SECTION XIV.
The Judgment of our English Reformers concluded.
IV. Doctor John Hooper, bishop of Gloucester and Worcester, comes next to be considered. He was born in Somersetshire, A.D. 1495; and received the academical part of his education at Merton College, Oxford. The exact time of his conversion to the Protestant faith, is unknown: but it certainly was previous to the year 1539. For, upon the passing of the six bloody articles into a statute, which happened in that year, we find Mr. Hooper quitting England for the sake of a good conscience, and wandering, like a partridge hunted on the mountains, first into France, Ireland, and Holland; and thence to Switzerland, in which latter, he lived partly at Basil, and partly at Zurich, where he became intimately acquainted with the learned Henry Bullinger.
On the death of Henry VIII. in 1547, our venerable exile returned to his native country. Prior to his setting out from Zurich, he dropt a very remarkable expression, in his parting interview with Bullinger. "In all probability," said Bullinger, "king Edward will raise you to a bishoprick. If so, don't suffer your elevation to make you forgetful of your old friend, in Switzerland. Let us, from time to time, have the satisfaction of hearing from you." Hooper answered, "No change of place, nor of station, no accession of new friends, shall ever render me unmindful of yourself and my other benefactors here. You may depend on my carefully corresponding with you. But it will not be in my power, to write you an account of the last news of all: for" [taking Bullinger by the hand] "others will inform you of my being burned to ashes in that very place where, in the mean while, I shall labour most for God and the gospel."1 The holy man was not mistaken in his prediction. Gloucester was, afterwards, the principal seat of his religious labours; and, at Gloucester, he sealed those labours with his blood, Feb. 9, 1555, in the 60th year of his age: being, as Burnet2 observes, the first of our Protestant bishops that suffered death for the gospel.
He is universally allowed to have been eminently pious, extensively learned, and of the most unimpeachable morals. A noble instance of the steadiness and impartiality with which he laboured to discountenance vice, occurs in the history last referred to. Being in his diocese of Gloucester, he denounced the censures of the church against some persons of inferior station, who had been convicted of open lewdness. One of them had the courage to say to him, We poor people must do penance for these things; while great and rich men, though as guilty as ourselves, are suffered to escape unpunished and unnoticed. The bishop answered, Name any person, how great soever, who can be convicted of adultery; and I will give you leave to use me as roughly as you please, if I do not proceed against him with all the severity of justice. The intrepid prelate was soon as good as his word: for, in a few days after, he cited Sir Anthony Kingston, a man of high consequence in that country, into the Ecclesiastical Court: and though, for some time, the knight behaved with great haughtiness and outrage, he was at last forced to do penance, and pay a fine of 500l. besides.3
As Dr. Hooper was thus a resolute assertor of virtue, so he asserted, with no less resolution, those grand evangelical doctrines, from the experimental belief of which, all genuine virtue flows. He observes, that, in Heaven, the souls of the faithful are "forever praising the Lord, in conjunction and society everlasting with the blessed company of God's elect, in perpetual joy."4 And he mentions it as one capital instance of the patience of God's people on earth, that "They wait until the number of the elect be fulfilled."5 With an eye to the same precious doctrine of election, he adds, in a letter, written a few weeks before his martyrdom, that the glorified spirits of them who had, in all ages, suffered death for the cause of Christ, were joyfully expecting the happy day, "When they shall receive their bodies again in immortality, and see the number of the elect associated with them in full and consummate joys."6
He is equally explicit, as to the necessity of grace. He justly observes, that true contentment under affliction is the fruit of supernatural regeneration. "It is not the nature of man that can be contented, until it he regenerated and possessed with God's spirit, to bear patiently the troubles of the mind, or of the body."7 Again: "These things" [viz. the knowledge and love of heavenly objects] "are easy to be spoken of, but not so easy to he practised. Wherefore, seeing they be God's gifts, and none of ours to have of our own when we would, we must seek them at our Heavenly Father's hand.8 Howbeit, no man of himself can do this [i.e. can pray and hope aright]; but the Spirit of God, that striketh the man's heart with fear, prayeth for the man stricken and feared, with unspeakable groanings."9 Once more: "Christ saith to every one of his people, By your own patience ye shall continue your life: not that man hath patience in [i.e. of] himself, but that he must have it for himself of God, the only giver of it."10
On the great article of justification, also, Hooper was a thorough Calvinist. This appears from the confession of faith (an extract of which is preserved in Burnet), which was signed, not only by Hooper himself, but by two bishops besides, and seven eminent ministers; all, at that time, prisoners for the gospel: viz. Coverdale, bishop of Exeter; Farrar, bishop of St. David's; with Taylor, Philpot, Bradford, Crome, Sanders, Rogers, and Lawrence. In this excellent declaration, the heroic sufferers publicly certified, that they "held justification by faith; which faith," said they, "is not only an opinion, but a certain persuasion, wrought by the Holy Ghost, which doth illuminate the mind, and supple the heart to submit itself unfeignedly to God." They add, that they "acknowledged an inherent righteousness; yet they believed that justification, and pardon of sins, came only by Christ's righteousness imputed to them."11
Let me, next, subjoin a word or two, concerning Hooper's doctrine of providence. "God," says he, "hath such care and charge of us, that he will keep, in the midst of all troubles, the very hairs of our head: so that one of them shall not fall away without the will and pleasure of our Heavenly Father. Whether the hair, therefore, tarry on the head, or fall from the head, it is the will of the Father."12 Again: "They [i.e. all afflictions] be servants of God, to go and come as he commandeth them."13 Once more: "Of this I am assured, that the wicked world, with all its force and power, shall not touch one of the hairs of our heads, without leave and license of our heavenly Father."14
A specimen of what he advances, respecting final perseverance, shall, for the present, conclude his testimony. To a company of Protestants who had been surprised at a religious meeting, and committed to prison, he thus wrote: God will go in and out with you, and will he present in your hearts and in your mouths. He that hath begun that work in you, will surely strengthen you in the same."15 In a letter to his own lady, he says; "Remember, that although your16 life, as all Christian men's be, be hid, and appeareth not, what it is; yet it is safe, (as St. Paul saith) with God in Christ: and when Christ shall appear, then shall our lives be made open [i.e. be rendered conspicuous] with him in glory."17 He adds, a little lower: we may be tempted of the Devil, the flesh, and the world; but yet, although these things pinch, they do not pierce: and though they work sin in us, yet in Christ no damnation to those that be grafted in him. Hereof may the Christian man learn both consolation and patience. Consolation, in that [notwithstanding] he is compelled, both in his body and goods, to feel pain and loss; and, in soul, heaviness and anguish of mind; howbeit, none of them both shall separate him from the love that God beareth him in Christ. He may learn patience, forasmuch as his enemies, both of body and soul, and the pains also they vex us withal for the time; if they tarry with us long as we live, yet, when death cometh, they shall avoid, and give place to such joys as be prepared for us in Christ."18 To one Mrs. Anne Warcop, who was in danger on account of the gospel, the holy bishop wrote as follows: "I did rejoice, at the coming of this bearer, to understand of your constancy; and that you are fully resolved, by God's grace, rather to suffer extremity, than to go from the truth of God which you have professed. He that gave you grace to begin so infallible a truth, will follow you in the same unto the end."19
From bishop Hooper, I pass on,
V. To Doctor Martin Bucer: a man, whose discretion, mildness and benevolence, procured him the name of "the moderate reformer;" and whose admirable talents obliged even Vossius to style him, Ter Maximum Bucerum. His judicious labours, during his residence in this kingdom, greatly assisted in the reformation of our church, at home; and his learned pen was, no less zealously and successfully, engaged, in defending and vindicating her doctrine, worship and discipline, from the calumnies of the Papists, and from the ill-judged exceptions of some foreign Protestants, abroad. Taking every thing into the account, he was, perhaps, in point of temper, conduct, and abilities, one of the most amiable and unexceptionable divines that ever lived: though few persons have been more insulted and traduced by bigots of all denominations.
