THE PUBLIC CAREER OF THOMAS CRANMER. By: Ayris, Paul, Reformation & Renaissance Review: Journal of the Society for Reformation Studies, 14622459, Dec2000, Issue 4
Abstract
The principal source for information on the public career of Thomas Cranmer is his archiepiscopal register in Lambeth Palace, and the author is currently editing this document for publication. Nonetheless, important material concerning Archbishop Cranmer's role in church and state also survives in episcopal and capitular archives around the country. Over 20 years, the author has identified and transcribed this material, and the fruits of this work are presented in this article. Cranmer's role as archbishop was profoundly modified by the issue of a royal commission in 1535, which effectively made him a royal civil servant. During the ascendancy of Thomas Cromwell as the king's vicegerent, Cranmer was eclipsed as the principal minister of the king's spiritual jurisdiction. The evidence for this claim is presented in the form of a calendar of part of Cromwell's register as vicegerent. The final part of the article presents in transcription the visitation Articles and Injunctions for Cranmer's visitation of the diocese of Norwich in 1550. This sensational discovery provides evidence for a theological and liturgical revolution in England in the middle of Edward VI's reign.
Episcopal registers are, by their nature, a formal record of a bishop's or archbishop's acts in his diocese. Archiepiscopal registers are doubly important, for they also record the deeds of the archbishops of Canterbury or York in their respective provinces. Early Canterbury registers are very full records of archiepiscopal administration. The register of Henry Chichele, archbishop of Canterbury 1414--43, is contained in two massive manuscript volumes at Lambeth, containing respectively 490 and 412 folios. This magnificent document has been meticulously edited by Professor E.F. Jacob.( n1) This document is mediaeval registration at its most impressive and is a full record of Chichele's acts as diocesan and primate of all England.
Thomas Cranmer's register is a massive manuscript compilation which is housed in the library and archive at Lambeth Palace.( n2) The register is comparatively full, but there are many gaps and omissions in the documents it contains. The single most important section of the text is the section of commissions and letters on folios 15-80, with misplaced material on folios 215-17. Through this material it should in theory be possible to trace the implementation and impact of the Reformation in England, both political and theological, during the 20 years of Cranmer's archiepiscopate between 1533 and 1553. To some extent, this is certainly the case and I have attempted to address the themes of royal supremacy, the role of the episcopate and Cranmer's disastrous metropolitical visitation of 1533-35 in a series of published studies that are designed to open up the text of the register to the historical researcher.( n3)
Nonetheless, it is clear that Thomas Cranmer's register is an inferior composition when compared to the riches to be found in registers such as those of Henry Chichele. In the section of commissions and letters, for example, there are only 13 documents which date from the 1530s. Yet this is a decade of profound change in the English Church, when the king assumed the title 'supreme head of the church' and Thomas Cromwell, as the king's vicegerent, conducted visitations of both the religious orders and the Church at large. Why is Cranmer's register relatively silent on these momentous changes? There are a number of reasons. First, the bishop's registrar who compiled the register, with a number of scribes to help him, used precedent as a guide to what kinds of material should be included. The kernel of episcopal registers is the record of institutions to benefices. Bishops needed to know which clerk held which living. It is, perhaps, because of convention that one of the more intriguing episodes of the 1540s, the Preaching of the Last Crusade, is entirely missing from the text of the register. I have attempted to reconstruct the history of the last preaching of a crusade in England from the registers of the bishops of London and the short-lived see of Westminster.( n4)
There are, however, other reasons that explain why Cranmer's register is a relatively poor witness to the profound events of the early Reformation period. Even before the cataclysm of the break with Rome in the 1530s, late mediaeval registers were inferior productions compared to their early mediaeval forebears. The disruption of the Wars of the Roses, for example, explains why the register of Thomas Bourgchier, archbishop of Canterbury 1454-86, is incomplete. Only the record of clerical ordinations has not suffered losses. In addition to Bourgchier's register itself, records for his archiepiscopate can be found in the second volume of John Morton's Canterbury register and among the records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury.( n5) The high ideals of mediaeval record keeping had been compromised due to the vicissitudes of contemporary politics and society. The example is instructive for it explains why Thomas Cranmer's register carries so many gaps in its coverage. Record keeping in episcopal registries was already in decline at the end of the Middle Ages and this trend accelerated, but was not in itself caused, by the irruption of the Reformation into English Church life. Thomas Cranmer's register, therefore, is in itself only a partial record of his acts in diocese and province.
In the light of the relative paucity of information in Cranmer's register, what other sources can be scoured to provide much-needed information on this history of the early Reformation in England? Clearly, all diocesan bishops kept registers and these sometimes contain material in the form of letters which were not recorded in Cranmer's own register. Deans and chapters also kept capitular registers which might shed light on Cranmer's activities. Cranmer himself had other branches of administration which kept registers. The Faculty Office registers are well known as a source of licences and dispensations, and these have been edited by Dr David Chambers.( n6) State papers also shed valuable shafts of light on Cranmer's public career. The holdings of the British Library, the Public Record Office and the superb Reformation collections of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, are important in this respect. 19 such documents have been identified. The text of these is reproduced here in Section A (A1-A15) and the contents of the more important analysed below.
Section B consists of a different set of texts. These comprise 17 extracts from the register of Thomas Cromwell as the king's vicegerent. The actual text of Cromwell's register seems not to have survived, but sixteenth-century extracts from his register have been identified amongst the Yelverton manuscripts in the British Library (B1-B17). For lack of permanent record, the role of Thomas Cromwell as the king's deputy in ecclesiastical affairs is something of a mystery. It is well known that he conducted a visitation both of the monasteries and the English Church.( n7) The extracts in B1-B17, however, are crucial in showing that Cromwell's rule as vicegerent was more thorough and far reaching than scholars had previously believed.
Section C is a sensational series of documents, whose existence has hitherto been unknown to scholarship. This series of documents comprises the previously unknown visitation articles and injunctions for a visitation at Norwich during a vacancy in the see in 1550. By virtue of his rights as metropolitan of the province, Thomas Cranmer was empowered to administer the spiritualities of vacant dioceses, while the Crown administered the temporalities. Thomas Cranmer's register contains very few records of the administration of vacant sees apart from sede vacante administration in the diocese of Hereford in 1538.( n8) The survival of records for the Norwich visitation in the form of printed articles and injunctions, following the pattern of printing the royal injunctions of 1536 and 1538, is vital in showing how Protestant beliefs and practices were actively encouraged and implemented in the dioceses of England during Edward VI's brief reign. The previous bishop of Norwich, William Repps, was a staunch conservative and the vacancy provided Cranmer with an opportunity to instill evangelical religion in the parishes of that eastern diocese. The vacancy also coincides with the establishment of the power of John Dudley in Council in January 1550 and the continuation of a Protestant religious polity. The documents thus illustrate the history of the English Reformation at a crucial moment in its early development.
The Rule of Thomas Cranmer
Section A contains documents illustrating the rule of Thomas Cranmer that exist outside his archiepiscopal register. Some of these are merely routine. A5 (i-ii) is a request and corresponding certificate for a valuation of the newly created see of Westminster in 1543. A6 is an early order for the use of the English Litany of 1544. A8 comprises a circular letter from the archbishop of Canterbury to the diocesan bishops, requesting information concerning the impropriation of benefices within their dioceses. The context of A9 is unclear, but may relate to the collection of first fruits and tenths. A10 is a routine piece of administration, whereby the dean and chapter of Canterbury were obliged to confirm certain of the archbishop's acts under their chapter seal. A11 also relates to the mode of collecting first fruits and tenths in the provinces of Canterbury and York. These documents show that Cranmer and his officials were closely involved in the administration of the diocese and province during the turbulent years of the early English Reformation.
Some of the documents call for more extended comment. Document A1 dates from 16 November 1534 and is a revocation of all preaching licences previously granted by the archbishop. The government was clear that it had to secure control of the pulpits to ensure obedience among the people to the extirpation of Roman jurisdiction and the annulment of the king's marriage to Catherine of Aragon. The November mandate cites as the reason for the revocation the fact that many preachers had abused the power of preaching authorized by the archiepiscopal licences. In April of the same year, Cranmer had summoned the bishops of London, Winchester and Lincoln and they had agreed to issue new preaching licences in each of their respective dioceses, instructing preachers not to:
intermeddle themselves to preach or teach any such thing that might slander or bring into doubt and opinion the catholic and received doctrine of Christ's church, or speak of such matters as touch the prince, his laws or succession; considering that thereupon can ensue no edification in the people, but rather occasion of talking and rumour...( n9)
So, soon after the break with Rome, the government was completely dependent on the bishops to regulate the conduct of preachers in the pulpit. At this early date, it is clear that they looked to the archbishop's powers as metropolitan of the province of Canterbury to deliver their cherished goal of obedience to the new order in Church and state.
Document A3, dated 21 July 1536, comprises letters from the archbishop, enclosed in a mandate from John Stokesley, bishop of London, ordering him to publish instructions for the collection of the arrears of a payment of £100,000 by the Convocation of Canterbury to the king. As dean of the province, the role of the bishop was to circulate this order to the bishops of the southern province. This he duly did and a copy of this order now exists at Lincoln. The bishop of London ordered the bishop of Lincoln to enforce the contents of the archbishop's letters and the articles in the city and diocese of Lincoln at once. He was to certify the bishop of London, or his deputy, of his actions in the matter. Similar documents exist for the see of Rochester.
In 1531, the Convocation of Canterbury granted to the king a payment of £100,000 when faced with a praemunire indictment for having acknowledged the authority of Thomas Wolsey as papal legate. The province of York, being poorer, escaped more lightly with a subsidy of £18,840. The wording of the act of pardon (22 Henry VIII, c. 15), however, excused the clergy for the mere fact of having exercised spiritual jurisdiction. The subsidies were really fines, by which the clergy bought peace.( n10) For the province of Canterbury, the price was considerably higher, £100,000. The payments were to be spread over five years, ending in 1536, and it was the responsibility of the archbishop of Canterbury to collect the monies. This was a tremendous undertaking and initially the burden fell on William Warham as primate of all England, but from 1533 this task was undertaken by Thomas Cranmer. Compliant as Cranmer was to the new settlement in Church and state, he was not excused the burdens that the government's financial policies laid on him. The documents in A3 show that he complied fully with his new responsibilities in Church and state.
Perhaps the most significant document in the new collection of unpublished materials in Section A is document A2, the commission from the king to the archbishop for the exercise of his jurisdiction. This document is missing from Cranmer's archiepiscopal register, nor does a copy now survive at Lambeth. The text is calendared from a copy in the Yelverton manuscripts in the British Library and from the records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury.
Mediaeval archbishops of Canterbury were accustomed to make an oath to the king on their appointment to the see. In the form of the oath that Cranmer took, the archbishop swore to renounce his papal bulls of provision, 'knowledging myself to take and hold the said archbishoprick immediately, and only, of your highness, and of none other'.( n11) Superficially, this wording might be taken to mean that mediaeval archbishops had renounced the authority of the pope in the matter of their appointment. However, this oath was customarily held to pertain only to the revenues and temporalities of the see and the supplicant archbishop ended the oath beseeching the king 'for restitution of the temporalities of the said archbishoprick', which had reverted to the king during the vacancy in the see. This customary oath was not held to cover the grant of the spiritualities of the see, which were granted by the pope.
In terms of Cranmer's appointment, the traditional papal bulls were duly issued by a compliant papacy wishing desperately to retain the loyalty of Henry VIII as a faithful son of the Church.( n12) The central document is the papal bull of provision, by which Pope Clement VII appoints Cranmer to the see of Canterbury at the request of the king. This is all customary mediaeval procedure, even the dispensation issued by the pope releasing Cranmer from any ecclesiastical censures, penalties or interdicts which might impede his preferment. Cranmer duly swore an oath of loyalty to the pope, although he also qualified this by the terms of a protestation in St Stephen's College, Westminster, at the time of his consecration. Nonetheless, Cranmer duly obtained his preferment to the vacant see of Canterbury at the hands of the pope.
With the extirpation of Roman jurisdiction, however, the authority of the episcopate in England could no longer rest on their papal bulls of provision and this explains the issue of document A2 to Cranmer and to the remaining bishops in England and Wales. By the issue of this licence, Cranmer was henceforth to be regarded as a royal civil servant. The licence is explicitly granted to last during the king's pleasure only, with the implication that it can be revoked. In terms of ideology, the commission makes it clear that all authority and jurisdiction emanate from the king as supreme head of the Church. This is no innovation, for Henry's predecessors were ever thus by human and divine law, as his successors always will be, and this authority has been recognized as such by the clergy and people of the kingdom.
In terms of the powers bestowed, Cranmer is authorized to ordain men within the diocese of Canterbury who are suitable in manners and learning; to admit, institute and invest men presented to livings in the diocese, if the candidates be suitable, with powers to deprive them should the need arise; to collate men to livings in his gift; to prove testaments and last wills, and to commit the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods lie in more than one diocese or jurisdiction, according to the custom of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury; to prove wills and commit administrations of the goods of all those who die within the diocese; and to hear all causes that fall to the archbishop or to his deputies by complaint or appeal according to the laws and statutes of the realm.
The most striking power that is not granted by the commission is the power to conduct visitations. This is highly significant when considered in the context of the emerging role of Thomas Cromwell as the king's vicegerent in the Church. Cromwell himself wished to undertake a royal visitation of the Church and this explains why the power of visitation was excluded from this remarkable licence of 1535. As the king's deputy in ecclesiastical matters Cromwell, a layman, was to be senior to Cranmer and to encroach in a radical way on the traditional powers of jurisdiction enjoyed by archbishops of Canterbury.
One final theme is also striking about the commission. The licence does not claim to grant powers of orders to the archbishop. The Tudor government never went so far as to claim a potestas ordinis over the clerical estate. It made radical claims over jurisdiction, potestas jurisdictionis, but acknowledged that some of the archbishop's powers were granted by God alone. The commission, therefore, expressly excludes from its scope those powers which are granted to the archbishop directly by God in Holy Scripture.
