Mr. Bromiley is careful, measured, and fair. He offers a standard narrative in favor of Mr. Cranmer's influence. A few little details emerge. It's quite accurate and useful for a novitiate.
"Chapter One: Preparation"
We get the standard narration of Mr. Cranmer's life as cited/stated by the other biographers with a few nuggets that are new.
Mr. Cranmer, after seated in Canterbury, and at the school of Christ Church Canterbury, said:
“I take it that none of us here, being gentlemen born (as I think), but had our beginnings that way from a low and base parentage” (1).
In 1501, his father died. The estate passed to the eldest son. 10s. were left to Whatton Church. 6s. were left to the small chapel at Aslocton. 5 marks were left to the four daughters. 20s/year were left to the two youngest boys, Thomas and Edmund. Standard stuff.
A little-oft mentioned note on Edmund who followed his older brother through the Reforms to Canterbury, being made an Archdeacon of Canterbury by Thomas, was that he fled during the Marian persecutions. Mr. Bromiley noted that “he lived to see the restoration and vindication of his brother’s work, dying abroad in 1571” (2). Mr. Bromiley offers little else.
We take a detour with a quote about two archdeacons of Canterbury (that are a bit paltry, if not a tad prejudicial, but are included).
We insert this here: http://
It is the account of Edmund Cranmer followed by the Marian archdeacon Mr. Harpsfied, infamous author of "The Pretended Divorce of Catherine of Aragon." We quote from the website:
"61. EDMUND CRANMER, brother to archbishop Cranmer, was by him, on March 9, 1534, collated to this archdeaconry, and the provostship of Wingham, and had several rich benefices besides conferred on him by his brother soon after his being made archdeacon; he was promoted in 1549, to a prebend in Christ-church, and to the rectories of Clyve and Ickham, in this country; (fn. 120) about which time he is said to have alienated the parsonage house, commonly called the archdeacon's place, at Hackington, to the lord Cromwell and others. All the above preferments he continued to possess till queen Mary's reign, when in1554 he was deprived of them for being married, and compelled to fly into Germany to save his life. He plainly confessed his marriage, alleging, that he thought his marriage lawful, and could never forsake his wife with a good conscience; upon which, sentence was pronounced against him, namely, to be suspended from executing the priestly functions, sequestered from all profits due to him, deprived of all ecclesiastical dignities and benefices, and enjoined to abstain from the marriage bed; to which sentence he submitted, without making any appeal or reply. (fn. 121)
"62. NICHOLAS HARPSFIELD, LL. D. an eminent theologist, was, on his deprivation, presented to this dignity, (fn. 122) and was admitted to it on April 21, 1554.—He was born in the city of London, and educated in Wykeham's school at Winchester, and afterwards at New college, in Oxford, of which he became fellow, where he became very eminent both in the civil and canon law. In 1544 he was admitted principal of an ancient hall, mostly for civilians, called Whitehall, on the site of which Jesus college was afterwards partly built, and in 1546 he was appointed king's professor of the Greek tongue in the university. In 1553 he left his fellowship and took the degree of doctor of his faculty, and had then considerable practice in the court of arches. (fn. 123) Upon his institution into this archdeaconry, he made a solemn protestation, as was injoined him, that he would pay to William Warham, formerly archdeacon, during his life, the pension which had been settled on him out of the profits of the archdeaconry, as mentioned above, and decreed by Dr. John Cocks, vicar-general and principal official to the late archbishop Cranmer; in the same year, on April 27,he was admitted to the prebend of Harlston, in St. Paul's church, and two days afterwards to the churchof Langdon, both void by the deprivation of Dr. John Hodgeskin. (fn. 124) In 1557 he visited all churches, as well exempt, as not exempt, within the diocese of Canterbury, and all chapels and hospitals; (fn. 125) at which time it appears, that he was rector of Saltwood, in this county; but in the year 1559 he was deprived of all his dignities and benefices in the church, and was committed prisoner to the Fleet in the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, for not acknowledging the queen's supremacy, after which he continued about twenty-four years a prisoner, which was to the time of his death, which happened in 1583. His confinement was easy, without any hardship or want; here he found leisure to compile several books, of which some remain in manuscript, and others have been printed; the chief of which is, his ecclesiastical history, printed at Douay in 1622; (fn. 126) towards the writing of which, archbishop Parker gave him much encouragement in the free use of his registers.
"The character of him and his writings, are given with such different censures by those who have mentioned him, so clearly contrary, and to every appearance so full of partiality, as the one or the other of them have been protestants or papists, or at least inclined to the cause of either persuasion, that it is perhaps difficult to judge the real truth of it. On the one side Pitseus, the compiler of the Athenæ Oxonienses, (fn. 127) and some others, give him and his history great commendations; whilst Fox the martyrologist, the author of the Anglia Sacra, and of the English Historical Library, and others of the same sort, give their severe censures, as much to the contrary; however, the general unprejudiced opinion is become much in favour of him, and the commendations the former have bestowed on him."
