of the church, July 29, 1554; and having chosen a temporary minister and deacons, they sent to their brethren, who had fled to other places, inviting them to Frankfort, where they might hear God's word truly preached, the sacraments duly administered, and the requisite christian discipline properly exercised: privileges which could not be obtained in their own country. The members of the congregation sent for Mr. John Knox from Geneva, Mr. James Haddon from Strasburgh, and Mr. Thomas Lever from Zurich, requesting them to take the oversight of them in the Lord. The church at Frankfort being thus comfortably settled with pastors, deacons, and a liturgy, according to its own choice; Dr. Richard Cox, a man of a high spirit, coming to that city, with some of his friends, broke through the conditions of the new-formed church, and interrupted the public service by answering aloud after the minister. On the Lord's day following, one of the company, equally officious as himself, ascended the pulpit, and read the whole litany. Mr. Knox, upon this, taxed the authors of this disorder with a breach of the terms of their common agreement, and affirmed, that some things in the Book of Common Prayer were superstitious and impure. Dr. Cox reproved him for his censoriousness; and being admitted, with the rest of his company, to vote in the congregation, obtained a majority, prohibiting Mr. Knox from preaching any more.+ But Mr. Knox's friends applied to the magistrates, who commanded them to unite with the French church both in doctrine and ceremonies, according to their original agreement. Dr. Cox and his party finding Knox's interest among the magistrates too strong, had recourse to an unworthy and unchristian method to get rid of him. This divine having published a book, while he was in England, entitled "An Admonition to Christians," in which he had said, "That the emperor was no less an enemy to Christ than Nero," these overbearing fellowexiles basely availed themselves of this and some other expressions in the book, and accused him of high treason against the emperor. Upon this, the senate being tender of the emperor's honour, and unwilling to embroil themselves in these controversies, desired Mr. Knox, in a respectful manner, to depart from the city. So he left the place, March 25, 1555. * Troubles at Frankeford, p. 1–3. + Cox and his friends were admitted to vote in the congregation, through the particular solicitations of Mr. Knox.-Ibid. p. 33. Upon Mr. Knox's departure, Cox's party having strengthened themselves by the addition of other exiles, petitioned the magistrates for the free use of King Edward's servicebook; which they were pleased to grant. The old congregation was thus broken up by Dr. Cox and his friends, who now carried all before them. They chose new churchofficers, taking no notice of the old ones, and set up the service-book without interruption. Among those who were driven from the peaceable and happy congregation, were Knox, Gilby, Goodman, Cole, Whittingham, and Fox, all celebrated nonconformists in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. From the above account, it will sufficiently appear who were the aggressors. Bishop Burnet, with great injustice, says, "That Knox and his party certainly began the breach."+ Towards the close of this queen's unhappy reign, her government having sustained many losses, her spirits failed, her health declined, and, being seized with the dropsy, she died November 17, 1558, in the forty-third year of her age, having reigned a little more than five years and four months. Queen Mary was a princess of severe principles, and being wholly under the controul of her clergy, was ever forward to sanction all their cruelties. Her conscience was under the absolute direction of the pope and her confessor; who, to encourage her in the extirpation of heresy, and in all the cruelties inflicted upon protestants, gave her assurance, that she was doing God service. She was naturally of a melancholy and peevish temper; and her death was lamented only by her popish clergy. Her reign was in every respect calamitous to the nation, and will be transmitted to posterity in characters of blood. SECT. II. From the Death of Queen Mary, to the Death of Queen Elizabeth. THE accession of Queen ELIZABETH to the crown, gave new life to the Reformation. The news had no sooner reached the continent, than most of the worthy exiles with joy returned home; and those who had concealed themselves, during the late storm, came forth as men restored from the Troubles at Frankeford, p. 1-&c. + Hist. of Refor. vol. ii. p. 339. C Ibid. p. 369-371, dead. By the queen's royal proclamation, the public worship of God remained some time without alteration. All preaching was prohibited; and the people were charged to hear only the epistles and gospels for the day, the ten commandments, the litany, the Lord's prayer, and the creed, in English. No other prayers were to be read, nor other forms of worship to be observed, than those already appointed by law, till the meeting of parliament.+ The parliament being assembled, the two famous acts, entitled "The Act of Supremacy," and "The Act of Uniformity of Common Prayer," were passed. The former gave rise to a new ecclesiastical court, called The Court of HIGH COMMISSION, which, by the exercise of its unlimited power and authority, became the engine of inconceivable oppression to multitudes of the queen's best subjects. The latter attempted, indeed, to establish a perfect uniformity in public worship, but it could never be effected. During the whole of this reign, many of the best divines and others, were dissatisfied with the Book of Common Prayer, and with the rigorous imposition of it in divine worship. Some things contained in the book, they considered to be erroneous; others superstitious; and the greater part to be derived from the corrupt fountain of popery, and, therefore, could not with a good conscience observe the whole; on which account, they were treated by the prelates with the utmost severity. The principal debate in the first parliament of this queen's reign, was not whether popery or protestantism should be established; but whether they should carry on the reformation, so happily begun in the days of King Edward, to a greater degree of perfection, and abolish all the remains of superstition, idolatry, and * It is observed, that when the exiles and others came forwards in public, a certain gentleman made suit to the queen, in behalf of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, who had long been imprisoned in a Latin translation, that they also might be restored to liberty, and walk abroad as formerly in the English tongue. To this petition her majesty immediately replied, "That he should first know the minds of the prisoners, who perbaps desired no such liberty as he requested."