diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/50328-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50328-0.txt | 16410 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 16410 deletions
diff --git a/old/50328-0.txt b/old/50328-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index d81e64f..0000000 --- a/old/50328-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,16410 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's The Eve of the Reformation, by Francis Aidan Gasquet - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - -Title: The Eve of the Reformation - Studies in the Religious Life and Thought of the English - people in the Period Preceding the Rejection of the Roman - jurisdiction by Henry VIII - -Author: Francis Aidan Gasquet - -Release Date: October 27, 2015 [EBook #50328] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE EVE OF THE REFORMATION *** - - - - -Produced by Clarity and the Online Distributed Proofreading -Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from -images generously made available by The Internet -Archive/Canadian Libraries) - - - - - - - - - -THE EVE OF THE REFORMATION - -FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B. - - - - - THE EVE OF THE - REFORMATION - - STUDIES IN THE - RELIGIOUS LIFE AND THOUGHT OF THE ENGLISH - PEOPLE IN THE PERIOD PRECEDING THE - REJECTION OF THE ROMAN JURISDICTION - BY HENRY VIII - - BY - - FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B. - - AUTHOR OF - “HENRY VIII. AND THE ENGLISH MONASTERIES,” ETC. - - LONDON - JOHN C. NIMMO - 14 KING WILLIAM STREET, STRAND - MDCCCC - - Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO. - At the Ballantyne Press. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - CHAP. PAGE - - I. INTRODUCTION 1 - - II. THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS IN ENGLAND 14 - - III. THE TWO JURISDICTIONS 51 - - IV. ENGLAND AND THE POPE 78 - - V. CLERGY AND LAITY 114 - - VI. ERASMUS 155 - - VII. THE LUTHERAN INVASION 208 - - VIII. THE PRINTED ENGLISH BIBLE 236 - - IX. TEACHING AND PREACHING 278 - - X. PARISH LIFE IN CATHOLIC ENGLAND 323 - - XI. PRE-REFORMATION GUILD LIFE 351 - - XII. MEDIÆVAL WILLS, CHANTRIES, AND OBITS 387 - - XIII. PILGRIMAGES AND RELICS 415 - - - - -THE EVE OF THE REFORMATION - - - - -CHAPTER I - -INTRODUCTION - - -The English Reformation presents a variety of problems to the student -of history. Amongst them not the least difficult or important is the -general question, How are we to account for the sudden beginning and -the ultimate success of a movement which, apparently at least, was -opposed to the religious convictions and feelings of the nation at -large? To explain away the difficulty, we are asked by some writers to -believe that the religious revolution, although perhaps unrecognised -at the moment when the storm first burst, had long been inevitable, -and indeed that its issue had been foreseen by the most learned and -capable men in England. To some, it appears that the Church, on the -eve of the Reformation, had long lost its hold on the intelligence and -affection of the English people. Discontented with the powers claimed -by the ecclesiastical authority, and secretly disaffected to much of -the mediæval teaching of religious truth and to many of the traditional -religious ordinances, the laity were, it is suggested, only too eager -to seize upon the first opportunity of emancipating themselves from -a thraldom which in practice had become intolerable. An increase of -knowledge, too, it is supposed, had inevitably led men to view as false -and superstitious many of the practices of religion which had been -acquiesced in and followed without doubt or question in earlier and -more simple days. Men, with the increasing light, had come to see, in -the support given to these practices by the clergy, a determination to -keep people at large in ignorance, and to make capital out of many of -these objectionable features of mediæval worship. - -Moreover, such writers assume that in reality there was little or no -practical religion among the mass of the people for some considerable -time before the outbreak of the religious difficulties in the sixteenth -century. According to their reading of the facts, the nation, as -such, had long lost its interest in the religion of its forefathers. -Receiving no instruction in faith and morals worthy of the name, they -had been allowed by the neglect of the clergy to grow up in ignorance -of the teachings, and in complete neglect of the duties, of their -religion. Ecclesiastics generally, secular as well as religious, had, -it is suggested, forfeited the respect and esteem of the laity by -their evil and mercenary lives; whilst, imagining that the surest way -to preserve the remnants of their former power was to keep the people -ignorant, they had opposed the literary revival of the fifteenth -century by every means at their command. In a word, the picture of -the pre-Reformation Church ordinarily drawn for us is that of a -system honeycombed with disaffection and unbelief, the natural and -necessary outcome of an attempt to maintain at all hazards an effete -ecclesiastical organisation, which clung with the tenacity of despair -to doctrines and observances which the world at large had ceased to -accept as true, or to observe as any part of its reasonable service. - -In view of these and similar assertions, it is of interest and -importance to ascertain, if possible, what really was the position -of the Church in the eyes of the nation at large on the eve of the -Reformation, to understand the attitude of men’s minds to the system -as they knew it, and to discover, as far as may be, what in regard -to religion they were doing and saying and thinking about, when the -change came upon them. It is precisely this information which it has -hitherto been difficult to get, and the present work is designed to -supply some evidence on these matters. It does not pretend in any sense -to be a history of the English Reformation, to give any consecutive -narrative of the religious movements in this country during the -sixteenth century, or to furnish an adequate account of the causes -which led up to them. The volume in reality presents to the reader -merely a series of separate studies which, whilst joined together by a -certain connecting thread, must not be taken as claiming to present any -complete picture of the period immediately preceding the Reformation, -still less of that movement itself. - -This is intentional. Those who know most about this portion of our -national history will best understand how impossible it is as yet for -any one, however well informed, to write the history of the Reformation -itself or to draw for us any detailed and accurate picture of the age -that went before that great event, and is supposed by some to have -led up to it. The student of this great social and religious movement -must at present be content to address himself to the necessary work of -sifting and examining the many new sources of information which the -researches of late years have opened out to the inquirer. For example, -what a vast field of work is not supplied by the _Calendar of Papers, -Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII._ alone! In many -ways this monumental work may well be considered one of the greatest -literary achievements of the age. It furnishes the student of this -portion of our national history with a vast catalogue of material, -all of which must be examined, weighed, and arranged, before it is -possible to pass a judgment upon the great religious revolution of -the sixteenth century. And, though obviously affording grounds for a -reconsideration of many of the conclusions previously formed in regard -to this perplexing period, it must in no sense be regarded as even an -exhaustive calendar of the available material. Rolls, records, and -documents of all kinds exist in public and private archives, which are -not included in these State Papers, but which are equally necessary -for the formation of a sound and reliable opinion on the whole story. -Besides this vast mass of material, the entire literature of the period -demands careful examination, as it must clearly throw great light on -the tone and temper of men’s minds, and reveal the origin and growth of -popular views and opinions. - -Writers, such as Burnet, for example, and others, have indeed presented -their readers with the story of the Reformation as a whole, and have -not hesitated to set out at length, and with assurance, the causes -which led up to that event. Whether true or false, they have made their -synthesis, and taking a comprehensive view of the entire subject, -they have rendered their story more plausible by the unity of idea -it was designed to illustrate and confirm. The real value of such a -synthesis, however, must of course entirely depend on the data upon -which it rests. The opening up of new sources of information and the -examination of old sources in the critical spirit now demanded in all -historical investigations have fully proved, however, not merely this -or that fact to be wrong, but that whole lines of argument are without -justification, and general deductions without reasonable basis. In -other words, the old synthesis has been founded upon false facts and -false inferences. - -Whilst, however, seeing that the old story of the Reformation in -England is wrong on some of the main lines upon which it depended, -it is for reasons just stated impossible at present to substitute a -new synthesis for the old. However unsatisfactory it may appear to be -reduced to the analysis of sources and the examination of details, -nothing more can safely be attempted at the present time. A general -view cannot be taken until the items that compose it have been proved -and tested and found correct. Till such time a provisional appreciation -at best of the general subject is alone possible. The present volume -then is occupied solely with some details, and I have endeavoured -mainly by an examination of the literature of the period in question -to gather some evidence of the mental attitude of the English people -towards the religious system which prevailed before the rejection of -the Roman jurisdiction by Henry VIII. - -In regard to the general question, one or two observations may be -premised. - -At the outset it may be allowed that in many things there was need -of reform in its truest sense. This was recognised by the best and -most staunch sons of Holy Church; and the Council of Trent itself, -when we read its decrees and measure its language, is sufficient -proof that by the highest authorities it was acknowledged that every -effort must be made to purify the Church from abuses, superstitions, -and scandals which, in the course of the long ages of its existence, -had sprung from its contact with the world and through the human -weaknesses of its rulers and ministers. In reality, however, the -movement for reform did not in any way begin with Trent, nor was it -the mere outcome of a terror inspired by the wholesale defection of -nations under the influence of the Lutheran Reformation. The need had -long been acknowledged by the best and most devoted sons of the Church. -There were those, whom M. Eugène Müntz has designated the “morose -cardinals,” who saw whither things were tending, and strove to the -utmost of their power to avert the impending catastrophe. As Janssen -has pointed out, in the middle of the fifteenth century, for instance, -Nicholas of Cusa initiated reforms in Germany, with the approval--if -not by the positive injunctions--of the Pope. It was, however, a true -reform, a reform founded on the principle “not of destruction, but of -purification and renewal.” Holding that “it was not for men to change -what was holy; but for the holy to change man,” he began by reforming -himself and preaching by example. He restored discipline and eagerly -welcomed the revival of learning and the invention of printing as the -most powerful auxiliaries of true religion. His projects of general -ecclesiastical reforms presented to Pius II. are admirable. Without -wishing to touch the organisation of the Church, he desired full and -drastic measures of “reformation in head and members.” But all this was -entirely different from the spirit and aim of those who attacked the -Church under the leadership of Luther and his followers. Their object -was not the reform and purification of abuses, but the destruction and -overthrow of the existing religious system. Before, say, 1517 or even -1521, no one at this period ever dreamt of wishing to change the basis -of the Christian religion, as it was then understood. The most earnest -and zealous sons of the Church never hesitated to attack this or that -abuse, and to point out this or that spot, desiring to make the edifice -of God’s Church, as they understood it, more solid, more useful, and -more like Christ’s ideal. They never dreamt that their work could -undermine the edifice, much less were their aims directed to pulling -down the walls and digging up the foundations; such a possibility was -altogether foreign to their conception of the essential constitution of -Christ’s Church. To suggest that men like Colet, More, and Erasmus had -any leaning to, or sympathy with, “the Reformation” as we know it, is, -in view of what they have written, absolutely false and misleading. - -The fact is, that round the true history of the Reformation movement in -England, there has grown up, as Janssen has shown had been the case in -Germany, a mass of legend from which it is often difficult enough to -disentangle the truth. It has been suggested, for instance, that the -period which preceded the advent of the new religious ideas was, to -say the least, a period of stagnation. That, together with the light -of what is called the Gospel, came the era of national prosperity, -and that the golden age of literature and art was the outcome of -that liberty and freedom of spirit which was the distinct product of -the Protestant Reformation. And yet what are the facts? Was the age -immediately before the religious upheaval of the sixteenth century -so very black, and was it the magic genius of Luther who divined how -to call forth the light out of the “void and empty darkness”? Luther, -himself, shall tell us his opinion of the century before the rise of -Protestantism. “Any one reading the chronicles,” he writes, “will find -that since the birth of Christ there is nothing that can compare with -what has happened in our world during the last hundred years. Never -in any country have people seen so much building, so much cultivation -of the soil. Never has such good drink, such abundant and delicate -food, been within the reach of so many. Dress has become so rich that -it cannot in this respect be improved. Who has ever heard of commerce -such as we see it to-day? It circles the globe; it embraces the whole -world! Painting, engraving--all the arts--have progressed and are still -improving. More than all, we have men so capable, and so learned, that -their wit penetrates everything in such a way, that nowadays a youth of -twenty knows more than twenty doctors did in days gone by.”[1] - -In this passage we have the testimony of the German reformer -himself that the eve of the Reformation was in no sense a period of -stagnation. The world was fully awake, and the light of learning and -art had already dawned upon the earth. The progress of commerce and -the prosperity of peoples owed nothing to the religious revolt of -the sixteenth century. Nor is this true only for Germany. There is -evidence to prove that Luther’s picture is as correct in that period -for England. Learning, there can be no question, in the fifteenth -century, found a congenial soil in this country. In its origin, as -well as in its progress, the English revival of letters, which may be -accurately gauged by the renewal of Greek studies, found its chief -patrons in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries among the clergy -and the most loyal lay sons of the Church. The fears of Erasmus that -the rise of Lutheranism would prove the death-blow of solid scholarship -were literally fulfilled. In England, no less than in Germany, amid -the religious difficulties and the consequent social disturbances, -learning, except in so far as it served to aid the exigencies of -polemics or meet the controversial needs of the hour, declined for -well-nigh a century; and so far from the Reformation affording the -congenial soil upon which scholarship and letters flourished, it -was in reality--to use Erasmus’s own favourite expression about the -movement--a “catastrophe,” in which was overwhelmed the real progress -of the previous century. The state of the universities of Oxford and -Cambridge, before and after the period of religious change, is an -eloquent testimony as to its effect on learning in general; whilst the -differences of opinion in religious matters to which the Reformation -gave rise, at once put a stop to the international character of the -foreign universities. English names forthwith disappeared from the -students’ lists at the great centres of learning in France and Italy, -an obvious misfortune, which had a disastrous effect on English -scholarship; the opening up of the schools of the reformed churches of -Germany in no wise compensating for the international training hitherto -received by most English scholars of eminence. - -In art and architecture, too, in the second half of the fifteenth -century and the beginning of the sixteenth, there was manifested an -activity in England which is without a parallel. There never was a -period in which such life and energy was displayed in the building -and adornment of churches of all kinds as on the very eve of the -Reformation. Not in one part of the country only, nor in regard only -to the greater churches, was this characteristic activity shown, but -throughout the length and breadth of England the walls of our great -cathedrals and minsters, and well-nigh those of every little parish -church in the land, still bear their testimony to what was done out -of love for God’s house during the period in question by the English -people. Moreover, by the aid of the existing accounts and inventories -it can be proved to demonstration that it was a work which then, more -than at any other period of our national existence, appealed to the -people at large and was carried out by them. No longer, as in earlier -times, was the building and beautifying of God’s house left in this -period to some great noble benefactor or rich landowner. During the -fifteenth century the people were themselves concerned with the work, -initiated it, found the means to carry it out, and superintended it in -all its details. - -The same may be said of art. The work of adorning the walls of the -churches with paintings and frescoes, the work of filling in the -tracery of the windows with pictured glass, the work of setting up, -and carving, and painting, and decorating; the making of screens, -and stalls, and altars, all during this period, and right up to the -eve of the change, was in every sense popular. It was the people who -carried out these works, and evidently for the sole reason because they -loved to beautify their churches, which were, in a way now somewhat -difficult to realise, the centre no less of their lives than of -their religion. Popular art grows, and only grows luxuriantly, upon a -religious soil; and under the inspiration of a popular enthusiasm the -parish churches of England became, if we may judge from the evidence of -the wills, accounts, and inventories which still survive, not merely -sanctuaries, but veritable picture galleries, teaching the poor and -unlettered the history and doctrine of their religion. Nor were the -pictures themselves the miserable daubs which some have suggested. -The stained-glass windows were not only multiplied in the churches -of England during this period, but by those best able to judge, the -time between 1480 and 1520 has been regarded as the golden age of the -art; and as regards the frescoes and decorations themselves, there is -evidence of the existence in England of a high proficiency, both in -design and execution, before the Reformation. Two examples may be taken -to attest the truth of this: the series of paintings against which the -stalls in Eton College Chapel are now placed, and the pictures on the -walls of the Lady Chapel at Winchester, now unfortunately destroyed -by the whitewash with which they had been covered on the change of -religion. Those who had the opportunity of examining the former series, -when many years ago they were uncovered on the temporary removal of the -stalls, have testified to their intrinsic merit. Indeed, they appeared -to the best judges of the time as being so excellent in drawing and -colour that on their authority they were long supposed to have been -the work of some unknown Italian artist of the school of Giotto. By a -fortunate discovery of Mr. J. Willis Clarke, however, it is now known -that both these and the Winchester series were in reality executed by -an Englishman, named Baker. - -The same is true with regard to decoration and carving work. In -screen-work, the Perpendicular period is allowed to have excelled all -others, both in the lavish amount of the ornament as well as in the -style of decoration. One who has paid much attention to this subject -says: “During this period, the screen-work was usually enriched by -gilding and painting, or was ‘depensiled,’ as the phrase runs, and many -curious works of the limner’s art may still be seen in the churches of -Norfolk and Suffolk. In Sussex, the screens of Brighton and Horsham -may be cited as painted screens of beauty and merit, both having -been thus ornamented in a profuse and costly manner, and each bore -figures of saints in their panels.”[2] The churchwardens’ accounts, -too, show that the work of thus decorating the English parish churches -was in full operation up to the very eve of the religious changes. -In these truthful pictures of parochial life, we may see the people -and their representatives busily engaged in collecting the necessary -money, and in superintending the work of setting up altars and statues -and paintings, and in hiring carvers and decorators to enrich what -their ancestors had provided for God’s house. It was the age, too, -of organ-making and bell-founding, and there is hardly a record of -any parish church at this time which does not show considerable sums -of money spent upon these. From the middle of the fifteenth century -to the period described as “the great pillage,” music, too, had made -great progress in England, and the renown of the English school had -spread over Europe. Musical compositions had multiplied in a wonderful -way, and before the close of the fifteenth century “prick song,” -or part music, is very frequently found in the inventories of our -English parish churches. In fact, it has been recently shown that -much of the music of the boasted school of ecclesiastical music to -which the English Reformation had been thought to have given birth, -is, in reality, music adapted to the new English services, from Latin -originals, which had been inspired by the ancient offices of the -Church. Most of the “prick song” masses and other musical compositions -were destroyed in the wholesale destruction which accompanied the -religious changes, but sufficient remains to show that the English -pre-Reformation school of music was second to none in Europe. The -reputation of some of its chief masters, like Dunstable, Tallis, and -Bird, had spread to other countries, and their works had been used and -studied, even in that land of song, Italy. - -A dispassionate consideration of the period preceding the great -religious upheaval of the sixteenth century will, it can hardly -be doubted, lead the inquirer to conclude that it was not in any -sense an age of stagnation, discontent, and darkness. Letters, art, -architecture, painting, and music, under the distinct patronage of the -Church, had made great and steady progress before the advent of the -new ideas. Moreover, those who will examine the old parish records -cannot fail to see that up to the very eve of the changes, the old -religion had not lost its hold upon the minds and affections of the -people at large. And one thing is absolutely clear, that it was not -the Reformation movement which brought to the world in its train the -blessings of education, and the arts of civilisation. What it did for -all these is written plainly enough in the history of that period of -change and destruction. - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS IN ENGLAND - - -The story of the English literary revival in the fifteenth and -sixteenth centuries is of no little interest and importance. The full -history of the movement would form the fitting theme of an entire -volume; but the real facts are so contrary to much that is commonly -believed about our English renaissance of letters, that some brief -account is necessary, if we would rightly understand the attitude of -men’s minds on the eve of the Reformation. At the outset, it is useful -to recall the limits of this English renaissance. Judged by what is -known of the movement in Italy, the land of its origin, the word -“renaissance” is usually understood to denote not only the adoption of -the learning and intellectual culture of ancient Greece and Rome by the -leaders of thought in the Western World during the period in question, -but an almost servile following of classical models, the absorption -of the pagan spirit and the adoption of pagan modes of expression so -fully, as certainly to obscure, if it did not frequently positively -obliterate, Christian sentiment and Christian ideals. In this sense, it -is pleasing to think, the renaissance was unknown in England. So far, -however, as the revival of learning is concerned, England bore its part -in, if indeed it may not be said to have been in the forefront of, the -movement. - -This has, perhaps, hardly been realised as it should be. That the -sixteenth century witnessed a remarkable awakening of minds, a -broadening of intellectual interests, and a considerable advance in -general culture, has long been known and acknowledged. There is little -doubt, however, that the date usually assigned both for the dawning -of the light and for the time of its full development is altogether -too late; whilst the circumstances which fostered the growth of -the movement have apparently been commonly misunderstood, and the -chief agents in initiating it altogether ignored. The great period -of the reawakening would ordinarily be placed without hesitation in -post-Reformation times, and writers of all shades of opinion have -joined in attributing the revival of English letters to the freedom of -minds and hearts purchased by the overthrow of the old ecclesiastical -system, and their emancipation from the narrowing and withering effects -of mediævalism. - -On the assumption that the only possible attitude of English -churchmen on the eve of the great religious changes would be one of -uncompromising hostility to learning and letters, many have come to -regard the one, not as inseparably connected with the other, but the -secular as the outcome of the religious movement. The undisguised -opposition of the clergy to the “New Learning” is spoken of as -sufficient proof of the Church’s dislike of learning in general, and -its determination to check the nation’s aspirations to profit by the -general classical revival. This assumption is based upon a complete -misapprehension as to what was then the meaning of the term “New -Learning.” It was in no sense connected with the revival of letters, or -with what is now understood by learning and culture; but it was in the -Reformation days a well-recognised expression used to denote the novel -religious teachings of Luther and his followers.[3] Uncompromising -hostility to such novelties, no doubt, marked the religious attitude -of many, who were at the same time the most strenuous advocates of the -renaissance of letters. This is so obvious in the works of the period, -that were it not for the common misuse of the expression at the present -day, and for the fact that opposition to the “New Learning” is assumed -on all hands to represent hostility to letters, rather than to novel -teachings in religious matters, there would be no need to furnish -examples of its real use in the period in question. As it is, some -instances taken from the works of that time become almost a necessity, -if we would understand the true position of many of the chief actors at -this period of our history. - -Roger Edgworth, a preacher, for instance, after speaking of those who -“so arrogantly glory in their learning, had by study in the English -Bible, and in these seditious English books that have been sent over -from our English runagates now abiding with Luther in Saxony,” praises -the simple-hearted faith that was accepted unquestioned by all “before -this wicked ‘New Learning’ arose in Saxony and came over into England -amongst us.”[4] - -From the preface of _The Praier and Complaynte of the Ploweman_, dated -February 1531, it is equally clear that the expression “New Learning” -was then understood only of religious teaching. Like the Scribes and -Pharisees in the time of Our Lord, the author says, the bishops and -priests are calling out: “What ‘New Learning’ is it? These fellows -teach new learning: these are they that trouble all the world with -their new learning?… Even now after the same manner, our holy bishops -with all their ragman’s roll are of the same sort.… They defame, -slander, and persecute the word and the preachers and followers of -it, with the selfsame names, calling it ‘New Learning’ and them ‘new -masters.’”[5] - -The same meaning was popularly attached to the words even after the -close of the reign of Henry VIII. A book published in King Edward’s -reign, to instruct the people “concerning the king’s majesty’s -proceedings in the communion,” bears the title, _The olde Faith of -Great Brittayne and the new learning of England_. It is, of course, -true, that the author sets himself to show that the reformed doctrines -were the old teachings of the Christian Church, and that, when St. -Gregory sent St. Augustine over into England, “the new learning was -brought into this realm, of which we see much yet remaining in the -Church at the present day.”[6] But this fact rather emphasises than -in any way obscures the common understanding of the expression “New -Learning,” since the whole intent of the author is to show that the -upholders of the old ecclesiastical system were the real maintainers -of a “New Learning” brought from Rome by St. Augustine, and not the -Lutherans. The same appears equally clearly in a work by Urbanus -Regius, which was translated and published by William Turner in 1537, -and called _A comparison betwene the old learnynge and the newe_. As -the translator says at the beginning-- - - “Some ther be that do defye - All that is newe and ever do crye - The olde is better, away with the new - Because it is false, and the olde is true. - Let them this booke reade and beholde, - For it preferreth the learning most olde.” - -As the author of the previous volume quoted, so Urbanus Regius compares -the exclamation of the Jews against our Lord: “What new learning is -this?” with the objection, “What is this new doctrine?” made by the -Catholics against the novel religious teaching of Luther and his -followers. “This,” they say, “is the new doctrine lately devised and -furnished in the shops and workhouses of heretics. Let us abide still -in our old faith.… Wherefore,” continues the author, “I, doing the -office of Christian brother, have made a comparison between the ‘New -Learning’ and the olden, whereby, dear brother, you may easily know -whether we are called worthily or unworthily the preachers of the -‘New Learning.’ For so did they call us of late.” He then proceeds -to compare under various headings what he again and again calls “the -New Learning” and “the Old Learning.” For example, according to the -former, people are taught that the Sacraments bring grace to the soul; -according to the latter, faith alone is needful. According to the -former, Christ is present wholly under each kind of bread and wine, -the mass is a sacrifice for the living and the dead, and “oblation is -made in the person of the whole church”; according to the latter, the -Supper is a memorial only of Christ’s death, “and not a sacrifice, but -a remembrance of the sacrifice that was once offered up on the cross,” -and that “all oblations except that of our Lord are vain and void.”[7] - -In view of passages such as the above, and in the absence of any -contemporary evidence of the use of the expression to denote the -revival of letters, it is obvious that any judgment as to a general -hostility of the clergy to learning based upon their admitted -opposition to what was then called the “New Learning” cannot seriously -be maintained. It would seem, moreover, that the religious position of -many ecclesiastics and laymen has been completely misunderstood by the -meaning now so commonly assigned to the expression. Men like Erasmus, -Colet, and to a great extent, More himself, have been regarded, to -say the least, as at heart very lukewarm adherents of the Church, -precisely because of their strong advocacy of the movement known as the -literary revival, which, identified by modern writers with the “New -Learning,” was, it is wrongly assumed, condemned by orthodox churchmen. -The Reformers are thus made the champions of learning; Catholics, the -upholders of ignorance, and the hereditary and bitter foes of all -intellectual improvement. No one, however, saw more clearly than did -Erasmus that the rise of Lutheran opinions was destined to be the -destruction of true learning, and that the atmosphere of controversy -was not the most fitting to assure its growth. To Richard Pace he -expressed his ardent wish that some kindly _Deus ex machinâ_ would -put an end to the whole Lutheran agitation, for it had most certainly -brought upon the humanist movement unmerited hatred.[8] In subsequent -letters he rejects the idea that the two, the Lutheran and the humanist -movements, had anything whatever in common; asserting that even Luther -himself had never claimed to found his revolt against the Church on -the principles of scholarship and learning. To him, the storm of the -Reformation appeared--so far as concerned the revival of learning--as a -catastrophe. Had the tempest not risen, he had the best expectations of -a general literary renaissance and of witnessing a revival of interest -in Biblical and patristic studies among churchmen. It was the breath of -bitter and endless controversy initiated in the Lutheran revolt and the -consequent misunderstandings and enmities which withered his hopes.[9] - -There remains, however, the broader question as to the real position -of the ecclesiastical authorities generally, in regard to the revival -of learning. So far as England is concerned, their attitude is hardly -open to doubt in view of the positive testimony of Erasmus, which is -further borne out by an examination of the material available for -forming a judgment. This proves beyond all question, not only that the -Church in England on the eve of the change did not refuse the light, -but that, both in its origin and later development, the movement owed -much to the initiative and encouragement of English churchmen. - -It is not necessary here to enter very fully into the subject of -the general revival of learning in Europe during the course of the -fifteenth century. At the very beginning of that period what Gibbon -calls “a new and perpetual flame” was enkindled in Italy. As in the -thirteenth century, so then it was the study of the literature and -culture of ancient Greece that re-enkindled the lamp of learning in -the Western World. Few things, indeed, are more remarkable than the -influence of Greek forms and models on the Western World. The very -language seems as if destined by Providence to do for the Christian -nations of Europe what in earlier ages it had done for pagan Rome. As -Dr. Döllinger has pointed out, this is “a fact of immense importance, -which even in these days it is worth while to weigh and place in its -proper light,” since “the whole of modern civilisation and culture is -derived from Greek sources. Intellectually we are the offspring of the -union of the ancient Greek classics with Hellenised Judaism.” One thing -is clear on the page of history: that the era of great intellectual -activity synchronised with re-awakened interests in the Greek -classics and Greek language in such a way that the study of Greek may -conveniently be taken as representing a general revival of letters. - -By the close of the fourteenth century, the ever-increasing impotence -of the Imperial sway on the Bosphorus, and the ever-growing influence -of the Turk, compelled the Greek emperors to look to Western -Christians for help to arrest the power of the infidels, which, like -a flood, threatened to overwhelm the Eastern empire. Three emperors -in succession journeyed into the Western world to implore assistance -in their dire necessity, and though their efforts failed to save -Constantinople, the historian detects in these pilgrimages of Greeks -to the Courts of Europe the providential influence which brought about -the renaissance of letters. “The travels of the three emperors,” writes -Gibbon, “were unavailing for their temporal, or perhaps their spiritual -salvation, but they were productive of a beneficial consequence, the -revival of the Greek learning in Italy, from whence it was propagated -to the last nations of the West and North.” - -What is true of Italy may well be true of other countries and places. -The second of these pilgrim emperors, Manuel, the son and successor of -Palæologus, crossed the Alps, and after a stay in Paris, came over the -sea into England. In December 1400 he landed at Dover, and was, with a -large retinue of Greeks, entertained at the monastery of Christchurch, -Canterbury. It requires little stretch of imagination to suppose that -the memory of such a visit would have lingered long in the cloister of -Canterbury, and it is hardly perhaps by chance that it is here that -half a century later are to be found the first serious indications -of a revival of Greek studies. Moreover, it is evident that other -Greek envoys followed in subsequent times, and even the great master -and prodigy of learning, Manuel Chrysoloras himself, found his way to -our shores, and it is hardly an assumption, in view of the position -of Canterbury--on the high-road from Dover to London--to suppose to -Christchurch also.[10] It was from his arrival in Italy, in 1396, -that may be dated the first commencement of systematic study of the -Greek classics in the West. The year 1408 is given for his visit to -England.[11] - -There are indications early in the fifteenth century of a stirring of -the waters in this country. Guarini, a pupil of Chrysoloras, became -a teacher of fame at Ferrara, where he gathered round him a school -of disciples which included several Englishmen. Such were Tiptoft, -Earl of Worcester;[12] Robert Fleming, a learned ecclesiastic; John -Free, John Gundthorpe, and William Gray, Bishop of Ely; whilst another -Italian, Aretino, attracted by his fame another celebrated Englishman, -Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, to his classes. These, however, were -individual cases, and their studies, and even the books they brought -back, led to little in the way of systematic work in England at the old -classical models. The fall of Constantinople in 1453 gave the required -stimulus here, as in Italy. Among the fugitives were many Greek -scholars of eminence, such as Chalcocondylas, Andronicus, Constantine -and John Lascaris, who quickly made the schools of Italy famous by -their teaching. Very soon the fame of the new masters spread to other -countries, and students from all parts of the Western World found their -way to their lecture-halls in Rome and the other teaching centres -established in the chief cities of Northern Italy. - -First among the scholars who repaired thither from England to drink -in the learning of ancient Greece and bring back to their country -the new spirit, we must place two Canterbury monks named Selling and -Hadley. Born somewhere about 1430, William Selling became a monk at -Christchurch, Canterbury, somewhere about 1448. There seems some -evidence to show that his family name was Tyll, and that, as was -frequently, if not generally, the case, on his entering into religion, -he adopted the name of Selling from his birthplace, some five miles -from Faversham in Kent.[13] It is probable that Selling, after having -passed through the claustral school at Canterbury, on entering the -Benedictine Order was sent to finish his studies at Canterbury College, -Oxford. Here he certainly was in 1450, for in that year he writes -a long and what is described as an elegant letter as a student at -Canterbury College to his Prior, Thomas Goldstone, at Christchurch -Canterbury.[14] He was ordained priest, and celebrated his first mass -at Canterbury in September 1456.[15] - -In 1464 William Selling obtained leave of his Prior and convent to go -with a companion, William Hadley, to study in the foreign universities -for three years,[16] during which time they visited and sat under -the most celebrated teachers at Padua, Bologna, and Rome.[17] At -Bologna, according to Leland, Selling was the pupil of the celebrated -Politian, “with whom, on account of his aptitude in acquiring the -classical elegance of ancient tongues, he formed a familiar and lasting -friendship.”[18] In 1466 and 1467 we find the monks, Selling and his -companion Hadley, at Bologna, where apparently the readers in Greek -then were Lionorus and Andronicus,[19] and where, on the 22nd March -1466, Selling took his degree in theology, his companion taking his in -the March of the following year.[20] - -Of this period of work, Leland says:--“His studies progressed. He -indeed imbued himself with Greek; everywhere he industriously and at -great expense collected many Greek books. Nor was his care less in -procuring old Latin MSS., which shortly after he took with him, as the -most estimable treasures, on his return to Canterbury.”[21] - -His obituary notice in the Christchurch Necrology recites not only his -excellence in learning, classical and theological, but what he had -done to make his monastery at Canterbury a real house of studies. He -decorated the library over the Priests’ Chapel, adding to the books, -and assigned it “for the use of those specially given to study, which -he encouraged and cherished with wonderful watchfulness and affection.” -The eastern cloister also he fitted with glass and new desks, “called -carrels,” for the use of the studious brethren.[22] - -After the sojourn of the two Canterbury monks in Italy, they returned -to their home at Christchurch. Selling, however, did not remain -there long, for on October 3, 1469, we find him setting out again -for Rome[23] in company with another monk, Reginald Goldstone, also -an Oxford student. This visit was on business connected with his -monastery, and did not apparently keep him long away from England, -for there is evidence that sometime before the election of Selling -to the Priorship at Canterbury, which was in 1472, he was again at -his monastery. Characteristically, his letter introducing William -Worcester, the antiquary, to a merchant of Lucca who had a copy of -Livy’s _Decades_ for sale, manifests his great and continued interest -in classical literature.[24] - -At Canterbury, Selling must have established the teaching of Greek on -systematic lines, and it is certainly from this monastic school as -a centre, that the study spread to other parts of England. William -Worcester, keenly alive to the classical revival, as his note-books -show, tells us of “certain Greek terminations as taught by Doctor -Selling of Christchurch, Canterbury,” and likewise sets down the -pronunciation of the Greek vowels with examples evidently on the same -authority.[25] - -Selling’s long priorship, extending from 1472 to 1495, would have -enabled him to consolidate the work of this literary renaissance which -he had so much at heart.[26] The most celebrated of all his pupils -was, of course, Linacre. Born, according to Caius, at Canterbury, he -received his first instruction in the monastic school there, and his -first lessons in the classics and Greek from Selling himself. Probably -through the personal interest taken in this youth of great promise -by Prior Selling, he was sent to Oxford about 1480. Those who have -seriously examined the matter believe that the first years of his -Oxford life were spent by Linacre at the Canterbury College, which was -connected with Christchurch monastery, and which, though primarily -intended for monks, also afforded a place of quiet study to others who -were able to obtain admission.[27] Thus, in later years, Sir Thomas -More, no doubt through his father’s connection with the monastery of -Christchurch, Canterbury, of which house he was a “confrater,” became -a student at the monks’ college at Oxford. In later years Sir Thomas -himself, when Chancellor of England, perpetuated the memory of his -life-long connection with the monks of Canterbury by enrolling his name -also on the fraternity lists of that house. - -Linacre, in 1484, became a Fellow of All Souls’ College, but evidently -he did not lose touch with his old friends at Canterbury, for, in 1486, -Prior Selling being appointed one of the ambassadors of Henry VII. to -the Pope, he invited his former pupil to accompany him to Italy, in -order to profit by the teaching of the great humanist masters at the -universities there. Prior Selling took him probably as far as Florence, -and introduced him to his own old master and friend, Angelo Politian, -who was then engaged in instructing the children of Lorenzo de Medici. -Through Selling’s interest, Linacre was permitted to share in their -lessons, and there are letters showing that the younger son, when in -after years he became Pope, as Leo X., was not unmindful of his early -companionship with the English scholar.[28] From Politian, Linacre -acquired a purity of style in Latin which makes him celebrated even -among the celebrated men of his time. Greek he learnt from Demetrius -Chalcocondylas, who was then, like Politian, engaged in teaching the -children of Lorenzo de Medici.[29] - -From Florence, Linacre passed on to Rome, where he gained many friends -among the great humanists of the day. One day, when examining the -manuscripts of the Vatican Library for classics, and engaged in reading -the _Phædo_ of Plato, Hermolaus Barbarus came up and politely expressed -his belief that the youth had no claim, as he had himself, to the title -Barbarus, if it were lawful to judge from his choice of a book. Linacre -at once, from the happy compliment, recognised the speaker, and this -chance interview led to a life-long friendship between the Englishman -and one of the great masters of classical literature.[30] - -After Linacre had been in Italy for a year or more, a youth whom he had -known at Oxford, William Grocyn, was induced to come and share with him -the benefit of the training in literature then to be obtained only in -Italy. On his return in 1492, Grocyn became lecturer at Exeter College, -Oxford, and among his pupils in Greek were Sir Thomas More[31] and -Erasmus. He was a graduate in theology, and was chosen by Dean Colet to -give lectures at St. Paul’s and subsequently appointed by Archbishop -Warham, Master or Guardian of the collegiate church of Maidstone.[32] -Erasmus describes him as “a man of most rigidly upright life, almost -superstitiously observant of ecclesiastical custom, versed in every -nicety of scholastic theology, by nature of the most acute judgment, -and, in a word, fully instructed in every kind of learning.”[33] - -Linacre, after a distinguished course in the medical schools of Padua, -returned to Oxford, and in 1501 became tutor to Prince Arthur. On the -accession of Henry VIII. he was appointed physician to the court, and -could count all the distinguished men of the day, Wolsey, Warham, Fox, -and the rest, among his patients; and Erasmus, Sir Thomas More, and -Queen Mary among his pupils in letters. In his early life, entering -the clerical state, he had held ecclesiastical preferment; in advanced -years he received priest’s orders, and devoted the evening of his life -to a pious preparation for his end.[34] - -Grocyn and Linacre are usually regarded as the pioneers of the revival -of letters. But, as already pointed out, the first to cross the Alps -from England in search for the new light, to convey it back to England, -and to hand it on to Grocyn and Linacre, were William Selling, and -his companion, William Hadley. Thus, the real pioneers in the English -renaissance were the two monks of Christchurch, and, some years after, -the two ecclesiastics, Grocyn and Linacre. - -Selling, even after his election to the priorship of Canterbury, -continued to occupy a distinguished place both in the political world -and in the world of letters. He was chosen, though only the fifth -member of the embassy sent by Henry VII. on his accession to the Pope, -to act as orator, and in that capacity delivered a Latin oration before -the Pope and Cardinals.[35] - -He was also and subsequently sent with others by Henry on an embassy to -the French king, in which he also fulfilled the function of spokesman, -making what is described as “a most elegant oration.” - -That as Prior, Selling kept up his interest in the literary revival is -clear from the terms of his obituary notice. There exists, moreover, -a translation made by him after his return from his embassy to Rome, -when he took his youthful protégé, Linacre, and placed him under -Chalcocondylas and Politian in Florence, which seems to prove that -the renewal of his intimacy with the great humanist masters of Italy -had inspired him with a desire to continue his literary work. Even in -the midst of constant calls upon him, which the high office of Prior -of Canterbury necessitated, he found time to translate a sermon of -St. John Chrysostom from the Greek, two copies of which still remain -in the British Museum.[36] This is dated 1488; and it is probably the -first example of any Greek work put into Latin in England in the early -days of the English renaissance of letters. The very volume (Add. MS. -15,673) in which one copy of this translation is found shows by the -style of the writing, and other indications, the Italian influences at -work in Canterbury in the time of Selling’s succession at the close -of the fifteenth century; and also the intercourse which the monastery -there kept up with the foreign humanists.[37] - -It is hardly necessary to say more about the precious volumes of the -classics and the other manuscripts which Selling collected on his -travels. Many of them perished, with that most rare work, Cicero’s -_De Republica_, in the fire caused by the carelessness of some of -Henry VIII.’s visitors on the eve of the dissolution of Selling’s old -monastery at Canterbury. Some, like the great Greek commentaries of -St. Cyril on the Prophets, were rescued half burnt from the flames; -“others, by some good chance,” says Leland, “had been removed; amongst -these were the commentaries of St. Basil the Great on Isaias, the -works of Synesius and other Greek codices.”[38] Quite recently it has -been recognised that the complete Homer and the plays of Euripides -in Corpus Christi College library at Cambridge, which tradition had -associated with the name of Archbishop Theodore in the seventh century, -are in reality both fifteenth-century manuscripts; and as they formed, -undoubtedly, part of the library at Christchurch, Canterbury, it is -hardly too much to suppose that they were some of the treasures brought -back by Prior Selling from Italy. The same may probably be said of a -Livy, a fifteenth-century Greek Psalter, and a copy of the Psalms in -Hebrew and Latin, in Trinity College Library.[39] - -Prior Selling’s influence, moreover, extended beyond the walls of his -own house, and can be traced to others besides his old pupil, and, as -some think, relative, Linacre. Among the friendships he had formed -whilst at Padua was that of a young ecclesiastical student, Thomas -Langton, with whom he was subsequently at Rome. Langton was employed -in diplomatic business by King Edward IV., and whilst in France, -through his friendship for Prior Selling, obtained some favour from -the French king for the monastery of Canterbury. In return for this -the monks offered him a living in London.[40] Prior Selling, on one -occasion at least, drafted the sermon which Dr. Langton was to deliver -as prolocutor in the Convocation of the Canterbury Province.[41] In -1483 Langton became Bishop of Winchester, and “such was his love of -letters” that he established in his own house a _schola domestica_ for -boys, and himself used to preside in the evening at the lessons. One -youth especially attracted his attention by his music. This was Richard -Pace, afterwards renowned as a classical scholar and diplomatist. -Bishop Langton recognised his abilities, and forthwith despatched him -to Italy, paying all his expenses at the universities of Padua and -Rome.[42] At the former place, he says: “When as a youth I began -to work at my humanities, I was assisted by Cuthbert Tunstall and -William Latimer, men most illustrious and excelling in every branch of -learning, whose prudence, probity, and integrity were such that it were -hard to say whether their learning excelled their high moral character, -or their uprightness their learning.”[43] - -At this university he was taught by Leonicus and by Leonicenus, the -friend and correspondent of Politian: “Men,” he says, as being unable -to give higher praise, “like Tunstall and Latimer.”[44] Passing on to -Bologna he sat at the feet of Paul Bombasius, “who was then explaining -every best author to large audiences.” Subsequently, at Rome, he formed -a lasting friendship with William Stokesley, whom he describes as “his -best friend on earth; a man of the keenest judgment, excellent, and -indeed marvellous, in theology and philosophy, and not only skilled -in Greek and Latin, but possessed of some knowledge of Hebrew,” whose -great regret was that he had not earlier in life realised the power of -the Greek language.[45] At Ferrara, too, Pace first met Erasmus, and -he warmly acknowledges his indebtedness to the influence of this great -humanist. - -In 1509, Richard Pace accompanied Cardinal Bainbridge to Rome, and -was with him when the cardinal died, or was murdered, there in 1514. -Whilst in the Eternal City, “urged to the study by that most upright -and learned man, William Latimer,” he searched the Pope’s library for -books of music, and found a great number of works on the subject. -The cardinal’s death put a stop to his investigations; but he had -seen sufficient to be able to say that to study the matter properly a -man must know Greek and get to the library of the Pope, where there -were many and the best books on music. “But,” he adds, “I venture to -say this, our English music, if any one will critically examine into -the matter, will be found to display the greatest subtlety of mind, -especially in what is called the introduction of harmonies, and in this -matter to excel ancient music.”[46] - -It is unnecessary to follow in any detail the story of the general -literary revival in England. Beginning with Selling, the movement -continued to progress down to the very eve of the religious disputes. -That there was opposition on the part of some who regarded the -stirring of the waters with suspicion was inevitable. More especially -was this the case because during the course of the literary revival -there rose the storm of the great religious revolt of the sixteenth -century, and because the practical paganism which had resulted from -the movement in Italy was perhaps not unnaturally supposed by the -timorous to be a necessary consequence of a return to the study of -the classics of Greece and Rome. The opposition sprung generally from -a misunderstanding, and “not so much from any hostility to Greek -itself as from an indifference to any learning.” This Sir Thomas More -expressly declares when writing to urge the Oxford authorities to -repress a band of giddy people who, calling themselves Trojans, made -it their duty to fight against the _Grecians_. It is true also that -the pulpit was at times brought into requisition to decry “not only -Greek and Latin studies,” but liberal education of any kind.[47] But, -so far as England is concerned, this opposition to the revival of -letters, even on the score of the danger likely to come either to faith -or morals, was, when all is said, slight, and through the influence of -More, Fisher, and the king himself, easily subdued.[48] The main fact, -moreover, cannot be gainsaid, namely, that the chief ecclesiastics of -the day, Wolsey, Warham, Fisher, Tunstall, Langton, Stokesley, Fox, -Selling, Grocyn, Whitford, Linacre, Colet, Pace, William Latimer, and -Thomas Lupset,[49] to name only the most distinguished, were not -only ardent humanists, but thorough and practical churchmen. Of the -laymen, whether foreigners or Englishmen, whose names are associated -with the renaissance of letters in this country, such as, for example, -the distinguished scholar Ludovico Vives, the two Lillys, Sir Thomas -More, John Clement,[50] and other members of More’s family, there can -be no shadow of doubt about their dispositions towards the ancient -ecclesiastical régime. A Venetian traveller, in 1500, thus records what -he had noticed as to the attitude of ecclesiastics generally towards -learning:--“Few, excepting the clergy, are addicted to the study of -letters, and this is the reason why any one who has any learning, -though he may be a layman, is called a _clerk_. And yet they have great -advantages for study, there being two general universities in the -kingdom, Oxford and Cambridge, in which there are many colleges founded -for the maintenance of poor scholars. And your magnificence (the Doge -of Venice) lodged at one named Magdalen, in the University of Oxford, -of which, as the founders having been prelates, so the scholars also -are ecclesiastics.” - -It was in England, and almost entirely among the ecclesiastics of -England, that Erasmus found his chief support. “This England of yours,” -he writes to Colet in 1498, “this England, dear to me on many accounts, -is above all most beloved because it abounds in what to me is the best -of all, men deeply learned in letters.”[51] Nor did he change his -opinion on a closer acquaintance. In 1517, to Richard Pace he wrote -from Louvain in regret at leaving a country which he had come to regard -as the best hope of the literary revival:--“Oh, how truly happy is your -land of England, the seat and stronghold of the best studies and the -highest virtue! I congratulate you, my friend Pace, on having such a -king, and I congratulate the king whose country is rendered illustrious -by so many brilliant men of ability. On both scores I congratulate this -England of yours, for though fortunate for many other reasons, on this -score no other land can compete with it.”[52] - -When William Latimer said in 1518 that Bishop Fisher wished to study -Greek for Biblical purposes, and that he thought of trying to get a -master from Italy, Erasmus, whilst applauding the bishop’s intention -as likely to encourage younger men to take up the study, told Latimer -that such men were not easy to find in Italy. “If I may openly say my -mind,” he adds, “if I had Linacre, or Tunstall, for a master (for of -yourself I say nothing), I would not wish for any Italian.”[53] - -Not to go into more lengthy details, there is, it must be admitted, -abundant evidence to show that there was in the religious houses of -England, no less than in the universities, a stirring of the waters, -and a readiness to profit by the real advance made in education and -scholarship. The name of Prior Charnock, the friend of Colet and -Erasmus at Oxford, is known to all. But there are others with even -greater claim than he to be considered leaders in the movement. -There is distinct evidence of scholarship at Reading, at Ramsey, at -Glastonbury, and elsewhere.[54] The last-named house, Glastonbury, -was ruled by Abbot Bere, to whose criticism Erasmus desired to submit -his translation of the New Testament from the Greek. Bere himself had -passed some time, with distinction, in Italy, had been sent on more -than one embassy by the king, and had been chosen by Henry VII. to -invest the Duke of Urbino with the Order of the Garter, and to make -the required oration on that occasion.[55] He had given other evidence -also of the way the new spirit that had been enkindled in Italy had -entered into his soul. It was through Abbot Bere’s generosity that -Richard Pace, whom Erasmus calls “the half of his soul,” was enabled -to pursue his studies in Italy.[56] Glastonbury was apparently a soil -well prepared for the seed-time, for even in the days of Abbot Bere’s -predecessor, Abbot John Selwood, there is evidence to show that the -religious were not altogether out of touch with the movement. The -abbot himself presented one of the monks with a copy of John Free’s -translation from the Greek of _Synesius de laude Calvitii_. The volume -is written by an Italian scribe, and contains in the introductory -matter a letter to the translator from Omnibonus Leonicensis, dated -at Vicenza in 1461, as well as a preface or letter by Free to John -Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester.[57] - -At St. Augustine’s, Canterbury, also, we find, even amid the ruins -of its desolation, traces of the same spirit which pervaded the -neighbouring cloister of Christchurch. The antiquary Twyne declares -that he had been intimately acquainted with the last abbot, whom he -knew to have been deeply interested in the literary movement. He -describes his friend as often manifesting in conversation his interest -in and knowledge of the ancient classical authors. He says that this -monk was the personal friend of Ludovico Vives, and that he sent over -the sea one of his subjects at St. Augustine’s, John Digon, whom he -subsequently made prior of his monastery, to the schools of Louvain, in -order that he might profit by the teaching of that celebrated Spanish -humanist.[58] - -Beyond the foregoing particular instances of the real mind of English -ecclesiastics towards the revival of studies, the official registers -of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge furnish us with evidence -of the general attitude of approval adopted by the Church authorities -in England. Unfortunately, gaps in the Register of Graduates at Oxford -for the second half of the fifteenth century do not enable us to gauge -the full extent of the revival, but there is sufficient evidence that -the renaissance had taken place. In the eleven years, from A.D. 1449 -to A.D. 1459, for which the entries exist, the average number of -degrees taken by all students was 91.5. From 1506, when the registers -begin again, to 1535, when the commencement of operations against the -monastic houses seemed to indicate the advent of grave religious -changes, the average number of yearly degrees granted was 127. In 1506 -the number had risen to 216, and only in very few of the subsequent -years had the average fallen below 100. From 108 in 1535, the number of -graduates fell in 1536 to only 44; and the average for the subsequent -years of the reign of Henry VIII. was less than 57. From 1548 to 1553, -that is, during the reign of Edward VI., the average of graduates was -barely 33, but it rose again, whilst Mary was on the throne, to 70. - -If the same test be applied to the religious Orders, it will be found -that they likewise equally profited by the new spirit. During the -period from 1449 to 1459 the Benedictine Order had a yearly average -of 4 graduates at Oxford, the other religious bodies taken together -having 5. In the second period of 1506-1539 the Benedictine graduates -number 200, and (allowing for gaps in the register) the Order had thus -a yearly average of 6.75, the average of the other Orders during the -same period being 5.2. If, moreover, the number of the religious who -took degrees be compared with that of the secular students, it will be -found that the former seem to have more than held their own. During -the time from 1449 to 1459 the members of the regular Orders were to -the rest in the proportion of 1 to 9.5. In the period of the thirty -years immediately preceding the general dissolution it was as 1 to 9. -Interest in learning, too, was apparently kept up among the religious -Orders to the last. Even with their cloisters falling on all sides -round about them, in the last hour of their corporate existence, that -is in the year 1538-39, some 14 Benedictines took their degrees at -Oxford. - -In regard to Cambridge, a few notes taken from the interesting preface -to a recent “History of Gonville and Caius College” will suffice to -show that the monks did not neglect the advantages offered to them -in the sister university.[59] Gonville Hall, as the college was then -called, was by the statutes of Bishop Bateman closely connected with -the Benedictine Cathedral Priory of Norwich. Between 1500 and 1523 the -early bursars’ accounts give a list of “pensioners,” and these “largely -consisted of monks sent hither from their respective monasteries for -the purpose of study.” These “pensioners paid for their rooms and their -commons, and shared their meals with the fellows. All the greater -monasteries in East Anglia, such as the Benedictine Priory at Norwich, -the magnificent foundation of Bury, and (as a large landowner in -Norfolk) the Cluniac House at Lewes, seem generally to have had several -of their younger members in training at our college. To these must be -added the Augustinian Priory of Westacre, which was mainly frequented -(as Dr. Jessopp tells us) by the sons of the Norfolk gentry.”[60] - -The Visitations of the Norwich Diocese (1492-1532), edited by Dr. -Jessopp for the Camden Society, contain many references to the monastic -students at the university. In one house, for example, in 1520, the -numbers are short, because “there were three in the university.” In -another case, when a religious house was too poor to provide the -necessary money to support a student during his college career, it -was found by friends of the monastery, until a few years later, when, -on the funds improving, the house was able to meet the expenses. This -same house, the Priory of Butley, “had a special arrangement with the -authorities of Gonville Hall for the reservation of a suitable room -for their young monks.” One object of sending members of a monastery -to undergo the training of a university course “was to qualify -for teaching the novices at their own house”; for after they have -graduated and returned to their monastery, we not infrequently find -them described as “_idoneus preceptor pro confratribus_”; “_idoneus -pro noviciis et junioribus_,” &c. Moreover, the possession of a degree -on the part of a religious, as an examination of the lists will show, -often in after life meant some position of trust or high office in the -monastery of the graduate. - -Nor was the training then received any light matter of form; it meant -long years of study, and the possession of a degree was, too, a public -testimony to a certain proficiency in the science of teaching. Thus, -for example, George Mace, a canon of Westacre, who became a pensioner -at Gonville Hall in 1508, studied arts for five years and canon law for -four years at the university, and continued the latter study for eight -years in his monastery.[61] William Hadley, a religious of the same -house, had spent eleven years in the study of arts and theology;[62] -and Richard Brygott, who took his B.D. in 1520, and who subsequently -became Prior of Westacre, had studied two years and a half in his -monastery, two years in Paris, and seven in Cambridge.[63] - -“With the Reformation, of course, all this came to an end,” writes -Mr. Venn, and we can well understand that this sudden stoppage of -what, in the aggregate, was a considerable source of supply to the -university, was seriously felt. On the old system, as we have seen, the -promising students were selected by their monasteries, and supported in -college at the expense of the house. As the author of the interesting -account of Durham Priory says: “If the master did see that any of -them (the novices) were apt to learning, and did apply his book and -had a pregnant wit withal, then the master did let the prior have -intelligence. Then, straightway after he was sent to Oxford to school, -and there did learn to study divinity.”[64] - -Moreover, it should be remembered that it was by means of the -assistance received from the monastic and conventual houses that a very -large number of students were enabled to receive their education at the -universities at all. The episcopal registers testify to this useful -function of the old religious corporations. The serious diminution in -the number of candidates for ordination, and the no less lamentable -depletion of the national universities, consequent upon the dissolution -of these bodies, attest what had previously been done by them for the -education of the pastoral clergy. This may be admitted without any -implied approval of the monastic system as it existed. The fact will -be patent to all who will examine into the available evidence; and the -serious diminution in the number of clergy must be taken as part of the -price paid by the nation for securing the triumph of the Reformation -principles. The state of Oxford during, say, the reign of Edward VI., -is attested by the degree lists. In the year 1547 and in the year 1550 -no student at all graduated, and the historian of the university has -described the lamentable state to which the schools were reduced. If -additional testimony be needed, it may be found in a sermon of Roger -Edgworth, preached in Queen Mary’s reign. Speaking of works of piety -and pity, much needed in those days, the speaker advocates charity to -the poor students at the two national universities. “Very pity,” he -says, “moves me to exhort you to mercy and pity on the poor students -in the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. They were never so few in -number, and yet those that are left are ready to run abroad into the -world and give up their study for very need. Iniquity is so abundant -that charity is all cold. A man would have pity did he but hear the -lamentable complaints that I heard lately when amongst them. Would to -God I were able to relieve them. This much I am sure of: in my opinion -you cannot bestow your charity better.” He then goes on to instance -his own case as an example of what used to be done in Catholic times -to help the student in his education. “My parents sent me to school in -my youth, and my good lord William Smith, sometime Bishop of Lincoln, -(was) my bringer up and ‘exhibitour,’ first at Banbury in the Grammar -School with Master John Stanbridge, and then at Oxford till I was a -Master of Arts and able to help myself.” - -He pleads earnestly that some of his hearers may be inspired to help -the students in the distress to which they are now reduced, and so help -to restore learning to the position from which it had fallen in late -years.[65] - -Of the lamentable decay of scholarship as such, the inevitable, and -perhaps necessary, consequence of the religious controversies which -occupied men’s minds and thoughts to the exclusion of all else, it is, -of course, not the place here to dwell upon. All that it is necessary -to do is to point out that the admitted decay and decline argues a -previous period of greater life and vigour. Even as early as 1545 the -Cambridge scholars petitioned the king for an extension of privileges, -as they feared the total destruction of learning. To endeavour to save -Oxford, it was ordered that every clergyman, having a benefice to the -amount of £100, should out of his living find at least one scholar at -the university. Bishop Latimer, in Edward VI.’s reign, looked back -with regret to past times “when they helped the scholars,” for since -then “almost no man helpeth to maintain them.” “Truly,” he said, “it -is a pitiful thing to see the schools so neglected. Schools are not -maintained, scholars have not exhibitions.… Very few there be that help -poor scholars.… It would pity a man’s heart to hear what I hear of the -state of Cambridge; what it is in Oxford I cannot tell.… I think there -be at this day (A.D. 1550) ten thousand students less than there were -within these twenty years.” In the year 1550, it will be remembered, -there was apparently no degree of any kind taken at the university of -Oxford. - -This fact appears patent on this page of history; that from the time -when minds began to exercise themselves on the thorny subjects which -grew up round about the “great divorce” question, the bright promises -of the revival of learning, which Erasmus had seen in England, faded -away. Greek, it has been said, may conveniently stand for learning -generally; and Greek studies apparently disappeared in the religious -turmoils which distracted England. With Mary’s accession, some attempt -was made to recover lost ground, or at least re-enkindle the lamp of -learning. When Sir Thomas Pope refounded Durham College at Oxford -under the name of Trinity, he was urged by Cardinal Pole, to whom he -submitted the draft of his statutes, “to order Greek to be more taught -there than I have provided. This purpose,” he says, “I like well, but -I fear the times will not bear it now. I remember when I was a young -scholar at Eton, the Greek tongue was growing apace, the study of which -is now of late much decayed.”