Page images


the nature of a sacrament; and in the five-and-twentieth of CHARLES the said articles, that five other reputed sacraments of the Church of Rome are not to be accounted sacraments. Yet, contrary and repugnant hereunto, he, the said Richard Montague, doth maintain and affirm in his book aforesaid, called, • The Answer to the Gag,' that the Church of Rome hath ever remained firm upon the same foundation of sacraments and doctrine instituted by God.

“III. In the nineteenth of the same articles it is farther determined, that the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living, and matters of ceremony, but also in matters of 737. faith. He, the said Richard Montague, speaking of those points which belong to faith and good manners, hope and charity, doth in the said book, called, "The Gag,' affirm and maintain, that none of these are controverted in their points, meaning the Protestants and Papists; and notwithstanding that in the one-and-thirtieth article it is resolved, that the sacrifice of masses, in which, as it is commonly said, the priest doth offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain and guilt too, is a blasphemous fable, and dangerous deceit; this being one of the points controverted between the Church of England and the Church of Rome ;—the said Richard Montague, in his book called “The Gag,' doth affirm, and maintain, that the controverted points are of a lesser and inferior nature, of which a man may be ignorant, without any danger of his soul at all ; a man may resolve to oppose that without peril of perishing for ever.

“ IV. Whereas in the second homily, entituled, Against Peril of Idolatry,' contained in the aforesaid book of homilies, and approved by the five-and-thirtieth article aforementioned, it is declared, that images teach no good lesson, neither of God nor godliness; but all error and wickedness : he, the said Richard Montague, in the book of Gag,' aforesaid, doth affirm and maintain, that images may be used for the instruction of the ignorant and excitation of devotion.

“ V. That in the same homily, it is plainly expressed, that the attributing the defence of certain countries to saints, is a spoiling God of his honour, and that such saints are but dii tutelares of the Gentiles, or idolaters. The said Richard Montague hath, notwithstanding, in his said book, entituled, • A Treatise concerning the Invocation of Saints,' affirmed and

this or

ABBOT, maintained, that saints have not only a memory, but a more Abp. Cant.

peculiar charge of their friends, and that it may be admitted, that some saints have a peculiar patronage, custody, protection, and power, as angels also have, over certain persons and countries, by special deputation; and that it is no impiety so to believe: whereas in the seventeenth of the said articles, it is resolved, that God hath certainly decreed by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation, those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation ; wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, and called according to God's purpose, working in due season, they through the grace obey the calling, they be justified freely, walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, attain to everlasting felicity. He, the said Richard Montague, in the said book, called, • The Appeal,' doth maintain and affirm, that men justified may fall away, and depart from the state which once they had; they may arise again, and become new men possibly, but not certainly, nor necessarily. And the better to countenance this his opinion, he hath in the same book wilfully added, falsified, and changed divers words in the sixteenth of the articles beforementioned, and divers other words, both in the Book of Homilies and in the Book of Common Prayer, and so misrecited and changed, the said places he doth allege in the said book, called “The Appeal,' endeavouring thereby to lay a most wicked and malicious scandal upon the Church of England, as if she did herein differ from the reformed Churches beyond the seas; and did consent to those pernicious errors, which are commonly called Arminianism, and which the late famous queen Elizabeth, and king James, of happy memory, did so piously and diligently labour to suppress'.

“That the said Richard Montague, contrary to his duty and allegiance, endeavoured to raise great factions and divisions in this commonwealth, by casting the odious and scandalous name of Puritans upon such his majesty's loving subjects as conform themselves to the doctrines and ceremonies of the Church of England; under that name laying upon them divers false and malicious imputations, so to bring them into jealousy and displeasure with his most excellent majesty, and into reproach and CHARLES ignominy with the rest of the people, to the great danger of sedition and disturbance in the state, if it be not timely prevented.

| Montague had moral courage enough, to defend what he conceived to be Catholic orthodoxy, against the favourite prejudices and conceit of sects and parties, by whom the truth was rent and torn to fragments.

“ That the scope and end of the said Richard Montague, in the books beforementioned, is to give encouragement to popery, and to withdraw his majesty's subjects from true religion established, to the Roman superstition, and consequently to be reconciled to the see of Rome; all which he laboureth, by subtle and cunning ways, whereby God's true religion hath been much scandalized, those mischiefs introduced, which the wisdom of many laws hath endeavoured to prevent, the devices and practices of his majesty's enemies have been furthered and advanced, to the great peril and hazard of our sovereign lord the king, and of all his dominions, and loving subjects.

