Sacrament-which have no resemblance whatever to those which were introduced into King Edward's "Order of the Communion,” although it cannot be doubted that Knox had that "Order" in his hands. But he had a decided preference for a form of administration which he had made use of several years before in the Castle of St. Andrew's. And his "Practice," then in 1547, and now in 1549, is of equal interest to both countries, as the characteristic Puritan "Order" first introduced into both by Knox has continued in both down to the present day.

Nor was this beginning of Puritan worship slow to be followed up in England, even at that early date. We shall hear of it immediately as being introduced into Newcastle; and there is a remarkable passage in Becon's "Displaying of the Popish Mass," written in the days of Queen Mary, which makes it certain that in London itself, where Becon resided, it was no uncommon thing in King Edward's reign for the most zealous worshippers to receive the Communion in the sitting posture.

"O how oft have I seen, here in England, at the ministration of the Holy Communion, people sitting at the Lord's table after they have heard the sermon, or the godly exhortation set forth in the Book of Common Prayer read unto them by the minister, bitterly weep, heartily repent, and sorrowfully lament their too much unkindness and unthankfulness towards the Lord God for the death of his Son, Christ, and for his other benefits; again their negligence in doing their duty towards their poor neighbours! What free and large gifts also have I seen given to the poor men's box! What laying aside of all enmity, and renewing of unfeigned mutual reconciliation! . . . . What godliness also of life have I seen afterwards practised by them that were the communicants! What alteration of manners! what newness of conversation! . . . . by hearing the word of God preached, and by the worthy receiving of the Holy Communion, hath full oft been seen in England, when the doctrine of the Gospel flourished among us!"*

There is also a significant entry in Strype's Life of Parker (p. 25), which shows that the issue of Edward's first Prayer-book had not been followed by a universal compliance with the sacramental order therein enjoined :

* Prayers and other Pieces of Thomas Becon, S.T.P., Chaplain to Archbishop Cranmer, Prebendary of Canterbury. Edited for the Parker Society, 1844, p. 256.

"Many also there were that administered the Sacraments in other manners than was prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer lately set forth by public authority. For the prevention of the spreading of these people, a commission was issued out in the month of January, 1550, to one-and-thirty persons, empowering them to correct and punish these men-five bishops, and divers other Protestant and learned men at Court."

"Sitting at the Lord's table," indeed, is not mentioned here as one of the non-conforming practices complained of, but in view both of Knox's and Becon's testimony, it was no doubt included among the rest; and Knox, when in London early in 1549, may even have seen it in use in some of the churches. But, so far as appears, his name is as yet the only one which can be distinctly associated with the introduction of this Helvetic form into the Anglican Church.

It is interesting to recall here the coincidence, which has already been suggested by the extracts given above from the letters of Hooper to Bullinger, that in the very same year that Knox the Puritan began his ministry at the northern extremity of the kingdom, Hooper the Puritan was commencing his in the capital. How much they resembled each other in their doctrine will appear by comparing what has just been quoted from Knox, with the following specimen of Hooper's preaching on the Book of Jonah before the King and his Court during Lent, in the following year, 1550. Limiting ourselves to his views on the right administration of the Sacraments, he spoke thus upon Baptism :—

"Baptism consisteth in two parts-the word and the element. The word is the preaching of the good and merciful promises of God's goodness, accepting us into his favour and grace for the merits of Christ; the which promises he briefly comprehended in these words: 'I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' These words show the form of Baptism, and also that only men, reasonable creatures, should be baptized. So is condemned the gentilism and superstition that hath been used in the christening of bells. The matter and element of this Sacrament is pure water; whatsoever is added-oil, salt, cross, lights, and such other be the inventions of men; and better it were they were abolished than kept in the Church; for they obscure the simplicity and perfectness of Christ our Saviour's institution. I pray the King's Majesty and his most honourable

D

Council to prepare a ship, as soon as may be, to send them home again to their mother church, the bosom and breast of man."

On "The Form how to celebrate the Lord's Supper," Hooper is equally exacting for Scriptural simplicity, and an absolute return to Christ's own institution :—

"The outward preparation, the more simple it is, the better it is, and the nearer unto the institution of Christ and his Apostles. If the minister have bread, wine, a table, and a fair table-cloth, let him not be solicitous nor careful for the rest, seeing they be no things brought in by Christ, but by Popes; unto whom, if the King's Majesty and his honourable Council have good conscience, they must be restored again; and great shame it is for a noble king, emperor or magistrate, contrary unto God's word, to detain and keep from the devil or his minister any of their goods or treasure, as the candles, vestments, crosses, altars! For if they be kept in the Church as things indifferent, at length they will be maintained as things necessary. Thus should the perfection of Christ's institution be had in honour, . . . and nothing done in this Sacrament that had not God's word to bear it. But alas! God is accounted a fool; for men can use the Sacrament more religiously, devoutly, godly, and Christianly, than Christ, God's Son, as it appeareth. For his form and manner is put out, and man's device and wisdom is accepted for it."

....

