I oR 1J:1. <5 rcen=Brm\'!tage. I
....
1,1(4.
t
,
W>'r \J
"
I
(j
\ \
"'" ;)òÎ
I
E:... 1Z.
----
-----
,--
-rkD W\..e\.:
c-k
\ Lo 0
4.
_
sr'
Lu.
flQ<<-:2-/
/87J
j) f 4.-?L ..r Þ't' .
9
- /
/
hrr-
_____
k
Y ""'"
'->--
h...-/-
J
- , o-
J:d
t:,..-e.,....,
- Z!I Ceo..:>L ------."...-...-..;:.
c-- L
C /k. Æ co-- .. D .
J.s;
é)
T/
c-
V
7
c: r
,&4-
L:
1 OL
d-
r eJ -
.>
L--t- ;/- c
-
C1--Ø' J "-
4.J
,a.. '7 c-
d..Jz--Æ.. ;-u---ú- 4Æ---
-- y-
k eo---/-
vh /4,
-
fi-
-
J
( aA1 /J /
.J
J
,
t
cu-iJ----7 r
,
.
sJ
r
cz.J />
J7 Ir
/Ii:.,
,.:4 h. -;-
- _ tl>
(/lð-A 4--,-
C
-,ðL
<6 :!/
t"A.
J IC-
'7 <<.
rR-J-p, C<-
7 ð
a.-F-
lJ.<",q.
--=rtõW\..eL
c-k
\ Loo
7
e
cA
k .
1"'-
.
J d.-ð
- /4.-..--J aÁ....
r-
_
. .
- 7 u - ra-
{-
4-
"k
"j
;z:z-
-;-tp. ..i
7
'
t:.
-. /l..J- J &L-s--
-
.... d- v- Æ
- C a --..
-P:;;7
ca
-
o:1
r/
ho.-?
cz;:.. ;t.J.
-
J.-..-
h....-c.c--^-
c.Æ.
r c: - -- .
-
_ L ,.-- ,P
'kv-/-
/,-.h-
.
r
- /t-.<- J Á-.. ;7 .7" ..J....-...A.,
- ---., "'5 ;;
THE
EAJ'Y CHAIR ,
.
NOTES AND ASlfJEJ".
T1wre was a prayer in t.he Prayer-book of
Edward VI., long since removed, that might
well 00 re-inse-rred in these days úf rapa- ..
cious landlords. It was to be found am2((CW",O
<>>IKa
fc(,
mimrt'rZffiU :\
It(lIft
1 ßÞ
ãfutm<<ß
-<1\ ",
""'>>,..: !i'''''''':
),
.....".: 1"""'1
"".!
('tV
"H
f
H-ah-V. Ow
4
ufu :"t1
tJ
ßntuM . .s"u' faÆui
&. 9
/t., ß'b u,,
..u "e:/ k E:: ;..!;, V14Ç;;;
'1 ia:l'
'f
. % r- M"
-fÕfó ..M
U
4
vd
- /
n fO , a - << Ao
'a
c:-'
a,. f-ff"
J c
","XC
'2'.<<- -.."
a......6
ß .
e éHuJ<<
. ':) n
.i
C
F;tt'
vÓ':P
-p"i
fT>W>>)
.
J-:ë
.
F'''''t-t""C ÂiJ"
"
.
h'-
"j
.., .
r!;.ð
..f
":
G <<
lY -6;t"'!"J =Ff}{:.jf;{;,., ..
ÆJ 6r
t
.... ...c....
'6 ""
"'h " ff':''-'' '"' 'P
. ",">>,c6
"'c/:-
n?t- .ß,tv
'"""' c
f'f
ë/
f1,hp
tJ(
.
rrç
Á4
(,
ß'i'
6 ....':Y;' Øf
'-hvJ;w;;1 "-
r
<<-U'
<< :;eu-ñt .
6-h
'-b
[;;k'-t.
Â
cr
l
'
:;
/ '.
r .
d3ø t
'
1
...-25(;
F'>>HA "t., "
""' . 1J'(-Cð t->> èJ- QJ /.
'
'4.
t
""Lf'$::'f
f.
Ir-ñf/
r"ksr
...
éh
6.
. Iz
'f..l?M" ,.
-b Þ..
':'
n.'vt-'
<-f-
t+ft.v cX
:5
0-
Gf
ht.C:
? 1Æe
,,"f- "M
1I ,
f'"f\
E
;
Ab t.
'i'W1n
fé-'
;=t;
r:z.
pC" v<>
,"&'+'ø p....<
tf"'
6
. <<.'b i;é-
'
f
"
y
c
-. e
C'-""'t..
>Gw\.'iM_ c;:,.P
,/
, ----; I?
t: ..g
d. -
<é,-h<:V
r:-u 4uft-
fv'-
Facsimile 1. ((rolltispit-a).
Fir<;t page of the Rrniary '>chenle', !-howing corrections by Cranmer. (
IS. Reg. ï H. IV f. I33 a ).
ED"FARD 'TI
AND THE
BOOK OF CO
IlVION PR,A YER.
AN EXAltfINATIOK INTO ITS ORIGIN AND EARLl"
HISTORY TVITH AN APPENDIX OF
UNPUBLISHED DOCUltfENTS.
BY
FRA:NCIS AIDAN GASQ"GET D.D.O.S.B.,
AUT H 0 R 0 F "H E Ii" R Y VIII.. AND THE EN G LIS HMO Ii" AS T E R I E S"
AKD EDl\IUND BISHOP.
Second Editioìl.
JOHK HODGES,
.AGAR STREET, CHARI"XG CROSS, LONDON.
1891.
j
PRDITED
T :IIIMEGUE:-O (nOLL
'\ID) BY II. C.
. THIEME OF NIMEGUE:-i (HOLL
:-iD}
:-iD
14 BILLITER
QU
RE BLILDI:-iOS. LO:-iDO:-i E. C.
Chapter
"
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
YIlI.
IX.
X.
XI.
"
"
"
"
XII.
XIII.
"
"
XIV.
XV.
XVI.
fI
c 0
TEN T S.
PAGE.
TO THE READER.
PREFACE TO THE SECOXD EDITIOX.
I. CHURCH SERYICES AT THE DEATH OF
YII
IX
1- 16
17 - 29
30- 39
40- 62
THE PARLIAUEXT AND COKYOCATION 1547. 63- 81
82- 96
97-117
. 118-133
HEXUY \"1n. .
CRAK:\IER'S PROJECTED BREnARY
CRAK!lIER'::; SECOND PROJECT . .
PREPAR.\TIOX FOR CHA
GE. . . .
THE CO:\ll\ICNIOX BOOK . . . .
PROCLAMATIONS AND PREACHINGS .
THE PRESS ON THE l\IASS . . . .
THENEWLITURGY: TDIE, PLACE, PERSONS ETC. 134-147
CONYOCATIOX AND THE PRAYER BOOK . . 148-156
THE DEBATE ON THE SACRA!lIENT IN PARLIA-
l\IEKT1548........... .157-181
THE FIRST EXGLISH BOOK OF com:nIONPRAYER 182-215
THE PRAYER BOOK OF 1549 AND CONTE
-
PORARY LITrRGIE::; . . . . . " 216-235
THE RECEPTION OF THE
EW SERYICE . . 236-258
FCRTHER PROJECTS. . . . . . . . . . 259 -276
THE REVISIOK OF THE PRAYER BOOK 1552 277-307
A P PEN D I X.
l' AGE.
1. AccorNT OF l\IS. REG. 7 B. IV. . . . . . 311-314
II. CRAXl\IER'S BREYIARY SCHEl\[E . . . . . . 315-352
III. CRANMER'S SCHEME FOR nlORKIKG A!\DEYEKINGPRAYER 353-382
IV. THE LECTIONARIES AND CALENDARS . . . . . . . 383-394
Y. THE DEBATE ON THE SACRAMENT IN PARLIAMENT 1548. 395-443
VI. THE WORDS OF INSTITL"TION. . . . 444-448
VII. NOTE ON THE ACTS OF CONVOCATION 1547. . . . 449-451
TO THE READER.
The present work had its origin in the desire to
edit Cranmer's hitherto unnoticed projects of litur-
gical reform printed in the appendix. In the researches
necessary for this purpose, it was found that the
history of the religious changes under Edward VI
had in some points become involved in much and
seemingly unnecessary 0 bscurity. It therefore appeared
desirable to present the story of the origin of the
Book of Common Prayer as a whole. Other docu-
lnents were found which had escaped the attention
of previous writers and amongst these the notes of the
discut;sion in Parliament preceding the introduction
of the first Act of Uniformity. 11his document affords
new details in the history of the Prayer Book, and
gives the on]y reliable information about the views
entertained by the english bishops on the subject.
Apart from this, the "Notes" are of considerable
interest as being the earliest report of a debate in
Parliament.
Though treating of liturgy the object of the work
is strictly historical. Unless a clear and intelligible
idea can be gained of the liturgical changes in the
reign of Edward VI. it is impossible to understand
a period which is the turning point in the religious
history of England.
The authors desire to record their thankE, to the
authorities of Corpus Christi CoJIege, Cambridge, for
permission to use the manuscripts in their lihrary.
To the Rev. S. S. Lewis M. A. the librarian, in par-
ticular, they are indebted for his special kindness
to them.
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
The first edition of this book was issued with on]y
a few words of introduction. In putting forth a second
some further prefatory remarks seem to be called for.
Regret has been expressed in more than one
quarter that the entire manuscript containing Cran-
mer's projects for liturgical reform had not been
printed. The reason is simple; the appendix contains
everything of real historical interest. What remains
still unprinted may afford some scope for minute
antiquarian investigation or some subject for specula-
tion. 1'he lessolls of the second scheme in particular
might invite rmnark: for instance the already advanced
character of the proposed english liturgical reform
may be further illustrated by the disuse of the
V uJgate. Cranmer's erasure of St. Babilas from
the calendar is doubtless explained by the story of
this martyr, the proposed lesson, derived from
St. Chrysostom's longer homily on the subject, scarcely
according with the rrudor idea of the due relation
between regality and the priesthood. rrhe lesson for
St. Gordias, although referred in the manuscript to
St. Basil, shows tha.t Cranmer did not disdain the
help of a then recent hagiologist. But the result of
such detailed enquiries, whatever it be, will have no
effect whatever in varying, though it might here or
x
there deepen, the historical lines already sufficiently
clear.
As regards the "ymns, to the omission of which
in the appendix special attention has been called,
it seemed unnecessary to print thenl in full. For
the most part they are wen known, and are to be
found in the hreviaries in daily use. 1'he only point
of real interest, namely, that Cranmer, as appears
from minute variants, took his text from the
volume of Clichtoveus and not from the old breviaries,
has been already indicated.
J n these circumstances it still seems best to leave
the appendix as it stood in t.he first edition. Liturgi-
cally, Cranmer's still-born projects are of no value;
and it is believed that their historical interest has
been practically exhausted.
The notices which this hook has received have
suggested a few observations on one or two points
of detail.
L ()um;ocatiou.
pecial interest has been Inanifested in the question
as to the approval of the Book of Common Prayer
of 1549 by Convocation. The object of the examin-
ation of this question in these pages was to elucidate
an obscure and doubtful point of history and to
enable the reader, so far as was possible, to come
to a probable conclusion. In estimating the proba-
bilities due weight hardly seems to have been given
to the evidence against such approval drawn fron1
the discussion on the Sacrament in Parliament 1. It
is true that the argllmentU1n e silentio is continually
abused, but it does not follow that it has not its
1 See p. 181 (5).
XI'
due and proper use. In the present case it seems
ahnost ÏInpossible to believe that had Convocation
actually and formally approved the Prayer Book.
Somerset, placed in the position into which rrhirlby
had forced him, could have maintained silence as to
such approval. The authors lTIUSt own that to them
this argument seemed finaHy conclusive and it conse-
quently appeared unnecessary to burden their pages
with further discussions.
To those, ho.wever, \vho are particularly interested
in the subject, it is proper to point out that the
treanlent. of Convocation by the governing powers
in the reign of Ed ward VI. forms a consistent
whole and has a history of its own. In dealing
with any special part of that history the whole
must be borne in lnind.
The matter is well illustrated by what took place
in 15;}2. r-rhe relation of Convocation to the catechis111
and articles set forth under its nanle in 1553 is obscure,
but a comparison of the scanty records \vhich remain
make the following results ahnost certain:
(1) The articles and catechislll .were submitted to
the bishops 1.
(2) They were never sublnitted to the lower house
of Convocation.
(3) But "sundry others of our clergy", a sman select
body, all or nlany of them Inembers of Convocation,
had a hand in the matter.
(4) As a result they were printed by the king's autho-
rity as the work of Convocation" agreed upon by the
bishops and other learned and godly men, in the
last Convocation at London in the year of our Lord
1552" .
1 Burnet's "brought into the upper house" is more precise
than the evidence warrants.
XII
(5) When the matter was objected to Cranmer in
his disputation at Oxford in 1554, he replied "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 me by them that the book was so entitled
because it was set forth in the time of the Convo-
cation " 1.
The various steps taken in regard to the articles
and catechislll thus bear a close resemblance to the
course followed in regard to the Prayer Book in 1548.
