Зображення сторінки
PDF

MONTHLY LIST OF PUBLICATIONS.

Serruous, Parochial and Domestic. By the Rev. R. S. Barton, Vicar of Alconbury, Hunts. 12mo, 4s.

Five Discourses on the Personal Office of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; on the Doctrine of the Trinity; on Faith and on Regeneration; with an Appendix. By the Rev. W. Procter, Jun. M.A. Fellow of Catherine Hall, Cambridge, and Lecturer of Berwick. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. bās.

Hele's Select Offices of Private Devotion: viz. 1. Office of Daily Devotion: with a Supplement—2. Office for the Lord's Day—3. Office of Pemitence and Humiliation—4. Office for the Holy Communion. With large Collections out of the Holy Scriptures.

New Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo. 10s. 6d.

An Essay on the Absolving Power of the Church; with especial reference to the offices of the Church of England for the ordering of Priests and the Visitation of the Sick. With copious Illustrations and Notes. By the Rev. T. H. Lowe, M.A. Vicar of Grimley, Worcester, and Chaplain to the Rt. Hon. Viscount Gage. 8vo. 2s. 6d.

A Reply to the Second Postscript in the Supplement to Palaeoromaica. By W. G. Broughton, M.A. Curate of Hartley Wespall, in Hampshire. 8vo. 2s.

l,ITERARY INTELLIGENCE.

The Rev. Dr. Russel, of Leith, is preparing for the Press two Octavo Volumes, to fill in the interval between the Works of Shuckford and Prideaux, “On the Sacred and Profane History of the World connected.” It is well known that the former of these writers meant to bring down his “Connection” to the period at which Dean Prideaux commonced his learned work on the same subject, but that he was prevented by death from accomplishing his undertaking. His narrative

ends with the demise of Joshua ; and the seven hundred years, which elapse from that date to the reign of Ahaz, constitute the historical field which Dr. Russel has announced his intention to occupy. His work is expected in the course of the present year.

A Volume of Sermons, translated by the Rev. Dr. Luscombe, from the French, of Protestant Continental Divines, is in the Press, and will appear in a few weeks.

NOTICE TO CORRESPONDENTS.

“Socius” will appear in another Number.
E. D's. reply to “Justus” has been received; but we do not think it expe-

dicnt to continue the discussion.

We have looked over the communication of P. C. in which he objects to the

“Form for admitting Converts,” &c. inserted in our Number for December, p. 737, as an innovation on our Liturgy, which he considers has already provided for such an occasion in the Baptismal Service appointed for such as have been privately baptized. Now, besides that such a service does not apply to a convert from the Church of Rome, whom we must consider as already publicly received “ into the congregation of Christ's flock,” as well as baptized, we beg to inform P. C. that the form which we inserted, is an authorized one, having been set forth in the 13th of Queen Anne, in the year 1714, when Tenison was Archbishop of Canterbury, as may be seen by a reference to “Wilkins's Concilia,” vol. iv. p. 660. There are a few omissions in the form as we have printed it, which ought not to have been. For after the exhortation a Psalm is appointed to be read—the l l 9th, at verse 161. Then a Lesson –Luke xv. to ver. 8. And after that two other Psalms—the 115th, to verse 10, when the peuitent

comes from the Church of Rome; or, instead of that, the 122d, if the peniteut comes sion, “the separation.”

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

ROBERT FERRAR, was born in the parish of Halifax, in Yorkshire, in the reign of Henry VII.t. He was educated at the University of Cambridge. When a young man, he was made a Canon Regular of the Order of St. Austin, upon which he retired to a religious house in Oxford, called St. Mary's, which served as a Nursery for the Canons of the order. It was in the year 1526, during his residence here, that he became a disciple of the Reformation. The principal instrument in his conversion was a person named Thomas Garret, who is described as the Curate of Honey Lane in London, and a Lutheran, by whom he was furnished with some of the prohibited books written against the Roman Catholic Religion. In 1533 he was admitted to the degree of Bachelor in Divinity, and about the same time was chosen Prior of a Monastery of his Order, called Nostel, or St. Oswald's, in Yorkshire, which he surrendered afterwards to the Commissioners, upon the dissolution of the Monastery in the year 1540, receiving, as a compensation, a pension of one hundred pounds a year. Afterwards he became Chaplain to Archbishop Cranmer, through whom he obtained some preferment in the Church. It was probably at this period of his professional advancement that he entered into the married state. He was much employed in public affairs in the reigns of both Henry VIII. and Edward VI. In 1535 he accompanied Bishop Barlow in the embassy, on which that Prelate was sent by Henry to Scotland. On another occasion he was entrusted with the charge of conveying some old books of great value from the dissolved Monastery of St. Oswald's, to the Archbishop of York. And in the royal visitation in the beginning of King Edward's reign, he was amongst the number of the King's Visitors, being appointed one of the Preachers, for his great ability in that capacity. In 1548, through the interest of the Duke of Somerset, in whose

* See Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. 3. p. 165–180. Strype's Memorials of Cranmer, 8vo. vol. 1. p. 261–263. Dodd's Church History, vol. 1. p. 378. Heylin's Ecclesia Restaurata, p. 70–219. Wood's Athenae Oxon. vol. 1. p. 678.

