Writings of the REV. Dr. Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury and Martyr, 37-51

http://books.google.com/books?id=26wQAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA40&dq=thomas+cranmer&output=text#PA40

Cranmer in the Reign of King Edward the Sixth.

Henry VIII. was succeeded by Edward VI., then a youth in the tenth year of his age. His reign was short, but his virtues and piety are recorded by every historian: even the Romanists scarcely attempt to depreciate his memory. During his reign the reformation proceeded with activity, and although much was left imperfect, yet the foundation was so firmly laid, that through the divine blessing, it withstood the violence of queen Mary, his successor.

When we examine into English history we find that many causes united to oppose the labours of the reformers. During the two preceding reigns, the regal office had been administered with an authority almost unlimited: the sceptre was now in the hands of a child, and consequently the executive power rested with the ministers. Two of the principal, Wriothesly, lord chancellor, and Tonstal, the bishop of Durham, were Romanists, and in political ability they far exceeded the earl of Hertford and Cranmer, the leaders of the protestants.* The earl of Hertford, afterwards duke of Somerset, was appointed protector by general consent; his relation to the young king gave him a claim to that office, while his talents were not sufficient to excite the jealousy of his opponents. He was also expressly limited from acting without the advice and consent of the other executors. The disposition of Cranmer, as we have seen, did not incline him to take a leading part in political affairs; he neither possessed, nor desired to assume that influence by which Romish primates of former days had virtually ruled the nation. Thus the short reign of Edward VI. exhibited a stormy conflict of parties, the leaders of which sought chiefly to promote their own individual interests. These, it is true, inclined them generally to favour the reformation, and Cranmer, with

" This king, notwithstanding his rigorous government, and his round dealing with many, to the taking away oftheir lives, lived and died highly beloved of his subjects, whatever were the reasons of it; whether it were some of those princely qualities and excellent accomplishments that he was endued with, or the suppressing the ecclesiastical power, which was so oppressive to the people." The more fully we are aware of the extent to which the profligacy and tyranny of the church of Rome had proceeded, the less we are surprised at this. The various executions during Henry's reign having been carried into effect by sentence of law, he appears to have had no impression upon his mind that they were wrong.

* The extent of Romish influence at the commencement of this reign appeared from the magnificent exhibition of popish ceremonial at the funeral of Henry. The conduct of the chancellor, however, soon caused his power and influence to be lessened, and the protestants were enabled to proceed with more activity.

the most pious of his associates, was enabled to do much in promoting the truth. That they did not effect all they might have done is more than probable, but certainly those cannot fairly enter upon this question who do not estimate the peculiar circumstances of those times, and the situation of England, both in its foreign and domestic relations, which were more complicated at that period than in almost any other of its history.*

One of the earliest measures connected with ecclesiastical affairs, after the accession of Edward, was for the bishops to take out new commissions from the king, authorizing them to hold their respective offices. Cranmer set the example, and his conduct in thus departing from the high assumptions of the Romish clergy was one cause of their displeasure against him. It is probable that the archbishop thought this measure would assist to prevent those prelates who were still attached to Romanism from being active in opposing the reformation, but doubtless it also proceeded from the little estimation in which Cranmer held his honours and titles. That he set lightly by them, appears from a letter written by him to Gardiner, in May, 1535, when that busy prelate had represented the archbishop's title, " Primate of all England," as inconsistent with the king's supremacy. An extract may be inserted here as illustrating this trait in the character of Cranmer. After having shown that the titles were not inconsistent, he says, "All this notwithstanding, if the bishops of this realm pass no more of their names, styles, and titles, than I do of mine, the king's highness shall soon order the matter betwixt us all. And if I saw that my style were against the king's authority, whereunto I am specially sworn, I would sue myself unto his grace that I might leave it; and would have done so before this time. For I pray God never be merciful unto me at the general judgment, if I perceive in my heart that I set more by any title, name, or style that I write, than I do by the paring of an apple, further than it shall be to the setting forth of God's word and will. Yet I will not utterly excuse me herein. For God must be judge, who knoweth the bottom of my heart, and so do not I myself. But I speak for so much as I do feel in my heart. For many evil affections lie lurking there, and will not lightly be espied. But yet I would not gladly leave any just thing at the pleasure and suit of the bishop of Winchester, he being none otherwise affectionate unto me than he is.