The answer of the Council to the archbishop's
objection to the catechism and articles being issued
as if with the approval of Convocation is perhaps
sufficient evidence of the justice and moderation of
the remark, that to examine closely into the terms
of official documents is "a process not unnecessary
in a period marked by so many doubtful dealings
on the part of the rulers".
In fact it is clear that the abolition of Convocation
was one of the items of general policy determined upon
in the early days of this reign, and that in practice the
aim of the rulers was to discredit its authority,
impair its influence and supersede it generally by in-
formal committees wholly dependent on themselves.
All this was only a preparation for its final destruc-
tion provided for in the archbishop's Re..forn'latio
legwm ecrlestasticarwn 2.
1 See Burnet III. 1. 210-213. The original passages relating
to the subject are: Foxe VI. 468 j Ridley's Works, Parker Soc.
216-7 j Philpot's Works, Parker Soc. p. 179-181 (cf. p. XIII)
See also Burnet, III. 2. 205 - 6. Brooke's sermon contains nothing
more on the subject than the few lines extracted by Burnet.
:! This explains the profound resentment which animated
members of Convocation against Cranmer on the accession of Mary.
XIII
II. Tile ..L1Iozarabic Jlissal.
It seems unnecessary either to enlarge or to
modify what has been already said on the subject
(pp. 185-6, 206-7 and 444-8). It would be easy
but hardly profitable to discuss more minutely the
subsidiary questions that have been raised.
The bearing of the possible intercourse between
Spain and England consequent on the marriage of
I\:atherine was obvious and had not escaped atten-
tion, but the difficulty was to discover satisfactory
evidence of literary intercourse in Henry's reign 1.
Even on the supposition that Cranmer possessed,
or had access to, a copy of this liturgy, the only
conclusion that can be ùrawn is, that in a volume
of nearly 1900 folio columns of print, a 1JâSSfll, he
found as proper for his purpose in the compilation
of his new Prayer Book only one colull1n-it may
be a line or two lllore or less - and that not relating
to the mass, but to the blessing of the font.
III. Tll(, lsidorean Tileory.
To the influence of the spanish rites on the com-
pilation of the Book of Common Prayer as much
space has been allotted in this book as the Inatter
in its historical bearings could warrant. Indeed the
whole subject would seem to have assumed a
fictitious importance. Still, as it has been touched
upon again, it is perhaps useful to deal ,vith a
1 For instance in the king's library in 1542 only three spanish
books appear. As they are interesting in themselves it may be
as weB to mention them: "Dantis works in the castilian tongue "-
" Triump hes of Petrarcb in castilian" - "Salustius with songis
in Spanyssh" (R. O. Aug t . Off. :Misc. Bk. 160 ff. 109 a , 114 b ,
119 a ).
XIV
kindred theory, which the authors had previously
examined, but which, on a review of the whole
circumstances appeared to theIll devoid of any
foundation in fact.
This theory is the influence supposed to have been
exercised by St. Isidore of Seville on the revision
of the Anglican Prayer Book in 1552. The impression
on this subject iB most conveniently expressed in a
document which from its character has naturally
obtained the widest circulation.
"In A. D. 1534" runs the passage "was printed at
Leipsic and Antwerp, edited by J oannes Cochleus,
the treatise and revision by Isidore of Seville of
that form of Gallican liturgy called the Mozarabic,
as used in the 6th and 7th centuries and long
before (Isid. Hispal. De off. Eccl., Lips. 4to., Antv.
Svo., 1534). This work was dedicated to Dr. Robert
Ridley, uncle of Bishop Ridley. In the dedication
Crann1er himself is named as 'vir eruditus et
theologus insignis.' It naturally excited much atten-
tion; it is quoted by several of tbe chief Reform-
ers. Scholars are now investigating the large use
of it made in other parts of the books of both
1549 and 1552. It was the more notable because
Cardinal Ximenes had in 1500 refounded the use in
Spain in such amplified form as was then possible,
which is not so sure to have come under Cranmer's
notice. Both forms give evidence which is to tbe
point. A Inixed cup was used, but in the ancient
form there is no order and no prayer for mixing.
In the later, the rubric and prayers are included in
the pneparatio which had in the interval grown up
before the Introit and Ante-Communion (Burbidge
196, 202, etc.)" 1
1 In the Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Read and
xv
In the foregoing passage the two" forms" n1entioned
are:
(1) the 1\Iozarabic nlissal: and
(2) St. Isidore's tract entitled de officiis ecclesiasticis.
The theory to be examined is based on this latter
and has nothing to do with the )lozarabic Inissal
which has been dealt with.
The character of this tract must be first clearly
understood. It is not a liturgy in any sense, but
an exposition and often a mystical interpretation
of ecclesiastical life and practice. In order that the
reader may be put in full possession of the reasons
adduced for believing that St. Isidore was a guiùe
to the reformers in the revision of the english
liturgy of 1552, the entire chapter of the work in
question is here translated and :àIr. Burbidge's
arguments are given in the margin.
ST. ISIDORE. RE3IARKS.
Book 1. chapter"13. Oft/Ie
mass and Prayers.
But the order of the
massaud prayers bywhich
the sacrifices offered to
God are consecrated was
first instituted by St.
Peter; the celebration of
which the whole world
observes (peragit) in one
and the same way.
The first of these is a
prayer of admonition
toward the people that
This" may be cOlnpared
with the english exhor-
tation 'dearly beloved
others v. the Lord Bishop of Lincoln. Judgment. Nov. 21, 1890
(London, 1890).
XVI
they n1ay he stirred up
to entreat God.
The second is of invo-
cation to God that he
would graciously receive
the prayers of the faithful
and their oblation.
The third is poured
forth for those who are
offering or for the faith-
ful departed that they may
obtain pardon through the
same sacrifice.
After these the fourth
is introduced that all
reconciled to each other
in charity may be united
together as worthy of the
Sacrament of the body
and blood of Christ. For
the indivisible body of
Christ does not permit in-
dividual discord.
The fifth is brought in
as an introduction to the
sanctification of the obla-
tion, in which also all
in the Lord'; and the
words fratres cha I'issimi
are in it in almost every
service ". (Liturgies and
offices of the Church. By
Edward Burbidge,
I.A.
p. 198. Note 1).
"The second and third
prayers take the place of
our prayer for the Church
n1Ìlitant. Special notice
should be paid to the fact
that the prayer for the
Church was thus separ-
ated from the consecra-
tion prayer" ibid. note 2).
" The fourth prayer may
be compared in respect of
its position and intention
with our invitation, con-
fession, absolution, and
comfortable words" (ibid.
note 3).
"Thefifth prayer con"es-
ponds with our preface,
earthly creatures and
heavenly powers are sum-
moned to the praising of
God; and Hosanna in
excel8is is sung, because,
by the birth of OUf Sa-
viour from the race of
David, sal vation has come
to the world, even to the
highest.
:Moreover the sixth no,v
follows, the confirmation
of the Sacrament, in order
that the oblation of
the body and blood
which is offered to God,
being sanctified by the
HoJy spirit, may be con-
firmed.
The last of these prayers
is that which Our Lord
taught his disciples to
pray, saying: Our Father
who art in heaven.
[Here follows in the
tract a short exposition
of the Lord's prayer which
xvn
banctus and prayer of
consecration" ibid. note 4:).
"The sixth prayer may
be compared in respect to
the contents of many exam-
ples of it 1 with our prayer
of humble access" (.p 199
note 1) 2.
1 These be it remarked can only be known in the Mozarabi.c
missal itself and not by the tract of St. Isidore.
2 At p. 201 the author calls attention to the difference
between St. Isidore and the Anglican communion service j namely
that this sixth prayer is omitted.
XYIn
need not be translated
as ba ving no bearing on
the present discussion. It
ends:] Our Saviour there-
fore taught this prayer,
in which is contained the
hope of the faithful and
the confession of sins,
whereof the prophet fore-
telling says, Et erif etc.
These then are the seven
prayers of the sacrifice
COlTIlnended by apostolic
and evangelical doctrine.
The reason of instituting
the particular nurn bel'
seems to be either because
of the seveLlfold univer-
sality of the holy Church.
or on account of the seven-
fold graces of the Spirit.
by whose gift those things
which are offered are sanc-
tified. "
The foregoing presents to the reader the suggested
guide of archbishop Crann1er in his reform of the
Anglican liturgy of 1552 and the arguments by which
that theory is supported. These invite some com-
ment. It will be observed that it is entirely founded
on a question of order, not upon a comparison of
forn1ularies. The similarity even of order breal{s
down at the very beginning. St. Isidore places first
a prayer of admonition toward the people and
secondly a prayer of invocation that God may receive
XIX
the prayers of the faithful. The Comnlunion service
of 1552 reverses this order.
In the next place the question is not whether the
prayers mentioned by St. Isidore" may be conlpared
with," or "correspond with", or " take the place of,"
certain portions of the Anglican cOlllmunion service;
but whether the revisers of 1552 took the order of
prayers given in this tract of St. Isidore as their
pattern.
It Inay however be turther asked, whether the
general character of the tract is such as to recom-
mend it to the particular and favourable consider-
ation of CralllUer. Ample luaterials exist for forming
a correct judgment as to his opinions at this period
year after year.
ioreover the whole tenour of his
ecclesiastical acts are well-known. The question
therefore is, how would the doctrine and tone of
St. Isidore's work accord with the temper and bent
of Crannler's mind at this period. The first chapter
deals with the component parts of the divine office,
with its hymns and antiphons and reponsories,
which Cranmer had just set aside. It treats of the
canonical hours, matins and lauds, tierce, sext., none.
vespers and conlpline, which Cranmer c.onsidered the
church had now outgrown. St. Isidore also deals with
those lesser orders of subdeacon, lector etc., all which
were now abolished in the church of England.
Turning to details the tra
t is found to be replete
with doctrine condemned by Cranmer in no measured
terms. The offertories, for example which, as St.
Isidore says, under the old law 'were chaunted
when the victims were immolated, we joyfully sing
"in that true sacrifice by the blood of whidl the
,vorld has been saved". In his chapter on the sacrifice
he begins: "The sacrifice that is offered by (' hristians
to God our Lord and
Iaster, Christ instituted when
xx
He gave to His apostles His body and blood before
He was betrayed".
Again. "We believe that it is a tradition fronl
the very apostles themselves to offer sacrifice for
the repose of the faithful departed and to pråy for
them, because this is observed throughout the whole
world". Further, St. Isidore n1entions the fires of
purgatory, and he distinguishes clearly between the
sacrifice of the altar and the sacrifice of our prayers,
referring this latter to offices such as vespers.
There can be no doubt therefore that the whole
of St. Isidore's work runs directly counter to the line
of ecclesiastical policy which Cranmer and his frienùs
were forcing on the nation during Edward's reign;
and that he could not have looked to it as a guide
in the revision of the COlnmunion Service of 1552.
The key to this the authors believe is to be found
in Cranmer's own works.
The study of liturgy can be pursued usefully and
fruitfully only on those rational methods which
should govern aU hbtorical investigation. In the case
of a document like the Book of ComInon Prayer it is
a dictate of cornmon-sense that any exalnination
of its origin and sources should be conducted with
a primary regard to the circumstances in which, and
the opinions of the persons by whom, it was produced.
In a word it must be put in its proper historical
setting and illustrated from the writings of those
who composed it, or their friends, and not by the
productions of those centuries the doctrine and prac-
tice of which it W'lS the avowed áÏln and intention
of its authors to destroy.
CHAPTER 1.
CHURCH SERVICE AT THE CLOSE OF HENRY'S REIGN.
The first Convocation of clergy in the reign of
Edward VI. met at St. Paul's on November 5, 1547.
The lower house immediately upon their assembling
"agreed that the prolocutor in the name of the
whole house should report to the most Reverend"
the archbishop of Canterbury certain petitions,
among which was the following: "that the labours
of the bishops and others, who by command of Con-
vocation had been engaged in examining, reforming
and setting forth (et edendo) the divine service should
be produced and should be submitted to the exami-
nation of this house".
Archbishop Cranmer's notes of this meeting show
some important variations frQm the official record
on this matter. According to his version, the clergy
declared that "by cOlnmand of king Henry VIII."
certain prelates and learned men were "appointed....
to devise a uniform order; who according to the
same appointment did make certain books, as they
be informed". And the object of their request was,
according to Cranmer's statement, that these books
should be submitted to them "for a better expedi-
tion of divine service to be set forth accordingly" 1.
1 This statement may perhaps in part have been drawn
from, or suggested by, the address of the Prolocutor; the con-
B
2 Church Service at tlle close of Henry's reign.
"'That the result of this application may have been
does not appear; nor does mention of these books
occur in any other record. It has been tacitly assumed
that if they did indeed exist, they have disappeared.
Convocation ho\vever, was in fact accurately infornl-
ed \vhen it spoke of their existence: and for the
last three hundred years in all probability such a
book has lain anlong the manuscripts of the Royal
library. The identification of the volume retnoves
one of the difficulties \vhich has hitherto stood in
the \vay of any satisfactory investigation into the
origin and character of the first Prayer Book of
Ed ward VI.
