The life, times, and writings of Thomas Cranmer, D.D. : the first reforming archbishop of Canterbury

Preface

" It will be admitted by all who are in any degree acquainted with it, that there is no period of our history which is more interesting than that of the Reformation. And this is not merely considered in an Ecclesiastical, but in a Political and Philosophical point of view : and as bearing on our constitution, our laws, habits, modes of thought and action, on the whole history of our country since that time, and our own state and circumstances at the present day." Such was the utterance of the Rev. Dr Maitland. The name of Cranmer, as our first Reforming Archbishop, is necessarily connected with the history of that period. Whatever his personal merits or demerits may have been, we are mainly indebted to him for laying the foundation of that Reformation which entirely revolutionised the Ecclesiastical, Political, and Social position of this country. The " Life and Times of Cranmer," therefore, whatever individual opinions may be — whether for good or evil — must be of vital interest to every Englishman ; but from the very nature of the subject, opinions will difter; especially where theological questions are involved.

Cranmer stands the most prominent character in the history of the Reformation in this country, and has in consequence been equally the object of virulent attacks and of fulsome praise. To undertake the Biography of such a character, and to be entirely impartial, is difificult. It was Descartes who said that " the prime condition for discovering the truth is to be free from all prejudices." But every

Vlll

PREFACE.

writer on such a subject, — be he a member of the Reformed or the Unreformed Church — will naturally have his own peculiar views and prejudices. How is he, then, to hold an even balance between opposite opinions Such, however, is the task upon which I have ventured. It is not an easy one. This protestation will of course be taken for what it is worth, coming from an avowed member of the Reformed Church of England ; and I do not hesitate to appropriate the sentiment of Dean Hook, who said, in his Preface to the " Life of Archbishop Cranmer ", " I have no inclination to vindicate the character of Cranmer, for in his conduct there was much which was indefensible ; but it is my duty as an historian to guard against the distortion of facts, while as Christians, we are bound to make due allowance for a person who, in a position not sought for by him, was surrounded with peculiar and unusual difficulties."

The number of " Lives " and " Biographical Sketches " that have been already published, renders the task more embarrassing from the diametrically opposite views taken of Cranmer'S actions and motives. Again, with so many details before us, a further difficulty presents itself, the fear of wearying the reader : — " Opere in longo fas est obrepere somnum," as Horace truly remarked — by a recapitulation of well-known historical facts. Under these circumstances I have not considered it necessary to trace Cranmer's life step by step, in all its details, which would be but a compilation, culled from the Avorks of many excellent biographers such as Strype, Todd, Le Bas, Gilpin, and Dean Hook. I have therefore determined, if possible, to mark out a new line of proceeding, by taking the more prominent incidents of the Life and Times of Cranmer, viewed with the surrounding circumstances wherein he has been both censured and commended, and I

PREFACE.

have endeavoured to arrive at an equal and just judgment between, what may be described as, the two extremes.

Cranmer has bequeathed to us Writings which speak for themselves. These I have endeavoured to analyse ; and the reader will, I trust, have a fair estimate of his labours, and appreciate the great work, which appears to have been the object of his life to accomplish.

I have endeavoured to avoid controversy ; and the many opponents of Cranmer will find that I have not omitted to blame him where blame is deserved. He lived in cruel and most exceptional times, when corruption in the Church was at its height, and persecutions for conscience' sake were fiercely enforced; but it is a fact that all the charges brought against Cranmer relate to acts done by him while a Roman Catholic in doctrine, in strict accordance with the principles of that Church, and participated in by all his Episcopal contemporaries.

Our earliest notice of Cranmcr's life and ultimate fall we derive from Fox's "Book of Martyrs," which may not inaptly be described as " the red-rag " of " Ritualists " and " Papists," at whose hands Fox has received severe castigation, being accused of wilful perversion of facts, and even of mutilating documents. I have, therefore, considered it not out of place to add, in an Appendix, a few observations on the Life and Writings of the Martyrologist, but I have limited my observations principally to testimonies of that writer's truthfulness,— a virtue in which he is accused of being lamentably deficient as an historian.