[66] - -The wholesale destruction of the great libraries in England is an -indirect indication of the new spirit which rose at this time, and -which helped for a time to put an end to the renaissance of letters. -When Mary came to the throne, and quieter times made the scheme -possible, it was seriously proposed to do something to preserve the -remnant of ancient and learned works that might be left in England -after the wholesale destruction of the preceding years. The celebrated -Dr. Dee drew up a supplication to the queen, stating that “among the -many most lamentable displeasures that have of late happened in this -realm, through the subverting of religious houses and the dissolution -of other assemblies of godly and learned men, it has been, and among -all learned students shall for ever be, judged not the least calamity, -the spoil and destruction of so many and so notable libraries wherein -lay the treasure of all antiquity, and the everlasting seeds of -continual excellency in learning within this realm. But although in -those days many a precious jewel and ancient monument did utterly -perish (as at Canterbury that wonderful work of the sage and eloquent -Cicero, _De Republica_, and in many other places the like), yet if -in time great and speedy diligence be showed, the remnants of such -incredible a store, as well of writers theological as in all the other -liberal sciences, might yet be saved and recovered, which now in your -Grace’s realm being dispersed and scattered, yea, and many of them in -unlearned men’s hands, still even yet (in this time of reconciliation) -daily perish; and perchance are purposely by some envious person -enclosed in walls or buried in the ground.” - -The scheme which accompanied this letter in 1556 was for the formation -of a national library, into which were to be gathered the original -manuscripts still left in England, which could be purchased or -otherwise obtained, or at least a copy of such as were in private -hands, and which the owners would not part with. Beyond this, John -Dee proposes that copies of the best manuscripts in Europe should be -secured. He mentions specially the libraries of the Vatican, and of St. -Mark’s, Venice, those at Florence, Bologna, and Vienna, and offers to -go himself, if his expenses are paid, to secure the transcripts.[67] -The plan, however, came to nothing, and with Mary’s death, the nation -was once more occupied in the religious controversies, which again -interfered with any real advance in scholarship. - -One other point must not be overlooked. Before the rise of the -religious dissensions caused England to isolate herself from the rest -of the Catholic world, English students were to be found studying in -considerable numbers at the great centres of learning in Europe. An -immediate result of the change was to put a stop to this, which had -served to keep the country in touch with the best work being done -on the Continent, and the result of which had been seen in the able -English scholars produced by that means on the eve of the Reformation. - -Taking a broad survey of the whole movement for the revival of letters -in England, it would appear then certain that whether we regard its -origin, or the forces which contributed to support it, or the men -chiefly concerned in it, it must be confessed that to the Church and -churchmen the country was indebted for the successes achieved. What put -a stop to the humanist movement here, as it certainly did in Germany, -was the rise of the religious difficulties, which, under the name of -the “New Learning,” was opposed by those most conspicuous for their -championship of true learning, scholarship, and education. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE TWO JURISDICTIONS - - -The Reformation found men still occupied with questions as to the -limits of ecclesiastical and lay jurisdiction, which had troubled -their minds at various periods during the previous centuries. It is -impossible to read very deeply into the literature of the period -without seeing that, while on the one hand, all the fundamental -principles of the spiritual jurisdiction of the Church were fully -and freely recognised by all; on the other, a number of questions, -mainly in the broad borderland of debatable ground between the two, -were constantly being discussed, and not infrequently gave cause for -disagreements and misunderstandings. As in the history of earlier -times, so in the sixteenth century ecclesiastics clung, perhaps -not unnaturally, to what they regarded as their strict rights, and -looked on resistance to encroachment as a sacred duty. Laymen on -the other part, even when their absolute loyalty to the Church was -undoubted, were found in the ranks of those who claimed for the State -power to decide in matters not strictly pertaining to the spiritual -prerogatives, but which chiefly by custom had come to be regarded as -belonging to ecclesiastical domain. It is the more important that -attention should be directed in a special manner to these questions, -inasmuch as it will be found, speaking broadly, that the ultimate -success or ill-success of the strictly doctrinal changes raised in -the sixteenth century was determined by the issue of the discussions -raised on the question of mixed jurisdiction. This may not seem very -philosophical, but in the event it is proved to be roughly correct. The -reason is not very far to seek. In great measure at least, questions -of money and property, even of national interest and prosperity, -were intimately concerned in the matter in dispute. They touched the -people’s pocket; and whether rightly or wrongly, those who found the -money wished to have a say in its disposal. One thing cannot fail to -strike an inquirer into the literature of this period: the very small -number of people who were enthusiasts in the doctrinal matters with -which the more ardent reformers occupied themselves. - -We are not here concerned with another and more delicate question as -to the papal prerogatives exercised in England. For clearness’ sake -in estimating the forces which made for change on the eve of the -Reformation, this subject must be examined in connection with the whole -attitude of England to Rome and the Pope in the sixteenth century. It -must, consequently, be understood that in trying here to illustrate the -attitude of men’s minds at this period to these important and practical -questions, a further point as to the claims of the Roman Pontiffs -in regard to some or all of them has yet to be considered. Even in -examining the questions at issue between the authorities--lay and -ecclesiastical--in the country, the present purpose is to record rather -than to criticise, to set forth the attitude of mind as it appears in -the literature of the period, rather than to weigh the reasons and -judge between the contending parties. - -The lawyer, Christopher Saint-German, is a contemporary writer to -whom we naturally turn for information upon the points at issue. He, -of course, takes the layman’s side as to the right of the State to -interfere in all, or in most, questions which arise as to the dues -of clerics, and other temporalities, such as tithes, &c., which are -attached to the spiritual functions of the clergy. Moreover, beyond -claiming the right for the State so to interfere in the regulation of -all temporalities and kindred matters, Saint-German also held that in -some things in which custom had given sanction to the then practice, -it would be for the good of the State that it should do so. In his -_Dyalogue between a Student of Law and a Doctor of Divinity_,[68] his -views are put clearly; whilst the Doctor states, though somewhat lamely -perhaps, the position of the clergy. - -To take the example of “mortuaries,” upon which the Parliament had -already legislated to the dismay of some of the ecclesiastical party, -who, as it appears, on the plea that the law was unjust and beyond -the competence of the State authority, tried in various ways to evade -the provisions of the Act, which was intended to relieve the laity of -exactions that, as they very generally believed, had grown into an -abuse. Christopher Saint-German holds that Parliament was quite within -its rights. The State could, and on occasion should, legislate as to -dues payable to the clergy, and settle whether ecclesiastics, who claim -articles in kind, or sums of money by prescriptive right, ought in -fact to be allowed them. There is, he admits, a difficulty; he does not -think that it would be competent for the State to prohibit specific -gifts to God’s service, or to say that only “so many tapers shall be -used at a funeral,” or that only so many priests may be bidden to the -burial, or that only so much may be given in alms. In matters of this -kind he does not think the State has jurisdiction to interfere. “But -it has,” he says, “the plain right to make a law, that there shall not -be given above so many black gowns, or that there shall be no herald -of arms” present, unless it is the funeral of one “of such a degree,” -or that “no black cloths should be hung in the streets from the house -where the person died, to the church, as is used in many cities and -good towns, or the prohibition of such other things as are but worldly -pomps, and are rather consolations to the friends that are alive, than -any relief to the departed soul.” In these and such like things, he -says: “I think the Parliament has authority to pass laws, so as to -protect the executors of wills, and relieve them from the necessity of -spending so much of the inheritance of the deceased man’s heirs.”[69] - -In like manner the lawyer holds that in all strictly temporal matters, -whatever privilege and exemption the State may allow and has allowed -the clergy, it still possesses the radical power to legislate where -and when it sees fit. It does not in fact by lapse of time lose the -ordinary authority it possesses over all subjects of the realm in -these matters. Thus, for example, he holds that the State can and -should prohibit all lands in mortmain passing to the Church; and that, -should it appear to be a matter of public policy, Parliament might -prohibit and indeed break the appropriations of benefices already -made to monasteries, cathedrals, and colleges, and order that they -should return to their original purposes. “The advowson,” he says, -“is a temporal inheritance, and as such is under the Parliament to -order it as it sees cause.” This principle, he points out, had been -practically admitted when the Parliament, in the fourth year of Henry -IV., cancelled all appropriations of vicarages which had been made from -the beginning of Richard II.’s reign. It is indeed “good,” he adds, -“that the authority of the Parliament in this should be known, and that -it should cause them to observe such statutes as are already made, and -to distribute some part of the fruits (of the benefices) among poor -parishioners according to the statute of the twentieth year of King -Richard II.” - -In the same way, and for similar reasons, Saint-German claims that the -State has full power to determine questions of “Sanctuary,” and to -legislate as to “benefit of clergy.” Such matters were, he contends, -only customs of the realm, and in no sense any point of purely -spiritual prerogative. Like every other custom of the realm, these -were subject to revision by the supreme secular authority. “The Pope -by himself,” he adds, “cannot make any Sanctuary in this realm.” This -question of “Sanctuary” rights was continually causing difficulties -between the lay and the ecclesiastical authorities. To the legal mind -the custom was certainly dangerous to the well-being of the State, -and made the administration of justice unnecessarily complicated, -especially when ecclesiastics pleaded their privileges, and strongly -resisted any attempt on the part of legal officials to ignore them. -Cases were by no means infrequent in the courts in the reigns of Henry -VII. and Henry VIII., which caused more or less friction between the -upholders of the two views.[70] To illustrate the state of conflict on -this, in itself a very minor matter, a trial which took place in London -in the year 1519 is here given in some detail. One John Savage in that -year was charged with murder. At the time of his arrest he was living -in St. John Street (Clerkenwell), and when brought to trial pleaded -that he had been wrongfully arrested in a place of Sanctuary belonging -to the Priory of St. John of Jerusalem. To justify his contention and -obtain his liberty, he called on the Prior of the Knights of St. John -to maintain his rights and privileges, and vindicate this claim of -Sanctuary. The prior appeared and produced the grant of Pope Urban -III., made by Bull dated in 1213, which had been ratified by King Henry -III. He also cited cases in which he alleged that in the reign of the -late King Henry VII. felons, who had been seized within the precincts, -had been restored to Sanctuary, and he therefore argued that this case -was an infringement of the rights of his priory. - -Savage also declared that he was in St. John Street within the -precincts of the priory “pur amendement de son vie, durant son vie,” -when on the 8th of June an officer, William Rotte, and others took -him by force out of the place, and carried him away to the Tower. He -consequently claimed to be restored to the Sanctuary from which he had -been abducted. Chief-Justice Fineux, before whom the prisoner had been -brought, asked him whether he wished to “jeopardy” his case upon his -plea of Sanctuary, and, upon consultation, John Savage replied in the -negative, saying that he wished rather to throw himself upon the king’s -mercy. Fineux on this, said: “In this you are wise, for the privileges -of St. John’s will not aid you in the form in which you have pleaded -it. In reality it has no greater privilege of Sanctuary than every -parish church in the kingdom; that is, it has privileges for forty days -and no more, and in this it partakes merely of the common law of the -kingdom, and has no special privilege beyond this.” - -Further, Fineux pointed out that even had St. John’s possessed the -Sanctuary the prior claimed, this right did not extend to the fields, -&c., but in the opinion of all the judges of the land, to which all the -bishops and clergy had assented, the bounds of any Sanctuary were the -church, cloister, and cemetery. Most certain it was that the _ambitus_ -did not extend to gardens, barns, and stables, and in his (Fineux’s) -opinion, not even to the pantry and buttery. He quotes cases in support -of his opinion. In one instance a certain William Spencer claimed -the privilege of Sanctuary when in an orchard of the Grey Friars at -Coventry. In spite of the assertion of the guardian that the Pope had -extended the privilege to the whole enclosure, of which the place the -friars had to recreate themselves in was certainly a portion, the plea -was disallowed, and William Spencer was hanged. - -In regard to the privilege of the forty days, Fineux declared that it -was so obviously against the common good and in derogation of justice, -that in his opinion it should not be suffered to continue, and he -quoted cases where it had been set aside. In several cases where -Papal privileges had been asserted, the judges had held “quant à les -Bulles du pape, le pape sans le Roy ne ad power de fayre sanctuarie.” -In other words, Fineux rejected the plea of the murderer Savage. -But the case did not stop here, both the prior and Savage, as we -should say, “appealed,” and the matter was heard in the presence of -Cardinal Wolsey, Fineux, Brudnell, and several members of the inner -Star Chamber. Dr. Potkyn, counsel for the Prior of St. John, pleaded -the “knowledge and allowance of the king” to prove the privilege. No -decision was arrived at, and a further sitting of the Star Chamber was -held on November 11, 1520, in the presence of the king, the cardinal, -all the judges, and divers bishops and canonists, as well as the -Prior of St. John and the Abbot of Westminster. Before the assembly -many examples of difficulties in the past were adduced by the judges. -These difficulties they declared increased so as to endanger the peace -and law of the country, by reason of the Sanctuaries of Westminster -and St. John’s. To effect a remedy was the chief reason of the royal -presence at the meeting. After long discussion it was declared that as -St. John’s Sanctuary was made, as it had been shown, by Papal Bull, -it was consequently void even if confirmed by the king’s patent, and -hence that the priory had no privilege at all except the common one of -forty days. The judges and all the canonists were quite clear that the -Pope’s right to make a Sanctuary had never been allowed in England, and -that every such privilege must come from the king. On the other hand, -the bishops present and all the clergy were equally satisfied that the -general forty days’ privilege belonged by right to every parish church. -The Abbot of Westminster then proved by the production of charters and -other indubitable evidence that the Sanctuary of Westminster had its -origin in the grants of various kings, and had only been blessed by the -Pope. - -Fineux pointed out that Sanctuary grants had always been made to -monasteries and churches “to the laud and honour of God,” and that it -was not certainly likely to redound to God’s honour when men could -commit murder and felony, and trust to get into the safe precinct of -some Sanctuary; neither did he believe that to have bad houses in -Sanctuaries, and such like abuses, was either to the praise of God or -for the welfare of the kingdom. Further, that as regards Westminster, -the abbot had abused his privileges as to the _ambitus_ or precincts -which in law must be understood in the restricted sense. The cardinal -admitted that there had been abuses, and a Commission was proposed to -determine the reasonable bounds. Bishop Voysey, of Exeter, suggested -that if a Sanctuary man committed murder or felony outside, with -the hope of getting back again, the privilege of shelter should be -forfeited; but the majority were against this restriction. On the -whole, however, it was determined that for the good of the State the -uses of these Sanctuaries should be curtailed, and that none should be -allowed in law but such as could show a grant of the privilege from the -crown.[71] - -In the opinion of many, of whom Saint-German was the spokesman, to go -to another matter, Parliament might assign “all the trees and grass in -churchyards either to the parson, to the vicar, or to the parish,” as -it thought fit; for although the ground was hallowed, the proceeds, -such as “trees and grass, are mere temporals, and as such must be -regulated by the power of the State.” - -Moreover, according to the same view, whilst it would be outside the -province of the secular law to determine the cut of a priest’s cassock -or the shape of his tonsure, it could clearly determine that no priest -should wear cloth made out of the country, or costing above a certain -price; and it might fix the amount of salary to be paid to a chaplain -or curate.[72] - -There were circumstances, too, under which, in the opinion of -Saint-German, Parliament not only could interfere to legislate about -clerical duties, but would be bound to do so. At the time when he was -writing, the eve of the Reformation, many things seemed to point to -this necessity for State interference. There were signs of widespread -religious differences in the world. “Why then,” he asks, “may not -the king and his Parliament, as well to strengthen the faith and give -health to the souls of many of his subjects, as to save his realm -being noted for heresy, seek for the reason of the division now in -the realm by diversity of sects and opinions?… They shall have great -reward before God that set their hands to prevent the great danger -to many souls of men as well spiritual as temporal if this division -continue long. And as far as I have heard, all the articles that are -misliked (are aimed) either against the worldly honour, worldly power, -or worldly riches of spiritual men. To express these articles I hold it -not expedient, and indeed if what some have reported be true, many of -them be so far against the truth that no Christian man would hold them -to be true, and they that do so do it for some other consideration.”[73] - -As an example, our author takes the question of Purgatory, which he -believes is attacked because men want to free themselves from the -money offerings which belief in the doctrine necessitates. And indeed, -“if it were ordained by law,” he continues, “that every curate at the -death of any of their parishioners should be bound to say publicly for -their souls _Placebo_, _Dirige_ and mass, without taking anything for -(the service): and further that at a certain time, to be assigned by -Parliament, as say, once a month, or as it shall be thought convenient, -they shall do the same and pray for the souls of their parishioners and -for all Christian souls and for the king and all the realm: and also -that religious houses do in like manner, I fancy in a short time there -would be few to say there was no purgatory.”[74] - -In some matters Saint-German considered that the State might reasonably -interfere in regard to the religious life. The State, he thinks, would -have no right whatever to prohibit religious vows altogether; but it -would be competent for the secular authority to lay down conditions to -prevent abuses and generally protect society where such protection was -needed. “It would be good,” for example, he writes, “to make a law that -no religious house should receive any child below a certain age into -the habit, and that he should not be moved from the place into which he -had been received without the knowledge and assent of friends.” This -would not be to prohibit religious life, which would not be a just law, -but only the laying down of conditions. In the fourth year of Henry IV. -the four Orders of Friars had such a law made for them; “when the four -Provincials of the said four Orders were sworn by laying their hands -upon their breasts in open Parliament to observe the said statute.”[75] - -In the same way the State may, Saint-German thinks, lay down the -conditions for matrimony, so long as there was no “interference with -the sacrament of marriage.” Also, “as I suppose,” he says, “the -Parliament may well enact that every man that makes profit of any -offerings (coming) by recourse of pilgrims shall be bound under a -certain penalty not only to set up certain tables to instruct the -people how they shall worship the saints, but also cause certain -sermons to be yearly preached there to instruct the people, so that -through ignorance they do not rather displease than please the -saints.”[76] - -The State “may also prohibit any miracle being noised abroad on such -slight evidence as they have been in some places in times past; and -that they shall not be set up as miracles, under a certain penalty, nor -reported as miracles by any one till they have been proved such in such -a manner as shall be appointed by Parliament. And it is not unlikely -that many persons grudge more at the abuse of pilgrimages than at the -pilgrimages themselves.” Parliament, he points out, has from time to -time vindicated its right to act in matters such as these. For example: -“To the strengthening of the faith it has enacted that no man shall -presume to preach without leave of his diocesan except certain persons -exempted in the statute” (2 Henry IV.).[77] - -There are, Saint-German notes, many cases where it is by no means -clear whether they are strictly belonging to spiritual jurisdiction -or not. Could the law, for example, prohibit a bishop from ordaining -any candidate to Holy Orders who was not sufficiently learned? Could -the law which exempted priests from serving on any inquest or jury -be abrogated? These, and such like matters in the borderland, are -debatable questions; but Saint-German makes it clear that, according -to his view, it is a mistake for clerics to claim more exemptions from -the common law than is absolutely necessary. That there must be every -protection for their purely spiritual functions, he fully and cordially -admits; but when all this is allowed, in his opinion, it is a grave -mistake for the clergy, even from their point of view, to try and -stretch their immunities and exemptions beyond the required limit. The -less the clergy were made a “caste,” and the more they fell in with the -nation at large, the better it would be for all parties in the State. - -On the question of tithe, Saint-German took the laymen’s view. To the -ecclesiastics of the period tithes were spiritual matters, and all -questions arising out of them should be settled by archbishop or bishop -in spiritual courts. The lawyer, on the other hand, maintained that -though given to secure spiritual services, in themselves tithes were -temporal, and therefore should fall under the administration of the -State. Who, for example, was to determine what was payable on new land, -and to whom; say on land recovered from the sea? In the first place, -according to the lawyer, it should be the owner of the soil who should -apportion the payment, and failing him, the Parliament, and not the -spirituality. - -In another work[78] Saint-German puts his view more clearly. A tithe -that comes irregularly, say once in ten or twenty years, cannot be -considered necessary for the support of the clergy. That people were -bound to contribute to the just and reasonable maintenance of those -who serve the altar did not admit of doubt, but, he holds, a question -arises as to the justice of the amount in individual cases. “Though -the people be bound by the law of reason, and also the law of God, -to find their spiritual ministers a reasonable portion of goods to -live upon, yet that they shall pay precisely the tenth part to their -spiritual ministers in the name of that portion is but the law of man.” -If the tithe did not at any time suffice, “the people would be bound -to give more” in order to fulfil their Christian duty. Some authority -must determine, and in his opinion as a lawyer and a layman, the only -authority competent to deal with the matter, so far as the payment of -money was concerned, was the State; and consequently Parliament might, -and at times ought, to legislate about the payment of tithes.[79] - -In a second _Treatise concerning the power of the clergy and the laws -of the realm_, Saint-German returns to this subject of the relation -between the two jurisdictions. This book, however, was published -after Henry VIII. had received his parliamentary title of Supreme -Head of the Church, and by that time the author’s views had naturally -become somewhat more advanced on the side of State power. In regard -to the king’s “Headship,” he declares that in reality it is nothing -new, but if properly understood would be recognised as implied in -the kingly power, and as having nothing whatever to do with the -spiritual prerogatives as such. He has been speaking of the writ, _de -excommunicato capiendo_, by which the State had been accustomed to -seize the person of one who had been excommunicated by the Church for -the purpose of punishment by the secular arm, and he argues that if the -Parliament were to abrogate the law, such a change would in no sense be -a derogation of the rights of the Church. Put briefly, the principle -upon which he bases this opinion is one which was made to apply to many -other cases besides this special one. It is this: that for a spiritual -offence no one ought in justice to be made to suffer in the temporal -order.[80] Whilst insisting on this, moreover, the lawyer maintained -that there were many things which had come to be regarded as spiritual, -which were, in reality, temporal, and that it would be better that -these should be altogether transferred to the secular arm of the State. -Such, for example, were, in his opinion, the proving and administration -of wills, the citation and consideration of cases of slander and libel -and other matters of this nature. “And there is no doubt,” he says, -“but that the Parliament may with a cause take that power from them -(_i.e._ the clergy), and might likewise have done so before it was -recognised by the Parliament and the clergy that the king was Head of -the Church of England; for he was so before the recognition was made, -just as all other Christian princes are in their own realms over all -their subjects, spiritual and temporal.”[81] - -Moreover, as regards this, “it lieth in princes to appease all -variances and unquietness that shall arise among the people, by -whatsoever occasion it rise, spiritual or temporal. And the king’s -grace has now no new authority in that he is confessed by the clergy -and authorised by Parliament to be the Head of the Church of England. -For it is only a declaration of his first power committed by God to -kingly and regal authority and no new grant. Further, that, for all the -power that he has as Head of the Church, he has yet no authority to -minister any sacraments, nor to do any other spiritual thing whereof -our Lord gave power to His apostles and disciples only.… And there is -no doubt that such power as the clergy have by the immediate grant -of Christ, neither the king nor his Parliament can take from them, -although they may order the manner of the doing.”[82] - -The question whether for grave offences the clergy could be tried by -the king’s judges was one which had long raised bitter feeling on the -one side and the other. In 1512, Parliament had done something to -vindicate the power of the secular arm by passing a law practically -confining the immunity of the clergy to those in sacred orders. It -ordained “that all persons hereafter committing murder or felony, -&c., should not be admitted to the benefit of clergy.” This act led to -a great dispute in the next Parliament, held in 1515. The clergy as -a body resented the statute as an infringement upon their rights and -privileges, and the Abbot of Winchcombe preached at St. Paul’s Cross to -this effect, declaring that the Lords Spiritual who had assented to the -measure had incurred ecclesiastical censures. He argued that all clerks -were in Holy Orders, and that they were consequently not amenable to -the secular tribunals. - -The king, at the request of many of the Temporal Lords and several -of the Commons, ordered the case to be argued at a meeting held at -Blackfriars at which the judges were present. At this debate, Dr. -Henry Standish, a Friar Minor, defended the action of Parliament, and -maintained that it was a matter of public policy that clerks guilty of -such offences should be tried by the ordinary process of law. In reply -to the assertion that there was a decree or canon forbidding it, and -that all Christians were bound by the canons under pain of mortal sin, -Standish said: “God forbid; for there is a decree that all bishops -should be resident at their cathedrals upon every festival day, and yet -we see the greater part of the English bishops practise the contrary.” -Moreover, he maintained that the right of exemption of clerks from -secular jurisdiction had never been allowed in England. The bishops -were unanimously against the position of Standish, and there can be -little doubt that they had put forward the Abbot of Winchcombe to be -their spokesman at St. Paul’s Cross. Later on, Standish was charged -before Convocation with holding tenets derogatory to the privileges -and jurisdiction of ecclesiastics. He claimed the protection of the -king, and the Temporal Lords and judges urged the king at all costs to -maintain his right of royal jurisdiction in the matters at issue. - -Again a meeting of judges, certain members of Parliament, and the -king’s council, spiritual and temporal, were assembled to deliberate on -the matter at the Blackfriars. Dr. Standish was supposed to have said -that the lesser Orders were not Holy, and that the exemption of clerks -was not _de jure divino_. These opinions he practically admitted, -saying with regard to the first that there was a great difference -between the greater Orders and the lesser; and in regard to the second, -“that the summoning of clerks before temporal judges implied no -repugnance to the positive law of God.” He further partially admitted -saying that “the study of canon law ought to be laid aside, because -being but ministerial to divinity it taught people to despise that -nobler science.” The judges decided generally against the contention -of the clergy, and they, with other lords, met the king at Baynard’s -Castle to tender their advice on the matter. Here Wolsey, kneeling -before the king, declared “that he believed none of the clergy had any -intention to disoblige the prerogative royal, that for his part he owed -all his promotion to his Highness’ favour, and therefore would never -assent to anything that should lessen the rights of the Crown.” But -“that this business of conventing clerks before temporal judges was, -in the opinion of the clergy, directly contrary to the laws of God and -the liberties of Holy Church, and that both himself and the rest of the -prelates were bound by their oath to maintain this exemption. For this -reason he entreated the king, in the name of the clergy, to refer the -matter for decision to the Pope.” Archbishop Warham added that in old -times some of the fathers of the Church had opposed the matter so far -as to suffer martyrdom in the quarrel. On the other hand, Judge Fineux -pointed out that spiritual judges had no right by any statute to judge -any clerk for felony, and for this reason many churchmen had admitted -the competence of the secular courts for this purpose. - -The king finally replied on the whole case. “By the Providence of God,” -he said, “we are King of England, in which realm our predecessors -have never owned a superior, and I would have you (the clergy) take -notice that we are resolved to maintain the rights of our crown and -temporal jurisdiction in as ample manner as any of our progenitors.” -In conclusion, the Archbishop of Canterbury petitioned the king in the -name of the clergy for the matter to rest till such time as they could -lay the case before the See of Rome for advice, promising that if the -non-exemption of clerks was declared not to be against the law of God, -they would willingly conform to the usage of the country. - -On this whole question, Saint-German maintained that the clergy had -been granted exemption from the civil law not as a right but as a -favour. There was, in his opinion, nothing whatever in the nature of -the clerical state to justify any claim to absolute exemption, nor was -it, he contended, against the law of God that the clergy should be -tried for felony and other crimes by civil judges. In all such things -they, like the rest of his people, were subject to their prince, -who, because he was a Christian, did not, for that reason, have any -diminished authority over his subjects. “Christ,” he remarks, “sent His -apostles,” as appears from the said words, “to be teachers in spiritual -matters, and not to be like princes, or to take from princes their -power.”[83] Some, indeed, he says, argue that since the coming of our -Lord “Christian princes have derived their temporal power from the -spiritual power,” established by Him in right of His full and complete -dominion over the world. But Saint-German not only holds that such a -claim has no foundation in itself, but that all manner of texts of Holy -Scripture which are adduced in proof of the contention are plainly -twisted from their true meaning by the spiritual authority. And many, -he says, talk as if the clergy were the Church, and the Church the -clergy, whereas they are only one portion, perhaps the most important, -and possessed of greater and special functions; but they were not the -whole, and were, indeed, endowed with these prerogatives for the use -and benefit of the lay portion of Christ’s Church. - -Contrary to what might have been supposed, the difficulty between -the clergy and laity about the exemption of clerics from all lay -jurisdiction did not apparently reach any very acute stage. Sir Thomas -More says that “as for the conventing of priests before secular -judges, the truth is that at one time the occasion of a sermon made the -matter come to a discussion before the king’s Highness. But neither at -any time since, nor many years before, I never heard that there was any -difficulty about it, and, moreover, that matter ceased long before any -word sprang up about this great general division.”[84] - -One question, theoretical indeed, but sufficiently practical to -indicate the current of thought and feeling prevalent at the time, was -as to the multiplication of holidays on which no work was allowed to be -done by ecclesiastical law. Saint-German, in common with other laymen -of the period, maintained that the king, or Parliament, as representing -the supreme will of the State, could refuse to allow the spiritual -authority to make new holidays. About the Sunday he is doubtful, though -he inclines to the opinion that so long as there was one day in the -week set apart for rest and prayer, the actual day could be determined -by the State. The Sunday, he says, is partly by the law of God, partly -by the law of man. “But as for the other holidays, these are but -ceremonies, introduced by the devotion of the people through the good -example of their bishops and priests.” And “if the multitude of the -holidays is thought hurtful to the commonwealth, and tending rather to -increase vice than virtue, or to give occasion of pride rather than -meekness, as peradventure the synod ales and particular holidays have -done in some places, then Parliament has good authority to reform -it. But as for the holidays that are kept in honour of Our Lady, the -Apostles and other ancient Saints, these seem right necessary and -expedient.”[85] - -In his work, _Salem and Bizance_, which appeared in 1533 as a reply -to Sir Thomas More’s _Apology_, Saint-German takes up the same ground -as in his more strictly legal tracts. He holds that a distinction -between the purely spiritual functions of the clergy and their position -as individuals in the State ought to be allowed and recognised. The -attitude of ecclesiastics generally to such a view was, perhaps not -unnaturally, one of opposition, and where the State had already stepped -in and legislated, as for instance in the case of “mortuaries,” their -action in trying to evade the prescription of the law, Saint-German -declared was doing much harm, in emphasising a needless conflict -between the ecclesiastical and secular jurisdiction. “As long,” he -writes, “as spiritual rulers will pretend that their authority is so -high and so immediately derived from God that people are bound to -obey them and to accept all that they do and teach without argument, -resistance, or murmuring against them” there will be discord and -difficulty.[86] - -Christopher Saint-German’s position was not by any means that of one -who would attack the clergy all along the line, and deprive them of -all power and influence, like so many of the foreign sectaries of the -time. He admitted, and indeed insisted on, the fact that they had -received great and undoubted powers by their high vocation, having -their spiritual jurisdiction immediately from God. Their temporalities, -however, he maintained they received from the secular power, and were -protected by the State in their possession. He fully agreed “that such -things as the whole clergy of Christendom teach and order in spiritual -things, and which of long time have been by long custom and usage in -the whole body of Christendom ratified, agreed, and confirmed, by the -spirituality and temporality, ought to be received with reverence.”[87] - -To this part of Saint-German’s book Sir Thomas More takes exception -in his _Apology_. The former had said, that as long as the spiritual -rulers will pretend that their authority is so high and so immediately -derived from God that the people are bound to obey them and accept -all that they do and teach “there would certainly be divisions and -dissensions.” “If he mean,” replies More, “that they speak thus of all -their whole authority that they may now lawfully do and say at this -time: I answer that they neither pretend, nor never did, that all their -authority is given them immediately by God. They have authority now -to do divers things by the grant of kings and princes, just as many -temporal men also have, and by such grants they have such rights in -such things as temporal men have in theirs.”[88] - -Some authority and power they certainly have from God, he says, “For -the greatest and highest and most excellent authority that they -have, either God has Himself given it to them, or else they are very -presumptuous and usurp many things far above all reason. For I have -never read, or at least I do not remember to have read, that any king -granted them the authority that now not only prelates but other poor -plain priests daily take on them in ministering the sacraments and -consecrating the Blessed Body of Christ.”[89] - -Another popular book of the period, published by Berthelet, just on the -eve of the Reformation, is the anonymous _Dialogue between a Knight -and a Clerk concerning the power spiritual and temporal_. We are not -here concerned with the author’s views as to the power of the Popes, -but only with what he states about the attitude of men’s minds to the -difficulties consequent upon the confusion of the two jurisdictions. -_Miles_ (the Knight), who, of course, took the part of the upholder of -the secular power, clearly distinguished, like Saint-German, between -directly spiritual prerogatives and the authority and position assured -to the clergy by the State. “God forbid,” he says, “that I should deny -the right of Holy Church to know and correct men for their sins. Not -to hold this would be to deny the sacrament of Penance and Confession -altogether.”[90] Moreover, like Saint-German, this author, in the -person of _Miles_, insists that the temporality “are bound to find the -spirituality that worship and serve God all that is necessary for them. -For so do all nations.”[91] But the direction of such temporalities -must, he contends, be in the hands of the State. “What,” asks the -conservative cleric, in the person of _Clericus_, “What have princes -and kings to do with the governance of our temporalities? Let them take -their own and order their own, and suffer us to be in peace with ours.” - -“Sir,” replies _Miles_, “the princes must in any wise have to do -therewith. I pray you, ought not men above all things to mind the -health of our souls? Ought not we to see the wills of our forefathers -fulfilled? Falleth it not to you to pray for our forefathers that -are passed out of this life? And did not our fathers give you our -temporalities right plentifully, to the intent that you should pray -for them and spend it all to the honour of God? And ye do nothing so; -but ye spend your temporalities in sinful deeds and vanities, which -temporalities ye should spend in works of charity, and in alms-deeds to -the poor and needy. For to this purpose our forefathers gave ‘great and -huge dominions.’ You have received them ‘to the intent to have clothes -and food … and all overplus besides these you ought to spend on deeds -of mercy and pity, as on poor people that are in need, and on such as -are sick and diseased and oppressed with misery.’”[92] - -Further, _Miles_ hints that there are many at that time who were -casting hungry eyes upon the riches of the Church, and that were it -not for the protecting power of the State, the clergy would soon find -that they were in worse plight than they think themselves to be. And, -in answer to the complaints of _Clericus_ that ecclesiastics are taxed -too hardly for money to be spent on soldiers, ships, and engines of -war, he tells him that there is no reason in the nature of things why -ecclesiastical property should not bear the burden of national works -as well as every other kind of wealth. “I pray you hold your noise,” -he exclaims somewhat rudely; “stop your grudging and grumbling, and -listen patiently. Look at your many neighbours round about you in the -land, who, wanting the wherewith to support life, gape still after your -goods. If the king’s power failed, what rest should you have? Would not -the gentlemen such as be needy, and such as have spent their substance -prodigally, when they have consumed their own, turn to yours, and waste -and destroy all you have? Therefore, the king’s strength is to you -instead of a strong wall, and you wot well that the king’s peace is -your peace, and the king’s safeguard is your safeguard.”[93] - -The foregoing pages represent some of the practical difficulties -which were being experienced on the eve of the Reformation between -the ecclesiastical and lay portion of the State in the question of -jurisdiction. Everything points to the fact that the chief difficulty -was certainly not religious. The ecclesiastical jurisdiction in -matters spiritual was cordially admitted by all but a few fanatics. -What even many churchmen objected to, were the claims for exemption -put forward by ecclesiastics in the name of religion, which they -felt to be a stretching of spiritual prerogatives into the domain of -the temporal sovereign. History has shown that most of these claims -have in practice been disallowed, not only without detriment to the -spiritual work of the Church, but in some instances at least it was the -frank recognition of the State rights, which, under Providence, saved -nations from the general defection which seemed to threaten the old -ecclesiastical system. Most of the difficulties which were, as we have -seen, experienced and debated in England were unfelt in Spain, where -the sovereign from the first made his position as to the temporalities -of the Church clearly understood by all. In Naples, in like manner, the -right of State patronage, however objectionable to the ecclesiastical -legists, was strictly maintained. In France, the danger which at one -time threatened an overthrow of religion similar to that which had -fallen on Germany, and which at the time was looming dark over England, -was averted by the celebrated Concordat between Leo X. and Francis -I. By this settlement of outstanding difficulties between the two -jurisdictions, all rights of election to ecclesiastical dignities -was swept away with the full and express sanction of the Pope. The -nomination of all bishops and other dignitaries was vested in the king, -subject, of course, to Papal confirmation. All appeals were, in the -first place, to be carried in ordinary cases to immediate superiors -acting in the fixed tribunals of the country, and then only to the Holy -See. The Papal power of appointment to benefices was by this agreement -strictly limited; and the policy of the document was generally directed -to securing the most important ecclesiastical positions, including even -parish churches in towns, to educated men. It is to this settlement of -outstanding difficulties, the constant causes of friction--a settlement -of difficulties which must be regarded as economic and administrative -rather than as religious--that so good a judge as M. Hanotaux, the -statesman and historian, attributes nothing less than the maintenance -of the old religion in France. In his opinion, this Concordat did in -fact remove, to a great extent, the genuine grievances which had long -been felt by the people at large, which elsewhere the Reformers of the -sixteenth century skilfully seized upon, as likely to afford them the -most plausible means for furthering their schemes of change in matters -strictly religious. - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -ENGLAND AND THE POPE - - -Nothing is more necessary for one who desires to appreciate the true -meaning of the English Reformation than to understand the attitude of -men’s minds to the Pope and the See of Rome on the eve of the great -change. As in the event, the religious upheaval did, in fact, lead -to a national rejection of the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, -it is not unnatural that those who do not look below the surface -should see in this act the outcome and inevitable consequence of -long-continued irritation at a foreign domination. The renunciation -of Papal jurisdiction, in other words, is taken as sufficient -evidence of national hostility to the Holy See. If this be the true -explanation of the fact, it is obvious that in the literature of the -period immediately preceding the formal renunciation of ecclesiastical -dependence on Rome, evidence more or less abundant will be found of -this feeling of dislike, if not of detestation, for a yoke which we are -told had become unbearable. - -At the outset, it must be confessed that any one who will go to the -literature of the period with the expectation of collecting evidence -of this kind is doomed to disappointment. If we put on one side the -diatribes and scurrilous invectives of advanced reformers, when the -day of the doctrinal Reformation had already dawned, the inquirer in -this field of knowledge can hardly fail to be struck by the absence of -indications of any real hostility to the See of Rome in the period in -question. So far as the works of the age are concerned: so far, too, as -the acts of individuals and even of those who were responsible agents -of the State go, the evidence of an unquestioned acceptance of the -spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope, as Head of the Christian Church, is -simply overwhelming. In their acceptance of this supreme authority the -English were perhaps neither demonstrative nor loudly protesting, but -this in no way derogated from their loyal and unquestioning acceptance -of the supremacy of the Holy See. History shows that up to the very -eve of the rejection of this supremacy the attitude of Englishmen, in -spite of difficulties and misunderstandings, had been persistently one -of respect for the Pope as their spiritual head. Whilst other nations -of Christendom had been in the past centuries engaged in endeavours by -diplomacy, and even by force of arms, to capture the Pope that they -might use him for their own national profit, England, with nothing to -gain, expecting nothing, seeking nothing, had never entered on that -line of policy, but had been content to bow to his authority as to -that of the appointed Head of Christ’s Church on earth. Of this much -there can be no doubt. They did not reason about it, nor sift and sort -the grounds of their acceptance, any more than a child would dream of -searching into, or philosophising upon, the obedience he freely gives -to his parents. - -That there were at times disagreements and quarrels may be admitted -without in the least affecting the real attitude and uninterrupted -spiritual dependence of England on the Holy See. Such disputes were -wholly the outcome of misunderstandings as to matters in the domain -rather of the temporal than of the spiritual, or of points in the broad -debatable land that lies between the two jurisdictions. It is a failure -to understand the distinction which exists between these that has led -many writers to think that in the rejection by Englishmen of claims put -forward at various times by the Roman curia in matters wholly temporal, -or where the temporal became involved in the spiritual, they have a -proof that England never fully acknowledged the spiritual headship of -the See of Rome. - -That the Pope did in fact exercise great powers in England over and -above those in his spiritual prerogative is a matter of history. No one -has more thoroughly examined this subject than Professor Maitland, and -the summary of his conclusions given in his _History of English Law_ -will serve to correct many misconceptions upon the matter. What he says -may be taken as giving a fairly accurate picture of the relations of -the Christian nations of Christendom to the Holy See from the twelfth -century to the disintegration of the system in the throes of the -Reformation. “It was a wonderful system,” he writes. “The whole of -Western Europe was subject to the jurisdiction of one tribunal of last -resort, the Roman curia. Appeals to it were encouraged by all manner -of means, appeals at almost every stage of almost every proceeding. -But the Pope was far more than the president of a court of appeal. -Very frequently the courts Christian which did justice in England -were courts which were acting under his supervision and carrying out -his written instructions. A very large part, and by far the most -permanently important part, of the ecclesiastical litigation that went -on in this country came before English prelates who were sitting not as -English prelates, not as ‘judges ordinary,’ but as mere delegates of -the Pope, commissioned to hear and determine this or that particular -case. Bracton, indeed, treats the Pope as the ordinary judge of every -Englishman in spiritual things, and the only ordinary judge whose -powers are unlimited.” - -The Pope enjoyed a power of declaring the law to which but very wide -and very vague limits could be set. Each separate church might have its -customs, but there was a _lex communis_, a common law, of the universal -Church. In the view of the canonist, any special rules of the Church of -England have hardly a wider scope, hardly a less dependent place, than -have the customs of Kent or the bye-laws of London in the eye of the -English lawyer.[94] - -We have only to examine the _Regesta_ of the Popes, even up to the dawn -of difficulties in the reign of Henry VIII., to see that the system -as sketched in this passage was in full working order; and it was -herein that chiefly lay the danger even to the spiritual prerogatives -of the Head of the Church. Had the Providence of God destined that -the nations of the world should have become a Christendom in fact--a -theocracy presided over by his Vicar on earth--the system elaborated by -the Roman curia would not have tended doubtless to obscure the real and -essential prerogatives of the spiritual Head of the Christian Church. -As it was by Providence ordained, and as subsequent events have shown, -claims of authority to determine matters more or less of the temporal -order, together with the worldly pomp and show with which the Popes of -the renaissance had surrounded themselves, not only tended to obscure -the higher and supernatural powers which are the enduring heritage -of St. Peter’s successors in the See of Rome; but, however clear the -distinction between the necessary and the accidental prerogatives might -appear to the mind of the trained theologian or the perception of the -saint, to the ordinary man, when the one was called in question the -other was imperilled. And, as a fact, in England popular irritation at -the interference of the spirituality generally in matters not wholly -within the strictly ecclesiastical sphere was, at a given moment, -skilfully turned by the small reforming party into national, if tacit, -acquiescence in the rejection of even the spiritual prerogatives of the -Roman Pontiffs. - -It is necessary to insist upon this matter if the full meaning of the -Reformation movement is to be understood. Here in England, there can -be no doubt, on the one hand, that no nation more fully and freely -bowed to the spiritual supremacy of the Holy See; on the other, that -there was a dislike of interference in matters which they regarded, -rightly or wrongly, as outside the sphere of the Papal prerogative. -The national feeling had grown by leaps and bounds in the early years -of the sixteenth century. But it was not until the ardent spirits -among the doctrinal reformers had succeeded in weakening the hold of -Catholicity in religion on the hearts of the people that this rise of -national feeling entered into the ecclesiastical domain, and the love -of country could be effectually used to turn them against the Pope, -even as Head of the Christian Church. With this distinction clearly -before the mind, it is possible to understand the general attitude of -the English nation to the Pope and his authority on the eve of the -overthrow of his jurisdiction. - -To begin with some evidence of popular teaching as to the Pope’s -position as Head of the Church. It is, of course, evident that in many -works the supremacy of the Holy See is assumed and not positively -stated. This is exactly what we should expect in a matter which was -certainly taken for granted by all. William Bond, a learned priest, and -subsequently a monk of Syon, with Richard Whitford, was the author of -a book called the _Pilgrimage of Perfection_, published by Wynkyn de -Worde in 1531. It is a work, as the author tells us, “very profitable -to all Christian persons to read”; and the third book consists of a -long and careful explanation of the Creed. In the section treating -about the tenth article is to be found a very complete statement of -the teaching of the Christian religion on the Church. After taking -the marks of the Church, the author says: “There may be set no other -foundation for the Church, but only that which is put, namely, Christ -Jesus. It is certain, since it is founded on the Apostles, as our Lord -said to Peter, ‘I have prayed that thy faith fail not.’ And no more it -shall; for (as St. Cyprian says) the Church of Rome was never yet the -root of heresy. This Church Apostolic is so named the Church of Rome, -because St. Peter and St. Paul, who under Christ were heads and princes -of this Church, deposited there the tabernacles of their bodies, which -God willed should be buried there and rest in Rome, and that should be -the chief see in the world; just as commonly in all other places the -chief see of the bishop is where the chief saint and bishop of the see -is buried. By this you may know how Christ is the Head of the Church, -and how our Holy Father the Pope of Rome is Head of the Church. Many, -because they know not this mystery of Holy Scripture, have erred and -fallen to heresies in denying the excellent dignity of our Holy Father -the Pope of Rome.”[95] - -In the same way Roger Edgworth, a preacher in the reign of Henry VIII., -speaking on the text “_Tu vocaberis Cephas_,” says: “And by this the -error and ignorance of certain summalists are confounded, who take -this text as one of their strongest reasons for the supremacy of the -Pope of Rome. In so doing, such summalists would plainly destroy the -text of St. John’s Gospel to serve their purpose, which they have no -need to do, for there are as well texts of Holy Scripture and passages -of ancient writers which abundantly prove the said primacy of the -Pope.”[96] - -When by 1523 the attacks of Luther and his followers on the position -of the Pope had turned men’s minds in England to the question, and -caused them to examine into the grounds of their belief, several books -on the subject appeared in England. One in particular, intended to -be subsidiary to the volume published by the king himself against -Luther, was written by a theologian named Edward Powell, and published -by Pynson in London. In his preface, Powell says that before printing -his work he had submitted it to the most learned authority at Oxford -(_eruditissimo Oxoniensium_). The first part of the book is devoted to -a scientific treatise upon the Pope’s supremacy, with all the proofs -from Scripture and the Fathers set out in detail. “This then,” he -concludes, “is the Catholic Church, which, having the Roman Pontiff, -the successor of Peter, as its head, offers the means of sanctifying -the souls of all its members, and testifies to the truth of all that -is to be taught.” The high priesthood of Peter “is said to be Roman, -not because it cannot be elsewhere, but through a certain congruity -which makes Rome the most fitting place. That is, that where the -centre of the world’s government was, there also should be placed the -high priesthood of Christ. Just as of old the summus Pontifex was in -Jerusalem, the metropolis of the Jewish nation, so now it is in Rome, -the centre of Christian civilisation.”[97] - -We naturally, of course, turn to the works of Sir Thomas More for -evidence of the teaching as to the Pope’s position at this period; and -his testimony is abundant and definite. Thus in the second book of his -_Dyalogue_, written in 1528, arguing that there must be unity in the -Church of Christ, he points out that the effect of Lutheranism has -been to breed diversity of faith and practice. “Though they began so -late,” he writes, “yet there are not only as many sects almost as men, -but also the masters themselves change their minds and their opinions -every day. Bohemia is also in the same case: one faith in the town, -another in the field; one in Prague, another in the next town; and yet -in Prague itself, one faith in one street, another in the next. And yet -all these acknowledge that they cannot have the Sacraments ministered -but by such priests as are made by authority derived and conveyed from -the Pope who is, under Christ, Vicar and head of our Church.”[98] It -is important to note in this passage how the author takes for granted -the Pope’s supreme authority over the Christian Church. To this subject -he returns, and is more explicit in a later chapter of the same book. -The Church, he says, is the “company and congregation of all nations -professing the name of Christ.” This church “has begun with Christ, and -has had Him for its head and St. Peter His Vicar after Him, and the -head under Him; and always since, the successors of him continually. -And it has had His holy faith and His blessed Sacraments and His holy -Scriptures delivered, kept, and conserved therein by God and His Holy -Spirit, and albeit some nations fall away, yet just as no matter how -many boughs whatever fall from the tree, even though more fall than be -left thereon, still there is no doubt which is the very tree, although -each of them were planted again in another place and grew to a greater -than the stock it first came off, in the same way we see and know well -that all the companies and sects of heretics and schismatics, however -great they grow, come out of this Church I speak of; and we know that -the heretics are they that are severed, and the Church the stock that -they all come out of.”[99] Here Sir Thomas More expressly gives -communion with the successors of St. Peter as one of the chief tests of -the true Church. - -Again, in his _Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer_, written in 1532 -when he was Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas More speaks specially about -the absolute necessity of the Church being One and not able to teach -error. There is one known and recognised Church existing throughout -the world, which “is that mystical body be it never so sick.” Of this -mystical body “Christ is the principal head”; and it is no part of his -concern, he says, for the moment to determine “whether the successor -of St. Peter is his vicar-general and head under him, as all Christian -nations have now long taken him.”[100] Later on he classes himself with -“poor popish men,”[101] and in the fifth book he discusses the question -“whether the Pope and his sect” (as Tyndale called them) “is Christ’s -Church or no.” On this matter More is perfectly clear. “I call the -Church of Christ,” he says, “the known Catholic Church of all Christian -nations, neither gone out nor cut off. And although all these nations -do now and have long since recognised and acknowledged the Pope, not as -the bishop of Rome but as the successor of St. Peter, to be their chief -spiritual governor under God and Christ’s Vicar on earth, yet I never -put the Pope as part of the definition of the Church, by defining it -to be the common known congregation of all Christian nations under one -head the Pope.” - -I avoided this definition purposely, he continues, so as not “to -entangle the matter with the two questions at once, for I knew well -that the Church being proved this common known Catholic congregation -of all Christian nations abiding together in one faith, neither fallen -nor cut off; there might, peradventure, be made a second question after -that, whether over all this Catholic Church the Pope must needs be -head and chief governor and chief spiritual shepherd, or whether, if -the unity of the faith was kept among them all, every province might -have its own spiritual chief over itself, without any recourse unto the -Pope.… - -“For the avoiding of all such intricacies, I purposely abstained from -putting the Pope as part of the definition of the Church, as a thing -that was not necessary; for if he be the necessary head, he is included -in the name of the whole body, and whether he be or not is a matter to -be treated and disputed of besides” (p. 615). As to Tyndale’s railing -against the authority of the Pope because there have been “Popes that -have evil played their parts,” he should remember, says More, that -“there have been Popes again right holy men, saints and martyrs too,” -and that, moreover, the personal question of goodness or badness has -nothing to say to the office.[102] - -In like manner, More, when arguing against Friar Barnes, says that -like the Donatists “these heretics call the Catholic Christian people -papists,” and in this they are right, since “Saint Austin called the -successor of Saint Peter the chief head on earth of the whole Catholic -Church, as well as any man does now.” He here plainly states his view -of the supremacy of the See of Rome.[103] He accepted it not only as -an antiquarian fact, but as a thing necessary for the preservation -of the unity of the Faith. Into the further question whether the -office of supreme pastor was established by Christ Himself, or, as -theologians would say, _de jure divino_, or whether it had grown with -the growth and needs of the Church, More did not then enter. The fact -was sufficient for him that the only Christian Church he recognised had -for long ages regarded the Pope as the _Pastor pastorum_, the supreme -spiritual head of the Church of Christ. His own words, almost at the -end of his life, are the best indication of his mature conclusion on -this matter. “I have,” he says, “by the grace of God, been always a -Catholic, never out of communion with the Roman Pontiff; but I have -heard it said at times that the authority of the Roman Pontiff was -certainly lawful and to be respected, but still an authority derived -from human law, and not standing upon a divine prescription. Then, when -I observed that public affairs were so ordered that the sources of the -power of the Roman Pontiff would necessarily be examined, I gave myself -up to a diligent examination of that question for the space of seven -years, and found that the authority of the Roman Pontiff, which you -rashly--I will not use stronger language--have set aside, is not only -lawful to be respected and necessary, but also grounded on the divine -law and prescription. That is my opinion, that is the belief in which, -by the grace of God, I shall die.”[104] - -Looking at More’s position in regard to this question in the light of -all that he has written, it would seem to be certain that he never -for a moment doubted that the Papacy was necessary for the Church. He -accepted this without regard to the reasons of the faith that was in -him, and in this he was not different from the body of Englishmen at -large. When, in 1522, the book by Henry VIII. appeared against Luther, -it drew the attention of Sir Thomas specially to a consideration of the -grounds upon which the supremacy of the Pope was held by Catholics. As -the result of his examination he became so convinced that it was of -divine institution that “my conscience would be in right great peril,” -he says, “if I should follow the other side and deny the primacy to -be provided of God.” Even before examination More evidently held -implicitly the same ideas, since in his Latin book against Luther, -published in 1523, he declared his entire agreement with Bishop Fisher -on the subject. That the latter was fully acquainted with the reasons -which went to prove that the Papacy was of divine institution, and that -he fully accepted it as such, is certain.[105] - -When, with the failure of the divorce proceedings, came the rejection -of Papal supremacy in England, there were plenty of people ready -to take the winning side, urging that the rejection was just, and -not contrary to the true conception of the Christian Church. It is -interesting to note that in all the pulpit tirades against the Pope -and what was called his “usurped supremacy,” there is no suggestion -that this supremacy had not hitherto been fully and freely recognised -by all in the country. On the contrary, the change was regarded as a -happy emancipation from an authority which had been hitherto submitted -to without question or doubt. A sermon preached at St. Paul’s the -Sunday after the execution of the Venerable Bishop Fisher, and a few -days before Sir Thomas More was called to lay down his life for the -same cause, is of interest, as specially making mention of these two -great men, and of the reasons which had forced them to lay down their -lives in the Pope’s quarrel. The preacher was one Simon Matthew, -and his object was to instruct the people in the new theory of the -Christian Church necessary on the rejection of the headship of the -Pope. “The diversity of regions and countries,” he says, “does not -make any diversity of churches, but a unity of faith makes all regions -one Church.” “There was,” he continued, “no necessity to know Peter, -as many have reckoned, in the Bishop of Rome, (teaching) that except -we knew him and his holy college, we could not be of Christ’s Church. -Many have thought it necessary that if a man would be a member of the -Church of Christ, he must belong to the holy church of Rome and take -the Holy Father thereof for the supreme Head and for the Vicar of -Christ, yea for Christ Himself, (since) to be divided from him was even -to be divided from Christ.” This, the preacher informs his audience, is -“damnable teaching,” and that “the Bishop of Rome has no more power by -the laws of God in this realm than any foreign bishop.” - -He then goes on to speak of what was, no doubt, in everybody’s mind at -the time, the condemnation of the two eminent Englishmen for upholding -the ancient teachings as to the Pope’s spiritual headship. “Of late,” -he says, “you have had experience of some, whom neither friends nor -kinsfolk, nor the judgment of both universities, Cambridge and Oxford, -nor the universal consent of all the clergy of this realm, nor the laws -of the Parliament, nor their most natural and loving prince, could by -any gentle ways revoke from their disobedience, but would needs persist -therein, giving pernicious occasion to the multitude to murmur and -grudge at the king’s laws, seeing that they were men of estimation and -would be seen wiser than all the realm and of better conscience than -others, justifying themselves and condemning all the realm besides. -These being condemned and the king’s prisoners, yet did not cease to -conceive ill of our sovereign, refusing his laws, but even in prison -wrote to their mutual comfort in their damnable opinions. I mean -Doctor Fisher and Sir Thomas More, whom I am as sorry to name as any -man here is to hear named: sorry for that they, being sometime men of -worship and honour, men of famous learning and many excellent graces -and so tenderly sometime beloved by their prince, should thus unkindly, -unnaturally, and traitorously use themselves. Our Lord give them grace -to be repentant! Let neither their fame, learning, nor honour move you -loving subjects from your prince; but regard ye the truth.” - -The preacher then goes on to condemn the coarse style of preaching -against the Pope in which some indulged at that time. “I would exhort,” -he says, “such as are of my sort and use preaching, so to temper their -words that they be not noted to speak of stomach and rather to prate -than preach. Nor would I have the defenders of the king’s matters rage -and rail, or scold, as many are thought to do, calling the Bishop of -Rome the ‘harlot of Babylon’ or ‘the beast of Rome,’ with many such -other, as I have heard some say; these be meeter to preach at Paul’s -Wharf than at Paul’s Cross.”[106] - -The care that was taken at this time in sermons to the people to -decry the Pope’s authority, as well as the abuse which was hurled at -his office, is in reality ample proof of the popular belief in his -supremacy, which it was necessary to eradicate from the hearts of -the English people. Few, probably, would have been able to state the -reason for their belief; but that the spiritual headship was fully and -generally accepted as a fact is, in view of the works of the period, -not open to question. Had there been disbelief, or even doubt, as to -the matter, some evidence of this would be forthcoming in the years -that preceded the final overthrow of Papal jurisdiction in England. - -Nor are direct declarations of the faith of the English Church wanting. -To the evidence already adduced, a sermon preached by Bishop Longland -in 1527, before the archbishops and bishops of England in synod at -Westminster, may be added. The discourse is directed against the -errors of Luther and the social evils to which his teaching had led in -Germany. The English bishops, Bishop Longland declares, are determined -to do all in their power to preserve the English Church from this -evil teaching, and he exhorts all to pray that God will not allow the -universal and chief Church--the Roman Church--to be further afflicted, -that He will restore liberty to the most Holy Father and high-priest -now impiously imprisoned, and in a lamentable state; that He Himself -will protect the Church’s freedom threatened by a multitude of evil -men, and through the pious prayers of His people will free it and -restore its most Holy Father. Just as the early Christians prayed when -Peter was in prison, so ought all to pray in these days of affliction. -“Shall we not,” he cries, “mourn for the evil life of the chief Church -(of Christendom)? Shall we not beseech God for the liberation of the -primate and chief ruler of the Church? Let us pray then; let us pray -that through our prayers we may be heard. Let us implore freedom for -our mother, the Catholic Church, and the liberty, so necessary for the -Christian religion, of our chief Father on earth--the Pope.”[107] - -Again, Dr. John Clark, the English ambassador in Rome, when presenting -Henry’s book against Luther to Leo X. in public consistory, said that -the English king had taken up the defence of the Church because in -attacking the Pope the German reformer had tried to subvert the order -established by God Himself. In the _Babylonian Captivity of the Church_ -he had given to the world a book “most pernicious to mankind,” and -before presenting Henry’s reply, he begged to be allowed to protest -“the devotion and veneration of the king towards the Pope and his most -Holy See.” Luther had declared war “not only against your Holiness -but also against your office; against the ecclesiastical hierarchy, -against this See, and against that Rock established by God Himself.” -England, the speaker continued, “has never been behind other nations -in the worship of God and the Christian faith, and in obedience to the -Roman Church.” Hence “no nation” detests more cordially “this monster -(Luther) and the heresies broached by him.” For he has declared war -“not only against your Holiness but against your office; against the -ecclesiastical hierarchy, against this See, that Rock established by -God Himself.”