Elizabethan Church Settlement: Bishop Bonner's Imprisonment & Restoration of Church, Study notes of English

Download Elizabethan Church Settlement: Bishop Bonner's Imprisonment & Restoration of Church and more Study notes English in PDF only on Docsity! THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. By JOHN F. HURST, Washington, D. C. WHEN Elizabeth came to the throne, in I558, it was uncer- tain what course she would pursue-whether that of her half- brother, Edward, or that of her half-sister, Mary. During the reign of the latter she had conformed to the Roman Catholic religion. She still heard mass, and was crowned with all the old Roman Catholic ceremonial. Bishop Bonner, however, was immediately imprisoned in the Marshalsea, London, where he was kept until his death, in 1569; the queen forbade the eleva- tion of the host in her presence; eight men of reforming views were added to the council; and the queen entertained a petition, or paper, from one of the councilors recommending (I) the restoration of the Church of England to its former purity; (2) the gradual abasement of those favorable to the late queen; (3) the giving over to the crown of the wealth of those bishops and clergy who had enriched themselves in the late reign, this to be secured by the pressure of the Praemunire statute; (4) the disregard of those who wished to carry reform farther; (5) the revision of the English Prayer Book; and (6) until this revision was accomplished the prohibition of all innovation. It was evident, therefore, that with all of Elizabeth's Roman Catholic views she had no intention whatever of keeping England in unity with the pope. Or, as Canon Perry comments on these proposals: "The main body of the nation, indifferent to the form of religion, was to be bribed by the spoil of the church, and the restoration to the crown of those sources of revenue, the alienation of which they had so grudgingly con- ceded in the late reign; while the lovers of the Reformation were to be propitiated by the restoration of the reformed worship, changed, however, in some particulars to conciliate and attract the more moderate of the Romanists."' 'History of the Church of EnZland, "Students' Series," London, I887, 6th ed., 1894, Vol. II, p. 255. 679 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY I. THE RESETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH. In 1548 Edward VI. published a new communion service in English, the same substantially as that now used.2 In I549 the first Prayer Book came forth from a committee of divines. It was based primarily on the old Latin service-books, and seconda- rily on Archbishop Hermann's Consultation, which was drawn up by Melanchthon and Bucer on the basis of Luther's Nuremberg services.3 This book was too Roman Catholic to suit Edward and some of the council; it was therefore subjected to a revision .4 The new book was published in 1552. It was more Protestant than the other, thus sacrificing much, says Perry, that succeed- ing generations of churchmen would have gladly retained.5 In the book of 1549 the direction in the delivery of the bread in the sacrament was: " And when he delivereth the sacrament of the body of Christ he shall say to everyone these words: ' The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, pre- serve thy body and soul unto everlasting life."' In the book of 1552 the words were: "And when he delivereth the bread he shall say: ' Take and eat this, in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiv- ing.'" 6 Protestants, however, considered even the second book of Edward as too Catholic. Calvin called it "intolerable stuff" and "'tolerable fooleries." It was this book which Elizabeth 2This service is given in full in appendix to CARDWELL, Two Liturgies of Edward VI. Compared, pp. 425 ff. 3 The divines who did most of the work were Cranmer (chief); Ridley; Goodryke, bishop of Ely; Holbeach, bishop of Lincoln; May, dean of St. Paul's; Dr. John Taylor, dean (afterward bishop) of Lincoln; Haynes, dean of Exeter; and Cox, the king's almoner, afterward bishop of Ely. See PROCTER, History of Book of Common Prayer, with the Sources and Rationale of its Offices, ed. of 1892, p. 268, note 4. Francis Procter was the vicar of a village in Norfolk, and this modest, but scholarly book, first printed in 1855, is an illustration of how good work makes for itself a perennial life. 4 The chief revisers were Cox, Taylor, Cranmer, and Ridley. 5 Loc. cit., Vol. II, p. 212. 6 The two Prayer Books are reprinted in full in parallel columns, with a valuable introduction by E. CARDWELL, Oxford, 3d ed., 1852. The words quoted from the second book were taken from the Liturgy of John a Lasco, a Polish nobleman and clergyman, who had established, in 1549, a foreign Protestant congregation in Lon- don. See CARDWELL, p. xxviii, note q. 680 ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH 683 in the Upper House, and it passed by a majority of only three. But the Prayer Book was at once received and used everywhere.," Immediately before this Uniformity Act was passed Parlia- ment restored to the crown its spiritual headship in an act, Janu- ary, 1559, so stringent and sweeping that it would have delighted Henry's own heart. It empowered the queen to give commis- sions to such persons as she thought fit to "visit, reform, redress, order, correct, and amend all such errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offenses, contempts, and enormities which by any man- ner of spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, or jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed, ordered, redressed, corrected, or amended." 