Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

for thirty-two persons to reform the ecclesiastical laws. These were, the archbishops, the bishops of London, Winchester, Ely, Exeter, Gloucester, Bath, and Rochester. The eight divines were, Taylor, Cox, Parker, Latimer, Cook, Peter Martyr, Cheek, John Álasco. The eight civilians were, Peter, Cecyl, Smith, Taylor of Hadley, May, Trayhern, Lyell, Skinner. The eight common lawyers were Hales, Bromley, Goodrick, Gosnald, Stamford, Caryl, Lucas, Brook.

This, it seems, brought Peter Martyr from Oxford to London in March, 1552. And on the 8th of that month, he wrote to Bullinger from Lambeth, being lodged with the archbishop. He tells him, "that the king did earnestly press the bishops, that since the papal authority was cast out of this church, the ecclesiastical laws might be so reformed, that none of the papal decrees might continue to be of any authority in the bishops' courts; and that another body of laws ought to be compiled for them. He had therefore appointed two-and-thirty persons to set about it, of which number he himself was one. He says, the greater number of them were persons both eminently learned and truly pious in this he desires both their advices and their prayers. This work must be so prepared as to receive a confirmation in parliament; in which he foresaw some difficulties." It seems that this number was thought too great to bring any thing to a good conclusion, or these persons had not all the same views: for soon after, on the 9th of November after this, a new commission was ordered to be made out to eight persons for preparing the same work *. These were, the archbishop, the bishop of Ely, Doctor Cox, Peter Martyr, Taylor, May, Lucas, Goodrick. Strype tells us, he saw the digest of the ecclesiastical laws written out by the archbishop's secretary: the title being prefixed to each chapter, with an index of the chapters in the archbishop's own hand. In many places there are corrections. and additions in his hand, and some lines are scored out: some of them were also revised by Peter Martyr: the seventh chapter in the title de Præscriptionibus is all written by Peter Martyr. Several chapters are added to the first draught, which is probably that which was prepared in King Henry's time. There was a later and more perfect draught of this work prepared for King Edward, which coming into Fox's hands, he printed it in the year 1571: the differences between the two draughts, as Mr. Strype assures us, are not very material. But all this was brought to no conclusion.

* Life of Cranmer, b. i, c. 30.

I find somewhat to be added concerning the duke of Somerset's tragical death, in a letter that one John ab Ulmis, a Switzer, then in England, wrote from Oxford, the 4th of December, 1552, to Bullinger. That the duke of Somerset was censured, as having been too gentle to the Lady Mary, in conniving at her mass. But when he proposed the doing that in council, the earl of Warwick answered, "The mass is either of God or of the devil. If it is of God, we ought all to go to it. If it is of the devil, why should it be connived at in any person?' Yet still the gentleness of the duke of Somerset made him suffer it to go on. But now, he adds, since the earl of Warwick had the greatest share in the government, he had put her priests in prison, and had given strict orders to suffer no mass to be said in her house.

He tells one remarkable particular in the duke of Somerset's trial: "That after he was found guilty of the conspiracy against the earl of Warwick (upon which the people expressed a great concern), the earl of Warwick addressed himself to the duke, and told him, That now, since by the law he was adjudged to die, he, as he had saved him formerly, so he would not now be wanting to serve him, how little soever he expected it from him. He desired him, therefore, to fly to the king's mercy, in which he promised he would faithfully serve him. Upon this the duke did petition the king; and it was hoped that he would reconcile those two great men, and that by this means the duke of Somerset should be preserved."

It seems there was some treaty about his pardon. For though he was condemned on the 1st of December, he was not executed till the 22d of January. What made it to be respited so long, and yet executed at last, does not appear. It is probable it was from a management of the duke of Northumberland's, who, by the delay, did seem to act in his favour, that so he might be covered from the popular odium, which he saw his death was like to bring upon him; and, at the same time, by the means of some who had credit with the king, he possessed him with so bad an opinion of the duke of Somerset, that he, looking on him as an implacable man, capable of black designs, resolved to let the sentence be executed upon him.

In the same letter he gives an instance of Hooper's impartial zeal in the discharge of his function in his diocess: that, while he was censuring some inferior people for their scandalous life, one said to him, "We poor people must do penance for these things, while great and rich men, as guilty as we, are overlooked. Upon that, he said, Name any per

son, how great soever, that was guilty of adultery, so that it should be proved against him, and he would leave himself in their hands, to be used by them as they pleased, if he did not proceed equally against all. So, in a few days, Sir Anthony Kingston, a great man in those parts, being accused of adultery, he cited him into his court: he, for some time, refused to appear. At last he came; and when the bishop was charging his sin severely upon him, he gave him very foul language, and at last fell to beat him. This was presently followed so severely, that he was fined in 5004 and forced to submit to do penance."

This raised the bishop's character, as it contributed not a little to establish his authority in his diocess. He set himself to his duty there with so much zeal, that his wife, who was a German, wrote to Bullinger, praying him to write to her husband to take a little more care of himself: for he preached commonly thrice, sometimes four times in one day. The crowds of those who came constantly to hear him, made him look on them as persons that were hungering for the word of life. So she, apprehending that his zeal made him labour beyond his strength, studied to get others to put some stop to that, which, it seems, she could not prevail with him so far as to restrain.

