, he was, between 3 and 5 P.M., admitted to the mastership of Trinity CoUege, Cambridge. He was also Eector of Upwell, a parish with the chm-ch mostly in Norfolk, partly in Cambridgeshire. He resigned his professorship in 1617, and was succeeded by Dr. Collins. In the mastership of Peterhouse he was foUowed by Thomas Turner, B.D. Thomas Turner was born at Burnby in Yorkshire, three miles south-east of Pocklington, between York and Beverley. He was B.A. of Peterhouse 1596, chosen a FeUow there, M.A. 1600, B.D. 1609, and D.D. 1616. He was also Eector 1 He is said to have been a Commoner of Trinity Hall in p. 41 of the trans lation of the Rev. Richard Parker's Cambridge. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 255 of Stokehammond in Buckinghamshire, three miles south of Fenny Stratford, and was installed Prebendary of Leicester St. Margaret's, August 23rd, 1612. He died in 1617. Our prelate was lodged at Peterhouse, as being one of the two Colleges in which the Bishops of Ely have a special interest, as having been founded and endowed by various occupants of that see. To this day the Master and Fellows of Peterhouse, now called St. Peter's College, are admitted to the mastership and fellowships, as the clergy of the diocese are to their spiritual preferments, by the Bishops of Ely. Peterhouse existed as a corporate society as early as 1274, for in that year a charter recognises their existence as the Warden and Scholars of Peterhouse.1 It has been objected that Hugh de Balsham, Bishop of Ely, the founder, left at his death 300 marks for new buildings. He however had previously placed his scholars in two hostels in Trumpington- street. He also assigned to it the advowson of Triplow, which, although the presentation has been of late in the hands of the Bishop of Ely, was in the last century appro priated to Peterhouse. The College found benefactors in Thomas de Insula, Bishop of Ely 1345, and his predecessors Hotham and Montacute, or Montague, who gave the advowson of Cherryhinton to Peterhouse in 1344. The rectory, to which a manor was annexed, was appropriated to the College in 1395 by Bishop Fordham. Dr. Eichardson was doubtless known to Andrewes, as being in the same company of trans lators of our present incomparable version of the Scriptures. He was also, like Andrewes, of a most munificent spirit: he gave £100 " towards the building of a new court, front, and gate towards the street, now finished," says Fuller, in his History ofthe University of Cambridge. Probably Andrewes would also find himself more at home at Peterhouse than at his own College, where Harsnet was now Master, who was compelled some years after to resign in consequence of an opposition headed by Andrewes' own favourite Matthew Wren, who was at this time a Fellow of Pembroke Hall. Wren was an undoubted and invaluable benefactor to both 1 Wharton's Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 637, ap. Dyer's Cambridge, vol. ii. p. 2. 256 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Pembroke Hall and to Peterhouse. He carefully catalogued the muniments of the latter College, a benefit that has been both felt and owned very recently by that venerable founda tion. On Thursday July 18 Casaubon dined with Dr. Eichardson, and after that arrived at Ely with the Bishop, who forthwith went to the Deanery to pay his respects to Dr. TindaU the Dean, also President of Queens' CoUege, Cambridge. He was of a noble Norfolk family. He was son to Sir Thomas TindaU, of Hockwold near Brandon in Norfolk. Sir William was made Knight of the Bath by Henry VII. at the creation of Arthur Prince of Wales, and was then declared heir to the kingdom of Bohemia in right of Margaret his great grand mother, niece of the King of Bohemia, and daughter to the Duke of Theise. Dr. Humphrey TindaU, or Tyndale, was great-grandson of this Sir William.1 He was at this time very infirm, and died October 12th, 1614, and was buried in the Cathedral. He had been made Chancellor of Lichfield and Archdeacon of Stafford both on the same day, February 21, 1586, by Bishop Overton, and retained these preferments to his death. He was also Vicar of Soham. On Sunday July 21st Casaubon attended with Andrewes at the Cathedral. He informs us that the Bishop daUy attended divine service there whilst he was in residence. On the 24th July, Wednesday, Casaubon took a survey of Ely itself and of the Cathedral, especially admiring the octagon lantern. On the following Wednesday, July 31 (our 9th August), the Bishop accompanied him to the Cathedral very early in the morning, and they together took especial notice of the lantern tower. At that time the choir was immediately under it. On the 4th August, being the first Sunday in the month, the holy Sacrament was administered, the Bishop and Casau bon being present. On Monday, 5th, the anniversary of the Gowrie Conspiracy was observed at the Cathedral. The Dean and the other 1 Blomefield's Norfolk, vol, i. p. 491. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 257 clergy met the Bishop at the great west -door, and psalms were chanted as they proceeded up the nave. After morning service the Bishop himself preached, and a few worshippers remained to receive the holy Communion. On Tuesday, August 6th, the Bishop took Casaubon with him, on his way to Wisbeach, to his palace at Downham1 Market, which was his favourite residence, and in the chapel of which it was his frequent practice to hold his ordinations. On Wednesday the Mayor and ten burgesses, with a company of about one-hundred-and-fifty on horses, met the Bishop at his entering into Wisbeach. On Thursday a sermon was preached at the church, the beauty of which Casaubon did not fail to observe. He went afterwards to the Castle where some Jesuits and recusants were confined. On Friday the 9th the Bishop and Casaubon went on horseback to inspect the dykes on the other side of Wisbeach from that by which they entered. After going four or five miles at a walking pace they lost their way. On their return the Bishop's horse threw him, but the good providence of 1 "The manor (of Downham) having been. purchased by Ethelwold, Bishop of Winchester, was given by him to the monks of Ely" (a.d. 970). " On the division of the manors of the church, in the time of Hervey, the first Bishop," (a.d. 1109), "Downham was one of those annexed to the see, and became one of the chief residences of its prelates. Bishop John de Fontibus died at his palace at Downham in 1225; Bishop Robert de Oxford in 1310; Bishop Fordham in 1425 ; and Bishop Grey in 1478. Downham Palace was repaired by Bishop Andrewes. Bishop Wren was arrested at Downham, and sent from thence prisoner to the Tower by the order of Parliament in 1642. The Palace having been suffered to go to decay during the interregnum, and no repairs having been attempted by the succeeding prelates, Bishop Patrick, who was promoted to the see in 1691, procured an Act of Parliament to enable him to lease out the mansion and demesnes, and to secure himself and his successors from dilapidations ; George Grantley of Piccadilly is the present lessee" (1808). " There are considerable remains of the Bishop's Palace which appears to have been rebuilt by Bishop Alcock, the founder of Jesus College in Cambridge, whose device with the arms of the see are upon a rich doorway of brick and stone, ornamented with crockets, &c. The offices are fitted up as a farmhouse ; the park in the reign of Henry III. contained 250 acres."— Lysons* Cambridge shire, p. 178. 258 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. God so ordered it that he received no hurt either from his fall or whilst between the horse's feet.1 On Saturday the 10th, after having read some Psalms together, as was the Bishop's custom, they went to the Assizes, at which the Bishop presided. They then returned to Downham Market. On Wednesday the 14th Casaubon and his wife went to the quarry near Ely. On Monday the 19th the Bishop accompanied him on his horse to see the country around and beyond Ely. On Wednesday the 21st the Bishop gave a great dinner to the nobility and gentry of the neighbourhood. On Thursday the 29th Casaubon returned to London. On the 22nd September Andrewes held an ordination in the chapel of his palace at Downham Market. He ordained Deacons Samuel Stubbin, B.A. of Emmanuel CoUege 1609, and M.A. 1612, and WiUiam Eawley, M.A., FeUow of Corpus Christi College, chaplain to Lord Bacon, and Eector of Landbeach near Cambridge, where he died, aged seventy- nine years, June 18, 1667. Bacon valued our prelate's learning, and sent to him the MS. of his Cogitata et Visa for his remarks upon it, as he had done upon previous occasions.2 1 " At Ely," says Buckeridge, in his funeral sermon for Bishop Andrewes, " he spent, in reparation of Ely House in Holborn, of Ely Palace at Downham, and Wisbeach Castle, £2000." (p. 19.) Ely House was bequeathed to the see by John de Kirkby, Chancellor and Treasurer of England, Dean of Wimborne, and then Bishop of Ely. He died in 1290. Queen Elizabeth obtained of Bishop Cox a lease of Ely House, Holborn, in 1579 for a term of years to Sir Christopher Hatton. The palace was re covered, but part of the precincts remained to the Hatton family, who built upon it the houses now called Hatton Garden. During the civil war it was converted into an hospital for the use of the sick and maimed soldiers. Bishop Keene, for some years Master of Peterhouse, Cambridge, and who owed his bishopric of Ely to his brother the Spanish Ambassador, procured an Act of Parliament for the alienation of this property in 1772. Wisbeach Castle was passed over from the King to the see of Ely. It was repaired or rebuilt of brick by Bishop Morton about 1480. Bishop Alcock died there October 1st, 1500. Andrewes repaired it. When it was sold in Cromwell's time Secretary Thurlow purchased it, and built a house on its site designed by Inigo Jones. Since the restoration it has been leased out by the Bishops. • Letter 96, Works, vol. iii. p. 241. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 259 In another letter, addressed to King James October 12, 1620,1 Bacon mentions that the Bishop was acquainted for nearly thirty years with his intention of writing the Novum Organon. After his retirement he also dedicated to Bishop Andrewes his Advertisement touching a Holy War, concluding in these words: "This work I have dedicated to your lordship in respect of our ancient and private acquaintance, and because amongst the men of our times I hold you in special rever ence."2 Andrewes usually spent July, August, and Sep tember in his diocese, and so he, soon after this ordination, returned to London. On the 13th October, Saturday, he took Casaubon with him from London to Ware, and on Saturday the 19th they reached Boyston, and were the King's guests at his house there in Armingford-street. It is still to be seen, with the private garden, in which is a mulberry-tree from one which the King himself is said to have planted, which fell down about twelve years since. They remained two days with the King. On the 4th of November Casaubon was again with Andrewes. On the 14th they again set out together to Boyston, spent the greater part of Friday the 15th with the King, and returned. Casaubon was with Andrewes again on the 25th. On the next day he wrote to Daniel Heyne. He relates that on October 22nd the King commanded him to attend him to London. There were present Archbishop Abbot and Bishop Andrewes. Andrewes begged of Heyne through Casaubon to make his house his home when he was not under Casaubon's roof. Casaubon relates how he was con stantly with Andrewes about this time, and that this great prelate supplied fo him the place of De Thou, such was hisv profound learning, and so great his affability.3 On Monday, December 2nd, he again went to the King at 1 p- 584- " Works, vol. ii. p. 282. 3 Casaub. Epist. pp. 437, 438. s2 260 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Eoyston with Andrewes, and remained with him there the next day. He was again in attendance upon Andrewes on the 7th on account of a letter from Mountagu, Bishop of Bath and Wells, written for the King respecting the returning of the papers with which he and Andrewes had been entrusted. These related to the letter to Cardinal Perron, which Casau bon was than preparing under the King's direction.1 Toward the end of this year (1611) was printed at London by Eobert Barker the King's printer, Elenchus Befutationis Torturm Torti pro Beverendissimo in Christo Patre Domino Episcopo Eliensi (Andrewes) adversus Martinum Becanum Jesuitam. Authore Bichardo Thomsonio Cantabrigiensi : A Confutation of the Jesuit Martin Becan's Befutation of Bp. Andrewes' s Tortura Torti. This little volume is a 12mo of 104 pages, dedicated to the author's friend, Sir Thomas Jermyn. It is written with much point, spirit, and ability. The author animadverts upon the misrepresentation of Becan, who for the King's supremacy substitutes primacy.2 Becan would have his readers imagine that Andrewes and King James were at variance respecting the Pope's being Antichrist. We have already seen the opinion of both upon that topic. The King only conceded, that whilst he held to his own opinion respecting Antichrist, he would not place his opinion thereon amongst articles of faith.3 Thomson alleges the remarkable coincidence with Bev. xvii. of the name long engraven on the Papal tiara, mystery. This most remarkable circumstance, admitted by Lessius, himself a zealous partisan of the Eomish see, was denied by Bossuet, who was exposed by M. Christian Gotthilf Blumberg in his Exercitium anti-Bossueticum, 1695, and again farther esta blished in his Mysterium Papali coronal adscriptum, 1702, against Dr. John Louis Hanneman, Professor of Medicine at Kiel. Thomson objects to Bellarmine the fact that the King of Spain was by hereditary right invested with the entire authority of a legatus a latere in the kingdom of Sicily, having 1 Andrewes' Minor Works, p. 7. * p. 33. 3 p. 61. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 261 power to absolve, excommunicate, forbid appeals to Eome, &c. This he proves by the very words of Ascanius Colonna, one of the College of Cardinals, in p. 161 of his work upon the kingdom of Sicily against Baronius.1 The author, Eichard Thomson, was Proctor in 1612 of Clare Hall, in which year occur also as Proctors, Stephen Haget of Queens' College, and Henry Bird of Trinity HaU.2 This Thomson or Thompson is said to have been the same with the author of another Latin treatise (unless indeed that was a posthumous treatise), which was published at Leyden in 1618, Bicardi Thomsonis Angli Diatriba de Amissione et Intercisione Gratia} et Justificationis, 1618. The author who wrote in defence of Andrewes was incorporated of the Uni versity of Oxford July 1, 1596, according to Wood, who at the same time concludes his account of him with this obser vation : " One of both his names was as a M. of A. of Cambr. incorporated in this University 1593, which I take to be the same with this," namely, the author both of the Elenchus and of the Diatriba. However, -our author, the author of the Elenchus, is doubtless truly described by Anthony Wood as a "Dutchman born of English parents," for he was an eminent tutor at Clare Hall in 1604, prior to which the pious Nicholas Ferrar was entered at that CoUege. In a life abridged from one written by Dr. Turner, Bishop of Ely, and published in the Christian Magazine for July 1761 (p. 356), we have the following notice of him and of Clare Hall at that time. " In his (Ferrar's) thirteenth year Mr. Brooks himself (who kept a school near Newbury, Berkshire,) would needs carry his young scholar to settle him in the University, declaring that he was more than ripe for it, and alleging his loss of time if he staid any longer at school. He placed him at Cambridge at Clare Hall, famous for a set of the most eminent men of their times in their several faculties ; Dr. Butler for physic,3 Mr. Lake, who was after advanced to be Secretary of l p. 84. 2 So Le Neve, but his name does not occur in any University documents for 1612. 3 Dr. William Butler was a Licentiate of Medicine 26th October, 1572, having been, previously to his election to a fellowship at Clare HaD, B.A. of 262 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. State, Mr. Euggle (the celebrated author of Ignoramus) for his exquisite skill in all polite learning, Dutch Thomson, as we quote him still at Cambridge, Mr. Parkinson, and Dr. Austin Lindsell, afterwards Lord Bishop of Peterborough, and at last of Hereford, for their profound knowledge in divinity. The last of these, who was the general scholar, was pleased to receive a youth of such great hopes into his own tuition."1 The other Thomson, incorporated M.A. at Oxford in 1593, was Eichard Thomson of Trinity College, Cambridge, B.A. 1587-8, M.A. 1591. The Jesuit Becan was this year answered also by the Eev. Eobert Burhill, of Corpus Christi CoUege, Oxford, whom Bishop Andrewes afterwards rewarded with the rectory of Snailwell, in the county of Cambridge, and about three miles north of Newmarket. BurhiU's vindication of the Bishop is entitled, Pro Tortura Torti, contra Martinum Becanum Jesuitam, Besponsio Boberti Burhilli Angli. Lon- dini : Excudebat Bobertus Barkerus, serenissimm Begim Ma- jestatis Typographus. Anno Dom. 1611. It is dedicated to Prince Henry. In his epistle to the reader he mentions that his references are to the Cologne edition of Tortus, 1608, and to the London edition of the Tortura, 1609. Becan had displayed the usual arts of his fraternity, and in so doing sometimes contradicted Bellarmine whom he professed to defend, by assuming a liberality inconsistent with the ultramontanism of the Cardinal. He also dealt in Pembroke Hall 1563, and M.A. 1566. He was born at Ipswich, and was the most eminent physician of his age. Dyer iu his account of Clare Hall has made him the same with another benefactor to that foundation, noticing him as " John Freeman Butler, Esq." * He attended Prince Henry in his last illness November 1612. He gave a chalice of solid gold for the divine service, and a handsome carpet to cover the Communion-table, and also left by his will two curious flagons, the one of crystal, the other serpentine tipped with silver, and all his books in folio. There is a mural monument to his memory, with his bust, on the south side of tho chancel of Great St. Mary's, Cambridge. He died January 9th, 1618, in his 83rd year. 1 The Life of George Ruggle, p. ix. prefixed to his Ignoramus, edited by Sir John Sidney Hawkins, 1787. * Dyer's Cambridge, vol. ii. p. 38, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 263 the popular misrepresentations of the royal supremacy, and continually laboured to pervert the meaning of his oppo nents. Burhill reminded him that whilst he had boasted of having refuted both the King and the Bishop in regard of the oath of allegiance, he had passed over a third author, George Blackwell, whom not very long before Clement VIII. had appointed arch-presbyter of England. Blackwell had written to demonstrate both the equity of the oath, and the falsity of the Papal claim to depose princes. Becan studied insolence and invective, treating both the King and our prelate with disrespect, and professing to depreciate the learning and talent of the latter in his very title-page, which ran as foUows, Befutatio Torturoz Torti, seu contra Sacellanum Begis Angliw quod causam Begis sui negli- genter egerit, ' A Eefutation of the Tortura, Torti, or against the Chaplain of the King of England because he had slight ingly handled the cause of his King.' Burhill objects to him the inconsistency of this charge of negligence on the Bishop's part with his own admission, Si verba spectem satis cultus et elegans es ; si laborem ac diligentiam, non culpo otium: at multa alia sunt quai non aique probem1 'If I look to the style, you are sufficiently ornate and elegant ; if to the pains and diligence, I have not to blame want of care. But there are many other things which I cannot equally approve.' Burhill justly charges Becan with making common cause with those traitors, Nicholas Sanders and the proto-pseudo martyr of the Jesuits in England, Edmund Campian. He proceeds to remind Becan that not only the Gallican and Venetian divines, but amongst the Spanish, Francesco de Victoria, Dominic Bannes, Medina, Ledesna, and Sotus denied that the clergy were jure divino exempt from the civU power, (p. 62). He maintains the royal supremacy on the now, alas, deserted doctrine that the end of Christian government is somewhat higher than the advancement of mere secular prosperity. The Church of Eome he does not hesitate to charge with spiritual adultery as the scarlet whore 1 p. 22. 264 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of the Apocalypse (purpurata meretrix). (p. 85.) He takes notice of the perversion of Scripture by Baronius, who, stirring up Pope Paul V. against the Venetians, admonished him that the Apostle Peter's was a twofold office, to feed and to slay, because it was said to him, Bise Peter, kill and eat. Acts x. 13. (p. 85.) He claims for the Sovereign the right as well of dis solving as of calling together ecclesiastical assemblies, and of interposing to set aside useless controversies, and for the sup pression of religious factions, (p. 106.) Also the power of annulling unjust censures, and of nominating in eccle siastical elections, (pp. 106, 107.) He denies to the Sove reign the right of imposing canons by his sole authority, or of condemning as heretical that which has not hitherto been pronounced heretical, (p. 108.) He notices the extra vagant claims of the Pope in the 7th section (p. 85) of the Book of Ceremonies, to " all power in heaven and in earth." (p. 109.) He recognizes the Augustinian idea of the invisible church, namely, those who through internal grace are members of the body of Christ, (p. 134.) He objects to Becan that there is no unity in his Church in regard of essentials if Bellarmine is to be followed, who repeatedly affirms that the Pope's power of deposing princes is an article, nay, one of the chief articles of the Catholic faith, (p. 145.) He refers to various Eomish writers who had taught the contrary, and here he makes use of that great storehouse of Protestant evidence, Flacii Illyrici Catalogus Testium Veritatis. (p. 146.) Becan, he says, must needs confess that there are three preva lent opinions respecting the Pope's dominion over princes, that of Baronius and the Canonists, that the Pope is directly lord of the world and judge of kings ; that of Bellarmine and of the Jesuits, that he is so not directly but indirectly ; and that of the Ghibelines and those who hold with them, that he has no such lordship and authority either directly or indirectly. (p. 147.) He exposes the historical falsehoods of Bellarmine in the 21st chapter of his book upon the Sacraments in his polemical works, and of Binius, at p. 1494 of the third volume of the Councils, respecting the pretended submission of the Greeks to the Church of Eome in the Council of Lateran 1215 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 265 (by a mistake printed 1195, p. 152), and at the Council of Lyons 1274, and thirdly at that of Florence in 1439. Toward the end of this the 15th chapter Burhill with his Sovereign applies the Apocalypse to the Church of Eome, and in the great diminution of the revenues of that church which ensued upon the Eeformation, sees the commencement of the punishmet predicted against that apostate communion in the 16th verse of the 17th chapter, (p. 161.) In the 12th chapter Burhill exposes the sanction which both Popes and Jesuits had given to the assassination of Henry III. of France, and the democratic doctrine of Bellarmine that kings derived their rights from the people, the Pope from God alone, and further iUustrates the tenet that no faith is to be kept with heretics, (p. 204.) He here takes occasion to expose the in consistency of Becan, who in one place had admitted that the Council of Constance had granted John Huss a safe- conduct, and in another had denied that the Council had made any promise to him. Burhill unveils the fallacies by which Becan would with others blind the public to the reality of this obnoxious tenet, and cites numerous autho rities of the Bomish Church who had insisted upon it : Simanca, Conrad Brunus (1. iii. De Haireticis, c. 15, n. 6, et seq. in Tractatibus illustrium Jureconsultorum de Judiciis crimi- nalibus sanctai Inquisitionis) , Francis Burchardt (in Autonomid, parte iii. c. 13), Joh. Paul Windeck (in Deliberatione deHaire- sibus extirpandis), Ayala (De Jure Belli, 1. i. c. 6, n. 8), Molanus (De Fide Haireticis Servandd, 1. iv. c. 7); and so Cardinal Hosius, in his Epistles to Henry King of Poland, " Never suffer yourself by any consideration to be bound to the fulfilment of those things that you have promised, because an oath ought not to be an obligation of iniquity." In the 20th chapter Burhill lays open the impious secret of the whole history of Jesuitism, the utter prostration of mind and conscience to the will of the superior, which forms the basis of the Jesuit's preparation for his career of perfidy and crime. So the Jesuit of old went forth to subjugate the world to the Pope, as in after times he has been seen endeavouring to subjugate Popes themselves to the greatness of his own order. 266 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Our author, in an earlier section of his work, refers with the highest commendation to Dr. Thomas Morton's Catholic Apology for Protestants, 1. i. c. 9. Morton was then Dean of Winchester, and was in 1615 consecrated to the see of Chester, translated to Lichfield and Coventry 1618, and thence to Durham in 1632. On Wednesday, Christmas-day, our prelate preached be fore the King at Whitehall, from John i. 14. ExceUently does he instance the force of the term flesh, as implying our nature. So St. Augustine of holy Scripture, in the 2nd chapter of the 14th book On the City of God : Saipe etiam ipsum hominem, id est naturam hominis carnem nuncupat, modo locutionis a parte totum significans.1 Nothing can be more perspicuous than the manner in which Andrewes here makes use of his learning, applies the Nicene Creed, and sets forth the doctrine of the Church on this great article, the union of the two natures in one person intended by the ex pression, ' the taking of the manhood into God.' Beyond all praise is the simple pathos of his transition from the doctrine viewed in itself to the doctrine in its relation to us and to om- nature, the wonderful humiUation which it manifested in Christ, all that in the mystery of the incarnation which is not simply the object of our faith but of our love. It is perhaps true that the very faultiness of the style, the continual mixture of English and Latin, yet frequently, as here, adds to the point of those antitheses which are so touch- ingly brought into our prelate's discourses. Certainly the rejection of that simpUcity, which in Bishop Andrewes is always effective because it spurns aU elaborate ness of construction and expression, gives to the best of our modern sermons a comparative coldness and ineffectiveness that cannot be too deeply regretted. Men scorn as over- prettinesses what is too simple to be natural to them or to the vitiated taste which they profess to esteem it their duty to pamper. Upon such, with whom a preaching next to foolish has the greatest attractions, the works of Bishop Andrewes would be thrown away ; they could not appreciate ' Op. torn. v. pars. 2da, p. 48. Lugduni, apud Sebastianum Honoratum, 1560. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 267 that fertility of the imagination, that combination of simple imagery, which, like the parables of our Saviour, is of uni versal adaptation. Let the reader study the point so promi nent in almost every sentence of this discourse. We may read and hear many long and overstrained compositions, out of which none shall be able to carry away so complete and so concise a lesson as this of the grace and truth of the Word: " Grace is to adopt us, truth to beget us anew ; for, of his own will he hath begotten us, by the word of truth." What are many of our sermons to this one paragraph? " Good hope we now have, that he being now flesh, all flesh may come to him, to present him with their requests. Time was when they fled from him, but ad factum carnem jam veniet omnis caro. For since he dwelt amongst us, all may resort unto him, yea, even sinners ; and of them it is said, Hie recipit peccatores et comedit cum eis, He receiveth them, receiveth them even to his table." And here we will conclude this chapter. It is brief, and comprises but one year of the life of our prelate; but we cannot better end than with the mention and memorial of His incarnation, who, by taking our flesh, assured us of his love, that love in which is bound up om- true, our eternal good. For now " He seeth us daily in himself; he cannot look upon his flesh but he must think upon us. And God the Father cannot now hate the flesh which the Word is made."1 1 Sermon 6 of The Nativity, p. 51. 268 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE XIII. The Version of 1611 — Br. Gell — Bishop Marsh — Luther — Tyndale — Coverdale — Cranmer' s Bible — Geneva Bible — Br. Whitaker on the Old Testament — Tregelles — Matthcei — Valla's Collations — Complutensian New Testament — Frasmus — Stephens — His MSS. of the New Testament — Beza. It was in the course of this year, 1611, that the present Version ofthe Holy Scriptures appeared. I cannot pass over this opportunity of attempting, however briefly and inade quately, to pay my passing tribute to this noble work, a work destined to abide the shock of peradventure one and another coming attack ; a work well able to abide every effort of the innovating spirit of our own or future generations that may be directed against it. The Eev. Frederick Hemy Scrivener, M.A., who has now established his reputation for accuracy and completeness as a collator of the Biblical MSS. preserved in our own country, in his Supplement to the Authorized English Version of the New Testament,1 remarks of King James's version of the Bible : " I hardly need observe that it has received the highest panegyrics from BibUcal scholars of every shade of theological sentiment, from the date of its publication to the present time. For more than a century after its completion almost the only person of respectable acquirements and station who wrote against it, was Dr. Eobert Gell, whose twenty discourses or sermons on this subject (London, 1659, foUo) I have not been able to meet with. 1 London : Pickering, 1845. p. 101. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 269 They are not in the British Museum nor in Sion College Library.1 Judging from Lewis's description of the book, my loss has not been great. Gell had taken up a foolish and very unfounded notion that the Calvinistic bias of some of the translators had a prejudicial effect on the version : but Gal. v. 6 is the only text I can discover to which he objects on this ground.2 The New Testament he thought to be worse rendered than the Old, and he complains that the order of the words in the original is wholly neglected (Heb. x. 34). Lewis also mentions Matt. xx. 23, 1 John iii. 20, as passages which Dr. Gell thought capable of improvement; but if he gives us any" thing " approaching to a fair analysis of the contents of these sermons, they never could have en dangered the reputation of the translation which they as sailed."3 Our rendering of Matt. xx. 23 accords with St. Chrysostom and Theophylact, as Mr. Scrivener himself admits, whilst proposing another,4 on the ground that aXKa, is here to be taken for et /x.fj, except to those for whom it is prepared of my Father. The other passage, 1 John iii. 20, has been diffe rently interpreted, and by some unnaturally connected with the preceding verse, as may be seen in Wolfii Curai Philo logical in Novum Testamentum. But our Version can no more in this than in the other instance be justly charged with inaccuracy. In the present century our authorized Version has found indeed various opponents of very various attainments, but none without their several prejudices, none possessed of the various qualifications of that band of scholars, whose labours they have aU in turn ventured to depreciate. 1 This remark is given by Mr. Scrivener in a note. 2 This is an erratum for Gal. v. 17, so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. Estius the Romish commentator very justly remarks that the original is equivalent to cannot. " Sensus est, hsec qua} dixi, caro et spiritus contrariis motibus ac desideriis ita pugnant inter se, in hominibus justis, quales vos estis; ut propter eam causam non omnia qua? vultis facialis. Vultis enim omnino non pati motus carnis, sed sine repugnantiEt quod bonum est facere: verum, impediente carne, non facitis; imo nee durante hac mortalitate, facere potestis." — p. 580. Paris, torn i. 1653. 3 pp. 101, 102. * p. 256. 270 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. The name of the pretender whom the able pages1 of Dr. Whitaker, then a Fellow of St. John's CoUege, Cambridge, have condemned to perpetual infamy, has only obtained a place in the catalogue of literary impostors. A more formidable opponent appeared in a late Bishop of Peterborough, the learned but inveterately prejudiced Herbert Marsh, who, with the authority of Archbishop New- come and Dr. Macknight, names that have now in their turn all but. passed away from the world of theological learning, recommended in his second lecture on the Interpretation of the Bible the revision of our present Version. This recommenda tion was however prefaced by the admission that as the coUa- tion of the preceding versions was made by some of the most distinguished scholars in the age of James I., it is probable that our authorized Version is as faithful a representation of the original Scriptures as could have been formed at that period.2 Bishop Marsh, in tracing up its genealogy, argues with all the warmth of an advocate in behalf of the influence of Luther's version upon the first English translation, that of Tyndale. Yet, strange to say, he does not appear to have made himself acquainted with the history of Luther's version. An ample history of this version was pubUshed in 1701 at Hamburg, from the pen of Dr. John Frederic Mayer or Meyer. More recently an account of it was given in Christian Frederic Bairner's much enlarged edition of James Le Long's Biblio theca Sacra. Dr. Whitaker refers also to Michael Walther's (of Lubeck) Officina Biblica, a work in great repute with the Lutherans in the last century. Bishop Marsh observes that Luther's only help in the form of a Hebrew Lexicon, was that of Eeuchlin extracted from the meagre glossaries of the Eabbins.3 Luther applied to living sources of information from amongst 1 An Historical and Critical Enquiry into tlw Interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures, with Remarks on Mr. Bellamy's Neiv Translation. By John William Whitaker, M.A., Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. Camb. 1819. 2 Bishop Marsh's Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible, fc. Camb. 1828. pp. 296, 297. 3 Lectures, p. 295. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 271 the Jews, whilst engaged on his translation of the Bible.1 Luther was not therefore dependent upon the Vulgate for the basis of his German version of the Bible. "When," says Bishop Marsh, " Sebastian Munster composed his Dictio* narium Hebraicum, he added to each Hebrew word the sense in Latin. And whence did he derive those Latin senses? From the Vulgate. Wolf, in his Historia Lexieorum Hebrai- corum, p. 87, says of Munster, Idem Vulgatam Versionem in vertendis Hebraicis vocibus expressit. He adds, " Luther, who was a contemporary of Munster, learnt also the meaning of Hebrew words, by seeing how they were translated in the Vulgate." But Luther's version was the result of the most learned orientalists, as well Jews as Christians. Those learned Jews were to Luther what Bishop Marsh admits they were to Pagninus, a living lexicon.2 It has been conceded that Tyndale paid great deference to Luther, but it by no means follows that Tyndale was him self ignorant of the Hebrew language. Both Dr. Whitaker3 and Mr. Scrivener have vindicated Tyndale's character in this respect.4 Tyndale's New Testament appeared in 1526. For the dignity and simplicity of its style, it is even superior to our present Version ; but his third edition, published in 1534, is his best. Mr. Scrivener has given a very concise and interesting review of Tyndale's labours on the New Testa ment in his Introduction to his Supplement to the Authorized English Version^ Tyndale did not live to translate the whole of the Old Testament. Miles Coverdale, an Augustinian friar, D.D. of Tubingen and afterwards incorporated of the University of Cambridge, undertook with John Eogers, the first martyr in 1 Das Leben Dr. Martin Luther's nach Johann Mathesius. Mit einem Vorwort von Dr. G. H. v. Schubert in Miinchen, p. 81. Stuttgart, 1846. 2 Appendix to Bishop Marsh's Lectures. 1828. pp. 13, 14. 3 Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 45 — 47. 4 Supplement to the Authorized English Version, pp. 78, 79, 0 pp. 78—83. 272 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Marian persecution, to revise and complete the translation of the Old Testament which had been commenced by Tyn dale. • " Coverdale's complete translation of the Bible into English was printed a.d. 1535 at Zurich, as is commonly supposed, and the printing is undoubtedly foreign. It is properly regarded as the joint production of Tyndale and Coverdale" (who had been associated with Tyndale at Antwerp) " in the translation of the Old Testament, but the Pentateuch pub lished in this edition is not the same as the former. In reality Coverdale, assisted by Eogers, who corrected the press, revised the whole of Tyndale's work before they reprinted it, not only the published but the unpublished part. " In his dedication to the King, Coverdale says that he used five different translations, both Latin and Dutch, in the latter of which German must manifestly be included. Now these five translations can have been no other than the Latin Vulgate, the Latin of Pagninus,1 the German of Luther, a Dutch translation of Luther, and a German translation of the Vulgate.2 Besides these, no entire Bibles in Latin or German were then published, though versions of detached parts may have been employed; for instance, the Latin Psalters of 1 " The Latin translation of Sanctes Pagninus, Lyons, a.d. 1528. Pico de Mirandula testifies, ' Sanctem Pagninum Veteri Testamento ex Hebrteo de novo convertendo annos viginti quinque impendisse,' ' that Sanctes Pagnin devoted twenty-five years to a new translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew.' Venema gives the following account of this translator : ' Sanctes Pagninus Lucensis, Ord. PrEedic. et Concionator apostolicus, mortuus a.d. 1541, nominis nactus est celebritatem non tantum per trium linguarum, in primis HebrEese et Chaldaicse peritiam, sed et, quod primus post Hieronymum, totam verterit scripturam e Unguis originalibus in Latinam, sumtus suppeditante, et ani'miim addente Leone X. PapaV ' Sanctes Pagninus of Lucca, of the Order of Preachers, and Preacher Apostolical, deceased a.d. 1541, obtained celebrity not only by his knowledge of the three languages, especially of Hebrew and Chaldee, but from his having been the first who after Jerome translated the whole Scriptures out of their original tongues into Latin, at the cost and with the patronage of Pope Leo X.' His translation was, in fact, perfectly new, and valuable from its closeness to the Hebrew." — Dr. Whitaker' s Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 19, 20. 2 "There existed several translations of the Vulgate into German long before the Reformation." — See Le Long's Bibl. Sacra. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 273 Felix Pratensis, Conrad Pellicanus, and our own Bucer. Two of the above number, it is to be observed, are secondary translations, one from the Latin Vulgate, and the other from Luther. Consequently from five they resolve themselves into three, viz., the Vulgate, Pagninus, and Luther, and these Coverdale confesses himself to have used, to which, for the sake of argument, we will add the Septuagint.1 Besides these four versions, there actually was no other source from which he could have translated except the Hebrew ; and if these four be removed, it will inevitably follow that he did translate from the Hebrew, and from nothing else."2 t Dr. Whitaker proceeds to prove that Coverdale did not in some instances adhere to any of the translations already mentioned, but translated for himself, and with success, from the Hebrew. As an instance he gives Isa. lvii. 5, as found in the Septuagint, the Vulgate, Pagninus, and Luther. Cover- dale renders, Ye take your pleasure under the oaks, and under all green trees, ihe child being slain in the valleys and dens of stone. This is not literal, but it gives the sense of the original with great accuracy, and is also very unlike the translations which he employed to help him in his labours."3 The true rendering was admitted into Cranmer's Bible, but changed in a large black-letter edition to Ye make your fire under the oaks. Among ihe oaks is still found in the margin of the Authorized Version. "Bishop Coverdale's translation," says Mr. Scrivener, "is spoken of in very favourable terms by Kennicott,4 who, besides several passages of the Old Testament, quotes Luke xxiii. 32, John xviii. 37, as instances where his interpretation is prefer able to that of our present Bibles."5 Indeed Mr. Scrivener i Had Mr. Scrivener borne these observations of Dr. Whitaker in mind, he would not have written the following in p. 84 of his Introduction : " Since it seems impossible to discover the precise versions to which he here alludes, or even to determine with certainty whether each of them contained the whole, or only a portion of Scripture, we cannot hope to arrive at any positive conclusion in this matter." 2 Dr. Whitaker's Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 48, 50. 3 Ibid. p. 54. < Diss. Gen. ad Vet. Test. § 89, note. 5 Introduction to his Supplement to the Authorized Version of the New Testa ment, p. 85. 274 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. speaks of the lavish praise which Dr. Kennicott has bestowed on Coverdale's labours, and condemns his version of the New Testament as very unequal, and betraying many marks of precipitancy.1 The second complete Protestant Bible in our language was that of John Eogers, who had assisted Coverdale, and been his corrector of the press. It was published under the feigned name of Thomas Matthew, and printed by Grafton and Whitchurch at Hamburg, as is supposed, though it bears date London, 1537. It was a mere revision of the former Bible, undertaken by Coverdale and Eogers together.2 Passing by Taverner's Bible 1539, which was taken partly from the Vulgate, and was suppressed by the Privy Council, we come to the Great Bible sometimes caUed Cranmer's, published also in 1539. Its translation of the Psalms is still retained in our Prayer Book. This version of the Bible was greatly indebted to the labours of Tyndale, Coverdale, and Eogers; but previously to its repubUcation in 1541, it was revised by Cuthbert Tonstall, Bishop of Durham, and Nicolas Heath, at that time Bishop of Eochester, afterwards successively Bishop of Worcester and Archbishop of York. " Cranmer's New Testament," says Mr. Scrivener, " is full of interpolations (distinguished however from the rest of the text by a difference in the character) which depend mainly or even exclusively on the authority of the ancient Latin version. I subjoin a few instances, selected from a much larger number, in all which the additions of the Great Bible have been re jected by subsequent English translators. Matt. xxvi. 53 ; xxvii. 8 : Mark ii. 23 : Luke xvi. 21 ; xxiv. 36 : Acts xv. 34 and 41 : Bom. i. 32 ; v. 2 and 8 ; xii. 17:1 Cor. iv. 16 ; xiv. 33 : 2 Cor. xi. 21 : Col. i. 6 : James v. 3 : 1 Pet. v. 2 and 3 : 2 Pet. i. 10 ; ii. 4. In the following texts it agrees with Latin MSS. against the present printed text, both Latin and Greek : Matt. xix. 21 : John vii. 29 : Acts xiv. 7 : 1 Cor. x. 17 : 2 Cor. viii. 20. The interpolated clause in the last five 1 Introduction to the Supplement to the Authorized Version of the New Testa ment, p. 85. ' Dr. Whitaker's Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 59, 60. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 275 instances is also found in Wickliffe. In 1 Cor. xv. 47, Cover- dale follows the Vulgate reading, while the Great Bible an nexes it to that of the Greek, which had been adopted by Tyndale. On the other hand, this edition very properly inserts from the Complutensian Polyglot, or the Vulgate, the latter part of James iv. 6, which not being found in the MS. chiefly used by Erasmus (2 of Wetstein1) had not yet been admitted into the received text. Another addition de rived from the same source is Luke xvii. 36, the authenticity of which is not so well established."2 In 1557 was published the first edition of the Geneva New Testament. This was followed by the Geneva Bible in 1560. This has been ascribed to several of the Marian exiles, Good man, Gilby, Whittingham, Sampson, Cole, Knox, Bodley, the father of the famous Sir Thomas Bodley, and Pulleyn. Mr. Christopher Anderson, in his Annals ofthe English Bible, reduces the number of the translators to three, Whittingham, Gilby, and Sampson,3 and remarks that at one period or another all the three seem to have been befriended by Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon.4 The three returned home after the last sheet of the Geneva Bible had been committed to the press, which was on the 10th April, 1560. Whittingham on his return from Geneva was nominated to accompany the Earl of Bedford to the French court, and 1 Codex Basileensis,"B. vi. 25, in Bengel Bas. £. According to Wetstein it is an incorrect copy of the Gospels, written in the 15th century, in which i\, i, and ei ; a and o, ai and c ; 0 and v are very frequently confounded. There are also many omissions from homoioteleuta or similar terminations of sentences. Both these defects, however, it has in common with the celebrated Codex Alexandrinus and many other MSS. Erasmus made use of it, but not of it only, in his edition of the New Testament ; and it was from this MS. that the press was set after he had made his alterations, which are still visible, as also the marks of the printer. Bengel has allotted a place in his Apparatus Criticus to several of its readings, which he procured from Iselin. See Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testa ment, edited by Herbert Marsh, B.D, Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. Camb. 1793. vol. ii. p. 220. Its text, according to Scholz, is allied to the Byzantine family. — Prolegomena to his New Testament, vol. i. p. xciv. Lips. 1830. 2 Scrivener's Introd. §c, pp. 87, 88. :< Vol. ii. p. 321. 4 See of him John Nichols' Leicestershire, vol. iii. part 2, pp. 583 — 588. 276 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. was on his return made Dean of Durham, July 19, 1563, through the influence of the Earl of Warwick. As Dean he successfully opposed the visitation of Sandys. He died June 10, 1579, and was buried in his Cathedral. Anthony Gilby was a native of Lincolnshire, B.A. Christ CoUege, Cambridge, 1531, M.A. 1535. He was preferred by the Earl of Hastings, whose seat was at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, to the vicarage there. Mr. Peck, from the MSS. of Thomas Baker, observes that " he lived at Ashby as great as a bishop." He is noticed with great commendation in Bishop HaU's autobiography, who was himself bom at Ashby-de-la-Zouch. He was succeeded by his son Nathaniel Gilby, who was matriculated at Christ CoUege December 8, 1582, but was a Fellow of Emmanuel CoUege 1589. He was also born at Ashby. Thomas Sampson had been Eector of All HaUows, Bread- street, London, and in 1552 Dean of Chichester. He fled to Geneva in the reign of Queen Mary, and on his return was made Prebendary of the seventh stall at Durham Septem ber 4, 1560, and was installed Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, in Michaelmas term 1561. Giving a factious opposition to the ceremonies of the Church of which he was a member, and that in so public a place as the University of Oxford, Arch bishop Parker removed him from this preferment in 1564. He was however afterwards appointed to the Prebendal StaU of St. Pancras in St. Paul's, London, September 13, 1570, whilst Sandys was Bishop of that see, and also made Master of Wigston's Hospital, on the north-east side of St. Martin's churchyard, Leicester. To this dignity he was appointed in 1588. He died there April 9, 1589, and was buried in the chapel of the hospital, where his sons John and Nathanael erected a monument to his memory.1 To John Bodleigh or Bodley, who also had fled with his wife Joan (before her marriage Miss J. Hone, an heiress in the hundred of Ottery, Devon,) to Geneva, and who was the father of that great benefactor not only to Oxford but to the world, Sir Thomas Bodley, was granted by his renowned 1 See the epitaph in Browne Willis's Cathedrals. Oxford, p. 440. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 277 sovereign on January 8th, 1561, a patent (to him and his assigns) for the term of seven years, for the printing of the English Bible with annotations (i. e. the Geneva Bible), "faithfully translated and finished this present year, and dedicated to us."1 The Eev. Frederic H. Scrivener, in his Introduction to his Notes on the New Testament, published by Pickering in 1845, remarks of the translators, " They appear to have paid little attention to Coverdale and the Great Bible, but taking Tyndale for their model, they subjected his version to a searching examination, retaining his renderings where they deemed them satisfactory, and never deserting his text without some adequate motive. The Geneva editors bestowed much care on the Greek particles ; for although Cranmer's version had already supplied some of Tyndale's deficiencies on this head, numerous important omissions were still left for its successors to detect. Another considerable improvement was their repre senting in a separate character the words they found it neces sary to insert in order to complete the sense of their translation. This admirable expedient is supposed to have originated with Sebastian Munster (Biblia Latina 1534), but it was first used in English for the Geneva New Testament."2 Mr. Scrivener thus concludes his observations on this version. "They (the translators) were intimately versed in the Scriptures, and profoundly imbued with their spirit. It is not too much to say that their version is the best in the English language, with the single exception of our present authorized Bible. And even King James's revisers sometimes retain the renderings of the Bishops' Bible, where they are decidedly inferior to that [those] of the Geneva New Testa ment, (e.g. Matt. v. 29 ; xii. 14 ; xiii. 45 ; xvi. 1, &c.) With the edition of 1557, however, commenced that unhappy defer ence to Beza's Latin Version, published only the year before, (see the Geneva renderings of Matt. i. 11 ; Luke ii. 22 ; Gal. 1 " This present year," i. e. 1560, according to the old style. Anderson's Annals of the English Bible, vol. ii. p. 324. 2 Scrivener's Introd. S;c, pp. 92, 93. 278 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. iv. 17 ; Heb. x. 38), which has in some instances warped the judgment of our own translators also. " It is proper to state that the version of the New Testa ment given of the Geneva Bible of 1560 varies considerably from that in the first edition of 1557. The alterations can scarcely have proceeded from the original translators, and considered as a whole, are inferior to the interpretations which they displace." 1 The Bishops' Bible, the authorized version of Queen Elizabeth, received its name from the number of bishops who were engaged upon it. It was first published in 1568, but a more accurate edition followed in 1572. Parker superintended its preparation and wrote the preface. This version has been regarded as better than Cranmer's, but inferior to the Genevan. In preparing the present, this last, the Bishops' Bible was to receive as few alterations as might be, and to pass throughout, unless the originals plainly caUed for amendment. But the translations of Tyndale, Mathews, Coverdale, Whitchurch (i.e. Cranmer's), and Geneva were to be used when they came closer to the Hebrew than the Bishop's Bible. " Sciolists, it is true," observes Dr. Whitaker, " have often attempted to raise their own reputation on the ruin of that of others, and the authors of the English Bible have frequently been calumniated by charlatans of every description ; but it may safely be asserted, without fear of contradiction, that the nation at large has always paid our translators the tribute of veneration and gratitude which they so justly merit. Like the mighty of former times, they have departed and shared the common fate of mortality, but they have not, like those heroes of antiquity, 'gone without their fame,' though but little is known of their individual worth. Their reputation for learning and piety has not descended with them to the grave, though they are there alike heedless of the voice of calumny and deaf to the praise which admiring posterity awards to the memory of the great and good. Let us not, therefore, too hastily conclude that they have ' fallen on evil 1 Scrivener's Introd. §c, pp. 93, 94. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 279 days and evil tongues,' because it has occasionally happened that an individual, as inferior to them in erudition as in talents and integrity, is found questioning their motives or denying their qualifications for the task which they so well performed. Their version has been used ever since its first appearance, not only by the Church, but by all the sects which have for saken her, and has justly been esteemed by all for its general faithfulness and the severe beauty of its language."1 " It is not pretended that our translation is faultless, but we contend that its errors have been misrepresented both as to number and magnitude. Of whatever nature those faults may be, none who are able to appreciate the excellence of our English Bible, and are real friends to the cause of religion, can hesitate in declaring that their removal is highly desirable. The first step towards such a measure would be a collection of those passages which are erroneously translated, with proofs that in such instances the Hebrew is not accurately rendered. It will be found that the number of these passages is very small."2 " There are many verbs in the Hebrew which are not rendered precisely in the same voice or number in our trans lation as they are in the original, and all these have been charged on our translators as instances of their ignorance. This is extremely unjust, for the alterations usually occur in places where they do not affect the sense, and were evidently made for the sake of euphony."3 " There are some, but very few, errors of inadvertency in the English Version. The Masora has not been equally attended to in all places, and sometimes an absurdity has resulted from translating the Hebrew as it stands in the text, and not regarding the Keri notes. Some alterations in such passages are much to be desired, for they are very important, and are sometimes rendered in a manner quite contradictory to their real import. It is not however quite clear that some of these omissions were not intentional, and it must at the 1 Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 92 — 94. - Ibid. pp. 110, 111. 3 Ibid. p. 112. 280 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. same time be observed that all these annotations are not of the same authority, and in some cases ought to be overlooked."1 Whosoever will be at the pains to compare our version of the Old Testament with the second and much improved edition of Bosenmuller's commentary, wiU be satisfied with the general fidelity and ability of our translators, and will deprecate any attempt in the present generation at a revision of the English Bible. We now come to the consideration of the New Testament. This Tregelles at home and Tischendorf abroad would have us believe to be founded upon a corrupt text, essentially different from the original. This is a bold and startling theory, but as baseless as a thousand other phantasies of the boasted illumination of the age. What Dr. TregeUes has thought fit invidiously to write of Scholz, who by his indefatigable labours doubled the number of known New Testament manuscripts, may with more justice be applied to himself. "It sometimes happens that an ex ploring collector is by no means the most competent person to classify and catalogue the objects which he brings home with him. His own estimate of their value may be far higher than that of an experienced man of science, whose time has been occupied rather with studying than with wandering."2 The only genuine student who examined his materials with scholarlike judiciousness, and devoted years to the study not only of the New Testament but of the Fathers, not in printed editions but in manuscript, was Matthaei, whose scholarship raised him in the estimation of the late leamed Bishop Mid dleton above Griesbach and aU his contemporaries. Griesbach, whilst he depreciated his labours and declaimed against his principles, was not always above being beholden to the fruits of his patient and much calumniated investi gations.3 Matthaei shewed that Griesbach, in quoting the Fathers, made use of Wetstein, following him even in the 1 Historical and Critical Enquiry, pp. 112, 113. 2 An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 94. Lond. Bagster, 1854. 3 See MatthEei's New Testament, 2nd ed. vol. i. Wittenberg, 1803. p. 344. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 281 errors of the press.1 He has also followed Wetstein in his attacks upon orthodoxy, whilst rashly departing altogether from his judgment on manuscripts.2 The scholarship of Tregelles is more than doubtful, who would thus translate 2 Tim iv. 1 : il I bear witness in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the quick and the dead, both to his appearing and his kingdom."3 Thus presented to the reader the whole verse stands utterly unconnected with the context, a circumstance altogether im material to this order of critics. The Kara, is changed into Kal on the authority of MSS. each of them notoriously corrupt in numerous instances though in various degrees; A, C, D, F, G, i. e. the Alexandrine, the Codex Ephremi, the Codex Claromontanus, the Codex Augiensis, and the Codex Boernerianus. Lastly, it is overlooked that in the Latin versions testificor and testor stand in this passage as does StafiapTvpo/jbai for obtestor, correctly rendered in our New Testament, I charge thee* and convicting the reading /cal (preferred by Tischendorf and Tregelles) of corruption. But Tischendorf and Tregelles are agreed with the famous Codex Vaticanus (B. No. 1209) in setting all Greek at defiance. Thus, in 1 Cor. vii. 31, they read ^joaj/ieiw tov Koafiov. Griesbach himself could not be induced to venture so far with " this most important of all New Testament MSS." So TregeUes calls it,5 although there is ample reason to prefer the Codex Alexandrinus (A) to it, whilst however the cor ruptions of both are such as to render them most unsafe and unreasonable standards of the original text of the New Testa ment. In this last-cited instance A, B, D, F, and G are agreed. It is however a great inconsistency in both Tischendorf and Tregelles to place all these MSS. on an equal footing. : Matthsei's New Testament, pp. 700, 701. 2 Ibid. p. 704. 3 Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 197. 4 See Estius in S. Pauli Epistolas in loco. 5 Account of the Printed Text ofthe Greek New Testament, p. 156. 282 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. A and B are allowedly as old as the 5th ; the other three range from the 7th to the 10th century.1 In truth this class of critics commend upon principle the most ungrammatical and the most improbable readings. So Tregelles prints Bengel's aphorism in large letters, Proclivi scriptioni praistat ardua.2 The present textus receptus of the Greek Testament is based upon the several editions of Erasmus, Stephens, Beza, and the Elzevirs, from 1624 to 1633. Erasmus, before he printed his own edition of the Greek Testament, edited from the MS. in 1505 at Paris, Laurentii Vallensis viri tam Grwcw quam Latinai Ungual peritissimi in Latinam Novi Testamenti Interpretationem ex collatione Grai- corum exemplarium Adnotationes apprime utiles. Not aU the censures, adds MichaeUs, which are in Mill's Prolegomena, § 1086, 1087, appear to be weU grounded ; and I would rather retain elK.fi, Matt. v. 22, with VaUa, than reject it in conformity with Mill. Valla himself says on Matt, xxvii. 12, " Tres codices Latinos et totidem Grascos habeo cum hasc com- pono, et nonnunquam alios codices consulo." Now we have- no reason to suppose, says Michaelis, that these included more than the Gospels, of which he had three Greek MSS. in his possession, but they hardly included the whole New Testa ment ; nor is this account contradicted by what he writes on pp. 7 — 29, Quairebant eum apprehendere. " Septem Grasca exemplaria legi, quorum in singulis ita scriptum est, Ego scio eum, quia ab ipso sum, et ille me misit. Quairebant igitur eum apprehendere. Cestera verba absunt, neque a Grascis exemplaribus tantum, sed etiam aplerisqueLatinorum." For though Valla had only three copies of the Gospels in his own possession, he might on this passage have consulted seven, in which the clause et si dixero quia nescio eum, ero similis vobis mendax, which is added in several Latin MSS., was not con tained. Although Michaelis confesses his ignorance of the MSS. 1 On D, E, F, G, see the Preface to St. Paul's Epistles in the 3rd vol. of Matthaei's New Testament, pp. 26 — 38. Ronneburg, 1807. 2 Account of the Printed Text ofthe Greek New Testament, p. 221, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 283 used by Valla, he concludes thus : " As it is probable that the Codices Vallae have not only been quoted in later ages under different titles, but that they contain ihe same readings with ihe Codices Barberini and other collections of that nature, they are at present of little importance, except in the Book of Eevelation, of which the number of MSS. is so few that the extracts of Valla are a useful accession."1 The Codices Barberini were preserved in the Vatican and other principal libraries in Eome. The Annotations of Valla were republished at Amsterdam in 1630 by Jacobus Eevius, pastor of Daventer to the north of Zutphen in Holland, with his own observations at the end. From an examination of the first six chapters of St. Mat thew, it would appear probable that he used the uncial MS. numbered S, being Cod. Vaticanus 354, written on vellum in folio, A.D. 949, and containing the Gospels with the canons of Eusebius. Some annotations are added secundd manit in the margin. It generally adheres, according to Scholz, to the Byzantine family. It was collated by the Danish critic Birch in the latter part of the last century. It is most fully de scribed in Jos. Blanchini, Evangeliarium Quadruplex. Eomae, 1749. II. P.P. fol. P. I. vol. ii. p. div. dlxxi. and plate VI. It is by mistake numbered 344 in Tischendorf's Prolegomena.2 It does not appear from Dr. TregeUes' Account of the Printed Text ofthe Greek New Testament, 1854, to have been collated by him. Valla reads at Matt, iv/10, virarye oirlaco p,ov Zarava. Not so the textus receptus, but it is so given by Matthasi, Scholz, Tischendorf, and found in the Codices Vaticani, 349, 360, and 1210. He does not with the Vulgate and B omit eiKy, but notes melius ii codices qui sine causa habent. He protests against the omission of the Doxology in St. Matt. vi. 11. 