account, for any one to leave or lose his ministerial function. Dr. Calamy, having mentioned Mr. Sprint's “Cassander Anglicanus," adds, "I think it not improper to communicate to the world a paper concerning it, which was written by the hand of his own son; a copy of which was sent me by the grandson of the author, with assurance that it was drawn up by his father, Mr. Samuel Sprint of Tidworth." The paper was as follows: 1. "This book meddles not with subscription, but disclaims it, p. 237. 2. "In all the arguments, it supposeth, that the ceremonies imposed are inconveniencies, and the church's burdens. 3. "By the quotations, p. 194, 196, and elsewhere, he adviseth us to bear witness against them, and to express our dissent from them, and then conform: Which is not to assent; and much less, to declare our unfeigned assent, as well as consent to them. 4. "Bishop Laud said, 'It had been no great matter, if this book and the author had been burnt together.' 5. "This book is not fully comprehensive of the author's judgment: for, besides what is extant of his in print, (viz. his Bellum Ceremoniale,' printed by another,) and what he hath left in manuscript, this book, as he hath acknowledged to his acquaintance, hath suffered much by the hands of the bishop's chaplain, who was appointed the reviser of books to be printed."+ From this account, and even from the words of Fuller, as cited above, it appears that Mr. Sprint was a puritan in principle and a nonconformist in practice; only he would conform, and recommended others to conform, rather than suffer deprivation. "To speak my free thoughts," observes Calamy, "I take that book of Mr. Sprint's to be a defence of occasional conformity to the church, in evidence of charity, while a testimony is publicly borne against its remaining corruptions; rather than a plea for entire conformity." He was a man of excellent wisdom and great moderation. He died in London, May 7, 1623, and his remains were interred at St. Ann's, Blackfriars, where he appears to have been for some time minister. Mr. Samuel Sprint and Mr. John Sprint, jun. both ejected in 1662, were his sons.§ His WORKS.-1. Propositions tending to prove the necessary Use of the Christian Sabbath, or Lord's Day, 1607.-2. The practice of * Wood's Athenæ, vol. i. p. 406.-Fuller's Worthies, part i. p. 360. + Calamy's Account, vol. ii. p. 343. Moderate Nonconformity, vol. i. p. 27. Edit. 1703. that Sacred Day, framed after the Rules of God's Word, 1607.-3. The Summ of Christian Religion by way of Question and Answer, 1613.— 4. Cassander Anglicanus: or, the Necessity of Conforming to the prescribed Ceremonies of the Church, in case of Deprivation, 1618. 5. The Christian's Sword and Buckler; or, a Letter sent to a Man seven years grievously afflicted in Conscience and fearfully troubled in Mind, 1638.-6. Bellum Ceremoniale, already mentioned. JOHN GEE, A. B.-This zealous person was the son of a minister, born in Devonshire, in the year 1597, and educated first in Brazen-nose college, then in Exeter college, Oxford. Entering upon the ministerial work, he was beneficed at Newton, near Winwick, in Lancashire. Being at this period much inclined to popery, he left the place, and retired to London, where he became intimately acquainted with several leading persons of the popish persuasion.. October 26, 1623, Mr. Gee was in the assembly of above three hundred persons, collected in an upper room, in Blackfriars, London; when, about the middle of the sermon, the floor giving way, Drury, the Roman catholic priest, and nearly one hundred of the congregation, were killed, and many others severely bruised. This he considered a most alarming and awakening providence. Having already received many urgent letters from his father, and by means of a conference which he had with Archbishop Abbot, he renounced the errors of popery, and became a zealous protestant. Some, it is said, thought he became too zealous a protestant. For he embraced the principles of the puritans, and wrote with great spirit and ability against the papists, exposing their errors and superstitions. The papists, however, in return, loaded him with much slander and abuse. After renouncing popery, he preached at Tenterden in Kent, where he died, but at what particular time we are not able to learn. He had a younger brother, called Orlando Gee, who was afterwards knighted. His WORKS.-1. The Foot out of the Snare, with a Detection of sundry late Practices and Impostures of the Priests and Jesuits in England, 1624.-2. A gentle Excuse to Mr. Greg. Musket for styling him Jesuit, 1624.-Both these passed through four editions this year.-3. Hold fast, a Sermon at Paul's cross, on Rev. iii. 11., 1624.-4. New Shreds of the old Snare, containing the Apparitions of two Female Ghosts, the copies of divers Letters, and Indulgences purchased at Rome, 1624. * Prince's Worthies of Devon, p. 338, 339. + Wood's Athenæ Oxon. vol. i. p. 427. JOHN KNEWSTUBS, B. D.-This learned divine was born at Kirkby Stephen in Westmoreland, in the year 1540, and chosen fellow of St. John's college, in the university of Cambridge, where he was much esteemed for his great piety, abilities, and learning. During his abode in the university, he united with Dr. Andrews, afterwards bishop of Ely, Dr. Chadderton, Mr. Culverwell, Mr. Carter, and other distinguished persons, in the observance of weekly meetings for conference upon certain portions of scripture. These meetings were conducted with great decorum, and found of signal advantage to all. In the year 1579, Mr. Knewstubs, upon his removal from Cambridge, became minister at Cockfield in Suffolk. Here he was labouring in the vineyard of Christ, when sixty ministers, from the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, and Cambridge, assembled in his church to confer about the Book of Common Prayer, with the view of coming to an agreement concerning what things might be tolerated, and what were to be refused. They consulted also about the clerical apparel, holidays, fasts, injunctions, and other matters.