Ced) through the grant of Oswald, son to St. Oswald king of Northumberland, (A. D. 651).

The monastery of Whitby, called otherwise Stenhalt, by Hilda, daughter to the nephew of Edwin king of Northumberland, (A. D. 657).

Another monastery called Hacanos, not far from the same place, built by Hilda the same year.

The abbey of Abbington, built by Sissa king of Southsex, (A. D. 666).

An abbey in the east side of Lincoln, called Joanno, by St. Botulph, A. D. 654. (Polych. lib. 5. cap. 16).

The monastery in Ely, founded by Etheldred or Etheldrida daughter of Anna king of Eastangles, and the wife of Elfride king of Northumberland, (A.D. 674).

The monastery of Chertsey in Southery, founded by Erkenwald bishop of London, (A. D. 674), thrown down by the Danes, after re-built by King Edgar.

The nunnery of Berking, built by the said Erkenwaldus bishop of London about the same time.

The abbey of Peterborough, called otherwise Modehamsted, founded by King Ethelwald, king of the Mercians, (A. D. 675).

Bardney abbey by Ethelred king of the Mercians, (A. D. 700).

Glastonbury by Iva king of the West Saxons, and after repaired and enriched by King Edgar, (A. D. 701). Ramsey in the time of King Edgar, by one Ailwinus a nobleman, (A. D. 973). King Edgar built in his time forty monasteries, who reigned A.D. 901.

The nunnery of Winburne built by Cuthberga sister to Ingilsus, King Iva's brother, A. D. 717.

The monastery of Sealsey by the Isle of Wight, by Wilfridus bishop of York, (A. D. 678).

The monastery of Wincombe by Kenulphus king of the Mercians, (Ă. D. 737).

St. Albans built by Offa king of the Mercians, (A. D. 755).

The abbey of Evesham by Edwin, bishop, (A. D. 691).

Ripon in the north by Wilfrid, bishop, (A. D. 709). The abbey of Echlinghey, by King Alfred, (A. D. 891).

The nunnery of Shaftsbury by Alfred, the same year. Thus we see what monasteries began to be founded by the Saxon kings, newly converted to the christian faith, within the space of two hundred years; who, as they seemed to have a certain zeal and devotion to God, according to the leading and teaching that then was: so it seems to me, there were two things to be wished in these kings: first, that they who began to erect these monasteries of monks and nuns, to live solely and singly by themselves, had foreseen what danger, and what absurd enormities might and did ensue, both publicly to the church of Christ, and privately to their own souls: secondly, that to this their zeal and devotion had been joined like knowledge and doctrine in Christ's gospel, especially in the article of our free justification by the faith of Jesus Christ; because of the lack whereof, as well the builders and founders, as they that were professed in the same, seem both to have ran the wrong way, and to have been deceived. For although there was in them a devotion and zeal of mind, that thought well in this their doing, which I will not here reprehend: yet the end and cause of their deeds and buildings cannot be excused, being contrary to the rule of Christ's gospel; for so much as they did these things seeking thereby merit with God, and for the remedy of their souls, and remission of their sins, as may appear testified in their own records.

By the contents of which may well be understood how great the ignorance and blindness of these men was; who, lacking no zeal, only lacking knowledge to rule it withall; seeking their salvation not by Christ only, but by their own deservings and meritorious deeds. Which I recite not here to any infamy or reprehension of them; but rather to put us in mind how much we at this present time are bound to God for the true sincerity of his truth, hidden so long before from our ancestors, and opened now unto us by the good will of our God, in his