With the issue of commissions, both to Cranmer and to the other bishops, the government acknowledged that it could not look to the episcopate to enforce the new settlement in Church and state on the basis of their own authority. Rather, the bishops were to be tied ever more securely to the Crown by the issue of commissions, which made it clear that they exercised authority at the behest of the king alone. For the see of Canterbury, it is a momentous development and marks a decisive point in the evolution of the episcopate in early modern England.
The Role of the Vicegerency
For lack of permanent record, the role of Thomas Cromwell as the king's vicegerent in ecclesiastical affairs has always been something of a mystery. The discovery of what is probably a transcript of parts of his register as vicar general sheds penetrating shafts of light on a momentous period in the development of the English Reformation between 1535 and 1540. What evidence do the 17 documents presented in calendared form below present on the relative importance of the roles of Cranmer and Cromwell?
Clearly, a big part of Cromwell's role was the issue of commissions to ecclesiastical officers so that they could continue their work in the dioceses and archdeaconries of England and Wales. Within Cromwell's register, such licences exist for archdeacons (B1, B10), cathedral chapters (B2) and religious-houses (B4, B5). Such licences, like that to the archbishop of Canterbury described above, have no precedent in the mediaeval English church. In the context of the archbishop's jurisdiction, particular interest attaches to document B10, which is a licence to the archdeacon of Canterbury. Archdeacons were traditionally known as 'oculus episcopi'. They conducted visitations and held archidiaconal courts and were close to the archbishop as one of his principal officials. During the episcopate of Thomas Cranmer, the archdeacon of Canterbury was his brother Edmund. The issue of a royal commission to him, therefore, likewise breaks mediaeval precedent.
Edmund was licensed at pleasure to prove the wills of those dying within the archdeaconry having goods of no greater value than £100, to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods are similarly valued at no more than £100, provided that such probate and administration has been performed by the archdeacon's predecessors; to install all bishops in the province of Canterbury, duly nominated, elected and confirmed, according to the laws and statutes of the realm; to induct all clerks admitted and instituted to benefices in the archdeaconry where induction falls to the archdeacon by custom, according to the laws and statutes of the realm; and to do all else necessary. With the issue of this licence, the archdeacon of Canterbury can no longer be said simply to be his brother's eye in the diocese and province. Like Thomas, he is now a royal official holding office at the king's pleasure only.
The conduct of the royal visitation itself is not illustrated by the extracts in Section B below. However, there is one very important document (B12) which was issued at the end of the visitation. This document, dated 20 July 1536, is a licence to the bishop of Hereford for the restoration of his powers as visitor in the diocese. This seems to be the earliest of such licences to be issued to the episcopate. This licence authorizes Edward Foxe to undertake diocesan visitations once more now that the royal visitation is over. Such powers, however, do not inhere in the see but are granted by the king, at pleasure only, as supreme head of the Church.
In terms of the routine issue of licences and dispensations, the vicegerent's register contains two examples of such documents (B8, B13). In terms of the transfer of papal powers of dispensation, this was translated into English law through the construction of the Faculty Office in 1534.( n13) Henceforth, it was to be through the archbishop's Faculty jurisdiction that dispensations, for example those concerned with the reading of marriage banns, would be issued. However, the archbishop himself retained the right to issue licences himself and several exist in his register for the construction of private chapels in manor houses away from the parish church.( n14) Most notably, however, the vicegerent himself possessed this right, which would ensure that recalcitrant bishops could not henceforth frustrate the Crown's pleasure.
Probate jurisdiction was an important area of the ecclesiastical prerogative. It touched individuals in every parish and was, in addition, a lucrative source of fees. Through the vicegerent, the Crown acted to curb the traditional rights enjoyed by the archbishops of Canterbury. Document B9, taken in conjunction with document A12 below, reveals the changes that the Crown made in such matters. Document A12 is in common form and is a commission to Richard Gwent as keeper of the archbishop's prerogative on Cranmer's appointment to Canterbury. Gwent is to have probate over all testaments, and the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, where the bona, iura sive credita are in more than one diocese in the province of Canterbury. On 11 January 1536, the Crown issued a testamentary commission to William Petre (B9). Under the terms of this commission, the king licensed Petre to exercise powers of probate in cases where the deceased possessed bona, iura sive credita in one or more dioceses or jurisdictions of the kingdom to the value of £200 or above, and to inhibit archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, deans and their officials, and all other ecclesiastical judges. The issue of such a commission was of great importance. It dealt a significant blow to the rights of the archbishop and forms a further expression of the supremacy of the Crown over the Church.( n15)
There are other areas of the archbishop's jurisdiction which were qualified by the new role of Thomas Cromwell as vicegerent. As metropolitan of the province of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer claimed the right to administer the spiritualities of sees during a vacancy, while the temporalities reverted to the Crown. A number of vacancy records exist in the text of Cranmer's register, most notably those for the administration of the diocese of Hereford in 1538.( n16) A central document in all such records within the register is the commission to the keeper of the spiritualities to act in the archbishop's name during a vacancy. In the 1538 Hereford vacancy, the keeper of the spiritualities was Hugh Coren and Cranmer empowered him to do a number of things which included the powers of visitation, to hold courts, the institution and induction of clergy, to prove wills and to reclaim criminous clerks from secular magistrates.
Records of such vacancy commissions are very rare for the 1530s and document B7 helps to explain why. Document B7 is a commission for the administration of the see of Norwich sede vacante in 1535. This commission was issued not by Cranmer as archbishop, but by Cromwell as vicegerent, and recites that the metropolitan's powers have been suspended during the royal visitation. Cromwell therefore authorizes Miles Spenser to prove wills in the diocese of Norwich which are not valued at more than £100, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods are similarly valued at less than £100 (providing that all such probate jurisdiction belongs to the bishop of Norwich by custom); to institute men to benefices, and if need be to deprive them of their benefices; and to hear all causes falling to the bishop. The power of visitation is expressly omitted from this commission while the royal visitation was in progress and the limit on the value of testamentary business is clearly with an eye to the commission to be issued to Petre in January 1536. During Cromwell's ascendancy, it is clear that Cranmer's role in the administration of vacant sees was significantly modified by Cromwell's powers.
The Visitation of the See of Norwich in 1550
Once recovered after the royal visitation of 1535, Cranmer's powers to administer vacant sees could be a powerful weapon in the aid of Protestant reform. The documents in Section C comprise visitation articles and injunctions for a sede vacante visitation in the diocese of Norwich in 1550. A vacancy in the see was notified to Cranmer on 31 January 1550.( n17) According to mediaeval agreement, or composition, the dean nominated three men as their official and visitor sede vacante. The dean, John Salisbury, was commissioned by Cranmer to act as his commissary in the archbishop's sede vacante visitation. However, Cranmer issued an identical commission to two reformers, William Wakefield and Rowland Taylor.( n18) Cranmer wished to break the spirit, if not the letter, of the mediaeval composition. The former bishop, William Repps, was a noted conservative and Cranmer clearly wanted to force the pace at Norwich when he gained the chance.
Cranmer's register is silent on the actual course of the visitation at Norwich. There is, however, strong evidence for the most advanced programme of reform anywhere in England at that time. The survival of Cranmer's visitation articles and injunctions (C1-C2), previously undocumented, sheds penetrating shafts of light on the work of Wakefield and Taylor. From the evidence of the injunctions, it looks as though Cranmer had a twofold plan of action for the vacant diocese. First, he was concerned to support existing measures for reform. The services of the Book of Common Prayer, recently introduced in 1549, were therefore enforced and ministers were ordered not to conduct services so that 'vnlearned simple people maye thinke the olde popishe masse to continew styll'. For good measure, Cranmer ran through a whole list of devotional practices and theological propositions that were now taken away by the king's 'moste godlye procedinges'. The list is rather a messy jumble of ideas, and shows that Cranmer and colleagues were working at speed--purgatory, the invocation of saints, the Act of Six Articles, and justification by works all find a mention in this rather bewildering catalogue. The Prayer Book Catechism was commended and its instruction reiterated that children should be taught its contents once every six weeks.
The second prong of attack suggested by the injunctions is a determination to introduce new, startling, reforms and this is clearly the reason why Cranmer, Taylor and Wakefield were working so very quickly. The injunctions say rather cryptically that no one should hallow altars 'or any other such lyke abuses & supersticions'. The injunctions do not say explicitly that altars should be pulled down, but this is certainly what happened at parish level. When Thomas Thirlby, the new bishop, was asked in December 1550 to implement the council's new orders to destroy all stone altars, he complied but said that such action was largely unnecessary as the work had already been undertaken during the archbishop's sede vacante visitation.( n19) This is a sensational claim, probably true, and is thus evidence of the most profound liturgical revolution in England at the time. The official orders from the council to the bishops to undertake such mass destruction are dated November 1550.( n20) It is commonly held that Ridley in London was the instigator of this national policy, but contemporary witnesses assert that even he did not begin work in his diocese until June.( n21) That this policy is Cranmer's own policy is clinched by a reference elsewhere in his register. At the consecration of Ponet as bishop of Rochester in June 1550, Cranmer celebrated the 'holy supper of the Lord' from The Booke of Commen Service using a table, covered with a white cloth, from which the archbishop and all the bishops present received communion.( n22) The cumulative effect of all the evidence is that the policy of destroying altars in churches is Cranmer's own policy and arose out of his desire to defeat the conservative bishops. The policy was tested during the sede vacante visitation at Norwich in the first half of 1550 and then adopted on a national scale in November. As such, the documents in Section C are evidence for the most profound theological and liturgical revolution anywhere in England at this date.
Conclusion
The results of this investigation of Thomas Cranmer's career have established a number of themes in the public life of the archbishop of Canterbury. First, while his episcopal register remains the single most important source of information for his public career, there are other sources, presented in transcription and calendared format here, which shed important light on his work. Secondly, his role and authority were significantly diminished by the impact of the royal supremacy, particularly during the ascendancy of Thomas Cromwell. From being the principal source of support to a government insistent on curbing inflammatory preaching in 1534, Cranmer became almost a subordinate officer in the partnership between Church and state in the years after that date. Thirdly, in the years after the accession of Edward VI in 1547, Cranmer was able to propound a theological and liturgical revolution in England. His visitation articles and injunctions for the diocese of Norwich in 1550 are a sensational discovery and illustrate the reforming hand of an archbishop determined to press ahead with reform at parish level in the dioceses of England.
(n1) E.F. Jacob and H.C. Johnson (eds.), The Register of Henry Chichele, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1414-1443 (4 vols.; Oxford: Canterbury and York Society, 42, 45-47, 1938-47).
(n2) Lambeth Palace Library, Thomas Cranmer's register, no classmark. I am currently editing the text of the register for publication by Boydell and Brewer and it is due to appear during 2002.
(n3) P. Ayris, Thomas Cranmer's Register: A Record of Archiepiscopal Administration in Diocese and Province (Unpublished dissertation submitted for the PhD degree, University of Cambridge, 1984); P. Ayris, 'God's Vicegerent and Christ's Vicar: The Relationship between the Crown and the Archbishopric of Canterbury, 1533-53', in P. Ayris and D.G. Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer: Churchman and Scholar (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1993; pbk edn with additions, Woodbridge, 1999), pp. 115-56; P. Ayris, 'Thomas Cranmer's Register', in Ayris and Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer, pp. 303-11; P. Ayris, 'Continuity and Change in Diocese and Province: The Role of a Tudor Bishop', Historical Journal 39 (1996), pp. 291-313; P. Ayris, 'Thomas Cranmer and the Metro-political Visitation of Canterbury Province 1533-5', in S. Taylor (ed.) From Cranmer to Davidson: A Church of England Record Society Miscellany (Woodbridge: Church of England Record Society, 1999), pp. 1-46.
(n4) P. Ayris, 'Preaching the Last Crusade: Thomas Cranmer and the "Devotion Money" of 154Y', Journal of Ecclesiastical History 49 (1998), pp. 683-701.
(n5) For full details, see D.M. Smith, Guide to Bishops' Registers of England and Wales (London: Royal Historical Society, 1981), pp. 14-15.
(n6) D.S. Chambers, Faculty Office Registers 1534-1549 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966). This work supersedes W. Hooper, 'The Court of Faculties', English Historical Review 25 (1910), pp. 670-86.
(n7) F.D. Logan, 'Thomas Cromwell and the Vicegerency in Spirituals: A Revisitation', English Historical Review 102 (1988), pp. 658-67; S.E. Lehmberg, 'Supremacy and Vicegerency: A Re-examination', English Historical Review 181 (1966), pp. 225-35; F.D. Logan, 'The first Royal Visitation of the English Universities, 1535', English Historical Review 106 (1991), pp. 861-88.
(n8) Documents 154-181 in my forthcoming edition of Thomas Cranmer's register.
(n9) See J.E. Cox (ed.), Miscellaneous Writings and Letters of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Martyr, 15.56 [henceforth cited as P.S., Cranmer II] (Cambridge: Parker Society, 1846), pp. 283-84.
(n10) See Statutes of the Realm [henceforth cited as Stat. Realm], compiled by A. Luders, T.E. Tomlins and J. Raithby et al. (11 vols.; London: Dawsons, 1810-28), III, pp. 334-38.
(n11) See P.S., Cranmer II, p. 460.
(n12) Documents 1-12 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register.
(n13) See n. 6.
(n14) See for example, documents 52-54 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register.
(n15) For an analysis of Cromwell's probate jurisdiction, cf. C.J. Kitching, 'The Probate Jurisdiction of Thomas Cromwell as Vicegerent', Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 46 (1973), pp. 102-106. Cf. also M. Bowker, 'The Supremacy and the Episcopate: the Struggle for Control, 1534-1540', The Historical Journal 18 (1975), pp. 240-41.