He was born, A.D. 1491, at Schelestadt, in Alsace. In his early part of life he entered himself of the order of Dominican Friars; but, after a time, God shewed him a more excellent way. Some writings, of Erasmus are said20 to have given his mind the first shock against Popery. His doubts were afterwards improved into a full conviction of the truth, by the books of Luther. As Luther's writings had driven the nail to the head; so some personal interviews, which Bucer had with that reformer, first at Heideberg, and then at Worms, in 1521, clinched the nail so effectually, that Bucer determined from that time forward, to profess the doctrines of the gospel more openly than ever. The conversations of these two great men, during those memorable interviews, appear to have turned chiefly on the articles of free-will and justification.
In the year 1548, Bucer was (not at the recommendation of Melancthon, but at the recommendation of archbishop21 Cranmer ) invited, by king Edward, from Strasburg to England. The learned Fagious was invited at the same time; and accompanied Bucer hither. Being arrived, Bucer was made divinity professor at Cambridge; with a salary, treble to what any of his predecessors had enjoyed. "These grave and learned Doctors," says Mr. Strype, meaning Martin Bucer and Peter Martyr, "were placed there [viz. in the two Universities; Bucer at Cambridge, and Martyr at Oxford]: the Lord Protector and the archbishop judging them the fittest persons to inform the students in their notions and doctrines concerning religion. Because, as they were very learned in other sciences: so in divinity, they took the Holy Scripture for their guide, and gathered their tenets from no other authority but from thence; according to the constant principle of the great and good archbishop."22 I shall quickly shew, that the archbishop and the Lord Protector were not mistaken, in their favourable opinion of the two celebrated foreigners; and that these illustrious divines did indeed "gather their tenets from no other authority but the Holy Scriptures."
But Bucer's business in England, and that of Martyr, was not restrained to the divinity chairs of Cambridge and Oxford, or to the instruction of the youth who were to serve in the ministry of this Protestant Church. Those learned professors had likewise a hand in the reformation and settlement of the Church herself. Even the fierce-flaming and high-flying Mr. Samuel Downes, notwithstanding all his redundant bitterness against Calvinism, both foreign and domestic, is compelled to own (though with grievous reluctance, and with no little mincing and twisting,) that the liturgy itself was submitted to the judgment and correction of Bucer and Martyr. These divines, says Mr. Downes, "being men of great learning, and of a moderate and peaceable disposition, had been invited over by archbishop Cranmer: and had, by their prudent carriage, and affection to our regular constitution, which they had given a remarkable instance of in their answers to Hooper's scruples concerning the episcopal habit, so well recommended themselves to the esteem of our bishops; that it was thought expedient to lay a Latin translation of the liturgy before them, and desire their opinion concerning what explanations, or amendments, were requisite to be made."23 Thus far, all is fair, candid and true. And, if this be indeed (as indeed it is) a just state of the fact; I should be glad to know, with what propriety and consistency the Arminian life-compiler has subjoined, in the very next words to those last cited, "But there is a wide difference between asking their advice, and adding, or omitting, according to their humour and fancy." Is not this, indirectly, saying that Bucer and Martyr were humoursome fanciful men? And how does such an unjust and ungenerous implication comport with the character which this very writer has, a moment before, given. of these very persons viz. That "their disposition was peaceable and moderate, that their carriage was prudent, and their affection to our regular constitution so remarkable as to recommend them to the esteem of the reforming bishops?" It does not appear, that either Bucer or Martyr, had any singularity either of "humour," or of "fancy," to indulge. On the contrary, their modesty and moderation were known to all men, and have pressed even Mr. Downes himself into an acknowledgment of both. It maybe asked, Did the English reformers actually make any alterations in the book of Common Prayer, conformably to the judgments of Martyr and Bucer? I answer, yes. And the aforesaid Mr. Downes shall second my testimony. Though, through an excess of bigotry, he faulters in pronouncing his evidence, still the evidence itself is full to the point. "If some particulars were altered agreeable to their judgment, it was because our bishops thought the reasons which they [i.e. which Martyr and Bucer] gave, for making those alterations, conclusive and convincing."24 Admitted. It remains, then, that these two foreign Calvinists were actually concerned in the modeling of our English liturgy: and, consequently, that they had some hand in the reformation of the Church of England.
But were they indeed doctrinal Calvinists? Let their own works answer the question. I shall begin with Bucer: and cite his observations, not under distinct heads, but in the same order as I extracted them, from such of his books as I could have present recourse to.