Enough on the detour on the two archdeacons of Canterbury. We drew brief attention to it because few comment on Thomas' younger brother. He died somewhere in Germany. A Lutheran? Reformed? We don't know.
We return to Mr. Bromiley’s report. It’s a standard narrative:
• 1503, off to Cambridge, at age 14
• Jesus College was “near Cambridge” and Queens was a “quiet retreat.” The idea was that Cambridge was small.
• Standard curricula: trivium/quadrivium
• 1511—B.A. But also, date when Erasmus comes to Cambridge
• No Greek or classical Latin was taught, just ecclesiastical Latin (an easier species)
• College library had few fathers, but only Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome and Gregory
• John Fisher, although “not an outstanding scholar,” was influential, was the Confessor to Lady Margaret Beaufort (mother of Henry VII), brought significant benefactions to Cambridge, was the Vice-Chancellor in 1501, initiated the Lectureship for Divinity and Preaching in English in 1502, and became a Bishop of Rochester and Chancellor in 1505. Further, he invited Erasmus to Cambridge. If not a brilliant scholar as Mr. Bromiley cites, he was a “rain-maker” or “money-maker” for the University. This is a new claim: Fisher was not an "outstanding scholar." No evidence is offered.
• There's no record of influences of Erasmus on Cranmer
• Yet, Luther is roiling the international waters and Zwingli has discovered Erasmus' Novum Testamentum in Greek (Zwingli memorized Paul’s epistles in Greek). The new detail or suggestion here is that Mr. Cranmer begins his very serious biblical and theological studies in/on/around 1517. This is a novel suggestion, the early date. We are not so sure about this.
• Standard narrative: slow, plodding, industrious and copious note-taker. Everyone cites this.
• New details: 350 books, 100 manuscripts, 2 Hebrew Bibles, 1 NT Greek Bible, complete set of the Greek and Latin fathers, texts from the Schoolmen, and some contemporary writers. We are tracking on a 500-page volume on Mr. Cranmer's collected books.
• Lecturer in divinity in 1523, holy orders in 1523 (this conflicts with some other biographers who date it 1520), and the Doctor of Divinity in 1523 (agreeing with Arthur James Mason), age 34. Some have cited 1526 as the date for the Doctorate.
• 1524, offered but declined canonry to Cardinal’s College, Oxford.
• Let a “most peaceful,” “most happy” and “wholly congenial life” of scholarship.
• Mr. Bromiley offers a larger picture of the resistance to Lutheranism at Cambridge that other writers “fly over.” First, Luther’s books “were burned at Cambridge in 1521” (9). Second, Henry and Fisher were on a rampage against Luther in the 1520s. Third, Thomas More “initiated a definite campaign to root out Lutheran supporters at Cambridge” (9). Fourth, despite this, Luther’s ideas were debated. Fifth, Mr. Bromiley gives a date for the White Horse Inn, or, “Little Germany” where Luther was discussed—1521. He places Barnes, Coverdale, Tyndale, “little Bilney” and Latimer in the mix, but not Cranmer. “There is no decisive evidence that Cranmer had already adopted a Lutheran position” (9)
• Standard narrative on the famed Waltham meeting in 1529 between Cranmer, Fox and Gardiner. Everyone points to this critical year.
Mr. Bromiley summarizes the transition year of 1529 this way:
"On any showing this was a fateful meeting. We can write it off as pure chance or coincidence. But judged in this light of its consequences, the perfect timing suggests strongly the over-ruling hand of God" (11).
Rarely, do the historians, other than Mr. J.H. Merle d’Aubigne, bring "divine providence" into the story. However, as theologians, that must be done.
The West was never the same after the English Reformation.
Whatever view we take of Mr. Cranmer's flaws or achievements, he was a key player in "one lasting and influential reformation," the Edwardian one, 3.0 Anglicanism. It would mutate in the 5.0 version, or, the Elizabethan version.
The influence of the English Bible was massive.
If this is doubted we point you to a massive, efficacious and powerful volume by David Daniell, The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. It is overwhelming in terms of the research supporting the conclusion of the Bible's influence.
Available at: http://www.amazon.com/
The English Bible influenced literature, poetry, music, drama, religious history and went worldwide.
The dominant question: why did England become so tenaciously Protestant in subsequent centuries and not lapse back to Papal (1.0, 4.0) or Non-Papal Roman Anglicanism (2.0, Tractarianism, the latter being a Roman Trojan Horse)?
This 900-page volume by Mr. (Dr. Prof.) Daniell answers that question about the vernacular Bible.
Mr. Cranmer was involved with this question.
No comments:
Post a Comment