A long post, but worth digesting. The cumulative force of the Professor's arguments are stunning and staggering. We bring notes with our musings. We'll give his conclusion first. The conclusion to the chapter is this: “The loss to understanding the English Reformation is great” (132). Indeed, Professor, indeed.
Chapter
8: “The Reformation in England,” pages 120-132: An Extraordinary Chapter
Mr. Daniel had addressed the “pre-printing era” in English
life: (1) the Bible in Britain to AD 850, (2) the Anglo-Saxon Bible in “glosses,”
in limited regions and for Latin-illiterate audiences, (3) the extent of
Wycliffism and his Bibles, (4) and the general environment of the 14th
and 15th centuries around Wyclif.
Mr. Daniel then moves to the “print era.” As noted in Chapter 7, Erasmus’ NT was the
motor of reform issuing in a Continent-wide rush of vernacular Bibles in
England, Germany, the Low Countries, French, Sweden, and Denmark. England was awash in English Bibles after
Queen Mary 1. Or, to switch the metaphor, once Erasmus squeezed the toothpaste
from the tube, it couldn’t be put back.
Mr. Daniel turns to a quick 13-page overview of the English
Reformation discussing: (1) Bible-based Protestant belief, (2) revisionist
denials in the academic community [think Tractarians, anti-Reformationists like
the ACNA, Romanist scholars, and secularists with one fear or another], (3)
wider Reformation studies to include archives in eastern Europe (closed off
during the Cold War, but opened up due to advances in digitalization and
electronics), (4) the release of literary and cultural energies [think Spenser,
Shakespeare, Donne, Milton, Bunyan and more], (5) the extensive publications of
the English Bible, (6) Protestantism as expressed by the Bible, (7) the
disappearance of the discussion of the Bible’s impact in courses on the Early
Modern Period, and (8) English Reformation essentials. As can be seen, Mr. Daniell offers a full
course meal from 30,000 feet in the air.
Bible-based
Popular Belief. There was
a “massive impact” after the 1st complete translation of Tyndale’s
NT in 1526. We know that (Bp.) Fisher
was reviling Luther, an episcopal voice for Henry VIII. We know Cranmer was ensconced in his cozy and
quiet academic life at Cambridge, trying to sort things out. But, “the Bible
was leaking” into the nation and the Romanist ship was, in time, to list and
sink in the English Channel—to the bottom.
Mr. Daniell points out the sheer numbers of print runs (120). From 1520 to 1640, a mere 115 years, modest
estimates based on official records indicate that 2 million were produced. By comparison to any other print run, the
classics, Ovid, Plutarch, Augustine or others—no comparison. Put simply, “demand was high.”
The Bible was being read by individuals in homes, local
gatherings and was “clearly and comprehensibly read in the services of the new
Church of England” (121). One charming
story: an illiterate father has a literate son; he enjoins his son to read the
Bible to him in the evenings; the father grows with substantial literacy,
thought, and analysis, a simple man, but one brought face-to-face with the
Triune God by God’s Self-Disclosure.
Stories could be replicated. Though
not all could read, the NT was read “clearly and loudly” in the churches three
times per year (later reduced to two times per year). The OT was read “loudly and clearly” once per
year in the 9000 parishes of England (some, but few, dissenting). The Psalms
were said or sung in English once per month.
A few contrasts suggest the impact.
Throughout the nation in the pre-Reformation period, the
parishioner would hear a priest “murmuring in Latin at a distant altar [DPV:
throw in a rood screen to keep the raffish lot enthralled and fenced out] with
his back to the people” (121). By
contrast, in post-Reformation England, the minister faced the congregation,
addressed them in English, read 3ish lessons from the English Bible, said or
sang English Psalms, and, in their close midst, delivered an English
sermon—while the people prayed together in the English Collects, the English
Lord’s Prayer, the English versicles and canticles, and confessed their common
faith in the English Creeds. Quite a
contrast.