'Illud autem, qua ratione niti potest, qubd bonam partem Dominicae orationis decurtavimus?'3 1 Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. pp. 339 — 341. * p. clxvi. 3 Matthsei justly remarks, Qui hac tollunt, ii necessario ambabus manibus amplect debent 1 John v. 7. 284 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Tischendorf reads with B in Matt. xiii. 55, James and Joseph for James and Joses. Compare Matt, xxvii. 56. Valla corrects the Vulgate here, and has Joses legendum est, non Joseph. He rejects the corrupt reading of B and of the Vulgate at Matt. xix. 17, Quid me interrogas de bono ? and adopts the equally ancient reading which is supported by the other evangelists, who must have been in error if in this instance B and the Vulgate are to be followed. ' Graece sic habetur,' says Valla, l Quid me dicis bonum ? nullus bonus.' At Matt, xxiii. 25 he reads, as do Matthaei and Scholz, contrary to B, D, L, the textus receptus, and Tischendorf, Intus autem plena sunt rapind et injustitid, regarding the common reading as an early conjectural emendation. At Mark v. 1 he has for Gerasenorum, Gadarenorum. Tischendorf, with B, C, D, L, A, omits the latter part of Mark vi. ^lf. Valla observes of this omission, ' Quod a nobis detruncatum esse, minus mirabile facit, quod ex Oratione Dominica multum detruncatum est.' Valla has no annotations on the last chapters of St. Mark. Excellently does he remark upon the Vulgate reading in Luke ii. 14, Peace to men of good will, ' Si ullo in loco,' &c. " If in any passage I wonder at least in this instance that such a change should have been made, that we read to men of good will for amongst men good will. And indeed what fitness was there in supplicating peace for the good, as though they were not possessed of it ? Therefore the angels prayed for peace upon earth and good will amongst aU men, and especially those who were not possessed of it, as the Lord said, / am not come to call the righteous, but sinners. Therefore let there be good will to those who have it not." — p. 62. The received reading is far more ancient than the oldest MS. being found more than once in Origen.1 It was the common reading of the Greek Fathers. The reading of the Vulgate found in B has been corrected in that MS. by a second hand. And although it stands uncorrected in the Codex Alexandrinus, the textus receptus is found in another 1 I. 374 d. II. 714 b. ed. Paris, 1733—1759, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 285 part of that same MS. in the Morning Hymn, which amongst other canticles follows the Psalms.1 At Luke iv. 1, Valla again deserts the Vulgate a Spiritu for the Greek. At Luke vi. 26 he corrects a remarkable error in the Vulgate, which for the false prophets reads the prophets. At Luke viii. 26 he reads, of the Gadarenes, and so Matthaei, Scholz, and the textus receptus, with the Codex Alex, and the far greater number of the uncial MSS. In v. 27 he marks the omission in the Vulgate of ex urbe ; also the conjectural emendation in the Vulgate in c. ix. v. 4, et inde ne exeatis. In Luke ix. 23 he observes that daily is not in the Greek MSS. It is retained by Tischendorf and the textus receptus, but rejected by Matthaei and Scholz with the majority of the uncials, but is found in A, B, and some kindred uncials and cursives. He severely censures the reading of the Vulgate at Luke x. 1, where for seventy we have the seventy-two disciples. The twelve apostles he regards as prefigured in the twelve wells (Exod. xv. 27), and the seventy disciples in the seventy palm-trees in the desert, as also Origen and some of the Fathers had done ; Origen in his Seventh Homily on Exodus ; TertuUian adv. Marcion, 1. iv. c. 24 ; Irenaeus, 1. ii. c. 37, and 1. iii. c. 13. The reader may see more in Whitby on this passage, and other authors given in Wolfii Curm Philol. in N. T. VaUa also condemns the reading of the Vulgate in v. 21, In that hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit, the corrupt reading also of B, C, D, K, L, X, and of the cursives 1, 33, 63, 114, 130, 145, and 253, all MSS. highly commended by Tischendorf, with the exception of 63, 145, and 253. Tischendorf not withstanding rejects, but Lachmann follows this manifest interpolation. Our version follows the Vulgate in omitting And turning to his disciples he said, at the end of v. 21. Valla censures 1 Woide's Prolegomena to the Cod. Alex., ed. by Spohn, pp. 103 and 290. Lips. 1788. 286 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. this omission, and regards it as an instance of homoioteleuton from the recurrence of the same words in v. 23. Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf are agreed in retaining these words with the Complutensian edition and the textus receptus. Valla condemns the old reading of the Vulgate in v. 30, suspiciens, which nevertheless kept its place even in the Eoman edition of 1590, after which it was altered to sus- cipiens. In Luke xii. 15 he excepts to ab omni, ab omni avaritia. This reading, evidently groundless, is that of A, B, and several other uncials, and is therefore retained by Tischendorf. At v. 49 he objects to the Vulgate, Quid volo nisi ut accendatur ? which however retains its place, although si jam accensus est found a place in the margin of the Vulgate printed at Paris by Charles Guillard and Guillaume Desbois in 1551. At chap. xv. 8 he condemns the error, which was never theless continued to the edition of 1590 inclusive, of evertit for everrit. This error was reproduced in an edition of the Vulgate printed at Lyons in 1648. The pious and witty Dr. Thomas Fuller, whose lot was cast, as is ours, upon a reform ing age, remarked in his Sermon of Beformation, aUuding to the turbulent spirit of the Anabaptists (the Baptists of those days) : " Very facile, but very foul, is that mistake in the Vulgar translation, Luke xv. 8. Instead of everrit domum, She swept ihe house, 'tis rendered, evertit domum, she over turned the house. Such sweeping we must expect from such spirits, which under pretence to cleanse our chm-ch would destroy it."1 Valla points out a kindred error in v. 14, where, for post quam omnia consumpsisset, the Vulgate still has consummasset. Also in chap, xxiii. v. 35, erat autem populus expectans. This error remained in 1551, but was in the course of time removed to make way for spectans. At John i. 14 he objects to quasi as inadequate to the idea of the divine reality of the glory of the incarnate Word, and would with Beza substitute ut, or else velut, or tanquam. 1 Rev. A. T. Russell's Memorials of the Life and Works of Thomas Fuller, D.D., p. 135. Lond. Pickering, 1844. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 287 So he very justly excepts to factus est in v. 15. He notices the omission in v. 52 of arrf apn. This im portant omission is common to B and L, with the Vulgate, Coptic, Armenian, and iEthiopic Versions. In John iv. 1 he reads the Lord in the place of Jesus, a reading now generally adopted. He observes at chap. v. 46 that forsitan is superfluous. Tischendorf and Lachmann read John vi. 11 with the Vulgate, omitting all mention of the disciples. Here they are content to follow A, B, L, and the cursives 1, 33, 118, 254, all highly commended by Tischendorf except 254. Valla, following the manuscripts with which he was acquainted, preferred that reading which has since obtained a place in the textus receptus. In John vii. 10 he reads ovira> — I go not up yet. He does not omit the account of the woman taken in adultery in John viii. He condemns, as in other instances so in John viii. 19, the use oi forsitan in the Vulgate, it being unbecoming to represent God speaking as in doubt. So however the Vulgate has been suffered to remain. He would correct the Vulgate at v. 25, where it reads, Principium, qui et loquor vobis. This, or initium, was also common to various Latin MSS. falsely revered for their antiquity by some, but justly condemned for their utter want of unanimity by Michaelis, who admits that we cannot rest upon the testimony of the old Latin versions, as Bengel and others would. His language is indeed at times all but contra dictory, but the following is surely explicit : " Whoever compares the Evangeliarium of Blanchini, will see with his own eyes the truth of Jerome's assertion, ' Si Latinis exemplaribus fides est adhibenda, respondeant quibus ? tot enim sunt exemplaria paene, quot codices.' In collating the Syriac with ancient Latin Versions, I found one half in favour of the Syriac, the other half against the Syriac reading."1 1 Bishop Marsh's edition of Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii. chap. 7, $ 27, p. 121. Camb. 1793. 288 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. He would have John x. 16, grex for ovile; and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. He would have corrected the Vulgate at v. 29, where it still reads Pater meus quod dedit mihi majus omnibus est. His correction is entered in the margin of the Vulgate. Paris, 1551. His emendation of chap. xi. 11 has been since admitted into the Vulgate, which now reads, Ut glorificetur Filius Dei per eam for eum. So from 1592 his correction of v. 16 was inserted, ut for et moriamur cum eo. In John xii. 32 he would have altered omnia to omnes traham ad meipsum. He would render John xiv. 1 either If ye believe in God, ye also believe in me ; or, Ye believe in God, ye believe also in me. The rendering of our own Version, the Vulgate, and Beza is more emphatic ; and a similar instance of the imperative thus following the indicative mood is observable in Matt. xxiv. 32, 33.1 He rejects quia in v. 2. Tischendorf receives on here on the authority of A, B and some few kindred MSS. At v. 11 he would alter non creditis mihi to credite mihi. He condemns the rendering of v. 24, by which the nomi native to the verb is turned into an accusative, et sermonem quam audistis, non est meus. In chap. xv. 11 he would alter sit to maneat. Tischendorf thinks it enough to follow here A, B, D with the Vulgate against the far greater number of uncials. In chap, xviii. 1 he would read for Cedron, Cedrorum, after the Greek. In v. 28 the old reading was ad Caiapham instead of a Caiapha. He censures Augustine's adherence to this reading. Under v. 35 he notices the discovery of seven Latin MSS., five by his friend Cyriac of Ancona, in Milan and some neigh bouring cities, and two at Eome by Joannes Tiburtius, of the Order of Preachers, in the now deserted monastery of St. Chrysogonus. Of the venerable basilica attached to this 1 See the Rev. William Webster's and the Rev. W. F. Wilkinson's New Testament in loco. Lond. 1855, vol. i. p. 492. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 289 convent an account is given in the Eev. Benjamin Webb's Continental Ecclesiology, p. 499. At chap. xix. 34 he remarks that the translators appear to have been misled by the likeness of r\voif;e aperuit (the reading of the Vulgate) to epvf-e, pupugit or punxit. However, several ancient Latin MSS. appear to have been marked with the same error. He notices the false reading in chap. xx. 18, Venit Maria Magdalene annuntians discipulis, Qui avidi Dominum et haic dixit mihi. This is countenanced by the boasted, yet in this very place inconsistent, Cod. Vaticanus B, ecopam top Kvpiov, Kal javra ehrev aiirfj. In chap. xxi. 3 he observes the omission of evdix;. Tisch endorf omits it also with B and some kindred MSS. ; also Simon Joannis at v. 15 (Iwdvov Cod. B) ; and agnos for oves (also with B and C) in v. 16. Lastly, he touches upon the ignorance of Greek frequently betrayed by St. Augustine, and especiaUy in his approbation of the evidently erroneous reading in v. 23 of sic for si. Si was inserted in the Vulgate 1551 in the marginal readings, but remains uncorrected. In Acts i. 14 he notices the omission of and supplication m the Vulgate. It is omitted in A, B, C, D, E, perhaps as superfluous. In chap. ii. 1 he corrects the Vulgate, which has the plural for the singular, the days of Pentecost. In v. 4 for variis he would read aliis. In v. 47 he would change augebat to addebat, and supply ecclesiai, which is wanting in the Vulgate. It was supplied in the margin of 1551. In chap. iii. 8 he would read as in our version, leaping up — leaping, a distinction lost in the Vulgate. In chap. iv. 36 he corrects Joseph to Joses. Joseph is the reading of A, B, D, E. In the Acts E is Laudianus 3 in the Bodleian Library (F 82), edited by the celebrated antiquary, Thomas Hearne. In chap. v. 3 he would substitute implevit for tentavit. At chap. vi. 5 he would read a proselyte for a stranger. 290 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. In chap. viii. 26 he would read toward for against ihe south. In chap. ix. he omits from It is hard for thee in v. 5 to the end of v. 6. The propriety of this omission is confirmed by Matthaei, Scholz, Hahn, Griesbach, and Tischendorf. At v. 31 he would read the churches, but Tischendorf reads with the Vulgate in the singular with A, B, C. On the side of the textus receptus are E, G, H ; G formerly belonged to Cardinal Passione, and is described in Blanchini Evangeli- arium Quadruplex, P, I, pp. 564, 565, with a facsimile. A facsimile is also given in Montfaucon's Palceographia, p. 514. It has been collated by both Tischendorf and TregeUes. It is in the famous Ubrary caUed AngeUca, from its first founder, P. Angelo Eocca, an Augustinian. It is attached to the convent and church of St. Augustine. The church was re built in 1483, near the site of the Campus Martius. H, the Modena MS. in the library of the Ducal Palace, has been collated by Tischendorf, Scholz, and TregeUes ; an excellent Byzantine MS., according to Scholz. But the first five verses of the first chapter and the whole of the twenty-eighth are of the 15th century, and the twenty-seventh of the 11th ; the rest being an uncial MS. of the 9th century. St. Paul's Epistles are written in cursive characters of the 12th century. In the Vulgate of 1551 ecclesiai was inserted in the margin as a various reading. In v. 32 per fines illos universos has given way to his suggestion, universos. I At v. 39 in the edition of 1551 is entered in the margin his reading, which is the aUowed reading of the Greek, cum esset cum before illis. In chap. x. 4 Quis es, which was retained up to 1590, was altered to Quid est, according to his suggestion in 1592 under Clement VIII. Our Version is in chap. xii. 20 in accordance with Valla, Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon. In Acts xiv. 14 Tischendorf follows the reading of the Vulgate, Valla that of the textus receptus, as does also Matthaei. Griesbach, following Wetstein, pleads St. Chrysostom, who, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 291 however, has both readings. The textus receptus accords with G and H. In v. 15 he would have for dimisit, permisit. The Vulgate of 1551 inserts in the margin his suggestion, et disputatione, but the Vulgate, omitting the equivalent expression in the Greek, retains, as in his time, factd ergo seditione non minimd. In chap. xvii. 22 his suggestion has been received into the Vulgate, which, for quasi superstitiosos now reads super- stitiosiores. This was inserted in the margin in 1551. So was also his suggestion eulturas for simulacra in v. 23, but the latter has nevertheless kept its place. At chap. xx. 7 he would substitute the textus receptus for the reading followed by the Vulgate, with which however Tischendorf and Scholz agree, following A, B, D, and E. The received reading is that of G and H. Valla rejects the paraphrastic word rapaces in v. 29, which represents graves, well rendered grievous in our Version. He also reprehends beatius magis in v. 35, where it should have been beatum, not baiatius, or beatius without magis. In chap. xxii. 12 he reads evXaB-fj'i with B, G, H, and so Tischendorf, Lachmann, and the Complutensian Greek Testa ment.1 Matthaei admits that this is equal in value to the received reading, which however he retains. It is altogether omitted in the Vulgate and in the Codex Alexandrinus. Valla may possibly have found evXaBrjs in the Codex Vaticanus B. Scholz and Hahn retain the textus receptus which follows E. The Vulgate at Acts xxfr. 14 stood in 1551 more accu rately than now. Then it had patrio Deo meo, as Valla had suggested ; now Patri et Deo meo. At v. 16 he follows the textus receptus, where Tischendorf has only ¦xap%e, and so the Codex Barberini 29, written in A.D. 1338.1 The Vulgate in Bom. viii. 10 foUows the kindred MSS., the Codices Augiensis and Boernerianus. Valla reads is life with the textus receptus. He proposed donabit for donavit in v. 32, and it is a marginal reading in the Vulgate of 1551, but donavit is still retained. Amongst several other errors he would amend a very serious one in the last verse of the 11th chapter, by altering in ipso to in ipsum. In chap. xii. 1 obsequium is retained notwithstanding the Vulgate of 1551, entered rationabilem cultum in the margin, after VaUa. And so in chap. xiv. 16 nostrum stands for vestrum, although after Valla it was received into the margin of the Vulgate in 1551. He notices the omission in chap. xv. 20, where we read only sic autem prwdicavi evangelium hoc. In v. 32 he reads in the future, a-vvavairavaofiat with the Codex Angelicus Eomanus, which he probably had in his hands whilst engaged upon his collations.2 Again, with the guidance of the Codex Angelicus he antici pates the textus receptus in chap. xvi. 6, and reads r)p,a<;, as does even Tischendorf in this instance against A and B and C prima manu. Juliam in v. 7 was in 1590 altered according to his sug gestion to Juniam. In 1 Cor. i. 10 the Vulgate reads, et in eddem scientid. Valla would have altered it to sententia (now the textus receptus), jvco/iy. The Vulgate reads yvwo-et, an evident corruption, but found in Codex Basil, ix. according to Scholz ; thus proving that the more modem ^MSS. may con tain very ancient readings, unless indeed it be a Latinized i Numbered 213 in Scholz, vol. ii. chap. ii. p. xxxiii. Lips. 1836. 2 The same reading is found (probably an error of the transcriber in both instances) in 42 (Acts) Biblioth. Gymnasii. Francofurt, of the 11th century. See Scholz, Prolegomena to vol. ii. p. viii. 294 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. MS., the existence of which class of MSS. is now denied by those who altogether condemn the textus receptus, and plead for a new text on the principles of Lachmann, Tregelles, and their precursor, Griesbach. In chap. ii. 13 he would read, as in the textus receptus, Sancti after Spiritus, which is omitted in the Vulgate, Tischen dorf, Hahn, Theile, and Griesbach. Matthaei retains it with the Codices Claromontanus and Angelicus, the latter of which probably decided Valla. He corrects chap. iii. 9, where for cooperarii the Vulgate has adjutores. Cooperatores was given in the margin of the Paris Vulgate of 1551. He would adopt the textus receptus (ppovelv, omitted in the Vulgate, Tischendorf, and Lachmann in chap. iv. 6. Estius would, with Matthaei and Valla, retain it with C and L, the Codices Ephremi and Angelicus. In chap. v. 7 he would restore for us, from the Codex Ange licus Christ, our Passover is sacrificed for us. It is given in the margin of the Paris Vulgate 1551. In chap. vi. 26he would reject etportate (Glorificate et portate Deum). It is probably a very early gloss or schoUon brought into the text. So he would reject magno, Ye are bought with a great price. Magno is marked as a doubtful reading in the Paris Vulgate of 1551. From his remarks upon chap. vii. 31 it appears that he did not read, as Tischendorf and some others are content to do after the famous A and B, xpdifievoi. tov koct/wv. Even Griesbach, as Matthaei observes, could not carry his veneration of his favourite MSS. so far. In 1 Cor. ix. 10 he adopts the same reading with the textus receptus. Griesbach, Tischendorf, and Scholz are with the Vulgate. In v. 20 he omits cum ipse non essem sub lege, which how ever is retained by both Scholz and Tischendorf, foUowing A, B, C, and the still more corrupted MSS. D, E, F, G. The Codex Mosquensis, marked g by Matthaei, and K by Tischendorf, sanctions the textus receptus. In chap. x. 13 he rejects the reading of the Vulgate, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 295 Tentatio non apprehendat vos, which is foUowed in the Codices Augiensis and Boernerianus. In chap. xi. 15 he follows the Codex AngeUcus, which agrees with the textus receptus. In v. 24 he retains with the Vulgate, foUowing K and L, (instances here of later MSS. retaining ancient readings, as also indeed in many, other places,) take, eat ; rejecting how ever and, as not being in the Greek. These words are re jected by both Scholz and Tischendorf. In v. 31 he reads with the textus receptus, el yap; so C, K, L. He follows the Codex Angelicus in xii. 13, into one spirit. In chap. xv. 23 he censures the reading of the Vulgate, qui in adventu ejus crediderunt, somewhat similar to which is the reading of F and G, they that hoped in his appearing. In chap. xv. 31 he reads for vestram, nostram, with the Codex Alexandrinus, Basil, B. x. 20, a MS. of the 15th century. Wetstein reckons it amongst the Latinizing MSS. This, though a recent MS., has some singular and ancient readings, and was probably a critical compilation, as were so many other MSS. In that celebrated passage, the 51st verse, he reads with us, We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed. The Codex Vaticanus B is with the textus receptus, only omitting fiev. The Codex Alexandrinus has also this reading, but the changes that have been made in it have rendered the whole passage doubtful in the eyes of some critics. Dr. TregeUes here foUows the common reading, and admits the excellence of the later MSS. in a body in this instance, observing that most later MSS. have this (in his opinion) the correct reading. Dr. TregeUes1 calls the Codex AngeUcus in St. Paul's Epistles J, Tischendorf L. Tregelles asserts that this also favours the textus receptus.2 In v. 55 the Vulgate, Tischendorf, and Lachmann read mors twice. Not so Valla, who with the Codex Angelicus has hades. For the first mors infeme was suggested in the margin of the Paris Vulgate 1551. 1 P- 157. 3 p. i91. 296 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. In chap. xvi. 2 he has for per. unam Sabbati of the Vulgate, per unam Sabbatorum. So in the margin of the Paris Vulgate 1551, in und Sabbatorum. In 2 Cor. ii. 10 he reads agreeably to the textus receptus against the Vulgate and Tischendorf, with L. In v. 16 he rejects tam before idoneus. In v. 17 for adulterantes he would read cauponantes, — making a gain of. In chap. iii. 6 he notices a strange corruption of the Vulgate, non literd sed spiritu. In v. 13 the Vulgate reads in faciem ejus quod evacuatur. This strange reading is countenanced if not foUowed by the Codex Alexandrinus which has here irpoa-mwov. But C. B. Michaelis has shewn that this celebrated MS. was in various instances conformed to the Latin.1 In chap. iv. 6 he proposes that which is the marginal reading in our Bibles, " is he who hath sS&ned," according to the textus receptus. Our present reading is that of the Vulgate which is followed by the Codices Augiensis and Boernerianus, and Bodleian 131, a MS. of the 13th century, brought from the East, and formerly in the possession of Dr. Eobert Hun tingdon. It is of the Byzantine famUy, according to Scholz. In v. 7 the Vulgate had habentes for habemus. It was so corrected by or before 1551. The old reading is, according to Scholz, found in H, the Modena MS. afready noticed. Under the 7th chapter he condemns as false the tenet that repentance is made up of confession, contrition, and satisfac tion. In chap. viii. 21 he would adopt the textus receptus, provi- dentes bona, for the reading of the Vulgate, providemus enim bona, and that of the Codex Vaticanus with the four corrupt MSS., D, E, F, G. Tischendorf adheres in this instance with Matthaei to the textus receptus, whilst Scholz follows the Vulgate, as does also Lachmann. Valla and the textus receptus are sanctioned by the Codex Angelicus and the more recently discovered Moscow MS. K. 1 De Variis Lectionibus N. T. { 100, pp. 109—112. Hahe Magd. 1749. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 297 So in chap. ix. 10, where Scholz and Tischendorf desert the textus receptus, Valla with K and L adhere to it. In chap. xi. 1 Valla reads with K, L, according to the received text, rfj d<;. In chap. x. 34 he condemns the reading of the Vulgate, which is retained by Tischendorf and Scholz, nam et vinctis compassi estis, adopting our reading, compassi estis vinculis meis, and observing that this place especially proves this Epistle to have been written by St. Paul. Matthasi remarks that in many prefaces and headings prefixed to this Epistle, this passage is thus given as an evidence of St. Paul's having been the author. It so occurs in St. Chrysostom, iii. 424, d. ed. Ben. 1718—1738; Clem. Alex. 514. Paris, 1641 ; Theo- doret, 611. Chrysostom has in some places Bea-filoif, whence Matthaei conjectures it found its way into the text. In chap. xi. 15 he reads with the textus receptus e^qkOov. He corrects the Vulgate in v. 21, and worshipped the top of his staff, inserting after the Greek, upon. In James i. 19 the Vulgate reads with A, B, C, scite for itaque, wore, the textus receptus, here also adopted by Tisch endorf and Scholz, Lachmann alone reading with the Vulgate. With the Vulgate also agree the Codex Vaticanus 367 already mentioned, and the MS. 1 B 12, formerly 223 in the Eoyal (Bourbon) Library, Naples, written in the 10th century. He would also correct chap. iii. 1, ye receive, where we read, as do also Tischendorf, Scholz, and Lachmann, we shall receive. The Vulgate is followed by Codex Vaticanus 367, of the 11th century. In v. 5 the Vulgate has quantus ignis. This evidently 1 Woide's Prolegomena, edited by Spohn, with a very valuable Appendix, p. 178. Lips. 1788. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 303 erroneous reading is foUowed by Tischendorf and Lachmann because B and C primd manu follow it. The Codex Alex andrinus originally had the received reading? which is here adopted by Valla. And so in the Paris Vulgate of 1551 for quantus we have in the margin exiguus. In chap. v. 5 he proposed addixistis, ye have condemned, for adduxistis. This suggestion was adopted in the Vulgate in 1590. In v. 7 he inserts the rain, omitted in B and the Vulgate, found in A, K, L. His suggestion in v. 13 was also partially carried into effect in the Vulgate under Clement VIII, 1592, which first for oret aiquo animo, read JEquo animo est? psallat, here foUowing the Paris Vulgate of 1551. In 1 Pet. i. 12 he would have read for in quem — in quai, which things the angels desire to look into. In v. 16 he reads yiveade. In chap. iii. 19 he would omit spiritu — spiritu veniens. This had stood in the Paris Vulgate of 1551, spiritaliter, with the various readings spiritu and spiritibus in the margin. The Vulgate has since adopted the latter. He would restore at rv. 14, on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. The words are not in the Vulgate, and are omitted by Tischendorf because not found in A and B. So in v. 16 he is with the textus receptus, " in ista parte legendum est," and not with the Vulgate, which is followed by Tischendorf, in isto nomine. Here again Valla is with K, L, and Tischendorf with A, B. In chap. v. 3 he would omit ex animo, and for forma read formal or exemplaria. The Vulgate is sed forma facti gregis ex animo. In Valla's time the Vulgate had in v. 6, in tempore tribu- lationis. It now has, in tempore visitationis. The Codex Alexandrinus has, " in the time of inspection," copied probably from the Vulgate. Upon such authority does Lachmann un dertake to give the ancient text. 1 Woide's Prolegomena, ed. Spohn, p. 440. 304 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. In 2 Pet. i. 12 we have /j.eXXrj, which is altogether without sense, and underivable but from fieXXco, to delay, in A, B, C ; and in Harleian 5537 ; Harleian 5620 (Covell 4), a MS. of the 15th century; Genevensis 20, of the 11th or 12th century; and Codex Eeg. 216, of the 10th century. Valla gives the correct reading, and that of the textus receptus, agreeably to K and L. Lachmann and Tischendorf, who, in spite of so much internal evidence, maintain the purity of the text of these MSS. as exhibiting the primitive state of the New Testament, follow A, B, and C, wbUst Scholz and Vater abide by the common reading. See on the probable origin of the pretended ancient readings Matthaei's note upon this verse. In chap. ii. 18 he corrects the Vulgate paululum foUowed by Tischendorf, and adopts the textus receptus, agreeably to 0, K, and L. He rejects et simus in 1 John iii. 1. Lachmann, foUowing the evident interpolation of A, B, C, would read et sumus. Tischendorf, who is more reasonable, rejects this reading. Both reject with Valla the reading of the Vulgate in chap. iv. 3, Omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum. The only notice Valla takes of the 7th and 8th verses in the 5th chapter is, " v. 8. Et hi tres unum sunt, Grasce est, et hi tres in unum sunt." Probably he would not venture to suggest so great an emendation as he must have done if he had written freely on this passage. In v. 17 the Vulgate reads, And there is a sin unto death for a sin not unto death. Here it is followed by 33 and the Vienna MS., Lambeeii 37, written in 1331. But it might have been in the instance of this latter MS. a mere over sight. In the Second Epistle v. 9 Tischendorf following A, B has irpodyav for irapaBaivwv. The Vulgate formerly read ac cordingly, prcecedit. It now has recedit without any MS. authority to support it. Transgreditur, the textus receptus and the reading of Valla, was inserted in the margin of the Paris Vulgate of 1551. In the 12th verse Tischendorf and Lachmann1 do not 1 Even Hahn follows them in this reading. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 305 hesitate to read ekiritya yevkadai irpb<; fytas with the famous Alexandrine A and Vatican B. The Vulgate has spero enim me futurum apud vos. Valla, Non est Grasce futurum sed venire. At the 4th verse of the Third Epistle he speaks of some MSS. that have Taurn<;, which Matthaei says he found only in 33. In this it would probably be a conjectural emendation. Scholz enumerates eight MSS. in which it is to be found. Most of these are also given in Tischendorf, namely : 27. Harleian 5620. Covell 4, of the 15th century. 29. Genevensis 20, of the 11th or 12th century. 40. Alexandrino- Vaticanus 179. 66. Vienna MS., Lambeeii 34, secundd manu. 68. Upsal MS. of the 11th and 12th centuries. 69. Guelpherbytanus xvi. 7, of the 14th century. 73. Codex Vaticanus 367, probably a critical MS. compiled from several; written in the 11th century, but un doubtedly comprising many ancient but equally cor rupt readings. In the 12th verse of Jude Valla takes the true reading, dydiravi vp,Sv, which is in part that of the Vulgate, which has epulis suis. Valla however missed the sense, translating it in dilectionibus vestris, a kindred reading to which found its way into the margin of the Paris Vulgate 1551. From the Vulgate B derived in this instance the true reading, whilst A has a7rarat?, with 56, i. e. Bodleian Clarkii 4; and 96, i. e. Venet. 11, of the 11th century, a remarkable MS. with a Latin version, mostly Alexandrine, but with many peculiar readings. On verses 22 — 24 Matthaei should be consulted. His notes on these verses scarcely admit of abridgment. Valla in v. 23 reads arguite with the Vulgate and Tischendorf, following A and C prima manu, and many other MSS. given in Tischendorf, who however here, as in very many other instances, appears to be indebted to Scholz, whom he handles so unsparingly in his Prolegomena. Valla reads judicando, holding with the common reading ; Tischendorf would havejudicatos, with the Vulgate. The second member of the verse Valla reads with the 306 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. textus receptus. Lachmann and Tischendorf add a third clause to this verse, ' and others compassionate in fear,' with the Vulgate. The Codex Vaticanus follows the Vulgate, but it is imperfect in the second clause, perhaps by an oversight of the copyist. The Codex Alexandrinus agrees with both. We come now to the Apocalypse, recently edited by both Dr. Wordsworth and Dr. TregeUes. Tischendorf has in this book ventured to deviate from Lachmann, whose text here, as elsewhere, cannot be relied upon as presenting the text of the four first centimes, from the inherent doubtfulness of some of his chief authorities. Valla rejects the addition in the Leicester and some other MSS., which was taken into the Complutensian, and the things that are, and those that must be hereafter, chap. i. 2. He rejects tawt^? in v. 3, found in Harleian 5537, written in 1087, and in the Codex Uffenbach 2, of the 15th century. He retains quickly in chap. ii. 5, rejected by Tischendorf as not found in A, C. In chap. iii. 7 he reads, as do Matthaei and Tischendorf, in the future sense, no man shall shut — no man shall open. He notices at chap. iv. 8 how several MSS. have sanctus nine times ; so B, which in the Apocalypse does not stand for 1209, the celebrated Codex Vaticanus, but for another Vatican MS. numbered 2066, from which this book is given in the Eoman editions of B (the Codex Vaticanus), an uncial MS. about the 8th century. Some repeat the sanctus six times. The Codex Alexandrinus here is with the Vulgate and the textus receptus, and this reading is sanctioned by the highest authority, that of the 6th chapter of Isaiah. Valla speaks of all the Greek MSS. as giving the sanctus nine times according to the nine orders of the angels. There can be no doubt that all those MSS. which so repeat the sanctus six or nine times were purposely corrupted to suit these groundless phantasies of the several orders which were unknown until the times of Gregory the Great. According to Scholz holy is repeated nine times in 2 Eegius 237, Stephani ik of the 10th century. 9. Bodleian 131,olim Eoberti Huntingdon, 13th century. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 307 29. Harleian 5613, written in 1407. 30. Guelph. (Wolfenbuttle) xvi. 7, of the 13th and 14th centuries. 32. Dresden, antea Loescheri, of the 15th century. Ac cording to Scholz " notas optimae." 33. Vienna 23, Lambeeii 1, of the 13th century. Used by Alter in his New Testament, Vienna, 1787. 34. Vienna 302, Lambetii 34, of the 12th century. " Tres codices emendatores distingui possunt." — Scholz. 35. Vienna 307, Lambeeii 248, 14th century. Contains, besides other minor theological treatises, the Apoca lypse with the Commentary of Andreas Cretensis. 41. Alexandrino-Vatican. 68, of the 14th century. 42. Pio-Vatican. 50, ofthe 12th century. 48. Matthaei 1, placed by him in the first class of his MSS. for the Apocalypse. Synod 380, of the 12th century. 49. Matthasi o, Synod 87, of the 15th century. Placed by him in the third class. 50. Matthaei p, Synod 206, of the 12th century. Placed by him in the first class. Holy occurs six times, according to Scholz, in the Codex Vaticanus 579, of the 13th century; and Codex Vaticanus 1160, in two volumes, of the 13th century. In chap. iv. 11 Valla reads, not with the Vulgate, Scholz, Tischendorf, and Matthaei, they were, but they are. In chap. v. 10 VaUa has, according to Scholz and Matthaei, given the true reading, Et fecisti ipsos Deo nostro reges et sacerdotes, et regnabunt super terram. In the Vulgate, chap. ix. 11, is added, Latinl habens nomen exterminans. Valla would omit this gloss. In chap. xi. 13 the Complutensian and Matthaei read day for hour, with B. In v. 17 Valla reads, with the textus receptus, And who art to come, omitted in the Vulgate in his time, but since received into the text. It is omitted by Griesbach, Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf, and in A, B, C, according to Tischen dorf. x2 308 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. In chap. xii. 18 for stetit he reads steti, with Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf, and so B. In chap. xv. 3 the Complutensian, Scholz, Matthaei, and Tischendorf read, 0 King ofthe nations for 0 King of saints. The Vulgate has, 0 King of ages, Bex saiculorum, with C and 18, Coislin 202, mostly of the 13th century. In v. 4 Valla justly objects to quia solus pius es in the Vulgate for sanctus es. For lino mundo the Vulgate in Valla's time read vestiti lapide mundo ! In chap. xvii. 8, for the beast that was and is not (the reading of the Vulgate), and yet is, the reading of the Com plutensian is now generally adopted, that was, and is not, and shall come. In chap. xxi. 6 he reads, with the Complutensian and with Matthaei, yeyova, alpha et omega. This reading must at once yield to the sufficiently-supported authority of the textus receptus, and to the parallel passages in this Epistle. In chap. xxn. 14 the Vulgate has Beati qui lavant stoias suas in sanguine Agni, ut sit potestas eorum in ligno vital. Tischendorf and Lachmann have, Blessed are they that wash their garments, omitting in the blood of the Lamb. The majority of MSS. is in favour of the common reading. In v. 20 Valla would retain val in both places, and so Matthaei with the textus receptus. Tischendorf and Scholz reject it at the commencement of the latter clause. The reader wiU, I trust, be interested in this review of a noble attempt before the Eeformation at bringing back the New Testament to the standard of the best Greek and Latin MSS. then known. In very many instances Valla's efforts were crowned with success ; and that so many exceUent suggestions were never applied to the improvement of the Vulgate, affords overwhelming evidence of the very inadequate nature of the Clementine revision. But, alas, Valla was destined in his lifetime to nothing but disappointment in regard of this noble undertaking. Valla found a friend in that great patron of learning, and most pacific, moderate, and iUustrious of the Eoman Pontiffs, Nicolas V. This remarkable person was, previously to his THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 309 elevation to the Popedom, known as Thomas de Sarzano, Bishop of Bologna. Sarzana is but a few miles to the east of Spezzia, which gives its name to the gulf that opens into the Mediterranean, to the south-east of Genoa. It lies on the road from Eome to Genoa. Valla was attacked by Poggio, against whom he wrote his Antidotum Pogii. With Poggio conspired Antony of Palermo, a profligate author, who is said narrowly to have escaped condign punishment for a work of the most abominable immoraUty. This was the man who, having no sense of religion himself, endeavoured to fix a false charge of infidelity upon Valla, and imputed to him the assertion, since repeated as having proceeded from Valla, that he had reserved his darts against Christ himself. VaUa, on the other hand, was in various points a favourer of both a doctrinal and prac tical reform in the Church of Eome. He exposed the pre tended donation of Constantine, and the apocryphal character of the works assigned to Dionysius the Areopagite. This he did in his Collations. He wrote also a discourse upon the Eucharist, and a treatise on Free Will, in which he main tained the doctrine of St. Augustine and of the ancient Church and Bishops of Eome. He was opposed to the secular power of the Papacy. He enjoyed a canonry in the BasiUcan church of St. John Lateran, and dying the same year with Pope Nicholas V. was buried at Eome in 1455. Erasmus found a MS. of the Collations in 1504, and Christopher Vischer Prothonotary apostolic, offering to be the patron of the book, Erasmus pubUshed it in 1505, and dedicated it to him. Pope Pius IV., when he inserted in the Index Expurgatorius Valla's De falsd Donatione Constantini, de Libero Arbitrio, and de Voluptate, suffered the Collations to pass. But his successor, Sixtus V., placed it in the list together with the book De Persond contra Boethium, with the proviso, nisi corrigantur. However the Collations, but with another name, and with many defects, were destined to come forth in four editions, besides that of 1505 at Paris. The first was published at Basle by Cratander in 1526 ; the second in 1540, in the collection of Valla's works; the third by Balthazar Lazius, also like the last, published at Basle in 310 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 1541 ; the fourth and corrected edition is that from which these notices of Valla's emendations and suggestions have been taken ; the edition of James Eevius, Pastor of Daventer, pub lished at Amsterdam in 1630. Eevius has added several notes at the end, frequently referring to Erasmus and Beza by way of correcting Valla, and here and there defending the Vulgate against VaUa. Eevius however does not invariably foUow either Beza or Erasmus. Stimulated by the example of Valla, the famous Cardinal Ximenes resolved upon bringing out the Complutensian Poly glot. Francis Ximenes de Cisneros, who in the time of Ferdinand the CathoUc conducted the Spanish armies with so much success against the Saracens towards the end of the 15th century, and administered the government of Spain for Charles V. with the greatest dignity and prudence, signaUzed himself as Cardinal and Archbishop of Toledo by his Polyglot. But, as Michaelis observes, he appears to have had no intention of propagating Biblical literature amongst the laity and the unlearned. Indeed his principles were quite the contrary; for when it was proposed to translate the Bible into Spanish for the conversion of the Saracens, he opposed the design. His great work was completed January 10th, 1514, but doubts were raised by the Church of Eome respecting the propriety of its being brought into general circulation. It was begun in 1502, edited in 1514, but seen by but few before 1523, being kept back by the poUcy of the court of Eome. It comprised the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Latin Vulgate, the Septuagint with a Latin Version, the Chaldee Paraphrase of the Pentateuch by Onkelos, the con temporary of Eabban Gamaliel the Elder, the preceptor of St. Paul,1 the New Testament both in Greek and Latin, the Greek without accents, together with a large apparatus com prising grammars, lexicons, and indexes. The persons to whom the Cardinal entrusted this great work were iElius Antonius Nebrissensis, Demetrius Cre- 1 See Hottingeri Thesaurus, p. 254. Zurich, 1659. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 311 tensis, Ferdinandus Pintianus, and Lopez de Stunica. At least these had the charge of the Greek Testament. Other persons superintended the Hebrew and Chaldee. Of these the most eminent was the first-named JElius Antony Lebrixa, known by the name of Nebrissensis. He was born in 1444, at Lebrixa or Lebrija, to the south of Seville. After he had studied at Salamanca he travelled to Italy, whence he was recalled by WiUiam Fonseca, Archr bishop of SeviUe. He restored the study of the Belles Lettres and the sciences in Spain by his public lectures. After that prelate's death he quitted Seville and returned to Salamanca, where he was endowed with the professorships of grammar and poetry. He was there accused by the scholastics of favouring novelties, and in 1488 retired to the family of John de Stunica, Grand Master of the Order of Alcantara, but he was soon recaUed to fill the first professorship in the Uni versity of Salamanca. King Ferdinand sent for him to court in 1504 to write his history, and Cardinal Ximenes employed him on his Polyglot. He afterwards gave him the direction of the University of Alcala, not far east of Madrid. There he died July 11, 1522, aged 77 years. His chief theological work is a critical treatise on fifty difficult passages of holy Scripture, entitled Quinquagesimum, highly commended by Dupin. Bishop Marsh, following Wetstein, depreciated the Greek Testament of the Polyglot, affirming more positively than truly that there cannot be a doubt that the Complutensian text was formed from modern MSS. alone.1 Not so Michaelis, who maintains that the Complutensian Greek Testament lati nizes much less than that of Erasmus ; and that though Wetstein was a declared enemy of this edition, the readings which he has preferred to the common text are in most cases found in the Complutensian Greek Testament. He therefore, he adds, degrades it in words, but honours it in fact.2 He further remarks that many readings, which were formerly supposed to be ratified by no authority, have been since dis- 1 Criticism ofthe Bible, lecture iii. p. 96. Camb. 1828. 2 Vol. ii. p. 439. 312 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. covered in Greek MSS., and that several which have been lately collated, agree with it in a very remarkable manner. For instance, the Havniensis 1, (in which Hehster found forty readings that agree with the Complutensian, and are in no other MS.) the Laudianus 2, and Vindobonensis Lambeeii 35. " Likewise in the Septuagint," says Michaelis, " I have ob served that readings which were before pecuUar to the Complu tensian edition, have been confirmed by the Alexandrine MS. These circumstances may reasonably lead us to conclude that the Complutensian edition was faithfully taken from MSS., and that those Complutensian readings which are in no MS. known to us at present, were actuaUy taken from MSS. used by the editors. So long, therefore, as we are without the MSS. from which this edition was taken, it must itself be con sidered as a valuable MS., or as a Codex Criticus that contains many scarce readings."1 Michaelis considers that part of it which gives the Apocalypse as better than the common editions, and observes that Bengel has made great use of it and adopted many of its readings, although he inconsistently condemns it in § 19 of his Funda- menta Criseos Apocalyptical. With this book in particular the Codex Guelpherbytanus very remarkably coincides. Mat thaei agrees with Michaelis in his judgment of the Apocalypse as given in the Complutensian edition. The extracts of Mill, Bengel, and Wetstein are by no means complete, and they have neglected one thing which is absolutely requisite in this edition, to quote the Latin as weU as the Greek ; for if the Greek contradicts the Latin text, it is a proof that it was supported by a great majority of MSS., since otherwise they would not have deviated from the esta blished version of the Church. And it is certain that they could not have avoided the difference, because they have pointed it out by an especial mark. Goeze, in his complete defence of this Version, printed at Hamburg in 1765, with a collection of the principal differences between the Greek and Latin text of the Complutensian, has given extracts from it, ' Vol. ii. pp. 439, 440. Matthsai, in his Appendix to the Apocalypse (first edition) condemns the editors as guilty of a love of innovation. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 313 which in the proper sense of the word may be called critical, and which no future editor of the Greek Testament ought to leave unnoticed. Goeze published a Continuation of his Defence in 1769. These are books which every one ought to read who would form a proper judgment of the Complutensian Polyglot. It would, concludes Michaelis, be rendering a real service to the cause of sacred criticism, to publish an exact copy both of the Greek and Latin Testament of the Complu tensian Polyglot. Its readings were inserted as of MS. authority in Bishop FeU's Oxford Greek Testament of 1675, and in that of Gerard of Maestricht taken from it, and published at Amsterdam in 1711. According to Michaelis, Professor Moldenhauer, who was in Spain in 1784, went to Alcala, and was informed that the Ubrarian about 1749, wanting room for some new books, sold the ancient vellum MSS. to one Toryo, who dealt in fireworks. He farther adds that Gomez declares that these MSS. cost 4000 aurei, and that amongst them were seven of the Hebrew Bible. Martinez, a man of learning and an excellent Greek scholar, heard of this barbarous sale soon after, but it was too late, for they were already destroyed, except a few scattered leaves which are now preserved in the library. That their number was very considerable appears from the fact that the money was paid at two different pay ments. — Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 441. " Dr. Bowring subsequently made enquiries and believed that the report was incorrect, the same MSS. being there as those described by the Cardinal's biographer Gomez, and in Bowring's opinion they are both modern and valueless.1 But Bowring's letters are by no means clear or decisive on the subject, for he says that the number of Hebrew MSS. in the University was only seven, and seven is the number that now remains." Of these seven he affirms that they are modern and valueless. His attention therefore was not specially di rected to Greek MSS. but to Hebrew ones. Indeed he states that there are at Alcala no Greek MSS. of the whole Bible. 1 See Hae Monthly Repository, vol. xvi. for 1820, p. 203, and New Series, vol. i. for 1827, p. 572. 314 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. " Subsequent enquiries made by Dr. James Thomson clear up the matter. All the MSS. formerly known to belong to Cardinal Ximenes, and preserved in the Library at Alcala, are now with the rest of that library at Madrid ; and the cata logue made in 1745 correctly describes the MSS. which stiU exist. The librarian at Madrid communicated to Dr. Thomson a catalogue of the Complutensian MSS., whence it appears that the chief MSS. used in the Polyglot are stiU preserved in safety, but the Greek New Testament is not contained in any of them. All the MSS. used in the Greek Testament by the editors were furnished from the Vatican, to which they were probably returned." A sale to a rocket-maker did take place about the time mentioned, but the librarian was a learned man, and could not have sold MSS. Probably he sold only waste and useless paper when he got all the books in the library rebound.1 By a comparison of the peculiar readings in the first ten chapters of St. Matthew, it appears probable that the Vatican MSS. in the hands of the editors of the Complutensian New Testament were as follows : — S. The Uncial Vatican MS. 354, written in a.d. 947 by an Eastern monk. Contains the Gospels. The text Byzantine. 127. Vat. 349, containing the Gospels with the Eusebian Canons. The text mostly Alexandrine. 128. Vat. 356, like the Codex Vat. 349, of the 11th century, containing the Gospels. The text Byzantine. 129. Vat. 358, formerly belonged to Cardinal Cusanus : of the 12th century; contains the Gospels with scholia. Text Byzantine. 130. Vat. 359, of the 13th century, written by a Latin scribe; contains the Gospels with a Latin version. Mixed text, but mostly Alexandrine. 142. Vat. 1210, of the 11th century ; contains the Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Psalms. Very many readings i Biblical Review for 1847, vol. iii. p. 186. Davidson's Biblical Criticism, vol. ii. pp. 107, 108. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 315 are entered in the margin. In the Gospels the text is mostly Byzantine. 157. Urbino-Vatican 2, probably written for the use of John II. , Emperor of the East, who succeeded on the death of Alexius A.D. 1118. It contains the Gospels with the Eusebian Canons; pictures, the chronicon of Jesus Christ, the chronicon of Hippo- lytus, and a preface from Chrysostom. It was tran scribed from very ancient MSS. at Jerusalem : mostly Alexandrine. In several peculiar readings the Complutensian Testament agrees with these MSS., aU of them prior to the period to which Wetstein would have the MSS. used by the editors of the Complutensian Greek Testament to have belonged. He would have them to have been all as late as the 14th, 15th, or 16th centuries. So Griesbach and Bishop Marsh after him would have it concluded that they had only some modern and worthless MSS. in their hands. Whosoever will look into the Complutensian Greek Testament for himself and compare it with the labours of modern critics, will probably come to a more favourable judgment of its merits and of the MSS. from which it was probably compiled. But even if it could be proved, which it cannot, that the MSS. in question were all as late as the 14th century, it would not prove them worthless. They might be copies of much earlier MSS. Michaelis was of opinion that the editors were supplied with other MSS. than those that were sent from the Vatican, and mentions the Codex Ehodiensis, now unknown, and the Codex Bessarionis which was used in the Septuagint, and presented to Cardinal Ximenes by the Senate of Venice. Already were there also MSS. in Lombardy, and probably at Florence and elsewhere, accessible to Ximenes. " From the Greek text of the Complutensian edition were printed the foUowing ; namely, seven at Antwerp by Plantin, in 1564, 1573, 1574, 1590, 1591, 1601, 1612 ; five Geneva editions in 1609, 1619, 1620, 1628, 1632 ; and lastly, that of 316 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Mayence in 1763. These are described in Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, ed. Masch, P. I. pp. 191— 195." 1 In 1821 Gratz published a Greek Testament at Tubingen, giving the text of the Complutensian with the Latin Vulgate. Van Ess contributed very greatly to the circulation of this edition, giving away many copies amongst the theological students of Germany, and disposing at a low price of others. At length in 1827 he brought out his own valuable edition of the New Testament both in Greek and Latin, also at Tubingen. In this edition the reader has the Complutensian text; those of the five editions of Erasmus ; Eobert Stephen's edition, Paris, 1546, the basis of the textus receptus; and the critical editions of Matthaei and Griesbach. The Vulgate presents that version as it stood under Popes Sixtus V. and Clement VIII., in the several editions of 1590, 1592, 1593, and 1598. The paraUel passages are given under the verses to which they belong. Before the Complutensian Polyglot was deUvered to the public, Erasmus published his Greek Testament with a new Latin translation. This work he undertook at the request of the famous printer, Froben of Basle, who was anxious to anticipate the publication of the Complutensian Polyglot. Froben proposed the work to Erasmus on AprU 17, 1515. It was published in the following spring. But it should be borne in mind that the attention of Erasmus had long before this been directed to the critical study of the New Testament. This has been overlooked by Dr. Tregelles, and by those who with him have had an object in depreciating the labom-s of Erasmus. " The manuscripts which Erasmus is known to have used are those noted by Wetstein in the first part, 1, 2, 3, 61, 69 (Proleg. p. 120), 4, 7, in the second part, and 1 in the fourth part." So Bishop Marsh in his Notes to Michaelis. They were as follows : — 1. Codex Basileensis, B. vi. 27. Erasmus calls it exemplar Capnionis, and also Beuchlini, because he had borrowed it 1 Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament, 'ed. Marsh, vol. ii. part 2, p. 845. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 317 from Eeuchlin, though it was not his property. It was one of those which were given by Johannes de Eagusio to a convent in Basle, and Eeuchlin borrowed it and kept it the remaining thirty years of his life. It is on veUum, in small characters, and contains the whole New Testament except the Apocalypse. Erasmus suspected, and Wetstein, who at first opposed the opinion, afterward agreed in the charge of Erasmus that it was Latinized. Wetstein has likewiseobserved that this MS. alone has as many readings which differ from the printed text, as all the other MSS. to gether. Amongst its other singularities is one strangely com mended by Michaelis at Luke x. 42, which he calls the preferable reading of Origen, the Coptic, and the margin of the Philoxenian Version, oXiiycov Se e? eh t&v irpotynT&v, was probably taken from it by Erasmus, from whose edition it has been transmitted to others. It is said to be also found in the Philoxenian Version ; Tischendorf indeed assigns this reading also to the uncial A, the Codex SangaUensis. According to Dr. TregeUes, this and the Codex Boernerianus are severed parts of the same book.2 When we find that Wetstein's 1 has more peculiar readings than any other MS., we shaU not be surprised at the appro bation bestowed upon it by Tregelles. He classes it with X, 33, 69, and D, F, of St. Paul's Epistles, the value of which he regards as very great? 2. Basil. B. vi. 25. An incorrect copy of the Gospels abounding in itacisms, as though the copyist wrote from dictation, and according to the pronunciation. It was from this MS. that the press was set after Erasmus had made his alterations, which are still visible. It is of the 15th century, and the text, according to Scholz, of the Byzantine family. 1 Peculiar in the insertion of t), Mark vi. 15. 2 Account of the Printed Text ofthe Greek New Testament, p. 165. 3 Ibid. p. 173. D and F are the Codices Claromontanus and Augiensis. 318 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 3. A MS. in the Imperial Library at Vienna, Caesareus Vindobonensis Forlosian 15, and in KoUar's Supplement 5. It formerly belonged to the Monastery of Canons Eegular of the Blessed Virgin at Corsendonck near Tumhout, to the north-east of Antwerp in Brabant. This is a MS. of the 12th century, containing the Gospels with synaxaria, the Acts, the Epistles, with prefaces and the Eusebian Canons. This was lent to Erasmus, and used, as perhaps were some of the others, in his second edition of the New Testament. The loan of this volume is attested in his own hand at the beginning of the MS. and at the end of the Gospel of St. Luke in 1519. It was collated by Alter for his edition ofthe Greek Testament in 1786 and 1787, and is described by Treschow in his Tentamen, Copenhagen, 1770, 8vo. and by Kollar. Wetstein contends that the text has been sometimes altered from the Latin. It was collated by Walker,1 and was at that time in the library of a Dominican convent at Brussels.2 Complete extracts are given from this MS. in Alter's Greek Testament, vol. i. pp. 704 — 750, and vol. ii. pp. 559 — 630. It is described in Treschow's Tentamen, pp. 85 — 89. 4. Basil, B. vi. 17, containing St. Paul's Epistles to Hebrews xii. 18. "A remarkable reading which Erasmus took into his text on the authority of this MS., Bom. viii. 35, From the love of God, instead of — of Christ, is," says Michaelis, " found only in this MS. and the Moscow MS. noted N.; some others have it as a scholion. The reading is Ukewise ancient, for it is found in Origen, but it does not necessarUy foUow that it be genuine." 3 The celebrated Codex Vaticanus B reads, from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. In A the words are now lost, whatever they were. The text of this Basil MS. is, ac cording to Scholz, mostly Byzantine. 5. Basil, B. ix. Wetstein has named it Codex Amerbachii. 1 Richard Walker, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, D.D. 1728. See notices of bim in Bishop Monk's Life of Bentley. 2 Wetstein's Prolegomena, p. 46. Marsh's Michaelis's Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. part 2, p. 729. 3 Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. p. 221. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 319 Mill (according to Michaelis) has given very groundless conjec tures respecting it. Wetstein was an eye-witness of what he re lates. It was altered in some places by Erasmus, and delivered into the printing-house like Basil, B. vi. 25. It was written before the 15th century. The text (according to Scholz) seldom recedes from the Byzantine. 6. Basil, B. x. 20 (4 Acts and Paul, Wetstein), contains the Acts and all the Epistles, elegantly written in the 15th century, the text (according to Scholz) mostly Byzantine. Wetstein reckons it amongst the Latinizing MSS., and ob serves that the copyist has inserted marginal glosses into the text : thus, Bom. xiv. 17, he adds to righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, Kal aovwjo-t?, a piece of monkish moraUty.1 In 1 Cor. xiv. 34, for eiriTeTpatrTai, this MS. alone has eiriTiraierai. Lachmann reads eTriTpeireTat, the reading of A, B, D, E, F, G. But the Alexandrine, amongst its nu merous inaccuracies, has hnTpkireTe. This MS. was, in the opinion of Michaelis, copied at least in part from a very ancient one.2 7. For the Apocalypse Erasmus had but one, and that an imperfect MS., the Codex Eeuchlinianus. " Yet," observes Michaelis, " in the editions of Erasmus we find variety even in the Eevelation ; a proof that Erasmus applied either his own conjectures, or consulted other sources in particular readings. Besides, Erasmus himself acknowledges that Eeuchlin's MS. had several chasms, and that the last leaf in particular was wanting. In these cases he made a virtue of necessity, and translated the Latin into Greek.3 8. The Codex Montfortianus, called also Dublinensis, from its having at length, after passing through several hands, found a resting-place in the Library of Trinity College, DubUn, 1 The contemplative or monastic life. This reading is passed over by Tischen dorf but noticed by Scholz, who is in numerous instances of a similar kind more complete than Tischendorf. 2 See his Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. p. ?22. According to Bishop Marsh, vol. ii. part 2, note 65, this was also the opinion of Semler. 3 Michaelis' Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. pp. 312, 313. 320 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. was examined by Erasmus subsequently to the second edition of his Greek Testament, 1519. It contains the whole New Testament, but is written in a modern hand, and is pro bably of the 16th century. Erasmus, in his third edition, 1522, inserted 1 John v. 7 as in this MS., to which he appeals under the general appellation of a British manuscript.1 Both he and Wetstein regarded it as a Latinizing MS., and 1 John v. 7 itself is an indication of this. "It is written in such Greek," says MichaeUs, " as manifestly betrays a translation from the Latin."2 Dr. Dobbin published in 1854 a coUation of this MS. throughout the Gospels and Acts with the Greek text of Wetstein and with certain MSS. in the University of Oxford. Mr. Scrivener, whose accuracy is now established beyond question, observes, from a careful comparison of this and the celebrated Leicester MS., that we can hardly resort to the Codex Montfort, as Tregelles suggests (Home's Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii. p. 216), for the readings of the Codex Leicestrensis in those parts of the Apocalypse which are defective in the latter MS."3 " Perhaps," says Michaelis, " there never existed a more able editor of the New Testament. His editions, notwith standing their faults, are much esteemed, and in some respects equivalent to MSS., though he has sometimes resorted to conjecture, and has in several instances altered the Greek text to the Vulgate. Examples of this have been given by Goeze, and every reader will observe them in examining Wetstein's various readings."* The reading dTrwXetas, 2 Pet. ii. 2, not known to Michaelis, is in some cursive MSS. ac cording to Tischendorf. The manner in which he endeavoured to supply the chasms in the Codex Eeuchlianus, containing the Eevelation, has been already noticed. But MichaeUs observes that he seems to have taken the same liberty in 1 Codex Britannicus. 