college, not only by suffering him quietly and peaceably to enjoy it, with all the privileges thereof, for more than three years, but also elected him by his own voice to be senior bursar of the college, and to be vice-master for two years by two separate elections.❤ Moreover, Dr. Still's conduct was in many particulars most shameful. He proceeded against Dr. Browning with great injustice and inhumanity. Not content with illegally depriving him of his office and benefice, he would not suffer him to dine in the hall of the college, nor any one to eat or drink with him. When Dr. Browning kept his chamber in the college, this inveterate enemy would not permit any of his friends or acquaintance to come to him, or converse with him; and those of his friends who had any private intercourse with him, he strictly examined by threatenings and oaths to confess what had passed, with a view to accuse them from their own mouths. He also complained in this case to a foreign judge, expressly contrary to the statute of the college. And though he caused the name of Dr. Browning to be struck out of the buttery, he commenced an action of £300 against him, merely on supposition that he had done the same by him. He, moreover, procured a restraint of Dr. Browning's liberty, by watching him and keeping him in his chamber for some time as in a prison. Not satisfied with these tyrannical proceedings, he assaulted Dr. Browning's lodgings in a most violent manner, and broke open his doors, and dragged him out of his chamber, to the great injury of his body; notwithstanding the Earl of Bedford by his letters had previously required all proceedings against him to be stayed, till the cause should be heard. To finish the business, this cruel oppressor of the Lord's servants prohibited Dr. Browning's pupils, servants and friends, from coming near him, or bringing him any thing to eat or drink, intending to starve him to death.+ During these rigorous and illegal proceedings, the Earl of Bedford, as intimated above, wrote to the Chancellor Burleigh, desiring his lordship not to give his consent to the sentence pronounced upon Dr. Browning, till after he had heard both parties. He spoke, at the same time, in high commendation of his character; that he had good * Baker's MS. Collec. vol. iv. p. 45, 46. + Ibid. Francis Earl of Bedford was a celebrated statesman, and a constant friend to the persecuted puritans. At his death he left twenty pounds to be given to a number of pious ministers, for preaching twenty sermons at Cheney, Woburn and Melshburn. -MS. Chronology, vol. ii. p. 373. (22.) experience of his sound doctrine, his useful preaching, and exemplary conversation, saying, that his deprivation was hard dealing. If his deprivation of his fellowship was hard dealing, what must all the other proceedings have been? These troubles came upon him in the year 1584: but we do not find that this persecuted servant of Christ obtained any relief. STEPHEN TURNER was minister of Arlington in Sussex, but much troubled for nonconformity. About the year 1584, being convened before his ecclesiastical judges, and required to subscribe to Whitgift's three articles, he refused, saying, that he was willing to subscribe as far as the laws of the realm required. With an evident design to ensnare his conscience, or accuse him upon his own confession, he was asked whether the Book of Common Prayer contained any thing contrary to the word of God; when he observed, that he was not bound by law to answer such an inquiry. Also, when he was asked whether he would use the form of prayers and administration of the sacraments, as prescribed, and no other, he replied, that he did not consider himself bound by law to answer. He was then suspended from his ministry. Having remained a considerable time under the ecclesiastical censure, he sent the following certificate to certain persons of quality: "These may certify your honours, that I, Stephen Turner, minister of Arlington in Sussex, have been suspended from my charge this year and a quarter, for refusing to subscribe, no other matter being laid to my charge."‡ JOHN WARD was a celebrated puritan divine, and many years the laborious minister of Haverhil in Suffolk. Afterwards, he appears to have become minister of Writtle, near Chelmsford, in Essex; but, about the year 1584, he was suspended by Bishop Aylmer, for not wearing the surplice. On account of his nonconformity, though he was a most excellent and peaceable man, Aylmer drove him from one place to another, by which means he was exceedingly harassed, and not suffered to continue long in any one situation.§ + MS. Register, p. 569. Strype's Parker, 391. MS. Chronology, vol. ii. p. 419. (1.1.) He subscribed the "Book of Discipline," and united with his brethren in their endeavours to promote the desired reformation of the church, meeting with them in their private associations.+ This persecuted servant of Christ died at Haverhil, where his remains were interred. Upon his grave was a monumental inscription erected to his memory, of which Fuller gives the following translation: t Grant some of knowledge greater store, None thundered more in preaching. Mr. Ward was an excellent divine, of whom the famous Dr. William Whitaker had the highest opinion, and used to say, "Give me John Ward for a text." Mr. Richard Rogers, the worthy puritan minister of Wethersfield in Essex, married his widow. Mr. Ward had four sons in the ministry. Samuel and Nathaniel were puritan divines of distinguished eminence. Mr. Ward, the ejected nonconformist, was most probably his son. EDMUND ROCKREY, B. D.