"Predestination," says Bucer, "is neither more nor less than pre-limitation, or fore-appointment: and God, who consigns every thing to its proper use, worketh all things agreeably to his own pre-determination; and, accordingly, separates one thing from another, so as to make each thing answer to its respective use. If you desire a more extensive definition of this predestination, take it thus: predestination is an appointment of every thing to its proper use; by which appointment, God doth, before he made them, even from eternity, destine all things whatever to some certain and particular use. Hence it follows, that even wicked men are predestinated. For, as God forms them out of nothing, so he forms them to some determinate end: for he does all things, knowingly, and wisely. The Lord hath made all things for himself, even the wicked for the day of evil [Prov. xvi. 4]. Divines, however, do not usually call this predestination; but reprobation. 'Tis certain, that God makes a good use of evil itself: and every sin we commit, hath something in it of the good work of God.25 Scripture does not hesitate to affirm, that there are persons, whom God delivers over to a reprobate sense, and whom he forms for destruction: why, therefore, should it be deemed derogatory from God, to assert, that he not only does this, but resolved beforehand to do it?"26
Nothing can be more plain and nervous than the following remarks of Bucer respecting God's obduration of Pharaoh. Whether the remarks be, or be not, carried too far, is beyond my province to enquire. "The apostle says, Who may resist the will of God? By the word will, Paul gives us to understand, that God actually willeth those very things unto which men are hardened by him. When Paul adds, Who may resist? he, in fact, points out the necessity which they, whom God hardens, are under, of doing those things. When God would harden Pharaoh, in order that he might not obey the commandment, it was the actual will of God that Pharaoh should not obey. Yea, God himself wrought in Pharaoh to oppose the commandment sent him. Pharaoh, therefore, did what God in reality willed him to do; yea, he did no more than what God himself had wrought in him: nor was it in Pharaoh's power, to act otherwise than he did." Such was the doctrine taught by this able and courageous Cambridge professor. Willing, however, to obviate any exceptions which those persons might raise who had not studied these deep points so carefully and so extensively as he had been enabled to do, he, presently after, shelters both his doctrine and himself under the following words, and the correspondent practice, of the great apostle whom he had quoted before: "Nay but, O man! [who art thou that repliest against God?] St. Paul does not accommodate nor soften down, a single syllable of what he had just asserted. The sacred penman does not deny that they who are hardened by God perish according to the will of God. The apostle does not admit it to be even possible that a person who is hardened from above can perform what is good. Paul [instead of setting himself to answer our vain reasonings on the matter] contents himself with merely giving us a solemn caution not to sit in judgment on the decrees of God: assuring us, that we cannot arraign the Deity at our own bar, without being guilty of the uttermost boldness and impiety."27 If Bucer was not a Calvinist, where shall we find one?
I cannot prevail on myself to defraud the reader of a few more citations, which I lately extracted from another most valuable work of Bucer, entitled, A continued Interpretation of the Four Gospels. And I the rather subjoin them, as the book itself is exceedingly scarce, though I have been so happy as to meet with it in a neighbouring library.
"They who are at any time able to fall quite away from Christ, did never really belong to him. Consequently, they never truly believed, nor were indeed pious, nor had the Holy Spirit of adoption: on the contrary, all their performances were nothing but hypocrisy, how sanctified and ready soever unto good works they, for a time, pretended to be. They, whom Christ loves, are loved by him even unto the end: and he doth not cast away those whom the Father giveth him; neither can any snatch them from his hand. Therefore, admitting that these may fall, yet they cannot fall utterly; for they are elect unto life: and God's election cannot be made void by any creature whatever. Seeing, then, that the purpose of God, according to election, may stand, not of works, but of him that calleth [Rom. ix. 11.]; he not only elected his own people before they were born, and had done either good or evil [Rom. ix. 11.], but even before the very foundations of the world [Eph. i. 4.] Hence, our Lord said, concerning his apostles, I pray not for the world, but for them whom thou hast given me; for they are thine: that is, they were chosen by thee unto life. As, therefore, on one hand, Christ never knew [i.e. never loved] the reprobate, whatever deceitful appearance of virtue they might have; so, on the other, he always knew [i.e. always loved] the elect, how ungodly so ever they might seem for a time. Consequently, as these [i.e. the elect] are predestinated and called, they shall, sooner or later, be formed anew, according to the likeness of Christ: while those [i.e. the reprobate] shall he stripped of that artificial mask, under which they passed for children of God; and be made to appear in their own proper colours."28
On those words of Christ, Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, Bucer thus remarks: "They were not of our Lord's sheep, i.e. they were not in the number of those who were given to him by the Father; they were not elected unto life. Therefore it was, that they were totally destitute of God's good spirit, and were utterly immersed in flesh: neither were they able to believe in our Lord, nor to embrace him as a Saviour."29
A little farther on, we find this admirable commentator observing as follows: "My sheep hear my voice, &c. In these words our Lord expressly teaches, that all good things are dependent on God's election; and that they, to whom it is once given to be sheep, can never perish afterwards. Christ here tells us, that they alone hear his voice: that is, they who are indeed his sheep, are made partakers of faith. Now, whence is it, that some people are Christ's sheep, or susceptible of his doctrine, while others are not? Undoubtedly, because the former are inspired by the good Spirit of God, whereas the latter are not inspired at all. But whence is it, that the former are endued with the Holy Spirit, and not the latter? For this reason: because the former were given to Christ, to be saved by him; but the latter were not given him. Let us therefore allow God the honour of being the bestower of his own Spirit, without supposing him to need or receive any of our assistance. Christ adds, and I know them: i.e. they are committed to my trust; I have them in especial charge. And, doubtless, from hence it is, that his sheep follow him, and live the life which never ends. The Father gave them to him, that he might endue them with life eternal, and they can no more be plucked from Christ's hand, than from the hand of the Father, who is mightier and greater than all. Christ and the Father are one: their power and strength are the same. Consequently, as none can pluck the elect from the Father's hand, so neither from the hand of Christ. We are to observe moreover, that it flows only from God's election, that we are the sheep of Christ, and follow him. We must observe, too, that such can never entirely fall away. For, the Father and the Son being undivided, their hand, that is, their power, must be undivided also: and out of their hand none shall never snatch those whom that hand has once laid hold on for salvation. Now, unto whomsoever it shall be given to hear the voice of Christ, and to follow him; they may be said to be thus laid hold on [by the hand, or power, of divine grace]: seeing, none but the sheep, are able to hear and follow the Redeemer. And if they are sheep now, they are so held in the hand of Christ and of the Father, as never to perish, but to have eternal life.30
