teract all these designs. A Bible, recognised by Richard Taverner, was published also during this year, which is so much altered as almost to merit the title of a new translation. He had belonged to Cardinal's College, in Oxford, and was subsequently taken into the protec tion of Sir Thomas Cromwell, afterwards earl of Essex, under whose patronage he executed the work. Upon the fall of Cromwell, he was for a time imprisoned in the Tower, but speedily restored to the favour of the king. He was famous for his great knowledge of Greek.

ceived to mean that it was not borrowed from any other source, which is hardly true, unless the expression be received under great latitude of interpretation, as the translation bears evident marks of having been in some degree taken from the former, though many expressions in it are varied. The book is dedicated to the king, in consequence of the directions which he had given for translating the Scriptures, and the favour which he showed towards the undertaking generally for, upon the remonstrance of the clergy, who objected to Tyndale's translation, on account of the supposed heresies which it contained, it was ordered to be destroyed; and the king directed that a more correct version should be formed for the use of the people. Coverdale, however, was not peculiarly suited to the task, as he was unacquainted with the original languages, and translated from such different Latin and Dutch son, and Cole; to these are sometimes copies as he could procure.

(A. D. 1537.) The edition which passes under the name of Matthew's, is partly taken from Tyndale, partly from Coverdale; and was put forth under this fictitious name, probably by John Rogers, who wished to conceal himself, through the fear of persecution. It was of this Bible that an impression of 2500 copies was burnt at Paris, in 1538, by the inquisition, though Francis had given leave for its being printed there.

§ 537. (A. D. 1560.) The refugees assembled at Geneva during the reign of Mary, employed themselves, among other useful pursuits, in forming a new translation of the Bible from the original languages. The persons said to have taken part in this work are Coverdale, Goodman, Gilby, Whittingham, Samp

added Knox, Bodleigh, and Pullain. The work, as might have been expected, was in part new and in part a revision of the old translation. Little need be said to prove its excellency, since, on comparing them, we should find that the present authorized Bible differs but little from it; and that those who engaged in the two subsequent versions, frequently adopted expressions taken from it into their own work. There are many marginal notes and glosses subjoined, which § 536. (A. D. 1539.) The Great Bible, occasionally point out the political bias published under the patronage of Cran- in the minds of the composers: a cirmer, is rather another edition of that cumstance which induced James I., durcalled Matthew's than a new one; and ing the conference at Hampton Court, to has acquired the name of the archbishop say that it was the worst of all the transfrom a preface which he wrote to the lations: one instance, among many, second edition, as well as from the sup- where the judgment of that monarch port which he gave to the publication. was overcome by his kingly prejudices; Cranmer, indeed, intended that this work for it is certainly better than any before should undergo a thorough correction; it. It was much used in private famiand for that purpose, having required the aid of the convocation in 1542, he proceeded to apportion the several parts to the different members; but found so much opposition among the bishops, that he persuaded the king to refer the matter to the universities, a step which might have produced some good effects, if the next parliament had not proved so favourable to the other party as to coun

It is from this version that the psalms in the Prayer Book are taken, with very slight varia

tions.

lies, but never authoritatively introduced into the church. The division into verses was first adopted in this Bible."

2 See § 222.

3 Fuller, x. 14.

4 N. B. It is sometimes called the Breeches

Bible, from Genesis iii. 7, where Adam and Eve are said to have sewed fig-leaves together to make themselves breeches.

5 The Old Testament was divided into sections

and verses, marked off by points, perhaps as early as the time of Ezra; a method adopted for the sake of interpreting it from Hebrew into Chaldee. The division into chapters is of much later date, and was made by Hugo de Sancto Caro, or Cardinalis, who composed the first Concordance to the

their own. The New Testament was
printed at Rhemes in 1582; the whole
Bible at Douay in 1609. It is made from
the Vulgate, and abounds with expres-
sions in which, from retaining the words
of the original, the sense is scarcely in-
telligible to an ordinary reader. The
persons who were deeply engaged in the
work were Cardinal Allen, Greg. Mar-
tin, and R. Bristol; others ascribe the
version of the New Testament to William
Reynold. The work was accompanied
by marginal notes by Thomas Worthing-
ton; and in order to recommend its adop-
tion, Greg. Martin published an attack
on the translations in general use in this
country, and was answered by Fulke.
§ 540. In consequence of certain ob-
jections raised against the Bishops' Bible