Or, the poor chaps in the parishes of pre-Reformation
England would hear their cleric say, Petite
et dabitur vobis; querite et invenetis; pulsate et aperiteur vobis. By contrast, the parishes in
post-Reformation England heard in a ringing, loud and clear voice: “Ask and it
shall be given to you; seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened
unto you.” Significant on a national,
or, macroscopic, level. England would be
awash with English Bibles. Even more remotely, but indicatively, ships in Her
Majesty’s Royal Navy, during Raleigh’s and Drake’s travels would have two
divine services per Sabbath—with the old English BCP, Bible lections and
Psalm-singing. Yet, many modern
historians appear to not be concerned about these matters. What’s up with that?
Revisionist
denials. Mr. Daniell
complains of the decades before 2000 (is if something must have happened since
then?). He claims that Catholic (his
term for Romanist) historians “dominated the field” (121). They offered up “as
new” an old argument of “Catholic continuity.” To them, the national courts of
Tudor England “barely touched the English population” which was “overwhelmingly
Catholic” (121). Gone were the older
explanations of a real Reformation in England. It came from the “political
bullying” by some figures in the courts of Henry VIII and Edward VI.
Students, he tells us, in these decades were taught that
the English Reformation “was a failure” (122). One could only write about the
Reformation after “many attempted reformations.” This was held and advocated in
spite of powerful objections.
Objections
to Roman and Tractarian revisionists.
1.
These tend to view the Reformation through a
political lens. We’ve observed this with Tractaholics in particular.
2.
There is a failure to compare and contrast the
two centuries: hostile repressions in the 15th century (previously
elaborated) by Rome and Canterbury compared to the dominance of English
Protestantism by the close of the 16th century.
3.
Failure to fully account for the new print
culture: England was awash with English services and Bibles.
4.
Failure to account for the “new thinking” in
the two universities of Oxbridge. Failure to account for the 100s of new
volumes coming to the press.
5.
Serious evidence that the revisionists are
selective and “cherry pick” the evidence.
For example, Eamon Duffy’s Stripping
of the Altars studied some congregations in East Anglia, committed to
Recusancy, and extrapolated his findings to an entire nation. Surely, there were Recusancy hold-outs,
notably in the remote districts in the north.
Of course, committed Recusants existed.
No surprises there. Nonetheless, 9000 churches as we’ve previously noted
with English services, an English Bible, an English BCP, English and
Calvinistic Articles, and English sermons including English Homilies.
6.
Failure to answer one big question by the
historian, Patrick Collinson: how did England, so strongly under the Italian
bishop [think the 1401 Act of De
Haeretico Comburendo, the 1407 Provincial Council of Oxford, the 1409 Canterbury
Constitutions and the Council of Constance]
become so permanently Protestant?
7.
Furthermore, how does one explain basically the
Protestant Wars of Religion in the 17th century, ones in which
England was thoroughly Protestant?
Protestant v. Protestant?
8.
Furthermore, how does one explain the “enormous
bulk of literature” that was “officially, aggressively and massively
Protestant” (122)?
9.
Some background and then a question. The Italian bishop, Gregory XIII,
excommunicated Queen Elizabeth 1 in the 1570s. Jesuit priests, like Campion,
were “smuggled in” and held Latin Masses in barns and some homes, some well
attended, especially, in remote areas in the northwest. Question: what about 9000 parishes with
English Bibles, English services, printed Prayer Books with Calvinistic
Articles, and the Homilies? If we assume 100 Prayer Books per parish, this
indicates 900,000 printed Prayer Books.
We believe this is low; we would like statistics here. There were
500,000 English Bibles in Elizabeth’s reign.
10. Furthermore, what was the national response to
the massacres of St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1572?
11. Furthermore, what was the response to the
murderous behaviors of the Spanish King, Philip II, in the Low Countries? Think 1566 while Elizabethan minds were still freshing "grieving as nation" about the Marian burnings. These things were known in England.
12. Furthermore, what do the Henrician, Marian and
Elizabethan Injunctions teach? Show?
Especially, the Elizabethan Injunctions; one thing clearly emerges: Roman
doctrine had no place in England, period.
13. How does one account for the massive
popularity of Foxe’s Acts and Monuments? Extensive print runs? High demand?
