VIII.

it would fall out otherwise, he must bestow her in marriage. CHAP. These things were argued more at large in the Bishop's foresaid letters.

Anno 1547.

a

quod in

In this disputation (because the Bishop in his letter denied that he used any contending in his discourse with Bucer) Bucer could not but take notice of the heat and passion of the Bishop, and as a sign thereofa, "how the veins Ut venæ in manibus, "in his hands, the like to which he never saw in any before, "did leap and tremble, as often as Bucer said any thing nullo un"that gave him offence; specially if he heard any such mine vidi, thing spoken by that learned and truly pious divine Alex"ander Ales, whom Bucer brought with him to Bishop rent, quo"Gardiner at this conference."

quam ho

subsilirent, et treme

ties audiret à nobis

quod offendebat, &c. Gratulat. ad Eccl. Angl. p. 58.

CHAP. IX.

Anabaptists. Bishop Ridley vindicated.

Latimer's talk

with an Anabaptist. Begins to preach.

Bishop Gardi

ner complies with the King's proceedings. Hancock the preacher. His troubles.

THIS busy Bishop, who had been imprisoned in the Fleet Bishop Gar

the last day of June, by the Council, was, the latter end of this year, by the King's general pardon, set at liberty: but the Council asked him, whether he and all his diocese would receive the injunctions and homilies lately made. He said, he would conform to all, and enjoin his diocese so to do; but he boggled at the homily of Justification, which was set forth to be by faith, and not by works. And concerning that, he desired some days to consider. And to satisfy and persuade him in this point, Bishop Ridley was sent to him.

diner set at liberty.

At this time he and Ridley were appointed to deal with Ridley misrepresented two Anabaptists of Kent: for divers of that sect had lately by Gardifled from Germany hither; and began to infect the realm ner. with odd and heretical opinions; and particularly spake contemptibly of the holy sacrament of the Lord's Supper

1.

BOOK So at the same time that Ridley exhorted Gardiner to receive the true doctrine of justification, against which he Anno 1547. was very refractory, he prayed him to be very diligent in confounding the Anabaptists in his diocese; and that he would be steady in defence of the Sacrament against them. This some Papist did pervert to such a sense, as though Ridley had spoken of and approved a carnal presence. 69 And so Bishop Gardiner reported to some in his house, after Ridley was departed. But though Ridley were not for that gross, corporeal, popish presence in the Sacrament, yet he approved of treating that holy mystery with all devotion and honour; because there were many in those times, who, that they might run the farther from Popery, gave it little or no respect at all. Wherefore he, in a sermon at St. Paul's Cross, preached earnestly for giving great reverence to the Sacrament: rebuking the unreverend behaviour of many towards it: for there had been fixed upon the cathedral church doors, and other places, railing bills against the Sacrament, terming it, Jack in a box, the sacrament of the halter, Round robin, and such like unseemly terms. Though they meant not these contemptible expressions, I suppose, against the holy Supper of our Lord, but only against the papal mass. But upon this occasion Bishop Ridley declared what estimation and reverence ought to be given to this holy institution; what danger ensued the mishandling thereof: and affirmed, that in it there was truly and verily the body and blood of Christ effectuously by grace and spirit. This some then understood again in the gross sense of the Papists, though he so meant it not.

Depositions
against
him.

And the more to expose Ridley, when Bishop of London, and to take off his credit, being one of the Commissioners in the year 1550 to examine Bishop Gardiner, the said Bishop got leave for certain of the clergy to be deposed on his behalf; to shew, that Bishop Ridley declared himself once for the corporal presence, and afterwards declared against the same doctrine. And what if he had so done? Is it such a crime to forsake an error, after a man hath found it to be so? But let us see the depositions. The

IX.

Mon. first

first witness was Maurice Griffith, Archdeacon of Roches- CHAP. ter: who deposed, "That Ridley, Bishop of Rochester, "the first year of the King, at Paul's Cross, treated earn- Anno 1547. estly and vehemently of the Sacrament; and did set Acts and "forth the presence of Christ's body there; and called edit. "them hogs and dogs, that did irreverendly behave them"selves touching the same." His second witness was Thomas Watson, his Chaplain; and he deposed, "That "he called them worse than dogs and hogs, that would as"sert the question, How he was there present. And noting "the dignity of the Sacrament said, that in the primitive "times three sorts of people were excluded from the Com“munion, catechumeni, energumeni, and pœnitentes. And "this, he said, he preached the first year of the King, in "November." And then was George Bishop of Chichester deposed, "That in the Parliament at Westminster, 1549, "the same Bishop Ridley did openly impugn the verity "of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament." But so yet, all this came to no more, but that he held a presence, but not after the gross popish way. So that these depositions could not arise to a proof, that Ridley varied in his opinions about the Sacrament.