" Even at the beginning of Christ's profession, Diotrephes desired to bear the pre-eminence in the church, as saith St. John in his last epistle. And since, he hath had more successors

* To say nothing of negotiations with the continental states, the protector in the early part ofthis reign was involved in a war with Scotland. Scarcely had this been terminated when the papists stirred up insurrections at home, which were followed by the dissensions among the nobility that terminated in the destruction of Somerset

CRANMER. 5

than all the apostles had, of whom have come all these glorious titles, styles, and pomps into the church. But I would that I, and all my brethren, the bishops, would leave all our styles, and write the style of our offices, calling ourselves the apostles of Jesus Christ; so that we took not upon us the name vainly, but were so even in deed. So that we might order our dioceses in such sort, that neither paper, parchment, lead, or wax, but the very christian conversation of the people, might be the letters and seals of our offices. As the Corinthians were unto Paul, unto whom he said, Ye are our letters, and the signs of our apostleship."

The proceedings of Cranmer at the coronation, and the open manifestation of piety by the protector, showed their determination to promote the progress of divine truth. One who could use in sincerity the prayer which was customarily offered up by Seymour, could not be a Romanist in principles or practice.

In Strype, Burnet, and other historians, will be found a minute account of the progress of the reformation during the short reign of Edward VI. The result may be thus summed up. The worship of images was prohibited; the saints and the virgin were no longer allowed to usurp any of that honour which is due unto God alone.—Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass were no longer substituted for the true doctrine and regular administration of the Lord's supper. —The free use of the scriptures in the vulgar tongue was permitted to persons of every rank and condition. Human traditions were not referred to, as equal or superior in authority to the word of God.—Public prayers were no longer offered in an unknown language.—The clergy were not prohibited from marriage.—Belief in purgatory, indulgences, and all the gainful traffics of the Romish church were no longer sanctioned. But the results attained in that short reign were not confined to these benefits, considerable as they are. The great doctrine, that salvation is by Christ Alone, was fully set forth to the people as the only ground for their hope and confidence—as the source of good works and holiness of heart and life, and this no longer obscured by the addition of man's devices, but fully and freely preached to all. The writings of the reformers, with the records of their proceedings, show that in no period of our history has the Rock of salvation been more fully exhibited, or with more simplicity and power, than in those days. Let us remember that during the reign of Henry these blessings had been very imperfectly attained. It is true that the main fabric of popery had been demolished, and much of the rubbish of that system had been removed, but little of the spiritual edifice was built up. All the advantages just enumerated were attained during the six years in which the influence of Cranmer prevailed, although limited and thwarted in many respects. This summary may give some idea of what we owe to him and to the faithful witnesses who laboured with him in life, and bore testimony with him in death.

Nor is it difficult to adduce undoubted evidence that the progress here described actually was made. The book of homilies, the forty-two articles of religion drawn up by Cranmer and Ridley, the English liturgy and communion book, the catechism of dean NowelT, with Cranmer's short instruction in the christian religion—his treatise against unwritten verities, his defence of the true catholic doctrine of the sacrament—the proposed improvements in the canon law,—the general diffusion of knowledge respecting the errors of popery,—the care taken to select faithful and zealous preachers—the numerous publications setting forth gospel truth which issued from the press—but above all, the many editions of the English scriptures printed in this reign—all these are evidences which yet survive, and bear testimony to the active proceedings of the reformers of that period.

