this boary villain-this panderer to the vices of the basest men in power-is held up to this day, by bigotted and interested individuals, as a paragon of virtue, and a holy martyr to the Protestant religion, and believed to be so by hundreds of credulous and ignorant people!

't bud

We do not attempt to justify, but condemn, the putting heretics to death for mere speculative doctrine; but as Protestants have been guilty of burning for heresy, as well as ripping and hanging for truth, it may not be amiss to point out some shades of difference between them and Catholic states in the exercise of this civil prerogative, for there is no authority existing in the church to authorize the putting any one to death for an error of the mind. The Arians were the first to persecute for conscience sake, after the establishment of Christianity and the eradication of Paganism; the Iconoclasts the next; and we have it on record that St. Ambrose and St. Martin, two great luminaries of the Catholic church, refused to hold communion with a Spanish bishop, named Ithacius, even against the will of the emperor, because he sought to have certain Priscillian heretics put to death. Heresy, we believe, was not made a capital punishment until those who broached it mingled with it doctrines that were dangerous to the peace and happiness of society, and threatened the subversion of all order. It consequently followed that kings and magistrates found themselves necessitated to adopt some strong measures to secure their own authority, and hence arose the statutes enacted to punish heresy with death.-In these cases the offender was taken before his ecclesiastical judges, who examined the doctrines he maintained, pointed out to him the erroneousness of his opinions, and if he continued obstinate, after due time was allowed him for reflection, he was pronounced contumacious and handed over to the secular power. This was the mode of proceeding with Joan Bocher, but who were her judges, and what authority had they to pronounce her a heretic. In those cases where Catholics were concerned, it is to be observed that their decisions were made according to a rule believed to be unerring. They pronounced upon the authority of an undeviating system of faith, brought down from age to age, and followed universally throughout the world. Here then it was antiquity and uniformity against novelty and disunion. Now this was not the case with Cranmer and Joan Bocher. Her judges had departed themselves from the invariable rule; they had set up reason, fallible human reason, as their guide; they allowed private interpretation of the scriptures; and at the same time they passed laws to punish individuals who did not or would not think as they did; they have them arrested; they sit in judgment upon them; and with the utmost composure sentence them to death, though it does not appear that the error maintained in the least affected the safety of the state. Here then we have real sheer tyranny; because the judges in this case did not decide by legitimate authority, and were themselves infected with the same crime. They condemned the woman for exercising a right which they said she possessed, and was to use according to her own judgment, and punished her because she could not see as they pretended to see. Thus we have shewn that there is a very great difference between Catholic divines pronouncing upon heresy, and the decisions of Protestants on that offence. The one decides according to

་

an ancient and unerring law; the other according to his own whim and fancy, which the other culprit under trial, if a Protestant, would probably exercise over his judges were the tables reversed and the power placed in his hands. This, as we have before said, is pure despotic tyranny; but the other is law, though subject to abuse, through human agency, and we have no doubt has been abused.

The saying of the king to Cranmer, “that since he resigned up himself to his judgment, if he sinned in it, it should lie at his door," seems to have struck old Tom a little queerly, and he and Ridley set about making a convert of old Joan.—But how could they expect to remove Joan's opinion when she was sensible that they had themselves shuffled in their own, and that too for their temporal interests. Hence when she was taken to the stake, and Dr. Scory undertook to refute her opinion in a sermon to the people, she told him “he lied like a rogue, and had better go home and study the scriptures."-Von Parris, or Von Parre, the other victim sent to the stake, was a surgeon in London. He was also arraigned before Cranmer, Ridley, Coverdale and others, after having been excommunicated by his brethren of the Dutch church. This man seems to have been a moralist, nor does there appear to have been the least charge of a seditious nature against him. He was burned purely for his speculative opinions, and Burnet is forced to acknowledge, though the modern editors have suppressed the admission, that this man's death “cast a great blemish on the reformers."

DIVISIONS AMONG THE REFORMERS.