vindication

at Paul's

But this slanderous report got such a vogue among the Ridley's Papists, that Ridley could never after get himself clear of of what he it. And in the beginning of Queen Mary's reign, Feck- had said nam, Dean of St. Paul's, had the confidence to relate it Cross. publicly in his sermon at St. Paul's Cross, that Ridley once declared himself in that place for a substantial change of the bread in the Sacrament. But if we would know indeed what Ridley preached, we may have it from himself: vindicating himself in this matter to Secretary Bourn and Fox's Act. Fecknam, in a conference with them in the Tower, shewing

them how unjustly and untruly reported he had been, he70

said, that what he then delivered at Paul's Cross was, "that inveighing against them that esteemed the Sacra❝ment no better than a piece of bread, he told his auditors "of the pœnitentes, audientes, catechumeni, and energu"meni in the primitive times, who were bid to depart when

I.

BOOK "the Sacrament was to be administered; and I," said Ridley, "bid them depart, as unworthy to hear the mystery; Anno 1547." and then said to those that were the sancti, that Cyprian "the martyr should tell them, how it was that Christ called "it, saying, Panis est corpus, cibus, potus, caro, &c. Bread "was the body, meat, drink, flesh of Christ; because unto "this material substance is given the property of the thing "whereof it beareth the name. And this [common] place," saith Ridley, "I then took to utter as the time would then "suffice, that the material substance of bread did remain." Fecknam heard all this talk of Ridley, as red as scarlet in his face, and said not a word. Yet notwithstanding, Fecknam would afterwards, as occasion served, mention Ridley, as serving his popish purpose. So he told Mr. Hawks the martyr, in his conference with him, that Ridley, in a sermon at Paul's Cross, had preached, "that the Devil believed better than 66 some among them; for he believed that Christ was able "of stones to make bread, but they would not believe that "Christ's body was in the Sacrament."

The effect

of an ana

error.

Among other dangerous errors vented nowadays by the baptistical Anabaptists, before spoken of, and believed by many honest meaning people, they held, that after an apostasy from the truth, there was no salvation: and that this was the sin against the Holy Ghost. This put one, about these times, into despair: for he had fallen from the truth known, and after fell to mocking and scorning it. At length, upon some melancholic thoughts, he fell into the hideous condition of desperation, reckoning verily that he had sinned the Sermon be- sin against the Holy Ghost. He repaired unto Latimer the great divine and casuist at this time, and told him, that "he should be damned, and that it was not possible for "him to be saved, for that he had sinned the sin against "the Holy Ghost." Latimer did think, that falling away from the truth was indeed the sin meant, of which the Scripture said, It should never be forgiven. But he told the man, "that it was a vehement manner of speaking in "the Scripture, but was not spoken universally, as though "God did never forgive it, but it was commonly called un

fore the

King.

IX.

"forgivable, because God seldom forgiveth it. Yet that CHAP. "there was no sin so great but that God may forgive it, and "doth forgive it to the repentant heart." And when no ar- Anno 1547. gument he could use had any force upon the man, this best quieted him, and took some place with him. But the said good Father made this observation hereupon, How seldom this sin is forgiven, in that he knew no more, but that one man that fell from the truth, and after repented, and came to grace again, though he had, as he said, known many, that knew more than he, and some whom he honoured, that after they had fallen from the truth, never, this man excepted, returned to grace and the truth again.

Cook, Ana

ons.

The Anabaptists of these days were generally infected Robert also with Pelagianism and other heresies; they were also baptist. very confident and disputatious. One of this sort was now crept into the Court, namely Robert Cooke. He was a71 person of a very courteous fair deportment, of some learning, and particularly well skilled in music. When Parkhurst (he that afterwards was Bishop of Norwich) was preacher to Queen Katharin Par at the Court, he was keeper of the wine-cellar. Here he came acquainted with the said Parkhurst, and also with Coverdale and Dr. Turner, and other learned men in their attendances at the Court. This man, besides that he was against the baptism His opiniof infants, denied original sin, and concerning the Lord's Supper he dispersed divers odd things. The said Dr. Turner wrote a book against him, in which he confuted his opinion of original sin. He often created trouble to Parkhurst and Coverdale about these controversies, so that they were tired with him; for he was a man full of words. When Jewel, and other learned men, his friends, came sometimes to Court to visit Parkhurst, Cooke would presently begin a dispute with them, and would never make an end. This man seems to have been among the exiles under Queen Mary, and became then known to the learned Rodulph Gualter at Zuric. Who afterwards in his correspondence with the said Parkhurst, then Bishop of Norwich, inquired after him; which was in the year 1573. He was then