Up to the present time there has been an entire
want of material to illustrate the history and course
of the composition of this book, and of the steps
whereby it assumed its present forn1. There has been
nothing but the book complete as it stands in print.
The spirit which dictated and directed the compila-
tion has been a matter of conjecture, coloured not
infrequently, as is natural in such a case, by the
personal prepossessions of the writer. r.rhis is the more
unfortunate, since a just estin1ate of the character of
a document of such supreme importance is a first
and necessary condition for a right understanding
of the history of the reJigious changes in England
during the sixteenth century.
The first Prayer Book of Ed\vard VI. \vas in itself
a revolution; and that on two grounds. Local and
diocesan usage of every sort was swept a\vay and
an absolute uniformity was prescribed for the whole
realm, - a thing unheard of in the ancient Catholic
church in England no less than in France and Ger-
fEet of statement as to the k1ng's eommandmfnt and the com-
mand of Convocation certainly cannot be thus explained.
Clmrrh Service at tlle dose of I-Jewry's 'j'eign. 3
1nany. This note of uniformity is struck emphatic-
ally in the Act itself, \vhich also declares the peace
and quiet to be engendered by the change. Secondly,
a book \vas introduced, the fornl and disposition of
\vhich was unlike any hitherto in use for public
worship in England.
Whether a nearer examination would show that
the divergence is rather one of outward seeming
than of reality is a matter involving many conside-
rations. Amongst these must necessarily find a place
the following: \vhat position does the first Prayer
Book hold in regard to the ancient service books in
England, or other contemporary documents of the
same kind
Is it conservative
Is it innovating
And how far is it either
vVhat was its inspiration
What were its ::;ources
Unfortunately all these
questions have become involved in extraneous and
notably polemical considerations. These, as all will
allow, are hardly favourable to the investigation or
exposition of bare historic truth. But. in spite of
these, it should not be impossible to fix, with a
sufficient. degree of accuracy and certainty, the position
which the Prayer Books of Edward VI. really hold
in the religious history of the time; especially when
new documents can be produced to make the t3Jsk
more easy or the result more sure.
No attempt will be Inade to enquire whether the
change brought about was good or whether it ,vas
bad. The present investigation is concerned with
facts, and where doctrinal questions lTIUst be touched
upon to elucidate the mere course of events or
change of individual opinion, the actors will be
allowed to give their own statements of their OWll
beliefs. Thus the enquiry \vhether this revolution.
which swept away the old order and established
in its place the liturgy now holding the affection
4 Churclt Service at tlte close of Henry's reign.
of the majority of Englishmen, \vas providential, or
whether it was a revolt against established law, is.
altogether foreign to the present purpose.
As a prelude it is necessary to have a clear under-
standing of the condition of public \vorship at the
end of the reign of Henry VIII. Looking back across
the course which events actually took in the estab-
lishment of an exclusively vernacular service in
England, there has been a tendency to attribute an
undue importance to the Primers or other prayer books
in English issued in the later years of that reign.
Vernacular prayers for private use were comlnon in
the middle ages, and the contents of the primers,
which were esseutially designed for such private devo-
tion, fall almost entirely outside the ground covered
by the first public english service book.
Glancing at the state of affairs at the moment of
Henry's death it may be said that the system of
public worship, which existed throughout the middle
ages in England, ren1ained intact and in full force.
The rites of Sarum, York and Hereford .were in prac-
tical use as they had been an hundred years before,
the same books, the same cerelllonies 1.
The acts of Convocation in 1542 however show
already a disposition to limit this diversity by pre-
scribing the observance of the Sarum rite for the \vhole
province of Canterbury. There appears however no
evidence to show that the use of Hereford was then
abrogated. It is not impossible that this order was
caused by the sudden secularization of so large a body
of clergy \vho had, as members of regular orders,
1 The purgation to which the service books had been subjected
was confined to the omission of the word "Pope", to the sup-
pression of the office and name of St. Thomas of C,tnterbury and
to a correction of typographical errors.
Church Service at tlze close of Henry's 'reign. 5
òeen accustomed to their own special rites and who,
in the change of condition, must have been at a loss
to tell what breviary to adopt in order to satisfy
an obligation binding them in conscience to the daily
recitation of the divine office.
It has been suggested by some recent \vriters of
repute that the suppression of the monastic houses
necessitated a change in the method of public \vorship
in order to render the daily homage of the creature
compatible with secular duties. It is moreover
implied that all offices, except a morning and eve-
ning prayer, were designed only for regular religious.
These ideas seenl due to a n1Ïsapprehension. The
disappearance of the monasteries in no way affected
the worship in cathedral or parish churches. It
is true that on the refoundation of the monastic
cathedrals a body of clergy was instituted somewhat
less numerous than it had been on the 01 d footing,
if for no other reason at least for this, that a given
revenue would suffice for a larger nUlTIber of lTIen
living in community than of men each in receipt. of
a separate income and keeping up a separate house-
hold. But even the cathedrals of the new foundation
bad a body of clergy fully able to maintain the divine
office in becon1Íng splendour 1.
Except in so far as personal obligations \vere con-
cerned, a cathedral or collegiate church of secular
. clergy was bound to a perpetual round of praise
and service hardly less onerous than that of the most
-observant monastery. The obligation however lay
upon them as members of their church and not, as
they \vould strenuously have contended, by vow as
1 The clergy who remained in the old monastic cathedrals
upon the suppression of tbe monastery were not uncommonly
recommend
d by the royal agen ts as "good choir men. n
6 Church Service at the close of I-IenJ"Y's reign.
religious. The public recitation of the canonical hours-
great and small, it is true, originated with persons
inclined to what is technically c.alled the religious
life: monazontes, as they are named in the recently
discovered Peregrinateo Sill-ice, which throws consider-
able light upon this as well as upon so many other
ecclesiastical usages at the close of the fourth
century 1.
Still, as early as the time of St. Gregory the Great,
it ,vas aEsumed that the office in a cathedral or even
a considerable church was to be publicly sung. By the
eighth century the clergy of such churches were
regarded and regarded themselves as a real conl-
munity, the provisions nlade for the conduct and
observance of which differed but slightly from those
of a community of monks. There was however this
essential difference between them; though the canons
around their bishop lived on common funds, they
retained their rights to their own property and,
subject of course to the obedience of all clergy to
their bishop, were free to come and go.
In the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries
the canons, especially of episcopal churches, gradually
emancipated thenlsel ves from ancient restrictions.
The funds originally COlnmon, became allotted to
individual members of the body. This practice received
recognition and confirmation more or less early from
the bishops, when the episcopal mensa and that of
the canons became distinct and separate.
The change produced in course of time a departure
not less marked in the opposite direction. rrhis latter
1 See Duchesne, Origines du c
tlte Cltrétien, Paris, 1889.
pp. 433-436, for an account of the way in which the public
ce]ebration of the divine office grew to be recognized as a duty
of the ecclesiastical state.
Church Serl'ice at tlle close of Henry's lJ'eign. 7
tendency was to a renunciation of all private property
and the aSt;unlption of religious vows, and thus by
the beginning of the twelfth century the distinction
of regular canons and
ec.ular canons was an aCCOlll-
plished fact. To the class of secular canons belonged
all our non-monastic english cathedrals except Car-
lisle: and St. Osmund's title to the gratitude of his
church will be probably found to lie, not in the
liturgical reforms which legend has attributed to
him, but in his legislation for the new pattern in his
cathedral churc.h at Sarun1. Such canons throwing
off perhaps gradually the old c.onllnunity restrictions
came to differ in no wise, so far as their method of
life was concerned, from the rest of the secular
clergy. The others formed themselves into a religious
order in the strictest sense of the word and became
known as regular or Augustinian canons. The name
"Canon" common to both, recalls the state of life from
which both had sprung, but which both had abandoned.
Henceforward whilst bearing this common name
they are perfectly distinct in life and spirit. By a
contradiction in terms one class callle to be called
secular canons, whilst the other by tautology received
the name of regular canons 1.
In one point ho.wever churches of canons, whether
secular or regular, kept to the old lines. Both were
bound to and observed the sol81nn and public recit-
ation of the entire divine office although now on
1 Trithemius long ago drew attention to this "a secular
canon" it is as much as to say" a white black" he writes. See in
Ducange S.v. canonicus. This article of Ducange is unfortunately
misleading on the origin of secular canons, although a careful
perusal of the passages cited therein is sufficif'nt to detect the
mistake which is corrected later s. v. Regulares. The question is
accurately exposed in Amort Disc : Vet: Canonicorum, pp. 329-333.
8 Church Service at lite close of Henry's reign.
different grounds. The regular canons observed this
duty as mmnbers of a religious order; the secular
canons as incorporated into a church, whether cathe-
dral or collegiate, by the foundation and tradition
of which its nlembers voluntarily undertook the
obligation so long as they held their prebend l.
To come to detail: taken as the rule the life of
a canon in our englisb cathedrals up to the close of
Henry's days was one of no slight labour and mor-
tification. The church offices were long: they ll1ade
up a day's work quite apart fronl all questions of
time to be given to stud
r, private devotion, or the
ordinary claims of daily life. The choral ,vork began
early. l\iorwen, chaplain to bishop Bonner of Lon-
don, in commenting on a sermon preached hy Pil-
kington in June 1561, when lightning had struck
the steeple of St. Paul's, and the roof and bells had
been burnt, called attention to the change \vhich
had been 11lade in the mode of worship. "Now," he
says, "whether the people of this reahn be declined
from the steps of St. Augustine and other blessed
fathers and saints which had mass and seven sacra-
ments in the church, and God was honoured night
and day in the church with divine service, I think
there is no man so simple but he ll1ay easily per-
ceive, except malice have blinded his heart. As in
1 The universal tradition as to common life in cathedrals
must be borne in mind in estimating the introduction of monks
into english cathedral churches under king Edgar and later.
Probably a practical compromise was come to, by allowing the
clergy of the other english episcopal churches, where the common
life had been abandoned, to go OD as they were. This will explain
William of Malmesbury's "contra morem Anglorum". In fact
traces of the old common life survived more generally in France
long after the cathedrals had been settled on the new model.
Cltll'/"ch Service at tlte close of Henry's reign. 9
St. Paul's church in London, by the decrees of bless-
ed fathers, every night at midnight they had matins;
all the forenoon masses in the church with other
divine service and continual prayer, and in the
steeple anthems and prayers were had certain
times". 1.
Pilkington in his reply writes: - "further, where
he charges us with declining from the steps of the
blessed fathers which ordained in Paul's n1atins to
be had at midnight, all forenoon ll1asses, and in the
steeple anthems; these things we do not only not
deny, for we do not count
uch superstitious idolaters
to be our fathers in religion, but we rejoice and praise
God for our deliverance from such superstitions.
They crack much of blessed fathers and yet name
not who they be, but much it shall not skill but
their deeds shall prove their holiness. What great
holiness was this, to have matins at midnight when
folk \vere on sleep in their beds! Is not COlnmon
prayer to be had at such hours when the people
might resort to it conveniently
If midnight be
such a time n10st convenient let the world judge ....
In Paul's and abbeys at their midnight prayers
were none commonly but a few bawling priests,
young quiristers and novices \vhich understood not
\vhat they said. The elder sort kept their beds....
A prayer not understanded in the heart but spok-
en \vith the lips is rather to be counted prating
and hawling than praying with good devotion.
The elder sort both in cathedral churches and
abbeys alrnost never came at their midnight pray-
er. It was thought enough to knoU the bells and
make men believe that they rose to prayer, therefore
1 Printed in Pilkington's Works (ed Parker Sac :), p. 483.
10 Church Service at the close of I-lenry's rel,gn.
they have not so n1uch to crack of this their doing...
But as all their religion is of their own devising
so is their reward. God has made them no such
promise and therefore they can claim nothing at (
his hands." 1
Whether Pilkington was carried away by his
fervour in confutation or not Inay be left an open
question. But the popular appreciation of these ser-
vices may be gauged by a lett.er which gives a glimpse
of Catholic cathedral life in Mary's days. The writer
was apparently one of the canons of IIereford. Its
date is about 1583 or 158-1; it is addressed to Scory
the aged bishop of the see, and its object is to secure
a stricter confinement for the catholic recusantö who
"are more increased this day in Hereford than ever
were this twenty five years before."
"Right Honorable and Reverend Father" it begins,
"my bounden duty always retnembered; may it
please your lordship to be advertised or to put in
111emory that in the dark days of queen Mary the
dean then and the clergy of your cathedral church
of Hereford did orderly observe their superstitious
orders (i. e. services), and were present thereat con-
tinually, exc.ept certain days of licence which are
called days of jubilee. 2 And did preach their su-
perstitious dregs not only, but also did in their
outward living keep great hospitality. For every
night at Inidnight they with the whole vicars choral
1 Pilkington's Works, pp. 527-8.
2 This was evidently a term current in Hel'eford for leaves
of absence, but does not appear to have been in use in other
english cathedrals, as far as a cursory examination of the available
Statutes has shown.
Church Service at tlte close of Henry's reign. 11
would rise to [natins and especially the 'donlydary', t
for the week being, would be the first.