[108] - -Whilst the evidence goes to show the full acceptance by the English -people of the Pope’s spiritual headship of the Church, it is also -true that the system elaborated by the ecclesiastical lawyers in -the later Middle Ages, dealing, as it did, so largely with temporal -matters, property, and the rights attaching thereto, opened the door -to causes of disagreement between Rome and England, and at times open -complaints and criticism of the exercise of Roman authority in England -made themselves heard. This is true of all periods of English history. -Since these disagreements are obviously altogether connected with the -question, not of spirituals, but of temporals, they would not require -any more special notice but for the misunderstandings they have given -rise to in regard to the general attitude of men’s minds to Rome and -Papal authority on the eve of the Reformation. It is easy to find -evidence of this. As early as 1517, a work bearing on this question -appeared in England. It was a translation of several tracts that had -been published abroad on the debated matter of Constantine’s donation -to the Pope, and it was issued from the press of Thomas Godfray in -a well-printed folio. After a translation of the Latin version of a -Greek manuscript of Constantine’s gift, which had been found in the -Papal library by Bartolomeo Pincern, and published by order of Pope -Julius II., there is given in this volume the critical examination of -this gift by Laurence Valla, the opinion of Nicholas of Cusa, written -for the Council of Basle, and that of St. Antoninus, Archbishop of -Florence. The interest of the volume for the present purpose chiefly -consists in the fact of the publication in England at this date of -the views expressed by Laurence Valla. Valla had been a canon of the -Lateran and an eminent scholar, who was employed by Pope Nicholas V. -to translate Thucydides and Herodotus. His outspoken words got him -into difficulties with the Roman curia, and obliged him to retire to -Naples, where he died in 1457. The tract was edited with a preface -by the leader of the reform party in Germany, Ulrich von Hutten. In -this introduction von Hutten says that by the publication of Pincern’s -translation of the supposed donation of Constantine Julius II. had -“provoked and stirred up men to war and battle,” and further, he -blames the Pontiff because he would not permit Valla’s work against -the genuineness of the gift to be published. With the accession of Leo -X. von Hutten looked, he declares, for better days, since “by striking -as it were a cymbal of peace the Pope has raised up the hearts and -minds of all Christian people.” Before this time the truth could not be -spoken. Popes looked “to pluck the riches and goods of all men to their -own selves,” with the result that “on the other side they take away -from themselves all that belongs to the succession of St. Peter.” - -Valla, of course, condemns the supposed donation of Constantine to the -Pope as spurious, and declares against the temporal claims the See of -Rome had founded upon it. He strongly objects to the “temporal as well -as the spiritual sword” being in the hands of the successors of St. -Peter. “They say,” he writes, “that the city of Rome is theirs, that -the kingdom of Naples is their own property: that all Italy, France, -and Spain, Germany, England, and all the west part of the world belongs -to them. For all these nations and countries (they say) are contained -in the instrument and writ of the donation or grant.” - -The whole tract is an attack upon the temporal sovereignty of the head -of the Christian Church, and it was indeed a bold thing for Ulrich von -Hutten to publish it and dedicate it to Pope Leo X. For the present -purpose it is chiefly important to find all this set out in an English -dress, whilst so far and for a long while after, the English people -were loyal and true to the spiritual headship of the Pope, and were -second to no other nation in their attachment to him. At that time -recent events, including the wars of Julius II., must certainly have -caused men to reflect upon the temporal aspect of the Papacy; and -hearts more loyal to the successor of St. Peter than was that of Von -Hutten would probably have joined fervently in the concluding words -of his preface as it appeared in English. “Would to God I might (for -there is nothing I do long for more) once see it brought to pass that -the Pope were only the Vicar of Christ and not also the Vicar of the -Emperor, and that this horrible saying may no longer be heard: ‘the -Church fighteth and warreth against the Perugians, the Church fighteth -against the people of Bologna.’ It is not the Church that fights and -wars against Christian men; it is the Pope that does so. The Church -fights against wicked spirits in the regions of the air. Then shall -the Pope be called, and in very deed be, a Holy Father, the Father of -all men, the Father of the Church. Then shall he not raise and stir up -wars and battles among Christian men, but he shall allay and stop the -wars which have been stirred up by others, by his apostolic censure and -papal majesty.”[109] - -Evidence of what, above, has been called the probable searching of -men’s minds as to the action of the Popes in temporal matters, may -be seen in a book called a _Dyalogue between a knight and a clerk, -concerning the power spiritual and temporal_.[110] In reply to the -complaint of the clerk that in the evil days in which their lot had -fallen “the statutes and ordinances of bishops of Rome and the decrees -of holy fathers” were disregarded, the knight exposes a layman’s view -of the matter. “Whether they ordain,” he says, “or have ordained in -times past of the temporality, may well be law to you, but not to us. -No man has power to ordain statutes of things over which he has no -lordship, as the king of France may ordain no statute (binding) on the -emperor nor the emperor on the king of England. And just as princes of -this world may ordain no statutes for your spirituality over which they -have no power; no more may you ordain statutes of their temporalities -over which you have neither power nor authority. Therefore, whatever -you ordain about temporal things, over which you have received no power -from God, is vain (and void). And therefore but lately, I laughed well -fast, when I heard that Boniface VIII. had made a new statute that -he himself should be above all secular lords, princes, kings, and -emperors, and above all kingdoms, and make laws about all things: and -that he only needed to write, for all things shall be his when he has -so written: and thus all things will be yours. If he wishes to have my -castle, my town, my field, my money, or any other such thing he needed, -nothing but to will it, and write it, and make a decree, and wot that -it be done, (for) to all such things he has a right.” - -The clerk does not, however, at once give up the position. You mean, -he says in substance, that in your opinion the Pope has no power over -your property and goods. “Though we should prove this by our law and -by written decrees, you account them for nought. For you hold that -Peter had no lordship or power over temporals, but by such law written. -But if you will be a true Christian man and of right belief, you will -not deny that Christ is the lord of all things. To Him it is said in -the Psalter book: ‘Ask of me, and I will give you nations for thine -heritage, and all the world about for thy possession’ (Ps. ii.). These -are God’s words, and no one doubts that He can ordain for the whole -earth.” - -Nobody denies God’s lordship over the earth, replied the knight, “but -if be proved by Holy Writ that the Pope is lord of all temporalities, -then kings and princes must needs be subject to the Pope in temporals -as in spirituals.” So they are, in effect, answered the clerk. Peter -was made “Christ’s full Vicar,” and as such he can do what his lord -can, “especially when he is Vicar with full power, without any -withdrawing of power, and he thus can direct all Christian nations in -temporal matters.” But, said the knight, “Christ’s life plainly shows -that He made no claim whatever to temporal power. Also in Peter’s -commission He gave him not the keys of the kingdom of the earth, but -the keys of the kingdom of heaven. It is also evident that the bishops -of the Hebrews were subjects of the kings, and kings deposed bishops; -but,” he adds, fearing to go too far, “God forbid that they should -do so now.” Then he goes on to quote St. Paul in the Epistle to the -Hebrews to prove that St. Peter was Christ’s Vicar only in “the godly -kingdom of souls, and that though some temporal things may be managed -by bishops, yet nevertheless it is plain and evident that bishops -should not be occupied in the government of the might and lordship of -the world.” And indeed, he urges, “Christ neither made St. Peter a -knight nor a crowned king, but ordained him a priest and bishop.” If -the contention that “the Pope is the Vicar of God in temporal matter -be correct,” then of necessity you must also grant that “the Pope may -take from you and from us all the goods that you and we have, and give -them all to whichever of his nephews or cousins he wills and give no -reason why: and also that he may take away from princes and kings -principalities and kingdoms, at his own will, and give them where he -likes.”[111] - -This statement by the layman of the advanced clerical view is somewhat -bald, and is probably intentionally exaggerated; but that it could -be published even as a caricature of the position taken up by some -ecclesiastics, shows that at this time some went very far indeed -in their claims. It is all the more remarkable that the argument is -seriously put forward in a tract, the author of which is evidently a -Catholic at heart, and one who fully admits the supreme jurisdiction -of the Pope in all matters spiritual. Of course, when the rejection -of Papal jurisdiction became imminent, there were found many who by -sermons and books endeavoured to eradicate the old teaching from -the people’s hearts, and then it was that what was called, “the -pretensions” of the successors of St. Peter in matters temporal were -held up to serve as a convenient means of striking at the spiritual -prerogatives. As a sample, a small book named a _Mustre of scismatyke -bysshops of Rome_ may be taken. It was printed in 1534, and its title -is sufficient to indicate its tone. The author, one John Roberts, rakes -together a good many unsavoury tales about the lives of individual -Popes, and in particular he translates the life of Gregory VII. to -enforce his moral. In his preface he says, “There is a fond, foolish, -fantasy raging in many men’s heads nowadays, and it is this: the Popes, -say they, cannot err. This fantastical blindness was never taught by -any man of literature, but by some peckish pedler or clouting collier: -it is so gross in itself.” And I “warn, advise, beseech, and adjure all -my well-beloved countrymen in England that men do not permit themselves -to be blinded with affection, with hypocrisy, or with superstition. -What have we got from Rome but pulling, polling, picking, robbing, -stealing, oppression, blood-shedding, and tyranny daily exercised upon -us by him and his.”[112] - -Again, as another example of how the mind of the people was stirred -up, we may take a few sentences from _A Worke entytled of the olde -God and the new_. This tract is one of the most scurrilous of the -German productions of the period. It was published in English by -Myles Coverdale, and is on the list of books prohibited by the king -in 1534. After a tirade against the Pope, whom he delights in calling -“anti-Christ,” the author declares that the Popes are the cause of many -of the evils from which people were suffering at that time. In old -days, he says, the Bishop of Rome was nothing more “than a pastor or -herdsman,” and adds: “Now he who has been at Rome in the time of Pope -Alexander VI. or of Pope Julius II., he need not read many histories. I -put it to his judgment whether any of the Pagans or of the Turks ever -did lead such a life as did these.”[113] - -The same temper of mind appears in the preface of a book called _The -Defence of Peace_, translated into English by William Marshall and -printed in 1535. The work itself was written by Marsilius of Padua -about 1323, but the preface is dated 1522. The whole tone is distinctly -anti-clerical, but the main line of attack is developed from the -side of the temporalities possessed by churchmen. Even churchmen, he -says, look mainly to the increase of their worldly goods. “Riches -give honour, riches give benefices, riches give power and authority, -riches cause men to be regarded and greatly esteemed.” Especially is -the author of the preface severe upon the temporal position which -the Pope claims as inalienably united with his office as head of the -Church. Benedict XII., he says, acted in many places as if he were all -powerful, appointing rulers and officers in cities within the emperor’s -dominions, saying, “that all power and rule and empire was his own, for -as much as whosoever is the successor of Peter on earth is the only -Vicar or deputy of Jesus Christ the King of Heaven.”[114] - -In the body of the book itself the same views are expressed. The -authority of the primacy is said to be “not immediately from God, but -by the will and mind of man, just as other offices of a commonwealth -are,” and that the real meaning and extent of the claims put forward by -the Pope can be seen easily. They are temporal, not spiritual. “This -is the meaning of this title among the Bishops of Rome, that as Christ -had the fulness of power and jurisdiction over all kings, princes, -commonwealth, companies, or fellowships, and all singular persons, so -in like manner they who call themselves the Vicars of Christ and Peter, -have also the same fulness of enactive jurisdiction, determined by -no law of man,” and thus it is that “the Bishops of Rome, with their -desire for dominion, have been the cause of discords and wars.”[115] - -Lancelot Ridley, in his _Exposition of the Epistle of Jude_, published -in 1538 after the breach with Rome, takes the same line. The Pope has -no right to have “exempted himself” and “other spiritual men from the -obedience to the civil rulers and powers.” Some, indeed, he says, “set -up the usurped power of the Bishop of Rome above kings, princes, and -emperors, and that by the ordinance of God, as if God and His Holy -Scripture did give to the Bishop of Rome a secular power above kings, -princes, and emperors here in this world. It is evident by Scripture -that the Bishop of Rome has no other power but at the pleasure of -princes, than in the ministration of the Word of God in preaching God’s -Word purely and sincerely, to reprove by it evil men, and to do such -things as become a preacher, a bishop, a minister of God’s Word to do. -Other power Scripture does not attribute to the Bishop of Rome, nor -suffer him to use. Scripture wills him to be a bishop, and to do the -office of a bishop, and not to play the prince, the king, the emperor, -the lord, and so forth.”[116] It is important to note in this passage -that the writer was a reformer, and that he was expressing his views -after the jurisdiction of the Holy See had been rejected by the king -and his advisers. The ground of the rejection, according to him--or -at any rate the reason which it was desired to emphasise before the -public--would appear to be the temporal authority which the Popes had -been exercising. - -In the same year, 1538, Richard Morysine published a translation of -a letter addressed by John Sturmius, the Lutheran, to the cardinals -appointed by Pope Paul III. to consider what could be done to stem the -evils which threatened the Church. As the work of this Papal commission -was then directly put before the English people, some account of it -is almost necessary. The commission consisted of four cardinals, two -archbishops, one bishop, the abbot of San Giorgio, Venice, and the -master of the Sacred Palace, and its report was supposed to have been -drafted by Cardinal Caraffa, afterwards Pope Paul IV. The document -thanks God who has inspired the Pope “to put forth his hand to support -the ruins of the tottering and almost fallen Church of Christ, and to -raise it again to its pristine height.” As a beginning, the Holy Father -has commanded them to lay bare to him “those most grave abuses, that is -diseases, by which the Church of God, and this Roman curia especially, -is afflicted,” and which has brought about the state of ruin now so -evident. The initial cause of all has been, they declare, that the -Popes have surrounded themselves with people who only told them what -they thought would be pleasant to them, and who had not the honesty -and loyalty to speak the truth. This adulation had deceived the Roman -Pontiffs about many things. “To get the truth to their ears was always -most difficult. Teachers sprung up who were ready to declare that the -Pope was the master of all benefices, and as master might by right sell -them as his own.” As a consequence, it was taught that the Pope could -not be guilty of simony, and that the will of the Pope was the highest -law, and could override all law. “From this source, Holy Father,” they -continue, “as from the Trojan horse, so many abuses and most grievous -diseases have grown up in the Church of God.” Even pagans, they say, -scoff at the state of the Christian Church as it is at present, and -they, the commissioners, beg the Pope not to delay in immediately -taking in hand the correction of the manifest abuses which afflict and -disgrace the Church of Christ. “Begin the cure,” they say, “whence -sprung the disease. Follow the teaching of the Apostle St. Paul: ‘be a -dispenser, not a lord.’” - -They then proceed to note the abuses which to them are most apparent, -and to suggest remedies. We are not concerned with these further -than to point out that, as a preliminary, they state that the true -principle of government is, that what is the law must be kept, and that -dispensations should be granted only on the most urgent causes, since -nothing brings government to such bad repute as the continual exercise -of the power of dispensation. Further, they note that it is certainly -not lawful for the Vicar of Christ to make any profit (_lucrum_) by the -dispensations he is obliged to give. - -Sturmius, in his preface, says he had hopes of better things, now -that there was a Pope ready to listen. “It is a rare thing, and much -more than man could hope for, that there should come a Bishop of Rome -who would require his prelates upon their oath to open the truth, to -show abuses, and to seek remedies for them.” He is pleased to think -that these four cardinals, Sadolet, Paul Caraffa, Contarini, and -Reginald Pole had allowed fully and frankly that a great portion of -the difficulty had come from the unfortunate attitude of the Popes -in regard to worldly affairs. “You acknowledge,” he says, “that no -lordship is committed to the Bishop of Rome, but rather a certain cure -by which he may rule things in the church according to good order. If -you admit this to be true and will entirely grant us this, a great part -of our (_i.e._ Lutheran) controversy is taken away; granting this also, -that we did not dissent from you without great and just causes.” The -three points the cardinals claimed for the Pope, it may be noted, were: -(1) that he was to be Bishop of Rome; (2) that he was to be universal -Bishop; and (3) that he should be allowed temporal sovereignty over -certain cities in Italy.[117] Again we find the same view put before -the English people in this translation: the chief objection to the -admission of Papal prerogatives was the “lordship” which he claimed -over and above the spiritual powers he exercised as successor of St. -Peter. On this point we find preachers and writers of the period -insisting most clearly and definitely. Some, of course, attack the -spiritual jurisdiction directly, but most commonly such attacks are -flavoured and served up for general consumption by a supply of abuse -of the temporal assumptions and the worldly show of the Popes. This -appealed to the popular mind, and to the growing sense of national aims -and objects, and the real issue of the spiritual headship was obscured -by the plea of national sentiment and safeguards. - -To take one more example: Bishop Tunstall, on Palm Sunday, 1539, -preached before the king and court. His object was to defend the -rejection of the Papal supremacy and jurisdiction. He declaimed against -the notion that the Popes were to be considered as free from subjection -to worldly powers, maintaining that in this they were like all other -men. “The Popes,” he says, “exalt their seat above the stars of God, -and ascend above the clouds, and will be like to God Almighty.… The -Bishop of Rome offers his feet to be kissed, shod with his shoes on. -This I saw myself, being present thirty-four years ago, when Julius, -the Bishop of Rome, stood on his feet and one of his chamberlains held -up his skirt because it stood not, as he thought, with his dignity -that he should do it himself, that his shoes might appear, whilst a -nobleman of great age prostrated himself upon the ground and kissed his -shoes.”[118] - -To us, to-day, much that was written and spoken at this time will -appear, like many of the above passages, foolish and exaggerated; but -the language served its purpose, and contributed more than anything -else to lower the Popes in the eyes of the people, and to justify -in their minds the overthrow of the ecclesiastical system which had -postulated the Pope as the universal Father of the Christian Church. -Each Sunday, in every parish church throughout the country, they had -been invited in the bidding prayer, as their fathers had been for -generations, to remember their duty of praying for their common Father, -the Pope. When the Pope’s authority was finally rejected by the English -king and his advisers, it was necessary to justify this serious breach -with the past religious practice, and the works of the period prove -beyond doubt that this was done in the popular mind by turning men’s -thoughts to the temporal aspect of the Papacy, and making them think -that it was for the national profit and honour that this foreign yoke -should be cast off. Whilst this is clear, it is also equally clear -in the works of the time that the purely religious aspect of the -question was as far as possible relegated to a secondary place in the -discussions. This was perhaps not unnatural, as the duty of defending -the rejection of the Papal supremacy can hardly have been very tasteful -to those who were forced by the strong arm of the State to justify it -before the people. As late as 1540 we are told by a contemporary writer -that the spirituality under the bishops “favour as much as they dare -the Bishop of Rome’s laws and his ways.”[119] - -Even the actual meaning attached to the formal acknowledgment of -the king’s Headship by the clergy was sufficiently ambiguous to -be understood, by some at least, as aimed merely at the temporal -jurisdiction of the Roman curia. It is true it is usually understood -that Convocation by its act, acknowledging Henry as sole supreme Head -of the Church of England, gave him absolute spiritual jurisdiction. -Whatever may have been the intention of the king in requiring the -acknowledgment from the clergy, it seems absolutely certain that the -ruling powers in the Church considered that by their grant there was no -derogation of the Pope’s spiritual jurisdiction. - -A comparison of the clauses required by Henry with those actually -granted by Convocation makes it evident that any admission that the -crown had any cure of souls, that is, spiritual jurisdiction, was -specifically guarded against. In place of the clause containing the -words, “cure of souls committed to his Majesty,” proposed in the king’s -name to his clergy, they adopted the form, “the nation committed to his -Majesty.” The other royal demands were modified in the same manner, -and it is consequently obvious that all the insertions proposed by the -crown were weighed with the greatest care by skilled ecclesiastical -jurists in some two and thirty sessions, and the changes introduced by -them with the proposals made on behalf of the king throw considerable -light upon the meaning which Convocation intended to give to the -_Supremum Caput_ clause. In one sense, perhaps not the obvious one, -but one that had _de facto_ been recognised during Catholic ages, the -sovereign was the Protector--the _advocatus_--of the Church in his -country, and to him the clergy would look to protect his people from -the introduction of heresy and for maintenance in their temporalities. -So that whilst, on the one hand, the king and Thomas Cromwell may well -have desired the admission of Henry’s authority over “the English -Church, whose Protector and supreme Head he alone is,” to cover even -spiritual jurisdiction, on the other hand, Warham and the English -Bishops evidently did intend it to cover only an admission that the -king had taken all jurisdiction in temporals, hitherto exercised by the -Pope in England, into his own hands. - -Moreover, looking at what was demanded and at what was granted by the -clergy, there is little room for doubt that they at first deliberately -eliminated any acknowledgment of the Royal jurisdiction. This deduction -is turned into a certainty by the subsequent action of Archbishop -Warham. He first protested that the admission was not to be twisted in -“derogation of the Roman Pontiff or the Apostolic See,” and the very -last act of his life was the drafting of an elaborate exposition, to -be delivered in the House of Lords, of the impossibility of the king’s -having spiritual jurisdiction, from the very nature of the constitution -of the Christian Church. Such jurisdiction, he claimed, belonged of -right to the Roman See.[120] - -That the admission wrung from the clergy in fact formed the thin end of -the wedge which finally severed the English Church from the spiritual -jurisdiction of the Holy See is obvious. But the “thin end” was, there -can be hardly any doubt, the temporal aspect of the authority of the -Roman See; and that its insertion at all was possible may be said in -greater measure to be due to the fact that the exercise of jurisdiction -in temporals by a foreign authority had long been a matter which many -Englishmen had strongly resented. - - - - -CHAPTER V - -CLERGY AND LAITY - - -It is very generally asserted that on the eve of the Reformation the -laity in England had no particular love or respect for churchmen. That -there were grave difficulties and disagreements between the two estates -is supposed to be certain. On the face of it, however, the reason and -origin of what is frequently called “the grudge” of laymen against -the ecclesiastics is obviously much misunderstood. Its extent is -exaggerated, its origin put at an earlier date than should be assigned -to it, and the whole meaning of the points at issue interpreted quite -unnecessarily as evidence of a popular and deep-seated disbelief in the -prevailing ecclesiastical system. To understand the temper of people -and priest in those times, it is obviously necessary to examine into -this question in some detail. We are not without abundant material in -the literature of the period for forming a judgment as to the relations -which then existed between the clerical and lay elements in the State. -Fortunately, not only have we assertions on the one side and on the -other as to the questions at issue, but the whole matter was debated at -the time in a series of tracts by two eminent laymen. This discussion -was carried on between an anonymous writer, now recognised as the -lawyer, Christopher Saint-German, and Sir Thomas More himself. - -Christopher Saint-German, who is chiefly known as the writer of -a _Dyalogue in English between a Student of Law and a Doctor of -Divinity_, belonged to the Inner Temple, and was, it has already been -said, a lawyer of considerable repute. About the year 1532, a tract -from his pen called _A treatise concerning the division between the -spiritualtie and temporaltie_ appeared anonymously. To this Sir Thomas -More, who had just resigned the office of Chancellor, replied in his -celebrated _Apology_, published in 1533. Saint-German rejoined in -the same year with _A Dyalogue between two Englishmen, whereof one -is called Salem and the other Bizance_, More immediately retorting -with the _Debellacyon of Salem and Bizance_. In these four treatises -the whole matter of the supposed feud between the clergy and laity is -thrashed out, and the points at issue are clearly stated and discussed. - -Christopher Saint-German’s position is at first somewhat difficult to -understand. By some of his contemporaries he was considered to have -been tainted by “the new teaching” in doctrinal matters, which at the -time he wrote was making some headway in England. He himself, however, -professes to write as a loyal believer in the teaching of the Church, -but takes exception to certain ecclesiastical laws and customs which -in his opinion are no necessary part of the system at all. In these he -thinks he detects the cause of the “division that had risen between the -spiritualtie and the temporaltie.” Sir Thomas More, it may be remarked, -is always careful to treat the writer as if he believed him to be a -sincere Catholic, though mistaken in both the extent of the existing -disaffection to the Church and altogether impracticable in the remedies -he suggested. In some things it must, however, be confessed, granting -Saint-German’s facts, that he shows weighty grounds for some grievance -against the clergy on the part of the laity. - -_The treatise concerning the division_ begins by expressing regret -at the unfortunate state of things which the author pre-supposes as -existing in England when he wrote in 1532, contrasting it with what -he remembered before. “Who may remember the state of this realm now -in these days,” he writes, “without great heaviness and sorrow of -heart? For whereas, in times past, there has reigned charity, meekness, -concord, and peace, there now reigns envy, pride, division, and strife, -and that not only between laymen and churchmen, but also between -religious and religious, and between priests and religious, and what is -more to be lamented also between priests and priests. This division has -been so universal that it has been a great (cause of) disquiet and a -great breach of charity through all the realm.”[121] - -It must be confessed that if this passage is to be taken as it stands, -the division would appear to have been very widely spread at the -time. Sir Thomas More, whilst denying that the difficulty was so -great as Saint-German would make out, admits that in late years the -spirit had grown and was still growing apace. He holds, however, that -Saint-German’s reasons for its existence are not the true ones, and -that his methods will only serve to increase the spirit of division. -As regards the quarrels between religious, at which Saint-German -expresses his indignation, he says: “Except this man means here by -religious folk, either women and children with whose variances the -temporality is not very much disturbed, or else the lay brethren, who -are in some places of religion, and who are neither so many nor so much -esteemed, that ever the temporality was much troubled at their strife, -besides this there is no variance between religious and religious -with which the temporality have been offended.”[122] Again: “Of some -particular variance among divers persons of the clergy I have indeed -heard, as sometimes one against another for his tithes, or a parson -against a religious place for meddling with his parish, or one place -of religion with another upon some such like occasions, or sometime -some one religious (order) have had some question and dispute as to -the antiquity or seniority of its institution, as (for instance) the -Carmelites claim to derive their origin from Elias and Eliseus: and -some question has arisen in the Order of Saint Francis between the -Observants and the Conventuals (for of the third company, that is to -say the Colettines, there are none in this realm). But of all these -matters, as far as I have read or remember, there were never in this -realm either so very great or so many such (variances) all at once, -that it was ever at the time remarked through the realm and spoken of -as a great and notable fault of the whole clergy.” Particular faults -and petty quarrels should not be considered the cause of any great -grudge against the clergy at large. “And as it is not in reason that it -should be, so in fact it is not so, as may be understood from this:” … -“if it were the case, then must this grudge of ours against them have -been a very old thing, whereas it is indeed neither so great as this -man maketh out, nor grown to so great (a pass) as it is, but only even -so late as Tyndale’s books and Frith’s and Friar Barnes’ began to go -abroad.”[123] - -Further, in several places Sir Thomas More emphatically asserts that -the talking against the clergy, the hostile feeling towards them, and -the dissensions said to exist between them and lay folk generally, -were only of very recent origin, and were at worst not very serious. -“I have, within these four or five years (for before I heard little -talk of such things),” he writes, “been present at such discussions in -divers good companies, never talking in earnest thereof (for as yet -I thank God that I never heard such talk), but as a pass-time and in -the way of familiar talking, I have heard at such times some in hand -with prelates and secular priests and religious persons, and talk of -their lives, and their learning, and of their livelihood too, and as -to whether they were such, that it were better to have them or not to -have them. Then touching their livelihood (it was debated), whether it -might be lawfully taken away from them or no; and if it might, whether -it were expedient for it to be taken, and if so for what use.”[124] - -To this Saint-German replies at length in his _Salem and Bizance_, and -says that Sir Thomas More must have known that the difficulties had -their origin long before the rise of the new religious views, and were -not in any sense founded upon the opinions of the modern heretics.[125] -More answers by reasserting his position that “the division is nothing -such as this man makes it, and is grown as great as it is only since -Tyndale’s books and Frith’s and Friar Barnes’ began to be spread -abroad.” And in answer to Saint-German’s suggestion that he should -look a little more closely into the matter, he says: “Indeed, with -better looking thereon I find it somewhat otherwise. For I find the -time of such increase as I speak of much shorter than I assigned, and -that by a great deal. For it has grown greater” by reason of “the book -upon the division,” which Saint-German with the best of intentions had -circulated among the people.[126] - -Putting one book against the other, it would appear then tolerably -certain that the rise of the anti-clerical spirit in England must be -dated only just before the dawn of the Reformation, when the popular -mind was being stirred up by the new teachers against the clergy. -There seems, moreover, no reason to doubt the positive declaration -of Sir Thomas More, who had every means of knowing, that the outcry -was modern--so modern indeed that it was practically unknown only -four or five years before 1533, and that it originated undoubtedly -from the dissemination of Lutheran views and teachings by Tyndale and -others. It is useful to examine well into the grounds upon which this -anti-clerical campaign was conducted, and to note the chief causes of -objection to the clergy which are found set forth by Saint-German in -his books. In the first place: “Some say,” he writes, that priests and -religious “keep not the perfection of their order,” and do not set -that good example to the people “they should do.” Some also work for -“their own honour, and call it the honour of God, and rather covet to -have rule over the people than to profit the people.” Others think more -about their “bodily ease and worldly wealth and meat and drink,” and -the like, even more than lay people do. Others, again, serve God “for -worldly motives, to obtain the praise of men, to enrich themselves and -the like, and not from any great love of God.” - -Such is the first division of the general accusations which -Saint-German states were popularly made against the clergy in 1532. -Against these may be usefully set Sir Thomas More’s examination of the -charges, and his own opinion as to the state of the clergy. In his -previous works he had, he says, forborne to use words unpleasant either -to the clergy or laity about themselves, though he had “confessed what -is true, namely, that neither were faultless.” But what had offended -“these blessed brethren,” the English followers of Luther, was that “I -have not hesitated to say, what I also take for the very truth, that -as this realm of England has, God be thanked, as good and praiseworthy -a temporality, number for number, as any other Christian country of -equal number has had, so has it had also, number for number, compared -with any other realm of no greater number in Christendom, as good and -as commendable a clergy. In both there have never been wanting plenty -of those who have always been ‘naught’; but their faults have ever been -their own and should not be imputed to the whole body, neither in the -spirituality nor temporality.”[127] - -Turning to the special accusation made by Saint-German that -ecclesiastics “do not keep the perfection of their order,” More grants -that this may “not be much untrue.” For “Man’s duty to God is so great -that very few serve Him as they should do.”…“But, I suppose, they keep -it now at this day much after such a good metely manner as they did -in the years before, during which this division was never dreamed of, -and therefore those who say this is the cause have need to go seek -some other.”[128] To the second point his reply is equally clear. It -is true, More thinks, that some ecclesiastics do look perhaps to their -own honour and profit, but, he asks, “were there never any such till so -lately as the beginning of this division, or are all of them like this -now?” No doubt there are some such, and “I pray God that when any new -ones shall come they may prove no worse. For of these, if they wax not -worse before they die, those who shall live after them may, in my mind, -be bold to say that England had not their betters any time these forty -years, and I dare go for a good way beyond this too. But this is more -than twenty years, and ten before this division” (between the clergy -and laity) was heard of.[129] Further, as far as his own opinion goes, -although there may be, and probably are, some priests and religious -whom the world accounts good and virtuous, who are yet at heart -evil-minded, this is no reason to despise or condemn the whole order. -Equally certain is it that besides such there are “many very virtuous, -holy men indeed, whose holiness and prayer have been, I verily believe, -one great special cause that God has so long held His hand from -letting some heavier stroke fall on the necks of those whether in the -spirituality or temporality who are naught and care not.”[130] - -In his _Apology_, Sir Thomas More protested against the author of -the work on the _Division_ translating a passage from the Latin of -John Gerson, about the evil lives of priests; and on Saint-German -excusing himself in his second book, More returns to the point in -_The Debellation of Salem and Bizance_. More had pleaded that his -opponent had dragged the faults of the clergy into light rather than -those of the laity, because if the priests led good lives, as St. John -Chrysostom had said, the whole Church would be in a good state; “and -if they were corrupt, the faith and virtue of the people fades also -and vanishes away.” “Surely, good readers,” exclaims More, “I like -these words well.” They are very good, and they prove “the matter right -well, and very true is it, nor did I ever say the contrary, but have -in my _Apology_ plainly said the same: that every fault in a spiritual -man is, by the difference of the person, far worse and more odious -to God and man than if it were in a temporal man.” And indeed the -saying of St. Chrysostom “were in part the very cause that made me -write against his (_i.e._ Saint-German’s) book. For assuredly, as St. -Chrysostom says: ‘If the priesthood be corrupt, the faith and virtue of -the people fades and vanishes away.’ This is without any question very -true, for though St. Chrysostom had never said it, our Saviour says as -much himself. ‘Ye are (saith He to the clergy) the salt of the earth.’ -… But, I say, since the priesthood is corrupted it must needs follow -that the faith and virtue of the people fades and vanishes away, and -on Christ’s words it must follow that, if the spirituality be nought, -the temporality must needs be worse than they. I, upon this, conclude -on the other side against this ‘Pacifier’s’ book, that since this -realm has (as God be thanked indeed it has) as good and as faithful a -temporality (though there be a few false brethren in a great multitude -of true Catholic men) as any other Christian country of equal size has, -it must needs, I say, follow that the clergy (though it have some such -false evil brethren too) is not so sorely corrupted as the book of -_Division_ would make people think, but on their side they are as good -as the temporality are on theirs.”[131] - -On one special point Saint-German insists very strongly. As it is -a matter upon which much has been said, and upon which people are -inclined to believe the worst about the pre-Reformation clergy, it -may be worth while to give his views at some length, and then take -Sir Thomas More’s opinion also on the subject. It is on the eternal -question of the riches of the Church, and the supposed mercenary spirit -which pervaded the clergy. “Some lay people say,” writes Saint-German, -“that however much religious men have disputed amongst themselves as -to the pre-eminence of their particular state in all such things as -pertain to the maintenance of the worldly honour of the Church and -of spiritual men, which they call the honour of God, and in all such -things as pertain to the increase of the riches of spiritual men, -all, religious or secular, agree as one.” For this reason it is found -that religious men are much more earnest in trying to induce people -to undertake and support such works as produce money for themselves, -such as trentals, chantries, obits, pardons, and pilgrimages, than in -insisting upon the payments of debts, upon restitution for wrong done, -or upon works of mercy “to their neighbours poor and needy--sometimes -in extreme necessity.”[132] - -Sir Thomas More replies that those who object in this way, object not -so much because the trentals, &c., tend to make priests rich, but -because they “hate” the things themselves. Indeed, some of these things -are not such that they make priests so very rich, in fact, as to induce -them to use all endeavour to procure them. The chantries, for example, -“though they are many, no one man can make any very great living out of -them; and that a priest should have some living of such a mean thing -as the chantries commonly are, no good man will find great fault.” As -for pilgrimages, “though the shrines are well garnished, and the chapel -well hanged with wax (candles), few men nowadays, I fear, can have much -cause to grudge or complain of the great offerings required from them. -Those men make the most ado who offer nothing at all.” And with regard -to “pardons,” it should be remembered that they were procured often -“by the good faithful devotion of virtuous secular princes, as was the -great pardon purchased for Westminster and the Savoy” by Henry VII. -“And in good faith I never yet perceived,” he says, “that people make -such great offerings at a pardon that we should either much pity their -expense or envy the priests that profit.” - -“But then the trentals! Lo, they are the things, as you well know, by -which the multitude of the clergy and specially the prelates, all get -an infinite treasure each year.” For himself, Sir Thomas More hopes and -“beseeches God to keep men devoted to the trentals and obits too.” But -where this “Pacifier” asserts that “some say that all spiritual men -as a body induce people to pilgrimages, pardons, chantries, obits, and -trentals, rather than to the payment of their debts, or to restitution -of their wrongs, or to deeds of mercy to their neighbours that are poor -and needy, and sometimes in extreme necessity, for my part, I thank -God,” he says, “that I never heard yet of any one who ever would give -that counsel, and no more has this ‘Pacifier’ himself, for he says it -only under his common figure of ‘some say.’”[133] - -In his second reply, More returns to the same subject. Saint-German -speaks much, he says, about “restitution.” This, should there be -need, no reasonable man would object to. “But now the matter standeth -all in this way: this man talks as if the spirituality were very -busy to procure men and induce people (generally) to give money for -trentals, to found chantries and obits, to obtain pardons and to go on -pilgrimages, leaving their debts unpaid and restitution unmade which -should be done first, and that this was the custom of the spirituality. -In this,” says More, “standeth the question.” The point is not whether -debts and restitution should be satisfied before all other things, -which all will allow, but whether the “multitude of the clergy, that -is to say either all but a few, or at least the most part, solicit -and labour lay people to do these (voluntary) things rather than pay -their debts or make restitution for their wrongs.… That the multitude -of priests do this, I never heard any honest man for very shame say. -For I think it were hard to meet with a priest so wretched, who, were -he asked his advice and counsel on that point, would not in so plain a -matter, though out of very shame, well and plainly counsel the truth, -and if perchance there were found any so shameless as to give contrary -counsel, I am very sure they would be by far the fewer, and not as this -good man’s first book says, the greater part and multitude.” What, -therefore, More blames so much is, that under pretext of an altogether -“untrue report” the clergy generally are held up to obloquy and their -good name slandered.[134] If he thinks that “I do but mock him to my -poor wit, I think it somewhat more civility in some such points as this -to mock him a little merrily, than with odious earnest arguments to -discuss matters seriously with him.” - -In some things even Saint-German considers the outcry raised against -the clergy unreasonable. But then, as he truly says, many “work rather -upon will than upon reason,” and though possessed of great and good -zeal are lacking in necessary discretion. Thus some people, seeing the -evils that come to the Church from riches, “have held the opinion that -it was not lawful for the Church to have any possessions.” Others, -“taking a more mean way,” have thought that the Church ought not to -have “that great abundance that” it has, for this induces a love of -riches in churchmen and “hinders, and in a manner strangles, the love -of God.” These last would-be reformers of churchmen advocate taking -away all that is not necessary. Others, again, have gone a step further -still, “and because great riches have come to the Church for praying -for souls in Purgatory, have affirmed that there is no Purgatory.” -In the same way such men would be against pardons, pilgrimages, and -chantries. They outwardly appear “to rise against all these … and to -despise them, and yet in their hearts they know and believe that all -such things are of themselves right good and profitable, as indeed they -are, if they are ordered as they should be.”[135] - -Sir Thomas More truly says that what is implied in this outcry against -the riches of the clergy is that as a body they lead idle, luxurious, -if not vicious lives. It is easy enough to talk in this way, but how -many men in secular occupations, he asks, would be willing to change? -There might be “some who would, and gladly would, have become prelates -(for I have heard many laymen who would very willingly have been -bishops), and there might be found enough to match those that are evil -and naughty secular priests, and those too who have run away from the -religious life, and these would, and were able to, match them in their -own ways were they never so bad. Yet, as the world goes now, it would -not be very easy, I ween, to find sufficient to match the good, even -though they be as few as some folk would have them to be.” - -In the fifteenth chapter of his book on the _Division_, Saint-German -deals specially with the religious life and with what in his opinion -people think about it, and about those who had given up their liberty -for a life in the cloister. The matter is important, and considerable -extracts are necessary fully to understand the position. “Another -cause” of the dislike of the clergy by the laity is to be sought for -in the “great laxity and liberty of living that people have seen -in religious men. For they say, that though religious men profess -obedience and poverty, yet many of them have and will have their own -will, with plenty of delicate food in such abundance that no obedience -or poverty appears in them. For this reason many have said, and yet -say to the present day, that religious men have the most pleasant and -delicate life that any men have. And truly, if we behold the holiness -and blessed examples of the holy fathers, and of many religious persons -that have lived in times past, and of many that now live in these -days, we should see right great diversity between them. For many of -them, I trow, as great diversity as between heaven and hell.” Then, -after quoting the eighteenth chapter of _The Following of Christ_, -he proceeds: “Thus far goeth the said chapter. But the great pity is -that most men say that at the present day many religious men will -rather follow their own will than the will of their superior, and that -they will neither suffer hunger nor thirst, heat nor cold, nakedness, -weariness nor labour, but will have riches, honour, dignities, friends, -and worldly acquaintances, the attendance of servants at their -commands, pleasure and disports, and that more liberally than temporal -men have. Thus, say some, are they fallen from true religion, whereby -the devotion of the people is in a manner fallen from them.” - -“Nevertheless, I doubt not that there are many right good and virtuous -religious persons. God forbid that it should be otherwise. But it is -said that there are many evil, and that in such a multitude that those -who are good cannot, or will not, see them reformed. And one great -cause that hinders reform is this: if the most dissolute person in all -the community, and the one who lives most openly against the rules of -religion, can use this policy, namely, to extol his (form of) religious -life above all others, pointing them out as not being so perfect as -that to which he belongs, anon he shall be called a good fervent -brother, and one that supports his Order, and for this reason his -offences shall be looked on the more lightly.” - -“Another thing that has caused many people to mislike religious has -been the great extremity that has been many times witnessed at the -elections of abbots, priors, and such other spiritual sovereigns. And -this is a general ground, for when religious men perceive that people -mislike them, they in their hearts withdraw their favour and devotion -again from them. And in this way charity has waxed cold between them.” - -“And verily, I suppose, that it were better that there should be no -abbot or prior hereafter allowed to continue over a certain number -of years, and that these should be appointed by the authority of the -rulers, rather than have such extremities at elections, as in many -places has been used in times past. - -“And verily, it seems to me, one thing would do great good concerning -religious Orders and all religious persons, and that is this: that the -Rules and Constitutions of religious bodies should be examined and well -considered, whether their rigour and straightness can be borne now in -these days as they were at the beginning of the religious Orders. For -people be nowadays weaker, as to the majority of men, than they were -then. And if it is thought that they (_i.e._ the Rules) cannot now be -kept, that then such relaxations and interpretations of their rules be -made, as shall be thought expedient by the rulers. Better it is to have -an easy rule well kept, than a strict rule broken without correction. -For, thereof followeth a boldness to offend, a quiet heart in an evil -conscience: a custom in sin, with many an ill example to the people. -By this many have found fault at all religious life, where they should -rather have found fault at divers abuses against the true religion. -Certain it is that religious life was first ordained by the holy -fathers by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, keep it who so may.”[136] - -Much of this criticism on the state of the religious orders on the eve -of the Reformation is obviously only very general, and would apply -to all states of society, composed, as such bodies are, of human -members. With much that Saint-German suggests, it is impossible not -to agree in principle, however difficult the attainment of the ideal -may be in practice. Sir Thomas More, whilst admitting that there were -undoubtedly things requiring correction in the religious life of the -period, maintains most strongly that in practical working it was far -better than any one would gather from the assertions and suggestions -of Saint-German, and that in reality, with all their carping at laxity -and worldliness, none of the critics of the monks would be willing to -change places with them. “As wealthy,” he writes, “and as easy and as -glorious as some tell ‘the pacifier’ religious life is, yet if some -other would say to them: ‘Lo sirs, those folks who are in religion -shall out, come you into religion in their steads; live there better -than they do, and you shall have heaven,’ they would answer, I fear me, -that they are not weary of the world. And even if they were invited -into religion another way, and it was said to them, ‘Sir, we will not -bid you live so straight in religion as these men should have done; -come on enter, and do just as they did, and then you will have a good, -easy, and wealthy life, and much worldly praise for it,’--I ween for -all that, a man would not get them to go into it. But as easy as we -call it, and as wealthy too--and now peradventure when our wives are -angry we wish ourselves therein--were it offered … I ween that for -all our words, if that easy and wealthy life that is in religion were -offered to us, even as weary as we are of wedding, we would rather bear -all our pain abroad than take a religious man’s life of ease in the -cloister.”[137] - -With some of the accusations of Saint-German, or rather with some of -his explanations of the supposed “grudge” borne by the laity to the -clergy, More has hardly the patience to deal. They, the clergy, and -above all religious, should, the former says, “give alms and wear hair -(shirts), and fast and pray that this division may cease.” “Pray, wear -hair, fast, and give alms,” says the latter; “why, what else do they do -as a rule? Some may not; but then there were some negligent in those -matters for the past thousand years, and so the present negligence of -a few can’t be the cause of the dissension now.” “But this ‘pacifier,’ -perceiving that what one man does in secret another cannot see, is -therefore bold to say they do not do all those things he would have -them do; that is to say, fast, pray, wear hair (shirts), and give alms. -For he says ‘that they do all these things it appears not.’” - -Now, “as to praying, it appears indeed that they do this; and that -so much that they daily pray, as some of us lay men think it a pain -(to do) once a week; to rise so soon from sleep and to wait so long -fasting, as on a Sunday to come and hear out their matins. And yet -the matins in every parish is neither begun so early nor so long in -the saying as it is in the Charter house you know well; and yet at -the sloth and gluttony of us, who are lay people, he can wink and fan -himself asleep. But as soon as the lips of the clergy stop moving he -quickly spies out that they are not praying.” - -And “now as touching on alms: Is there none given, does he think, by -the spirituality? If he say, as he does, that it does not appear that -they do give alms, I might answer again that they but follow in this -the counsel of Christ which says: ‘Let not the left hand see what thy -right hand doeth.’… But as God, for all that counsel, was content that -men should both pray and give to the needy and do other works both of -penance and of charity openly and abroad, where there is no desire -of vain glory, but that the people by the sight thereof might have -occasion therefore to give laud and praise to God, so I dare say boldly -that they, both secretly and openly too, … give no little alms in the -year, whatsoever this ‘pacifier’ do say. And I somewhat marvel, since -he goes so busily abroad that there is no ‘some say,’ almost in the -whole realm, which he does not hear and repeat it; I marvel, I say, -not a little that he neither sees nor hears from any ‘some say’ that -there is almsgiving in the spirituality; I do not much myself go very -far abroad, and yet I hear ‘some say’ that there is; and I myself see -sometimes so many poor folk at Westminster at the doles, of whom, as -far as I have ever heard, the monks are not wont to send many away -unserved, that I have myself for the press of them been fain to ride -another way.” - -“But to this, some one once answered me and said; ‘that it was no -thanks to them, for it (came from) lands that good princes have given -them.’ But, as I then told him, it was then much less thanks to them -that would now give good princes evil counsel to take it from them. And -also if we are to call it not giving of alms by them, because other -good men have given them the lands from which they give it, from what -will you have them give alms? They have no other.…” - -Further replying to the insinuation of Saint-German that the religious -keep retainers and servants out of pride and for “proud worldly -countenance,” Sir Thomas More says: “If men were as ready in regard to -a deed of their own, by nature indifferent, to construe the mind and -intent of the doer to the better part, as they are, of their own inward -goodness, to construe and report it to the worst, then might I say, -that the very thing which they call ‘the proud worldly countenance’ -they might and should call charitable alms. That is to say, (when they -furnish) the right honest keep and good bringing up of so many temporal -men in their service, who though not beggars yet perhaps the greater -part of them might have to beg if they did not support them but sent -them out to look for some service for themselves,” (they are giving -charitable alms). - -“And just as if you would give a poor man some money because he was in -need and yet would make him go and work for it in your garden, lest -by your alms he should live idle and become a loiterer, the labour he -does, does not take away the nature nor merit of alms: so neither is -the keeping of servants no alms, though they may wait on the finder and -serve him in his house. And of all alms the chief is, to see people -well brought up and well and honestly guided. In which point, though -neither part do fully their duty, yet I believe in good faith that -in this matter, which is no small alms, the spirituality is rather -somewhat before us than in any way drags behind.”[138] - -With regard to the charge brought against the clergy of great laxity in -fasting and mortification, More thinks this is really a point on which -he justly can make merry. Fasting, he says, must be regulated according -to custom and the circumstances of time and place. If there were to be -a cast-iron rule for fasting, then, when compared with primitive times, -people in his day, since they dined at noon, could not be held to fast -at all. And yet “the Church to condescend to our infirmity” has allowed -men “to say their evensong in Lent before noon,” in order that they -might not break their fast before the vesper hour. The fact is that, in -More’s opinion, a great deal of the outcry about the unmortified lives -of the religious and clergy had “been made in Germany” by those who -desired to throw off all such regulations for themselves. As a Teuton -had said to him in “Almaine” colloquial English--“when I blamed him,” -More says, “for not fasting on a certain day: ‘Fare to sould te laye -men fasten? let te prester fasten.’ So we, God knows, begin to fast -very little ourselves, but bid the ‘prester to fasten.’”[139] - -“And as to such mortifications as the wearing of hair shirts, it -would indeed be hard to bind men, even priests, to do this, … though -among them many do so already, and some whole religious bodies too.” -If he says, as he does, that this “does not appear,” what would he -have? Would he wish them to publish to the world these penances? If -they take his, Saint-German’s, advice, “they will come out of their -cloisters every man into the market-place, and there kneel down in the -gutters, and make their prayers in the open streets, and wear their -hair shirts over their cowls, and then it shall appear and men shall -see it. And truly in this way there will be no hypocrisy for their -shirts of hair, and yet moreover it will be a good policy, for then -they will not prick them.”[140] - -In the same way More points out that people in talking against the -wealth of the clergy are not less unreasonable than they are when -criticising what they call their idle, easy lives. “Not indeed that we -might not be able always to find plenty content to enter into their -possessions, though we could not always find men enough content to -enter their religions;” but when the matter is probed to the bottom, -and it is a question how their wealth “would be better bestowed,” then -“such ways as at the first face seemed very good and very charitable -for the comfort and help of poor folk, appeared after reasoning more -likely in a short while to make many more beggars than to relieve those -that are so already. And some other ways that at first appeared for -the greater advantage of the realm, and likely to increase the king’s -honour and be a great strength for the country, and a great security -for the prince as well as a great relief of the people’s charges, -appeared clearly after further discussion to be ‘clean contrary, and of -all other ways the worst.’” - -“And to say the truth,” he continues, “I much marvel to see some -folk now speak so much and boldly about taking away any possessions -of the clergy.” For though once in the reign of Henry IV., “about the -time of a great rumble that the heretics made, when they would have -destroyed not only the clergy but the king and his nobility also, there -was a foolish and false bill or two put into Parliament and dismissed -as they deserved; yet in all my time, when I was conversant with the -court, I had never found of all the nobility of this land more than -seven (of which seven there are now three dead) who thought that it -was either right or reasonable, or could be any way profitable to the -realm, without lawful cause to take away from the clergy any of the -possessions which good and holy princes, and other devout, virtuous -people, of whom many now are blessed saints in heaven, have of devotion -towards God given to the clergy to serve God and pray for all Christian -souls.”[141] - -In his _Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer_, made in 1532, when Sir -Thomas More was still Lord Chancellor of England, he protests against -imputations made by his adversary and his follower Barnes, that the -clergy were as a body corrupt. “Friar Barnes lasheth out against them, -against their pride and pomp, and all their lives spent in” vicious -living, “as if there were not a good priest in all the Catholic -Church.… He jesteth on them because they wear crowns and long gowns, -and the bishops wear rochets. And he hath likened them to bulls, -asses, and apes, and the rochets to smocks.” “But he forgets how many -good virtuous priests and religious people be put out of their places -(in Germany) and spoiled of their living, and beaten, and sent out -a-begging, while heretics and apostates, with their women, keep their -shameless lives with the living that holy folks have dedicated unto God -for the support of such as would serve God in spiritual cleanness and -vowed chastity. He knows well enough, I warrant you, that the clergy -can never lack persecution where heretics may grow; nor soon after -the temporality either, as it has hitherto been proved in every such -country yet.”[142] - -He will not repeat all his “ribald railing upon all the clergy of -Christendom who will not be heretics” when he calls “them bulls, apes, -asses and abominable harlots and devils.” … “No good man doubts, -although among the clergy there are many full bad (as, indeed, it were -hard to have it otherwise among so great a multitude, whilst Christ’s -own twelve were not without a traitor), that there are again among them -many right virtuous folk, and such that the whole world beside fares -the better for their holy living and their devout prayer.”[143] - -Beyond the above supposed causes for the growth of the dislike of -the clergy which Sir Thomas More weighs and considers in the above -extracts, Saint-German gives others which are instructive as to the -actual status of the clergy; but with which, as they do not reflect -upon their moral character, Sir Thomas More was not immediately -concerned in his reply. One occasion of the present difficulties and -division, writes Saint-German, “has partly arisen by temporal men who -have desired much the familiarity of priests in their games and sports, -and who were wont to make much more of those who were companionable -than of those that were not so, and have called them good fellows -and good companions. And many also would have chaplains which they -would not only suffer, but also command, to go hunting, hawking, and -such other vain disports; and some would let them lie among other lay -servants, where they could neither use prayer nor contemplation.” - -Some even go so far as to insist on their chaplains wearing “liveries,” -which “are not convenient in colour for a priest to wear.” Others give -them worldly businesses to attend to in the way of stewardships, &c., -“so that in this way their inward devotion of heart has become as -cold and as weak, in a manner, as it is in lay men.” Nevertheless, in -spite of the evil effect to be feared from this training, they do not -hesitate to put them into the first benefice they have to dispose of; -“and when they have done so, they will anon speak evil of priests, and -report great lightness in them, and lightly compare the faults of one -priest with another.” This they do “even when they themselves have been -partly the occasion of their offences.” - -Moreover, “where by the law all priests ought to be at the (parish) -church on Sundays and holidays, and help the service of God in the -choir, and also, when there, to be under the orders of the curate -(or parish priest of the place), yet nevertheless many men who have -chaplains will not allow them to come to the parish church; and when -they are there, will not suffer them to receive their orders from the -curate, but only from themselves; nor will they tolerate seeing them in -the choir;” and what is the case with “chaplains and serving priests is -also (true) of chantry priests and brotherhood priests in many places.” - -To remedy these evils, Saint-German thinks, as indeed every one would -be disposed to agree with him, that priests should be prohibited from -hunting and all such games as are unsuitable to the priestly character, -“though perchance he may, as for recreation, use honest disportes for a -time.” Moreover, he should not “frequent the ale house or tavern,” and, -if in his recreations the people are offended, he should be warned by -“an abbot and a justice of the peace of the shire.” If, after this, he -does not change, he ought to be suspended. Further than this, no one -should be permitted to have a chaplain who has not “a standing house,” -where the priest is able to have his private chamber with a lock and -key, so that “he may use himself therein conveniently in reading, -prayer, or contemplation, or such other labours and business as it is -convenient for a priest to use.”[144] - -Both in his work on the _Division_ and in his previous tract, -_A Dyalogue between a Student of Law and a Doctor of Divinity_, -Saint-German lays great stress upon the question of mortuaries, as one -that gave great offence to lay people at the period when he wrote. As -he explained in the _Dyalogue_, the State had already interfered to -regulate the exactions made by custom at funerals, but nevertheless -“in some places the Church claims to have the taper that stands in the -middle of the hearse over the heart of the corpse, and some claim to -have all the tapers. Some also claim to have one of the torches that is -about the hearse, and others to have all the torches. And if the body -be brought in a charette or with coat armour or such other (ornaments), -then they claim all the horses and charette and the apparel or part -thereof.”[145] Now, in his other book, Saint-German thinks that though -these things “are annulled already by statute,” there is rising up -“a thing concerning mortuaries,” that “if it be allowed to continue” -will cause great difficulties in the near future. It is this: “Many -curates not regarding the king’s statute in that behalf, persuade -their parishioners when they are sick to believe that they cannot be -saved unless they restore them as much as the old mortuary would have -amounted to.” All those who act in such a way are, he thinks, “bound in -conscience to restitution, since they have obtained money under false -information.”[146] - -After arguing that Parliament has a right to legislate in all matters -concerning goods and property, our author says: “It is certain that -all such mortuaries were temporal goods, though they were claimed by -spiritual men; and the cause why they were taken away was, because -there were few things within this realm which caused more variance -among the people than they did, when they were allowed. They were taken -so far against the king’s laws and against justice and right, as shall -hereafter appear. First they were taken not only after the husband’s -death, but also after the death of the wife, who by the law of the -realm had no goods, but what were the husband’s. They were taken also -from servants and children, as well infants as others; and if a man -died on a journey and had a household, he should pay mortuaries in both -places.” Whilst in some places both the parson and the vicar claimed -the mortuary; “and sometime even the curate (_i.e._ parish priest) -would prohibit poor men to sell their goods, as were likely to come to -them as mortuaries, for they would say it was done in order to defraud -the Church.” And the mortuaries had to be handed over at once, or they -would not bury the body. All these things led to the great growth of -mortuaries “by the prescription of the spiritual law, and had they not -been put an end to by Parliament they would have grown more and more. - -“And in many places they were taken in such a way that it made the -people think that their curates loved their mortuaries better than -their lives. For this reason there rose in many places great division -and grudge between them, which caused a breach of the peace, love, and -charity that ought to be between the curate and his parishioners, to -the great unquietness of many of the king’s subjects, as well spiritual -as temporal, and to the great danger and peril of their souls. For -these causes the said mortuaries be annulled by Parliament, as well in -conscience as in law, and yet it is said that some curates use great -extremities concerning the said mortuaries another way; and that is -this: If at the first request the executor pay not the money that is -appointed by the statute, they will anon have a citation against him, -and in this he shall be so handled that, as it is said, it would have -been generally much better for him to have paid the old mortuary, than -the costs and expenses he will then have to pay.”[147] - -Another fertile cause of complaint against the clergy at this time -was, in Saint-German’s opinion, the way in which tithes were exacted; -in many cases without much consideration for justice and reason. “In -some places, the curates all exact their tenth of everything within the -parish that is subject to tithe, although their predecessors from time -immemorial have been contented to do without it: and this even though -there is sufficient besides for the curates to live upon, and though -perchance in old time something else has been assigned in place of it. -In some places there has been asked, it is said, tithe of both chickens -and eggs; in some places of milk and cheese; and in some others tithe -of the ground and also of all that falleth to the ground. In other -places tithes of servants’ wages is claimed without any deduction; and -indeed it is in but few places that any servant shall go quite without -some payment of tithe, though he may have spent all in sickness, or -upon his father and mother, or such necessary expenses.” - -Our author, from whom we get so much information as to the relations -which existed in pre-Reformation times between the clergy and people, -goes on to give additional instances of the possible hardships -incidental to the collection of the ecclesiastical dues. These, -where they exist, he, no doubt rightly, thinks do not tend to a good -understanding between those who have the cure of souls, and who ought -to be regarded rather in the light of spiritual fathers, than of -worldly tax collectors. He admits, however, that these are the abuses -of the few, and must not be considered as universally true of all -the clergy. “And though,” he concludes, “these abusions are not used -universally (God forbid that they should), for there are many good -curates and other spiritual men that would not use them to win any -earthly thing, yet when people of divers countries meet together, and -one tells another of some such extremity used by some curates in his -country, and the other in like manner to him, soon they come to think -that such covetousness and harsh dealing is common to all curates. And -although they do not well in so doing, for the offence of one priest -is no offence of any other, if they will so take it: yet spiritual men -themselves do nothing to bring the people out of this judgment; but -allow these abuses to be used by some without correcting them.”