A Biography can scarcely be said to be complete without the writer giving an estimate, according to his view, of the character of the person whose life is reproduced. To come to a just conclusion, we ought to place ourselves, so far as may be possible, in the same situation, and under

X

PREFACE.

the same circumstances, and consider both the times and the surroundings of the period. We are too ready to form an opinion, judging from our own present stand-point, and according to our own present accepted notions of moraHty. Having perused many different " Lives " and " Historical Sketches " of Craxmer, and observed the diametrically opposite views and opinions arrived at by different writers, I feel that any individual expression of opinion on my part might have, perhaps, even less weight, than that expressed by others. In order, however, that a member of the Unreformed Church may arrive at a proper estimate of his character, and judge of his motives and actions, he must take into consideration that every act of the Primate, for which he has been condemned, was in strict accordance with the principles and practice of his Church, or shared in by his clerical and lay contemporaries, all members of the same Unreformed Church, even if he be charged with Schism. Apostacy, the result of honest conviction, cannot be fairly deemed a crime, so long as each party seeks to make converts to his creed. What one sect calls conversioji, the opposite sect calls pei-- version. From a Protestant point of view, it might be said that every single act of Cranmer brought in judgment against him, having been perpetrated while a member of the Unreformed Church, and in accordance with Papal laws and customs in which he had been brought up, must be condemned, but with a rider to the verdict, of " extenuating circumstances." Members of the Reformed Church, on the other hand, glory in Cranmer's alleged apostacy. They esteem him for his work's sake, and point to his Martyrdom as a practical vindication of the truth of iiis doctrines.

Cranmer commends himself to us as a Churchman, as

PREFACE.

XI the founder, and " great Master Builder," of our Reformed Church of England ; and, whatever his frailties and shortcomings may have otherwise been, his Writings, which he has bequeathed to us, we prize as a lasting monument of his greatness. To borrow the eloquent words of his biographer, Strype : —

" The name of this Reverend Prelate deserves to stand upon eternal record, having been the first Reforming Archbishop of this kingdom, and the greatest instrument, under God, of the happy Reformation of this Church of England, in whose piety, learning, wisdom, conduct, and blood, the foundation of it was laid."

C. H. COLLETTE.

April 1887.

THE BEATIFICATION OF BISHOP FISHER, THE CHANCELLOR

MORE, AND OTHERS, AS MARTYRS .... 306

LIFE AND TIMES OF CRANMER.

Chapter I. Introductory

" To write History truly is an office little less than sacred. To indite justly the records of the bygone is a duty upon which honour and honesty impose the inevitable responsibility of faith and truthfulness."— S. Hubert Burke.

Two notable characters stand forth prominently in the history of the REFORMATION of the sixteenth century, on whom unmeasured abuse and equally fulsome praise have been bestowed. These two characters are LUTHER and Cranmer. The truth would possibly lie equi-distant from the two extremes. At present, we are only concerned with Cranmer. Party spirit, enhanced by theological animosities, has gone far to embitter the controversy. A late biographer of Cranmer, Dean Hook, observed Ihat, " the fault is not so much in misstatement of facts, but the inferences drawn from them." Would that such were the case ! It is far otherwise. Human failings are, on the one hand, dwelt upon and even exaggerated by the opponents of the Reformation. Every act of the reforming Archbishop's life has been closely scrutinised, dwelt upon, and advanced as a cogent reason for condemning even the Reformation itself, which Cranmer was one of the principal instruments in effecting in this country. Where Cranmer

A cannot be made personally responsible, he is made so indirectly, by associating him with others with whom he is alleged to have been in close relation or friendship. Every questionable act of which the King and his Parliament are charged, and the several persecutions and confiscations, are laid at the door of Cranmer, as the King's principal adviser, and also his ready tool in all his questionable and alleged nefarious transactions.^ While it must be admitted that some of the charges brought against Cranmer can be substantiated, the cause of the Reformation does not require us to justify the failings of our Reformers. The ready reply has been, that —

" The Reformation in England is founded upon doctrines which revert back to the fountain-head — Christ — as revealed to us in the New Testament ; and if that doctrine be true, it cannot be overthrown by railing accusations against our Reformers, the teachers of these doctrines, nor even by the exposure of their infirmities and sins. Yet, unhappily, such has been the course taken by many who have resorted to that line of argument to shake our faith in the justice and desirability of such a reformation to which we, in England, are mainly indebted to Cranmer." ^

This is the view maintained by members of the reformed Churches, who confidently challenge their opponents to point out one single doctrine embraced in the three accepted Creeds of the Christian Church, or maintained by the first four General Councils, which was rejected by the Reformers.