The only difference between Hooper's Puritanism and Knox's was that Hooper was an Episcopalian Puritan, and accepted a bishopric, while Knox was a Presbyterian Puritan, and declined one; and thus they became the fathers and founders of the two chief varieties of Puritanism which emerged at the commencement of Elizabeth's reign, and the history of which forms so large a portion of its ecclesiastical annals. They were both, indeed, largely fitted to become ecclesiastical types and prototypes, for the description of Hooper drawn by Foxe the martyrologist would apply equally well to Knox. "Of body strong, his health whole and sound, his wit very pregnant, his invincible patience able to sustain whatsoever sinister fortune and adversity could do. In his doctrine he was earnest, in tongue eloquent, in the Scriptures perfect, in pains indefatigable. In his sermons, according to his accustomed manner, he corrected sin and sharply inveighed against the iniquity of the world and the corrupt abuse of the

Church."* And no less applicable to Knox than to Hooper was what the Papist Dr. Smith was compelled to say of Hooper's influence as a preacher, "that he was so admired by the people that they held him for a prophet."

It was an immense and astonishing success that Knox should have been able, in so short a time, to carry over the great bulk of his flock at Berwick from the practice of the Roman Mass to the observance of the Lord's Supper according to his own Puritan views. It is natural to inquire by what kinds of reasoning and appeal he could produce such a result in the course of less than twelve months; and, happily, we are in possession of one grand specimen of his logic and eloquence upon this theme, which was the great subject of controversy all over England in the years 1549, '50, and '51; the Convocation, the Universities, and the pulpits were all ringing with it. In April, 1550, Knox had to give, as we shall see in the next chapter, a public account of the doctrine which "he had constantly affirmed" in Berwick-" that the Mass was, and at all times had been, idolatry and abomination before God;" and there is one part of his "Vindication,” uttered on that occasion, which we may here anticipate as the most popular part of it in point of style, and the most likely to have been a specimen of his manner of handling the subject in his pulpit at Berwick. It is the interesting and effective passage where he contrasts the Mass with the Lord's Supper, as follows :

"Let no man intend to excuse the Masse with the pretext of the Lord's Supper. For now will I prove that thairwith it hath no congruence, but is express contrarie to it, and hath tackin the rememberance of the same out of mynd. And farther, it is blasphemous to the death of Jesus Chryst. First: Thai are contrarie in institutioun, for the Lord's Supper was instituted to be a perpetuall memorie of these benefittis whilk we have ressavit by Jesus Chryst, and by his death. And, first, we suld call to mynd in what estait we stude in the loynis of Adam, when that we all blasphemed the majestie of God in his face. Secondlie, that his owne incomprehensibill gudnes movit Him to love us maist wreachit and miserabill, yea, maist wickit and blasphemous; and love most perfyte compellit Him to schow mercie. And mercie

* "Biographical Notice of Bishop Hooper," prefixed to his "Early Writings," p. 10.

pronouncit the sentence, whilk was that his only Sone suld pay the pryce of our redemptioun. Whilk thing, rychtlie callit to memorie in the present actioun of the Supper, culd not but move us to unfeaned thankisgeving unto God the Father, and to his onlye Sone, Jesus, who hath restorit us agane to libertie and lyfe; and this is it whilk Paule commandeth, saying: 'As oft as ye sall eat of this bread and drink of this cup, ye sall declair the Lordis death till He cum.' That is, ye sall laude, magnifie, and extoll the liberall kyndnes of God the Father, and the infinitt benefittis whilk ye have ressaveit by Chrystis death. But the Mass is instituted, as the plane wordis thairof and thair own lawis do witness, to be a sacrifice for the synnis of the quick and the dead; for doing of the whilk sacrifice God is bound not onlie to remit our synnis, but also to gif unto us whatever we will ask. And that sall testifie dyvers Massis celebratit for dyvers caussis; sum for peace in tyme of war; sum for raine, sum for fair weather; yea, and (allace, my hart abhorreth sic abominatioun !) sum for sickness of bestiall. Thay will say, thay severallie take prayeris for obteanyng sic thingis; and that is all whilk I desyre thay say; for the obteanyng sic vane triffellis destinat thay thair haill purpoise, and so prophane the Sacrament of Chrystis bodie and blude (yf that was any Sacrament which thai abused so) whilk suld never be usit but in memorie of Chrystis death. Then suld it not be useit to pray that the tuthe-acke be takin away from us; that oure oxen suld not tak the lowing ill, oure horse the spavin or farsye, and so of all maner diseasis for oure cattell. Yea, what was it whairfor ye wuld not say Mass, perversit preistis ?

us.

"But lat us hear more. The Supper of the Lord is the gift of Jesus Chryst, in whilk we suld laude the infinite mercie of God. The Masse is a sacrifice whilk we offer unto God, for doing whereof we alledge God suld love and commend "In the Supper of the Lord confes we ourselves redeamit from sin by the death and blud of Jesus Chryst onlie. In the Mass crave we remissioun of sinnes, yea, and whatsoever thing we list by working of that same work whilk we presentlie do ourself.

And herein is the Mass blasphemous unto Chryst and his Passioun. For in so far as it offereth or permitteth remissioun of synnis, it imputeth imperfectioun upon Chryst and his sacrifice, affirmyng that all synnis were not remitted by his death, but that a great part are reservit to be purgeit by vertew and the value of