2 See Introd. to the New Testament, vol. i. p. 286. 3 Contributions to the Criticism of tlie Greek New Testament, p. 43. Camb. 1859. 4 Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. p. 444. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 321 many places where he had not that excuse. Witness Acts ix. 5, 6. However Matthaei found this passage in the margin of one MS., but in a recent hand. Erasmus took it from the Vulgate. In his Annotationes in N. T. he gives a particular account of those Greek readings which differ from the Latin, yet his Greek text Latinizes much more than the Complutensian. Erasmus excited much opposition from venturing to give a Latin version of his own together with the Greek text. He afterwards published the Vulgate together with it. We have already seen that VaUa attempted a revision of the Vulgate in the preceding century. Michaelis assigns the honour of renewing this great work to Eobert Stephens, who published the Latin New Testament from ancient MSS. in 1543 and 1545." Besides the Complutensian editions of the Vulgate New Testament at Paris in folio in 1528, 1532, 1540, Johannes Benedictus, a Doctor of the Sorbonne, published a critical edition of the Bible according to the Vulgate in 1541, also in folio. This was followed by the edition of Isidore Clarius at Venice, folio, 1542, for which Pope Paul III. re warded him with the mitre, translating him from the abbot- ship of Casino in the Pope's states, to the see of Foligno. He is said indeed to have been greatly indebted to the labours of Sebastian Munster. Johannes Hentenius edited the New Testament in 1547 for the University of Louvain, availing himself of the labours of Stephens. In 1551 appeared the smaller edition of the Vulgate New Testament, Paris, 1551, by John Benedictus, so frequently referred to in these pages. Another edition of the Vulgate, with a preface by John Faber, Doctor of the Sorbonne, ap peared in 1574, and again at Antwerp in 1580. At length in 1590 came forth the imperfect revision by authority of Pope Sixtus V., which was again revised and improved, and yet but very unsatisfactorily in 1592, by authority of Clement VIII. The succeeding editions exhibited some fluctuations down to that of 1598. For the history of Erasmus as a translator the reader is 1 Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. p. 126. T 322 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. referred to Jortin's Life of Erasmus, and to his works, and to Wetstein's Prolegomena. After the Complutensian Polyglot was permitted to go abroad, Erasmus availed himself of it in his edition of 1527. MiU relates that of an hundred alterations which Erasmus made in this edition, not less than ninety relate to the Eeve lation alone. Erasmus probably availed himself also of the labours of his learned contemporary Aldus Manutius, and so, as well as from MS. 1, Erasmus had his choice as well of the so-called ancient as of those which have by some been unjustly stig matized as modern readings. The probabiUty is, that the so-caUed ancient readings are mostly not older than the third and fourth centuries. Many of these are evidently corrup tions, and such as even Griesbach and Tischendorf themselves have been compelled to reject in favour of the readings of more modern but more faithful MSS. Various instances of this have already passed before the reader in these pages. And it has been already seen that at this early period numerous and most respectable MSS. from the time of VaUa to that of Erasmus were made tributary to the great work of forming an authentic Greek text of the New Testament. Erasmus had published his first edition early in 1516.1 In 1517 Aldus Manutius published his Biblia Graca. He probably made use of Codex Vaticanus 360, which was in his own possession. It is in quarto, of the 11th century, and comprises the whole of the New Testament except the Book of Eevelation. In this MS. are numerous itacisms. It wonderfully harmonizes with the 8th of Stephens' MSS., Codex Eeg. 62, called L, the MS. of Eeuchlin, Basil B. vi. 27, a Latinized MS. in the opinion of Erasmus, who had 1 " It is easy to declaim on the low date and little worth of the MSS. used by the Complutensian divines, by Erasmus, or Stephens ; but what would have been the present state of the text of the Gospels, had the least among them conceded to the Cambridge MS. or Codex BezEe, the influence and adoration* which its high antiquity seemed to challenge ? " * " Codices vetustatis specie pame adorandos." — R. Stephani Praf. N. T, 1546. Rev. F. H. Sprivener's Introduction to his Supplement to the Authorized English Version, p. 7. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 323 it in his hands, and the Leicester MS., of which the Eev. F. H. Scrivener has given a minute account in his Introduction to his edition of the Codex Augiensis and Fifty other MSS., p. 40. Camb. 1859. It has a great number of peculiar readings. In various instances it agrees, says Dr. Birch, with the Gothic Version of the Gospels only. He collated the four Gospels in this MS., Codex Vaticanus 360. Eobert Stephens formed his celebrated Paris edition of 1546 from the Complutensian and Erasmus, together with the aid of fifteen MSS. of various value and of very different kinds, 'which were collated by his son Henry. He may be considered as the parent of the textus receptus. Bishop Marsh observes indeed that the second MS. of the 16 (in cluding the Complutensian as the first) could not have been coUated until after 1547, because this MS. was collated in Italy, and Henry Stephens did not go into Italy before that year. He further remarks that Mill, on collating the Com plutensian and Stephens, found that the variations between them amounted to at least 1300. The third edition, which is in folio, is one of the most elegant editions that was ever printed, and has the readings of Stephens' MSS. in the margin. In the fifth the various readings are printed at the end. The sixteen MSS. of Stephens are reckoned with the Complutensian Greek Testament as the first. This has been already considered. The second was probably the Codex Bezae, or D. The elder or Christian Benedict Michaelis, in § 80 — 82 of his Tractatio Critica de Variis Lectionibus Novi Testamenti, and Bishop Middleton, toward the end of his work upon the Greek Article, have treated at some length, of this remarkable MS., upon which and upon similarly doubtful authorities Hug contends as Tregelles has since done, that the Christian Church has long lost the original text of the Scriptures. This MS. is written in large or uncial letters without any separation or distinction of words, the Unes not of the same length, but some longer, others shorter; the Greek and Latin words corresponding, word for word, the very same t2 324 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. order of the words for the most part preserved. The Greek occupies the left, the Latin the right side of the page. Mill, Prolegomena, 1269. And (Prolegomena, 1271) he thus pro ceeds : " Certainly the text itself of the MS. both Greek and Latin alike is the production of a Latin copyist, which Father Simon shows, from the similarity of the characters, from letters purely Greek admitted into the version on the opposite side of the page, from the very design of Graeco-Latin MSS. of this kind, which certainly could not have been for the use of the Greeks (for what need could they have had either of the Latin version or of the Latin tongue ?) but they appear to have been made altogether for the use of the West, that by means of the Greek text inserted opposite the Latin, those who had some knowledge of Greek might be aided in ac quiring a more accurate knowledge of the New Testament, and in amending their own Latin version wherever it might require correction ; lastly, from the orthographical errors, of which some abundantly evince a Latin amanuensis, for in stance, 'HpaSovs, Itodwov;, Icodvvei, SafuipiTavoov, $XayeX- Xwaas, Xeirptaaov, and others of the same kind. On these see Mill in Varr. ad Matt. ii. 1 ; x. 5 ; xxvi. 6 : Mark xv. 15. Again, Mill (Prolegomena 1272) graphicaUy depicts the free dom which the copyist of the MS. has taken in altering the Greek to the Italic version. " The Latin part of the MS. exhibits the Italic translation in its interpolated state before its revision by Jerome, but the Greek part a text marveUously corrupted and debased, but evidently derived from the same sources with the Italic version." And he adds a Uttle after, "In regard of the Greek of this MS. the wanton Ucense which the interpolator, whoever he was, took in the compUa- tion of this MS. is aU but incredible. You would at first sight beUeve that he had in view not to give the same text with the writers of the Gospels, but, observing the order of the text and retaining the history, to give each Gospel in a more complete and copious form. For this is the purport of the various particles introduced iuto the text of each Gospel, and of the whole periods in the other parts ; of the many transpositions in each, to give greater clearness to the THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 325 histoiy; of the paragraphs inserted from the apocryphal Gospels, and of the other innumerable interpolations. Then again, other features of this MS. would incline one to another opinion ; other words, for instance, introduced instead of the genuine, not at all more significant, and therefore no way conducive to the clearness and entireness of the history; changes of numbers, cases, tenses, scattered over the MS. without any reason ; infinite transpositions, for which no adequate cause whatsoever can be conjectured ; lastly, many passages curtailed, and portions here and there cut out, and indeed whole sentences which make beyond compare for the completeness of the evangelical history." Michaelis proceeds to instance from MiU the omission of Kaivav, Luc. in. 36, evidently from design, and refers to Bengel on Matt. xx. 29. Michaelis then condemns Mill for admitting that, notwith standing its manifold corruptions, this MS. must be held to contain many ancient readings of undoubted purity, differing from those now received. Michaelis justly excepts against any reading being received on the sole authority of such a document, in opposition to other MSS. and to all versions, not excepting the Vulgate itself, to which so many of the readings of the Codex Bezae are conformed. He then proceeds to examine the readings in this MS. which Mill adduces as genuine. 1. Mill pleads for the omission of KUKpov?, Matt. xv. 30. It is retained by Tischendorf, Matthaei, Scholz, Lachmann, and Griesbach. It is omitted only here and in 219, a Vienna MS., Lambeeii 32, of the 13th century, and in three Evan- gelistaria, one of the 15th, the others of the 13th century. 2. Matt. xxv. 1. The Beza MS. adds after the bride— the bridegroom, with the Velesian readings, the Vulgate, Syriac, Armenian, and Persian Versions. MichaeUs answers that the Cambridge MS. (as this is also caUed) and the Velesian readings follow the Vulgate, as the Persian the Syriac. The question lies therefore with these three, the Vulgate, Syriac, and Armenian. But here we may oppose Mill to himself, who says, " But as neither MSS. nor Jerome, Hilary, Chry sostom, and Origen, as far as we can gather from their com- 326 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. mentaries, recognise it, we must take it as clearly an addition, borrowed perhaps from Bev. xxi. 2. Had the Vulgate been revised according to Johannes Benedictus, et sponsce would have been omitted. It is found also in 1 (Basil, B. vi. 27), one of the favorite MSS. both of Tischendorf and TregeUes, and in another commended by TregeUes as giving the ancient text, 209, Venetian 10, ofthe 15th century, coUated by Birch and Engelbrecht. 3. Matt. xxv. 6. Cometh is omitted after Behold the bridegroom. This omission indeed is not peculiar to D. It is omitted also in B, L (Eegius 62), a MS. of the same class, of the 8th century, and Z, the Dublin fragment of St. Mat thew, edited by Dr. John Barrett, DubUn, 1801. It is accordingly omitted by Tischendorf and Lachmann. It is found in the great majority of uncials, and retained by Mat thaei, Scholz, Vater, and Hahn. It is found in the Vulgate ; Bengel retains it, and accounts for the omission from the eye resting upon the word that foUows it, Go forth. 4. Mill pleads for the omission of that just person, Matt. xxvii. 24. Here again D and MiU are foUowed by Tischen dorf, because it is omitted also by B. It is also omitted in 102, a Medicean MS. containing the five last chapters of St. Matthew and the first seven of St. Mark, commended by Tischendorf as giving the ancient text.1 It is found in the majority of uncials, and in the Vulgate, and with a transpo sition in the Codex Alexandrinus, the antiquity of which is far greater than of the Codex Bezas. 5. Matt, xxviii. 12. This MS. has dpyvptov Uavbv, the singular in accommodation to the Latin ; whereas the received text, suitably to the Greek language, is in the plural. Mill ignorantly defends this Latinized reading. 6. Mark ii. 16. Kal Trivet, is omitted in D. This reading does not indeed rest on the sole authority of D. The same omission is found in B, 102 mentioned above, also in 235 Havniensis (Copenhagen) 2, written in 1314, the text mostly Alexandrine, containing the Gospels adapted for church use ; and in 271 Eeg. 75a, a MS. of the 12th century, said to have i Also in four, and only four, of Matthsei's MSS. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 327 in Mark a mixed text, and to conform to the Byzantine family in the other Gospels. The great majority of the uncials, with the Codex Alexandrinus, retain the words, and so do Scholz, Tischendorf, and Matthaei. Tischendorf probably considered that the testimony of A and C, with so many other uncials, and amongst them K and L, which often accord, but more especially L, with the oldest MSS., was sufficient to outweigh B and D and the few cursives that followed them. The words are rendered in the Vulgate, et bibit. They are in Luke v. 30, but not in Matt. ix. 11. Not being in the same form in St. Luke it is most probable that they were not inserted in St. Mark from that Gospel. 7. Mark x. 2. Trpoo-eXdovTe? is wanting in D, but is found in the majority of uncials, including A and B, and therefore it is retained by Tischendorf and Lachmann themselves, and is found in the Vulgate. 8. Mark x. 46. e/j^erat, the singular for the plural against all the other uncials which contain this passage. 9. Mark xiii. 33. In watch and pray, and pray is omitted. The same omission occurs in B and in 122, the Leyden MS. of the 12th century. Tischendorf omits it on this very insuf ficient authority, as does also Lachmann. On the other hand, A and C, the approximating uncials K, L, A, and the Byzan tine group E, F, G, H, with S, retain the words. 10. Mark xiv. 1. Kal to, a£v/u,a is omitted. Neither Tischendorf nor Lachmann here follow Mill, against the all but universal evidence which is in favour of the textus receptus. 11. Mark xiv. 22. Jesus is omitted in D. Here, because B is with D, Tischendorf omits Jesus. Lachmann inserts it, but with hesitation. A and C, and a majority of the uncial MSS., retain it, as do both Scholz and Matthaei. 12. Luke iv. 5. d AtdBoXo? being omitted by B and L, and a few cursives, Tischendorf omits it also ; but Lachmann rightly retains it, for it is in A, which is equally ancient with B, and in the Gospels more accurate. 13. Luke vi. 34. to, 'iaa, as much again. Here both Tischendorf and Lachmann desert Mill, not content with him to accept D as the sole representative of the ancient text. 328 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 14. Luke xxi. 24. a%/?t irX'qpmO&a-i, omitting the sequel, the times of the Gentiles. The same observation appUes in this instance. 15. John vi. 14. dXwBm is omitted. The same remark is similarly applicable here. 16. John vi. 23. After that the Lord had given thanks omitted. Also omitted in 69 ; the Leicester MS., retained both by Tischendorf and Lachmann. 17. John viii. 2. And he sat down and taught them. MiU will have this to have been interpolated from the other Evan- geUsts, because it is omitted in D. This being a portion of the history of the woman taken in adultery is omitted both by Lachmann and Tischendorf, but it is in the majority of the uncials. It was known to St. Augustine. There is abundant MS. authority, and what ought never to be overlooked, internal evidence for this history. See Middleton On ihe Greek Article. It is accordingly retained by Scholz, Matthaei, and Hahn. 18. John viii. 34. Of sin .omitted. Eetained by both Tischendorf and Matthaei, as in the case of Luke vi. 34, &c. 19. John viii. 53. Than our father omitted. The same remark applies in this instance. 20. John ix. 17. Again omitted. The same observation applies here also. 21.- Acts ii. 1. They were all with one accord in one place. D and the Syriac omit to and opLoOvpahov. MiU in this instance, as in others, is inconsistent. The latter word is also omitted by Tischendorf and Lachmann, who have 6/iov with A and B. 22. Acts xvi. 5. In the faith omitted. The same remark is applicable here as at Luke vi. 34 ; xxi. 24 : John vi. 14 • viii. 34, 53, and ix. 17. The elder Michaelis then proceeds to shew from numerous instances that the Greek was accommodated to the Latin version then in use, as at Matt. iii. 16, where descending is in the Greek made not to agree with the Greek but with the Latin Spiritus, and accordingly changed from the neuter to the masculine. But not only so, this MS. appears to have THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 329 been written by a Latin scribe ignorant of Greek. For instance, accommodating the Greek at Matt. v. 24 to the Latin, and changing the present into the future, instead of Trpocroio-eLS he has Trpoo-cbepeK. But Wetstein1 remarks that the Latin also is marked with the greatest anomalies, of which, he adds, not a few instances are found also in the old Itala version. Amongst these he gives calicem quod — san guis quod effunditur — ut seducantur et electos — agrum quod dedit. The forms of Latin are intermixed with those of Greek letters, and whether from writing by dictation only, and so mistaking, as in ipyatpp,evoi for opyttpfievoi,, or from other causes, the orthographical inaccuracies are most material and very numerous.2 It was probably written in Gaul, for fiepijLvavi is rendered soniis, in the French, soins.3 For an account of the controversy respecting the identity of the Codex Bezae, or Cambridge MS. D, with the second of those used by Stephens, the reader is referred to Michaelis, Introd. to the New Testament, vol. ii. pp. 235 — 240, and Bishop Marsh's notes upon those pages, in the second part of that volume, pp. 687 — 699. Matthaei, in his second edition of the New Testament, in a note upon Matt, xxvii. 52, hazards a conjecture that Stephens' second MS. is one still kept at Geneva, in the library of the Eeformed pastor there, and that once belonged to Beza. Matthaei gives a remarkable inter polation in that MS. at the place in St. Matthew above mentioned. This MS. does not appear to have been noticed since Matthasi's time. The third of Stephens' MSS. is Codex Eeg. 2867, now 84, on veUum in quarto, containing the four Gospels. In many places incisions have been made in the leaves. This MS. was identified by Le Long. Scholz collated SS. Matthew and John in this MS. and found the few readings noted by Stephens. It was written in the 12th century. Scholz's account of its mutilations varies from that in Michaelis. Michaelis says that it is defective in John i. to ver. 13 ; Scholz that it wants Matt. ii. 9 — 20; John i. 49 to the end, and 1 Prolegomena, ed. Semler, pp. 84, 85.. Halle, 1764. 2 Ibid. p. 85. 3 Ibid. 330 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. iii. 11. The text is mixed, but more frequently Byzantine. For Aminadab it reads Aminadam, as do 1, 116, 127, 157, MSS. commended by Tischendorf as giving the ancient text. In ver. 18 it has the Alexandrine reading, ykvecrvs. In ii. 11, elBov. In iii. 1 it omits Be. In ver. 6 it has the river before Jordan, an Alexandrine reading. In ver. 8 it has fruit worthy of, the reading preferred by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischen dorf; it is the reading also of the Complutensian and the Vulgate. The plural is retained in our version from the editions of Erasmus. It omits and with fire in ver. 11, as does also Matthaei,1 regarding it as brought in hither from St. Luke. In iv. 18 it omits Jesus; And Jesus walking by the sea of Galilee. So likewise Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. In ver. 24 it has, with eight other MSS. commended by Tisch endorf as giving the ancient text, namely, C, 1, 4, 33, 127, 131, 208, and 262, e%f)X6ev, instead of the common reading which is however retained by Tischendorf in this place. In v. 28 it has ai/Trjv for avr?)?, the reading preferred also by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. It has the account of the woman taken in adultery, but marked with obeli. The worth of this MS. may in some measure be estimated by the above specimens ; and those who adopt the standard of TregeUes and Tischendorf cannot surely complain that the textus receptus was a work of chance and grounded upon modern and inadequate authorities, with the evidence of D from amongst the uncials, and 4 as leading the cursive MSS. By the elder Michaelis it is indeed placed amongst the Lati nized MSS., a class in favour with the, critics of the Tischen- dorfian and Griesbachian schools.2 4 §'. Eegius 2871, now 106, contains the whole of the New Testament except the Eevelation. It is thus arranged : the Acts, the Catholic Epistles, the Epistles of St. Paul, and the Gospels with prologues. It is on vellum in quarto, is 1 Matthsei's note upon this passage in his first edition is worth consulting. He simply refers to it in his second. He attributes its insertion in St. Matthew to the influence of the ancient scholia, and of St. Chrysostom upon the Yulgate, and upon the early compilers of MSS. 2 Tractatio Crilica de Variis Lectionibus N. T. § 85, p. 94. Halle, 1749. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 331 referred to the 12th century, and exhibits a mixed text. Collated by Scholz. 5 e. Eeg. 3425, now 112. The whole New Testament except the Apocalypse. Identified by Le Long, numbered 6 by Wetstein. On vellum in 12mo, of the 11th century ; contains also synaxaria and the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom. It exhibits a mixed text. It was collated by Scholz in the four first chapters of St. Mark, in the 7th and 8th of St. John, and in the whole of St. Matthew. In Matt. iii. 6 it adds the river, with 4, i. e. Codex Eeg. 2867, and in chap. iii. 11 omits with that MS. and with fire. In chap. v. 47 it has your friends for your brethren. Here the Complutensian and Matthaei adopt the same reading, whilst Tischendorf retains the textus receptus with B, D, as does also Scholz. In ver. 48 it reads, with B, L, 1, 13, 33, and some others, your heavenly Father for your Father which is in heaven. At chap. ix. 36 it has eo-KvX/Aevoi, the reading alike of Scholz, Matthaei, and Tischendorf. In chap. x. 8 it omits raise the dead. It is also rejected by the critical autho rities above named. In chap. xii. 6 it has /leltpv, a reading adopted by the three above-named critics. It has the history of the woman taken in adultery. At Acts xx. 28 it reads the church of ihe Lord and God, the reading also of the Com plutensian and of Matthaei. In 1 Tim. iii. 16 it has the received reading, God was manifest in the flesh. The two last chapters of the Epistle to Titus and the Epistle to Philemon, nearly to the end of the 12th verse, are wanting. 6 ?'. Eeg. 2886, now 71 ; Fleischer, but 72 Griesbach ; Wetstein's 7. On vellum in quarto, of the 11th century; contains the Gospels with prologues, synaxaria, the Eusebian Canons, and figures. The text more Byzantine than Alex andrine. Collated by Scholz in the first six chapters of St. Mark, and in St. John from the 3rd to the 8th chapter inclusive. In Mark i. 5 this MS. has there went out in the plural number, the reading of Erasmus. In ver. 11 it reads, In thee I am well pleased, with B, D, 1, 4, 5 (the 4th of 332 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Stephens' MSS.), 13, 22, 28, 33, 69, 118, 131, 209, 435, all MSS. commended by Tischendorf as giving the ancient text. This reading is also that of a few other MSS. This MS. was probably prepared by some critic, as was the case with many others. Thus by an over-nicety, as Matthaei observes, the article is omitted before angels in ver. 13. It contains the history of the woman taken in adultery. 7 £'. Eeg. 47 (not 49 as in Michaelis n. p. 300), formerly 2242 ; written in 1364 at Constantinople ; contains the New Testament with prologues, synaxaria, the Psalms, and the Canticles sung in divine service. Scholz collated the Gospels and Acts, and the rest of the New Testament only partially. He describes it as rarely departing from the textus receptus, and as exhibiting therefore for the most part the Byzantine text. 8 n'. Eeg. 62 L, formerly 2861, on veUum in quarto ; an uncial of the 8th century. Imperfect from Matt. iv. 21 to v. 14, and in the last chapter from the 17th verse to the end ; also in the 10th chapter of Mark from the 17th to the 30th verse, and in the 15th from the 2nd to the 20th verse ; and lastly in John xxi. from ver. 15 to the end. Some of the leaves have been misplaced by the binder. It is to be ob served, says Wetstein, that Beza produced forty various readings and more from this very MS., and amongst them that notable one at Mark xvi. 9. This is another and apo cryphal termination to this Gospel, probably added by the critical compiler of this eclectic manuscript, from the objec tions unjustly taken on the alleged ground of internal evidence to the usual conclusion of St. Mark. The style is too arti ficial and didactic for the Evangelist. This addition is given in Scholz. It also occurs with some variation in 274, Eeg. 79a , written on veUum in quarto for the use of the Church of Callipolis, in the Thracian Chersonese in the 10th century. L is condemned by the elder MichaeUs (after Mill) as a very corrupt and Latinizing MS. It is accordingly highly commended by Tischendorf1 in company with B and A, the 1 "Qui toties soli fere veram lectionem conservarunt." — p. 272. N. T. 1859. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 333 Codex Sangallensis, of the 9th century, which has an inter linear Latin version. In Mark xi. 8 it has dyp&v for BevBpwv with B, an un doubtedly false though very ancient Alexandrine reading. Tischendorf indeed adopts this reading, which even Lachmann rejects. At Luke x. 42 it has the singular reading, there is need of a few things or of one, found in Origen, and in the Syriac and Coptic versions. This palpable corruption it retains in common with B, 1, 33, and a very similar reading is found in 38, another of Stephens' MS. It has some other remarkable corruptions together with B, as at Luke xxiii. 42 and 45. With B it also reads (and is herein foUowed by 33 Eeg. 14) at John i. 18, ihe only begotten God, a reading rejected by both Lachmann and Tischendorf, but too unique not to find an advocate in Dr. Tregelles, although truth compels him to admit that the textus receptus is at least as old as Irenaeus. L, although agreeing with B in very numerous instances, does not invariably copy it. It is not so Alexandrine in its forms. In Matt. i. 18 it reads ykvvncri*;. For io-Tadn, B, C, D, it has eo-TT? in Matt. ii. 9. In ver. 17 it has vito where B, C, D, Z have Bia, the reading of Tischendorf. It does not omit Luke xxii. 43, 44. It has a vacant space with B, C, where the history of the woman taken in adultery is usuaUy found. 9 0'. Co/sUnianus 200, Wetstein's 38. It has several chasms. It was sent as a present from the Court of Con stantinople to Louis IX. It was written on vellum in quarto, in the 14th century, at the command of the Emperor Michael Palseologus. So Scholz, but Bishop Marsh thought that it might be older. Montfaucon assigned it to the 13th century. It has neither the Epistles of St. Paul nor the Apocalypse. So Scholz, who consulted it ; but Wetstein, followed by Michaelis, describes it as containing the whole New Testament except the Apocalypse. It is defective from Matt. xiv. 15 to xv. 30 ; from xx. 14 to xxi. 27 ; and from Mark xii. 3 to xiii. 4. Wetstein agrees with Mill in commending this MS. as one of the best of those which Stephens used, but differs from 334 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. him in regard of the extent to which he represents Stephens as having followed it. Its text is Byzantine. 10 £. Eeg. 2870, now 102, Wetstein's 7 in the Acts; on vellum in octavo, of the 10th century. Contains the Acts and St. Paul's Epistles with prologues. The text, according to Scholz, is Byzantine. According to Mill (Prolegomena, 1170), it varies from the edition of Stephens in more than 330 places, where most of its readings agree with the Vulgate. It is therefore reckoned by the elder MichaeUs amongst the Latinizing MSS. The Epistle to the Hebrews is placed between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Timothy. 11 id. Not yet discovered. A Latinizing MS. varying from the text of Stephens in about 400 passages, of which 276 agree with the Vulgate or some other Latin text. Estius had long since condemned it on this account in his Comm. on 1 Pet. iii. 19, p. 1182. Paris, 1653. Stephens has once quoted it, Bev. xiii. 4, for the beast in the dative case, ac cording to the reading of C, and several other MSS. given by Scholz. The textus receptus has the accusative case, but the dative is the reading adopted aUke by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. 12 i0. Eeg. 2862, now 83, Wetstein's 9 ; on vellum in quarto, written in 1168. The text mostly Byzantine. Con tains the Gospels, with the Canons of Eusebius and synax aria. 13 if. Discovered by Bishop Marsh to be the Codex Vatabli, Kk. 6. 4. in the University Library, Cambridge. It belonged to Vatablus, who was Hebrew Professor at Paris in the time of E. Stephens, and one of his most intimate friends. It is a MS. of the Acts and of aU the Epistles. It is Wetstein's 9 in the Acts, and 11 Paul, of the 11th century, and, according to Scholz, exhibits the Byzantine text. According to Mill (Prolegomena, 1173) it has in the Acts a few passages with which the Vulgate coincides, but many more in the Epistles, and is therefore ranked by the elder MichaeUs amongst the Latinizing MSS. 14 t6v. In the library of St. Victor, Paris, 774. Griesbach refers it to the 13th century. It has lost the Gospel of St. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 335 Mark, and the first leaf of St. John's Gospel. Griesbach has given extracts from it under the title Codex 120. It is said to harmonize with the Eeg. 2244, now 55, of the 5th century, with a Latin version. This, the 14th of Stephens' MSS., is 12 of Wetstein's, who makes it the same with 2865 Eeg. which is numbered by Scholz not 12 but 31. It is classed by Mill amongst the inferior MSS. The Eeg. 2244, now 55 (in MichaeUs, II. 303, numbered 204), was, according to Wetstein, written by Jerome of Sparta, Greek Professor at Paris, and preceptor of Eeuchlin and Budaeus. It is thus a very modern MS, but Griesbach at tached no small weight to it from its favouring that pseudo- antiquity which he followed. 15 te'. Eeg. 2869, now 237, on vellum in quarto, neatly and correctly written, in the 10th century ; contains the Acts, Epistles, and Eevelation, with prologues, scholia, and the treatise of Dorotheus, Bishop of Tyre, on the twelve Apostles and seventy-two Disciples, an apocryphal and legendary work. The text is, according to Scholz, mostly Byzantine. It is numbered 10 Acts, 12 Paul, 2 Apoc. 16 t?'. Not yet discovered, numbered 3 Apoc, and con taining only the Apocalypse. From this enumeration it will be seen that Stephens had before him specimens of very various states of the text of the New Testament, and not a few MSS. which Tregelles, Tisch endorf, and the pseudo-antiquaries who prefer A, B, C, D, L, A, to all other MSS., are bound to regard on their own prin ciples with the deepest respect. " Professor Scholefield's Greek and English Testament, printed at Cambridge in 1836, although stated to be an exact reprint of the Stephanie edition of 1550, differs from it in Luke vii. 12 ; x. 6 ; xvii. 1, 35 : John viii. 25 ; xix. 7 : Acts ii, 36 : Eph. iv. 25 : James v. 9 : 1 Pet. iv. 8 : 2 Pet ii. 12 : 2 John 5: Bev. vii. 10." ' The first edition of Eobert Stephens appeared in 1546, the second in 1549, with 77 alterations ; the third very finely 1 Rev. F. H. Scrivener's Introduction to his Supplement to tlie Authorized English Version of the New Testament, p. 6. Lond. Pickering, 1845. 336 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. executed in folio, 1550 ; the fourth in 1551 ; the fifth by his son Henry in 1569. Meanwhile Crispin copied his edition from Stephens in 1553 ; and Vogel his edition, Leipzig, 1569. That celebrated divine and eminent scholar Theodore Beza published his first edition of the New Testament in 1565, with additional readings copied from the margin of Eobert Stephens' own unpublished copy of readings collected in preparing for his third edition, that of 1550. "Theodore Beza's several editions of the Greek Testament contain a text essentially the same as that published by Stephens, from whose third edition he does not vary in much more than eighty places. But his critical labours claim our especial notice from the deference paid to them by the translators of the English authorized version ; who, though they did not impUcitly foUow Beza's text, yet have received his readings in many passages where he differs from Stephens'." Mr.. Scrivener then subjoins a list of those places in which our translation agrees with Beza's New Testament against that of Stephens. Matt. xxi. 7, eireKaQtaav, they set him. Beza, with the Vulgate and Cas- taUo, e-n-eKadta-ev, he sat. Stephens. This latter reading is adopted by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. Beza's is the reading of L. Matt, xxiii. 13, 14. Here also our translators followed Beza for the worse. Matthaei observes upon this place, that in all the better MSS. ver. 14 is read before ver. 13. Mark viii. 24. / see men as trees walking. So Beza and the Vulgate. But Stephens follows the other reading, 7 see men walking indeed, but I see them as trees, i. e. indistinctly. See Wolfii Curai Phil. This reading was adopted by Erasmus, and has been received by Matthaei, and after him by Tischen dorf, on very ample testimony. Mark ix. 40. For he that is not against us is on our part. So Beza, Erasmus, and Tischendorf. It was probably altered to this reading from St. Luke, but stands as in Stephens in the majority of uncials, He that is not against you is on your part. And so Matthaei and Scholz, and so the Vulgate. Mark xii. 20. Beza inserted ergo, now ; rejected by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 337 Luke i. 35. Beza adds of thee, as it stood in the first edition of Erasmus. The addition came from C, 1, 33, the Vulgate, and some few other sources. Some, observes Matthaei, introduced it into the text from the scholia, others by a pious fraud, against the heretics. Luke ii. 22. Beza has the days of the purification of Mary, and so the Vulgate, purgationis ejus, foUowed by the Com plutensian. But Stephens, as also Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf, the days of their purification. See this reading vindicated in Surenhusii Liber KaraXXayrfi, pp. 303, 304. Amsterdam, 1713. Luke x. 22. Here Stephens, with the Complutensian, Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf, prefix, and turning to his disciples he said. These words are omitted in D and some kindred MSS., but are found either wholly or in part in A, B, L themselves. Luke xv. 26. One of the servants, Stephens after Erasmus, one of his servants. Luke xvii. 36. This verse, received into our version, is omitted by Stephens, Matthaei, and Tischendorf. It owes its place in Beza and our version to the influence of the Codex Bezae, and is in several kindred MSS. as 13, 33, 69, and some others, but is not found in the majority of MSS. of every class. John xiii. 31. For and it was night when he went out, v. 30, we read, and it was night, v. 31, therefore when he was gone out, &c. The first reading was adopted by the Complu tensian and Matthaei. John xvi. 33. For in ihe world ye have tribulation, the reading also of Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf, we have the future ; but the present might here stand for the future. John xviii. 24. Now Annas had sent him bound for Annas had sent him bound, &c. The latter reading is adopted by Matthaei, Scholz, and Tischendorf. Acts xvii. 25. And all things. Stephens read Kanh irdvTa, as does the excellent uncial G, the Codex Angelicus. The textus receptus follows A, B. K and so it became and continued a royal palace until the reign of William III., who, finding that there was great truth in the remark of King James, regranted it to the family of its founder. Henry Earl of Suffolk hereupon pulled down the greater part of it. The Earl died at Suffolk House (which occupied the site of the present Suffolk Street) in Westminster, May 28, 1626. To return to the royal visit. The Lord Treasurer is said to have expended a thousand pounds a day on this occasion. His family appear to have constituted no small part of the spectacle, there being few or no noble ladies present but such as were of his own kindred ; as Alethaea the Countess of Arundel, youngest daughter and coheir of Gilbert Talbot, 398 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. seventh Earl of Shrewsbury, married to Thomas Howard Earl of Arundel;1 her sister the Lady Elizabeth Grey, the Earl of Shrewsbury's second daughter, married to Sir Henry Grey, Lord of Kuthin, son of Charles Grey, Earl of Kent ;2 the Countess of Suffolk (the Earl's second wife), Catherine, eldest daughter and coheir of Sir Henry Knyvett of Chorlton in Wilts, Knt. ;3 with her daughters, namely, Frances her second daughter, not long after too well known by her divorce from the Earl of Essex and subsequent marriage with Eobert Carr, Earl of Somerset ; and Catherine, Countess of Salisbury, the third daughter of the Countess of Suffolk ;4 together with the Lady Walden, Elizabeth, daughter and coheir to George, Lord Hume, Earl of Dunbar f and lastly, Elizabeth, daughter and sole heir of William Basset, Esq., after whose death she was married to William Cavendish, Duke of Newcastle.6 FuUer relates that the King's entertainment at Cambridge cost the Earl of Suffolk five thousand pounds and up wards ;7 and Chamberlain that the Earl spent twenty-six tun of wine in five days. He lodged and kept his table at St. John's College, but his lady and her retinue at Magdalene College, of which her grandfather Audley, Lord Chancellor, was a kind of second or co-founder. To him the CoUege owes its present name, having been previously called Buckingham Hall (1519) from Edward Stafford, third Duke of Bucking ham. The King and Prince Charles lay at Trinity College, where the plays were represented. The hall was so weU ordered for room, that above two thousand persons were accommodated. On the first day, Tuesday the 7th of March, the King attended a Divinity Act which was kept by Dr. Davenant, Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity and President of Queens' College. He disputed on three questions. Nulla est temporalis Papai potestas super Beges in ordine ad bonum spirituals. The affirmative had been maintained by BeUar mine (lib. v. De Bom. Pont. cap. 6), who professed to mode- 1 Brooke's Catalogue of Nobility, p. 10. 2 Ibid. p. 120. 1 Ibid. p. 213. 4 Ibid. p. 213. r> Ibid. p. 144. « Ibid. p. 143. 7 Worthies. Essex, p. 329. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 399 rate the doctrine taught up to his time respecting the power of the Pope, by changing his dominion over all things into an indirect instead of a direct power. Augustinus Triumphus, of the order of Eremites of St. Augustine, of the country of Ancona, and who was present at the Second Council of Lyons in 1274 (called the Fourteenth General Council, when a forced union of the Greek and Latin Churches took place under Pope Gregory X. and the Emperor Michael Palaeologus, and which lasted but a few years owing to the imperiousness of Pope Martin IV.), had taught without reserve the direct dominion of the Eoman Pontiff over the whole world in things both political and ecclesiastical. In this he had been followed by Alvarus Pelagius, a Spaniard of the Friars Minorites, Penitentiary to the Pope and Bishop of Corunna, early in the next century, and many others. Bellarmine indeed only threw a veil over the monstrosity of the papal claims by asserting an indirect in the place of a direct dominion. Others however continued to affirm the Pope's dominion in the more undisguised form, as Augustinus Steuchus of Eugubium or Gubbio (at the foot of the Apennines above Perugia), who died in 1550, and a host besides, whose names are given in Dr. John Gerhard's Confessio Caiholica.1 Bellarmine, whilst he learnedly refuted the older opinion, as Dr. Field shews at length in the 44th chapter of his 5th book Ofthe Church, gave back to the Pope with his left hand all that he appeared to take from him with his right ; grounding his power to depose princes and to dispose of their kingdoms on his right in ordine ad bonum spirituale, " that is, in a kind of reference to the procuring and setting forward of the spiritual good." This claim the learned Dr. Field exposes and refutes in the 45th and 46th chapters of his 5th book.2 In this Act the eminently learned and pious Davenant, afterward Bishop of Salisbury, was answerer, and the muni ficent and very able Eegius Divinity Professor and Master of Peterhouse, Dr. John Eichardson, one of the opposers. In behalf of the excommunicating of kings, Dr. Eichardson 1 1. ii. art. 3, cap. 9, p. 659. Jena?, 1662. 2 pp. 609—632, 3rd ed. Oxf. 1635. 400 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. vigorously pressed the practice of St. Ambrose, who excom municated the Emperor Theodosius. The King with some warmth replied, Profecto fuit hoc ab Ambrosia insolentissime factum ; upon which Dr. Eichardson answered, " Eesponsum vere regium et Alexandro dignum; hoc non est arguments dissolvere sed dissecare," (a truly royal answer and worthy of Alexander, "this is not to untie but to cut arguments"), and sitting down desisted from any further dispute. The second thesis was, Infallibilis fidei determinatio non est annexa cathedra; Papali. Dr. Field states the general opinion in the Eomish Church at this time to have been, that the Pope whether he might err personally or not, yet could not " define for falsehood," i. e. could not err as Pope. BeUarmine main tained, but as Field proved, falsely, that all "Catholics" con sented that the Pope with a General Council could not err.1 The third thesis was, Cwca obedientia est illicita. This was against that doctrine of impUcit and unquestioning obe dience which is the foundation of the Jesuit system, and which makes it therefore an essentially dangerous, irreUgious, and immoral institution, namely, that the mind, will, and con science of the members of that Society should be one and the same with the mind, will, and conscience of their superior. So Ignatius Loyola, in the epistle De Virtute Obediential at the end of the Eules of the Society : " Obedience comprehends not only the execution, that one should do what he is commanded, and the will, that he should do it willingly, but also the judgment, that whatsoever the superior thinks and enjoins, the same should appear true and right to his inferior, in so far as I have said the will can bend the understanding by its own power."2 The first night's entertainment was a comedy made and acted by St. John's men. It is but slightingly aUuded to by Chamberlain in that letter to Dudley Carleton from which so much of om- information respecting the royal visit is drawn. A Law Act was moderated by Dr. Hemy Mutlow, first Gresham Professor of Civil Law. He had been a Fellow of King's College, was Proctor in 1589 and 1593, a Burgess of 1 See Field's Book ofthe Church, b. v. chap. 42. 2 § ix. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 401 Parliament, many years Public Orator ; he died 1634, aged eighty years, and was buried at St. Mary's. The second night, March 8, the celebrated comedy of Ignoramus was acted to the great entertainment of the King, who was the more pleased as the whole was a satire upon the professors of the common law, for which his imperial bias would gladly have substituted the civil law as more in unison with his favourite theory of absolute monarchy. * The author was the Eev. George Euggle, whose family name was derived from Eugely in Staffordshire. He had been educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he was B.A. 1594, and M.A. 1597. He was thence transferred to a fellowship and tutorship at Clare Hall 1598, a time when that foundation was favoured with a constellation of genius and learning, as we have noticed elsewhere. He was born at Lavenham in Suffolk. He was Taxor of the University in 1604, went to Oxford when the King visited that University in 1605, and was there incorporated M.A. He resigned his fellowship in 1620, and died about a year after. His Igno ramus was not published until some years after his death, first in 1630, then in eight editions to one at Dublin inclusive in 1736, and lastly, with ample notes and a valuable life of Euggle by Sir J. S. Hawkins, in 1 787. A translation by Bobert Codrington, M.A. of Magdalene College, Oxford, appeared in 1662, and a mutilated one in 1678, under the title of The English Lawyer, a Comedy acted at the Boyal Theatre; written by Edward Bavenscroft, Gent, in 1678. The play was acted by (amongst others) several members of the University in holy orders, which was not overlooked at Oxford, where a more discreet course had been observed in 1605. Amongst them were Towers, afterwards Bishop of Peterborough, Bar- grave, Dean of Canterbury, Love, Dean of Ely, and Mason of Pembroke Hall, Dean of Sarum. Spencer Compton, then a youth only thirteen years of age, only son of Lord Compton, and of Queens' College, Cambridge, attracted especial observa tion. He personated three several characters in this comedy. Mr. John Holies, of Christ College, eldest son of Sir John Holies, whom he succeeded as second Earl of Clare in 1637, 402 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. was another of the actors. He was a man of honour and courage, and remarkable for his moderation in the troubles of the ensuing reign. He died January 2, 1665, and was succeeded by his son Gilbert. Love, afterwards Dean of Ely, was also with Bargrave of Clare Hall. In the Physic Act the King's Physician, Sir Edward Eadcliffe, distinguished himself. He was brother of Dr. Jeremiah Eadcliffe, one of the Senior Fellows of Trinity College, and also one of the translators of the Bible. He some time lived at Orwell, where his brother was Eector, and erected a monument to his memory. He was grandson of Ealph, a celebrated schoolmaster at Hitchin.1 He died September 1631, aged 78. The famUy stiU reside at the Priory near Hitchin. On the third night, March 9th, a comedy, Aioumazar, was acted before the King. Its author was Mr. Tomkis, scholar of Trinity College 1594, and B.A. 1598. The comedy was published in quarto in 1615, and again in 1634. It is re printed in the ninth volume of Dodsley's Collection. Tomkis was in part indebted, as was also Euggle, to John Baptist Porta, an ItaUan dramatist of the preceding century. The last evening Melanthe, a Latin pastoral composed by Mr. afterwards Dr. Brook,2 was acted. Chamberlain, who did not exercise the good feeling of the witty Corbet,8 who being asked to criticise the performances of the University, answered that he had left his malice and judgment at home, and came thither only to commend, admits that the Philosophy Act was excellently kept. 1 See Wood's Ath. Oxon. ed. Bliss, vol. i. p. 215 ; and Fasti, vol. i. p. 287. 2 This Dr. Samuel Brook was of a Yorkshire family. His father was an eminent merchant, and twice Lord Mayor of York. He was an early and faithful friend of John Donne, Dean of St. Paul's, his fellow-student at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was appointed Chaplain to Prince Henry, and on the recommendation of that Prince, Divinity Professor in Gresham College Sep tember 26, 1612, D.D. 1615, Rector of St. Margaret's, Lothbury, June 13, 1618, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, September 5, 1629, Archdeacon of Coventry May 13, 1631. He is said to have been nominated not by Bishop Morton but by the King. See more respecting him in Dr. Bliss's valuable notes to Wood's Fasti, vol. i. pp. 401, 402 3 Afterwards Bishop of Oxford (1628) and Norwich (1632), THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 403 After it was concluded Bishop Andrewes sent the mode rator, the answerer, the varier or prevaricator, and one of the repliers, who were all of his College, twenty angels each. Wren was answerer or respondent ; Preston, tutor of Queens' College, the celebrated Puritan, was first opponent ; Dr. Eeade of Pembroke HaU was moderator. Alexander Eeade, B.A., was chosen to a Fellowship at Pembroke Hall November 5th, 1605, whilst Harsnet was Master ; Humanity Lecturer (the first of Mr. Farr's founda tion) 1616. Mr. Farr was Henry Farr, Fellow 3rd November 1570, whilst Dr. John Young, afterward Bishop of Eochester, was Master; he was M.A. 1574, and Junior Proctor 1586. Eeade held the same office in 1617, had a testimonial for orders in 1618, was made D.D. and President, i. e. next to the Master or Vice-Master, in 1624, and Perpetual Curate or Minister of Yately, a small preferment in the gift of the Master of St. Cross' Hospital, on the northern border of Hampshire, east of Bramshill Park. He died about 1628. " Their moderator was no fool ; He far from Cambridge kept a school." For this last information we are indebted to " A grave poem, as it was presented in Latin by certain divines before his Majesty in Cambridge, by way of interlude, styled Liber novus de adventu Begis ad Cantabrigiam. Faithfully done into English with some liberal advantage ; made rather to be sung than read. To the tune of Bonny Nell." It is inserted in Corbet's poems, and has been reprinted by Sir J. S. Hawkins in his edition of Ignoramus, and by Nichols in his Boyal Progresses. The question was whether dogs could make syllogisms, suggested by a passage from Chrysippus in Sir W. Ealeigh's Sceptic, in which the position is affirmed. Wren, whose abilities had early recommended him to the kind patronage of Andrewes, pleaded a kind of divine right for the King's hounds. Fuller in his Worthies has in his own way per petuated this Act. After identifying him from his arms with the worshipful family of the Wrens in Northumberland, he dd2 404 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. adds, ' He was bred Fellow of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, where he kept the extraordinary Philosophy Act before King James. I say, kept it with no less praise to himself than pleasure to the King, where, if men should forget, even dogs would remember his seasonable distinction, what the King's hounds could perform above others by virtue of their pre rogative.'1 On Easter-day, April 9, Bishop Andrewes preached before the King at Whitehall a sermon of the most unparalleled ingenuity upon those words of our Lord, Destroy this Temple, and within three days I will raise it up again. His prose continually reminds us throughout of Herbert's verse, the same fertility of invention, the same facUity of application. He notes how the sign our Lord gave the Pharisees was far greater than that which was in their thoughts. The Temple men could raise again, but not this temple the body. He takes occasion to condemn the avaricious sacrilege of his times, that will leave nothing standing of the house of God, not even the roof if it be of lead. He briefly touches on the typical character of the Temple and its furniture, adducing St. Ambrose, saying, " that is truly a temple wherein is the purification of our sins." Toward the end he observes that we make our bodies anything rather than temples, or if temples, temples of Ceres, Bacchus, Venus. " But if this be the fruit of our Ufe, and we have no other but this, to fill and farce our bodies, to make them shrines of pride, and to maintain them in this excess, to make a money-change1 of all besides, Commonwealth, Church, and all, 1 know not well what to say to it. I doubt at their rising they will rather make blocks for hell-fire than be made pillars in the temple of God, in the holy places made without hands." In the course of this year Bishop Andrewes added Matthew Wren (afterward Bishop of Ely) to the number of his chap lains. He had been Fellow of Pembroke College from 1605, and on January 20, 1610, had been preferred by the same 1 Worthies of England. Lond. p. 208. 2 As the Jews did of the Temple. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 405 patron to the Vicarage of Harston, and on March 26, 1614, to that of Barton. These he resigned, Harston in November 1615, and Barton in the year following, being instituted on the gift of Bishop Andrewes to the Eectory of Teversham this same year, in which he was also made his chaplain, on May 15. His learning was such as to rank him amongst the first scholars ofthe University ; and by his application to whatsoever affairs concerned the interest of the Colleges to which he suc cessively belonged, Pembroke and St. Peter's College, he has been deservedly regarded by those societies as one of their principal benefactors. Such merits could not fail to attach Andrewes to him, who was himself unrivalled as a promoter of learning and of learned men. Thus Wren was brought into the royal presence, and all courtly favours from that time flowed in upon him, if not in rapid yet in sure succession. In 1621 he was made Chaplain to Prince Charles, and accom panied him in that imprudent and unsuccessful journey to Spain. On his return he was in May 1624 made Eector of Bingham in the county of Nottingham. The town itself, still of no great size, owed what little importance it possessed to a noble coUegiate church, now no longer collegiate, but highly interesting for its architectural features. This preferment was of considerable value. Not long before, on the preceding 10th November 1623, he was installed in the first stall of Win chester through Andrewes, then Bishop of that see. On July 26, 1625, he was elected Master of Peterhouse, and in 1628 was made Dean of Windsor and Eegistrar of the Order of the Garter. Some time after he was made Clerk of the Closet, and attended the King to Scotland. In 1634 he was promoted to a prebend in the abbey-church of Westminster, in the room of Dr. John Wilson, and the same year was consecrated to the see of Hereford on the death of the learned Dr. Augustine Lindsell. In the following year he was trans lated to Norwich on the decease of the poetical Bishop Corbett. On the death of Bishop White he was removed to Ely. Whilst Master of Peterhouse he collected contributions and built the college chapel, which was dedicated March 17, 1632. With the same liberality, on his restoration to his see after an 406 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. unjust imprisonment of eighteen years in the Tower, he built a new chapel to Pembroke College, elegantly designed by the famous Sir Christopher Wren, and gave to the College the manor of Hardwick near Cambridge, to keep it in repair. The chapel of Pembroke College cost him above £5000. The first stone was laid on May 13, 1663, by Dr. Mark Frank,1 who had in the preceding year succeeded to the Mastership in the place of Dr. Benjamin Laney, Bishop of Peterborough. Bishop Wren himself consecrated it upon St. Matthew's-day, September 21, 1665. He died at Ely House, Holbom, April 24, 1667. As a prelate and theologian Wren possessed neither the prudence nor the sound and solid piety of his great patron Andrewes. He professed to adhere to him as a ritualist, but in regard of that great practical point, the observance of the Lord's-day, he departed from the doctrine of Bishop Andrewes. That prelate maintained the divine institution of the day and the sanctification of the whole of it. Not so Bishop Wren, who although not guilty in so many instances as were objected to him, yet acknowledged that he had excommunicated some of his clergy for not publishing the King's declaration of the Book of Sports.2 He was very rigid in confining his clergy to the form of the bidding prayer, which form itself was continually varied and accommodated to the occasion in the time of Bishop Andrewes, as may be seen in the Bidding Prayers inserted in his Posthumous Works. Bishop Wren was not therefore justified in the use which he made of his name in his defence.8 George Herbert used his own form,4 and the 55th canon itself permits each minister and preacher to frame his own prayer upon the model of the canon, unrestrained as to the very form itself. 1 Dr. Mark Frank was Archdeacon of St. Alban's, Treasurer and Prebendary of St. Paul's. He died in 1664, and was buried in the old cathedral. He wrote much and successfully in the style of his predecessor in the Mastership, Bishop Andrewes. His two volumes of Sermons are amongst the most valuable works in the Anglo- Catholic Library. 2 Rushworth's Mist. Collect. Pt. 2, vol. i. p. 461. Wren's Parentalia, p. 64. 3 See Parentalia, p. 90. ¦» Remains, p. 99, ed. Pickering. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 407 Wren was also over-zealous for the custom of bowing to the altar, for which in his defence he alleged without any ground Jewel's Defence of his Apology. There in page 203 (ed. Lond. 1565) Jewel has not one word of bowing to the communion-table, but only, " kneeling, bowing, standing up, and other like are commendable gestures and tokens of de votion, so long as the people understandeth what they mean." He more pertinently appealed to Bishop Morton on the Institution of the Sacrament? who however is entirely silent upon the mystical meaning of bowing as it is now understood by some, and as it was perhaps in the mind of Laud himself. " The use of bowing toward the Lord's table hath in it no other nature or meaning than Daniel his kneeling with his face towards Jerusalem and the Temple. For as this was a testification of his joint society in that religious worship which had been exercised in the Temple and altar thereof at Jeru salem, so ours is a symbol of our union in profession with them who do faithfully communicate at the table of the Lord." He again has recourse to the name of Andrewes in behalf of bowing to the holy table. But Andrewes at least, as Dr. Fuller has left on record, did not impose upon any in any of the dio ceses which he governed, unauthorized ceremonies. No wonder that Wren incurred the displeasure of those who felt that from his hands they had suffered unjustly, and who saw clearly that overmuch zeal for such external points was incompatible with purity of doctrine and with the maintenance of the reformed faith. It was indeed a sort of Pharisaism that punctiliously bowed at the altar, and the next moment looked on with satisfaction at the congregation released from church to dance around the maypole. This was to set up human institutions (the Book of Sports) practically and imperiously above divine, 'the day which the Lord hath made.' On April 16th the Council wrote to the Bishop to request him to supervise the priests to be sent to Wisbeach Castle, and to appoint learned divines to converse with those who might desire it. Letters were sent to the neighbouring i B. vii. u. 9, § 2, p. 551. Lond. 1635. 408 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. justices cautioning them against any attempt at escape or rescue. Orders were sent at the same time for the better government of the said priests to Matthias Taylor, Keeper of the Castle. Amongst these seem to have been Alexander Faircloth, Eichard Cooper, George Muskett, and John Ainsworth. On May 24th the Bishop wrote to the Keeper the answers of the Council to divers points of the requests made by the priests. Their breviaries were to be restored to them, and they permitted to see or write to friends who wished to relieve them without the names being known. He wrote further that he could not allow his own house to be used for the prisoners, as it had been during the vacancy of the see.1 The Eomish historian Dod highly eulogizes George Mus kett alias Fisher, which latter he regards as his true name. He says that he had a brother at Attlebridge in Norfolk near Eepham in the hundred of Taverham. He was educated at the English College at Eome, and was ordained priest there. He resided mostly in London, and was very zealous in prose lytizing to his communion. He and the Jesuit Fisher were engaged for two days, April 21 and 22, 1621, in controversy with Drs. Goad and Featly. He was in prison in 1635, being then 53 years old. He was condemned to die, being convicted of saying mass, but remained twenty years a prisoner under sentence. But all this time, says Dod, he found means to exercise his functions with the same success as if he had enjoyed his liberty. He remained a prisoner mitil 1641, having been reprieved by the Queen's intercession. He was chosen to succeed Dr. Kellison as President of the English College at Douay. Again the watchful zeal of Henrietta, directed by those about her, found an opportunity of for warding the plans of Eome and the interests of the Eomish Church. The Queen prevailed to have his imprisonment exchanged for exile. He arrived at Douay November 14th, 1641. He died of consumption December 24th, 1645. In his presidentship he was succeeded by Dr. WilUam Hyde. 1 Catalogue of State Papers, vol. lxxx. p. 287. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 409 Muskett was called at Eome, Flos cleri Anglicani — The flower of the English clergy. On May 28th1 Andrewes preached before the King at Greenwich upon our Lord's baptism. Here the peculiar gift of his prolific genius appeared to great advantage, in illus trating from analogy the design of our Lord's baptism as our federal head ; the character of his baptism as the sanctification and pattern of ours ; and the dovelike spirit of true Chris tianity and of the true Church in contradistinction to the vulturelike nature of the Church of Eome. " The Holy Ghost is a dove, and he makes Christ's spouse the Church a dove, a term so oft iterate in the Canticles and so much stood on by S. Augustine and the Fathers, that they make no question, no dove no Church. St. Peter," he adds, " was Bar- Jona, the son of a dove, and without such a dovelike spirit there is no remission of sins, no Holy Ghost in the Church."2 Upon July 9th our prelate assisted at the consecration of Dr. Eichard Milbourne to the see of St. David's. The other prelates were Archbishop Abbot, Dr. John King, Bishop of London, Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, and Dr. John Overall, who had in April 1614 been raised to the see of Lichfield and Coventry. Dr. Eichard Milbourne was of a Pembrokeshire family but a native of London. He was educated at Winchester School and at Queens' College, Cambridge, was successively Eector of Sevenoaks, Chaplain to Prince Henry, Precentor of St. David's, and Dean of Eochester. This last preferment he resigned in the following year, and was succeeded by Dr. Eobert Scott.8 In 1621 Dr. Milbourne was translated from St. David's to Carlisle, and Laud was consecrated to the former see. He died in 1624, 1 By a mistake the 29th in the folio edition. 