14. What does Mr. (Dr. Prof.) Diarmaid MacCulloch
mean when he says that the English Reformation was a “howling success” by the
end of Elizabeth’s reign?
15. How do the revisionists deny reports “from the
ground” described by William Tyndale or Simon Fish? Or Chaucer and William Langland? Chaucer’s Summoner
or Pardoner are replete with descriptions of corrupt ecclesiastics. Or, even
reports by the Pope in the 1520s or, later, Bellarmine that the church was
corrupt, top to bottom? More on that one
later from Charles Hardwick's History of the Articles.
16. Furthermore, why do the revisionists fail to
account for the Bibles—widely bought and used—in the Reformation? Failure to account for this point alone
indicates “perversity” if not a “hilarious perversity” (124). Revisionists seem to sweep the Bible out of
the narrative. It was more than a movement foisted on a nation by “Protestant
guerillas,” but was a “massive, complex, successful and deeply rooted movement”
(124).
Protestant
Beliefs, page 125.
1.
It was not a “watered-down version” of
Christianity. Protestantism, contrary to
what the ever-facile-REC-Chameleon-Forked-Tongue-Ray Sutton would have it, was
not “Catholic Christianity gone wrong” (125).
Rather, it was a clean-up operation.
2.
Gone was purgatory, the cult of the saints,
mandatory and auricular confession, mandatory priestly celibacy, justification
by complexes of works of various sorts, necromancy and invocation of saints,
invocation of and attribution of divine attributes to Mary the Queen of heaven…gone
was bread-worship, cannibalism and Ubiquitarianism…gone were indulgences,
meritorious pilgrimages, and meritorious and propitiatory Masses for the living
and the dead. Gone. Gone was Petrine
supremacy. This was not some “nibbling at the edges of Christian practice”
(125). As Tyndale noted in The Obedience
of the Christian Man (1528), “The pope’s Church sold for money what Christ
gave freely.”
Energy
and Cultural Achievements, 125-126.
1.
The released energies “were colossal” (125). A
new nation emerged as a consequence of Protestant forces: the USA, for one, in
a further effort at freedom. It was distinctively Protestant in large measure.
2.
If one looks at the Geneva presses themselves,
a beehive of activity for scholars, a flood of books were “edited, translated
and printed” by scholars in the new University of Geneva, founded for theology
and classical studies. There was a
widening internationalization of studies. Poor Laud would (repeatedly,
aggressively, and with hostility) whine like a howling French poodle, or childish
imperialist, or sick narcissist about Reformed theology in England; he wasn’t half the man of any of the Reformed
scholars; Tractarians still howl about this influence from the Continent.
3.
Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars, complains about the cultural disaster. Revisionists act like the Reformation was “quite
an unheralded bolt out of the blue” (126). We’ll say more about this later.
4.
Sacred art flourished with the Drurers and
Cranachs in Germany or Hans Holbein in England. We will continue to review this front in other
places.
5.
Musical influences were influenced too.
Psalm-singing was widely popular. Think Handel in a later period, English
Bible, while the Romanists were still putting Latin services forward—until 1965ish
in America. Think JFK’s funeral service.
6.
Mr. Daniell reminds us of the rise of a supreme
literature of poets and prose writers, e.g. Spenser, Shakespeare, Donne, Milton
and others. It was a golden period. This is Mr. Daniell’s area of expertise as a
Ph.D. in English literature.
English
Bibles, 126. 10 new
English versions of the entire Bible or NT were issued from Tyndale’s work
until the 1611 KJV. To the Romanists,
this would be a “cultural disaster.” To Protestant and Reformed Churchmen, yeah
Americans of any stripe, this was 180 degrees out from the Romanist putdowns of "heretical translations."
Again, 500,000 copies sold during Elizabeth’s 42-year reign.
Protestantism
and the Bible, 127-128. The Reformation is a wide and
complex movement, trans-national in reach and consequences. Luther’s 95 Theses in 1517, attacking
indulgences, leading to his excommunication in 1521, set the Romanist barn on
fire. Luther’s German Bible in 1522 had huge sales. The complex intersection of
Lutheranism, the Church of England, the Swiss Churches, and the Dutch Churches
is that—complex.