(n16) See n. 8.
(n17) Document 202 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register.
(n18) Document 204 in my forthcoming edition.
(n19) See D. MacCulloch, Thomas Cranmer: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996), p. 458, where the relevant evidence is discussed, although Professor MacCulloch was not then aware of the existence of Cranmer's articles and injunctions.
(n20) P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 524-25.
(n21) J.G. Nichols (ed.), Chronicle of the Grey Friars of London (Camden Society, first series, 53; London: Camden Society, 1852), p. 67.
(n22) Document 416 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register.
The Documents Section A Introduction
In editing the text of Thomas Cranmer's register, I have seen the surviving episcopal registers of all the diocesan bishops of the southern province and the capitular archives of all the cathedral corporations for the period of Cranmer's archiepiscopate. In addition, I have searched the archives in the major repositories of London, Oxford and Cambridge. Within the ecclesiastical archives, a number of important commissions, mandates and letters exist which are not recorded in Cranmer's own register. Where these documents have not been printed in flail in Cranmer's Works issued by the Parker Society, or in the Concilia of David Wilkins, I present them here in Section A. All known surviving contemporary copies of a document, which may contain alternative readings, have been collated in the transcripts and calendars below. Where the form of a document has not appeared in Cranmer's own register, I give it here as a verbatim transcript. Where the form of a document, however, has already been established in the register, I include it here in calendared form. A full guide to the editorial method adopted will appear in my edition of Cranmer's register.
A1
[16 Nov. 1534. Mandate from the archbishop to all rectors, vicars, chaplains, and to those with and without cure throughout the province of Canterbury. All preaching licences issued before 12 Nov. are hereby revoked.]
THOMAS permissione divina Cant' archiepiscopus, totius Anglie primas et metropolitanus, dilectis nobis in Christo universis et singulis rectoribus, vicariis, capellanis, curatis et non curatis, per provinciam nostram Cant' ubilibet constitutis, salutem graciam et benedictionem.( n1)
LICET nos, vestigiis predecessorum( n2) nostrorum inherentes, facultatem verbum Dei clero et populo, sermone Latino vel vulgari, ubicumque( n3) per provinciam nostram antedictam proponendi nonnullis sacras litteras callentibus, sub certa forma in litteris nostris desuper factis ac sigillo nostro roboratis tune expressa, nuper concesserimus;( n4) QUIA tamen nonnulli (ut asseritur) auctoritate per dictas nostras litteras, eis in eaparte( n5) concessa, abutuntur ac ex aliis iustis et legitimis( n6) causis nos et animum nostrum ad hoc moventibus, easdem litteras omnes et singulas ante xiium diem mensis Novembris instantis( n7) concessas duximus revocandas, prout tenore presentium sic( n8) revocamus. VOBIS igitur supradictis omnibus et singulis, ad quos presentes( n9) pervenerint, communiter et divisim cornmittimus et( n10) firmiter iniungendo mandamus quatenus( n11) prefatas litteras nostrarum concessionum sic( n12) per nos revocatas fuisse et esse pro loco et tempore congruis et oportunis publicetis et declaretis;( n13) prefatis nihilominus( n14) omnibus et singulis dictas nostrarum concessionum litteras ante dictum xiium diem( n15) mensis Novembris emanatas obtinentibus auctoritate nostra iniungentes, quibus omnibus et singulis tenore presentium( n16) nos etiam sic iniungimus, quatenus nullus eorum vigore dictarum deinceps concionari presumat( n17) sub pena iuris.( n18)
IN CUIUS rei testimonium sigillum nostrum presentibus est appensum. DAT' in manerio nostro de Lamhythe xvito die mensis Novembris anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo xxxiiiito et19 nostre consecrationis anno secundo.( n20)
( n1) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS 106, item 299, henceforth cited as [C]. Another copy exists in the vicar general's book for the diocese of London; cf. London Metropolitan Archives, DL/C/330, fol. 242v, henceforth cited as [L]. Both copies have been collated for the present transcript. [L] has the heading 'Littere Cant' archicpiscopi revocantes facultatem per eum concessam concionatoribus infra provinciam Cant' '.
( n2) 'Licet nos predecessorum nostrorum vestigiis' [L].
( n3) 'uibicumque' [L].
( n4) 'concesserimus' interlined as a correction [L].
( n5) 'ea parte' [L].
( n6) 'de' erased in [C].
( n7) 'duodecimum diem instantis Novembris' [L].
( n8) 'sic' interlined in [C].
( n9) 'presentes littere' [L].
( n10) 'ac' [L].
( n11)'quatenus' omitted in [L].
( n12) 'sic ut premittitur' [L].
( n13) 'declaretis' interlined as a correction [L].
( n14) 'nichilominus' [L].
( n15) 'duodecimum diem' [L].
( n16) 'presentium' interlined as a correction [L].
( n17) 'dictarum litterarum deinceps concionari presumat' [L].
( n18) 'sub' interlined before 'presumat', struck through and interlined as a correction before 'pena' [L].
( n19) 'tricesimo quarto et' [L].
( n20) 'tercio' erased in [C].
A2
Commission( n1) from Henry VIII, king of England and France, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland, supreme head on earth under Christ of the English church, to Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, king's councillor. All authority to make law and all jurisdiction, both ecclesiastical and royal, emanates from the king's power as if from the supreme head. The king wishes all magistrates to acknowledge this with grateful hearts as solely the gift of royal munificence. As supreme head, therefore (our predecessors were ever thus by human and divine law,( n2) as our successors will be forever), and recognized as such by the clergy and people of the kingdom, the king has begun a visitation through Thomas Crumwell, principal secretary, master of the rolls, previously appointed vicegerent for ecclesiastical causes, vicar general and official principal in letters patent under the great seal.( n3) The king has inhibited the archbishop, and all the bishops of the realm, from visiting churches, monasteries or any other ecclesiastical places or from exercizing any powers of jurisdiction.( n4) Crumwell, however, is detained by public business from exercising the king's jurisdiction as supreme head in person. Acceding to the archbishop's petition, the king issues the following commission in order that the needs of his royal subjects may be met.
The archbishop is empowered, at the king's pleasure, to ordain men within the diocese of Canterbury who are suitable in manners and learning; to admit, institute and invest men presented to livings in the diocese, if the candidates be suitable, with powers to deprive them should the need arise; to collate men to livings in his gift; to prove testaments and last wills, and to commit the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods lie in more than one diocese or jurisdiction, according to the custom of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury; to prove wills and commit administrations of the goods of all those who die within the diocese; to hear all causes which fall to the archbishop or to his deputies by complaint or appeal according to the laws and statutes of the realm; to do all else necessary; and to appoint deputies at the archbishop's pleasure. The commission expressly excludes from its scope those powers which are granted to the archbishop directly by God in Holy Scripture.
As he will answer before God and the king, the archbishop is enjoined to exercise his office according to the teachings of Holy Scripture. He is not to promote anyone to holy orders or to cure of souls unless they are fit for such an office in their lives and learning. The king knows that as corruption has spread amongst the people due to wicked pastors, so the true religion of Christ and an improvement in lives and morals will result from the appointment of fine shepherds. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, dated [blank] day of October 1535.( n5)
( n1) The Henrician commission to the archbishop is lacking in Cranmer's register, but it is presented here in calendared format from a sixteenth-century copy in the Yelverton manuscripts which survives as British Library [henceforth cited as BL], Add. MS 48012, fols. 85v-86r, and from a copy in the probate registers of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, which survives in the Public Record Office [henceforth cited as PRO] as PROB 11/25 fol. 315. Although displaying many minor verbal variations, the two sources are substantially the same. Major differences in readings are given in the footnotes below. A secondary copy of the commission, not therefore collated with the copies already noted, survives in another Yelverton MS as BL, Add. MS 48022, fol. 98r-v. Many of the forms in this MS are copied from MS 48012, where they are marked with a pencil cross. A description of the relationship between BL. Add. MS 48012 and Add. MS 48022 is given in Section B below.
( n2) The statement 'iure tam divino quam humano' is omitted in BL, Add. MS 48012, fol. 85v.
( n3) Cromwell's commission is not actually entered on the patent rolls. See Ayris and Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer, pp. 125-26.
( n4) See P.S., Cranmer II, p. 463.
( n5) The day, month and year are left blank in PRO, PROB 11/25 fol. 315.
A3
[21 July 1536. Letters from the archbishop, enclosed in a mandate from John Stokesley, bishop of London, ordering him to publish instructions for the collection of the arrears of a payment of £100,000 by the Convocation of Canterbury to the king.]
(i)
Mandate( n1) from John, bishop of London to John, bishop of Lincoln, reciting letters missive from the archbishop of Canterbury, which the bishop of London received along with the text of certain articles of a concord, made on Good Friday, annexed to the present mandate. The archbishop's letters run as follows.
THOMAS permissione divina Cant' archiepiscopus, totius Anglie primas et metropolitanus venerabili confratri nostro domino Johanni London' episcopo, salutem et fraternam in Domino charitatem. Cum, post nonnullas examinationes certificatoriorum collectorum ultimi subsidii centum millium librarum domino nostro regi concessi,( n2) tandem apparuerit per eorum aliqua atque quorumdam collectorum culpa et negligencia maiestati regie plene non fuisse de predicto subsidio satisfactum iuxta formam concessionis eiusdem, idcirco auctoritate totius Convocationis nostre Cantuar' provincie conclusum et concordatum est, prout schedula presentibus annexa( n3) plenius continetur. Vobis igitur committimus ac firmiter iniungendo mandamus quatenus omnibus et singulis episcopis provincie nostre Cant' sede plena, sede vero vacante custodi spiritualitatis sedis huiusmodi vacantis, aut aliquo ipsorum episcoporum absente vicario ipsius absentis in spiritualibus generali, per litteras vestras harum seriem continentes vice et auctoritate nostris iniungatis, quibus etiam tenore presentium sic iniungimus, quod ipsi episcopi ac vicarii in spiritualibus generales et custodes spiritualitatis predicte et eorum singuli omnia et singula in dicta schedula presentibus annexa,( n3) prout eorum quemlibet respective concernit, in suis civitatibus et diocesibus, adiunctis sibi assistentibus et expresse consentientibus archidiaconis offcialibus et clericis in alia schedula presentibus annexa( n3) specificatis et auctoritate dicte Convocationis assignatis, firmiter observent et exequantur cum effectu. Et quid in premissis quoad executionem presentium feceritis, nos citra festum omnium sanctorum proximum futurum certificare curetis per litteras vestras patentes harum seriem modumque et formam executionis earumdem in se continentes autentice sigillatas. In cuius rei testimonium sigillum nostrum presentibus apponi fecimus. Dar' quoad sigillationem presentium in manerio nostro de Lamhith xxio die Julii anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo xxxvjto et nostre consecrationis quarto.
The bishop of London orders the bishop of Lincoln to enforce the contents of the archbishop's letters and the articles in the city and diocese of Lincoln at once. He is to certify the bishop of London, or his deputy, of his actions before the feast of the birth of our Lord [25 Dec.] in letters patent, duly sealed. Dated at the bishop's palace in London 'sub sigillo nostro', 8 Aug. 1536.
[Lincoln Archive Office (henceforth cited as LAO), Convocation Papers 20]
( n1) The mandate at Lincoln, an original document not a registered copy, has lost its seal. It bears an eighteenth century endorsement: 'Bishop of London's mandate to the bishop of Lincoln (concerning Convocation) 8th August 1536'.
( n2) In 1531, the Convocation of Canterbury granted to the king a payment of £100,000 when faced with a praemunire indictment for having acknowledged Wolsey's legatine authority. The province of York, being poorer, escaped more lightly with a subsidy of £18,840. The wording of the act of pardon (22 Henry VIII, c. 15), however, excused the clergy for the mere fact of having exercized spiritual jurisdiction. The subsidies were really fines, by which the clergy bought peace. Cf. Stat. Realm, III, pp. 334-38. At Canterbury, the payment of £100,000 was spread over five years, with annual instalments from each diocese of the southern province beginning in 1532 and ending in 1536. Overall responsibility for the collection of the subsidy resided with the archbishop of Canterbury. The first payments were to be made on the feasts of St Michael the Archangel [29 September] 1531 and the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary [25 March] 1532. The fifth set of payments were to be made on 29 September 1535 and 25 March 1536. A scheme for late payments was also envisaged. The original grant from William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, and dated 4 March 1531 survives as PRO E/315/8/36. Letters testimonial notifying the grant to the king also survive as PRO E 315/8/37.
( n3) These schedules no longer survive at Lincoln.
(ii)
Registered copy of the above mandate from the bishop of London, enclosing the mandate from the archbishop of Canterbury, addressed to John bishop of Rochester, with the following important differences: the phrase 'idcirco auctoritate totius Convocationis nostre Cantuar' provincie conclusum et concordatum est, prout schedula presentibus annexa plenius continetur' omitted and the date of the bishop of London's mandate given as 12 Aug. 1536.( n1)
[Kent Archive Office (henceforth cited as KAO), DRb/Ar 1/14, fols 8v-9r (new foliation); 190v-191r (old foliation)]
( n1) The gravity of the situation can be gleaned from a marginal heading in the Rochester register, which talks of sums of money 'pro domino nostro rege nondum eidem solutas super taxationem in ultima quinta factam'.
A4
Mandate( n1) from the archbishop of Canterbury to Edmund bishop of London, or to his vicar general and official principal, asserting that for more than three hundred years the armies of the Turk have devastated much of Asia, Africa and Europe, inflicting great cruelty on Christian peoples. They have attempted to abolish the true worship of God by imposing the falsehoods of Mohammed, a fate which is partly due to the Christians' grave misdeeds and partly to their negligence in failing to join forces to resist such a powerful enemy.