"Then at five o'clock in the nlorning at
t. Nicholag
mass; then at other masses at certain altars; then
at eight of the clock our Lady mass was solemnly
said. Then at nine the prime and hours; then the
high mass was in saying until it was eleven of the
clock, besides every Inan must have said his own
private mass at some one or other altar daily:'
"Then after dinner to even song till five o'clo
k,
in which time of service anum bel' of tapers were
burning every day, and there wa
great censing at
the high altar daily to their idols, and there was
a lamp burning day and llight continually before
their god::;. And every sabbath day and festival day
St. Thomas' bell should ring to procession and the
dean would send his ::;omner:! to warn the mayor
to the procession. And then upon the somner's
warning the mayor would send the sergeants to the
parish churches, every man in his ward to the alder-
man. Then the alderman would cause the parish priest
to command all the freemen to attend on the lllayor to
the procession 3 or lecture. For want of a sermon there
should be a lecture in the chapter house every sabbath
and holy day, notwithstanding they were at high
mass in the choir. And then by the nlayor and commons
it was agreed at a general law-day that if the mayor
did not come to procession and sermon he should
pay 12d. for every default and every alderman Sd.
and every man of the election Gd. and every freeman
or gild merchant 4d., if it were known they were
1 i. e. Hebdomadarian, or weekly officiant, whether in secular
or regular churches.
2 i. e. his verger.
:) That is before the High Mass.
12 Chlll'cll SelTice at tlle close of Henry's reign.
.absent and within the hearing of the said bell and
did not come, which ordinance was and is recorded
in the custom book of the city: so zealous and
diligent were the temporality then in observing those
dregs of the clergy. Then the dean and clergy would
come so orderly to church with such a godly show
of humbleness and in keeping such hospitality that
it did allure the people to what order they would
request them."
"This is true for I did see and know it; but then
did I as a child and knew not the truth, and then
such heavy burdens were but light; but now in these
joyful days of light how heavy is it alTIOng a number
of us to come two hours of the day to serve the
true God, the everlasting I{ing of all glory. It is
lamentable to think on it and much nlore grievous
to him that did see the blind zeal in darkness so
observed, and ÐO\V the true light and pathway to
salvation neglected. Then were there tapers, torch-
es and lanlps great plenty, wit.h censing to idols
most costly in the clearest day of SUlnnler; and now
not scarce one little candle is allowed or maintained
to read a chapter in the dark evenings in the choir.
And as for resorting to hear the truth of the gospel,
it is little regarded... notwithstanding the visitation" f.
1 This letter is contained in Egerton Ms. 1693 p. 81 (B. Mus.)
a volume of the papers of 'Valsingham, Elizabeth's minister
relating chiefly to ecclesiastical affairs. It is a copy, without name
or d=1te, evidently forwarded to Walsingham by Bp. Scory. The
same volume contains many papers relating to the visitation
named in the letter, which was attended with peculiar difficulties,
as the cathedral chapter claimed to be exempt by their charters
and privileges "as wen from the Archbishop of Canterbury as...
from their own bishop." (p. 95. cf. Parker's Corresp. Parker
Soc. p. 165). The visit was eventually managed by Aubery, Vicar
General of the archbishop, in virtue of a royal command, and was
Church Service at tlte close of Henry's reign. 13
That the writer's reminiscences were not incorrect
will appear from the account bishop Scory himselt
gives of the state of feeling in Hereford in 1561,
nearly three years after
iary's death. "The popish
justices of the city" so runs Scory's plaint" command-
ed the observance of St. Laurence's day as a ho1i-
day. On the eve no butcher in the town ventured
to sell meat; on the day itself no 'gospeller' durst
work in his occupation or open his shop. A party
of recusant priests from Devonshire were received
in state by the magistrates, carried through the
streets in procession and 'so feasted and mågnified'
as Christ himself could not have been more rever-
ently entertained." 1
If it is desired to realize what were the english
cathedrals in days gone by, it is only necessary to
inquire .what the french churches were in the be-
ginning of the last century: a subject for which ma-
terials abound. These stately corporations were un-
doubtedly a prominent feature in the religious life
of France up to the era of the great Revolutiou.
ot merely in such small towns as Beauvais or Châ-
Ions, where a cathedral establishment might natur-
ally be supposed to overpower all other interests
but in busy centres like Rouen, Amiens or Lyons,
they were a real religious power in the life of the
city. More than that: as may have been already
gathered from the Hereford letter, they were the
living manifestations in the country of the public
recognition that the people formed a Christian and
Catholic nation. On high-days and great days the re-
held sometime between 5 Sept. 1582 and 19 April 1583. The
whole story is shortly told in the Downside Review Vol. VI
pp. 58 -61.
1 Fronde. History, (ed. 1870) VII p. 19.
I! Church Service at the close of Henry's 1'eifJ'n.
presentatives of every class and profession, up to the
lieutenant of the sovereign, took part in the solemn
offices along with the clergy as making up together
one corporate whole, and thus publicly proclaimed
religion an integral part of the national life.
There were days n10reover when the offices of
the parish churches were discontinued and the clergy
and their flocks assembled within the mother church
for one united celebration. Thus the cathedral became
essentiaHy a popular institution, even apart froIn
the exceptional splendour witb which its services were
invested.
The parish churches of England according to their
size and wealth followed the model set them by their
cathedral l . The body of clergy attached to theIll by
one title or another, along with choristers and the nu-
merous clerics in minor orders who lived the life of lay
people in secular caHings, was much larger than is now
generally realized. This made the maintenance of the
public office in the larger churches, at least on sun-
days and feast-days practicable and even easy. 2 It
1 This is the simple origin of a diocesan "use J' and explains
naturally and certainly the predominance of the rite of Sarum in
southern England. Five of the episcopal sees of the Canterbury pro-
vince, not including Bath and Coventry, had a monastic cathedral,
and as the monastic office and the solemnities entirely differed
from those of the secular clergy, the rites of these cathedrals could
not furnish the model for the parish and collegiate churches of these
dioceses. They were thus perforce obliged to adopt the use of some
other and secular cathedraL It is unnecessary to discuss here the
reasons which may have led to tbe adoption of the Sarum rather
than any other use.
2 The chanting of the office (i. e. cum nota) was in the middle
ages required even in cases where such practice might at the
present day seem useless and impossible. :Many such examples
occur in the Registrum Visitationum of Eudes Rigaud, arch-
bishop of Rouen.
Clzllrclt 8errice at the close of Henry's 'reign. 1;)
must be renlembered also that what are now known
as "devotions" were then essentially regarded as
private and personal and, besides the mass, the
office was the only church service.
The Ineasures of Henry VIII. had at 1110St but slightly
touched the parish churches and, so far as the ser-
vices are concerned they, as little as the cathedrals,
had been affected by the suppression of the monas-
teries. Still, though no practical cnange had taken
place on the accession of Ed ward, there is evidence
that Cranmer had already designed considerable
alterations in public worship, the character of which
will he considered in the next chapter.
CHAPTER II.
CRANlIER'S PROJECTED BREVIARY.
More than fifty years ago the late Sir William
Palmer pointed out that the breviary of Cardinal
Quignon had evidently exercised an influence in the
compilation of the Book of Common Prayer. Whole
passages in the preface were shown to be either
translations or more or less close adaptations of
parts of Quignon's own preface to the first edition
of his office-book. Here, however, in fact the inves-
tigation rested, since it was not possible to attribute
the origin of any part or form of the printed
english book directly to Quignon's volume. The
manuscript to which attention is now invited supplies
what has hitherto been wanting to make clear the
connection.
It has been mentioned in the last chapter that
this manuscript 1 is at least one of the books, if
not all, which Convocation in 1547 asked to see. It
comprises two schemes of Office 2 and three tables
of lessons. An account of the manuscript and a print
1 B. )'1 us. Royal MS. 7 B. IV.
2 What is meant by Office must be clearly understood. It
is not the Mass, which corresponds to the anglican Communion
Service, but the canonical hours, which correspond to the matins
and evensong of the Common Prayer Book.
,j \>",,::; .&
'uf-f.",
,,
,:t.:.:_p · .w{
(v...KI:" (ì.Æ.l 1
.
.
<w
n7t'ffmt"?
KMi+tm
tt1
'P"í{
+-
h
--
i{
fi t1m4-
r
r
\
("
f.ttt< -tK
,.+H<
M<
.
F"fPr--
u<ç.J
f1
t\4 (
ti'.
V
"i
fPf
"iM.
..("
"'
p
l
"
<
i.
f"
, .w'""'" ó\-tW
1
0
.w(
...Cf14
ðWfuð'i
'. bøkttk'6
/
tW
/
./ I '"
t
RG
"t-ifhkt: *"9. Fn-t\-VmM f
ktM'w
f<
WK(1 ":t
\1(
v
M:
t/
>< <<"
t>"
>(" tf
.
'r
>
f
t\Y'--f\
>>'b.:
t<(./
/\'{c
'\1
t""".
&
.,.'""
,,"'4- bw 'ættb
, - I
<>(
pP(.'j.?'
m7
'""*
t\
"f,
tMM .
'Dmb<é"
Fac,.,imilc If. (to facl p, 1(1).
Lltin draft 01 the preface to the nonl
"fComm"n 1'r.I
"r. pIS. Heg. -; B. I\r f. 7;1/.
CranJJler's Projected ]]J'('VÏrlJ',1/.
J7
of its contents are given in the appendix: here it
,yill suffice to state results.
It is however well first to point out the ground::;
upon which this 111anuscript is attributed to arch-
bishop Cranmer. The schemes of office are, as is
evident on the face of then1 and as win appear
lllore and more clearly the more closely they are
exanÜned, of a date earlier than that of the Book
of COl1lmOn Prayer. The first of then1, roughly
speaking, follows the old order of breviary services,
and Inay be described as Sarunl 111aterial worked
up under Quignon's influence. The second, although
also in latin, conIes nearer to the fonn of morning
and evening prayer in the first printed Prayer Book
of Edward VI. (1349). The preface of this latter
scheme, also in latin, is manifestly an earlier draft
of the english preface of the book of 15-1-9.
Further, on
onfronting the Itoya] )lS. with the
Harleian
IS. 42ß, (Cranlner's draft of the abortive
Ilefo1"matio legum eccleSlastiraruJJl, which is recog-
nized as being partly in the archbishop's hand-
\vriting,) the identity of \vorkmanship and style is
unmistakable. The saIne secretary (Ralph 3Iorrice)
writes the body of the book in both tases; in hoth,
after head lines had been \vritten in, hlanks are left,
as the Reformatio legum says "for All'. 1\10r1'es" to
fill up 1; in both corrections and annotations are
Inade in the same characteristic manner and by the
saUle hand, whi
h i:-; that of archbishop Cranmer 2.
rTo understand the nature of the earlier s
heIne
it i:-; necessary to give :-;ome idea of the mediæval
office and that cOlnpiled by cardinal (Juignon. The
seven canonical hours of the church may first be
1 H.
Ius. Harl. MS.. 426 f. 17.
:! See facsimiles here reduced in size.
c
IS
Cranmer's Projected Breviar!!.
divided into night and da}T office, of which the
fornler Jnaking one service or "hour", included matins
and lauds and vvas as long a
the other six hours
put together.
The hody of an the office, ,vhether day or night,
was the psahns, including certain
criptural canticles
like those of Zachary, the Three Children, and the
Blessed Virgin. And what speciaUy characterized
n1atins was the reading of nun1erous lessons taken
fron1 Holy Scripture, the works of the Fathers and
the lives of the Saints. In the other "hours" the
lessons of scripture were reduced to a few lines,
COn11110nly called the "little chapter". These then,
the psahns and lessons, were the substance of the
office and to thenl, at dates which naturally it is
now impossible to fix exactly, other portions .were
added which served at once for piety and for con-
venience in public recitation.
Thus in a body of clergy, as might be presullled,
only the few would have either lllusical aptitude or
knowledge. l\loreover all could Dot be supplied with
the l1lusic. This would naturally bring about the
adoption of antiphons, which were taken generally
froIn SOlne verse of the psalm about to be sung. The
practical use of these antiphons, which .were sung
by trained cantors in the middle of the choir, was
to give the general body of the clergy the tone of
the coming psalm. t This reaRon, which applied in
the early ages, was not less cogent at the moment
w hen the ancient offices were superseded in England.
1 This is somewhat obscured by the present practice, which
however counts a respectable antiquity, of saying the antiphon
after the psalm as well as before, hut the ancient roman practice
gives it only before the psalm (cf. Grancolas, Brév. Romain
livre 1. ch. 30).
Cranmer's Projerted BrerÏrlJ'!J.
19
:'The antiphon was not less necessary in our long english
gothic choirs than in the spacious rOlnan basilicas. 1
In the same .way the use of the responsory which
,vas sung at the end of each lesson at 111atins was
dictated by a like practical need. To chant these
lessons implies a great strain UPOll the voice. The
response, therefore. drawn from some part of HolJr
Scripture appropriate to the occasion, and sung partly
by the cantors and partly by the choir at large,
afforded a welconle and necessary hreathing space for
the lector.