Son Christ Jesus. Lamenting this only by the way, to see them to have such works, and to lack our faith, and us to have the right faith, and to lack their works. And this blind ignorance of that age, was the cause not only why these kings built so many monasteries, but also why so many of them, forsaking their orderly vocation of princely government, gave themselves over to the monastic profession, or rather wilful superstition. Concerning the names and number of which kings that were professed monks, is sufficiently declared before; the names of whom we shewed to be seven or eight, within these two hundred years. Such was then the superstitious devotion of kings and princes, and no less also to be noted in queens' and kings' daughters, with other noble women of the same age and time; the names of whom it were too long here to recite. As Hilda daughter to the nephew of Edwin king of Northumberland, abbess of Ely. Erchengoda, with her sister Ermenilda, daughters of Ercombertus king of Kent, which Erchengoda was professed in St. Bridget's order in France. Edelberga wife and queen to King Edwin of Northumberland, and daughter of King Anna, who was also made a nun in the same house of St. Bridget. Etheldreda, whom we term St. Eldred, wife to King Ecfride of Northumberland, who was professed a nun at Helings. Werburga was the daughter of Ulferus King of Mercians, and made nun at Ely. Kenreda, sister of King Ulferus and Kineswida her sister, were both nuns professed. Sexburga daughter of King Anna, king of Mercians, and wife of Ercombert king of Kent, was abbess at Ely. Elfrida daughter of Oswy king of Northamberland was abbess of Whitney; Mildreda, Milburga, and Milguida, all three daughters of Merwardus, king of West Mercians, entered the profession and vow of devoted nuns. Kineburga, wife of Alfride king of Northumberland, and sister to Ofricus king of Mercians, and daughter of King Penda, was professed abbess of the monastery in Glocester. Elfleda daughter of Oswy king, and wife of Peda, son of King Penda, likewise enclosed herself in the same profession and vow. Likewise Alfritha wife to King Edgar, and Editha, daughter to the said Edgar, with Wolfride her mother, &c., all which holy nuns with divers more, the Romish catholics have canonized for saints, and put the most part of them in their calendar, only because of the vow which they solemnly professed. Concerning which I will say, that although they kept it never so perfectly, yet it is not that which maketh saints before God, but only the blood of Christ Jesus, and a true faith in him.

It likewise remains, that as we have declared the devotion of these noble women, who professing monastic life, cast off all worldly dignity and delights; so we should also treat of such noblemen, who among the Saxon kings in like zeal of devotion, have given over themselves from the world (as they thought) to the contemplative life of the monkish profession. The names of whom are these nine.

1. Kinigils, king of the West Saxons.
2. Iva, king of the West Saxons.
3. Ceolulf, king of Northumberland.
4. Edbert, king of Northumberland.
5. Ethelred, king of Mercia.
6. Kenred, king of Mercia.

7. Offa, king of the East Saxons.

8. Sebbi, king of the East Saxons.
9. Sigebert, king of East Angles.

What is to be thought of these kings and their doings, the reader has seen before.

By these histories it is apparent what changes, what perturbations, and what alterations of state have been in this realm of Britain, first from British kings to Roman; then to British again; afterward to Saxon. First, to seven reigning together, then to one, &c. And this alteration not only happened in the civil government, but also followed in the ecclesiastical state. For as in the Britons' time the metropolitan see was in London, so in the Saxons' time, after the coming of Austin, it was removed to Canterbury; the catalogue and order of which metropolitans, from the time of Austin to Egbert, is thus described in the history of Malmesbury.

The names and order of the archbishops of Canterbury from Austin to the time of King Egbert, of whom the first seven were Italians or other foreigners. 1. Austin.

2. Laurentius.

3. Melitus.

4. Justus.

5. Honorius.
6. Deusdedit.
7. Theodorus.
8. Berctualdus.

9. Tacuinus.

10. Nothelmus. 11. Cutbertus.

12. Berguinus.

13. Lambrightus, or Lambertus. 14. Ethelardus.

15. Ulfredus.

16. Feolegeldus.

17. Celnothus.

During the course of these seventeen archbishops of Canterbury, there were thirty-four popes in Rome, of whom we have partly declared.

And thus much touching the time of the seven kingdoms of the Saxons, ruling together in England, from the reign of Hengist unto Egbert, the first monarch of the whole land, after the expulsion of the Britons.

It now remains (by the grace of Christ) in the next book, to give the history of such kings as principally reigning alone had this realm in their possession, from the time of Egbert king of the West Saxons, to the coming of William the Conqueror, the Norman; comprehending therein the rest of the next three hundred years, with the acts and state of religion in the church during that space; wherein may appear the declining time of the church, and of true religion, preparing the way to antichrist, which followed not long after.