About this time, the bishops and divines were employed in the review of the Common Prayer; but I have met with nothing new with relation to that matter, save that, on the 6th of May, 1551, there was an order of council for preserving peace sent to all the cathedrals, at least to that of Exeter, for it is in that register. And on the 18th of January there was a commission issued out for the repressing of heresy, and for observing the Common Prayer. And on the 27th of October, 1552, the council-book mentions also a letter written to the lord chancellor, to add, in the edition of the new Common Prayer Book, a declaration, touching kneeling at the receiving the communion.

It remains that I give the best account I can of the Articles of Religion. It seemed to be a great want that this was so long delayed, since the old doctrine had still the legal authority of its side. One reason of delaying the publishing them probably was, that the king, in whose name and by whose authority they were to be published, might be so far advanced in years, and out of the time of pupillage, that they might have the more credit, and be of the more weight. For though it was a point settled in law, that the king's authority was at all ages the same, yet the world would still make a difference in their regard to things passed VOL. III, PART I.

Z

while he was a child, and those things authorized by him when he was in the sixteenth year of his age.

The first impression of these Articles appeared with a title apt to make one think they had been agreed on in the convocation. It runs thus in English, "Articles which were agreed to in the synod of London, in the year 1552, by the Bishops and other Godly and Learned Men, to root out the Discord of Opinions, and establish the Agreement of true Religion." But there is reason to believe that no such articles were offered to the convocation. Weston objected afterwards to Cranmer, that he had set forth a catechism in the name of the synod of London; and yet, said he, there be fifty, which, witnessing that they were of the number of the convocation, never heard one word of this Catechism. And in a long and much-laboured sermon of Brooks, preached at St. Paul's Cross in November 1553, there is an intimation that makes it indeed probable, that the Ai icles were brought into the upper house of convocation. For when he complains that they were set forth as allowed by the clergy, he adds, Whereas the convocation, without all doubt (for the lower house at least), was never made privy thereto. That reserve seems to make it probable that they were brought into the upper house. In the first impression of the Articles, the Catechism is printed first before the Articles. So this is to be understood of that whole book, which is indeed a very small one.

When this was objected to Cranmer, he answered, "I was ignorant of the setting to of that title; and as soon as I had knowledge thereof, I did not like it. Therefore, when I complained thereof to the council, it was answered by them, that the book was so entitled, because it was set forth in the time of the convocation." In the interrogatories that were afterwards exhibited to him, in order to his final censure, the seventh ends thus, "That he did compile and caused to be set abroad divers books." The last part of his answer to that was, "As for the Catechism, the book of Articles, with the other book against Winchester, he grants the same to be his doings."

It is true, in the first convocation, under Queen Mary, when the prolocutor charged Philpot with this, that a Catechism was put forth without their consent, he answered on the sudden, that the house had granted an authority to make ecclesiastical laws to certain persons to be appointed by the king's majesty. And what was set forth by them might be well said to be done in the synod of London, although the house had no notice thereof before the promulgation. But

Weston also said, "That the Catechism beareth the title of the last synod before this, although many of them who were then present were never made privy thereof in setting it forth." So that both Weston and Philpot agree that the book was never brought before the convocation. In this matter, Philpot, as he could not deny the fact, so he made use of the best answer that then occurred to him, without considering that the convocation had not agreed to any such deputation of thirty-two persons. For that was settled by an act of parliament; nor did the deputation relate to matters of doctrine, but only to the canons and proceedings in the ecclesiastical courts. For, as it was a revival of the acts passed in King Henry's time, so it run in the same strain with them. These evidences make it plain that the Articles of Religion did not pass in convocation. We have Cranmer's own word for it, that he drew them; and that he, who was always plain and sincere, did not approve of that deceitful title, that was prefixed to them to impose upon the unwary vulgar. He also owns that they were his doings. One reason, that may seem probable for his not offering them to the convocation, might be, that he had observed, that many made a difference between obeying orders already made, and the consenting beforehand to the making of them: a greater degree of authority and evidence seemed necessary for the one than for the other. Besides, that the offering things to debate, while it was free to argue on either side of the question, might carry some to engage themselves so far, that they could not after that submit with any decency. This, as far as I can judge, seems to be Cranmer's reason for not offering the articles to be debated and passed in convocation.

But now that they were to be published with authority, that was to be done in the king's name. So a very few days before the king's death, he sent a mandate to Cranmer to publish the Articles, and to cause them to be subscribed. This was done pursuant to the archbishop's motion to the king and council; for he had desired, "That all bishops might have authority from him to cause all their preachers, archdeacons, deans, prebendaries, parsons, vicars, curates, with all their clergy, to subscribe the said Articles. And he trusted that such a concord and quietness in religion should shortly follow thereon, as else is not to be looked for in many years. God shall thereby be glorified, his truth shall be advanced, and your lordships (for he writes it to the privy council) shall be rewarded of him, as the setters forward of his true word and gospel." Dated from Ford, the 24th of November. It seems they were prepared some time before

« ZurückWeiter »