to ridicule and affront a proud hierarchy endowed with large legal means of doing mischief, and not wanting in will to exercise those powers to the full." "They were the attempt of wit," says Mr. Arber, " to fight (though at desperate odds) against cruelty for permission to worship God according to the dictates of conscience. The Martinist attack was the New School of young Radicals attacking the Old School of aged Conservatives. And this partly explains why there was no compromise sought out by the bishops. They were too old to change, so they stood stiffly to their legal rights, and contemned anything like public opinion." How the Martinist books could ever be called "blasphemous" passes all comprehension. Let those who have formed an unfavourable opinion in regard to them. read the noble exhortation at the end of the Epistle. Conclusion of the Epistle.-Now M. Prelates I will giue you some more counsell, follow it. Repent cleargie men, and especially bishopps, preach fayth Bb, and sweare no more by it, giue ouer your Lordly callings: reform your families and your children They are the patterne of loosenesse, withstand not the knowen trueth no longer: you haue seduced her Maiestie and hir people. Praye her Maiestie to forgiue you, and the Lord first to put away your sinnes. Your gouernment is Antichristian, deceiue the Lord no longer thereby: You will grow from euil to worse vnlesse betimes you return. You are now worse than you were 29. yeeres ago: write no more against the cause of reformation: Your vngodlinesse is made more manifest by your writings: And because you cannot answer what hath bene written against you, yeeld vnto the trueth. If you should write, deale syllogistically: For you shame your selues, when you vse any continued speach, because your stile is so rude and barbarous. Raile no more in the pulpitt against good men, you do more hurt to your selues, and your owne desperat cause, in one of your rayling sermons, then you could in speaking for reformation. For euerie man that hath any light of religion in him will examine your groundes, which being found ridiculous (as they are) will be decided, and your cause made odious. Abuse not the high commission as you do, against the best subiects. The commission it selfe was ordained for very good purposes, but it is most horriblie abused by you, and turned cleane contrarie to the ende wherefore it was ordayned. Helpe the poore people to the meanes of their saluation, that perish in their ignorance: make restitution vnto your tenants, and such as from whome you haue wrongfully extorted anything: Vsurpe no longer, the authoritie of making of ministers and excommunication: Let poore men be no more molested in your vngodly courts: Studie more than you doe, and preache oftener: Fauor nonresidents and papists no longer: labor to clense ye ministery of the swarms of ignorant guides, wherewith it hath bin defiled: Make conscience of breaking the Sabboth, by bowling and tabling: Be ringleaders of prophanenes no longer vnto the people: Take no more bribes: Leaue your Symonie: Fauor learning more than you doe, and especially godly learning: Stretch your credit if you haue any, to the furtherance of the gospell: You haue ioyned the prophanation of the magistracie to the corruption of the ministerie: Leaue this sinne. All in a word, become good Christians, and so you shall become good subiects, and leaue your tyrannie. And I would aduise you, let me here no more of your euill dealing. Giuen at my Castle between two wales, neither foure dayes from penilesse benche, nor yet at the West ende of Shrofftide but the foureteenth yeare at the least of the age of Charing crosse, within a yeare of Midsommer, betwene twelue and twelue of the clocke. Anno pontificatus vestri Quinto, and I hope vltimo of all Englishe Popes. By your learned and worthie brother, MARTIN MARPRELATE. NOTES WHO WAS MARTIN MARPRELATE? The authorship of the Martin Marprelate tracts is enveloped in almost as much obscurity as that of the celebrated letters of Junius. It is a mystery how they ever got into print, a mystery still greater how Martin fought, and continued to fight, as he did, behind his closed visor, defeating the rage of the bishops and the vigilance of their scouts, while the secret of his identity was never rifled from him. Suspicion fell upon John Penry and John Udal. Strype says Penry "was reckoned the chief publisher, if not author, of those scandalous libels under the name of Martin Marprelate." Penry was imprisoned on the charge of being the author of Hay any Worke for Cooper? but, in the absence of evidence sufficient to convict him, he was released after a month's confinement. By painstaking collation of evidence, and by a "process of exhaustion," Mr. Arber has arrived at the conclusion that John Penry and Job Throckmorton were the joint authors of the Epistle and other Martinist tracts. "Penry has long been known in our literary history. Henceforth Throckmorton must be placed by his side. The two together are the most eminent prose satirists of the Elizabethan age." "It is indubitable that John Penry was the managing director, the soul,' of this [Martinist] attack." It is right to say that Mr. Arber holds a very singular position in attributing to Penry the authorship of those tracts. The majority of those who have written upon this period, whether their sympathies are Anglican or Puritan, concur in admitting that Penry was not Martin Marprelate. "There is nothing in Penry's character or his writings that gives any countenance to the conjecture that he was Martin Marprelate." "The persistency with which the Marprelate tracts have been ascribed to Penry is a notable instance of the recklessness with which men write history when they have a purpose to serve."-Hunt's Religious Thought, vol. i. p. 83. Even Mr. Maskell, who never scruples to use his opportunity when he can fasten a damning charge upon a Brownist, and most bitter enemy to the Church of England," says: "We must not overlook this, that no evidence was found, and also that Penry himself at the time (which I cannot give much weight to) and always after, even when about to die (when one is rather inclined to believe that he would speak the truth), denied that he had been concerned in the writing of those tracts."-Maskell's Marprelate, pp. 107, 108. 66 We think Dr. Dexter shows very strong and conclusive reasons for dissenting from Mr. Arber's opinion that Penry was the real author of the Martinist tracts. He bases his dissent upon these four grounds— 1st. There is nothing in the affidavits bearing upon the case which implies that Penry was the author. 2nd. There is nothing in the style and manner of Penry's acknowledged works that makes it probable. 3rd. It is difficult to see how Penry could have found time with all the work he had to do in writing other books. 4th. The prelates did not dare to put him on trial as the author of the Martinist tracts. 5th. Contemporary opinions acquit Penry of their authorship. 6th. Penry solemnly denied that he was the author of these tracts.1 But though not the author of Martin Marprelate's pasquinades, Dr. Dexter thinks that Penry was the publisher. He it was that owned the press and the type that were used in their production, gave out the copy to the various workmen, corrected the proofs, used to pay the printers, and "appeared to be a principall dealer in all the action everywhere." Who, then, was the author? Dr. Dexter has adventured the theory that the author was no other than Henry Barrowe, prisoner in the Fleet since 1586. We shall have occasion to advert shortly at greater length to both Penry and Barrowe, and need only say here that Dr. Dexter has succeeded in constructing an ingenious if not convincing argument in support of his contention. See Dexter's Congregationalism as seen in its Literature, pp. 196-201, and Arber's Introductory Sketch, pp. 185-196. Some impression of the effect produced in high quarters by the Martinist publications may be formed by reading section iv. of Mr. Arber's Introductory Sketch to the Martin Marprelate Controversy, containing State documents, etc. :— 1588. Lord Burghley's autographic minutes of a letter to Archbishop Whitgift on the first appearance of the Epistle. Pp. 107, 108. 1589. The Queen's proclamation against certain seditious and schismatical books and libels, etc., in which the Epistle and Epitome are undoubtedly aimed at. Pp. 109-111. Archbishop Whitgift's report to Lord Burghley of the seizure of the Martinist press near Manchester. Pp. 112, 113. Summary of the information in the hands of the Queen's Government at this date. Pp. 114–117. 1 "Argument by the Rev. H. M. Dexter, D.D., of New Bedford, Massachusetts, U.S." Printed by Mr. Arber in Introductory Sketch to the Martin Marprelate Controversy, pp. 187–189. |