teresting relic, previously quoted by Mr. Maskell (Mon. Rit. I. cciii.). It is an aspersio, or service for sprinkling holy water, consisting of the following antiphon with the first verse of our 51st Psalm, as is usual in the Latin aspersio, but all in the vernacular :

'Remember youre promys made yn baptym,
And Chrystys mercyfull bloudshedyng;
By the wyche most holy sprynklyng

Off all youre syns youe haue fre perdun.'

This is written in a vellum MS. of the Sarum Breviary (now in the Salisbury Chapter Library), which was begun about 1440. And this English service, of which Mr. Kingdon gives a photograph in his pamphlet, was penned (as our chief experts agree) about 1470, certainly not later than 1490. It is carefully written, with musical notation on four lines, which proves that it was intended for public use. Mr. Kingdon shows that Latimer probably saw the book when it was at Arlingham and adopted the service for use in his diocese in the following century.

Although we may not be very sanguine in our hopes of furt! er treasures of this kind being turned up, yet such discoveries are by no means beyond the bound of possibility or even likelihood. At all events we maintain that we have before us already a highly interesting collection of material which bears witness to the religious cravings of the less learned people of England for prayers intelligible to themselves, in the fifteenth century and before it.

ART. VII.-TWO SCOTTISH BISHOPS.

1. Memoir of Bishop Folly. By the Rev. W. WALKER. (Edinburgh, 1878.)

2. Memoir of Bishop Gleig. By the Rev. W. Walker. (Edinburgh, 1876.)

3. History of the Scottish Church. By M. KINLOCH. (Edinburgh, 1874.)

IT is a truism to say that the history of the Church of Scotland is unique. Miss Kinloch's little book, though in appear

ance designed for children, is in fact most carefully written under the guidance of the great Bishop Forbes, of Brechin, and thus may be taken as one of our best authorities and guides. It is concerned only with the pre-Reformation Church, and is a most melancholy record of corruption and violence, interspersed with very few of the soft green isles' that refresh us in the most evil times. First, the native Church of S. Columba became corrupt and savagely ignorant in the hands of the later Culdees, until the renovation by S. Margaret; and then the Roman system proved equally incapable of restraining the fiercer and grosser passions of people and clergy alike.

In point of fact, Scotland was too remote to be easily reached either by the central discipline or by European public opinion, which could only come to her through England or France. Her best times were during the friendly alliance that subsisted with little intermission from the days of S. Margaret till 'Alexander our king was dead;' and we hope our Northern readers will not close our volume in horror and indignation, when we say that in spite of all our love of Border ballad and adventure, in spite of having gloried in Bannockburn and grieved for Flodden, in spite of Flowers of the Forest,' and 'Scots wha hae wi' Wallace bled,' it is our deliberate conviction that the worst thing that ever befel Scotland was Bruce's success. It cut her off from all chance of improvement from the only country that could improve her, and it pent up her fierce nobility in a space where they could do nothing but rend one another to pieces, and destroy their king the moment he became efficient. Further, enmity to England threw Scotland into the arms of France. Thence came her architecture, her culture, her opinions, and what civilization she ever had, and there her young men found their chief opening, both for study and adventure. Now, not only was France unfortunately far out of reach, but her own standard of religion and morality had never recovered from the slough into which Philip the Fair had plunged it. In the great schism, Scotland held, with the French, by the Avignon Popes, who were of necessity more needy, more rapacious, more unscrupulous, and more heedless of discipline than their Roman rivals. Thus the degradation of the Church was almost unchecked, save for a short time, by the influence of James I. and the good Bishop Kennedy. Bishoprics and Abbeys were the prey of savage younger sons of the nobility, who used their resources by turns in violence and licentiousness; vice walked abroad shameless and unchecked in all ranks; cruelty, injustice, and ferocity

were the heritage of the nobles, and any endeavour on the part of the Kings to restrain them was instantly met by rebellion and murder, till the history of the House of Stuart may almost be summed up by the lines:

'Come, let us sit upon the ground,

And tell sad stories of the deaths of kings.'

Even the Kings who most bravely strove against violence and injustice were, with the one noble exception of James I., leaders in all habits of licence and dissipation. How callous public feeling must have been to the grossest outrages on the laws of the Church is shown by the fact that the favourite pupil of Erasmus was a boy-Archbishop of S. Andrews, illegitimate son of James IV., with whom he died on Flodden field while still under the age for consecration.

The most corrupt branch of the Western Church thus existed among the most intelligent people, and it was the natural consequence that the reaction should be terrible. The keen logical Scottish mind accepted no medium. It went at once from one pole to the other, and its refuge from corrupt Roman Catholicism was in the strongest Calvinism. Selfinterest and rapacity aided and maintained the work that zeal had begun, and the Church was absolutely swept away by one simultaneous national movement in the absence and minority of the helpless young queen. With that destruction, in 1569, Miss Kinloch concludes her history. The old Church of Scotland was overthrown, and only existed here and there among a few noble families and their retainers, and among the Highland clans.