Circumstances, however, now dictate that the forces of Europe can take up arms together, with full justification, to recover the land of Hungary from the perpetual enemy of the cross of Christ. Who is there who will not wish to aid such a pious work, save those who utterly deny the unity of the undivided Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Righteous Lot delivered Segor as the town was about to perish.( n2) Samuel the faithful prophet brought forth victory for Israel over the lord of the Philistines at Mizpah.( n3) Moses, at the top of the hill at Rephidim, gave a sign to Joshua as he was fighting Amalek and his people afar off.( n4) With these arms, rather than those of the most Christian princes, let us otter assistance to our brothers.
The bishop of London, or his vicar general and official principal, are instructed to command all the bishops suffragan of the province to recite these letters in their cathedral and parish churches. The hearers are to implore the Most High, at whose beckoning all things tremble, to preserve the Christian princes and their forces gathered together in the name of His only begotten Son that, when His enemies are defeated and brought back to the holy catholic faith, a happy victory may be celebrated to the glory of God. Prayers are to be said every Wednesday and Friday, unless some impediment occur, until further orders are received from the archbishop. Croydon, 30 June 1542.( n5)
( n1) The mandate was authorized by the Privy Council on 27 June from Hampton Court. Their register stipulates: 'Letters wer sent to tharchebisshop of Yorcke and Canterbury to commawnde speciall prayers and processions thorowghowt theyre provinces for the prosperite off the Christian Army ageynst the Turckes'. Cf. Acts of the Privy Council of England A.D. 1542-1631 (new series; 46 vols.; London: HMSO, 1890-1964), I, p. 15.
( n2) Gen. 19.19-22.
( n3) 1 Sam. 7.5-11.
( n4) Exod. 1.8-16.
( n5) The archbishop's mandate, contained in letters from the bishop of London, occurs in seven diocesan registers for the province. With minor verbal variations, the texts are similar. Cf. See Somerset Record Office [henceforth cited as SRO], D/D/B. register 13, fols. 11v-12r (old foliation` for the diocese of Bath and Wells; Guildhall Library [henceforth cited as GL], MS 9531/12 part 1, fols. 41v-42r for the diocese of London, which has 'Lambeth' for 'Croydon'; Cambridge University Library [henceforth cited as CUL], G/l/7, fol. 148r-v for Ely diocese; LAO, Register XXVI, fol. 294r-v for Lincoln diocese; KAO, DRb/Ar 1/15, fols. 213v-14v (old foliation), 15v-16v (new foliation) for Rochester diocese; Hereford and Worcester Record Office [henceforth cited as HWRO], b 716.093-BA 2648/9(iii), pp. 64-5 for Worcester diocese; Hereford Record Office [henceforth cited as HRO], AL19/14 fols. 39v-40v for Hereford diocese.]
A5
(i)
[4 Oct. [1543]. Letter from the archbishop of Canterbury to the bishop of Westminster concerning the revenues of his bishopric]
AFTRE my veray right hertie commendations unto youre lordeshipp. Whereas in the acte of the subsidie graunted to the kinges mooste excellent maiestie by the clergie of my province of Canturburye, in the laste Convocation holden at Saincte Paules in London by vertue of his highnes' breve,( n1) amongest other thinges it was enacted, condescended and agreed that I shall enquyre the true value of the yerely revenues of the newe erected bysshopps within my saide province, and the same certyfie before Chrystmas Day nexte commyng unto the Courte of the Firste Frutes and Tenthes, there to remayne recordyd, as by the graunte confirmed by acte of parliament of this realme( n2) more at large appeareth; this ys to requyre and neverthelesse to chardge you, by force of the said acte, that you with all diligence and fidelitie, by your lettres sealed with youre episcopall seale in due forme to be made, signyfie( n3) unto me, on thyssyde the foure and twentie day of Novembre nexte commyng, the true and perfecte value of all the yerelye revenues of youre bysshopprych, being newlie and of late by the kinges maiestie within my saide province erectyd, and for the mayntenaunce of youre epyscopall dignitie and lyving by his maiestie to you assigned, that upon the receiptt of youre saide lettres of certificate I may according to thintente, effecte and purporte of the saide acre further proceade in that behalf, as to me appartayneth, requyryng you not to faile this to doo as you will aunswer for the contrarye.
And thus righte hertelie fire ye well. At my palace of Canterburye the fourth of Octobre.
Youre loving brother( n4)
T. Cantuariensis( n5)
[GL, MS 9531/12, part 1 fols. 256v-57r]
( n1) The writ of summons is not recorded in Cranmer's register, but see document 20 in my edition of Cranmer's register.
( n2) Stat. Realm, III, pp. 951-53.
( n3) 'made, [fol. 257] signyfie' in MS.
( n4) The marginal heading reads: 'Littere sive mandatum domini Cant' archiepiscopi ad certificandum de vero valore omnium et singulorum fructuum et emolumentorum episcopatus West".
( n5) For the archbishop's letter to the Court of First Fruits and Tenths, see document 114 in my published edition of Cranmer's register.
(ii)
Certificate from Thomas, bishop of Westminster, to the archbishop of Canterbury concerning this request. The bishop certifies that the annual revenues of his see, in both spirituals and temporals, amount to £573 5s 6 3/4d, as appears both from the bishop's books and rolls recording his revenues and from an investigation recently performed by certain commissioners, deputed by the king to enquire into the revenues of the bishopric. Sealed with the seal of the vicar general, since the bishop does not have his to hand, in his manor at Hendon, 16 November 1543.
[GL, MS 9531/12, part 1, fol. 257]
A6
Mandate in English from Edmund, bishop of London, to William bishop of Bath and Wells (Bathe) reciting letters in English from Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, primate and metropolitan of all England.
The king has set forth a good and Godly procession in the English tongue( n1) so that his people might understand the prayers and, for a uniformity of usage, has commanded the same to be sung and said throughout the realm upon days accustomed for the procession. The king now wishes this procession to be used as well upon work days as also from henceforth upon Sundays and all other festival days in the year.( n2) Upon receipt, the bishop of London is commanded that the English procession, set forth the last year, be sung or said throughout the whole diocese of London as well upon holy days as other days. He is also to signify the king's command to all the bishops of the province at once. Given under my seal at Lambeth, 15 Oct. 37 Henry VIII [1545].
On receipt of these letters, the bishop of Bath and Wells is to execute them throughout his diocese. Given under my seal at London, 16 October the regnal year above written.( n3)
( n1) The English Litany of 1544. See documents 109 and 85 in my edition of Cranmer's register.
( n2)This is the injunction for which Brightman could find no manuscript authority. See F.E. Brightman, 'The Litany under Henry VIII', English Historical Review Vol. XXIV (1909), p. 103.
( n3) SRO, D/D/B. register no. 13 [William Knight's register], fols. 27v-28r (old foliation); summarized in H. Maxwell-Lyte (ed.), The Registers of Thomas Wolsey, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1518-I523, John Clerke, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1523-1541, William Knyght, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1541-1547, and Gilbert Bourne, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1554-1559 (London: Somerset Record Society, 55, 1940), no. 615. A copy of the archbishop's mandate survives in the London episcopal registers as GL, MS 9531/12 part 1, fols. 82v-83r. The text of this copy is incomplete, as comparison with the registers in the diocese of Bath and Wells clearly shows. Further copies of Cranmer's complete mandate, enclosed in letters from the bishop of London, and identical save for minor verbal variations with the text for Bath and Wells, survive for the dioceses of Westminster as GL, MS 95.3 1/12 part 1, fol. 263, for Ely as CUL, G/1/7, fol. 176r-v and for Chichester diocese as West Sussex Record Office [henceforth cited as WSRO], Ep. I/1/6, fol. 23r-v.
A7
(i)
[27 January 1548. Letter from the archbishop to the bishop of London concerning the ceremonies of candles, ashes and palms]
MY LORDE, after my hartie commendations. I have receaved youre lettres and doo very well like that you have taken a good ordree for the place appoynted for Mr Barnardyne( n1) to preache. Howe beyt you shall doo well to provyde asmanny formes as you convenyentlie may for the Italions and other straungers to sitt upon, by cause their manner ys not longe to stande. The preachor begynneth his sermon aboute viii of the clocke and yf youre lordeshipp bee there, I wilbe there my self also to accompany you. And as for youre dynner, your lordeshipp preparinge the same with finall expenses for Mr Barnardyne shall contente you, for he intendeth to bringe noo straungers with hym but two servantes whiche wayteth upon him; but for me I wolde not have you to looke for by cause I am allredye appoynted to be at dynner with my lorde protector.
Moreover, this ys tadvertyse your lordeshipp that my lorde protector's grace with thadvyse of other the kinges maiestie's counsaill for certayne considerations them movinge hathe fullie resolved that noo candells shalbe borne upon Candelmas Day, nor also from hensforthe asshes or palmes used noo longer. Wherefore I beseche your lordeshipp to cause admonition thereof to bee gyven in all paryshe churches throughe owte your dioc' withall celeritie, and lykewyse unto all other bysshopps that bee neere here aboutes that they may doo the sembleable in their dioc' before Candlemas Day; and as for other bysshopps that cannot have knowledge so soone, you may gyve them knowledge hereof at more leasure, so that yt bee doon before Asshewednesday.( n2)
Thus fare youre lordeshipp hartelie well. From my mannor of Lambehithe the xxviith of January 1547. Youre lovinge freende. T. Cantuariensis.( n3)
To the reverende father the bysshopp of London ( n4)
[GL, MS 9531/12 part 1, fol. 117r-v]
( n1) Bernadino Ochino, who arrived in England in 1547 with Peter Martyr.
( n2) 'before [fol. 117] Asshewednesday' in MS.
( n3) The marginal heading reads: 'Littere arehiepiscopi Cant' pro abolitione ceremoniarum candelarum, cineorum et palmarum'.
( n4) A version of this letter is printed in P.S., Cranmer II, p. 417, which omits the whole of the first paragraph.
(ii)
[9 February 1548. An explanation of the archbishop's letter. ]
AFTER( n1) my harty commendations unto youre lordeshipp. I have receaved youre lettres advertysinge you that, towchinge the commaundement I sent unto you of late by my lettres for the ceremonies of candells, asshes and palmes to bee abolyshed and extincte,( n2) I dyd not sende the same commaundemente to you of my self, but declared that the counsaill hadde so commaunded the thinge, and their commaundymente, yf youre lordeshipp doo well consider, ys not contrary to the proclamation( n3) that ys nowe sett forthe, but doothe stande with the same. And therefore, my lorde, to use youre self accordinge to the counsaill's former commaundemente, which I signified to you by my lettres, yt shall so behove you.
Thus hartelye( n4) fare your L. well.( n5) At my mannor of Lambehithe, this Thursday anno 1547. Youre lovinge brother. T. Cantuariensis.( n6)
To( n7) the reverende father the bysshopp of London( n8)
[GL, MS 9531/12 part 1, fol. 117v]
( n1)Another copy of this letter survives in the vicar general's letter book for the diocese of London. The copy in Bonner's register [GL] has been collated with the vicar general's copy [LMA] in the transcript above; see LMA, DL/C./331, fol. 24v.
( n2) A word, now indecipherable, struck through before 'extincte' in LMA.
( n3) P.L. Hughes and J.F. Larkin (eds.), Tudor Royal Proclamations (3 vols.; New Haven: Yale, 1964-69), I, pp. 416-17. It looks very much as though Bonner was sent a special version of this proclamation to ensure his conformity. Bonner's episcopal register contains, in manuscript, a copy of the proclamation of 6 February 1548, which forbids private innovation in ceremonies. This copy contains a paragraph, not included in the printed schedule, to the effect that the abolition of the ceremonies of ashes and palms, and candles at Candlemas, was no private innovation. Rather any command which the archbishop of Canterbury, by his majesty's will and commandment, might declare to the bishops by his writing under seal was to be reputed as if it were commanded by the king's injunctions. See GL, MS 9531/12 part 1, fol. 117r-v.
( n4) 'hartelye' interlined as a correction in [GL].
( n5)'you weale' [LMA].
( n6) Marginal: 'Explanatio dictarum litterarum' [GL]; 'Littere domini archiepiscopi Cant' concernentes cerimonias quasdam abolendas' [LMA].
( n7) Addressee added at the head of the letter [LMA].
( n8) LMA has an additional note: 'Recepta fuit littera originalis ['per' struck through in MS] a magistro Clyff cancellario domini episcopi in domo sua xiiio Februarii anno predicto'. This annotation cracks the problem of dating the letter. Cranmer speaks of the proclamation of 6 February as now set forth. If the letter was received by the vicar general on 13 February, the only available Thursday for the letter to have been written is 9 February. This evidence now helps me to correct the dating in Ayris and Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer, p. 298 no. 12.
A8
[20 April 1550. Circular letter from the archbishop of Canterbury to the diocesan bishops, requesting information concerning the impropriation of benefices within their dioceses]
To his right welbelovyd brother the busshope of Chichester.( n1)
AFTER my hartie comendations. The kynges maiestie's pleasure and hight comandyment to me is that I shall will and charge you to assertayne me of the names( n2) of all suche benefices wythin your diocese as at any tyme have byn or yet be immpropried, in whose handes and possessyon the same been,( n3) either in his maiestie's or of any( n4) his graces subiectes, wyth your treu certificat also of all vicoragys endowed within your saide diocese and of all other churches impropried havinge no vicoragys endowed, beynge eyther servyd( n5) by a manuall pryst or destytute of a curat, with the severall values of suche vicoragys and benefices as ryght( n6) as ye may. Fayll you not this to do withall celerytie as you tender thaccomplyssynge( n7) of his graces pleasur. Fare you well. From my manor of Lamhehith this xxth of Aprill anno 1550.
Your lovinge brother
T. Cant
( n1) WSRO, Ep. I/1/6, fols. 73v-74r, hereinafter cited as [Ch]. Another copy, collated with the present transcript, survives for the diocese of Exeter, hereinafter cited as [Ex] in the Devon Record Office, Chanter catalogue 15, fol. 117, with the following heading 'In octavo Maii venerabilis vir magister Morgan recepit apud Exon' litteras sequentes'. The Exeter copy is printed in P.S., Cranmer II, p. 428.