“ That the said Richard Montague hath inserted into the book, called “ The Appeal,' divers passages dishonourable to the late king, his majesty's father, of famous memory; full of bitterness, railing, and injurious speeches to other persons, disgraceful and contemptible to many worthy divines, both of this kingdom, and other reformed Churches beyond the seas; impious and profane in scoffing at preaching, meditating and conferring, pulpits, lectures, Bible, and all show of religion ; all which do aggravate his former offences, having proceeded from malicious and envenomed heat against the peace of the Church, and the sincerity of the reformed religion publicly professed, and by law established in this kingdom. All which offences being to the dishonour of God, and of most mischievous effect and consequence against the good of this Church and commonwealth of England, and of other his majesty's realms and dominions, the Commons assembled in parliament, do hereby pray that the said Richard Montague may be punished according to his demerits, in such exemplary manner, as may deter others from attempting so presumptuously

Rushworth's to disturb the peace of the Church and State, and that the Collections, book aforesaid may be suppressed and burnt."

vol. 1.

p. 209.

It does not appear this impeachment was laid before the house of Lords, in what manner the Commons intended to prosecute their charge, or how far they proceeded. Rushworth having made a search into this matter, could not find that Montague was brought to his defence, or that he returned any



A.D. 1626.

ABBOT, answer to the articles : from whence we may conclude the Abp. Cant.

process was dropped by the Commons. Whether their impeachment of the duke of Buckingham might draw them from business of lower consideration, or their distrust of making the charge good, or the sudden dissolution of parliament, was the occasion of this issue, is somewhat uncertain.

Before the ending of parliament, the bishop of Gloucester preaching before his majesty, asserted the real presence in such strong language, that he was suspected of going to an excess, and coming too near the verge of popery. The discourse made

a great noise, and gave disgust both in town and country. The Erceptions convocation examined the exceptionable passages, but came laken at the bishop of to no decision. The king, being willing to satisfy himself and Gloucester's

the parliament, ordered archbishop Abbot; Andrews, bishop before the

of Winchester; and Laud, bishop of St. David's, to make king. April 12, a thorough inquiry into the bishop's discourse, and report their

opinion. They met accordingly, and after having perused the sermon, and argued upon the meaning of those sentences which gave offence, they returned the king this answer:

“ That some things in that sermon had been spoken less warily, but nothing falsely : that nothing had been innovated by him in the doctrine of the Church of England: but, however, they thought very fit that Goodman should be appointed to preach again

before his majesty, for the better explaining his meaning, and Cyprian. showing how, and in what particulars, he had been mistaken Archbishop by his auditors." Goodman preaching accordingly before the Diary.

king, had no farther trouble. Montague's As for Montague's business, who had been charged with business not moved in deserting towards Popery and Arminianism, by the Commons convocation, of both parliaments, the reader may possibly be somewhat at

a loss why the convocation took no cognizance of this matter. For the articles exhibited were points of religion, and by consequence proper to the decision of the clergy. Besides, the king was plainly inclined to give the convocation their just liberty, as appears by the letter of the three bishops abovementioned, to the duke of Buckingham. Here they acquaint the duke, “ that his majesty had taken that business into his own care, and most worthily referred it in a right course to Church consideration.” But then, we are to remember, that Laud had been lately sent by the duke of Buckingham to consult Andrews, about what was thought fit to be proposed in




the convocation; and whether it was seasonable to revive the CHARLES Quinquarticular controversy. Now by the issue we may collect, Andrews did not think it proper to refresh those disputes at present. Those of Montague's profession, it is likely, did not think it safe to push the matter to a crisis: they knew the archbishop, and many of the bishops and clergy, were rather of the Calvinian side ; and therefore it was more prudential to let the cause sleep, than run the hazard of a debate in convocation.

But though the convocation seemed to overlook, or stand neuter in the contest, Montague was attacked in print by Carleton, bishop of Chichester; Sutcliffe, dean of Exeter; by Yates, Rouse, &c. And thus the clashing was kept on, and the breach grew rather wider. To accommodate matters, a conference had lately been held in York-house, the duke of Packingham, and some other temporal lords, being present. The managers were Buckeridge, bishop of Rochester, and Dr. White, dean of Carlisle, on the one side ; and Morton, bishop of Coventry, and Dr. Preston, preacher at Lincoln's-inn, on the other. They touched upon the five points, but the ques. Tuo contion argued most at length was, “ Whether it was possible upon the five

points. for one elected to fall from grace.” The advantage of the dis- Feb. 11,

, pute was given to either side, according to the variety of judg- 1626. ment or inclination in the audience. There was soon after a second conference in the same place, and before the same temporal lords, of which, Robert, earl of Warwick, and William, earl of Pembroke, were two. The divines were likewise the same, excepting that Montague appeared in bishop Bucke- Fuller's ridge's room. As to the event, it was not more successful than the former; they came to no accommodation, nor made any book !!,

Archbishop converts of each other.

Laud's His majesty, to prevent the controversy's growing warmer, The king's and breaking the people into parties, by the advice of the proclamabishops, published a proclamation to keep both sides quiet. the disputing In this state-paper the king declares “ his utter dislike of all those who, to show their parts, to please their humour, or play their revenge, shall be so hardy as to propagate any new opinions differing from the orthodoxal belief of the Church of England ; that he is fully resolved never to admit any innovation in the doctrine or discipline of the Church. And as he shall always be forward to encourage his religious and well

Church Hist.


the controversy.

« PreviousContinue »