These antiphons and responsories are ::;0 ancient
an addition to the psalmody that they may almost
be considered a part of the prinÜtive office. The
"hY1TInS", although some se81n to have been cer-
tainly composed by Saint Ambrose for the choral
service, were a later element and admitted with the
greatest reluctance by the more conservati ve churches,
such as Rome and Lyons. 2
The special feature of late nlediæval breviaries,
that i:-; to say, of what are called the uses, whether
english, french, german, italian or monastic, is the
lengthening out of the office by the addition of what
1 Thus whilst the editions of the Sarum breviary were issued
by the dozen, one only of the antiphonal' arpeared. One copy on
the cantor's desk would be enough for even a church of the first
dass. It is probable moreover that the ancient
Iss. antiphonal's,
enormous volumes, executed at great cost, were
till used in spite
of the printed edition, as they are to the present day at
Ionte
Cassino and Einsiedeln.
2 At Rome hymns do not appear to have been admitted into
the office till after the twelfth century. Even in the eighteenth
Lyons bad adopted only the compline hymn. Their general adoption
was probably due to the influence of the monast.ic order. St. Bene-
dict in the sixth century made them part of the office 0 f his monks.
20
Cranmer's Projected Breriary.
are known as prece::; t and by the accull1ulatioll of
offices. That is; not content with the" hours" of the
day, ,,"hich were the hours of the church, out of
excess of devotion, after each obligatory "hour" the
corresponding portion of the Inerely devotional office
of the Blessed Yirgin was recited. These also were
e,en at tÌJnes followed by the office of the dead.
And thu:, three offices were s0111etinles said in place
of one 2. Even as early as the twelfth century Con1-
plaints of this growing practice had 111ade themsel ve:5
heard, and by the sixteenth century recitation of the
office had becolne a heavy burden upon the clergy.
The sense of weariness which must have resulted
could not but have a prejudicial effect upon the
chanting of the obligatory part of the divine office.
There was urgent ueed of refonll, and that carried
out by Pius Y. in 1:JG8, which swept away the bulk of
these late accretions, restored the breviary to a
rational and practicable fonn.
lore than thirty years previously however a nluch
more radical change had been almost effected by
cardinal {luignon, with the approval and recom-
lnendation of the Pope. Quignon was a 8paniard, a
n1el11he1' of the Franciscan order, and a trusted friend
and confidant of Pope Clement VII. and his successor
Paul III. He was 0 ne of the leading spirits of the
curia and on intirna te terms with the small and able
1 In the anglican Prayer llook the short versicles said after
the creed in the MorninJ Prayer may be taken as a specimen
of the ancient preces.
:J The practice of churches varied cOll3ilerably in diffðrent
Ioealities: thus at Sarum only the Matins and Vespet's of the
Blessed Virgin were recited in choir, the other "hours" being
said privately.
Cranmer's Projected Brez:iar!J.
21
body of ecclesiastics who ardently at that time desired
reform.
He had been commissioned by Clel11ent ViI. to draw
up a breviary hut the work only appeared after that
Pope's death. The volume was dedicated to Paul Ill.
and was publisheà in February 1335 under the title
Breriarium RomaWiJJl wiper Tcformafl{}Jl. Prefixed to
it wa
a comnlend
Ltory brief frol11 the Pope.
The changes proposed were so Tadical that notwith-
standing the Pope's favour the new breviary raised
a storm of opposition. rrhe Sorbonn8 distinguished
itself especial1y by the vigour of its condeI11uation.
Quignou felt it prudent to l11a1\:e concessions and
issued a revised text intended in some lneasure to
meet the objections taken to his first edition. During
the short space, however, of the eighteen months
in which the first text was current, no less than
six editions appeared at Ronle, Venice, Paris an d
Antwerp 1.
That this reforn1ed rOl11a11 breviary met a real
need is evident froll1 the l1um bel' of editions published:
those of the second text being "probably not far
short of a hunched". This latter text need not be
here considered, for it is certain fron1 the preface of
the Book of Common Prayer that Cranmer made use
()f the earlier edition 2. And, although the archbishop's
1 "These are all the editions of the first text that I have met
with" writes its recent editor; "no doubt there are others still
undiscovered, although I have searched carefully in many libraries
in Italy and also in France." Brev. RomallltlU a Francisco Card.
.(Juignoniv ed: curanle Johanne Wickham L('gg. Cambridge. 1888.
2 The prefaces to the two texts of Cardinal Quignon's hreviary
-differ very materially, and in the preface of the Prayer Book
Cranmer uses passages of eJuignon's first preface which do not
.appear in the second.
-
')
_..J
CraJlIJlf3r.s Projected BrcL"iary.
scheme includes antiphons, there is DO sufficient evi-
dence that he derived this feature from Quignon's.
revised text. r.rhe following ren1arks therefore apply
only to the earlier edition.
The first thing that strikes anyone accustolned to
the ancient. breviaries, on glancing through Quignon's
yohune, is the absence of all antiphons, responses
and little chapters, the reduction of the preces to
very narrow lÏ1nits, and the entire olnission of every
office but that of the day 1. His Inain concern was
to secure in practice the regular reading of the
Scriptures. This of course was the original intention
and practice of the church, which, however, traditions
and the rubrics of the later breviaries had partially
neutralized.
The parts 0111itted obviously shortened the office,
which was further curtailed by reducing the llunlber
of psalrns at Inatins, lauds, vespers and compline
to three. rThe fram e-work however of the breviary,
and the number and disposition of the hours, rmnained
the same.
Quignoll's arrangmnent of the Holy Scripture was.
dictated by his ,vish that the chief books of t.he Old
TestaLnent and all the New should be reaù through
during the year. "Every day throughout the year",
he writes in his preface, "the first (lesson at Inatins)
is fro 111 the Old Testall1ent, the second froln the N e,v,
and the third froln the life of a Saint if a feast be
celebrated; hut if there be no such feast, the AGts
and Epistles are read in this third lesson in the
order noted in the Calendar" 2.
1 i. e. be put aside such 'Cotive offices as those of the B. V.
JIary and the t Dead'. Quignon calls special attention to this in
his preface: his oLject being to get rid of whatever "interfered
with the reading of Holy Scri})ture".
:! ed: J. "T. Legg. p: XXI.
CraJlmer's Projected Brecirlry.
2;3
One other Ílnportant feature of this new breviary
Blust be noticed. In the old office hooks there were
numerous variations in the service according as
the day was a sunday, feastday, or \veekday. By
Quignon's plan such variations were reduced to a
n1Îninlun1. "In my (book)" he writes "there is no
difference, or very little, in the days of the entire
year and so far as lengt.h is concerned sunday and
weekday are the sanle. The first and second lessons,
nloreover, are disposed in an unchangeahle order
throughout the year".
The reader will now be in a position to estin1ate
the general character of Crannler's new scheme of
office. In the appendix win he found an indication
of the sources froln which this was drawn, and it
,viII be shown as far as possible in deta.il how far
Cranmer was indebted to Quignon, how far to Sarum,
and how far the work appears to be origina1. In this
place again only general results can be given.
In the disposition of the ecclesiastical year the
archbishop appears not to have come to a definite
conclusion when drafting his schen1e. The body of
the book shows the ancient Sarurn arrangement,
whilst the table of lessons drawn up by his own
hand adopts the changes initiated oy cardinal Quignon.
Cranlner's propo
ed office consisted of the ancient
hours of 111atins and lauds, prime, tierce, sext, none,
vespers and compline.
The latin language is retained even for tile reading
of Scriptul'e throughout the year.
The distribution of the psalter is unfortunately
indicated only by the general direction in each hour
" JNwlmi ex ordine desi.rJJlrdi"'. As, however, the num-
ber of lessons at matins was reduced ordinarily to
three, and three psalms are expres
ly prescribed for
each of the last three days of Holy vVeek, it lTIay
2-1
Crall mer's 1
rojccfed }JreÚa}'!J.
fairly be conjectured that Quignon was also to he
followed in the reduction of the psalms at n1atins,
lauds, vespers and compline to three.
Differing from (luignon's first breviary, Cranmer
allowed one antiphon at each hour; but like his
model he olnitted the responses and little chapters.
Another significant change fron1 the old order
is found both in Quignon and Crann1er. In the brev-
iaries formerly in use the portion called the tem-
porale begins with vespers: the feast being then, as
now, regarded as commencing with the vesper :::;er-
vice of the eve. Both the cardinal and the arch-
bishop begin their temporale with the office of matins.
r:rhe table of lessons in Cranmer's scheme of office,
following the old ecclesiastical tradition, begins with
the first Sunday of Ad vent. Besides the three lessons
directed to be said at n1atins, one is appointed to be
reêtd at lauds and another at vespers, which, al-
though longer, may be taken to represent the ancient
little chapters, omitted by
uignon altogether.
In another 1110st important matter Cranmer's first
schen1e adopts l
uignon's plan of reducing the va-
riable parts of the service, and he even goes beyond
his lHodel in this direction. rrhe office of one day
was made exactly similar to every other through-
out the year, except in the Holy 'vVeek and on
one or two feasts for whidl special directions were
given.
Those who are particularly interested in the ma.t-
tel' will find on exan1Ïnation unmistakable and re-
peated instances of the way in which Cranmer's
scheme of office, both in its general order and in
detail, was inspired by Quignon's roman breviary. 1
1 See the print of the scheme in the Appendix. It is remark-
able that in the catalogue of the library of Henry VUL, dated
Crall1Jl('r's [)J'ojected ßrel"ÍrtJ"!J.
')-
_.J
The relation of the projected office to that of
Sarum is 1l10rej simple. The archbishop appears to
have used this breviary as a quarry from which to
take his materials, when not quite satisfied with the
new roman office. It lTIUSt be aIIow8d that what he
does take froln the ancient english sources is used
in a somewhat unscrupulous fashion. Thus, for
exaluple, a little chapter is turned into an antiphon,
the old position of \'arious parts is changed without
apparent reason, anù snipping and cutting indulged
in, in what
eems to have been an arbitrary way.
Rtill it n1llst be added that in placeR he enriches the
modern baldness of Quignon fronl the ancient CatholiL
storehouse of :)arum. ·
Two questions remain for consideration: \vhen was
this scheme drawn up, and under whose inti uence?
It is always unsatisfactory to deal with a dateless
do
umelJt like this, the contents of which necessarily
afford but the slightest indication of time. Under such
circunlstances all that can he done is to see where
it best fits in with the events or the tendencies of
particular minds. What foJIows therefore 111Ust be
taken 11lerely as conjecture, made however after care-
ful exan1Ïnation.
The Convocation of 1542, as already noted, directed
that the Sarum office should be generally adopted
for the province of Canterbury. It gave also a second
ritual direction: namely "that the curate of every
church after the Te DeU111 and :\Iagnificat shall
24 April 1542, which appears to contain all the books of the
royal chapel 8xcept one or two missals, three breviaries only
are mentioned, each of which is entered in full as II Breviariulll
Romanum". It is hardly perhaps too much to suppose that these
were copies of Quignon's volume. Another volume is described
as "CerE'illonie Ecc1esie Romane" (R. Û. Augt. Office
Ii:::c: Bk :
160. f. 12S a . lOSb).
6
C}'anmer's Projected Brevir[,}'!J.
openly read unto the people one chapter of the New
rTestalllent in english... and when the New rresta-
111ent is read over, then to begin the Old
'.
By this order a chapter of the Bihle was to be
read to the people in english twice on every day
of public service: in the early n10rning after Inatins
and in the afternoon at vespers. This lnea.sure was
a distinct break frol11 the traditional order of service
although it certainly had a precedent in the arrange-
Inent made by Luther and by this tilne (15..t:2) COlll-
111011 in gernlan refonned churches.
"Here then at this point" writes Canon Dixon
"rested the revision of the public service... The old
books were ordered to be called in and castigated.
If the order was ever enforced the books after their
expurgation must have been restored to the churches
whence they were taken; hut it is more likely nothing
was done" 1.
The docun1ent known as the Rationale, or exposition
of the order of divine service in nlass and office, is
unfortunately also dateless and anonymous, but there
is great probability in the theory put forward by
Canon Dixon that it is really the outcome of the
ritual COIn mission appointed by Henry VIII. in 1340.
In this document "the succession and connection of
the "various parts of the great Catholic rites were
exhibited with lucidity and even with brevity. All
the dispute dceremonies were maintained. The litur-
gic prindples of the remarkable Rationale must have
been highly obnoxious to Cranlner and it is prob-
able enough that it was he who prevented it from
seeing the light" :!.
In the Convocation of 1343 Cl'anlner made his own
1 History ol Church of England II, 31 t3.
Ibid. p. 313.
Cranmer's Projected Bretial'!J.
27
proposal for liturgical reform. "He declared it to be
the royal win that all Blass books, antiphoners,
portasses in the church of England should he newly
examined, reformed and castigated from all manner
of 111ention of the bishop of Ronle's nall1e; froln all
apocryphas, feigned legends, superstitious orations,
collects, versicles and responses: that the naU1es and
ulemories of all saints which were not
ontained in
the Scripture or authentic doctors should be abolished
and put out of the saUle books and calendars, and
that the service should be nlade out of the Scrip-
tures and other authentic doctors". The examination
was committed to the bishops of Salisbury and Ely,
Capon and Goodrich, and to six of the lower House;
hut this c0l1ll11ittee ,vas not formed, the lower House
declining to appoint" 1.
