PAR 
nation, “ that it was their duty, in theif prefent circum- 
ftances, to break oft' from the public churches, and to af- 
femble, as they had opportu-nity, in private houfes, or 
elfewhere, to worfhip God in a manner that might not 
offend againft the light of their confciences.” It was alfo 
debated among them, whether they fhould ufe as much 
of the Common Prayer and Service of the Church, as 
was not offenfive ; or refolve at once to fet up what they 
confidered to be the pureft and belt form of worfliip, molt 
confonant to the holy fcriptures, and to the practice of 
the foreign reformers. The latter of thefe meafures 
was concluded upon ; and accordingly, they laid afide the 
Englilh Liturgy, and made ufe of the Geneva Service- 
Book. Thus commenced the formal feparation of the 
Protellant Nonconformifts from the Church of England : 
“a molt unhappy event of this controverfy,” fays Mr. 
Strypej “ whereby people of the fame country, of the 
fame religion, and of the fame judgment in do&rine, 
parted communions ; one part being obliged to go apart 
into fecret houfes and chambers, to ferve God by them- 
felves, which begat ftrapgenefs between neighbours, 
Chriftians, and Proteftants.” “And not only llrange- 
nefs,” adds Mr. Neal, “ but unfpeakable tnifchiefs to the 
nation in this and the following reigns. The breach 
might eafily have been made up at firlf, but it widened 
by degrees ; the paftions of the contending parties in- 
creafed, till the fire, which for fome years was burning 
under ground, broke out into a civil war, and with un¬ 
fpeakable fury deftroyed the conllitution both of church 
and ftate. At whole door the beginning of thefe forrows 
are to be laid,” the impartial reader will be at no lofs in 
determining. 
In the year 1567, the archbifhop founded three gram¬ 
mar- fcholarlhips, or exhibitions, in Benne’t-college ; and 
two years afterwards, feven more fcholarlhips, and two 
fellowlhips, in the fame hcufe. In 1568, a new folio 
edition of the Englilh Bible was publilhed, chiefly under 
the infpeflion of archbilhop Parker, with a preface writ¬ 
ten by him. This was commonly called the Bijhops' 
Bible, on account of its having been revifed and cor¬ 
rected, principally by bilhops, from the tranllation pub- 
lifhed by Cranmer; and it was made ufeofin the churches, 
till the laft tranllation took place in the reign of James 
I. About the year 157a, archbilhop Parker gave hand- 
fome prefents of plate, and other benefactions, to feveral 
colleges in the univerlity of Cambridge; and founded a 
fcholarlhip for the lludy of the law, and another for 
the ftudy of phyiic. In 1574, he prefented many 
volumes to the library of the univerlity of Cambridge, 
of which twenty-five were valuable manufcripts; and 
he gave additional benefactions to Corpus-Chrilfi col¬ 
lege- . ... 
One of the laft public afits in which his grace was em¬ 
ployed, was a metropolitical vifitation of the diocefe of 
Winchefter, and in particular of the I fie of Wight, in 
the year 1575, in which he exercifed fuch feverities as 
expofed him to univerfal odium, and even induced the 
court to interfere and reverfe his proceedings. That 
ifland being a place of refort for foreign proteltants, and 
fea-faring perfons of all countries and religions, many of 
whom were Calvinifts, it had been judged expedient by 
government not to be fo ftriCt on the fubjeCts of the ha¬ 
bits and ceremonies, as in other places, left the commerce 
of the country fhould fuff a in an injury. But fuch confi- 
derations had no weight with Parker, who was determined 
to enforce a ftriCt conformity throughout the ifland. 