Cranmer's personal concern in the various labours just described is generally admitted, and is a sufficient answer to the allegations which represent him as an ambitious and active partisan in the political proceedings of that day, for one whose mind was so fully occupied by the subjects already mentioned, could not be found directing measures so contrary. What were considered the duties of his official station required his continual presence in the council, and frequent reference to him for advice; but he appears rather to have withdrawn from political power than to have sought it

One of the earliest proceedings was to cause a general visitation of the kingdom, (which was divided into six districts,) by persons furnished with authority to promote the work of reformation, who were accompanied by preachers of ability to set forth the truth. The articles and injunctions prepared for these visitors are given by Strype in his Memorials. They show both the wisdom and care of the chief promoters of the good work, and also exhibit the state of corruption and superstition in which the bulk of the nation was still involved. Among other important injunctions, the due observance of the Lord's day was required; the bishops were to be careful to ordain none but such as were learned in the scriptures, and to inquire whether the word of God and the faith of Christ were preached purely and sincerely in every cure; also whether the clergy moved the people to hear and read the scriptures in English.

As preaching ever has been one of the most efficient means for diffusing the light of divine truth, Cranmer's attention was early called to the compiling of a book of homilies; an important and necessary work at that time, when a very small proportion of the clergy were able to prepare sermons for their congregations.* Gardiner's concurrence in this work was requested, but he opposed it as much as possible, and with others of his party declared that no innovation whatever in religious matters could be made during the king's minority.! Cranmer, however, proceeded, and having himself written the homily on salvation, communicated it to Gardiner, who said he would admit the statements it contained, if they " could show him any old writer that wrote how faith excluded charity in the office of justification." This was not difficult to do, but Gardiner was determined not to be satisfied, and continued to wrangle on this subject. At that period he was confined in the Fleet, whither he had been sent by the council for his opposition to the proceedings of the government, which he had with much pertinacity endeavoured to counteract. He blamed the archbishop exceedingly "for troubling the people with a needless speculation," as he termed it—namely, " that we be justified by faith, without all works of the law." He said this was unnecessary, " because in baptism we are justified being infants," before we can talk of the justification we strive for; " for all men receive their justification in infancy in baptism, and if they fall after baptism, they must arise again by the sacrament of penance." But it is unnecessary to dwell upon the cavils, the errors, the railing, or the sophistry of Gardiner. The doctrines he advanced were not peculiar to himself; full replies to them will be found in the writings of every reformer, particularly in the volumes written by Cranmer himself immediately with reference to their discussions. Another subject of displeasure to this bigoted Romanist, was the order that a copy of the translation of Erasmus's paraphrase on the new testament should be set up in every church. The proceedings of Gardiner before his imprisonment, and during its continuance, plainly show the difference of the treatment he received, compared with that which he and his associates inflicted upon the followers of the truth in the succeeding reign. The opinion of the foreign reformers respecting the homilies, was, as may be supposed, widely different from that of Gardiner. In an epistle to the church of England, Bucer spoke highly of them; he " commended much the homily of faith," the nature and force of which was so clearly and soberly discussed; and wherein it was so well distinguished from faith which was dead. He much approved

* Warner observes, that the greatest hinderance which Cranmer met with in his design of reformation was the miserable condition of the parochial clergy, and the want of able men to propagate the doctrines of truth throughout the kingdom.

t Some images having been plucked down and destroyed at Portsmouth, Gardiner complained bitterly of such proceedings. He said that " such as were affected with the principle of breaking down images were hogs and worse than hogs, and were ever so considered in England, being called Lollards."

of " the manner of treating concerning the misery and death we are all lapsed unto by the sin of our first parent, and how we are rescued from this perdition only by the grace of God, and by the merit and resurrection of his Son ; and how hereby we are justified in the sight of God, and adopted into the number of his children and heirs; and then showing what ought to be the study and work of those that are justified and regenerate. So that, by this full and dexterous restitution of Christ's doctrine, his kingdom was so fully explained to the people that no relics of the old leaven could remain long in any parts of our ceremonies or discipline." He and other foreign divines strongly urged Cranmer to proceed onwards in the work of reformation. Melancthon, in particular, departing from the course he too often pursued, recommended the use of the plainest terms on controverted subjects, such as could not be misunderstood.

