BISHOP AYLMER. 91 



such a submission would be both contrary to GooTs word, CHAP. 



VIII 

 and of great offence unto the Church. 



In May, on a Thursday, he appeared before the Com- Appears at 

 missioners at Lambeth, who told him with some threats, 

 that seeing he would not comply, he must attend them two 

 days after, and then be deprived of his ministry, (as he had 

 been of his benefice before,) and be made a layman. 



Yet they were so patient towards him, that this sentence Degraded 

 was not executed upon him until a whole year after; namely, 

 May the 14th, 1590 : when, having been divers and sundry 

 times advised and commanded to submit himself unto the 

 former sentences, and to the Queen s laws, in the observa 

 tion of the order of the book, but he had refused and de 

 nied to yield thereunto ; wherefore on the same day, for the 

 said contempt and disobedience, (as the instrument of the 

 sentence ran,) the nature and merits of this cause being first 

 duly considered, he was by sentence in writing degraded 

 and deposed from the ministry by these Commissioners pre 

 sent ; viz. Whitgift, Archbishop of Canterbury, Mr. Se 

 cretary Wolley, Mr. Fortescu, the Lord Chief Justice of 

 the Common Pleas, the Lord Chief Baron, Dr. Aubrey, 

 the Dean of Westminster, the Attorney General, Dr. Co- 

 sin, Archdeacon Redman, Dr. Stanhop, Dr. Lewin, Dr. 

 Bancroft. At this meeting the Archbishop told him, that 

 if he would not conform himself and be obedient to law, 

 they would deprive him of his ministry. Cawdry answered, 

 that he never denied to conform himself so far as he was 

 bound by law, and as a Minister of God in conscience was 

 bound to do. Upon this, the Commissioners 1 Proctor said he 

 was deprived for speaking against the Book of Common 

 Prayer. Cawdry answered, it was not true ; for that it ap 

 peared in his answer to the Articles upon his oath, that it 

 was for speaking against an inconvenience that came by the 

 book : but, added he, that if it were so in the worst manner 

 that they could take it, yet it was no deprivation by law for 

 the first offence ; and that he should have been indicted at 

 the next assizes after, which he was not, and therefore clear 

 by statute. 