Accordingly, when he came thither, he deprived all the 
clergy who refufed fubmiflion, confiding of the greater 
part of that body, and Ihut up their churches. The in¬ 
habitants, greatly concerned at this difplay of intempe¬ 
rate zeal, fenta complaint againft the prelate to the earl 
of Leicefter, who laid it before the queen. The bifhop 
of Winchefter, likewife, tranfmitied a remonftrance to 
court, againft the inquifitorial proceedings of the arch¬ 
bishop in his diocefe. Thefe complaints were inveftigated 
K J2 R, oos 
at the council, who declared their difapprobation of the 
archbifhop’s condufit, and advifed her majefty that eccle- 
fiaftical matters fhould be placed in the Ifle of Wight upon 
their former footing. This was done accordingly ; and, 
when Parker came next to court, the queen not only re¬ 
ceived him very coldly, but declared her difpleafure at hi* 
unfeafonable feverities. Full of refentment at the recep¬ 
tion which he had met with, and the interference of the 
earl of Leicefter, and fome others, in this bufinefs, the 
archbifhop wrote an angry letter to the lord treafurer, in 
which he expreffed his difcontent at the oppofition made 
to his meafures, difclaimed all concern in the prefent po¬ 
licy of the court, and declared the church and ftate to be 
in danger of difl'olution, from the countenance given to 
the Puritans. 
Archbifhop Parker now rapidly declined in his health, 
and fuftered much from attacks of the ftone and ftran- 
gury ; a violent paroxyfm of which carried him off in 
May 1575, when he was in the feventy-firft year of hi* 
age. He was buried, with great magnificence and fo- 
lemnity, in his own private chapel at Lambeth, under a 
tomb ereCted by himfelf; which remained there till 1648, 
when colonel Scot, having purchafed that palace for a 
manfion-houfe, pulled down the tomb, and fcandaloufly 
abufed the remains of the prelate, by directing them to 
be thrown into a hole near an outhoufe where poultry 
were kept, while he difpofed of the leaden coffin which 
had contained them to a plumber. Some time after the 
reftoration they were decently re-interred in the place 
where the monument had ftood, which was again ereCted 
to his mpmory, 
Archbifhop Parker has the honour to rank among the 
principal agents in expofing the fuperftitions of popery, 
and in placing the proteftant religion on a permanent 
footing in England. It is to be lamented, however, that 
he fullied this honour, by introducing in proteftantifm 
much of the ecclefiaftical pride, and tyrannical perfecu- 
ting fpirit, of the church from which he feparated. It is 
juftly obferved by Dr. Warner, that a general character 
of him cannot be given, which will accord with the 
former and latter part of his life, fince he was fo different 
a man in thofe two periods. In the former part of his 
life, he had behaved with remarkable good temper, as a 
modeft humble man ; and the great unwillingnefs with 
which he accepted the primacy, lhows that he entertained 
a deep fenfeof the duties of the epifcopal office, and that 
he was then uninfluenced by avarice or ambition : but, 
when he wasinvefled with the archiepifcopal dignity, he 
loft all his former humblenefs of mind, and afl'umed high 
notions of authority both in church and ftate: he be¬ 
came as rough and uncourtly in his behaviour towards 
thofe who had bufinefs with him, as he was flaviffi in hi* 
obedience to the prerogative and fupremacy. The queen 
had once told him, that he had a fupreme ecclefiaftical 
authority in himfelf, which feems to have fired him with 
ambition, to fee what great things he could do for the 
church ; and he appears to have thought, that his belt 
method of rendering fervice to it, would be by enforcing 
an uniformity of opinion and worfliip; forgetting that, 
upon the fame principles, the popiffi perfecutions might 
have been defended. His religion feems to have almoft 
wholly confifted in a fervile fubmiflion to the queen’s 
injunctions, and in regulating the public fervice of the 
church ; for, while he was expending his zeal, and time, 
and labour, in fuppreffing Puritanifm, he appears to have 
taken little care to reform the lives and manners of his 
clergy; of which many complaints were made in parlia¬ 
ment, in pamphlets, and in converfation. Neal remarks, 
that “ his grace had too little regard for public virtue; 
his entertainments and feaftings being chiefly on the 
Lord’s day : nor do we read, among his epifcopal quali¬ 
ties, of his diligent preaching or pious example. Fuller 
calls him a parlter indeed, careful to keep the fences, and 
Ihut the gates of difeipline, againft all fuch night-ftealers 
as would invade the lame; and indeed this was his chief 
excellence,” 