Bucer was also a Calvinist on the article of limited redemption. He was too well acquainted with the Scriptures, and too accurate a reasoner, as well as entertained too exalted an idea of the dignity of Christ's sacrifice, to imagine that the Messiah died at sixes and sevens, for any body and every body, but effectually for nobody. The learned reformer's sentiments on this subject appear, among other passages, from his pious and judicious paraphrase on our Lord's answer to Peter (Matth. xvi. 23.), which was, says Bucer, as if Christ had said, "If I am the Messiah, I must, according to the Scriptures, be slain for the elect. If I am the son of God, why should I not obey my father, whose will it is, that I should be a victim and a sacrifice for the sins of all those whom he hath ordained unto life?"31
I shall only add, concerning this great man, that he died at Cambridge, A.D. 1551; of which melancholy event, good king Edward VI. made the following entry in his journal: "Feb. 28. The learned man Bucerus died at Cambridge; who was, two days after, buried in St. Mary's church, at Cambridge; all the whole University, with the whole town, bringing him to his grave, to the number of 3000 persons. Also there was an oration of Mr. Haddon, made very eloquently, at his death; and a sermon of [Dr. Parker]: after that, Master Redman made a third sermon. Which three sermons made the people wonderfully to lament his death. Last of all, all the learned men of the University made their epitaphs in his praise, laying them on his grave."32
Bucer's death was occasioned by a complication of disorders: particularly the cholic, and the stone: intestinoram dolor (says Melch. Act. p. 220.), calculus, fastidium ciborum, alvi, siccitas, catarrhi copiosi capitis. During his whole illness, that illustrious mother in Israel, Catharine Brandon, duchess dowager of Suffolk, attended him, watched with him, and deigned to undergo the offices and fatigues of a nurse: in hopes that providence might make her the instrument of saving so valuable a life; or, at least, that her generous assiduity might conduce to soften the last agonies of her beloved friend and pastor.33 This was the same lady, who, in the succeeding reign of Mary, to avoid the resentment of the Papists, was obliged to follow her second husband, Mr. Richard Bertie, into voluntary banishment: where they suffered such hardships, and ran such dangers, as cannot be read without the strongest feelings of sympathetic distress. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, the religious and noble exiles returned to England; where, many years after, they finished their course, in wealth, honour and felicity.34
Some short time before Bucer's decease, Mr. John Bradford (the celebrated martyr) coming to see him, with tears, said, "I am going to preach, and will not fail to remember you in my prayers with the congregation." Bucer devoutly answered, weeping, "Cast me not away, O Lord, in my time of old age, when my strength faileth me!" Immediately on pronouncing which words, he seems to have received a fresh and powerful manifestation of the Divine presence: for he added, Castiget fortier, abjiciet autem nunquam; nunquam abjiciet: "God may chasten me greatly, but he'll never cast me away; no, he'll never cast me away." Somebody advising him to arm himself against the assaults of Satan; he replied, I have nothing to do with Satan: I am only in Christ. I should be sorry, indeed, if I did not now experience the sweetest consolations. Among his last words (they seem to have been the very last) were, with his eyes cheerfully thrown up toward Heaven, Ille, ille regit, et moderatur omnia! i.e. "He, he reigns, and governs all!" Thus comfortably did this blessed saint of God expire in the 61st year of his age.
Paul Fagius, who accompanied him to this kingdom, and was fixed at Cambridge, in quality of Hebrew Professor, died there, the November preceding: and the famous Tremellius, an Italian Protestant, of great piety and learning, and as rooted a Calvinist as Fagius himself, succeeded to the Hebrew chair; and was, afterwards, made Prebend of Carlisle.35 On the death of king Edward, Tremellius retired into Germany: and, after several removes, died at Sedan, in France, A.D. 1580.
In the reign of Queen Mary, the bones of Bucer and Fagius were dug out of their graves, and publicly burned, together with as many of their writings as could be collected.
VI. Peter Martyr, another reformer and luminary of the Church of England, was born at Florence, A.D. 1500. "His family name was Vermilius: but his parents gave him that of Martyr, from one Peter, a martyr, whose church happened to stand near their house."36 Providence had given him a vast capacity: and his acquired learning was prodigious. The writings of Bucer and Zuinglius were the first means of bringing him to the knowledge of the truth.
For some time after his conversion, Martyr seemed to follow those words of St. Paul too literally, Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God (Rom, xiv. 22.). But Providence would not suffer such a burning and shining light to be always under a bushel. By degrees, God gave him more and more boldness; and at length called him forth, in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ. He preached salvation by grace, with the demonstration of the Spirit and with power. Many were converted under his ministry; some of whom proved eminently useful in the Church of God: particularly those two illustrious divines Zanchius and Tremellius.
Martyr's courage and success soon made his native country, Italy, too hot to hold him. Switzerland and Germany afforded him safe retreat; till, in the latter end of the37 year 1547, he was invited to England, to help forward the good work of reformation then beginning in this kingdom. Melchior Adam, a writer of great accuracy and fidelity, observes, that "On the death of Henry VIII. the young king Edward was resolved to abolish Popery, and to reduce the English Church to the standard of God's Word, under the auspices of his uncle, the duke of Somerset, and of Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury. And, since the Universities may be considered as the nurseries in which the clergy of the rising generation are trained up for the ministry; it seemed a point of the first importance, to reform those nurseries: that, from them, as from a pure fountain, the streams of sound doctrine might water every corner of the nation. Now, Peter Martyr being in the judgment of the most learned men, a person of singular erudition, and of such general knowledge as almost seemed incredible, he was thought the properest divine, on earth, to preside in the divinity chair at Oxford. He was accordingly, with the king's concurrence, invited to England, by the archbishop.38 The specimens, which I shall shortly produce, of the doctrines, with which Dr. Martyr seasoned the minds of the students that were designed for the established ministry, will demonstrate, that he was indeed one of the "properest divines on earth," to be intrusted with that important charge. Would to God that all his successors, in the said chair, had been as "proper" for the task as himself.