§ 538. (A. D. 1568.) When a new edition of the Great Bible1 was required for the use of parish churches, in the reign of Elizabeth, Parker was unwilling to put it forth again without endeavouring to correct all the errors which had been observed in it; and for this purpose employed a certain number of divines to aid him in the task of making it as perfect as possible. As the majority of the persons employed were bishops, the Bible itself has been ordinarily denominated the Bishops' or Parker's Bible, and is the one which formed the basis for the last or authorized translation. The persons engaged in it were Alley, Davis, Sandys, Horne, Grindal, Parkhurst, Cox, and Guest, all bishops; besides Peerson, Beecon, Pern, Cole, and Goodman. This may more properly be called a corrected in the Conference at Hampton Court, a edition of the Great Bible, for nothing was altered unless from the fear that it might give occasion to an error. A large preface is prefixed to it, as well as several tables, one of which forms that of the degrees of kindred within which matrimony is forbidden, inserted at present in our Common Prayer Book.

§ 539. The Roman Catholics, finding that of the numerous copies of the Bible some must of necessity fall into the hands of members of their communion, wisely determined to put forth a translation of

new translation was agreed on, and every step taken which could render it worthy of our church and nation. The king called upon the principal divines of the nation to assist in carrying on the work, and invited all who had any acquaintance with the subject to lend their aid with regard to such texts of Scripture as they had found to be incorrectly rendered in the former translations. The number of persons engaged in the work itself amounted to forty-seven, who were divided into six committees, and sat at

Vulgate. (1240.) It has been used in the Hebrew since Rab. Nathan made his Concordance, 1445. Robert Stephens divided the New Testament, and his son Henry printed it so. (1551.) (Prideaux, Conn. ii. 84, fol., i. 266.)

1 Strype's Parker, i. 414.

2 Printed in Strype's Parker, No. 84.

3 Newcome, 89.

4 The translators were divided into six classes, and were to meet at Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford. (Lewis, 310.)

Spaldinge,
Birge.

Chronicles with the
rest of the story,
and the Hagio-
grapha, viz., Job,
Psalms, Proverbs,
Cantica, Ecclesias-

tes.

The classes at Cambridge were

Duport,
Brathwaite,

The prayer of Manasses and the rest of the Apocrypha.

Radcliffe,

Ward,

Downes,

Boyse,

Warde.

Westminster and the two universities. | elapsed since this review of the Bible; The different portions of the Bible were and the church has subsequently conassigned among them, but each portion tented itself with discovering inaccurawas, on its completion, subjected to the cies, without attempting to correct them. other committees for examination; and The whole question of a new translation in case of any difficulties, a final com- is one of considerable delicacy; but the mittee was to be formed for their discus- opinion of Archbishop Newcome, supsion. In order that the clergy so em- ported as it is by the concurrent testiployed might not be unrewarded, all mony of nearly thirty divines of conpersons possessed of any ecclesiastical siderable weight, together with his own patronage were urged to bestow what- judicious remarks, which was given to ever happened to fall vacant on some of the world almost forty years ago, ought the translators, and the king exhorted not to have remained without due and ecclesiastical bodies to be liberal in con- public attention. If prudential reasons tributing money for the support of the forbid the publication of a new version, undertaking. The rules laid down for yet surely there could be no danger the performance of the task were judi- in the correction of such mistakes as are cious. As little alteration as possible obvious to all men, (for some passages was to be made in the Bishops' Bible; are scarcely intelligible,) and of such and whenever this did not agree with the as are acknowledged by all who are original text, recourse was to be had to acquainted with the original languages. former translations. No notes were to These amendments might be introduced be affixed beyond what the literal expla- into the margin, and sanctioned by aunation of the Hebrew and Greek words thority, so that they might be used at adopted into the text might require; and the discretion of the minister; a step a few marginal references, and only a which would at least prepare the way few, were to be appended. The com- for their ultimate introduction into the missions were issued in 1604; the per- text, and show a wish to make use of sons appointed entered on the work the growing knowledge of the country itself in the spring of 1607, but the for the improvement of the services of Bible was not printed till 1611, so much the church. Our present translation is, time and caution was used to prevent probably, the best in existence; yet this inaccuracies. circumstance need not prevent the attempt of lessening its imperfections.