[148] - -To these objections, and more of the same kind, Sir Thomas More did -not make, and apparently did not think it at all necessary to make, -any formal reply. Indeed, he probably considered that where such -things could be proved it would be both just and politic to correct -them. His failing to reply on this score, however, seems to have -been interpreted by Saint-German as meaning his rejection of all -blame attaching to the clerical profession in these matters. In the -_Deballacion of Salem and Byzance_, More protests that this is not his -meaning at all. “He says,” writes he, “that I, in my mind, prove it to -be an intolerable fault in the people to misjudge the clergy, since I -think they have no cause so to do, and that there I leave them, as if -all the whole cause and principal fault was in the temporality.” This, -More declares he never dreamed of, for “if he seek these seven years -in all my _Apology_, he shall find you no such words” to justify this -view. On the contrary, he will find that “I say in those places, ‘that -the people are too reasonable to take this or that thing’ amiss for -‘any reasonable cause of division.’”[149] The fact is, “I have never -either laid the principal fault to the one or to the other.” To much -that Saint-German said, More assented; and his general attitude to the -general accusations he states in these words: “Many of them I will pass -over untouched, both because most of them are such as every wise man -will, I suppose, answer them himself in the reading, and satisfy his -own mind without any need of my help therein, and because some things -are there also very well said.” - -Reading the four books referred to above together, one is forced to the -conviction that the description of Sir Thomas More really represents -the state of the clergy as it then was. That there were bad as well as -good may be taken for granted, even without the admissions of More, but -that as a body the clergy, secular or religious, were as hopelessly bad -as subsequent writers have so often asked their readers to believe, -or even that they were as bad as the reports, started chiefly by -Lutheran emissaries, who were striving to plough up the soil in order -to implant the new German teachings in the place of the old religious -faith of England, would make out, is disproved by the tracts of both -Saint-German and Sir Thomas More. In such a discussion it may be taken -for granted that the worst would have appeared. Had the former any -evidence of general and hopeless corruption he would, when pressed by -his adversary, have brought it forward. Had the latter--whose honesty -and full knowledge must be admitted by all--any suspicion of what -later generations have been asked to believe as the true picture of -ecclesiastical life in pre-Reformation England, he would not have -dared, even if his irreproachable integrity would have permitted him, -to reject as a caricature and a libel even Christopher Saint-German’s -moderate picture. - -In one particular More categorically denies a charge made by Tyndale -against the clergy in general, and against the Popes for permitting -so deplorable a state of things in regard to clerical morals. -As the charge first suggested by Tyndale has been repeated very -frequently down to our own time, it is useful to give the evidence -of so unexceptional authority as that of the Lord Chancellor of -England. Tyndale declared that although marriage was prohibited by -ecclesiastical law to the clergy of the Western Church, the Pope -granted leave “unto as many as bring money” to keep concubines. And -after asserting that this was the case in Germany, Wales, Ireland, -&c., he adds, “And in England thereto they be not few who have (this) -licence--some of the Pope, and some of their ordinaries.” To this More -says: “We have had many pardons come hither, and many dispensations -and many licences too, but yet I thank our Lord I never knew none -such, nor I trust never shall, nor Tyndale, I trow either; but that he -listeth loud to lie. And as for his licences customably given by the -ordinaries, I trust he lies in regard to other countries, for as for -England I am sure he lies.”[150] - -It would of course be untrue to suggest that there were no grounds -whatever for objection to the clerical life of the period. At all -times the ministers of the Church of God are but human instruments, -manifesting now more now less the human infirmities of their nature. -A passage in a sermon preached by Bishop Longland of Lincoln in 1538 -suggests that the most crying abuse among the clergy of that time was -simony. “Yet there is one thing, or ill which the prophet saw not in -this city (of Sodom). What is that? That which specially above other -things should have been seen. What is it? That which most is abused -in this world. I pray thee, what is it? Make no more ado: tell it. -That which almost destroyed the Church of Christ. Then, I pray thee, -shew it: shew what it is: let it be known, that remedy may be had and -the thing holpen. What is it? Forsooth it is simony, simony: chapping -and changing, buying and selling of benefices and of spiritual gifts -and promotions. And no better merchandise is nowadays than to procure -advowsons of patrons for benefices, for prebends, for other spiritual -livelihood, whether it be by suit, request, by letters, by money -bargain or otherwise: yea, whether it be to buy them or to sell them, -thou shalt have merchants plenty, merchants enough for it. - -“These advowsons are abroad here in this city. In which city? In most -part of all the great cities of this realm. In the shops, in the -streets, a common merchandise. And they that do come by their benefices -or promotions under such a manner shall never have grace of God to -profit the Church.”[151] - -It is interesting to recall the fact that the late Mr. Brewer, whose -intimate knowledge of this period of our national history is admitted -on all hands, arrived, after the fullest investigation, at a similar -conclusion as to the real state of the Church in pre-Reformation -England. Taking first the religious houses, this high authority -considers that no doubt many circumstances had contributed at this time -to lower the tone of religious discipline; but taking a broad survey, -the following is the historian’s verdict: “That in so large a body of -men, so widely dispersed, seated for so many centuries in the richest -and fairest estates of England, for which they were mainly indebted to -their own skill, perseverance, and industry, discreditable members were -to be found (and what literary _chiffonnier_, raking in the scandalous -annals of any profession, cannot find filth and corruption?) is likely -enough, but that the corruption was either so black or so general as -party spirit would have us believe, is contrary to all analogy, and is -unsupported by impartial and contemporary evidence.”[152] - -“It is impossible,” he says in another place, “that the clergy can have -been universally immoral and the laity have remained sound, temperate, -and loyal.” This, by the way, is exactly what More, who lived in the -period, insisted upon. - -“But,” continues Brewer, “if these general arguments are not -sufficient, I refer my readers to a very curious document, dated -the 8th of July 1519, when a search was instituted by different -commissioners on a Sunday night, in London and its suburbs, for all -suspected and disorderly persons. I fear no parish in London, nor any -town in the United Kingdom, of the same amount of population, would -at this day pass a similar ordeal with equal credit.”[153] And in -another place he sums up the question in these words: “Considering -the temper of the English people, it is not probable that immorality -could have existed among the ancient clergy to the degree which the -exaggeration of poets, preachers, and satirists might lead us to -suppose. The existence of such corruption is not justified by authentic -documents or by any impartial and broad estimate of the character and -conduct of the nation before the Reformation. If these complaints of -preachers and moralists are to be accepted as authoritative on this -head, there would be no difficulty in producing abundant evidence from -the Reformers themselves that the abuses and enormities of their own -age, under Edward VI. and Elizabeth, were far greater than in the ages -preceding.”[154] - -It is too often assumed that in the choice and education of the -clergy little care and discretion was exercised by the bishops and -other responsible officials, and that thus those unfit for the -sacred ministry by education and character often found their way -into the priesthood. In the last Convocation held on the eve of the -Reformation a serious attempt was evidently made to correct whatever -abuses existed in this matter, when it was enacted that no bishop -might ordain any subject not born in his diocese or beneficed in it, -or without a domicile in it for three months, even with dimissorial -letters. Further, that no secular clerk should be ordained without -testimonial letters as to character from the parish priest of the -place where he was born or had lived for three years, sealed by the -archdeacon of the district, or in the case of a university, by the seal -of the vice-chancellor. No one whatsoever was to be admitted to the -subdiaconate “who was not so versed in the Epistles and Gospels, at -least those contained in the Missal, as to be able at once to explain -their grammatical meaning to the examiner.” He must also show that he -understands and knows whatever pertains to his office.[155] - -The most important book of this period dealing with the life and -education of the clergy is a tract printed by Wynkyn de Worde about -the beginning of the sixteenth century. It was written by William -de Melton, Chancellor of York, and at the end is the declaration of -Colet, that he has read it and highly approves of its contents.[156] -The author states that he desires to instruct the “many young men” who -every Ember time come up to York for ordination in their duties. No -person, he says, ought to present himself to receive the priesthood -who is not prepared to lead a life in all things worthy of the sacred -ministry. He should remember that he is really to be accounted one -of the twelve who sat with our Lord at His last supper. He must be -sufficiently versed in the learning of the world not to dishonour the -priestly calling, and above all be taught in His school “who has said, -‘Learn of Me, for I am meek and humble of heart.’” - -“And since I am now on the question of those only partly well learned,” -continues the author, “I wish all coming for ordination to understand -that always and everywhere those who have not yet attained to at least -a fair knowledge of good letters are to be rejected as candidates for -Holy Orders. They can in no way be considered to have a fair knowledge -of letters who, though skilful in grammar, do not possess the science -well enough to read promptly and easily Latin books, and above all, -the sacred Scriptures, and expound their meaning and the literal -signification of the words as they stand in the books; and this not -haltingly, but readily and easily, so as to show that they know the -language not merely slightly and slenderly, but that they possess a -full and radical knowledge of it and its construction. Therefore, those -who read the sacred Scriptures or other Latin work with difficulty, -or, whilst reading, often mistake the proper connection of the words, -or read them with such pauses as to seem not to be used to the Latin -language, are to be refused Sacred Orders until, by diligent study, -they have become more skilled in their letters.” - -In the same way the tract goes on to declare that those who are unable -to explain or understand the spiritual signification of Scripture -are to be refused ordination to the sacred ministry until they show -themselves at least fairly well able to do so. “To be reckoned among -even the fairly proficient, we require,” says the author, “such a -thorough and sure foundation of grammatical knowledge that there may be -hopes that alone and without other teachers they may, from books and -diligent study, endeavour day by day to improve themselves by reading -and study.” Then addressing the candidates the author begs them, if -they feel they have not this necessary foundation, “not through mere -presumption to offer themselves to the examiners.” “Seek not a position -in the Church of God in which neither now nor during your whole life -will you be able to show yourself a fitting minister. For those who -before taking Holy Orders have not fitted themselves fairly well in -learning rarely if ever are seen to make progress in literature. On the -contrary, they ever remain, even to old age, dunces and stupid, and, -furthermore, such priests known to the common people for such manifest -ignorance are a great scandal which involves the whole sacred ministry.” - -Great damage is done to the whole Church of God through the ignorance -of the clergy. Both in towns and country places there are priests -who occupy themselves, some in mean and servile work, some who give -themselves to tavern drinking; the former can hardly help mixing -themselves up with women, the latter employ their time in games of -dice, &c., and some of them pass it in the vanities of hunting and -hawking. Thus do they spend their whole lives to extreme old age in -idleness and non-religious occupations. Nor could they do otherwise, -for as they are quite ignorant of good letters, how can they be -expected to work at and take a pleasure in reading and study; rather -throwing away these despised and neglected books, they turn to that -kind of miserable and unpriestly life described above, hoping to kill -time and cure their dulness by such things. - -He then goes on to exhort the young to implant in their hearts a strong -desire to study deeply in the books of God’s Law rather than to be -tainted thus by the stains and vanities of the world which they were -supposed to have left. “It is,” he continues, “impossible that such a -holy desire should possess you, unless you have made progress in such -studies before taking Holy Orders, and are so advanced in your literary -studies that the reading of many books is both easy and pleasant -to you, and the construction of the meaning of a passage no longer -difficult, but whilst reading you may quickly and easily follow at -least the literal sense of the sentence.” - -This interesting tract then goes on to warn subdeacons not to take -upon themselves the perpetual obligations of Sacred Orders unless -they are conscious to themselves of no reason or objection, however -secret and hidden, which may stand in the way of their faithfully -keeping their promises. They must feel that they enter the ranks of -the clergy only from the motive of serving God. Then, after warning -the clergy against the vices which specially detract from the sacred -character of the priesthood, the author continues, “Let us therefore -turn to study, reading, and meditation of the Holy Scriptures as the -best remedy against unworthy sloth and foolish desires. Let us not -consume the time given us uselessly and fruitlessly.” A priest should -say his Hours and Mass daily. He should spend the morning till mid-day -in choir and other works, and even then not think he has fulfilled the -whole duty of the priesthood. A priest is bound to serious studies and -meditation. “Constant reading and meditation of the books of God’s law -and the writings of the holy Fathers and Doctors are the best remedy -for slothful habits,” and these have been put at the disposition of -all through the printing-press. Just as a workman has besides his shop -a workroom where he has to spend hours preparing the wares that he -offers for sale, so the priest, who in the church on Sunday offers his -people the things necessary for salvation, should spend days and nights -in holy reading and study in order to make them his own before he -hands them on to others. “Wherefore, my dearest brethren, let us think -ourselves proper priests only when we find our delight and joy in the -constant study of Holy Scripture.” - -So much for the important advice given to priests or those intending -to be priests as to the necessity of acquiring previous habits of -study. Not infrequently the fact that in 1532 Parliament did actually -transfer the power of ecclesiastical legislation hitherto possessed by -Convocation to the Crown, is adduced as proof that to the nation at -large the powers of the clergy, for a long time resented, had at length -become a yoke not to be borne. Yet it is clear that the policy of the -king to crush the clergy in this way was by no means heartily supported -by the Commons. There can be no doubt whatever that the petition of -the Commons against the spirituality really emanated from the Court, -and that the Lower House was compelled by direct royal influence to -take the course indicated by royal will. Four drafts of the petition -existing among the State papers in the Record Office put this beyond -doubt, as they are all corrected in the well-known hand of Henry’s -adviser at this time, Thomas Cromwell. The substance of the petition -states that on account of the diffusion of heretical books, and the -action of the bishops in spiritual courts, “much discord had arisen -between the clergy and the laity at large.” The answer of the bishops -denies all knowledge of this discord, at least on their parts. The -ordinaries, they said, exercised spiritual jurisdiction, and no one -might interfere in that, as their right to make laws in this sphere -was from God, and could be proved by Scripture. The two jurisdictions -could not clash as they were derived from the same source, namely, the -authority given by God. Finally, they practically refused to consider -the possibility of any just royal interference in matters of the purely -ecclesiastical domain. Their resistance was, of course, as we know, -of no avail; but the incident shows that up to the very eve of the -changes the clergy had no notion of any surrender of their spiritual -prerogatives, and that it was the Crown and not the Commons that was -hostile to them.[157] - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -ERASMUS - - -During the first portion of the sixteenth century Erasmus occupied a -unique position in Europe. He was beyond question the most remarkable -outcome of the renaissance in its literary aspect; and he may fairly -be taken as a type of the critical attitude of mind in which many -even of the best and the most loyal Catholics of the day approached -the consideration of the serious religious problems which were, at -that time, forcing themselves upon the notice of the ecclesiastical -authorities. Such men held that the best service a true son of the -Church could give to religion was the service of a trained mind, ready -to face facts as they were, convinced that the Christian faith had -nothing to lose by the fullest light and the freest investigation, but -at the same time protesting that they would suffer no suspicion to -rest on their entire loyalty of heart to the authority of the teaching -Church. - -Keenly alive to the spiritual wants of the age, and to what he, in -common with many others of the time, considered crying abuses in -the government of the Church, resulting from the excessive temporal -grandeur of ecclesiastics engaged in secular sovereignty and -government, Erasmus, like many of his contemporaries, is often perhaps -injudicious in the manner in which he advocated reforms. But when the -matter is sifted to the bottom, it will commonly be found that his -ideas are just. He clamoured loudly and fearlessly for the proper -enforcing of ecclesiastical discipline, and for a complete change in -the stereotyped modes of teaching; and he proclaimed the need of a -thorough literary education for Churchmen as the best corrective of -what he held to be the narrowing formalism of mediæval scholastic -training. It is, perhaps, hardly wonderful that his general attitude -in these matters should have been misunderstood and exaggerated. By -many of his Catholic contemporaries he was looked upon as a secret -rebel against received authority, and in truth as the real intellectual -force of the whole Lutheran movement. By the Reformers themselves, -regarded as at heart belonging to them, he was upbraided as a coward, -and spoken of as one who had not the courage of his convictions. -Posterity has represented him now in the one aspect, now in the other, -now as at best a lukewarm Catholic, now as a secret and dangerous -heretic. By most Catholics probably he has been regarded as a Reformer, -as pronounced even as Luther himself; or to use the familiar phrase -founded upon an expression of his own, they considered that “his was -the egg which Luther hatched.” Few writers have endeavoured to read -any meaning into his seemingly paradoxical position by reference to -his own explanations, or by viewing it in the light of the peculiar -circumstances of the times in which he lived, and which are, to some -extent at least, responsible for it. - -Desiderius Erasmus was born at Rotterdam, in the year 1467. His -father’s Christian name was Gerhard, of which Desiderius was intended -for the Latin, and Erasmus for the Greek, equivalent. Other surname -he had none, as he was born out of wedlock; but his father adopted -the responsibility of his education, for which he provided by placing -him first as a chorister in the cathedral of Utrecht, and subsequently -by sending him to Deventer, then one of the best schools in Northern -Europe. Deventer was at that time presided over by the learned -scholar and teacher Alexander Hegius, and amongst his fellow-students -there, Erasmus found several youths who subsequently, as men, won for -themselves renown in the learned world. One of them, under the title of -Adrian VI., subsequently occupied the Papal chair. - -His father and mother both died of the plague whilst Erasmus was still -young. At the age of thirteen he was taken from Deventer by the three -guardians to whose charge he had been committed, and sent to a purely -ecclesiastical school, meant to prepare those intended only for a life -in the cloister. Here he remained for three years, and after having for -a considerable time resisted the suggestions of his masters that he -should join their Order, he finally entered the novitiate of the Canons -Regular of St. Augustine at Stein, near Gouda. Here he was professed at -the age of nineteen, and after the usual interval was ordained priest. - -Much obscurity and many apparent contradictions prevent us fully -understanding Erasmus’s early life, and in particular the portion spent -by him in the cloister. One thing, however, would seem to be quite -clear; he could never have had any vocation for the religious life. His -whole subsequent history shows this unmistakeably; and the ill-judged -zeal of those who practically forced him into a state for which he -was constitutionally unfitted, and for which he had no aptitude or -inclination, must, if we take his account of the facts as correct, -be as strongly condemned by all right-thinking people as by himself. -He, however, appears not to have understood that this may have been a -special case, and not the usual lot of youths entering religion. One -evident result of his experience is the bitter feeling created in his -heart towards the religious Orders and the uncompromising hostility he -ever after displayed towards them. In the celebrated letter he wrote -to the papal secretary, Lambert Grunnius, which was intended for the -information of the Pope himself, and which is supposed to describe -his own case, Erasmus justly condemns in the strongest language the -practice of enticing youths into the cloister before they were fully -aware of what they were doing. If we are to believe the statements -made in that letter, Erasmus did not think that his was by any means -a singular case. Agents of the religious Orders, he declared, were -ever hanging about the schools and colleges, endeavouring to entice -the youthful students into their ranks by any and every method. But he -is careful to add, “I do not condemn the religious Orders as such. -I do not approve of those who make the plunge and then fly back to -liberty as a licence for loose living, and desert improperly what they -undertook foolishly. But dispositions vary; all things do not suit all -characters, and no worse misfortune can befall a youth of intellect -than to be buried under conditions from which he can never after -extricate himself. The world thought well of my schoolmaster guardian -because he was neither a liar nor a scamp nor a gambler, but he was -coarse, avaricious, and ignorant, he knew nothing beyond the confused -lessons he taught to his classes. He imagined that in forcing a youth -to become a monk he would be offering a sacrifice acceptable to God. -He used to boast of the many victims which he destined to Dominic and -Francis and Benedict.”[158] - -Without any taste for the routine of conventual life, and with his mind -filled by an ardent love of letters, which there seemed in the narrow -circle of his cloister no prospect of ever being able to gratify, -the short period of Erasmus’s stay at Stein must have been to him in -the last degree uncongenial and irksome. Fortunately, however, for -his own peace of mind and for the cause of general learning, a means -was quickly found by which he was practically emancipated from the -restraints he ought never to have undertaken. The Bishop of Cambray -obtained permission to have him as secretary, and after keeping him a -short time in this position he enabled him to proceed to the University -of Paris. From this time Erasmus was practically released from the -obligations of conventual life; and in 1514, when some question had -been raised about his return to the cloister, he readily obtained from -the Pope a final release from a form of life for which obviously he was -constitutionally unfitted, and the dress of which he had been permitted -to lay aside seven years previously. - -The generosity of his episcopal patron did not suffice to meet all -Erasmus’s wants. To add to his income he took pupils, and with one of -them, Lord Mountjoy, he came to England in 1497. He spent, apparently, -the next three years at Oxford, living in the house which his Order -had at that University; whilst there he made the acquaintance of the -most learned Englishmen of that time, and amongst others of Grocyn, -Linacre, and Colet. He also at this time took up the study of the Greek -language, with which previously he had but a slender acquaintance, and -his ardour was so great that the following year, 1498, whilst at work -on the _Adagia_, he could write, “I am giving my whole soul to the -study of Greek; directly I get some money I shall buy Greek authors -first, and then some clothes.” From 1499 to 1506 he was continually -moving about in various learned centres of France and Holland, his -longest stay being at the University of Louvain. - -In the April of 1506 he was again in England, first with Archbishop -Warham and Sir Thomas More in London, and subsequently at Cambridge; -but in a few months he was enabled to carry out the plan of visiting -Italy which he had long contemplated. He engaged to escort the two sons -of Sebastian Boyer, the English court physician, as far as Bologna, and -by September he was already in Turin, where he took his doctor’s degree -in divinity. The winter of the same year he passed at Bologna, and -reached Venice in the spring of 1507. - -His main object in directing his steps to this last-named city was -to pass the second and enlarged edition of his _Adagia_ through the -celebrated Aldine printing-press. Here he found gathered together, -within reach of the press, a circle of illustrious scholars. Aldus -himself, a man, as Erasmus recalled in a letter written in 1524, -“approaching the age of seventy years, but in all matters relating to -letters still in the prime of his youth,” was his host. In 1508 Erasmus -removed to Padua, and the following year passed on to Rome, where he -was well received. His stay in the eternal city at this time was not -prolonged, for a letter received from Lord Mountjoy announcing the -death of Henry VII., and the good affection of his youthful successor -to learning, determined him to turn his face once more towards England. -He had left the country with keen regret, for, as he wrote to Dean -Colet, “I can truly say that no place in the world has given me so many -friends--true, learned, helpful, and illustrious friends--as the single -city of London,” and he looked forward to his return with pleasurable -expectation. - -For a brief period on his arrival again in this country Erasmus stayed -in London at the house of Sir Thomas More, where, at his suggestion, -he wrote the _Enconium Moriæ_, one of the works by which he is best -known to the general reader, and the one, perhaps, the spirit of which -has the most given rise to many mistaken notions as to the author’s -religious convictions. - -From London, in 1510, he was invited by Bishop Fisher to come and -teach at Cambridge, where by his influence he had been appointed Lady -Margaret Professor of Divinity and Regius Reader of Greek. “Unless I -am much mistaken,” Erasmus writes, “the Bishop of Rochester is a man -without an equal at this time, both as to integrity of life, learning, -or broad-minded sympathies. One only do I except, as a very Achilles, -the Archbishop of Canterbury (Warham), who alone keeps me in London, -though I confess not very unwillingly.”[159] - -In estimating the spirit which dictated the composition of the _Moriæ_, -it is well to remember not only that it represented almost as much -the thought and genius of Sir Thomas More as of Erasmus himself, but -that, at the very time it was taking definite shape in More’s house at -Chelsea, the author’s two best friends were the two great and devout -churchmen, Archbishop Warham and the saintly Bishop Fisher. Moreover, -Sir Thomas More himself denies that to this work of Erasmus there can -justly be affixed the note of irreverence or irreligion; he answers -for the good intention of the author, and accepts his own share of -responsibility for the publication of the book. - -The period of Erasmus’s stay at Cambridge did not extend beyond three -years. The stipend attached to his professorships was not large, and -Erasmus was still, apparently, in constant want of money. Archbishop -Warham continued his friend, and by every means tried continually to -interest others directly in the cause of learning and indirectly in -the support of Erasmus, who is ever complaining that his means are -wholly inadequate to supply his wants. The scholar, however, remained -on the best of terms with all the chief English churchmen of the day, -until, as he wrote to the Abbot of St. Bertin, “Erasmus has been -almost transformed into an Englishman, with such overwhelming kindness -do so many treat me, and above all, my special Mæcenas, the Archbishop -of Canterbury. He indeed is not only my patron, but that of all the -learned, amongst whom I but hold a low place. Immortal gods! how -pleasant, how ready, how fertile is the wit of that man! What dexterity -does he not show in managing the most complicated business! What -exceptional learning! What singular courtesy does he not extend to all! -What gaiety and geniality at interviews! so that he never sends people -away from him sad. Added to this, how great and how prompt is his -liberality! He alone seems to be ignorant of his own great qualities -and the height of his dignity and fortune. No one can be more true and -faithful to his friends; and, in a word, he is truly a Primate, not -only in dignity, but in everything worthy of praise.”[160] - -Erasmus returns to this same subject in writing to a Roman Cardinal -about this time. When I think, he says, of the Italian sky, the rich -libraries, and the society of the learned men in Rome, I am tempted to -look back to the eternal city with regret. “But the wonderful kindness -of William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, to me mitigates my desire -to return. Had he been my father or brother he could not have been -more kind and loving. I have been accorded, too, the same reception -by many other bishops of England. Amongst these stands pre-eminent -the Bishop of Rochester, a man who, in addition to his uprightness of -life, is possessed of deep and varied learning, and of a soul above all -meanness, for which gifts he is held here in England in the highest -estimation.”[161] - -Erasmus certainly had reason to be grateful to Warham and his other -English friends for their ready attention to his, at times importunate, -requests. Warham, he writes at one time, “has given me a living worth -a hundred nobles and changed it at my request into a pension of one -hundred crowns. Within these few years he has given me more than four -hundred nobles without my asking. One day he gave me one hundred and -fifty. From other bishops I have received more than one hundred, and -Lord Mountjoy has secured me a pension of one hundred crowns.” In fact, -in the _Compendium Vitæ_, a few years later, he says that he would have -remained for the rest of his life in England had the promises made to -him been always fulfilled. This constant and importunate begging on -the part of the great scholar forms certainly an unpleasant feature -in his life. He gets from Dean Colet fifteen angels for a dedication, -and in reference to his translation of St. Basil on the Prophet -Isaias, begs Colet to find out whether Bishop Fisher will be inclined -“to ease his labours with a little reward,” adding himself, “O this -begging! I know well enough that you will be laughing at me.”[162] -Again, whilst lamenting his poverty and his being compelled to beg -continually in this way, he adds that Linacre has been lecturing him -for thus pestering his friends, and has warned him to spare Archbishop -Warham and his friend Mountjoy a little. In this same letter, written -in October 1513, there are signs of friction with some of the -Cambridge teachers of theology, which may have helped Erasmus in his -determination once more to leave England. Not that he professed to care -what people thought, for he tells Colet he does not worry about those -whom he calls in derision “the Scotists,” but would treat them as he -would a wasp. Nevertheless, he is still half inclined by the opposition -to stop the work he is engaged on; confessing, also, that he is almost -turned away from the design of thus translating St. Basil, as the -Bishop of Rochester is not anxious for him to do it, and--at least so a -friend has told him--rather suspects that he is translating, not from -the original Greek, but is making use of a Latin version. - -Almost immediately after writing this letter Erasmus again bade -farewell to England, and passed up the Rhine to Strasburg, where he -made the acquaintance of Wimpheling, Sebastian Brant, and others. The -following year, 1515, he went on to Basle, attracted by the great -reputation of the printing-press set up in that city by Froben. He was -there eagerly welcomed by the bishop of the city, who had gathered -round him many men imbued with the true spirit of learning; and Erasmus -soon became the centre of this brilliant group of scholars. From this -time Basle became Erasmus’s home, although, especially in the early -years, he was always on the move. He paid a flying visit once more, in -1517, to England, but he had learnt to love his independence too much -to entertain any proposals for again undertaking duties that would tie -him to any definite work in any definite place. Even the suggestions of -friends that he would find congenial and profitable pursuits in England -were unheeded, and he remained unmoved even when his friend Andrew -Ammonius wrote to say the king himself was looking for his return. -“What about Erasmus?” Henry had asked. “When is he coming back to us? -He is the light of our age. Oh that he would return to us!”[163] - -From England, however, he continued to receive supplies of money; -although his circumstances improved so much with the steady circulation -of his books, that he was not at this second period of his life -so dependent upon the charity of his friends. About the year 1520 -Erasmus settled permanently at Basle as literary superintendent of -Froben’s press. What, no doubt, induced him to do so, even more than -the offer of this position, was the fact that Basle had then become, -by the establishment of printing-presses by Amberbach and Froben, -the centre of the German book-trade. Froben died in 1527, and that -circumstance, as well as the religious troubles which, separating Basle -from the empire and making it the focus of civil strife, ended in -wrecking learning there altogether, put an end to Erasmus’s connection -with the press which for eight years had taken the lead of all the -presses of Europe. Not only was the literary superintendence of the -work completely in the hands of Erasmus during this period which he -described as his “mill,” but all the dedications and prefaces to -Froben’s editions of the Fathers were the distinct work of his own -pen. His literary activity at this period was enormous, and only the -power he had acquired of working with the greatest rapidity could -have enabled him to cope with the multiplicity of demands made upon -him. Scaliger relates that Aldus informed him Erasmus could do twice -as much work in a given time as any other man he had ever met. This -untiring energy enabled him to cope with the immense correspondence -which, as he says, came pouring in “daily from almost all parts, from -kings, princes, prelates, men of learning, and even from persons -of whose existence I was, till then, ignorant,” and caused him not -infrequently to write as many as forty letters a day. - -On Froben’s death in 1527, the fanatical religious contentions forced -him to remove to Freiburg, in Breisgau, where he resided from 1529 to -1535. The need for seeing his _Ecclesiastes_ through the press, as well -as a desire to revisit the scenes of his former activity, took him back -to Basle; but his health had been giving way for some years, and, at -the age of sixty-nine, he expired at Basle on July 12, 1536. - -Such is a brief outline of the life of the most remarkable among the -leaders of the movement known as the renaissance of letters. Without -some general knowledge of the main facts of his life and work, it -would be still more difficult than it is to understand the position -he took in regard to the great religious revolution during the later -half of his life. With these main facts before us we may turn to a -consideration of his mental attitude towards some of the many momentous -questions which were then searching men’s hearts and troubling their -souls. - -In the first place, of course, comes the important problem of Erasmus’s -real position as regards the Church itself and its authority. That he -was outspoken on many points, even on points which we now regard as -well within the border-line of settled matters of faith and practice, -may be at once admitted, but he never appears to have wavered in his -determination at all costs to remain true and loyal to the Pope and -the other constituted ecclesiastical authorities. The open criticism -of time-worn institutions in which he indulged, and the sweeping -condemnation of the ordinary teachings of the theological schools, -which he never sought to disguise, brought him early in his public life -into fierce antagonism with many devoted believers in the system then -in vogue. - -The publication of his translation of the New Testament from the Greek -brought matters to an issue. The general feeling in England and amongst -those best able to judge had been favourable to the undertaking, and -on its first appearance Erasmus was assured of the approval of the -learned world at the English universities.[164] More wrote Latin verses -addressed to the reader of the new translation, calling it “the holy -work and labour of the learned and immortal Erasmus,” to purify the -text of God’s Word. Colet was warm in its praises. Copies, he writes to -Erasmus, are being readily bought and read. Many approved, although, -of course, as was to be expected, some spoke against the undertaking. -In England, as elsewhere, says Colet, “we have theologians such as you -describe in your _Moriæ_, by whom to be praised is dishonour, to be -blamed is the highest praise.” For his part, Colet has, he says, only -one regret that he did not himself know Greek sufficiently well to be -able fully to appreciate what Erasmus had done, though “he is only -too thankful for the light that has been thrown upon the true meaning -of the Holy Scripture.” Archbishop Warham writes what is almost an -official letter, to tell Erasmus that his edition of the New Testament -has been welcomed by all his brother bishops in England to whom he -has shown it. Bishop Tunstall was away in Holland, where, amidst the -insanitary condition of the islands of Zeeland, which he so graphically -describes, he finds consolation in the study of the work. He cannot -too highly praise it--not merely as the opening up of Greek sources of -information upon the meaning of the Bible, but as affording the fullest -commentary on the sacred text.[165] Bishop Fisher was equally clear as -to the service rendered to religion by Erasmus in this version of the -Testament; and when, in 1519, Froben had agreed to bring out a second -edition, Erasmus turned to Fisher and More to assist in making the -necessary corrections.[166] - -More defended his friend most strenuously. Writing to Marten Dorpius -in 1515, he upbraided him with suggesting that theologians would never -welcome the help afforded to biblical studies by Erasmus’s work on the -Greek text of the Bible. He ridicules as a joke not meriting a serious -reply the report that Erasmus and his friends had declared there was -no need of the theologians and philosophers, but that grammar would -suffice. Erasmus, who has studied in the universities of Paris, Padua, -Bologna, and Rome, and taught with distinction in some of them, is -not likely to hold such absurd ideas. At the same time, More does not -hesitate to say that in many things he thinks some theologians are to -be blamed, especially those who, rejecting all positive science, hold -that man is born to dispute about questions of all kinds which have not -the least practical utility “even as regards the _pietas fidei_ or the -cultivation of sound morals.” - -At great length More defends the translation against the insinuations -made by Dorpius, who evidently regarded it as a sacrilege to suggest -that the old Latin editions in use in the Church were incorrect. St. -Jerome, says More, did not hesitate to change when he believed the -Latin to be wrong, and Dorpius’s suggestion that Erasmus should have -only noted the errors and not actually made any change would, had -the same principle been applied, have prevented St. Jerome’s work -altogether. If it was thought proper that the Latin codices should be -corrected at that time by Greek manuscripts, why not now? The Church -had then an equally recognised version before the corrections of St. -Jerome.[167] - -There were, indeed, as might be expected, some discordant notes in the -general chorus of English praise. For the time, however, they remained -unheeded, and, in fact, were hardly heard amid the general verdict -of approval, in which the Pope, cardinals, and other highly-placed -ecclesiastics joined. Erasmus, however, was fully prepared for -opposition of a serious character. Writing to Cambridge at the time, he -says that he knows what numbers of people prefer “their old _mumpsimus_ -to the new _sumpsimus_,” and condemn the undertaking on the plea that -no such work as the correction of the text of Holy Scripture ought to -be undertaken without the authority of a general Council.[168] - -It is easy to understand the grounds upon which men who had been -trained on old methods looked with anxiety, and even horror, at this -new departure. Scholarship and literary criticism, when applied to the -pagan classics, might be tolerable enough; but what would be the result -were the same methods to be used in the examination of the works of -the Fathers, and more especially in criticism of the text of the Holy -Scripture itself? Overmuch study of the writings of ancient Greece and -Rome had, it appeared to many, in those days, hardly tended to make the -world much better: even in high places pagan models had been allowed to -displace ideals and sentiments, which, if barbarous and homely, were -yet Christian. Theologians had long been accustomed to look upon the -Latin Vulgate text as almost sacrosanct, and after the failure of the -attempt in the thirteenth century to improve and correct the received -version, no critical revision had been dreamt of as possible, or indeed -considered advisable. Those best able to judge, such as Warham and More -and Fisher, were not more eager to welcome, than others to condemn and -ban, this attempt on the part of Erasmus to apply the now established -methods of criticism to the sacred text. Not that the edition itself -was in reality a work of either sound learning or thorough scholarship. -As an edition of the Greek Testament it is now allowed on all hands -to have no value whatever; but the truth is, that the Greek played -only a subordinate part in Erasmus’s scheme. His principal object was -to produce a new Latin version, and to justify this he printed the -Greek text along with it. And this, though in itself possessing little -critical value, was, in reality, the starting-point for all modern -Biblical criticism. As a modern writer has said, “Erasmus did nothing -to solve the problem, but to him belongs the honour of having first -propounded it.” - -It must, however, be borne in mind that the publication of Erasmus’s -New Testament was not, as is claimed for it by some modern writers, -a new revelation of the Gospel to the world at large, nor is it true -that the sacred text had become so obscured by scholastic theological -disquisitions on side issues as almost to be forgotten. According to -Mr. Froude, “the New Testament to the mass of Christians was an unknown -book,” when Erasmus’s edition, which was multiplied and spread all -over Europe, changed all this. Pious and ignorant men had come to look -on the text of the Vulgate as inspired. “Read it intelligently they -could not, but they had made the language into an idol, and they were -filled with horrified amazement when they found in page after page -that Erasmus had anticipated modern critical corrections of the text, -introduced various readings, and re-translated passages from the Greek -into a new version.”[169] The truth is that the publication of the New -Testament was in no sense an appeal _ad populum_, but to the cultivated -few. A writer in the _Quarterly Review_, commenting upon Mr. Froude’s -picture of the effect of the new edition on the people generally, is by -no means unjust when he says, “Erasmus beyond all question would have -been very much astonished by this account of the matter. Certain it is -that during the Middle Ages the minds of the most popular preachers and -teachers (and we might add of the laity too) were saturated with the -sacred Scriptures.”[170] - -Loud, however, was the outcry in many quarters against the rash author. -His translations were glibly condemned, and it was pointed out as -conclusive evidence of his heterodoxy that he had actually changed some -words in the Our Father, and substituted the word _congregatio_ for -_ecclesia_.[171] - -The year 1519 witnessed the most virulent and persistent attacks upon -the good name of Erasmus. Of these, and the malicious reports being -spread about him, he complains in numerous letters at this period. -One Englishman in particular at this time, and subsequently, devoted -all his energies to prove not only that Erasmus had falsified many of -his translations, but that his whole spirit in undertaking the work -was manifestly uncatholic. This was Edward Lee, then a comparatively -unknown youth, but who was subsequently created Archbishop of York. -In February 1519, Erasmus wrote to Cardinal Wolsey, complaining of -these continued attacks upon his work, although so many learned men, -including bishops, cardinals, and even the Pope Leo X. himself, had -given their cordial approval to the undertaking. Those who were at the -bottom of the movement against the work, he considered, were those -who had not read it, though they still had no shame in crying out -against it and its author. He was told that in some public discourses -in England he had been blamed for translating the word _verbum_ in St. -John’s Gospel by _sermo_, and about this matter he addressed a letter -to the Pope defending himself.[172] To the Bishop of Winchester he -wrote more explicitly about his chief opponent. “By your love for me,” -he says, “I beg you will not too readily credit those sycophants about -me, for by their action all things seem to me at present infected by -a deadly plague. If Edward Lee can prove that he knows better than I -do, he will never offend me. But when he, by writing and speech, and -by means of his followers, spreads rumours hurtful to my reputation, -he is not even rightly consulting his own reputation. He has openly -shown a hostile spirit against me, who never, either in word or deed, -have done him harm. He is young, and lusts for fame.… Time will bring -all to light. Truth may be obscured; overcome it cannot be.”[173] To -the English king he writes that in all he had published he had been -actuated by the sole desire to glorify Christ, and in this particular -work had obtained the highest approval, even that of the Pope himself. -Some people, indeed, have conspired to destroy his good name. They are -so pleased with their “old wine,” that “Erasmus’s new” does not satisfy -them. Edward Lee had been instigated to become their champion, and -Erasmus only wished that Lee were not an Englishman, since he owed more -to England than to any other nation, and did not like to think ill even -of an individual.[174] - -When men are thoroughly alarmed, they do not stop to reason or count -the cost; and so those, who saw in the work of Erasmus nothing but -danger to the Church, at once jumped to the conclusion that the root -of the danger really lay in the classical revival itself, of which -he was regarded as the chief exponent and apostle. The evil must be -attacked in its cause, and the spread of the canker, which threatened -to eat into the body of the Christian Church, stayed before it was too -late. From the theologians of Louvain, with which university Erasmus -was then connected, he experienced the earliest and most uncompromising -opposition. He was “daily,” to use his own words, “pounded with -stones,” and proclaimed a traitor to the Church.[175] His opponents -did not stop to inquire into the truth of their charges too strictly, -and Erasmus bitterly complains of the damaging reports that are being -spread all over Europe concerning his good name and his loyalty to -religion. To him all opposition came from “the monks,” who were, in his -eyes, typical of antiquated ecclesiastical narrowness and bigotry. In a -letter written in 1519, at the height of “the battle of the languages,” -as it was called, he gives several instances of this attitude towards -himself at Louvain when he suggested some alteration in a text of -Holy Scripture. A preacher told the people that he had declared the -Gospel “to be merely a collection of stupid fables,” and at Antwerp, a -Carmelite attacked him in a sermon, at which he happened to be present, -and denounced the appearance of his New Testament as a sign of the -coming of Antichrist. On being asked afterwards for his reasons, he -confessed that he had never even read the book himself. “This,” says -Erasmus sadly, “I generally find to be the case: that none are more -bitter in their outcry than they who do not read what I write.” In this -same letter, Erasmus describes the ferment raised in England against -the study of languages. At Cambridge, Greek was making progress in -peace, “because the university was presided over by John Fisher, Bishop -of Rochester, a theologian of learning and uprightness of life.” At -Oxford, however, fierce public attacks were made in sermons on Greek -studies; “but the king,” continues Erasmus, “as one not unlearned -himself, and most favourable to the cause of letters, happened to -be in the neighbourhood, and hearing of the matter from More and -Pace, ordered that all wishing to study Greek literature should be -encouraged, and so put a stop to the business.” - -The contest was not confined to the schools. “A theologian preaching -in the royal palace before the king took this opportunity to inveigh -boldly and uncompromisingly against Greek studies and the new methods -of interpretation. Pace, who was present, glanced at the king to -see how he took it, and Henry smiled at Pace. After the sermon the -theologian was bidden to the king, and to More was assigned the task -of defending Greek learning against him, the king himself desiring to -be present at the discussion. After More had spoken for some time most -happily, he paused to hear the theologian’s reply; but he, on bended -knees, asked pardon for what he had said, asserting that whilst talking -he was moved by some spirit to speak about Greek as he had done. -Thereupon the king said, ‘And that spirit was not that of Christ, but -of folly!’ Then Henry asked him whether he had read Erasmus’s works--he -admitted that he had not. Then said the king, ‘By this you prove -your folly, in condemning what you have not read.’ Finally the king -dismissed him, and ordered that he should never be allowed to preach in -the royal presence again.” - -Those who desired to carry on the campaign to extremities, endeavoured, -and even with temporary success, to influence Queen Katherine against -Erasmus and the party for the revival of letters which he represented. -Her confessor, a Dominican bishop, persuaded her that in correcting -St. Jerome, Erasmus had perpetrated a crime which admitted of no -excuse.[176] It was but another step to connect the renaissance of -letters generally with the revolt now associated with the name of -Luther. In England, however, it was not so easy to persuade people -of this, since, among the chief supporters of the movement were to -be numbered the best and wisest of churchmen and laymen whose entire -orthodoxy was not open to suspicion. Abroad, however, the cry once -started, was quickly taken up. A theologian at Louvain, writes Erasmus, -who up to this time had been noted for his sober judgment, before a -large audience, after having spoken of Lutheranism, attacked “the -teaching of languages and polite letters, joining the two together, -and asserting that heresy came from these springs, as if experience -had shown eloquence to be a mark rather of the heretics than of the -orthodox, or that the Latin authors of heresy were not mere children -so far as languages went, or that Luther had been schooled by those -masters and not rather by the scholastics, according to scholastic -methods.”[177] - -Erasmus puts the position even more clearly in a letter to Pope Leo -X. on the publication of the revised version of his New Testament in -August 1519. The book is now in people’s hands, he says, and as it has -appeared under the direct auspices of the Holy Father himself, it may -be regarded as his work. Some foolish people, he understands, have -been trying to get the Pope to believe that a knowledge of languages -is detrimental to the true study of theology, whereas, in reality, -the very contrary is obviously the case. Such people will not reason, -they cry out and will not listen. They suggest damning words, such -words for example as “heretics,” “antichrists,” &c., as appropriate -to their opponents. They call out that even the Christian religion -is imperilled, and beg the Pope to come forward and save it. On his -part Erasmus hopes that the Pope will believe that all his work is -for Christ alone, and His Church. “This only reward do I desire, that -I may ever seek the glory of Christ rather than my own. From boyhood -I have ever endeavoured to write nothing that savoured of impiety or -disloyalty. No one has ever yet been made blacker by my writings; no -one less pious, no one stirred up to tumult.”[178] Again, writing to -Cardinal Campeggio, when sending him a copy of the New Testament “which -Pope Leo had approved by his Brief,” Erasmus tells him that, to his -great regret, many at Louvain were doing their best not to allow good -letters to flourish. As for himself, his only real desire was to serve -Christ and increase the glory of His Church; though, he adds, “I am a -man, and as such liable to err.” No one has ever succeeded in pleasing -every one, and he, Erasmus, will not try to do the impossible. Still -he wishes to be judged by what he really has said and written; whereas -all kinds of things, letters, books, &c., are attributed to him, about -which he knows nothing: “even Martin Luther’s work, amongst the rest,” -whilst the truth is, he does not know Luther, and certainly has never -read his book.[179] - -At the end of the following year, 1520, Erasmus again writes to -Cardinal Campeggio at great length. After telling him that he had -hoped to have passed the winter in Rome to search in the libraries for -Greek manuscripts, he informs him that in Louvain those who prefer -the old barbarism are now rampant. Some think to please the people by -opposition to learning, and amongst the aiders and abettors of the -Lutheran movement they place Erasmus in the forefront. The Dominicans -and Carmelites, he says, will regard him only as their enemy. Why, he -does not know, for in reality he reverences true religion under “any -coloured coat.” If on occasion he has said something about the vices of -the monks, he does not think it were more right for the religious, as -a body, to turn against him, than it would be for priests as a body, -when their vices were spoken against. He does not in the least wish to -be thought opposed to the religious life, as such. The condemnation -of Luther had been interpreted by many as a condemnation of learning, -and had been turned against Reuchlin and Erasmus. As for himself, -he has never, he declares, even seen Luther, who has certainly -never been famous for good letters or for any knowledge of ancient -tongues, and hence the revival of letters has no connection whatever -with the Lutheran movement. The prefaces of some of Luther’s books, -because written in good Latin, are considered sufficient proof of his -(Erasmus’s) connection with the matter, and it is asserted openly that -he was working cordially with the Reformer; whereas, as a fact, he had -not suggested even so much as a full stop or comma for his writings. -He had, he admitted, written to Luther, and this and another letter to -the Cardinal of Mentz were pointed to as proof positive of his Lutheran -leanings. For these he has been denounced to bishops as a heretic and -delated to the Pope himself, while all the time, in truth, he has never -read two pages of Luther’s writings. Certainly, indeed, he recognised -in Luther considerable power, but he was not by any means alone in -doing so. Men of undoubted faith and uprightness had congratulated -themselves on having fallen in with Luther’s works. For himself, he -adds, “I have always preferred to look for the good rather than to -search for the evil, and I have long thought that the world needed many -changes.” Finally, before passing from the subject, he begs Cardinal -Campeggio to look at the letter in question himself, and see whether it -could justly be said to favour Luther in any way.[180] - -To Pope Leo X. Erasmus also wrote, protesting against the cause of -letters generally being made the same as that of Reuchlin and Luther. -With the former movement he was identified heart and soul; with Luther -and his revolt he had, he declared, no part nor sympathy. “I have -not known Luther,” he says, “nor have I ever read his books, except -perhaps ten or a dozen pages in various places. It was really I who -first scented the danger of the business issuing in tumults, which I -have always detested.” Moreover, he declares that he had induced the -Basle printer, Johann Froben, to refuse to print Luther’s works, and -that by means of friends he had tried to induce Luther to think only -of the peace of the Church. Two years previously, he says, Luther had -written to him, and he had replied in a kindly spirit in order to get -him, if possible, to follow his advice. Now, he hears, that this letter -has been delated to the Pope in order to prejudice him in the Pontiff’s -eyes; but he is quite prepared to defend its form and expression. “If -any one,” he says, “can say he has ever heard me, even at the table, -maintain the teaching of Luther, I will not refuse to be called a -Lutheran.” Finally, he expresses the hope that, if the opponents of -letters have been trying to calumniate him, he may rely on the Pope’s -prudence and the knowledge of his own complete innocence. “I, who do -not wish to oppose even my own bishop, am not,” he writes, “so mad as -to act in any way against the supreme Vicar of Christ.”[181] - -As time went on, the position of Erasmus did not become more -comfortable. Whilst the Lutherans were hoping that sooner or later -something would happen to compromise the outspoken scholar and force -him to transfer the weight of his learning to their side, the champions -of Catholicity were ill satisfied that he did not boldly strike out -in defence of the Church. To this latter course many of his English -friends had strongly urged him, and both the king, Fisher, and others -had set him an example by publishing works against Luther’s position, -which they invited him to follow. The Pope, too, had on more than one -occasion personally appealed to him to throw off his reserve and come -to the aid of orthodoxy. They could not understand how he was able to -talk of peace and kindness amidst the din of strife, and plead for less -harsh measures and less bitter words against Luther and his adherents, -when the battle was raging, and cities and peoples and even countries -were being seduced by the German Reformer’s plausible plea for freedom -and liberty. Those who believed in Erasmus’s orthodoxy, as did the Pope -and his English friends, considered that no voice was more calculated -to calm the storm and compel the German people to listen to reason than -was his. Whilst the Reforming party, on the other hand, were doing -their best to compromise him in the eyes of their opponents, Erasmus -was most unwilling to be forced into action. “Why,” he writes, “do -people wish to associate me with Luther? What Luther thinks of me, -where it is a question of matters of faith, I care very little. That -he doesn’t think much of me he shows in many letters to his friends. -In his opinion I am ‘blind,’ ‘miserable,’ ‘ignorant of Christ and -Christianity,’ ‘thinking of nothing but letters.’ This is just what I -should expect,” he says, “for Luther has always despised the ancients.” -As for himself, he (Erasmus) has always tried his best to inculcate -true piety along with learning.[182] - -To Œcolampadius, in February 1525, he wrote a letter of protest -against the way some of Luther’s followers were doing all they could -to associate his name with their movement. He does not wish, he says, -to give his own opinion on the questions at issue; but he can tell his -correspondent what the King of England, Bishop Fisher, and Cardinal -Wolsey think on these grave matters. He objects to Œcolampadius putting -_Magnus Erasmus noster_--“our great Erasmus”--in a preface he wrote, -without any justification. “This naturally makes people suppose,” he -adds, “that I am really on your side in these controversies,” and he -begs that he will strike out the expression.[183] - -This was no new position that Erasmus had taken up in view of the -ever-increasing difficulties of the situation. Six years before (in -1519) he had written fully on the subject to the Cardinal Archbishop -of Mentz. It was this letter which had been much misunderstood, and -even denounced to the Pope as the work of a disloyal son of the Church. -He, on the other hand, declared that he was not committed in any way -to the cause of Reuchlin or Luther. “Luther is perfectly unknown to -me, and his books I have not read, except here and there. If he had -written well it would not have been to my credit; if then the opposite, -no blame should attach to me. I regretted his public action, and when -the first tract, I forget which, was talked about, I did all I could -to prevent its being issued, especially as I feared that tumults would -come out of all this. Luther had written me what appeared to my mind to -be a very Christian letter, and, in replying, I, by the way, warned him -not to write anything seditious, nor to abuse the Roman Pontiff, &c., -but to preach the Gospel truly and humbly.” He adds that he was kind -in his reply purposely, as he did not wish to be Luther’s judge. And, -as he thought that there was much good in the man, he would willingly -do all he could to keep him in the right way. People are too fond, he -says, of crying out “heretic,” &c., and “the cry generally comes from -those who have not read the works they exclaim against.”[184] - -“I greatly fear,” he writes shortly after, “for this miserable Luther; -so angry are his opponents on all sides, and so irritated against him -are princes, and, above all, Pope Leo. Would that he had taken my -advice and abstained from these hateful and seditious publications. -There would have been more fruit and less rancour.”[185] - -Testimonies might be multiplied almost indefinitely from Erasmus’s -writings to show that with Lutheranism as such he had no connection nor -sympathy. Yet his best friends seem to have doubted him, and some, in -England, suspected that Erasmus’s hand and spirit were to be detected -in the reply that Luther made to King Henry’s book against him. Bishop -Tunstall confesses that he is relieved to hear by the letter Erasmus -had addressed to the king and the legate that he had had nothing to -do with this violent composition, and, moreover, that he was opposed -to Lutheran principles. In his letter on this subject, the bishop -laments the rapid spread of these dangerous opinions which threaten -disturbances everywhere. When the sacred ceremonies of the Church and -all pious customs are attacked as they are, he says, civil tumults are -sure to follow. After Luther’s book _De abroganda Missa_, the Reformer -will quickly go further, and so Tunstall begs and beseeches Erasmus, by -“Christ’s Passion and glory” and “by the reward” he expects; “yea, and -the Church itself prays and desires you,” he adds, “to engage in combat -with this hydra.”[186] - -At length, urged by so many of his best friends, Erasmus took up his -pen against Luther and produced his book _De libero Arbitrio_, to -which Luther, a past master in invective, replied in his contemptuous -_De servo Arbitrio_, Erasmus rejoining in the _Hyperaspistes_. Sir -Thomas More wrote that this last book delighted him, and urged Erasmus -to further attacks. “I cannot say how foolish and inflated I think -Luther’s letter to you,” he writes. “He knows well how the wretched -glosses into which he has darkened Scripture turn to ice at your touch. -They were, it is true, cold enough already.”[187] - -Erasmus’s volume on _Free-will_ drew down on him, as might be expected, -the anger of the advanced Lutherans. Ulrich von Hutten, formerly -a brilliant follower of Erasmus and Reuchlin in their attempts to -secure a revival of letters, was now the leader of the most reckless -and forward of the young German Lutherans, who assisted the Reformer -by their violence and their readiness to promote any and all of his -doctrinal changes by stirring up civil dissensions. Von Hutten -endeavoured to throw discredit upon Erasmus by a brilliant and -sarcastic attack upon it. In 1523, Erasmus published what he called the -_Spongia_, or reply to the assertions of von Hutten on his honour and -character. The tract is really an apology or explanation of his own -position as regards the Lutherans, and an assertion of his complete -loyalty to the Church. The book was in Froben’s hands for press in -June 1523, but before it could appear in September von Hutten had -died. Erasmus, however, determined to publish the work on account of -the gravity of the issues. It is necessary, if we would understand -Erasmus’s position fully, to refer to this work at some considerable -length. After complaining most bitterly that many people had tried to -defame him to the Pope and to his English friends, and to make him -a Lutheran whether he would or no; and after defending his attitude -towards Reuchlin as consistent throughout, he meets directly von -Hutten’s assertion that he had condemned the whole Dominican body. “I -have never,” he says, “been ill disposed to that Order. I have never -been so foolish as to wish ill to any Order. If it were necessary -to hate all Dominicans because, in the Order, there were some bad -members, on the same ground it would be needful to detest all Orders, -since in every one there are many black sheep.” On the same principle -Christianity itself would be worthy of hatred.[188] The fact really -is that the Dominicans have many members who are friendly to Erasmus, -and who are favourable to learning in general, and Scripture study and -criticism in particular. - -In the same way, von Hutten had mistaken Erasmus’s whole attitude -towards the Roman Church. He had charged him with being inconsistent, -in now praising, now blaming the authorities. Erasmus characterises -this as the height of impudence. “Who,” he asks, “has ever approved of -the vices of the Roman authorities? But, on the other hand, who has -ever condemned the Roman Church?” - -Continuing, he declares that he has never been the occasion of discord -or tumult in any way, and appeals with confidence to his numerous -letters and works as sufficient evidence of his love of peace. “I -love liberty,” he writes; “I neither can aid, nor desire to aid, -any faction.” Already many confess that they were wrong in taking a -part; and he sees many, who had thrown in their lot with Luther, now -drawing back, and regretting that they had ever given any countenance -to him.[189] His (Erasmus’s) sole object has been to promote good -letters, and to restore Theology to its simple and true basis, the -Holy Scripture. This he will endeavour to do as long as he has life. -“Luther,” he says, “I hold to be a man liable to err, and one who has -erred. Luther, with the rest of his followers will pass away; Christ -alone remains for ever.” - -In more than one place of this _Spongia_, Erasmus complains bitterly -that what he had said in joke, and as mere pleasantry at the table, had -been taken seriously. “What is said over a glass of wine,” he writes, -“ought not to be remembered and written down as a serious statement of -belief. Often at a feast, for example, we have transferred the worldly -sovereignty to Pope Julius, and made Maximilian, the emperor, into -the supreme Pontiff. Thus, too, we have married monasteries of monks -to convents of nuns; we have sent armies of them against the Turks, -and colonised new islands with them. In a word, we turn the universe -topsy-turvy. But, such whims are never meant to be taken seriously, as -our own true convictions.” - -Von Hutten had complained that Erasmus had spoken harshly about Luther, -and hinted that he was really actuated by a spirit of envy, on seeing -Luther’s books more read than his own. Erasmus denies that he has ever -called Luther by any harsh names, and particularly that he has ever -called him “heretic.” He admits, however, that he had frequently spoken -of the movement as a “tragedy,” and he points to the public discords -and tumults then distracting Germany as the best justification of this -verdict.[190] - -Von Hutten having said that children were being taught by their nurses -to lisp the name Luther, Erasmus declares that he cannot imagine whose -children these can be; for, he says, “I daily see how many influential, -learned, grave, and good men have come to curse his very name.” - -The most interesting portion, however, of the _Spongia_ is that in -which, at considerable length, Erasmus explains his real attitude to -Rome and the Pope. “Not even about the Roman See,” he says, “will I -admit that I have ever spoken inconsistently. I have never approved -of its tyranny, rapacity, and other vices about which of old common -complaints were heard from good men. Neither do I sweepingly condemn -‘Indulgences,’ though I have always disliked any barefaced traffic in -them. What I think about ceremonies, many places in my works plainly -show.… What it may mean ‘to reduce the Pope to order’ I do not rightly -understand. First, I think it must be allowed that Rome is a Church, -for no number of evils can make it cease to be a Church, otherwise we -should have no Churches whatever. Moreover, I hold it to be an orthodox -Church; and this Church, it must be admitted, has a Bishop. Let him be -allowed also to be Metropolitan, seeing there are very many archbishops -in countries where there has been no apostle, and Rome, without -controversy, had certainly SS. Peter and Paul, the two chief apostles. -Then how is it absurd that among Metropolitans the chief place be -granted to the Roman Pontiff?”