the table." After a discussion on the subject of Christian peace, by the great minister of State in the king's name, they took up the question of sacraments, when Fox, Bishop of Hereford, remarked that they were commanded by his majesty "that these controversies should be determined only by the rule and judgment of the Scripture." "The lay people," he went on to observe," the lay people do now know the Holy Scripture better than many of us; and the Germans have made the text of the Bible so plain and easy, by the Hebrew and Greek tongues, that now many things may be better understood without any glosses at all, than by all the commentaries of the Doctors. And, moreover, they have so opened these controversies by their writings, that women and children may wonder at the blindness and falsehood that have been hitherto." Then rising into a strain of real eloquence, the bishop added, " Truth is the daughter of time, and time is the mother of truth; and whatsoever is besieged of truth cannot long continue; and upon whose side truth doth stand, that ought not to be thought transitory, or that it will ever fall. All things consist not in painted eloquence, and strength, or authority: for the truth is of so great power, strength, and efficacy, that it can neither be defended with words, nor be overcome with any strength; but after she hath hidden herself long, at length she putteth up her head and appeareth, as it is written in Esdras, 'A king is strong; man is stronger; yet women be more strong: but truth excelleth all.'"* This was an unanswerable argument for the circulation of the Scriptures; but, like other wise and weighty words uttered at the time, it would seem to have made very little impression; but Cromwell and Cramner, and others present, felt its force, and used such influence in the Foxe, vol. v. p. 382,

highest quarters that an edition of Coverdale's Bible, printed by Nicolson of Southwark in 1537, "overseen and corrected," not, however, to an important extent, came out with these words," Set forth with the king's most gracious licence." A wonderful step was this in the way of promoting the study of the Scriptures amongst all ranks, and involved, for the instant at least, a change in the royal ecclesiastical policy more momentous than historians generally seem to apprehend.

It must have been to the sanction of this later publication, not the edition of 1535, that Coverdale referred, when he said in a sermon at Paul's Cross, according to the testimony of Fulke, "After it was finished, and presented to King Henry VIII. of famous memory, and by him committed to divers bishops of that time to peruse, of which I remember Stephen Gardiner was one, after they had kept it long in their hands, and the king was divers times sued unto for the publication thereof, at the last, being called for by the king himself, they re-delivered the book, and being demanded by the king what they thought of the translation, they answered that there were many faults therein. Well,' said the king, but are there any heresies maintained thereby?' They answered that there were no heresies that they could find.' If there be no heresies,' said the king, 'then, in God's name, let it go abroad among our people.'

If we are to trust this statement, it seems as if the first edition was submitted to the bishops, and that after their perusal of it the royal sanction was given to the second.

Though from an English press there issued this new edition of Coverdale-followed by another in 1538, and in the same year by the English New Testament, and editions of a

*Fulke's Defence of Bible Translations, p. 4.

Diglott Testament, exhibiting the Vulgate and English in parallel columns*-the main work of preparing and printing vernacular Scriptures for this country went on abroad; and what was done there at this time will appear in the next chapter.

* In an edition of Coverdale's Bible, by Grafton and Whitchurch, 1538, is a dedication to Cromwell, in which he laments the numerous errors which had crept into Nicolson's editions, printed in London during Coverdale's absence. A New Testament, both in Latin and English, "after the Vulgate texte, commonly called St. Jerome's, faythfully translated by Johan Hollybushe," printed in Southwark by Nicolson, appeared the same year. The English is really Coverdale's, and it answers to the first edition of Coverdale's, page for page. Like the first edition, it contains many blunders. What is meant by the name of Johan Hollybushe no one knows, that I am aware. I suspect that Coverdale had fallen out with Nicolson, and that the printer issued this book on his own account.

HE Bible, which is all the Holy Scriptures, in which are contayned the olde and newe Testaments truely and purely translated into Englysh by Thomas Matthew. Essaye 1. Hearken to ye Heavens, and thou earth geave eare: for the Lorde speaketh, MDXXXVII." This was the title-page of a folio volume which appeared at the date specified; and at the bottom we read in large red letters, "Set forth with the Kinges most gracyous lycence." At the end are these words-" To the honoure and prayse of God was this Byble prynted and fynesshed, in the year of our Lorde God MDXXXVII." The book had been printed abroad, where and by whom we do not know; but

it was a publication of great consequence; its results were important, and connected with its history are some difficulties, which after much exaggeration are partially cleared up certain particulars, however, continue unexplained. The volume demands attentive consideration.

1. On opening it, one of the first things which strikes an observer, is the collection of notes appended to the text. Wycliffe has sent forth his translation without notes. Tyndale had done the same, as respects his 8vo Testament, though he had given some in the 4to edition, and had written expositions of the Pentateuch and Jonah. Coverdale's Bible contained no comment, no gloss whatever. This new Bible, bearing the name of Matthew, in this respect exhibits a new feature. The Psalms are more fully explained than other books: and in the Apocrypha, this passage arrests attention: 2 Macc. xii., "Judge upon this place whether the opinion hath been to pray for the dead, as to be baptized for them " (1 Cor. xv.), which thing was only done to confirm the hope of the resurrection of the dead, not to deliver them from any pain. St. Paul did not allow the ceremony of christening for the dead; no more doth any place of the canonical scripture allow the ceremony of offering for the dead. Furthermore, this whole book of the Maccabees, and specially this second, is not of sufficient authority to make an article of our faith, as it is before sufficiently proved by the authority of St. Jerome in the prologue of the books called Apocrypha.

The controversial bearing of this note is sufficiently obvious; and it appears surprising when we refer to the announcement of "the Kinges most gracyous lycence."

2. For a long time, no accurate knowledge was possessed by historians as to the nature of the text. It was not care