In taking leave of the foregoing subject for the present, it is necessary that we should observe, that while Cranmer and his associates were thus proscribing with fire and fagot Unitarian sentiments, a convenient latitude was given to other sectarians, and foreign religionists, as well as foreign troops, were encouraged to settle in the kingdom. Men of every sect as well as of every nation found an asylum in the palace of Cranmer, and he procured for them livings in the church and protection at court. In return for these favours, some accommodated their consciences to the existing order of things. There was one, however, of the native reformers, whose vagaries and obstinacy led to a train of confusion and disorder, which had nigh proved fatal to the new church, and have left testimony of the fallacy of her foundation, and another instance of the subtlety of Tom Cranmer. This incident we shall give in the words of Dr. Lingard." John "Hooper, by his activity, his fervid declamation and his bold though * intemperate zeal, had deserved the applause and gratitude of the well wishers to the new doctrines. Edward named him to the bishopric *of Gloucester; when the preacher himself opposed an unexpected ❝ obstacle to his own promotion. How could he swear obedience to "the metropolitan, who was determined to obey no spiritual authority "but that of the scriptures? How could he submit to wear the epis“copal habits, the livery of that church, which he had so often de"nominated the harlot of Babylon? Cranmer and Ridley attempted "to convince him by argument, and to influence him by authority : "Bucer reminded him that to the pure all things are pure; and Peter

"Martyr contended that the wearing of episcopal habits, though meet "in his opinion to be abolished, was yet an indifferent matter, in which "the most timorous might conscientiously acquiesce; on the other "hand the Helvetic divines applauded his consistency: the earl of "Warwick conjured the archbishop to yield in favour of his extraordi"nary merit and the king promised to protect that prelate from the "penalties, to which he might subject himself by swerving from the ordinal, But Cranmer was unwilling to incur the danger of a præ"munire: and Hooper not only refused to submit, but published a justi"fication of his conduct, and from the pulpit declaimed against the "habits, the ordinal, and the council, The new church was on the "point of being torn into fragments, by the intemperance of her own "children; when the royal authority interposed, and committed the refractory preacher to the Fleet. In the confinement of a prison, the "fervour of his imagination gradually cooled; the rigour of his con"science relaxed; he condescended to put on the polluted habit; he "took the obnoxious oath; he accepted from the king a patent, empowering him to govern the diocess of Gloucester; and fourteen "months later was transferred to the united bishopric of Gloucester "and Worcester. By this union a wider field was opened for the exer"cise of his zeal, but at the same time an ample source was supplied "for the depredations of the courtiers. With a double diocess he re"tained a less income: the larger portion of the revenues of the two "sees was destined to be divided among the men, who at this period were actively employed in carving out of the possessions of the church, "fortunes for themselves and their posterity."

66

Dr. Heylin, speaking of this transaction, says, "thus we have the first "beginning of that opposition, which hath continued ever since; against "the liturgy itself, the cap and surplice, and other rights and usages " of the Anglican church,' These oppositions were introduced by one John a Lasco, a German, who took sanctuary in England, and was allowed liberty of conscience, in return for which he took great liberty with the discipline of the new church. Peter Martyr, of whom we have before spoken, was another of the dissidents, and objected to the wearing of square caps, because he had a round head. He was joined by many others, and square caps, gowns and tippets, were cried down as superstitious and Popish attire. To shew the state to which religion was reduced at this period, if we may be allowed the term, we will here give the statement of Dr. Heylin, who being a Protestant divine, must be considered unimpeachable authority in the case, "Such," writes the doctor," were the effects of Calvin's interposings in behalf of Hooper, and such the effects of his exceptions against some ancient 66 usages in the public liturgy; and such the consequences of the indulgence granted to John a Lasco, and his church of strangers, opposite "both in practice and point of judgment to the established rules. and orders of the church of England. For what did follow hereupon, but "a continual multiplying of disorders in all parts of this church? What "from the sitting at the sacrament, used and maintained by John a "Lasco, but first, irreverence in receiving, and afterwards a contempt and depraving of it? What from the crying down of the sacred vestments, and the grave habit of the clergy, but first a disesteem of the

"men themselves, and by degrees a vilifying and contempt of their "holy ministry? Nay, such a peccancy of humour began then manifestly to break out; that it was preached at Paul's cross by one sir "Steven (for so they commonly called such of the clergy as were un"der the degree of doctor,) the curate of St. Katherine Christ church, "that it was fit the names of churches should be altered, and the names "of the days in the week changed; that fish-days should be kept on "any other days than on Fridays and Saturdays, and the Lent at any "other time except only between Shrovetide and Easter. We are "told also by John Stow, that he had seen the said sir Steven to leave "the pulpit, and preach to the people out of an high elm, which stood " in the midst of the churchyard; and that being done, to return into "the church again, and leaving the high altar, to sing the Communion "Service upon a tomb of the dead, with his face toward the 'North. "Which is to be observed the rather, because sir Steven hath found so many followers in these latter times. For as some of the preciser' "sort have left the church to preach in woods and bärns, &c. and in"stead of the names of the old days and months, can find no other title "for them than the first, second, or third month of the year, and the first, second, or third day of the week, &c. so was it propounded not long since by some state-reformers, that the Lenten fast should be "kept no longer between Shrovetide and Easter, but rather (by some "act or ordinance to be made for that purpose,) betwixt Easter and "Whitsuntide.' To such wild fancies do men grow, when once they "break those bonds, and neglect those rules, which wise antiquity or"dained for the preservation of peace and order."