But there was also another reason that induced Cranmer to wish for Martyr's settlement in England; and which, in concert with the cause already assigned, lay at the bottom of the invitation. Even old Anthony Wood doth not scruple to declare, in express terms, that "in 1547, he [viz. Peter Martyr] was invited into England, by Edward [duke of somerset and] lord protector, and Dr. Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury; to the end that his assistance might be used to carry on a reformation in the church."39 In assisting to carry on which reformation of our church, as also in the care and zeal with which he instructed the Oxford students in our church doctrines; he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of the king, and the rest of the reformers here, that he was made canon of Christ-church, and a prebendary of Canterbury. Nay, so much was he admired and revered by queen Elizabeth herself, that, after she ascended the throne, "she invited him to return into England, and there to accept of what preferment he pleased."40 But, it seems, he "modestly refused" the offer; being fearful lest Popery might get the ascendency in this kingdom again: in which case, he might run the risk of being a martyr in reality, as well as name. He therefore continued at Zurich; where he died in peace, A.D. 1562. So much for the good man himself. Now for his Calvinism.
(1.) "If" says he, "by fate, be meant, a certain power resulting from the stars, and an irresistible implication of causes, by which God himself is reduced within the bounds of restraint - we justly reject the word fate, in this signification of it. But if by fate, you mean a train of causes governed by the will of God - such a fate as this, can by no means seem injurious to true religion, however expedient we may think it to abstain from using the word."41
He very justly observes that the wiser stoics themselves asserted fate, in the Christian sense of the term. "There are some, who dream of an iron or adamantine fatality; impressed on the stars and natural causes, unalterable by God himself. This is erroneous; nay, 'tis impious: 'tis even contrary to the judgment of the ancient sages themselves for they plainly declare, that, by fate, they mean no more than the will and providence of the Supreme being. Witness those verses of Cleanthes the stoic:
Father, and
king of Heav'n, my footsteps guide
My wish
with thy
decrees shall coincide.
Too feeble for denial
or delay,
I follow where thy purpose
marks my way.
Were I reluctant,
still the
chain proceeds;
Fate drags th'
unwilling, and the willing leads.
Resign'd I stand, to
suffer and to do
What must be borne
and done, resign'd or no.
now, " (continues Peter Martyr,) "though fate is strongly asserted in these lines; still, the reigns and government of fate are placed in the hand of God: for the philosopher invokes the Supreme Father, and supplicates the guidance of him, whose will is affirmed to be certain and infallible."42
Nothing can be more judicious, than Martyr's reasoning, relative to the true meaning of that blameless fate, which was so wisely and so solidly asserted by the best philosophers of the portico. And our reformer's vindication of that doctrine, as settled and ascertained in the golden verses which he quotes, is a very conclusive proof of his own candour, good sense, and regard to truth. I wish I could have done justice to those admirable lines, by translating them better: but, even as I have rendered them, the maxims which they convey, and the implicit submission to Providence which they inculcate, most certainly breathe the very language of Christianity. They express what Milton so finely sings, in those majestic words, which he supposes to be spoken by God the Father:
- Necessity and chance Approach not me; and what I will is fate.43
The verses of Cleanthes are cited, by Peter Martyr, as they stand in Seneca's translation of them into Latin, Seneca's beautiful lines, are, however, rather a paraphrase, than a version. Cleanthes' prayer ran thus, as cited by Epictetus:44
Age dh me, w Zeu, kai
su, h` Petrwmenh,
Opoi poqV u`min eimi diatetagmenoj,
Wj e`yomai spoudaioj hde aoknoj
Ean de mh eqelw, ouk h`tton e`yomai
Lead me, O Jove, and thou, O fate,
Where'er your pleasure has ordain'd
I wish with cheerfulness to meet
What no reluctance can withstand.
By Jove, is meant the God and Father of all. By fate, not a power independent on him, or a separate deity in joint-commission with him; but his own superintending providence. When I consider such exalted sentiments as these; sentiments, so directly tending to give unto God the honour due to his name, and so comnpletely calculated for the general happiness of man; I cease to wonder at those tributes of high, but just encomium on the ancient stoics, which have fallen from the pens even of some learned Arminians themselves. Dr. Cave informs us, that, "Of all the sects of philosophy, St. Pantaenus principally applied himself to the stoics, with whose notions and rules of life he was most enamoured. And no wonder," says the learned Doctor, "seeing, as St. Jerom observes, their doctrines [i.e. the doctrines of the stoics,] in many things come nearest to the doctrines of Christianity. As indeed they do: especially as to the45 moral and practic part of their principles. They held, that nothing was good, but what was just and pious; nothing evil, but what was vicious and dishonest: that a bad man could never be happy, nor a good man miserable: that the deity was perpetually concerned for human affairs; and that there was a wise and powerful Providence, which particularly superintended the happiness of mankind: that, therefore, this God was, above all things, to be admired, adored, and worshipped, prayed to, acknowledged, obeyed, praised; and that it is the most comely and reasonable thing in the world, that we should universally submit to his will, and aspazesqai ex o`lhj thj yuchj ta suhbainonta panta, cheerfully embrace, with all our souls, all the issues and determinations of his Providence; that we ought not to think it enough to be happy alone, but that it is our duty apo kardiaj filein, to love men from our very heart; to relieve and help them, advise and assist them, and contribute what was in our power to their health and safety: and this, not once, or twice, but throughout our whole life; and that unbiassedly, without any little designs of applause or advantage to ourselves: that nothing should be equally dear to a man, as honesty and virtue; and that this is the first thing he should look at, whether the thing he is going about be good, or bad, and the part of a good, or a wicked man; and, if excellent and virtuous, that he ought not to let any loss or damage, torment, or death itself, deter him from it. Whoever runs over the writings of Seneca, Antoninus, Epictetus, Arrian, &c. will find these, and a great many more, claiming a very near kindred with the main rules of life prescribed in the Christian faith. And what wonder, if Saint Pantaenus [or, indeed, every other saint] was in love with such generous and manly principles? which he liked so well, that as he [viz. St. Pantaenus] always retained the title of the Stoic Philosopher, so, for the main, he owned the profession of that sect, even after his being admitted to eminent offices and employments in the Christian Church."46
I must make two short remarks on this observable quotation. 1. We see, that, in the judgment of St. Jerom, St. Pantaenus, and Dr. Cave himself, the main branches of the stoical theology and ethics were supposed to come very near the theology and ethics of Christianity: yea, that there was "a very near kindred" between them. So different was the idea, which those eminent persons entertained, concerning stoicism, from the illiterate and ungenerous prejudices which breed in the bosoms of some puny, piddling sciolists among the Arminians, against that ancient and respectable philosophy. 2. May not the lives and morals of the stoical fatalists put the generality of free-willers to the blush?