Ir now remains, as I before described, the descent and diversity of the seven kings, all reigning and ruling together in this land: so to prosecute in like order the lineal succession of them, which, after Egbert, king of the West Saxons, governed and ruled solely, until the conquest of William the Norman; and first, of King Egbert:

In the reign of Brightric, about A. D. 795, there was a noble personage called Egbert, who was feared by Brightric, because he was of kingly blood, and was by force and conspiracy chased out of Britain into France, till the death of Brightric. After hearing whereof, Egbert came back to his country, where he obtained the government of the kingdom of the West Saxons.

Bernulph, king of Mercia, with other kings, had this Egbert in much derision, making scoffing jests at him; all which he sustained for a time. But when he was more established in his kingdom, he assembled his knights, and gave battle to Bernulph, and won the field; which done, he made war upon the Kentish Saxons, and obtained the victory. He also subdued Northumberland, and caused the kings of these three kingdoms to live under him as tributaries. After these and other victories, he called a council of his lords at Winchester, where by their advices he was crowned king and chief lord over this land, which before that day was called Britain; but then he sent out into all the land his commandments and commissions, charging straightly, that from that day forward, the Saxons should be called Angles, and the land Anglia.

About the thirtieth year of the reign of Egbert, the Danes, who a little before had made horrible destruction in Northumberland, and especially in the isle of Lindefarae, where they spoiled the churches, and murdered the ministers, with men, women, and children, after a cruel manner, entered now the second time with a great host into this land, and spoiled the isle of Sheppy in Kent: Egbert assembled his people, and met with them at Charmouth. But he did not succeed so well in that conflict as he had done before, but with his knights was compelled to forsake the field. Notwithstanding, in the next battle, Egbert, with a small force, overthrew a great multitude of them, and so drove them back. The

next year the Danes returned again, and after this they were continually abiding in one part or other of the realm of England, till the time of Hardecanute. And although they were often driven out of the land, and chased from one country to another, yet they always gathered new strength and power, and abode still in the land.

Egbert, when he had ruled the West Saxons, and the greater part of England, thirty-seven years, died, and was buried at Winchester, leaving his kingdom to his son Ethelwolf, who first was bishop of Winchester, and afterwards, upon necessity, was made king.

Ethelwolf had entered into the order of sub-deacon, and, as some say, was made bishop of Winchester; but afterwards, being the only son of Egbert, was made king through the dispensation of the pope. This Ethelwolf (as being himself once in that order) was always good and devout to holy church and religious orders, insomuch that he gave to them the tithe of all his goods and lands in West Saxony, with liberty and freedom from all servage and civil charges.

Whence, it may appear, how and when the churches of England began first to be endued with temporalities and lands; and enlarged with privileges and exemptions.

Ethelwolf, having done these things in his realm, went to Rome with Alfred his youngest son, and committed him to the bringing up of Pope Leo IV.; and he gave and granted to Rome a penny to be paid for every fire-house through his whole land, as King Iva in his dominion had done before. He also gave and granted, towards maintaining the light of St. Peter, 100 marks, to be paid annually; to the light of St. Paul, 100 marks; for the use of the pope also another 100.

Ethelwolf had always about him two bishops, whose counsel he was most ruled by, Swithin bishop of Winchester, and Adelstan bishop of Sherborne. One was more skilful in temporal and civil affairs, touching the king's wars, and filling of his coffers. The other (which was Swithin) was of a contrary disposition, wholly inclined to spiritual meditation, and to minister spiritual counsel to the king: he had been schoolmaster to the king before. And herein appeared one good feature in this king's nature, among his other virtues, not only in

following the precepts of his old schoolmaster, but also that, like a kind and thankful pupil, he so reverenced him, that he made him bishop of Winchester.

From the time of Pope Adrian I. unto Pope Adrian II. the emperors had some hand in the election (at least in the confirmation) of the Roman pope; but several of these popes began to endeavour to bring their purpose about. Yet all their devices could take no full effect, before Adrian III. So that the emperors all this while had some authority in choosing the popes, and in assembling general councils. Wherefore, by the commandment of the Emperor Lewis, in the time of Gregory IV., a general synod was commenced at Aquisgrane, where it was decreed by Gregory and his assistants: first, that every church should have sufficient of its own proper lands and revenues to keep the priests thereof, that none should lack or go about a begging. Also, that none of the clergy, of what order or degree soever he be, should use any vesture of any precious or scarlet colour. Neither should wear rings on their fingers, unless it be when prelates be at mass, or give their consecrations. Also, that prelates should not keep too great houses or families, nor keep many horses, use dice, or be guilty of immoral conduct; and that the monks should not exceed in gluttony or riot. Also, that none of the clergy being either anointed or shaven, should use either gold or silver in their shoes, slippers, or girdles, like to Heliogabalus. By this it may be conjectured, what pomp and pride in those days was crept into the clergy. Moreover, by Pope Gregory IV., the feast of All Saints was first brought into the church.