[191] - -As to the rest, Erasmus had never, he declares, defended the excessive -powers which for many years the popes have usurped, and, like all men, -he wishes for a thorough apostolic man for Pope. For his part, if the -Pope were not above all things else an apostle, he would have him -deposed as well as any other bishop, who did not fulfil the office of -his state. For many years, no doubt, the chief evils of the world have -come from Rome, but now, as he believes, the world has a Pope who will -try at all costs to purify the See and Curia of Rome. This, however, -Erasmus fancies is not quite what von Hutten desires. He would declare -war against the Pope and his adherents, even were the Pope a good -Pope, and his followers good Christians. War is what von Hutten wants, -and he cares not whether it brings destruction to cities and peoples -and countries. - -Erasmus admits that he knows many people who are ready to go some -way in the Lutheran direction; but who would strongly object to the -overthrow of papal authority. Many would rather feel that they have -a father than a tyrant: who would like to see the tables of the -money-changers in the temple overthrown, and the barefaced granting of -indulgences and trafficking in dispensations and papal bulls repressed: -who would not object to have ceremonies simplified, and solid piety -inculcated: who would like to insist on the sacred Scriptures as the -true and only basis of authoritative teaching, and would not give to -scholastic conclusions and the mere opinions of schools the force of -an infallible oracle. With those who think thus, says Erasmus, “if (as -is the case) there is no compact on my part, certainly my old friendly -feeling for them remains cemented by the bond of learning, even if I do -not agree with them in all these things.” - -But, he continues, it is not among these well-wishers of reform that -von Hutten and Luther will find their support. This is to be found -among the “unlettered people without any judgment; among those who are -impure in their own lives, and detractors of men; amongst those who -are headstrong and ungovernable. These are they who are so favourable -to Luther’s cause that they neither know nor care to examine what -Luther teaches. They only have the Gospel on their lips; they neglect -prayer and the Sacraments; they eat what they like; and they live to -curse the Roman Pontiff. These are the Lutherans.” From such material -spring forth tumults that cannot be put down. “It is generally in -their cups,” adds Erasmus, “that the Evangelical league is recruited.” -They are too stupid to see whither they are drifting, and “with such -a type of mankind I have no wish to have anything to do.” Some make -the Gospel but the pretext for theft and rapine; and “there are some -who, having squandered or lost all their own property, pretend to be -Lutherans in order to be able to help themselves to the wealth of -others.” Von Hutten wants me, says Erasmus, to come to them. “To whom? -To those who are good and actuated by the true Gospel teaching? I would -willingly fly to them if any one will point them out. If he knew of -any Lutherans, who in place of wine, prostitutes, and dice, have at -any time delighted in holy reading and conversation; of any who never -cheat or neglect to pay their debts, but are ready to give to the -needy; of any who look on injuries done to them as favours, who bless -those who curse them--if he can show me such people, he may count on me -as an associate. Lutherans, I see; but followers of the Gospel, I can -discover few or none.” - -Von Hutten had, in his attack, with much bitterness condemned Erasmus -for not renouncing connection with those who had written strongly -against Luther. Erasmus refused to entertain the notion. “There is,” he -says, “the reverend Father John, Bishop of Rochester. He has written -a big volume against Luther. For a long period that man has been my -very special friend and most constant patron. Does von Hutten seriously -want me to break with him, because he has sharpened his pen in writing -against Luther? Long before Luther was thought of,” he says, “I enjoyed -the friendship of many learned men. Of these, some in later years took -Luther’s side, but on that account I have not renounced outwardly my -friendship for them. Some of these have changed their views and now do -not think much of Luther, still I do not cease to regard them as my -friends.” - -Towards the close of his reply, Erasmus returns to the question of the -Pope. Von Hutten had charged him with inconsistency in his views, and -Erasmus replies, “He who most desires to see the apostolic character -manifested in the Pope is most in his favour.” It may be that one can -hate the individual and approve of the office. Whoever is favourable -to, and defends, bad Popes does not honour the office. He (Erasmus) has -been found fault with for saying that the authority of the Pope has -been followed by the Christian world for very many ages. What he wrote -is true, and as long as the work of Christ is done may it be followed -for ever. Luther wants people to take his _ipse dixit_ and authority, -but he (Erasmus) would prefer to take that of the Pope. “Even if the -supremacy of the Pope was not established by Christ, still it would be -expedient that there should be one ruler possessing full authority over -others, but which authority no doubt should be free from all idea of -tyranny.… Because I have criticised certain points in the See of Rome, -I have not for that reason ever departed from it. Who would not uphold -the dignity of one who, by manifesting the virtues of the Gospel, -represents Christ to us?” The paradoxes of Luther are not worth dying -for. “There is no question of articles of faith, but of such matters as -‘Whether the supremacy of the Roman Pontiff was established by Christ:’ -‘whether cardinals are necessary to the Christian Church:’ ‘whether -confession is _de jure divino_:’ ‘whether bishops can make their laws -binding under pain of mortal sin:’ ‘whether free will is necessary for -salvation:’ ‘whether faith alone assures salvation,’ &c. If Christ gave -him grace,” Erasmus hopes that “he would be a martyr for His truth, but -he has no desire whatever to be one for Luther.” - -This last point was immediately taken up by the Lutherans. Von Hutten, -as it has already been said, had died before the publication of the -_Spongia_, and the reply to Erasmus was undertaken by Otto Brunfels. -He rejected Erasmus’s suggestion that nearly all that the Lutherans -were fighting for were matters of opinion. They were matters of faith, -he says, and no uncertainty could be admitted on this point. In order -to make the matter clear, he enumerates a great number of tenets of -Lutheranism which they hold to as matters of revealed certainty. -For instance: that Christ is the only head of the Church; that the -Church has no corporate existence; that the mass is no sacrifice; that -justification comes by faith alone; that our works are sins and cannot -justify; that good men cannot sin; that there are only two Sacraments; -that the Pope’s traditions are heretical and against Scripture; that -the religious state is from the devil; and several score more of -similar points more or less important. - -That Erasmus’s views upon the necessity of the Papacy expressed in the -_Spongia_ were not inconsistent with his previous position there is -ample evidence in his letters, to which he himself appeals. Replying, -for example, to one who had written to him deploring the religious -differences in Bohemia, Erasmus declares that, in his opinion, it -is needful for unity that there should be one head. If the prince -is tyrannical, he should be reduced to order by the teaching and -authority of the Roman Pontiff. If the bishop play the tyrant, there -is still the authority of the Roman Pontiff, who is the dispenser of -the authority and the Vicar of Christ. He may not please all, but who -that really rules can expect to do that? “In my opinion,” he adds, -“those who reject the Pope are more in error than they who demand the -Eucharist under two kinds.” Personally, he would have allowed this, -although he thinks that, as most Christians have now the other custom, -those who demand it as a necessity are unreasonable and to be greatly -blamed. Above all others, he reprobates the position of those who -refuse to obey, speak of the Pope as Antichrist, and the Roman Church -as a “harlot” because there have been bad Popes. There have been bad -cardinals and bishops, bad priests and princes, and on this ground -we ought not to obey bishop or pastor or king or ruler.[192] In the -same letter he rebukes those who desire to sweep away vestments and -ceremonies on the plea that they may not have been used in apostolic -times. - -Later on, in another letter, he complained that people call him a -favourer of Luther. This is quite untrue. “I would prefer,” he says, -“to have Luther corrected rather than destroyed; then I should prefer -that it should be done without any great social tumults. Christ I -acknowledge; Luther I know not. I acknowledge the Roman Church, which, -in my opinion, is Catholic. I praise those who are on the side of the -Roman Pontiff, who is supported by every good man.”[193] - -Again, the following year, writing on the subject of the invocation of -Papal authority against Luther, he says: “I do not question the origin -of that authority, which is most certainly just, as in ancient times -from among many priests equal in office one was chosen as the bishop; -so now from the bishops it is necessary to make choice of one Pontiff, -not merely to prevent discords, but to temper the tyrannical exercise -of authority on the part of the other bishops and secular princes.”[194] - -The publication of Erasmus’s book against Luther and of his reply -to von Hutten made little change, however, in the adverse feeling -manifested against him by those who were most busily engaged in -combating the spread of Lutheran opinions. As he wrote to King Henry -VIII., the noisy tumults and discords made him long for the end of -life, when he might hope at least to find peace.[195] Luckily for him, -he still retained the confidence of the Pope and some of the best -churchmen in Europe. Had he not done so, the very violence of the -attack against his good name might have driven him out of the Church in -spite of himself. Kind words, he more than once said, would have done -more for the cause of peace in the Church than all the biting sarcasm -and unmeasured invective that was launched against Luther, and those -who, like Erasmus, either were, or were supposed to be, associated with -his cause. Luther was not delicate about the choice of his language -when he had an enemy to pelt, but some of the preachers and pamphlet -writers on the orthodox side were his match in this respect. In this -way Erasmus puts the responsibility for “the tragedy” of Lutheranism -upon the theologians, and in part especially upon the Dominicans and -Carmelites. “Ass,” “pig,” “sow,” “heretic,” “antichrist,” and “pest -of the world,” are terms named by Erasmus as samples of the epithets -launched from the pulpit, or more deliberately set up in type, as -arguments against Luther and himself.[196] - -In writing to one of the cardinals after the publication of his -_Spongia_, there is a touch of sadness in his complaints, that having -been forced to do battle with the “Lutherans as against a hydra of -many heads,” Catholics should still try and make the world believe -that he was really a Lutheran at heart. “I have never,” he declares, -“doubted about the sovereignty of the Pope, but whether this supremacy -was recognised in the time of St. Jerome, I have my doubts, on account -of certain passages I have noted in my edition of St. Jerome. In the -same place, however, I have marked what would appear to make for the -contrary opinion; and in numerous other places I call Peter ‘Prince -of the apostolic order,’ and the Roman Pontiff, Christ’s Vicar and -the Head of His Church, giving him the highest power according to -Christ.”[197] - -Probably a more correct view of Erasmus’s real mind can hardly be -obtained than in part of a letter already quoted (Ep. 501) addressed -to Bishop Marlianus of Tuy in Galicia, on March 25, 1520. “I would -have the Church,” he writes, “purified, lest the good in it suffer by -conjunction with the evil. In avoiding the Scylla of Luther, however, -I would have care taken to avoid Charybdis. If this be sin, then I own -my guilt. I have sought to save the dignity of the Roman Pontiff, the -honour of Catholic theology, and to look to the welfare of Christendom. -I have, as yet, read no whole work of Luther, however short, and I -have never even in jest defended his paradoxes. Be assured that if any -movement is set on foot which is injurious to the Christian religion -and dangerous to the public peace or the supremacy of the Holy See, -it does not proceed from Erasmus.… In all I have written, I have not -deviated one hair’s-breadth from the teaching of the Church. But every -wise man knows that practices and teachings have been introduced into -the Church partly by custom, partly by the canonists, partly by means -of scholastic definitions, partly by the tricks and arts of secular -sovereigns, which have no sound sanction. Many great people have begged -me to support Luther, but I have ever replied that I would be ready to -take his part when he was on the Catholic side. They have asked me to -draw up a formula of faith; I have said that I know of none save the -creed of the Catholic Church, and every one who consults me I urge to -submit to the authority of the Pope.”[198] - -In many ways Erasmus regarded the rise of Lutheranism as the greatest -misfortune. Not only did it tend to make good men suspicious of the -general revival of letters, with which without reason they associated -it, but the necessity of defending the Catholic position against the -assaults of the new sectaries naturally obscured the need of reform -within the Church itself, for which far-seeing and good men had long -been looking. To Bishop Tunstall he expressed his fears lest in -pulling up the tares, some, and perchance much, of the precious wheat -might perish. Whilst, undoubtedly, there was in Luther’s work a great -deal that he cordially detested, there was also much that would never -have been condemned, had the points been calmly considered by learned -men, apart from the ferment of revolt. “This, however, I promise you,” -he adds, “that for my part I will never forsake the Church.”[199] - -This same sentiment he repeats the following year, 1526: “From the -judgment of the Church I am not able to dissent, nor have I ever -dissented.”[200] Had this tempest not risen up, he said, in another -letter from Basle, he had hoped to have lived long enough to have seen -a general revival of letters and theology returning more and more to -the foundation of all true divinity, Holy Scripture. For his part, he -cordially disliked controversy, and especially the discussion of such -questions as “whether the Council was above the Pope,” and such like. -He held that he was himself in all things a sound Catholic, and at -peace with the Pope and his bishop, whilst no name was more hated by -the Lutherans than that of Erasmus.[201] - -So much with regard to the attitude of mind manifested by Erasmus -towards the authority of the teaching Church, which is the main point -of interest in the present inquiry. His disposition will probably be -construed by some into a critical opposition to much that was taught -and practised; but it seems certain that Erasmus did not so regard -his own position. He was a reformer in the best sense, as so many -far-seeing and spiritual-minded churchmen of those days were. He -desired to better and beautify and perfect the system he found in -vogue, and he had the courage of his convictions to point out what -he thought stood in need of change and improvement, but he was no -iconoclast; he had no desire to pull down or root up or destroy under -the plea of improvement. That he remained to the last the friend of -Popes and bishops and other orthodox churchmen, is the best evidence, -over and above his own words, that his real sentiments were not -misunderstood by men who had the interests of the Church at heart, and -who looked upon him as true and loyal, if perhaps a somewhat eccentric -and caustic son of Holy Church. Even in his last sickness he received -from the Pope proof of his esteem, for he was given a benefice of -considerable value, and it was hinted to him that another honour, as -was commonly supposed at the time nothing less than the sacred purple, -was in store for him. - -Most people are of course chiefly interested in the determination of -Erasmus’s general attitude to the great religious movement of the age. -In this place, however, one or two minor points in his literary history -can hardly be passed over in silence. His attitude to the monks and the -religious Orders generally, was one of acknowledged hostility, although -there are passages in his writings, some of which have been already -quoted, which seem to show that this hostility was neither so sweeping -nor so deeply rooted as is generally thought. Still, it may be admitted -that he has few good words for the religious Orders, and he certainly -brings many and even grave accusations against their good name. There -is little doubt, however, that much he had to say on the subject was, -as he himself tells us, said to emphasise abuses that existed, and was -not intended to be taken as any wholesale sweeping condemnation of -the system of regular life. Very frequently the _Enconium Moriæ_ has -been named as the work in which Erasmus hits the monks the hardest. -Those who so regard it can hardly have read it with attention, and -most certainly they fail to appreciate its spirit. It was composed, -as we have seen, at Sir Thomas More’s suggestion, and in his house at -Chelsea in 1512, on Erasmus’s return from Italy. It is a satire on the -ecclesiastical manners and customs in which all abuses in turn come -in for their share of sarcastic condemnation; superstitions of people -as to particular days and images, superstitions about “magic prayers -and charmlike rosaries,” as to saints set to this or that office, -to cure the toothache, to discover stolen goods, &c., in the first -place came under the lash of Erasmus’s sarcasm. Then come, in turn, -doctors of divinity and theologians, “a nest of men so crabbed and -morose” that he has half a mind, he says, to leave them severely alone, -“lest perchance they should all at once fall upon me with six hundred -conclusions, driving me to recant.” They are high and mighty and look -down on other men, thinking of common individuals as “silly men like -worms creeping on the ground,” and startling ordinary folk by the -variety of their unpractical discussions and questions. “Nowadays,” he -says, “not baptism, nor the Gospel, nor Paul, nor Peter, nor Jerome, -nor Augustine, nor yet Thomas Aquinas, are able to make men Christians, -unless those Father Bachelors in divinity are pleased to subscribe to -the same. They require us to address them as _Magister noster_ in the -biggest of letters.” - -Following upon this treatment of the scholastic theologians come the -few pages devoted to monks, those “whose trade and observance were -surely most miserable and abject, unless I (Folly) did many ways -assist them.” They are so ignorant (at least so says Folly), that -they can hardly read their own names. Erasmus makes merry over the -office they chant, and the begging practised by the friars, and jeers -amusingly at their style of dressing, at their mode of cutting their -hair, and at their sleeping and working by _rule_. “Yea,” he says, -“some of them being of a straightened rule are such sore punishers of -their flesh, as outwardly they wear nought but sackcloth and inwardly -no better than fine holland.” In a word, he laughs at the general -observance of regular life, and in one place only passes a hint that -some of their lives are not so saintly as they pretend. As a whole, -however, the sarcasm is not so bitter as that addressed to other -ecclesiastics, and even to the Pope himself. In view of Sir Thomas -More’s subsequent explanation about the spirit of the _Enconium Moriæ_, -there can be no doubt that it was intended mainly as a playful, if -somewhat ill-judged and severe, lampoon on some patent abuses, and -in no sense an attack upon the ecclesiastical system of the Catholic -Church.[202] - -One other misunderstanding about Erasmus’s position in regard to the -revival of letters may be here noticed. The great scholar has been -regarded as the incarnation of the spirit of practical paganism, which, -unfortunately, was quickly the outcome of the movement in Italy, and -which at this time gave so much colour and point to the denunciations -of those of the opposite school. No view can be more unjust to Erasmus. -Though he longed anxiously for the clergy to awake to a sense of the -importance of studies in general, of classical and scriptural studies -in particular, there was no one who saw more clearly the danger and -absurdity of carrying the classical revivalist spirit to extremes. In -fact, in his _Ciceroniana_, he expressly ridicules what he has seen in -Rome of the classical spirit run mad. Those afflicted by it, he says, -try to think that old Rome has returned. They speak of the “Senate,” -the “conscript fathers,” the “plebs,” the “chief auger,” and the -“college of soothsayers,” “Pontifices Maximi,” “Vestals,” “triumphs,” -&c. Nothing can be more unlike the true Ciceronian spirit. Am I, he -asks, as a Christian speaking to Christians about the Christian -religion to try and suppose I am living in the age of Cicero, and speak -as if I were addressing a meeting of the conscript fathers on the -Capitol? Am I to pick my words, choose my figures and illustrations -from Cicero’s speeches to the Senate? How can Cicero’s eloquence help -me to speak to a mixed audience of virgins, wives, and widows in praise -of fasting, penance, prayer, almsgiving, the sanctity of marriage, the -contempt of the fleeting pleasures of this world, or of the study of -Holy Scripture. No, a Christian orator dressed in Cicero’s clothes is -ridiculous.[203] - -As an illustration of the height of absurdity to which the madness of -the classical craze had brought people in Rome in his day, Erasmus -relates the story of a sermon he himself once heard in the Eternal -City during the pontificate of Pope Julius II. “I had been invited,” -he says, “a few days before, by some learned men to be present at this -sermon (to be preached on Good Friday). ‘Take care not to miss it,’ -they said, ‘for you will at last be enabled to appreciate the tone -of the Roman language, spoken by a Roman mouth.’ Hence, with great -curiosity, I went to the church, procuring a place near the orator so -as not to miss even one word. Julius II. was himself present, a very -unusual thing, probably on account of his health. And there were also -there many cardinals and bishops, and in the crowd most of the men of -letters who were then in Rome. - -“The exordium and peroration were nearly as long as the rest of the -discourse, and they all rang the changes of praise of Julius II. -He called him the almighty Jove, and pictured him as brandishing -the trident, casting his thunderbolts with his right hand, and -accomplishing all he willed by the mere nod of his head. All that had -taken place of late years in Gaul, Germany, Spain, &c., were but the -efforts of his simple will. Then came a hundred times repeated, such -words as ‘Rome,’ ‘Romans,’ ‘Roman mouth,’ ‘Roman eloquence,’ &c.” But -what, asks Erasmus, were all these to Julius, bishop of the Christian -religion, Christ’s vicegerent, successor of Peter and Paul? What are -these to cardinals and bishops who are in the places of the other -apostles? - -“The orator’s design,” he continues, “was to represent to us Jesus -Christ, at first in the agony of His Passion, and then in the glory -of His triumph. To do this, he recalled the memory of Curtius and -Decius, who had given themselves to the gods for the salvation of the -Republic. He reminded us of Cecrops, of Menelaus, of Iphigenia, and of -other noble victims who had valued their lives less than the honour -and welfare of their country. Public gratitude (he continued, in tears -and in most lugubrious tones) had always surrounded these noble and -generous characters with its homage, sometimes raising gilded statues -to their memory in the forum; sometimes decreeing them even divine -honours, whilst Jesus Christ, for all His benefits, had received no -other reward but death. The orator then went on to compare our Saviour, -who had deserved so well of His country, to Phocion and to Socrates, -who were compelled to drink hemlock though accused of no crime; to -Epaminondas, driven to defend himself against envy roused by his noble -deeds; to Scipio and to Aristides, whom the Athenians were tired of -hearing called the ‘Just one,’ &c. - -“I ask, can anything be imagined colder and more inept? Yet, over all -his efforts, the preacher sweated blood and water to rival Cicero. -In brief, my Roman preacher spoke Roman so well that I heard nothing -about the death of Christ.[204] If Cicero had lived in our days,” asks -Erasmus, “would he not think the name of God the Father as elegant as -Jupiter the almighty? Would he think it less elegant to speak of Jesus -Christ than of Romulus, or of Scipio Africanus, of Quintus Curtius, or -of Marcus Decius? Would he think the name of the Catholic Church less -illustrious than that of ‘Conscript Fathers,’ ‘Quirites,’ or ‘Senate -and people of Rome’? He would speak to us of faith in Christ, of the -Holy Ghost, or the Holy Trinity?” &c.[205] - -At considerable length Erasmus pours out the vials of his scorn upon -those who act so foolishly under the influence of the false classical -spirit. He points out the danger to be avoided. People, he says, go -into raptures over pagan antiquities, and laugh at others who are -enthusiastic about Christian archæology. “We kiss, venerate, almost -adore a piece of antiquity,” he says, “and mock at relics of the -Apostles. If any one finds something from the twelve tables, who does -not consider it worthy of the most holy place? And the laws written by -the finger of God, who venerates, who kisses them? How delighted we -are with a medal stamped with the head of Hercules, or of Mercury, or -of Fortune, or of Victory, or of Alexander the Great, or one of the -Cæsars,[206] and we deride those who treasure the wood of the cross or -images of the Virgin and saints as superstitious.”[207] If in dealing -with his subject Erasmus may appear to exaggerate the evil he condemns, -this much is clear, that his advocacy of letters and learning, however -strenuous and enthusiastic, was tempered by a sense of the paramount -importance of the Christian spirit in the pursuit of science. - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -THE LUTHERAN INVASION - - -It is not uncommonly asserted that the religious changes in England, -although for convenience’ sake dated from the rejection of Papal -supremacy, were in reality the outcome of long-continued and -ever-increasing dissatisfaction with the then existing ecclesiastical -system. The Pope’s refusal to grant Henry his wished-for divorce -from Katherine, we are told, was a mere incident, which at most, -precipitated by a short while what had long been inevitable.[208] -Those who take this view are bound to believe that the Church in -England in the early sixteenth century was honeycombed by disbelief -in the traditional teachings, and that men were only too ready to -welcome emancipation. What then is the evidence for this picture of the -religious state of men’s minds in England on the eve of the Reformation? - -It is, indeed, not improbable that up and down the country there were, -at this period, some dissatisfied spirits; some who would eagerly -seize any opportunity to free themselves from the restraints which no -longer appealed to their consciences, and from teachings they had come -to consider as mere ecclesiastical formalism. A Venetian traveller of -intelligence and observation, who visited the country at the beginning -of the century, whilst struck with the Catholic practices and with the -general manifestations of English piety he witnessed, understood that -there were “many who have various opinions concerning religion.”[209] -But so far as there is evidence at all, it points to the fact, that of -religious unrest, in any real sense, there could have been very little -in the country generally. It is, of course, impossible to suppose that -any measurable proportion of the people could have openly rejected the -teaching of the Church or have been even crypto-Lollards, without there -being satisfactory evidence of the fact forthcoming at the present day. - -The similarity of the doctrines held by the English Reformers of -the sixteenth century with many of those taught by the followers of -Wycliffe has, indeed, led some writers to assume a direct connection -between them which certainly did not exist in fact. So far as England -at least is concerned, there is no justification for assuming for the -Reformation a line of descent from any form of English Lollardism. It -is impossible to study the century which preceded the overthrow of -the old religious system in England without coming to the conclusion -that as a body the Lollards had been long extinct, and that as -individuals, scattered over the length and breadth of the land, -without any practical principle of cohesion, the few who clung to the -tenets of Wycliffe were powerless to effect any change of opinion in -the overwhelming mass of the population at large. Lollardry, to the -Englishman of the day, was “heresy,” and any attempt to teach it was -firmly repressed by the ecclesiastical authority, supported by the -strong arm of the State; but it was also an offence against the common -feeling of the people, and there can be no manner of doubt that its -repression was popular. The genius of Milton enabled him to see the -fact that “Wycliffe’s preaching was soon damped and stifled by the Pope -and prelates for six or seven kings’ reigns,” and Mr. James Gairdner, -whose studies in this period of our national history enable him to -speak with authority, comes to the same conclusion. “Notwithstanding -the darkness that surrounds all subjects connected with the history of -the fifteenth century,” he writes, “we may venture pretty safely to -affirm that Lollardry was _not_ the beginning of modern Protestantism. -Plausible as it seems to regard Wycliffe as ‘the morning star of the -Reformation,’ the figure conveys an impression which is altogether -erroneous. Wycliffe’s real influence did not long survive his own day, -and so far from Lollardry having taken any deep root among the English -people, the traces of it had wholly disappeared long before the great -revolution of which it is thought to be the forerunner. At all events, -in the rich historical material for the beginning of Henry VIII.’s -reign, supplied by the correspondence of the time, we look in vain for -a single indication that any such thing as a Lollard sect existed. The -movement had died a natural death; from the time of Oldcastle it sank -into insignificance. Though still for a while considerable in point of -numbers, it no longer counted among its adherents any men of note; and -when another generation had passed away the serious action of civil war -left no place for the crotchets of fanaticism.”[210] - -On the only evidence available, the student of the reign of Henry VII. -and of that of Henry VIII. up to the breach with Rome is bound to come -to the same conclusion as to the state of the English Church. If we -except manifestations of impatience with the Pope and Curia, which -could be paralleled in any age and country, and which were rather on -the secular side than on the religious, there is nothing that would -make us think that England was not fully loyal in mind and heart to -the established ecclesiastical system. In fact, as Mr. Brewer says, -everything proves that “the general body of the people had not as yet -learned to question the established doctrines of the Church. For the -most part, they paid their Peter pence and heard mass, and did as their -fathers had done before them.”[211] - -It may be taken, therefore, for granted that the seeds of religious -discord were not the product of the country itself, nor, so far as we -have evidence on the subject at all, does it appear that the soil of -the country was in any way specially adapted for its fructification. -The work, both of raising the seed and of scattering it over the soil -of England, must be attributed, if the plain facts of history are to be -believed, to Germans and the handful of English followers of the German -Reformers. If we would rightly understand the religious situation in -England at the commencement of the Reformation, it is of importance to -inquire into the methods of attack adopted in the Lutheran invasion, -and to note the chief doctrinal points which were first assailed. - -Very shortly after the religious revolt had established itself in -Germany, the first indications of a serious attempt to undermine the -traditional faith of the English Church became manifest in England. -Roger Edgworth, a preacher during the reigns of Henry and Queen Mary, -says that his “long labours have been cast in most troublesome times -and most encumbered with errors and heresies, change of minds and -schisms that ever was in the realm.… Whilst I was a young student in -divinity,” he continues, “Luther’s heresies rose and were scattered -here in this realm, which, in less space than a man would think, had -so sore infected the Christian folk, first the youth and then the -elders, where the children could set their fathers to school, that the -king’s Majesty and all Christian clerks in the realm had much ado to -extinguish them. This they could not so perfectly quench, but that ever -since, when they might have any maintenance by man or woman of great -power, they burst forth afresh, even like fire hid under chaff.”[212] - -Sir Thomas More, when Chancellor in 1532, attributed the rapid spread -of what to him and most people of his day in England was heresy, to -the flood of literature which was poured forth over the country by -the help of printing. “We have had,” he writes, “some years of late, -plenteous of evil books. For they have grown up so fast and sprung up -so thick, full of pestilent errors and pernicious heresies, that they -have infected and killed, I fear me, more simple souls than the famine -of the dear years have destroyed bodies.”[213] - -We are not left in ignorance as to the books here referred to, as some -few years previously the bishops of England had issued a list of the -prohibited volumes. Thus, in October 1526, Bishop Tunstall ordered that -in London people should be warned not to read the works in question, -but that all who possessed them should deliver them over to the -bishop’s officials in order that they might be destroyed as pernicious -literature. The list included several works of Luther, three or four of -Tyndale, a couple of Zwingle, and several isolated works, such as the -_Supplication of Beggars_, and the _Dyalogue between the Father and the -Son_.[214] - -In 1530 the king by proclamation forbade the reading or possession of -some eighty-five works of Wycliffe, Luther, Œcolampadius, Zwingle, -Pomeranus, Bucer, Wesselius, and indeed the German divines generally, -under the heading of “books of the Lutheran sect or faction conveyed -into the city of London.” Besides these Latin treatises, the -prohibition included many English tracts, such as _A book of the old -God and the new_, the _Burying of the Mass_, Frith’s _Disputation -concerning Purgatory_, and several prayer-books intended to propagate -the new doctrines, such as _Godly prayers_; _Matins and Evensong with -the seven Psalms and other heavenly psalms with commendations_; the -_Hortulus Animæ_ in English,[215] and the _Primer_ in English. - -In his proclamation Henry VIII. speaks of the determination of the -English nation in times past to be true to the Catholic faith and to -defend the country against “wicked sects of heretics and Lollards, -who, by perversion of Holy Scripture, do induce erroneous opinions, -sow sedition amongst Christian people, and disturb the peace and -tranquillity of Christian realms, as lately happened in some parts of -Germany, where, by the procurement and sedition of Martin Luther and -other heretics, were slain an infinite number of Christian people.” -To prevent like misfortunes happening in England, he orders prompt -measures to be taken to put a stop to the circulation of books in -English and other languages, which teach things “intolerable to the -clean ears of any good Christian man.”[216] - -By the king’s command, the convocation of Canterbury drew up a list -of prohibited heretical books. In the first catalogue of fifty-three -tracts and volumes, there is no mention of any work of Wycliffe, and -besides some volumes which had come from the pens of Tyndale, Frith, -and Roy, who were acknowledged disciples of Luther, the rest are all -the compositions of the German Reformers. The same may be said of a -supplementary list of tracts, the authors of which were unknown. All -these are condemned as containing false teaching, plainly contrary to -the Catholic faith, and the bishops add: “Moreover, following closely -in the footsteps of our fathers, we prohibit all from selling, giving, -reading, distributing, or publishing any tract, booklet, pamphlet, -or book, which translates or interprets the Holy Scripture in the -vernacular … or even knowingly to keep such volumes without the licence -of their diocesan in writing.”[217] - -About the same time a committee of bishops, including Archbishop -Warham and Bishop Tunstall was appointed to draw up a list of some -of the principal errors contained in the prohibited works of English -heretics beyond the sea. The king had heard that “many books in the -English tongue containing many detestable errors and damnable opinions, -printed in parts beyond the sea,” were being brought into England and -spread abroad. He was unwilling that “such evil seed sown amongst his -people (should) so take root that it might overgrow the corn of the -Catholic doctrine before sprung up in the souls of his subjects,” and -he consequently ordered this examination. This has been done and the -errors noted, “albeit many more there be in those books; which books -totally do swarm full of heresies and detestable opinions.” The books -thus examined and noted were eight in number: _The Wicked Mammon_; -the _Obedience of Christian man_; the _Revelation of Antichrist_; -the _Sum of Scripture_; the _Book of Beggars_; the _Kalendar of the -Prymer_; the _Prymer_, and an _Exposition unto the Seventh Chapter -of I Corinthians_. From these some hundreds of propositions were -culled which contradicted the plain teaching of the Church in matters -of faith and morality. In this condemnation, as the king states in -his directions to preachers to publish the same, the commission were -unanimous.[218] - -The attack on the traditional teachings of the Church, moreover, -was not confined to unimportant points. From the first, high and -fundamental doctrines, as it seemed to men in those days, were put -in peril. The works sent forth by the advocates of the change speak -for themselves, and, when contrasted with those of Luther, leave no -room for doubt that they were founded on them, and inspired by the -spirit of the leader of the revolt, although, as was inevitable in -such circumstances, in particulars the disciples proved themselves in -advance of their master. Writing in 1546, Dr. Richard Smythe contrasts -the old times, when the faith was respected, with the then state of -mental unrest in religious matters. “In our days,” he writes, “not a -few things, nor of small importance, but (alack the more is the pity) -even the chiefest and most weighty matters of our religion and faith -are called in question, babbled, talked, and jangled upon (reasoned -I cannot nor ought not to call it). These matters in time past (when -reason had place and virtue with learning was duly regarded, yea, and -vice with insolency was generally detested and abhorred) were held in -such reverence and honour, in such esteem and dignity, yea, so received -and embraced by all estates, that it was not in any wise sufferable -that tag and rag, learned and unlearned, old and young, wise and -foolish, boys and wenches, master and man, tinkers and tilers, colliers -and coblers, with other such raskabilia might at their pleasure rail -and jest (for what is it else they now do?) against everything that -is good and virtuous, against all things that are expedient and -profitable, not sparing any Sacrament of the Church or ordinance of the -same, no matter how laudable, decent, or fitting it has been regarded -in times past, or how much it be now accepted by good and Catholic -men. In this way, both by preaching and teaching (if it so ought to -be called), playing, writing, printing, singing, and (Oh, good Lord!) -in how many other ways besides, divers of our age, being their own -schoolmasters, or rather scholars of the devil, have not forborne or -feared to speak and write against the most excellent and most blessed -Sacrament of the Altar, affirming that the said Sacrament is nothing -more than a bare figure, and that there is not in the same Sacrament -the very body and blood of our blessed Saviour and Redeemer, Jesus -Christ, but only a naked sign, a token, a memorial and a remembrance -only of the same, if they take it for so much even and do not call it -(as they are wont to do) an idol and very plain idolatry.”[219] - -As to the date of the introduction of these heretical views into -England, Sir Thomas More entirely agreed with Dr. Smythe, the writer -just quoted. He places the growth of these ideas in the circulation -of books by Tyndale, Frith, and Barnes, and even as late as 1533, -declares that the number of those who had accepted the new teaching -was grossly exaggerated. He states his belief that “the realm is not -full of heretics, and it has in it but a few, though that few be indeed -over many and grown more also by negligence in some part than there -has been in some late years past.”[220] It was, indeed, part of the -strategy pursued by the innovators in religion to endeavour to make -the movement appear more important than it had any claim to be. It -is, writes More, the “policy” of “these heretics who call themselves -‘evangelical brethren,’” to make their number appear larger than it is. -“Some pot-headed apostles they have that wander about the realm into -sundry shires, for whom every one has a different name in every shire, -and some, peradventure, in corners here and there they bring into the -brotherhood. But whether they get any or none they do not hesitate to -lie when they come home, and say that more than half of every shire is -of their own sect. Boast and brag these blessed brethren never so fast, -they feel full well themselves that they be too feeble in what country -so ever they be strongest. For if they thought themselves able to meet -and match the Catholics they would not, I ween, lie still at rest for -three days.” - -“For in all places where heresies have sprung up hitherto so hath it -proved yet. And so negligently might these things be handled, that at -length it might happen so here. And verily they look (far as they be -yet from the power) for it, and some of them have not hesitated to say -this, and some to write it, too. For I read the letter myself which was -cast into the palace of the Right Reverend Father in God, Cuthbert, -now Bishop of Durham, but then Bishop of London, in which among other -bragging word … were these words contained: ‘There will once come a -day.’ And out of question that day they long for but also daily look -for, and would, if they were not too weak, not fail to find it. And -they have the greater hope because … they see that it begins to grow -into a custom that among good Catholic folk they are suffered to talk -unchecked.” For good men in their own minds indeed think the Catholic -faith so strong that heretics with all their babbling will never be -able to vanquish it, “and in this undoubtedly their mind is not only -good, but also very true. But they do not look far enough. For as the -sea will never surround and overwhelm all the land, and yet has eaten -it in many places, and swallowed whole countries up and made many -places sea, which sometime were well-inhabited lands, and has lost part -of its own possession again in other places, so, though the faith of -Christ shall never be overwhelmed with heresy, nor the gate of hell -prevail against Christ’s Church, yet as in some places it winneth in -new peoples, so by negligence in some places the old may be lost.”[221] - -Sir Thomas More is all for vigilance on the part of the authorities. He -likens those who are in power and office to the guardians of a fertile -field who are bound to prevent the sowing of tares on their master’s -land; and the multiplication of evil books and their circulation -among the people, cannot, in his opinion, have any other effect than -to prevent the fertilisation of the good seed of God’s word in the -hearts of many. “These new teachers,” he says, “despise Christ’s -Sacraments, which are His holy ordinances and a great part of Christ’s -New Law and Testament. Who can place less value on His commandments -than they who, upon the boldness of faith only, set all good works at -naught, and little consider the danger of their evil deeds upon the -boldness that a bare faith and slight repentance, without shrift or -penance, suffices, and that no vow made to God can bind a man to live -chastely or hinder a monk from marriage. All these things, with many -pestilent errors besides, these abominable books of Tyndale and his -fellows teach us. Of these books of heresies there are so many made -within these few years, what by Luther himself and by his fellows, and -afterwards by the new sects sprung out of his, which, like the children -of Vippara, would now gnaw out their mother’s belly, that the bare -names of those books were almost enough to make a book. Some of every -sort of those books are brought into this realm and kept in ‘hucker -mucker’ by some shrewd masters who keep them for no good. Besides -the Latin, French, and German books of which these evil sects have -put forth an innumerable number, there are some made in the English -tongue. First, Tyndale’s _English Testament_, father of them all by -reason of his false translating, and after that, the _Five Books of -Moses_ translated by the same man; we need not doubt in what manner -and for what purpose. Then you have his _Introduction to Saint Paul’s -Epistle_, with which he introduces his readers to a false understanding -of Saint Paul, making them believe, among many other heresies, that -Saint Paul held that faith only was always sufficient for salvation, -and that men’s good works were worth nothing and could not deserve -thanks or reward in heaven, although they were done in grace.… Then we -have from Tyndale _The Wicked Mammona_, by which many a man has been -beguiled and brought into many wicked heresies, which in good faith -would be to me a matter of no little wonder, for there was never a more -foolish frantic book, were it not that the devil is ever ready to put -out the eyes of those who are content to become blind. Then we have -Tyndale’s _Book of Obedience_, by which we are taught to disobey the -teaching of Christ’s Catholic Church and set His holy Sacraments at -naught. Then we have from Tyndale the _First Epistle of Saint John_, -expounded in such wise that I dare say that blessed Apostle had rather -his Epistle had never been put in writing than that his holy words -should be believed by all Christian people in such a sense. Then we -have the _Supplication of Beggars_, a piteous beggarly book, in which -he would have all the souls in Purgatory beg all about for nothing. -Then we have from George Joye, otherwise called Clarke, a _Goodly Godly -Epistle_, wherein he teaches divers other heresies, but specially that -men’s vows and promises of chastity are not lawful, and can bind no man -in conscience not to wed when he will. And this man, considering that -when a man teaches one thing and does another himself, the people set -less value by his preaching, determined therefore with himself, that -he would show himself an example of his preaching. Therefore, being a -priest, he has beguiled a woman and wedded her; the poor woman, I ween, -being unaware that he is a priest. Then you have also an _Exposition -on the Seventh Chapter of Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians_, -by which exposition also priests, friars, monks, and nuns are taught -the evangelical liberty that they may run out a-caterwauling and wed. -That work has no name of the maker, but some think it was Friar Roy -who, when he had fallen into heresy, then found it unlawful to live -in chastity and ran out of his Order. Then have we the _Examinations -of Thorpe_ put forth as it is said by George Constantine (by whom I -know well there has been a great many books of that sort sent into -this realm). In that book, the heretic that made it as (if it were) a -communication between the bishop and his chaplains and himself, makes -all the parties speak as he himself likes, and sets down nothing as -spoken against his heresies, but what he himself would seem solemnly -to answer. When any good Christian man who has either learning or any -natural wit reads this book, he shall be able not only to perceive -him for a foolish heretic and his arguments easy to answer, but shall -also see that he shows himself a false liar in his rehearsal of the -matter in which he makes the other part sometimes speak for his own -convenience such manner of things as no man who was not a very wild -goose would have done. - -“Then have we _Jonas_ made out by Tyndale, a book that whosoever -delight therein shall stand in such peril, that Jonas was never so -swallowed up by the whale, as by the delight of that book a man’s soul -may be so swallowed by the devil that he shall never have the grace to -get out again. Then, we have from Tyndale the answer to my _Dyalogue_. -Then, the book of Frith against _Purgatory_. Then, the book of Luther -translated into English in the name of Brightwell, but, as I am -informed, it was translated by Frith; a book, such as Tyndale never -made one more foolish nor one more full of lies.… Then, we have the -_Practice of Prelates_, wherein Tyndale intended to have made a special -show of his high worldly wit, so that men should have seen therein that -there was nothing done among princes that he was not fully advertised -of the secrets. Then, we have now the book of Friar Barnes, sometime a -doctor of Cambridge, who was abjured before this time for heresy, and -is at this day come under a safe conduct to the realm. Surely, of all -their books that yet came abroad in English (of all which there was -never one wise nor good) there was none so bad, so foolish, so false -as his. This, since his coming, has been plainly proved to his face, -and that in such wise that, when the books that he cites and alleges -in his book were brought forth before him, and his ignorance showed -him, he himself did in divers things confess his oversight, and clearly -acknowledged that he had been mistaken and wrongly understood the -passages. - -“Then, we have besides Barnes’s book, the _A B C for children_. And -because there is no grace therein, lest we should lack prayers, we -have the _Primer_ and the _Ploughman’s Prayer_ and a book of other -small devotions, and then the whole _Psalter_ too. After the _Psalter_, -children were wont to go straight to their _Donat_ and their Accidence, -but now they go straight to Scripture. And for this end we have as a -Donat, the book of the _Pathway to Scripture_, and for an Accidence, -the _Whole sum of Scripture_ in a little book, so that after these -books are learned well, we are ready for Tyndale’s _Pentateuchs_ and -Tyndale’s _Testament_, and all the other high heresies that he and -Joye and Frith and Friar Barnes teach in all their books. Of all these -heresies the seed is sown, and prettily sprung up in these little -books before. For the _Primer_ and _Psalter_, prayers and all, were -translated and made in this manner by heretics only. The _Psalter_ was -translated by George Joye, the priest that is wedded now, and I hear -say the _Primer_ too, in which the seven Psalms are printed without -the Litany, lest folks should pray to the saints; and the _Dirge_ is -left out altogether, lest a man might happen to pray with it for his -father’s soul. In their Calendar, before their devout prayers, they -have given us a new saint, Sir Thomas Hytton, the heretic who was -burned in Kent. They have put him in on St. Matthew’s Eve, by the name -of St. Thomas the Martyr. - -“It would be a long work to rehearse all their books, for there are -yet more than I have known. Against all these the king’s high wisdom -politically provided, in that his proclamation forbade any manner of -English books printed beyond the sea to be brought into this realm, or -any printed within this realm to be sold unless the name of the printer -and his dwelling-place were set upon the book. But still, as I said -before, a few malicious, mischievous persons have now brought into this -realm these ungracious books full of pestilent, poisoned heresies that -have already in other realms killed, by schisms and war, many thousand -bodies, and by sinful errors and abominable heresies many more thousand -souls. - -“Although these books cannot either be there printed without great -cost, nor here sold without great adventure and peril, yet, with money -sent hence, they cease not to print them there, and send them hither by -the whole sacks full at once; and in some places, looking for no lucre, -cast them abroad at night, so great a pestilent pleasure have some -devilish people caught with the labour, travail, cast, charge, peril, -harm, and hurt of themselves to seek the destruction of others.”[222] - -In his introduction to the _Confutation_ of Tyndale’s answer, from -which the foregoing extracts are taken, Sir Thomas More gives ample -evidence that the teaching of “the New Learning” was founded entirely -upon that of the German Reformer Luther, although on certain points his -English followers had gone beyond their master. He takes for example -what Hytton, “whom Tyndale has canonized,” had been teaching “his holy -congregations, in divers corners and luskes lanes.” Baptism, he had -allowed to be “a sacrament necessary for salvation,” though he declared -that there was no need for a priest to administer it. Matrimony, he -thought a good thing for Christians, but would be sorry to say it was -a sacrament. Extreme Unction and Confirmation, together with Holy -Orders, he altogether rejected as sacraments, declaring them to be -mere ceremonies of man’s invention. “The mass,” he declared, “should -never be said,” since to do so was rather an act of sin than virtue. -Confession to a priest was unnecessary, and the penance enjoined was -“without profit to the soul.” Purgatory he denied, “and said further, -that neither prayer nor fasting for the souls departed can do them -any good.” Religious vows were wrong, and those who entered religion -“sinned in so doing.” He held further, that “no man had any free-will -after he had once sinned;” that “all the images of Christ and His -saints should be thrown out of the Church,” and that whatsoever laws -“the Pope or a General Council might make beyond what is expressly -commanded in Scripture” need not be obeyed. “As touching the Sacrament -of the Altar, he said that it was a necessary sacrament, but held that -after the consecration, there was nothing whatever therein, but only -the very substance of material bread and wine.”[223] - -Now, it was to defend these points of Catholic faith, as More, in -common with the most learned in the land, believed them to be, that he -took up his pen against Tyndale and others. I wish, he says, to second -“the king’s gracious purpose, as being his most unworthy chancellor,” -since “I know well that the king’s highness, for his faithful mind to -God, desires nothing more effectually than the maintenance of the true -Catholic faith, whereof is his no more honourable than well-deserved -title, ‘defensor.’ He detests nothing more than these pestilent books -which Tyndale and others send over into the realm in order to set -forth their abominable heresies. For this purpose he has not only by -his most erudite famous books, both in English and Latin, declared his -most Catholic purpose and intent, but also by his open proclamations -divers times renewed, and finally in his own most royal person in the -Star Chamber most eloquently by his mouth, in the presence of his -lords spiritual and temporal, has given monition and warning to all -the justices of peace of every quarter of his realm then assembled -before his Highness, to be declared by them to all his people, and did -prohibit and forbid under great penalties, the bringing in, reading, -and keep of those pernicious poisoned books.”[224] - -The other writers of the time, moreover, had no doubt whatever as to -the place whence the novel opinions had sprung, and they feared that -social disturbances would follow in the wake of the religious teaching -of the sectaries as they had done in the country of their birth. Thus -Germen Gardynare, writing to a friend about the execution of John Frith -for heresy, says that he was “amongst others found busy at Oxford -in setting abroad these heresies which lately sprang up in Germany, -and by the help of such folk are spread abroad into sundry places of -Christendom, tending to nothing else but to the division and rending -asunder of Christ’s mystical body, His Church; and to the pulling down -of all power and the utter subversion of all commonwealths.”[225] - -Sir Thomas More, too, saw danger to the ship of State from the storms -which threatened the nation in the rise of the religious novelties -imported from abroad. As a warning anticipation of what might come to -pass in England if the flood was allowed to gain head, he describes -what was known of the state of Germany when he wrote in 1528. What -helped Luther to successfully spread his poison was, he says, “that -liberty which he so highly commended unto the people, inducing them -to believe that having faith they needed nothing else. For he taught -them to neglect fasting, prayer, and such other things as vain and -unfruitful ceremonies, teaching them also that being faithful -Christians they were so near cousins to Christ that they were, in a -full freedom and liberty, discharged of all governors and all manner of -laws spiritual and temporal, except only the Gospel. And though he said -that, as a point of special perfection, it would be good to suffer and -bear the rule and authority of Popes and princes and other governors, -whose rule and authority he calls mere tyranny, yet he says the people -are so free by faith that they are no more bound thereto than they are -to suffer wrong. And this doctrine Tyndale also teaches as the special -matter of his holy book of disobedience. Now, this doctrine was heard -so pleasantly in Germany by the common people that it blinded them in -looking on the remnant, and would not allow them to consider and see -what end the same would come to. The temporal lords also were glad to -hear this talk against the clergy, and the people were as glad to hear -it against the clergy and against the lords too, and against all the -governors of every good town and city. Finally, it went so far that it -began to burst out and fall to open force and violence. For intending -to begin at the most feeble, a boisterous company of the unhappy sect -gathered together and first rebelled against an abbot, and afterwards -against a bishop, wherewith the temporal lords had good game and sport -and dissembled the matter, gaping after the lands of the spirituality, -till they had almost played as Æsop tells of the dog, which, in order -to snatch at the shadow of the cheese in the water, let the cheese -he had in his mouth fall, and lost it. For so it was shortly after -that those uplandish Lutherans took so great boldness and began to -grow so strong that they set also upon the temporal lords. These … so -acquitted themselves that they slew in one summer 70,000 Lutherans -and subdued the rest in that part of Germany to a most miserable -servitude.… And in divers other parts of Germany and Switzerland this -ungracious sect is so grown, by the negligence of governors in great -cities, that in the end the common people have compelled the rulers to -follow them.… - -“And now it is too piteous a sight to see the ‘dispiteous dispyghts’ -done in many places to God and all good men, with the marvellous -change from the face and fashion of Christendom into a very tyrannous -persecution, not only of all good Christians living and dead, but -also of Christ Himself. For there you will see now goodly monasteries -destroyed, the places burnt up, and the religious people put out -and sent to seek their living; or, in many cities, the places (the -buildings) yet standing with more despite to God than if they were -burned to ashes. For the religious people, monks, friars, and nuns, -are wholly driven or drawn out, except such as would agree to forsake -their vows of chastity and be wedded; and places dedicated to -cleanliness and chastity, left only to these apostates as brothels to -live there in lechery. Now are the parish churches in many places not -only defaced, all the ornaments taken away, the holy images pulled -down, and either broken or burned, but also the Holy Sacrament cast -out. And the abominable beasts (which I abhor to think about) did -not abhor in despite to defile the pixes and in many places use the -churches continually for a common siege. And that they have done in -so despiteful a wise that when a stranger from other places where -Christ is worshipped resorts to these cities, some of those unhappy -wretched citizens do not fail, as it were, for courtesy and kindness, -to accompany them in their walking abroad to show them the pleasures -and commodities of the town, and then bring them to the church, only -to show them in derision what uses the churches serve for!” Then, -after pointing out that “of this sect were the greater part of those -ungracious people who lately entered into Rome with the Duke of -Bourbon,” Sir Thomas More details at considerable length the horrors -committed during that sack of the Eternal City; adding: “For this -purpose I rehearse to you these their heavy mischievous dealings, that -you may perceive by their deeds what good comes of their sect. For as -our Saviour says: ‘ye shall know the tree by the fruit.’”[226] - -The activity of the teachers of the new doctrine was everywhere -remarkable. More only wished that the maintainers of the traditional -Catholic faith were half so zealous “as those that are fallen into -false heresies and have forsaken the faith.” These seem, he says, -indeed to “have a hot fire of hell in their hearts that can never -suffer them to rest or cease, but forces them night and day to labour -and work busily to subvert and destroy the Catholic Christian faith -by every means they can devise.”[227] The time was, “and even until -now very late,” when no man would allow any heresy to be spoken at -his table; for this “has been till of late the common Christian zeal -towards the Catholic faith.” But now (1533) “though, God be thanked, -the faith is itself as fast rooted in this realm as ever it was before -(except in some very few places, and yet even in those few the very -faithful folk are many more than the faithless), even good men are -beginning to tolerate the discussion of heretical views, and to take -part in ‘the evil talk.’” - -To understand the Reformation in England, it is important to note -the progress of its growth, and to note that the lines upon which -it developed were to all intents and purposes those which had been -laid down by Luther for the German religious revolution, although, in -many ways, England was carried along the path of reformed doctrines, -even further than the original leader had been prepared to go. The -special points of the traditional faith of the English people, which -the reforming party successfully attacked, were precisely those -which had been the battle-ground in Germany, and Sir Thomas More’s -description of the result there might somewhat later have been written -of this country. Tyndale was described by More as “the captain of the -English heretics,” and the influence of his works no doubt greatly -helped to the overthrow of the traditional teaching. The key of the -position taken up by the English Reformers, as well as by their German -predecessors, was the claim that all belief must be determined by -the plain word of Holy Scripture, and by that alone. Tradition they -rejected, although Sir Thomas More pointed out forcibly that the -Church had always acknowledged the twofold authority of the written -and unwritten word.[228] Upon this ground Tyndale and his successors -rejected all the sacraments but two, attacked popular devotion to -sacred images and prayers to our Lady and the saints, and rejected -the old teaching about Purgatory and the help the souls of the -departed faithful could derive from the suffrages and penances of -the living. Confirmation and the anointing of priests at ordination -they contemptuously called “butter smearing,” and with their denial -of the priesthood quickly came their rejection of the doctrine of the -Sacrifice in the Mass, and their teaching that the Holy Eucharist is a -“token and sign” rather than the actual Body and Blood of our Lord. - -No means were left untried to further the spread of the new views. -Books of prayer were drawn up, in which, under the guise of familiar -devotions, the poison of the reformed doctrine was unsuspectedly -imbibed. Richard Whitford complains that his works, which just on the -eve of the Reformation were deservedly popular, had been made use of -for the purpose of interpolating tracts against points of Catholic -faith, which people were induced to buy under the supposition that they -were from the pen of the celebrated monk of Sion. John Waylande, the -printer of some Whitford books, in 1537 prefixed the following notice -to the new edition of the _Werke for Householders_. “The said author -required me instantly that I should not print nor join any other works -with his, specially of uncertain authors. For of late he found a work -joined in the same volume with his works, and bought and taken for his -work. This was not his, but was put there instead of his work that -before was named among the contents of his book, and yet his (real) -work was left out, as is complained in this preface here unto the -Reader.” - -In his preface Whitford says that the substituted work was obviously by -one of the Reformers, and “not only puts me into infamy and slander, -but also puts all readers in jeopardy of conscience to be infected (by -heresy) and in danger of the king’s laws, for the manifold erroneous -opinions that are contained in the same book.” He consequently adds a -warning to his readers: “By my poor advice,” he says, “read not those -books that go forth without named authors. For, doubtless, many of them -that seem very devout and good works, are full of heresies, and your -old English poet says, ‘There is no poison so perilous of sharpness as -that is that hath of sugar a sweetness.’”[229] - -In a subsequent volume, published in 1541, called _Dyvers holy -instructions and teachings_, Whitford again complains of this device of -the teachers of the new doctrines. In the preface he gives the exact -titles of the four little tracts which go to make up the volume, in -order, as he says, “to give you warning to search well and surely that -no other works are put amongst them that might deceive you. For, of a -certainty, I found now but very lately a work joined and bound with my -poor labours and under the contents of the same volume, and one of my -works which was named in the same contents left out. Instead of this, -was put this other work that was not mine. For the title of mine was -this, ‘A daily exercise and experience of death,’ and the other work -has no name of any author. And all such works in this time are ever to -be suspected, for so the heretics are used to send forth their poison -among the people covered with sugar. For they seem to be good and -devout workers, and are in very deed stark heresies.”[230] - -Even the smallest points were not deemed too insignificant for the -teaching of novel doctrines destructive of the old Catholic spirit. -To take an example: John Standish, writing in Mary’s reign about the -vernacular Scripture, complains of the translation which had been made -in the time of Henry VIII. “Who is able,” he writes, “to tell at -first sight how many hundred faults are even in their best translation -(if there is any good). Shall they be suffered still to continue? Shall -they still poison more like as they do in a thousand damnable English -books set forth within the last twenty-two years? Lord deliver us from -them all, and that with all speed! I take God to record (if I may -speak only of one fault in the translation and touch no more) my heart -did ever abhor to hear this word _Dominus_ … translated _the_ Lord, -whereas it ought to be translated _our_ Lord, the very Latin phrase -so declaring. Is not St. John saying to Peter (John, xxi.), _Dominus -est_, ‘it is our Lord’? whereas they have falsely translated it as in -many other places ‘_the_ Lord.’ And likewise in the salutation of our -Lady, ‘Hail, Mary, full of grace, _dominus tecum_,’ does not this word -_dominus_ here include _noster_, and so ought to be translated ‘our -Lord is with thee’? Would you make the Archangel like a devil call him -_the_ Lord? He is the Lord to every evil spirit, but to us He is our -most merciful Lord and ought to be called so. If, perchance, you ask of -a husbandman whose ground that is, he will answer, ‘the lord’s,’ who is -perhaps no better than a collier. Well, I speak this, not now so much -for the translation, seeing that it swarms as full of faults as leaves -(I will not say lines) as I do, because I wish that the common speech -among people sprung from this fond translation, ‘I thank the Lord’; -‘the Lord be praised’; ‘the Lord knoweth’; with all such-like phrases -might be given up, and that the people might be taught to call Him ‘our -Lord,’ saying, ‘I thank our Lord’; ‘our Lord be praised,’[231] &c., &c.” - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -THE PRINTED ENGLISH BIBLE - - -It is very commonly believed that until the influence of Cranmer had -made itself felt, the ecclesiastical authorities continued to maintain -the traditionally hostile attitude of the English Church towards the -English Bible. In proof of this, writers point to the condemnation -of the translations issued by Tyndale, and the wholesale destruction -of all copies of this, the first printed edition of the English New -Testament. It is consequently of importance to examine into the extent -of the supposed clerical hostility to the vernacular Scriptures, and -into the reasons assigned by those having the conduct of ecclesiastical -affairs at that period for the prohibition of Tyndale’s Testament. - -It may not be without utility to point out that the existence of any -determination on the part of the Church to prevent the circulation -of vernacular Bibles in the fifteenth century has been hitherto too -hastily assumed. Those who were living during that period may be -fairly considered the most fitting interpreters of the prohibition -of Archbishop Arundel, which has been so frequently adduced as -sufficient evidence of this supposed uncompromising hostility to -what is now called “the open Bible.” The terms of the archbishop’s -monition do not, on examination, bear the meaning usually put upon -it; and should the language be considered by some obscure, there is -absolute evidence of the possession of vernacular Bibles by Catholics -of undoubted orthodoxy with, at the very least, the tacit consent of -the ecclesiastical authorities. When to this is added the fact that -texts from the then known English Scriptures were painted on the walls -of churches, and portions of the various books were used in authorised -manuals of prayer, it is impossible to doubt that the hostility of the -English Church to the vernacular Bible has been greatly exaggerated, -if indeed its attitude has not altogether been misunderstood. This -much may, and indeed must, be conceded, wholly apart from the further -question whether the particular version now known as the Wycliffite -Scriptures is, or is not, the version used in the fifteenth and early -sixteenth century by Catholic Englishmen. That a Catholic version, or -some version viewed as Catholic and orthodox by those who lived in -the sixteenth century, really existed does not admit of any doubt at -all on the distinct testimony of Sir Thomas More. It will be readily -admitted that he was no ordinary witness. As one eminent in legal -matters, he must be supposed to know the value of evidence, and his -uncompromising attitude towards all innovators in matters of religion -is a sufficient guarantee that he would be no party to the propagation -of any unorthodox or unauthorised translations. - -Some quotations from Sir Thomas More’s works will illustrate his belief -better than any lengthy exposition. It is unnecessary, he says, to -defend the law prohibiting any English version of the Bible, “for there -is none such, indeed. There is of truth a Constitution which speaks -of this matter, but nothing of such fashion. For you shall understand -that the great arch-heretic Wycliffe, whereas the whole Bible was -long before his days by virtuous and well-learned men translated into -the English tongue, and by good and godly people and with devotion and -soberness well and reverently read, took upon himself to translate -it anew. In this translation he purposely corrupted the holy text, -maliciously planting in it such words, as might in the readers’ ears -serve to prove such heresies as he ‘went about’ to sow. These he not -only set forth with his own translation of the Bible, but also with -certain prologues and glosses he made upon it, and he so managed this -matter, assigning probable and likely reasons suitable for lay and -unlearned people, that he corrupted in his time many folk in this -realm.