the Puritan doctrine of justification by faith. Episcopal order, and the use of the Prayer Book, without even the slightest alteration, found in Thorndike a most zealous defender; and, it may be inferred from such a circumstance, that the Puritans had not a more steady and determined opponent than this able man. He could not understand them. Their doctrinal views, as seen through his prejudices, seemed to be of an antinomian nature, whilst their ecclesiastical proceedings, judged of with the same unfairness, were denounced as schismatical and as utterly subversive of all Church order. Hence he condemned Sanderson's practice of altering the prayers; arguing that though force might make him omit what he was ecclesiastically commanded, it could not make him do what he was ecclesiastically forbidden.1 Thorndike was made of such stern, tough stuff, that he revolted from all mere politic measures, and from all attempts at compromise. He never asked what was expedient, but only what was right; yet also he deemed trimming to be as unwise as it was wrong, and he maintained that not to omit a word of the service would be as safe as the method adopted by Sanderson. He advised that when the whole Liturgy could not be read, as much of it should be used as possible without any alteration.2 One of his papers, dated 1656, preserved in the Westminster Chapter Library, contains an argument against communicating with the Presbyterian or other sects: most uncharitably and unjustly he inferred-from their doctrine of justification by faith, which he quite misunderstood that they could not "think themselves tied to live as Christians," or, as he added, to repent and

1 Sanderson is said to have before found fault with Thorndike's manner of conducting worship at Claybrook.—Works, vi. 181.

2 Works, vi. 118.

return to that Christianity which they had forfeited. And beside this-fearing that the sects would swallow up the Church, which they had broken in pieceshe warned Churchmen against in any way owning Puritan teachers or frequenting Puritan sermons, whatever danger there might be of temporal penalties in pursuing a different path, or whatever "difficulty of finding what course to take."1

66

As to the inner life of persecuted Episcopalianism, Evelyn's Diary" affords information beyond, perhaps, any other contemporary production. A sequestered and learned minister preached in Evelyn's parlour and administered the blessed sacrament, when, according to Episcopal usage, it was "wholly out of use in the parish churches." He heard once the Common Prayer read2 ("a rare thing in those days") in St. Peter's, at Paul's Wharf, London; and in the morning of the same day he listened to the preaching of "the Archbishop of Armagh—that pious person and learned man, Ussher-in Lincoln's Inn Chapel." On a Christmas day there was no sermon anywhere, no church being permitted to be open, so the diarist observed it at home. The next day he went to Lewisham, where" an honest Divine delivered a discourse.3

Thorndike's Works, vi. 125. See also Letter concerning the Present State of Religion. Vol. v. 5.

* The following is another instance:

"During the usurpation the Latin prayers were discontinued; but some of the members, John Fell, John Dolben Allestree, and others, afterwards men of eminence in the Church, performed the Common Prayer in the lodgings of the celebrated Dr. Willis, in Canterbury Quadrangle, and afterwards in his

VOL. II.

Z

house, opposite Merton College Chapel, and the practice continued until the Restoration. Dr. Willis's house afterwards became an Independent meeting. In the museum of the Dolby family, in Northamptonshire, is a fine painting, by Sir Peter Lely, grounded on the above circumstance. A copy of this picture was presented to the society, and placed in the hall."-Chalmer's Oxford, vol. ii. 311.

3 Evelyn's Diary, 1649, March 18th and 25th. 1652, December 25th.

Now and then an "honest orthodox man" ascended the pulpit of Evelyn's parish church, and although the Incumbent was "somewhat of the Independent," yet "he ordinarily preached sound doctrine and was a peaceable man, which was an extraordinary felicity in that age.' Once Evelyn heard a person who "had been both chaplain and lieutenant to Admiral Penn, and who thus, as he says, used "both swords."1