'Vhether Capon and Goodrich did anything does
not appear, but, in the Jight now thrown on the
question by the hitherto neglected Royal i\IS. it seeIns
practically certain that S0111e steps were taken to
prepare for the proposed change. The scheme now
brought under notice corresponds so closely to the
programlne proposed by Cranlner to the Convocation
of 15-13, that even if the
IS. did not evidence his
own hand, there could be little doubt that this pro-
jected order of service was his.
As to the exact date then, it is possible that the
archbishop may have had his n1aterial for the pro-
posed book already prepared to present to the com-
mission which convocation failed to appoint. But it
is far I1101'e probable that seeing the failure of his
attempt to induce the synod of the english Church
to take up the matter, he turned his own attention
1 Ibid p. 315. The original is somewhat obscure: "But tbis
the lower House released" (\Vilkins. III. 863). The gloss is Strype's.
28
Cranmer's Projected Breviary.
to it, and that consequently the docunlent is to he
assigned to S0111e date between 15-13 and Henry's
death in January 15-1:7 1.
That it is Gertainly of a date prior to Edward's
accession will be clear fron1 a consideration of the
doctrinal points of the book. In the office of the
feast of Corpus Christi for instance the Catholic
doctrine of the Blessed Sacralnent as 111aintained by
Henry is ul1nlistakably expressed 2.
It nlay perhaps be considered unnecessary to raise
the question as to the influence under which Cranmer
probably drew up his schÐllle : but the enquiry leads to
a consideration which Inight easily escape attention
and which is of Gonsiderable inlportallce. The choice
of Quignon's work for a t110del has an aspect ahnost
eirenical. At the till1e it must have seenled more
than probable that the Quignon breviary would he-
fore \ery 10llg beGome the recognized office book of
the roman church. Its ready and general acceptance
on this side of the Alps gave pron1Íse that it would
become the Com1110n hreviary of the 'Vest. To take
the Quignoll text therefore showed some disposition,
so far from widening the breach caused in Euglanc1
by the separation 1'ron1 Rome, to keep to points of
contact with the 'Vestern church as far as possible.
1 In 1546 Cranmer strove to gain his end through the king.
He went so far as to draw up a draft letter which he proposed
that Henry should adopt as his own. In this bishops Day of Chi-
chester and Heath of \V Ol'cester are represented as pressing
with Cranmer for liturgical change. The King appears not to have
entered into Cranmer's projects, for nothing more is heard of the
matter {Burnet II. 2. pp. 236-7).
2 The Invitatory for this feast is: Christum sal1;atorem et
panem ?:ite celestis, Venite adm'emus. This is not the same as
Sarum or Quignon, but original.
Cranmer's PJ'ojeded Breviary.
29
This was hardly Cranll1er'S natural disposition. It
was however nluch the t8111per of Tunstall of Durham,
for whom during twenty years the archbishop had the
deepest friendship. 1'0 these ties Cranmer was faithful
to the last. His voi
e alone was raised in Par1ia-
111ent in Tunstall's favour, when that prelate's ruin
had been resolved on by I\:ing and Council.
Looking round then on all the most prominent eccle-
siastits of the day, the tone and temper of Tunstall's
n1Ïnd, his 1110deration, his \vise conservatism, his open-
ness to new iùeas and his acquaintance with lllen
of the llew era, seern to point to him as the Inost
likely counselJor of Cranmer in this 111atter. 1
1 It is necessary here to notice a suggestion of Canon Dixon
in regard to the Rationale spoken of abovf'. He says: "if it had
come into Convocation it would have passed": again "I am sure
it was never brought Lefore Convocation, for I have no doubt that it
was the document which Convocation in the first year of Edward VI.
requested Cranmer to produce" (p. 313. see p. 16 ante). The words
of Convocation itself and of Cranmer make this suggestion hardly
probaLle. The Rationale is merely an account of the divine service
and cannot in any sense be called a revision of the service books
It still less suits Cranmer's version of the petition of Con vocation,
for he speaks of an appointment" to alt.er the service in the church
and to devise other convenient and uniform order" and notes that
the "said books" were to be "for a better exposition of the di vine
service to be set forth accordingly". This is a good description
of the purpose of the scheme contained in the Royal lIS. Further,
C
'anrner stated to Con vocation in 1543 thai it was "the royal
will" that the new books should be framed, and this accords
with his note in 15-17, "by the commanùment of King Henry VIIL"
rather than with the other version "e:c mancla!o Convocalionis".
CHAPTER III.
CRA
]IER'S
ECOND PROJECT.
Archbishop Crann1er's second scheme for the public
office may be briefly disn1Ïssed. It is however of
considerable iU1portance and interest, as lllarking the
step whereby he passed from the ancient arrange-
ment of the divine office to the order for n10rning
and evening prayer which was eventual1y put forth
in the Prayer Book of 15-4:9.
The daily services were in this SCheIlle reduced
to two, namely matins and vespers. "'V e have
thought good" it says" to 0111it compline altogether
and also the accustolned hours, prime, tierce, sext
and none, as well because in all these there is a
continual repetition of the same things, ,vhich is
idle and useless, as because it seeU1S a 11lockery
to retain the same divisions of the hours observed
by the ancient fathers, when the custom of praying
seven times a day has long since ceased and we now
assemble only twice a day for prayers" t.
In the second place, the matins and vespers were
to be said as hitherto in latin, except the Lord's
Prayer and the lessons of Holy Scripture, which were
directed to be recited in english. These last were
to be read fro1l1 the pulpit or some other place out-
1 Ms. Reg. 7 B. lV, f. llb.
C}'aumers Second Project.
31
side the choir. The psalter ,vas to he gone through
once in the month, and the general rubric regulating
the recital is much the saIne as it now stands in
the present Book of Common Prayer.
The daily order of 1\Iatins ,vas as follows: after
the Ow' Fat/Ie'/' said aloud in english, there followed
the Domine laúia mea aperirJS &c. 1 The JTenite was
Olllitted altogether. "It has seemed sufficient" says
the rubric "that this should be recited anlong the
rest of the psalms in its ordinary course once a
11lonth" 2. Next came a hymn varied according to
the day of the ,veek or the season of the year. Then
fol] owed in order three psalms, Our [?athe'/' in eng-
lish, three lessons from the Holy Scriptures 3, Te
Dcmn and Benedictus , the salutation Dominus 'Cobis-
cum, and the prayer varying according to the titl1e
of the year. The service closed with the Benedicamus
Domino to which a new response was given.
On sundays and feastdays a fourth lesson was to be
said after the Te Dewm, which was directed to be
taken, either from some homily of the Fathers, or
from the life of a saint. On sundays also after the
Benedicamus Domino there were added to the service,
the Athanasian Creed, the preces, which still survive
in the Book of Common Prayer, with the Collect, now
called "for grace".
The order of vespers was the sallle on all days of
the year and followed that of the daily matins,
except that two lessons .were read in place of three,
1 This is the arrangement of the present Prayer Book after
the absolution.
2 Ibid. f. 11a.
3 These were preceded in the traditional way by the Jube
Domine with the blessing given by the officiant, and closed with
the Tu mtfem.
.
')
..)
Cranmer's Secolld Project.
and the JJafJuificat replaced the Te Ðeun1. After the
canticle the prayer was said, and the service closed
in the usual way.
It will be seen therefore that this project, though
on the same lines as that which subsequently ap-
peared in the printed Book of 134:9, is somewhat
1110re simple. The vespers are drawn entirely fron1
the old vespers service; the daily morning services
comprise certain features of the ancient matins with
the Benedictus drawn frolYl lauds; and on suudays
the Athanasian creed, the }Jreces and the collect 'for
grace' takerr from prime.
Of the llun1erous hYU111S of the old breviaries
twenty-six "rere retained; fourteen heillg assigned to
the days of the week and the other twelve to the
ecclesiastical seasons of ChristInas, Passiontide, Holy
"\Vee1\:, Easter, Ascension and Pentecost.
The variable collects were reduced in the SaIne
way. Of the five and thirty prayers retained, whilst
one was assigned to each of the sundays after Pente-
cost, only ten had to serve for the ecclesiastical
seasons hOll1 Advent to Pentecost inclusively.
Considerable difficulty seems to have been experi-
enced in settling the calendar which is the key to
all office books on the traditional lines. rfhe Itoyal
)IS.
which contains these projects of archbishop
Cranll1er, cOlnprises two schemes of a calendar for
saints and three schemes of a table of lessons frollJ
Scripture, besides an imperfect draft of a {estivale
or series of fourth lessons for saints' days. Each
of the
e elements of the entire project must be
considered in turn. To take first the two calendars
of baillts' days. These are Inarkedly distinct in char-
acter and there is little difficulty in placing then1
in their correct order of date. rfhe earlier differs
from the traditional calendar only by the pa,ucity
- ./ ,
-
m HIlIn ltr J'l::I.ur IT
m t
T"-
;::
'1:nÐ E
t'W\4
r
. tJIO" ..&1...'#
"T ,,f '3 14 I)
I< 7
......,.
<) J
S "Y+ 10 ,6
1ft>
ID 9 ,6
\ l' 17
t4S
iii -- Z%
11 IØ
6 19
r.:bdj"
ø.0zhi. \"1. u 2.Q
7 Z3 21 ,%.tr-.iif
'} IZ- 17 '8 'LI- 13
(-
L.-
;..r.'
14- I
=+
ø
1 2
b \\)1,
lu 11- -=6
:z 'Zb ,
ottIO
f\:.' \7 r..1 It. I
%.7 too - %8
if \6 'a. 1'7 16 Z4 6. + :;0
IS
... 1f
"
ct
Iß 17 ;, 6'%
::
lA 1+ ;., K
tq 18 n 0;, -6
-
IS I
'.L ..6 :4) I!J ;s 64- 7
C' 1% 'a. 71 ZI1 &I.tt
' 6) i>
11
'Z '%
,;...,
U
" 'Zz %.,
øt. q +
ID
'Z; V + 6b 1# S
') "" h
..(fl"M . ::::4 %J (,
't>L,' 7i %4- B ;:. 12 ') t ",14-
r... :zb Z
1Þ : ,y "
ll; 6
=7 26 1%
t+ 1-;
('
:a, -r.:3 ' %.7 14-
U I
i-
+
::::. :::.tl .6 4- \6 f7 !NI;U
t ;
a. '\1' "1.9 18 of 17 1"
.., ii
ta. 3 1 ;0 '20 S '8 z'
rul 16 ..
--, .. . .r_ ,J .x.-
mA' 1 1 1.
, I') '" "'1'
.a..... -t
"l. "" 2i-
%ð %S
'
J .
:, 5 16 6 %.1 ::::,
,'i tMlhol;i# + "t 28 '7 /1 ,./ 10 too -+
6....
10 UI
11 7 "
("
Wt
"
II .. 7 II S ß
\
cø
1
12 1': q 11 ., ,,'
_'t
"'"
-, H 13 10 1} III II
If' IS
..& \L .&"'7:id
Î-I\.'.M4J ti- t'" p: I
II I}
q t7' t.. H 1S .+ Ii- 1
I
l..tl 16 "01 .
<'.
"( 16 Ib tf! IS n 17 1
t1,
e I" 17 17 .& 16 1+ 19
(' 1+
,\. 18 18 2ø 17 I
2.
n !':.L T,
,,,," 10 ,<) 27 17 Ú> Y
IZ ["'- 7.0 ZD :+ 16 17 l'n
tll"\ I
ff II
"'- :;;, %
I'"
,cw '% 1$ .
::: 1-
tll
ID ',,- .r(bo:t\ -:2 zz + 14 t9 j
t<[
:>\
o
t,i".., 2.3 %3 (;
"ZØ -f
6 8 '... ;"
""" . 7.4 %-4- ;" 2.1 %t 6 ,
,
( 7 :0\ ILt.,
,,"t_ 2.) ::.
., 2.
zz !'
b to l'.a z& ::ró U, '2
=
"
<. ..
01 7 7.7 I
'3 z+ '11
t-+ '..tJ K.t ",,1M! fIE'h. '-tn
'Z
zi 14- 2} 2) I)
i
o\ ó) 2L) Ib :Lf- z6 17
\"ç."
,'.t. :;1' 3 0 '8 :z.S 7.7 \9 ,_
Fac"imile III. (tn [;lce p. 33).
The later calcndar sh(m ing alteratiOib in Cranmer's hand. (:\IS. Rl'
ï H. 1\' f. 4 h ).
Cranmer's Second }-Jroject.
33
of saints' names ,vhich are entered in it. Not a single
english nan1e is to be found in the entire list: that
of St. Gregory the Great is in fact the only one
connected with England. Of the festi vals of the
Blessed Virgin, the Purification, Annunciation,
Assumption and Nativity are preserved as well as
the feast of St. Anne. A special characteristic of
this scheme appears to be the retention of the
names of the great Fathers of the Church. There
would seem to be one trace of the influence of
Quignon in the insertion of the feast of SSe Phileas
and Philoromus at the third of February, whilst the
calendar gives already, in the insertion of the fes-
tival of St. Tirnothy on 22 January and St. Benjamin
on 21 February, an indication of the spirit which
presided at the con1pilation of the later calendar.