( n2) 'assertaine me the names' [Ex].
( n3) 'they be same byn' [Ch] corrected to 'the same byn' in MS; 'the same been' supplied from [Ex].
( n4) 'or any' [Ex].
( n5) 'selvyd' [Ch]; 'eyther [fol. 74] selvyd' in [Ch].
( n6) 'right' [EX], wrongly transcribed as 'nigh' in P.S., Cranmer II, p. 428.
( n7) 'thaccomplisshement' [Ex].
A9 [WSRO, Ep. I/1/6, fol. 74]
Certificate of execution from George, bishop of Chichester, addressed to Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and metropolitan. The bishop received the above letters on 12 May and instigated an enquiry throughout the diocese to ascertain the answers to all the archbishop's questions. These answers are contained in a book [not registered in MS] annexed to this certificate. Dated in the bishop's palace at Chichester (Cicestr') and sealed with his seal, 10 July 1550 (4 Edward VI).
A10
[10 December 1550. Fragment of a letter from the archbishop to the dean and chapter of Canterbury, requesting that they confirm a document under their chapter seal]
... ... ... shall perceyve by the sa[me]( n1) which herewith I sen[d] unto you ... desire you therefore to graunt your favor[a]ble consentes unto my said servant for the due [con]firmation therof under your chapiter seale so [a]s the same may be of force and effecte accordingly. And thus fare ye hertily wel. From my manor at Lambieth, the xth of December 1550.( n2)
Your lovynge frende
T Cant'( n3)
[Canterbury Cathedral Archives and Library (henceforth cited as CCAL), DCc, Christ Church Letters, vol. 3 no. 2]
( n1)The surviving document is badly damaged. Missing portions are indicated by three adjacent points in the transcript, while editorial reconstructions are given in square brackets.
( n2) Possibly 1551.
( n3) The last two lines of the letter are in Cranmer's own hand. A secretary's hand has endorsed the letter with the following address: 'To my loving freends the deane and chapiter of my cathedral church in Cant"
A11
[Undated. Advertisement directed to the bishops of the realm concerning the form of rendering accounts in the court of first fruits and tenths]
Advertysmentes( n1) geven to the moste reverende fathers( n2) the archiebisshoppes of Canturbury and Yorke and other the bisshoppes of this realme
Firste, that no vicecollector bee hereafter receyved in the Courte of Firste Fruyctes and Tenthes,( n3) but suche as be auctorised by the archiebisshopp( n4) or bishopp and that under hys auctentique seale.
The certificate of the recusantis to bee by suche vicecollector, and none other persone, broughte into the courte, and that the same certificates conteyne the name and surname of thincombent refusynge,( n5) with the daye, yere and place when and where it was demaunded together with the promotion or benefice, and the same refused to be payed, and also whoo is patrone there.
That fromehensfourthe( n6) the moneye due by every bysshoppe for the tenthes and subsidies bee payed in the dayes appoynted in the estatute,( n7) and that they also, by the tyme lymyted in the estatute, make theire perfyte and full accompte concerning theire receipte and collection.( n8)
( n1) GL, MS 9531/12 part 2, fol. 300r-v, hereinafter cited as [L]. Another copy exists for the diocese of Chichester in WSRO, Ep. I/1/6, fol. 83v, hereinafter cited as [Ch1]. A third copy survives in the archives of the Dean and Chapter of Chichester as WSRO, Cap. I/3/1, fol. 18v (main sequence); this is cited here as [Ch2]. The capitular copy is also calendared in W.D. Peckham (ed.), The Acts of file Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral Church of Chichester 154.5-1642 (Sussex Record Society, 58; Cambridge: Sussex Record Society, 1959), no. 516. All three copies have been collated to produce this annotated transcript, where the readings of the London MS have been taken as authoritative.
( n2) 'fathers in God' [Ch1] and [Ch2].
( n3) 'that Courte of Fruictes and Tenthes' [Ch1].
( n4) 'tharchebysshoppes' [Ch1].
( n5) 'thincombent [fol. 300v] refusynge' in [L].
( n6) 'frome hense' in [Ch2].
( n7) 26 Henry VIII, c. 3; Stat. Realm, III, pp. 493-99.
( n8) Marginal headings: Decretum factum auctoritate Curie regis Primorum Fructuum et Decimarum de modo et forma faciendi et reddendi compotum [L]; Advertysment gevyn to tharchbisshopps and bsshops [sic] of ye realme for an ordre in the collection of the tenthes [Ch1]. While the document itself is undated in all three sources, the context of its registration in the episcopal and capitular registers at Chichester suggests a date of May, June or July 1552.
Commissions from the registers of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury
A12 [PRO, PROB 11/25, fol. 1r-v]
Commission from 'THOMAS PERMISSIONE DIVINA CANT' ARCHIEPISCOPUS, TOTIUS Anglie primas et apostolice sedis legatus' to M. Richard Gwent Dec. D., which stresses that the probate of all testaments, and the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, where the bona, Jura site credita are in more than one diocese in the province of Canterbury, belong to the archbishop, and not to any inferior judge, by law, prerogative and custom. Gwent is hereby appointed as the archbishop's commissary general at pleasure to prove such wills, and to commit administration of the goods of those who die intestate; to sequester goods according to law; to examine accounts; to inhibit inferior judges, even bishops; to rescribe in all pleas; to proceed in all causes ex officio mero, mixto vel promoto or ad instanciam partium; and to do all else necessary. Lambeth, 30 March 1533.( n1)
( n1) The archbishop was consecrated on 30 March 1533 and, following his consecration, properly issued commissions to his officials. The registers of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury record acts of probate 'a penultimo die mensis Marcii anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo tricesimo tertio, quo die dictus reverendissimus pater in archiepiscopum Cantuariensem consecratus [est]'; cf. PRO, PROB 11/25, fol. 1.
A13 [PRO, PROB 11/25, fol. 200]
Commission at pleasure from 'THOMAS PERMISSIONE DIVINA CANTUAR' archiepiscopus, totius Anglie primas et metropolitanus per illustrissimum in Christo principem et dominum nostrum Henricum octavum, Anglie et Francie regem, fidei defensorem et dominum Hibernie, ac in terris supremum ecclesie Anglicane sub Christo caput, ad infrascripta sufficienter deputatus' to Richard Gwent, official of the Court of Canterbury, master or commissary of the prerogative, and dean of the Arches. Gwent is hereby empowered to prove testaments, and to commit administration of the goods of those who die intestate, where the bona, iura sive credita are in more than one diocese or jurisdiction within the realm of England, according to the custom of the archbishop's prerogative court; to expedite accounts; to hear causes in the Court of Canterbury, in the archbishop's prerogative court or in the court of the peculiar jurisdiction of the Arches; and to do all else necessary, with powers to appoint a deputy. Lambeth, 12 Oct. 1535.( n1)
(n1.) The issue of fresh commissions to his officials was the result of the archbishop's own receipt of a commission from the king, which firmly grounded the primate's authority in the king as supreme head; see A2. above. On 13 Jan. 1536, William Petre was issued with a commission by Thomas Cromwell as vicegerent, which significantly limited the powers expressed above; cf. B9 below.
A14 [PRO, PROB 11/29, fol. 170]
Commission from the archbishop addressed to M. John Cockes LL.D., which stresses that the probate of the testaments of those who die having bona, iura sive credita in more than one diocese or jurisdiction in the province of Canterbury, and the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, belongs to the archbishop by law, prerogative and custom. Cockes is appointed as the archbishop's commissary general at pleasure to prove wills, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, in the city, diocese or province of Canterbury; to sequester goods according to law; to examine accounts; to inhibit inferior judges, even bishops; to rescribe in all pleas; to proceed in all causes ex officio mero, mixto vel promoto or ad instanciam partium; and to do all else necessary. Lambeth, 24 July 1543.
A15 [PRO PROB 11/30, fol. 157v; CCAL, DCc, register U, fol. 157r-v]
(i)
Commission( n1) from the archbishop addressed to M. William Cooke LL.D., which stresses that the probate of the testaments of both sexes, who have bona, iura sive credita in more than one diocese or jurisdiction,( n2) and the administration of the goods of those who die intestate, belong to him both by royal grant and by law, prerogative and custom. Cooke is hereby appointed commissary and master of the archbishop's prerogative court for life. He may prove testaments; commit administration of the goods of those who die intestate; sequester goods according to law; examine accounts; inhibit inferior judges, even bishops; rescribe in all pleas and proceed in all causes ex officio mero, mixto vel promoto or ad instanciam partium; receive all emoluments due by custom; and do all else necessary. Sealed with the archbishop's seal, Lambeth 13 January 1547 (38 Henry VIII).
(ii)
Confirmed by the clean and chapter of Canterbury; sealed with their common seal and dated in the chapter house, 23 January 1547.
( n1) See document 84 in my edition of Cranmer's register.
( n2) 'peculiar jurisdiction' in CCAL.
Section B A calendar of part of Thomas Cromwell's register as vicegerent in BL Add. MS 48022 fols. 83r-96v
Introduction
The 197 volumes of Yelverton manuscripts in the British Library (Add. MSS 48000-48196) are a prime source for Tudor historians.( n1) The core of the collection comprises the papers of Robert Beale, an Elizabethan public servant who was born in 1541. Some of Beale's manuscripts concern church history, canon law and theology; the draft reform of canon law compiled in 1535, recently discovered by Professor Donald Logan, is among these papers.( n2)
Among the more interesting of the original manuscripts acquired by Beale is Add. MS 48012, an ecclesiastical formulary containing commissions, mandates, letters and the like, mostly of the archbishops of Canterbury 1490-1564. It was compiled successively by John Barrett, Archbishop Morton's scribe of the acts, and Thomas Argall, who was registrar of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury under Archbishop Matthew Parker. Beale copied much of the contents of the present Add. MS 48012 into Add. MS 48022, in which he notes that the extracts come 'out of an old booke which I borowed of Mr Saye, whose father was principall register for ecclesiasticall causes--June 1588'.( n3) A seventeenth-century note in MS 48012 (fol. 1) however, referring to Beale's note, describes Saye senior as registrar of the lower house of Convocation. The Sayes, therefore, senior and junior are probably William and Robert; Saye senior is probably the William q who appears throughout Cranmer's register.
In Add. MS 48022, fols 83r-184v have been copied by Beale from what is now Add. MS 48012, where they are marked with a pencil cross. Despite Beale's note on fol. 83, the commissions and documents on fols 83r-96v are not actually from Add. MS 48012, but from another source, not yet identified. Fols. 83r-96v, transcribed and calendared below, form a copy of the whole, or more likely a part, of the register of Thomas Cromwell as the king's vicegerent in ecclesiastical causes. It is unlikely that the 17 extracts below represent the full extent of Cromwell's register. Indeed Thomas Yale, vicar general to Archbishops Matthew Parker and Edmund Grindal, also made notes from what looks like Cromwell's register. Yale lists 10 licences granted to leading clerics in the reign of Henry VIII which effectively grounded their authority in the authority of Henry VIII as supreme head of the Church. Only two of the licences, those for the dean and chapter of London and the archdeacon of Canterbury, appear in Beale's extracts. It looks very much as though the extracts copied by Beale form only a selection from Cromwell's original register, now lost.( n4)
Cromwell's commission as vicegerent probably dates from 21 January 1535. Until his death in 1540, Cromwell wielded enormous power as the king's vicar general, possessing authority in the church which no layman had hitherto claimed. The 17 extracts below, therefore, are a fascinating insight into the relationship between church and state in Tudor England.( n5)
( n1) The British Library Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts. The Yelverton Manuscripts, 2 vols (London, 1994).
( n2) Ayris and Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer, pp. 318-20.
( n3) BL, Add. MS 48022, fol. 83.
( n4) See BL, MS Cleopatra FI, fol. 47v. It seems likely that most of the 10 licences noted by Yale are from Cromwell's lost register, although Yale saw the original registers for the sees of Canterbury and London. The licences that Yale notes are for the archbishops of Canterbury and York (granted in October 1535), John Longland as bishop of Lincoln (granted 13 October 1535), John Stokesley as bishop of London (granted 19 October 1535), Stephen Gardiner as bishop of Winchester (noted simply as granted in 1535), Cuthbert Tunstall as bishop of Durham (granted on 10 November 1535), the dean and chapter of London (,granted on 15 October 1535 and see B2 below), the archdeacons of London and Middlesex (both granted on 15 November 1535) and the archdeacon of Canterbury (noted as being granted on 14 November 1535, but see B10 below). See A. Harmer, A Specimen of some errors and defects in the History of the Reformation of the Church of England wrote by Gilbert Burnet D.D., now lord bishop of Saturn (London, 1693), pp. 51-53 and MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 133 and n. 160.
( n5) The significance of this copy of Cromwell's register for the rule of Thomas Cranmer as archbishop of Canterbury is considered in Ayris and Selwyn (eds.), Thomas Cranmer, pp. 125-30.