… - -“After it was seen what harm the people took from the translation, -prologues, and glosses of Wycliffe and also of some others, who after -him helped to set forth his sect for that cause, and also for as much -as it is dangerous to translate the text of Scripture out of one tongue -into another, as St. Jerome testifieth, since in translating it is -hard to keep the same sentence whole (i.e. the exact meaning): it was, -I say, for these causes at a Council held at Oxford, ordered under -great penalties that no one might thenceforth translate (the Scripture) -into English, or any other language, on his own authority, in a book, -booklet, or tract, and that no one might read openly or secretly any -such book, booklet, or treatise newly made in the time of the said -John Wycliffe, or since, or should be made any time after, till the -same translation had been approved by the diocesan, or, if need should -require, by a Provincial Council. - -“This is the law that so many have so long spoken about, and so few -have all this time sought to look whether they say the truth or not. -For I hope you see in this law nothing unreasonable, since it neither -forbids good translations to be read that were already made of old -before Wycliffe’s time, nor condemns his because it was new, but -because it was ‘naught.’ Neither does it prohibit new translations to -be made, but provides that if they are badly made they shall not be -read till they are thoroughly examined and corrected, unless indeed -they are such translations as Wycliffe and Tyndale made, which the -malicious mind of the translator has handled in such a way that it were -labour lost to try and correct them.” - -The “objector,” whom Sir Thomas More was engaged in instructing in -the _Dialogue_, could hardly believe that the formal Provincial -Constitution meant nothing more than this, and thereupon, as Sir Thomas -says: “I set before him the Constitutions Provincial, with Lyndwood -upon it, and directed him to the place under the title _De magistris_. -When he himself had read this, he said he marvelled greatly how it -happened that in so plain a matter men were so deceived.” But he -thought that even if the law was not as he had supposed, nevertheless -the clergy acted as if it were, and always “took all translations out -of every man’s hand whether the translation was good or bad, old or -new.” To this More replied that to his knowledge this was not correct. -“I myself,” he says, “have seen and can show you Bibles, fair and old, -written in English, which have been known and seen by the bishop of -the diocese, and left in the hands of laymen and women, whom he knew -to be good and Catholic people who used the books with devotion and -soberness.” He admitted indeed that all Bibles found in the hands -of heretics were taken away from them, but none of these, so far -as he had ever heard, were burnt, except such as were found to be -garbled and false. Such were the Bibles issued with evil prologues or -glosses, maliciously made by Wycliffe and other heretics. “Further,” -he declared, “no good man would be so mad as to burn a Bible in which -they found no fault.” Nor was there any law whatever that prohibited -the possession, examination, or reading of the Holy Scripture in -English.[232] - -In reply to the case of Richard Hunn, who, according to the story set -about by the religious innovators, had been condemned and his dead body -burnt “only because they found English Bibles in his house, in which -they never found other fault than because they were in English,” Sir -Thomas More, professedly, and with full knowledge of the circumstances, -absolutely denies, as he says, “from top to toe,” the truth of this -story.[233] He shows at great length that the whole tale of Hunn’s -death was carefully examined into by the king’s officials, and declares -that at many of the examinations he himself had been present and heard -the witnesses, and that in the end it had been fully shown that Hunn -was in reality a heretic and a teacher of heresy. “But,” urged his -objector, “though Hunn were himself a heretic, yet might the book (of -the English Bible) be good enough; and there is no good reason why a -good book should be burnt.” The copy of this Bible, replied More, was -of great use in showing the kind of man Hunn really was, “for at the -time he was denounced as a heretic, there lay his English Bible open, -and some other English books of his, so that every one could see the -places noted with his own hand, such words and in such a way that no -wise and good man could, after seeing them, doubt what ‘naughty minds’ -the men had, both he that so noted them and he that so made them. I -do not remember the particulars,” he continued, “nor the formal words -as they were written, but this I do remember well, that besides other -things found to support divers other heresies, there were in the -prologue of that Bible such words touching the Blessed Sacrament as -good Christian men did much abhor to hear, and which gave the readers -undoubted occasion to think that the book was written after Wycliffe’s -copy, and by him translated into our tongue.”[234] - -More then goes on to state his own mind as to the utility of -vernacular Scriptures. And, in the first place, he utterly denies -again that the Church, or any ecclesiastical authority, ever kept the -Bible in English from the people, except “such translations as were -either not approved as good translations, or such as had already been -condemned as false, such as Wycliffe’s and Tyndale’s were. For, as for -other old ones that were before Wycliffe’s days, they remain lawful, -and are in the possession of some people, and are read.” To this -assertion of a plain fact Sir Thomas More’s opponent did not dissent, -but frankly admitted that this was certainly the case,[235] although he -still thought that the English Bible might be in greater circulation -than it was.[236] Sir Thomas More considered that the clergy really had -good grounds not to encourage the spread of the vernacular Scriptures -at that time, inasmuch as those who were most urgent in the matter were -precisely those whose orthodoxy was reasonably suspected. It made men -fear, he says, “that seditious people would do more harm with it than -good and honest folk would derive benefit.” This, however, he declared -was not his own personal view.[237] “I would not,” he writes, “for my -part, withhold the profit that one good, devout, unlearned man might -get by the reading, for fear of the harm a hundred heretics might -take by their own wilful abuse.… Finally, I think that the Provincial -Constitution (already spoken of) has long ago determined the question. -For when the clergy in that synod agreed that the English Bibles -should remain which were translated before Wycliffe’s days, they, as -a necessary consequence, agreed that it was no harm to have the Bible -in English. And when they forbade any new translation to be read till -it were approved by the bishops, it appears clearly that they intended -that the bishop should approve it, if he found it to be faultless, and -also to amend it where it was found faulty, unless the man who made it -was a heretic, or the faults were so many and of such a character that -it would be easier to retranslate it than to mend it.”[238] - -This absolute denial of any attitude of hostility on the part of -the Church to the translated Bible is reiterated in many parts of -Sir Thomas More’s English works. When, upon the condemnation of -Tyndale’s Testament, the author pointed to this fact as proof of the -determination of the clergy to keep the Word of God from the people, -More replied at considerable length. He showed how the ground of the -condemnation had nothing whatever to do with any anxiety upon the -part of ecclesiastics to keep the Scriptures from lay people, but was -entirely based upon the complete falsity of Tyndale’s translation -itself. “He pretends,” says Sir Thomas More, “that the Church makes -some (statutes) openly and directly against the Word of God, as in that -statute whereby they have condemned the New Testament. Now, in truth, -there is no such statute made. For as for the New Testament, if he mean -the Testament of Christ, it is not condemned nor forbidden. But there -is forbidden a false English translation of the New Testament newly -forged by Tyndale, altered and changed in matters of great weight, in -order maliciously to set forth against Christ’s true doctrine Tyndale’s -anti-Christian heresies. Therefore that book is condemned, as it is -well worthy to be, and the condemnation thereof is neither openly nor -privily, directly nor indirectly, against the word of God.”[239] - -Again, in another place, More replies to what he calls Tyndale’s -“railing” against the clergy, and in particular his saying that they -keep the Scripture from lay people in order that they may not see how -they “juggle with it.” “I have,” he says, “in the book of my _Dyalogue_ -proved already that Tyndale in this point falsely belies the clergy, -and that in truth Wycliffe, and Tyndale, and Friar Barnes, and such -others, have been the original cause why the Scripture has been of -necessity kept out of lay people’s hands. And of late, specially, by -the politic provision and ordinance of our most excellent sovereign -the king’s noble grace, not without great and urgent causes manifestly -rising from the false malicious means of Wycliffe and Tyndale,” this -has been prevented. “For this (attempt of Tyndale) all the lay people -of this realm, both the evil folk who take harm from him, and the good -folk that lose their profit by him, have great cause to lament that -ever the man was born.”[240] - -The same view is taken by Roger Edgworth, a popular preacher in the -reign of Henry VIII. After describing what he considered to be the -evils which had resulted from the spread of Lutheran literature in -England, he says: “By this effect you may judge the cause. The effect -was evil, therefore there must needs be some fault in the cause. But -what sayest thou? Is not the study of Scripture good? Is not the -knowledge of the Gospels and of the New Testament godly, good, and -profitable for a Christian man or woman? I shall tell you what I think -in this matter. I have ever been in this mind, that I have thought it -no harm, but rather good and profitable, that Holy Scripture should be -had in the mother tongue, and withheld from no man that was apt and -meet to take it in hand, specially if we could get it well and truly -translated, which will be very hard to be had.”[241] - -There is, it is true, no doubt, that the destruction of Tyndale’s -Testaments and the increasing number of those who favoured the new -religious opinions, caused people to spread all manner of stories -abroad as to the attitude of the Church authorities in England towards -the vernacular Scriptures. Probably the declaration of the friend, -against whom Sir Thomas More, then Chancellor, in 1530, wrote his -_Dyalogue_, “that great murmurs were heard against the clergy on this -score,” is not far from the truth. Ecclesiastics, he said, in the -opinion of the common people, would not tolerate criticism of their -lives or words, and desired to keep laymen ignorant. “And they” (the -people) “think,” he adds, “that for no other cause was there burned at -St. Paul’s Cross the New Testament, late translated by Master William -Huchin, otherwise called Tyndale, who was (as men say) well known, -before he went over the sea, as a man of right good life, studious and -well learned in the Scriptures. And men mutter among themselves that -the book was not only faultless, but also very well translated, and was -ordered to be burned, because men should not be able to prove that such -faults (as were at Paul’s Cross declared to have been found in it) were -never in fact found there at all; but untruly surmised, in order to -have some just cause to burn it, and that for no other reason than to -keep out of the people’s hands all knowledge of Christ’s Gospel and of -God’s law, except so much as the clergy themselves please now and then -to tell them. Further, that little as this is, it is seldom expounded. -And, as it is feared, even this is not well and truly told; but watered -with false glosses and altered from the truth of the words and meaning -of Scripture, only to maintain the clerical authority. And the fear -lest this should appear evident to the people, if they were suffered to -read the Scripture themselves in their own tongue, was (it is thought) -the very cause, not only for which the New Testament translated by -Tyndale was burned, but also why the clergy of this realm have before -this time, by a Constitution Provincial, prohibited any book of -Scripture to be translated into the English tongue, and threaten with -fire men who should presume to keep them, as heretics; as though it -were heresy for a Christian man to read Christ’s Gospel.”[242] - -It has been already pointed out how Sir Thomas More completely disposed -of this assertion as to the hostility of the clergy to “the open -Bible.” In his position of Chancellor of England, More could hardly -have been able to speak with so much certainty about the real attitude -of the Church, had not the true facts been at the same time well -understood and commonly acknowledged. The words of the “objector,” -however, not only express the murmurs of those who were at that -period discontented with the ecclesiastical system; but they voice -the accusations which have been so frequently made from that day to -this, by those who do not as a fact look at the other side. Sir Thomas -More’s testimony proves absolutely that no such hostility to the -English Bible as is so generally assumed of the pre-Reformation Church -did, in fact, exist. Most certainly there never was any ecclesiastical -prohibition against vernacular versions as such, and the most -orthodox sons of the Church did in fact possess copies of the English -Scriptures, which they read openly and devoutly. This much seems -certain. - -Moreover, Sir Thomas More’s contention that there was no prohibition is -borne out by other evidence. The great canonist Lyndwood undoubtedly -understood the Constitution of Oxford on the Scriptures in the same -sense as Sir Thomas More. In fact, as it has been pointed out already, -to his explanation Sir Thomas More successfully appealed in proof -of his assertion that there was no such condemnation of the English -Scriptures, as had been, and is still, asserted by some. It has, of -course, been often said that Sir Thomas More, and of course Lyndwood, -were wrong in supposing that there were any translations previous to -that of the version now known as Wycliffite. This is by no means so -clear; and even supposing they were in error as to the date of the -version, it is impossible that they could have been wrong as to the -meaning and interpretation of the law itself, and as to the fact that -versions were certainly in circulation which were presumed by those who -used them to be Catholic and orthodox. Archbishop Cranmer himself may -also be cited as a witness to the free circulation of manuscript copies -of the English Scriptures in pre-Reformation times, since the whole of -his argument for allowing a new version, in the preface to the Bishops’ -Bible, rests on the well-known custom of the Church to allow vernacular -versions, and on the fact that copies of the English Scriptures had -previously been in daily use with ecclesiastical sanction. - -The same conclusion must be deduced from books printed by men of -authority and unquestionable piety. In them we find the reading of the -Scriptures strongly recommended. To take an example: Thomas Lupset, the -friend and protégé of Colet and Lilly, gives the following advice to -his sisters, two of whom were nuns: “Give thee much to reading; take -heed in meditation of the Scripture, busy thee in the law of God; have -a customable use in divine books.”[243] The same pious scholar has much -the same advice for a youth in the world who had been his pupil. After -urging him to avoid “meddling in any point of faith otherwise than as -the Church shall instruct and teach,” he adds, “more particularly in -writings you shall learn this lesson, if you would sometimes take in -your hand the New Testament and read it with a due reverence”; and -again: “in reading the Gospels, I would you had at hand Chrysostom and -Jerome, by whom you might surely be brought to a perfect understanding -of the text.”[244] - -Moreover, the testimony of Sir Thomas More that translations were -allowed by the Church, and that these, men considered rightly or -wrongly, had been made prior to the time of Wycliffe, is confirmed -by Archdeacon John Standish in Queen Mary’s reign. When the question -of the advisability of a vernacular translation was then seriously -debated, he says: “To the intent that none should have occasion to -misconstrue the true meaning thereof, it is to be thought that, if -all men were good and Catholic, then were it lawful, yea, and very -profitable also, that the Scripture should be in English, as long as -the translations were true and faithful.… And that is the cause that -the clergy did agree (as it is in the Constitution Provincial) that the -Bibles that were translated into English before Wycliffe’s days might -be suffered; so that only such as had them in handling were allowed by -the ordinary and approved as proper to read them, and so that their -reading should be only for the setting forth of God’s glory.”[245] - -Sir Thomas More, in his _Apology_, points out that although, in his -opinion, it would be a good thing to have a proper English translation, -still it was obviously not necessary for the salvation of man’s soul. -“If the having of the Scripture in English,” he writes, “be a thing -so requisite of precise necessity, that the people’s souls must needs -perish unless they have it translated into their own tongue, then the -greater part of them must indeed perish, unless the preacher further -provide that all people shall be able to read it when they have it. For -of the whole people, far more than four-tenths could never read English -yet, and many are now too old to begin to go to school.… Many, indeed, -have thought it a good and profitable thing to have the Scripture well -and truly translated into English, and although many equally wise -and learned and also very virtuous folk have been and are of a very -different mind; yet, for my own part, I have been and am still of the -same opinion as I expressed in my Dyalogue, if the people were amended, -and the time meet for it.”[246] - -The truth is, that there was then no such clamour for the translated -Bible as it has suited the purposes of some writers to represent. In -view of all that is known about the circumstances of those times, it -does not appear at all likely that the popular mind would be really -stirred by any desire for Bible reading. The late Mr. Brewer may be -allowed to speak with authority on this matter when he writes: “Nor, -indeed, is it possible that Tyndale’s writings and translations could -at this early period have produced any such impressions as is generally -surmised, or have fallen into the hands of many readers. His works were -printed abroad; their circulation was strictly forbidden; the price -of them was beyond the means of the poorer classes, even supposing -that the knowledge of letters at that time was more generally diffused -than it was for centuries afterwards. To imagine that ploughmen and -shepherds in the country read the New Testament in English by stealth, -or that smiths and carpenters in towns pored over its pages in the -corners of their masters’ workshops, is to mistake the character and -acquirements of the age.”[247] - -“So far from England then being a ‘Bible-thirsty land,’” says a -well-informed writer, “there was no anxiety whatever for an English -version at that time, excepting among a small minority of the -people,”[248] and these desired it not for the thing in itself so much -as a means of bringing about the changes in doctrine and practice -which they desired. “Who is there among us,” says one preacher of the -period, “that will have a Bible, but he must be compelled thereto.” And -the single fact that the same edition of the Bible was often reissued -with new titles, &c., is sufficient proof that there was no such -general demand for Bibles as is pretended by Foxe when he writes: “It -was wonderful to see with what joy this book of God was received, not -only among the learneder sort, and those that were noted for lovers of -the Reformation, but generally all England over among all the vulgar -common people.” “For,” says the writer above quoted, “if the people all -England over were so anxious to possess the new translation, what need -was there of so many penal enactments to force it into circulation, and -of royal proclamations threatening with the king’s displeasure those -who neglected to purchase copies.”[249] - -There can be little doubt that the condemnation of the first printed -English Testament, and the destruction, by order of the ecclesiastical -authority, of all copies which Tyndale had sent over to England for -sale, have tended, more than anything else, to confirm in their opinion -those who held that the Church in pre-Reformation England would -not tolerate the vernacular Scriptures at all. It is of interest, -therefore, and importance, if we would determine the real attitude of -churchmen in the sixteenth century to the English Bible, to understand -the grounds of this condemnation. As the question was keenly debated at -the time, there is little need to seek for information beyond the pages -of Sir Thomas More’s works. - -The history of Tyndale’s translation is not of such importance in -this respect, as a knowledge of the chief points objected against it. -Some brief account of this history, however, is almost necessary if we -would fully understand the character and purpose of the translation. -William Tyndale was born about the year 1484, and was in turn at Oxford -and Cambridge Universities, and professed among the Friars Observant -at Greenwich. In 1524 he passed over to Hamburg, and then, about the -middle of the year, to Wittenberg, where he attached himself to Luther. -Under the direction at least, of the German reformer, and very possibly -also with his actual assistance, he commenced his translation of the -New Testament. The royal almoner, Edward Lee, afterwards Archbishop -of York, being on a journey to Spain, wrote on December 2, 1525, from -Bordeaux, warning Henry VIII. of the preparation of this book. “I am -certainly informed,” he says, “that an Englishman, your subject, at the -solicitation and instance of Luther, with whom he is, hath translated -the New Testament into English; and within a few days intendeth to -return with the same imprinted into England. I need not to advertise -your Grace what infection and danger may ensue hereby if it be not -withstanded. This is the way to fill your realm with Lutherans. For all -Luther’s perverse opinions be grounded upon bare words of Scripture not -well taken nor understood, which your Grace hath opened (_i.e._ pointed -out) in sundry places of your royal book.”[250] - -Luther’s direct influence may be detected on almost every page of the -printed edition issued by Tyndale, and there can be no doubt that -it was prepared with Luther’s version of 1522 as a guide. From the -general introduction of this German Bible, nearly half, or some sixty -lines, are transferred by Tyndale almost bodily to his prologue, whilst -he adopted and printed over against the same chapters and verses, -placing them in the same position in the inner margins, some 190 of the -German reformer’s marginal references. Besides this, the marginal notes -on the outer margin of the English Testament are all Luther’s glosses, -translated from the German. In view of this, it can hardly be a matter -of surprise that Tyndale’s Testament was very commonly known at the -time as “Luther’s Testament in English.” - -In this work of translation or adaptation, Tyndale was assisted by -another ex-friar, named Joye, with whom, however, he subsequently -quarrelled, and about whom he then spoke in abusive and violent -terms. At first it was intended to print the edition at Cologne, but -being disturbed by the authorities there, Tyndale fled to Worms, -and at once commenced printing at the press of Peter Schœffer, the -octavo volume which is known as the first edition of Tyndale’s New -Testament. Although the author is supposed to have been a good Greek -scholar, there is evidence to show that the copy he used for the work -of translation was the Latin version of Erasmus, printed by Fisher in -1519, with some alterations taken from the edition of 1522, and some -other corrections from the Vulgate. - -John Cochlæus, who had a full and personal knowledge of all the -Lutheran movements at the time, writing in 1533, says: “Eight years -previously, two apostates from England, knowing the German language, -came to Wittenberg, and translated Luther’s New Testament into English. -They then came to Cologne, as to a city nearer to England, with a more -established trade, and more adapted for the despatch of merchandise. -Here … they secretly agreed with printers to print at first three -thousand copies, and printers and publishers pushed on the work with -the firm expectation of success, boasting that whether the king and -cardinal liked it or not, England would shortly ‘be Lutheran.’”[251] - -It was this scheme that Cochlæus was instrumental in frustrating, his -representations forcing Tyndale to remove the centre of his operations -to Worms. For the benefit of the Scotch king, to whom his account was -addressed, Cochlæus adds, that Luther’s German translation of the -New Testament was intended of set purpose to spread his errors; that -the people had bought up thousands, and that thereby “they have not -been made better but rather the worse, artificers who were able to -read neglecting their shops and the work by which they ought to gain -the bread of their wives and children.” For this reason, he says, -magistrates in Germany have had to forbid the reading of Luther’s -Testament, and many have been put in prison for reading it. In his -opinion the translation of the Testament into the vernacular had become -an idol and a fetish to the German Lutherans, although in Germany -there were many vernacular translations of both the Old and the New -Testaments, before the rise of Lutheranism.[252] - -With a full understanding of the purpose and tendency of Tyndale’s -translation and of the evils which at least some hard-headed men had -attributed to the spread of Luther’s German version, upon which almost -admittedly the English was modelled, the ecclesiastical authorities of -England approached the practical question--what was to be done in the -matter? Copies of the printed edition must have reached England some -time in 1526, for in October of that year Bishop Tunstall of London -addressed a monition to the archdeacons on the subject. “Many children -of iniquity,” he says, “maintainers of Luther’s sect, blinded through -extreme wickedness, wandering from the way of truth and the Catholic -faith, have craftily translated the New Testament into our English -tongue, intermeddling therewith many heretical articles and erroneous -opinions, pernicious and offensive, seducing the simple people; -attempting by their wicked and perverse interpretations to profane -the majesty of Scripture, which hitherto hath remained undefiled, -and craftily to abuse the most holy Word of God, and the true sense -of the same. Of this translation there are many books printed, some -with glosses and some without, containing in the English tongue that -pestiferous and pernicious poison, (and these are) dispersed in our -diocese of London.” He consequently orders all such copies of the New -Testament to be delivered up to his offices within thirty days.[253] - -This was the first action of the English ecclesiastical authorities, -and it was clearly taken not from distrust of what the same bishop -calls “the most holy Word of God,” but because they looked on the -version sent forth by Tyndale as a profanation of the Bible, and as -intended to disseminate the errors of Lutheranism. - -Of the Lutheran character of the translation the authorities, whether -in Church or State, do not seem to have had from the first the least -doubt. The king himself, in a rejoinder to Luther’s letter of apology, -says that the German reformer “fell in device with one or two lewd -persons, born in this our realm, for the translating of the New -Testament into English, as well with many corruptions of that holy -text, as certain prefaces and other pestilent glosses in the margins, -for the advancement and setting forth of his abominable heresies, -intending to abuse the good minds and devotion that you, our dearly -beloved people, bear toward the Holy Scripture and infect you with the -deadly corruption and contagious odour of his pestilent errors.”[254] - -Bishop Tunstall, in 1529, whilst returning from an embassy abroad, -purchased at Antwerp through one Packington, all copies of the English -printed New Testament that were for sale, and, according to the -chronicler Hall, burned them publicly at St. Paul’s in May 1530. For -the same reason the confiscated volumes of the edition first sent -over were committed to the flames some time in 1527,[255] and Bishop -Tunstall explained to the people at Paul’s Cross that the book was -destroyed because in more than two thousand places wrong translations -and corruptions had been detected. Tyndale made a great outcry at -the iniquity of burning the Word of God; but in _The Wicked Mammon_ -he declares that, “in burning the New Testament they did none other -thynge than I looked for.” Moreover, as he sold the books knowing the -purpose for which they were purchased, he may be said to have been -a participator in the act he blames. “The fact is,” says a modern -authority, “the books were full of errors and unsaleable, and Tyndale -wanted money to pay the expense of a revised version and to purchase -Vastermann’s old Dutch blocks to illustrate his Pentateuch, and was -glad to make capital in more ways than one by the translation. ‘I am -glad,’ said he, ‘for these two benefits shall come thereof: I shall get -money to bring myself out of debt, and the whole world will cry out -against the burning of God’s Word, and the overplus of the money that -shall remain to me shall make me more studious to correct the said New -Testament, and so newly to imprint the same once again, and I trust the -second you will much better like than you ever did the first.’”[256] - -Tyndale allowed nine years to elapse before issuing a second edition -of his Testament. Meantime, as his former assistant, Joye, says, -foreigners looking upon the English Testament as a good commercial -speculation, and seeing that the ecclesiastical authorities in England -had given orders to purchase the entire first issue of Tyndale’s -print, set to work to produce other reprints. Through ignorance of -the language, the various editions they issued were naturally full of -typographical errors, and, as Joye declared, “England hath enough and -too many false Testaments, and is now likely to have many more.” He -consequently set to work himself to see an edition through the press, -in which, without Tyndale’s leave, he made substantial alterations -in his translation. Joye’s version appeared in 1534, and immediately -Tyndale attacked its editor in the most bitter, reproachful terms. -In George Joye’s _Apology_, which appeared in 1535, he tried, as he -says, “to defend himself against so many slanderous lies upon him in -Tyndale’s uncharitable and unsober epistle.” In the course of the -tract, Joye charges Tyndale with claiming as his own what in reality -was Luther’s. “I have never,” he says, “heard a sober, wise man praise -his own works as I have heard him praise his exposition of the fifth, -sixth, and seventh chapters of St. Matthew, insomuch that mine ears -glowed for shame to hear him; and yet it was Luther that made it, -Tyndale only translating it and powdering it here and there with his -own fantasies.” - -In a second publication Joye declares Tyndale’s incompetence to judge -of the original Greek. “I wonder,” he says, “how he could compare it -with the Greek, since he himself is not so exquisitely seen therein.… -I know well (he) was not able to do it without such a helper as he -hath ever had hitherto.”[257] Tyndale, however, continued his work of -revision in spite of opposition, and further, with the aid of Miles -Coverdale, issued translations of various portions of the Old Testament. - -Shortly after the public burning of the copies of the translated -Testament by Bishop Tunstall, on May 24, 1530, an assembly was called -together by Archbishop Warham to formally condemn these and other books -then being circulated with the intention of undermining the religion -of the country. The king was present in person, and a list of errors -was drawn up and condemned “with all the books containing the same, -with the translation also of Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale, -as well in the Old Testament as in the New.” After this meeting, a -document was issued with the king’s authority, which preachers were -required to read to their people. After speaking of the books condemned -for teaching error, the paper takes notice of an opinion “in some of -his subjects” that the Scripture should be allowed in English. The king -declares that it is a good thing the Scriptures should be circulated -at certain times, but that there are others when they should not be -generally allowed, and taking into consideration all the then existing -circumstances, he “thinketh in his conscience that the divulging of the -Scripture at this time in the English tongue to be committed to the -people … would rather be to their further confusion and destruction -than for the edification of their souls.” - -In this opinion, we are told, all in the assembly concurred. At the -same time, however, the king promised that he would have the New -Testament “faithfully and purely translated by the most learned men,” -ready to be distributed when circumstances might allow. - -Sir Thomas More plainly states the reason for this prohibition. “In -these days, in which Tyndale (God amend him) has so sore poisoned -malicious and new-fangled folk with the infectious contagion of his -heresies, the king’s highness, and not without the counsel and advice, -not only of his nobles with his other counsellors attending upon his -Grace’s person, but also of the most virtuous and learned men of both -universities and other parts of the realm, specially called thereto, -has been obliged for the time to prohibit the Scriptures of God to be -allowed in the English tongue in the hands of the people, lest evil -folk … may turn all the honey into poison, and do hurt unto themselves, -and spread also the infection further abroad … and by their own fault -misconstrue and take harm from the very Scripture of God.”[258] - -Early in 1534 Tyndale took up his abode once more in Antwerp at the -house of an English merchant, and busied himself in passing his -revised New Testament through the press. This was published in the -following November. To it he prefixed a second prologue dealing with -the edition just published by George Joye. This he declares was no -true translation, and charges his former assistant with deliberate -falsification of the text of Holy Scripture in order to support his -errors and false opinions. The edition itself manifests many changes -in the text caused by the criticism to which the former impression had -been subjected, whilst many of the marginal notes “exhibit the great -change that had taken place in Tyndale’s religious opinions, and show -that he had ceased to be an Episcopalian.”[259] - -Having given a brief outline of the history of Tyndale’s Testament, -we are now in a position to examine into the grounds upon which the -ecclesiastical authorities of England condemned it. For this purpose, -we need again hardly go beyond the works of Sir Thomas More, who in -several of his tracts deals specifically with this subject. “Tyndale’s -false translation of the New Testament,” he says, “was, as he himself -confesses, translated with such changes as he has made in it purposely, -to the intent that by those changed words the people should be led into -the opinions which he himself calls true Catholic faith, but which all -true Catholic people call very false and pestilent heresies.” After -saying that for this reason this translation was rightly condemned -by the clergy and openly burnt at Paul’s Cross, he continues: “The -faults are so many in Tyndale’s translation of the New Testament, and -so spread throughout the whole book, that it were as easy to weave a -new web of cloth or to sew up every hole in a net, so would it be less -labour to translate the whole book anew than to make in his translation -as many changes as there needs must be before it were made a good -translation. Besides this, no wise man, I fancy, would take bread which -he well knew had once been poisoned by his enemy’s hand, even though he -saw his friend afterwards sweep it ever so clean.… For when it had been -examined, considered, and condemned by those to whom the judgment and -ordering of the thing belonged, and that false poisoned translation had -been forbidden to the people,” it would be the height of presumption -for any one to encourage the people boldly to resist their prince and -disobey their prelates, and give them, as some indeed have, such a poor -reason as this, “that poisoned bread is better than no bread.”[260] - -Further, in speaking with sorrow of the flood of heretical literature -which seemed ever growing in volume, Sir Thomas More writes: “Besides -the works in Latin, French, and German, there are made in the English -tongue, first, Tyndale’s New Testament, father of them all, because -of his false translations, and after that the five books of Moses, -translated by the same man, we need not doubt in what manner, when we -know by whom and for what purpose. Then you have his introduction to -St. Paul’s Epistle, with which he introduces his readers to a false -understanding of St. Paul, making them, among many other heresies, -believe that St. Paul held that faith alone was sufficient for -salvation, and that men’s good works were worth nothing and could -deserve no reward in heaven, though they were done in grace.”[261] - -Again, he says: “In the beginning of my _Dyalogue_, I have shown that -Tyndale’s translation of the New Testament deserved to be burnt, -because itself showed that he had translated it with an evil mind, and -in such a way that it might serve him as the best means of teaching -such heresies as he had learnt from Luther, and intended to send -over hither and spread abroad within this realm. To the truth of my -assertion, Tyndale and his fellows have so openly testified that I need -in this matter no further defence. For every man sees that there was -never any English heretical book sent here since, in which one item -of their complaint has not been the burning of Tyndale’s Testament. -For of a surety they thought in the first place that his translation, -with their further false construction, would be the bass and the tenor -wherever they would sing the treble with much false descant.”[262] - -To take some instances of the false translations to which More -reasonably objects: First, Tyndale substitutes for _Church_ the word -_Congregation_, “a word with no more signification in Christendom than -among the Jews or Turks.” After protesting that Tyndale has no right -to change the signification of a word, as, for example, to speak of “a -football,” and to mean “the world,” More continues: “Most certainly -the word _Congregation_, taken in conjunction with the text, would not, -when he translated it first, have served to make the English reader -understand by it the Church any more than when he uses the word _idols_ -for _images_, or _images_ for _idols_, or the word _repenting_ for -_doing penance_, which he also does. And indeed he has since added to -his translation certain notes, viz., that the order of the priesthood -is really nothing, but that every man, woman, and child is a priest as -much as a real priest, and that every man and woman may consecrate the -body of Christ, and say mass as well as a priest, and hear confessions -and absolve as well as a priest can; and that there is no difference -between priests and other folks, but that all are one congregation and -company without any difference, save appointment to preach.” - -This enables men to understand “what Tyndale means by using the word -_Congregation_ in his translation in place of _Church_. They also see -clearly by these circumstances that he purposely changed the word to -set forth these his heresies, though he will say he takes them for no -heresies. But, on the other hand, all good and faithful people do, and -therefore they call the Church the Church still, and will not agree to -change the old _Church_ for his new _Congregation_.”[263] - -In reply to Tyndale’s claim to be able to use the word _Congregation_ -to signify the _Church_, More declares that words must be used in their -ordinary signification. “I say,” he writes, “that this is true of the -usual signification of these words in the English tongue, by the common -custom of us English people that now use these words in our language, -or have used them before our days. And I say that this common custom -and usage of speech is the only way by which we know the right and -proper signification of any word. So much so that if a word were taken -from Latin, French, or Spanish, and from lack of understanding the -tongue from which it came, was used in English for something else than -it signified in the other tongue; then in England, whatsoever it meant -anywhere else, it means only what we understand it. Then, I say, that -in England this word _Congregation_ never did signify the body of -Christian people … any more than the word _assembly_, which has been -taken from French … as _congregation_ is from the Latin.… I say now -that the word Church never has been used to signify in the ordinary -speech of this realm, any other than the body of all those that are -christened. For this reason, and more especially because of Tyndale’s -evil intent, I said, and still say, that he did wrong to change -_Church_ for _Congregation_; a holy word for a profane one, so far as -they have signification in our English tongue, into which Tyndale made -his translation.…[264] - -“If Tyndale had done it either accidentally, or purposely merely for -pleasure, and not with an evil intent, I would never have said a word -against it. But inasmuch as I perceive that he has been with Luther, -and was there at the time when he so translated it, and because I knew -well the malicious heresies that Luther had begun to bring forth, I -must needs mistrust him in this change. And now I say that even from -his own words here spoken, you may perceive his cankered mind in his -translation, for he says that Demetrius had gathered a company against -Paul for preaching against _images_. Here the Christian reader may -easily perceive the poison of this serpent. Every one knows that all -good Christian people abhor the idols of the false pagan gods, and also -honour the images of Christ and our Lady, and other holy saints. And -as they call the one sort images, so they call the other sort idols. -Now, whereas St. Paul preached against idols, this good man comes and -says he preached against images. And as he here speaks, even so he -translates, for in the 15th chapter of St. Paul to the Corinthians, -where St. Paul says, ‘I have written to you that ye company not -together … if any that is called a brother be … a worshipper of -_idols’_--there Tyndale translates worshipper of _images_. Because -he would have it seem that the Apostle had in that place forbidden -Christian men to worship images.… Here you may see the sincerity and -plain meaning of this man’s translation.”[265]… - -“As he falsely translated _Ecclesia_ into the unknown word -_congregation_, in places where he should have translated it into the -known word of _holy Church_, and this with a malicious purpose to set -forth his heresy of the secret and unknown church wherein is neither -good works nor sacraments, in like manner is it now proved, in the -same way and with like malice, he has translated _idols_ into _images_ -… to make it seem that Scripture reprobates the goodly images of our -Saviour Himself and His holy saints.… Then he asks me why I have not -contended with Erasmus whom he calls my darling, for translating this -word _Ecclesia_ into the word _congregatio_.… I have not contended -with Erasmus, my darling, because I found no such malicious intent -with Erasmus, my darling, as I found with Tyndale; for had I found -with Erasmus, my darling, the cunning intent and purpose that I found -with Tyndale, Erasmus, my darling, should be no more ‘my darling.’ But -I find in Erasmus, my darling, that he detests and abhors the errors -and heresies that Tyndale plainly teaches and abides by, and therefore -Erasmus, my darling, shall be my darling still.… For his translation of -_Ecclesia_ by _congregatio_ is nothing like Tyndale’s, for the Latin -tongue had no Latin word used for Church, but the Greek word, Ecclesia, -therefore Erasmus, in his new translation gave it a Latin word. But -we in our English had a proper English word for it, and therefore -there was no cause for Tyndale to translate it into a worse. Erasmus, -moreover, meant therein no heresy, as appears by his writings against -heretics, but Tyndale, intended nothing else thereby, as appears by the -heresies that he himself teaches and abides by. Therefore, there was in -this matter no cause for me to contend with Erasmus, as there was to -contend with Tyndale, with whom I contended for putting ‘congregation’ -instead of ‘Church.’”[266] - -Further, More blames Tyndale’s translation in its substitution of -_senior_ or _elder_ for the old-established word _priest_. This word, -presbyter, in the Greek, he says, “as it signifies the thing that men -call priest in English, was sometimes called _senior_ in Latin. But -the thing that Englishmen call a priest, and the Greek church called -_presbyter_, and the Latin church also sometimes called _senior_, was -never called elder either in the Greek church, or the Latin or the -English.”[267] He considers, therefore, the change made by Tyndale, -in the second edition of his translation, from senior into elder was -not only no improvement, but a distinct and reiterated rejection of -the well-understood word of priest.… “I said and say,” he continues, -“that Tyndale changed the word priest into senior with the heretical -mind and intent to set forth his heresy, in which he teaches that the -priesthood is no sacrament … for else I would not call it heresy if -any one would translate _presbyteros_ a block, but I would say he was -a blockhead. And as great a blockhead were he that would translate -_presbyteros_ into an elder instead of a priest, for this English word -no more signifies an elder than the Greek word _presbyteros_ signifies -an elderstick.”[268] “For the same reason he might change bishop into -overseer, and deacon into server, both of which he might as well do, as -priest into elder; and then with his English translation he must make -us an English vocabulary of his own device, and so with such provision -he may change chin into cheek, and belly into back, and every word into -every other at his own pleasure, if all England like to go to school -with Tyndale to learn English--but else, not so.”[269] - -In the same way More condemns Tyndale for deliberately changing the -word “Grace,” the meaning of which was fully understood by Catholic -Englishmen, into “favour,” “thinking that his own scoffing is -sufficient reason to change the known holy name of virtue through all -Scripture into such words as he himself liketh.”[270] He says the same -of the change of the old familiar words _Confession_ into _knowledge_, -and _penance_ into _repentance_. “This is what Tyndale means: he would -have all willing confession quite cast away and all penance doing -too.”[271] And “as for the word _penance_, whatsoever the Greek word -be, it ever was, and still is, lawful enough (if Tyndale give us leave) -to call anything in English by whatever word Englishmen by common -custom agree upon.… Now, the matter does not rest in this at all. For -Tyndale is not angry with the word, but with the matter. For this -grieves Luther and him that by _penance_ we understand, when we speak -of it … not mere repenting … but also every part of the Sacrament of -Penance; oral confession, contrition of heart, and satisfaction by good -deeds. For if we called it the Sacrament of repentance, and by that -word would understand what we now do by the word penance, Tyndale would -then be as angry with repentance as he is now with penance.”[272] - -Speaking specially in another place about the change of the old -word _charity_ into _love_ in Tyndale’s translation, More declared -that he would not much mind which word was used were it not for the -evident intention to change the teaching. When it is done consistently -through the whole book “no man could deem but that the man meant -mischievously. If he called _charity_ sometimes by the bare name -_love_, I would not stick at that. But since charity signifies in -Englishmen’s ears not every common love, but a good virtuous and -well-ordered love, he that will studiously flee from the name of good -love, and always speak of ‘love,’ and always leave out ‘good,’ I would -surely say he meant evil. And it is much more than likely. For it is to -be remembered that at the time of this translation Huchins (or Tyndale) -was with Luther in Wittenberg, and put certain glosses in the margins, -made to uphold the ungracious sect.”… And “the reason why he changed -the name of _charity_ and of the _church_ and of _priesthood_ is no -very great difficulty to perceive. For since Luther and his fellows -amongst their other damnable heresies have one that all salvation rests -on Faith alone--therefore he purposely works to diminish the reverent -mind that men have to charity, and for this reason changes the name of -holy virtuous affection into the bare name of love.” - -In concluding his justification of the condemnation of Tyndale’s -Testament and his criticism of the translator’s _Defence_, Sir Thomas -More says: “Every man knows well that the intent and purpose of my -_Dyalogue_ was to make men see that Tyndale in his translation changed -the common known words in order to make a change in the faith. As for -example: he changed the word _Church_ into this word _congregation_, -because he would raise the question which the church was, and set forth -Luther’s heresy that the church which we should believe and obey is -not the common known body of all Christian realms remaining in the -faith of Christ and not fallen away or cut off with heresies.… But -the church we should believe and obey was some secret unknown kind of -evil living and worse believing heretics. And he changed _priest_ into -_senior_, because he intended to set forth Luther’s heresy teaching -that priesthood is no sacrament, but the office of a layman or laywoman -appointed by the people to preach. And he changed _Penance_ into -_repenting_, because he would set forth Luther’s heresy teaching that -penance is no sacrament. This being the only purpose of my _Dyalogue_, -Tyndale now comes and expressly confesses what I proposed to show. -For he indeed teaches and writes openly these false heresies so that -he himself shows now that I then told the people the truth … his own -writing shows that he made his translation to the intent to set forth -such heresies as I said he did.”[273] - -John Standish in the tract on the vernacular Scriptures, published -in Queen Mary’s reign, uses in some places the same language as Sir -Thomas More in condemning the translations which had been later in -vogue. “At all times,” he writes, “heretics have laboured to corrupt -the Scriptures that they might serve for their naughty purposes and -to confirm their errors therewith, but especially now in our time. O -good Lord, how have the translators of the Bible into English purposely -corrupted the texts, oft maliciously putting in such words as in the -readers’ ears might serve for the proof of such heresies as they -went about to sow. These are not only set forth in the translations, -but also in certain prologues and glosses added thereunto, and -these things they have so handled (as indeed it is no great mastery -to do) with probable reasons very apparent to the simple and -unlearned, that an infinite number of innocents they have spiritually -poisoned and corrupted within this realm, and caused them to perish -obstinately.”[274] - -If further proof were wanting that the New Testament as set forth -by Tyndale was purposely designed to overthrow the then existing -religious principles held by English churchmen, it is furnished by -works subsequently published by the English Lutherans abroad. The tract -named _The Burying of the Mass_, printed in Germany shortly after the -burning of Tyndale’s Testament, was, as Sir Thomas More points out, -intended as a direct attack upon the Sacrifice of the Mass and the -Sacramental system. In it the author poured out the vials of his wrath -upon all those who caused Tyndale’s translation of the New Testament -to be destroyed, saying that they burned it because it destroyed the -Mass. “By this,” adds More, “you may see that the author accounted -the translation very good for the destruction of the Mass.”[275] -Moreover, in a book called _The Wicked Mammon_, published by Tyndale -himself shortly after this, although he blames the style of the author -of _The Burying of the Mass_, he tacitly accepts his assertion that -his translation of the New Testament was intended to bring about the -abolition of the Sacrifice of the Mass.[276] - -In later times, after the experience of the religious changes in the -reign of Edward VI., some writers pointed to the evils, religious and -social, as evidence of the harm done by the promiscuous reading of -the Scriptures. In their opinion, what More had feared and foretold -had come to pass. “In these miserable years now past,” says Standish -of Mary’s reign, in this tract on the vernacular Scriptures: “In -these miserable years now past, what mystery is so hard that the -ignorant with the Bible in English durst not set upon, yea and say they -understood it: all was light! They desired no explanation but their -own, even in the highest mysteries.… Alas! experience shows that our -own men through having the Bible in English have walked far above their -reach, being sundry ways killed and utterly poisoned with the letter of -the English Bible.”[277] - -The spirit in which the study of Sacred Scripture was taken up by many -in those days is described by the Marian preacher, Roger Edgworth, -already referred to. “Scripture,” he says, “is in worse case than any -other faculty: for where other faculties take upon them no more than -pertaineth to their own science, as (for example) the physician of -what pertains to the health of man’s body, and the carpenter and smith -of their own tools and workmanship--the faculty of Sacred Scripture -alone is the knowledge which all men and women challenge and claim to -themselves and for their own. Here and there the chattering old wife, -the doting old man, the babbling sophister, and all others presume -upon this faculty, and tear it and teach it before they learn it. Of -all such green divines as I have spoken of, it appeareth full well -what learning they have by this, that when they teach any of their -disciples, and when they give any of their books to other men to read, -the first suggestion why he should labour (at) such books is ‘because -of this,’ say they, ‘thou shalt be able to oppose the best priest in -the parish, and tell him he lies.’”[278] - -The result is patent in the history of the religious confusions which -followed, for this much must be allowed, whatever view may be taken -of the good or evil which ultimately resulted. Dr. Richard Smith, in -1546, then states the position as he saw it: “In old times the faith -was respected, but in our days not a few things, and not of small -importance, but (alack the more the pity) even the chiefest and most -weighty matters of religion and faith, are called in question, babbled -about, talked and jangled upon (reasoned, I cannot and ought not to -call it).”[279] - -Although the cry for the open Bible which had been raised by Tyndale -and the other early English reformers generally assumed the right to -free and personal interpretation of its meaning, no sooner was the -English Scripture put into circulation than its advocates proclaimed -the need of expositions to teach people the meaning they should attach -to it. In fact, the marginal notes and glosses, furnished by Tyndale -chiefly from Lutheran sources, are evidence that even he had no -wish that the people should understand or interpret the sacred text -otherwise than according to his peculiar views. Very quickly after the -permission of Henry VIII. had allowed the circulation of the printed -English Bible, commentators came forward to explain their views. -Lancelot Ridley, for example, issued many such explanations of portions -of the Sacred Text with the object, as he explains, of enabling “the -unlearned to declare the Holy Scriptures now suffered to all people -of this realm to read and study at their pleasure.” For the Bible, -“which is now undeclared (_i.e._ unexplained) to them, and only had -in the bare letter, appears to many rather death than life, rather -(calculated) to bring many to errors and heresies than into the truth -and verity of God’s Word. For this, when unexplained, does not bring -the simple, rude, and ignorant people from their ignorant blindness, -from their corrupt and backward judgments, false trusts, evil beliefs, -vain superstitions, and feigned holiness, in which the people have long -been in blindness, for lack of a knowledge of Holy Scripture which the -man of Rome kept under latch and would not suffer to come to light, -that his usurped power should not have been espied, his worldly glory -diminished, and his profit decayed.”[280] - -Again, in another exposition made eight years later, the same writer -complains that still, for lack of teaching what he considers the true -meaning of Scripture, the views of the people are still turned towards -the “old superstitions” in spite of “the open Bible.” “Although the -Bible be in English,” he says, “and be suffered to every man and -woman to read at their pleasures, and commanded to be read every day -at Matins, Mass, and Evensong, yet there remain great ignorance and -corrupt judgments … and these will remain still, except the Holy -Scriptures be made more plain to the lay people who are unlearned by -some commentary or annotation, so that lay people may understand the -Holy Scripture better.”[281] Commentaries would help much, he says in -another place, “to deliver the people from ignorance, darkness, errors, -heresy, superstitions, false trusts, and from evil opinions fixed and -rooted in the hearts of many for lack of true knowledge of God’s Holy -Word, and expel the usurped power of the bishop of Rome and all Romish -dregs.”[282] - -It is interesting to find that from the first, whilst objecting to the -interpretation of the old teachers of the Church, and claiming that the -plain text of Scripture was a sufficient antidote and complete answer -to them and their traditional deductions, the “new teachers” found that -without teaching and exposition on their part, the open Bible was by -no means sufficient to wean the popular mind from what they regarded -as superstitious and erroneous ways. Their attitude in the matter is -at least a confirmation of the contention of Sir Thomas More and other -contemporary Catholic writers, that the vernacular Scriptures would be -useless without a teaching authority to interpret their meaning. - -A brief word may now be said as a summary of the attitude towards the -vernacular Bible taken up by the ecclesiastical authorities on the eve -of the Reformation. The passages quoted from Sir Thomas More make it -evident that no such hostility on the part of the Church, as writers of -all shades of opinion have too hastily assumed, really existed.[283] -In fact, though those responsible for the conduct of affairs, both -ecclesiastical and lay, at this period objected to the circulation -of Tyndale’s printed New Testament, this objection was based, not on -any dread of allowing the English Bible as such, but on the natural -objection to an obviously incorrect translation. It is difficult to see -how those in authority could have permitted a version with traditional -words changed for the hardly concealed purpose of supporting Lutheran -tenets, with texts garbled and marginal explanations inserted for the -same end. Those who hold that Tyndale’s views were right, and even that -his attempt to enforce them in this way was justifiable, can hardly, -however, blame the authorities at that time in England, secular or lay, -who did not think so, from doing all they could to prevent what they -regarded as the circulation of a book calculated to do great harm if -no means were taken to prevent it. Men’s actions must be judged by the -circumstances under which they acted, and it would be altogether unjust -to regard the prohibition of the Tyndale Scriptures as a final attempt -on the part of the English Church to prevent the circulation of the -vernacular Scriptures. To the authorities in those days at least, the -book in question did not represent the Sacred Text at all. That it was -full of errors, to say the least, is confessed by Tyndale himself; and -as to the chief points in his translation which he defended and which -Sir Thomas More so roundly condemned, posterity has sided with More -and not with Tyndale, for not one of these special characteristics of -the translation in which so much of Tyndale’s Lutheran teaching was -allowed to appear, was suffered to remain in subsequent revisions. -From this point of view alone, those who examine the question with an -unbiassed mind must admit that there was ample justification for the -prohibition of Tyndale’s printed Testament. If this be so, the further -point may equally well be conceded, namely, that the Church on the eve -of the Reformation did not prohibit the vernacular Scriptures as such -at all, and that many churchmen in common with the king, Sir Thomas -More, and other laymen, would, under happier circumstances, have been -glad to see a properly translated English Bible. - - - - -CHAPTER IX - -TEACHING AND PREACHING - - -It is very commonly assumed that on the eve of the Reformation, and for -a long period before, there was little in the way of popular religious -instruction in England. We are asked to believe that the mass of the -people were allowed to grow up in ignorance of the meaning of the faith -that was in them, and in a studied neglect of their supposed religious -practices. So certain has this view of the pre-Reformation Church -seemed to those who have not inquired very deeply into the subject, -that more than one writer has been led by this assumption to assert -that perhaps the most obvious benefit of the religious upheaval of the -sixteenth century was the introduction of some general and systematic -teaching of the great truths of religion. Preaching is often considered -as characterising the reforming movement, as contrasted with the old -ecclesiastical system, which it is assumed certainly admitted, even if -it did not positively encourage, ignorance as the surest foundation -of its authority. It becomes of importance, therefore, to inquire if -such a charge is founded upon fact, and to see how far, if at all, the -people in Catholic England were instructed in their religion. - -At the outset, it should be remembered that the questions at issue in -the sixteenth century were not, in the first place at least, connected -with the influence of religious teaching on the lives of the people at -large. No one contended that the reformed doctrines would be found to -make people better, or would help them to lead lives more in conformity -with Gospel teaching. The question of what may be called practical -religion never entered into the disputes of the time. Mr. Brewer warns -the student of the history of this period that he will miss the meaning -of many things altogether, and quite misunderstand their drift, if he -starts his inquiry by regarding the Reformation as the creation of -light to illuminate a previous period of darkness, or the evolution of -practical morality out of a state of antecedent chaotic corruption. -“In fact,” he says, “the sixteenth century was not a mass of moral -corruption out of which life emerged by some process unknown to art -or nature; it was not an addled egg cradling a living bird; quite the -reverse.” For, as the historian of the German people, Janssen, points -out, the truth is that the entire social order of the Middle Ages “was -established on the doctrine of good works being necessary for the -salvation of the Christian soul.” Whilst, as Mr. Brewer again notes, -Luther’s most earnest remonstrances were directed not against _bad_ -works, but against the undue stress laid by the advocates of the old -religion upon _good_ works. Moreover, an age which could busy itself -about discussions of questions as to “righteousness,” whether of “faith -or works,” “is not a demoralised or degenerate age. These are not the -thoughts of men buried in sensuality.” - -Two questions are contained in the inquiry as to pre-Reformation -religious teaching, namely, as to its extent and as to its character. -There can hardly be much doubt that the duty of giving instruction to -the people committed to their charge was fully recognised by the clergy -in mediæval times. In view of the positive legislation of various -synods on the subject of regular and systematic teaching, as well as of -the constant repetition of the obligation in the books of English canon -law, it is obvious that the priests were not ignorant of what was their -plain duty. From the time of the constitution of Archbishop Peckham -at the Synod of Oxford in 1281, to the time of the religious changes, -there is every reason to suppose that the ordinance contained in the -following words was observed in every parish church in the country: “We -order,” says the Constitution, “that every priest having the charge of -a flock do, four times in each year (that is, once each quarter) on one -or more solemn feast days, either himself or by some one else, instruct -the people in the vulgar language simply and without any fantastical -admixture of subtle distinctions, in the articles of the Creed, the Ten -Commandments, the Evangelical Precepts, the seven works of mercy, the -seven deadly sins with their offshoots, the seven principal virtues, -and the seven Sacraments.” - -This means that the whole range of Christian teaching, dogmatic and -moral, was to be explained to the people four times in every year; and -in order that there should be no doubt about the matter, the Synod -proceeds to set out in considerable detail each of the points upon -which the priest was to instruct his people. During the fourteenth and -fifteenth centuries the great number of manuals intended to help the -clergy in the execution of this law attest the fact that it was fully -recognised and very generally complied with. When at the close of -the latter century, the invention of printing made the multiplication -of such manuals easy, the existence both of printed copies of this -Constitution of Archbishop Peckham, and of printed tracts drawn up -to give every assistance to the parochial clergy in the preparation -of these homely teachings, proves that the law was understood and -acted upon. In the face of such evidence it is impossible to doubt -that, whatever may have been the case as to set sermons and formal -discourses, simple, straightforward teaching was not neglected in -pre-Reformation England, and every care was taken that the clergy might -be furnished with material suitable for the fundamental religious -teaching contemplated by the law. As late as 1466, a synod of the York -Province, held by Archbishop Nevill, not only reiterated this general -decree about regular quarterly instructions of a simple and practical -kind, but set out at great length the points of these lessons in the -Christian faith and life upon which the parish priests were to insist. - -Even set discourses of a more formal kind, though probably by no -means so frequent as in these times, when they have to a great extent -superseded the simple instructions of old Catholic days, were by no -means neglected. Volumes of such sermons in manuscript and in print, -as well as all that is known of the great discourses constantly being -delivered at St. Paul’s Cross, may be taken as sufficient evidence of -this. For the conveyance of moral and religious instruction, however, -the regular and homely talks of a parish priest to his people were -vastly more important than the set orations, and it is with these -familiar instructions that the student of this period of our history -has chiefly to concern himself. All the available evidence goes to -show that the giving of these was not only regarded as an obligation -on the pastor; but attendance at them was looked upon as a usual -and necessary portion of the Christian duty. For example, in the -examinations of conscience intended to assist lay people in their -preparation for the Sacrament of penance, there are indications that -any neglect to attend at these parochial instructions was considered -sufficiently serious to become a matter of confession. It is, of -course, hardly conceivable that this should be so, if the giving of -these popular lessons in the duties of the Christian life was neglected -by the priests, or if they were not commonly frequented by the laity. -To take a few instances. “Also,” runs one such examination, “I have -been slow in God’s service, and negligent to pray and to go to church -in due time … loth to hear the Word of God, and the preacher of -the Word of God. Neither have I imprinted it in my heart and borne -it away and wrought thereafter.”[284] Again: “I have been setting -nought by preaching and teaching of God’s Word, by thinking it an -idle thing.”[285] And, to take an example of the view taken in such -documents as to the priest’s duty: “If you are a priest be a true -lantern to the people both in speaking and in living, and faithfully -and truly do all things which pertain to a priest. Seek wisely the -ground of truth and the true office of the priesthood, and be not -ruled blindly by the lewd customs of the world. Read God’s law and -the Expositions of the Holy Doctors, and study and learn and keep -it, and when thou knowest it, preach and teach it to those that are -unlearned.”[286] - -Richard Whitford, the Monk of Sion, in his _Work for Householders_, -published first in 1530, lays great stress upon the obligation of -parents and masters to see that those under their charge attended the -instructions given in the parish church. Some may perhaps regard his -greater anxiety for their presence at sermons rather than at Mass, -when it was not possible for them to be at both, as doubtful advice. -In this, however, he agrees with the author of what was the most -popular book of instructions at this period, and the advice itself -is proof that the obligation of attending instructions was regarded -as sufficiently serious to be contrasted with that of hearing Mass. -Speaking of the Sunday duties, Whitford says: “At church on Sundays see -after those who are under your care. And charge them also to keep their -sight in the church close upon their book and beads. And whilst they -are young accustom them always to kneel, stand, and sit, and never walk -in the church. And let them hear the Mass quietly and devoutly, much -part kneeling. But at the Gospel, the Preface, and at the Paternoster -teach them to stand and to make curtesy at the word Jesus, as the -priest does.… If there be a sermon any time of the day let them be -present, all that are not occupied in needful and lawful business; -all other (occupations) laid aside let them ever keep the preachings, -rather than the Mass, if, perchance, they may not hear both.” - -Nothing could possibly be more definite or explicit upon the necessity -of popular instructions and upon the duty incumbent upon the clergy of -giving proper vernacular teaching to their flocks than the author of -_Dives et Pauper_, the most popular of the fifteenth-century books of -religious instruction. In fact, on this point his language is as strong -and uncompromising as that which writers have too long been accustomed -to associate with the name of Wycliffe. No more unwarranted assumption -has ever been made in the name of history than that which classed -under the head of Lollard productions almost every fifteenth-century -tract in English, especially such as dealt openly with abuses needing -correction, and pleaded for simple vernacular teaching of religion. -This is what the author of _Dives et Pauper_ says about preaching: -“Since God’s word is life and salvation of man’s soul, all those who -hinder them that have authority of God, and by Orders taken, to preach -and teach, from preaching and teaching God’s word and God’s law, are -manslayers ghostly. They are guilty of as many souls that perish by -the hindering of God’s word, and namely those proud, covetous priests -and curates who can neither teach, nor will teach, nor suffer others -that both can and will and have authority to teach and preach of God -and of the bishop who gave them Orders, but prevent them for fear -lest they should get less from their subjects, or else the less be -thought of, or else that their sins should be known by the preaching -of God’s word. Therefore, they prefer to leave their own sins openly -reproved generally, among other men’s sins. As St. Anselm saith, God’s -word ought to be worshipped as much as Christ’s body, and he sins as -much who hindereth God’s word and despiseth God’s word, or taketh it -recklessly as he that despiseth God’s body, or through his negligence -letteth it fall to the ground. On this place the gloss showeth that it -is more profitable to hear God’s word in preaching than to hear a Mass, -and that a man should rather forbear his Mass than his sermon. For, -by preaching, folks are stirred to contrition, and to forsake sin and -the fiend, and to love God and goodness, and (by it) they be illumined -to know their God, and virtue from vice, truth from falsehood, and -to forsake errors and heresies. By the Mass they are not so, but if -they come to Mass in sin they go away in sin, and shrews they come and -shrews they wend away.