The act of the six articles, which prevented all discussion upon subjects connected with religion, was now repealed by the interference of Cranmer. Also the act against Lollards, with every act by which men could be made to suffer for any religious opinion which was not considered as opposed to the christian faith. By the provisions of an act restraining persons from treating the sacrament of the altar with levity or contempt, the laity were restored to communion in both kinds.

The visitation throughout the kingdom was now completed. Many abuses had been corrected, numerous relics of superstition were removed from the churches, and the reading of the English bible was encouraged. Gardiner's opposition to the latter measure was one of the causes of his imprisonment. This proceeding of the council, however, made that busy, meddling prelate to be accounted the champion of his party, and exhibited him as a sufferer for religion. He was liberated after a few months' confinement, when the proceedings which he so warmly opposed had received the sanction of parliament. He returned to Winchester, but his conduct there induced the council to send for him again to London, and to require his residence in the metropolis; shortly after he was again committed to prison.

In the early part of 1548, the communion book was compiled by several prelates and divines who had been appointed for this purpose. The particulars of their discussions are given by Burnet, and are interesting, as they exhibit to us Cranmer's mind freed from those errors upon the subject of the Lord's supper by which it had been so long enthralled. The following account is given by Strype. " Ridley, reading Bertram's book of the body and blood of Christ, was sharpened to examine more accurately the old opinions of the presence of Christ's flesh and blood; and looking into ecclesiastical authors he found it greatly controverted in the ninth century, and learnedly written against, which made him begin to conclude it none of the ancient doctrines of the church, but more lately brought into it. These his thoughts he communicated to archbishop Cranmer, which was about the year 1546; whereupon they both set to examine it with more than ordinary care, and all the arguments that Cranmer gathered about it he digested into his book. Nor was the good archbishop ashamed to make a public acknowledgment in print of this as well as of his other popish errors, in his answer to Dr. Smith, who, it seems, had charged him with inconstancy." The reply to Smith is as follows:—

" He understood not my book of the catechism, and therefore reporteth untruly of me, that I in that book did set forth the real presence of Christ's body in the sacrament. Unto which false report 1 have answered in my fourth book, the eighth chapter.* But this I confess of myself, that not long before I wrote the said catechism I was in that error of the real presence, as I was many years past in divers other errors, as of transubstantiation, of the sacrifice propitiatory of the priests in the mass, of pilgrimages, purgatory, pardons, and many other superstitions and errors that came from Rome, being brought up from youth in them, and nousled therein for lack of good instruction from my youth, the outrageous floods of papistical errors at that time overflowing the world. For the which, and other mine offences in youth, I do daily pray unto God for mercy and pardon, saying, Good Lord, remember not mine ignorances and offences of my youth.

" But after it had pleased God to show unto me by his holy word a more perfect knowledge of his Son Jesus Christ, from time to time as I grew in knowledge of him, by little and little, I put away my former ignorance. And as God of his mercy gave me light, so through his grace I opened mine eyes to receive it, and did not wilfully repugn unto God and remain in darkness. And I trust in God's mercy and pardon for my former errors, because I erred but of frailness and ignorance. And now I may say of myself as St. Paul said, when I was like a babe or child in the knowledge of Christ, I spake like a child and understood like a child. But now that I am come to man's estate, and growing in Christ through his grace and mercy, I have put away that childishness." (p. 402, 3.)f

This subject now occupied much of the public attention. Peter Martyr having lectured against transubstantiation at Oxford,

* Cranmer here refers to his own work on the sacrament.

t In the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, among the Parker MSS., is " a thin note book" of Cranmer's concerning the sacrament, which Strype conjectures to be " his meditations and conclusions when he set himself accurately to examine the sacramental controversy, and fell off from the opinion of the carnal presence." Strype also considers that Cranmer was the means of bringing Peter Martyr to the clearer views of this subject, which that reformer afterwards stated in his defence of the ancient and apostolical doctrine.

was interrupted by the papists, who conducted themselves in a very disorderly manner. The council then directed that a regular disputation should be held, in which proper order should be observed. This was accordingly done. At Cambridge similar public discussions took place. They were summed up by Ridley, who was then more fully master of that subject than any other English divine. The particulars of these disputations are given by Fox. The substance of Martyr's discourse was published both in Latin and English.