-Heylin's Hist. of Refor. p. 275. + Burnet's Hist. of Refor, vol. ii. p. 378.—Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 41-44. Ibid. p. 69. This act was designed to establish a perfect and universal conformity, among the laity, as well as the clergy. It required" all persons diligently and faithfully, having no lawful or reasonable excuse, to resort to their parish church, every Sunday and all holidays, on pain of punishment by the censures of the church, and also on pain of forfeiting twelve-pence for every such offence, to be levied by way of distress."-Burn's Eccl. Law, vol. ii. p. 145. Edit. 1775. popish innovations, which being still retained in the church, were stumbling blocks to many worthy subjects.* In the year 1559, the queen published her Injunctions, consisting of upwards of fifty distinct articles. She commanded all her loving subjects obediently to receive, and truly to observe and keep them, according to their offices, degrees and estates, upon pain of suspension, deprivation, excommunication, and such other censures as to those who had ecclesiastical jurisdiction under her majesty, should seem meet. Though in these injunctions the queen manifested some disapprobation of the Romish superstitions and idolatry, she was much inclined to retain images in churches, and thought they were useful in exciting devotion, and in drawing people to public worship. Her object was to unite the papists and protestants together. She still retained a crucifix upon the altar, with lights burning before it, in her own chapel, when three bishops officiated, all in rich copes, before the idol. Instead of stripping religion of the numerous, pompous ceremonies with which it was incumbered, she was inclined rather to keep it as near as possible to the Romish ritual: and even some years after her accession, one of her chaplains having preached in defence of the real presence, she presented her public thanks to him, for his pains and piety. She spoke with great bitterness against the marriage of the clergy, and repented having made married persons bishops. Her majesty having appointed a committee of divines to review King Edward's liturgy, she commanded them to strike out all passages offensive to the pope, and to make the people easy about the corporeal presence of Christ in the sacrament.** The liturgy was, therefore, exceedingly well fitted to the approbation of the papists.++ The queen commanded, that the Lord's table should be placed in the form of an altar; that reverence should be made at the name of Jesus; that music should be retained in the churches; and that all the festivals should be observed as in times of popery. The reformation of King Edward, therefore, instead of being carried forwards and perfected, was, according to Burnet, removed considerably backwards, partly * MS. Remarks, p. 463. +Sparrow's Collec. p. 65-86. § Ibid. vol. iii. p. 292. Burnet's Hist. of Refor. vol. ii. p. 397. 1 Strype's Parker, p. 109. ** Burnet's Hist. of Refor. vol. ii. p. 392. ++ Heylin's Hist. of Pres. p. 259. Heylin's Hist. of Refor. p. 283. Edit. 1674. from the queen's love of outward magnificence in religion, and partly in compliance with the papists.* Many of our excellent reformers who had espoused the cause of nonconformity, in the days of King Edward, retained their principles, and acted upon them, during their exile in a foreign land, especially those who being driven from Frankfort, settled at Geneva and other places. Nor did they forget their principles upon the accession of Elizabeth. Having settled for several years among the best reformed churches in Europe, they examined more minutely the grand principles of the reformation, and returned home richly fraught with wisdom and knowledge. They wished to have the church purged of all its antichristian errors and superstitions, and to have its discipline, its government, and its ceremonies, as well as its doctrine, regulated by the standard of holy scripture. On the contrary, many of the bishops and clergy being too well affected to popery, opposed a thorough reformation, accounting that of King Edward sufficient, or more than sufficient, for the present church of England. Therefore, so early as in the year mentioned above, there were many warm debates betwixt the two contending parties.+ In addition to the oath of supremacy, a compliance with the act of uniformity, and an exact observance of the queen's injunctions, a public creed was drawn up by the bishops, entitled "A Declaration of certain principal Articles of Religion," which all clergymen were obliged to read publicly at their entrance upon their cures. These were, at this time, the terms of ministerial conformity. There was no dispute among the reformers, about the first and last of these qualifications, but they differed in some points about the other two. Many of the learned exiles and others, could not, with a good conscience, accept of livings according to the act of uniformity and the queen's injunctions. If the popish garments and ceremonies had been left indifferent, and some liberties allowed in the use of the common prayer, the contentions and divisions which afterwards followed, would no doubt have been prevented. But as the case then stood, it was almost miraculous that the reformation did not fall back to popery; and if some of the nonconforming divines had not in part complied, in hopes of the removal of these grievances at some future period, that would most probably have been the unhappy * Burnet's Hist. of Refor. vol. iii. p. 305. + Ibid. vol. ii. p. 407.-Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xxvii. p. 387. |