… Nevertheless, the Mass profiteth them that are -in grace to get grace and forgiveness of sin.… Both are good, but the -preaching of God’s word ought to be more discharged and more desired -than the hearing of Mass.”[287] - -In the same way the author of a little book named _The Interpretatyon -and Sygnyfycacyon of the Masse_, printed by Robert Wyer in 1532, -insists on the obligation of attending the Sunday instruction. “On each -Sunday,” he says, “he shall also hear a sermon, if it be possible, for -if a man did lose or omit it through contempt or custom, he would sin -greatly.”[288] And in _The Myrrour of the Church_, the author tells -those who desire “to see the Will of God in Holy Scripture,” but being -of “simple learning” and “no cunning” cannot read, that they may do so -“in open sermon, or in secret collation” with those who can. And in -speaking of the Sunday duties he tells his readers not to lie in bed, -“but rising promptly you shall go to the church, and with devotion say -your matins without jangling. Also sweetly hear your Mass and all the -hours of the day. And then if there is any preacher in the church who -proposes to make a sermon, you shall sweetly hear the Word of God and -keep it in remembrance.”[289] And lastly, to take one more example, in -Wynkyn de Worde’s _Exornatorium Curatorum_, printed to enable those -having the cure of souls to perform the duties of instruction laid down -by Archbishop Peckham’s Provincial Constitution, whilst setting forth -a form of examination of conscience under the head of the deadly sins, -the author bids the curate teach his people to ask themselves: “Whether -you have been slothful in God’s service, and specially upon the Sunday -and the holy day whether you have been slothful to come to church, -slothful to pray when you have been there, and slothful to hear the -Word of God preached. Furthermore, whether you have been negligent to -learn your _Pater Noster_, your _Ave Maria_, or your Creed, or whether -you have been negligent to teach the same to your own children or to -your god-children. Examine yourself also whether you have taught your -children good manners, and guarded them from danger and bad company.” -The same book insists on the need of such examination of conscience -daily, or at least weekly.[290] - -The following in this connection is of interest as being a daily rule -of life recommended to laymen in the English Prymer printed at Rouen -in 1538: “First rise up at six o’clock in the morning at all seasons, -and in rising do as follows: Thank our Lord who has brought you to the -beginning of the day. Commend yourself to God, to Our Lady Saint Mary, -and to the saint whose feast is kept that day, and to all the saints in -heaven. When you have arrayed yourself say in your chamber or lodging, -Matins, Prime, and Hours, if you may. Then go to the church before you -do any worldly works if you have no needful business, and abide in the -church the space of a low mass time, where you shall think on God and -thank Him for His benefits. Think awhile on the goodness of God, on His -divine might and virtue.… If you cannot be so long in the church on -account of necessary business, take some time in the day in your house -in which to think of these things.”… Take your meal “reasonably without -excess or overmuch forbearing of your meat, for there is as much danger -in too little as in too much. If you fast once in a week it is enough, -besides Vigils and Ember days out of Lent.” After dinner rest “an hour -or half-an-hour, praying God that in that rest He will accept your -health to the end, that after it you may serve Him the more devoutly.” - -“… As touching your service, say up to _Tierce_ before dinner, and make -an end of all before supper. And when you are able say the _Dirge_ and -_Commendations_ for all Christian souls, at least on holy days, and if -you have leisure say them on other days, at least with three lessons. -Shrive yourself every week to your curate, except you have some great -hindrance. And beware that you do not pass a fortnight unless you have -a very great hindrance. If you have the means refuse not your alms to -the first poor body that asketh it of you that day. Take care to hear -and keep the Word of God. Confess you every day to God without fail of -such sins you know you have done that day.” Think often of our Lord’s -Passion, and at night when you wake turn your thoughts to what our Lord -was doing at that hour in His Passion. In your life look for a faithful -friend to whom you may open “your secrets,” and when found follow -his advice. No doubt this “manner to live well” will perhaps hardly -represent what people at this time ordinarily did. But the mere fact -that it could be printed as a Christian’s daily rule of life as late as -1538, is evidence at any rate that people took at the least as serious -a view of their obligations in religious matters as we should.[291] In -the same way _The art of good lyvyng_, quoted above, suggests as the -proper way to sanctify the Sunday: Meditations on death, the pains of -hell, and the joys of Paradise. Time should be given to reading the -lives of the saints, to saying Matins, and studying the Paternoster and -the Creed. Others should be exhorted to enter into God’s service, and -fathers of families are bound to see that “their children, servants, -and families go to church and hear the preachings.”[292] - -By far the most interesting and important part of any inquiry on the -subject of pre-Reformation instructions, regards of course their -nature and effect. We are asked to believe that the people were -allowed to grow up in ignorance of the true nature of religion, and -with superstitions in their hearts which the clergy could easily have -corrected; but which they, on the contrary, rather fostered as likely -to prove of pecuniary value to themselves. To keep the people ignorant -(it is said) was their great object, as it was through the ignorance -of the lay folk that the clergy hoped to maintain their influence and -ascendency, and, it is suggested, to draw money out of the pockets of -the faithful. The reverence which was paid at this time to images of -the saints, and in an especial manner to the crucifix, is often adduced -as proof that the people were evidently badly instructed in the nature -of religious worship; and the destruction of statues, paintings, and -pictured glass by the advanced reformers is thought to be explained, -if not excused, by the absolute need of putting a stop once for all to -a crying abuse. The explanation given to the people by their religious -teachers on the eve of the religious changes on this matter of devotion -to the saints, and of the nature of the reverence to be paid to their -representations, may be taken as a good sample of the practical nature -of the general instructions imparted in those times. The question -divested of all ambiguity is really this: Were the people taught to -understand the nature of an image or representation, or were they -allowed to regard them as objects of reverence in themselves--that is, -as _idols_? The material for a reply to this inquiry is fortunately -abundant. The _Dyalogue_ of Sir Thomas More was written in 1528, in -order to maintain the Catholic teaching about images, relics, and the -praying to saints. To this, then, an inquirer naturally turns in the -first place for an exposition of the common belief in these matters; -for Sir Thomas claims that in his tract he is defending only “the -common faith and belief of Christ’s Church.” “What this is,” he says, -“I am very sure; and perceive it well not only by experience of my -own time and the places where I have myself been to, with the common -report of other honest men from all other places of Christendom.” After -having explained that the commandment of God had reference to idols or -images worshipped as gods, and not to mere representations of Christ, -our Lady, or the Saints,[293] he continues: “but neither Scripture -nor natural reason forbids a man to reverence an image, not fixing -his final intent on the image, but referring the honour to the person -the image represents. In such reverence shown to an image there is no -honour withdrawn from God; but the saint is honoured in his image, and -God in His saint. When a man of mean birth and an ambassador to a great -king has high honour done to him, to whom does that honour redound, -to the ambassador or to the king? When a man on the recital of his -prince’s letter puts off his cap and kisses it, does he reverence the -paper or his prince?… All names spoken and all words written are no -material signs or images, but are made only by consent and agreement -of men to betoken and signify such things, whereas images painted, -graven, or carved, may be so well wrought and so near to the life and -the truth, that they will naturally and much more effectually represent -the thing than the name either spoken or written.… These two words, -_Christus crucifixus_, do not represent to us, either to laymen or to -the learned, so lively a remembrance of His bitter Passion as does -a blessed image of the crucifix, and this these heretics perceive -well enough. Nor do they speak against images in order to further -devotion, but plainly with a malicious mind to diminish and quench -men’s devotions. For they see clearly that no one who loves another -does not delight in his image or in anything of his. And these heretics -who are so sore against the images of God and His holy saints, would -be right angry with him that would dishonestly handle an image made in -remembrance of one of themselves, whilst the wretches forbear not to -handle villainously, and in despite cast dirt upon the holy crucifix, -an image made in remembrance of our Saviour Himself, and not only of -His most blessed Person, but also of His most bitter Passion.”[294] - -Later on, in the same tract, rejecting the notion that people did not -fully understand that the image was intended merely to recall the -memory of the person whose image it was, and was not itself in any -sense the thing or person, More says: “The flock of Christ is not so -foolish as those heretics would make them to be. For whereas there is -no dog so mad that he does not know a real coney (_i.e._ rabbit) from -a coney carved and painted, (yet they would have it supposed that) -Christian people that have reason in their heads, and therefore the -light of faith in their souls, would think that the image of our Lady -were our Lady herself. Nay, they be not so mad, I trust, but that -they do reverence to the image for the honour of the person whom it -represents, as every man delights in the image and remembrance of his -friend. And although every good Christian man has a remembrance of -Christ’s passion in his mind, and conceives by devout meditation a -form and fashion thereof in his heart, yet there is no man I ween so -good nor so learned, nor so well accustomed to meditation, but that he -finds himself more moved to pity and compassion by beholding the holy -crucifix than when he lacks it.”[295] - -In his work against Tyndale, More again takes up this subject in -reference to the way in which the former in his new translation of -the Bible had substituted the word _idol_ for _image_, as if they -were practically identical in meaning. “Good folk who worship images -of Christ and His saints, thereby worship Christ and His saints, whom -these images represent.” Just as pagan worshippers of idols did evil in -worshipping them, “because in them they worshipped devils (whom they -called gods and whom those idols represented), so Christian men do well -in worshipping images, because in them they worship Christ and His holy -saints.”[296] - -Roger Edgworth, the preacher, describes at Bristol in Queen Mary’s -reign how the Reforming party endeavoured to confuse the minds of -the common people as to the meaning of the word idol. “I would,” he -says, “that you should not ignorantly confound and abuse those terms -‘idol’ and ‘image,’ taking an image for an idol and an idol for an -image, as I have heard many do in this city, as well fathers and -mothers (who should be wise) as their babies and children who have -learned foolishness from their parents. Now, at the dissolution of the -monasteries and friars’ houses many images have been carried abroad -and given to children to play with, and when the children have them -in their hands, dancing them in their childish manner, the father or -mother comes and says, ‘What nase, what have you there?’ The child -answers (as she is taught), ‘I have here my idol.’ Then the father -laughs and makes a gay game at it. So says the mother to another, -‘Jugge or Tommy, where did you get that pretty idol?’ ‘John, our parish -clerk gave it to me,’ says the child, and for that the clerk must have -thanks and shall not lack good cheer. But if the folly were only in -the insolent youth, and in the fond unlearned fathers and mothers, it -might soon be redressed.” The fact is, he proceeds to explain, that -the new preachers have been doing all in their power to obscure the -hitherto well-recognised difference in meaning between an image and an -idol. He begs his hearers to try and keep the difference in meaning -between an image and an idol clearly before their minds. “An image is a -similitude of a natural thing that has been, is, or may be,” he tells -them. “An idol is a similitude of what never was or may be. Therefore -the image of the crucifix is no idol, for it represents and signifies -Christ crucified as He was in very deed, and the image of St. Paul with -a sword in his hand as the sign of his martyrdom is no idol, for the -thing signified by it was a thing indeed, for he was beheaded with a -sword.”[297] - -In another part of the _Dialogue_ Sir Thomas More pointed out that what -the reforming party said against devotion to images and pilgrimages -could be summed up under one of three heads. They charge the people -with giving “to the saints, and also to their images, honour like in -kind to what they give to God Himself”; or (2) that “they take the -images for the things themselves,” which is plain idolatry; or (3) that -the worship is conducted in a “superstitious fashion with a desire of -unlawful things.” Now, as to these three accusations, More replies: -“The first point is at once soon and shortly answered, for it is not -true. For though men kneel to saints and images, and incense them -also, yet it is not true that they for this reason worship them in -every point like unto God.… They lack the chief point (of such supreme -worship). That is, they worship God in the mind that He is God, which -intention in worship is the only thing that maketh it _latria_, and not -any certain gesture or bodily observance.” It would not be supreme or -divine worship even if “we would wallow upon the ground unto Christ, -having in this a mind that He were the best man we could think of, -but not thinking Him to be God. For if the lowly manner of bodily -observance makes _latria_, then we were in grave peril of idolatry in -our courtesy used to princes, prelates, and popes, to whom we kneel as -low as to God Almighty, and kiss some their hands and some our own, -ere ever we presume to touch them; and in the case of the Pope, his -foot; and as for incensing, the poor priests in every choir are as well -incensed as the Sacrament. Hence if _latria_, which is the special -honour due to God, was contained in these things, then we were great -idolaters, not only in our worship of the saints and of their images, -but also of men, one to another among ourselves.” Though indeed to God -Almighty ought to be shown as “humble and lowly a bodily reverence as -possible, still this bodily worship is not _latria_, unless we so do -it in our mind considering and acknowledging Him as God, and with that -mind and intention do our worship; and this, as I think,” he says, “no -Christian man does to any image or to any saint either.” - -“Now, as touching the second point--namely, that people take the images -for the saints themselves, I trust there is no man so mad, or woman -either, that they do not know live men from dead stones, and a tree -from flesh and bone. And when they prefer our Lady at one pilgrimage -place before our Lady at another, or one rood before another, or make -their invocations and vows some to the one and some to the other, I -ween it easy to perceive that they mean nothing else than that our Lord -and our Lady, or rather our Lord for our Lady, shows more miracles at -the one than the other. They intend in their pilgrimages to visit, -some one place and some another, or sometimes the place is convenient -for them, or their devotion leads them; and yet (this is) not for the -place, but because our Lord pleases by manifest miracles to provoke men -to seek Him, or His Blessed Mother, or some Holy Saint of His, in these -places more especially than in some others.” - -“This thing itself proves also that they do not take the images of our -Lady for herself. For if they did, how could they possibly in any wise -have more mind to one of them than to the other? For they can have -no more mind to our Lady than to our Lady. Moreover, if they thought -that the image at Walsingham was our Lady herself then must they needs -think that our Lady herself was that image. Then, if in like manner -they thought that the image at Ipswich was our Lady herself, and as -they must then need think that our Lady was the image at Ipswich, they -must needs think that all these three things were one thing.… And so -by the same reason they must suppose that the image at Ipswich was the -self-same image as at Walsingham. If you ask any one you take for the -simplest, except a natural fool, I dare hold you a wager she will tell -you ‘nay’ to this. Besides this, take the simplest fool you can find -and she will tell you our Lady herself is in heaven. She will also -call an image an image, and she will tell you the difference between -an image of a horse and a horse in very deed. And this appears clearly -whatever her words about her pilgrimage are calling, according to the -common manner of speech, the image of our Lady, our Lady. As men say, -‘Go to the King’s Head for wine,’ not meaning his real head, but the -sign, so she means nothing more in the image but our Lady’s image, no -matter how she may call it. And if you would prove she neither takes -our Lady for the image, nor the image for our Lady--talk with her about -our Lady and she will tell you that our Lady was saluted by Gabriel; -that our Lady fled into Egypt with Joseph; and yet in the telling she -will never say that ‘our Lady of Walsingham,’ or ‘of Ipswich,’ was -saluted by Gabriel, or fled into Egypt. If you would ask her whether -it was ‘our Lady of Walsingham,’ or ‘our Lady of Ipswich,’ that stood -by the cross at Christ’s Passion, she will, I warrant you, make answer -that it was neither of them; and if you further ask her, ‘which Lady -then,’ she will name you no image, but our Lady who is in heaven. And -this I have proved often, and you may do so, too, when you will and -shall find it true, except it be in the case of one so very a fool that -God will give her leave to believe what she likes. And surely, on this -point, I think in my mind that all those heretics who make as though -they had found so much idolatry among the people for mistaking (the -nature) of images, do but devise the fear, to have some cloak to cover -their heresy, wherein they bark against the saints themselves, and when -they are marked they say they only mean the wrong beliefs that women -have in images.”[298] - -As regards the third point--namely, that honour is sometimes shown to -the saints and their images in “a superstitious fashion with a desire -of unlawful things,” More would be ready to blame this as much as any -man if it could be shown to be the case. “But I would not,” he says, -“blame all things which are declared to be of this character by the -new teachers. For example, to pray to St. Apollonia for the help of -our teeth is no witchcraft, considering that she had her teeth pulled -out for Christ’s sake. Nor is there any superstition in other suchlike -things.” Still, where abuses can be shown they ought to be put down as -abuses, and the difference between a lawful use and an unlawful abuse -recognised. But because there may be abuses done on the Sunday, or -in Lent, that is no reason why the Sunday observance, or the fast of -Lent, should be swept away.[299] “In like manner it would not be right -that all due worship of saints and reverence of relics, and honour of -saints’ images, by which good and devout folk get much merit, should -be abolished and put down because people abuse” these things. “Now, -as touching the evil petitions,” he continues, “though they who make -them were, as I trust they are not, a great number, they are not yet -so many that ask evil petitions of saints as ask them of God Himself. -For whatsoever such people will ask of a good saint, they will ask of -God Himself, and where as the worst point it is said, ‘that the people -do idolatry in that they take the images for the saints themselves, or -the rood for Christ Himself,’--which, as I have said, I think none do; -for some rood has no crucifix thereon, and they do not believe that the -cross which they see was ever at Jerusalem, or that it was the holy -cross itself, and much less think that the image that hangs on it is -the body of Christ Himself. And though some were so mad as to think so, -yet it is not ‘the people’ who do so. For a few doddering dames do not -make the people.”[300] - -It is hard to imagine any teaching about the use and abuse of images -clearer than that which is contained in the foregoing passages from Sir -Thomas More’s writings. The main importance of his testimony, however, -is not so much this clear statement of Catholic doctrine on the nature -of devotion to images, as his positive declaration that there were not -such abuses, or superstitions, common among the people on the eve of -the religious changes, as it suited the purpose of the early reformers -to suggest, and of later writers with sectarian bias to believe. - -For evidence of positive and distinct teaching on the matter of -reverence to be shown to images, and on its nature and limits, we -cannot do better than refer to that most popular book of instruction -in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, already referred to, -called _Dives et Pauper_, a treatise on the Ten Commandments. It was -multiplied from the beginning of the fifteenth century in manuscript -copies, and printed editions of it were issued from the presses of -Pynson, Wynkyn de Worde, and Thomas Berthelet. These editions published -by our early printers are sufficient to attest its popularity, and -the importance attached to it as a book of instruction by the -ecclesiastical authorities on the eve of the Reformation. - -This is how the teacher lays down the general principle of loving God: -“The first precept of charity is this: Thou shalt love the Lord God -with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, with all -thy might. When He saith thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart, -He excludeth all manner of idolatry that is forbidden by the first -commandment; that is, that man set not his heart, nor his faith, nor -his trust in any creature more than in God, or against God’s worship.… -God orders that thou shouldst love Him with all thy heart, that is to -say, with all thy faith, in such a way that thou set all thy faith and -trust in Him before all others, as in Him that is Almighty and can -best help thee in thy need.” Later on, under the same heading, we are -taught that: “by this commandment we are bound to worship God, who is -the Father of all things, who is called the Father of mercies and God -of all comfort. He is our Father, for He made us of nought: He bought -us with His blood, He findeth us all that we need, and much more, He -feedeth us. He is our Father by grace, for by His grace He hath made -us heirs of heavenly bliss. Was there ever a father so tender of his -child as God is tender of us? He is to us both father and mother, -and therefore we are bound to love Him and worship Him above all -things.”[301] - -Under the first commandment the whole question as to images, and the -nature of the reverence to be paid to them, is carefully considered, -and the matter put so plainly, that there is no room for doubt as to -the nature of the instructions given to the people in pre-Reformation -days. Images, the teacher explains, are ordered for three great ends, -namely: “To stir men’s minds to meditate upon the Incarnation of Christ -and upon His life and passion, and upon the lives of the saints;” -secondly, to move the heart to devotion and love, “for oft man is -stirred more by sight than by hearing or reading;” thirdly, they “are -intended to be a token and a book to the ignorant people, that they may -read in images and painting as clerks read in books.” - -And in reply to a question from _Dives_, who pretended to think that -it would be difficult to read a lesson from any painting, _Pauper_ -explains his meaning in calling them “books to the unlearned.” “When -thou seest the image of the crucifix,” he says, “think of Him that -died on the cross for thy sins and thy sake, and thank Him for His -endless charity that He would suffer so much for thee. See in images -how His head was crowned with a garland of thorns till the blood burst -out on every side, to destroy the great sin of pride which is most -manifested in the heads of men and women. Behold, and make an end to -thy pride. See in the image how His arms were spread abroad and drawn -up on the tree till the veins and sinews cracked, and how His hands -were nailed to the cross, and streamed with blood, to destroy the sin -that Adam and Eve did with their hands when they took the apple against -God’s prohibition. Also He suffered to wash away the sin of the wicked -deeds and wicked works done by the hands of men and women. Behold, -and make an end of thy wicked works. See how His side was opened and -His heart cloven in two by the sharp spear, and how it shed blood and -water, to show that if He had had more blood in His body, more He would -have given for men’s love. He shed His blood to ransom our souls, and -water to wash us from our sins.” - -But whilst the instructor teaches the way in which the crucifix may -be a book full of deep meaning to the unlearned, he is most careful -to see that the true signification of the image is not misunderstood. -In language which for clearness of expression and simplicity of -illustration cannot be excelled, he warns _Dives_ not to mistake the -real nature of the reverence paid to the symbol of our redemption. “In -this manner,” he says, “read thy book and fall down to the ground and -thank thy God who would do so much for thee. Worship Him above all -things--not the stock, nor the stone, nor the wood, but Him who died -on the tree of the cross for thy sins and thy sake. Thou shalt kneel -if thou wilt before the image, but not to the image. Thou shalt do thy -worship before the image, before the thing, not to the thing; offer -thy prayer before the thing, not to the thing, for it seeth thee not, -heareth thee not, understandeth thee not: make thy offering, if thou -wilt, before the thing, but not to the thing: make thy pilgrimage not -to the thing, nor for the thing, for it may not help thee, but to Him -and for Him the thing represents. For if thou do it for the thing, or -to the thing, thou doest idolatry.” - -This plain teaching as to the only meaning of reverence paid to images, -namely, that it is relative and intended for that which the image -represents, our author enforces by several examples. Just as a priest -when saying mass with a book before him, bends down, holds up his -hands, kneels, and performs other external signs of worship, not to the -book, but to God, “so should the unlettered man use his book, that is -images and paintings, not worshipping the thing, but God in heaven and -the saints in their degree. All the worship which he doth before the -thing, he doth, not to the thing, but to Him the thing represents.” - -The image of the crucified Saviour on the altar is specially intended, -our author says, to remind all that “Mass singing is a special -mind-making of Christ’s passion.” For this reason, in the presence of -the crucifix, the priest says “his mass, and offers up the highest -prayer that Holy Church can devise for the salvation of the quick and -the dead. He holds up his hands, he bows down, he kneels, and all the -worship he can do, he does--more than all, he offers up the highest -sacrifice and the best offering that any heart can devise--that is -Christ, the Son of the God of heaven, under the form of bread and -wine. All this worship the priest doth at mass before the thing--the -crucifix; and I hope there is no man nor woman so ignorant that he will -say that the priest singeth his mass, or maketh his prayer, or offers -up the Son of God, Christ Himself, to the thing.… In the same way, -unlettered men should worship before the thing, making prayer before -the thing, and not to the thing.” - -One of the special practices of the mediæval church to which the -English reformers objected, and to which they gave the epithet -“superstitious,” was the honour shown to the cross on Good Friday, -generally known as “the creeping to the cross.” The advocates of change -in insisting upon this time-honoured ceremony being swept away, claimed -that in permitting it the Church had given occasion to wrong ideas of -worship in the minds of the common people, and that the reverence shown -to the symbol of our redemption on that occasion amounted practically -to idolatry. In view of such assertions, it is not without interest -to see how _Pauper_ in this book of simple instructions treats this -matter. “On Good Friday especially,” says _Dives_, “men creep to the -cross and worship the cross.” “That is so,” replies the instructor, -“but not in the way thou meanest. The cross that we creep to and -worship so highly at that time is Christ Himself, who died on the cross -on that day for our sin and our sake.… He is that cross, as all doctors -say, to whom we pray and say, ‘_Ave crux, spes unica_,’ ‘Hail, thou -cross, our only hope.’” But rejoins _Dives_, “On Palm Sunday, at the -procession the priest draweth up the veil before the rood and falleth -down to the ground with all the people, saying thrice thus, ‘_Ave Rex -noster_,’ ‘Hail, be Thou our King.’ In this he worships the thing as -King! _Absit!_” “God forbid!” replies _Pauper_, “he speaks not to the -image that the carpenter hath made and the painter painted, unless the -priest be a fool, for the stock and stone was never king. He speaketh -to Him that died on the cross for us all--to Him that is King of all -things.… For this reason are crosses placed by the wayside, to remind -folk to think of Him who died on the cross, and to worship Him above -all things. And for this same reason is the cross borne before a -procession, that all who follow after it or meet it should worship Him -who died upon a cross as their King, their Head, their Lord and their -Leader to Heaven.” - -Equally clear is the author of _Dives et Pauper_ upon the distinction -between the worship to be paid to God and the honour it is lawful to -give to His saints. It is, of course, frequently asserted that the -English pre-Reformation church did not recognise, or at least did not -inculcate, this necessary difference, and consequently tolerated, even -if it did not suggest, gross errors in this matter. No one who has -examined the manuals of instruction which were in use on the eve of the -Reformation can possibly maintain an opinion so opposed to the only -evidence available. In particular, the real distinction between the -supreme worship due to God alone, and the honour, however great, to be -paid to His creatures is drawn out with great care and exactness in -regard to the devotion paid to our Lord’s Blessed Mother. Thus, after -most carefully explaining that there are two modes of “service and -worship” which differ not merely in degree, but in kind and nature, and -which were then, as now, known under the terms _latria_ and _dulia_, -our author proceeds, “Latria is a protestation and acknowledgment of -the high majesty of God; the recognition that He is sovereign goodness, -sovereign wisdom, sovereign might, sovereign truth, sovereign justice; -that He is the Creator and Saviour of all creatures and the end of all -things; that all we have we have of Him, and that without Him we have -absolutely nothing; and that without Him we can neither have nor do -anything, neither we nor any other creature. This acknowledgment and -protestation is made in three ways: by the heart, and by word, and by -deed. We make it by the heart when we love Him as sovereign goodness; -when we love Him as sovereign wisdom and truth, that may not deceive -nor be deceived; when we hope in Him and trust Him as sovereign might -that can best help us in need; as sovereign greatness and Lord, who may -best yield us our deserts; and as sovereign Saviour, most merciful and -most ready to forgive us our misdeeds.… Also the acknowledgment is done -in the prayer and praise of our mouths.… For we must pray to Him and -praise Him as sovereign might, sovereign wisdom, sovereign goodness, -sovereign truth; as all-just and merciful as the Maker and Saviour of -all things, &c. - -“And in this manner we are not to pray to or praise any creature. -Therefore, they who make their prayers and their praises before images, -and say their _Paternoster_ and their _Ave Maria_ and other prayers and -praises commonly used by holy Church, or any such, if they do it to the -image, and speak to the image, they do open idolatry. Also they are not -excused even if they understand not what they say, for their lights, -and their other wits, and their inner wit also, showeth them well that -there ought that no such prayer, praise, or worship be offered to such -images, for they can neither hear them, nor see them, nor help them in -their needs.” - -Equally definite and explicit is another writer, just on the eve of the -Reformation. William Bond, the brother of Sion, in 1531 published his -large volume of instructions called _The Pilgrymage of Perfeccyon_, to -which his contemporary, Richard Whitford, refers his readers for the -fullest teaching on sundry points of faith and practice. In setting -forth the distinction between an _image_ and an _idol_ this authority -says, “Many nowadays take the Scripture wrongly, and thereby fall into -heresy as Wycliffe did with his followers, and now this abominable -heretic, Luther, with his adherents.… And (as I suppose) the cause -of their error is some of these following:--First, that they put no -difference between an idol and an image; secondly, that they put no -difference between the service or high adoration due to God, called -in the Greek tongue _latria_, and the lower veneration or worship -exhibited and done to the saints of God, called in Greek _dulia_.… The -veneration or worship that is done to the images (as Damascene, Basil, -and St. Thomas say) rest not in them, but redound unto the thing that -is represented by such images: as for example, the great ambassador -or messenger of a king shall have the same reverence that the king’s -own person should have if he were present. This honour is not done to -this man for himself, or for his own person, but for the king’s person -in whose name he cometh, and all such honour and reverence so done -redoundeth to the king and resteth in him.… So it is in the veneration -or worshipping of the images of Christ and His saints. The honour -rests not in the image, nor in the stock, nor in the stone, but in the -thing that is represented thereby.” According to St. Thomas, he says -the images in churches are intended to “be as books to the rude and -unlearned people,” and to “stir simple souls to devotion.”[302] - -Bond then draws out most carefully the distinction which the Church -teaches as to the kinds of honour to be given to the saints. “Our -lights, oblations, or Paternosters and creeds that we say before images -of saints,” he says, “are as praisings of God, for His graces wrought -in His saints, by whose merits we trust that our petitions shall be the -sooner obtained of God.… We pray to them, not as to the granters of our -petitions, but as means whereby we may the sooner obtain the same.”[303] - -Speaking specially of the reverence shown to the crucifix, our author -uses the teaching of St. Thomas to explain the exact meaning of this -honour. “The Church in Lent, in the Passion time,” he continues, -“worships it, singing, ‘_O crux ave, spes unica_,’ ‘Hail, holy cross, -our only hope.’ That is to be understood as ‘Hail, blessed Lord -crucified, Who art our only hope’--for all is one worship and act. -Christ, our Maker and Redeemer, God and man in one person, is of duty -worshipped with the high adoration only due to God, called _latria_. -His image also, or his similitude, called the crucifix, is to be -worshipped, just as the Blessed Sacrament is adored with the worship of -_latria_.”[304] - -To this testimony may be added that of another passage from Sir Thomas -More. He was engaged in refuting the accusation made by Tyndale against -the religious practices of pre-Reformation days, to which charges, -unfortunately, people have given too much credence in later times. “Now -of prayer, Tyndale says,” writes More, “that we think no man may pray -but at church, and that (_i.e._ the praying before a crucifix or image) -is nothing but the saying of a _Paternoster_ to a post. (Further) -that the observances and ceremonies of the Church are vain things of -our own imagination, neither needful to the taming of the flesh, nor -profitable to our neighbour, nor to the honour of God. These lies come -in by lumps; lo! I dare say that he never heard in his life men nor -women say that a man might pray only in church. Just as true is it also -that men say their _Paternosters_ to the post, by which name it pleases -him of his reverent Christian mind to call the images of holy saints -and our Blessed Lady, and the figure of Christ’s cross, the book of -His bitter passion. Though we reverence these in honour of the things -they represent, and in remembrance of Christ do creep to the cross and -kiss it, and say _Paternoster_ at it, yet we say not our _Paternoster_ -to it, but to God; and that Tyndale knows full well, but he likes to -rail.”[305] - -Finally a passage on the subject of pre-Reformation devotion to the -saints and angels, from the tract _Dives et Pauper_, may fitly close -this subject. “First,” says the author, “worship ye our Lady, mother -and maid, above all, next after God, and then other saints both men -and women, and then the holy angels, as God giveth the grace. Worship -ye them not as God, but as our tutors, defenders and keepers, as our -leaders and governors under God, as the means between us and God, who -is the Father of all and most Sovereign Judge, to appease Him, and to -pray for us, and to obtain us grace to do well, and for forgiveness -of our misdeeds.… And, dear friend, pray ye heartily to your angel, -as to him that is nearest to you and hath most care of you, and is, -under God, most busy to save you. And follow his governance and trust -in him in all goodness, and with reverence and purity pray ye to him -faithfully, make your plaints to him, and speak to him homely to be -your helper, since he is your tutor and keeper assigned to you by God. -Say oft that holy prayer, _Angele qui meus est_, &c.” - -This prayer to the Guardian Angel, so highly commended, was well known -to pre-Reformation Catholics. Generations of English mothers taught it -to their children; it is found frequently recommended in the sermons -of the fifteenth century, and confessors are charged to advise their -penitents to learn and make use of it. For the benefit of those of -my readers who may not know the prayer, I here give it in an English -form, from a Latin version in the tract _Dextra Pars Oculi_, which -was intended to assist confessors in the discharge of their sacred -ministry-- - - “O angel who my guardian art, - Through God’s paternal love, - Defend, and shield, and rule the charge - Assigned thee from above. - - From vice’s stain preserve my soul, - O gentle angel bright, - In all my life be thou my stay, - To all my steps the light.” - -It is, of course, impossible here to do more than refer to the -books of instruction, and those intended to furnish the priests on -the eve of the Reformation with material for the familiar teaching -they were bound to give their people. Such works as Walter Pagula’s -_Pars Oculi Sacerdotis_, and the _Pupilla Oculi_ of John de Burgo, -both fourteenth-century productions, were in general use during the -fifteenth century among the clergy. The frequent mention of these works -in the inventories and wills of the period shows that they were in -great demand, and were circulated from hand to hand, whilst an edition -of the latter, printed in 1510 by Wolffgang, at the expense of an -English merchant, William Bretton, attests its continued popularity. -In a letter from the editor, Augustine Aggeus, to Bretton, printed on -the back of the title-page, it is said that the _Pupilla_ was printed -solely with the desire that the rites and sacraments of the church -might be better understood and appreciated, and to secure “that nowhere -in the English Church” should there be any excuse of ignorance on those -matters.[306] - -The contents of the first-named tract, the _Pars Oculi Sacerdotis_, -show how very useful a manual it must have been to assist the clergy -in their ministrations. It consists of three parts: the first portion -forms what would now be called the _praxis confessarii_, a manual -for instructing priests in the science of dealing with souls, and -giving examples of the kind of questions that should be asked of -various people, for example, of religious, secular priests, merchants, -soldiers, and the like. This is followed by a detailed examination -of conscience, and pious practices are suggested for the priest to -recommend for the use of the faithful. For example, in order that the -lives of lay people might be associated in some way with the public -prayer of the church, the Divine office, the priest is advised to get -his penitents to make use of the Pater and Creed, seven times a day, -to correspond with the canonical hours. Those having the cure of souls -are reminded that it is their duty to see that all at least know the -Lord’s Prayer, the Creed, and the Hail Mary by heart, and they are -urged to do all in their power to inculcate devotions to our Lady, -Patron Saints, and the Guardian Angels. - -The second part of the _Dextra Pars Oculi_ deals minutely and carefully -with the instructions which a priest should give his people in their -religion, and this includes not only points of necessary belief -and Christian practice, but such matters as the proper decorum and -behaviour in Church, and the cemetery, &c. The materials for these -familiar instructions are arranged under thirty-one headings, and -following on these are the explanations of Christian faith and practice -to be made in the simple sermons the clergy were bound to give to their -people quarterly. The third part, called the _Sinistra Pars Oculi_, is -an equally careful treatise on the sacraments. The instructions on the -Blessed Eucharist are excellent, and in the course of them many matters -of English religious practice are touched upon and the ceremonies of -the Mass are fully explained.[307] - -It is obvious that much of the real religious instruction in -pre-Reformation days, as indeed in all ages, had to be given at home by -parents to their children. The daily practices by which the home life -is regulated and sanctified are more efficacious in the formation of -early habits of solid piety and the fear of God in the young than any -religious instructions given at school or at Church. This was fully -understood and insisted upon in pre-Reformation books of instruction. -Such, for example, is the very purpose of Richard Whitford’s book, -called _A werke for Housholders, or for them that have the guyding or -governance of any company_, printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1534, and -again by Robert Redman in 1537. After reminding his readers that life -is short, and that it is impossible for any man to know when he shall -be called upon to give an account of his stewardship, he turns to the -consideration of the Christian’s daily life. Begin the day well, he -says; on first awakening, turn your thoughts and heart to God, “and -then use by continual custom to make a cross with your thumb upon your -forehead or front, whilst saying these words, _In nomine Patris_; and -another cross upon your mouth, with these words, _Et filii_; and then -a third cross upon your breast, saying, _Et spiritus Sancti_.” After -suggesting a form of morning and evening prayer, and urging a daily -examination of conscience, he continues: Some may object that all this -is very well for religious, or people secluded from the world, “but we -lie two or three sometimes together, and even in one chamber divers -beds, and so many in company, that if we should use these things in the -presence of our fellows some would laugh us to scorn and mock at us.” -But to this objection Whitford in effect replies that at most it would -be a nine days’ wonder, and people would quickly be induced to follow -an example of such a good Christian practice if set with courage and -firmness.[308] - -Speaking of the duty of instructing others, “the wretch of Syon,” as -Whitford constantly calls himself, urges those who can read to use -their gifts for the benefit of others not so fortunate. They should get -their neighbours together on holidays, he says, especially the young, -and teach them the daily exercise, and in particular the “things they -are bound to know or can say: that is the _Paternoster_, the _Ave_, -and the _Creed_.” Begin early to teach those that are young, for “our -English proverb saith that the young cock croweth as he doth hear and -learn of the old.” Parents, above all things, he urges to look well -after their children and to take care of the company they keep. Teach -them to say their grace at meals. “At every meal, dinner or supper, -I have advised, and do now counsel, that one person should with loud -voice say thus, ‘Paternoster,’ with every petition paraphrased and -explained, and the Hail Mary and Creed likewise. This manner of the -Paternoster, Ave, and Creed,” he says, “I would have used and read from -the book at every meal, or at least once a day with a loud voice that -all the persons present may hear it.” People are bound to see that all -in their house know these prayers and say them.[309] - -Very strongly indeed does Whitford in this volume write against belief -in charms and giving way to superstitions. There is no question about -his strong condemnation of anything, however slight, which might -savour of reliance on these external things, and as an instance of -what he means, he declares that the application of a piece of bread, -with a cross marked upon it, to a tooth to cure its aching, savours of -superstition, as showing too great a reliance on the material cross. In -the same place our author urges parents to correct their children early -for any use of oaths and strong expressions. “Teach your children,” he -says, “to make their additions under this form: ‘yea, father,’ ‘nay, -father,’ ‘yea, mother,’ ‘nay, mother,’ and ever to avoid such things as -‘by cock and pye,’ and ‘by my hood of green,’ and such other.”[310] - -Finally, to take but one more example of the advice given in this -interesting volume to parents and others having the charge of the -young, Whitford says: “Teach your children to ask a blessing every -night, kneeling, before they go to rest, under this form: ‘Father, I -beseech you a blessing for charity.’” If the child is too stubborn to -do this, he says let it “be well whisked.” If too old to be corrected -in this way, let it be set out in the middle of the dining-room and -made to feed by itself, and let it be treated as one would treat one -who did not deserve to consort with its fellows. Also teach the young -“to ask a blessing from every bishop, abbot, and priest, and of their -godfathers and godmothers also.”[311] - -In taking a general survey of the books issued by the English presses -upon the introduction of the art of printing, the inquirer can hardly -fail to be struck with the number of religious, or quasi-religious, -works which formed the bulk of the early printed books. This fact -alone is sufficient evidence that the invention which at this period -worked a veritable revolution in the intellectual life of the world, -was welcomed by the ecclesiastical authorities as a valuable auxiliary -in the work of instruction. In England the first presses were set up -under the patronage of churchmen, and a very large proportion of the -early books were actually works of instruction or volumes furnishing -materials to the clergy for the familiar and simple discourses which -they were accustomed to give four times a year to their people. Besides -the large number of what may be regarded as professional books chiefly -intended for use by the ecclesiastical body, such as missals, manuals, -breviaries, and horæ, and the prymers and other prayer-books used by -the laity, there was an ample supply of religious literature published -in the early part of the sixteenth century. In fact, the bulk of the -early printed English books were of a religious character, and as the -publication of such volumes was evidently a matter of business on the -part of the first English printers, it is obvious that this class of -literature commanded a ready sale, and that the circulation of such -books was fostered by those in authority at this period. Volumes of -sermons, works of Instruction on the Creed and the Commandments, lives -of the saints, and popular expositions of Scripture history, were not -only produced but passed through several editions in a short space -of time. The evidence, consequently, of the productions of the first -English printing-presses goes to show not only that religious books -were in great demand, but also that so far from discouraging the use -of such works of instruction, the ecclesiastical authorities actively -helped in their diffusion. - -In considering the religious education of the people in the time -previous to the great upheaval of the sixteenth century, some account -must be taken of the village mystery plays which obviously formed no -inconsiderable part in popular instruction in the great truths of -religion. The inventories of parish churches and the churchwardens’ -accounts which have survived show how very common a feature these -religious plays formed in the parish life of the fifteenth century, and -the words of the various dramas, of which we still possess copies, show -how powerful a medium of teaching they would have been among the simple -and unlettered villagers of Catholic England, and even to the crowds -which at times thronged great cities like Coventry and Chester, to be -present at the more elaborate plays acted in these traditional centres -of the religious drama. - -As to their popularity there can be no question. Dramatic -representations of the chief events in the life of our Lord, &c., were -commonly so associated with the religious purposes for which they were -originally produced, that they were played on Sundays and feast days, -and not infrequently in churches, church porches, and churchyards. -“Spectacles, plays, and dances that are used on great feasts,” says -the author of _Dives et Pauper_, quoted above, “as they are done -principally for devotion and honest mirth, and to teach men to love -God the more, are lawful if the people be not thereby hindered from -God’s service, nor from hearing God’s word, and provided that in such -spectacles and plays there is mingled no error against the faith of -Holy Church and good living. All other plays are prohibited, both on -holidays and work days (according to the law), upon which the gloss -saith that the representation in plays at Christmas of Herod and the -Three Kings, and other pieces of the Gospel, both then and at Easter -and other times, is lawful and commendable.” - -A few examples of the kind of teaching imparted in these plays will -give a better idea of the purpose they served in pre-Reformation days -than any description. There can be no reasonable doubt that such -dramatic representations of the chief mysteries of religion and of -scenes in the life of our Lord or of His saints served to impress -these truths and events upon the imaginations of the audiences who -witnessed them, and to make them vivid realities in a way which we, -who are not living in the same religious atmosphere, find it difficult -now to understand. The religious drama was the handmaid of the Church, -and was intended to assist in instructing the people at large in the -truths and duties of religion, just as the paintings upon the walls of -the sacred buildings were designed to tell their own tale of the Bible -history, and form “a book” ever open to the eyes of the unlettered -children of the Church, easy to be understood, graphically setting -forth events in the story of God’s dealings with men, and illustrating -truths which often formed the groundwork for oral instruction in the -Sunday sermon. - -Whatever we may be inclined to think of these simple plays as literary -works, or however we may be inclined now to smile at some of the -characters and “situations,” as to the pious spirit which dictated -their composition and presided over their production there can be -no doubt. “In great devotion and discretion,” says the monk and -chronicler, “Higden published the story of the Bible, that the simple -in their own language might understand.”[312] - -This was the motive of all these mediæval religious plays. As a popular -writer upon the English drama says: “There is abundant evidence that -the Romish ecclesiastics in the mystery plays, especially that part -of them relating to the birth, passion, and resurrection of Christ, -had the perfectly serious intention of strengthening the faith of the -multitude in the fundamental doctrines of the Church, and it seems the -less extraordinary that they should have resorted to this expedient -when we reflect that, before the invention of printing, books had no -existence for the people at large.”[313] - -The subjects treated of in these plays were very varied, although -those which were performed at the great feasts of Christmas and -Easter generally had some relation to the mystery then celebrated. In -fact, the mystery plays of the sacred seasons were only looked upon -as helping to make men realise more deeply the great drama of the -Redemption, the memory of which was perpetuated in the sequence of -the great festivals of the Christian year. In such a collection as -that known as the _Towneley Mysteries_, and published by the Surtees -Society, we have examples of the subjects treated in the religious -plays of the period. The collection makes no pretence to be complete, -but it comprises some three and thirty plays, including such subjects -as the Creation, the death of Abel, the story of Noah, the sacrifice of -Isaac and other Old Testament histories, and a great number of scenes -from the New Testament, such as the Annunciation, the Visitation, Cæsar -Augustus, scenes from the Nativity, the Shepherds and the Magi, the -Flight into Egypt, various scenes from the Passion and Crucifixion, the -parable of the Talents, the story of Lazarus, &c. - -Any one who will take the trouble to read these plays as they are -printed in this volume cannot fail to be impressed not only with the -vivid picture of the special scene in the Old or New Testament that -is presented to the imagination, but by the extensive knowledge of -the Bible which the production of these plays must have imparted to -those who listened to them, and by the way in which, incidentally, the -most important religious truths are conveyed in the crude and rugged -verse. Again and again, for instance, the entire dependence of all -created things upon the Providence of Almighty God is declared and -illustrated. Thus, the confession of God’s Omnipotence, put into the -mouth of Noah at the beginning of the play of “Noah and his Sons,” -contains a profession of belief in the Holy Trinity and in the work of -the three Persons: it describes the creation of the world, the fall -of Lucifer, the sin of our first parents, and their expulsion from -Paradise. In the story of Abraham, too, the prayer of the patriarch -with which it begins: - - “Adonai, thou God very, - Thou hear us when to Thee we call, - As Thou art He that best may, - Thou art most succour and help of all,” - -gives a complete résumé of the Bible history before the days of -Abraham, with the purpose of showing that all things are in the hands -of God, and that complete obedience is due to Him by all creatures whom -He has made. - -The same teaching as to the entire dependence of the Christian for all -things upon God’s Providence appears in the address of the soul to its -Maker in the “morality” of Mary Magdalene, printed by Mr. Sharpe from -the Digby Manuscript collection of religious plays:-- - - “_Anima_: - - ‘Sovereign Lord, I am bound to Thee; - When I was nought, Thou made me thus glorious; - When I perished through sin, Thou saved me; - When I was in great peril, Thou kept me, Christus; - When I erred, Thou reduced me, Jesus; - When I was ignorant, Thou taught me truth; - When I sinned, Thou corrected me thus; - When I was heavy, Thou comforted me by truth (_i.e._ Thy mercy); - When I stand in grace, Thou holdest me that tide; - When I fall, Thou raisest me mightily; - When I go well, Thou art my guide; - When I come, Thou receivest me most lovingly; - Thou hast anointed me with the oil of mercy; - Thy benefits, Lord, be innumerable: - Wherefore laud endless to Thee I cry; - Recommending me to Thy endless power endurable.’” - -The more these old plays which delighted our forefathers are examined, -the more clear it becomes that, although undoubtedly unlearned and -unread, the people in pre-Reformation days, with instruction such as -is conveyed in these pious dramas, must have had a deeper insight into -the Gospel narrative, and a more thorough knowledge of Bible history -generally, not to speak of a comprehension of the great truths of -religion, than the majority of men possess now in these days of boasted -enlightenment. Some of the plays, as for example that representing St. -Peter’s fall, exhibit a depth of genuine feeling, of humble sorrow, for -instance, on the part of St. Peter, and of loving-kindness on the part -of our Lord, which must have come home to the hearts as well as to the -minds of the beholders. At the same time, the lesson deduced by our -Saviour from the apostle’s fall, namely, the need of all learning by -their own shortcomings to be merciful to the trespasses of others, must -have impressed itself upon them with a force which would not easily -have been forgotten. - -In that most popular of all representations--that of Doomsday--“people -learnt that before God there is no distinction of persons, and that -each individual soul will be judged on its own merits, quite apart -from any fictitious human distinctions of rank, wealth, or power.” -Thus, as types, appear a _saved_ pope, emperor, king and queen, and -amongst the _damned_ we also find a pope, emperor, king and queen, -justiciar and merchant. And the words of thankfulness uttered by the -Pope that has obtained his crown betrays “no self-satisfaction at the -attainment of salvation; on the contrary, the true ring of Christian -humility betokens a due appreciation of God’s unutterable holiness, and -our unworthiness to stand before His face till the uttermost blemish -left by sin has been wiped away” by the healing fires of Purgatory. -No less clearly is the full doctrine of responsibility taught in the -lament of the Pope, who is represented as having lost his soul by an -evil life, and as being condemned to eternal punishment. The mere fact -of a pope being so represented was in itself, when the Office was -held in the highest regard, a lesson of the highest importance in the -teaching of the true principles of holiness. In a word, these mystery -plays provided a most useful means of impressing upon the minds of -all the facts of Bible history, the great truths of religion, and the -chief Christian virtues. The people taught in such a school and the -people who delighted in such representations, as our forefathers in -pre-Reformation days unquestionably did, cannot, even from this point -of view alone, be regarded as ignorant of scriptural or moral teaching. - - - - -CHAPTER X - -PARISH LIFE IN CATHOLIC ENGLAND - - -To understand the attitude of men’s minds to the ecclesiastical -system on the eve of the great religious changes of the sixteenth -century, some knowledge of the parochial life of Catholic England is -necessary. Under present conditions, when unity has given place to -diversity, and three centuries of continuous wrangling “over secret -truths which most profoundly affect the heart and mind” have done much -to coarsen and deaden our spiritual sense; when the religious mind of -England manifests every shade of belief and unbelief without conscious -reflection on the logical absurdity of the position, it is by no means -easy to realise the influence of a state of affairs when all men, from -the highest to the lowest, in every village and hamlet throughout the -length and breadth of the land, had but one creed, worshipped their -Maker in but one way, and were bound together with what most certainly -were to them the real and practical ties of the Christian brotherhood. -It is hardly possible to overestimate the effect of surroundings upon -individual opinion, or the influence of a congenial atmosphere both -on the growth and development of a spirit of religion and on the -preservation of Christian morals and religious practices generally. -When all, so far as religious faith is concerned, thought the same, and -when all, so far as religious observance is concerned, did the same, -the very atmosphere of unity was productive of that spirit of common -brotherhood, which appears so plainly in the records of the period -preceding the religious revolt of the sixteenth century. Those who will -read below the surface and will examine for themselves into the social -life of that time must admit, however much they feel bound to condemn -the existing religious system, that it certainly maintained up to the -very time of its overthrow a hold over the minds and hearts of the -people at large, which nothing since has gained. Religion overflowed, -as it were, into popular life, and helped to sanctify human interests, -whilst the affection of the people was manifested in a thousand ways in -regard to what we might now be inclined to consider the ecclesiastical -domain. Whether for good or evil, religion in its highest and truest -sense, at least as it was then understood, was to the English people -as the bloom upon the choicest fruit. Whatever view may be taken as -to advantage or disadvantage which came to the body politic, or to -individuals, by the Reformation, it must be admitted that at least -part of the price paid for the change was the destruction of the sense -of corporate unity and common brotherhood, which was fostered by the -religious unanimity of belief and practice in every village in the -country, and which, as in the main-spring of its life, and the very -central point of its being, centred in the Church with its rites and -ceremonies. - -A Venetian traveller at the beginning of the sixteenth century bears -witness to the influence of religion upon the English people of that -time. His opinion is all the more valuable, inasmuch as he appeals -to the experience of his master, who was also the companion of his -travels, to confirm his own impressions, and as he was fully alive to -the weak points in the English character, of which he thus records his -opinion: “The English are great lovers of themselves and of everything -belonging to them; they think that there are no other men but -themselves and no other world but England. Whenever they see a handsome -foreigner they say that ‘he looks like an Englishman,’ or that ‘it is a -great pity that he should not be an Englishman,’ and when they partake -of any delicacy with a foreigner they ask him whether such a thing is -made in his country.”[314] In regard to the religious practices of -the people, this intelligent foreigner says, “They all attend mass -every day, and say many _Paternosters_ in public. The women carry long -rosaries in their hands, and any who can read take the Office of Our -Lady with them, and with some companion recite it in Church verse by -verse, in a low voice, after the manner of churchmen. On Sundays they -always hear Mass in their parish church and give liberal alms, because -they may not offer less than a piece of money of which fourteen are -equivalent to a golden ducat. Neither do they omit any form incumbent -on good Christians.”[315] - -In these days perhaps the suggestion that the English people commonly -in the early sixteenth century were present daily at morning Mass is -likely to be received with caution, and classed among the strange tales -proverbially told by travellers, then as now. It is, however, confirmed -by another Venetian who visited England some few years later, and who -asserts that every morning “at daybreak he went to Mass arm-in-arm with -some English nobleman or other.”[316] And, indeed, the same desire of -the people to be present daily at the Sacrifice of the Mass is attested -by Archbishop Cranmer when, after the change had come, he holds up -to ridicule the traditional observances previously in vogue. What he -specially objected to was the common practice of those who run, as -he says, “from altar to altar, and from sacring, as they call it, to -sacring, peeping, tooting, and gazing at that thing which the priest -held up in his hands … and saying, ‘this day have I seen my Maker,’ and -‘I cannot be quiet except I see my Maker once a day.’”[317] - -If there were no other evidence of the affection of the English people -on the eve of the Reformation for their religion, that of the stone -walls of the churches would be sufficient to prove the sincerity of -their love. In the whole history of English architecture nothing is -more remarkable than the activity in church building manifested during -the later half of the fifteenth and the early part of the sixteenth -centuries. From one end of England to the other in the church walls -are to be seen the evidences of thought and skill, labour and wealth, -spent freely upon the sacred buildings during a period when it might -not unnaturally have been thought that the civil dissensions of the -Wars of the Roses, and the consequent destruction of life and property, -would have been fatal to enterprise in the field of church building and -church decoration and enrichment. It is not in any way an exaggeration -to say that well-nigh every village church in England can show signs -of this marvellous activity, whilst in many cases there is unmistakable -evidence of personal care and thought in the smallest details. - -No less remarkable than the extent of this movement is the source -from which the money necessary for all the work upon the cathedrals -and parish churches of the country came. In previous centuries, to -a great extent churches and monastic buildings owed their existence -and embellishment mainly to the individual enterprise of the powerful -nobles or rich ecclesiastics; but from the middle of the fifteenth -century the numerous, and, in many cases, even vast operations, -undertaken in regard to ecclesiastical buildings and ornamentation, -were the work of the people at large, and were mainly directed by their -chosen representatives. At the close of the fifteenth century, church -work was in every sense of the word a popular work, and the wills, -inventories, and churchwardens’ accounts prove beyond question that the -people generally contributed generously according to their means, and -that theirs was the initiative, and theirs the energetic administration -by which the whole was accomplished.[318] Gifts of money and valuables, -bequests of all kinds, systematic collections by parish officials, or -by directors of guilds, often extending over considerable periods, -and the proceeds of parish plays and parish feasts, were the ordinary -means by which the sums necessary to carry out these works of building -and embellishment were provided. Those who had no money to give brought -articles of jewellery, such as rings, brooches, buckles, and the -like, or articles of dress or of domestic utility, to be converted -into vestments, banners, and altar hangings to adorn the images and -shrines, to make the sacred vessels of God’s house, or to be sold for -like purposes. For the same end, and to secure the perpetuity of lamps -before the Blessed Sacrament, or lights before the altars of saints, -people gave houses and lands into the care of the parish officials, or -made over to them cattle and sheep to be held in trust, which, when -let out at a rent, formed a permanent endowment for the furtherance of -these sacred purposes. - -Undoubtedly the period with which we are concerned was not merely an -age of building, but an age of decoration, and of decoration which -may almost be described as “lavish.” The very architecture of the -time is proof of the wealth of ornament with which men sought to give -expression to their enthusiastic love of the Houses of God, which -they had come to regard as the centre of their social no less than -of their religious life. Flowing lines in tracery and arch moulding -gave place to straight lines, groined roofs were enriched by extra -ribs, and panels of elaborate work covered the plain surfaces of -former times; the very key-stones of the vaulting became pendants, -and the springers branched out like palm trees, forming that rich and -entirely English variety of groin called “fan-tracery,” such as we -see at Sherborne, Eton, King’s College, Cambridge, and Henry VII.’s -Chapel at Westminster. “In other respects,” says a modern writer, “the -architects of the fifteenth century were very successful. Few things -can be seen more beautiful than the steeples of Gloucester Cathedral -and St. Mary’s, Taunton. The open roofs, as for example that of St. -Peter Mancroft, Norwich, are superb, and finally they have left us a -large number of enormous parish churches all over the country, full of -interesting furniture and decoration.” - -The fact is, that this was the last expression of Gothic as a living -art. The builders and beautifiers of the English churches on the eve of -the religious changes spoke still a living language, and their works -still tell us of the fulness of the hearts which planned and executed -such works. It is somewhat difficult for us to understand this, when -living in an age of imitation, and at a time when architecture has no -longer a language of its own. “Imitation,” writes Mr. Ferguson, “is -in fact all we aim at in the architectural art of the present day. We -entrust its exercise to a specially educated class, most learned in the -details of the style they are called upon to work in, and they produce -buildings which delight the scholars and archæologists of the day, but -which the less educated classes neither understand nor appreciate, -and which will lose their significance the moment the fashion which -produced them has passed away. - -“The difference between this artificial state of things and the -practice of a true style will not be difficult to understand. When, -for instance, Gothic was a living art in England, men expressed -themselves in it as in any other part of the vernacular. Whatever -was done was a part of the usual, ordinary every-day life, and men -had no more difficulty in understanding what others were doing than -in comprehending what they were saying. A mason did not require to be -a learned man to chisel what he had carved ever since he was a boy, -and what alone he had seen being done during his lifetime, and he -adapted new forms just in the same manner and as naturally as men adapt -new modes of expression in language as they happen to be introduced, -without even remarking it. At that time any educated man could design -in Gothic Art, just as any man who can read and write can now compose -and give utterance to any poetry or prose that may be in him. - -“Where art is a true art, it is naturally practised and as easily -understood, as a vernacular literature of which, indeed, it is an -essential and most expressive part, and so it was in Greece and -Rome, and so, too, in the Middle Ages. But with us it is little more -than a dead corpse, galvanised into spasmodic life by a few selected -practitioners for the amusement and delight of a small section of -the specially educated classes. It expresses truthfully neither our -wants nor our feelings, and we ought not to be surprised how very -unsatisfactory every modern building really is, even when executed -by the most talented architects as compared with the productions of -our village mason or parish priest at an age when men sought only to -express clearly what they felt strongly, and sought to do it only in -their natural mother tongue, untrammelled by the fetters of a dead or -familiar foreign form of speech.”