His own diocese received early attention from Cranmer, particularly the city of Canterbury, which had been kept in much darkness by the Romish ecclesiastics who combined so actively against the archbishop during the last reign. He now appointed six preachers to officiate in that city, all of whom were protestants. Their labours were blessed in the conversion of many, as appears by the number of martyrs who in the following reign suffered there the torment of fire for their profession of the gospel. One of these preachers was Becon, a laborious divine, whose writings were very useful in promoting the truth, and are among the most valuable remains of the British reformers, though scarcely known at the present day. The new service-book was brought into public use in the autumn of this year, 1548. It was grounded upon the liturgies of the primitive church, divested of most of the Romish additions, and retaining the phraseology of scripture. Of the language used in this work we may observe, that it was compiled before the pedantic phraseology, which became general some years afterwards, had affected the simplicity of the English tongue, and if we compare the translations of ancient prayers contained therein, with modern renderings, we shall be impressed with the value of the reformers' writings, when considered only in that point of view. Considerable progress now had been made in removing the errors of popery, but the representation contained in a letter of Paget to the protector, written in the following year, as given by Strype, was but too true. " The use of the old religion is forbidden by a law, and the use of the new is not yej; printed in the stomachs of eleven out of twelve parts of the'.realm; what countenance soever men make outwardly to please them in whom they see the power resteth." Many of the clergy who were attached in their hearts to popery, read the English liturgy and the homilies, so as to make them unintelligible to the people.

Cranmer had to contend with many ecclesiastics of this description; but he proceeded with his accustomed mildness and forbearance. An instance of this appears in his conduct towards the vicar of Stepney, who formerly had been abbot of Tower-hill. That unworthy pastor would commonly disturb the protestant lecturers in his church, in the midst of their sermons, if he liked not their doctrine, by causing the bells to be rung or " beginning to sing with the choir before the sermon was half done; and sometimes by challenging the preacher in the pulpit; for he was a strong, stout, popish prelate." At length Underhill, one of the gentlemen pensioners, a person of good family and well respected, came to reside in the parish. Finding that the vicar persisted in his opposition to the law, he took him to the archbishop at Croydon, and stated the particulars of his conduct. Cranmer dismissed him with a gentle rebuke, bidding him to do so no more. Underhill remonstrated at this lenity, as encouraging the opposers of the truth, adding, " If it ever come to their turn they will show you no such favour." " Well," said Cranmer, " if God so provide, we must abide it." As Strype relates, " his opinion was, that clemency and goodness, as they were more agreeable to the gospel which he laboured to adorn, so they were more likely to obtain the ends he proposed than rigour and austerity."

The ambitious and unprincipled conduct of the lord admiral, Seymour, brother to the protector, led to his attainder in 1549. The unpopularity of the duke of Somerset was increased by his proceedings against so near a relative, and other circumstances. The papists eagerly promoted these discontents among the people, who were further agitated by the opinions diffused among them by some of the fanatics active in the recent popular disturbances in Germany, who had fled to this country. Their opinions were considered dangerous to the christian religion, as well as to the good order of the state, and a commission was issued to Cranmer and thirty-one other persons, to inquire respecting these seditious fanatics, and all who opposed the truth. Several persons were brought before the commissioners, and prevailed upon to recant, but their comprehensive powers caused individuals to be included whose opinions were rather fantastic than dangerous. One of them, named Joan Bocher, had adopted some views respecting the nature of Christ which were inconsistent with the truths of the christian religion, although not upon the points of most vital importance ; she accordingly fell under the provisions of the barbarous laws which had been enacted by the papists, and which still continued in force with respect to similar cases. Cranmer, therefore, while sitting as judge, had to pronounce sentence of condemnation against her; the rulers however were unwilling to follow the example of the church of Rome; and both Cranmer and Ridley exerted themselves to induce her to forsake the opinions she had embraced. She was kept in prison for twelve months, but as she refused to retract her opinions, the barbarous laws then in force required her life, and on the 27th of April, 1551, the council resolved that she should be burned. It is stated by Fox that the king being unwilling to direct the execution of this sentence, the council prevailed upon Cranmer to urge him to sign the warrant, which the youthful monarch very unwillingly did, casting the responsibility upon the archbishop; the persecuted female accordingly was committed to the flames.

It is not intended to represent Cranmer as a faultless character, and certainly his part in this affair cannot be defended or excused. We ought however to remember that his conduct rather proceeded from his education, the principles of the times in which he lived, and the official station he filled, than from a sanguinary natural disposition. So deep had men in general drunk of the persecuting spirit of Romanism, that Cranmer in this respect erred with Melancthonand every leading protestant, with the exception of Luther. It should also be remembered that Bocher and Von Parr would have been burned by the Romanists, while their sentence would have been more promptly carried into execution, and their treatment more harsh. The eagerness with which the Romanists urged many slanders against the reformation also tended much to produce this painful tragedy, by rendering the protestants anxious to show that in departing from the Romish faith, they were not actuated by atheistical indifference, as their enemies asserted. It was in this view that they falsely thought it their duty to put to death those whom they considered to be blasphemers of the christian religion, while in no instance did they proceed to extremities against the Romanists. In justice to the unhappy victim of intolerance, Joan Bocher, it should be stated that she was a friend of Anne Askew who suffered for the truth in the preceding reign; she herself had been active in circulating the English scriptures, at the hazard of her life. The opinions for which she suffered were erroneous views respecting the nature of Christ,—her errors were speculative rather than practical, and although her conduct cannot be defended in every respect, yet she ought by no means to be accounted as one of the violent fanatics of Munster.*

In 1549 Bonner was removed from the see of London, and soon after Gardiner from that of Winchester. Much forbearance and lenity were shown towards these men, whose conduct in every respect was the reverse of obedient subjects. The proceedings against Bonner and Gardiner fully show that they suffered, not for their religion, but for political malpractices. Gardiner especially promoted the decision against himself; he

* Strype remarks that Fox, contrary to his usual plan in matters of importance, has not given his authority for the conversation said to have passed between the monarch and the primate. Nor has Saunders, the earliest and most abusive calumniator of the British reformation, alluded to it, though he has particularly related other circumstances connected with this tragedy. The Rev. H. Soames observes, " Of the part which Cranmer really took in the affair of Joan Bocher we are ignorant, except that he presided judicially at her trial, and that he endeavoured in company with Ridley to shake her opinions in several subsequent interviews. His dislike to the shedding of blood must be inferred from the mildness of his disposition, and is rendered undeniable by known facts." Strype also remarks, that although kins Edward VI. notices her condemnation and execution in his own diary, he makes no mention of this conversation with Cranmer. From the records of the council it appears that Cranmer was not present when her execution was resolved on, which would lead us to conclude that he had no eager desire for her death.

knew that his life was not endangered, and he had no objection to be exhibited as suffering for his principles. Though Bonner offered no resistance to the measures of reformation, he suffered the greatest disorder to prevail in his diocese, and took care not to enforce the observance of any wholesome regulations.*

In 1550, bishop Hooper was appointed to the see of Gloucester. Some serious discussions ensued with Cranmer and Ridley relative to the episcopal habits. Upon the particulars of these differences we need not dwell, but may notice with much pleasure, the brotherly love which these once contending parties manifested towards each other, when fellow-sufferers in the days of Mary. In fairness to Cranmer it should be said, that he was apprehensive of consequences to himself if he did not enforce what the law then demanded.! Had the English reformation been carried further, these unhappy differences would have been prevented.

At this time several parts of England were agitated by insurrections, and much discontent prevailed amongst the lower classes. The causes are principally to be found in the changes which had taken place in the general state of society during the preceding half century, unconnected with religion. These changes in many instances bore very heavily upon the lower ranks, and had supplied subjects for reproof equally to sir Thomas More, Tindal, and Latimer, before the reformation commenced. The monks and bigoted Romanists increased the popular discontent. The Romish priesthood encouraged superstitious feelings, and the first proceeding of the misguided populace was to demand the restoration of the mass, with all its trumpery, attendant superstitions, and persecutions. These insurrections became very formidable, especially in the west of England and in Norfolk ; they were suppressed with considerable difficulty and bloodshed. There are many references to them in the writings of the reformers. From the concurrent testimony of contemporary writers it is evident that plunder and revolution were the main objects which the leaders had in view, while the particular circumstances in which the lower classes were then placed forwarded their designs. The parts of England best cultivated were thickly peopled, and the landlords, anxious to keep pace with the luxuries and improvements of the age, sought to make their estates more productive by measures which too often were oppressive. The superfluous labourers were in many cases driven from their natural homes, to make room for increased flocks of sheep, on account of the

* After the death of queen Mary, some letters from the popish bishops were found amongst her papers, which showed their intrigues during her brother's reign.

t Strype says, " Neither was Cranmer any other ways instrumental to Hooper's imprisonment, than by doing that which was expected from him, namely, giving a true account of his unsuccessful dealing with him." The letters of Bucer, Alasco, and Hooper on this subject will be found in Stiype's Memorials.

A. D. 1550.] Insurrections in Devonshire and Norfolk. 51

great demand for wool, while the state of manufactures and commerce did not find them employment in the cities. Mr. Soames correctly observes, that " unprincipled plunderers, political incendiaries, and gloomy bigots, eagerly laid hold of the discontents necessarily springing from these causes, and by persuading the miserable peasantry that their distresses arose from the abolition of their accustomed superstitions, inflamed their passions so far as to lead them into open rebellion." As a general remark it may be observed, that in the market towns and places of trade the people mostly favoured the reformation, while in the " upland towns" and more secluded agricultural districts ignorance and superstition still prevailed.*

Cranmer preached a sermon on this occasion, the particulars of which are given by Burnet. It is a faithful, plain, practical discourse, reproving the vices of the times, and exhorting to repentance and change of life. He also wrote a reply to the demands of the rebels in the west of England, who not only required the restoration of popery in its grossest forms of error, but that the act of six articles should be again enacted. One specimen of their demands will suffice to show the influence by which these poor people were misled. " 4. We will have the sacrament hang over the high altar, and there to be worshipped as it was wont to be; and they which will not thereto consent, we will have them die like heretics against the holy catholic faith." Cranmer's reply to the rebels fully exposes the errors of popery; it is printed at length by Strype, but is rather fitted for an historical collection than the present. The doctrines of the gospel were plainly stated, as the following extract relative to purgatory will show. " What can be more foolish than to say that pains can wash sins out of the soul 1 I do not deny but that corrections and punishments in this life are a calling of men to repentance and amendment, and so to be purged by the blood of Christ. But correction without repentance can nothing avail, and they that are dead are past the time of repentance, and so no correction or torments in purgatory can avail them. And what a contumely and injury is this to Christ, to affirm that all have not full and perfect purgation by his blood who die in his faith ! Is not all our trust in the blood of Christ, that we be cleansed, purged, and washed thereby ? And will you have us now to forsake our faith in Christ, and bring us to the pope's purgatory to be washed therein, thinking that Christ's blood is an imperfect ley or soap that washes not clean t If he shall die without

* The duke of Somerset, writing to sir Philip Hoby, then ambassador at the imperial court, says, " The causes and pretences of their uproars and risings are divers and uncertain: some cry, pluck down enclosures and parks; some for their commons; others pretend religion ; a number would rule and direct things as gentlemen have done; and indeed all have conceived a wonderful hate against gentlemen, and take them all as their enemies. The ruffians among them, and soldiers cashiered, which be the chief doers, look for spoil."