Seven issues emerged:
1.
Canonical issues.
2.
The establishment of Hebrew and Greek texts.
3.
The inspiration and authority of the
Scriptures.
4.
Exegesis, especially of “the hard places”
(127). While the perspicuity, clarity
and sufficiency of the Scriptures was held forth [think Cranmer’s Preface to the “Great Bible”],
extraordinary efforts ensued to expound the Scriptures, e.g. the complex and
detailed notes in the Geneva Bibles, largely lexical, translational and, at
points, doctrinal. Also, think too of
this as a period of Grand Protestant Creedalism and Confessionalism throughout
the nations: Scots, French, Belgic, Swiss and English.
5.
Vernacular Bibles everywhere; this cannot be
under-estimated; this would be one major contrast between Latin Masses versus
Protestant vernacular services.
6.
Printed Bibles for all churches. This remains a concern for Wycliffe Bible
Translators. There are 6000 languages in
the world.
7.
A hefty and large industry of scholarship and
circulation of aids to Bible study, prefaces, marginal notes, concordances not
just of the vernaculars but the original languages, encyclopedias, atlases,
Psalters, hymns, Prayer Books and sermonic materials. The Reformation unleashed a reformation in
Biblical studies.
Disappearance,
128—130.
1.
The influence of the English Bible has “disappeared
from the sight of scholars of Early Modern History” (128). There is an occasional remark that the “Geneva
Bible failed” because the “notes were objectionably Calvinistic” (128). This was not true until Mr. (Canterbury)
Bancroft’s time in 1604, but that’s another story. The Geneva Bible had a
100-year run in England and a longer one in the US. Even Lancelot Andrewes, the
darling of Laudians, used it for his sermons.
2.
Sometimes “major textbooks about the English
Reformation fail to mention the English Bible at all” (128). This surely needs further review and testing.
We would believe it is mentioned, but
not developed. We will be on the lookout
to test this proposition.
3.
Mr. Daniell argues that the English Bible is “privatized
and fenced off” in Early Modern History studies with “acres out of bounds”
along with the typical wave-off that the English Reformation from 1530-1600 was
“all top down” (128). Bye, bye English
Bible. We’ve heard that too, but largely from Tractaholics grousing about
Protestant bullies and guerillas…as if Tractarians weren’t that themselves. More generally, we’ve seen that this subject is
little discussed. Yet, it fails to
account for the widely printed, reprinted, used and read Geneva Bibles and Foxe’s
Acts and Monuments. More narrowly, we
are reminded of two situations. (1) The poor English sheriff of a shire upon
his initial acquaintance with the English Bible and 1 Cor. 9.5. He learned that the apostles were married
men. He exclaimed, “The Bible is heresy.”
Earthly “purging” (“purgatory” and “refining fires” on earth through
Biblical exposition) was on-going with exposure to the Bible. (2) Poor Queen
Bess probably never, on our view, quite acclimated herself to 1 Cor. 9.5. Although the Bible was the clear Bible on
this issue, she tolerated married Bishops and Presbyters, but she was a tad
rude to Mrs. Grindal, the wife of her second Canterbury. Our theory?
Poor Bess was psychologically affected—adversely—by the grievous matrimonial
resume of her despotic father, the murder of her mother, and the persistent
insistences that she be turned into a “Royal breeding mare” for dynastic
purposes, but we digress.
4.
Mr. Daniell repeats the claim, warranting
appreciation: “For the English Bible was formidably present” (129). 10 new
translations of the Bible, by contrast, while a few fresh translations of Ovid, Plutarch and Augustine. 211 English Bibles
or New Testaments were “freshly edited and produced” during Shakespeare’s
52-year life. We are not sure how Mr. Daniell is using his numbers 10 or 211.
But this will more fully develop: Tyndale, Coverdale, 3 Geneva Bibles, Great
Bible, Bishops’ Bible, and more.
5.