One testimonial more, and that from a very capable hand, shall finish this digression. "I cannot but think," says the learned and celebrated Mr. Ditton, "that the doctrines of that sect [meaning the stoics] have been much misrepresented. And the truth of it is, that there is, generally speaking, a nearer approach to Christianity, in the morals, discipline, and doctrines of that noble sect, than in those of any other sect whatsoever."47
But I willingly return, from even the excellencies of Paganism, to the school of Christ. Let us now listen to those precious, satisfying truths of the gospel, which do indeed render the soul wise unto salvation, and, beyond all the exterior disquisitions in the world, make glad the city of God. Peter Martyr, the thread of whose testimony I now resume, shall set before us some of those precious truths, pure and genuine as he drew them from the oracles of Scripture. We have heard his judgment concerning fate: let us.
(2.) Attend to him on the subject of predestination.
"Forasmuch as God worketh all things by his determinate purpose, and doth nothing by chance, or accidentally; it is a most indubitable axiom, that whatsoever he creates and makes, is destined by him to some certain end and use. Consequently, neither ungodly men, nor Satan himself, nor even sins themselves, can be exempted from predestination: for, of all these, God makes what use he pleases. Hence, those of the unrighteous, who are devoted to final condemnation, are stilled by St. Paul, skeuh, or vessels, i.e. God's vessels: vessels, in whom God makes known his wrath. Thus it is said, respecting Pharaoh, To this very end have I raised thee up, that in thee I might display my power. Take the word predestination in this extensive sense, and it reaches to all things: it will import no other than God's eternal appointment of his creatures to their respective use."48
(3.) "We may distinguish between the knowledge and the fore-knowledge of God. His knowledge extends not only to every thing past, present, and future; but even to what shall never come to pass: neither possibles, nor impossibles, are unknown to him. But his fore-knowledge is conversant with those things only which are certainly future. God's will is the foundation of his prescience: for nothing could be future if God did not will its futurition. Whatever he does not will should come to pass, he takes care to hinder from coming to pass. God, therefore, fore-knows a thing, because it was his will and pleasure that the thing should exist and take place."49
(4.) "Providence is God's well-ordered, fixed, and incessant management of all things whatever. When I say, that his providence extends to all things whatever, I advance no more than I am able to prove. And I prove it thus:
"God has a perfect knowledge and comprehension of every thing: else his wisdom would be defective. Now the government of this All-wise Being is either unlimited as his knowledge, or partial and confined. If his government be confined and limited, such limitation must arise either from want of will, or from want of power. If from want of power, he would cease to be Almighty: if from want of will, he would cease to be all-excellent. But to deny the infinity either of his knowledge, power, or excellence, would be the same as to deny that he is God. It remains, therefore, that the supreme Being superintends all things: and this the Scripture, in numberless passages, most expressly declares. For it affirms, that the over-sight of God reaches even to the leaves of the trees, to the hairs of our heads, and to the meanest birds of the air."50 The sum of this reasoning is, that to deny the absolute universality of God's incessant providence is neither more nor less than plain, direct, palpable Atheism.
"I term divine providence," says he "the administration of all things whatever; because nothing can elude its influence: nor, without it, could any thing even continue to exist. I term it well-ordered, because it is so conjoined with unerring wisdom, as to preclude all possible confusion and embarrassment. I term it fixed, or immovable; because the knowledge of the Divine Administrator cannot be disappointed, nor his power defeated: he is equally incapable of mistake, and of disconcertment. Moreover, I term his providence perpetual, or incessant; because he himself is constantly and most intimately present with the things which he has made. When he created them he did not leave them to themselves; but he is, himself, within them, as their perpetual principle of motion: for in him we live, and are moved, and do exist. (Acts. xvii. 28.) So much respecting providence: to which, and to its correlative articles, fate is nearly allied. I have already observed, that, if you suppose the word fate to signify such an inevitable necessity as results from the influence and position of the stars; the ancient Christians did, with very just reason, abstain from the use of the word, in that sense of it. But if it [i.e. if the word fate] mean no more than a sure concatenation of second causes, which is not carried on, either with a blind precipitancy, or with an unmeaning accidentality; but is regulated by the providence of God, and way be varied according to the sovereign pleasure of his will; I can see no reason why the thing called fate should, in this view of it, be disrelished or rejected by any man."51
(5.) I shall just touch on this reformer's doctrine concerning reprobation: requesting the reader still to bear in mind, that I am not, professedly, delivering my own judgment, but simply setting before him the judgment of Peter Martyr. According to him, "Reprobation may be defined, that most wise determination of God, whereby he did, before all eternity, immutably decree not to have mercy on those whom he loved not, but passed by: and this without any injustice on his part."52
Martyr does not scruple to affirm, that "God withholds his grace from [some] then: which grace being withheld, those men cannot but fall." He even ventures to add, that, "since we all live and move by actuation from God, it is certain, that all the deeds which we perform, are, of necessity, some way or other, wrought under a divine impulse." Yet though he expresses himself with such strength and plainness, he will not admit that this doctrine makes God the author of sin: "There is no need," says he, "for God to infuse additional evil into our hearts. There is enough there already. We have it sufficiently, of ourselves: partly, through the foulness of original sin; and partly, because a created being doth, of himself, degenerate, without measure and without end, unless he is succoured by God."53 From hence, we may easily anticipate his opinion.
(6.) Concerning free-will. "Paul plainly saith, It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Our salvation is the work of God, and not the achievement of our own strength. For he it is who worketh in us both to will and to accomplish. Before God thus worketh in us, he has to do [as it were] with stones: for our hearts are hearts of stone, till Christ transforms them into hearts of flesh."54
"They who are born again ought never to forget, that they obtained this freedom, not by their own deserts, but by the favour of God. It was owing, not to themselves, but to their heavenly Father, that they were drawn to Christ. For unless God the Father had inwardly won them over by main efficacy, they would have shunned and avoided Christ, even as others."55
Luther, in his answer to Erasmus, had, after his blunt, but nervous manner, compared the human will to a horse: "If grace," says he, "be in the saddle, the will moves to what is good; but man's will, if rid by the Devil, is sure to rush headlong into sin." This comparison, unceremonious as it is, was adopted and subscribed to by Peter Martyr; whose words are, "Christ hath said, Ye shall then be free, when the Son makes you so: from whence it follows, that so long as men are unregenerated, they cannot, with truth, he pronounced free. Besides, the tyranny of Satan is such, that he detains men in captivity, till they are rescued by Christ: for our Lord has declared, That the strong man armed keeps peaceable possession of his palace, and continues master of the spoils; till One stronger than he, arrives, and dispossesses him by force. Likewise, in the 2d Epistle to Timothy, the apostle affirms, that such as oppose the truth are kept prisoners by Satan at his will. And it is a well-known illustration, that the will of man resembles a horse, which sometimes has grace for his rider, and some times the Devil. Now, perhaps, it is set in motion by the former: anon, it is whipp'd and spurr'd by the latter. Human liberty, therefore, is cut short by manifold slavery. And, seeing the freedom of the will is so exceedingly small, during the present state of things, it is wonderful to me, that men do not, with Luther, rather term the will a slave and a bond-woman, than free. If a man was shut up in prison, manicled and fettered; could he justly call himself free, only because he were able to move his head and lift up his eyelids?"56 Thus much for free-will.
(7.) Now for justification. So far was Martyr from supposing that men are justified and accepted of God on account of their works, that there is a sense, in which he would not admit justification even by faith itself. And very justly. For, though the grace and principle of faith are of God's giving, and of God's infusing, yet faith, as acted and exercised by us, is attended with extreme imperfection: and we cannot be justified, in the strict meaning of the term, by any thing which is defective. Hence the following remark of our judicious reformer: "If faith itself be considered as our act, 'tis impossible we should be justified by it: because faith, in this view of it, is lame and imperfect, and falls far short of that completeness which the law requires. But we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because it is by faith that we lay hold upon, and apply to ourselves, the promises of God and the righteousness and merits of Christ. A beggar (we'll suppose) extends his foul and leprous hand, to receive an alms from a person that offers it: certainly it is not from the leprosy and foulness of his own hand, that he derives any benefit; but from the donation given, and which he receives with such a hand as he has."57 This single paragraph is so full to the point, that it supersedes the necessity of multiplying quotations on the subject in question. Let us hear him.
(8.) On the article of perseverance.
"If we consult the sacred writings, we shall there find, not only, in general, that God is good and powerful; but likewise, that he is good and powerful for our particular benefit" [i.e. for the particular benefit of us who truly believe]: "and that in consequence of his power and goodness, he'll so confirm our will, that it shall never entirely revolt from him. For he will not suffer us to be tempted above what we are able to bear; but will, with the temptation, make a way for our escape. He will establish you, even unto the end, blameless to the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye are called. Very numerous are the Scripture attestations which promise us perseverance through Christ, and the establishment of our wills [in holiness]."58
So much shall suffice, at present, for Peter Martyr's judgment concerning the points in contest.
And let it be further observed, that this excellent divine appears to have had some hand in drawing up the articles of religion adopted by the Church of England. Heylyn himself confesses as much: tho' he labours, as usual, to mince, and qualify the concession by every diminishing quirk, in his power to apply. I can compare him to nothing, but to a miser, who, forced, against the grain, to pay a sum of money, counts it out, with grudging reluctance, and draws it back again and again, till obliged to part with it indeed. Heylyn's words are these: "Though Peter Martyr lived to see the death of king Edward, and consequently the end of the convocation, Anno 1552, in which the articles of religion were first composed and agreed on; yet there was little use made of him in advising, and much less in directing, any thing which concerned that business, tho' some use might be made of him as a labourer to advance the work."59
There are testimonies of Martyr's orthodoxy and usefulness still in reserve; able, if need required, to enlarge these gleanings into a harvest. But I must not dismiss this great reformer and ornament of our church, without observing, that he and Bucer were the principal instruments of persuading Dr. Hooper into a compliance (as far as he did comply) with king Edward's reformation, respecting some matters of exterior ceremony: which (however indifferent those matters were in their own nature,) became important, because adopted by the church, and enforced by the state.
Few readers need to be informed, that, when Hooper was nominated to the see of Gloucester, he entertained some unhappy scruples, more nice than necessary, concerning the form of the episcopal habit. He supposed, that the robes, in which a bishop was expected to appear, favoured more of superstition and Popish pomp, than comported with the scriptural simplicity of Protestantism. Amazing, that a person of Hooper's learning, piety, and exalted sense, could look for Popery in the fold of a garment; and extract superstition out of an angular cap! Groundless, however, and ill-timed, as his scruples were, they had such weight with himself, that he refused to be consecrated after the usual mode, and even suffered himself to be imprisoned in the Fleet, for his contempt of legal authority. But I must also do him the justice to add, that he lived long enough to see the weakness and absurdity of opposing things which the law of God has left indifferent. The severities of Mary's reign taught the honest, but over-scrupulous, bishop that Popery consisted in something more than a robe, a scarf, or a four-cornered cap.
While Hooper's obstinacy continued, Bucer and Martyr took all imaginable pains to solve his objections, and, if possible, reduce him to conformity. They gained on him so far that he consented to wear the usual habit on some principal occasions. One of Martyr's letters to him may be seen at full length, in an appendix to60 that edition of his Common Places, which has supplied me with the preceding extracts. It is written with such modesty, learning, candour, and force of reason, as are a standing honour to the writer, and demonstrate that his attachment to the Church of England extended to her rites, as well as her doctrines.
The letter itself being very long, I shall only give the substance of Martyr's arguments, in Mr. Rolt's judicious abridgement of them. "He commended Hooper, for his pains in preaching; but advised him not to exert his zeal on points that are indefensible, or things of little moment, lest the people should from thence be led to call in question the judgment of the reformed preachers, and give no credit to what they delivered on the most important articles. In answer to one objection of Hooper's, that we ought to have an express warrant from Scripture for every thing belonging to religion; Martyr told him, that, if the general rules of order were observed, the governors of the church had a discretionary latitude in little matters. Thus, for instance, our receiving the communion in a church, in a forenoon, not in a reclining posture, [nor] in a congregation [consisting] of men only; stood upon no other than ecclesiastical, that is, upon human authority: to which [nevertheless], he presumed, Hooper had always submitted without any scruple. He told him, further, that it would be difficult to produce any warrant, from the New Testament, for singing Psalms in public worship. And that the Christian church, from the beginning, had a regard, in many particulars, to the Jewish polity: especially, in the great festivals of Easter and Whitsunday. Supposing, what he [Martyr] could not grant, that the episcopal habit and vestments had been introduced into the church by the see of Rome; yet he did not think the contagion of Popery so very malignant, as to carry infection into every thing which it touched. That to govern by such narrow maxims would lay an inconvenient restraint on the Church of God: and that our ancestors moved much more freely, who made no difficulty of turning heathen temples into Christian churches; and of translating, to pious uses, the revenues [once] sacred to idolatry."61 Had Martyr's coolness and moderation been universally prevalent in the Protestant world, how much vain wrangling and party-division would it have prevented!