2 pp. 681, 682. And see Joh. Simonis Onomasticon N.T. 1762, p. 84. 5 Dr. Robert Scott was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, Sub-Almoner to the King, Master of Clare Hall 1612, Dean of Rochester July 12, 1615, served the office of Vice-Chancellor in 1619, and died December 23, 1620. In his Deanry he was succeeded by Goodman, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, and in the Mastership of Clare Hall by Dr. Thomas Paske, Archdeacon of London, Prebendary of the fifth stall at Canterbury 1625, Rector of Great Hadham, Herts, Prebendary of York 1628. He died in 1661. 410 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. when Dr. Eichard Senhouse was raised to his see of Carlisle. Dr. Senhouse was also of the University of Cambridge, of Trinity and then of St. John's College, and Chaplain first to the Earl of Bedford and afterward of Prince Charles. On Saturday August 5th our prelate being in attendance upon the King, preached before him in Salisbury Cathedral, from the four first verses of the 21st Psalm. This sermon, preached before a concourse of people and of considerable length, must have lost much of its effect from the unhappy custom, for which nevertheless our prelate himself contended, of interspersing every ten lines with Latin. On the 25th of this month Bishop Andrewes preferred the learned John Boys to the second stall in his cathedral of Ely. " At the vacancy of the prebend he was sent for to London," writes his biographer Anthony Walker, " by Lancelot An drewes, then Lord Bishop of Ely, who bestowed it upon him unasked for. When he had given him, as we commonly say, joy of it (which was his first salutation at his coming to him), he told him ' that he did bestow it freely on him without any one moving him thereto ; though,' said he, ' some pickthanks will be saying they stood your friends herein.' Which pre diction proved very true."1 Under the patronage and probably at the request of Bishop Andrewes, Boys began his comparison of the Vulgate with the modern versions of the New Testament by Beza and others, to point out where the moderns had needlessly varied from the Vulgate. This work he completed to the end of the Acts of the Apostles, but upon the death of Bishop Andrewes desisted from his undertaking, having then entered but a little way into the Epistle to the Eomans.2 These notes, to the end of the Acts, appeared in 1656, entitled, Veteris Interprets cum Beza aliisque Becentioribus Collatio in Quatuor Evangeliis et Apostolorum Actis. In qua annon saipius absque justd satis causa hi ab illo discesserint disquiritur, &c. Thus closely connected as is the name of Boys with that of Andrewes, it may not be out of place to add a brief notice ' Peck's Desiderata Curiosa, b. viii. p. 50, vol. ii. 1736. 2 Ibid. p. 63. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 411 of him, taken from the memoirs from which has been drawn the anecdote relating to his promotion at Ely. His grandfather John Boys was an inhabitant of Halifax in Yorkshire, where also his father William was born. His father was sent to Cambridge and lodged in Michael House (afterwards swallowed up in Trinity College), but went to lectures to St. John's College to Mr. John Seaton, afterward D.D. and Prebendary of Winchester, and author of a com pendium of logic for the use of junior scholars. Mr. William Boys entered into holy orders, but becoming a convert to the doctrine of the Eeformers, withdrew himself from the Uni versity and took a farm at Nettlestead, between Hadleigh and Needham Market, and married a gentlewoman named Mirable Pooley, of an ancient and respectable family. Her son, the learned translator, records of her that she had read the Bible over twelve times, and the Book of Martyrs twice, besides other books not a few.1 When Queen Elizabeth came to the throne he took upon him to serve the cure of Elmset, between Nettlestead and Hadleigh ; and on the death of the incumbent was presented by the Lord Keeper to the Eectory, and not long after to the Eectory of West Stow by his brother Mr. Pooley, a small parish between Bury St. Edmund's and Mildenhall. He died in his sixty-eighth year, and his widow survived him about ten years, dying about her seventy-eighth year. His son John was born January 3, 1560, at Nettlestead. His father taught him to write Hebrew when he was but six years old, and took great pains himself in his education, sending him also daily to school at Hadleigh, two miles from his house at Elmset. There commenced his acquaintance with the learned Dr. John Overall, Dean of St. Paul's and afterwards Bishop of Norwich. He was admitted of St. John's College under the tuition of Mr. Henry Coppinger on the 1st of March, 1675.2 He was of the ancient family of 1 Peck's Desiderata Curiosa, b. viii. p. 39, vol. ii. 1735. 2 He was the sixth son of Henry Coppinger, Esq., by Agnes, daughter of Sir Thomas Jermyn. He was on December 4, 1591, collated by the pious and primitive Archbishop Piers to the prebendal stall of Apsthorpe in the Church of 412 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the Coppingers of Buxhall, between Stow Market and Laven- ham. To St. John's College he was sent to be under Dr. Still,1 who on the 21st of July in the preceding year had been raised to the Mastership, being also Eector of Hadleigh. In 1576 Dr. Still was made Archdeacon of Sudbuiy, and in 1577 advanced to the Mastership of Trinity College, Cam bridge. His good management of the revenues of the latter foundation is memorialized by Dr. Fuller in his Holy and Profane State; and Walker, himself a Fellow of St. John's, says of him at that College, " This is he who procured the alteration of the College statutes, before which few Masters continued seven years ; which gave occasion to the then common merry saying, viz. ' that the College was a good horse, but that he would kick till Still went to court and got new girths.'" There were then in St. John's three Greek lectures read. In the first grammar was taught, as is commonly now in schools. In the second an easy author was explained in a grammatical way. The third was of a more advanced kind. A year was usually spent in attending upon the first course of lectures, and two upon the second. Within six weeks, however, Boys being a fair Greek scholar at the time of his admission was remitted to the third and higher lecture. Andrew Downes (in 1585 Eegius Greek Professor) then lectured at St. John's five times a week with great diligence, but took such delight in this young scholar as to read over to him privately twelve of the more difficult Greek authors, both in prose and verse. Boys was in his first year elected to a scholarship. York. This stall he resigned to Ambrose Coppinger, whom Dr. Toby Mathews collated June 2, 1619. The Earl of Oxford being patron of Lavenham presented Coppinger to it, and after resolving to keep back from him all tithe of his park (almost half the land of the parish), on Coppinger's offering rather to resign than be a party- to such sacrilege, retracted his ill-made resolution. But the Earl's successor being a minor, his agent iiriquitously put this exemplary person to the cost of £1600 before he could recover the rights of the Church. He was for forty-five years the very laborious and charitable incumbent of Lavenham, where he died on St. Thomas's-day, 1662, in his seventy-second year. — See Fuller's Church Mist. b. x. c. 6. ' Dr. Still was B.A. of Christ CoUege 1561, M.A. 1565. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 413 In 1577 his tutor Henry Coppinger was advanced by the Queen to the Mastership of Magdalene College, whereupon he left his Fellowship and went to Magdalene and took his pupil Boys along with him. This stretch of her prerogative however was not suffered to pass without animadversion, for the appointment belonged to the Earl of Suffolk. Coppinger therefore resigned, and lost both his Mastership and Fellow ship. Boys was readmitted to his scholarship, and in due time chosen a Fellow, having the small-pox upon him at the time of his election. Whilst a Fellow he continued his studies in the summer in the University Library from four in the morning till eight at night. He resided upon his Fellowship, and delayed receiving holy orders the full time that the College statutes permitted him. On Friday, June 21, 1583 (having been eight years a member of St. John's Col lege) he was ordained deacon, and on the following day, by dispensation, priest by Dr. Edmund Freake, Bishop of Norwich. Such was the esteem in which Boys was held by Dr. Whitaker (who, on the elevation of Dr. Eichard Howland to the see of Peterborough, was made Master of St. John's on St. Matthew's-day, February 25, 1586,) that every Friday evening he came to Boys' chamber to hear his pupils declaim. This may be observed as an instance also of the forgiving and kind spirit of that famous controversialist, for Boys had voted against his election. However as he acknowledged to Walker his sorrow afterward for the part he then took, so he probably evinced to Whitaker, after his better knowledge of him, the deference and regard that were his due. Dr. Whitaker died December 4, 1595. Eobert (afterwards Sir Eobert) Naunton, Fellow of Trinity College and University Orator, was ap pointed to deliver the oration at Great St. Mary's, and Boys in his own College. He has testified in his notes, to the commendation of Whitaker, that under his governance learning, if at any time, flourished and increased, but that after his death the College was augmented in its buildings but declined in letters. Mr. Boys was afterwards made Philosophy Lecturer, and in the course of one year commented upon the greater part of, Plato's Timaius. These lectures were held in the 414 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. schools, the Vice-Chancellor and a great concourse of auditors flocking to him. He was for ten years chief Greek Lecturer in his College, and besides the College lecture read a Greek lecture at four of the clock in the morning in his own chamber, which was frequented by many of the Fellows. At the death of his father, his mother by request commanding him that it might be continued to her for a place of abode, he asked Mr. Pooley for the living of West Stow, which he promptly gave him, but resigned upon Mr. Pooley's taking his mother under his own roof. About 1596 the Earl of SaUsbury made Boys one of his chaplains, who the same year thus became possessed of the rectory of Boxworth in the county of Cambridge. " When he was about thirty-six years old Mr. Holt, Eector of Boxworth, dying, left the advowson of that Uving in part of a portion to one of his daughters, requesting of some of his friends that, if it might be by them procured, Mr. Boys of St. John's might become his successor by the marriage of his daughter. Whereof when he was advertised he went over to see her, and soon after, they taking a liking to each other, he was pre sented to the parsonage, and instituted by Archbishop Whit gift, it being then the great vacation of the see1 of Ely." He was instituted October 13, 1596. " The College at his departure gave him £100, though I must confess," adds Walker, " that was then custom more than courtesy." From Boxworth he came constantly into the University to hear the lectures of the Greek and Hebrew Professors, Downes and Lively (the former of St. John's, the latter of Trinity College), as also of the Eegius Divinity Professor, his friend Dr. Overall. Meanwhile he fell into debt and was obliged to part with his library, a rare collection of classical authors. He was, moreover, unhappy for a while in his domestic relations, but a reunion of affection ensued, and those affections were but the more confirmed. About twelve of the neighbouring clergy met every Friday at each other's house to dinner, amongst whom Boys was one. Then they 1 A vacation of about nineteen years from the death of Bishop Cox in 1581 to the appointment of Heton in 1599. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 415 gave an account of their studies, and discussed and resolved such questions as might be propounded. He was employed in tuition and kept some young scholars in his house, as well for the instruction of his own children and those of the gentry who were entrusted to him, as of the poorer children of his parish. When the present translation of the Bible was commenced, he, with Dr. Duport, Master of Jesus College, Dr. William Branthwayt, Master of Gonville and Caius College, Ward, afterward Master of Sidney College, Dr. Jeremiah Eadcliffe, one of the Senior Fellows of Trinity College, Professor Downes, Mr. afterward Dr. Ward, Fellow of Queens' College, Prebendary of Chichester, and also by the same patron, his old scholar, Bishop Andrewes, Eector of Bishop's Waltham, was appointed to undertake the Apocrypha. But having finished his portion, he also relieved another of another College, whither he went and lodged during the week until that second portion was finished. The several companies of translators were engaged upon the work four years, after which two of each company were selected to review the whole work, and to put it to the press. Of his company Boy3 himself and his friend Downes were appointed to this second labour. These (six in all) went daily to Stationers' Hall, and in three quarters of a year finished their task. Whilst thus engaged the Company of Stationers paid them 30s. per week. Boys alone, it is said, took notes of their proceedings, and these he kept till his dying day. Coming to the knowledge of that lay-bishop, Sir Henry Savile, as Walker pleasantly calls him, he read over for his edition of St. Chrysostom the greater part of that voluminous Father in the MSS., besides the supervising of both Sir Henry's and his friend Downe's notes. It is probable that but for the death of Sir Henry he would have been rewarded for this labour with a Fellowship at Eton. He was indeed nominated to a Fellowship in the projected Theological Col lege at Chelsea, but the College and with it his Fellow ship soon came to nothing. Bishop Andrewes rewarded his labours as a translator, as we have seen, in 1615. He lived 416 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. however still at Boxworth till 1628 when he removed to Ely, not sparing himself even in his old age, but preaching not only in his own turn, but frequently for his friends, some times only at an hour's warning. He was often called upon to preach funeral sermons. Twice a year he went from Ely to his living at Boxworth to administer the holy Communion, and preach to his parishioners. At Ely he went twice, sometimes thrice, a day to prayers in the Cathedral to his very death, for he survived the suppression of the Liturgy by the Eebels only five days. In his extreme old age he would study eight hours a day. He read walking, and in his youth often walked from college to his mother's house at West Stow to dinner, which was above twenty miles. This he did doubtless between about four and twelve at noon. Such were the primitive habits of our literary giants. Not only to Sir Henry SavUe but also to that industrious patristic antiquary, Augustine Lindsell, Bishop of Hereford, he rendered very considerable assistance. He was very temperate, very charitable, very devout. To the poor of Boxworth he sent annually forty shillings at Christmas, besides the relief he gave them at his going to them. Some poor person he feasted for some years on the Lord's-day at his own table. He visited the prisoners, and often sent or carried them money. He seldom began any thing without invoking the blessing and help of God. He used very many rather than very long prayers. He never carried any book into the pulpit with him but his Bible, and though a prodigy of learning, sought nothing so much as to be under stood by the least instructed of his congregation. His wife departed this life May 16, 1642, and after a most painful illness which he endured with great resignation, entreating of his children and all who were about him that if at any time he expressed anything which savoured of impatience they would tell him of it, he died upon Sunday, January 14, 1643, being eighty-three years and eleven days old. He was buried on February 6th, Mr. Thurston of St. John's College preaching his funeral sermon.1 Eeturn we now from this most worthy person, well worthy 1 Peck's Desiderata Curiosa, vol. ii. b. 8, pp. 37 — 58. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 417 of so great and renowned a patron to the patron himself, whom we find on the 5th of November discoursing at Whitehall very admirably upon the divine mercy : The Lord is good to all, and his mercies are over all his works. Here indeed he proceeds so far as to say that the very angels have some need of mercy. "The very seraphim have somewhat to cover. As for the cherubim they will set mercy a seat upon the top of their wings." He accommodates a passage of St. Chrysostom from his Homilies on the Epistle to the Bomans : " Great is the deep of my sins, but greater the abyss of the mercy of God ;" and adds, " Great is the whirlpool of my wicked works, but greater is the Bethesda, the wide and deep gulph of the mercy of God that hath no bottom. And indeed it were not truly said, It is above all his works (all his, and much more then above all ours,) if any of all our works were above it. No more then there is a Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world if there were any sin of the world he takes not away." On November 29th Bishop Andrewes preferred Walter Balcanqual, Fellow of Pembroke College, Cambridge, to the Vicarage of Harston (in the place of Wren). Balcanqual was M.A. of Pembroke College 1609, elected to a Fellowship there September 8, 1611, B.D. 1616, and in that year was preferred to Waterbeach near Cambridge. In 1617 he was made Master of the Savoy, and in 1618 was sent as the representative of the Scotch Church to the Synod of Dort, being at that time one of the King's Chaplains. The Mastership of the Savoy he resigned in 1618, in favour of the rapacious and unstable Mark Antony de Dominis. In 1621 that remarkable person left this kingdom, and Balcanqual was reinstated in the Mastership of the Savoy. In 1624 he was made Dean of Eochester, and in 1639 of Durham. He escaped from the siege of York and took refuge at Chirk Castle in Denbighshire, but sinking under the fatigue died there on Christmas-day 1645. He was buried in the church, and Sir Thomas Middleton of Chirk Castle erected a monu ment to his memory. Bishop Pearson wrote his epitaph. On December 3rd Bishop Andrewes, King, Bishop of 418 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. London, and Neile, Bishop of Lincoln, assisted Archbishop Abbot at the consecration of the incomparably learned and indefatigably laborious Dr. Eobert Abbot, Master of BaUiol College, and Eegius Professor of Divinity in the University of Oxford, to the see of Salisbury, on the decease of Dr. Henry Cotton of Magdalene CoUege in that University. Eobert Abbot was the eldest brother of the Archbishop, and was bom at Guildford in 1560. They were both edu cated at the Free School there, founded by Edward VI. He was sent to BalUol College, Oxford, 1575, and upon an oration made by him the 17th of November, the day of Queen Elizabeth's accession, was chosen a scholar of that famous foundation. His brother George became a student there in 1578. Eobert took his degree of M.A. in 1582. At Oxford he first distinguished himself by his eloquence as one of the lecturers at Carfax Church in the High Street. He officiated also for a time at Abingdon. He was, upon the first sermon he preached at Worcester, admitted to a lectureship in that city, and was soon after, in 1588, appointed Eector of All Saints, between Bridge Street and the Cathedral. John Stanhope, Esq., hearing him preach at St. Paul's Cross, ap pointed him Eector of the rich benefice of Bingham in Nottinghamshire. He was made D.D. in 1597, and on the accession of James I. one of his Majesty's Chaplains. On the death of Dr. Edward Lilly, late of Magdalene CoUege but Master of Balliol, he was elected to succeed in the Master ship March 5, 1610, in which year the King, who greatly esteemed him, appointed him one of the FeUows of his new Controversial College at Chelsea. On the 2nd of November, 1610, he was coUated, and on the 27th admitted, to the pre bendal stall of Normanton in the church of SouthweU. This was one of the three original prebends of that church. Abbot first published A Mirror of Popish Subtleties, written against a Cavilling Papist, in the behalf of one Paul Spence, dedicated to Whitgift, 1594. 2. The Exaltation of the King dom and Priesthood of Christ, being a Commentary upon the WOih Psalm, dedicated to Gervase Babington, Bishop of Worcester. Lond. 1601. 3. Antichristi Demonstratio, dedi- THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 419 cated to the King, printed at London in 1602 and 1608. The second edition was, by the King's command, accompanied with his own comment upon the 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th verses of the 20th chapter of the Bevelation. 4. A Defence of the Beformed Catholic of Master William Perkins, lately deceased, against the Bastard Counter Catholic of Dr. Bishop, Seminary Priest, dedicated to King James, 1st part, quarto, Lond. 1606, the 2nd part 1607, the 3rd part 1609. 5. The True Ancient Boman Catholic, dedicated to Prince Henry, Lond. 1611 ; but previously to this a single sermon at St. Mary's, entitled The Old Way, quarto, Lond. 1610, translated into Latin by Thomas Drax. It was preached on July 8th, Act Sunday, and dedicated to Archbishop Bancroft. On the death of Dr. Thomas Holland, also of Balliol College, Abbot was preferred by the King to be Eegius Professor of Divinity March 25, 1612. In the following year appeared his able work, already referred to in these pages, Antilogia adversus Apologiam Andrew Eudaimon Johannis Jesuitai pro Henrico Garnetto proditore, dedicated to the King. L'Heureux's Apology for Garnet, under the as sumed name of Andreas Eudaemon Johannes, had appeared at Cologne in 1610. His noblest work, his Commentary on the Epistle to the Bomans, lies stiU in MS. in the Bodleian Library. He preached a sermon (also in MS.) at St. Mary's, on the notes to the Geneva Bible, and clearing Calvin from Arianism. This was against Dr. Howson, of whom Sir Thomas Bodley makes no very honourable mention in his Letters. Howson, however, who was more of the courtier than of the divine, by command of the King " turned his edge," says Dr. Featly, " from Geneva to Eome, and in the next sermon he preached at St. Mary's fell fierce and foul upon the Pope himself, threatening to loose him from his chair though he were fastened thereunto with a tenpenny naU."1 Howson had been educated at Christ Church, and had been appointed Prebendary of Hereford July 15, 1587, and of Exeter May 29, 1592, and Canon of the second stall at Christ Church May 15, 1601. He was also Eector of 1 Fuller's Abel Redwimus, p. 546. ee2 420 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Brightwell and one of the Vicars of Bampton. He was consecrated to the see of Oxford May 9, 1619, and translated to Durham in 1628. He died in his seventy-fifth year, Feb ruary 6th, 1632, and was succeeded by that illustrious prelate Dr. Thomas Morton. Preaching on the afternoon of Easter-day, 1615, at St. Peter's-in-the-East before the University, Dr. Abbot attacked Laud, Howson, and their partisans, saying that there were men who, under pretence of truth and preaching against the Puritans, struck at the heart, and root of that faith and religion now established amongst us, which was the very practice of (the Jesuit) Parsons' and Campian's counsel, when they came hither to seduce young students, who, afraid to be expelled if they should openly profess their conversion, were directed to speak freely against the Puritans as what would suffice ; so these do not expect to be counted Papists, because they speak only against Puritans ; but because they are indeed Papists they speak nothing against them, or if they do, they beat about the bush, and that softly too, for fear of disquieting the birds that are in it." At length his all but incredible dfligence in the University was rewarded by his elevation to the see of Sarum. He was accompanied to the borders of the diocese of Oxford to North Hinksey by the heads of houses and many others, all lamenting his departure. At Salisbury he was as heartily welcomed, and on the Sunday following preached in the cathedral from Psalm xxvi. 8 : Lord, 1 have loved the habitation of thy house, and ihe place where thine honour dwelleth. And soon did he shew the sincerity of this profession ; for finding that the cathedral had been greatly neglected, he used his authority and influ ence with the chapter, which led to an expenditure of £500, a great sum in those days, upon the building. It appears that his elevation to the episcopate was opposed by a party at court favourable to the Chm-ch of Eome ; for the King said to him, soon after his consecration, Abbot, I have had very much to do to make thee a Bishop, but I know no reason for it, unless it were because thou hast written against one, an allusion to his defence of Perkins' Beformed Catholic, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 421 against Bishop the Seminary Priest. Abbot visited his whole diocese in person, and preached every Lord's-day whilst he enjoyed his health, either in the city or in the churches in its vicinity. He was engaged in his last illness upon a Latin reply to Eichard Thompson, commonly called Dutch Thomp son (noticed in this volume), on falling away from grace and justification. Thrice a-week this Prelate sent provisions to the prison at Salisbury, and at Christmas feasted all the poor of the city. He suffered very greatly from that most painful complaint the stone, which brought him to his end. The judges being then on their circuit visited him during this iUness. His last words were, Jesu, come quickly ; finish in me the work that thou hast begun. Then he added in Latin, Into thy hands, 0 Lord, I commit my spirit, for thou hast redeemed me, 0 God of truth. Save thy servant who hopeth and trusteih only in thee. Let thy mercy, 0 Lord, be upon me. 0 Lord, in thee have I trusted, let me never be confounded. He died between 7 and 8 in the evening of March 2, 1618. He was buried in his cathedral on the following Thursday in the choir over against the Bishop's throne. Bishop Abbot was twice married, the second time, after he became a bishop, to Mrs. Bridget CheyneU. He left one son and two daughters. Of these, one married Sir Nathaniel Brent, Warden of Merton College, Oxford, whose daughter Margaret married Dr. Edward Corbet, Eector of Haseley in Oxfordshire, who presented some of this Prelate's MSS., in cluding his Commentary on the Bomans, to the Bodleian Library. Abbot was succeeded in his Professorship by a divine who ably upheld the same theology which he had maintained, Dr. John Prideaux, Eector of Exeter College. Dr. Prideaux was B.A. of that CoUege January 31, 1600. He succeeded Dr. Holland as Eector of Exeter College April 4, 1612, and Abbot as Eegius Professor of Divinity December 8, 1615. He was installed Canon of the fifth stall at Christ Church March 16, 1617, was consecrated Bishop of Worcester De cember 19, 1641, and on August 3, 1642, resigned the Eec- torship of his College. He died July 20, 1650, in his 422 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. seventy-fourth year, and was buried at Bredon in Worcester shire. His Fasciculus Controversiarum was published at Oxford in 1649, and dedicated by him to William Hodges, Henry Sutton, Eowland Crosby, Edward Best, Eleazar Jackson, Emanuel Smith, William Lole, and other his brethren in the ministry in his diocese. At SaUsbury succeeded Dr. Martin Fotherby, the author of Atheomastix, pubUshed in folio in 1622, of Grimsby in Lincoln shire, a Fellow of Trinity CoUege, Cambridge, and Prebendary of Canterbury. He died March 12, 1620. Bishop Fotherby's Atheomastix was published two years after his death, but then only two out of four books saw the light. The work, a small folio, abounding in classical and other learning, was entitled, "Atheomastix, clearing Four Truths against Atheists and Infidels : 1. That there is a God. 2. That there is but one God. 3. That Jehovah our God is that one God. 4. That the Holy Scripture is the word of that God. All of them proved by natural reasons and secular authorities. Lond. 1622." It was dedicated to the Eight Hon. Sir Eobert Naunton, Secretary to the King. Bishop Andrewes had upon last Christmas-day treated of the first prophecy cited in the New Testament. He now took the second, namely, that of Micah, foretelling the birthplace of Christ, Bethlehem (the house of bread) Ephrata (fruitful). He enlarged upon the twofold sense of the word rendered ruler, as implying both guidance and protection. His whole discourse he, as his manner was, drew out of his text with a facility peculiarly his own, but doubtless much assisted by his patristic studies. Thus, as Christ came forth from eternity, so he is our guide, leader, and shepherd to bring us thither. The words themselves raised this association of ideas in the mind of the preacher. Very many would meditate upon them a thousand times and not light upon a similar combi nation. Excellently does he enforce humility as the grace which the comparative obscmity of the place, and all the circumstances of our blessed Eedeemer's birth, was designed THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 423 to teach us. Alluding to Ephrata (fruitful) he weU remarks : "We fall stiU upon one extreme or other: if fertile, then proud ; if humble,.then barren." There is much contained in this, not that true humility will be unfruitful, but a mere sentimental self-abasement will ever excuse itself the works of obedience. The King was disabled by the gout from attending at the Eoyal Chapel, but heard the sermon and received the Eucha rist in private. 424 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE XVH. Cosin — Drusius — Whitsunday 1616 — The King at Burleigh-on-the Sill — Andrewes a Privy Councillor — Thomas Earl of Arundel — Amner — Beale — The King's Progress to Scotland — Andrewes at Durham 1617. John Cosin, at the Eestoration Bishop of Durham, one of the most diligent ecclesiastical antiquaries of his age, was in 1616 invited both by Bishop Andrewes and by Overall, Dean of_Si. Paul's^ to become his librarian. He attached himself to the latter. The Deanry of St. Paul's offered facilities ofl Uterary intercourse with the learned both of our own nation and of the Continent, perhaps abo"ve any other ecclesiastical] ( residence. On February 12 died the learned John Drusius, one of. those eminent foreigners who are said both by Bishop Bucke ridge and by Isaacson to have enjoyed the patronage and munificent friendship of Andrewes. He came over to England from Flanders in 1567, was admitted of the Uni versity of Cambridge August 3, 1569, and on his return from France 1572, was entered at Merton CoUege, Oxford, and read lectures on Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac at Merton and Magdalene Colleges, and afterward in the Public Schools ; but in 1576 he left Oxford for a Professorship at Leyden, and thence removed to the University of Franeker, in Friesland. At Franeker Sixtus Amama succeeded to some share of his reputation. Andrewes was called upon as usual to preach before the the life of bishop andrewes. 425 King at Whitehall on Easter-day, March 31. His sermon on this occasion is not so remarkable as many that preceded it. But whatsoever is his subject it is sure to be amply illustrated in his hands. Upon Whitsunday, May 19,1 he preached before the King at Greenwich, upon our Lord's words to his Apostles, Beceive the Holy Ghost. In the introduction he says, " Now what is here to do, what business is in hand, we cannot but know, if ever we have been at the giving of holy orders. For by these words are they given, Beceive ihe Holy Ghost, whose sins ye remit, &c, were to them, and are to us even to this day, by these and by no other words. Which words, had not the Church of Borne retained in their ordinations, it might well have been doubted (for all their Accipe potestatem, &c, Beceive thou authority to sacrifice for ihe living and for ihe dead,) whether they had any priests at all or no. But, as God would, they retained them, and so saved themselves. For these are the very operative words for the conferring this power, for the performing of this act." He next refutes the Eomish tenet that holy orders are a sacrament, denying that it confers grace, the grace being but in office or function. Again, Christ alone instituted sacraments, but this ceremony he instituted with breathing upon the parties, which ceremony hath since been changed to laying on of hands. But such a change is inadmissible in a sacrament. Very full of meaning is his unfolding the symbol of wind and of breath as betokening in Scripture the Holy Ghost. " For as for this let it not trouble you, that it is but breath, and breath but air, and so, one would think, too feeble ; as indeed what feebler thing is there in man than it ? The more feeble, the more fit to manifest his strength by. For, as weak in appearance as it is, by it were great things brought to pass. By this puff of breath was the world blown round about. About came the philosophers, the orators, the emperors. Away went the mist of error ; down went the idols and their temples before it."2 With equal beauty does he apply in the patristic manner 1 By a mistake ' the 20th ' in the folio edition. 2 p. 690. 426 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to the Apostles the words of the 8th Psalm, Out of ihe mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained praise. In this sermon, as elsewhere, he removes the gross notion of the real presence, insisted on even now by not a few. Christ's body is received, he says, even as the Holy Ghost was, that is, not the substance but the virtue of it. Both are "truly received in the same sense." So too Jeremy Taylor on the Beal Presence. He also notes how this passage con demns those who are sent only by themselves, who take that to them which none ever gave them. The Spirit of Christ, he observes here as elsewhere, is not an artificial but a constant principle and power working upon the will: " Of ourselves to move: not wrought to it by any gin, or vice, or screw made by art. Else we shaU move but while we are wound up for a certain time tiU the plummets be at the ground, and then our motion wiU cease straight. All which1 (but these last especiaUy) are against the automata, the spectra, the puppets of religion, hypocrites. With some spring within their eyes are made to roll, and their Ups to wag, and their breast to give a sob. AU is but Hero's pneu- matica, a vizor, not a very face ; an outward show of godU- ness, but no inward power of it at all." The grace of apostleship he interprets to be the office itself, for it is a grace to be a conduit of grace any way. The anointing was no inward hoUness, " but the right of ruling only. So here it is no internal quaUty infused, but the grace only of their spiritual and sacred function. Good it were and much to be wished, that they were holy and learned aU ; but if they be not, their office holds good though." These again as conduits may, by transmitting the water, make the garden to bear both herbs and flowers, though themselves never bear any. Those who built the ark were yet drowned themselves. In the month of August our prelate was in attendance upon the King at Burleigh-on-the-Hill, and on Monday the 5th, the anniversary of the Gowrie Conspiracy, preached before him from the 2nd chapter of Esther. Ahasuerus Bishop Andrewes takes to be the same with Artaxerxes 1 Alluding to the six preceding distinctions. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 427 Longimanus. He notes in this discourse how contrary the Eomish doctrine of the seal of confession is to the 1st verse of the 5th chapter of Leviticus, and altogether unchristianizes the Eomanists. But though this may by some be condemned in him as inconsistent with some passages in his works, and as against certain favourite opinions respecting the essential nature of ' the Apostolical succession, it is no more than the Holy Ghost doth, when by St. Paul he asks, " What agreement hath the temple of God with idols?"1 So Bishop Andrewes, speaking of BeUarmine and King James, " The King in die hoc (in this day) neither heathen, I am sure, nor that can have the least touch of idolatry fastened on him. He that shamed not to say l No Christian,' and hath been fain since to eat his word; he durst not say an idolater, that would soon have rebounded back upon himself. And no idolater is a Christian, nor Christian an idolater, I am sure."2 This is one of many instances in which the truth will force itself a way out of the pulpit, however it may be racked or fettered in the Schools. Even Laud (according to StilUng- fleet in his preface to his work on The Idolatry of the Bomish Communion) held the Eomanist to be an idolater. Idolatry excluded from the Jewish Chm-ch, and it is incumbent for those who maintain that the practice of it is compatible with Christianity to shew their warrant out of the Holy Scriptures. On the following day the King knighted at Burleigh Sir Francis Bodenham.1 On September 2nd Bishop Andrewes ordained Edward Catherall, M.A., deacon, and William Beale, M.A., and Humphrey Tovey, M.A., priests, in the chapel of Downham Palace. Catherall was B.A. of Jesus College 1614.4 One William Tovey, B.D., occurs as Prebendary of the first stall » 2 Cor. vi. 16. 2 p. 569, 5th ed. Lond. 1661. 3 A family of this name, called from the village of Bodenham between Leominster and Hereford, gave sheriffs to the county from the 3rd of Henry the Fourth to the 35th of Elizabeth inclusive. Arms : Azure, a fess between three chess-rooks, or. 4 Univ. Reg. Cambridge. 428 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. at Worcester October 15, 1586.1 He was also Prebendary of Hereford March 17, 1588. He died in 1598.2 On September 29 Bishop Andrewes was admitted into the King's Privy Council,8 but his custom was always to with- 1 Hardy's Le Neve, vol. iii. p. 79. 2 Ibid. vol. i. p. 503. 3 Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, had died June 18th (he was buried by night in Westminster Abbey), and had been succeeded by the King's not unworthy favourite the pious and munificent Dr. James Montagu, Bishop of Bath and ¦ Wells. He was brother of that most loyal and Christian patriot Edward, first Lord Montagu of Boughton in Northamptonshire, whose third brother Sir Henry was first Earl of Manchester, father of Edward, Earl of Manchester in the suc ceeding reign, and ancestor of the Dukes of Manchester. Our prelate was edu cated in Christ College, Cambridge. " He was afterwards Master" [the first] "or rather nursing father" (says Fuller) "to Sidney College" [1595 — 1608] " for he found it in bonds to pay 20 marks per annum to Trinity College for the ground whereon it is built, and left it free, assigning it a rent for the discharge thereof." Fuller records, both in his Worthies and in his Mistory of the University of Cambridge, how this prelate expended a hundred marks to bring irinning water into the King's Ditch, to the great conveniency of the University. On the death of Dr. George Boleyn, Prebendary of Canterbury and Chichester, and Dean of Lichfield, Montagu was preferred to that Deanry, and installed July 16, 1603. On the death of Dr. Eedes, Dean of Worcester, he was presented to that Deanry, December 20, 1604, being succeeded at Lichfield by Dr. William Tooker, of whom see an account in Bliss's Wood's Athena Oxonienses. On the death of Bishop Still, Master of Trinity College and Bishop of Bath and Wells (B.A. 1561, M.A. 1565, of Christ College, Cambridge), known not only by the memory of his talents in his several oflices, but as the author of the second English comedy in point of time, Gammer Gurton's Needle, Montagu was, on April 17, 1608, consecrated to the see of Bath and Wells, Andrewes with four other prelates assisting Bancroft at his consecration. Whilst Bishop of that see he completed the abbey at Bath, the west part of the nave of which was still uncovered. He was now, on the death of the learned Bishop Bilson, translated to Winchester, which was said to have been the occasion of Andrewes being appointed a Privy Councillor to compensate in some measure for his disappointment. " This honour was done the bishop to put him in heart upon the distaste he had in missing the bishopric of Winchester ; but, for aught I hear, he is yet as silent as Mr. Wake's nuncio, the new cardinal." — Chamberlain to Sir Dudley Carleton, October 12, 1616. (Birch's Court of James I., vol. i. p. 429.) Lloyd in his State Worthies says of Andrewes, " He did not concern himself much with civil politics. 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."' The flippant John Chamberlain will not have our prelate to have preached at court this Christmas, but confined to his house, " being surprised by a sudden surfeit of pork that had almost carried him away." * * p. 456, Court of James I., vol. i. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 429 draw as much as possible from all state affairs. No greater proof could he give of his freedom from ambitious motives. It is true that a courtier's life was in those days a dangerous one and that was sure to make enemies ; but ambition always calculates upon labours and adventures, and is generally of a subtle if not intriguing nature. On November 4th Andrewes was present at the creation of Charles, Prince of Wales. Our prelate's 5th of November sermon is one of the most remarkable of that series, abounding however with pleasantries and witticisms, well deserved indeed by those at whom they were pointed. Irony, though forbidden by some moderns, is confirmed by precedents from both the Old and New Testa ment. On December 8th Bishop Andrewes assisted at the conse cration of the very pious and learned Dr. Arthur Lake to the see of Bath and Wells, and that excellently devout author, Dr. Louis Bayley, to that of Bangor. His Christmas-day sermon, taken from the 85th Psalm, is excellent throughout, and is probably one of the best known of all his discourses. His personifying of the divine attributes and the reconciling of them all in the sacrificial death of the Lamb of God, these render this sermon as favourite an illus tration of the doctrine of the atonement, as Hooker's cele brated sermon from Habakkuk i. 4 ( The wicked doth compass about ihe righteous) is of the doctrine of justification.1 This same day Thomas Earl of Arundel, who had been educated in the Eomish religion, and had lately travelled through Italy, seeing that religion in all its deformity, abjured it, and received the holy Communion in Whitehall Chapel. The same day also Montagu, now Bishop of Winchester (upon the death of Bilson), preached before the King; and in the afternoon Dr. King, Bishop of London, preached at St. Paul's ; Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, also in his own church of St. Giles', Cripplegate, was much commended. Thomas Earl of Arundel was the son of Philip Howard, son of the daughter of Henry Fitzalan, the eleventh and last i See the late Bishop Kaye's Charges, pp. 280 — 283. Rivingtons, 1864. 430 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Earl of that surname. He, " not able to digest the wrongs and hard measure offered unto him, by the cunning sleights of some envious persons, fell into the toil and net pitched for him, and being brought into extreme peril of his life, yielded up his vital breath in the Tower. But his son Thomas, a most honourable young man (in whom a forward spirit and fervent love of virtue and glory most beseeming his nobility, and the same tempered with true courtesy, shineth very apparently), recovered his father's dignities, being restored by King James and Parliament authority."1 Thus Holland in his edition of Camden. Thomas was restored to his titles in 1603. It has been remarked, probably with justice, that the great and repeated reluctance which Elizabeth evinced, previously to the final condemnation of his father the Duke of Norfolk in 1572, may relieve her memory of the charge of hypocrisy so recklessly urged against her by the advocates of her rival the Queen of Scots. On the 1st of March, 1617, Andrewes ordained John Amner, Bachelor of Music, Deacon at Ely Chapel, the chapel of the noble palace of the Bishops of Ely, Holborn. Amner was organist of Ely Cathedral and master of the choristers. He had been admitted to the degree of Bachelor of Music at Oxford in May 1613.2 He composed and pubUshed sacred hymns of three, four, five, and six parts, for voices and viols. Lond. 1615, quarto. He set the 6th Psalm, old version, as an anthem. The words are given as the 141st anthem in CKfford's Collection, published soon after the Eestoration. On the 16th of March Andrewes coUated his friend Jerome Beale to the third stall in Ely Cathedral, vacant by the death of Dr. Eobert Tinley, Prebendary and Archdeacon of Ely. To the Archdeaconry Andrewes preferred his friend Daniel Wigmore, who held that dignity to his death in 1646, and to whom he had given the second staU in his cathedral in 1615. Wigmore was also Eector of Northwold in Norfolk and Snail- well in Cambridgeshire. He was probably of a Somersetshire family. He purchased the manor of Little Shelford of Sir 1 p. 310, Holland's Camden's Britannia, 1610. 2 Wood's Fasti Ath. Oxon. ed. Bliss, vol. i. p. 351. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 431 Toby Pallavicini, and dying in 1646, was buried at Little Shelford. One of his family, Dr. Gilbert Wigmore, was Eector of Little Shelford after the Eestoration, and Uving to a great age was Eector there in 1709. Beale was born at Gloucester, and educated first at Christ College, Cambridge, and on October 9, 1579, was elected to a Fellowship at Pembroke College, being then B.A. An drewes on September 25, 1616, preferred him to the Vicarage of Barton near Cambridge, and on July 13, 1615, to the Eectory of WiUingham. He was also Eector of Nuthurst near Horsham in Sussex, probably by the favour of the same patron. When Dr. Nicholas Felton, Bishop of Bristol and Master of Pembroke CoUege, was translated to the see of Ely, Beale was elected to succeed him in the Mastership, February 21, 1619. He was amongst the most eminent scholars in his University, in great favour with the King, who made him his chaplain and sub-almoner, and appears as a constant corre spondent of Isaac Vossius.1 Like Andrewes he was a great student of patristical learning. Doublet makes honourable mention of Beale and Balcanqual as amongst the most devoted friends of Vossius.2 In the collection of epistles to Vossius is one from Pembroke ' Hall by Beale, April 2, 1628, highly commending Vossius's History of Pelagianism. For this Vossius received the unbounded thanks of Laud,3 and due acknowledgments, but with some animadversions from the pious and learned Dr. Ward, Master of Sidney Sussex Col lege.4 In a letter of Andrew Colvin's to Vossius, Wren, Beale, and Creighton are memorialized as the most learned individuals belonging at that time (1629) to the University of Cambridge.5 Creighton succeeded George Herbert as Public Orator, and was in his old age raised to the see of Bath and WeUs.6 Dr. Beale died in 1630, being succeeded in his 1 Vossii Epist. 72, 76, 96, 106, 224. 2 Ep. ad Voss. Aug. 16, 1622, pp. 30, 31, and again from Venice April 18, 1625. CI. Virorum ad Voss. Epist. 58, p. 35. 3 In a letter from Hampton Court, September 25, 1627. Ep. 82, p. 49. * Ep. 73, pp. 43, 44. 5 Ep. 105, p. 67. s " The worthy Bishop of Wells."— Walton's Life of George Merbert, p. 40, ed. Pickering, 1836. 432 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Mastership by Dr. Benjamin Laney, successively Bishop of Peterborough, Lincoln, and Ely. In this same month1 (March 1617) Andrewes with Dr. Valentine Carey, Dean of St. Paul's and Master of Christ College, Cambridge, and Laud, now Dean of Gloucester and Chaplain to the King, attended his Majesty upon his visit to Scotland. On Sunday March 30,2 the King being at Lincoln attended divine service at the cathedral, being met at the great west entrance by Andrewes, his old servant Montagu, Bishop of Winchester, and his most humble of servants and entirely devoted of courtiers, Dr. Neile, Bishop of Lincoln, who preached before him. After the sermon the King (we read) healed fifty persons of the King's evil. He dined at the Bishop's palace, formerly one of the most elegant specimens of both late and early Gothic in this kingdom.3 After dinner the King went in his carroche in private to St. Catherine's. On Tuesday April 1 Chancellor Eland preached before the King in his chamber of presence.4 From Lincoln the King went to Newark, and thence to Worksop, Doncaster, Pontefract, and York, where on April 11 he attended service at the Minster. On the 12th he rode with his train to Bishopthorpe, and dined 1 Nichols's Progresses of James I., vol. iii. p. 232. Now also Andrewes was made a Commissioner for the furtherance of the Spanish match, with the Lord Keeper, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privy Seal, Duke of Lenox, and Sir Thomas Lake. Abbot, Sir Thomas Edmondes, and Sir Ralph Winwood were excepted from the commission as being unfavourable to the match. 2 On Saturday April 5th our prelate's name was put in a commission for the releasing and banishing from the kingdom William Danvers, Roger Walter, Nicholas Johnson, and John Armstrong, who had refused to take the oath of allegiance. — Rymer's Fosdera. 3 It was destroyed in the Civil Wars. A view of the remains was published in Grose's Antiquities, four views in the Antiquarian Cabinet, one of the Gateway in the Gent. Mag. Feb. 1826, and others in Pugin's Specimens of Gothic Archi tecture. 4 George Eland, B.D., Rector of Irtlingborough, Northamptonshire, and of Tempsford, Bedfordshire, was by his great patron Dr. Chaderton, Bishop of Lincoln, collated to the Archdeaconry of Bedford February 4, 1599, and on January 22, 1605, was installed Chancellor of the Cathedral. He died about 1631, and was succeeded in his. Archdeaconry by the celebrated Dr. Hacket, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 433 with the aged but most sprightly and cheerful Toby Mathew, Archbishop.1 On Sunday the 13th Dr. Mathew preached a learned sermon before him, after which there were brought to him seventy persons to be cured of the King's evil. This day the King and all his court dined with the Lord Mayor, and after dinner knighted Sir Eobert Ayscough the Lord Mayor, and Sir Eichard Hutton the Eecorder. This same year Sir Eichard was made a judge of the Common Pleas.2 On Monday the 14th the King rode to Sheriff Hutton Park, and there knighted Sir Eichard Harper of Derbyshire, Sir John Hippisley, and Sir William Bellassis of Durham.3 On Tuesday April 15 Dr. Phinehas Hodson, of the Uni versity of Cambridge, who had in September 1611 been made by Toby Mathew Chancellor of York, preached before the King at the Manor House.4 Probably it was through the Archbishop that Dr. Hodson was either now or before Chaplain to the King. On Wednesday April 16 the King was entertained at Aske Hall in the parish of Easby, the seat of Talbot Bowes, Esq.6 On the skirts of the high country and looking down the fertile vale of Gilling, with swelling lawns in front, and a long sweep of rising woods beyond, Eichmondshire has not perhaps a single residence which surpasses Aske in point of situation. 1 Dr. T. Mathew was born at Bristol in 1545, in 1572 he was made President of St. John's College, Oxford, and in 1576 Dean of Christ Church. After the see of Durham had remained vacant nearly two years he was consecrated to it. Queen Elizabeth had his learning in great esteem, and expressed great admiration of his preaching. On the death of Dr. Matthew Hutton, January 16, 1605, King James raised him to the archishopric. He was to the last a frequent and constant preacher, and was famous, like Bishop Andrewes and so many other noble persons in that age, for his great hospitality. Sir John Harrington, in his Brief View of the Church of England, delivers some familiar anecdotes respecting him, but in a manner sufficiently indicative of the reverence and affection with which he regarded him. * Nichols' Progresses of James I, vol. iii. p. 273. 3 Hence the Lord Bellassis of Worlaby in Lincolnshire. 4 To his beloved wife there is a monument and most panegyrical inscription in the minster. He died in 1646. 5 Arms : Ermine, three long bows bent in pale, gules. 434 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On the 17th the King was received at the palace Bishop Auckland by Dr. William James, successor to Toby Mathew in the see of Durham. There he spent Good Friday, and on Saturday the 19th entered Durham. The 20th being Easter- day Bishop Andrewes preached in the cathedral on the sign of the prophet Jonas, with his usual ingenuity laying open the whole scope and force of the words. First he exposed the hypocrisy and impenitent hardheartedness of the Phari sees, worshippers of their own imaginations, literally an adulterous generation, contradicting themselves with a mali cious mind in asking yet another after so many signs. But " the worse the men, the more importune ever, and the harder to satisfy."1 Yet Christ in his goodness gives them a sign, and the greatest of all signs. Other prophets had raised the dead, none had raised themselves. Christ would compare himself to the prophet Jonah, that prophet who was a sinner and a fugitive. He came in the simili tude of sinful flesh, and accordingly would make sinful flesh his similitude. Jonah was sent to the Gentiles, and sent the first in order of time of all the sixteen, the four great, the twelve less. So Jonah was every way a sign of salvation to us sinners of the Gentiles. Jonah and none but he had the honour to be a kind of expiatory sacrifice, when by his being cast out the ship was saved. And he alone gave a type of the resurrection. He came forth the third day by special grace, not by the course of nature. Incomparable is om prelate's comparison of Jonah in the whale to the security of the state of death. " There he was, but took no hurt there. 1. As safe, nay more safe there than in the best ship of Tharsis : no flaw of weather, no foul sea could trouble him there. 2. As safe, and as safely carried to land: the ship could have done no more. So that upon the matter he did but change his vehiculum [carriage], shifted but from one vessel to another ; went on his way stiU. 3. On he went, as well, nay better than the ship would have carried him ; went into the ship, the ship carried him wrong, out of his way clean to Tharsisward ; went into the whale, and the whale carried him 1 p. 608, Sermons, 4th ed. 1641. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 435 right, landed him on the next shore to Ninive, whither in truth he was bound, and where his errand lay. 4. And all the while at good ease as in a cell or study, for there he indited a psalm, expressing in it his certain hope of getting forth again. So as in effect where he seemed to be in most danger, he was in greatest safety. Thus can God work. And the evening and the morning were Jonah's second day." We may add, how great a proof is here of the faithfulness of God's protection and the omnipotence of his providence. What darkness should bring us into the deep of despair who are commanded to trust in such a God, whose miracles in the world of spirits never cease, and whose tender pity is as great toward the meanest and poorest of his children now as once toward the prophet Jonah? This is a sign as well for the comfort of his children as for the conviction of his enemies. But how triumphantly did our prelate pursue the com parison : Jonah but given up for dead, Christ really so, taken down from his cross, laid in, sealed up in his grave, a stone rolled on him, a watch set over him. The whale, not Jonah, delivered the prophet, but Christ by his own power broke the bars of death and loosed the sorrows of hell, of which it is impossible he should be holden. Jonas rose but to the same state, mortal still. Christ rose never to die more. Jonas was but cast out upon the dry land, but Christ was received into glory. And in sign of it the place whereon Jonas was cast was dry land or cliffs, where nothing grows. The place wherein Christ rose was a well-watered garden, wherein the ground was in all her glory, fresh and green and full of flowers at the instant of his rising this time of the year. And yet behold a greater than all these. For Jonas when he came forth, came forth and there was all, left the whale as he found it. Christ slew the whale that devoured him ; he was the death of death. Our good bishop fails not towards the conclusion to teach that lesson of faith in God's providence touched upon above, and to speak of the great deliverance of all from the power of Satan the spiritual Leviathan. fp2 436 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE XVIII. The King's progress to Scotland — Whitsunday 1617 — Carey and Laud — Grotius " Delmperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra" — Felton, Bishop of Bristol. The King's visit to Scotland was professedly to discharge some points of his kingly office in reforming abuses both in the church and commonwealth. But in attempting these changes he outran the zeal and prudence of the Scottish Bishops, who themselves with great moderation interposed, and prevented consequences that the Sovereign himself was too disinclined to provide for, ever as ready to exalt his prerogative as he was unable to maintain his claims. Hence his visit was ineffectual, and served only to increase mutual prejudice and aversion. On June the 8th, being Whitsunday, Bishop Andrewes preached before him in Holyrood chapel, saying many ad mirable things upon our Lord's first sermon upon his com mission; dwelling much upon the guilt of assuming the ministry without being sent, since Christ himseH went not before he was sent ; highly commending the ancient Fathers as those who were endued with a greater measure of the Spirit than men in later ages (which, had he confined it to the apostolic age, might peradventure have been true), and excel lently unfolding the design of our Saviour's commission to bind up the broken-hearted, to deliver us from captivity, and to bring with him the true year of jubilee. " On this day of salvation the sun never goes down." Our Lord's commission, THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 437 he observed, was only to them that are of a broken spirit. Elias healed none but the poor widow of Sarepta ; Eliseus, only Naaman after his spirit came down ; Christ, none but such as were of a contrite spirit. " The right hammer," he remarks, " to break the heart is the sight of om sins. And I will say this for it, that I never in my life saw any man brought so low with any worldly calamity as I have with this sight. And these I speak of were not of the common sort, but men of spirit and valour, that durst have looked death in the face. Yet when God opened their eyes to see this sight their hearts were broken, yea, even ground to powder with it, contrite indeed." Toward the end of this sermon he notes that the "jubilee ever began with no other sound but even of a cornet made of the horns of a ram. Of which horns they gave no other reason but that it was so in reference to the horns of that ram that in the thicket was caught by the horns and sacrificed in Isaac's stead, even as Christ was in ours, to shew that our jubilee has relation to that special sacrifice so plainly pre figuring that of Christ's." On June 21 Mr. Chamberlain thus wrote to Sir Dudley Carleton : " Our churchmen and ceremonies are not so well allowed of, the rather by an accident that fell out at the burial of one of the guard who died there, and was buried after the English fashion ; and the Dean of St. Paul's [Valen tine Carey] preaching, desired all the assembly to recommend with him the soul of their deceased brother to Almighty God, which was so ill taken that he was driven to retract it openly and to confess he did it in a kind of civility rather than according to the perfect rule of divinity. Another exception was taken to Dr. Laud's putting on a surplice when the corpse was to be laid in the ground.1 So that it seems they are very averse from our customs, insomuch that one of the bishops, Dean of the chapel2 there to the King, refused to receive the Communion with him kneeling." i Before 1692 the body was laid in the ground previously to the lesson in the Burial Service. 2 Cooper, Bishop of Galloway. " Cooper was an amiable man. At one period 438 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On the King's return Dr Morton, then Bishop of Chester, preached before him at Hoghton in the hundred of Blackburn, Lancashire, August 17. About 10 or 11 in the evening there was a mask of noblemen, knights, gentlemen, and courtiers before the King in the middle round in the garden of Hoghton tower.1 Very frequent instances occur of the Sovereign's profanation of the Lord's-day in his progresses, even in this his tour of ecclesiastical reformation. On August 26 Mr. Thomas Dod (uncle to the pious Non conformist, usuaUy called Dod the decalogist,) preached before the King, who was so pleased with him that he made him one of his chaplains in ordinary.2 Upon July 9 (N.S.) we find Grotius writing to Isaac Vossius, commending to him his book De Imperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra, and requesting him to shew it to those of whom he thinks highly, especially to Bishop An drewes.3 The same year he wrote to Overall, referring to his judgment his book against the Socinians, and touching at some length upon his book De Imperio Summarum Potes tatum, expressing at the same time his fears that it will not be altogether satisfactory to Andrewes and others in England. In this work he sets the authority of the chief magistrate in religion sufficiently high, and enters with his usual learning upon various topics relating to the discipUne and government of the Church in the earlier ages. He estabUshes the power of princes in matters of religion. They have authority to restrain and punish evil of every kind, authority over every soul, over both clergy and laity ; he is the minister of God to he had warmly entered into the prevailing views against episcopacy, and had, not very decently, compared bishops to coals or candles, that not only light but have a filthy smell in all men's noses. He soon altered his opinion, however, and became a Bishop ; but he uniformly shewed much moderation, and guided by sincere attachment to the best interests of religion." — Dr. Cook's Mistory of the Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 269. 1 On a hill four miles and a-half west of Blackburn. It is now left to decay, the south wing only being inhabited, and by poor people. Nichols' Progresses of James I, vol. iii. p. 300. 2 He was also Archdeacon of Richmond 1607, Dean of Ripon, Prebendary of Chester, and Rector of Astbury and Malpas. 3 Grotii Epistola!, ep. 100. Amsterdam, 1687. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 439 thee for good, good of every kind without limitation. He is appointed that we may live a quiet and peaceable life, not only in all honesty but in all godliness. For the true happi ness of a state is that it love God and be loved of him ; that it acknowledge him for its king, itself for his people, as St.' Austin excellently says,1 who also adds, that those kings are happy who make their power subservient to his majesty, to the entire promotion and advancement of his worship. So the Emperors Theodosius and Honorius in their epistle to Marcellinus, ' For we seek no other end by the toils of war, we purpose nought else by the counsels of peace, than that the people of our empire may with full affection observe the true worship of God.' So Theodosius in his epistle to Cyril, ' It is the office of the emperor to provide that his subjects live not only peaceably but piously.' And therefore Isidore of Pelusium saith that the same is the end both of the priest hood and of the kingly power, namely, the salvation of their subjects. Aristotle, reasoning only by the light of nature, comes to a similar conclusion. But to proceed to the Scrip tures, kings are commanded as kings, in their office, to observe the whole law of God, to serve the Lord, to salute his Christ. As St. Augustine saith, ' Kings then fulfil the, divine command when they enjoin good and forbid evil, not only in its relation to human society but also to true religion.'2 And Isidore of Seville, ' Let the princes of this world know that they must render an account to God for the Church which is entrusted by Christ to their protection. For whether the peace and order of the Church be strengthened by faithful princes, or whether it be brought to nought, he demands of them an account who hath committed the Church to their power.3 With regard to the practice of the Church, the ecclesiastical historian Socrates has summed it up in those words of his, ' From the time that the emperors became Chris tian all ecclesiastical affairs depended upon their authority.'4 Constantine is called on an old inscription the patron of 1 De Civ. Dei, lib. v. v. 16. 2 Contra Cresfon. lib. iii. c. 51, and Ep. ad Bonifac. 3 Sent. iii. c. t\. * Lib. v. Pref 440 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. religion and of the faith. The Emperor Basil, calling the Church the ship universal, saith that the guidance of it is by God entrusted to him. And so in the epistle to Lucius, ascribed to Eleutherius, Bishop of Eome, the king is called ecclesiastically the Vicar of God. To this doctrine agreed the reformed Confessions of Belgium, of Switzerland, of Basle ; to this the Church of England, to this the writings of Musculus, Bucer, Jewel, Whitaker, Eainolds, and more lately of King James, of Andrewes, Bishop of Ely, of Burhill, Tooker, Casaubon, and Paraeus. The same was asserted in the volu minous works of Melchior Goldastus. Again, the very nature of religion, which inclines men to peace, obedience, the true love of then country, and of justice and equity, commends it to princes as a fit object of their care and protection. The very enemies of Christianity have testified to its great moral efficacy, and to the purity of its precepts. Add to this, that doctrine and worship themselves have no small influence upon the manners and happiness of mankind. This is obvious in the doctrine, for instance, of the spirituality of the divine nature. From the aU-seeing presence of God it follows at once that we should do nothing offensive to him. From ,the fulness of his knowledge and prescience flows this consolation, that nothing can happen to the good but for their good. Nor said Plato without cause that it was not to be endured that any should teach that God was the author of evil actions. Had SiUus Italicus, instead of Heu prima? scelerum causae mortalibus segris Naturam nescire Deum, written Dei, he had written truly enough. Amongst inferior reasons for the ecclesiastical supremacy of the civil power may be placed the great influence of the priesthood, and the danger of the more ambitious part of them. Curtius himself bears witness that the multitude wiU sooner follow their priests than their generals. Add to this, that all changes in religion, if not by general consent and manifestly for the better, are always dangerous to the state. For these two last reasons even those confess that the actions of THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 441 the priesthood should be subjected to the supreme power, who deny such subjection where inconsistent with the due exercise cf their spiritual function. So John Paris, Francis Victoria, and Eoger Widdrington.1 In the second chapter he gives the history of the union and disjunction ofthe spiritual and civil power, and shews that they are not naturally opposed, but were for a long time joined in the same person, as in the patriarchal age, but severed both under the Mosaic and Christian dispensations. This however he would so restrict as that it should not be understood that every business of a secular kind is inconsistent with the exercise of the spiritual function. On the other hand, the Christian Emperors took to themselves ecclesiastical titles, not assuming them officially but in a wider sense, to signify their general overseership and care of the Church. In the third chapter he considers the power of the civil magistrate to oblige, and to what actions it extends ; also of the lawfulness and unlawfulness of resistance. Passive obe dience is due where the chief magistrate is neither bound by law nor created by it ; so the Eoman Emperors were obeyed by the early Christians ; so David did not lift up his hand against Saul, who, though a tyrant, was a king by a positive and unconditional ordinance. But where the chief magistrate is rather primus than summus, the first not the absolute head, the nobles may, upon just cause, take up arms against him.2 He then condemns the doctrine that the chief magistrate may make laws in opposition to the Word of God, a necessary error of those who would mould all institutions anew upon the principle that wealth alone is to legislate, wealth alone to be had in honour, wealth to draw all things to itself. So the civil magistrate cannot lawfully forbid preaching and the administration of the sacraments, or alter the divinely instituted form or substance of the sacraments, or the law of marriage, or innovate, that is, make new articles of faith, or essentially new kinds of worship, or new sacraments. But his power does extend to the circumstantials of religion, as to the age that shall qualify for the episcopate, the laws relating 1 Grotius, p. 23, 2nd ed. Paris, 1648. 2 p. 53. 442 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to residence and non-residence ; also that the priest shaU utter the canon of baptism and of the holy Communion with an audible voice, &c. He may also take away whatsoever ministers occasion to the violation of God's commandments. So Hezekah removed the high places and ground to powder the brazen serpent. So Josiah abolished idolatry and the idolatrous priesthood. So the Christian Emperors shut up the Pagan shrines and temples. He may also punish profane- ness, as Nebuchadnezzar ordered those to be punished who should speak against the God of the Hebrews.1 So too Grotius decides against the Puritans that the laws of the civil magistrate can bind in all things not contrary to Scripture, and make that binding which before was not so. This he ratifies by the Augustan and Bohemian Confessions.2 These positions he defends against objectors, and further explains in the three following chapters, after which he proceeds to treat of the history, origin, and limits of the power of Councils. In his ninth chapter he gives his opinion upon absolution and the power of the keys, and denies that the acts concerning them are properly acts of jurisdiction. He follows Peter Lombard,3 who defines the power of absolution to be the power of shewing to men that they are, or declaring that they are, bound or loosed, as the priest pronounced who were leprous and who free from the leprosy.4 He adduces Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine.5 The same appears to be the doctrine of Jewel in the early part of his Apology. On the history of absolution let me refer my reader to the 24th chapter in Field's Appendix to the third book Ofthe Church, and to the ninth book of Forbes' Instructiones Historico- Theologicai. In his tenth chapter he treats of the election of pastors, and here he regards the Apostles themselves as presbyters. In the eleventh chapter he discusses at large the name and office of the bishop, pleading for its apostolic origin, but denying it to be of divine right, since many appointments were equally apostolical for which no such high distinction is i p. 60. ¦' p. 63. 3 B. iv. d. 18. * p. 227. 5 Ep. 55 Ambros. de Spiritu St°- lib. iii. c. 19. Aug. adv. Petilian, 1. iii. c. 54. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 443 claimed. He shews that episcopacy cannot be repugnant to Scripture, from the 12th chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, God appointed in the Church first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers. So it is plain that distinction and disparity of ranks is not antichristian. And here he affirms that he truly follows Zanchius, Chemnitz, Hemmingius, Calvin, Melancthon, Bucer, and Beza. Jerome he treats more fairly than does Saravia, who with much special pleading endeavours to disprove that Father entirely in his celebrated Epistle to Evagrius. He says truly enough, that when the Fathers speak of custom they do not exclude apostolical institution. So Augustine, ' Whatsoever the whole Church observes, and that though not set up by Councils, has been always retained, is most rightly believed to have been de livered by no other than apostolical authority.'1 Epiphanius himself attests that some places were suffered to remain with out bishops, but adds that in such places none could be found worthy of the episcopate. Even in the case of ordination the concurrence and cooperation of presbyters were required.2 " Meanwhile," observes Grotius, " I see not how it can be refuted that where there are no bishops, ordination may be validly conferred by a presbyter, as William of Auxerre, the school divine, has long since admitted."3 He proceeds to vindicate the foreign churches who did not perpetuate epis copacy, and treats also fully of lay elders, proving, as in the case of bishops, that they are not of divine right, but that they are not contrary to the Holy Scriptures. This work was translated in 1651. In a letter from John Chamberlain to Sir Dudley Carleton, dated October 31, Chamberlain states that on the receipt of Sir Dudley Carleton's letter of the 19th, he went to Bishop Andrewes, who received him with great kindness, and expos tulated with him for the very long interval which he had suffered to elapse without seeing him. He delivered him Sir Dudley's proposition, " and withal upon long conference something you had written touching the Arminians counte nancing themselves with some of his letters. Whereupon he 1 p. 355. » P. 358. » p. 359. 444 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. fell into a long speech of a writing that the Archbishop Whitgift had got from him in some parts of that argument, and that he knows not what became of it, for he never gave a copy of it, but only one to Mr. Hooker, who promised to return it, but never did. But he expressed not all the while which opinion he inclined to, but stiU insisted if they had any writing of his they should shew it ; concluding that I should assure you that they have no letter of his, and with that vehemency that he would give me leave to send you his head in a platter if they could shew any letter of his. He told me further that Grotius when he was here dined once with him, and supped another time ; but other communication than passed at table he had none with him, though he under stands since that he gave out and fathered many things upon him that were neither so nor so. Surely he hath a wonderful memory, for he not only calls to mind any matter that passed at any time, but the very time, place, persons, and all other circumstances, which seemed strange to me in a discourse of almost two hours."1 On the 5th of November Andrewes preached before the King at Whitehall Chapel on Luke i. 74, 75. He in this sermon reminded his hearers of our memorable national deliverance in 1588. His wit remarkably discovers itself throughout this discourse as a holy ingenuity, full of practical point. He speaks much of reverence in worship. But let it be remembered to the credit of Laud, that he first broke off the custom of breaking off the prayers for the sermon upon the King's coming into the chapel. On the 30th of November Bishop Andrewes collated his brother Eoger to the fourth stall in Ely Cathedral, which he held till his death in 1635. He was then succeeded in his stall by John Harris, M.A., Eector of Passenham on the borders of Northamptonshire, near Stony Stratford. The Dean of Ely at this time was Dr. Henry, son of Dr. Julius Caesar, brother of Sir Julius Caesar, Master of the Bolls, and son of Julius, physician to Queens Mary and Elizabeth, a most munificent benefactor to Jesus College, 1 Birch's James I., vol. ii. p. 47. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 445 Cambridge, although himself of the University of Oxford. The other prebendaries were Dr. John Boys, one of the translators of the Bible, Eector of Boxworth, who had been preferred by Andrewes himself; Daniel Wigmore, Arch deacon of Ely, another of the Bishop's friends ; Jerome Beale, also in the enjoyment of the same honour; the learned and pious Andrew Willet, whose works have fallen into undeserved neglect. He was as a Biblical scholar not inferior to any of his contemporaries ; his life in Fuller's Abel Bedivivus was written by his son-in-law Dr. Peter Smith of King's College, Cambridge. John Hills, B.D., Master of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, Archdeacon of Lincoln, his patron being Bishop Barlow, Eector of Fulboum All Saints, the place of his nativity. He was buried at Horsheath near Newmarket September 1626. He had been raised to the Mastership of Catharine Hall from a Fellowship at Jesus College. Dr. John Duport, Master of Jesus College, Precentor of St. Paul's, Vicar of Fulham, Middlesex, and Eector of Bosworth and Medbourn in his native county of Leicester ; and lastly, Dr. James Taylor, Eector of Westmill, Hertfordshire, where he was buried. He died March 19, 1624. Our prelate on the 5th of December joined in a letter to the King respecting the retrenchment of his expenses.1 Upon December 14th Andrewes, with Dr. King, Bishop of London, Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, Marc Antony de Dominis, late Archbishop of Spalatro, and Overall, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, assisted Abbot at the consecration of Dr. George Montaig£^fo' the see of Lincoln, and of Andrewes' most worthy, learned, and upright friend Dr. Nicholas Felton,2 Master of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, to the see of Bristol. There he succeeded Dr. John Thornborough, who had but a contentious and disturbed rule in that see. He was now, on the death of that eminent prelate Dr. Parry, translated to Worcester. Dr. George Montagu was born at Cawood in Yorkshire, north-west of Selby, and educated at Queens' College, Cam- 1 Bacon's Letters, No. 194. Works, vol. iii. p. 357. Lond. 1778. 2 See Stevenson's Supplement to Bentham's Ely, p. 109, notes. 446 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. bridge, was Lecturer in Gresham College, Master of the Savoy, Eector of Great Cressingham, Norfolk, January 25, 1603, on the presentation of Lord Keeper Egerton, and November 22, 1609, Eector of Cheam on the presentation of the King. He succeeded Neile as Dean of Westminster December 10, 1610. He resigned this Deanry upon this his consecration to the see of Lincoln, and was succeeded in it by Dr. Thomas Fuller's uncle, Dr. Eobert Townson, who was born in Cambridge and educated also at Queens' College in that University. He was translated to London July 20, 1621, on the death of Bishop King, and to Durham early in 1628 on the promotion of NeUe to Winchester, and a {ew months afterward to York. He was succeeded at Durham by Howson. He was elected to York June 26th, was enthroned October 24th, and dying (probably 6th of November) that same year, was buried in Cawood Church. Hugh Holland wrote an epitaph upon him. His tomb is in the chancel with his bust in his lawn sleeves. He was succeeded at York by Harsnet, Bishop of Norwich. Of Dr. Felton the reader may find several notices in my Memorials of Dr. Thomas Fuller.1 He was the son of a merchant of Yarmouth. He was B.A. of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, 1580, and was elected to a FeUowship, M.A. 1581, B.D. 1591, Eector of St. Antholin's and St. Mary-le-Bow, London, and of Great Easton near Dunmow in Essex, and of Blagden or Blagdon near Bristol, Somersetshire, Prebendary of St. Paul's, London, 4th March, 1616. On the translation of Andrewes to Winchester Felton was removed from the see of Bristol to that of Ely, being elected March 2nd, 1619, and confirmed March 11th. He died October 5th, 1626, and was buried under the Communion-table in the chancel of St. Antholin's, London, without any memorial. At Ely he was succeeded by Dr. John Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester. He was a prelate of eminent piety and integrity, and of no less learning, for which he was appointed one of the trans lators of the Bible. " He had," says Fuller in his Church History? " a sound head and a sanctified heart, was beloved 1 At pp. 11, 12, 114, 179. 2 B. ix. p. 134. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 447 of God and all good men, very hospitable to all and charitable to the poor." Andrewes assisted in procuring for him the Mastership of Pembroke Hall, which he held from 1616 to 1619. In the course of this year appeared Epphata to F. T. (Thomas Fitzherbert, mentioned under 1613) ; or, the Defence of the Bight Beverend Father in God the Lord Bishop of Elie, Lord High Almoner and Privy Councillor to the King's most excellent Majestie. Concerning his Answer to Cardinal Bellarmine's Apologie : against the slanderous cavils of a nameless Adjoinder ; entitling his book in every page of it, A Discoverie of many foule absurdities, falsities, lies, &c, wherein these things chiefly are discussed (besides many other incident) : 1. The Pope's false Primacie claiming by Peter. 2. Invocation of Saints, with Worship of Creatures and Faith in them. 3. The Supremacie of Kings both in Temporal and Ecclesiastical Matters and Causes, over all States and Persons, &c., within their Eealms and Dominions. By Dr. Collins, Chapleine to His Majestie. Apoc. xviii. 7. Give her torture (an allusion to the title of the Bishop's book, Tortura Torti). Printed by Cantrell Legge, Printer to the University of Cambridge, 1617. This work was, for abun dance of learning, force of argument, and felicity of illustration and application, not unworthy the great reputation of its author, who was accounted one of the most learned theologians and scholars of his age, and who at school had given early promise of the ability which distinguished him at the Uni versity. He was a constant guest at Buckden at the table of the munificent and hospitable Williams, with Dr. Samuel Ward and Dr. Brownrigg, afterwards Bishop of Exeter. He was born at Eton, where he was also educated ; was from a Fellowship raised to the Provostship of King's College 1615, succeeded Dr. Eichardson, Master of Trinity College, as Eegius Professor of Divinity 1617, and was, on the death of Dr. Duport, Master of Jesus College, Cambridge, collated by Bishop Andrewes to the seventh staU at Ely February 9th, 448 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 1618. He was deprived in 1644, and died, aged 75, Sep tember 16th, 1651, and was buried in King's College chapel. He fully exposes the weakness, incompetence, and sophistry of Fitzherbert. This elaborate work is one of many proofs how valuable is the study of the Fathers to those who have sufficient learning to profit from them, and how dangerous it is merely to dabble in them, as Fitzherbert appears to have done. But in truth we need never look into the writings of those who adhere to Eome for right views of the Fathers. Their learned men are fully aware that the Fathers often and in many things make against them. Hence we find the theory of development anticipated by Bishop Fisher. As some in our own time have done, so Fitzherbert caught at Andrewes' words, that Christ is to be adored in and with the sacrament. "The Bishop grants that Christ is to be worshipped, and that he is to be worshipped in the sacrament, which he infallibly accompanieth, and effectually assisteth : ergo, with you he is a Pontifician, and maintaineih your cause, and betrayeth his own. No such thing, gentle sir. To make him yours, more goes to it than so. Especially these two, corporal presence, and transubstantiation or conversion. These are the two main badges or rather buttresses of your Cyclops, neither of which is to be found in the Bishop's writing, and God knows is far off from his belief." " Though again, when we say that Christ is in the sacrament (because we would not be mistaken), we say not that he is there after a corporal manner : nay, that your own Captain and Cardinal dis- claimeth, corporaliter esse Christum, in Sacramento ; but we say not so much as that his flesh is there, or his body there at all, not only after a bodily or fleshly manner. Christus, saith St. Leo, quadragesimo post resurrectionem die, coram dis- cipulis elevatus in ccelum, corporalis praesentiae modum fecit, &c. Christ made a period of his bodily presence, being lifted up into heaven before the face of his disciples the fortieth day after his resurrection. And St. Austin, out of those words, Matt, xxvi., Non semper habebitis me vobiscum, with other like in St. John xii., resolves it plainly that secundum carnem non semper, according to the flesh he is not always with THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 449 us. (Tract. 109 in Joh.) It were not hard to produce divers more to the same purpose. Yea, si esset in terrd, non esset sacerdos. (Heb. viii.) If Christ were on the earth, he could be no priest, &c. So as you destroy his priesthood, while you stand for such presence, to commend your sacrifice. I say, therefore, neither bodily nor in body at all." The contrary to this is insisted upon by the late Archdeacon Wilberforce in his work upon the Eucharist ; and accordingly whilst he affixes a literal, Dr. Collins gives a more just and reasonable interpretation to Cyril's Catecheses, where the author of that uncertain book touches upon the Eucharist. For Eivet did not without reason caU the authorship of the Catecheses in question.1 In a note Dr. Collins ridicules those who make Christ's body to be a figure of itself in the Sacrament.2 Collins was, besides his other preferments, Eector of Braintree, Essex, February 15, 1611, and of Fen Ditton in 1643. He was ejected thence by the Earl of Manchester. He had declined the see of Bristol. He was the son of Master Baldwin Collins, whom the Queen for his piety used to call Father Collins. Dr. Collins quotes that most admirable passage from St. Augustine, in which he limits adoration to him who is the source of our felicity, thus shutting out at once every kind of worship besides, whether addressed to men or angels : " Solus ille colendus est, quo solo fruens, beatus fit cultor ejus, et quo solo non fruens, omnis mens misera est, etsi qualibet re alia perfruatur." (Contra Faustum Manichaium, lib. xx. c. 5.3) " He alone is to be adored by the enjoyment of whom alone the worshipper is made happy, and without the enjoyment of whom alone the mind is miserable, whatsoever else it may enjoy." Dr. Collins defends the imputation of our Saviour's righteousness to us (p. 376), and quotes St. Jerome; and, 1 They are also questioned in An Answer to the Eighteenth Chapter of Cardinal Perron's Reply. " We will not question the author, as well we might." —p. 15, Andrewes' Works, vol. xi. Oxford, 1854. 2 p. 412. 3 Opera, torn. vi. p. 449. Lugd. 1562. In Dr. Collins, p. 371. G G 450 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. on the other hand, for the imputation of the sin of Adam, St. Gregory Nazianzen, Oratio in Baptism., that Adam's eating the forbidden fruit was so ours, that of itself it was enough to condemn us. He speaks of regeneration as including the whole life of a Christian; we are regenerating here aU the time of our life. (p. 377.) He applies the 7th chapter of the Epistle to the Eomans to the regenerate, as did St. Augustine, and as Bishop Andrewes also did in his Book of Devotions, p. 379. Dr. Collins defends Calvin, who says that Christ bade his disciples receive, not adore the sacrament. Calvin would have us refrain from worshipping the sacrament of the Eu charist for safety's sake : " Quia non tutum. Nam ut Christum illic rite apprehendant piae animae, in ccelum erigantur necesse est." (Instit. lib. iv. c. 17, § 36.) "It is not safe; for that the faithful may duly apprehend Christ in that sacrament, it is requisite that their minds should be lifted up to heaven." Dr. Collins observes that St. Augustine and St. Ambrose interpreted ihe footstool of God — the earth is my footstool, Isa. lxvi. 1, of our Lord's human nature. So Augustine on Psa. xcviii. (Psa. xcix.), where he is careful not to .be mis understood, as though he intended the presence of Christ bodily in the Eucharist, as the sequel clearly demonstrates. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 451 CHAPTEE XIX. Andrewes and Grotius, 1618 — Condemnation of Trash — Peter du Moulin — Dr. Preston — Andrewes translated to Winchester — Christmas 1619 — The King at Farnham 1620 — Consecration of St. Mary's Chapel near Southampton — Tilenus. We find Chamberlain again with Andrewes in February. He wrote to Sir Dudley Carleton on the 14th : " I made an errand to Ely House to have shewn the Bishop the Pope's determination 'twixt the Franciscans and Jacobins, if he had not seen it ; as likewise what you wrote concerning Grotius to make him more wary hereafter, though, for aught I ever heard, he hath used caution enough that way ; but he was at Lambeth." He found him at home a few days after, and he informed Chamberlain "that he had had letters lately, and that before Christmas one came to him for an answer; but being presently to preach at court, and not finding himself well at ease, he made his excuse. But I perceived by this that he holds him for a very learned and able man : yet I doubt not but this little conference will serve him for a caveat hereafter. I lent him the Pope's determination 'twixt the Franciscans and Jacobins, and the censure of the Sorbonists upon the Archbishop of Spalatro's books, which I met with aU by chance, none of which he had, or had seen."1 Our prelate preaching before the King at Whitehall on April 5, Easter-day, 1618, prefaced his sermon with a suitable application of his text, 1 Cor. xi. 16 : But if any man seem 1 Birch's James I., vol. ii. pp. 63 — 66. gg2 452 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither ihe churches of God, to the question of the authority of the Church in things ceremonial.1 This passage is similarly applied by the learned Dr. John Forbes in his Theologia Moralis, who quotes Calvin upon it.2 Andrewes proceeds to the conditions to be regarded in the putting forth of Church authority, that all customs be agreeable to the general custom of the Church : especially is a custom to be commended if it be ancient and from the Apostles. The third part of this sermon is a learned dissertation upon the various computations of the time of Easter in the first four centuries, and a reference to many patristic testimonies of the observance of the festival. That the Apostles them selves instituted this festival he maintains on the ground of St. Augustine's often quoted and but too often misapplied assertion : For such things as come to us not by writing, but by practise (and yet such as are observed quite through ihe world), we are given to understand they were commended to us, and were instituted either by the Apostles themselves, or by General Councils, whose authority hath ever been accounted of as wholesome in the Church. "Now," adds Andrewes, "what be those things so generally observed toto orbe terrarum? These : that the passion, the resurrection, the ascension of Christ, and the coming of ihe Holy Ghost from heaven, anni- versaria solemnitate celebrantur, are yearly in solemn manner celebrated. And, saith he" [St. Augustine], "if there be any beside these : for these are most clear." When we call to mind that the Apostles would, by the Passover and the Day of'Pentecost, be annuaUy led back to the still more wonderful events which endeared those seasons to their hearts, we may well conjecture that from the very earliest they annually commemorated at those seasons the sufferings and the resurrection of Christ, and the descent of the Holy Ghost. His Whitsunday sermon, May 24th, preached before the King at Greenwich from Acts ii. 7, is not one of the most felicitous of his discourses. He observes the tendency of the 1 p. 518. 2 Lib. i. u. 4, § 7. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 453 age to turn reUgion into an auricular profession; but whilst the whole is upon the effusion of the Spirit, it is not a pouring forth worthy of the occasion. But one comparison there is in it, which would have sufficed for a sermon of itself; when he remarks that as copious as was the effusion of Christ's blood, so copious was the effusion of the Spirit, " He as liberal of his grace, as Christ of his blood." 1 Andrewes appears to have been nominated to the see of Winchester on the very day of the decease of Bishop Montague at Greenwich, 20th July, 1618. The conge" dSlire for his election is dated 29th July, 1618. But a short time before he was, on June 23rd, put in commission for banishing Jesuits, Seminary Priests, &c.2 This year, 1618, the King appointed Drs. Carleton, Hall, Davenant, and Ward to represent the English Church at the Synod of Dort.3 George Carleton was born at Norham in Northumberland, and was educated by the famous Bernard Gilpin, the apostle of the North, (whose zeal was emulated by the indefatigable Edmund Bunney, of an eminent family from the village of Bunney in Nottinghamshire, B.D., and Fellow of Merton College, Oxford, and Prebendary of St. Paul's, of York and Carlisle, and Eector of Bolton Percy4). He first went to St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, and thence to Merton College, of which he was chosen a Fellow. He was made D.D. 1613. He held the stall of St. Dubritius in the church of Llandaff, previously to his being appointed to the bishopric. He was consecrated to that see a few months before he went to Dort, namely, July 12, 1618, at Lambeth. Abbot was assisted on this occasion by Dr. Jokn King, Bishop of London, Dr. John Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, Dr. John Overall, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, and Dr. George Monteigne, Bishop of Lincoln. Dr. Joseph Hall of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, was at this time Dean of Worcester and Arch deacon of Nottingham. The latter dignity he received on the promotion of Dr. King, Dean of Christ Church, to the see of 1 p. 713. 2 Rymer's Fcedera, vol. xvii. s Between Rotterdam and Antwerp. 4 Buried in the south aisle of the choir of York Minster. 454 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. London in 1611, and his Deanry to the promotion of that other equally noble and illustrious divine Dr. Arthur Lake to the see of Bath and Wells in 1616. Dr. Samuel Ward was at this time Master of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, Eector of Much Munden, between Ware and Buntingford, Arch deacon of Taunton, and Prebendary of Ampleforth in the church of York. In 1622 he succeeded Bishop Davenant at Cam bridge as Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity. Dr. John Davenant, uncle to the celebrated Dr. Thomas Fuller, was of a wealthy London family, had been for a short time Vicar of Oakington near Cambridge,1 received his education at Queens' College, Cambridge, and was appointed President of Queens' College 1614, on the death of Dr. Humphrey TindaU, Dean of Ely, having been Lady Margaret's Divinity Professor from 1609. He was in 1622 made Bishop of SaUsbury, and Carleton was in 1619 translated from Llandaff to Chichester. Ward, Davenant, Hall, and Carleton had an interview with King James at Newmarket previously to their departure for Dort. Andrewes was probably with the King at the same time, when his commissary came to Newmarket to lay a complaint against the celebrated preacher Dr. Preston, at this time a Fellow of Queens' CoUege. Ward and Davenant were again summoned to the royal presence at Eoyston on the 8th of October, "where," says FuUer in his Church History? " his Majesty vouchsafed his familiar discourse unto them for two hours together, commanding them to sit down by him, and at last dismissed them with his solemn prayer that God would bless their endeavours, which made them cheerfully to depart his presence." On October 16th Andrewes admitted Edmund (or Edward3) White, M.A., to be his domestic chaplain.4 He had been admitted as a sizar at Corpus Christi CoUege, Cambridge, in 1605, was B.A. 1609, M.A. 1612. On November 5th om prelate preached before the King at 1 From April to December 1612. 2 Book x. p. 78, fol. ed. 3 Both names occur in the University Register. 1 Baker's MSS. Univ. Lib. Camb. October 28th was made unhappily memor able by the execution of the illustrious Sir Walter Raleigh. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 455 Whitehall from Esther ix. 31 : To confirm these days of Purim, according to their seasons, &c. Comparing the plot to that of Haman, he observed, " Haman was to the Jews a stranger in nation, for he was an Agagite : a stranger in religion, for he was an heathen man. Ours were no strangers in nation, the same nation that we. No Turks or infidels, but professing the same Christ that we ; and better than we, say they, for right Catholics they ; and not Christians, but (which is more than Christians) Jesuits some of them."1 On the 10th of December Walter Balcanqual, B.D., Fellow of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, was also sent over as in the name of the Church of Scotland. On the 8th of March, 1625, he was installed Dean of Eochester on the promotion of Dr. Goodman to the see of Gloucester, but about three weeks before the death of King James. On the 13th of May, 1639, he was instaUed Dean of Durham. The same cause was forwarded at home by Archbishop Abbot, who joined with Sir Henry Savile in publishing Bradwardine's Causa Dei. Dr. Hall returning home on account of ill health, Dr. Thomas Goade was sent over to supply his place. In the late Mr. Carwithen's History of the Church of England, Goade is thus depreciated : " Goade, a chaplain of Abbot, of whom nothing more can be said than that he was ready to join in any measure which might be adopted against the Eemon strants."2 Goade was the learned son of a learned father, who when Provost of King's College discerned the talent of Dr. Collins, and pointed him out as his successor. This came to pass five years after his death, two Provosts succeeding in the interim, Dr. Fogge Newton, Eector of Kingston near Cam bridge, where he lies buried, and Dr. William Smyth, one of King James's Chaplains, who from his Fellowship at King's College was chosen Master of Clare Hall in 1598, and thence raised to the Provostship of King's College in 1612, on the death of Dr. Newton. Goade was in the time of Bishop King made Precentor of St. Paul's February 16, 1618, Prebendary of the tenth stall at Winchester August 25, 1621, Proctor of his University in 1629, and Professor of Civil Law. i p. 1001. 2 vol. ii. p. 248. 456 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. in 1635. If he was ejected he was probably restored. His successor in the Professorship was not appointed until 1666. At the Synod of Dort met not only the divines of Holland with those sent from England, but also from the Palatinate, from Hesse, from Switzerland, from Herborn in Nassau, from Bremen, Emden, and Geneva. The French Protestant divines were not suffered to attend, the King being displeased with the Dutch for their noncompliance with his intercession in behalf of Barneveldt, and other political reasons.1 It was found that not a few favourers of Socinianism concealed their errors under colour of anti-Predestinarianism ; and this the Lutheran historian Weismann confesses was the principal cause of the great hostiUty of the Predestinarian divines to the Eemonstrants.2 The canons of the Synod of Dort have recently been republished in Niemeyer's Collectio Confessionum in Ecclesiis Beformatis publicatarum. Leipz. 1840. In the course of this year Andrewes delivered his speech in the Star Chamber against that unstable and fanatical person John Traske. His speech was a confutation of Traske's two judaical points, namely, that we should abstain from all the forbidden meats enumerated in Leviticus, and that we should observe the Jewish Sabbath or Saturday. Some few there are still in our own country and in America who appear to have inherited his perverseness in the latter particular. In 1620 he put forth a recantation, entitled A Treatise of Liberty from Judaism, or an Acknowledgment of true Christian Liberty, indited and published by John Traske; of late stumbled, now happily running again in the Bace of Christianity. Bishop Andrewes himself, we have before seen, acknowledged the moral nature and obligation of the Lord's-day ; and so in the recantation of Traske we read, ' A new spiritual service we are to yield. And that a Sabbath- day we do still acknowledge, it is by virtue of the command ment itself, as far as it is moral.' Andrewes began his speech thus : " It is a good work 1 C. E. Weismanni Mist. Eccl. torn. ii. p. 1170. 2 p. 1178. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 457 to make a Jew a Christian ; but to make Christian men Jews hath ever been holden a foul act, and severely to be punished." Eespecting the distinction of meats he cites our Saviour's words, that there is nothing that goeth into the mouth that defileih a man. And he adds, " This is our ground : Sermo Christi omnes cibos mundans, saith Gregory Thaumaturgus more than 1300 years since."1 He proceeds to observe that the distinction of clean and unclean was only appointed for the Jews. He passes over the distinction of clean and unclean in Genesis viii. 20, probably because it was made with a view to the law of sacrifice. He alleges not only the ceremonial nature of the prohibition which proved that it was not a part of the moral and eternal law, but of the law of ordinances, which was in its own nature temporary, but the vision related in the tenth chapter of the Acts. He observes that this distinction was not insisted on in the fifteenth chapter. He observes from St. Augustine that the prohibition of eating the blood was, in like manner, but for a time.2 In his remarks on the Sabbath he, in alleging St. Atha nasius, attributes to him the Creed called after his name. Dr. Waterland refers the composition of this Creed to Hilary, Archbishop of Aries, about A.D. 430 ; Alt, in his Christliche Cultus,3 ascribes it to Vigilius of Thapsus (on the coast of the province of Byzacium or Byzacena below Carthage), about A.D. 460. In November commenced his correspondence with Peter du Moulin, who on the death of Bilson betook himself to the patronage of Andrewes, it being well known that the King had destined him to the vacant see. Du Moulin (although, in a work intended to answer the Jesuit Arnold, he had owned the very rise and prevalence of episcopacy, and had highly complimented the English prelacy,) had given offence by 1 'AA\a Kid S 'Swriip d iravra KaSaplfav ri. fipi&fiaTa, ((pno'i) Ou to eliTToptv- &p.evov koivoI tov &v9panrov, k.t.A. S. Greg. Thaumat. Epist. Canon. Can. i. apud Beveredg. Pan. Can. torn. ii. p. 243. 2 Contra Faust, lib. xxxii. c. 13. Op. torn. viii. p. 700. 3 p. 380. Berlin, 1843. 458 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. affirming that in the New Testament the names bishop and presbyter were interchanged ; that the order of bishop and presbyter was but one and the same ; and that episcopacy was not of divine right, meaning thereby that it was not of indispensable obligation. The first of these three Andrewes admitted, but complained that Du Moulin had not guarded against the ill inferences that some might draw from it. For the second and third he contended, admitting however that episcopacy was not so of divine right as to be essential to the being of a Church or to the salvation of any Christian community. Du Moulin took the same ground with Grotius, and both agree in witnessing that theirs was the opinion of all the reformed Churches abroad. Not long before Bishop Andrewes was translated to Winchester, there appears to have been no smaU commotion in the University from the popularity of the celebrated Puritan Preston, then a Fellow of Queens' College. FuUer thus warily (to use his own words) expresses himself hereupon in his History of the University of Cambridge : " Master John Preston, Fellow of Queens', suspected for inclination to non conformity, intended to preach in the afternoon (St. Mary's sermon being ended) in St. Botolph's Church. But Dr. Newcombe, Commissary to the ChanceUor of Ely, offended by the pressing of the people, enjoined that service should be said without sermon. In opposition whereunto a sermon was made without service, whence large complaints to Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of Ely, and in fine to the King himself. Hereupon Mr. Preston was enjoined to make what his foes called a recantation, his friends a declaration sermon ; therein so warily expressing his aUowance of the Liturgy and set forms of prayer, that he neither displeased his own party nor gave his enemies any great advantage."1 This incident is related much more circumstantially in Clark's Lives of Thirty-two English Divines / but both he and Fuller place it under the Vice-Chancellorship of Dr. Scott, Master of Clare Hall, before whose Vice-ChanceUorship Andrewes was translated to the see of Winchester ; in which 1 p. 308. Camb. 1840. 2 Life of Dr. Preston, pp. 86—88. 1677. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 459 case Dr. Newcombe would not have brought a complaint before him. According to Clark, Dr. Newcombe seeing the crowd, commanded that only evening prayer should be read, and no sermon preached. The incumbent entreated that for that time Preston might be suffered to preach, as did the Earl of Lincoln and others present. But the Commissary refused his permission, and went home with his family. However Preston preached from 2 Peter ni. 17, 18. There was so much time spent in debates and messages before the Com missary left the church, that the prayers were omitted, that so the scholars might depart in time for their College services. This furnishing the Commissary with farther ground of complaint, he went the next day to the court at Newmarket where the Bishop also was. Upon complaint made to the King, a letter was directed to the Vice-Chancellor (Dr. Scott, who however was not then Vice-Chancellor,) and to the other heads to call Preston before them. He appealed to Andrewes, and offered himself to undergo an examination by Andrewes if he was in any way suspected of disaffection to the established order. On Andrewes objecting to him his disUke ofthe Liturgy, he replied that it was a slander of his enemies, for he thought set forms of prayer lawful, and refused not on all occasions to be present at prayers in College, and to read them in his turn. The Bishop answered that he was glad, and would inform the Eng, and do him all the good he could, and bade him wait awhile, and return to him. But time passed on, and nothing further was done. Dr. Young, " an honest Scotchman," Dean of Winchester, told Preston plainly that the Bishop was his greatest adversary, and desirous of his expulsion, but to save the odium, as desirous that this should be left to the University. Preston then waited upon Andrewes, calling upon him at once to say what he would do, and whether he would stir in his behalf or no. The Bishop upon this bade him come again, and said that he would deal with the King in his behalf. The Bishop is said to have gone to the King, and to have advised that the harsher course should be dropped, and Preston enjoined to deliver his opinion at St. Botolph's the next Sunday on set forms of prayer. He the next Sunday 460 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. preached accordingly, commending as weU private extem poraneous prayer as public set forms of devotion. And there this affair ended. We are not bound to believe that Andrewes dissembled, as Clark represents him to have done.1 Dr. Young, Dean of Winchester, was brother of the learned Patrick Young, who leaving Scotland was made a Chaplain of New College, and otherwise preferred. He was an exceUent classical scholar, and translated the King's works into Latin. His brother the Dean did not attain such celebrity, but besides his Deanry he was appointed to the prebendal stall of Eiccall in the church of York April 30, 1613, in the place of Dr. Henry Banks, who was appointed to the Precentorship. He died some time after, 1642. " On November 26th, upon report made to the Lords of the Council by Sir Clement Edmunds, it was ordered by their lordships that the Earl of Arundel, Dr. Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester, the Lord Carew, Mr. Treasurer, and Mr. Comptroller of his Majesty's Household, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Master of the EoUs, and Mr. Edward Coke, or any four of them, should take consideration of the state of the business, &c. [i. e. of the drainage of the fens], and prepare some opinion to be delivered to the board, of what present course might be fit to be taken therein. The Earl of Arundel made a journey to the fens, and treaty with Sir William Ayloff, Knight, and Antony Thomas, Esq., and others. They undertook to drain all the fens in Cambridge shire, the Isle of Ely, Norfolk, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, North amptonshire, and Huntingdonshire."2 "The work nevertheless," says Lysons, "meeting with much opposition in the country, was carried on with little effect." Of the subsequent vicissitudes ofthe drainage system Lysons gives a concise account in his History of Cambridge shire, to whom I remit the reader. On Friday, Christmas-day 1618, our prelate preached an incomparable discourse from the gospel for the day, before the King and Court at Whitehall. WeU does he observe of the i Life of Dr. Preston, pp. 86, 88. Lives of Thirty-two English Divines, 1677. 2 Dugdale's Mistory of Embanking, p. 401. Lond. 1662. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 461 meanness of our Saviour's birth and of the glory that yet attended it, the angels themselves making melody upon it: " It is a course, (this) the Holy Ghost began it (here) at his birth, and after observed it all along, Sociare ima summis, et insolita solitis temperare ; to couple low and high together, and to temper things mean and usual, with others as strange every way."1 Affectingly in his own simple way does he note how the sign by which the Lord was to be found suited the time, his coming in humility, and the persons : " The poorest of the earth may repair to him, being no other place but this ; and by this sign to find him." Yet was this sign not without glory. " It was much, from a babe floating in the flags of Nilus, in a basket of bulrushes, (Moses) to gather himself a people, even the nation and kingdom of the Jews, and to deliver his law. It was infinitely much more, from this babe (here) lying in the cratch, to work the bringing in of the Gentiles, and the turning about of the whole world, and to publish his gospel, the power of God to salvation."2 Then does he open to us our sign of Christ's presence, humility: "As St. Augustine saith well, Signum vobis si signum in vobis, A sign for you if a sign in you."3 How would men's minds turn from the externals to the internals of religion, if they bore in their hearts the teaching of our prelate, that to be but babes in Christ » they must to faith join humility.* Those who would pour contempt upon patristic reading and upon the name of Bishop Andrewes, and have men go no farther than to some modern commentator, or some idolized name of the last or present century, would never come upon so pregnant a passage, such a storehouse of illustration, as the few foUowing sentences. "But then if it be signum vobis" [a sign to you] "to some, it is for some others signum contra vos" [a sign against you] : " and that is, the proud. For the Word of God hath two edges : and if it go one way, that for humility, it cuts as i p. 109. 2 p. in. 3 p- H3- " p. 113. 462 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. deep the contrary, against pride. And withal, under one leads us to the cause straight, and shews us the malignity of the disease of pride, for the cure whereof this so profound humility was requisite in Christ. There was one, when time was, took the disease of Ero similis Altissimo" [I will be Uke the Most High], " and he breathed upon om first parents with his Eritis sicut DU" [ye shaU be as gods], " and infected them with it. To make themselves equal with God is plain robbery (saith the Apostle, Phil, ii.) For that robbery of theirs was the Son of God robbed (as I may say), and quite spoiled of his glory. For their puffing up, eKevas p. 734. 464 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. most reverend prelate, and long make use of your influence to the good of his Church. " FareweU. " Paris, Cal. Sept. 1619." Du Moulin's work was translated into English in 1635 with the following title, The Anatomie of Arminianism : or ihe Opening of the Controversies of these times (formerly handled in the Low Countries) concerning the Doctrine of Providence, of Predestination, ofthe Death of Christ, of Nature and Grace, &c. By Peter du Moulin, Minister of the Church at Paris. London : printed for Nathaniel Newbery, at the sign of the Star in Pope's Head Alley. Anno Dom. 1635. The translation is dedicated by Nathaniel Newbery to Sir Henry Mildmay, Knight, Master of his Majesty's Jewels, and Sir Henry Eowe, Knight. The work was prefaced by the author with an epistle to the Lords the States-General of the United Provinces of the Low Countries. In this epistle King James is commended for his sanction of the Synod of Dort. Du Moulin expresses his regret that he could not be present at that assembly, adding that he did what he could, by sending to the Synod his opinion upon the subjects there treated of. The answers he thus gave, he drew out at fuU length in this treatise. From it he appears to have been opposed to the supra-Lapsarian theory, against which he writes very unreservedly in the sixth chapter, Of the Sin of Adam. Of the efficacy of the death of Christ he says : " When we say that Christ died for all, we take it thus, to wit, that the death of Christ is sufficient to save whosoever do beUeve ; yea, and that it is sufficient to save all men, if all men in the whole world did believe in him : and that the cause why all men are not saved, is not in the insufficiency of the death of Christ, but in the wickedness and incredulity of man."1 On the difficulties which those who maintain what is called particular redemption have thrown in the way of those whom they should encourage to believe in the Gospel, Dr. Chalmers has delivered himself with an effectiveness peculiarly his own, 1 Chap, xxvii. p. 198. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 465 in the eleventh chapter of his Institutes of Theology, entitled, On the warrant which each man has to appropriate the calls of the Gospel to himself, and what that is which marks his doing so.1 Let the reader also peruse the third chapter of the third part, entitled, On ihe Universality of the Gospel. He will then perceive that the doctrine of divine predestination is not necessarily at variance with that of universal redemption. The opposite opinion has arisen from the injudicious and un hallowed attempts of some to harmonize their own misgivings of the truth with their imperfect conceptions of it. Calvin was altogether too practical to lose himself in the artificial reasonings of such as have made it impossible for themselves to testify to all men with St. Paul, repentance towards God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts xx. 21.) With Calvin, faith was the receiving of Christ as he is offered to us in the Scriptures, that is as at once our redemp tion and sanctification.2 Neither do we find the tenet of particular redemption coun tenanced in the Synod of Dort, but the very contrary : " Caeterum promissio evangelii est, ut quisquis . credit in Christum crucifixum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aetemam. Quae promissio omnibus populis et hominibus, ad quos Deus pro suo beneplacito mittit evangelium, promiscue et indis- criminatim annuntiari et proponi debet cum resipiscentiae et fidei mandato.3 ' But the promise of the Gospel is, that who soever believes in Christ crucified shall not perish but shall have eternal life. And this promise is to be proclaimed and set forth to all nations and individuals without exception and without any difference, with the command to repent and believe, to whom God, according to his own good pleasure, sends the Gospel.' Upon Saturday, Christmas-day, December 25th, our prelate delivered one of his most copious and eloquent dis courses. How many sermons might be produced from this 1 pp. 249 — 257, Posthumous Works, vol. viii. 1849. 2 Institutes, lib. iii. c. 2, § 8, p. 255. Lond. 1576. 3 Canones Synodi Dordrechtanee, c. ii. art. 6. Niemeyer's Collectio Confess. p. 705. Lips. 1840. H H 466 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. one. What a multitude of holy lessons does it contain, what heavenly peace pervades it. How fit an exposition of the angels' hymn, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men. Most happily too, whilst its exceUencies are incomparable, its defects are few. On the 5th of February, 1620, our prelate was on the Committee of Privileges of the Lords. On the 14th he was one of the Conference with the Commons for the uniting of both Houses in a petition to the King for the better execution of the laws then in force against Jesuits, Seminary Priests, and Popish recusants. On Saturday, February 17th, he was on a committee to consider a Bill that had been read a second time for the con firmation of the King's letters-patent to Sir Philip Carey, Knight, and others, of the manor of Minster in the Isle of Thanet. On the 21st he was to meet on the naturalization of Sir Francis Stewart, Knight, Walter Stewart, James Maxwell, and William Carr, Esquires. James MaxweUwas afterwards Groom of the Bedchamber to Charles I., and was with the King when he was surprised by Colonel Joyce at Holdenby in Northamptonshire. On Thursday the 22nd he was appointed to meet in a committee for clearing the passage by water from London to beyond Oxford, at two p.m. in the council-chamber, WhitehaU. On the 1st of March he was to meet, by eight a.m. in the committee-chamber, to enable Edmund Clough, Esq., and other bargainers in trust to convey the manor of Temple Newsome, &c. to Esme Stuart, Lord Aubigny, and Earl of March, and the Lady Catharine his wife, or such as they shall name and appoint. On Monday the 5th of March he was appointed to meet at eight A.M. in the Painted Chamber on an Act for the con firmation of the Hospital of King James founded in Charter House at the humble petition and only costs, &c, of Thomas Sutton, Esq. On the 9th he was to meet upon a projected academy for the training of the younger nobility and gentry. On the 12th, respecting abuses on the Lord's-day ; and on THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 467 a committee of grievances complained of by the House of Commons, as also of complaints respecting the patents of gold and silver thread. On March 26th he attended the King to St. Paul's, one of the most venerable Norman structures in England, and of unusual dimensions. This was with a view to promote the repairs of that vast edifice, upon which the munificence of the whole church and nation was liberally expended so long as it remained. We may be allowed to regret that it was not restored and preserved, as peradventure it might have been, after the great fire. Not less to be commended is his Easter-day sermon, preached at Whitehall in the following year April 16, being taken from the account of our Lord's resurrection by the Evangelist St. John. His discourse upon the 4th of June, Whitsunday, is among the best of that series.1 It is full of patristic learning such as may be gathered from the commentaries of Lorinus. Both learnedly and piously has the same place — This is he that came by water and blood — been treated of in the second of Bishop Heber's Sermons in India? On April 27th Andrewes was on a commission for selling some of the crown jewels, and on the 29th on the High Commission. On the 6th of August, 1620, he admitted Christopher Wren, the younger brother of Matthew, and father of the famous architect, one of his domestic chaplains. Wren preached before him in Windsor chapel. He then received his appointment, and with his brother accompanied the Bishop to Farnham, where the King and his Court were feasted three days at a cost of above £3,000.3 Buckeridge observes of this entertainment, in his funeral 1 The King received the holy Sacrament at the hands of Bishop Andrewes and Dr. George Mountain, Bishop of Lincoln, who this day preached his first sermon before the King. The Court was very thin.— Nichols' Progresses of 1 1, vol. iii. p. 609. 2 Entitled Office of Christ, p. 47. lond. Murray, 1829. 3 Wren's Parentalia, p. 142. hh2 468 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. sermon for our prelate, that it was as bountiful and great an entertainment as ever King James received at a subject's hands. Christopher, afterwards Dean of Windsor and Wolver hampton in 1635, was born in 1589. He was of St. John's College, Oxford, B.D. 1620, but D.D. 1630 of the University of Cambridge. Andrewes made him Eector of Knoyle Magna or East Knoyle near Hindon in the south-west part of Wilt shire. In 1628 he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to Charles I.; in 1635 Dean of Windsor and Wolverhampton ; and in 1638 Eector of Haseley in Oxfordshire. His Deanry was plundered in 1642. He died at Blechindon near Oxford, 29th of May, 1658, at the parsonage of Mr. WiUiam Holder (who had married his daughter), and was buried in the chancel. He was a good mathematician, and gave proofs of that ingenuity which shone so eminently in his only son the architect. On Sunday September 17th Andrewes consecrated the new chapel in St. Mary's parish, called St. Mary's Extra, near Southampton, for the benefit of the village of Weston and the hamlets Itchen, Wolston, Eidgway, and part of Bittern Manor. This form, which is every way more impressive than those now in use, was followed by Laud at the consecration of St. Catharine Cree, Leadenhall-street (a remarkable specimen of the mixed architecture of his age) in 1630.1 This consecration gave occasion to many aspersions upon Laud both before and at his trial, and these have, with the usual veracity of blind party-spirit, been continued by Eapin and others, as though they had never been refuted. Happy had it been for Laud, if he had followed the judgment of Bishop Andrewes as well in points of doctrine as of ceremony. Bishop Andrewes, attended by his two chaplains Matthew and Christopher Wren, proceeded to the chapel, and at eight in the morning, being in their proper habits, came out of the chapel; and the Bishop addressed Captain Eichard Smith, who gave into the hands of William Cole, the Bishop's 1 Wharton's Mistory of the Troubles and Trial of Laud, p. 340. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 469 registrar, the instrument praying for the consecration and constant appropriation of the chapel to the service of God. After this the two chaplains read alternately the 24th Psalm, and after the Doxology had been said, the Bishop ' advancing nearer the porch, said, i" was glad when they said unto me, We will go into the house ofthe Lord. Our feet shall stand in thy gates, 0 Jerusalem. Then all entering the chapel, the Bishop read, with some few accommodations to this service, the dedication prayer of King David, the 29th chapter of the First Book of Chronicles, from the 10th to the 18th verse inclusive. Then followed the prayer, ' Most glorious God.' This prayer is in part taken from one in common use at that time, and recorded to have been offered up also at the consecration of a chapel at Edmonton by Bishop King in 1615,1 and of another chapel in Clay Hall in the parish of Barking, Essex, September 15, 1616, by Dr. Thomas Morton, Bishop of Chester (afterward of Durham). It is remarkable that in the Parentalia Bishop Wren is said to have prepared an office for consecrating a church at Dore in Herefordshire,2 in 1634. After the longer prayer commemorating the precedents of such acts of consecration, followed a prayer and benediction in the name of the Holy Trinity. Then the Bishop laying his hand upon the font consecrated it with a short prayer, as also the pulpit, reading-desk, communion-table, site of joining of hands in matrimony, and the whole pavement with reference to such bodies as should be interred beneath. Then a general prayer of dedication for the whole church was said by the Bishop before the communion-table. Then the morning ser vice commenced. For the psalms were read the 84th, 122nd, and 132nd. The first lesson was the 28th chapter of Genesis, in which is read the dedication of Bethel by Jacob. For the second was read the 2nd chapter of St. John from the 13th verse to the end, in which is read the purifying of the Temple. After the three Collects the Bishop said a fourth, full of that humility and earnest devotion for which he was ever so 1 Jer. Collier's Mistory of the Church of England, ii. p. 709. 2 Parentalia, p. 50. 470 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. conspicuous. Then the other chaplain read the Litany, and the Bishop concluded with a prayer, as for himself and from himself apart from the congregation, that God would be pleased to hear whatsoever prayers should in that place be made according to his will. After the benediction the 132nd Psalm was sung, and Mr. Eobinson, B.D., brother-in-law to the founder, preached the sermon from the 16th verse of the 28th chapter of Genesis. After the sermon a poor woman returned thanks to Almighty God for safe deliverance. The psalm used pre viously to the last review was the 121st. The Communion service was then commenced by the two chaplains, standing one on either side the holy table. Before the Epistle for the day a special Collect was read : ' Most blessed Saviour, who by thy bodily presence at the feast of dedication didst honour and approve such devout and religious services as we have now in hand, be thou present also at this time with us, and consecrate us into an holy temple unto thyself, that thou dwelling in our hearts by faith, we may be cleansed from all carnal affections, and devoutly given to serve thee in aU good works. Amen.' The Epistle was 1 Cor. iii. from ver. 16 to the end ; the Gospel from the 10th chapter of St. John, from ver. 22 to the end. Then after the Nicene Creed the Bishop, casting himself down before the holy table, prayed the dedication prayer of Solomon, 2 Chron. vi. from ver. 18 to ver. 40, praying also at the end that God would favourably hear this congregation as he did Solomon. Then sitting in his chair, with his head covered, Thomas Eidley his Chancellor standing on his right hand, and Dr. Barlow,1 Archdeacon of Winchester, on his left, he read in Latin the Act of Consecration, Dedication, and Appropriation. The chapel was named Jesus Chapel, as a chapel-of-ease to St. Mary's parish near Southampton. The officiating minister was to be endowed with at least 20 marks 1 Dr. Randolph (Carter's Cambridge), or according to Le Neve, Ralph Barlow, was of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge; M.A. 1594, B.D. 1604, Archdeacon of Winchester October 3, 1609 ; Prebendary of the third stall in that church January 12, 1610; Archbishop of Tuam 1629. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 471 per annum. The patronage was to be in the family of the founder. Then a short prayer was added by the Bishop, that God would bless this day's action unto his people. After this those who did not communicate were dismissed. At the Offertory was collected £4 12s. 2d., which the Bishop ordered to be appropriated to the purchasing of a chalice for the use of the chapel. Before the consecration prayer of the Communion service the Bishop washed his hands, and mixed water with the wine, according to the custom of the Church from the age of St. Cyprian. After he had received the holy Communion, he delivered it first to the founder, then to his chaplains, and delivered the bread to all the rest, one of the chaplains delivering the wine. The Bishop read the first of the two prayers that precede the Gloria in Excelsis, and concluded with a prayer for the founder and for all who should hereafter enjoy the benefit of this his munificent and pious act. After the Bishop and a numerous company had dined at the founder's house at Peer Tree (now called Pear Tree), the congregation reassembled in the chapel, and one of the chaplains read the Lord's Prayer, and for the psalms was read alternately the 90th Psalm. The act of consignation of the churchyard was then read, and after confirmed by the founder and his neighbours. The time being short the second lesson was omitted, and only the 23rd chapter of Genesis read, being the account of the burial of Sarah. The act of consignation and remainder of the consecration service was read in the churchyard ; which being completed they returned to the chapel, and sang the first part of the 16th Psalm, and Matthew Wren preached the sermon from The zeal of thine house hath even eaten me. After sermon, was sung the rest of Psalm xvi., and the service, beginning at the Apostles' Creed, proceeded in the ordinary course. The Bev. James Bliss, M.A., of Oriel College, Oxford, the able editor of Bishop Andrewes' Minor Works (Oxford, 1854), and Vicar of Ogboume St. Andrew near Marlborough, observes of Andrewes' Form for the Consecration of a Church or Chapel, that it was first published in 32mo in 1659, with a preface 472 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. dated May 29 of that year ; that the only copy of this edition which he had seen was now in the Bodleian Library, and that it was afterwards reprinted in quarto, and appended to Bishop Sparrow's Collection of Articles. It has since been reprinted and bound up with Bishop Sparrow's Bationale of the Book of Common Prayer. In a letter from Junius to Vossius dated from Paris September 18, Junius relates that on the 15th he had met with Tilenus. He writes of him in terms of high commend ation as most strenuous in behalf of the truth. Tilenus informed Junius that he was about to visit England to enjoy an interview with the King, from whom and from Bishop Andrewes he had received letters. The King had sent over his physician to attend him on this journey.1 Upon Monday, Christmas-day, Bishop Andrewes preached before the King at Whitehall, very ably and with much learning, upon the wise men's coming to our Saviour. If any will see the force and beauty of typical illustration, let them read this sermon, and let them confess that many types there are in Holy Writ besides those that are there caUed so. 1 Cl. Vim: ad Voss. Epist. Ep. 42, p. 23. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 473 CHAPTEE XX. Bishop Andrewes preaches at the opening of Parliament 1621 — Sis Sermon upon Fasting — Upon St. John xx. 17 — Whitsunday — Archbishop Abbot's calamity — Andrewes befriends Abbot — Enter tains Junius and Doublet at Farnham — Dr. Thomas Goad. On the assembling of the Parliament, 1621, our prelate preached before them in the Abbey of Westminster from the first psalm in the evening service (Psalm lxxxii.), God standeth in the congregation of princes ; in the midst will he judge the gods. Upon the words God standeth, he contrasts with God's unchangeable the mortal nature of princes, these earthly gods ; and says, in allusion to that most solemn sanctuary of death in which they were then met, " This could not be told us in a fitter place : the place where we stand is compassed about with a congregation of these fallen gods, these same DU caduci (fragile gods), with monuments of the mortality of many a great Elohim (God) in their times. And let me tell you this, that in the Hebrew tongue the grave is called a synagogue as well as the church. All shaU be gathered, even the gods, even the whole synagogue of them, into this synagogue at last." Very plain and earnest is the whole sermon, treating of the presence of God, and of the duty of being well affected toward his presence if we would stand in the judgment. On February 14, Ash-Wednesday, Bishop Andrewes preached at Whitehall upon the duty of fasting, overthrowing the cavils of those who would expunge when from the text 474 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. (Matt. vi. 16), by leaving it so at liberty as that it should never be performed. About the 15th or 16th of March Andrewes and Moun- taigne, Bishop of Lincoln, in the name of all the rest, pre sented to the King at Hampton Court a grant of subsidies passed by the clergy of the province of Canterbury.1 Upon Easter-day, April 1st, he resumed his discourse upon the narrative of the resurrection, as it is given in St. John's gospel, Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father, giving the three interpretations of Chrysostom, Gregory, and Augustine, which last is also followed and expressed with his usual energy and conciseness by Leo the Great. The first is that our Lord saw in her a degree of irreverence. Under this head our prelate condemns the too famiUar and irreverent handling of the doctrine of predestination, and the familiar taking of Christ in the sacrament, when to touch the ark itself, that other symbol of him, was death. Yet we have those who most familiarly pray to God and plead that they are his children, a most irreverential excuse for this much worse than childish practice. But even this irreverence is not without some share of popularity, and that amongst some who profess themselves, notwithstanding, members (not children) of the Church of England. The second and third interpretations however will stand better, and may well stand together ; that our Lord forbade her at this time, when his disciples were stiU fuU of sorrow, to spend her moments in the enjoyment of his presence. Add secondly, that thus too she was admonished that the touch of faith was more excellent than to touch him corporeally, whom the wicked could indeed also touch, and yet not be thereby healed of their spiritual diseases. On April 30th Andrewes attended with other peers on Lord Bacon, to ascertain from him whether he acknowledged as his own the petition and confession made in his name to the House.2 On May 2nd our prelate was appointed to take examinations 1 Nichols' Progresses of James I., vol. iii. p. 658. 2 Biog. Britt. pp. 403, 404. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 475 in the case of Sir John Bennet, who had been charged by the House of Commons with abusing his office of Judge of the Prerogative Court to purposes of corruption and fraudulent self-aggrandisement, and was eventually committed to custody for a short time, fined the enormous sum of £20,000, and deprived of his office. On the 8th of May Bishop Andrewes was on a committee for confirming the sale of the Eectory of Dorking, heretofore made by Charles Earl of Nottingham, and William late Lord Howard of Effingham, deceased, to Thomas Trevor and William Bryan and their heirs. On the 12th of May he was appointed to meet on committee, at two p.m. in the Painted Chamber, respecting an Act for the making good of grants made by collegiate churches and corporations to the late Queen Elizabeth after the 2nd of April in the thirteenth year and before the 8th of February in the twenty-fifth year of that Queen. On the 18th he was again on a committee upon an Act for the confirmation of exchange of lands between Prince Charles and Sir Lewis Watson, Knight. On May 20th, Whitsunday, our prelate preached before the King at Greenwich from St. James i. 16, 17. " If," he says, " we look forth, let it not be about us, either on the right hand or on the left, on any place here below. Look up ; turn your eye thither. It is an influence, it is no vapour; an inspiration, no exhalation : thence it comes ; hence it rises not : our spirit lusts after envy, and worse matter. (James iv. 5.) Why should thoughts arise in your hearts ? saith Christ. If they arise they are not good; if they be good, then they come down from above."1 The lights from above he begins with " the light of nature, for rebelling against which, all that are without Christ suffer condemnation. Solomon calls it the candle of the Lord searching even the very bowels (Prov. xx.), which though it be dim and not perfect, yet good it is : though lame, yet (as Mephibosheth) it is regia proles, of the blood royal."2 This sermon, excellent in detail, is however unhappily too ' p. 749. " p, 751. 476 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. much broken up, too variegated in its texture. It might be made the groundwork of more than one discourse upon the noble diversity of God's heavenly gifts. On June the 10th Andrewes was present at the delivery of the great seal to Dr. John Williams, Dean of Westminster.1 Monteigne, Bishop of Lincoln, being elected to the see of London on July 20th, on the death of Dr. John King, Williams was raised to the see of Lincoln. He was elected the 3rd of August, and consecrated on the 10th of November. He was permitted to hold his Deanry in commendam. On July 12th Andrewes was on a commission for examining Lewis Bayly, Bishop of Bangor.2 Bayly was committed to the Fleet Prison July 15th, but soon after Uberated. The most serious charges are said to have been brought against this prelate ; they are mentioned in a letter by the celebrated Mede of Cambridge, but his early liberation is the best answer to them. On July 24, 1621, there befel a great calamity to the primate Abbot, who, upon a visit to Lord Zouch at Bramshill Park (two miles to the west of Hartford Bridge in the north east corner of Hampshire), shooting with the cross-bow at a buck, and his arrow meeting with a swelling bough in the way, had the mishap to wound one of the keepers. It was but a flesh-wound and a slight one, but being under the care of an heedless surgeon, the poor man died of it the next day. The King, upon hearing it, feelingly remarked that an angel might have miscarried in that sort. ' The Archbishop,' says Hacket, ' was an happy man in this unhappiness, that many hearts condoled with him, and many precious stones were in the breastplate which he wore, that pleaded for him. He was painful, stout, severe against bad manners, of a grave and a voluble eloquence, very hospitable, fervent against the Eoman Church, and no less so against the Arminians, which in those days was very popular.' Laud was raised by Williams at the solicitation of Villiers tlie great favourite. Abbot's first patron was the more truly 1 Rymer's Fcedera. 2 Birch's Court of James I., vol. ii. p. 266. And see Camden's Annals. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 477 illustrious Thomas Sackville Earl of Dorset. Laud was ever fearful of the excess of that popular aversion to Eomanism which was natural enough in a period in which it was the ill fate of his country to be governed by a family proud of Eomish alliances. Abbot was the intrepid assertor of Protestantism as essential to the good of the commonwealth. Hence the friends of Laud have always depreciated his equally honest and far more consistent, nay more honest and upright predecessor. It could not be said of Laud as of Abbot, that ' that Archbishop was wont to dissent from the King as often as any man at the Council-board.'1 In Abbot it was a merit, in Laud it would have been. For years the latter was, according to Heylyn, the King's chief adviser, in effect, after the death of the royal favourite, his prime minister, the flatterer of his royal master, the inquisitor of his more exemplary brethren, of men such as Hall, who found it no small trial to hold the episcopal office under so arbitrary a primate. And now the question was agitated both at home and abroad, what penalty was incurred by Abbot lying under the charge of casual homicide. The Eomish party were not backward to exult over him, and to shew what kind of opinions and individuals were sure of their most cordial aversion. But ambition magnified his difficulties in the eyes even of some of his brethren. Hacket, the good and eloquent Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry (a more impartial author than Wharton would concede2), remarks of his great bene factor Williams the Lord Keeper, that he did not come forward in Abbot's behalf as he might have done. That he came out of this great trouble unhurt, he owed to the good offices of Andrewes and to the kind heart of the King — a King who could discern merit and admire integrity. According to Fuller, Abbot and Andrewes were not upon terms of intimacy. It has been imagined that the latter regarded Abbot as his undeservedly successful rival. An drewes was probably much less at the Council-table than 1 Hackef s Life of Archbishop Williams, p. 68. 2 In his Preface to the Mistory of Laud's Troubles, &c. 478 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Abbot, and would doubtless hear many reports to his dis advantage from those who were immediately about the King. Hence might arise mutual misunderstanding. But be this as it might, " the party," writes Fuller, " whom the Archbishop suspected his greatest foe, proved his most firm and effectual friend, even Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester. For when several Bishops inveighed against the irregularity of the Archbishop, laying as much (if not more) guilt on the act than it would bear, he mildly checked them : ' Brethren,' said he, ' 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 Canones qui dicunt lapsos post actam painitentiam, ad clericatum non esse restitu- endos, de rigore loquuntur discipline, non injiciunt despera- tionem indulgentios, ('that the Canons that say that persons who have fallen into some offence are not, after they have repented, to be restored to their place in the church, speak in regard of the strict execution of discipline, but do not design to create despair of pardon.'1) But to set at rest aU doubts and canonical scruples, he advised thejKing to grant a dis pensation to Abbot in virtue of his royal supremacy, and so an address was prepared praying a dispensation from the King, and signed by Andrewes, Monteigne, Bishop of Lincoln, Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, and WUliams, Bishop elect of Lincoln, Carey, Bishop elect of Exeter, and Laud, Bishop elect of St. David's ; together with Judges Hobart, Doddridge, Marten, and Stywarde.2 The dispensation was granted on November 21. By a letter from Junius to Vossius, dated London, August 18, Bishop Andrewes appears to have been at Farnham. Their kinsman George Eataller Doublet had, about this time, come to England. On September 3rd we find Doublet himself writing from London to Vossius, and most gratefully alluding to the muni ficent hospitality and frank affection with which he and Junius were entertained at Farnham, always supping and dining 1 Fuller's Church Mistory, b. *.. p. 87. 2 See Jer. Collier's Mistory ofthe Church of England, vol. xii. p. 721. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 479 with Bishop Andrewes in his own hall, who never failed to drink to the health of Grotius, Vossius, and Erpenius. Bishop Andrewes had already seen Grotius when that politic and eminently learned person had visited this country to plead the cause of the Eemonstrants and of the edict of pacification. But whatever the favour they appeared to obtain, and however they might colour over their opinions, the endeavours of that party did not prevail with the King to side with them at the Synod of Dort. Nor until after that Synod did that party openly profess itself in this country, and not then without some repulses. Erpenius had been in England before Grotius, and was personally well known to Andrewes. Vossius he earnestly desired to see also.1 On November 24th Vossius wrote to Bishop Andrewes in reply to a letter from that prelate received by the hands of Doublet. He excuses his long delay on the ground of the protracted illness of his wife. Everywhere indeed in his correspondence does the affection of Vossius shine forth unabated and undiminished by the multitude of his literary avocations. He mentions how Junius, in all his epistles to him, had ever reverted to the name of Andrewes with the liveliest emotions of grateful regard.2 Junius, in a letter to Vossius from London on the 1st of December, informs him of Abbot's casualty, and of the doubt of the four bishops elect respecting the canonicalness of a consecration performed by the Archbishop. Nor were there wanting, he adds, some who were desirous of making this an occasion of deposing Abbot, and of placing Andrewes in his room; Andrewes himself indeed strenuously opposing the project, and shewing himself a firm friend to the primate. The King is here said to have appointed ten persons to take this emergency into consideration, and Andrewes to have brought over the greater part to milder proceedings by alleging this canon, ' Clericus de quo dubitatur an sit regularis, non est irregularis.' ' A clerk of whose irregularity there is doubt, is not irregular.' The King himself, he relates, was delighted 1 Cl. Virorum ad Voss. Ep. 48, p. 28. 2 Vossii Ep. 20, pp. 43, 44. 480 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. with the moderation of Andrewes, and told Abbot to regard Andrewes on this occasion as the sole person to whom he owed his escape from deprivation. Junius adds that Andrewes would have answered Vossius earlier but for this sudden interruption. On the 25th of August Dr. Thomas Goad, Precentor of St. Paul's, Chaplain to Archbishop Abbot, and who had been' sent by the King on Hall's return home to take his place in the Synod of Dort, was installed Prebendary of the tenth stall of Bishop Andrewes' church of Winchester. He retained this dignity to his death in 1638. He was Proctor of the University of Cambridge 1629, being then Fellow of King's College. He was also LL.D., and Eegius Professor of CivU Law in that University in 1635. This year saw the elevation of Williams and Laud to the episcopal bench. Williams owed his rise to the King himself, Laud to Williams, who recommended Laud to the King, and pressed his promotion upon him in order to shew a favour to Villiers. At the same time he recommended to the King his secretary, the pious and highly talented Dr. John Donne, for the Deanry of St. Paul's, Dr. Valentine Carey for the see of Exeter, and Dr. Davenant for that of Salisbury. So Carey and Davenant were consecrated to Exeter and Sarum, and Laud to St. David's on the same day, November 18th, the very Sunday after the consecration of the Lord Keeper Williams, Dean of Westminster, to the see of Lincoln. The King herein yielded to WiUiams, as he so often did to others, against his better judgment, and after remonstrating with Williams on Laud's restless temper instanced in his advice to him and urgency with him respecting the affairs of the Scotch Kirk.1 1 Hacket's Life of Williams, arm. 1621. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 481 CHAPTEE XXI. Bishop Andrewes' Sermon on Sypocrisy — The Archbishop of Spalatro — The King's Letter to Preachers — William Knight — Disputes on Predestination at Cambridge — Junius — Andrewes' Christmas Sermon on the Wise Men. Never was the pious severity of Bishop Andrewes more effectually put forth than in his sermon against hypocrisy preached upon March 6, 1622, Ash- Wednesday, from When ye fast, be not as ihe hypocrites are. It is a masterpiece of its kind. The worshippers indeed of their own imaginations, who have resolved fasting, holy-days, and all religious reve rence into Popery, will but condemn the good Bishop as a patron of superstition. To such objectors to fasting he very pertinently repUes that as weU might they object to prayer and almsgiving, for that these also have been observed by some to the same evil end, to obtain praise of men. Hypocrisy is ' the moth that frets in sunder all that holy or good is.' In truth, since men have learned an easier repentance, a repentance that only humbles them whilst they are upon their knees, and then but with a superficial sentimentality, they have taken upon them to despise all abstinence, and the more because the Chmch directs it to be observed at set times. And to justify themselves they tum from the Scrip tures by which they cannot be justified, to plead other men's abuse of that which is good; thus excusing themselves a neglected and unpopular duty, as some excuse their attendance upon the holy Communion. 482 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On March 23rd Bishop Andrewes assisted at the conse cration of Dr. Eobert Wright to the see of Bristol. On the 30th of this month Bishop Andrewes sat in com mission at Lambeth with Archbishop Abbot, WiUiams, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, and Bishop of Lincoln, Mountaine, Bishop of London, Neile, Bishop of Durham, and other Privy Councillors, upon that most eminently learned but most worldly-minded and ambitious person, Mark Antony de Dominis, late Archbishop of Spalatro. Bishop Neile pub lished an account of Mark Antony de Dominis, and Hacket in his Life of Williams exposes upon the most incontestable evidence the double-mindedness of this unstable and in the end most unhappy ecclesiastic. Spalatro, as appears from Fuller,1 took the side of the Eemonstrants, and so found a zealous advocate in that most partial of controversiaUsts and doubtful of historians, Dr. Heylyn. Archbishop Abbot, in the name of the rest, by his Majesty's special command, in a long Latin speech recapitulated the many misdemeanours of Spalatro, especially animadverting upon his inconstancy, who, coming hither as a refugee from Italy, now designed to return to Eome, having for that purpose held correspondence with the Pope without the King's know ledge. Spalatro made answer, an answer that was regarded as rather a shuffling excuse than a just defence.'2 Then the i Church Mistory, b. x. p. 100. Dr. Christopher Wren, Dean of Windsor, reports of bim {Parentalia, p. 148) that he was indeed of most sufficient learning, but most lavish in his expenditure, and a slave to his table. He came over to England in December 1616 (Fuller), having left Italy in discontent and with personal ill-will to Pope Paul V., yet probably not without a conviction of the errors of Romanism ; such convictions we may not uncharitably believe to be entertained by very many who never leave that communion. It may seem in a manner to require ignorance and credulity together to hold cordially the palpable contradictions of their real yet unbloody sacrifice, to say nothing of the lying wonders multiplied even in our own age and inserted into the Breviary. Such however was Spalatro' s "conscience, that he resigned his archbishopric to his nephew on condition of receiving a yearly pension out of it, which pension he bitterly complained to Archbishop Ussher was never paid him. Count Gondomar is said to have enticed him into his departure, and this was done probably first to revenge a sarcasm upon the Count himself; secondly, the lasting injury which Antony de Dominis had done the Church of Rome by his writings. 2 Fuller's Church Mistory, b. x. p. 98. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 483 Archbishop in his Majesty's name commanded him to depart the kingdom within twenty days, and never to return. His erudition was very great, but the love of money was his snare and his destruction. His own countrymen did not confide in him, but received him only to imprisonment in the Inqui sition. He probably never cordially again professed their religion, and had his integrity been equal to his learning, he would have gone down to his grave with fame not surpassed by any of his contemporaries. But so it is, the greatest talents lose no small part of their reward when once devoted to sinister ends. Upon Easter-day, April 21, Bishop Andrewes preached his third sermon upon the resurrection as recorded by St. John. Of these three, the first is the most replete with interest, but each is well worthy of its very pious author. The last, as more quaintly subdivided than the preceding, will be least acceptable to modern taste. His Whitsunday sermon is entitled one ' prepared to be preached.' It might be that he was already suffering from his sedentary habits, as we find he did most afflictively some two years after. It displays his usual fertility of ideas, a mul titude of verbal allusions, and many most pertinent observa tions, but embraces too many topics for a single sermon. He plainly condemns those who without gifts yet seek for places and offices or callings in the church. Again he speaks against the officiousness of the weak-minded, who, without either gifts or calling, take upon themselves to meddle in public and in private with divine things. ' Either a calling without a gift, or a gift without a calling. What say you to them that have neither, but fetch their run for all that, and leap quite over gift and calling, Christ and the Holy Ghost both, and chop into the work at the first dash? that put themselves into businesses which they have neither fitness for, nor calling to?' And our prelate justly observes that the gift should precede the calling : and as no man comes to Christ but by the Holy Ghost, so no man to the calling but by the gift. Yet how fearfully, how generally, is this still lost sight of! Still but comparatively little regard is had to the office and n2 484 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. dignity of the Holy Ghost, whose it is to make men overseers of the flock which the Lord hath purchased with his own blood. On July 4th we find Andrewes on a commission for de fective titles. Upon August 5th Andrewes preached at Windsor the anniversary sermon on the Gowrie Conspiracy, from 1 Sam. xxiv. 5. He again touched upon the treasons of the Eomanists, and on the assassination of Henry III. and IV. of France. Chamberlain dined with Andrewes, and did not leave him until half-past five. The weather was so 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.1 On the 15th Andrewes wrote from Farnham to his Arch deacon to forward to his clergy copies of the King's Letter : 1. to limit preachers to such topics as are in the Articles and Homilies; 2. to enjoin that (except funeral sermons) none shall preach in the afternoon, but on the Catechism or on some text taken from the Ten Commandments or the Lord's Prayer, and those to be most encouraged who spend the afternoon in catechising ; 3. to restrain preaching on predesti nation, election, or reprobation, or the universaUty, efficacy, resistibility or irresistibility of grace; 4. that in respect of the royal prerogative, they shall in their public teaching be regulated by the Homilies upon obedience, &c; 5. to forbid all violent invectives against the persons of Papists and Puritans, but modestly and gravely to touch upon the con troversies relating to them as the text may caU the preacher to it ; 6. that the Bishops be more wary in Ucensing preachers, and that lecturers be licensed only on the recommendation of the Bishop, with a, fiat from the Archbishop, and confirmation under the great seal.2 It may well be doubted whether this was a wise extension of the royal authority. It is especially to be noted that Heylyn himself supposes that Laud had a hand in drawing up'these instructions.8 1 Birch's James I., vol. ii, p. 325. 2 Cabala, p. 112. And see the Lord Keeper's Letter, Jer. Collier's Mist. b. viii. :1 Heylyn's Cyprianus Anglicns, or Life of Laud, p. 97. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 485 Doublet, in a letter to Vossius from London, August 16th, informs Vossius of William Knight of Broadgate. Hall, Ox ford, who, on Palm Sunday, had maintained in a sermon that it was lawful for subjects to take up arms in defence of religion against the King, and on being called into question for his doctrine, defended himself by the authority of Paraeus. Upon this occasion Andrewes himself, with other bishops, directed a mandatory letter to the Vice-Chancellor and Heads of Houses at Oxford, intimating to them their judgment in this case. Doublet with his own epistle sent to Vossius the decree of the University of Oxford condemnatory of Paraeus On the Bomans, and speaks of the theological tem perament of the University of Cambridge as somewhat over heated in regard of such as were strictly for the Genevan Eeformation, either through their great animosity to every thing savouring of Puritanism, or through their inclination to the opinions of the Eemonstrants. He was at Cambridge during the Commencement. There he heard very warm disputes upon predestination, free-will, and other kindred points; some strongly maintaining the side of the Eemon strants against Dr. Balcanqual. He was informed by one and another of the Doctors to whom he had introductions from Bishop Andrewes, that it was a doubt which was the greater party in the University, the Eemonstrants or the Anti-Eemonstrants. The Vice-Chancellor himself (Dr. Leo nard Mawe), he adds, was ' remonstrantissimus.' He found many much attached to Vossius, especially Balcanqual and Dr. Jerome Beale.1 On September 13th Vossius wrote to Bishop Andrewes, thanking him with much affection for his kindness to his son-in-law Francis Junius, and that at a time when Junius was suffering from the neglect of his other friends.2 Bishop Andrewes had commended Junius to the Earl of Arundel, the Marshal of England, who took him into his family, and with whom he long continued. The Earl of Arundel was one of the greatest patrons of the fine arts whom this age produced. A part of his 1 Gl. Vir. ad Voss. Ep. pp. 30, 31. 2 VossiiFp. p. 74. 486 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. noble collection remains in the hands of the University of Oxford. He in the reign of James relinquished the errors of Eomanism, and appears to have enjoyed the con fidence of his sovereign. The succeeding monarch created him Earl of Norfolk, but would not raise him to the Dukedom. He was variously looked upon, by some with suspicion, as he would not live in dependence upon the smiles and favour of the Court. He took no part in the subsequent commotions, but went over to Italy, where he died at Padua October 4, 1646. Upon Wednesday, Christmas-day, Bishop Andrewes pro ceeded with the history of the Wise Men's coming. Here, he said, are three stars, the star in the firmament, the star of faith in their hearts, and Christ himseU, the bright and morning star. Their faith believed that he, though of the Jews, had relation to them ; that benefit was to come to them by him ; that therefore their worship was due to him. They did the work of faith, they confessed him boldly. They had a faith that was well grounded. They had seen his star. They most probably were led to that star by Balaam's prophecy, that a King should arise who should not only smite the corners of Moab, that is Balak their enemy, for the present ; but should reduce and bring under him all the sons of Seth, that is, all the world. For all are now Seth's sons ; Cain's were all drowned in the flood. The West had some glimmering of knowledge of this star. It is seen in Virgil's sixth Eclogue, but not having the word of prophecy they missed it. So this, this book must be our morning light, a more sure word of prophecy, as St. Peter saith. And besides these, there must be a light within, in the eye. And that must come from him and the enlightening of his Spirit. The work of their faith they shewed in that they came. They left their country, and so walked in the steps of the faith of Abraham ; did Abraham's first work. They came not a short journey, as the shepherds, but a long and wearisome one over the deserts and rocks and insecure ways of Arabia, and in the worst season. And they set out without delay. No sooner did they see the star than forthwith they set out. And THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 48'7 having come they inquired where he was born ; they enquired of the scribes ; they went not to a conventicle but to the church. And as they enquired themselves, so must we, and seek Christ not by another but by ourselves. And they came and worshipped him, not in hypocrisy, as Herod at his birth, or the other Herod at his death. They came and found him in a stable, and yet they turned not away. They find him in so humble a state that he might seem more like to be abhorred than adored of such persons. " Will they be as good as their word, trow ? Will they not step back at the sight, repent themselves of their journey, and wish them selves at home again? But so find him, and so finding, worship him for all that ? If they will, verily then great is their faith." " The Queen of the south, who was a figure of these Kings of the east, she came as great a journey as these. But when she came she found a king indeed, King Solomon in all his royalty ; saw a glorious king and a glorious court about him ; saw him and heard him ; tried him with many hard questions, received satisfaction of them all. This was worth her coming. Weigh what she found and what these here : as poor and unlikely a birth as could be ever to prove a king, or any great matter. No sight to comfort them, nor a word for which they any whit the wiser : nothing worth their travell. Weigh these together, and great odds will be found between her faith and theirs. Theirs the greater far."1 1 p. 146. 488 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE XXII. Easter, 1623 — Cluverius — Bishop Andrewes foresees the coming dangers — The Isle of Jersey. From Laud's diary we find the name of Andrewes once more involved in secular and state affairs. On the 23rd of February, 1623, he, with Laud, VilUers, Marquess of Buck ingham, and the Lords Arundel and Pembroke, appear to have made up the Commission of Grievances. On the 26th of tlie same month he preached before the Court upon the fruits meet for repentance. Better had it been if he had more dwelt upon the motives to it. Useless indeed is a repentance that does not exercise the heart, and humble both the soul and the body, and put both to grief. But first there must be the root, and he who should look for the fruit without watering the root itself, would but faU into the extreme of superstition by way of avoiding that of irreverence. His Easter-day sermon for the 13th of AprU is not liable to any such objections. Amongst the latest, it is also amongst the best of Bishop Andrewes' discourses. It is taken from the beginning of the 63rd chapter of Isaiah. There is throughout a vividness and depth of colouring that could proceed only from such a hand. He brings before our eyes the winepress of redemption and the winepress of triumphal retribution ; the first in which the Lord himself was trodden under foot, the second in which he treads down his enemies, hell itself, the spiritual Edom, the most inveterate of aU the foes of Israel. Over Edom, strong as it was, David cast his THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 489 shoe, that is, set his foot upon it, and trod it down. And Bozra, as impregnable a hold as it was holden, yet David won it, was led into the strong city ; led into it and came thence again. So did the son of David, this day from his Edom, death, how strongsoever, yet swallowed up in victory this day. In 0 death where is thy victory he supposes an allusion to ' the Eoman standard that had in it the image of the goddess Victory.' Here having direct occasion he passes not over the doctrine of our justification, and that as he had done elsewhere, Christ, he saith, ' laid by his own righteousness to be clothed with our sin : he to wear our colours that we his : he in our red that we in his white. So we find our robes are not only washed clean, but dyed a pure white in the blood of the Lamb. Yea, he died and rose again both in our colours, that we might die and rise too in his.' And again, a little after, ' He in Mount Golgotha, like to us ; that we in Mount Tabor, like to him.' On the 13th of June we find Vossius writing to our prelate, expressing his grief upon the death of their common friend Cluverius,1 who had left his young family but a poor in heritance. But he is comforted from the consideration that their grandmother survives, herself an Englishwoman and of good parentage. She was preparing to come to England to claim her property, at that time unjustly detained from her. He begs of Bishop Andrewes to put her cause into the hands of some honest and sufficient person. He mentions with cordial and not undeserved commendation the unparalleled benevolence of Andrewes, as eminent as his great learning. 1 Cluverius sometime after 1612 spent some time in England, in that inter esting pile of building at Exeter College, Oxford, recently rebuilt in the Turl, and first erected on the north side by the learned Dr. Prideaux, chiefly for the accommodation of foreigners. The Rev. Dr. Bliss, Prmcipal of St. Mary's Hall, has taken care for the preservation of the memory of this venerable specimen of our domestic architecture (for so it may be called), having had a copy taken of it for a future Oxford Calendar. J. Sigismund Cluverius, the son of the above-named, was admitted a member of the same College in 1633. 490 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. He complains that antiquity finds now but few admirers, and that solid learning is out of favour. Upon Sunday, July 20th, Bishop Andrewes administered to the ambassadors the oath for the observance of the articles with Spain. This was celebrated at Whitehall Chapel with great ceremony, all of which is fully detailed in Nichols' Progresses of King James.1 The marriage-treaty, however, and the consequent articles with it feU to the ground. Our unhappy nation was to be ruined from another quarter. Bishop Andrewes was appointed to preach before the King on the 5th of August, and prepared a sermon which from some cause or other does not appear to have been delivered. After the 5th of October, the day of the return of Prince Charles from Spain, occurred the foUowing incident noted down by Bishop Wren, Chaplain both to the Prince and to Bishop Andrewes. " After our return from Spain, my Lord of Winchester (among other great expressions of his respects to me) made me promise to him that upon all occasions of my coming to London (for I abode still at Cambridge) I would lodge with him ; to which end he caused three rooms near the garden2 to be fitted and reserved for me ; and twice or thrice I had lodged there. " And at another time, coming suddenly to London and late, I lodged at my sister's in Friday Street ; and the next day being Friday, I went to Winchester House to dinner, and craved his lordship's pardon that I lodged not there; because that my business was to treat with some country gentlemen who lay in Holborn, whom I should not meet with but in the evening and morning, when it would not be safe for me to pass the bridge or the Thames ; and so after dinner I took my leave of him, hoping to return for Cambridge on Monday. " But on Saturday, going to do my duty to my Lords of Dmham [Neile] and St. David's [Laud], and telling them of my sudden return, they would needs overrule me, and made me promise them, though I had taken leave of my Lord of ' Vol. iii. p. 882. 2 Winchester House, Southwark. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 491 Winchester, yet to meet them next day at Whitehall at my lord's chambers at dinner. I did so, and there we sat after dinner above an hour. And then, I shewing them that on the morrow my business would be dispatched, and I would be gone on Tuesday, I took my leave again of them all. But on Monday morning by break of day (before they used to be stirring in Friday Street) there was a great knocking at the door where I lay ; and at last an apprentice who lay in the shop came up to my bedside, and told me there was a messenger from Winchester House to speak with me. The business was to let me know that my lord, when he came from court last night, had given his steward charge to order it so that I might be spoken with, and be required as from him without fail to dine with him on Monday ; but to be at Winchester House by ten of the clock, which 1 wondered the more at, his lordship not using to come from his study till near twelve. My business would hardly permit this ; yet because of his lordship's importunity, I got up presently, and into Holborn I went, and there made such dispatch that soon after ten o'clock I took a boat and went to Winchester House, where I found the steward at the Water-gate, waiting to let me in the nearest way, who telling me that my lord had called twice to know if I were come, I asked where his lord ship was. He answered, in his great gallery (a place where I knew his lordship scarce came once in a year), and thither I going, the door was locked ; but upon my lifting the latch, my lord of St. David's opened the door, and letting me in, locked it again. " There I found none but those three lords, who causing me to sit down by them, my lord of Durham began to me : ' Doctor, your lord here will have it so, I that am the unfittest person must be the speaker. But this it is ; after you left us yesterday at Whitehall, we, entering into farther discourse of those things which we foresee and conceive will ere long come to pass, resolved again to speak to you before you went hence. We must know of you what your thoughts are concerning your master the Prince. You have now been his servant above two years, and you were with him in Spain. We 492 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. know he respects you well, and we know you are no fool, but can observe how things are like to go.' ' What things, my lord?' quoth I. 'In brief,' said he, '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?' My reply was to this effect, that, however, I was the most unfit of any to give my opinion herein, attending but two months in the year, and then at a great distance, only in the closet and at meals ; yet seeing they so pressed me, I would speak my mind freely. So I said, c 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 these particulars which your lordships 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, in whom they say (better than I can) is so much inconstancy in some particular cases.' " Hereupon my lords of Durham and St. David's began to argue with me, and required me to let them know upon what ground I came to think thus of the Prince. I gave them my reasons at large, and after many replyings (above an hour together), then my lord of Winchester, who had said nothing all the while, bespake me in these words : ' 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 shaU be in my grave, and so shaU you, my lord of Durham ; but my lord of St. David's and you, Doctor, wiU 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 Chm-ch.' " Of this prediction made by that holy Father, I have now no witness but mine own conscience and the eternal God, who knows I lie not; nobody else being present when this was spoken but these three lords." s Hence it would appear that whatsoever might be the connivance of the King's advisers in the matter of the Spanish match, they were not without their secret apprehensions. They dreaded the return of Popery, and so questioned Wren 1 Wren's Parentalia, pp. 45 — 47. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 493 respecting the inclinations of the Prince. It is very certain that Andrewes was more thoroughly imbued with a sense of the essential evil of the Eomish system than Laud, and probably Neile himself was inferior to Andrewes in this respect, as in every other. Neile was himself some years younger than Andrewes, and lived to see the beginning of those troubles of which the false friends of the Prince were themselves so great and so guilty a cause. Bishop Andrewes' sermon on Christmas-day, upon the summing up of all things in Christ, displays his usual inge nuity, piety, and learning, but is not equal in point of interest to many of the preceding. In the course of this year the Isle of Jersey was, after many efforts throughout the greater part of this reign, brought to conformity with the Church of England, and David Bandi- nelli, an Italian and minister of St. Mary's, was appointed Dean. A book of canons was then drawn up by the Dean and ministers, and examined and corrected by Archbishop Abbot, Bishop Williams, Lord Keeper, and Bishop Andrewes, now Diocesan of Jersey. The rupture with Spain prevented the application of the same regulations to the Isle of Guernsey. 1 Jer. Collier's Ecclesiastical Mistory of England. 494 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. CHAPTEE XXIII. Bishop Andrewes on Repentance and Fasting — Andrewes and Neile on the King's Prerogative — Meric Casaubon — The Death of King James — Moderation of Andrewes — Fast Service — Richard Montagu — Death of Andrewes. Bishop Andrewes this year (1624) completed his doctrine of repentance in his Ash- Wednesday sermon, February 10th. The last five of the eight Ash- Wednesday sermons may be regarded as one treatise. The first of them, from the 2nd chapter of Joel, treats of repentance generally as a turning out of the way of sin to God, a sincere turning with the heart, and, for the manner of it, with fasting. This he commends not only as preventive of sin but as a correction of it, I wept and chastened myself with fasting.1 For " if in very sorrow we are to fast when the bridegroom is taken away, much more when we ourselves, by our sins committed, have been the cause of his taking, nay, of his very driving away from us. And must we then fast ? Indeed we must, or get us a new Epistle for the day, and a new Gospel too." " But how fast ? Two kinds of fasting we find in Scripture : 1. David's, who fasted, tasted neither bread nor aught till the sun was down; no meat at all: that is too hard. 2. What say you to Daniel's fast ? He did eat and drink, but no meats of delight, and (namely) eat no flesh. The Church as an indulgent mother mitigates all she may ; enjoins not for fast that of David, and yet he who can, let him receive 1 Psa, lxix. 10. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 495 it for all that. She only requires of us that other of Daniel, to forbear meat of delight (and flesh is there expressly named), meats and drinks provoking the appetite, full of nourishment, kindling the blood. " And yet even this also doth the Church release to such as are in Timothy's case, have many infirmities. It is not the decay of nature but the chastisement of sin she seeketh. But this must not be hypocritically taken advantage of. Then weeping, and if we cannot weep, yet mourning is required. Mourning they call the sorrow which reason itself can yield. Complain and bemoan ourselves we can, and desire and pray for some portion of the grace of tears. 0 that my head were full of water, and mine eyes fountains of tears. And we can humbly beseech our merciful God and Father, in default of ours, to accept of the strong crying and bitter tears which, in the days of his flesh, his blessed Son in great agony shed for us. Our hearts must be rent, contrite, ground as it were to powder, to feel that it is a bitter and an evil thing to have turned away and forsaken the Lord. We must be angry with ourselves, or we are not truly grieved with ourselves. Indignation naturally seeks revenge. We must abhor our selves for our sins, not from mere earthly principles, but for the manifold indignities offered by our sins to God, to the law of his justice, to the awe of his majesty, to the reverent regard of his presence, to the dread of his power, and to the long-suffering of his love. And let repentance be without delay. Now is the only sure part of our time." Then in the second discourse our prelate establishes the duty of fasting from our Lord's own injunction in the 6th chapter of St. Matthew, and this preceded by the constant practice of the Old Testament saints ; the fast of Ai, under Joshua;1 at Gibeah,2 under the Judges; at Mizpah, under Samuel ;3 at Hebron, under David ;4 of Jeremiah, before the Captivity;5 of Daniel under it;6 of Zachary after it;' at Jerusalem, of the Jews at the preaching of Joel ,8 at Nineveh, 1 Josh. vii. 6. 2 Jud. xx. 26. 3 2 Sam. iii. 35. 4 2 Sam. iii. 36. 5 Jer. xxxvi. 9. 6 Dan. i. 8, 10. ' Zach. vii. 5. 8 Joel i. 14. 496 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. of the Gentiles at the preaching of Jonas.1 And so the Christians at Antioch, the prophets of the New Testament there, as well as the prophets of the Old.2 So the rest of Christ's ministers shewed themselves such by this proof of fasting amongst others.3 And what themselves did, they advised others to do, to give themselves to fasting and prayer.4 In truth, it accompanied ever all great acts of devotion, whether for the deprecating of evU, or the obtaining of good. He returns to treat of the time and circumstances. The forty days' fast is sanctioned by Moses, Elias, and Christ, and God gave the same number to the people of Nineveh to repent in. We may here consider whether those go not a presump tuous length, who deny anything of an exemplary nature in the fast of our Saviour. As we take less pleasing meats, less luxurious and dainty, so we may diminish the quantity and put off the time. CorneUus fasted to three at noon, Peter to twelve at noon.5 The third discourse is, as we have seen, against hypocrisy. The fourth and fifth are upon the fruits of repentance. The fruits are works meet for repentance. For spiritual sins let us now bring forth prayer and works of devotion ; for fleshly, bodily self-denial; for worldly, alms and works of charity, and compassion. 'For the first Simon Magus went not through with his bargain; did but think the Holy Ghost had been ware for his money, all was but thinking ; went no further than the Spirit. St. Peter prescribes him what to do, to faU to prayer ; pray, saith he, if it be possible, this thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee. Prayer serves where it goes no further than thought. ' For the second, the king of Nineveh and his people, they fell to fasting on all hands. What was their sin? Nahum will best tell us that : he wrote the burden of Nineveh. This it was, Because of the fornications of the harlot. For that kind oi fleshly sin, that was the proper fruit. 1 Jon. iii. 5. 2 Acts xiii. 2, 3. 3 2 Cor. vi. 5. 4 1 Cor. vii. 6. 5 Acts x. 9, 13. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 497 ' For the third, one example shall be the King of Babylon. He had been a mighty oppressor of his people. There have ye now a worldly sin. Break off thine iniquities with mercy to the poor, is Daniel's prescript to him.'1 These make up the corrective or penal part of repentance. But most certain it is that he denies to the best of our works everything that is strictly of the nature of satisfaction. ' Shall we put them into the balance, to weigh the worthiness of our fruits with the unworihiness of our sins, and the conse quent of our sins, the wrath of God ? the dignity of the one with the indignity of the other, and think by their dignity to satisfy God's great indignation ? I trow not. At this beam no fruits of ours will hold weight ; none so found worthy ; no, not if we could, I say not, shed or pour out, but even melt into tears, and every tear a drop of blood. The honour of worthy in this sense belongs to the fruits of no tree but the tree of the cross of Christ ; to his sufferings, and to none but his.'2 To apportion to each his proper works of repentance, that there may be no self-deception, he commends that the minister of God be consulted. So it was of old time. ' In the law every man was not left to himself. The offering for sin, which was to them a fruit of repentance, it was rated ever, ever taxed by the priest.3 According to his ordering, so it went: he made the estimate, how much was enough, what would serve. And here now in St. John's time — to St. John they come with their What shall we do ? — and under the Gospel there we see, for the Corinthian St. Paul said, This much is enough, this shall serve : his conscience may be quiet ; I restore him to the Church's peace. And the canons peni tential which were made in the times under persecution, the very best times of the Church, lay forth plainly what is to be followed and observed in this kind.' He witnesses the general neglect of casuistry of this kind, and laments over it. ' Truly it is neither the least nor the last part of our learning, to be able to give answer and directions in this point ; but therefore laid aside and neglected by us, because not sought after by 1 Sermons, p. 253, 2nd ed. 1631. 2 p. 256, 2nd ed. 1631, and 4th ed. 1641. 3 Levit. v. 18. K K 498 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. you; therefore not studied but by very few, because it is grown out of request quite.' He who would faithfully treat both of repentance and the fruits of repentance, may well consult Bishop Andrewes' Manual for the Sick, edited by Dr. Drake in 1685.1 We find a sermon prepared to be preached on March 28th, Easter-day, from the 18th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the benediction toward the end of the chapter. It abounds in pious applications of the text, but embraces too many points to have been easily carried away by the auditory, the greatest perhaps of all the faults of that age of learned and truly able preachers. On May 29th, the day after the proroguing of ParUament, Mr. Waller, " going to see the King at dinner, overheard a very extraordinary conversation between his Majesty and Bishops Andrewes and Neile, who were standing behind the King's chair. His Majesty asked them, 'My lords, cannot I take my subjects' money when I want it, without aU this formality in Parliament?' The Bishop of Durham readily answered, 'God forbid, Sir, but you should; you are the breath of our nostrils.' Whereupon the King turned and said to Bishop Andrewes, 'Well, my lord, what say you?' ' Sir,' replied the Bishop, ' I have no skiU to judge of parlia mentary cases.' The King answered, ' No put-offs, my lord, answer me presently.' ' Then, Sir,' said he, ' I think it lawful for you to take my brother NeUe's money, for he offers it.'"2 Bishop Andrewes' name frequently occurs upon committees of the Peers in this and occasionally the foUowing year. On February 26th he was on a committee of privileges. On March 1st he had leave to be absent. On March 8th he was on a committee on the observance of the Lord's-day. On March 11th on the Bill respecting recusants made in the third of this reign. On March 12th on a committee to prevent the carrying of gold out of the country by bills of exchange, ' and, as they conceive, by the Papists.' On March 1 And since by Pickering. - Nichols' Progresses of James I., vol. iii. p. 976. Andrewes, Biog. Brit. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 499 16th on a committee to enable Prince Charles to make leases of lands parcel of the Duchy of Cornwall. On May 29th, at eight in the morning, respecting an Act for the confirmation and continuance of hospitals and free-schools that had been called in question. About this time Dr. Field, Bishop of Llandaff, was to be admonished in the Convocation House before the Bishops, a charge having been laid against him by the Archbishop of dealing in bribery.1 On May 31st Andrewes was placed on a committee, " the session not to be closed by the royal assent being given to some acts."2 In the month of August our prelate was afflicted with a very dangerous illness at his palace at Waltham, Hants. On the 6th of August he wrote to Dr. Fenton. His rest was disturbed and his whole system disordered. His appetite for meat had left him. " No drink," he says, " but distastes to me." He also suffered great pain in his left side. After detailing his symptoms, he adds : " This I hope will make you to come. I have sent my own coach for you to be here on Tuesday. I would it could be sooner, but not to fail of you then. You shall never come more welcome. Till then and for ever God have you in his keeping. Waltham, 6 Aug. 1624. " Your very assured loving friend, " La. Winton." He complains in a P.S. that he is disappointed in respect of his brother and his wife ; " so that," he adds, " you are like to come alone. You shall be never a wit the loser, but better welcome. See you come in any wise." But we find him named in a committee on a private bill the following 1st of December ; again on Saturday, December the 5th, to meet at eight A.M. in the Painted Chamber on a committee for making the Thames navigable for barges, boats, or lighters from the village of Bercott (Buscott or Burwardscot in Berkshire) to Oxford. On that day he was also on a commission for the banishing of Jesuits and Seminary Priests. In December 1624s the King was a third time in Cam- 1 Journal ofthe Mouse of Lords, p. 144. 2 p. 146. 3 Nichols' Progresses of James I., vol. iv. p. 1008. KK.2 500 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. bridge (having paid two visits to the University in 1615), and kept his court at Trinity College. Prince Charles also was with him; and here Monsieur de Villiariler and the Marquis d' Effiat, Embassadors Extraordinary from the King of France, had audience of his Majesty, who, on the 12th of December, signed here the ratification of the treaty with France respecting the marriage of the Prince of Wales with the Princess Henrietta Maria. The King was confined with the gout in his hands and arms, but the Prince, Embassadors, and Nobility were entertained with public disputations, &c. There was an extraordinary Commencement, when many degrees were granted.1 1 Doctors created by his Majesty's letters-patent : Shaw, Peterhouse. John Leslie, Trinity, took no other degree. Anthony Topham, Trinity (FeUow), B.A. 1605, M.A. 1609, B.D. 1616. Thomas Rayment, Peterhouse, M.A. 1606. Laurence Burnell, John's, B.A. 1600, M.A. 1604. Alexander Reade, Pembroke, B.A. 1604-5—1608. Gabriel Moore, Christ, B.A. 1605-6, M.A. 1609. John Towers, Queens', B.D. 1615. Abraham Gibson, John's, B.A. 1606-7, M.A. 1610, B.D. 1617. Thomas Warner, Emmanuel, B.A. 1604-5, M.A. 1608. Amongst those who received the degree of M.A. were Sir Kenelm Digby and Sir William Fleetwood. Richard Bagnall intruded himself, and his name not being found in the King's list, he was three days after (i. e. the 16th) deprived of his degree. The King, by a letter to the University on the 17th, gave instructions that all persons so taking their degrees should promise to perform the usual exercises according to the statutes and customs ofthe University.* Dr. Anthony Topham was Vicar of Trumpington, and 7th September, 1629, installed Dean of Lincoln. He retired, after the loss of his preferment, to Clayworth, to the south of the road between Bawtry and Gainsborough, and died there October 22, 1655. Dr. Thomas Rayment, or Raymond, of Peterhouse, was at this time Preben dary of Milton Ecclesia in the church of Lincoln, to which he had been collated November 17th, 1620, and installed January 19th, 1621. He was also Prebendary of Chamberlainswode in the church of St. Paul's, London, and Archdeacon of St. Alban's. He died in his 47th year November 4th, 1631, and was buried in St. Paul's. The Latin inscription on his gravestone is given in Dugdale's St. Paul's, and in Browne Willis's Survey of Lincoln Cathedral, p. 221. * See Mr. Charles H. Cooper's Annals of Cambridge, vol. iii. p. 171. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 501 Of this visit to Cambridge of King James with Andrewes, Isaak Walton relates in his Life of George Herbert, " the year foUowing the King appointed to end his progress at Cam bridge, and to stay there certain days ; at which time he was Dr. John Towers of Norfolk was B.A of Queens' College, Cambridge, 1602, M.A. 1606, Fellow of his College, B.D. 1615. His letter to Sir John Lamb, to intercede for him with Laud for the bishopric of Peterborough, is given in p. 354 of Prynne's Compleat Mistory of the Trial and Condemnation of William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury. He was accordingly promoted from the Deanry, to which he had been nominated 14th November, 1630, to the see of Peterborough November 21, 1638. He was consecrated 1639 by Laud, Juxon, Bishop of London, Curie, Bishop of Winchester, Wren, Bishop of Ely, and Warner, Bishop of Rochester. Prynne gives also this prelate's orders for and concerning the sermon weekly on Wednesday in St. James's Chapel, Brackley, September 14th, 1639. These orders contain the names of the clergy appointed to preach the lecture, the time of the service, which was nine a.m., and the order of divine service. By these instructions it appears that the whole morning service was to be read as now, i. e. the Morning Prayer, Litany, and the Communion Service, " commonly called the second service." A psalm was to be sung after the Litany. The preacher was to go up into the pulpit immediately after the Nicene Creed, in his surplice and hood. He was to use no form of prayer before sermon, but the bidding prayer as set down in the 55th Canon. Only he might, if he would, insert " the names of the Universities and of his College, or of his patron, he being one qualified by law to have a chaplain." The sermon was to be at the utmost within the compass of an hour, and no prayer was to be used after it, but it was to end with Glory be to God, &c. ; and after the sermon the preacher was to return to the Communion-table, and read the prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church, &c, and one or two of the Collects at the end of the Communion Service, and lastly the blessing, The Peace of God, &c. If the prayers were neglected or deserted, the lecture was to be altogether discontinued. Dr. Towers died January 10th, 1649, and was buried in his cathedral near his predecessor Bishop Dee, without any memorial, in the middle of the choir. The choir of this cathedral was, until at least about the middle of the last century, much more spacious than at present. It commenced with the last pillar but one on either side the nave, thus standing partly beneath the lantern tower. It is now much too contracted for the wants of the city. 1 Dr. Laurence Burnell was B.A. of St. John's College, Cambridge, 1601, M. A. 1604, Chancellor of Exeter July 20th, 1624. He died in his 68th year, November 12th, 1647. Dr. John Lesley, of Trinity College, was Bishop of Sodor August 17, 1628, and was translated to Raphoe in Ireland in 1633. Dr. Reade, who was minister of Tately, Hants, has been already mentioned in the account ofthe royal visit to Cambridge in 1615. Gabriel Moore, of Christ College, was Taxor in 1616 and Proctor in 1620, Prebendary of the first stall at Westminster March 8, 1632. He held it until the Usurpation. 