XXVIII. petition from the Puritans for the further reformation of CHAP. the "Book of Common Prayer." But instead of bringing Richard on a debate the petitioners were admonished, that before Bancroft. the ensuing Midsummer Day they would be expected to 1604-10. conform. All debate, however, was not excluded, for we Puritan petition read of a discussion on May 23 in the upper house on against the subject of the use of the cross in holy baptism; the Book. pith of the debate may be read in our 30th canon, which contains a learned and succinct defence of that ancient custom. Rudd, the Bishop of St. David's, pleaded in vain on the Puritan side. Bishop Bancroft answered him, and then put an end to further discussion. Prayer Compila tion of a book of As the canons were the work of which Richard Bancroft was the chief author, a selection from them will not here be out of place, and will be read with interest canons. by the student of the present day. It was declared that whoever affirmed that the Church of England, notwithstanding the reformation it had undergone, was not a true and apostolical Church, teaching and maintaining the doctrine of the Apostles, should be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored until he had made a public revocation of his wicked error. This canon, which is still in force, condemns those partial or occasional conformists, who, attending the services of the meeting-house, yet take part in the debates in Parliament as consistent Churchmen. Likewise ipso facto excommunication was pronounced to be incurred, by those who disparaged the form of godly worship established in the Book of Common Prayer, or who pronounced the rites and ceremonies of the English Church to be superstitious. Excommunication was also pronounced upon those who separated themselves from the Communion of Saints, as approved by apostolic CHAP. rule in the English Church. The same penalty was inXXVIII. curred by all who, forsaking the Church, adhered to a Richard fereign sect. The Common Prayer was to be said or 1604-10. sung distinctly and reverently upon the days appointed Bancroft. to be kept holy; and the ceremonies were to be observed in such place of every church as the bishop of the diocese, or the ecclesiastical ordinary of the place, thought meet for the purpose. No man was to appear in church with his head covered during divine service, unless he had some infirmity, in which case he might wear a cap or coif. All manner of persons present at divine service were reverently, at the time appointed, to kneel on their knees, when the General Confession, Litany, and other prayers were read, and they were to stand up at the saying of the Creed, according to the rules on that behalf prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer. When the name of the Lord Jesus was pronounced, due and lowly reverence was to be done by all persons present, testifying by these outward gestures their inward humility, their christian resolution, and their due acknowledgment that the Lord Jesus Christ-is the true and eternal Son of God. In all cathedral and collegiate churches the Holy Communion was to be administered upon the principal feast days, and the bishop, dean, or canon in residence, or the principal minister, when he officiated, was to use a decent cope, and to be assisted by a Gospeller and Epistoler agreeably, according to the advertisements published in the 7th year of Elizabeth. All members of the cathedral body, including the petty canons and the singing men, were to receive the Communion four times yearly at least. We have already mentioned that the king still demurred to the use of the cross in baptism. It may be mentioned to the credit of Bancroft that, anxious as he CHAP. XXVIII. Richard Bancroft. and his brethren were to conciliate the king and meet his wishes, they did not in this instance show any symptom of yielding to him, but enlarged in these canons on the primitive use of this profitable ceremony. As these 1604-10. canons never received the sanction of Parliament it has on more than one occasion been decided by the judges that they do not bind the laity. It is generally agreed, however, that the law of the case is fairly stated by Lord Hardwicke. "We are all of opinion," he says, "that the canons of 1604 do not proprio vigora bind the laity. I say proprio vigoræ, by their own force and authority, for there are many provisions contained in these canons which are declaratory of the ancient usage and law of the Church of England received and allowed here, which in that respect, and by virtue of such ancient allowance, will bind the laity."* The canons made by the Convocation of Canterbury were, by the king's letters patent, made binding also on York; this had been done before by Queen Elizabeth. the Nor The Northern Convocation regarding this as an Petition of impeachment of their independence, petitioned at their thern Connext meeting, that they might be allowed to retain vocation. their right of making canons for themselves, and when the concession was made, the Convocation of York adopted the canons which had been previously passed at Canterbury. It may, however, be remarked, that, during the reign of James, no canons were enacted by the Convocation of York, that Convocation, in fact, being in a state of abeyance; not even a prolocutor was elected,† except on the occasion of the ratification of the canons above mentioned. What occasioned the delay in the appointment of a * Lathbury's Convocation, 231. Joyce's Sacred Synods, p. 640. † Archbishop Wake, 507-508. CHAP. XXVIII. Richard Bancroft. successor to Archbishop Whitgift does not very clearly appear. Bancroft had been appointed immediately after the conference, one of the commissioners to regulate 1604-10. matters of the Church, and he was also placed in the commission for perusing and suppressing books printed here, or brought into the realm, without public authority; but it was not until October 9, 1604, that Bancroft was nominated by King James to the primacy. On the 10th of December, he was confirmed in Lambeth Church, the bishops of Durham, Rochester, St. David's, Chester, Chichester, and Ely officiating. Bancroft Archbishop of Canterbury, Dec. 10, 1604. CHAPTER XXIX. BANCROFT, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. Strong measures of the new archbishop-Letter to his suffragans— Subscription required to the three articles of the 36th CanonProceedings in the Star Chamber-Treatment of the Puritans— Gunpowder plot-New oath of allegiance-Blackwell's abhorrence of the plot-Articuli Cleri-State of the Church of Scotland-Dunbar and Abbot sent to Scotland-Illegal assembly at AberdeenMembers thereof summoned before the king-Restoration of the Church in Scotland-Difficulties about the consecration of certain Scotch Bishops-Bancroft's share in the discussion-Consecration of the bishops-High Court of Commission-Bancroft's reforms at Cambridge The pope condemns the oath of allegiance-Paolo Sarpi -Reformation of the Channel Islands-James Van HarminFoundation of Chelsea College-Cowell's interpreter-The king directs an inquiry into abuses-Bancroft's letter to his suffragansOverall's Convocation Book-Bancroft's death-His will-His character. XXIX. Richard Bancroft. 1604-10. Strong measures of the new arch ARCHBISHOP BANCROFT at the very beginning of his CHAP. archiepiscopate certified to all parties, that it was not his intention to permit the laws of the Church to be evaded. Letters were received from the Council by him and by the Archbishop of York, Dr. Hutton, which were evidently prompted by the primate himself, intimating the royal expectation, that where advice did not prevail, or admonition take effect, there should henceforth be no more delay in compelling obedience to his Majesty's proclamation, in which he enjoined upon all the clergy to conform to the laws of the Church. The not unwilling primate forwarded copies of the letter on December 22, to each of his suffragans, and he enclosed in another letter gans. bishop. Letter to his suffra |