After this pope, came Sergius II., who first brought in the altering of the pope's names, because he was named before "Swines-snout;" he also ordained the Agnus to be sung thrice at the mass, and the host to be divided into three parts.

After him was Pope Leo IV. By this pope it was first enacted in a council, that no bishop should be condemned under threescore and twelve witnesses, according as ye see by the witnesses, was practised at the condemnation of Stephen Gardiner.

Also contrary to the law of Gregory IV., his predecessor, this pope ordained the cross (all set with gold and precious stones), to be carried before him, like a pope.

And here next comes in the whore of Babylon, (Rev. xix. 2.), rightly in her true colours, by the permission of God, and manifestly to appear to the whole world; and that not only after the spiritual sense, but after the very letter. For after this Leo above mentioned, the cardinals proceeding to their ordinary election (after a solemn mass of the Holy Ghost, to the perpetual shame of them, and of that see), instead of a man pope, elected a woman, called Joan VIII., to minister sacraments, to say masses, to give orders, to constitute deacons, priests, and bishops; to promote prelates, to make abbots, to consecrate churches and altars, to have the reign and rule of emperors and kings. This woman's proper name was Gilberta, who went with an English monk out of the Abbey of Fulda, in man's apparel, to Athens, and through her wit and learning was promoted to the popedom, where she sat two years and six months. At last openly in the face of a general procession, she gave birth to a child, and so died, and was succeeded by Benedict III., who first ordained the dirge to be said for the dead.

After him came Pope Nicholas I., who enlarged the pope's decrees with many constitutions, equalling the

(1) This extraordinary event has naturally been disputed by the modern advocates of the church of Rome. The election and session of a woman, who is incapable of orders, in the seat of the pontiffs, is such a sundering of the links of apostolic succession in the papal chair, and such an impeachment of the orders of some in that church, that it were passing strange if every effort that talent, learning, and ingenuity could devise, were not made to obliterate such a fact from the page of history.

There is however this broad, plain, and unquestionable fact, which requires an answer more cogent than any it has yet received, namely, that for five hundred years after the time of Pope Joan, it was acknowledged as an historical event of as great notoriety as any other connected with the papal chair, and that it

authority of them with the writings of the apostles. He ordained that no secular prince, nor the emperor himself, should be present at their councils, unless in mat ters concerning the faith; to the end that such as they judged to be heretics, they should execute and murder. Also, that no laymen should sit in judgment upon the clergymen, or reason upon the pope's power. Also, that no christian magistrate should have any power upon any prelate, alleging that a prelate is called God. Also, that all church service should be in Latin, yet allowing the Sclavonians and Polonians to retain still their vulgar language. Sequences in the mass were by him first allowed. By this pope priests began to be debarred from marrying; whereof Huldrike, bishop of Ausburgh, (a learned and a holy man), sending a letter to the pope, gravely and learnedly refutes and declaims against his indiscreet proceedings touching that matter; which letter I judged meet for the instruction of the reader, and worthy to be inserted here, as follows:"A learned epistle of Huldrike, Bishop of Ausburgh, sent to Pope Nicholas I., proving by substantial proofs, that priests ought not to be restrained from marriage.

"Huldrike, bishop only by name, unto the reverend father Nicholas, the vigilant provisor of the holy church of Rome, with due commendation sendeth love as a son, and fear as a servant. Understanding, reverend father, your decrees which you sent to me concerning the single life of the clergy, to be far from all discretion, I was troubled partly with fear, and partly with heaviness. With fear, because, as it is said, the sentence of the pastor, whether it be just or unjust, is to be feared. For I was afraid lest the weak hearers of the scripture (which scarcely obey the just sentence of their pastor, much more despising this unjust decree) through the onerous transgression of their pastor, should shew themselves disobedient. I was troubled with heaviness, and with compassion, because I doubted how the members of the body should do, their head being so greatly out of frame. For what can be more grievous, or more to be lamented, touching the state of the church, than for you, being the bishop of the principal see, to whom appertaineth the government of the whole church, to swerve never so little out of the right way? Certainly in this you have not a little erred, in that you have gone about to constrain your clergy to singleness of life, through your imperious tyranny, whom rather you ought to stir up to the honourable estate of marriage. For is not this to be counted a violence and tyranny in the judgment of all wise men, when a man is compelled by your decrees to do that which is against the institution of the gospel and the proceeding of the Holy Ghost? Seeing then there be so many holy examples both of the Old and New Testament, teaching us, as you know, due information; I desire your patience not to think it grievous for me to bring a few here out of many.

"First, in the old law, the Lord permitteth marriage unto the priests, which afterward in the new law we do not read to be restrained, but in the gospel thus he saith, 'There be some eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able receive it, let him receive it,' Matt. xix. 12. Wherefore, the apostle saith, Concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my judgment,' 1 Cor. vii. 25. Which counsel also all men do not take, as in the commandment of the Lord before, but many

was never called in question till the church of Rome began to feel the necessity of defending herself against those who openly opposed her assumed authority. Marianus Scotus, who lived very near the time of Pope Joan, mentions her as "Joanna, Mulier," and adds that she was pope for two years, five months and five days, and all the historians for some centuries-although all were members of the church of Rome-in like manner acknowledge the facts, and even since the reformation a large number of Romish divines - among whom are some of their best learned mon -have admitted it.

Thus much at all events is certain. If this matter be an inven tion or falsehood, it rests not on protestants-but on romanists themselves. [ED.]

there be, false dissemblers and flatterers, going about to please men, and not God, whom we see under a false pretence of holiness to fall into horrible wickedness. And, therefore, lest through the infection of this wicked pestilence, the state of the church should too much go to ruin, he said, 'Let every man have his own wife;' touching which saying, our false hypocrites falsely do lie and feign, as though it only pertained to the laity, and not to them. And yet they themselves, seeming to be set in the most holy order, are not afraid to do outrage in all manner of wickedness.

"These men have not rightly understood the scripture; for the saying of the apostle, Let every man have his own wife,' doth except none in very deed, but him only which hath the gift of continency. Wherefore, O, reverend father! it shall be your part to cause and oversee, that whosoever hath made a vow of celibacy, and afterward would forsake it, should either be compelled to keep his vow, or else by lawful authority should be deposed from his order.

"And to bring this to pass, you should not only have me, but also all other of my order, to be helpers unto you. But that you may understand, that such which know not what a vow doth mean, are not to be violently compelled thereunto : hear what the apostle saith to Timothy; a bishop, saith he, 'Must be blameless, the husband of one wife,' 1 Tim. iii. 2. Which sentence lest you should turn and apply only to the church; mark what he inferreth after. If a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God;' and 'Let the deacon be the husband of one wife, ruling their children and own houses well,' 1 Tim. iii. 5-12. And this wife, how she is wont to be blessed by the priest, you understand sufficiently, I suppose, by the decrees of holy Sylvester the pope.

"To these and such other holy sentences of the scripture agreeth also, he that is the writer of the rule of the clergy, writing after this manner, of the clerks, Let them have one wife.' Whereby it is to be gathered, that the bishop and deacon are noted infamous and reprehensible, if they be divided with more women than one; otherwise, if they do forsake one under pretence of religion, they, as well the bishop as the deacon, are here condemned by the canonical sentence, which says, Let no bishop or priest forsake his own wife, under the colour and pretence of religion. If he do forsake her, let him be excommunicate. And if he so continue, let him be dragged.' St. Augustine also, (a man of discreet holiness), says in these words, There is no offence so great or grievous, but it is to avoid a greater evil.'

"Furthermore, we read in the second book of the Tripartite history, that when the council of Nice, going about to establish the same decree, would enact that bishops, priests, and deacons, after their consecration, either should utterly forsake their own wives, or else should be deposed; then Paphnutius, (one of those holy martyrs, whose right eye the Emperor Maximus had put out, and houghed their left legs), rising up amongst them, withstood their purposed decree; confessing marriage to be honourable, and so persuaded the council from making that law, declaring what evil might come of it. And thus much did Paphnutius (being unmarried himself), declare to them. And the whole council commending his sentence, agreed thereto, and left the matter freely without compulsion, to the will of every man, to do therein as he thought.

"Notwithstanding there be some which take St. Gregory for their defence in this matter, whose temerity I laugh at, and ignorance I lament; for they know not, being ignorantly deceived, how dangerous the decree of this heresy was, (being made of St. Gregory), who afterwards revoked the same, with much repentance.

"Peradventure if these men had read with me what happened through this decree, I think they would not he so rash in their doing and judging; fearing at least the Lord's commandment, Judge not that you be not judged.' And St. Paul saith, Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth, yea, he shall be holden up, for God is able to make him stand.' Therefore let your holiness

cease to compel and enforce those whom you ought only to admonish, lest through your own private commandment (which God forbid) you be found contrary as well to the Old Testament as to the New. For as St. Au gustine saith to Donatus, This is only what we do fear in your justice, lest (not for the consideration of christian lenity, but for the grievousness and greatness of transgressions committed), you be thought to use violence in executing punishment of that, which only we do desire you (by Christ) not to do. For transgressions are so to be punished, that the life of the transgressors may repent.' Also another saying of St. Augustine we would have you to remember, which is this, 'It nothing be done through the greediness of hurting, but all things through the charity of profiting; neither let any thing be done cruelly, nothing ungently.' Also by the same Augustine it is written, In the fear and name of Christ I exhort you, who have not the goods of this world, be not greedy to have them. Such as have them, presume not too much upon them. For, I say, to have them is no damnation, but if you presume upon them, that is damnation; if for the having of them you shall seem great in your own sight, or if you do forget the common condition of man through the excellency of any thing you have. Use, therefore, therein due discretion, tempered with moderation, the which cup of discretion is drawn out of the fountain of the apostolic preaching, which said, Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife,' 1 Cor. vii. 27. Where, also it followsIt remaineth, that they who have wives be as though they had none, and they that use this world as not abusing it.'

،، Concerning the widow, he saith, She is at liberty to be married to whom she will, only in the Lord,' 1 Cor. vii. 39. To marry in the Lord, is nothing else but to attempt nothing in contracting of matrimony, which the Lord doth forbid. Jeremy also saith, Trust ye not in the lying words, saying, The Temple of the Lord, The Temple of the Lord, The Temple of the Lord, are these,' Jer. vii. 4. The which saying of Jeremy, Jerome expounding, saith thus, This may agree also, and be applied to such nuns as boast of their vow, and know not how the apostle defineth the virgin, that she should be holy in body, and also in spirit. For what availeth the purity of the body, if the mind inwardly be unholy? Or if it have not the other virtues, which the prophetical sermon doth describe?' The which virtues, for so much as we see partly to be in you, and because we are not ignorant, that this discretion, although neglected in this part, yet in the other actions of your life is kept honestly of you, we do not despair, but you will also soon amend the little lack which is behind. And therefore with as much gravity as we can, we cease not to call upon you, to correct and amend this your negligence. For although, according to our common calling, a bishop is greater than a priest, and Augustine was less than Jerome; notwithstanding the good correction proceeding from the lesser to the greater, was not to be refused or disdained, especially when he which is corrected is found to strive against the truth to please men. For as St. Augustine saith, writing to Boniface, The disputations of all men, be they never so catholic or approved persons, ought not to be had instead of the canonical scriptures.' So that we may disapprove or refuse (saving the honour and reverence which is due unto them) any thing that is in their writings, if any thing there be found contrary to truth. And what can be found more contrary to the truth than this? When as the truth itself, speaking of abstaining from marriage, saith, He that can receive it, let him receive it,' which saying, these men (moved, I know not by what) do turn and say, ' He that cannot receive it, let him be accursed.' And what can be more foolish amongst men, than when any bishop or archdeacon run themselves headlong into all kind of sin, and yet say, that the marriage of priests is an abomination; and, as void of all compassion and true righteousness do not desire or admonish their clerks, as their fellow-servants to abstain from marriage, but command