" Cranmer's fate has been peculiarly hard. Living in evil days, and exposed, after his death, to the malice of evil tongues, he has suffered in almost every part of his reputation. ' Papists ' have impeached the sincerity, while Protestants have doubted the steadfastness of his principles ; and a too general idea seems to prevail that his opinions were ever fluctuating, or at least were so flexible as to have rendered him little better than a weak instrument in the hands of those who pos-

1 See S. Hubert Burke's " Historical Portraits of the Tudor Dynasty." London, 1883. Vol. ii. p. 4 ; vol. iii. pp. 32 et setj.

2 Todd's " Vindication of Cranmer. " London, 1826. P. 14.

INTRODUCTORY.

sessed more talent and more consistency. But, if we are to be guided by the result of his ministration, the fact was far otherwise. He was, in truth, the chief promoter and ablest advocate for the Reformation, planning it with the discretion of a prudent, and the zeal of a good man, and carrying it on towards perfection with a firmness, a wisdom, and liberality which obtained for him (by those who value the result of his labours) no less credit for the endowments of his head, than for the impressions of his heart." *

Occupying a more distinguished position, as Archbishop of Canterbury, than his contemporaries, Cranmer's actions become, as it were, public property, and, therefore, legitimate subjects for criticism. But it must ever be borne in mind that the acts of Cranmer, which have been brought in accusation against him, were equally shared by a vast majority of the ecclesiastics and nobles of the land, who were all members of the unreformed Church, and professed to hold the doctrines and practices of that Church. If persecution for heresy is laid to his charge, the practice was in strict accordance with the Canon Law of his Church. If a reputed sorcerer or witch was to be burnt, it would be in strict conformity with the statute law enacted in times essentially under Church rule. If schism be laid to his charge, it was equally shared by the leading clerical and lay members of the King's Council and Convocation. In fact, nothing can be more disastrous to the cause of the then dominant Church and religion than the ruthless attacks, justly or unjustly, made on Cranmer and his contemporaries in office, by their modern assailants, members of the same unreformed Church. Such an argument, it must be admitted, could only be advanced in " controversy," but not as a justification where censure is justly due, and where censure is due, let each bear his fair share ; but let the judgment be a righteous judgment.

* Richard Lawrence, LL.D., " Bampton Lectures," pp. 23, 24 (a.d. 1804). Third edition. Oxford, 1838.

While nothing new can now be advanced on the more than " thrice told tale " of the " Life and Times of Cranmer," there is still room left for criticism on the merits and demerits — the virtues and failings of a man, who, after LUTHER, has perhaps occupied more consideration, as well from the opponents as the advocates of the Reformation, than any other of the Reformers.

Chapter II. Cranmer At The University Of Cambridge

Little is known or recorded of Thomas Cranmer's^ early history. He was born, 2d July 1489, at Aslacton, Northamptonshire. He was the second son of Thomas Cranmer, who is said to have been a descendant of ancestors who had for many centuries resided in the same county. Cranmer, the subject of this biography, was placed by his parents under the tutelage of a harsh preceptor, " a rude parish-clerk," from whom " he learned little, and had to suffer much." When relieved from the supervision of this task-master, Cranmer's father encouraged his son in the pursuit of field sports, with hawk and hounds. He became a good marksman, and a bold and skilful horseman. These accomplishments he seems to have retained even after he had risen to the highest office in the Church as Archbishop. His father died when Cranmer was about fourteen years old. He was then [a.d. 1503] placed in the University of Cambridge, and entered Jesus College, with the ultimate vievy^ iiccording to his mother's wish, of becoming a priest. His inclination, however, did not seem to turn in that direction, for he gave himself up to the dry study of logic, and scholastic philosophy of the day, and to Civil La\\^ These studies seem to have occupied his time until he arrived at the age of twenty-

' In the Letter which stands first in the list of "Cranmer's Remains," by Jenkyns (p. 6, vol. i., Oxford, 1833), the name appears at foot as Cranmar, and is noted by the editor as being the only exception.

two. He also made the Canon Law a special branch of his studies. He obtained a "Fellowship" of Jesus College in 1511. His attention was then turned to the study of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, in all of which he became proficient. One of his favourite authors was the eminent Dutch priest ERASMUS, at that time a resident at the University of Cambridge. On these subjects he was occupied for four or five years, taking such full notes and copious extracts from his books of study as were worth preserving. When the writings of Luther began to excite public attention, these also engaged Cranmer's close examination, which first led him to enquire into the great controversies of the day, for he then, as Strype relates : —

" Considered what great controversy there was in matters of religion, not in trifles, but on the chiefest articles of our salvation, and bent himself to try out the truth therein. And forasmuch as he perceived he could not rightly judge in such weighty matters without the knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, before he was influenced with any man's opinions or errors, he applied his whole study for three years therein. After this he gave his mind to good writers, both new and old ; not rashly running over them ; for he was a slow reader but a diligent marker of whatsoever he read, seldom reading without pen in hand. And whatsoever made either for the one part or the other, of things in controversy, he wrote it out if it were short, or at least noted the author and the place, that he might write it out at leisure, which was a great help to him in debating matters ever after."

Such was Cranmer's course of study.

In his twenty-seventh year (a.d. 15 16), while still a " Fellow " of his college, he married the daughter of a respectable farmer of a neighbouring county, a niece of the hostess of the " Dolphin " Inn. There is nothing on record to show that there was any impropriety either in this alliance or leading to it ; nor was the marriage, as sometimes alleged, a secret, for he did not attempt to conceal the fact. He resigned his Fellowship on his marriage, in pur-

CRANMER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 7 suance of the college regulation.^ The lady was not, as frequently asserted, a bar-maid. She was of respectable parentage, on a visit to her aunt at the time of her marriage. The visits of Cranmer at the " hostelry " could not have been considered derogatory, since it is admitted that the tavern was much frequented by the alumni of the University. Stephen Gardyner was amongst the students who dined and supped at this hostelry ; and Bonner and Edward Foxe lodged there at times. In those days such establishments were owned or kept by men of position, and respected. The lady, in derision, has been called " Black Joan " from the fact of her having dark eyes and black hair, a " nick-name " perpetuated by Cranmer's assailants to the present day. So great, however, was the estimation in which Cranmer was held for his learning in the University, that although he had forfeited his Fellowship he was appointed Lecturer at Buckingham (afterwards Magdalen) College, his wife still residing at the " Dolphin " with her aunt until her death in child-birth, which took place within a year of her marriage.

On this subject two specific charges are brought against Cranmer — first, that he committed perjury in marrying while a Fellow of his college for breaking his vow of chastity. And second, that he was in consequence " expelled " from his college.2 In the first place, at this period monks and friars alone were required to take vows of chastity, no

' The Rev. Dr Littledale, " Priest of the Church of England," in his Lecture on " Ritualistic Innovation," p. 37, London, 1868, thus comments on this marriage : " Cranmer's first appearance is his detection after he had privately married ' Black Joan,' the bar-maid of a pot-house in Cambridge, at a time when he was Fellow of Jesus College, and of course pledged to celibacy. He thus showed himself as a liar, by holding his fellowship under false pretences, and as a thief, by cheating his lawful successor to the vacancy." The italics are the Doctor's.

2 Burke's " Tudor Dynasties, &c.," vol. ii. p. 4. 1880.

LIFE, TIMES, AND WRITINGS OF CRANMER.

priest on taking Orders was so required. Cranmer was not a monk, and at this time was not a priest ; and further, a Fellow of a college is not required to take any such vow. The penalty, then, as now, was simply forfeiture. Celibacy of the priesthood, even at the present day, in the Church of Rome is accounted a matter of discipline, and not of doctrine, and may be changed as circumstances might require.^

Fuller, an admitted authority, in his History of the University of Cambridge, says, " Thomas Cranmer was oiisied of his Fellowship in Jesus College for being married." ^

The subject is referred to in Cooper's valuable " Athenae Cantabrigiensis " ^ : — "He was elected fellow of Jesus College, but soon vacated his fellowship by marriage."