'Out of an old booke which I borowed of' Mr Saye whose father was principall register for ecclesiasticall causes--June 1588'
B1 [fol. 83r-v]
Commission at pleasure in the name of Henry VIII to his chaplain Richard Pate, archdeacon of Lincoln, to exercise jurisdiction within the archdeaconry. The power and authority of the judiciary, both ecclesiastical and secular, and of all magistrates emanates from the king as if from the supreme head. Intending to visit all the clergy of the kingdom, the king has inhibited all those possessing ecclesiastical jurisdiction from exercizing such powers. Nevertheless, Thomas Crumwell, principal secretary, master of the rolls and vicegerent, vicar general and official principal for ecclesiastical causes is so occupied with affairs of state that he cannot attend to all business in person, t laving listened to Pate's entreaties, and wishing to help the king's subjects in the archdeaconry, Pate is licensed to prove wills whose value is under £100 and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the value of the goods is similarly not more than £100; to induct clerics into livings; to hear causes in his court according to the laws and statutes of the realm; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with 'sigillum nostrum quo ad causas ecclesiasticas utimur', 14 October 1535; 27 Henry VIII.( n1)
( n1) The original commission, stained and damaged, now lacking the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, survives as LAO, Dij/60/3/17. It carries the holograph signatures of 'Thomas Crumwell' and 'Gulielmus Petreus LL.D.'. For a grant to Petre of a testamentary commission out of the vicegerent's court, see B9 below. The archdeacon of Lincoln received his commission just after the bishop, John Longland, who was granted a commission for the exercise of his episcopal jurisdiction on 12 October 1535. Cf. LAO, Register XXVI, fols. 261v-62r. The dean and chapter of Lincoln did not receive their commission until 19 December 1535; cf. LAO, Dean and Chapter Wills 1534-59, II, fols. 33v-34v and also 1r-v (second numeration) (much damaged).
B2 [fols. 84-85]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to the president( n1) and chapter of St Paul's Cathedral, London [in the same terms as B1]. The dean and chapter are licensed to prove the wills of the king's subjects in parishes, where the dean and chapter have exercised jurisdiction in times past, and where the value of these wills does not exceed £100, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where their value is similarly not more than £100;( n2) to collate and induct men to livings according to custom; to hear causes according to the laws and statutes of the realm; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 15 October 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) A marginal heading gives the recipient of the commission as 'decanus et capitulum Sancti Pauli London".
( n2) 'centum librarum' ruled through in MS.
B3
Mandate in the name of the king to the dean, or president, and the chapter of Hereford Cathedral, reciting that Edward Foxe (Fox) S.T.P. has been nominated by the Crown, and duly elected by the dean, or president, and chapter to the see of Hereford. Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, has confirmed this election and consecrated Foxe as bishop. Assenting to the election, its confirmation and Foxe's consecration, the king commands the dean and chapter to enthrone Foxe, or his proctor, as their new bishop according to the cathedral statutes and approved customs, to induct him into the corporal possession of all that pertains to the office, and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 15 Oct. 1535; 27 Henry VIII.( n1)
( n1) See documents 375A-O in my edition of Cranmer's register.
B4 [fols. 85v-86r]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to the abbot and convent of the exempt monastery of St Alban's in Herts (Hertford) [in the same terms as B1]. The abbot and convent are licensed to prove wills within their peculiar jurisdiction where they have exercised jurisdiction in times past, and where the value of those wills does not exceed £100; and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where their value is similarly not more than £100;( n1) to institute suitable men to benefices and, if need be, to deprive them of such livings; to collate and induct men to livings, where the abbot and convent have rights of patronage; to hear causes according to the laws and statutes of the realm; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 16 October l535; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) The clause relating to probate is registered incorrectly in the MS and has been reconstructed here from similar commissions in the vicar general's register.
B5 [fols. 86v-87r]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to the prioress and convent of the Poor Clares without Aldgate in London (abbatisse et conventui monasterii exempti minorissarum ordinis Sancti Clari extra Algate civitatis nostre London') [in the same terms as B1]. The prioress and convent are licensed to prove wills within their peculiar jurisdiction, in cases where they and their predecessors have exercised jurisdiction in times past, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the value of the goods is similarly under £100; to hear causes according to tile laws and statutes of the realm, where jurisdiction in such cases has customarily fallen to the prioress and convent; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with tile seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 22 November 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
B6 [fols. 87-88]
Commission in the name of the king to John, bishop of Rochester,( n1) a man renowned for his zeal in Christ's gospel (de cuius erga Christi euangelium zelo ...plurimum confidimus). It has come to the king's attention that all blasphemy, heresy and idolatry take root amongst the people at the hands of pseudo-prophets. Considering that nothing is more important than turning the people away from such enormities, the king wishes suitable preachers to spread the seed of the teaching of evangelical doctrine (semen evangelice doctrine) and to defend the pure teaching of Christ and his religion (veram Christi doctrinam eiusque religionem). The bishop of Rochester is therefore empowered to examine all preachers concerning their learning, character and other qualifications for such a task. Those who are found well qualified are to be authorized to preach the Word of God to the clergy and people, according to their talents, in all churches and other suitable places in the city and suburbs of London. Those who are unsuitable for such a duty are to be inhibited from such activity and to be banished from the city and suburbs. The bishop has powers of coercion, even of imprisonment, which he may use against those who refuse to accept his decisions. This commission is to last only until the bishop hears further from the king or from the king's councillor Thomas Cromwell, principal secretary, master of the rolls and vicegerent, vicar general and official principal in ecclesiastical causes. All mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs and other officials are to help the bishop in this task. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 20 December 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) John Hilsey, who was installed as bishop on the order of the king on 30 November 1535. Cf. KAO, DRb/Ar 1/13 (formerly DRc/R7), fol. 184v (old foliation), fol. 2v (new foliation).
B7 [fols. 88-88A]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to Miles Spenser LL.D. and [blank] to exercise jurisdiction in the see of Norwich sede vacante. The king recites that an inhibition was dispatched to all bishops by Thomas, have exercised jurisdiction in times past, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the value of the goods is similarly under £100; to hear causes according to the laws and statutes of the realm, where jurisdiction in such cases has customarily fallen to the prioress and convent; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 22 November 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
B6 [fols. 87-88]
Commission in the name of the king to John, bishop of Rochester,( n1) a man renowned for his zeal in Christ's gospel (de adus erga Christi euangelium zelo ...plurimum confidimus). It has come to the king's attention that all blasphemy, heresy and idolatry take root amongst the people at the hands of pseudo-prophets. Considering that nothing is more important than turning the people away from such enormities, the king wishes suitable preachers to spread the seed of the teaching of evangelical doctrine (semen evangelice doctrine) and to defend the pure teaching of Christ and his religion (veram Christi doctrinam eiusque religionem). The bishop of Rochester is therefore empowered to examine all preachers concerning their learning, character and other qualifications for such a task. Those who are found well qualified are to be authorized to preach the Word of God to the clergy and people, according to their talents, in all churches and other suitable places in the city and suburbs of London. Those who are unsuitable for such a duty are to be inhibited from such activity and to be banished from the city and suburbs. The bishop has powers of coercion, even of imprisonment, which he may use against those who refuse to accept his decisions. This commission is to last only until the bishop hears further from the king or from the king's councillor Thomas Cromwell, principal secretary, master of the rolls and vicegerent, vicar general and official principal in ecclesiastical causes. All mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs and other officials are to help the bishop in this task. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 20 December 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) John Hilsey, who was installed as bishop on the order of the king on 30 November 1535. Cf. KAO, DRb/Ar 1/13 (formerly DRc/R7), fol. 184v (old foliation), fol. 2v (new foliation).
B7 [fols. 88-88A]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to Miles Spenser LL.D. and [blank] to exercise jurisdiction in the see of Norwich sede vacante. The king recites that an inhibition was dispatched to all bishops by Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury and king's councillor, to inhibit them from exercising jurisdiction during the royal visitation.( n1) Since Thomas Crumwell, principal secretary [etc.] is too busy to conduct all business in person, Richard lately bishop of Norwich( n2) was licensed to exercise such authority. The bishop of Norwich is now deceased and Crumwell is too occupied to attend to business in the vacant see. Tile latter has therefore nominated Spenser and an unnamed commissioner to act as his deputies. Ratifying Crumwell's action, the king empowers the commissioners to prove wills in the diocese of Norwich, which are not valued at more than £100, and to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods are similarly valued at less than £100 (providing that all such probate jurisdiction belongs to the bishop of Norwich by custom); to institute men to benefices, and if need be to deprive them of their benefices; to hear all causes, falling to the bishop whether by complaint, appeal or otherwise according to the laws and statutes of the realm; to do all else which the late bishop of Norwich might do according to the terms of the king's commission; and to do all else necessary; Thomas Godsalva notary public is to be scribe of the acts. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, last of December 1535; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) The text of the inhibition appears in P.S., Cranmer II, p. 463. The inhibition, dispatched to the archbishop of Canterbury, did not in fact cover the province of York. There, the inhibition was dispatched to the Archbishop Edward Lee. Cf. Borthwick Institute, York, register 28, fols. 101v, 104r-v.
( n2) Richard Nykke, who died before 29 December 1535. Cf. L. Stephen and S. Lee (eds.), Dictionary of National Biography [henceforth cited as DNB] (72 vols.; London, 1885-1913), sub nomine].
B8 [fol. 88Ar-88Av]
Preaching licence in the name of the king addressed to [blank] Cardemaker (Cardmaker)( n1) S.T.B., Franciscan friar. Ks supreme head of the English church, the king stresses that he has no greater duty than to ensure that the Word of God is preached as sincerely as possible to the people committed to his charge and that men appointed as preachers throughout the kingdom are of the highest character, showing themselves to be an example of good works (exemplum bonorum operum). Cardemaker is licensed to preach, according to the talents bestowed on him by God, in all churches and other places throughout the kingdom, delivering sermons in Latin or English (sermone latino vel vulgari). Despite the latter's zeal towards the gospel of Christ, Cardemaker is licensed only until the king, or Thomas Crumwell [etc.; cf. B6]. All mayors, sheriffs and bailiffs and other officers are to help Cardemaker in his task. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 12 January 1536; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) The recipient of the licence is John Cardmaker, alias Taylor, who eventually suffered martyrdom under Mary; cf. DNB, sub nomine.
B9 [fols. 88Av-90r]
Commission( n1) in the name of the king to William Petre (Peter, Petrus, Petreus) LL.D. which recites that the king has previously issued a commission, in letters patent sealed with the great seal, to Thomas Crumwell, principal secretary, master of the rolls and vicegerent, vicar general and official principal for ecclesiastical causes, with powers to appoint a commissary or commissaries. Crumwell is too occupied with affairs of state to deal with the business outlined below and has nominated Petre in his place. Ratifying Crumwell's nomination, the king licenses Petre to exercise powers of probate in cases where the deceased possesses bona, Jura sive credita in one or more dioceses or jurisdictions (in una aut diversis diocesibus sive iurisdictionibus) of the kingdom to the value of £200 or above, and to inhibit archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, deans, and their officials, and all other ecclesiastical judges.
The detailed clauses of the commission empower Petre to prove the wills of all the king's subjects, where probate has previously been granted by letters patent sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas to archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, deans or other persons, colleges or ecclesiastical houses; and to commit administration of the goods to those who may perform the same by the laws or customs of the realm; to administer the goods of those who die intestate; to receive inventories of the bona, Jura sive credita; to receive accounts from executors, even where the bona, iura sive credita are in diversis diocesibus sive iurisdictionibus of the kingdom; to issue receipts; to cite both the principal parties and witnesses from any place in the kingdom; to demand muniments, registers and ail forms of written records, even original records themselves, from any ecclesiastical judge or court; to impose a suitable punishment on those who oppose the terms of the commission; and to do all else necessary. Petre is granted powers to appoint a deputy or deputies to aid him and the commission is to last until it is revoked by the king or Crumwell. Petre is to take 'dilectis nobis Smithe et [blank] Note'( n2) as auditors of the accounts, the latter having been assigned to this task by the vicegerent. Petre is to inform the king, or Crumwell, of all accounts which he draws up. All decrees issued by Petre are to be of full effect, in all tribunals both ecclesiastical and lay. Sealed with the seal ad causes ecclesiasticas, 13 January 1536; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) A copy of Petre's commission appears in the probate registers of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury in the PRO as PROB 11/26, fol. 1r-v. With minor verbal variations, it is similar to the text recorded here. Major differences in readings are noted in the footnotes below as [PROB]. Another, much later, copy of the commission, which is textually much closer to the readings in the register of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury than to the Yelverton MS, and which has not been collated with the copies above, is to be found in PRO, SP 1/101, fol. 82r-v; J.S. Brewer, J. Gardner and R.H. Brodie (eds.), Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII: [a calendar] (21 vols; London: HMSO, 1862-1910), I (rev. edn, 1920); Addenda (1 vol.; 1929-32), X, 88. For a discussion of Cromwell's probate jurisdiction, cf. CJ. Kitching, 'The Probate Jurisdiction of Thomas Cromwell as Vicegerent', Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 46 (1973), pp. 102-106. For another example of the work of Petre and the vicegerency in probate, see F.E. Warnford (ed.), Star Chamber Suits of John and Thomas Warneford (Wiltshire Record Society, 48; Trowbridge: Wiltshire Record Society, 1993), pp. 2, 6-7, 14-15. I am grateful to Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch for drawing my attention to this reference.
( n2) 'dilectis nobis Johanni Smyth et Johanni Note' [PROB].
B10 [fols. 90-91]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to Edmund Cranmer, archdeacon of Canterbury( n1) [where the preamble is abbreviated to 'etc.' but probably follows the form of BI]. The archdeacon is licensed to prove the wills of those dying within the archdeaconry having goods of no greater value than £100; to administer the goods of those who die intestate, where the goods are similarly valued at no more than £100; provided that such probate and administration has been performed by the archdeacon's predecessors; to install all bishops in the province of Canterbury, duly nominated, elected and confirmed, according to the laws and statutes of the realm, and to do all else necessary according to custom; to induct all clerks admitted and instituted to benefices in the archdeaconry where induction falls to the archdeacon by custom, according to the laws and statutes of the realm; and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 20 February 1536; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) The text of the commission refers to Edmund Cranmer as archbishop of Canterbury, while the heading correctly identifies him as the archdeacon of Canterbury. A later (?) marginal heading, in another hand and ink, reads 'archidiacono'.
B11 [fols. 91-92]
Commission in the name of the king to Thomas Legh LL.D., in which the preamble stresses that the Crown must strive as keenly as possible to ensure that suitable men are appointed as rulers or prelates in each church of the land, lest officers are nominated in the future, or now hold sway, in monasteries, religious houses (cenobiis) or other places of religion, carrying cure of very many souls, who are in any way unsuitable or unworthy. It has come to the king's attention that dominus Henry Brooke, prior of the cathedral church or monastery of St Swithun at Winchester (ecclesie cathedralis site monasterii Sancti Swithuni( n1) Winton') has squandered the fruits, goods and jewels of the catholic church, allowed the buildings to fall into utter ruin and disrepair, a neglect which continues day by day, and is negligent in tile administrative duties of his office; unless a remedy is found at once the monastery stands in imminent danger of final dissolution (extremam dissolutionem). Legh, therefore, is commissioned to enquire into the truth of these accusations, and into any other abuses in the monastery which demand correction; if Brooke is found unsuitable for his office, he is to be deprived, or punished at the discretion of the commissioner; should Brooke resign, Legh is to accept the resignation on the king's authority as supreme head of the church; Brooke is empowered to hold an election for a new prior, with the choice of candidate falling to the Crown; to confirm the election on the king's authority as head of the church; to annul the election if necessary, having first summoned those who should be examined by law, the king's prerogative and the statutes of the realm; to commit the spiritualities and temporalities of the house to the elect and to install him into the corporal possession of the priory; to receive an oath of fidelity and obedience according to the statutes and ordinances of the realm( n2) and any other oath due to the king; and to do all else necessary. Legh is to inform the king of his actions in the matter as quickly as possible. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 11 March 1536; 27 Henry VIII.
( n1) 'Sanct Swithuni' in MS.
( n2) From 31 July 1536, a formal oath of supremacy was demanded of all newly-appointed office holders. The Succession Act of that year also required an oath. Cf. Stat. Realm, III, pp. 663-66 and 655-62.
B12 [fols 92-93]
Commission at pleasure in the name of the king to Edward, bishop of Hereford (Hereford'), 'king's councillor, reciting that the Crown has inhibited the bishops of the kingdom from exercising powers of visitation by an inhibition transmitted to them by Thomas archbishop of Canterbury,( n1) king's councillor. In a separate commission, granted at the bishop's request, powers of ecclesiastical jurisdiction were restored to the bishop, save those of visitation, but the bishop now wishes to hold an ordinary visitation in the cath., city and diocese of Hereford. Wishing that such a visitation may uproot vice and sow virtue, the king licenses the bishop to visit the cathedral and city of Hereford, all monasteries, abbeys, priories, colleges and other monastic houses, all hospitals, the clergy and people of the diocese, provided they be not exempt from his jurisdiction and fall beneath his rule by custom and the laws and statutes of the realm. The bishop is also to investigate 'ex officio mero, mixto vel promoto' alt crimes within the diocese according to the comperta drawn up during the visitation; and to do all else necessary above and beyond those powers bestowed by the king in his earlier commission. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 20 July 1536; 28 Henry VIII.( n2)
( n1) The text of the inhibition appears in P.S., Cranmer II, p. 463.
( n2) A registered copy of this commission appears in Foxe's Hereford register as HRO, AL19/13, fols. 7v-8r, which is printed in Wilkins, Concilia, III, p. 810. There are numerous small differences between the version in Cromwell's register and the final commission issued to Foxe which was received at Hereford. The copy in Cromwell's register is dated 'Dat' sub sigillo nostro ad causas ecclesiasticas xxo die Julii anno Domini 1536'. Tile commission actually issued to Foxe is dated one day later, sealed with 'sigillum nostrum ad causas ecclesiasticas... Dat' xxio die mensis Julii anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo xxxvio'. This usefully shows that the documents entered into Cromwell's register were copied from drafts, which could then be worked up to the final version issued to the recipient.
B13 [fol. 93r-v]
Licence in the name of the king to his servant Philip van Wylder, alien, and Frances Dabonall of the city of London, for their matrimony to be solemnized by a suitable chaplain on Tuesday next, despite the fact that this is in times prohibited, and with the banns being called only once, provided that there be no other impediment and that nothing prejudicial be done to the churches within whose parishes the recipients dwell. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 4 February 1537; 28 Henry VIII.
B14 [fols 93v-94v]
Commission in the name of the king to Thomas Legh LL.D. and William Petre coniunctim et divisim [with a preamble similar to BI 1 omitting the stipulation concerning religious houses (cenobiis)]. Dominus Thomas Spaldyng, prior of the monastery of Spalding (Spaldyng) in the county of Lincoln (Lyncoln') has squandered the fruits, goods and jewels of the monastery; he is negligent in the administrative duties of his office and has committed many other serious offences, to which the king cannot turn a blind eye. Legh and Petre are licensed to enquire into the truth of the accusations, into the life and character of Spaldyng, into any other abuses in the monastery which demand correction, and to demand written accounts of his administrative activities. Should Spaldyng be found guilty, he is to be punished and, if necessary, removed from office and the goods of the monastery sequestrated. Should Spaldyng resign, the commissioners are to accept the resignation on the king's authority as supreme head of the church. The commissioners may hold an election for a new prior, with the choice of candidate falling to the Crown; quash the election if necessary, having first summoned those who should be examined by law, the king's prerogative and the statutes of the realm; commit the spiritualities and temporalities of the house to the new prior, elect and confirmed, and install him into the corporal possession of the monastery. The commissioners are empowered to receive an oath of fidelity and obedience according to the statutes and ordinances of the realm, and any other oath due to the king;( n1) and to do all else necessary. They are to inform the Crown of their actions in the matter as quickly as possible. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 20 March 1537; 28 Henry VIII.
( n1) See B11, n. 2.
B15 [fols. 94v-95r]
Mandate in the name of the king to the archdeacon or president and the chapter of Llandaff cathedral, which recites the fact that Thomas archbishop of Canterbury has confirmed the election of Robert as their new bishop, nominated by the king and elected by the archdeacon or president and chapter of Llandaff, and consecrated as bishop.( n1) Ratifying the election, confirmation and consecration, the recipients are to enthrone the new bishop, or his proctor, and induct him into the corporal possession of all that pertains to the office, according to the cathedral statutes and approved customs, and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 4 May 1537; 29 Henry VIII.
( n1) The copy of the mandate is ambiguous on this point. It recites the fact of Robert Holgate's election and the confirmation of that election, but does not expressly state that the archbishop has consecrated him. Holgate, however, was consecrated on 25 March; see document 383K in my edition of Cranmer's register.
B16 [fols. 95-96]
Commission in the name of the king to Thomas Bedyll. archdeacon of Cornwall (Cornubie), councillor, and Richard Gwent, archdeacon of London. They are to make investigation into the state of the Charterhouse (domus sive prioratus salutationis Beate Marie Virginis) in the suburbs of London, particularly concerning the life and conversation of all religious persons there, and to demand the following oath of succession and obedience to the king and his heirs from the priors, monks, lay brothers (conversi) and all others living there. The form of the oath is:
Yee shall from hencforth utterly renounce, refuse, relinquish and forsake the bisshoppe of Rome and his authoritye, power and jurisdiction. And ye shall never consent or agree that the bisshoppe of Rome shall practise, exercise or have any manner of authority, jurisdiction or power within this realm, or in any other the kinges domminions, but ye shall resist the same at all tymes to the uttermost of your power. And from hencforth, ye shall accept, repute & take the kinges maiestye to be the only supreme head in earth of the church of England. And to your witt, cunning and uttermost of your power without fraud, gyle or other undewe meane ye shall observe, keepe, maintayn and defend the whole effectes and contentes of all and singular actes & statutes made and to be made within this realm in derogation, extirpation and extinquishment of the bisshoppe of Rome and his authority, and all other acts made or to be made in reformation and corroboration of the kinges power of suprem head in earth of the church of England. And this ye shall do against all mannier of persons of what estate, dignity, degre or condition they be, and in no wise do or attempt, nor to your power suffer to be don or attempted directly( n1) or indirectly, any thing prively or appertly to the lett, hindraunce, damage or derogation therof, or of any part therof, by any manner of meanes or for any manner of pretence. And in case any oath be made or hath ben made by you to any person or persons in maytenaunce, defence or favor of the bisshoppe of Rome or his authority, jurisdiction or power, ye shall repute the same as vayn and adnichilate. So helpe you God, all saynctes, and the holy evangelies.
The commissioners are to receive the professions in the king's name, duly signed and sealed, and to do all else necessary. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 6 May 1537; 29 Henry VIII.
( n1) Corrected to 'directly' in MS.
B17 [fol. 96r-v]
Commission in the name of the king to [blank] Arundell kt,( n1) William Petre LL.D. and Thomas Bennet LL.D., reciting that Walter Hungerford (Hungford, Hungeforde) lord Hungerford of Heytesbury (Heytestbury) has petitioned the Crown to commit his marital cause for judgement, since he can no longer cohabit with his wife. The commissioners, or any two of them, are licensed with full powers to determine the cause summarie, according to law, with authority to compel witnesses to give evidence, and to do all else necessary. If the case is proven, Hungerford is to be declared separated from his wife a mensa et thoro until the two are reconciled. The commissioners are to inform the king of their actions. Sealed with the seal ad causas ecclesiasticas, 3 February 1540; 31 Henry VIII.( n2)
( n1) William Fitzalan, earl of Arundel and knight of the Garter; cf. G.E. Cockayne, The Complete Peerage (new ed. V. Gibbs et al.; 13 vols.; London: St Catherine's Press, 1910-59), I, p. 250.
( n2) The commission is clearly connected with Hungerford's execution on attainder on 28 July 1540 for charges principally centring on unnatural vice. See Cockayne, The Complete Peerage, II, p. 626.]
Section C Introduction
The articles and injunctions given below stem from Thomas Cranmer's administration of the spiritualities in the vacant see of Norwich in 1550. They do not appear in the Parker Society edition of Cranmer's Works, nor in the text of Cranmer's own register, and were believed to have perished. The articles, but not the injunctions, have been noted as 'Abp. Cranmer's Articles of Visitation in the Diocese of Norwich, a copy of which has not yet been discovered'.( n1) A copy of the articles, lacking the injunctions, is to be found at Balliol College, Oxford, at classmark 560 c 7 (31). They were noted in A Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England etc. 1475-1640 (compiled for the Bibliographical Society by A.W. Pollard and G.R. Redgrave et al.; 2nd edn, revised and enlarged by W.A. Jackson, F.S. Ferguson and K.F. Pantzer; 3 vols.; London, 1976-91 [1926]) as R.S.T.C. 10285.
Copies of the original printed articles and injunctions for Norwich are also to be found in the United States and the nature of the surviving documents there has recently been clarified by an article in The Library by Dr Stephen Tabor.( n2) Dr Tabor notes copies of the articles at the Folger Shakespeare Library (reproduced on UMI reel 643) and at the Huntington Library. Only one copy of the injunctions is known to exist, at the Folger (classmark STC 10285.8, not filmed by UMI).
The three settings of the articles are generally line-for-line, but all three exhibit subtle differences. As Dr Tabor has indicated, it is not easy to uncover the order of printing. All three printed copies of the articles have been collated in the transcript below. The Huntington copy of the articles has been taken as the basis for the transcript (HN) for, as Dr Tabor noted, this copy of the articles once formed a unit with the sole surviving copy of the injunctions in the Folger Shakespeare Library (F). Variations in wording and layout, but not insignificant variations in spelling, between the Huntington articles, those in the Folger Shakespeare Library and in Balliol College Oxford (O) are noted in the footnotes. The Folger copy of the articles has been annotated in a way which may reflect how the visitors elaborated on the articles as they visited the parishes in each deanery. Articles 1, 3-5, 26, and 36-40 have been annotated 'N', perhaps for the Latin word 'Notandum' or 'Notatur'. Articles 26 and 28 have been annotated with further text and this is noted in the footnotes below. Punctuation after Latin numerals and at the end of each article and injunction has been standardized to avoid any obscurity in meaning in the text. Line breaks, which occur in the middle of words and where suspension marks are lacking, are noted by '/' in the footnotes.
The earliest set of injunctions to survive as a testimony to the powers of the archbishop as metropolitan of the province are for the see of Worcester in 1535 and stem from Cranmer's metropolitical visitation. They do not appear in the Parker Society edition of Cranmer's Works, but were printed by Canon J.M. Wilson as 'Wolsey's and Cranmer's Visitations of the Priory of Worcester', English Historical Review 41 (1926), pp. 418-23. The injunctions themselves survive in Worcester Cathedral Library (WCL), Register A 6 (ii), fob. 187-88; cf. WCL, Register A 12, fob. 144 (bis)-45. The most important act in this visitation was the rejection by the prior and his brethren of the authority of the bishop of Rome, their acceptance of Henry VIII as supreme head and their swearing of an oath of obedience to the king, to Anne Boleyn and to her offspring. Cranmer was present in person at Worcester to oversee the work.( n3)
The present set of visitation articles and injunctions for the diocese of Norwich stem from the archbishop's visitation in that diocese during a vacancy in the see in 1550. Along with a set of injunctions for the diocese of Hereford in 1538 (see document 172 in my edition of Cranmer's register; printed in P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 81-82), they illustrate the archbishop's sede vacante jurisdiction during vacancies in the province of Canterbury as recorded in his principal register. The Norwich articles and injunctions were printed by Wolfe in London, but the lesson of using printing presses to inculcate reform had been taught by the production of the royal injunctions of 1536 and 1538 (cf. R.S.T.C., 10084.7, 10085-10087).
Two documents within the records of sede vacante jurisdiction in Cranmer's register support these articles and injunctions. Document 207 in my printed edition comprises a citation for visitation, addressed to the dean and chapter of Norwich, in the name of the archbishop as custodian of the spiritualities in the see of Norwich sede vacante. Document 208 is a corresponding inhibition of the powers of the archdeacon of Norfolk during the archbishop's visitation of the diocese by commissaries during the vacancy. Unfortunately, no material survives at Norwich concerning the visitation. The material presented here, however, sheds illuminating light on the process of reform in the 1550s.
The previous bishop William Repps was a staunch supporter of traditional religion and practice. The administration of the spiritualities in Norwich sede vacante was governed by composition and Cranmer duly issued a commission to the dean of Norwich as his official to visit the diocese (see documents 202-203 in my edition of' Cranmer's register). However, a wily Cranmer also got his own way by issuing a similar commission (document 204) to his own nominees, Rowland Taylor and William Wakefield. The results of the work of Cranmer's officials have already been described. Reformation in England was a bitter battle between conservatives and evangelicals and it was not clear at the time which side would win. As archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer used the opportunity presented to him by the vacancy in the see of Norwich to push through radical reformation in a diocese previously known as a haven for conservatives. The prelate's actions illustrate in a vivid way the reality of Reformation in the reign of Edward VI. The articles and injunctions presented here reveal a reforming bishop hard at work in the bitter religious divides which characterize mid-Tudor England.
( n1) P.S., Cranmer II, p. 154 n. 1.
( n2) See S. Tabor, 'Additions to STC', The Library, 6th series 16 (1994), pp. 194-95. I am most grateful to my friend and colleague David Selwyn, of St David's University College Lampeter, for drawing my attention to the significance of this article.
( n3) WCL, Register A 6 (ii), fols. 182v-83r; Cranmer's personal presence at Worcester from 14 August 1534 is attested by an entry in Prior More's journal; see E.S. Fegan (ed.), Journal of Prior William More (Worcestershire Historical Society; London: Worcestershire Historical Society, 1914), p. 391. For an overview of Cranmer's metropolitical visitation, cf. Ayris and Selwyn (eds.),Thomas Cranmer, pp. 122-25; cf. also Ayris, 'Metropolitical Visitation', pp. 1-46.
C1
[fol. A1]
ARTICLES TO BE INQVIRED OF IN THE VISITATION TO BE HAD in the byshopricke of Norwyche, now vacant, in the fourth yere of our most drad souerayn Lorde Edwarde the syxte, by the grace of God kynge of Englande, Fraunce and Irelande, defender of the faythe, and in earthe of the churche of Englande and also of Ireland, the supreme heade, nexte and immediatly vnder our sauioure Christe: by the moste Reuerend father in God, Thomas Archebyshop of Canterbury, Prymate of all Englande and Metropolitan. LONDINI, Anno Domini M.D. XL. IX.
[fol. A1v]
Articles to be inquired of.
I. FYRST, whether they haue exhorted the people to obedience to the Kynges maiestee and his ministers, and to vse charitie & loue, one to an other.
II. Also, whether any preacher or any other person hath affirmed( n1) the Kynges maiestee, that now is, not to be a full kynge, or not to haue his full power and auctoritee in al thynges, duryng his tender age, or his subiectes not to be bounde to obey his lawes made in the same age, as well as yf he were xxx. or xl. yeares of age.
III. Item, whether your persones, vicars and curates or mynisters, doo vse onely the Mattins, Euensong, celebration of the Lordes supper, and administration of eche of the Sacramentes, and all other common and open praier, in suche order and forme, as is mencioned in the boke of Common praier, of late sette forthe in englysshe, and none other, or otherwyse.
IIII. ITEM, whether there be any that doo preache, declare or speake any thyng in the derogation or deprauing of the said boke of Common praier, or seruice of this Churche of Englande, or against any thyng therin conteyned, or of any part therof.
V. Also, whether any person or persons, what soeuer they be, do in any enterludes, plaies, songes, rimes, orby any other open wordes, declare or speake( n2) any thing in the derogation, deprauing or dispisinge the sayde booke of Seruice.
VI. Item, whether thei haue charged fathers and mothers, maisters and gouernours of youth, to bring them vp in sore vertuous studi or occupation.
VII. Item, whether such beneficed men as be laufully absent from their benefices, do leaue their cure to a rude and vnlearned persone, and not to an honest well learned and expert curate, which can and wyll teache you holsome doctrine.
VIII. Item, whether they haue provyded in euery of theyr cures one booke of the whole Bible of the largest volume, in Englysh, and the Paraphrasis of Erasmus also in englyshe vpon the Gospelles, and sette vp the same in some conuenient place in the Churche, where theyr paisheoners( n3) maye moste commodiousely resorte to the same.
IX. Item, whether they be common haunters and resorters to tauernes or alehouses, geuing them selues to drinking, riotting, or playeng at vnlaufull games, and doo not occupy them selues in the reading or hearyng of some parte of holye Scripture, or in some other godly exercise.
X. Item, whether they haue admitted any man to preach in their cures, not beynge laufully lycended( n4) therunto, or have refused or denied suche to preache, as haue been lycensed accordinglye.
XI. Item, whether they haue heretofore declared to their parisheoners any thyng to the extolling or settynge foorth of pilgremages, relykes, or ymages, or lyghtyng of candels, kyssyng, kneelyng,( n5) deckyng of the same Images, or any suche superstition, and haue not openly recanted and reproued the same.
XII. Item, whether they haue one boke or register safely kepte, wherein they write the daye of euery weddinge, christenyng, and buriyng.
XIII. Item, whether they be resident vpon their benefices, and kepe hospitalitee or no, and if they be absent or kepe no hospitalitee, whether they do make due distribution among the poore parysheoners or not.
XIIII. Item, whether all manner proprietaries, persones, vicars and clarkes, hauynge churches, chapelles or mansions, doo keepe theyr chauncelles, rectoryes, and all other howses apperteynynge to theym in due reparacions.
XV. Item, whether they haue connsayled or moued( n6) theyr parisheoners rather to pray in a tung not knowen, then in englyshe, or to put theyr trust in any prescribed numbre of prayers, as in sayinge ouer a numbre of beades, or other lyke.
XVI. Also, whether they haue boughte theyr benefices, or come to theym by fraude or deceipt.
XVII. Item, whether they haue geuen open monicion to theyr parisheoners to detecte and present to theyr ordinary, all adulterers and fornicatours, and such men as haue two wyues lyuynge, and suche women as haue two husbandes lyuyng, within their parishes.
XVIII. Also, whether euery parishe haue prouyded a stronge cheste for the poore mens boxe, and sette and( n7) fastened the same neare to the hygh altare.
XIX. Item, whether they haue diligently exhorted and moued theyr parisheoners, and specially when they make theyr testamentes, to geue to the sayd poore mennes boxe, to bestowe the same vppon the poore.
XX. Item, whether ye knowe any persone within your parish, or else where, that is a letter of the woorde of God to bee redde in englyshe, or syncerelye preached, or of the execution of the kinges maiesties procedings in matters of religion.
XXI. Item, whether there be any other Grammar taught in any schoole within this diocesse, than that which is sette forth by the kynges majesty.
XXII. Item, whether any haue wilfully mainteyned and defended anye heresyes, erroures or false opinions contrary to the faithe of Christ, and( n8) holye Scripture.
XXIII. Item, whether any haue committed adultery fornication or incest, or be common baudes, and receyuers of suche euyll persones, or vehemently( n9) suspected of any of the premisses.
XXIIII. Item, whether any be braulers, sclanderers, chiders, scoulders, and sowers of discorde betwene one persone and an other.
XXV. Item, whether you know any that vse charmes, sorcery, enchauntements, witchcraft, south saiyng, or any lyke craft inuented by the diuell.
XXVI. Item, whether any inholders or alehouse kepers,( n10) doo vse commonly to sell meat and drinke in the tyme of common praier, preachynge, readynge( n11) of the Homelies or scripture.( n12)
XXVII. Item, whether you knowe anye executours or administratours of dead mens goodes, whiche doo not duely bestowe such of the sayde goodes, as were gyuen and bequeathed, or appoynted to be distributed amonge the poore people, repayring of highe waies, findynge of poore scholers, marieng( n13) of poore maydens, or suche other lyke charitable deedes.
XXVIII. Item, whether you knowe any that speaketh againste the baptisme of children, or agaynst the holy communion.( n14)
XXIX. Item, whether ye knowe anye that saye, that the wickednes of the mynister dooth take away the effecte of Christes sacramentes.
XXX. Item, whether ye knowe anye that saye, that Christian men canne neuer be allowed to repentaunce, yf they synne voluntarely after batisme.( n15)
XXXI. Item, whether ye knowe any that affirme all thinges to be common, or that there ought to bee no magistrates, gentelemen, or rychemenne in christian realmes.
XXXII. Item, whether you knowe anye that saye, that christian men maye not sweare, or take an othe before a Judge, or go to lawe one with an other: or maye sweare contrary to the treuthe.
XXXIII. Item, whether ye knowe anye that saye, that priuate pesones( n16) maye make insurrections, vprors or sedition: or compell men try forse or feare, to gyue theim anye of theyr goodes.
XXXIIII. Item, whether you knowe any that holdeth, that( n17) Christe dyd not take fleshe and bloude of the bled( n18) virgine Marye.
XXXV. Item, whether you knowe any that say, that Magistrates maye no( n19) punishe by death notorious malefactors, or vse any compulsion or war.
XXXVI. Item, whether euery Sondaye at the leaste, you haue a communion in your paryshe church, accordinge to the Kynges graces booke in that behalfe, and yf not, in whome is the defaulte.
XXXVII. Item, whether your minister doo admitte any notorious euyll liuer to the holy communion, before the amendement of hys naughty life: or any that is in malice, before reconciliation be had in that behalfe.
XXXVIII. Item, whether in the communion, preachyng or diuine seruice tyme, any iangle, talke, walke or otherwise trouble or let the same.
XXXIX. Item, whether ones in syxe wekes at the least your ministers doo heare some children saye the Catechisme openly in the church on( n20) the holy day at after noone before Euensonge, accordyng to the Kynges booke in that behalfe.
XL. Item, whether any absent them selues from sermons, the readyng of the Homelyes, or other diuine seruice in the church on holly daies.
Imprinted at London by Reynold Wolfe.
Cum priuilegio adimprimendum solum
( n1) 'affir/med'.
( n2) 'or [fol. A2] speake'.
( n3) 'parisheoners' in O and F.
( n4) 'lycenced' in O and F.
( n5) 'knee [fol. A2v]lyng'.
( n6) 'mo/ued'.
( n7) 'and sette [fol. A3] and'.
( n8) 'aud' in O and F.
( n9) 'vehement/ly' in HN.
( n10) 'ke/pers' in HN.
( n11) 'rea[fol. A3v]dynge'.
( n12) F is annotated with a note asking if they absent themselves from the same in any other way.
( n13) 'or maryeng' in O and F
( n14) F is annotated with a note asking if there are any who withdraw themselves from the order for the same, contrary to the king's command.
( n15) 'baptysme' in O and F.
( n16) 'personnes' in O and F.
( n17) 'holdeth [fol. A4] that'.
( n18) 'blessed' in O and F
( n19) 'not' in O and F.
( n20) 'of' in O and F.
C2
[fol. A1]
INIVNCTIONS GEVEN IN THE VISITATION OF THE MOST REUERENDE FATHER THOMAS ARCHBYSHOPPE OF Canterbury, Primate of all England & Metropolitane, for an vniformitie in the Diocesse of Norwiche, In the fourth yeare of our soueraygne Lorde Kynge Edwarde the syxte, By the grace of God Kyng of Englande, Fraunce and Irelande, defender of the fayth, and in earthe of the churche of England and also of Ireland the supreme heade, nexte and immediatly vnder our sauioure Christ.
LONDINI, ANNO DOMINI M.D. XLIX.
[fol. A1v] I. FYRST, that there be no readyng of suche iniunctions as maketh mencion of ye masse, of candels, ymages, prime and houres, or chauntry prestes, to be vsed: neyther that there be vsed anye superaltaryes, or trentalles of Communions.
II. Item, that no minister kysse the altare, washe his handes, shyfte the booke from one place to an other, lycke the Chalice, blesse his eyes with the sudary thereof or patten, or crosse hys heade with the same, hold vp hys thombes and forefingars to his eares, after the receauinge of the sacrament, breath on the Bread or Chalice, say the Agnus before the Communion, shewe the Sacramente openly, or make anye eleuacion thereof, haue any ringynge of the sacrynge bell, or any lyghtes of the aultare, fynally, that no minister order the matter so after the old sort, that the vnlearned simple people maye thinke the olde popishe masse to continew styli.
III. Item, that no pompe of lyghtes be at buryall tymes.
IIII. Item, that common prayer be hadde in euery church vppon wednesdaies and fridayes, accordinge to the kinges graces ordinaunce, and that all suche as conueniently maye, shall dylygently resorte to the same.
V. Item, that the Catechsime be frequented euery syx weekes ons at the least in euery parish, according to the boke of seruice touching the same.
[fol. A2] VI. Item, that none maintaine purgatory, inuocation of saintes, the syx articles, bederowles, ymages, relykes, rubrikt primers, lyghtes, iustificacion by workes, holy belles, holy bread, palmes, ashes, candels, sepulchre, pascall, creeping the crosse, hallowing the fonte, tier, or ahare, or any other such lyke abuses & supersticions now taken away by the kinges graces moste godlye procedinges.
VII. Item, that all ministers do moue the people to the often & worthy receauing of ye holi communion.
VIII. Item, that euery minister doo moue his parisheoners to come diligently to the church, and when they come, not to talk or walk in the sermon, Communion, or diuyne seruice tyme, but rather at the same to behaue them selues reuerentelye, godly and deuoutly in the church, and that they also monishe the church wardens to be diligent ouersears in that behalfe.
IX. Item, that no persones use to minister the sacramentes, to expound the holy scriptures, or to preache openlye, before they be fyrste lawefullye ordered and auctorised in that behalfe.
God saue the Kynges grace, and his moste honourable Counsell AMEN.
[fol. A2v] Imprinted at London by Reynolde Wolfe
Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum
~~~~~~~~
By Paul Ayris
No comments:
Post a Comment