XVI.

CHAP. session of the convocation*. All the bishops of the province of Canterbury subscribed, except those Jan. 29. of Gloucester and Rochester, who were absent, and of the lower house there were above one hundred names. Among the subscribers were several of the learned exiles, who were afterwards conspicuous in the ranks of nonconformity.

The next subject which came under the consideration of the convocation were the rites and ceremonies of the church. Sandys, bishop of Worcester, moved, that a paper of advice might be presented to the queen on the following points: that private baptism, and baptism by women, might be taken out of the common prayer book: that the cross in baptism might be disallowed as needless and superstitious; and that commissioners might be appointed to reform the ecclesiastical lawst.

Another paper was afterwards presented to the house with the following articles of petition, subscribed by thirty-three names: that the psalms might be sung distinctly by the whole congregation, and that organs might be laid aside; that none of the laity might be allowed to baptize, and that the use of the cross might be discontinued in the sacrament of baptism; that kneeling at the eucharist might be left at the discretion of the ordinary; that the use of copes and surplices might be discontinued; that the ministers of the word and sacraments might not be compelled to use such habits as the enemies of Christ's gospel have chosen to

* Strype's Annals, vol. i. folio edition.

† Collier's Eccles. History, vol. ii. b. 6. Neal's History of the Puritans, vol, i. c. 4.

be the special array of their priesthood; that the clause in the thirty-third article, which censured such as did not conform to the public order, might be mitigated; and that all festivals kept in honour of the saints might be abrogated, or at least commemorated only in sermons, homilies, or prayers illustrative of their history, and that, after having attended public service on those days, the people might be allowed to work *.

A. D.

1562. Elizabeth.

This paper being disapproved, another, contain- Feb. 13. ing a modification of the preceding articles, was brought into the lower house. It went to abrogate all festivals, except Sundays and principal feasts observed in honour of Christ: it recommended that in reading divine service the minister should turn his face towards the people, that the people might hear and be edified: it allowed the use of the surplice in reading prayers, and only abolished the cope and the other sacerdotal vest

ments.

These articles were warmly contested in the lower house; and some of the members were willing to refer the controversy to the decision of the prelates. Others protested against such a compromise, and declared a resolution to resist any innovation on the book of common prayer, and on the rules, rites, and ceremonies prescribed by it. When the question was put to the vote, it appears that the innovators formed a considerable part of the assembly, and that the English exiles had brought back a predilection for the discipline of

*Collier's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii. b. 6. Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. i. c. 4.

XVI.

CHAP. the foreign churches. On a scrutiny, the approvers of the propositions who were present exceeded the other party by a majority of eight *; but when the proxies were counted, the scale was turned, and the propositions were rejected by a majority of one. The prolocutor, Nowell, divided with the favourers of the innovations. It is not to be supposed that, if the affirmative vote had been carried, the alterations would have taken place: it might have been followed by an address from the lower house of convocation to the queen, and there the matter would have terminated t.

Feb. 26.

April 10.

This contest in the lower house impeded the business of convocation during several days; and after a subsidy had been granted, a book of discipline was brought to the upper house by the prolocutor of the lower, accompanied by ten other members. The book was referred to the archbishop, and the bishops of London, Winchester, Chichester, Hereford, and Ely. The prolocutor then brought up some additional articles relating to discipline, and the archbishop delivered to him the former book to be reconsidered. What this book of discipline was does not clearly appear, for the convocation was prorogued before the book was confirmed.

In this convocation, a Latin catechism on a more comprehensive plan than that of Edward the Sixth, and intended for the use of schools, was composed

* Forty-three to thirty-five, present, in favour of innovation; fifty-nine to fifty-eight, including proxies, in favour of the established order. Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. i. c. 4.

+ Burnet's History of the Reformation, vol. iii. b. 6.

by the prolocutor, Alexander Nowell. He engaged in the undertaking by the advice of Cecil, to whom the work was dedicated; and it being submitted to the lower house of convocation, that assembly gave to the performance of its president the sanction of its approbation. But there is no evidence that the catechism was submitted to the upper house of convocation, and it never obtained a place among the authorized formularies of the church. The statement is erroneous, that the catechism of Nowell was reviewed and sanctioned by the same convocation which reviewed and sanctioned the articles *; and it is not partially but totally erroneous. The articles were reviewed by the archbishops and bishops alone; and it does not appear that they were submitted to the lower house, except for the purpose of being subscribed. The catechism was composed by the prolocutor of the lower house at the solicitation of Cecil: it was reviewed and corrected by that house; but was never sanctioned, or, perhaps, even revised by the prelates. Whatever may be its merit, it has no other weight than that which it derives from the deserved reputation of its author, and from the suffrages of other names of high estimation. These testimonies it undoubtedly possesses; and among them the encomium of Whitgift is not the least valuable, that there is no one so well instructed who may not derive benefit from the repeated perusal of so learned and necessary a book.

What Nowell's catechism has been inaccurately represented to be, that Jewel's Apology really is,

* Daubeny's Vindiciæ, p. 113.

A. D.

1562. Elizabeth.

XVI.

CHAP. an accredited and public confession of the catholic and Christian faith of the church of England. It is not to be considered as the unauthorized work of an eminent prelate; but as an authentic exposition of the doctrines of that church whose name it bears. It was published by the express command of the queen, and at the royal expense; and it expressed with such fidelity and force the sentiments of the English hierarchy, that Parker designed it as an accompaniment to the articles.

The design of the Apology is twofold: first, to state the reasons of the separation of the English church from that of Rome; and, secondly, to answer the calumnies which, on account of that separation, had been raised against the English nation. Like the articles, it appeared during the last meeting of the council of Trent, and its seasonable publication excited a general attention to its arguments. The character which the biographer of Jewel has given of the Apology cannot be expressed better than in his own language. "It is so drawn, that the first part of the work is an illustration, and, as it were, a paraphrase, of the twelve articles of the Christian faith contained in the creed; the second is a short and solid confutation of whatever is objected against the church. If the arrangement be considered, nothing can be better distributed; if the perspicuity, nothing can be more clear; if the style, nothing can be more terse; if the diction, nothing can be more splendid; if the arguments, nothing can be stronger*.

Humfrey's Life of Jewel.