Above two hundred years have now

CHAPTER XIII.

THE REIGN OF CHARLES I. 1625, TO 1649.

551. Causes of the fall of the church. 552. Montague; Mainwairing; impolicy of the court. 553. Forced loans promoted by the clergy. 554. Star Chamber. 555. High commission; Williams; Abbot. 556. Feoffees of impropriations brought before the Exchequer. 557. Arminianism; declaration prefixed to the Thirty-nine Articles. 558. Sabbatarian controversy. 559. Book of Sports. 560, 561. The question discussed. 562. Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton. 563. Williams; Osbolston. 564. Scotch liturgy. 565. Episcopacy in Scotland. 566. Charles I. does not govern wisely. 567. In 1637 he endeavours to introduce the Liturgy; the canons sent down previously. 568. Tumults in Edinburgh; the covenant framed and signed; civil war successfully carried on against the government. 569. Laud; ceremonies. 570. Canons of 1640. 571. State of England. 572. Long Parliament. 573. Bishops deprived of their votes. 574. Destruction of the church. 575. Causes of the war. 576-579. Outline of the war. 580. Self-denying ordinance; Fairfax; Cromwell. 581. Their campaign. 582. Lord Strafford; Laud. 583. His character. 584. And trial. 585. Usher's episcopacy; the assembly of divines at Westminster. 586. The parties in the assembly. 587. Presbyterians, their church government. 588. Independents; Erastians. 589. Thirty-nine Articles altered; church government; ordination. 590. Works of the assembly, directory, &c. 591. Presbyterian government. 592. Set up in London and Lancashire; earnestness exhibited in its favour. 593. The growth of independency. 594. Fate of the king. 595. His discussions on episcopacy, (7) present state of church discipline. 596, 597. Character of Charles. 598. Sufferings of the clergy. 599. Cambridge. 600. Oxford.

to the king, which tended only to increase the storm. When objections were raised against these books in the House of Commons, the king injudiciously advocated the cause of the writer, till deterred from doing so by the displeasure which this conduct created among his subjects.

§ 551. (A. D. 1625.) In the period | concessions which offended many Proof history on which we are about to testants, and when attacked, had deenter, it is difficult to distinguish be- fended himself by publishing an appeal tween the portions which belong to the civil or to the ecclesiastical historian. The interests of church and state are so intimately blended that they admit of no real separation; yet the multiplicity of affairs, in this eventful reign, renders it absolutely necessary that much should be omitted, and that a decided line should be drawn between the two. Strictly speaking, perhaps little can be referred to the church alone, but during the whole of the earlier government of Charles, churchmen not only influenced his councils to a great extent, but the influence which they possessed tended greatly to overthrow the monarchy, and to swallow up the ecclesiastical establishment in its train. The causes which had contributed to transfer to the church much of the popular odium which was due to the civil government, not only continued to exist, but some accidental circumstances tended to augment the evil; it must therefore be our first object to enter on the detail of these, that we may understand how the church and monarchy fell together, and how each assisted in promoting the destruction of the other.

The necessities of the court induced those who governed to have recourse to many expedients for raising money, and as these depended for their success on the strength of the royal prerogative, whatever augmented it became peculiarly acceptable to those in authority. Mainwairing, who was one of the chaplains to the king, preached and printed two sermons on this subject, (1628,) which gave great offence to the Commons, and he was severely punished. Montague was held to bail in 2000l.; (the dissolution of the parliament probably prevented further proceedings against him;) Mainwairing was fined 10007., and declared incapable of holding preferment, or of preaching before the court. Yet both these men

Gag for the New Gospel; his answer, A New Gag for an Old Goose. He published also a treatise on the invocation of saints, and a work entitled Appello ad Cæsarem. Collier, ii. 736, gives a full account. Neal's Puritans.

3 Fuller, xi. 129. Collier, ii. 743.