Le Bas, in his life of Cranmer,* thus alludes to the subject : — " The marriage of Cranmer was, of course, attended with the forfeiture of his fellowship. It did not, however, disqualify him from his office of a college Teacher and Lecturer."

Dr Hook, Dean of Chichester, makes the following observations on this marriage in his " Lives of the Archbishops" ^ : — " Cranmer's marriage was not regarded as disreputable, for although, as a matter of course, he forfeited his fellowship, he found at once an income to support his wife by accepting the appointment of Reader or Lecturer at Buckingham Hall."

' See "Faith of Catholics." London, 1846. Vol. iii. p. 228.

^ New edition, 1840, pp. 150, 151. Fuller continues to observe on this subject— " His wife was kinsman to the hostess at the ' Dolphin,' which, causing his frequent repair thither, gave the occasion to that impudent lie of ignorant Papists, that he was an ostler. Indeed, with his learned Lectures, he rubbed the galled backs and curried the lazy hides of many an idle, ignorant friar, being now made Divinity reader in Buckingham College. But soon after, his wife dying within the year, being a widower, he was re-elected into Jesus College."

s Vol. vi. p. 433. Edit. i868.

CRANMER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 9

On the death of his wife, Cranmer was re-appointed a Fellow of his College ; and here again it is asserted that it was on the presentation of " a penitential petition." I can find no authority for any such assertion. Such was the reputation which Cranmer had gained at the University, that Cardinal Wolsey, who had established a new foundation at Oxford, and had induced some of the more eminent scholars of Cambridge to remove to his new establishment, nominated Cranmer as one of them ; but though this appointment would have proved more advantageous in a pecuniary point of view, Cranmer declined to abandon his own College.

On what apparently trifling circumstances great events hang ! Had Cranmer. accepted this tempting offer, he would have been removed from the atmosphere of the plague, which drove him to Waltham Abbey, where he met the King's two secretaries, which led to his engagement as the King's advocate for the divorce, then in active agitation, and his subsequent elevation to the See of Canterbury. He would have been spared the odium of any participation in the King's intervening marriage complications, and perhaps his ultimate martyrdom at the stake !

Cranmer now resolved to pursue his studies in Divinity with a view to enter the priesthood. He was, as before stated, re-elected a Fellow of his College and appointed Examiner in Divinity. He was ordained Priest, and took the degree of Doctor of Divinity in his fortieth year (a.d. 1523), and was appointed Public Examiner in Theology. Strypc informs us that he became a " model of propriety, goodness, and piety to those who were placed under his charge." We are further informed that in the capacity of Examiner in Divinity, — rO LIFE, TIMES, AND WRITINGS OF CRANMER.

" He did much good, for he used to question the candidates out of the Scriptures, and by no means wou'd he let pass if he found they were unskilled therein, or unacquainted with the history of the Bible. The Friars, whose study lay only in school authors, especially were so, whom therefore he sometimes turned back as insufficient, advising them to study the Scriptures for some years longer, before they came for their degree, it being a shame for a professor in Divinity to be unskilled in the book wherein the knowledge of God and the grounds of divinity lay. Whereby he made himself from the beginning hated by the Friars ; yet some of the more ingenuous afterwards rendered him great thanks for refusing them, whereby, being put upon the study of God's Word^ they att uned to more sound knowledge of religion."

From this time until the incidents we are about to relate, which brought Cranmer into public notice, he appears to have passed an uneventful life at the University, principally acting as tutor, and, according to all accounts, with satisfaction to his superiors and credit to himself

And here I may be permitted to borrow an extract from Mr Burke's late work, " Historical Portraits of the Tudor Dynasty," which he purports to give from a Letter of one John Alcock, a student and contemporary of Cranmer, and a chess-player at the " Dolphin," " abbreviated and modernised as to diction." If genuine, we may take it as an interesting description of Dr Cranmer at this period : —

"At this time Father Cranmer looked oldish ; he was of dark complexion, with a long beard, half grey ; part of his head had no hair ; he spoke little ; his amusement at times was chess. He was accounted an admirable hand at that game, which he enjoyed very much. His habits were temperate, and he frequently admonished young gentlemen ' for indulging in the use of strong liquors ' — a vice then making progress amongst the students of Cambridge. Father Cranmer was reckoned a good horseman, and, like most early risers, was much given to walking on a summer morning ; his manners were cold and disdainful, unless to those to whom he considered it his interest to be the reverse. He seems to have had no desire for the society of educated women. 1 must state, however, that he had no opportunity of meeting them. ' Black Joan,' as his wife was styled from her hair and complexion, was a woman of no education — a peasant girl from a

CRANMER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. I I neighbouring farm. During the long years Thomas Cranmer was attached to Cambridge, he had many acquaintances, but was never known to have formed what might be called a friendship for any fellow-student."