This Bishop was an ancestor of Nicholas Ferrar, or Farrar, the friend of George Herbert, and so distinguished both for his early piety, (which obtained him “the reputation, as Izaac Walton says, of being called Saint Nicholas, at the age of six years,”) and for the extraordinary service of unintermitted devotion which he instituted in his family. He took much delight in reading the Book of Martyrs, and it is said, could repeat perfectly by heart the story of his kinsman as related by Fox.

t Henry the Seventh's reign began in 1485, ended in 1509. It was probably towards the close of it that Ferrar was born.

vol. Wii. No. iii. S

favour he stood high, he was appointed to the Bishopric of St. David's, on the translation of Barlow to the See of Bath and Wells. On September the 9th of that year, he received consecration by the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury—Holbech, Bishop of Lincoln, —and Ridley, then Bishop of Rochester, in the Archbishop's house at Chertsey. - - - This promotion was far from being any addition to his happiness; on the contrary, it only paved the way to the misfortunes of his subsequent life. Indeed he was permitted afterwards to enjoy but little of liberty, for, on the fall of his Patron, the Duke of Somerset, he became a ready prey to malicious persecutions, against which he had no longer sufficient power to shield him, “proving unhappy,” as Strype observes, “by his preferment unto a Church, whose corruptions while he endeavoured to correct, he sunk under his commendable endeavours.” With that activity which distinguished him, not long after his entrance on his bishopric, he resolved to make a visitation of his diocese, learning that it was overrun with great corruptions. But what attracted his notice particularly, as requiring his prompt interference, was the gross example of corruption which had been reported to him as existing in the Chapter of the Church of Carmarthen, where two principal men, Thomas Young, the Chaunter of St. David's, and Rowland Merick, one of the Canons, who had before acted as Commissioners of the diocese, had spoiled the Cathedral Church of crosses, chalices, and censers, with other plate, jewels, and ornaments, to the value offive hundred marks or more; which they had converted to their own private benefit. The same persons had also sealed many blanks, during the vacancy of the see, without the King's license or knowledge. These circumstances coming to the ear of Ferrar, he issued out his commission to Edmund Farlee, his Chancellor, for visiting the Chapter, as well as the rest of the diocese. This commission proved the beginning of sorrow to himself. It happened that the Chancellor in drawing up the requisite form, had worded it incorrectly. For instead of asserting the King's supremacy, it was couched in the old form used under the Papal ascendancy; though the Bishop professed to visit in the King's name and authority. This informality afforded a handle against him to the two individuals who had been guilty of the acts of spoliation. Availing themselves of the absence of the requisite authority for legalizing the commission, they not only refused to obey it, but in their turn became aggressors, and accused the Bishop of a praemumire, as having exceeded his powers". With them also was leagued against him, his ungrateful Registrar, George Constantine, a man on whom he had bestowed preferment. So that his very first exertions in reforming the abuses of his Clergy being impeded by this trivial error in the form of the proceedings, were the means of involving him in calamity. At the instigation of these persons and other enemies of Ferrar, information was laid before the Council by Hugh Rawlins, a Priest, and Thomas Lee, brother-in-law to Constantine; highly inculpating the Bishop. It branched out into fifty-six distinct articles of accusation, many of which were of the most frivolous nature. He was required accordingly to repair to London to justify himself against the vexatious prosecution. The tenor of these articles" is sufficiently evidenced by the concluding one of the series, which asserts that, “since he came into his diocese, he had behaved himself most unmeet for a man of his vocation, being for a minister of justice, an abuser of the authority to him committed—for a teacher of the truth, and reformer of superstition, a maintainer of superstition without any doctrine of reformation,-for a liberal and hospital, an unsatiable, covetous man—for a diligent overseer, wilful and negligent;—for an example of godly wisdom, given wholly to folly—for merciful, a cruel revenger, And further, for a peace-maker, a sower of discord. And so in all his behaviour a discrediter and slanderer of his vocation, and a deceiver of all men, that had hope that he should do any reformation. For he yet hath neither brought into his diocese, nor hath belonging to him, any learned Preacher. But such learned Preachers as he hath found in the diocese at his entry, he so vexeth and disquieteth, that they cannot attend to apply their preaching, for the defence of their livings, against his quarrellous inventions and unjust certificates.” The hearing of these vexatious charges was appointed by the

* “This was a conspiracy of his enemies against him, and of wicked fellows who had robbed the Church, kept concubines, falsified records, and committed many other gross abuses.” Sutclif's Answer to Parsons's Threefold Conversion of England, quoted by Strype.