2 It makes a limitation, however, to irresponsible judgments in that it says that nothing shall be adjudged heresy which has not already been so adjudged by the Scriptures, or by the first four councils, or by any other council which judged according to the Scriptures, or in the future by the Parliament and Convocation. This, in reality, was no safeguard to the rights of conscience, because it left the determination of what was thus condemned to the court and not to the "heretic." But it clearly showed what has already been proven, namely, the intermediate position of the Church of England, holding aloft both the Scrip- tures and the acta concilia as tests of orthodoxy, with final appeal, with true Erastian instinct, to Parliament. The act also changed the title of the queen from " supreme head" to " supreme governor"-a distinction without a difference. Elizabeth abated her authority not one jot. Injunctions were also issued forbidding, among other things, the extolling of images, clerical marriages without the permis- sion of the bishop and two justices of the peace, the wearing of vestments, except those in use under Edward, and the taking away of altars, except under the supervision of the curate and church wardens, in which case the place of the altar is to be taken by a table. Although the injunctions did not command the removal of images, it appears that in some places these, with " Parkhurst to Bullinger, May, 1559: "The book set forth in time of King Edward is now in general use throughout England." (Zurich Letters, Vol. I, pp. 29, 3I.) I2 For the text of this act see GEE and HARDY, pp. 442 ff. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY other objects of veneration, were both removed and burned.13 Matthew Parker was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury in the chapel of Lambeth Palace, December 17, I559. The Thirty- nine Articles of Religion were published in I563. Some efforts toward making the church more Protestant were thwarted. For instance, a petition of the Lower House of Convocation to the Upper House was drawn up embodying the following reforms: (l) only Sundays to be kept as holy days; (2) in church the minister to read the service with his face to the congregation, and distinctly; (3) the sign of the cross in baptism to be disused; (4) kneeling at the communion not to be obligatory; (5) a surplice is sufficient vestment for all occasions; (6) let organs be prohibited. These salutary provisions were rejected, but only by a majority of one. Another attempt toward Protestantism was the catechism of Dean Nowell, accepted by Parker and, with alterations, by the Lower House of Convocation; but for some reason it failed to get through the Upper House, to the joy of all Anglicans since. The catechism was of a Calvinistic and Puritan cast. " It would have proved a serious burden to the Church of England," says Canon Perry.14 "We may be satis- fied," says Dean Hook, "with expressing our deep sense of gratitude to the merciful Providence which has exonerated us from a burden which it would be difficult to sustain." '5 A second Book of Homilies was published in 1563, intended especially for the use of ignorant and otherwise incompetent clergy, of whom the Church of England was then full. Minis- ters held a plurality of livings; they were non-graduates and illiterate; very few had real capacity; many parishes were with- out priests at all; and a contemporary remark on the clergy of Hereford seems applicable over a wide area: " The clergy of the cathedral are said to be disreputable as well as ignorant."'6 The consecration of Parker as bishop has been made the sub- ject of fierce controversy, because on it turns the validity of the '3 HEYLIN, History of Elizabeth, p. 118; Ziirich Letters, Vol. I, p. 74. H4 History of the Church of England, "Students' Series," Vol. II, p. 280. '5 Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, Vol. IX, p. 354. 6 State Papers of Elizabeth (Domestic), Vol. XVII, p. 32. 684 ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH 685 orders, in the Catholic sense, of the Church of England. Various objections have been made to it: I. The Nag's Head fable was set forth in I603, and is to the effect that at Nag's Head Tavern, at Cheapside, Parker and other bishops were ordained in a hasty and indifferent manner, namely, by Scory placing a Bible on their heads or shoulders and saying, " Take the authority to preach the word of God sincerely."17 This fable is now recognized as such by even Roman controver- sialists. 2. The fact of the consecration in Lambeth Chapel has been denied by some on the ground of alleged irregularities in the Lambeth episcopal register. These irregularities, if they exist, can be explained by the methods of the copyists. Cooke says that there were those at the time who denied the existence of the register,'8 but the only one he quotes is Harding, the Roman Catholic antagonist of Jewel, who says: "We say to you, Mr. Jewel, show us the register of your bishop." But on turning to the original of this quotation-Cooke does not give the place-we find that Harding does not refer to the Parker register at all, and never mentions Parker, but is quoting Ter- tullian in a free translation for the purpose of impugning the apostolic succession of the Church of England: "Tell us the original and first spring of your church. Show us the register (ordinem) of your bishops continually succeeding one another from the beginning, so that the first bishop have some one of the apostles or apostolic men for his author and predecessor." '9 Harding argues against the English hierarchy on the ground that they had separated from Catholic belief, that their bishops did not have confirmation of the bishop of Rome, and that, even if they received consecration, those conferring it had no authority, and therefore the ceremony was invalid. Jewel replies that he (Jewel) was consecrated by three bishops and the metropolitan, '7 TIERNEY'S Dodd, Vol. II, appendix xlii; PERRY, Vol. II, p. 282. I8 COOKE, Historic Episcopate, New York, I896, p. 47. 