Such, then, was Cranmer when he was unexpectedly and unwilHngly called upon to enter upon more public duties. It was Cranmer's misfortune that his lot in life should have fallen on unhappy and troubled times, and to serve under a monarch represented to be — though not without considerable exaggeration — cruel, tyrannical, and lascivious.

It was justly remarked by the late Rev. Joseph Mendham, that, with the vindication of Henry VIII., we, as members of the Reformed Church, have little concern. Our opponents, with whom he, as little as ourselves, is a favourite, would gladly impose on us the necessity of his defence. But in one respect — ^his effectual renunciation of the usurped authority of the Papal See and its Bishops — - that which constitutes his main if not only offence in the eyes of Romanists, we do and always will defend him ; for the rest he is more their client than ours. He wanted to establish a royal Papacy as absolute and persecuting as the purely ecclesiastical one which he was rejecting; but he was in reality making loopholes for liberty, and laid the foundation on which the Reformation was erected.

Chapter III

THE PROCEEDINGS LEADING TO THE DIVORCE OF HENRY VIII. FROM CATHERINE.

We are now come to the period of Dr Cranmer's first appearance, in 1529, as a public character. It was in connexion with the complicated circumstances " which were destined to occupy a prominent place in the history of this country," attending the marriage of Henry VIII. with his brother's widow, Catherine, the daughter of King Ferdinand of Spain and Isabella of Castile, his wife — Henry's divorce and his second marriage with Anne Boleyn, the daughter of Sir Thomas Boleyn, afterwards created Earl of Ormond and Wiltshire. The part taken by Cranmer in these events has furnished fruitful subjects of censure both of the King and Cranmer.

There is no action of Cranmer's life which has been so much under contention, to his disparagement, as his participation in these transactions ; nor have any events in the history of our Kings been so misunderstood, indeed misrepresented. Considering the important results which followed, we need scarcely express any surprise.

In order to make this clear, it will be necessary — as perhaps the most eventful period of Cranmer's life — that we should enter into a minute examination of all the facts and circumstances connected with those transactions, and the part which Cranmer took, in order, as is alleged, to further Henry's cruel and lascivious propensities.

DIVORCE OF HENRY VIII. FROM CATHERINE.

The popular version is shortly as follows : We are told that Henry was a monster in his appetites and passions. After some eighteen or twenty years of married life, with Catherine, who had ever been to him a virtuous and affectionate wife, Henry suddenly fell in love, and carried on an illicit intercourse with Anne Boleyn, the Queen's maid of honour. Some have gone so far as to insinuate, the scandal boldly proclaimed by Sanders, a secular priest, that Anne was Henry's daughter — that Henry applied to the Pope of Rome to grant him a divorce on the plea of religious scruples — that the Pope peremptorily refused his sanction — that Henry could not restrain his passions, but with the aid of Cranmer obtained, in England, a declaration of divorce, on the pretence of having sudde^dy discovered that his first marriage was contrary to the Divine law according to the Scriptures — that Cranmer aided and abetted the King in these views, and took upon himself to pronounce the decree of divorce; whereupon the King married Anne Boleyn, whom he had previously " taken under his protection " — that the King rewarded Cranmer for his services by making him Archbishop of Canterbury — that Henry thus forfeited Pontifical favour, and turned Protestant, threw off the supreme sway of the Pope, proclaiming himself to be the head of the Church in England, and thus, with the further aid of Cranmer, introduced the Reformation, and founded the Church of England, " which " (according to Cobbett) " he cherished and maintained by plunder, devastation, and by rivers of innocent blood," — and that the Pope issued his Bull of " excommunication and damnation against the heretic Henry, as a punishment for his past disobedience, and as an expression of his virtuous indignation."