8.5
MATTHEW W R E N, D. D.
to use any preaching or expounding, or to hold any lecturing, otherwise thanthe Church required it, without express Allowance from the Bishop. But healso faith, that these Directions were never personally directed by him to thesaid Officials, or any account expected. Neither did he ever deny to any,that in due Manner or Order, desired to have his Allowance for any preach-ing.
He further faith, that the Enquiry in his Articles being, whether the After-noon Sermons were turned into catechising by Question and Answer, whereand whensoever there was no great Cause apparent to the contrary. This En-quiry was inserted by him verbatim out of a Paper of Instructions given bythe King unto the Lord Archbiffiop of Canterbury, concerning certain Ordersto be put in Execution by the several Bishops of his Province; a Copy ofwhich Instructions, with the King’s Name subscribed thereunto, was pub-lickly delivered to this Defendant upon the Day of his Consecration at Lam-beth, whereby he, as all other Bishops of both Provinces were, was also re-quired to give an Account in writing every Year concerning the same In-structions, according to his Majesty's Command, practised in the Time ofArchbiffiop Abbot also, to the Performance of all which this Defendant hum-bly conceiveth, that he was bound by two Oaths administered unto him, andone of the King’s Supremacy, the other of canonical Obedience. He alsodenieth, that he did not allow the Ministers to expound, or open the Ca-techism to the People. Only he enquired, whether the catechising weretruly and sincerely performed without Mockery, or in Shew only. As notapproving, that any Minister should in Word, pretend to give Obedience tothe King’s Injunction, but then in Effect, should elude and make a Mock ofthe fame. As for taking Care and Pains in the catechising, thereby to makethe simple and ignorant to learn not only the Words, but also the Proprietyand Meaning thereof, and to understand the Sense of what they said, this hehighly commended, and in particular to many himself gave Direction, howthey should do it to the best Behalf and Edification of the poor People. Mr.
bVhite of- — - - hath reported to others, that this Defendant gave not only
Allowance, but also Direction and Charge to them, to expound the Wordsof the Catechism j he therefore believeth, that no Man was ever questioned forexpounding the same.
He further faith, that he did direct, that the laid catechising should beperformed according to the Catechism of the Church of England only, whichCatechism is by the Law of the Land in the Rubricks of the Service-bookproposed, as the Rule of Examination for the Bishop to go by, and is thebest Form that ever was compiled for laying the Foundation and Groundsof Religion in the Hearts and Minds of unlearned Christians. He consideredjdso, that the great Variety of Catechisms, which every Man did in formerTime thrust out at his Pleasure, did distract and corrupt the Minds of theFeople more than any Thing else, sowing in them the Seeds both of Erroraiid Faction. And he conceived it an unreasonable Thing, that in theChurch any catechising should be publickly practised, but according to theCatechism which the Church of England in her Liturgy al lo we th. The dueObservation whereof was so far from suppressing Knowledge, or introducing■Ignorance, that the Defendant is humbly confident, it produced the quitecontrary Effects. For, some godly, and laborious Ministers (by Name, as*! e remembereth, one Mr. Crackenthoyr, then Parson of Burton-magna in Suf-and another of his neighbour Diocese with him, Men otherwise un-known to this Defendant) came to visit him, and told him, that they blessed,’od f° r the good Success, which upon half a Year’s Experience they had foundtlei ein, prosoffing that their People had sensibly profited more by this cate-
Z chising