Bucer was no less assiduous, than Martyr, in respectfully combating the pertinacity of Hooper. They united in assuring him "That in the business of religious rites, they were for keeping as close as possible to the holy Scriptures, and to the most uncorrupt ages of the church: but, however, they could not go so far as to believe that the substance of religion was effected by the clothes we wear; and they thought things of this nature altogether indifferent, and left to our liberty by the word of God."62 Thus, it incontestably appears, that these two learned Calvinists, Bucer and Martyr, were church of England men not in word and tongue only, but in deed and in truth.
Before I conclude this Section, I beg leave to subjoin an observation, that would more properly have fallen under the immediate article of Bucer; but which, though omitted in its due place, is too important to the design of this undertaking to be entirely passed over. It has been affirmed (and what is there, which some Arminians will not affirm?) that Bucer held the doctrine of justification by works, and believed human obedience to be meritorious in the sight of God.
That he was once of this opinion, is not at all wonderful, when we consider that he was born and educated in the bosom of the Romish church, with whom the tenet of legal justification is a fundamental principle. And, for a considerable time after God had called him out of Papal darkness, his improvements in divine knowledge were progressive. His spiritual growth resembled the gradual vegetation of an oak; not the rapid prosiliency of a mushroom. Bucer seems to have expressed himself the most incautiously, in the disputation at Leipsic, A.D. 1539; yet, even then, he roundly declared, that "those good works, to which so great a reward is given, are themselves the gifts of God."63 And that passage, which Vossius quotes from Bucer, falls extremely short of proving that the latter was, even at the early period in which he penned it, an assertor of justification by performances of our own. Impartiality obliges me to subjoin that celebrated passage, which so many Arminians and merit-mongers have since caught at, as if it made for the Popish doctrine of justification. "I cannot but wish," said Bucer, in the year 1529, "a more sound judgment to some persons, who have disturbed many in this our age with this paradox, that we are saved by faith only: tho' they saw the thing was carried so far, as to confine righteousness only to the opinion of the mind, and excluding good works. Where is their charity, who refuse to cure this evil by one word or two? It is only to say that, when faith is formed, we are justified; and that, through faith, we obtain a disposition to good works, and, consequently, a righteousness: or, that faith is the foundation and root of a righteous life, as Augustin said."64 Is there a single sentence, in this paragraph, to which the strictest Calvinist would not consent? Observe the order in which Bucer arranges faith, justification, and obedience. Faith goes before; justification follows faith; and practical obedience follows justification: we first believe; we no sooner believe, than we are justified; and the faith which justifies disposes us to the after-performances of good works: or, in other words, justifying faith "is the root and foundation of a righteous life." Says not every Calvinist the same?
As Bucer advanced in years and experience, he learned to express his idea of justification with still greater clearness and precision, than he had done on some past occasions. Finding that the enemies of grace had greedily laid hold of some inadvertent phrases, and taken ungenerous advantage of some well-meant concessions, which he had made, before his evangelical light was at the full; he deemed it necessary to retract such of his positions as countenanced the merit of works; and to place justification on the scriptural basis of the Father's gratuitous goodness, and the Son's imputed righteousness: still, however, taking care to inculcate, that the faith, by which we receive the grace of God and the righteousness of Christ, is the certain source of all good works. For being thus honest to his convictions, he was loaded, by his adversaries, with accumulated slander and reproach. How modestly and forcibly he vindicated his conduct, may be judged from the following passage: "The Lord," says Bucer, "has given me to understand some places [of scripture] more fully than I formerly did: which, as it is so bountifully given to me, why should I not impart it liberally to my brethren, and ingenuously declare the goodness of the Lord? What inconsistency is there, in profiting in the work of salvation? And who, in this age, or in the last, has treated of the Scripture, and has not experienced, that, even in this study, one day is the scholar of another?"65
Indeed, no stronger proof need be given, of Bucer's soundness in the article of justification, than the rapture and admiration with which he mentions the English book of Homilies. "No sooner," says Mr. Strype, "were the homilies composed, and sent abroad; but the news thereof (and the book itself, as it seemed, already translated into Latin) came to Strasburgh, among the Protestants there: where it caused great rejoicing. And Bucer, one of the chief ministers there, wrote a gratulatory epistle hereupon to the Church of England, in November, 1547: which was printed the year after. Therein that learned and moderate man shewed, how these pious sermons were come among them, wherein the people were so godlily and effectually exhorted to the reading of the Holy Scriptures; and faith was so well explained, whereby we become Christians; and justification, whereby we are saved; and the other chief heads of the Christian religion so soundly handled. And therefore, as he added, these foundations being rightly laid, there could nothing be wanting in our Churches, requisite towards the building here upon sound doctrine and discipline. He commended much the Homily of Faith, the nature and force of which was so clearly and soberly discussed; and wherein it was so well distinguished from the faith that was dead. He much approved of the manner of treating Concerning the misery and death we are all lapsed into, by the sin of our first parent; and how we are rescued from this perdition, only by the grace of God, and by the merit and resurrection of his Son."66
No wonder, that this excellent man was, soon after, called into England, to assist in perfecting that reformation, whose beginnings he so heartily approved. When here, vast deference was paid to his judgment and advice, by Cranmer and the other Protestant bishops. This is confessed, even by Burnet himself; whose words are, "About the end of this year (1550), or the beginning of the next, there was a review made of the Common-Prayer Book. Martin Bucer was consulted in it: and Alesse translated it into Latin for his [i.e. for Bucer's] use. Upon which, Bucer wrote his opinion; which he finished the 5th of January in the year following: and, almost in every particular, the most material things, which Bucer excepted to, were corrected afterwards."67 This acknowledgement of Bishop Burnet's confirms what is delivered by Guthrie: who, in his English History, observes, concerning Bucer and Peter Martyr, that their authority was great in England."68
Endnotes: