He must either openly profess his reformed doctrines, or else at once renounce them. The former alternative was the only one that he felt he could follow, and he adopted it accordingly. He laid aside his habit of a monk, assumed that of a secular priest, and having abandoned his convent and order, went about preaching at different places, and arguing, with the view to convert those whom he met, from the Roman Catholic doctrines.

cure.

In the commencement of 1528, we find that he was at Bumsteed in Essex, of which Richard Fox had the One Thomas Topley, an Augustine friar of Stoke Clare, who was then doing duty for Fox at Bumsteed, was induced, partly by the perusal of certain books of the reformed doctrine, and partly by means of Coverdale and Richard Fox, to cast off both his order and his habit, and to go as a secular priest. He was however informed against, and taken before Cuthbert, Bishop of London, and under the usual threat of being burnt in case of refusal, compelled to abjure. He there stated that having read a book of Wicliff's, which he found at Fox's, he was much perplexed in mind "until he heard Sir Myles "Coverdale preach, and then his mind was sore with"drawn from that blessed sacrament, insomuch that " he took it then but for the remembrance of Christ his body." He further stated, "that in Lent last past, "as he was walking in the fields at Bumsteed, with "Sir Myles Coverdale, who had preached the fourth

66

66

66

Sunday in Lent at Bumsteed, they did commune together of Erasmus's works, and also upon confes

66

"sion; the which Sir Myles Coverdale said and did hold, that it was sufficient for a man to be contrite "for his sins betwixt God and his conscience, without "confession made to a priest: which opinion the re

66

spondent thought to be true, and did affirm and "hold the same at that time. Also he stated that at "the said sermon made by the said Myles Coverdale "at Bumsteed, he heard him preach against worshipping of images in the church, &c."*

66

From Coverdale's name being thus mentioned in so public a manner, it was clear that he could no longer remain in England. As the Bishop's attention had thus been so pointedly directed to him, as to one who was going about corrupting the weak and the credulous, and disseminating heretical and blasphemous doctrines, it did not require much foresight to see that if he once got into his hands, he could not escape except on the usual alternative of abjuring or burning. He therefore determined to make his escape from England; and as Germany and the Northern States were the only safe parts to which those of the reformed religion could betake themselves, he resolved on proceeding thither; particularly as through the means of Barnes, or his own reputation for learning and letters, he was favourably esteemed by Tyndal,' who was then abroad engaged in translating the Scriptures into English.

s Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. ii. p. 323.

Offor's Life of Tyndal, attached to the reprint of his New Testament.

CHAPTER II.

TYNDAL'S NEW TESTAMENT PUBLISHED.

BY THE BISHOP OF LONDON.

TRANSLATION.

PROHIBITION OF IT WRITINGS OF SIR THOS. MORE

AGAINST IT. - HALLE'S ACCOUNT OF THE BURNING OF THIS COVERDALE GOES TO ANTWERP AND ASSISTS TYNDAL IN TRANSLATING THE PENTATEuch. PROCEEDINGS IN ENGLAND AGAINST TYNDAL'S NEW TESTAMENT AND THE WRITINGS OF THE REFORMERS. SEVERE PROCLAMATION OF THE KING AGAINST.-BISHOP OF NORWICH DESIRES FURTHER AUTHORITY TO SUPPRESS HERESY IN HIS DIOCESE.

AND now to look back a short period. In the year 1526, the whole of the New Testament was published in English for the first time." William Tyndal translated it, and about 1500 copies of this impression were issued from the press. He dared not print it in England, but brought it out at Antwerp, from whence it was sent over into England.

Several writers who have engaged in the history of our early printers, have expressed much surprise

a

Copy in the Baptist Museum, Bristol. Imperfect one at St. Paul's. Mr. Bagster has published a reprint of this scarce and curious work. 'Fox's Acts and Monuments, quoted in Lewis's transl. Bible, p. 61, incorrectly numbered as p. 77.

66

that amongst the many valuable books they brought forth, none of them should have undertaken the most valuable of all, the Bible. Sir Thomas More has, however, thus accounted for it. He says that by reason of the penalties ordered by Archbishop Arundel's constitution, "though the old translations that were before Wycliff's days remained lawful and were in some folkys handys had and red, yet he thought no printer would lyghtly be so hote to put any byble in print at hys owne charge-and their hange upon a "doubtfull tryall whyther the fyrst copy of his translacyion was made before Wycliffs dayes or synnes. "For yff yt were made synnys yt must be approued "byfore the pryntyng." Which approbation, Sir Thomas More gives us to understand, was not then to be obtained."

66

66

66

The constitution here referred to, was decreed by Archbishop Arundel at a convocation of his province in 1408, about twenty-four years after the death of Dr. Wicliff, against whose followers it was chiefly directed.

It began by reciting, that it was a dangerous thing, as St. Jerome himself had testified, to translate the text of the holy scripture from one idiom into another, for that in these translations the same sense was not easily retained in all; in proof of which, St. Jerome himself, although he was inspired, had averred that he had often erred: and it therefore enjoined, that no one should thereafter translate any text of holy scripture into English, by way of a book, little book, or

tract; and that no such book, little book, or tract, should be read, either in public or in private, that was composed lately in the time of John Wicliff, or since his death, unless such translation were first approved of by the diocesan of the place, or if necessity should so require, by the provincial council; on pain of offenders herein suffering the punishment of encouragers of heretics."

At the same time that this New Testament by Tyndal was printed, there were published many other books written by the reformers. Some contained attacks upon the bishops, and other high ecclesiastical dignitaries, and against the Pope and popish superstitions; whilst the rest were filled with disputes and dissertations on points of religion. These, together with the New Testament, were very industriously circulated, and as greedily bought up and read; "as," remarks Lewis, "it is in the nature of "man to incline to what is forbidden, and vehemently "to desire whatever is denied him." Cardinal Wolsey and the bishops did all they could to suppress these books, and to prevent the king from hearing of them; but when that could no longer be hindered, they met together to consult on the best means for effectually stopping their further circulation, and a commission was agreed upon to be given out to forbid their being read, which was done accordingly.

The prohibition sent out by Cuthbert Tonstal," against the New Testament, in pursuance of this re

dEx reg. Arundel. ii. fol. 10. const. vii. printed in Wilk. conc. M. B. • Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. ii. p. 284. Dated Oct. 23, 1526.