-He was fellow of Queen's college, Cambridge, and a person distinguished for learning and abilities, but was brought into many troubles on account of his nonconformity. He was a man of great reputation, and, in the year 1569, was chosen one of the proctors of the university. The year following, he was convened before the ruling ecclesiastics, and required to enter into a bond of forty pounds, to appear from time to time before the vicechancellor or his deputy, until such matters should be determined and ended as were and should be laid against him. After appearing several times before the vicechancellor, Dr. Whitgift, and the heads of colleges, it was decreed, that he should remain, continue, and quietly keep his chamber as a true prisoner, till the matters objected against him should be ended.”** It appears very probable that he continued under con Neal's Puritans, vol. i. p. 423. § Firmin's Real Christian, Pref. + Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xv. p. 79. **Baker's MS. Collec. vol. iii. p. 377, 378. finement a long time: for towards the close of the year 1571, he was again several times brought before the vicechancellor and heads of colleges; when "Dr. Whitgift willed him to acknowledge and confess his fault, and openly to revoke his rashness in the same place, and before the same company, where he had given the offence;" and in the conclusion, he was required to make the following public recantation: "For as much as on Sunday, being the 26th of No“vember, in this place before you, I disorderly stood up, "(after that Dr. Chadderton, having commandment from "the vice-chancellor, had given. warning that we should "not speak against such statutes as the queen's majesty had "sent to the university,) and spoke words tending to the "complaining of such things 'as were then by our master "spoken, to the discrediting of some about the queen's "majesty; saying, that godly princes might be deceived by "hypocrites and flatterers, as David was by Shebna, or "such like; and to the derogation of the said statutes, and "condemnation of some of them, saying, that they tended "to the impairing of the liberty and privileges of the "university, and that some of them were directly against "God's word. I therefore acknowledge my rashness and "indiscreetness in so doing, and am heartily sorry for them, "desiring you to think as it becometh dutiful subjects to "think of the queen's majesty, her counsellors and laws, and "reverently obey the same, as I for my part intend to do, "God willing, to the uttermost of my power. In witness "whereof, I have subscribed this confession with my own "hand, and deliver the same here in your presence, to "our master, to be by him also delivered to Mr. Vice"chancellor." From the above, we see the crimes with which Mr. Rockrey was charged, together with the proceedings of these ruling ecclesiastics. He seems to have refused making this recantation. He would not defile his conscience, by subscribing that which appeared to him contrary to truth, as well as a tyrannical invasion of christian liberty. Though he was several times summoned before his superiors, it is probable, our author adds, that he still continued in the same mind.+ Mr. Rockrey scrupled wearing the habits, for which, during the above troubles, he was deprived of his fellowship, Baker's MS. Collec. vol. iii. p. 382, 383. + Ibid. p. 384. and in effect, expelled from the university. Lord Burleigh, the chancellor, procured his restoration, with a dispensation from wearing the habits for a twelvemonth, at the expiration of which, he was admonished three times by the master of the college, to conform himself in wearing the apparel. But he could not with a good conscience comply, and, therefore, was finally expelled, as an example to keep others in a state of obedience. He was one of the prebendaries of Rochester, where he was justly esteemed an admired and popular preacher; but, about the year 1584, was suspended from his ministerial function, and continued under the ecclesiastical censure many years.+ H. GRAY was a puritanical minister in Cambridge, and one of the preachers to the university. He delivered a sermon in St. Mary's church, January 8, 1586, in which he was charged with asserting the following opinions :—“That the church of England doth maintain Jewish music, contrary to the word of God, which alone ought to sound in his church. That it is contrary to the same word, to use in sermons the testimonies of doctors and profane writers.That to play at dice or cards is to crucify Christ.-That there are in this church dumb dogs, Jereboam's priests, and Chemarins, that have place at the upper end of the altar, which by the word should have no place in the church.That it is thought there be some among us who send over news to Rome and Rheims, and would have us all murdered. -That whoever would, might fill his hand, and be minister among us, as in the time of Jereboam; whereby it cometh to pass that some go about the country to offer their service for ten pounds a year and a canvas doublet.-And that we celebrate the joyful time of the nativity throughout the land as atheists and epicures." For these assertions, alleged against him, he appears to have been called before the ruling ecclesiastics, when he gave the following answers to the various accusations :— "Concerning music, I had no set treatise against it, but only I made this simile, that set music and its curious notes is an imitation of the Jewish music; and because it is not understood, it may delight, but not edify: so affected and curious eloquence, which the people cannot understand, may affect and delight the outward sense, but it cannot enter + MS. Register, p. 285, 585. *Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 434. Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xxx. p. 294. |