19 " Edant ergo origines ecclesiar-um suarum; evolvant ordinem episcoporum suorum, ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille episcopus aliquem ex apostolis." (TERTULLIAN, De Prescript. Hcer., xxxii.) See Harding, in JEWEL, Works, Vol. III, p. 32I (Parker Soc.). THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY the identity of priest and bishop. Could the Anglicans do less ? But both churches held to the necessity of episcopal ordination for the due and safe constituting of a church. This the ordinal assumes throughout.26 4. A defect in the form of ordination, the words used being: "Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir up," as in 2 Tim. 1:6, 7. Whereas it is claimed that the name of the office or order to which the person ordained is admitted should be part of the form. But this is the exact form used in some of the Latin services of the old church, and never questioned. The essence of ordination in the Catholic sense is prayer and impo- sition of hands, and the form of words is indifferent.27 5. A defect in intention. Did the English ordinal intend to consecrate a priest or bishop in the Catholic sense ? This is the gravamen of the Roman objections. Leo XIII. says, "No," because a Catholic intention in ordination points to one who is to sacrifice the unbloody offering of the mass, and not to a minister or priest who is to consecrate elements which are sacra- mentally the body and blood of Christ and to be received spirit- ually. Everything that sets forth the "dignity and office of the priesthood in the Catholic rite has been deliberately removed from the Anglican ordinal.28 In the whole ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the sacerdotium, and of the power of consecrating and offering sacri- fice, but every trace of these things" in the Latin rites was pur- posely struck out.29 This is the vital point, and from the Roman point of view it completely vitiates English orders. The only reply from the Anglican side is to say: We intend to do what the ancient church intended to do in conferring orders, and if you require more than that, so much the worse for you. Then Rome could say: The Catholic church is a living organism, and to be part of it you must be in harmony with mediaeval and 26 For the text of the Edwardine Ordinal see CARDWELL, The Two Liturgies of Edward VI., pp. 398 ff. 27 See BRIGHTMAN, " What Objections have been Made to English Orders," Lon- don, I897, in Publications of Church Historical Society, Vol. I, pp. 153 ff. 28 LEO'S "Bull on English Orders," ? 7. '9 Ibid., ? 8. 688 ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH 689 present Christendom as well as with what you think was the ancient teaching. II. THE ATTITUDE OF THE CHURCH TOWARD CATHOLICS. If 286 people (including 46 women) perished for Protestantism under Mary-not including those who died in prison, computed at 68-204 perished for Catholicism under Elizabeth.30 Of these latter 15 are said by Milner to have died for denying the queen's spiritual supremacy, 126 for exercising the priesthood, and the others for returning to the old church or for succoring priests. This does not include those who died for real or imaginary plots, nor the 90 who died in prison, nor the I05 who were banished. " I say nothing," says Milner, " of many more who were whipped, fined (the fine for recusancy-not attending church-was ?20 a month), or stripped of their property to the utter ruin of their families. In one night 5o Catholic gentlemen in the county of Lancaster were suddenly seized and committed to prison, on account of their non-attendance at church. At the same time I find an equal number of Yorkshire gentlemen lying prisoners in York castle, on the same account, most of whom perished there. These were every week, for a twelve-month together, dragged by main force to hear the established service performed in the castle chapel." Under the pretext of treason, to which, of course, they made themselves liable for refusing to acknowledge the queen as the religious dictator of England, many of them were put to death with the horrible barbarity which the laws sanc- tioned, namely, hung, cut down alive, disemboweled, and beheaded. Tudor history has made us familiar with all this, and it is not necessary to dwell upon it; but there was one peculiar- ity of the penal processes under Elizabeth which gives her reign a bad preeminence-the universal use of torture. This was employed occasionally by her predecessors, but in her reign this 30 See full table of Marian martyrs in PERRY, Vol. II, p. 25I. For Elizabethan martyrs see BUTLER, Memoirs of English, Irish, and Scottish Catholics, Vol. I, pp. 176 ff.; LEE, Church under Queen Elizabeth, Vol. I, pp. I40 ff.; Vol. 1I, passim; BRADY, Annals of the Catholic Hierarchy in England and Scotland, Rome, 1877, pp. 37-60; MILNER, Letters to a Prebendary, ISt ed., of ten reprinted. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY horrible method of eliciting the desired information or confes- sions was employed by wholesale.31 For this persecution it cannot be denied that there was provo- cation. I. Pius V., a pope of austere morals and profound conviftions of duty, but without statesmanship or insight-still acting as though the world was yet in the twelfth century-issued a bull of excommunication against Elizabeth, February 25, I570, in which she is deprived of her crown and her subjects absolved from allegiance.32 Although this bull fell absolutely flat, and was either practically or expressly repudiated by almost every responsible Catholic in England, yet it gave occasion for untold suffering. 2. This bull gave excuse to Philip of Spain to fit out his Invincible Armada, 1588, as the Spaniards foolishly called it- armada being the Spanish name for any armed fleet. How this great enterprise of one hundred and twenty ships went to pieces against the better ships, the heavier guns, and the more trained marksmanship and seamanship of the English sailors- helped by adverse winds and storms-is a familiar story. The victory of 1588 was repeated for exactly the same reasons -barring storms- by the American victories of Manila and Santiago in I898. Here again the loyalty of the Catholics was unimpeach- able. The admiral of the English fleet was himself a Catholic- Lord Howard of Effingham-and Catholics freely offered them- selves for their country. "The very presence of such a man as Admiral Howard," says the historian Gardiner, "was a token of patriotic fervor of which Philip and the Jesuits had taken no 3' For full details see BUTLER, Vol. I, pp. I80 ff.; BURKE, Historical Portraits of the Tudor Dynasty, Vol. IV, pp. 97 ff.; LEE, Vol. II, pp. 279 ff., and elsewhere. 32 For the text of this bull in Latin and English see SANDERS, De Origine ac Pro- gressu Schismatis Anglicani, lib. iv, c. 8 (tr. by Lewis, London, 1877), first published 1585; TIERNEY, Dodd's Church History of England, Vol. III, p. ii; W. E. COLLINS, The English Reformation and its Consequences, London, I898, pp. 242 ff. The bull was rescinded by Gregory XIII., April 5, I580, so far as it bound English Catholics in their present circumstances, but was renewed by Sixtus V. on condition of the success of the Armada. For Sixtus' bull see BUTLER, Vol. I, p. I97, and for his interest in the Armada see HUBNER, Sixtus V., Vol. I, pp. 352 ff. 69o ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH 693 afterward retracted his confession, and died asserting innocence. (c) Parry, first a Protestant spy employed by the queen's min- isters, then a Catholic and a member of Parliament, where he used his influence for toleration, was arrested on a charge of a plot to assassinate the queen, wrote a confession of it-perhaps with a view to pardon-and afterward, when condemned, retracted his confession, saying it was extorted from him by dread of torture, and cried out that he " never meant to kill the queen, and that he would lay his blood upon her and his judges before God and the world;" and to this he adhered till his exe- cution, March, I585. It is no wonder that Hallam refuses to pronounce on his guilt.38 (d) John Somerville, a son-in-law of Edward Arden, a relative of Mary (Arden) Shakespeare, the mother of the dramatist, was convicted of conspiracy with his father-in-law. The plot was probably the invention of Leicester, the enemy of the Ardens.39 (e) The only plot that is well on the field of history is that of Babington, in which Mary, queen of Scots, then a prisoner at Fotheringhay, nine miles from Peter- boro, was implicated. Even of the genuineness of this plot there are grave doubts, and historians are hopelessly divided. Walsingham, one of the great men that survived Elizabeth, had reduced deception to an exact science, and it is impossible to say that the whole business was not an invention of his. A recent writer says that the " real fountain head of Babington's, or, as some have called it, Walsingham's conspiracy, and the chief confederates, were spies in the pay of Walsingham, and all the correspondence of Mary and her friends passed through his hands." Mary charged him with having forged the correspond- ence against her. " His administration of foreign affairs was founded on a system of bribery, espionage, and deception. He is said to have had in his pay fifty-three agents and eighteen spies in various countries.4? In an age when diplomacy was uni- versally tainted with intrigue and lies, the astute Walsingham 38 Constitutional History of England, Vol. I, p. i6I, note. See BUTLER, Vol. I, pp. 249-54. 39BUTLER, Vol. I, p. 254; BAYNES, "Shakespeare," in Encycl. Brit., 9th ed., Vol. XXI, p. 790. Hallam calls Somerville a half-lunatic. 40 Art. " Walsingham, Sir Francis," in Chambers' Encycl., ed. I893, Vol. X, p. 540. 694 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY would, no doubt, have considered that he was doing God's serv- ice in encompassing the death of one who, he must have believed, endangered England while she lived. The trial of Mary was, as Hallam says, an illustration of that "shameful breach of legal rules almost universal in trials of high treason during the reign of Elizabeth."41 Such are the palliations of the restored church-state's per- secutions of the Catholics. When we consider the splendid loyalty of the Roman Catholics in the face of unparalleled provo- cation, the murderous venom of her tortures and hangings stains the history of the Church of England in her hour of triumph with ineffaceable dishonor and reproach. 4'Loc. cit., Vol. I, p. 164.