* Under the head of folly are the following specimens of ridiculous imputations against Ferrar. “48. Item. To declare his folly in riding, he useth bridle with white studs and snaffle, white Scottish stirrups, white spurs, a Scottish pad with a little staff of three quarters long, which he hath not only used superstitiously these four or five years, in communication oftentimes boasting what countries he hath compassed and measured with the same staff. “49. Item. He hath made a vow that he will never wear a cap, for he saith, it is comely wearing of a hat, and so cometh in his long gown and hat, both into the Cathedral Church, and to the best town of his diocese, sitting in that sort, in the King's great Sessions, and in his consistory, making himself a mock to the people. o: Item. He said he would go to the Parliament on foot; and to his friends, that dissuaded him, alleging, that it is not meet for a man in his place, lie answered, “I care not for that, it is no sin.” “51. Item. Having a son, he went before the midwife to the Church, presenting the child to the Priest, and giving his name Samuel, with a solemn interpretation of the name, appointing also two Godfathers and two Godmothers, contrary to the ordination, making his son a monster, and himself a laughing stock throughout all the country. “52. Item. He daily useth whistling of his child, and saith that he understood his whistle, when he was but three days old. And being advertised of his folly, he answered, “they whistle their horses and dogs, and I am contented, they might also be contented that I whistle my child, and so whistled him daily, all friendly admonition neglected. “53. Item. In his ordinary visitation among other his surveys, he surveyed Milford Haven, where he espied a seal-fish tumbling. And he crept down to the water side, and continued there whistling by the space of an hour, persuading the company that laughed fast at him, that by his whistling he made the fish to tarry there. “54. Item. Speaking of scarcity of herrings, he laid the fault to the covetousness of fishers, who in time of plenty took so many that they destroyed the breeders. “55. Item. Speaking of the alteration of the coin, he wished, that what value soever it were of, the penny should be in weight worth a penny of the same metal." s 2

Council to take place before Sir John Mason and Dr. Wotton, as Commissioners, and these received Ferrar's answers to them, which were delivered in order to the several articles brought against him. In these answers he clears himself from all imputation of any intention of acting in defiance of the King's authority—or of maintaining superstition, since on the contrary he had laboured to abolish it by true doctrine;—or of covetousness, which he alleges could be disproved by his neighbours;–or of wilful negligence, shewing that he had exerted himself to the utmost;-or lastly, of folly, setting forth “that his desire was, in true simple manner of words, and deeds, and other honest behaviour, through God's grace, to shew godly wisdom.” After the answers exhibited by Ferrar to the mass of frivolous accusations brought against him, Constantine and Young, came forward as witnesses; against whose evidence Ferrar first laid exceptions, and then proceeded to adduce matter in justification of himself. Whereupon Constantine and Young, finding their depositions to be insufficient, asked and obtained a commission for examining further witnesses in the country. And two distinct commissions being granted by the Council, severally to Rawlins and Lee, these persons contrived, through the favour of the officers, to join both in one, in order to diminish the costs. Three months were assigned them to make their return. During all this time, while the process against him was pending before the Council, Ferrar was detained in London, his enemies alleging, that if he were suffered to go down to his diocese he would prevent their collecting the requisite proofs of the charges. Thus having full opportunity of collecting such evidence as they wished, without his being able to confront them on the spot, they returned to London at the end of the time appointed, and reported that they had examined no less than an hundred and twenty-seven witnesses. This body of evidence naturally produced a strong impression against the unfortunate Bishop, among the members of the Council. The delay also which intervened, before he could learn the nature of the evidence against him, (for on account of the bulk of the manuscript containing the depositions, it was five weeks still before he could obtain a copy of them,) must have served to heighten the unfavourable colouring of his case. Thus it was that even his friend, the Archbishop, was disposed to give credit to the injurious calumnies maintained with such malignant perseverance; though afterwards he appears to have seen through the malice of the prosecution, understanding by means of letters which Ferrar wrote in his affliction, both to him and to Bishop Goodrick, the Lord Chancellor, the flagrant injustice of the whole proceeding. To enable him to meet his enemies on their own ground, he then asked for a commission for himself also to examine witnesses—which was granted to him,--but the great dispatch which he was required to use, and the interruption which happened to him from his being required to answer at the Bar daily during the Sessions at Carmarthen, on the charge of praemunire, conspired to render his persecutors an over match for him, and he sunk at last a victim to their evil designs. His detention in London had also given them a more plausible plea against him, for, as he was thus prevented from being exact in the payment of

« НазадПродовжити »