+ Dr. Heylin says, this meeting was held May 8, 1582. In the year 1583, upon the publication of Whitgift's three articles, Mr. Knewstubs and sixty other ministers of Suffolk, whose names are now before me, were not resolved to subscribe, and, for further satisfaction, wrote to their diocesan, desiring the resolution of their doubts, some of which were the following:-" The administration of baptism in private.-The use of the cross in baptism.The interrogatories proposed to the infants.-The burial service, requiring us to commit to the ground all characters, in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life. And the reading of apocryphal books in public worship, to the exclusion of some parts of canonical scripture." Their application, however, proved unsuccessful, and they were all suspended from their ministerial work, upwards of forty of whom received the ecclesiastical censure on one day. This excellent divine being laid aside from his beloved work, the Lord Treasurer Burleigh wrote to him and Mr. John Oxenbridge, another suspended minister, requesting them to declare, "That they would use the Book of Common Prayer; and that in their public ministry they * Peck's Desiderata Curiosa, vol. i. b. vi. p. 22. + Fuller's Church Hist. b. ix. p. 135. Heylin's Hist. of Pres. p. 292. MS. Register, p. 434, 435. Ibid. p. 436, 437. would not preach against it." Upon the reception of this, they returned his lordship the following open and generous declaration, earnestly soliciting his favourable attention to their case, as the silenced ministers of Christ :-"Right honourable and very good lord," say they, "we find it is your lordship's pleasure that we should declare in writing our consent to these two points: That we will use the Book of Common Prayer; and that we will not inveigh against it in our public ministry.-In the first place, as we have hitherto used the said book in our public worship, so we do purpose to use it, and no other, except some other shall be established by public authority. And, secondly, we always have had a special regard, both in our public ministry and private life, for the peace of the church and our duty to her majesty, and to walk in all quiet and christian behaviour towards all who use the book in some things more strictly than we can do: and we mean always to act thus in future. "Seeing these are the things which your honour thinketh good to request at our hands, we most humbly beseech your lordship's favour, that we may be relieved from that subscription, which, as we verily think, the states of the realm have not required of us; and that we may be restored to our ministry, as in times past. Which, if we obtain, we shall be bound both to praise God for your clemency and to pray for the increase and continuance of your honour's estate and happiness.' It does not appear how long these learned divines remained under the bishop's censure, nor whether their application to the treasurer proved at all available. Mr. Knewstubs joined with his brethren in subscribing the "Book of Discipline." He laboured with great zeal and moderation to carry on the work of reformation in the church, and frequently met with his brethren at their associations in the counties of Suffolk, Norfolk, and Cambridge. Being a known and decided nonconformist, though a man of no severe principles, his house was narrowly watched, and afterwards strictly searched, by the prelate's officers.+ In the year 1603, Mr. Knewstubs was one of the puritan divines appointed by King James to attend the Hamptoncourt conference. He signified, on this occasion, his objections against the interrogatories in baptism. But Dr. Barlow, who published "The Sum and Substance of the * MS. Register, p. 587, 588. + MS. Chronology, vol. ii. p. 593. (4.) Conference," instead of informing us what he said upon this point, is pleased to observe, that his discourse was so extremely perplexed that it was very difficult to be understood. This, surely, is a short and easy method of answering an argument, and of reproaching an adversary. Mr. Knewstubs also excepted against the cross in baptism;+ because, as he observed, it gave offence to many weak brethren, contrary to Rom. xiv. and 2 Cor. viii., where their consciences are not to be offended. He inquired whether the church had power to add external significant signs. Then, if it had such power, whether it might add them where Christ hath already ordained one. To attempt this, appeared to him no less derogatory to the institution of Christ, than if any person in the land should presume to add his own seal to the great seal of England. But if the church had this power also, Mr. Knewstubs further inquired, How far is such an ordinance to bind us, without impeaching our christian liberty? The king, hearing this, was greatly moved, and said it smelt raukly of anabaptism; and, therefore, he would not argue the point with him! "I will," added his majesty, "have one doctrine, one discipline, and one religion, in substance and in ceremony; and, therefore, I charge you never more to speak upon that point, how far you are to obey, when the church hath ordained it!" Such was the logic of that prince who was styled the Solomon of the age! Towards the close of the conference, Dr. Chadderton having requested that the wearing of the surplice, and the use of the cross in baptism, might not be urged upon certain pious and painful ministers in Lancashire, Mr. Knewstubs, upon his knees, requested the like favour and forbearance for certain of his brethren in Suffolk, saying, it would be much against them to require these things. "Sir," replied the king," you shew yourself to be uncharitable. We have taken pains, and in the end have concluded on unity and uniformity; and you, forsooth, must prefer the credit of a few private men, before the peace * Barlow's Account, p. 163. + He might with propriety have asked, Why may not any other sign be used in baptism, as well as the sign of the cross? If it had been said, Because our Saviour was crucified upon the cross; he might have inquired of what shape or figure was the Saviour's cross; lest, in making the sign of it, they should not make the sign of that cross, but of some other. And how shall we know the exact figure of our Saviour's cross? The original word, as used in the New Testament, according to the opinion of the learned, signifies a stake or post, as well as a cross, Ibid. p. 164-166. |