Of this second proposal for a new calendar for
the english church it is difficult to speak seriously,
or to believe it could be meant in earnest were
it not that the correcting hand of Cranmer has
attempted to reduce it to a more reasonable forn1,
and that the projected (estivale is actually drawn
up on the lines which it lays dowll. It lI1ay be de-
scribed in one sentence as scripturalisll1 without dis-
cretion. It commemorates Abel, Noe, the good Thief,
Benjamin, Lydia and Deborah, Gideon and San1p.
son, Booz and the Centurion, king David and
Nathan, Judith and Esther with others. At the same
time it hears traces of having been a further develop-
ment of the former calendar. Two englif:;h saints
are now admitted, St. Edward, king and Inartyr,
and St. Edmund the king.
The correcting hand introduced some measure of
sense by adding old fan1Ïliar feasts like those ot
St. Agnes and St. Vincent, the In-vention of the Holy
Cross, St. Cuthbert, St. Augustine of Canterbury and
Ð
Hi
Cl"anmer's Second Project.
St. Alban. But saints Phileas and Philoromus
maintain their ground, and Cranmer's annotations
in the feslivale refer to the Brem:ariwfl Romanum
as a source from which lives of saints may be taken.
On con1paring these schemes with the calendar of
feasts which actually appeared in the Prayer Book
of 1549 it is not difficult to understand the situation.
There were clearly contrary influences at work, the
one advocating the ancient calendar somewhat purged
of its objectionable elements, the other insisting
upon Scripture being the primary basis. What was
actually done in 1549 was to retain such feasts as
could be distinctly referred to the New rrestament.
That is, putting aside those of Our Lord, the feasts
were reduced to those of the Apostles, the Purifi-
cation and Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin,
St. John the Baptist, St. Mary Magdalen, St. Stephen
and the Holy Innocents, with the addition of
St. Michael as a commemoration of the angels, and
of the one general celebration of All Saints.
The kernel of the new office lay in the novel tables
of lessons of which the Inanuscript gives three sche-
mes. These lTIUst be taken jn connection with that
which appeared in the print of the first Book of
Common Prayer. It has been already pointed out
that the earliest scheme of lessons is written in
Cranmer's own hand and adopts the arrangement
of the ecclesiastical year Inade in Quignon's breviary.
In the distribution of the Bible throughout the year,
however, like the later SChe111eS it is original and
cannot be referred to any earlier breviary, although,
as rnight be expected in one who had long used the
Sarun1 office, there are traces of the influence of the
Salisbury use J. This sch81ue of course belongs to
1 For example: the lessons of Advent are taken from Isaias,
1. '""
J,.
4.
-&_
,
'rco.. +" .\.-_1.
_
-
..--6
,6 '8
,
t-fÇ '\8 '-
5
1.7 1.,C) I)
t 7 '9 ð. . J
..t.t> ,
l8 tJ 01
1.8 .0
+
-.,,- ""7
;; #-7 to;> 1..9
( Lþ -
""-^-
...."c;:I\.., , 'V. J
,
r;-:J. 1.
.::J
1.9 ::...3 n..",::J
r"\
CKr -2..
ZO
(?"..... t
(þ
" '" e-?J!: :z.. ...,-.1..,J 2-0
m t.;
. '"
X.'!- 2. 2..
.
l
' ?
2.. :J...:J
îad'"
t+
4 2.1 '2.\
4
2...
2-1. 2..\ '- +
tf
..b 1-4!J
4\
;. .,:;)
'tr
2 -
r.
--"
-.áD
.
crcoh./i-A.'J 'hn-:","
..6
'áL
F-hß-t
.,
7ff:H.<4 .
-
-
;%..Z
r
"'
f-:
7
--
'
',
-
i \
.
5
b 7 5
8 J S
..\ \.1.. b
T
6
&
7
7
8
8
9
?
24-
<
41f
z+
'tl ::z.+
H Z4
7
i 7 12.. ;2-5
is .
2..
5
8 t:%-
,
k
Î'
z.
,
1-
ø'
J
..,
,
I
/.
\.
Z-
7
Z t f')..
( 2-
-=-t 4-
.,
7
1
\
:2-2
:;"2.
"t
'",
2.
2.2.
..6'
'7
1$
U
2..
2..4-
'S
z.b
z-7 2.8
:z...:J ZO
I\.
'\.
ri
W
}'Z..
i+
Z7
2.2..
\..7
4.9
2.-,
2..
'-
:l.l
4
2:\..
t
z+
,
2-7
2-T
,Z...i .
'2..t'
2-9
Z"
ì t
11..
J+
î 7
1 8
Fal'...imile 1\". (to f.ICe' p. 3-l).
Draft of a talJ)e of !c"'SO!l'; in Crallllwr'., haud. (
I S. Rpg. ;- H. I V f. 15 2a).
Cl'anmer'8 fiecund Project.
35
the projected breviary described in the last chapter.
Passing to the next in order of date a significant
change occurs in the arrangen1ent. The first scheme
was n1ade to depend upon the ecclesiastical year,
the portions of Holy Scripture being assigned to the
various seasons of Ad vent, Epiphany, Lent, &c. The
second was regulated entirely by the days of the
month, and the comlllencen1ent of the book of
Genesis' was transferred from Septuagesima, as in
the traditional office, to January the third. In other
words the ecclesiastical year was abandoned in
favour of the calendar year, and this was main-
tained in the Praym' Book of 154:9 and its successors.
The steps by which the present arrangement of the
lessons fron1 Scripture was arrived at are interesting
but the details n1ust be sought in the appendix.
Here it will be sufficient to note that in none of
the schen1es was the continuous reading of Scripture
interrupted. Special lessons were first assigned for
the ordinary sunday office ill 1559, and however the
distrihution of the lessons varied the actual amount
of Scripture read from auy book ren1ained ahnost
the same throughout; but the variations also show
how closely linked together are these three schemes
and that which was printed in the first Book of
C0111mon Prayer.
The plan of morning and evening service adopted
in this second project can have n') pretence to ori-
ginality. For five and twenty years such services had
been in use in the Lutheran parts of Germany where
the ancient ritual hooks had, as in this case, been
used as the quarry out of which the lI1aterials for the
new forms of prayer were drawn. It must be re-
those after the Epiphany from Romans and Corinthians, whilst
Gpnesis was comnlPnceù on Spptuagesima Sunday.
36
Cranmer's Second Project.
111ernbered however that so far as these services were
concerned their conception and their similarity were
due less to acquaintance ,vith the new books than
to intercourse with lllen who had used them. There
are features however which distinguish the eng1ish
services contemplated by Cranmer fronl those which
owed their origin exc1usively to Lutheran inspiration
'The german reformer, however violent nlay have been
his language always held firmly the principle of litur-
gical tolerance. Writing in 1;)-15 to the Prince of
Anhalt, Luther says: "I cannot reCOll1ll1end the plan
of a uniforn1ity of ceremonies in every place". 1
In reviewing the manuscript projects in connection
with the Book of 154:9, it is impossible not to see-
ho.w Cranmer's mind constantly tended to greater
rigidity in these nlatters. The projects not merely
witness to a desire for a uniformity of observance
throughout the country; but all churches alike, fron}
the catherlral with its numerous clergy, singing Hlen
and boys, to that of the sll1allest vil1age, were confined
by the Book of Comnlon Prayer to a single type of
service, which was Inade as nearly as possible the.
same for every day throughout the year.
It may be that the ancient office manifested a
superabundant richness of varying devotional fanus,
but the new order certainly runs to the opposite
extreme. 'Vithout doubt subsequent revisions of the
Book of Comnlon Prayer have introduced elements,
which, although it Inay not be easy to justify them
by the test of antiquity, have given to the daily
service a breadth or even a certain dignity which is
altogether wanting in the book of 154:9.
One further feature in the manuscript of the second
project remains to be noticed. The whole scheme is
1 Quoted in Jacoby's Lifurgik der Re(orlllatorcn, I, p. 2
3ï.
Cnwmer's 0ecoJld Project.
37
introduced by a ]atin preface of which that of the
present Prayer Book is little more than a translation.
There are however variants which deserve attention.
In the first place in the enumeration of the english
""uses" the latin omits the lnention of that of Lincoln,
but adds "those of the 111anifold orders of religious,
.each one of which had its own special use". Further,
passages from Quignon's preface to his breviary are
given in the latin draft, which were subsequently
left out in the english version. Quignon's measured
and telling criticisn1 of the lessons fronl saints' Ii ves,
in this preface to the secoud project takes another
.colour, and its author was doubtless weB advised in
on1Ïtting fronl the preface to the Prayer Book his
Telnar}{S on "old wives' fables and the stupidity of
those who had put thenl together". The fonowing
passage which could not of course be nlade to suit
the printed hook is interesting. "We have left" the
latin preface says" on]y a few hymns which appeared
to be nlore ancient and n10re beautiful than the rest
and the histories of certain saints as to w hOll1 no
doubt can be raised. These we have caused to be
gathered fronl fitting authorities greek and latin.
:l\1oreover, we have only rejected those saints whose
solemnities we saw to be wrongly and superstitiously
observed by the common people, or whose Jives and
conduct appeared to us open to exception, or whose
history was not recorded by approved authors". 1
It may be further remarked in regard to passages
<>ften quoted frolll the printed preface to the Prayer
Book, that they were peI-fectly appropriate as used
by Quignon from whom they were derived, but even
in the first scheme were already out of place. Thus
'Quignon could say with justice that on a candid con-
1 Royal Ms. 7n.rV. f. Sa.
38
Cranmer' 8 Second Project.
sideration of the original intention of our forefathers
in regard to the divine office, it would be acknow-
ledged that his book was not so much a novel inven-
tion as the restoration of the ancient breviary. Tn
the latin draft of his preface, adapting this CranIum.
says: "You have here a fonn of prayer not newly
invented by us but rather the ancient one handed
down by the fat.hers and restored to its prirnitive-
use and pristine beauty". In the printed english
preface he Iuakes a rnore modest, but less intellig-
ible, claim. " So here you have", he says, "an order for
prayer (as touching the reading of Holy Scripture}
much agreeable to the mind and purpose of the old
fathers". A recent writer bas remarked that Crannler
was in error in attributing the order of lessons from
Scripture to the Fathers of the church, although his
expressions are perfectly correct when applied to the
mediæval breviaries. The writer did not know that
the passage to which he took exception was derived
from Quignon, but had been applied by Cranmer
to a book in which the distinctive features of the-
breviary had been abandoned. I
Finally the order for morning and evening prayer
ends with the following advertisement: "we do not
wish that anyone be bound, as regards the recital
of nlatins and vespers, to anything more than is
here set down". This of course relates to the obli-
gation under which priests lay to recite the entire
1 See the interest.ing tract by E. Ranke Del' Fortbestand
des herkömmlichen Pericopenkreises. Gotha, 1859, pp. 53-4.
The writer's judgment of the Anglican calendar of lessons
seems more equitable than that of Kliefoth, but lit is to be
noticed that the two features he selects for commendation are.
not Cranmer's, whilst that which he specially criticises is of the
archbishop's own devising.
Cranmer' 8 Second Project.
39
divine office either privately or in public, and thus
contemplates the private recitation of the usual" Hours".
The Prayer Book of 15-19 relaxes the obligation of
private recitation altogether, but this was reimposed
in the second Book of 1552.
The general rubrics of this project are closed by a
"Canon" as to the shortening of ecclesiastical prayers
for the sake of preaching. After noticing the advan-
tages .which win ensue from this exercise, "therefore"
(says the canon)" lest the length of the public prayers
here established by us should in any way hinder
the work of good pastors in teaching their flock,
we win that as often as any serlllon is preached to
the people, the parish priest may omit the Te Dell'Jn,
the fourth lesson and the Athanasian creed in the
public prayers before the people". I
It only remains to consider the probable date at
which this scheme of morning and evening prayer
was dra.wn up. rfhe alteration of the calendar and
the omission of all provision for a hYllln and collect
for the festival of Corpus Christi lllake it almost
certain that the scheme does not belong to the reign
of Henry VIII. On the other hand it certainly dates
before the compilation of the printed Book of Common
Prayer and clearly manifests traces of having been
used for that work. It may safely therefore be assigned
to an early period in the reign of Edward VI.
I Cf. in the Prayer Book of 1549 the last note on ceremonies.
CHAPTER IV.
PREP ARATIO:NS FOR CHAKGE.
So long as Henry lived the Engli"sh church, although
depri ved of some dignity and strength, in her outward
appearance remained unchanged. Her system of
worship was the same as it had been for many genera-
tions, but her chief prelate Cranmer was prepared to
suggest innovations and had ready in hand a scheme
that was revolutionary. To lllaintain the old order in the
great churches of the realm one thing was absolutely
necessary: ample revenues to support a large body
of clergy with their attendant n1Ïnisters. The old
elaborate ritual must necessarily be curtailed or alto-
gether swept away if the ecclesiastical revenues were
din1inished or entirely alienated froll1 their original
purposes. A small establishment would quite suffice
for the public service on the simple model now pro-
jected by Craniller. "\Vhether he had in lllind the
spoliation of the church or a redistribution of its
wealth is very doubtful, but it is certain that the
simplicity of his proposed ritual rendered confis-
cation possible, and would therefore highly commend
it to the men who were now to come into supreme
power.