Mr. Daniell affords some comparisons between
Germany and England. Between 1517—1520, Luther’s publications “sold well over
300,000” works. Some of those got to
Cambridge’s White Horse Inn, Henry VIII, and Bp. Fisher. By 1522, Luther’s “September
Bible” sold 5000 copies in the first weeks of publication. Now, who bought
those? What were the effects of that? By
1572, Luther’s main publisher, Hans Lufft of Wittenberg, retired after printing
100, 000 Germany Bibles. Same
questions. Influences? Who and
where? Meanwhile, Rome was grousing and
whining…and conducting Latin Masses for Latin-illiterate throngs. Yet, England had far more vernacular Bibles in print that Germany. No one doubts there was a Reformation in
Germany with vernacular Bibles; nor should it be denied in England. 500,000
Bible were circulating in Shakespeare’s lifetime. “Geneva Bibles in particular gripped the
nation” (129). This was the Bible of the poet and prose writers into the 17th
century. The analogy of “airbrushing” this history “is particularly apt here”
(129). The Victorian so-called “High
Churchmen,” whatever that was and whoever they were, Mr. Daniell reports, disliked the Geneva Bible. (We wonder about Dean Burgon or Bp. Westcott, both High Churchmen.) There were 274 editions of the Psalter
before 1616—Steinhold and Hopkins. Again, 9000 English parishes were using
English services, Bibles and were singing Psalms. The failure to deal with this subject—academically—“beggars
belief” (129).
English
Reformation Essentials, 130-132.
1.
The Protestant mind “thought, wrote, and spoke
English” (130). There was an “overwhelming” body of “printed matter in English.”
Latin plays remained at Cambridge and Oxford—150 were performed between 1550
and 1650. Latin services were authorized
for collegiate and Cathedral churches for the Latin-literate, but this was the
exception and not the rule. Suddenly,
England had English literature that was “full and bursting at the seams and
overflowing” (131).
2.
Protestant Anglicanism “was an intellectual
movement in England” powered by university men.
New historical and Protestant studies emerged in “huge volumes”
(131). Raphael Holinshed and Edward Hall’s
Chronicles alongside Foxe’s Acts were found in many homes, giving an
account of the upheavals in England and Europe. Foxe’s books had huge sales and
had high demand. There was also a serious uptick of volumes of the Latin and
Greek Churchmen during Elizabeth’s reign. One is reminded of John Jewel’s
patristic learning or William Whittaker’s at Cambridge. There were 2 editions
of Foxe, 1563 and 1570, consisting of 28,000 pages. A significant number were purchased and “chained
in churches” (131). Many passages were used in English sermons and lectures.
Drake, floating around the Spanish naval assets, would capture Spaniards and
read passages of Foxe to them. Yet, Early Modern syllabi and courses lament a
handful of Jesuit priests put to death during Elizabeth’s reign while failing
to account for the 100s of murdered Lollards or English Reformers…matters that
were fresh to “Elizabethan and Jacobean minds” (131). We would add that these fears were strongly
stoked when James II, a devout Romanist, was on the throne in the late 17th
century.
3.
There was a new sense of “liberty.” Elizabeth had her censors, but, Mr. Daniell
argues, this was more about sedition than heresy (this is unconvincing
actually). Rather than being a “cultural
disaster,” English plays were being put on and attended, afternoon by
afternoon, in “state-of-the-art theaters.”
4.
Upshot: English Bibles were everywhere and English worship services were
conducted nationwide. "For the English Bible was formidably present."
The
Puzzle, 132.
Again, Mr. Daniell draws a comparison between Germany and
England. Germany had just a few different
editions of the vernacular German Bible between 1565 and 1616. England had 211
different and revised editions in that period.
Yet, for Mr. Daniell (and us), the silence amongst academics is “puzzling.”
Mr. Daniell offers some theories. (1)
Academic timidity at the thought of the daunting task needed for a careful analysis of 211 different
editions, a warrantable timidity given the voluminous English efforts and
concerns. (2) Or, there are “fears” or “embarrassments” about being called a “Bible
thumper.” (3) Or, calling attention to
these varied facts would imply that Bible reading “has been too Protestant a
thing for Catholics to do” (132)
The conclusion to the chapter
is this: “The loss of understanding the English Reformation is great”
(132).
Indeed, Professor, indeed.
Indeed, Professor, indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment