does not even hint at any incompetence on the part of the crown to regulate ecclesiastical affairs. She merely gives encouragement to the pretence then bandied about among the disaffected, that religion ought to be left as it was on the late King's demise, until the reigning sovereign should attain an age of maturity. From such a principle must, indeed, eventually follow the necessity of disjoining the ecclesiastical supremacy from the civil. For religious questions are liable to require especial interference during a minority, as well as political ones. Of this truth Edward's reign affords an obvious instance. When King Henry died, the most active spirits, and many of the ablest heads in England, were bent upon rooting out from the land every remnant of the papal system. To restrain this mass of energy and virtuous intelligence from keeping up a constant ferment in the public mind, would have been found impossible, unless by continuing in force the infamous act of Six Articles. In these days no man of acknowledged understanding would openly declare his approbation of such a statute. There are, however, those who loudly and justly condemn the intolerance of Edward's administration. For this, indeed, no apology can be offered, except by pleading the force of inveterate habit. Hitherto dissenters from the established religion had been consigned to the flames; they were now treated as civil offenders. An unrestrained enjoyment of religious liberty was a privilege, upon which the public mind had during

several ages never dwelt. So violent a transition from long established maxims of polity was not, therefore, suddenly to be expected. The Reformers, however, in their intolerance were not only much more merciful than their Romish predecessors, but they were also much more reasonable. The principles to which they demanded conformity, being all fairly deducible from a Record of acknowledged authenticity, were equal to the satisfaction of any candid and impartial enquirer. Whereas the doctrines, to which fire and faggot had been used to lend protection, were unsupported by any thing approaching certainty. If it be disbelieved, that upon St. Peter were conferred the extraordinary privileges attributed to him, that such have descended upon the Popes, that articles of faith were entrusted by the Apostles to mere recollection, and that this important traditionary deposit is vested in the Roman Church; things, indeed, all asserted positively, but no one of them resting upon the semblance even of a proof; then the whole fabric of Popery falls at once.

Of the resolutions ultimately formed upon the Lady Mary's inconformity, we have no knowledge. An application made, early in September, for the release of her officers, by the imperial ambassador, was disregarded, because unathorised by his court. That the Princess, however, at length admitted the new service is by no means probable;

King Edward's Journal. Burnet, Hist. Ref. Records, II. 48.

but we hear no more of her until early in the autumn of 1552. Bishop Ridley then, in his way from Cambridge, stopped at Hadham, in Hertfordshire, where at that time stood a mansion belonging to the see of London. At Hunsdon, within about two miles of that place, was then residing the Lady Mary. The Prelate paid her a visit there, and was very courteously received. After some ordinary conversation, he was invited to dine with her principal attendants, and his meal being concluded, he was again introduced into her presence. He then took an opportunity of saying, that he had not only come to pay her Grace a visit of dutiful civility, his intention also was to preach before her on the following Sunday, if she would graciously permit him. On this her countenance immediately fell, and after an interval of silence, she said, "As for that matter, I pray you, my Lord, make answer to it yourself." The Bishop replied, that his office and duty required the offer of him. "I can only repeat," added Mary, "your Lordship is able to resolve the question put to me. You surely know my mind therein. If, however, some answer to your proposal must come from me, I can only say, that should you visit Hunsdon on Sunday next, the pulpit of the parish-church will of course be at your service. There you may preach, if you please but I will not come to hear you, nor shall any of my servants." Ridley then said, "Madam, I trust your Grace will not refuse God's Word." The Princess rejoined, "I cannot tell what you

call God's Word: that which passed as such in my father's time, and that which is now so termed, are different things." She was answered, "God's Word is the same at all times, but in some periods it has been understood and practised better than in others." On hearing this, the Princess angrily said, "You durst not for your ears have avouched, in my father's days, for God's Word, that which you now set forth as such." This incivility was followed by many passionate reflections upon recent ecclesiastical reforms, and by a repetition of the stale pretence, that people were not bound to accept any changes in religion made during the King's minority. When at length her visitor took his leave, Mary said, " My Lord, I thank you for your civility in coming to see me; but for your offer to preach before me, I thank you not a whit." The Bishop then retired into another room, and there Sir Thomas Wharton offered him a glass of wine. This he had no sooner drunk, than he said with an air of concern, "Surely I have done amiss. I ought not to have taken any refreshment in a place where God's Word has been refused. Rather was it my duty to have departed instantly, and to have shaken off the dust from my feet, as a testimony against this house!"

In the autumn of this year, the cases of two incompliant prelates, confined in the Fleet, were taken into consideration at the council-board. One of these, Heath, Bishop of Worcester, had

! Life of Bp. Ridley, 380.

been a prisoner ever since the new ordinal was completed. He was one of the twelve appointed for the preparation of that book, and he so far concurred with his brother commissioners as to confess, that their work might be safely used in the Church. He refused, however, himself to sanction it by his signature. His fellow-prisoner was Day, Bishop of Chichester, who had never been at large since his opposition to the removal of altars. On the 22d of September, Bishop Heath was brought before the council, and informed, that if he would now consent to subscribe the ordinal, he would immediately be restored to liberty. He answered, "I admit, that my usage in prison has been gentle, more like that of a son than of a subject. I have not, however, seen, during the course of it, any reason to change my opinion as to the services which occasioned me to be placed under restraint. I cannot consent to sign the ordinal; but I am not disposed to act in opposition to it." This conduct appeared so unreasonable", that each of the councillors severally made an attempt to shake his determination. He proved, however, immovable, adding that he ob

Although he was reasoned withal by every one of the said council in disponing his manner of answer that he would not subscribe it, being every thing in the said book true and good, and being devised by eleven other learned men, to the which he was joined as the twelfth, and received of the whole estate of the realm, agreeing also that he would obey it, but not subscribe it, which contained a contradiction in reason, yet he still as a man not removable from his own conceit refused to subscribe it." Proceedings of Privy Council, 43.