« AnteriorContinuar »
And now after this long digrefsion, made for the information of my reader concerning what follows, I bring him back to the venerable Mr. Hooker, where we left him in the Temple, and where we shall find him as deeply engaged in a controversy with Walter Traversd, a friend and favourite of Mr. Cartwright's, as Dr. Whitgift had ever been with Mr. Cartwright himself; and of which, I shall proceed to give this following account.
And first this, that though the pens of Mr. Cartwright and Dr. Whitgift were now at rest, and had been a great while, yet there was sprung up a new generation of restless men, that: by company and clamours became possessed of a faith which they ought to have kept to themselves, but could not; men that were become positive in asserting, “ that a Papist cannot “ be saved;" infomuch, that about this time, at the execution of the Queen of Scots, the Bishop that preached her funeral fermon (which was Dr. Howland, then Bishop of Peterborough“),
object of purfuit, why should the topic of debate be canvassed with animolity or personal invective? Thomas Cartwright, the Archbishop's old antagonist, was alive in 1601, and grew rich at his hospital at Warwick, preaching at the chapel there, faith my author, very temperately ac. cording to the promise made by him to the Archbishop. Which mildnefs of his fome ascribed to his old age and more experience. But the latter end of next year he deceafed, out-lived little above two months by the Archbishop, who yet was much his elder in years. And now at the end of Cartwright's life to take our leave of him with a fairer chas racter, it is remarkable what a noble and learned man (Sir H. Yelverton) writes of some of his last words:-" That he seriously lamented . of the unnecessary troubles he had caused in the Church, by the schism he " had been the great fomenter of, and wished to begin his life again, that * he might testify to the world the dislike he had of his former ways :" and in this opinion he died. (Strype's Life of whitgift, p. 554.)
d WALTER TRAVERS, formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, was called by Fuller, “ the Neck," as Cartwright was termed by bim “ the Head, of the Presbyterian party.” They were intimate friends and joint preachers to the English Factory at Antwerp. When Travers came into England, he was appointed chaplain to Lord Burghley, through whose influence he was made Leclurer at the Temple. He is the suppolęd author of the book “ De Disciplinâ Ecclefiafticâ," written in Latin against the government of the Church of England, and containing the ground and model of the Puritan discipline. Archbishop Whitgift, in a letter to the Queen, to whom Travers was recommendeci as a proper person to be cholen Master of the Temple, on the death of Father Alvy, describes him as “one of the chief and principal authors " of dissension in the church, a contemner of the book of prayers and or other orders by authority established; an earnesi leeker of innovation; ós and either in no degree of the ininifiry at all, or else ordered beyond r the seas not according to the form in this Church of England used." Mr. Travers was ordained at Antwerp, May 8, 1578, by Cartwright,
Villers, and others, the beads of a congregation there. - e Dr. RICHARD HOWLAND, Master of St. John's College in Cam
was reviled for not being positive for her damnation. And be. Ides this boldness of their becoming gods, so far as to set limits to his mercies, there was not only “Martin Mar-prelate'," but
bridge, and the fourth Bishop of Peterborough, died in 1600. It does not appear that he was the preacher on this occasion.
Gunton, in his “ History of the Church of Peterborough,” page 73, &c. has given a circumftantial account of the funeral of Mary Queen of Scots, on Tuelday August 1,1587, fix months after ber death, for the was beheaded in the catile of Forheriogay, February 8, in that year. He relates that the Bishop of Lincoln (Wickhain) preached out of the 39th Psalm, 5, 6, 7, Lord, let me know my end and the number of my duys, &c. In the prayer, when he gave thanks for such as were trantjated out of this vale of misery, he used these words :- Let us give thanks for the happy dissolution of the high and nighty Princess Mary, late Queen of Scotland and Dowager of France, of whose life and death at this time I have not much to say, because I was not acquainted with the one, neither was I present at the other. I till. ot enter into judgment further; but, because it liath been signified to me that she trusted to be sated by the blood of Christ, we must hope well of her saloution: “ For," as Father Luther was wont to say, “ many one that liveth a Pupist, dieth a Protestant." lo the discourse of his text, he only dealt with general doctrine of the vanity of all field.