Wild as these fancies might be considered by the doctor, they were followed by a general order for the taking down of altars, bearing date the 24th of November, 1550, and subscribed by the duke of Somerset, the archbishop of Canterbury, and others. For the advancement of this work, John Hooper observed, in a sermon before the king, "that it "would be very well, that it might please the magistrate to turn the "altars into tables, according to the first institution of Christ; and

thereby to take away the false persuasion of the people, which they "have of sacrifices to be done upon altars. Because (said he) as long "as altars remain, both the ignorant people, and the ignorant and evil "persuaded priest, will dream always of sacrifice." Such was the recommendation of one of the chief and turbulent reformers, but though his advice was followed to the destruction and pillaging of those necessary appendages to the temples of the living God, yet the adorable sacrifice of the mass could not be wholly obliterated from the minds of the people, and it is daily offered at this day in almost every part of England. This change of altars into tables was the occasion of much derision and satire. The differences of opinion among the reformers might fairly be compared to the confused tongues among the Babelbuilders. The ministers who had to officiate were at a loss to know where they were to stand at at the table, whether at this end or that end, or in the middle. Bishop Ridley called it an oyster board, and White, of Lincoln, according to John Fox, in his original work, said, "that "when their table was constituted, they could never be content in ' placing the same; now east, now north; now one way, now another;

66

" until it pleased God in his goodness to place it quite out of the church." Dr. Heylin says, The like did Weston, (the prolocutor of the convo"cation in the first of queen Mary) in a disputation held with Latimer; "telling him with reproach and contempt enough, that the Protestants having turned their table, were like a company of apes, that knew "not which way to turn their tails; looking one day east, and another day west; one this way, and another that way, as their fancies led "them. Thus, finally, one Miles Hubbard, in a book called 'The "Display of Protestants,' printed in 1556, p. 81, doth report the business, 'How long (say they) were they learning to set their tab e sto "minister the communion upon? First they placed it aloft, where the "high altar stood; then must it be removed from the wall, that one might go between; the ministers being in contention whether part to "turn their faces, either toward the west, the north, or south; some "would stand westward, some northward, some southward.' To settle these diversities a rubrick was drawn up, and the north side was pitched upon as the most proper place for the table. We have before noticed the changes made in the liturgy, arising from the factious and capricious whims of the leading reformers, who blasphemously stated that every alteration was made under the influence of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth.

4

and

Much has been said of late on the subject of EXCOMMUNICATION, it has been frequently brought as a heavy charge against the Catholic Clergy of Ireland, to justify the exclusion of the Irish people from the exercise of their civil rights. The power of excommunication, or separating the unbeliever from the faithful, is clearly established in the scriptures, and it is exercised by all sects, though we never hear any complaint made against the use of this prerogative but only when ap plied to the Catholic church.-We have seen that the Anabaptists excommunicated Von Parris for Unitarianism, and we are now about to shew that one of the greatest of the 16th-century reformers thought it necessary to call for this ancient discipline of the church, the new bishops of Edward's making, having some how or other lost, or were restrained in, the right of exercising it; but were subsequently empowered by act of parliament, to assume it.-The strifes amongst the reforming divines, and the repeated changes and alterations made in the creed and ceremonies of the new church, all tending to a relaxation of morals and devotion, produced the most dismal consequences in the condition of the people, whose habits were now marked by the grossest vices and the most impure debaucheries. Latimer, who was appointed bishop of Worcester, by Harry, but resigned his see rather than sign the six articles, in a sermon, before the young head of the church, complained of the luxury and vanity of the age, and of many called Gospellers, who were concerned for nothing but abbey and chantry lands, and he thus, according to Dr. Heylin, called for the restitution of the ancient discipline. "Lechery," says he," is used in England, and such lechery as is "used in no other part of the world, and yet it is made a matter of sport, a matter of nothing, a laughing matter, a trifle not to be passed on, nor reformed. Well, I trust it will be amended one day, and I' hope to see it mended as old as I am. And here I will make a suit "to your highness, to restore unto the church the discipline of Christ,

68

વર્ષ