502 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. attended by the great secretary of nature and all learning, Sir Francis Bacon (Lord Verulam), and by the ever memorable and leamed Doctor Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester, both which did at that time begin a desired friendship with our orator." " And for the learned Bishop, it is observable that at that time there fell to be a modest debate betwixt them two about predestination and sanctity of Ufe ; of both which the orator did not long after send the Bishop some safe and useful aphorisms in a long letter written in Greek; which letter was so remarkable for the language and reason of it, that after the reading it the Bishop put it into his bosom, and did often shew it to many scholars both of this and foreign nations, but did always return it back to the place where he first lodged it, and continued it so near his heart tiU the last day of his life."1 This same year Bishop Andrewes preached his last Christmas-day sermon before the King, from the 2nd Psalm, Thou art my Son, &c. ; first, treating of them as spoken to our Lord; secondly, as the law preached by him to aU that are adopted into the family of God. About this time he preferred Meric the son of Isaac Casaubon, but far his inferior in learning, to the Eectory of Bleadon, a small village west of Axbridge in Somersetshire. He was born at Geneva in August 1599, but coming over with his father was admitted at Christ Church, Oxford, and in 1621 published a vindication of his deceased father against the false rumours and artifices of the Papists, Heribert Bosweid, a Jesuit, Andrew Scioppius, Julius Caesar Bullinger, and the traitor of 1605 (the favourite of the great Anglo-Bomish historian), Andrew Eudaemon Joannes. After the death of Andrewes Laud became Casaubon's patron,2 and preferred him in 1628 to a prebendal stall in Canterbury. Fuller, in his Church History, b. xi. i. § 46, says that Andrewes' gravity in a manner awed King James, who re frained from that mirth and liberty in the presence of this prelate, which otherwise he assumed to himself. However 1 Merberts Remains, ed. Pickering, 1841, pp. 25, 26. 2 See CI. Viror. ad Vossium Ep. p. 149. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 503 the King highly esteemed his wit, which as it shone forth in all his writings, his sermons not excepted, would doubtless have given an unrivalled charm to his conversation. Those who enjoyed the society of the late incomparable Bishop of Lincoln wUl never fail to remember that unaffected playfulness which never lost sight of the higher requisites of conversation. Both were perhaps the greatest patristic scholars of their day, both eminent for their benevolence, and both have left behind them monuments of as learned piety as their several ages can boast. On January 1st, 1625, Andrewes was on the High Com mission. His royal master in his last illness desired his attend ance, but by reason of a severe fit of the stone and gout, at the same time, he was unable to be with him. The King, however, had the comfort of the presence of Abbot and Williams, both soon to lose the best of masters, and to fall into great and undeserved disgrace. The King ended his days in much peace of mind. He was indeed but too incon stant, and an uncertain friend to that religion in which he professed to die, and in defence of which he had written with sufficient learning. He was a true patron of learning, and protector of the rights and revenues of the Church. But he lived in the contaminating atmosphere of flattery, from the shameless adulation of Whitgift at the Hampton Conference1 to that of Neile standing behind his table. He was indolent and irresolute, seeing a better way than that which he would walk in, and thus guilty of injustice which he but inade quately regretted. He left his throne to a son weaker and more arbitrary, but less conciliating, and far less versed in theoretical wisdom. He left him to young and inexperienced counsellors, who soon aggravated the difficulties with which the crown was already environed, and raised up a host of enemies to the Church by attempting innovations both in doctrine and ceremonies. Andrewes was always of an unambitious and quiet spirit. Laud took the place which he alone was fitted to occupy, and Villiers soon thrust aside Williams. 1 ' Undoubtedly your Majesty speaks by the special assistance of God's Spirit.' 504 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. On Wednesday, March 24th, our prelate was one of a committee of the Lords for the confirmation of Wadham College and its possessions. It had been founded in 1610. On March 27, Midlent Sunday, whilst Laud was preaching at Whitehall, news was brought in of the King's death.1 He died at Theobalds about three-quarters of an hour past eleven in the forenoon. The King fell sick March 4th, on Friday. On the 1st of April Laud received letters from the Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain to the King, and therein a command to preach before him and the House of Peers in the opening of Parliament to be held on the 17th of May. This Parliament, however, was deferred to the 18th of June, and on the 19th Laud preached before the King at WhitehaU.2 Abbot and Andrewes were both henceforth superseded most effectually, and Laud became the real primate and director of all ecclesiastical affairs. So on April 5th he de livered to the Duke of Buckingham a Ust of divines marked O and P, Orthodox and Puritans. Thus was all church patronage placed at once under his influence. After this most responsible step had been taken he received a command to go to Andrewes, and learn from him what he would have done in the cause of the Church, and especially in regard of pre destination. There can be little doubt that this was in con sequence of Laud's own suggestion. The next day being Sunday, April 10th, he went to Bishop Andrewes, who was then in his chamber at court. He acquainted him with what he had received in command. Andrewes gave Laud his answer, but the purport of it we learn from Laud's chaplain and panegyrist Heylyn. It accorded with the moderation and experience of Andrewes, and, by advising that nothing be done, and no controversies stirred, checked the ardent spirit of 1 Laud, perceiving from the confusion that spread throughout his auditory that this event had taken place, discontinued his discourse. — Heylyn's Life of Laud, part i. p. 131, 2 Bishop Andrewes was on committees April 3rd as one of the Conference with the Commons touching Popish recusants; on April 13th, Tuesday, eight a.m., concerning certain of the lands of Sir Horatio PaUavicini, deceased, of Babraham, Cambridgeshire ; on July 6th, touching lands to be sold by Richard, late Earl of Dorset, to pay his debts and raise portions for his daughters, &c. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 505 Laud. There can indeed be no doubt that their opinions and whole theology varied widely. Laud denied the character of a Church to every communion that was not episcopal ; not so Andrew.es, as may be seen in his letters to Du Moulin. Andrewes maintained that the Pope was Antichrist, Laud that he was not. Andrewes never deserted the doctrine of St. Augustine on predestination; Laud was at this time, in all probability, at least a concealed Arminian. With much subtlety and little ingenuousness both he and Neile indirectly answered to the charge of Arminianism when it was objected to them in the latter part of this reign. Laud's answer on his trial was, ' I have nothing to do to defend Arminianism, no man having yet charged me with the abetting any point of it.'1 On June 6th, Whit-Monday, Laud and Andrewes dined together with Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, at his house at Bromley. On June 7th he was on a commission for mortgaging some of the crown lands to Edward Allen and others.2 On Friday, June 24th, Andrewes was, with Laud, Moun tain, Bishop of London, Neile, Bishop of Durham, Buckeridge, Bishop of Eochester, Harsnet, Bishop of Norwich, and Abbot the Archbishop, appointed to advise concerning a public fast and a form of prayer, to implore the divine mercy on occasion of the spreading of the plague, and the extraordinarily wet weather which threatened a famine ; and also to beg the divine blessing upon the fleet now ready to put to sea. This form of prayer was altered and enlarged from that which was put forth in 1563, which had also been used with some altera tions and accommodations in 1603, on occasion of the plague that raged at the time of the late King's coronation. The same responses were now used instead of the 95th Psalm, and for the psalms the seven penitential psalms, the 6th, 32nd, 38th, 51st, 102nd, 130th, and 143rd, were read at the morning prayer; and at the evening prayer the 9th, 39th, 86th, 90th, and 91st. The lessons were Deuteronomy xxviii. and xxx., 1 Kings viii., 2 Sam. xxiv., Joel ii., Jonah iii., . ' Wharton's Mistory of Laud's Troubles and Trial, p. 352. 2 Rymer. 506 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. St. Matthew vi. or viii. or ix., and St. Luke xiii. or xxi. The prayer, 'O almighty, most just, and merciful God,' was altered so as to be less pointedly opposed to Eomanism : for the words hitherto used, ' thou hast delivered us from all horrible and execrable idolatry,' were substituted, 'thou hast delivered us from superstition and idolatry.' To this form was appended as a preface the prayer for the High Court of Parliament, since excellently altered and inserted into the Liturgy. After 'the welfare of our sovereign and his kingdoms,' it proceeded, 'Lord, look upon the humility and devotion with which they are come into thy courts ; and they are come into thy house in assured confidence upon the merits and mercies of Christ (our blessed Saviour), that thou wilt not deny them the grace and favour which they beg of thee. Therefore, 0 Lord, bless them with all that wisdom which thou knowest necessary to speed and bring great designs into action, and to make the maturity of his Majesty's and their counsels the happiness and the blessing of this commonwealth. These and all other necessaries for them, for us, &c. For the second lesson at the evening service were appointed 1 Cor. x. to the 16th verse, 1 Cor. xiii., or 2 Cor. ix., or 1 Thess. iv. The homily put forth in 1603 was printed at the end of the prayers. On the 23rd of July the Bishop promoted his brother Dr. Eoger Andrewes, Master of Jesus College, to the sixth stall in Winchester Cathedral, on the death of William Barlow, Archdeacon of Salisbury.1 1 He was the second Master of Jesus College who had been taken from Pembroke Hall. The first Master of the latter foundation, Dr. William Chubbes, who was appointed by Bishop Alcock in 1497, was born at Whitby in Yorkshire, and had been a Fellow of Pembroke Hall. His name is said, in Sherman's Mistory of Jesus College, to have been spelt in very various ways by Wren himself in his MS. Memorials of Pembroke Mall. He put forth an Introduction to Logic, and was a benefactor to his College. Roger Andrewes had been preferred to this Mastership by his brother the Bishop of Ely in 1618, after the death of Dr. John Duport, the father of the learned Greek Professor. He was also Vicar of Chigwell in Essex, Rector of Cockfield near Sudbury, Cheriton near New Alresford, Hampshire, and of the Donative of Emneth in the Isle of Ely ; Prebendary of North Muskham in the church of Southwell 22nd September, 1609, in the place of his brother then Bishop of Chiohester, who also gave bim THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 507 On September 8th Andrewes was on a commission for charitable uses, to inquire into the disposition of the property of Andrew Windsor, Esq., who had bequeathed property for the support of eight poor persons in an almshouse founded by himself at Farnham. The gift was declared good.1 This year a third of the inhabitants of London and of the suburbs died of the plague. Andrewes gave 100 marks during this time to the parish of St. Saviour's, Southwark. Buckeridge adds in his funeral sermon, that since the year 1620 he gave in private alms to the sum of £1340. In Secretary Conway's Letter Book is the following minute : "To Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester, to admit Dr. Middleton to the place of Confessor of the House hold," October, 1625. This was the occasion of the following letter from our prelate : " Et. Hon. aud mt vehy good Loed, " Tour lordship's from Salisbury of the 25th October came not to my hand till this day the 4th November, lest your lordship should imp ate the delay of mine answer to any neglect of dutie. May it please your lordship to be advertised that there hath nothing been done in this matter of the Confessorship but with the know ledge and by order of his Majestie. " Mr. Beckett, the confessor that now is, and that hath been for a great part of the time of our late Sovereign Lord King James (whose remembrance be ever in blessing) had the grant of that place not by me, but by Bishop Montague my predecessor, then Dean of the Chapel, to whom appertaineth the gift of that place, to appoint one of his own chaplains (as by the Book of the Household appeareth, and as ever hath been used). " It hath ever been the most gracious goodness of the Kings and Queens, his Majestie's precedessors, so far to commiserate their poor servants, as if the hand of God were upon them (as upon Mr. a staU in that cathedral, and made him Archdeacon of Chichester 23rd February, 1608, as he had previously made him ChanceUor October 16th, 1606. He was the first who commenced a CoUege Register. He was undoubtedly deserving of promotion, for his learning obtained for him a place amongst the translators of the Bible in the reign of King James. He died in 1635. He was succeeded in his stall at Winchester by Dr. Thomas Buckner, in his Mastership by Dr. William Beale, brother of Jerome, Master of Pembroke CoUege. His staU at SouthweU he resigned in 1631, and was succeeded by Dr. Henry WiUis. John Scull was on his decease appointed ChanceUor, and Laurence Pay Archdeacon of Chichester. 1 Manning and Bray's Surrey, vol. iii. p. 157. 508 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Beckett it hath been now for these few years past, hath been stricken with a palsy, not yet recovered), they could continue in their place still, and serve them by a deputy. " It may please his Majestie to caU to mind, that not long after his happy coming to the crown, upon the humble petition of Mr. Beckett, his Majestie's pleasure was to me signified by my Lord Duke of Buckingham, and after by his Majestie himself, that he would have Mr. Beckett continue in the place during his life; whereupon he was orderly sworn by me. This as among the multitude of far more weighty affairs it very well may, so it is likely his Majestie calleth not to his remembrance. Under reforma tion and craving pardon, I thought it to stand with my duty to make this known. May it please it your lordship to pat his Majestie in mind thereof. And his memory being informed, his pleasure shall be fulfilled, as becometh me. " I beseech your lordship to bear with and to support this my imperfect manner of writing, who have 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. I remain while I live, to pray and to wish your lordship continuance and increase of health, honour and happiness from God, who long preserve you. " In all duty and service " At your lordship's commandment, " La. "Weston. " Bishop's "Waltham, "Novemb. 4, 1625."1 Thus early was the very patronage of Andrewes as Dean of the Chapel Eoyal invaded, and that with the royal sanction. So little reverence did the Sovereign shew to his recently departed father's most deserving friend and favourite. Had Abbot been removed before Andrewes from his trials to that world for which his afflictions doubtless ripened him, nothing can be more improbable than that Andrewes would have been raised to Canterbury. Laud would not have declined such an opportunity — Laud, who was already aiming at the metropolitan functions. On December the 8th Bishop Andrewes wrote as foUows to the Lords of the Council : " Et. Hon. my very good Loeds, "Tour Lordships' letters of the 30th October I received on Monday night last (the 5th of this present), wherein I am required 1 In the margin is as foUows : " (By his Majestie himself) in the gallerie at Whitehall, my Lord Chamberlain and divers others then present." THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 509 to signify to the Lord Marquess of "Winchester and to his son (the Lord St. John) his Majestie's pleasure touching the removing of their arms and other habiliments of war, and taking them into my custodie. " 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 readily to obey and to execute any of his Majestie's commands, or your Lord ships' 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. The ague hath held me these twelve weeks and more, and is now come to plain tertian, which forceth me (being now low brought) to keep my bed every other day. And within these three weeks I have had at times three grievous fits of stone in the bladder, which afflicteth me still. And to both these is now come the gout, to make me more unliable for undertaking a journey, or taking on me a matter of so great importance. All which, offering to your Lord ships' grave judgment (that his Majestie's service sustain no preju dice), I humbly desire your favourable report to his Majestie of my weak estate. And the business requiring speed, that your Lordships will be pleased to think of some other that are not only for the state of their health and strength of their bodies, but besides better hable every way than myself. Or, if it be required that I do it, that I may be respited some time till it please God I may recover some strength to go about it. "Which I write not as any way unwilling to any of his Majestie's service in this kind (for I shall be ever most ready to execute it or any the like to the uttermost of my power), but only that as my case is I have neither health nor strength to perform it. " And herewithal I have returned the letter sent to the two Lords, expecting his Majestie's further pleasure and your Lord ships' command, whereto my ability I will ever yield due obedience. Beseeching God with all his graces ever to bless that most honourable board at all your meetings, and to crown your consultations with all prosperous success. "At your Et. Honourable Lordships' " Commandment, "In all humble duty and service, " La. "Winton. " Bishop's "Waltham, "Decemb. 8, 1625." On January 16, 1626, by the King's command a con sultation was held to resolve what should be done in the case of Eichard Mountague. This leamed and able writer, now Dean of Hereford and one of the King's Chaplains, had given great offence, not to the Puritans only, but to many whom it would be unjust to characterize by that name. 510 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. He had, in answer to a proselytist who troubled his parish of Stanford Eivers near Ongar, put forth in 1624 a work entitled A New Gag for an Old Goose, &c. This book was severely animadverted upon by Yates and Ward,1 two Puritan ministers of Ipswich. Antony Wotton, Divinity Professor of Gresham College, afterwards entered into the controversy in as severe a spirit, but with far more ability. To Ward and Yates Mountagu replied in his Appello Coesarem, A Just Appeal from Two Unjust Informers. This second work is written with gall rather than with ink, and proved its author to be indeed what in that age would have entitled him to be called ' a man of a stout spfrit.' True it is, how ever, that the two informers exaggerated his offences. In Bishop Carleton Mountagu found a far more formidable opponent. This prelate had himself taken part in the Synod of Dort, and was well read in Christian antiquity. He wrote piously and gravely, and without mingling false charges with true, exposed the subtlety, sophistry, and inconclusiveness of Mountagu, where he innovated upon the then received doctrine of the Church. His examination of Mountagu's errors he dedicated to King Charles, but it may be questioned whether that monarch had either the knowledge or the impartiaUty requisite for so deep and (to speak the truth) repulsive a subject. Upon the assembUng of the Commons June 21, 1625, amongst other subjects they took into consideration the alleged errors of Mountagu. In the late reign the cause was 1 Samuel Ward, an eminent preacher at Ipswich, appealed from the over- severe Bishop Harsnet to the King, who referred him to the Lord Keeper WiUiams, who so wrought upon him by mUdness, that he became as useful a, man on the Bishop's own acknowledgment as any in his diocese. This was WiUiams' constant way of deahng with the Puritans, endeavouring to gain them by argument, and using to this purpose Dr. Sibbes and Dr. Gooch. (Hacket's Life of Bishop Williams, p. 95.) Sibbes, the most effective practical writer of his age, was first FeUow of St. John's CoUege, then Preacher of Gray's Inn, and Master of Catharine HaU from 1626 to his death in 1635. John Yates, B.D., was of Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge, and minister of St, Andrew's, Norwich. Dr, Gooch was Master of Magdalene CoUege, Cambridge, ChanceUor of the dioceses of Exeter and Worcester, and Advocate of the Court of Arches. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 511 put into the hands of Archbishop Abbot, and ended in an admonition being given to Mountagu. Afterward the Bishops of the Arminian party, says Bush- worth, consulted the propagation of the five articles condemned in the Synod of Dort, [and] concluded that Mr. Mountagu, being already engaged in the quarrel, should publish his Appeal to Caisar, at first attested by their joint authority, which afterward they withdrew by subtlety, having pro cured the subscription of Dr. Francis White,1 whom they left to appear alone in the testimony, as himself ofttimes com plained publicly. The Archbishop disallowed the book and sought to suppress it ; nevertheless it was printed and dedi cated to King Charles, whereby that party did endeavour to engage him in the beginning of his reign. Mountagu himself, on the contrary, asserts in his Epistle Dedicatory to King Charles, that his royal father acquitted him of all the charges that were brought against him, and gave express order to Dr. White, Dean of Carlisle, for the authorising and publishing thereof. The Commons appointed a committee to examine the errors therein, and gave the Archbishop thanks for the admo nition given to the author, whose books they voted to be contrary to the articles established by the Parliament, to tend to the King's dishonour and disturbance of Church and State, and took bond for his appearance. Hereupon the King intimated to the House that the things determined concerning Mountagu without his knowledge did not please him, for that he was his servant and chaplain-in-ordinary, and he had taken the business into his own hands ; whereat the Commons seemed to be much displeased.2 It is reported that the King at one time thought of leaving Mountagu to the Parliament, and to this that reflection in Laud's Diary was supposed by some to refer: ' I seem to see a cloud arising, and threatening the Church of England; God for his mercy dissipate it!' This occurs in Laud's Diary January 29 : ' Jan. 29. Sunday. I understood i Afterward Bishop of Ely. 2 Rushworth's Collections, vol. i. pp. 173, 174. 512 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. what D. B. had collected concerning the cause, book, and opinions of Eichard Mountague, and what E. C [King Charles] • had determined with himself therein. Methinks I see a cloud rising,' &C1 On January 16th, about a fortnight before the preceding observation of Laud, he, with Monteigne, Neile, and Bucker idge, met at Winchester House, where they together with Bishop Andrewes signed a letter, doubtless very satisfactory to the King and sufficiently exculpatory of Mountagu. The letter was addressed to the royal favomite, the Duke of Buckingham : " May it please yoto Gkace, " Upon your late letters directed to the Bp. of "Winchester, signifying his MatieB pleasure that, taking to him the Bps. of London, Durham, Eochester, Oxford, and St. David's, or some of them, he and they should take into consideration the business con cerning Mr. Mountagu's late book, and deliver their opinions touching the same, for the preservation of the truth and the peace of the Church of England, together with the safety of Mr. Mountagu's person, we have met and considered, and for our particulars do think, that Mr. Mountagu in his book hath not affirmed anything 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 humility do conceive that his Maae shall do most graciously to prohibit all parties, members of the Church of England, any further controversy of those questions by public preaching, or writmg, or any other way to the disturbance of the peace of the Church for the time to come. And for any thing that may further concern Mr. Mountagu's person in that business, we humbly com mend him to his MatieB gracious favour and pardon. And so we humbly commend your Grace to the protection of the Almighty, resting " Tor Grace's faithful and humble servants, " Geo. London. " B. Dttnelm. La. "Wlnion. "Jo. Eoffens- " Gtjil. Meneve. " Erom "Winchester House, "January 16, 1625."2 It is evident that the King and the Duke, probably swayed by Laud, had previously determined upon Mountagu's ac- 1 Wharton's Troubles of Laud, $c. p. 27. * Marl. MSS. No. 7000, fol. 104. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 513 quittal. This is clear from the wording of the Duke's letter. The Bishops were to consult for the safety of Mountagu's person. The prelates appointed to conduct the cause were all prelates in favour at court. It is not on record that any of them, except Andrewes, had ever appeared on the side of the doctrine of the Church of England as maintained during at least the greater part of the preceding reign. Both the Archbishops were passed over, and so Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, Davenant, Bishop of Salisbury, Carleton, Bishop of Chichester, Morton, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry ; on the other hand, Laud, Buckeridge, and Howson, Bishop of Oxford, were known to be his friends. Thus the King in fact asked the assistance of Monteigne, Neile, Andrewes, and their assessors in shielding his chaplain Mountagu from the prose cution of the Commons. The House of Commons charged Mountagu with main taining that the Church of Eome is and ever was a true Church ; that it hath ever remained firm on the same founda tion of the Sacraments and doctrine instituted by God ; that no points of faith, hope, charity, and good manners are con troverted between Protestants and Eomanists ; that images may be used to raise devotion ; that in his treatise upon the invocation of saints he had maintained that they have a more peculiar charge of their friends, and that it may be believed that some saints have tutelage of countries, &c. ; that he had also taught, contrary to the 17th Article, that justified men may fall away ; that he had misquoted the 16th Article, and sought to bring in Arminianism ; that he had factiously used the term Puritan of such as conform to the discipline and ritual of the Church ; and that the scope and end of Eichard Mountagu was to give encouragement to Popery, and to lay the ground for a reconciliation with Popery ; lastly, that he, in some things that he had written, reflected upon the late King, and had used railing and bitter speeches to many other persons and contemptuous to foreign reformed churches.1 Mountagu, in his New Gag for an Old Goose, or Answer ' Rushworth, i. pp. 209—212. 514 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. to the late Gagger of Protestants, begins with the controversies touching the relative places of Scripture and the Chm-ch. He affirms that 'the written Word of God is the rule of faith with us.' 1 c Unto the law and unto the prophets was a direction of a perpetual morality, and is continued in that of om Saviour, (John v.) Search the Scriptures, for in them you hope to have eternal life : a rule absolute in itself, a rule most sufficient unto us, for that end intended, to make the man of God perfect in every good work.' 'Plainly delivered in Scripture are all those points which belong unto faith and manners, hope, and charity, to wit.' But other points there are which are obscure and open to controversy. These the Church has power to interpret and resolve.2 He adduces Cyril of Jerusalem in his Fourth Catechism speaking thus, ' In any point concerning the divine and holy mysteries of our faith, not any the least thing must be tendered without warrant of divine Scripture.' And he (Cyril) addeth, ' Believe me not that speak and deUver these things unto you, unless for proof of them I do bring plain and evident demon stration out of divine writ.' Mountagu proceeds : ' Was this man a Protestant or a Papist? Those Bibles he had then which we have now : and it seemeth that addressing his own belief and doctrine accordingly varied not in judgment any whit from us, who make Scripture the rule of our belief, and in doubtful points that require determination, appeal unto the Catholic Church for judgment in that rule.' He then comments upon that passage so little understood, but so much in some men's mouths, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' chair ; all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.3 He asks, ' Do you suppose that our Saviour approved them so well, as that he would have had the Jews in matters of faith to rely upon them and their decisions, as pastors of the Church in points of faith? If this were his meaning, what meant he then to give warning else where, Take heed of ihe leaven of the Pharisees ? that is, as the Holy Ghost expoundeth it, of their doctrine. If the question had been put, Art thou ihe Christ? would he have 1 p. 13. - A New Gag, p. 14. 3 Matt, xxiii. 2. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 515 sent them unto the Scribes or Pharisees for resolution, or advised the people to believe on them? We find it not practised : the contrary we do. What then is this text in consequence unto the point ? Surely he meant no more but this, and in that he will declare himself a Protestant ; What soever they bid you observe out of Moses, observe ; that is, so long as they teach but Scripture they must be heard ; if here they fail, then hear them not. Verba legis proferendo, in the opinion of St. Augustine, so long as they speak law. Then he adduces the Jesuits Maldonatus and Barradas giving the same exposition.1 His antagonist had alleged from the 10th chapter of St. Luke, He that heareih you, heareih me, &c. These words, he observes, might relate to the Apostles in the fullest sense as having mission immediate from the Son himself, which none ever had but they. But in relation to those after them, it must be understood as St. Bernard understood it, with this restriction, ' as far as man doth not gainsay the will and commandment of the Most High.' ' A flat Protestant in his assertion,' adds Mountagu, ' and upon reason ; for a nuncio must go to his commission.' 2 St. Anselm he calls ' a factionist for Pope Urban, his good lord and master.'3 As upon the authority of Scripture so of traditions, he might have written more clearly. Thus why say that 'traditions derived from the Apostles have equal authority with their preachings and their writings?' The love-feasts were such traditions, and yet who would affirm that they were of equal authority with the Eucharist, equally binding upon the ob servance of the Church? It is not true that we hold all apostolical traditions as binding. Such a tradition was baptism by immersion ; yet neither is this observed by us. Such a tradition was the order of deaconesses, yet where is it to be found? In animadverting upon the Bomanist's allegation, that it is our doctrine that the Church can err, Mountagu maintains the same doctrine with some in our own day, that the Church i p. 16. " P- 17. 3 p. 29. ll2 516 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. representative, true and lawful, cannot err in fundamentals. The Church representative is in the second chapter of the second part of his Appeal identified with a general council. This is a fruitless controversy, and upon Mountagu's own shewing, a needless one. For as all things according to him requisite to be believed in order to salvation are in Holy Scripture, why should general councils be called? not to clear points of doctrine. And in points of disci- pUne they may err without question, since they are liable to err on points of fact which are always involved in the administration of discipline. It is remarkable how those who speak much for general councils are not careful to define them. Even deacons spoke in antient councils. Would the modern advocates of them be content with the antient model? In his fifth chapter occurs in Latin that passage which gave just cause of offence to the House of Commons : ' And although 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 recog nises 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.' So then, the half-communion, idolatrous worship, and the enjoining as essential to salvation doctrines of human origin and no part of the Word of God, all this however unUke the primitive Church is not so unlike it as to constitute a separate being ! Now Mountagu admitted the gross idolatry of the Church of Eome, and therefore the absurdity is his own. " 1 do not, I cannot, I will not deny that idolatry is grossly committed in the Church of Eome." This is his own testi mony. But will any say, it is one thing for the Church to commit idolatry, another thing for idolatry to be committed in the Church? He answers, that the idolatrous worship of the image of Christ as maintained by [St. Thomas Aquinas THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 517 " is an article of faith in the Eoman Church."1 To what end we may well ask, did the Apostle write to the Corinthians, What agreement hath the temple of God with idols?* No wonder that the multitude have ever suspected of Popery those who have thus palliated idolatry, and taught that it has ceased under Christianity to be that mortal sin which it was under the law. Upon the question how St. Peter fell, whether totally or finally, he forgets his usual caution, and condemns Ward and Yates for their doctrine of final perseverance,3 forgetting that it was the doctrine of Hooker. Here his factious use of fhe term Puritan is apparent, and justifies the animadversion both of the Commons and of the learned and pious Bishop Carleton. To his opponent objecting to the Protestants the doctrine that the Pope is Antichrist, Mountagu replies that this is but a private opinion of some men, but that for himself he inclines to think that the Mahometan and Papal powers taken together are the Antichrist of the Scriptures. This point he discusses at some length in his Appeal. The reader will peruse him with advantage upon the topics of absolution and confession. Well had it been if, in regard of the former, the language of Peter Lombard had satisfied himself and some other divines. According to Peter Lombard, the priest is commissioned not to give but to declare absolution ; and if to give, to give it sacramentally, or in the administration of the Sacraments, and thus only indirectly and mediately. It is no small indication of the true feeling upon this subject that the more startling and repulsive form of absolution was not in existence for many centuries. It did not arise until the priesthood itself had learnt to claim a kind of deification. In treating of works of supererogation, Mountagu declared himself in favour of the doctrine that Christ had given two kinds of instructions, precepts and counsels ; precepts obliging all, counsels left to those who were able to receive them. This was grounded upon the 19th chapter of St. Matthew, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to i Appeal, p. 249. z 2 Cor. vi. 16. 3 p. 18. 518 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the poor; and, he that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Here, as in the case of confession, he adduces the opinion of Bishop Morton, 'that we allow the distinction of precepts and counsels.'1 He quotes on this topic Saints Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, and Augustine, deeming the authority of the Fathers in all cases a sufficient proof of the fitness of an interpretation of Scripture. Our Saviour's words, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it, are indeed an irrefragable proof that this is no superstitious distinction. But it is to be feared that such an attestation to the exceUency of a purely spiritual life, and to the possibility of leading it, is opposed and rudely dealt with in our age from the very prevalent disposition to abide by a lower standard of holiness and of self-denial than is consistent with true religion. In treating of free-will, Mountagu seemed to affirm that the will, unable at the first to choose good, spiritual good, was upon our renewal able to work together with grace by its own ability, by a power lodged in itself. He admits that the Fathers did in some instances venture too far in what they asserted of the power of the will.2 He defended his own modes of speaking upon this most difficult point by the language of Whitaker, Chemnitz, Perkins, and others. But indeed it is easy to conceal a man's real opinion here under terms that are used by his opponent in a far different sense. These writers would probably have agreed that without the preventing grace of God the will could not turn to him. They would have resolved every good thought and desire into the same degree of divine grace ; in a word, they would have resolved the goodness of man's will from first to last into the grace of God. To his working with us they would have ascribed it that man had a good wiU kept alive in him. This is in words confessed by Mountagu, but it is at variance with another part of his system, that the calling of them that are saved is in consideration of their faith, repentance, and obedience.3 This it was which identified him with the Semi-Pelagians and Arminians. He refused 1 Bishop Morton's Appeal, b. v. chap. 4, § 3. '' P- H3. 3 Appeal, p. 58. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 519 the name, and denied knowledge of the works of Arminius ; but this one dogma, perhaps on his part incautiously owned, left no doubt upon the more discriminating of his contem poraries, of his real adherence to Arminianism. Mountagu very ably and learnedly exposes and refutes the impious doctrine of the Eomanists respecting the possibility of human perfection, or rather, of rendering to God a perfect obedience.1 His statement of the doctrine of justification is open to exceptions if he is not fairly read and allowed to explain himself. At the same time he shewed a disposition to extend the use of the term justification, so as to include in it both our forensic justification in Christ, or by the imputation of his righteousness, and our declarative justification by works, which he would call our second justification. But what would be the result? That which has already followed in the attempt at a departure from the accustomed language of the Church, a bringing in of opinions still less excusable than the novel expressions under which they are veiled. Mountagu did, it is true, use language liable to exception in one page, but in the very next2 he so rectified himself that it was uncandid in his opponents to overlook all that he had said in explanation and correction of his own words. Nor is there any reason to suspect him here. He wrote in language that could not be misunderstood by the Eomanists. He fully honoured the name of Christ as our justifying righteousness, and faith as that by which alone we lay hold of it. " In the first signification then of justification, the which properly is justification, we acknowledge instrumentally faith alone, and causally God alone." "In the second and third [to be more just inherently, and to be declared just at last by works,] beside God and faith, we yield to hope and holiness and sanctification and the fruits of the Spirit in good works. But both these are not justification, rather fruits and consequents and effects and appendants of justification than justification, which is a solitary act."3 " Our justification in the act thereof, is only 1 New Gag, pp. 116—139. 2 p. 144. = p. 144. 520 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. the work of God for Christ's sake, whose death and passion apprehended by faith, which is the sole peculiar work of faith to do, as it hath made an atonement betwixt God and us, so hath it procured remission of our sins at his hands, and there upon a new state of grace, not for any merit or deserving of our own, which is utterly excluded in this act." " Faith that is without charity doth not justify, but faith may yet justify without charity. They have their several distinct acts, and the act of faith is to justify, though both are virtues incident to a just man." Accordingly he explains St. Paul and St. James as speaking, the one of the attaining of justification which is ' confessed to be the act of faith,' the other of justification now obtained, which necessarily is not separate from works. Justus factus through the grace of Christ, is Justus declaratus by his holy life and conversation. And so St. James is expounded by yourselves, or else hath access of justification, as it is also taught by your own men."1 Now this last expression is apparently a contradiction to the preceding, and accordingly in the Appeal we find the sting taken out of it. He there explains thus, ' Access unto justification is not by me made essential unto justification, but only declaratory.'2 Mountagu then was unjustly charged with Eomanism and with innovation in the doctrine of justification, and with equal injustice the two informers imputed to him the Eomish doc trine of merit. He rightly notes the patristic use of mereor as expressing simply to procure, to incur, to purchase, not to deserve. Thus the Vulgate, ' My iniquity is greater than that I can obtain pardon.'3 The Eomanist objecting to the Protestants the opinion that faith once had cannot be lost, Mountagu affirms that it can, and that this is the doctrine of the Church of England, that Judas was as much given to Christ as Peter or John, and that Simon Magus was a sincere Christian, but afterward apos tatized. Bishop Carleton has copiously answered and refuted him on this point, and vindicated St. Augustine from the tenet here imputed to him, that to some men God gave faith 1 p. 118. - Appeal, p. 197. 3 Gen. iii. p. 203. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 521 and justification, and afterward left them to perish in apostacy. It is but an adventurous assertion, that as God gave Peter and John, so he gave Judas to Christ. If all were alike given to him as apostles, they were not all alike given to him as heirs of his kingdom. There was a sense in which they were not all his. So St. John saith at the beginning of the 13th chapter, Having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them to the end. Again he said, / know whom I have chosen1 Judas was one of the world for which he did not pray. The Apostles were both his own and his Father's in a sense in which Judas was not. I pray for them ; I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine ; and I am glorified in them.2 In the topic of predestination Mountagu proceeded with some wariness, yet not able to act an entirely neutral part. He attacked the supralapsarian doctrine, and laboured to make it appear odious. But it may not be denied that all things are resolvable into the divine decrees ; yet let us not hold this so as to deny that which we feel, our natural liberty, neither let us deny that to God we owe the renewal of the will, and that in an inscrutable manner he worketh in them that love him to will and to do of his good pleasure. The invocation of saints Mountagu calls 'grand foolery,' but touches upon the impiety of offering false worship with a gentle peradventure, ' Perhaps there is no such great impiety in saying — St. Laurence, pray for me.'3 For lay-baptism in cases of emergency he pleads, as did Whitgift before him in his Answer to Cartwright, ' the use and warrant of antiquity.' He does not imagine any true baptism independent of faith. ' As in little infants the faith of the Church, and those that present them to be baptized, is by God reputed their own ; so the willingness and desire of the same Church, of their godfathers and parents, is reputed theirs.'4 1 ver. is. 2 ver. 9, 10. 3 p. 200. Observe his quotation from Justin Martyr in p. 206. 4 p. 247. 522 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Upon the real presence he uses the same language with others of his own and the preceding century, who gave but a handle to the Eomanists to charge them with unmeaning distinctions, whilst they professed to take literally (which Tertullian and Augustine did not) the words of Christ, This is my body. Allow this, and we partake of Christ's natural body in the Eucharist, for he gave no other if he gave it at all. Allow this, and Tertullian, Theodoret, and Augustine must be condemned for heterodox, and with them all the believers of their times; for they do not appear to have condemned them for agreeing in this, that This is my body is the same with This is the figure of my body. We find in him the doctrine of quasi-sacramentals, though not the word. Nor is there any valid reason to the contrary. This distinction forces itself upon us in the case of marriage, confirmation, and ordination, which all border upon the nature of a sacrament, being consecrated to holy ends. "Yates and Ward here shewed their Puritanism when they objected to the form of the ordination of priests, Beceive ye the Holy Ghost; not that we are to look for that divine gift ex opere operato. There must be fit dispositions to receive it. Simon Magus had it not, neither do those amongst us who seek ordination not for the work of the ministry but for its emoluments. Mountagu supposes, on the ground of the antiquity of the opinion, that Christ took the saints up icith him to heaven at his ascension. He also asserted the literal descent of Christ into the place of the damned. But om- Lord went into Paradise. And so the more antient opinion, that of Lenajus and Tertullian, was that the only hell into which om- Lord went was Hades, the state of departed spirits, where they lived in Abraham's bosom in the comfort of the hope of a joyful resurrection.1 He also follows some of the antients in their veneration of the sign of the cross, pleading for its use as a token of Anti-Puritanism. So zealous was he against ' the brethren,' 1 See Usher's Answer to a Jesuits Challenge, p. 292, 4th ed. 1686. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 523 as he calls the Puritans in the very title of his appeal, Appello Caisarem, An Appeal from the Brethren. Such are the Gag and the Appeal, a mass of learning and of satire, coarse in style and full of invective ; erroneous enough, but by no means so erroneous as some of his oppo nents represented. Upon Bishop Andrewes' acquittal of Mountagu, given in the above letter to the Duke of Buckingham, he has himself been claimed as a convert to the opinions upon predestination maintained in Mountagu's Appeal. Yet it may admit of doubt whether he did not act in this instance upon the grounds of general policy, considering the attack made by the Puritans and by the Commons on Mountagu as intended to wound the Church of England and to elevate the Puritans. Their charges against him were partly groundless, partly false, partly exag gerated. It was not possible for him to have effected a reconciliation of England and Eome on the basis maintained in his New Gag. At the same time he was evidently desirous of giving the Eomanists every possible advantage, every concession that seemed to him not to compromise essential truths. His spirit was not that of a Christian, but his learning was so great and so undoubted that it seems to have covered all his defects. He had promised too, at the end of his last performance, to return the royal protection with the service of his polemical sword. And therefore, in perfect accordance with the then principles of government, which singled out for promotion those who were most obnoxious to unpopularity (a rule savouring of petulance rather than of discretion, and of weakness rather than true dignity), the King speedily raised Mountagu to a bishopric, to the very see of his late opponent Carleton. On August 24th, 1628, he was consecrated to the see of Chichester by Archbishop Abbot, assisted by Laud, now Bishop of London, by Neile, Bishop of Winchester, Buckeridge, now Bishop of Ely, and Dr. Francis White, Bishop of Carlisle. On the translation of Wren from Norwich to Ely, Mountagu was in 1638 appointed his successor, and Dr. Brian Duppa consecrated to Chichester. Mountagu was elected to Norwich May 4th, 1638, and died in April 1641, 524 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. when, to make episcopacy more popular, Bishop Hall was translated thither from Exeter. Besides Bishop Carleton, Anthony Wotton, Yeates, and Ward, Mountagu was animadverted upon by Dr. Matthew Sutcliffe, Dean of Exeter, Dr. Daniel Featley, Francis Bouse, and Henry Burton of Friday Street, London. Dr. Featley, Abbot's Chaplain, put forth his animadversions in 1626, entitling them, Pelagius Bedivivus, or Pelagius Bak'd out of the Ashes by Arminius and his Scholars. This book consists of two parallels, one between the Pelagians and Arminians, the other between the Church of Eome, the Appealer, and the Church of England, in three columns. Francis Eouse (made by the Parliamentarians Provost of Eton) did not direct his work by name against Mountagu, but published in the same year his Testis Veritatis ; The Doctrine of King James and of the Church of England plainly shewn to be one in the points of Predestination, Free- Will, and Certainty of Salvation. 1626. He was a member of the House of Commons, and thus sustained a mixed character. He was especially busy in the ecclesiastical innovations of his party, and in opposing episcopacy. He died in January 1659. The recommendation in the letter of the Bishops was enforced, and the works that were written against Mountagu were sought after and suppressed. But whether or not this prohibition put a stop to the publication of works directly treating of these controversies, certain it is that it was not until a later period that the Universities declared in favour of the Court divinity. Dr. Prideaux, afterward Bishop of Worcester, Eegius Professor of Divinity at Oxford, and Dr. Ward, Master of Sidney Sussex College, and Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, continued the Predestinarian doctrine in their respective Universities. On January 18th, 1626, the before-mentioned prelates met together to prepare a form of thanksgiving for the staying of the plague, to be used on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. On the 2nd of February Bishop Andrewes was present at THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 525 the coronation, and carried the golden plate for the Com munion. On April 12th, Wednesday, at nine A.M., Archbishop Abbot, Andrewes, Neile, and Laud met together by the King's command to consult concerning a sermon preached before the King on the Fifth Sunday in Lent last past by Dr. Goodman, Bishop of Gloucester. He had spoken ambiguously upon the real presence in the Sacrament, and was aheady suspected of Eomanism. They advised together, and gave answer to the King that some things were therein spoken less cautiously, but nothing falsely ; that nothing was innovated by him in the doctrine of the Church of England ; that the best way would be that the Bishop should preach the sermon again at some time to be chosen by himself, and should then shew how and wherein he was misunderstood by his auditors.1 On May 1st, Monday, Andrewes was on a commission upon an Act concerning the issuing of citations out of the Ecclesiastical Courts. This is the last transaction with which we find the name of Bishop Andrewes connected. And now let his grateful secretary Isaacson conclude this imperfect narrative of his life. " He was not often sick, and but once (till his last illness) in thirty years, before the time he died, which was at Downham in the Isle of Ely, the air of that place not agreeing with the constitution of his body. But there he seemed to be prepared for his dissolution, saying oftentimes in that sickness, ' It must come once, and why not here ?' And at other times before and since he would say, ' The days must come, when, whether we will or nill, we shall say with the Preacher, I have no pleasure in them.' Of his death he seemed to presage himself a year before he died, and therefore prepared his oil that he might, be admitted in due time into the bride- chamber. That of qualis vita finis ita, &c. was truly verified in him, for as he lived so died he. As his fidelity in his health was great, so increased the strength of his faith in his sickness. His gratitude to men was now changed into thank- 1 Laud's Diary, ed. Wharton, p. 31. 526 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. fulness to God; his affability to incessant and devout prayers and speech with his Creator, Eedeemer, and Sanctifier; his laborious studies to restless groans, sighs, cries, and tears, his hands labouring, his eyes lifted up, and his heart beating and panting to see the living God, even to the last of his breath." He died on September 25th, 1626, about four of the clock in the morning. Thus eloquently also Bishop Buckeridge in his funeral sermon for him : ' God's house is truly called, and is indeed the house of prayer; it accompanies aU acts done in God's house. Of this reverend prelate I may say his life was a life of prayer. A great part of five hours every day did he spend in prayer and devotion to God. After the death of his brother Mr. Thomas Andrewes in the sickness time, whom he loved dearly, he began to foretel his own death before the end of summer, or before the beginning of the winter. And when his brother Mr. Nicholas Andrewes died, 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 prayerbook, 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 aU the parts of the confession and other petitions with an audible voice, as long as his strength endured, he did, as was weU observed by certain tokens in him, continually pray to himself, though he seemed otherwise to rest or slumber. And when he could pray no longer with his voice, yet by lifting up his eyes and hands he prayed still; and when both voice and eyes and hands failed in their office, then with his heart he stiU prayed, until it pleased God to receive his blessed soul to himself."1 Bishop Andrewes was buried on Saturday, November 11th. The funeral procession went from Winchester House, South wark, where he had died 26th September. It was ordered and directed by Sir William Segar, Garter Principal King- 1 p, 21. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 527 of-Arms,1 Henry St. George, Eichmond Herald,2 and George Owen, Eouge Cross.3 Neile, Bishop of Durham, chief mourner, assisted by Dr. Eoger Andrewes, the Bishop's brother, Mr. Burrell, the husband of his sister Mary, Mr. Salmon, the husband of his sister Martha, Mr. Eoger Andrewes, the son of his brother Thomas, and Mr. Eooke, the husband of his niece Mary, daughter of Mary Burrell. The great banner was borne by Mr. William Andrewes, the son of his brother Nicholas ; the four bannerolls by Mr. Prinseps, the son of his sister Martha Salmon by her first husband; Mr. Samuel Burrell, third son of his sister Mary Burrell ; Mr. Peter Salmon, eldest son of Martha by her second husband ; and Mr. Thomas Andrewes, the eldest son of his brother Thomas. The corps assisted by Drs. Collins, Beale, Wren, and Green of Corpus Christi CoUege, Oxford, Eector of Stockton, Wilts. The inhabitants of St. Saviour's parish honoured his funeral by hanging the church with 165 yards of black baise. The house mourners made an offering, and Mr. Archer, one of the chaplains, received £11 17s. Id., which he paid to the wardens as their due, but they handsomely returned it to him and Mr. Micklethwaite the other chaplain.4 The sermon was preached by Dr. Buckeridge, at that time Bishop of Eochester. His text was Hebrews xiii. 16 : To do 1 He accompanied Dudley Carleton, Baron Imbercourt in Surrey, to Holland in the third year of James I. — Wood's Ath. Oxon. vol. iii. p. 520. He died in 1634. 2 Sir Henry St. George, Knight, Garter Principal King-of-Arms, created M.D. May 9th, 1643. The eldest son of Sir Richard St. George, Clarenceux Eng-of-Arms, was born of an ancient family at Hatley St. George, Cambridge shire. In 1627 joint-embassador with the Lord Spencer and Peter Tonge, gentleman-usher and daily waiter to King Charles I., and Master of St. Cross Hospital near Winchester, to invest the King of Sweden with the Order of the Garter. The King gave them the arms of the King of Sweden to be used by them and their posterity for ever as an augmentation to their own arms. He died in Brasenose College, Oxford, 5th November, 1644, and was buried in the Cathedral. See Wood's Fasti, vol. ii. p. 67. 3 See an account of him in note 2, p. 61, Wood's Fasti, vol. ii. He was a son of George Owen, of Henlys, Pembrokeshire, and retained office under both CromweU and Charles II. He died May 13th, 1665. 4 From the Book of Funeral Certificates, marked ' I. 8 ' (fol. 31) in the College of Arms, London. Manning and Bray's Surrey. Minor Works, xxxi. 528 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. good and to distribute forget not: for with such sacrifices' God is well pleased. He at once enters into the subject of sacrifices. "Our head, Christ," he observes, "offered his sacrifice of himself upon the cross; Crux altare Christi; and the cross of Christ was the altar of our Head, where he offered the unicum, verum, et proprium sacrificium, the only, true, proper sacrifice, propitiatory for the sins of mankind ; in which all other sacrifices are accepted, and applicatory of this pro pitiation. " 1. The only sacrifice, one in itself, and once only offered, that purchased eternal redemption ; and if the redemption be eternal, what need is there that it should be offered more than once, when once is all-sufficient ? " 2. And the true sacrifice. All others are but types and representations of this sacrifice; this only hath power to appease God's wrath, and make all other sacrificers and sacrifices acceptable. " 3. And the proper sacrifice : as the psalm saith, Corpus aptasti mihi (Psa. xl. 6, lxx.), ' Thou hast fitted me with a body' ; the deity assumed the humanity that it might accipere a nobis quod offerret pro nobis (' receive of us what it might offer for us ') ; being the deity could not offer, nor be offered to itself, he took flesh of ours that he might offer for us. " Now as Christ's cross was his altar where he offered himself for us, so the Church hath an altar also, where it offereth itself, not Christum in capite but Christum in membris, not Christ the head properly, but Christ the members. For Christ cannot be offered again and properly, no more but once upon the cross ; for he cannot be offered again, no more than he can be dead again ; and dying and shedding blood as he did upon the cross, and not dying and not shedding blood, as in the Eucharist, cannot be one action of Christ offered on the cross, and of Christ offered in the Church at the altar by the priest by representation only, no more than Christ and the priest are one person : and therefore though in the cross and the Eucharist there be idem sacrificatum, the same sacri ficed thing, that is, the body and blood of Christ offered by Christ to his Father on the cross, and received and partici- THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 529 pated by the communicants in the sacrifice of the altar; yet idem sacriftcium quoad actionem sacrificii or sacrificandi, it is impossible there should be the same sacrifice, under standing by sacrifice the action of sacrifice; for then the action of Christ's sacrifice, which is long since past, should continue as long as the Eucharist shall endure, even to the world's end ; and his consummatum est is not yet finished : and dying and not dying, shedding of blood and not shedding of blood, and suffering and not suffering, cannot possibly be one action, and the representation of an action cannot be the action itself." He gives the true design of the term the Beal Presence as used by the Church of England, when deriving Eucharistia from good grace, he says the Lord's Supper is so called because "it really contains Christ, who is full of grace." It is true he quotes this from Aquinas, but Aquinas here conveyed a truth, if the words are taken in a spiritual sense, expressive of the faith of both catholic antiquity and of the Beformers of our Church. He proceeds to shew clearly out of Aquinas himself, as Dr. Field had also done in the 19th chapter of his Appendix to his third book Of the Church .-1 " Here is a representative or commemorative and partici pated sacrifice of the passion of Christ the true sacrifice, that is past ; and here is an eucharistical sacrifice : but for any external proper sacrifice, especially as sacrifice doth signify the action of sacrificing, here is not one word. And therefore this is a new conceipt of latter men, since Thomas his time unknown to him, and a mere novelism. And the cure is as bad as the disease. Though Thomas gives no other reasons why it is called a sacrifice, yet (say they) Thomas denieth it not: for that is plainly to confess that this is but a patch added to antiquity. And yet when he saith it is a repre sentative or commemorative sacrifice, respectu praiteriti, in respect of that which is past, that is, the passion of Christ, which was the true sacrifice, he doth deny by consequent that it is the true sacrifice itself, which is past. And if Christ be sacrificed daily in the Eucharist according to the action of Third ed. Oxford, 1635, p. 335. M M 530 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. sacrifice, and it be one and the same sacrifice offered by Christ on the cross, and the priest at the altar, then can it not be a representation of that sacrifice which is past, because it is one and the same sacrifice and action present."1 He proceeds thus: "Therefore St. Paul proceeds in the 15th verse, By him therefore let us offer ihe sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name. Let us offer up to God ; Christians then have an offering : and let us offer up to God continually; this is the ground of the daily sacrifice of Christians that answereth to the daily sacrifice of the Jews. And this sacrifice of praise and thanks may well be understood the Eucharist, in which we chiefly thank and praise God for this his chief and great blessing of our redemption. And this and aU other sacrifices of the Church external or spiritual must be offered up and accepted per ipsum, in, by, and through Christ. St. Paul saith not, Ipsum offeramus, Let us offer him (that is) Christ ; but let us offer and sacrifice per ipsum, by him, in whom only we and our sacrifices are accepted." He afterwards affirms that " all the offerings of the Church are the Church itself." And then, after having again spoken of Christ having once offered himself for us, he adds, "Neither doth Christ there (that is) in heaven, where he now appears in the presence of God, offer often or any more for us, but this once ; there is appearing but no offering. And the Apostle gives the reason of it : For then he must have often suffered since the foundation of the world, (Heb. ix. 24, 25, 26). He appears in heaven as our high priest, and makes intercession for us ; but he offers his natural body no more but once, because he suffers but once. No offering of Christ (by St. Paul's rule) without the suffering of Christ. The priest cannot offer Christ's natural body without the suffering of Christ's natural body." We have lived to see St. Augustine deserted in the doc trine both of our Lord's sacrifice and sacrament, but not so Buckeridge. He fully shews out of St. Augustine that the Church herself is the only sacrifice which in the Church is offered up to God.2 He next proceeds to treat of alms, and 1 PP. 2, 3. * pp. 6, 7. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 531 to shew that nothing that we can offer to God can merit anything. We can only be justified by the imputed righteous ness of Christ. "What is the reason the prophet saith (Psa. lxxi. 16), 0 Lord, memorabor justitim tuos solius, I will remember thy righteousness only, but because there is no other righteousness tforthjthe remembering but only thy righteousness only? That righteousness that is a Domino" [from the Lord], "inherent in us by sanctification of the gifts and graces of the Lord, is not worth the remembrance, for it is a defiled cloth and dung in itself; and were it never so good, God hath no need of it ; nay, being offered to God, he is nothing increased by it. If thou do all good works, Deus meus es, et bonorum meorum non indiges: Thou art my God, saith David (Psa. xvii. 2), my goods, and therein are his good works also, are nothing to thee : God is not increased or enriched by them. If thou do commit all manner of sins with all manner of greediness, thou canst not defile God, nor take any thing from him ; thy evil cannot decrease or diminish him. But it is Justitia in Domino, Bighteousness in ihe Lord, (that is) Christ's righteousness communicated or imputed to us; for Christ is made to us wisdom from God, and justice or righteousness and sancti fication, and redemption. And he doth not say fecit nos, he made us righteous in the concrete, but factus est nobis, he was made righteousness to us in the abstract, because he commu nicates his righteousness to us, and thereby covers our naked ness, as Jacob clothed in his elder brother's garments received the blessing.1 And therefore the name of the Son of God is Jehovah, Justitia nostra, ihe Lord our Bighteousness."1 After ' This simile we find in the hymn Ecce nunc Joseph mysticus, used in the procession to the place of the dividing the vestments of Christ, in Jerusalem, in the Processiones qum fiunt quotidie a PP. Franciscanis ad SS. Naseentis Christi Prmsepe in Bethlehem : in Ecelesid Annuntiationis B. V.M. in Nazareth : in Ecelesid SS. et gloriosissimi Sepulchri Christi: in Ecclesia S. Salvatoris in Jerusalem, $c. Antwerpiai, 1670, p. 35. Jacob en sic pelliceis Vestitus fratris hoedinis, TJt benedictum raperet ' Arte, quod culpa perdidit. 2 pp. 14, 15. mm2 532 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. descanting farther upon this most essential topic, and exposing the false pleas of the Church of Eome for her doctrine of merit, Buckeridge gives a very valuable account of Bishop Andrewes, which has already been quoted in various places, according as the chronological order of these memorials gave occasion. I will here add the following extracts : " His admirable knowledge in the learned tongues, Latirf, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, besides other modem tongues, to the number of fifteen (as I am informed), was such and so rare that he may well be ranked in the first place, to be one of the rarest linguists in Christendom; in which he was so perfect and absolute, both for grammar and profound knowledge therein, that he was so perfect in the grammar and criticism of them, as if he had utterly neglected the matter itself; and yet he was so exquisite and sound in the matter and learning of these tongues, as if he had never regarded the grammar." He mentions his love and encouragement of learning and of learned men, " which appeared in his liberality and bounty to Master Casaubon, Master Cluverius, Master Vossius, Master Grotius, Master Erpenius, whom he attempted, with the offer of a very large stipend out of his own purse, to draw into England, to have read and taught the Oriental tongues here." To these his secretary Isaacson adds Moulin, Barclay, and Bedwell. "He meddled little with them" (the goods of the world), " but left the taking of his accounts from his officers to his brothers; and when he began his will at Waltham a year before his death, he understood not his own estate; nay, till about six weeks before his death, when his accounts were delivered up and perfected, he did not fully know his own estate: and therefore in his first draught of his will he gave but little to his kindred, doubting he might give away more than he had ; and therefore in a codicil annexed to his will he doubled all his legacies to them, and made every hundred to be two hundred, and every two hundred to be four hundred : and yet, notwithstanding this increase, he\ gave more to the maintenance of learning and the poor than^ THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 533 to his kindred. His charity and love of God and the poor was greater in him than natural affection, and yet he forgot not his natural affection to them." For many years since he left St. Giles's, Cripplegate, Buckeridge records that he sent £5 about Christmas, besides the number of pounds given to the poor of that parish when he was almoner. " And," he adds, " I have reason to presume the like of those other parishes mentioned in his will, to which he also gave legacies : to St. Giles an hundred pounds, where he had been Vicar ; to All-Hallows, Barking, where he was born, twenty pounds ; to St. Martin's, Ludgate, where he dwelt, five pounds ; to St. Andrew's in Holborn, where Ely House stands, ten pounds ; and to this parish of St. Saviour's in Southwark, where he died, twenty pounds : which parishes he hath remembered for his alms to the poor, when the land shaU be purchased for the relief and use of the poor." " The total of his pious and charitable works mentioned in his will amounts to the sum of six thousand three hundred twenty-six pounds. Of which to Pembroke Hall for the creation of two feUowships and other uses mentioned in the codicil, a thousand pound, to buy fifty pound land per annum to that purpose, besides a bason and ewer like that of their foundress, and some books." "To buy two hundred pound per annum, four thousand pound : viz. for aged poor men, fifty pound per annum ; for poor widows the wives of one husband, fifty pound ; for the putting of poor orphans to prentice, fifty pound ; to prisoners, fifty pound." " After he came to have an episcopal house with a chapel,1 he kept monthly communions inviolably ; yea, though himself had received at the Court the same month, in which his carriage was not only decent and religious but also exem plary : he ever offered twice at the altar, and so did every one of his servants, to which purpose he gave them money, lest it should be burthensome to them." " A great part of five 1 Ely House and chapel, the chapel in Ely Place. 534 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. hours every day did he spend in prayer and devotion to God." " He instructed his chaplains and friends to inform him of such young men at the University as stood in need of assistance. He of his own accord preferred men of learning, as Boys and Nicholas Fuller the Orientalist. If any deserving youths missed their election to the University from the great schools of London and Westminster, he sent them to the University at his own charge. " He always observed a most noble hospitality, and at the same time paid regard to all the appointments of the Church in regard of fasts, at Lent, Embers, and other times. He dined at noon, giving his mornings to prayer and study. He was averse to be interrupted by calls before that time. "He doubted," says Isaacson, "they were no true scholars that came to speak with him before noon. After dinner, for two or three hours' space, he would willingly pass the time either in discourse with his guests or other friends, or in despatch of his own temporal affairs, or of those who (by reason of his episcopal jurisdiction) attended him. And being quit of these and the like occasions, he would return to his study, where he spent the rest of the afternoon even tiU bedtime, except some friend took him off to supper, and then did he eat but sparingly." He suffered much by suits at law sooner than wilUngly institute persons whom he suspected of simoniacal engage ments. When Bishop of Winchester he would not renew some leases that would have been most lucrative to himself, when he foresaw that such renewals would tend to the injury of his successor. His secretary Henry Isaacson was born in St. Catharine Coleman's parish September 1581. He was the son of Bichard Isaacson, Sheriff of London, who died January 19th, 1620, son of William Isaacson of Sheffield, by Isabel his first wife. Henry Isaacson died about the 7th December, 1654, and was buried in St. Catharine's, Coleman Street, London (since rebuilt), on December 14th.1 Isaacson is reckoned 1 Wood's Fasti, vol. i. p. 377. THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 535 amongst the writers of Pembroke Hall. Antony Wood appears to have been unable to have discovered more respect ing him than that which is here presented to the reader. Bishop Andrewes' Devotions in Greek and Latin, Preces Private?, Sfc., were published at Oxford 1675, pp. 359, with a portrait (probably by no means a good one) by Loggan, the admirable engraver of those most beautiful folios the * Oxonia and Cantabrigia Illustrata.' There is the usual old view of the Sheldonian Theatre in the title-page. Upon Log- gan's successor as University engraver, Burghers, see the second volume of Hearne's Diary,' recently edited by Dr. Bliss, p. 630. This edition of Bishop Andrewes' Devotions was put forth by Dr. John Lamphire, of New College, Oxford, from the MSS. of Samuel Wright, the Bishop's own amanuensis, communicated by Dr. Richard Drake, Chancellor of Sarum, and with other fragments from the then recently edited collection of Dr. David Stokes. John Lamphire was the son of George an apothecary of Winchester, and was born in St. Lawrence's parish in that city. He was educated first at Winchester School, and then at New College, Oxford, of which he was Fellow in 1636. He was ejected thence by the Parliamentary authorities, practised medicine at Oxford, and lived to be restored in 1660. Being again Fellow of New College, he was elected Camden Professor of Ancient History August 16th, 1660, and appointed Principal of New Inn Hall September 8th, 1662, on the ejection of Dr. Christopher Eogers of Lincoln College. Thence he was removed to Hart Hall, of which he was made Principal May 30th, 1663. After he had published this very neat edition of Bishop Andrewes' Devotions in 1675 in 12mo., he obtained a more perfect copy, which other avocations hindered him from giving to the world. He died at Hart Hall March 30th, 1688, aged 73 years, and was buried in the ante-chapel near the west door of New College. He was succeeded in his professorship by that learned but somewhat eccentric genius Henry Dodwell, for an account of whom the reader may refer to ' Hearne's Diary.' Hearne does his memory ample justice. Dr. David Stokes was educated at Westminster School, was first a scholar of Trinity College,1 then a, Fellow of Peterhouse, Cambridge, D.D. 1630, also a Fellow of Eton College, Rector of Binfield near Windsor j and Canon of Windsor, to which he was appointed llth July, and installed 12th July, 1628, on the promotion of Richard Montagu to the see of 1 Trinity College B.A. 1615, migrated to Peterhouse, of which College he was made Fellow June 30th, 1618, and admitted to his Fellowship by Bishop Andrewes, it having always been the privilege of the Bishops of Ely to admit the Fellows of Peterhouse to their Fellowships. 536 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Chichester. He was also preferred by Sir Henry Wotton to the Rectory of Everdon near Daventry (in the gift of Eton College) September 19th, 1638. He assisted Walton in the Polyglott, wrote on the Twelve minor Prophets, 1659,' 8vo. Verus Christianus, or Directions for Private Devotions and Retire- ments, with an Appendix containing some private devotions of Bishop Andrewes. Truth's Champion. Some Sermons. He was also M.A. of Peterhouse in 1618. He was elected to his Fellowship in the place of the Rev. John Blithe, who was instituted to the College living of Statherne in Leicestershire. Blithe founded some scholar ships at Peterhouse. His portrait is in the hall of the College (Johannes Blithe, Bac. Theol. Socius Collegii anno 1617), on the south side ofthe hall. Dr. Stokes resigned his Fellowship in 1625. He was made D.D. 1630. The College chapel at Peterhouse was built in 1632. He con tributed £10. He was deprived of all his preferments, and took refuge at Oxford. He was reinstated in them in 1660, and spent the remainder of his days in peaceful enjoyment to his death, May 10th, 1669. To his stall at Windsor succeeded Henry Wotton, M.A., May 28th, 1669. He resigned on May 1st, 1671. He was M.A. of Merton College, Oxford, 1660. In Lamphire's edition of Andrewes' Prayers in Greek and Latin, Dr. David is by a mistake called WiUiam Stokes. The beautiful copy by Samuel Wright is a small 12mo., still in the Library of Pembroke College, Cambridge. The portions alluded to by Lamphire as taken from Stokes, are taken from the Appendix to his Verus Christianus, pubhshed at Oxford. Wright's copy, consisting of 168 pages, contains the Devotions in Greek without any Latin translation, down to the Meditation on the Day of Judgment at p. 252 of the Oxford edition recently set forth in the ' Anglo-Catholic Library.' The two meditations on the Last Judgment and on Human Frailty, are from Dr. Stokes, and also many passages in the Latin Devotions. The prayers as thus edited have been reprinted in 1828 and 1848.* The recent Oxford edition in 8vo. has a third part from the Harleian MSS. No. 6614. That manuscript indeed is not in the handwriting of Andrewes, as a MS. note by J. Cole asserts. Andrewes' Manual of the Sick, first put forth with some spurious additions in 1647 by Humphrey Moseley, a bookseller at the Prince's Arms in St. Paul's Churchyard, was edited with fidelity in 1648, by Richard Drake, with the other Devotions translated from Wright's MS., with a dedication to the Prince of Wales. The Preface to the Christian Reader is dated on the Nativity of St. John Baptist, 1646. Dr. Richard Drake was a scholar of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, on Dr. Watts's foundation, Maroh 15th, 1626, B.A. 1628, M.A. 1631, Rector of THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 537 Radwinter, between Thaxted and Walden in Essex, D.D. by royal mandate August 2nd, 1660, Prebendary of North Alton in the Cathedral of Salis bury September 9th, 1660. He resigned this stall- on March 23rd, 1663, having been appointed to the Chancellorship of that church on the 12th of March. He was installed Prebendary of Bricklesworth in the church of Sarum, February 24th, 1665. He was, as was also Dr. Stokes, one of Walton's assistants in the Polyglott. He died in 1681. In 1655 a volume appeared entitled Holy Devotions, with Directions to Pray, Sfc, by the Rt. Eev. Father in God L. Andrewes, late Bishop of Winchester. The 4th edition, printed for Henry Seile, <&c. 1655.' The first edition had appeared in 1660, with another title, Institutiones Pice, or Directions to Pray. The initials of the Compiler are given as H. I. This was retained in the second and third editions. The initials are those of Henry Isaacson. He died in 1654. The date of his death (1654) accords with H. Seile's statement in the preface to the fourth edition, that the three previous editions had been dressed up by a kind foster-father who now sleeps in the Lord. It is most likely, says Mr. Bliss, that the volume was compiled By Isaacson from some ofthe Bishop's papers. The earlier portion appears to be notes of sermons either made by Andrewes himself to assist in composition, or else taken down by some of his hearers. Other passages agree exactly with portions of his Latin Devotions, especially with some recently published in the Oxford 8vo. edition. The volume can in no other and stricter sense be regarded as Andrewes'. The first editor (Isaacson) states that he had originally compiled the Devotions for his own use. This volume has been re-edited by a recent successor of our prelate in the Vicarage of St. Giles', Cripplegate, Archdeacon Hale. Milton had been sent from St. Paul's School to Cambridge, and admitted of Christ's College there February 12th, 1625, under the tuition of Mr. William Chappel.1 He probably wrote his Elegy on the death of Andrewes whilst an undergraduate at Christ College. Here he took his degree of B.A. in 1629, and of M.A. in 1632, after which he left the Uni versity, and went to live five years with his parents at Horton in Bucking hamshire. There he Hved until the death of his mother. Her remains are buried beneath a dark slab in the centre of the chancel, on which is this inscription : Meare lyeth the body of Sara Milton, the wife of John Milton, who died The 3rd of April, 1637.s i Chappel was M.A. of Christ College 1606, FeUow 1607, B.D. 1613, Provost of Trinity CoUege, Dublin, Bishop of Cork and Ross 1638. Laud was his patron. * p 12 Poets and Statesmen, their Momes and Maunts in tlie neighbourhood of Eton and Windsor. Lond. PubUshed for E. P. WiUiams, 1866. 538 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Milton's elegy is evidently a youthful exercise. After a poetical com plaint that death exercises his dominion over not only the material creation but over man himself, he presents to the reader a vision of Para dise, and the joyful reception of Andrewes by its celestial inhabitants to his new abode. " A List " of persons to whom I intend rings, as in my will mentioned," probably six weeks before his death : Abbot ; Neile, Bishop of Durham ; Bucke ridge ; Laud, Bishop of Bath and Wells ; Sir Thomas Edmondes, Comp troller of the Household ; Sir Julius Csesar, Master of the RoUs ; Sir Thomas Lake, Secretary of State in the reign of James; his Lady Mary; Sir Henry Martin, Judge of the Prerogative Court ; Dr. John Young, Dean of Winchester ; Dr. Steward, a civilian ; Dr. Collins, Provost of King's College, Cambridge ; Dr. Ward of Waltham, Herts ; Dr. Beale of Pembroke Hall; Dr. Wren of Peterhouse; Mr. Man of Westminster, probably a bookseller ; Mr. Roger, late Proctor in the Court of Arches ; Mr. Greene, Prebendary of Bristol ; Mr. WiUiam Johnson ; and Mr. Joseph Fenton. Prynne, whose Canterbury's Doom and Necessary Intro duction to Laud's Trial contain a vast store of most valuable information, doubtless frequently betrays the most exaggerated feelings and unhappy prejudices. Nowhere is this more apparent than in his unhandsome charges against Bishop An drewes. He takes up with Father GUes' or Davenport's misrepresentations of our prelate, who would persuade his readers that Andrewes held not the doctrine of the Eeformation but of the Church of Eome respecting justification by faith. The reader will, if he refer to the Bishop's sermon on Jer. xxiii. 6f perceive at once the untruthfulness of such a statement. Laud was indeed most blameable in procuring sanctuary for so perfidious a writer in the University of Oxford. Prynne was not less blameable in giving currency to his falsities. See p. 424, and sequel of his Compleat History of Laud. Prynne speaks in one place of the Popish furniture, &c. of Bishop Andrewes' private chapel ; in another he professes to doubt whether Laud did not make an unwarrantable use of Bishop Andrewes' name. Speaking of his form of conse- THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. 539 cration he says, that he took his form from Bishop Andrewes is only avowed by himself, not proved by any witnesses. (p. 503.) It is certainly most remarkable that if Andrewes did observe the ceremonies comprised in the notes to the Liturgy ascribed to him, and involved in the account of his private chapel to be found in Prynne, pp. 121 — 124, there is evidence that at Winchester there were in the time of Andrewes neither rails to the Communion-table, which probably stood then in the middle of the choir, nor bowing to it. " From Canter bury," says Prynne, "we shall next hunt this Bomish Fox to the cathedral of Winchester, where, keeping a visitation in the year 1635 by Sir Nathanael Brent, his Vicar-General, he did by his injunctions under seal enjoin them to provide four copes, to rail in the Communion-table, and place it altarwise, to bow unto it, and daily to read the epistles and gospels at it. This was attested by Sir Nathanael Brent himself, manifested by his own injunctions to that Church, and by his articles proposed to the College of Winchester, produced, and read in the Lord's house." (p. 79.) Then follow the in junctions themselves, (p. 80.) This verifies the assertion of Dr. Fuller that it " was the constant practice of Dr. Andrewes, successively Bishop of Chichester, Ely, and Winchester, never to urge any other ceremonies than those which he found there." This remark of Fuller's drew down upon him the indignation of Heylyn, in whose eyes Laud's greatest indis cretions were his highest excellencies. He accordingly takes care that they shall not be hid. Andrewes was the most imaginative of all our older divines, and would therefore have a natural bias toward a ceremonial piety. He was as remarkable for pathos and simplicity as for wit and fancy. He was an intense student of both the Fathers and the divines of succeeding ages. As a critic he was often led away by his excessive love of illustration. He was perfectly free from covetousness and pride, a lover of learning and of learned men. His infirmities were a want of firmness in opposing the unwise and unhallowed counsels of his sovereign ; and an undue partiality toward his kindred and 540 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. friends, whom he loaded with preferments in an age in which pluralities were found to be a grievance — a grievance to the cause of piety, however they might operate in favour of learning. His own brother was unworthy of his name. He was the object of general aversion in the College over which Andrewes placed him. He was not however what he has been represented even in our own time, an ambitious courtier. He never intermeddled with state affairs. He did indeed sometimes his sovereign's bidding where others, more faithful in some remarkable instances, declined. But he never forced himself into observation. His rise was due to his great learning, piety, and munificence. His patrons were men whose names will be had in honour so long as piety and patriotism shaU perpetuate the names of Henry, third Earl of Huntingdon, and Secretary Walsingham. He was by bis sermons a truly pastoral prelate, and his Prayers wiU probably continue to the end of time to cherish the devotion of an innumerable company who shaU foUow him to his heavenly rest. APPENDIX. The Family of Andbewes. The name of our prelate was variously spelt, — Andrew, Andrews, Andrewes, and Andros. The e in Andrewes was sometimes omitted in the early part of the seventeenth century. Sir Eobert Andrewes of Normandy, knt., came over with William I., and married the daughter and heiress of Sir Eobert Winwick of Winwick, Nor thamptonshire, and afterward of Denton in the same county.1 In 1303 occurs John Andrew, Alderman of Redingate, Canter bury.2 A Sir William Andrewes of Northamptonshire and Carlisle occurs in 1234.3 Thomas Andrews of Beggar's Weston, or Weston Bigard, (or Begard,) a few miles east of Hereford, was born in 1501, and died in 1615. See the genealogy of this branch in Nichol's Leicestershire, parish of Syston.4, From him was descended the late highly re spected Gerard Andrewes, Fellow, of Trinity College, Cambridge, Rector of St. James', Westminster, and 8th November, 1809, Dean of Canterbury. He died, aged 75, on June 2nd, 1825. In a window in St. Bartholomew the Less, London, over the door in the passage into the church, are the arms and crest (painted in glass) of Henry Andrewes, Alderman of London, 1636 : argent, a saltire azure on a chief gules; 3 mullets or: crest, a Moor's head in profile. In 1649 and 1651 Thomas, a leatherseller, son of Robert An drewes of Feltham near Hounslow, Middlesex, and of the Fish mongers' Company, was Lord-Mayor of London. Jonathan Andrewes was a member of the court of Merchant Taylors 1665, and Richard Andrewes, M.D., 1627—1634. Sir Matthew Andrewes, knt., was one of the Elder Brethren of Trinity House, 1625.5 Our prelate in his will makes mention of William the son of his deceased brother Nicholas ; Thomas, Nicholas, and Roger the sons of his deceased brother Thomas, and their eldest sister Ann, married 1 See Milton's New Baronetage of England, vol. i. p. 220. 8 Hasted's Kent, vol. xii. p. 596. Appendix. 3 Berry's Meraldic Dictionary. * Vol. iii. Part I. 6 Strype's Stovfs Survey, vol. ii. p. 289. 542 APPENDIX. to Arthur Woollaston ; also her younger sister Mary. His brother Nicholas was born in 1567, and died in 1626. His brother Thomas was named after his father, who appears as a benefactor to All Hallows', Barking, " 1593, towards repairs of the church, £2; to the poor £5 ;" probably bequeathed. Our prelate's mother, Mrs. Joan Andrewes, left in 1524 a bequest of £10. He also makes mention of his sister Mary Burrell. One Alexander Burrell, B.A., Trinity College, Cambridge, 1706, M.A. 1710, was Vicar of Buck- den, July 5, 1717, which he resigned in 1721, being made in 1720 Rector of Adstock near Winslow, Bucks., by Dr. Gibson, then Bishop of Lincoln, and also Rector of Puttenham, Herts, by the same patron. His father was also of Trinity College, B.A. 1666, M.A. 1670. There have been about twenty members of the University of Cam bridge of that name. The name is also spelt Burwell; Mr. Samuel Bur well was at our prelate's funeral. Of this name was Thomas, LL.D. ofthe University of Cambridge, 1661 ; Thomas, M.B. ofthe same University per Liter as Regias, 1662; Francis, A.M. of the same University per Literas Regias, 1675; Thomas, M.B., King's College, 1677; and Charles, M.B., Pembroke College, 1717. The name Burwell appears to have merged into Burrell. The children of the Bishop's sister, Mary Burrel, were Andrew, John, Samuel, Joseph, James, Lancelot, Mary Eooke, and her daughter Martha. His sister Martha, born in 1577, married first to Robert Princep, by whom she had a son Thomas. Charles Bobert Princep (probably a descendant) was B.A. St. John's College, Cambridge, 1811, M.A. 1813. At Oxford was John Princep, B.A., Balliol College, Oct. 12, 1738. Martha was married secondly to Mr., probably Peter, Salmon, by whom she had two sons, Peter and Thomas. The Rev. Thomas Peter Dod Salmon was B.A. St. John's College, Cambridge, 1782, M.A. 1786, FeUow of that College, B.D. 1793, and was living in 1811. Mr. Salmon had a sister Martha and a daughter Anne Best. The Bishop also makes mention of his cousin Anne Hockett. John Hockett was B.A. of Trinity College, Cambridge, 1662, M.A. 1666, and a Fellow of that society. Another of the same name was B.A. of that College 1696. He names another cousin, Sandbrooke; also his cousin Robert and his two children; his cousin Rebecca; his father's half-sister Joan; her first hus band's name was Bousie. Also his godson Lancelot Lake, son of Sir Thomas Lake. There was a Lancelot Lake, B.A. Catharine Hall, Cambridge, 1666, M.A. 1670. Also his two godsons Robert and Charles Barker, son of Mr. Robert Barker, " latelie the King's printer." His principal executor was Mr. John Parker, citizen and Merchant Taylor, of London, to be assisted by Sir Thomas Lake, Sir Henry Martin, and Dr. Nicholas Styward or Steward. His will was witnessed by Robert Bostock, Prebendary of Norton Episcopi in the church of Lincoln, and afterward Archdeacon of Suffolk, and (if not in 1626) Prebendary of Chichester; Joseph Fenton, probably our prelate's physician ; John Browning, Rector of Buttermere near Hungerford, whom he had preferred to that APPENDIX. 543 living in 1624, author of Six Sermons concerning Public Prayer and the Fasts of the Church (Lond. 1636) ; Thomas Eddie and WiUiam Green, two of the Bishop's servants. Archdeacon Wig more also signed the three several codicils to the wUl. The family of Andrew or Andrewes has seated itself in Gloucester shire;. Plymouth, Devon; Bisbrook, Rutlandshire; Norfolk, Suffolk, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Lancashire, WUts, Bucks, Hert fordshire, Cambridgeshire, Surrey, and Hants. In Cambridgeshire it is stUi represented by the Rev. Thomas Andrew of Pembroke CoUege, Cambridge, Yicar of Triplow ; and by another descendant, a respectable yeoman at Litlington in the same county. In Hert fordshire, by the father of this latter, a yeoman in the parish of Buckland near Barkway. In Suffolk, by George W. Andrewes, Esq., Sudbury, Suffolk. In Surrey, by the Rev. WilUam Gerard Andrewes, M.A., Magdalen HaU, Oxford, curate of Morden near Mitcham, and grandson of the late Dean of Canterbury. The Rev. Thomas Andrew of Triplow is descended of a Northamptonshire branch of this famUy. From Northamptonshire a branch of this fanrily migrated about the beginning of the seventeenth century to the neighbourhood of Canterbury. Thence Henry Andrews re moved to London, and was cut off with his whole household, except one infant, in the Great Plague in 1665. This infant hved to a considerable age, and having acquired some fortune by merchandise, thought it right to take out arms afresh in 1729. He died in 1730. His grandson Joseph was at a very early age appointed Paymaster to the Forces serving in Scotland 1715. His son Joseph was created a Baronet in 1766. His brother, James Pettit Andrews, born at Shaw House near Newbury, 1737, was the author of a misceUaneous coUection entitled Anecdotes, Ancient and Modern, fyc. Lond. 8vo. 1789. A supplement to this volume in 1790; History of Great Britain, 1794, vol. I., from Caesar's invasion to the death of Richard I. 4to. Lond. In 1795 appeared a second part, to the accession of Edward VI. The plan of this work was founded on that of Dr. Henry. He appears to have discontinued it for the purpose of com pleting Dr. Henry's history, which, in 1796, he brought down to the accession of James I. He translated The Savages of Ewrope ; a popular French novel now forgotten. In 1798 he published The Inquisitor, a Tragedy in five Acts altered from the German, in conjunction with his friend H. J. Pye, the Poet Laureate. He was a contributor to the Archceohgia and the Gentleman's Magazine. On the establishment ofthe London Police Magistracy in 1792, he was appointed Magistrate for Queen's Square and St. Margaret's West minster. He died in London August 6th, 1797. He had married Anne daughter of the Rev. Rumney Penrose, Rector of Newbury. He survived her twenty years. The present exceUent Master of the Grammar School, Stamford, the Rev. Frederic E. Gretton, B.D., late FeUow of St. John's CoUege, Cambridge, and author of some valuable Parochial Sermons,1 is descended from Bishop Andrewes 1 London, Edwards and -Hughes, Ave Maria Lane. 1843. Author also of Elmsleiana, 1839, &e., &c. 544 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. both on the mother's and father's side. His father married a Clayh and his grandfather a Pigott, the granddaughter and daughter re spectively of Catharine and EUen Andrewes, whose father died and was buried at Southwell in or about 1717. Mr. G. W. Andrews of Sudbury is a younger brother of the Rev. Robert Andrews, B.D., who was ninth Senior Optime, Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge, and B.A. 1821, of Middleton near Sudbury. The eldest brother is Lieut.- Colonel Andrews, residing at 57, Ecclestone Square, London; and the youngest, the Rev. WUliam Nesfield Andrews, of Jesus College, Cambridge, M.A. 1832, Rector of Chilton near Sudbury 1853. A.D. 1600. Five days after the death of Hooker, Andrewes wrote to Dr. Parry, afterward Bishop of Worcester : " Saitttem is Cheisio. " I cannot choose but write though you do not ; I never faded since I last saw you, but daily prayed for him tUl the very instant you sent me this heavy news. I have hitherto prayed Serva nobis hunc ; now must I Da nobis alium. Alas, for our great loss ! and when I say ours, though I mean yours and mine, yet much more the common : with [which ?] the less sense they have of so great a damage, the more sad we need to bewaU them ourselves, who knew his works and his worth to be such as behind hrm he hath not, that I know, left any near him. And whether I shaU Uve to know any near him, I am in great doubt that I care not how many and myself had redeemed his longer life, to have done good in a better subject than he had in hand, though that were very good. Good brother, have a care to deal with his executrix or executor, or (him that is like to have a great stake in it) his father- in-law, that there be special care and regard for preserving such papers as he left, besides the three last books excepted. By pre serving, I mean, that not only they be not embezzled and come to nothing, but that they come not into great hands who wiU only have use of them quatenus et guousque, and suppress the rest, or unhappily aU; but rather into the hands of some of them that unfeignedly wished him weU, though of the meaner sort, who may upon good assurance (very good assurance) be trusted with them; for it is pity they should admit any limitation. Do this and do it mature ; it had been more than time long since to have been about it, if I had sooner known it. If any word or letter would do any good to Mr. Churchman, it should not want. But what cannot yourself or Mr. Sandys do therein? For Mr. Cranmer is away; happy in that he shall gain a week or two before he know of it. Almighty God comfort us over him, whose taking away, I trust I shaU no longer Uve than with grief remember; therefore with grief because with inward and most just honour I ever honoured him since I knew him. " Tour assured poor loving friend, " L. Andkewes. "At the Court, Nov. 7, 1600." APPENDIX. 545 About a month after this letter was written the Archbishop sent Andrewes to Mrs. Hooker to enquire after the MSS. He did not however succeed in obtaining any information. Upon this the Archbishop sent for her to London, when she confessed that Mr. Chark, a Puritan, and another minister of the same bias, had de stroyed some of his papers as being in their opinion not such as should see the Ught. However the rough drafts of the three last books of the Eccl. PoUty were discovered and deUvered by Whitgift to Dr. Spenser, who drew up as perfect a copy as he could, a tran script of which was given to Andrewes amongst others. — Strype's Whitgift, u. 441. Page 216. The Apocalypse. Dr. Christopher Wordsworth has in his work entitled The Apocalypse, (Lond. Rivingtons, 1849,) given in Appendix I., the doctrine of Andrewes upon Antichrist, pp. 166 — 203, Ex secundo capite ad Thessal. probabiliter colligi Romanum Pontificem esse Antichristum. — De Sede et Duratione Antiehristi — De Enoch et Elid.—De quatuor Visionibus S. Johannis in Apocalypsi, in quibus Antichristus designator. Page 248. Heinsitts. Daniel Heinsius (Heyn), Professor of PoUtics and History at Leyden, was bom at Ghent in May 1580, and was a pupU of Joseph Scaliger. He was appointed Greek Professor when but 18 years old. Urban VIII. made him great offers if he would come to Rome. He was an indefatigable critical editor. He died February 25, 1655. Page 377. Of Dr. Sibbes see Materials for a Life of Dr. Richard Sibbes, communicated by the Rev. J. E. B. Mayor, M.A. (FeUow of St. John's CoUege, Cambridge). Read December 1, 1856, Communica tions made to the Cambridge Antiquarian Society, No. VII. Cam bridge, 1857, pp. 253 — 264. Dr. Sibbes was an ornament of St. John's' CoUege, of which he was successively a Scholar and Fellow. To his feUowship he was admitted on April 3, 1601, M.A. 1602, taxor 1608, preacher of Gray's Inn about 1618, Master of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, 1626, died July 5, 1635. For an invaluable coUection of his works the University Library at Cambridge is indebted to the discriminating zeal of the Rev. J. E. B. Mayor. Page 378. Martin. The Rev. John Martin was, on the day after his admission to priest's orders, presented to Loddon in Norfolk. Baker's MSS. 546 THE LIFE OF BISHOP ANDREWES. Page 384. Mede, Moee, and Cudwobth. The tablet to the memory of these eminent persons was erected by the late Bishop of Lincoln, the then Master, and the Fellows of Christ CoUege, at the suggestion of that lamented prelate's early and devoted friend the Venerable Archdeacon of Lincoln, Dr. Henry Kaye Bonney, Rector of Kingseliffe, Nor thamptonshire, the author of a Life of Jeremy Taylor, and of an account of Fotheringay and Buckden Palace. Page 396. Thomas Macaeness. Thomas Macarness was admitted to the Vicarage of Barton near Cambridge in the spring of 1617. Page 472. Junius. Francis Junius, the son of the joint translator of the Old Testa ment with TremeUius, was born at Heidelberg in 1589. He was the nephew of Isaac Vossius, Canon of Windsor, and from 1620 resided mostly in England, partly in the famUy of Thomas Earl of Arundel, partly at Oxford, for the sake of the Bodleian and other Ubraries. There he took lodgings opposite Lincoln CoUege, that he might be near his learned pupU Dr. MarshaU, the Rector of the CoUege, who, like himself, was a zealous student in the northern languages. Thence he removed to St. Ebb's parish. In 1665 he pubUshed his Glossarium GotMcum in quatuor Evangelia Gothica. Dordrac, 1555, 4to., with notes by Dr. MarshaU. He died in 1677, at the house of Vossius at Windsor, and was buried in St. George's Chapel. His Etymologicon Anglicanum was pubUshed in 1 743, in foUo, by the Rev. Edward Lye, M.A., Vicar of Little Houghton, Northamptonshire. Page 472. Tilenus. Daniel Tilenus, at first a Predestinarian, but afterward an in temperate opponent of predestination, was born at Goldberg in Silesia, Feb. 4, 1563, came to France about 1590, and was natural ized by Henry IV. He entered into controversy with Peter du MouUn, and afterward with the learned John Cameron of Saumur. See of him Quick's Synodicon, vol. i., and Collatio inter Tilenum et Cameronem. He gained the favour of James by recommending episcopacy to the Scotch. He died at Paris Aug. 1, 1633. MSS. In the Library of the British Museum are five smaU volumes of Latin notes on various parts of Holy Scripture, coUected by our prelate. MS. Harl. No. 6616. LibeUus in 8vo. scriptus a.d. 1602, et continens Expositiones Evangelii S. Lucae a capite nono. Ab Episc. Andrewes, et propria manu descriptus, ut videtur. 6617 — 6619. In 8vo. Tres Tomi eadem manu scripti in annis 1608, 1612, et 1619. APPENDIX. 547 6620. LibeUus eadem manu scriptus, et continens: 1. Frag- mentum notarum in Psalmos, novem foliis. 2. Notas in Epistolam ad HebraBOS; inceptus a.d. 1586, AprU 10. In the Library of Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge, are some MS. notes taken from some Sermons (probably deUvered in Cambridge) in an unknown hand. This MS. is imperfect. 1658. A Discourse of Ceremonies retained and used in Christian Churches. Written by the Rt. Rev. Father in God Lancelot Andrewes, late Bishop of Winchester, a little before his death. At the request of one person that desired satisfaction therein. Printed by the original copy written with his own hand. 1653. With a Preface by Edward Leigh. The scope of this little treatise, judged by some unworthy of Bp. Andrewes, and certainly not altogether favouring his style, is to prove that many pagan ceremonies were retained in England after Christianity was received. There is a portrait of Bp. Andrewes prefixed, which is reduced from that in the foUo edition of his Sermons. INDEX. Absolution, 71, 72. Acqua Viva, 222. Aglionby, Dr. John, 131. Geo. 131. Array, Dr. Henry, 134. Albertus Magnus and Aquinas, 152. Alcuin, 221. Alton, Hants, 17. Alderton, 108. Ambrose, St., 81, 86, 210, 365, 375, 400, 442. Anabaptists, The, 169. Andre-wes, Family of, 1, and Appendix. Antichrist, 221, 222, 245. Antiquaries, Society of, Andre-wes a member of, 36. Apocalypse, 216, 221, 222, 245, 264, 265. Apocrypha, 240, 241. Apthorp, 102, 103, 104. Aquinas, 56, 214, 238, 529. Archer, Rev. Thomas, 100. Aristotle, 439. Arminius, 372. The Arminians, 443, 444, 505, 511, 513. Ascham, Dingley, 1. Ashworth, Henry, M.D., 140. Athanasius, St., 13. Creed of, 457. Audley End, 397. Augustine, St., 12, 21, 28, 46, 48, 49, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 59, 62, 64, 73, 84, 86, 89, 156, 203, 240, 241, 289, 309, 328, 358, 365, 409, 439, 442, 443, 448, 449, 452, 461, 474, 515, 530. Aylworth, Anthony, M.D., 140. Ayscough, Sir Robert, 433. Bacon, Lord, 259, 474, 502. — Roger, 152. Balcanqual, Dean of Durham, 357, 392, 417, 455, 485. BaUow, Dr. William, 144. Baptism, 10, 166, 521. Of bells, 243. Bandinelli, Dean of Jersey, 493. Bargrave, Dean, 401. Barkham, Dr., Dean of Booking, 146. Baro, Dr. Peter, 50. Baronius, 264. Barrett, WiUiam, 50, 61. Barrow, Henry, 45. Barwell, Edmund, 231. Baskerville, Simon, 141, 142. Basil, St., 365, 374. Beale, Jerome, 430, 431. — WiUiam, 395. Becan, Martin, the Jesuit, 260. Beckett, Mr., 508. Bede, Venerable, 361. BedweU, WiUiam, 170. BeUassis, Sir W., 433. BeUarmine, 81, 82, 83, 89, 174, 182, 186, 200, 201, 202, 203, 205—229, 235—246, 264, 359, 388, 398, 399, 400. Benedictus, Dr. John, 321. Bennet, Sir John, 150, 381, 475. Beoley, 395. Bernard, St., 81, 158, 515. Bertius, 372. Beza, 54, 103, 336—343. Codex Beza?, 303 329 Bird, Wm., D.C.L., 136. Thomas, 137. Bisham Abbey, 153. Bishops' Bible, 278. Bishops. Abbot, Archbishop, 98, 114, 154, 158, 195, 231, 247, 248, 249, 259, 358, 368, 373, 380, 381, 388, 455, 476, 480, 482, 503. — Abbot, SaUsbury, 132, 194, 375, 376, 418—421. — Alcock, Ely, 257. — Anselm, Archbishop, 240, 515. — Augustine, Archbishop, 361. — Bancroft, Archbishop, 173, 231, 232 236. — Bayley, Bangor, 429, 476. — Barlow, Thomas, Lincoln, 129, 160, 162. Tuam, 470. — Bilson, Winchester, 11, 154, 158, 381, 388. — Brideoak, Chester, 143. — Bridges, Oxford, 128, 387. — Buckeridge, Ely, 11, 162, 252, 380, 429, 446, 505, 527. — Brownrigg, Exeter, 447. — Bull, St. David's, 83. — Carleton, Chichester, 453, 510, 520. — Carey, Exeter, 432, 437, 480. — Chaderton, Lincoln, 17, 51. — Compton, London, 105. — Cooper, Galloway, 437. — Cooper, Lincoln, 128. 550 INDEX. Bishops. Corbet, Norwich, 107, 402. — Cosin, Durham, 240, 424. — Cotton, Exeter, 173. — Cranmer, Archbishop, 49, 274. — Creighton, Bath and Wells, 431. — Davenant, SaUsbury, 398, 454, 480. — Dove, Peterborough, 3, 4. ¦ — • Downame, Geo., Deny, 85. — Duppa, Winchester, 91. — Felton, Ely, 17, 354, 445, 446. — Field, Llandaff, 499. — Fisher, Rochester, 224, 448. — Fletcher, Worcester, 47, 52. — Fotherbie, SaUsbury, 422. — Grey, Archbishop, 34. — GoldweU, SaUsbury, 85. — HaU, Norwich, 377, 453. — Hanmer, St. Asaph, 153. — Harsnet, Archbishop, 67, 232, 233. — Hacket, Lichfield and Coventry, 90, 154. — Heath, Archbishop, 274. — Heton, Ely, 67, 231. — Hopkins, Derry, 18. — Howland, Peterborough, 17, 51, 52. — Howson, Durham, 419. — Hutton, Archbishop, 17, 52, 55. — James, Durham, 160. — Jewel, SaUsbury, 218, 407, 442. — Juxon, Archbishop, 66, 67. — Kaye, Lincoln, 48, 50, 87, 102, 503. — King, London, 128, 162, 172, 173, 381, 387, 429. — Lake, Bath and Wells, 429. — Laud, Archbishop, 98, 172, 217, 407, 420, 432, 437, 444, 476, 477, 480, 484, 488, 490, 502, 504, 505, 508, 511, 512, 525. — LesUe, Raphoe, 501. — LindseU, Hereford, 262, 416. — Marsh, Peterborough, 270, 311, 334. — Matthew, Archbishop, 160, 433. — Mawe, Bath and Wells, 485. — Morton, Durham, 17, 59, 266, 365, 373, 407, 438, 469, 518. — Middleton, Marmaduke, St. Da vid's, 45. — MUbourne, CarUsle, 85, 86, 409. — Mountagu, Winchester, 171, 249, 365, 387, 428. — Mountagu, Norwich, 509 — 524. — Montaine, Archbishop, 445, 467. — Neile, Archbishop, 172, 380, 387, 432, 482, 490, 498, 503, 527. — OveraU, Norwich, 60, 61, 63, 64, li, 249, 350, 368, 369, 372, 381, 389, 411, 424, 438. — Parry, Worcester, 45, 168. Bishops. Piers, Archbishop, 173. — Prideaux, Worcester, 421, 524. — Ravis, London, 160, 173. — Rudd, St. David's, 158. — Sancroft, Archbishop, 188. — Scottish Bishops, 161, 236. — Senhouse, Carlisle, 86, 410. — Sharpe, Archbishop of York, 83. — Still Bath and Wells, 159, 412, 428. — Taylor, Down and Connor, 83. — Thompson, Gloucester, 3, 93, 132, 252. — Thornborough, Worcester, 445. ¦ — Tomline, Winchester, 83. — TonstaU, Durham, 274. — Towers, Peterborough, 401, 501. — Tounson, SaUsbury, 446. — Turton, Ely, 349. — Vaughan, London, 52. — Watson, Chichester, 153. — Wedderburn, Dunblane, 392, 393. — Whitgift, Archbishop, 24, 26, 52, 503. — WiUiams, Archbishop, 477, 480, 503. — Winniffe, Lincoln, 144. Wren, Ely, 84, 85, 233, 255, 256, 350, 403—407, 431, 468, 469, 471, 490, 527. — Tonge, John, Rochester, 24. Bisse, Dr., Subdean of Wells, 45. BlackweU, 186, 199, 263. Blencoe, Dr. 136. Bletsoe, 101, 171. BUss, Rev. James, 471. Bodley, Sir Thomas, 149. John, 276. Bolton, Robert, 143. Bonney, Dr., Archdeacon of Lincoln, 106. Borlace, 131. Boxworth, 414, 416. Boys, Dr. John, Preb. of Ely, IS, 410 —416. Bowes, Talbot, Esq., 433. Brasenose CoU., Oxford, 151. Brook, Dr., 402. Budden, Dr. John, 138. BuU, Dr., 128. Bunney, Edmund, 87, 88. BurhiU, Robert, 262, 263. BurneU, Dr. 501. Butter, Wm., M.D., 261. CsBsar, Sir Julius, 381. Dr. Henry, Dean of Ely, 444. Calvin, 21, 50, 53, 62, 232, 450, 452, 465. Cambridge, James' Visit to, 397 — 404. Campian, Edmund, 263. INDEX. 551 Carleton, Sir Dudley, Letter to, 366. Carter, John, Clare HaU, 19. Casaubon, Isaac, 246, 249, 251, 253 — 260, 350, 355, 356, 357, 358, 364— 378, 385, 388, 389. Casaubon, Meric, 251, 385, 502. CastiUon, Douglas, 153. Dean Cas- tiUon, 153. Castle Ashby, 105. Catesby the conspirator, 179, 180, 181, 190. Catharinus, Ambrose, 64. CeUbacy, 359. Chaderton, Dr., Master of Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge, 18, 33. Chalmers, Dr., 264. Charles I., 157, 491, 492, 499, 500, 511, 512. Charles IX., 163. Charrier, Dr. Benj., 378. Charterhouse, 253. Chrysogonus, Monastery of St., at Rome, 288. Christiern IV., King of Denmark, 159. Church, The, 246, 514. CheyneU, John, M.D., 140. Clare HaU in the time of James I., 261. Clarius, Isidore, 321. Clayton, Dr. Thomas, 142. Clemens Alexandrinus, 302. Clement VIII., 175, 177, 186, 211, 216. Clifford's Divine Services, 249. Cluverius, 489. CoUins, Dr., Provost of King's CoUege, Cambridge, 361, 362, 447—450, 527. Colonna, Cardinal, 261. Compton, Spencer, 401. Coppinger, Henry, 411, 413. Confession, 182, 183. Conspirators, Gunpowder, harboured by the Romish States, 191. Corbet, Dr. E., 421. Cotton, Thomas, of Conington, 1. Councils, General. Their infalUbiUty maintained by Mountagu, 516. Con vened by Charlemagne and other Emperors, 215. Council of Elibe- ris, 86, 88. Florence, 265. Lyons, 265, II. 399. Milevum, 86. Nice, 2nd, 9, 10. First Lateran, 216, 264. Countesses, 123, 352. Coughton, Warwickshire, 181, 190. Coverdale's Translation, 271—274. Cranmer's Bible, 274, 275. Cripplegate, Andrewes' Lectures at, 31. Charities, 43. CromweU, The Lord-Protector, 238. Crowley, Robert, 17, 18. CulverweU, Ezekiel, 18. Cyprian, St., 370, 471. Cyriac of Ancona, 288. Cyril of Alexandria, 299. CyrU of Jerusalem, 514. Daniel, Samuel, 148. Danvers, Wm., 432. Day, The Lord's, 11, 12. Dearth, The, in 1594, 46. Deposing power, The Pope's, 205. Devereux, Walter, 34. Devotions, Andrewes's, 535. Digby, Sir Everard, 185, 190, 192. — Sir Kenelm, 500. Dispensing power of the Pope ex posed, 207—209. Divinity School, Oxford, 150. Divorce, Marriage after, 86 — 89. Divorce of the Earl of Essex, 379 — 382. Dod, Thomas, 438. Dominis, Marc Antony de, 417, 451, 482, 483. Donne, Dean of St. Paul's, 408. Donne, Sir Daniel, 381. Dorking, 475. Dort, The Synod of, 58, 453, 456, 465, 511. Douglas, Sir George, 385. Downes, Andrew, 412, 415. Downham Palace, 257. Andrewes's illness at, 355. Drake, Dr. Richard, 535. Drusius, 424. Duke of Buckingham, 131, 389, 488, 503, 504, 513, 523. — Lenox, Esme Stewart, 114. — Richmond, James, 104. Duport, Professor, 445. Durham, Bishop Andrewes preaches at, 434. Earl of Arundel, 115, 429, 485. — Banbury, 121. — Bedford, (2nd) 102. — Bolingbroke, 101. — Bristol, Digby, 149. — Cumberland, Clifford, 106. — Clare, (2nd) 401. — Devonshire, 120. — Dorset, (Buckhurst) 108, 110, 111, 112. — Essex, 71, 109, 111. His son, 119. — ¦ Huntingdon, Henry Hastings, 17, 275. — Leicester, 18, 111. — Montgomery, PhiUp Herbert, 120. — Northampton, 109, 388. — Northumberland, Henry, 117. — Nottingham, 93, 119. 552 INDEX. Earl of Oxford, Vere, 116. — Pembroke, William, 118. — Perth, 120. — Rutland, Manners, 116. — SaUsbury, 99, 109, 183, 192. — Somerset, Carr, 380—382. — Southampton, 117. Henry, 118. — Suffolk, 109, 149, 396, 397. — Totness, 110. — Worcester, 108. Edwards, Dr. Thomas, 381. Egerton, Lord-Keeper, 151, 173. Eland, George, 432. Elizabeth, Queen, 35, 46, 91. Ely, Andrewes at, 256—258. Espence, Claude D., 376. Enoch, The Apocryphal Book of, 38. Epiphany, The, 70, 486. Episcopacy, 220, 457, 458. Erasmus, 282, 309, 316. His New Testament, 316—322. Erpenius, 479. Estius, 269, 292. Eucharist, The, 10, 11, 38, 67, 166, 351, 365, 378, 449, 522, 528. Euthymius Zigabenus, 210. Ewelme, Rectory of, 153. Faber, Dr. John, 321. Faith, 6, 23. Farnham, Andrewes entertains King James at, 467. Farr, Henry, 408. Fasting, 13, 14, 473, 481. Fathers, The, 436. Featley, Dr., 524. Fens, Drainage of the, 460. Fenton, Dr. Roger, 25, 164. Ferrar, Nicholas, 261. Field, Dr. Richard, Dean of Gloucester and Canon of Windsor, 11, 52, 92, 133, 135, 370, 399, 400, 529. Fisher, George, anas Muskett, 408. Fitzherbert, Archdeacon, 144. Fitzherbert, Thomas, 379, 447 Fleetwood, Sir WiUiam, 500. Fletcher, Richard, 390. Forbes, Dr. John, 89, 452. Friar, Dr., 91. Fronto Ducaeus, Casaubon's Letter to, 189. Fulke, Dr. WiUiam, 26. FuUer, Nicholas, 534. Fuller, Dr. Thomas, 142, 164, 218, 286, 403, 412, 428. Gaguinus, 151. Garnet, 175, 176, 179, 180—184, 186, 190, 192, 194, 197, 216. Gell, Dr. Robert, 268, 269. Genesis, Andrewes' Lectures on, 30 — 33. GentiUs Alberic, 136—139. Geneva Bible, 275—278. George, Sir Henry St., 527. Gerhardi Confessio CathoUca, 89, 135, 242, 399. Gibson, Nicholas, 2. Gifford, John, M.D., 140. Gift, The, and Calling, 483. GUby, Antony, 278. Goade, Dr. Thomas, 146, 455, 489. Goat, Antichrist's, 351. God, Proofs of his Being, 7. Fear of God, 15. Grace of God, 16. God in Christ, 54. Glory of God, 68. Alone to be worshipped, 449. Gooch, Dr. Barn., 149. Goodwin, Dr., Dean of Christ Church, 373. Gordon, Dr., Dean of Sarum, 97, 112, 135, 223. Gorges, W., Esq., 106. GospeL Summary of, 5. The Law and the Gospel, 8. Gowrie Conspiracy, 174, 245, 246, 256. Grant, Dr. Edward, 75. Green, Dr. 527. Greenwood, John, 45. Grafton Lodge, 106. Gregory Nazianzen, St., 450. Gregory the Great, 215, 224, 306, 474. Griesbach, 280. Grotius, 368, 369, 372, 438—443, 444, 479. Gunpowder Plot, 178—194, 210, 211, 391. Gwynne, Dr., 126, 139. HaU the Jesuit, 181. Hamilton and Wishart the Scottish Martyrs, 238. Hammond, John, M.D., father of Dr. Henry, 126, 1^7, 149. Hampton Court Conference, 93, 96. HanweU, 106. Harding, Dr. John, 143. Hare, Archdeacon, 250. Harlay, C. de, 131. Harpur, Sir Richard, 171. Harrowden, 105. Harston, 392. Hatfield Palace, 99. Havering-atte-Bower, 98. Hawnes, Beds., 99, Hatton, Sir Christopher, 104. Henrietta, Queen, 408, 500. Henry III. and IV., 485. Henry III., 211, 219. Henry Prince of Wales, 113, 130, 141, 146, 147, 234, 235, 358. INDEX. 553 Heidelberg Catechism, 168. Hentenius, 321. Herbert, George, 235, 404, 431, 502. Heselrige, Sir W., 106. Heureux, L., John Eudaemon, 189, 361 —363, 364. Heylyn, Peter, 88, 504. Heyne, Daniel, 259, 369, 389. Hills, John, 231, 445. Hoby, Sir Edward, 171. Hodson, Dr. Phinehas, 433. Holdenby, 171. HoUand, Dr. Thomas, 132. Holt, Thomas, Architeot, 151. Holy Spirit. Freedom of his operations, 159. His witness, 235. Divinity of, 353. Hooker, 58, 517. And Appendix. Hope, The assurance of, 71. Horndon, Essex, 1. Hoveden, Dr. Robert, 152. Houghton Conquest, 99. Howitt, Mr., 388. Hugo de Sancto Victore, 62, 210. Huss, John, 269. Hussey, Dr. James, 137. Huntingdon, Dr. Robert, 296, 306. Hutchenson, Dr. Ralph, 375. Hutton, Sir Richard, 433. Idolaters no Christians, 427. Ignoramus, The Comedy of, 401, 402. Images, 9, 223, 244. Immanuel, Andrewes' Sermons on, 393, 394. Independents, The, 169. Ladustry, 32. Invocation of Saints, 621. Ireland's, Dean, Nuptice Saerce, 87. Irenaeus, 322. Isaacson, Henry, 534. Isidore of SeviUe, 439. Jackson, John, 5. Jacobson, Professor, 51. James, King. His Premonition to all Christian monarchs, 196, 202—204. His Confession of Faith, 203, 204, 358, 359, 360. His humanity, 477. His death, 503. James, Dr. Francis, 381. Jebb's, Rev. John, Choral Responses, 250. Jerome, St., 86, 210, 234, 287, 297. Jesuits, The, 159, 160, 163, 164, 177, 188, 192, 193, 194, 211, 222, 238, 285, 357, 391, 455, 466, 499. Job, 234. John, King, 217. John VIII., Pope, 217. Jonah, 434, 435. JubUee, The, 437. Judas, 221. Junius, 472, 478, 479, 485. Justification, 32, 33, 68, 69, 76—83, 219, 220, 375, 449, 519, 520, 531. King, Dr. John, 145. KeUison, Dr., 408. Kennicott, Dr., 274. King's CoUege, Cambridge, 455. Kings, God's commission to, 165. KingscUffe, 102. Knewstubs, John, 18. KnoUys, Sir Wm., 34. Sir Robert, 34. Lachmann, 300, 303, 304. lake, Secretary, 262, 353. Lamphire, Professor, 535. Langdon, Essex, 1. Langley, 112. Langton, Dr. WiUiam, 145, 376. Lapworth, Edward, M.D., 142. Lathbury, Bucks, 1. Lay-Baptism, 521. Lebrixa of Alcala, 311. Legends, Impiety of Romish, 243. Leo a Castro, 374. Leo the Great, 474. LiUy, Dr., Archdeacon of Wilts, 153. Lingard, Dr., 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 182, 183, 188, 189, 192, 193, ig4, 195, 200, 210. Litton, Sir Richard, 108. Lloyd, Dr. Oliver, 138. Lombard, Peter, 11, 442. Lord Abergavenny, temp. Henry VII., 111. Lady ArabeUa Stuart, 123. Lord Braybrooke, 105. — Carey, 110, — Chandos, 149. — Compton, 110. — Crewe, 171. — Delawarr, 149. — Erskine, 122. — Grey de Wilton, Arthur, 147. — Grey, WiUiam, 147. — Griffin of Braybrooke, 105. — Hervey of Kidbrook, 101. — Harrington, 389. — Howard of Walden, 105, 397. — St. John, OUver, (3rd) 101, 171. — Kinloss, 149. — • Mountjoy, Charles Blount, 120. — Mounteagle, Wm. Parker, 122. — Rich, 34, 35. — Sondes, 104. — Vaux, 105. — Wotton, 121. 554 INDEX. Lorinus, 467. Love, Dr., Dean of Ely, 401. Loughton HaU, 98. Loyola, Ignatius, 400. Luther's Translation, 270. Luton, Hoo, 99. Mable, James, 130. Macarness, Thomas, 396. Maldonatus, 515. Malin, Nicolo, 131. Manutius, Aldus, 322. Marbeck, Dr. Roger, 84. Margaret, Lady, Countess of Rich mond, 101. Marquess of Buckingham, 118. Marquess of Winchester, 509. Martin, Dr. H., 137. John, 378. Martin del Rio, the Jesuit, 185. Mason, Dean of Sarum, 401. Mass, The Romish, 38, 351. Matthew's Bible, 274. Matthaei, 280. Mayor, The Lord, Andrewes dines with, 253. Mede, Joseph, 18, 384. Melancthon, 48. MelviUe, Andrew and James, 161 — 163. Merchant Taylors' School, 2, 3, 66, 74, 84, 93. Meriton, Dr., Dean of York, 85. Michael the Archangel, 71. Middleton, Dr., 507. Mildmay, Sir Anthony and Sir Walter, 102, 103. Mocket, Dr. Richard, 143. Monson, Sir Thomas, 149. Montford, Dr. Thomas, 74. — John, 74, 75. Moore, Gabriel, 501. Moses and Christ, 461. Motives, Christian, 453. Moulin, Peter du Moulin, 356, 366, 457, 458, 463, 464. Mount, Sermon on the, 39. Mulcaster, Richard, 2, 3. WiUiam, 2. Muriel, Thomas, 355. Mutlow, Dr. H., 400. Napier, Bt., 99. NevUle, Dean, 33. Sir Henry, 149. Newdigate, Sir Robert and Sir Roger, 100. Newton, Suffolk, 1. Nicene Creed, 266. Nicetas, Choniates, 374. Nicholas VIII., Pope, 308. Nicholson, Richard, Mus. B., 129. November 5th, First anniversary of, 163, 164. Nowell, Dean Alexander, 3, 33, 35, 61. Nuce, Dr., 230. Oath ex officio, 37 Oaths, 39. Oath of AUegiance, 198, 199 ; condemned by Paul V., 199. Obedience, Passive, Grotius on, 441. fficolampadius, 365, CEcumenius, 55. Ogle, Sir John, Letter to, 385. Olave's, St., Hart Street, 33, 34, 302. Orders, Holy, no Sacrament, 425. Origen, 86, 210, 238. Orphan Lectures, Andrewes', 382, 383. Overbury, Sir Thomas, 381. Owen, Dr. John, 129. — Dr. Henry, 302. Oxford, James I., his Progress to, 98 — > 113. The King at Oxford, 113— 153. Aristotle's WeU, 113. Oxford Gloves, 114. St. GUes', 124, 125. Saxon Oxford, 1 24, 1 25. City Gates, 125. St. John's CoU., 126. Carfax, 126. ChristChurch, 126, 127. Cathe dral, 128. Prince Henry at Magda lene CoU., 129, 130. The Comedv Vertumnus, 131. Div. Theses, 131 — 136 ; in the Civil Law, 136—139 ; in Medicine, 139 — 141 ; in Philoso phy, 141 — 144. Two appointed by the King, 144: — 146. Banquet at Magd. Coll., 146, 147. Convocation at St. Mary's, 148, 149. Bodleian Library, 149 — 151. Brasenose CoU., 151, 152. The King at Magd. CoU., 153. Dines at Christ Church, and leaves Oxford, 153. Pagninus Sanctus, 272. Palatinates, Churches ofthe recognised, by Andrewes, 371- Pancras, Andrewes Prebendary of, 25, 43. Parsons fhe Jesuit, 175, 196, 420. Paul V., 372. His Bull, 199, 212, 225. Paul's, St., London, 467. Passion Sermons, 65, 94, 97. Patronage of Andrewes attempted to be resumed, 507, 508. Pearce, Dr., Dean of Ely, 100. Pelagius Alvarus, 399. Pembroke CoU., Cambridge, 3. 4, 5, 24, 26, 28, 85, 233, 405. Penal laws against the Papists, 213. Pemberton, W., 5. Penitentiary of St. Paul's, Andrewes, 26. Perin, Dr. John, 26. Perkins, WUliam, 18. — Sir Christopher, 195. Perron, Cardinal, 253, 260, 358. Perrot, Sir Thomas, 34. Peryam, Sir George, 99. INDEX. 555 Peterhouse, Andrewes and Casaubon at, 253, 256, 405. Pierce, Dr. Thomas, 383. Pinke, Dr. Robert, 143. Pius IV., 219, 309. Plato, 440. Poggio, 309. Polyglot, the Complutensian, 310—316. Pooley, Mr., 411, 414. Pope, Sir William, 106. Pope's supremacy, 245, 264. InfaUi- bUity, 462. Papal tiara, 260, 264. Porter, Walter and Henry, musicians, 129. Roger, 141. Prayer, Form of, for a Fast Day, 505, 506. Prayer, 30. The Lord's Prayer, Andrewes' Sermons on, 18. Andrewes' Bidding Prayers, 27, 39 — Preaching, 10. Of Andrewes', 266, 267. Predestination, 48 — 60. Final Per severance, 61, 62. Preface to King James's Bible, 346, 347. Preston, Dr., the Puritan, 403, 454, 458—460. Preston, Dr. Thomas, 26. Primitive Antiquity, 309. Providence, 7. Puckering, Sir John, 39. Purgatory, 244. Purification of the Blessed Virgin, 70. Puritans, The, 38, 44, 167, 239, 373, 504. Pusey, Dr., 166. Quasi- Sacramentals, 522. Raban Maur, 210. Radcliffe, Sir Edward, 402. Dr. Jere miah, 402. Rainolds, Dr. John, 88, 89. Raleigh, Sir Walter, 430. Ravens, Dr., Vicar of Dunmow, 94. Rawley, W., Chaplain to Lord Bacon, 258. Raymond, Dr., Archdeacon of St, Al ban's 500. Reade, Alexander, 403. Real Presence, The, 237, 351, 360, 426, 448, 522, 529. Reformatio legum, 87. Repentance, The Doctrine of, 494 — 498. Danger of delay, 29, 91. Revenues, Church, 27, 28. Richardson, Dr. John, 254, 255, 256, 399, 400. Rivetus, 58. ., Rockingham Caotle, 104. Rome. Babylon according to An drewes, 216, and so BurhiU, 264. Atteged unity of, 264. Contrast be tween the Romish and the CathoUc Church, 371, 409, 516, 517. Rosweyd, Heribert, 389. Rotherfield Greys, 153. Rouse, Francis, 524. Royalty, Sanctity of, 390. Royston, 233, 253, 259, 260, 454, 462. Sacraments, The, 377. Of the Old Testament, 14. The term Tlie Sacra ment, 92. Sacrifice of, 528. The Christian, 528. Sacrilege and Simony, 22, 31. Salisbury, 410, 420, 421. Sampson, Thomas, 276. Samuel, 70. Saravia, Adrian, 85. SavUe, Sir Henry, 150, 373, 374, 375, 377, 381, 415, 455. Schism, 31. Scholefield's, Prof., Greek Testament, 335. Scholz, 306. Scotland, 157, 158, 160—163, 236— 23g, 436, 437. Scott, Dr. R., Dean of Rochester, 409, 458, 459. Scriptures, The Holy, how to be studied, 7. Scrivener, The Rev. F. H., 268, 273, 277, 342—348. Seaton, Dr., 411. Serpent, The Old, Our conflict with, 71. Seymour, W., 130. Shepherd of Hermas, 87. Sibbes, Dr., 377. Singleton, Dr. Thomas, 151. Sixtus V., 201, 309. Smith, John, 18. Socrates, the Ecclesiastical Historian, 439. Souls, The love of, 64. Southampton, Jesus Chapel, Consecra tion of, 468—472. Southwell, Andrewes' staU at, 24. Spackman, Rev., Norwich, 384. Spenser, Dr., of C. C. C. Oxford, 94. — the Poet, 110. Spital Sermons, 19. Stanhope, Dr., 47- Stapleton, 81. State. Its power in things ecclesiasti cal, according to Grotius, 438 — 443. St. Barbe, Edmund, Esq., 169. Stephens, Robert, 323—336. Steward, Dr., 368. Stokes, Dr. David, 91, 535. 556 INDEX. Stonard, Wm., 128, 129. Stourbridge Fair, 356. Supererogation, Works of, 243. Supremacy, The Royal, 225—229, 263, 264. Sutton's (founder of the Charterhouse) Funeral, 351. Taverner's Bible, 274. Taylor, Dr. James, 231, 445. Thornton, Richard, Canon of Christ Church, 145. Temptation, Andrewes' Sermons on the, 18, 38. TertuUian, 87, 522. Theobald's, 98, 99. Theodoret, 302. Theophylact, 89, 269. This is my body, figurative, 243. Thomson, Richard, of Clare HaU, 260, 261, 356, 421. Thoresby, Ralph, 369. Thuanus, (De Thou), 259. Thurleigh, 100. Thurston, Mr., 416, Tiburtius, John, 288. THenus, 472. Tischendorf, 281, 291, 293, 308. Tomkis, Mr., 402, Topcliffe, Edmund, 390. Topham, Dr., Dean of Lincoln, 500. Tortura Torti, Andrewes', 174, 205 — 229. Tovey, Humphrey, 390. Traditions, 515. Traske, John, Andrewes' speech on, 456. TregeUes, Dr., 280, 281, 290, 294, 298, 299, 300, 301, 306, 333. Tresham, Sir Thomas, 171. Triumphus Augustinus, 399. Turner, Dr., Master of Peterhouse, 264, 255. Tyndale's New Testament, 271. Tyndale, Dr., Dean of Ely, 35, 51, 52, 230, 256. Vaticanus Codex, 281, 289 — 318. VaUa, Laur. 282. Annotations, 283. TJdal the Puritan, 35, 36. Version, Authorised, of the Bible, 278—280. Vilvain, Dr. Robert, 141. Vincent of Lerins, 359. Viscount Falkland, 131. — Haddington, 123. Viscount Hereford (Robert Devereux), 34. — Montagu, 111. — Wallingford (KnoUys), 34. TJitenbogard, John, 386, 387. Vossius, Isaac, 431, 438, 472, 478, 479, 485, 489. Urban VI., 219. Vulgate, The, 283—309, 321. Wake, Sir Isaac, 127. Walsingham, Sir Francis, 1, 3, 17, 25, 26, 30. Lady, 34. Waltham, Bishops, 2. Ward, Dr., Master of Sidney Sussex CoUege, 431, 447, 454, 524. Ward, Samuel, of Ipswich, 510. Ward, Dr., of Waltham, 2. Warner, Dr. Bartholomew, 139. Waterbeach, 3g2. Watson, the Priest, 177, 178, 211. Sir Edward, 104. Watts, Dr. Thomas, 3. Weston, Dr., Dean of Wells, 137. Dr. John, 137. Whitaker, Master of St. John's CoUege, Cambridge, 50, 51, 63, 369, 413. His sons Alexander and Samuel, 33. Whitaker's, Dr. (of Blackburn), re marks on BeUamy's New Transla tion, 270. White, Dr. Thomas, 45. Edmund, 454. Whittingham, Dean of Durham, 275. Wicliff, 245. Wigmore, Archdeacon, 391, 392, 430. WiUet, Andrew, 85, 230, 445. Thomas, 85. Wilson, John, musician, 129. Windsor, Andrew, Esq., 507. Winter, Thomas, 176. Winwood, Sir Ralph, 368. Wisbeach, 257, 258, 407, 408. Wolvercote, 113. Woodstock, 108. Wordsworth, Dr. Christopher, 306. Worsley, Sir Richard, 147. Wotton, Anthony, 510. Wren, Dr., Dean of Windsor, 467, 468. Wroth, Sir Richard, 84. Wroxton Park and Abbey, 106, 107. Ximenes, Crrdinal, 310. Yates, John, of Norwich, 510. Young, Dr., Dean of Winchester, 460. JONATHAN PALMER, PRINTER, SIDNEY STREET, CAMBRIDGE. 3 9002 00885 6032