In the Supplement subjoined to " Gunton's History,” page 331, the subject of the sermon is resumed Bilhop Morton, in his Pro" tesiant Appeal,' l. iv. c. I. hath given the best account I meet with " of that passage (which in the “Apology of the Roman Church' is "taken out of Martin Mar-Prelate') in the Bishop of Lincoln's Ser" mon at her (the Queen of Scots) funeral, which made so great noise o among factious people, who reported that he prayed his soul and the • souls of all there present might be with the soul of the Queen deceased. « But the truth of ihe fiory, he fays, is this, that the reverend Bithop “now menioned, underlianding how that great and honourable per“ fonage in the last act of her life renounced all presumption of her own rijoherent righteousness, and wholly affianced her soul unto Christ, in o belief to be justified only by his fatisfactory justice, did therefore con-' "scrive hope of her falvation by virtue of that cordial prescribed by the co holy Apofile, viz. that where sin aboundetle, the grace of God doth super. acabound. Which the Apolile hath ministered for the comfort of every 96 Cbrilian, who, erring by ignorance, Mall (by fincere repentance, "elpecially for all known fios) depart from this mortal life, having "The heel or end of it fod with this preparation of the gospel of o veace: not of the new Romill, but of ihe old Catholic faith, which o is the faith of all Protestants. And this confideration of that our r preacher cannot but now worthily condemn the Apologists of partial « Prejudice, who chose rather to be informed concerning that lermon Hoy (as they copless) a reproacbtul traducer and libeller, than (which ou liiey might easily have done) by teftimony of a thousand temperate “ ud ipanterent hearers then pretent."
fin 1588 many libels, full of law fcurrility, and petulant fatire, were publitlied against the Bishops. They were principally written by a Luciety of men, assuming the name of “Martin Mar-Prelate.” They appeared under various titles, as “ Diotrephes ;" * The Minerals; " ile Epitile to the Confocation Houle ;' “ Have you airy Work for a Coupei;” in antwer to what Cowper, Bishop of Winchelier, brad
i Strype has drawn a comparison between these two rival preachers.** Hooker was a true man to the church as established: Travers was not $.fo: Hooker was for universal redemption, and taught the decrees of « God concerning the salvation of mankind by Jesus Chrift in more la * titude: Travers was for the more rigid way, for absolute exclusion of " the greatest part of mankind from it, and to be shut up under a de “ cree of reprobation and rejection. These and other opinions caufed « different doctrines to be preached in the same pulpit morning and af: s ternoon." ik That prohibition was chiefly because of his foreign ordination.
Their different characters as preachers are thus delineated by Dr. Gau
den:-“ Mr. Travers was a more plausible and profitable preacher to “ vulgar auditors, as well as more popular, having much more of the " oratorian decoy, a pleasing voice, a pathetic pronunciation, and an " jnfinuating fashion or gefiure to captivate his auditors by his agree"able presence, vigorous speech, and graceful activity; nor were his "texts and matter usually ill-chosen, or iinpertinently or dully handled, “ upon practical heads and common places of divinity. Mr. Hooker " was more profound, and the other more fluent: different gifts they “ had from the fame Spirit, for several uses of the church, to the fame “ end of God's glory and souls' good, though in different ways of mi" nifiration."
(Hooker's Life, p. 30.) According to Fuller, the manner of filencing Travers gave great of fence. “ For all the congregation on a Sabbath in the afternoon were " assembled together, their attention prepared, the cloth, as I may fay, " and napkins were laid, yea the guesis let, and their knives drawn for “ their spiritual repaft, when suddenly, as Mr. Travers was going up to " the pulpit, a forry fellow ferved him with a letier, prohibiting him to « preach any more. In obedience to authority, the mild and constant “ submission whereunto won bim respect with his adversaries, Mr. Tra“ vers calmly fignified the fame to the congregation, and requefied them “ quietly to depart to their chambers. Thus was our good Zacharias “ Tiruck dumb in the Temple, but not for infidelity; un partial people « accounting his fault at moti but indiscretion. Meantime his auditory “ (pained that their pregnant expectation to hear him preach thould lo " publicly prove abortive, and lent fermonless home) manifested in their « variety of passion, some grieving, some frowning, some murmuring, " and ihe wisest sort, who held their tongnes, Maked their heads, as “ dilliking the managing of the matter." (Fuller's Church Hist. B.IX. p.217.)-Upon bis expullon from the Temple he was appointed Provolt of Trinity College in Dublin, at the indiance of his old friend and fellow collegian Adam Loftus, Archbishop of Dublin. He afterward religned that office, and returned to England, where he lived many years in obscurity, but with much quiet and contentment.
1 " The Supplication made to the Council by Mr. Walter Travers," and “Mr. Hooker's Answer to it, addressed to my Lord of Canterbury his Grace,'' are usually printed with Mr. Hooker's works.