Henry VIII. died at Westminster on Friday,
28 January 154:7, at two o'clock in the morning.
PreparatioJls fo}' chauge.
i1
Parliament was then sitting; but the king's death
,vas kept secret for nearly three days. On :Monday,
31 January, the C0111mons ,vere sent for to the
House of Lords and the Lord Chancellor W riothesley
acquainted them with the event.
Edward, at the moment of his father's death, was
at Hertford. His uncle, the Earl of Hertford, after-
,vards the Duke of Son1erset, was in Lonòon but
hastened at once to join his nephew. Defore leaving
the city, however, it is clear that he had n1ade ail
the arrangen1ents needful for seizing the supreme
power. Scarcely twenty four hours after Henry's
death he wrote to Paget fronl IIertford a letter dated
29 January, between three and four o'clock in the
morning, sent by a n1essenger, hidden to " baste, post
haste, haste with all diligence for thy life, for thy
life". The object of the letter was to intiu1ate, "that
for divers respects, I think it not convenient to
satisfy the world" as to the contents of Henry's will,
and saying that between this and Wednesday
(February 2) "we to meet and agree therein as there
may be no controversy hereafter". I
Even Edward himself, although in his uncle's
keeping, was not informed of his father's death until
they had made the journey from Hertford to Enfield.
" 'Ve intend," writes Hertford in a second Jetter,
"from Enfield, this Sunday night. at eleven of the
clock," that the "IGl1g's
iajesty shall be a-horse-
back tomorrow by eleven
o that by three \ye
trust his Grace shall be at the Towel'''.
The an1l0UllCement III Parliament of the names of
the executors of Henry's ,viII, who were to constitute
the Privy Council and exercise all the authority of
I Tytler, Rci!JHS of Edw. VI and ]lIary. 1. pp. 15-1(;.
4
PrelJllratiollS {oJ' dWl/ge.
the crown during Edward's minority, raised murn1urs
of surprise and distrust. How much of the contents
of the will was n1ade public is not known; but it
would seem that the Earl of llerttord's plan, sketched
in his letter of 29 January, was followed. His direc-
tion to Paget was "to have the will presently with
you and to show this is the win, naming unto them
severally who the executors are that the king did
specially trust, and who be counsel]ors".
rrhe first proceedillgs of the Oouncil within a week
of the king's arrival in London, and before Henry
was buried, indicated the spirit with which they
were prepared to manage even the most weighty
111atters of ecclesiastical administration. Under Henry,
however strong his will and n1asterful his lllind even
as supreme head, the old forms of ecclesiastical
govenUllent retained an ecclesiastical aspect. Under
Edward, year by year not merely was all ecclesias-
tical power wholìy absorbed by the IGng, the Council
and their lay agents; hut all care to preserve even
the outward forms was disrega.rded and the admi-
nistration of the Church appeared as a mere depart-
ment of the State.
On Sunday, ß February, in pursuance of this policy,
the Council assembled at the Tower resolved; "Item
whereas all the' bishops of the reahll had authority
of spiritual jurisdiction by force of instruments under
the seal appointed ad Ires ecclesiasticas which was
determined by the decease of our late Sovereign lord
JGng Henry VIII. .. and for as much as for the better
order of the affairs of the realn1 it is thought con-
venient the same authority be renewed unto them;
it was therefore ordained... that they should cause
new instruments to be drawn in forn1 of the others
they had before... and thereupon every of the said
bishops to exercise their jurisdiction in such 111anner
Preparatiolls for cllwl.ge.
43
as they did before by virtue of their former grants".'
At this Council both Cranmer and rrunstall were
present, and in compliance with the order the arch-
bishop took out hid new comn1ission on the following
day. 2 The whole tone of this document, professin
as it does that "all ecclesiastical jurisdiction" pro-
ceeded from the king" as well as secular", is sufficient
to show that the taking out of these cOlllmissions
was regarded as a necessary part of the programlne,
even if the Council Book had not recorded its positive
order. In f
tct it was an immediate announcement
of the cardinal point of the \vhole ecclesiastical
policy of Ed ward's reign. rrhe bishops were to be
mere delegates of the I\:iug.
'Vhether Cranmer found any imitators among
the bishops in thus immediately complying with the
order of the Council, of which he was one of the
1110St important members, does not appear; but it is
wqrthy of note that Tunstall's name disappears early
from the documents issuing from theCouilcil board 3.
Council Book Had MS. 23J8 f. 25 d.
2 This order of the Council appears to have been commonly
overlooked and the proceeding has been attributed to the initia-
tive of Cranmer. Tho impression that has generally prevailed may
be conveniently given in the words used by Canon Dixon. "Even
before the prince was crowned" he writes "it came into the mind
of Cranmer, so great was his loyalty, that it was desimble for
himself and the other bíshops to renew their commissions as
functionaries of the new King. He therefore issued or caused to
be issued again without delay those curious instruments" &c.
(Hist. II, p. 413). "Desirable" seems hardly the word to use in
view of the proem of the commission itself printed in Burnet
(LL 2. p. 90), who seems to have seen the Council order, since
he says (H p. 6) "and the bishops were required to take out
llew commissions ".
3 After the first three weeks ot this reign his signature does not
4!
Preparations for change.
One bishop certainly objected, and fron1 his own words
it may be taken that he spoke in the name of the
rest. The full l11eanil1g of this novel order did not
escape the keen sight of that "ignorant" or "ignorant
and subtle lawyer" as Crann1er designates Gardiner,
the great opponent of his innovating tendencies. For
nearly a n10nth the jurisdiction of the bishop of
"\Vinchester over his diocese must have been suspend-
ed pending the result of the correspondence he had
on the matter with the Council. His objections are
best stated in his own words. In a letter of 1 :l\larch
to "1\Iaster Secretary Paget
' he writes: "Being the
111atter of the expedition of our commissions com-
mi tted to you, these (letters) shall be to require you
to expedite then1 favourably as ye promised me you
would. This day 1 have seen your addition which I
like not; for we be called ordinaries of the realm,
and there should be a request on our parts to make
()urselves delegates. And 1 have been exercised on
making of treaties, where words (as ye know) have
been thrust in to signify son1ewhat at length and
then have such an interpretation as 111ay serve. And
we poor bishops be not such a 111atch as the parties
be in treaties.. .It would be a n1arvellous matter if
after my long service and the love of my master
(Henry VIII), I should offend in going about to do
well, to see things well by visitations and receiving
of convicts to 111Y charge as ordinary, and am but a
delegate. Ye lnust grant archdeacons authority to
visit or they cannot pay their tenths, for thereupon
their profit doth arise, and then how shall it stand,
the archdeacons to have more authority than the
bishop, having in his name to be overseer and yet
appear on the Privy Seals with those of the other councillors,
ex.cept once in May and twice in June of this year.
Preparations for change.
45
may not go see. And now is the time when such as
have office to order the people should rather have
more committed to then1 than less. And there is no
luan I think so made as will ad venture furt.her than
the evident speech of the commission will bear...
I write generally unto you for all and specially for
my lord of London. For lil{e as the brethren have
made a ballad and solace themselves in it, where
Bonner lalllenteth the fall of "\Vinchester, so for
recon1pense of his lamentation I speak in his cause,
with whom I perceive ye be offended, justly or no I
will not reason for I know not, nor have been, 011
my fidelity, ever spoken to by hin1 of it" '.
Gardiner had been, as he hinlself declares, in
Paget's youth "his tutor anù teacher; afterwards
his master, then his beneficial master" obtaining
from Henry "one of the rooms of the clerkship of
the signet for him" 2. The tone of Paget's reply to
his old master is extraordinary. It is dated :Uarcb
2, the day after Gardiner had \vritten his request,
and it H1llSt have shown the bishop that there ,vas
no room for appeal against a policy already decided
upon. "1 lualign not bishops" he writes" but would
that both they and all other were in such order as
Inight be n10st to the glory of God and the benefit
of this realnl. And if the estate of bishops is or shall
be thought meet to be reformed, 1 wish either that
you were no bishop, or that you could have such a
pliable will as could well bear the reformation that
should be thought lueet for the quiet of the reahn".
"Your lordship shall have your con1111ission in as
ample manner as I have authority to luake out the
sanle, and in an ampler IDanner than you had it
1 State Papers. Darn. Ed. VI. ValL No. 24.
'2 Foxe's Acts ed. Townsend, VI. p 259.
46
Preparations for change.
before. No n1an wisheth you better than I do, which
is as weB as to n1yself; if you wish me not like,
you are in the wrong; and thus I take my leave ot
your lordship" 1.
Another n1atter affecting the interests of the church
,vas as easily settled and the course entered on was
as persistently pursued. '1'he ecclesiastical revenues
and the sacred buildings themseìves were early
marked out for spoliation. In a paper, dated 15 February
1547 are seen "the names of those to be raised to
dignity, and lands to be given to then1". An10ngst these
are the following: "l\Iy lord of Hertford "with his
dukedo111" Æ 800 lands a year, and ;E 200 of the
next bishop's lands" 2.
Sir Thon1as Darcy was to be made steward of
the bishop of Norwich in Suffolk and Sir Richard
Southwell in Norfolk.
1.y lord Wentworth was "to have
the stewardship of all my lord of Ely, his lands and
master of his game in Norfolk, in Suffolk and in
Calnbridgeshire": Sir William Petre was granted
"the J} 100 a year of my lord of \tVinchester" (bishop
Gardiner) ,vhilst "the stewardship of all my lord of
Lincoln's lands" with other small perquisites was
divided between Sir William Goring and Sir Ralph
Vane. It is a n1ere common place of history how
faithfully and generously the policy thus modestly
initiated was pursued to the end.
But the rulers were not content to lay down only
the lnain lines of conduct in greater matters. The
attack began at once and in detail upon almost every
point of the ancient system. In 1547, Ash Wednesday
1 Tytler. I p. 25.
2 State Papers. Domestic. Vol. I No. 11. This appears to be
a draft corrected by Hertford himself: the words "and R, 200
&c" have been added by the corrector.
Preparations {or f'!w}lge.
47
fell upon 23 February, and the Lent sermons
afforded an excellent opportunity for the preachers
of the new era. It must be borne in mind that in
those days there was no "liberty of prophecying".
Henry had opened and shu t the 1110uths of the preachers
throughout the country at will, and they n1Ïght preach
unacceptable doctrine at their periL The pulpit was
consequently at this time essentially and purely an
official organ of the state and its utterances are to
be accepted as indications of the will of the govern-
n1 en t.
The man selected to preach before the court on
Ash vVednesday was Nicholas Ridley, who in Sep-
tember of the saIne year was 111ade bishop of Rochester.
In it he gave a specimen of the acceptable word and
struck the note which it would be safe for other
preachers to take up. After admonishing his audience
that he would specially travail in the confutation
"of the Bishop of Ron1e's pretended authority" -
a subject which it 111ight be thought was by this
time sOl11ewhat out of date - he proceeded to matters
of more inllnediate interest and dealt with images
and ceren10nies. All Ílnages, whether of our Lord or
the saints he styled idols. In the l11atter ot ceremon-
ies he particularly selected "holy water to drive
away devils It for condemnation. The text of the
sern10n is lost, but it is not difficult to conjecture
the n1anner in which Ridley developed his theme.
Besides these minor Il1atters he touched on a prin-
ciple of the greatest practical importance. Although
speaking of the invisible church of the elect - " an
uul\:uown church to us and known only to God",
yet he declared "the union of that church in the
permixec1 church, which God ordereth man to con1-
plain unto and to hear again". At this point he
becoll1es clear: " 111 en " he says "n1ust receive the
48
Preparations for change.
detennination of the practical church and obey where
God's law repllgneth not expressly". 1
About this same time Barlow, bishop of St. David's
preached a sermon seemingly advocating religious
changes generally, to which also Gardiner directed
the Protector's attention. In hiq letter the bishop so
clearly expressed the ideas of religious policy to
which during the whole reign he was faithful that
a few passages frolll it deserve quotation.
" Alas! my lord, this is a piteous case" he writes
"that, having so much business as ye have, these
inward disorders should be added unto thenl...
being now a time rather to repair that which needeth
reparation, than to make any new buílr1ings, which
they pretend. Quiet, tranquility, unity and concord
shall lllaintain estimation. The contrary may animate
the enemy to attempt that which was never thought
on, which God forbid. There was never attempt of
alteration made in England but upon comfort of
discord at home; and woe be to them that 111ind it.
If nlY lord of St. David's, or such others, have their
heads cumbered with any new platform, I would
wish they were COnl111anded, between this and the
king's majesty's full age, to draw the plat, diligently
to hew the stones, dig the sand and chop the chalk,
in the unseasonable tilne of building. And, when the
King's l\lajesty cometh to full age to present their
labours to him; and in the mean time, not to dis-
turb the state of the realm, whereof your Grace is
protector; but that you lnay, in every part of reli-
gion, laws, lands and decrees (which four contain
1 See Bp. Gardiner's letter to Ridley cautiously enclosed in
one to Somerset for 