Repeatedly notices occur in the "Diary" of neglected festivals, and of private preachings and communions; and he indicates his caution no less than his zeal, by stating that his only reason for going to church whilst these "usurpers" possessed the pulpits was, that he might not be suspected of being a Papist. He felt the wholesome. uses of adversity, and states-after alluding to Dr. Wild as preaching in a private house in Fleet Street-that the zealous Christians who gathered together there were much more religious and devout than they had ever been in times of prosperity. He notes down the circumstance, that on Christmas-day, 1657, at the conclusion of a sermon by Mr. Gunning, in Exeter Chapel, the building was surrounded by soldiers, and the communicants were kept inside as prisoners. Evelyn himself had his place of confinement in the mansion to which the chapel belonged; but was allowed to dine with the noble master of it, the Countess of Dorset, Lady Hatton, and others. Some of Oliver's colonels came in the afternoon to enquire into the matter, and they asked the Royalist churchman why he durst offend against the ordinances of Parliament. It appears

1 January 30th, 1653. January 28th, 1655. It appears from Patrick's Autobiography that all through the troubles he received the communion kneeling, p. 37.

April 15th, 1655. "Dr. Wild preached at St. Gregory's, the ruling powers conniving at the use of the Liturgy in that church alone."— Evelyn's Diary.

from his answer that the name of "King Charles" had been omitted from the service, and that supplications of a general kind were offered on behalf of kings and princes. At the conclusion of the account, however, the diarist acknowledges that the soldiers after all, did not really interrupt the worship, but only held up their muskets as if," he says, "they would have shot us at the altar, but yet suffering us to finish the office of communion."1

Such was the case in London. In the country an instance occurred-perhaps only representing several of the same kind-of a public defiance of the law. In the year 1658, as John Wilson, a cloth merchant of Leeds, kinsman of Bishop Wilson's father, was walking through the streets he met the Vicar and said to him: "When shall we have Divine service again in Leeds Old Church?" The Vicar replied: "Whenever Mr. Wilson will protect me in the discharge of my duty." "Then," he rejoined, "by the grace of God it shall be next Sunday." Accordingly, on that day the bells rang as in the days before the wars, for morning prayers, and a large congregation was gathered together. In the centre aisle stood Mr. Wilson, with a great number of persons drawn up as if to protect the Vicar. News of this occurrence soon reached London, and an order came down for the imprisonment of the bold violator of Parliamentary ordinances; but before his trial could take place Oliver Cromwell died.2

Mention has been already made of a practice, adopted by some Anglicans, of using parts of the Prayer Book

Kennet says: "The prejudice Cromwell had against the Episcopal party was more for their being Royalists than for being of the good old Church," and the Bishop relates that the Protector said: "To disturb

them is contrary to that liberty of conscience which he and his friends always acknowledged and defended." -Kennet, iii. 206.

2 Quoted in Keble's Life of Wilson, Bishop of Sodor and Man, 407.

with less or more of alteration. But besides this method another appears to have been proposed, if not actually adopted. There lies before us, at the moment of writing these lines, a little volume in manuscript,1 evidently intended to be read by Episcopalian Churchmen in their worship during the Commonwealth. It neither exactly follows the order, nor does it, except in a very few instances, adopt the phraseology of the Common Prayer. "A Prayer preparatory to the holy Sacrament" appears upon the first page, followed by "A Meditation when we come to the holy table "—meant no doubt for private use; and next to it there follows that which appears to be the opening of a service of social worship. It commences with a long series of confessions, including this remarkable one :-"Not observing the times of festivity or fasting appointed by just authority according to the example of Thy people in all ages.' After each article of confession there occur the words: "O Lord! righteousness belongs unto Thee, but unto us confusion of face, as at this day." "The form of absolution, to be pronounced by the priest only," is expressed in the following terms:-" Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, who of His great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them that with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto Him, have mercy upon you, pardon and deliver you from all your sins, confirm and strengthen you in all goodness, and bring you to everlasting salvation, both of body and soul, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Next to the absolution is the Lord's Prayer; and next to the Lord's Prayer are brief petitions associated with itthe same as are found in the like portion of the "Order

'I am indebted to Mr. Clarence Hopper, to whom the valuable manuscript volume belongs, for permission to make extracts from its pages.