Phillip Stubbes's Anatomy of the abuses in England in Shakspere's youth, A.D. 1583 / edited by Frederick J. Furnivall.

  • Stubbs, Philip, active 1581-1593.
Date:
1877-1882
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Phillip Stubbes's Anatomy of the abuses in England in Shakspere's youth, A.D. 1583 / edited by Frederick J. Furnivall. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    629/682 (page 91)
    whofe Hues and conuerfations they hauehad fufficient triall of, whofe foundnefle in religion, integritie of life, and godly zeale to the truth they are not ignorant of. Then the bifliops and others to whom it doth appoerteine, to examine and trie them thoroughly for their fufficiencie in learning, foundnefle in do6trine,and dexteritie in teach- ing, and finding them furnifhed with fuflicient gifts for fuch an honorable calling, to admit them, to lay their hands vppon them, and to fend them foorth (the chiefeft of them) to that congregation or church fo deftitute. Which order, if It were ftri6tly obferued and kept (as it ought to be) then fhould not fo manie run abroad in the countries to feeke linings, then fhould not churches bee peftered with infufficient minifters. Then fhould not the bifhops be fo deceiued in manie as they be. And no maruell. For how fhould the bifliop choofe but be deceiued in him, whom he neuer fawe before, whofe conuerfation he knoweth not, whofe difpofition hee is ignorant of, and ^whofe qualities and properties in generall, he fufpefteth not? Whereas If this order were eftablifhed, that euerie church deftitute of a paftor fliould prefent certeine able men, whofe conuerfation and integritie of life in euerie refpedt they perfeftly knowe (for the whole church is not likely to erre in iudging of their conuerfations, who haue been either altogither, or for the moft part conuerfant among them) then (as I fay,) fliould not the bifliop be deceiued in any, nor yet any church fcandalized with the wicked hues of their paftors (or rather depaftors) as they be. For now it is though fufficient for the certeintie of his conuerfation, if he either haue letters dimifforie from one bifliop to another (whereas they little or nothing knowe the conuerfation of the man) or elfe letters commendatorie from any gentleman, or other, efpecially if they be of any reputation. If he can get thefe things, he Is likely to fpeede, I warrant him. Which thing is fcarce well, in my iudgement. For you knowe one priuate man or two, or three, or foure may, peraduenture either write vpon affedtion, or elfe bee corrupted with bribes or gifts, whereas the whole church cannot, nor would not. Therefore is the other the furer way. ^Theod. How prooue you that the churches that are deftitute of a paftor, ought to prefent him whom they would haue admitted, to the bifliop, and not the bifliop to intrude vpon the church whom he will ? and he should ordain the best for that Church. leaf M 7, back] Now, a Bishop gets but small proof of a candidate’s fitness. [* leaf M 8] Bishops ought not to intrude their nominees on churches,