Through Queen Mary and her French connection, these adherents to the old Communion became, of course, identified with the cause of Rome. The main body of the people were at that time too ignorant for anything more than the violent iconoclasm which was sure to be the Nemesis of the Second Commandment, and relief at their deliverance from the exactions of the clergy. The English Prayer-Book (the Second Book of Edward VI.) was at first introduced, but Knox had already proclaimed his hostility to that form of worship at Frankfort, and the Genevan order prevailed for an entire generation. During this time, the metaphysical reasonings of Calvinism, and the education which had been made part and parcel of the Establishment, had done much to win the people. Their acute minds were for the first time really fed, and no doubt this, as well as their strong national spirit, and the avarice of the nobles, tended to cause the vehement and jealous

support of the Genevan doctrine that has ever since characterized the nation.

Between 1569 and 1612 there had been time for the Episcopal succession to die out, and for a generation to arise who only remembered the Church of their fathers in ribald songs, or as the communion to which belonged Queen Mary and those Highlanders who were still the terror of the South. When James I. made the first attempt at reviving Episcopacy, and Charles I. at restoring a Liturgy and due administration of the Sacraments, the work might be reckoned as an utter failure. However much faction and intrigue may have contributed to excite the fanatic resistance to 'Prelacy,' such resistance was a fact, and did much to precipitate the ruin of the Royal cause in England. All that was gained was the compilation of the Scottish Prayer-Book, under the superintendence of Laud, and that, as it afterwards proved, was an immense step. There, however, the Liturgy lay a dead letter. The Scottish Royalists were either Romanist or Presbyterian. Even Montrose had signed the Covenant, and though reckoned as having betrayed that cause he was not, like his English fellow cavaliers, fighting for Church as well as King; and, as we all know, the supporters of Charles II. were the strongest of Covenanters.

The next attempt to restore the Church seemed beyond all measure inauspicious and unlikely to succeed. It was not dictated by conscience, like that of Charles I., and, as we may fairly believe, that of James I. likewise; for such faith as Charles II. possessed would have made him strive for the revival of the Roman Catholic system. So far as can be judged, what actuated him was the belief that a Covenanter could never be a submissive subject, and that the doctrine of passive obedience would be inculcated by an Episcopal ministry. Still worse, the first new Prelate was a deserter from the Presbyterian cause. There is no need to enter into the question whether James Sharpe was honestly convinced of the errors of Calvinism and of the truth of Church doctrine. However that may be, it was strange to make the ambassador of the Presbyterians the first Archbishop of S. Andrews. By such acceptance, he may be almost said to have provoked his fate.

Then came Charles's imitations of the dragonnades of Louis XIV. They were equally savage, and had not the plea of sincerity. Perhaps they are the most distressing and humiliating facts that a member of our Communion has to recollect in connection with the history of our Church; and

there can be no doubt that the victims often showed the genuine spirit of martyrdom. It is true, indeed, that some instances have been exaggerated, and that Professor Aytoun has established the claim of Claverhouse to be a gallant and loyal gentleman: but alas! the whole history of persecution shows that a gallant and loyal gentleman can only too easily learn to think ferocity a part of his duty. During the twenty years of the 'killing time,' as it was called, it had, however, been possible to arrange the Scottish hierarchy; and since many of the gentry who had accepted the new order of things out of loyal obedience had become attached to it, no doubt there were many who rejoiced to have something else to fall back upon besides the alternative between Calvin and the Pope.

Thus Episcopacy in Scotland was sufficiently strong to have rendered William III. willing to accept it both for the sake of uniformity, and because of its power of making good subjects. The difficulty was that the Scottish Church would not acknowledge him. The oath of allegiance of the Bishops was, 'I do promise to be true and faithful to the King and to his heirs,' and they could not hold themselves free to accept the choice of the nation in lieu of hereditary right. It seems as if it had been this noble, upright faithfulness that wiped out the stains connected with the first introduction of Episcopacy. If it had been brought in by the strong hand of the State, it stood against the strong hand of the State. William III. simply left the clergy to their fate, and the greater number of them were harshly and cruelly driven out of their homes, not by their own flocks, but by Cameronians in their hour of triumph. About two hundred were thus ejected, and condemned to the utmost poverty and misery, and in two years more Presbyterianism was established as the religion of the State by Act of Parliament in 1690.

Still there were many Episcopal clergy in possession of their churches, and it was declared that such as would take the oaths, and use the prayers for William and Mary, should remain. Informers were not slow to drive out those who refused, and the Scottish Privy Council forbade these ejected priests to perform any office of the ministry. Of course, as they did not acknowledge the authority of the Government, they persevered at all costs, and said prayers in their own houses with the doors open, baptized children, and underwent the penalties of fine, imprisonment, or exile. The persecution they thus suffered made their adherents the more warmly attached to them, and, almost as a matter of course, a Jacobite who was not a Roman Catholic was an Episcopalian.