[319] - -To any one who will examine the churchwardens’ accounts of the period -previous to the religious changes, the truth of the above quotation -will clearly appear. Then, if ever, ecclesiastical art and architecture -was the living expression of popular feeling and popular love of -religion, and the wholesale destruction of ancient architectural -monuments throughout the land, the pulling down of rood and screen and -image, the casting down of monuments sacred to the memory of the best -and holiest and most venerated names in the long roll of English men -of honour, the breaking up of stone-work and metal-work upon which -the marks of the chisel of the mason and graver were yet fresh, the -whitewash daubed over paintings which had helped to make the parish -churches objects of beauty and interest to the people, the ruthless -smashing of the pictured window lights, and the pillage of the sacred -vessels and vestments and hangings, which the people and their fathers -had loved to provide for God’s service--all this and much more of the -same kind, the perhaps inevitable accompaniments of the religious -change, was nothing less to the people than proscription by authority -of the national language of art and architecture, such as they had -hitherto understood it. And never probably had the language been more -truly the language of the people at large. For reasons just assigned, -the work of church building and church decoration, and the provision -of vestments and plate, the care of the fabric and the very details -of things necessary for the church services, were in the hands of the -people. The period in question had given rise to the great middle -class, and here, as in Germany, the burgher folk, the merchants and -traders, began literally to lavish their gifts in adornment of their -parish churches, and to vie one with another in the profusion of their -generosity. - -It is somewhat difficult for us, as we look upon the generally bare -and unfurnished churches that have been left to us as monuments of -the past about which we are concerned, to realise what they must have -been before what a modern writer has fitly called “the great pillage” -commenced. All, from the great minsters and cathedral churches down -to the poorest little village sanctuary, were in those days simply -overflowing with wealth and objects of beauty which loving hands had -gathered together to adorn God’s house, and to make it the best and -brightest spot in their little world, and so far as their means would -allow the very pride of their hearts. This is no fancy picture. The -inventories of English churches in this period when compared, say, -with those of Italy, reveal the fact that the former were in every -way incomparably better furnished than the latter. The Venetian -traveller in England in 1500 was impressed by this very thing during -his journeyings throughout the country. He notes and comments upon the -great sums of money regularly given to the church as a matter of course -by Englishmen of all sorts. Then after speaking of the important wealth -of the country as evidenced by the silver plate possessed by all but -the poorest in the land, he continues: “But above all are their riches -displayed in the church treasures, for there is not a parish church -in the kingdom so mean as not to possess crucifixes, candlesticks, -censers, patens and cups of silver, nor is there a convent of mendicant -friars so poor as not to have all these same articles in silver, -besides many other ornaments worthy of a cathedral church in the same -metal. Your magnificence may therefore imagine what the decorations -of those enormously rich Benedictine, Carthusian, and Cistercian -monasteries must be.… I have been informed that amongst other things -many of these monasteries possess unicorns’ horns of an extraordinary -size. I have also been told that they have some splendid tombs of -English saints, such as St. Oswald, St. Edmund, and St. Edward, all -kings and martyrs. I saw, one day being with your magnificence, at -Westminster, a place out of London, the tomb of that saint, King Edward -the Confessor, in the church of the foresaid place, Westminster; and -indeed, neither St. Martin of Tours, a church in France, which I have -heard is one of the richest in existence, nor anything else that I have -ever seen, can be put into comparison with it. The magnificence of the -tomb of St. Thomas the Martyr, Archbishop of Canterbury, surpasses all -belief.” - -Our present concern, however, is not with the greater churches of -the kingdom, but with the parish churches which were scattered in -such profusion all over the country. An examination of such parochial -accounts as are still preserved affords an insight into the working -of the parish, and evidences the care taken by the people to maintain -and increase the treasures of their churches. What is most remarkable -about the accounts that remain, which are, of course, but the scanty -survivals from the wreck, is their consistent tenor. They one and all -tell the same story of general and intelligent interest taken by the -people as a whole in the beautifying and supporting of their parish -churches. In a very real sense, that seems strange to us now, it was -_their_ church; their life centred in it, and they were intimately -concerned in its working and management. The articles of furniture and -plate, the vestments and hangings had a well-known history, and were -regarded as--what in truth they were--the common property of every -soul in the particular village or district. Such accounts as we are -referring to prove that specific gifts and contributions continued to -flow in an ample stream to the churches from men and women of every -sort and condition up to the very eve of the great religious changes. - -From these and similar records we may learn a good deal about parochial -life and interests in the closing period of the old ecclesiastical -system. The church was the common care and business. Its welfare was -the concern of the people at large, and took its natural place in their -daily lives. Was there any building to be done, a new peal of bells to -be procured, the organs to be mended, new plate to be bought, or the -like, it was the parish as a corporate body that decided the matter, -arranged the details, and provided for the payment. At times, say for -example when a new vestment was in question, the whole parish would be -called to sit in council in the church house upon this matter of common -interest, and discuss the cost, and stuff, and make. - -To take some examples: the inventory of Cranbrook parish church for -1509 shows that all benefactors were regularly noted down on a roll of -honour, that their gifts might be known and remembered. The presents, -of course, vary greatly in value: thus, there was a monstrance of -silver and gilt of the “value of £20, of Sir Robert Egelonby’s gift; -which Sir Robert was John Roberts’ priest thirty years, and he never -had other service nor benefice; and the said John Roberts was father to -Walter Roberts, Esquire.” And the foresaid Sir Robert gave also to the -common treasury of the parish “two candlesticks of silver and twenty -marks of old nobles.” Again John Hendely “gave three copes of purple -velvet, whereof one was of velvet upon velvet with images broidered,” -and, adds the inventory, “for a perpetual memory of this deed of -goodness to the common purposes of the parish church, his name is to be -read out to the people on festival days.” “He is grandfather of Gervase -Hendely of Cushorn, and of Thomas of Cranbrook Street.” Or once more, -it is recorded that “old mother Hopper” gave the “two long candlesticks -before Our Lady’s altar, fronted with lions, and a towel on the rood of -Our Lady’s chancel.” - -So, too, the inventory of the church goods of St. Dunstan’s, -Canterbury, includes a wonderful list of furniture, plate, and -vestments to which the names of the donors are attached. Thus, the best -chalice was the gift of one “Harry Bole”; the two great candlesticks of -laten of John Philpot; and “a kercher for Our Lady and a chapplet and a -powdryd cap for her Son,” the gift of Margery Roper. - -The memory of these gifts was kept alive among the people by the -“bede-roll” or list of those for whom the parish was bound to pray -in return for their benefactions to the public good. Thus to take an -example: at Leverton, in the county of Lincoln, the parson, Sir John -Wright, presented the church with a suit of red purple vestments, “for -the which,” says the note in the churchwardens’ accounts, “you shall -all specially pray for the souls of William Wright and Elizabeth his -wife (father and mother of the donor), and for the soul of Sir William -Wright, their son, and for the soul of Sir John, sometime parson of -this place, and for the souls of Richard Wright and Isabel his wife, -John Trowting and Helen his wife, and for all benefactors, as well them -that be alive as them that be departed to the mercy of God, for whose -lives and souls are given here (these vestments) to the honour of God, -His most blessed Mother, Our Lady Saint Mary, and all His Saints in -Heaven, and the blessed matron St. Helen his patron, to be used at such -principal feasts and times as it shall please the curates as long as -they shall last. For all these souls and all Christian souls you shall -say one Paternoster.”[320] - -In this way the memory of benefactors and their good deeds was ever -kept alive in the minds of those who benefited by their gifts. The -parish treasury was not to them so much stock, the accumulation -of years, without definite history or purpose; but every article, -vestment, banner, hanging, and chalice, and the rest called for the -affectionate memories of both the living and the dead. On high day -and festival, when the church was decked with all that was best and -richest in the parochial treasury, the display of the parish ornaments -recalled to the mind of the people assembled within its walls the -memory of good deeds done by neighbours for the common good. “The -immense treasures in the churches,” writes Dr. Jessop, “were the joy -and boast of every man and woman and child in England, who day by day -and week by week assembled to worship in the old houses of God which -they and their fathers had built, and whose every vestment and chalice -and candlestick and banner, organs and bells and picture and image -and altar and shrine, they looked upon as their own and part of their -birthright.”[321] - -What seems so strange about the facts revealed to us in these church -accounts of bygone times is that, where now we might naturally be -inclined to look for poverty and meanness, there is evidence of the -contrary, so far as the parish church is concerned. Even when the -lives of the parishioners were spent in daily labours to secure the -bare necessities of life, and the village was situated in the most -out-of-the-way part of the country, the sordid surroundings of a hard -life find no counterpart in the parish accounts so far as the church -is concerned, but even under such unfavourable circumstances there -is evidence of a taste for things of art and beauty, and of both the -will and power to procure them. To take some examples: Morebath was -a small uplandish parish of no importance lying within the borders -of Devon, among the hills near the sources of the river Exe. The -population was scanty, and worldly riches evidently not abundant. -Morebath may, consequently, be taken as a fair sample of an obscure -and poor village community. For this hamlet we possess fairly full -accounts for the close of the period under consideration, namely, from -the year 1530. At this time, in this poor place, there were no less -than eight separate accounts kept of money intended for the support of -different altars, or for carrying out definite decorations, such as, -for example, the chapels of St. George and Our Lady, and the guilds -of the young men and maidens of the parish. To the credit of these -various accounts, or “stores,” as they are called, are entered numerous -gifts of money, or articles of value, and even of kind, like cows and -swarms of bees. Most of them are possessed of cattle and sheep, the -proceeds from the rent of which form a considerable portion of their -endowment. The accounts as a whole furnish abundant evidence of active -and intelligent interest in the support and adornment of the parish -church on the part of the people at large. Voluntary rates to clear -off obligations contracted for the benefit of the community, such as -the purchase of bells, the repair of the fabric, or even the making of -roads and bridges, were raised. Collections for Peter’s pence, for the -support of the parish clerk, and for various other church purposes, -are recorded, and the spirit of self-help is evidenced in every line -of these records. In 1528 the vicar gave up his rights to certain wool -tithes in order to purchase a complete set of black vestments, which -were only finished and paid for, at the cost of £6, 5s. 0d., in 1547. -In the year 1538, the parish made a voluntary rate to purchase a new -cope, and the collection for the purpose secured £3, 6s. 8d. When in -1534 the silver chalice was stolen, “ye yong men and maydens of ye -parysshe dru themselffe together, and at ther gyfts and provysyon they -bought in another chalice without any charge of the parysshe.” Sums of -money big and small, specific gifts in kind, the stuff or ornaments -needed for vestments, were apparently always forthcoming when occasion -required. Thus at one time a new cope is suggested, and Anne Tymwell -of Hayne gave the churchwardens her “gown and ring,” Joan Tymwell a -cloak and girdle, and Richard Norman “seven sheep and three shillings -and four pence in money,” towards the expenses. At another time it is -a set of black vestments; at another a chalice; at another a censer; -but whatever it was, the people were evidently ready and desirous -of taking their share in the common work of the parish. In 1529 the -wardens state that Elinor Nicoll gave to the store of St. Sydwell her -wedding-ring--“the which ring,” they add, “did help to make Saint -Sydwell’s shoes.” Then she gave to “the store of Jesus” a little silver -cross, parcel gilt, of the value of 4d. In 1537 there is one item which -deserves to be noted, as it records the arrival of a piece of spoil -from Barlinch Abbey Church, which was dissolved by the king’s orders -the previous year. “Memorandum,” runs the entry, “Hugh Poulett gave to -the church one of the glass windows of the Barlinch, with the iron and -stone and all the price” for setting it up.[322] - -To understand the working of the pre-Reformation parish, it is -necessary to enter in detail into some one of the accounts that are -still preserved to us. We may conveniently take those of Leverton in -Lincolnshire, printed in the _Archæologia_, which commence in the year -1492. It is well to note, however, that the same story of self-help and -the same evidence of a spirit of affection for the parish church and -its services, is manifested in every account of this kind we possess. -It must be remembered that it was popular government in a true sense -that then regulated all parochial matters. Every adult of both sexes -had a voice in this system of self-government, and what cannot fail to -strike the student of these records is that, in the management of the -fabric, in the arrangements for the services, and all things necessary -for the due performance of these, diocesan authorities evidently -left to the parish itself a wise discretion. No doubt the higher -ecclesiastical officials could interfere in theory, but in practice -such interference was rare. If the means necessary to carry out repairs -and keep the church in an efficient state, both as to fabric and -ornaments, were apparently never wanting, it must be borne in mind that -it was then regarded as a solemn duty binding on the conscience of each -parishioner to maintain the House of God and the parochial services. -Bishop Hobhouse, from an examination of the churchwardens’ accounts -for some parishes in Somerset, is able to describe the various ways -in which the parochial exchequer was replenished. First, there were -the voluntary rates, called “setts,” and these, though voluntary in -the sense that their imposition depended on the will of the people at -large, when once the parish had declared for the rate, all were bound -to pay. Then the mediæval church authorities cultivated various methods -of eliciting the goodwill of the people, and after prohibiting work -on Sundays and certain festivals, busied themselves with the finding -of amusements. Amongst these were the parish feasts and church ales, -at which collections for various public purposes were made, which, -together with the profits made from such entertainments by those who -managed them for the benefit of the public purse, formed one of the -chief sources of parochial income. Beyond this, the principle of -association was thoroughly understood and carried out in practice in -the village and town communities. People banded themselves together -in religious guilds and societies, the _raison d’être_ of which was -the maintenance of special decorations at special altars, the support -of lamps and lights, or the keeping of obits and festivals. These -societies, moreover, became the centres of organisation of any needed -special collections, and from their funds, or “stores” as they were -called, they contributed to the general expenses of maintaining the -fabric and the services. Popular bounty was, moreover, elicited by -means of the “bede-roll,” or list of public benefactors, for whom -the prayers of the parishioners were asked in the church on great -festivals. On this list of honour, all--even the poorest--were anxious -that their names should appear, and that their memory be kept and their -souls prayed for in the House of God which they had loved in life. Even -more than money, which in those days, especially in out-of-the-way -places, was not over plentiful, the churchwardens’ accounts show that -specific gifts of all kinds, either to be sold for the profit of the -purpose for which they were bestowed, or to form a permanent part of -the church treasury, were common in pre-Reformation times. - -Added to these sources of income were the profits of trade carried -on in the “church house.” Besides the church itself, the wardens’ -accounts testify to the existence of a church house, if not as a -universal feature in mediæval parish life, at least as a very common -one. It was the parish club-house--the centre of parochial life and -local self-government; the place where the community would assemble -for business and pleasure. It was thus the focus of all the social -life of the parish, and the system was extending in influence and -utility up to the eve of the great religious changes which put an end -to the popular side of parochial life. At Tintinhull, a small village -in Somerset, for example, the accounts help us to trace the growth -of this parish club-house. Beginning as a place for making the altar -bread, it developed into a bakery for the supply of the community. It -then took up the brewing of beer to supply the people and the church -ales and similar parish festivals. This soon grew into the brewing of -beer to supply those who required a supply, and at the same time the -oven and brewing utensils were let out to hire to private persons. In -the reign of Henry VII. a house was bought by the wardens for parish -purposes, and one Agnes Cook was placed in it to manage it for the -common benefit. In 1533 it was in full swing as a parish club-house, -used for business and pleasure.[323] The “ale”--the forerunner of the -wardens’ “charity dinner”--was the ordinary way of raising money to -meet extraordinary expenses; and as an incidental accompaniment came -invitations to other parishes in the neighbourhood, and we find items -charged for the expenses of churchwardens attending at other parochial -feasts, and the sums they there put into the collection plate. - -Beyond this, the parish, as a corporate body generally, if not -invariably, possessed property in land and houses, which was -administered by the people’s wardens for the public good. The annual -proceeds lightened the common burdens, as indeed it was intended that -they should. A further source of occasional income was found in the -parish plays which were managed for the common profit. Very frequently -the production was entrusted to some local guild, and the expenses -of mounting were advanced by the parochial authorities, who not -infrequently had amongst the church treasures the dress and other stage -properties necessary for the proper productions. At Tintinhull, in -Somerset, for instance, in 1451, five parishioners got up a Christmas -play for the benefit of the fund required for the erection of the -new rood loft. At Morebath there was an Easter play representing the -Resurrection of our Lord, to defray the expenses incurred by the parish -on some extensive repairs.[324] - -With this general notion of the working of pre-Reformation parochial -accounts, we are now in a position to turn by way of a particular -example to those of Leverton. The village is situated about six miles -from Boston. The church, until the neglect of the past three hundred -years had disfigured it, must have been very beautiful when decked with -the furniture and ornaments which the loving care of the people of the -neighbourhood had collected within its walls. When first the accounts -open in 1492, the parish was beginning to be interested, as indeed, by -the way, so many parishes were at this period, in the setting up of -a new peal of bells. The people had evidently made a great effort to -get these, and they contributed most generously. The rector promised -ten shillings and sixpence--which sum, by the way, some one paid for -him--but the whole arrangement for the purchase and hanging of the -bells was in the hands of the churchwardens. The bell chamber was -mended and timber was bought to strengthen the framework. When this -was ready, the great bell was brought over from the neighbouring town, -and money is disbursed for the carriage and the team of horses, not -forgetting a penny for the toll in crossing a bridge. One William -Wright of Benington came over professionally to superintend the hanging -and “trossyng” of this great service bell. We may judge, however, that -it was not altogether satisfactory, for in 1498 the two wardens made -a “move” to “the gathering of the township of Leverton in the kirk,” -in which they collected £4, 13s. 0d., and they forthwith commenced -again the building of a steeple for another set of bells. The stone -was given to them, but they had to see to the work of quarrying it, -and to all the business of collecting material and of building. Trees -in a neighbouring wood were bought, were cut and carried, and sawn -into beams and boards, and poles were selected for scaffolding. Lime -was burnt and sand was dug for the mortar, and tubs were purchased to -mix it in, whilst Wreth, the carpenter, was retained to look after the -building in general, and the timberwork of the new belfry in particular. - -This seems to have exhausted the parish exchequer for a year or two, -but in 1503 the two wardens attended at Boston to see their bell -“shot,” and to provide for its transport to Leverton. Here Richard -Messur, the local blacksmith, had prepared the necessary bolts and -locks to fasten it to the swinging beam, and he was in attendance -professionally to see the bell hung, with John Red, the bellmaker of -Boston, who, moreover, remained for a time to teach the parish men how -to ring a peal upon their new bells. - -As the sixteenth century progressed, a great deal of building and -repairs was undertaken by the parish authorities. In 1503, a new font -was ordered, and a deputation went to Frieston, about three miles from -Leverton, to inspect and pass the work. The lead for the lining was -procured, and it was cast on the spot. In 1517, repairs on the north -side of the church were undertaken, and these must have been extensive, -judging from the cost of the timber employed to shore up the walls -during the progress of the work. Two years later, on the completion -of these extensive building operations, which had been going on for -some time, the church and churchyard were consecrated at a cost to -the public purse of £3. In 1526, the rood loft was decorated, and the -niches intended for images of the saints, but which had hitherto been -vacant, were filled. One of the parishioners, William Frankish, in that -year left a legacy of 46s. 8d. for the purpose. The wardens hired a -man, called sometimes “the alabaster man,” and sometimes “Robert Brook -the carver,” and in earnest for the seventeen images of alabaster of -the rood loft they gave him a shilling. At the same time a collection -was made for the support of the artist during his stay; some of the -parishioners gave money, but most of them apparently contributed -“cheese” for his use. - -So much with regard to the serious building operations which were -continued up to the very eve of the Reformation. They by no means -occupied all the energies of the parish officials. If the books -required binding, a travelling workman was engaged on the job, and -leather, thread, wax, and other necessary materials were purchased for -the work; the binder’s wife was paid extra for stitching, and he was -apparently lodged by one of the townspeople as a contribution to the -common work. Then there were vestments to be procured, and surplices -and other church linen to be made, washed, and marked; the very marks, -by the way, being given in the accounts. So entirely was the whole -regarded as the work of the people, that just as we have seen how the -parish paid for the consecration of their parish church and graveyard, -so did they pay a fee to their own vicar for blessing the altar linen -and the new vestments, and entering the names of benefactors on the -parish bede-roll.[325] - -Details such as these, which might be multiplied to any extent, -make it abundantly clear that the church was the centre and soul of -village life in pre-Reformation times, and that up to the very eve of -the religious revolution it had not lost its place in the hearts of -the people. In this connection it is useful to bear in mind, though -somewhat difficult to realise, inasmuch as it is now too foreign to our -modern experience, that in the period about which we are concerned the -“parish” meant the whole community of a well-defined area “organised -for church purposes and subject to church authority.” In such a -district, writes Bishop Hobhouse, “every resident was a parishioner, -and, as such, owed his duty of confession and submission to the -official guidance of a stated pastor. There was no choice allowed. -The community was completely organised with a constitution which -recognised the rights of the whole and of every adult member to a voice -of self-government when assembled for consultation under” their parish -priest.[326] In this way the church was the centre of all parish life, -in a way now almost inconceivable. “From the font to the grave,” says -an authority on village life at this time, “the greater number of the -people lived within the sound of its bells. It provided them with all -the consolations of religion, and linked itself with such amusements as -it did not directly supply.”[327] - -The writer of the above words was specially interested in the accounts -of the parish of St. Dunstan in the city of Canterbury, and some few -notes on those accounts founded upon his preface may usefully be added -to what has already been said. The parochial authorities evidently -were possessed of considerable power either by custom or consent over -the inhabitants. In St. Dunstan’s, for example, somewhere about 1485, -there was some disagreement between a man named Baker and the parish, -and an item of 2½d. appears in the accounts as spent on the arbitration -that settled it. Later on, two families fell out, and the vicar and -a jury of four parishioners met in council to put an end to what was -considered a scandal. A parish so managed had necessarily some place -in which the inhabitants of the district could meet, and this in St. -Dunstan’s is called the _church house_, and sometimes the _parish -house_. It is frequently mentioned in the matters of repairs, &c., -and two dozen trenchers and spoons, the property of the parish, were -placed there for use at the common feasts, and for preparation of food -distributed to the poor. The annual dinner is named in the accounts, -and there is no doubt the young people too had dancing, bowling, and -other games, while “the ancients sat gravely by.” - -The money needed for the repairs of the fabric and for parish work -generally was here collected by the various brotherhoods connected -with the church. Some wore “scutchons” or badges to show that they -were authorised to beg. These brotherhoods were possessed of more than -money; malt, wheat, barley, besides parish sheep and parish cows let -out to the highest bidder, are mentioned in the accounts as belonging -to them. One Nicholas Reugge, for example, left four cows to the people -of the parish to free them for ever from the cost of supplying the -“paschal,” or great Easter candle. These four cows were valued by the -churchwardens at 10s. apiece, and were each let at a rent of 2s. a -year. In 1521, one John Richardson rented five-and-twenty of the parish -sheep, and the wardens received rent of lambs, wool, &c. The chief -of the brotherhoods connected with St. Dunstan’s was that named the -“Schaft,” and it had the principal voice in the ultimate management -of parochial affairs. Besides this, however, there were many other -associations, such as that of St. Anne for women and that of St. John -for youths, and various wardens were appointed to collect the money -necessary to keep the various lights, such as St. Anne’s light, St. -John’s light, St. Katherine’s light, and the light of the Holy Rood. -“These things,” writes the editor of these interesting accounts, “all -go to show what life and activity there was in this little parish, -which never wanted willing men to devote their time and influence to -the management of their own affairs.” - -The parish was small, numbering perhaps hardly more than 400 souls. -“But if small,” says the same authority, “it was thoroughly efficient, -and the religious and intellectual work was as actively carried on -as the social.” At the close of the reign of Henry VIII. the church -possessed a library of some fifty volumes. Of these about a dozen were -religious plays, part, no doubt, of the Corpus Christi mystery plays, -which were carried out at St. Dunstan’s with undiminished splendour -till the advent of the new ideas in the reign of Edward VI. - -These parish accounts prove that many cases of disagreement and -misunderstanding, which in modern times would most likely lead to -long and protracted cases in the Law Courts, were not infrequently -settled by arbitration, or by means of a parish meeting or a jury -of neighbours. Sometimes, undoubtedly, the law had to be invoked -in defence of parochial rights. A case in point is afforded in the -accounts of St. Dunstan’s, Canterbury. Nicholas Reugge, as we have -said above, had left money to purchase four cows as an endowment for -the Paschal candle and the Font taper. Things went well, apparently, -till 1486, when William Belser, who rented the stock, died, and his -executors either could not or would not, or, at any rate, did not pay. -To recover the common property, the churchwardens, as trustees for -the parish, had to commence a suit at law. Chief-Justice Fineux and -Mr. Attorney-General John Roper were two of the parishioners, and the -parish had their advice, it may be presumed gratuitously. The case, -however, seems to have dragged on for five years, as it was finally -settled only in 1491, when the parish scored a pyrrhic victory, for -although they recovered 30s., the value of three of the cows, their -costs had mounted up to 35s. 2d., and as they never could get more than -a third of that amount from the defendants, on the whole they were out -of pocket by their adventure with the law. - -For the most part, however, the parish settled its own difficulties in -its own way. Documents preserved almost by chance clearly show that -a vast number of small cases--police cases we should call them--were -in pre-Reformation days arranged by the ecclesiastical authority. -Disputes, brawls, libels, minor immoralities, and the like, which -nowadays would have to be dealt with by the local justices of the peace -or by the magistrates at quarter sessions, or even by the judges at -assizes, were disposed of by the parson and the parish. It may not -have been an ideal system, but it was patriarchal and expeditious. The -Sunday pulpit was used not only for religious instruction, properly -so called, and for the “bedes-bidding,” but for the publication of -an endless variety of notices of common interest. The church was, -as we have said, the centre of popular life, and it was under -these circumstances the natural place for the proclamation of the -commencement of some inquiry into a local suit, or one in which local -people were concerned. It was here, in the house of God, and at the -Sunday service at which all were bound to be present, that witnesses -were cited and accused persons warned of proceedings against them. Here -was made the declaration of the probate of wills of deceased persons, -and warning given to claimants against the estate to come forward -and substantiate their demands. Here, too, were issued proclamations -against such as did not pay their just debts or detained the goods -of others; here those who had been guilty of defamation of character -were ordered to restore the good name of those they had calumniated; -and those who, having been joined in wedlock, had separated without -just and approved cause, were warned of the obligations of Christian -marriage. The transactions of business of this kind in the parish -church by the parish officials made God’s house a practical reality -and God’s law a practical code in the ordinary affairs of life, and -gave religion a living importance in the daily lives of every member of -every parish throughout the country. - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -PRE-REFORMATION GUILD LIFE - - -It would be impossible to fully understand the conditions of life on -the eve of the Reformation without some knowledge of the working and -purposes of mediæval guilds. These societies or brotherhoods were so -common, formed such a real bond of union between people of all ranks -and conditions of life, and fulfilled so many useful and even necessary -purposes before their suppression under Edward VI., that a study of -their principles of organisation and of their practical working cannot -but throw considerable light on the popular social life of the period. -To appreciate the position, it is necessary to bear in mind the very -real hold the Gospel principles of the Christian brotherhood had over -the minds of all in pre-Reformation days, the extinction of the general -sense that man did not stand alone being distinctly traceable to the -tendencies in regard to social matters evolved during the period of -turmoil initiated by the religious teachings of the Reformers. What -M. Siméon Luce says about the spirit of common life existing in the -villages of Normandy in the fourteenth century might be adopted as a -picture of English life in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. -“Nobles, priests, religious clerks, sons of the soil who laboured -at various manual works,” he writes, “lived then, so to say, in -common, and they are found continually together in all their daily -occupations. So far from this community of occupations, this familiar -daily intercourse, being incompatible with the great inequality of -conditions which then existed, in reality it resulted from it. It was -where no strict line of demarcation divided the various classes that -they ordinarily affected to keep at a distance one from the other.”[328] - -There can be no doubt as to the nature of the teaching of the English -Church in regard to the relation which, according to true Christian -principles, should exist between all classes of society. In particular -is this seen in all that pertained to the care of the poorer members -of the Christian family. The evidence appears clear and unmistakable -enough in pre-Reformation popular sermons and instructions, in formal -pronouncements of Bishops and Synods, and in books intended for the -particular teaching of clergy and laity in the necessary duties of the -Christian man. Whilst fully recognising as a fact that in the very -nature of things there must ever be the class of those who “have,” -and the class of those who “have not,” our Catholic forefathers in -pre-Reformation days knew no such division and distinction between -the rich man and the poor man as obtained later on, when pauperism, -as distinct from poverty, had come to be recognised as an inevitable -consequence of the new era. To the Christian moralist, and even to the -bulk of Catholic Englishmen, whether secular or lay, in the fifteenth -century, those who had been blessed by God’s providence with worldly -wealth were regarded not so much as the fortunate possessors of -personal riches, their own to do with what they listed, and upon which -none but they had right or claim, as in the light of stewards of God’s -good gifts to mankind at large, for the right use and ministration of -which they were accountable to Him who gave them. - -Thus, to take one instance: the proceeds of ecclesiastical benefices -were recognised in the Constitutions of Legates and Archbishops -as being in fact as well as in theory the _eleemosynæ et spes -pauperum_--the alms and the hope of the poor. Those ecclesiastics -who consumed the revenues of their cures on other than necessary and -fitting purposes were declared to be “defrauders of the rights of God’s -poor,” and “thieves of Christian alms intended for them;” whilst the -English canonists and legal professors who glossed these provisions -of the Church law gravely discussed the ways in which the poor of a -parish could vindicate their right to their share in the ecclesiastical -revenues of the Church. - -This “_jus pauperum_,” which is set forth in such a text-book of -English Law as Lyndwood’s _Provinciale_, is naturally put forth more -clearly and forcibly in a work intended for popular instruction such -as _Dives et Pauper_. “To them that have the benefices and goods of -Holy Church,” writes the author, “it belonged principally to give alms -and to have the cure of poor people.” To him who squanders the alms -of the altar on luxury and useless show, the poor may justly point -and say: “It is ours that you so spend in pomp and vanity!… That thou -keepest for thyself of the altar passing the honest needful living, it -is raveny, it is theft, it is sacrilege.” From the earliest days of -English Christianity the care of the helpless poor was regarded as an -obligation incumbent on all; and in 1342, Archbishop Stratford, dealing -with _appropriations_, or the assignment of ecclesiastical revenues to -the support of some religious house or college, ordered that a portion -of the tithe should always be set apart for the relief of the poor, -because, as Bishop Stubbs has pointed out, in England, from the days of -King Ethelred, “a third part of the tithe” which belonged to the Church -was the acknowledged birthright of the poorer members of Christ’s flock. - -That there was social inequality is as certain as it was inevitable, -for that is in the very constitution of human society. But this, as -M. Luce has pointed out in regard to France, and Professor Janssens -in regard to Germany, in no way detracted from the frank and full -acknowledgment of the Christian brotherhood. Again and again in the -sermons of the fifteenth century this truth, with all its practical -applications, was enforced by the priest at the altar, where both poor -and rich alike met on a common footing--“all, poor and rich, high and -low, noble and simple, have sprung from a common stock and are children -of a common father, Adam:” “God did not create a golden Adam from -whom the nobles are descended, nor a silver Adam from whom have come -the rich, and another, a clay Adam, from whom are the poor; but all, -nobles, rich and poor, have one common father, made out of the dust of -the earth.” These and similar lessons were constantly repeated by the -religious teachers of the pre-Reformation English Church. - -Equally definite is the author of the book of popular instruction, -_Dives et Pauper_, above referred to. The sympathy of the writer is -with the poor, as indeed is that of every ecclesiastical writer of the -period. In fact, it is abundantly clear that the Church of England in -Catholic days, as a _pia mater_, was ever ready to open wide her heart -to aid and protect the poorer members of Christ’s mystical body. This -is how _Pauper_ in the tract in question states the true Christian -teaching as to the duties of riches, and impresses upon his readers the -view that the owners of worldly wealth are but stewards of the Lord: -“All that the rich man hath, passing his honest living after the degree -of his dispensation, it is other men’s, not his, and he shall give full -hard reckoning thereof at the day of doom, when God shall say to him, -‘Yield account of your bailywick.’ For rich men and lords in this world -are God’s bailiffs and God’s reeves, to ordain for the poor folk and -to sustain them.” Most strongly does the same writer insist that no -property gives any one the right to say “_this is mine_” and that is -“_thine_,” for property, so far as it is of God, is of the nature of -governance and dispensation, by which those who, by God’s Providence -“have,” act as His stewards and the dispensers of His gifts to such as -“have not.”[329] - -It would, of course, be affectation to suggest that poverty and -great hardness of life were not to be found in pre-Reformation days, -but what did not exist was pauperism, which, as distinguished from -poverty, certainly sprung up plentifully amid the ruins of Catholic -institutions, overthrown as a consequence--perhaps as a necessary and -useful consequence--of the religious changes in the sixteenth century. -Bishop Stubbs, speaking of the condition of the poor in the Middle -Ages, declares that “there is very little evidence to show that our -forefathers in the middle ranks of life desired to set any impassable -boundary between class and class.… Even the villein, by learning a -craft, might set his foot on the ladder of promotion. The most certain -way to rise was furnished by education, and by the law of the land, -‘every man or woman, of what state or condition that he be, shall be -free to set their son or daughter to take learning at any school that -pleaseth him within the realm.’” Mr. Thorold Rogers, than whom no one -has ever worked so diligently at the economic history of England, and -whom none can suspect of undue admiration of the Catholic Church, -has also left it on record that during the century and a half which -preceded the era of the Reformation the mass of English labourers -were thriving under their guilds and trade unions, the peasants were -gradually acquiring their lands and becoming small freeholders, the -artisans rising to the position of small contractors and working with -their own hands at structures which their native genius and experience -had planned. In a word, according to this high authority, the last -years of undivided Catholic England formed “the golden age” of the -Englishman who was ready and willing to work. - -“In the age which I have attempted to describe,” writes the same -authority, “and in describing which I have accumulated and condensed a -vast amount of unquestionable facts, the rate of production was small, -the conditions of health unsatisfactory, and the duration of life -short. But, on the whole, there were none of those extremes of poverty -and wealth which have excited the astonishment of philanthropists and -are exciting the indignation of workmen. The age, it is true, had -its discontents, and these discontents were expressed forcibly and -in a startling manner. But of poverty which perishes unheeded, of a -willingness to do honest work and a lack of opportunity there was -little or none. The essence of life in England during the days of the -Plantagenets and Tudors was that every one knew his neighbour, and that -every one was his brother’s keeper.”[330] - -In regard to the general care of the poorer brethren of a parish in -pre-Reformation England, Bishop Hobhouse, after a careful examination -of the available sources of information, writes as follows: “I can -only suppose that the brotherhood tie was so strongly realised by -the community that the weaker ones were succoured by the stronger, -as out of a family store. The brotherhood tie was, no doubt, very -much stronger then, when the village community was from generation -to generation so unalloyed by anything foreign, when all were knit -together by one faith and one worship and close kindred; but, further -than this, the guild fellowships must have enhanced all the other -bonds in drawing men to share their worldly goods as a common stock. -Covertly, if not overtly, the guildsman bound himself to help his needy -brother in sickness and age, as he expected his fellow-guildsman to do -for him in his turn of need, and these bonds, added to a far stronger -sense of the duty of children towards aged parents than is now found, -did, I conceive, suffice for the relief of the poor, aided only by the -direct almsgiving which flowed from the parsonage house, or in favoured -localities from the doles or broken meat of a monastery.”[331] - -To relieve the Reformation from the odious charge that it was -responsible for the poor-laws, many authors have declared that not only -did poverty largely exist before, say, the dissolution of the monastic -houses, but that it would not long have been possible for the ancient -methods of relieving the distressed to cope with the increase in their -numbers under the changed circumstances of the sixteenth century. It is -of course possible to deal with broad assertions only by the production -of a mass of details, which is, under the present circumstances, out -of the question, or by assertions equally broad, and I remark that -there is no evidence of any change of circumstances, so far as such -changes appear in history, which could not have been fully met by the -application of the old principles, and met in a way which would never -have induced the degree of distressing pauperism which, in fact, was -produced by the application of the social principles adopted at the -Reformation. The underlying idea of these latter was property in the -sense of absolute ownership in place of the older and more Christian -idea of property in the sense of stewardship. - -Most certainly the result was not calculated to improve the condition -of the poorer members of the community. It was they who were made -to pay, whilst their betters pocketed the price. The well-to-do -classes, in the process, became richer and more prosperous, whilst the -“masses” became, as an old writer has it, “mere stark beggars.” As a -fact, moreover, poverty became rampant, as we should have expected, -immediately upon the great confiscations of land and other property -at the dissolution of the religious houses. To take one example: Dr. -Sharpe’s knowledge of the records of the city of London enables him to -say that “the sudden closing of these institutions caused the streets -to be thronged with the sick and poor.” - -“The devil,” exclaims a preacher who lived through all these troublous -times--“the devil cunningly turneth things his own way.” “Examples -of this we have seen in our time more than I can have leisure to -express or to rehearse. In the Acts of Parliament that we have had -made in our days what godly preambles hath gone afore the same; even -_quasi oraculum Apollinis_, as though the things that follow had come -from the counsel of the highest in heaven; and yet the end hath been -either to destroy abbeys or chauntries or colleges, or such like, by -the which some have gotten much land, and have been made men of great -possessions. But many an honest poor man hath been undone by it, and an -innumerable multitude hath perished for default and lack of sustenance. -And this misery hath long continued, and hath not yet (1556) an end. -Moreover, all this commotion and fray was made under pretence of a -common profit and common defence, but in very deed it was for private -and proper lucre.”[332] - -In the sixty years that followed the overthrow of the old system, it -was necessary for Parliament to pass no less than twelve acts dealing -with the relief of distress, the necessity for which, Thorold Rogers -says, “can be traced distinctly back to the crimes of rulers and -agents.” I need not characterise the spirit which is manifested in -these acts, where poverty and crime are treated as indistinguishable. - -Dr. Jessop writes: “In the general scramble of the _Terror_ under -Henry the Eighth, and of the _anarchy_ in the days of Edward the Sixth -… the monasteries were plundered even to their very pots and pans. -The almshouses, in which old men and women were fed and clothed, were -robbed to the last pound, the poor almsfolk being turned out in the -cold at an hour’s warning to beg their bread. The splendid hospitals -for the sick and needy, sometimes magnificently provided with nurses -and chaplains, whose very _raison d’être_ was that they were to look -after the care of those who were past caring for themselves, these were -stripped of all their belongings, the inmates sent out to hobble into -some convenient dry ditch to lie down and die in, or to crawl into some -barn or house, there to be tended, not without fear of consequences, -by some kindly man or woman, who could not bear to see a suffering -fellow-creature drop down and die at their own doorposts.”[333] - -Intimately connected with the subject of the care of the poor in -pre-Reformation days is obviously that of the mediæval guilds which, -more than anything else, tended to foster the idea of the Christian -brotherhood up to the eve of the religious changes. - -It would probably be a mistake to suppose that these societies existed -everywhere throughout the country in equal numbers. Mr. Thorold -Rogers, it is true, says--and the opinion of one who has done so much -work in every kind of local record must carry great weight--that “few -parishes were probably without guild lands.” But there is certainly -no distinct evidence that this was the case, especially in counties -say like Hampshire, always sparsely populated as compared with other -districts in the east of England, and where the people largely depended -on agricultural pursuits for a living. It was in the great centres -of trade and manufacture that the guilds were most numerous and most -important, for it was precisely in those parts that the advantages of -mutual help and co-operation outside the parish bond were most apparent -and combination was practically possible. - -An examination of the existing records leads to a general division of -mediæval guilds into two classes--_Craft_ or _Trade_ associations, and -_Religious_ or, as some prefer now to call them, _Social_ guilds. The -former, as their name implies, had, as the special object of their -existence, the protection of some work, trade or handicraft, and in -this for practical purposes we may include those associations of -traders or merchants known under the name of “guild-merchants.” Such, -for instance, were the great companies of the city of London, and it -was in reality under the plea that they were trading societies that -they were saved in the general destruction which overtook all similar -fraternities and associations in the sixteenth century. The division -of guilds into the two classes named above is, however, after all more -a matter of convenience than a real distinction founded on fact. All -guilds, no matter for what special purpose they were founded, had the -same general characteristic of brotherly aid and social charity; and -no guild was divorced from the ordinary religious observances commonly -practised by all such bodies in those days. - -It is often supposed that, for the most part, what are called -religious guilds existed for the purpose of promoting or encouraging -the religious practices, such as the attendance at church on certain -days, the taking part in ecclesiastical processions, the recitations -of offices and prayers, and the like. Without doubt, there were such -societies in pre-Reformation days--such as, for example, the great -Guild of Corpus Christi, in the city of York, which counted its members -by thousands. But such associations were the exception, not the rule. -An examination of the existing statutes and regulations of ancient -guilds will show how small a proportion these purely _Ecclesiastical_ -guilds formed of the whole number of associations known as Religious -guilds. The origin of the mistaken notion is obvious. In mediæval -days--that is, in times when such guilds flourished--the word -“religious” had a wider, and what most people who reflect will be -inclined to think, a truer signification than has obtained in later -times. Religion was then understood to include the exercise of the -two commandments of charity--the love of God and the love of one’s -neighbour--and the exercises of practical charity to which guild -brethren were bound by their guild statutes were considered as much -religious practices as attendance at church or the taking part in an -ecclesiastical procession. In these days, as Mr. Brentano in his essay -_On the History and Development of Guilds_ has pointed out, most of -the objects, to promote which the guilds existed, would now be called -social duties, but they were then regarded as true objects of Christian -charity. Mutual assistance, the aid of the poor, of the helpless, of -the sick, of strangers, of pilgrims and prisoners, the burial of the -dead, even the keeping of schools and schoolmasters, and other such -like works were held to be “exercises of religion.”[334] - -If the word “religious” be thought now to give a wrong impression about -the nature of associations, the main object of which was to secure the -performance of duties we should now call “social,” quite as false an -impression would be conveyed by the word “social” as applied to them. -A “social” society would inevitably suggest to many in these days an -association for convivial meetings, and this false notion of the nature -of a mediæval guild would be further strengthened by the fact that in -many, if not most, of them a yearly, and sometimes a more frequent -feast existed under an item in their statutes. This guild feast, -however, was a mere incident in the organisation, and in no case did it -form what we might consider the end or purpose of the association. - -By whichever name we call them, and assuming the religious basis -which underlay the whole social life in the fifteenth century, the -character and purpose of these mediæval guilds cannot in reality be -misunderstood. Broadly speaking, they were the benefit societies -and the provident associations of the middle ages. They undertook -towards their members the duties now frequently performed by burial -clubs, by hospitals, by almshouses, and by guardians of the poor. -Not infrequently they acted for the public good of the community in -the mending of roads and the repair of bridges, and for the private -good of their members, in the same way that insurance companies to-day -compensate for loss by fire or accident. The very reason of their -existence was the affording of mutual aid and assistance in meeting -the pecuniary demands which were constantly arising from burials, -legal exactions, penal fines and all other kinds of payments and -compensations. Mr. Toulmin Smith thus defines their object: “The -early English guild was an institution of local self-help which, -before the poor-laws were invented, took the place in old times of the -modern friendly or benefit society, but with a higher aim; while it -joined all classes together in the care of the needy and for objects -of common welfare, it did not neglect the forms and practice of -religion, justice, and morality,”[335] which I may add was, indeed, the -main-spring of their life and action. - -“The guild lands,” writes Mr. Thorold Rogers, “were a very important -economical fact in the social condition of early England. The guilds -were the benefit societies of the time from which impoverished members -could be, and were, aided. It was an age in which the keeping of -accounts was common and familiar. Beyond question, the treasurers of -the village guild rendered as accurate an annual statement of their -fraternity as a bailiff did to his lord.… It is quite certain that the -town and country guilds obviated pauperism in the middle ages, assisted -in steadying the price of labour, and formed a permanent centre for -those associations which fulfilled the function that in more recent -times trades unions have striven to satisfy.”[336] - -An examination of the various articles of association contained in the -returns made into the Chancery in 1389, and other similar documents, -shows how wide was the field of Christian charity covered by these -“fraternities.” First and foremost amongst these works of religion -must be reckoned the burial of the dead; regulations as to which are -invariably to be found in all the guild statutes. Then, very generally, -provisions for help to the poor, sick, and aged. In some, assistance -was to be given to those who were overtaken by misfortune, whose goods -had been damaged or destroyed by fire or flood, or had been diminished -by loss or robbery; in others, money was found as a loan to such as -needed temporary assistance. In the guild at Ludlow, in Shropshire, for -instance, “any good girl of the guild had a dowry provided for her if -her father was too poor to find one himself.” The “guild-merchant” of -Coventry kept a lodging-house with thirteen beds, “to lodge poor folk -coming through the land on pilgrimage or other work of charity,” with -a keeper of the house and a woman to wash the pilgrims’ feet. A guild -at York found beds and attendance for poor strangers, and the guild of -Holy Cross in Birmingham kept almshouses for the poor in the town. In -Hampshire, the guild of St. John at Winchester, which comprised men and -women of all sorts and conditions, supported a hospital for the poor -and infirm of the city. - -The very mass of material at hand makes the task of selecting examples -for illustrating some of the objects for which mediæval guilds existed -somewhat difficult. I take a few such examples at haphazard. The -organisation of these societies was the same as that which has existed -in similar associations up to the time of our modern trades unions. A -meeting was held at which officers were elected and accounts audited; -fines for non-acceptance of office were frequently imposed, as well -as for absence from the common meeting. Often members had to declare -on oath that they would fulfil their voluntary obligations, and would -keep secret the affairs of the society. Persons of ill-repute were not -admitted, and members who disgraced the fraternity were expelled. For -example, the first guild statutes printed by Mr. Toulmin Smith are -those of Garlekhithe, London. They begin: “In worship of God Almighty -our Creator and His Mother Saint Mary, and all Saints, and St. James -the Apostle, a fraternity is begun by good men in the Church of St. -James, at Garlekhith in London, on the day of Saint James, the year of -our Lord 1375, for the amendment of their lives and of their souls, and -to nourish greater love between the brethren and sisters of the said -brotherhood.” Each of them has sworn on the Book to perform the points -underwritten. - -“First: all those that are, or shall be, in the said brotherhood -shall be of good life, condition, and behaviour, and shall love God -and Holy Church and their neighbours, as Holy Church commands.” Then, -after various provisions as to meetings and payments to be made to -the general funds, the statutes order that “if any of the foresaid -brethren fall into such distress that he hath nothing, and cannot, -on account of old age or sickness, help himself, if he has been in -the brotherhood seven years, and during that time has performed all -duties, he shall have every week after from the common box fourteen -pence (_i.e._ about £1 a week of our money) for the rest of his life, -unless he recovers from his distress.”[337] In one form or other -this provision for the assistance of needy members is repeated in -the statutes of almost every guild. Some provide for help in case of -distress coming “through any chance, through fire or water, thieves or -sickness, or any other haps.” Some, besides granting this kind of aid, -add: “and if so befall that he be young enough to work, and he fall -into distress, so that he have nothing of his own to help himself with, -then the brethren shall help him, each with a portion as he pleases in -the way of charity.”[338] Others furnish loans from the common fund to -enable brethren to tide over temporary difficulties: “and if the case -falleth that any of the brotherhood have need to borrow a certain sum -of silver, he (can) go to the keepers of the box and take what he hath -need of, so that the sum be not so large that any one may not be helped -as well as another, and that he leave a sufficient pledge, or else -find a sufficient security among the brotherhood.”[339] Some, again, -make the contributions to poor brethren a personal obligation on the -members, such as a farthing a week from each of the brotherhood, unless -the distress has been caused by individual folly or waste. Others -extend their Christian charity to relieve distress beyond the circle -of the brotherhood--that is, of all “whosoever falls into distress, -poverty, lameness, blindness, sent by the grace of God to them, even -if he be a thief proven, he shall have seven pence a week from the -brothers and sisters to assist him in his need.”[340] Some of the -guilds in seaside districts provide for help in case of “loss through -the sea,” and there is little doubt that in mediæval days the great -work carried on by such a body as the Royal Lifeboat Society would -have been considered a work of religion, and the fitting object of a -religious guild. - -It would be tedious to multiply examples of the purposes and scope of -the old fraternities, and it is sufficient to repeat that there was -hardly any kind of social service which in some form or other was not -provided for by these voluntary associations. As an illustration of the -working of a trade or craft guild, we may take that of the “Pinners” of -the city of London, the register of which, dating from A.D. 1464, is -now in the British Museum.[341] These are some of the chief articles -approved for the guild by the Mayor and Corporation of the city of -London: (1) No foreigner to be allowed to keep a shop for the sale of -pins. (2) No foreigner to take to the making of pins without undergoing -previous examinations and receiving the approval of the guild officers. -(3) No master to receive another master’s workman. (4) If a servant -or workman who has served his master faithfully fall sick he shall be -kept by the craft. (5) Power to the craft to expel those who do ill and -bring discredit upon it. (6) Work at the craft at nights, on Saturdays, -and on the eves of feasts is strictly prohibited. (7) Sunday closing is -rigidly enforced. - -It is curious to find, four hundred years ago, so many of the -principles set down as established, for which in our days trades unions -and similar societies are now contending. It has been remarked above, -that even in the case of craft guilds, such as this Society of Pinners -undoubtedly was, many of the ordinary purposes of the religious guilds -were looked to equally with the more obvious object of protecting the -special trade or handicraft of the specific society. The accounts of -this Pinners’ Guild fully bear out this view. For example: We have -the funeral services for departed brethren, and the usual _trentals_, -or thirty masses, for deceased members. Then we find: “4d. to the wax -chandlers’ man for setting up of our lights at St. James.” One of the -members, William Clarke, borrowed 5s. 10d. from the common chest, to -secure which he placed a gold ring in pledge. There are also numerous -payments for singers at the services held on the feast days of the -guild, and for banners and other hangings for processions. - -Of payments for the specific ends of the guild there are, of course, -plenty of examples. For instance: spurious pins and “other ware” -are searched for and burnt by the craft officers, and this at such -distances from London as Salisbury and the fair at Stourbridge, near -Cambridge, the great market for East Anglia and the centre of the -Flanders trade. “William Mitchell is paid 8d. for pins for the sisters, -on Saint James’ day.” In 1466, a man is fined 2s. for setting a child -to work before he had been fully apprenticed; and also another had to -pay 2s. for working after seven o’clock on a winter night. Later on in -the accounts we have a man mulcted for keeping a shop before he was -a “freeman” of the society, and another “for that he sold Flaundres -pynnes for English pynnes.” At another time, a large consignment of no -less than 12,000 “pynnes of ware” were forfeited to the craft, and -sold by them for 8s., which went to the common fund. These accounts -show also the gradual rise in importance and prosperity which the -Pinners’ Guild, under the patronage of St. James, manifested. At -first, the warden and brethren at their yearly visit to Westminster -were content to hire an ordinary barge upon the Thames, but after a -few years they had started “a keverid boote” of their own at the cost -of half-a-crown, in place of the sixpence formerly paid. So, too, in -the early days of their incorporation they had their annual dinner -and audited their accounts at some London tavern--the “Mayremayde in -Bread Street” and “the brew house atte the Sygne of the Rose in Old -Jury” are two of the places named. Later on they met in some hall -belonging to another guild, such as the “Armourers’” Hall, and later -still they built their own Guild Hall and held their banquet there. -This building made a great demand upon their capital, and the officers -evidently began to look more carefully after the exaction of fines. -For late working at this time one of the brethren was mulcted in the -sum of twenty pence; another was fined twopence for coming late to the -guild mass, and several others had to pay for neglecting to attend the -meeting. From the period of starting their own hall, ill-fortune seems -to have attended the society. About the year 1499, they got involved in -a great lawsuit with one Thomas Hill, upon which was expended a large -sum of money. A special whip was made to meet expenses and keep up -the credit of the guild; for what with counsel’s fees, the writing of -bills, and the drawing of pleas, the general fund was unable to find -the necessary munitions of war to continue the suit. To the credit of -the members, most of them apparently responded generously to this call, -and, in consequence of this unfortunate litigation, to many subsequent -demands which the empty exchequer necessitated. - -There would be no difficulty whatever in multiplying the foregoing -illustrations of the working of these mediæval societies. The actual -account books of course furnish us with the most accurate knowledge, -even to minute details, and any one of them would afford ample material. - -The funds at the disposal of the guilds were derived chiefly from -voluntary subscriptions, entrance fees, gifts, and legacies of members. -Frequently these societies became in process of time the trustees -of lands and houses which they either held and administered for the -purposes of the guilds, or for some specific purpose determined by the -will of the original donor. Thus, to take one or two examples from the -account rolls of the Guild of Tailors in the city of Winchester. In the -time of King Richard II.--say 1392--the usual entrance fee for members -was 3s. 4d., and the annual subscription was 1s. There were 106 members -at that time, seven of whom had been enrolled during the previous year. -Among others who had thus entered was one Thomas Warener, or Warner, a -cousin of Bishop William of Wykeham, and the Bishop’s bailiff of the -Soke; his payment was 4s. 8d. instead of the usual entrance fee. In -the same year we find the names of Thomas Hampton, lord of the manor -of Stoke Charity, and Thomas Marleburgh, who was afterwards Mayor of -Winchester. In the following year, seventeen new members were enrolled, -one of them being a baker of Southampton, called Dunster. Turning over -these accounts, we come upon examples of presents either in kind or -money made to the society. Thus in one place Thomas Marleburgh makes a -present of a hooded garment which was subsequently sold for eighteen -pence; and in another, one Maurice John Cantelaw presented for the -service of the guild, “a chalice and twelve pence in counted money,” -requesting the members “to pray for his good estate, for the souls of -his parents, friends, benefactors, and others for whom he was bound to -pray.” In return for this valuable present, the guild granted that it -should be accounted as Cantelaw’s life-subscription. - -Having spoken of the sources of income, which were practically the -same in all guilds, something must be said as to the expenditure -over and above the purposes for which the guilds existed. This may -be illustrated from the accounts of this same fraternity of tailors -of Winchester.[342] In the first place, as in almost every similar -society, provision was made for the funerals of members and for the -usual daily mass for thirty days after the death of the deceased -members. The sum set down is 2s. 6d. for each trental of thirty masses. -Then we find mention of alms to the poor and sick; thus in 1403, the -sum of 36s., about one-tenth of the annual revenue, was spent upon this -object. This, of course, was charity of a general kind, and wholly -unconnected with the assistance given by rule to necessitous members of -the guild.[343] - -One expense, very common in these mediæval guilds, was the preparation -for taking a fitting part in the great annual religious pageant or -procession on Corpus Christi day. In the case of this Tailors’ Guild -at Winchester, we find sums of money charged for making wax torches -and ornamenting them with flowers and red and blue wax, with card -shields and parchment streamers, or “pencils,” as they are called. The -members of the guild apparently carried small tapers; but the four -great torches were borne by hired men, who received a shilling each for -their trouble. It is somewhat difficult for us nowadays to understand -the importance attached to these great ecclesiastical pageants by our -ancestors four hundred years or so ago. But as to the fact, there -can be no doubt. Among the documents in the municipal archives of -Winchester there exists an order of the Mayor and Corporation as to -the disposition of this solemn procession in 1435. It runs thus: “At -a convocation holden in the city of Winchester the Friday next after -the Feast of Corpus Christi in the thirteenth year of the reign of King -Harry the Sixth, after the conquest; it was ordained by Richard Salter, -mayor of the city of Winchester, John Symer and Harry Putt, bailiffs of -the city aforesaid, and also by all the citizens and commonalty of the -same city: It is agreed of a certain general procession on the Feast of -Corpus Christi, of divers artificers and crafts within the said city: -that is to say the carpenters and felters shall go together first; -smiths and barbers, second; cooks and butchers, third; shoemakers with -two lights, fourth; tanners and japanners, fifth; plumers and silkmen, -sixth; fishers and farriers, seventh; taverners, eighth; weavers, -with two lights, ninth; fullers, with two lights, tenth; dyers, with -two lights, eleventh; chaundlers and brewers, twelfth; mercers, with -two lights, thirteenth; the wives with one light and John Blake with -another light, fourteenth; and all these lights shall be borne orderly -before the said procession before the priests of the city. And the four -lights of the brethren of St. John’s shall be borne about the Body of -our Lord Jesus Christ, the same day in the procession aforesaid.” - -The brethren of St. John’s just named, as the chief object of their -association, kept a hospital for the poor and sick in the city. They -paid a chaplain of their own, as indeed did most of the guilds, and -had a master and matron to look after the comfort of the poor. They -provided bed and bedding, and carefully administered not only their -own subscriptions, but the sums of money freely bequeathed to them -to be spent on charity. At every market held within the precincts of -Winchester an officer, paid by the society, attended and claimed for -the support of the poor a tax of two handfuls of corn from every sack -exposed for sale. The mayor and bailiffs were apparently the official -custodians of this guild, and numerous legacies in wills, even in the -reign of Henry VIII., attest its popularity. For example, on February -19, 1503, John Cornishe, alias Putte, late Mayor of Winchester, died -and left to the guardians his tenements and gardens under the penthouse -in the city for the charity, on condition that for ten years they would -spend 6s. 8d. in keeping his annual obit. In 1520, a draper of London, -named Calley, bequeathed ten shillings to the hospital for annually -repairing and improving the bedding of the poor. The accounts of this -Fraternity of St. John’s Hospital for a considerable period in the -fourteenth century are still in existence. They show large receipts, -sometimes amounting to over £100, from lands, shops, houses, and -from the sale of cattle and farm produce, over and above the annual -subscriptions of members. On the other side, week by week we have the -payments for food provided for the service of the poor: fish, flesh, -beer, and bread are the chief items. One year, for instance, the bread -bought for the sick amounted to 36s. 6d.; beer to 36s. 8d.; meat to -32s. 2d.; fish to 28s. 3½d., &c. Besides this seven shillings were -expended in mustard, and 3s. 6d. for six gallons of oil. This same year -the guardians also paid 2s. 2d. for the clothes and shoes for a young -woman named Sibil “who nursed the poor in the hospital.” The above -represents only the actual money expended over the sick patients, and -from the same source, most minute and curious information might be -added as to the other expenses of the house, including, for instance, -even the purchase of grave-clothes and coffins for the dead poor, -the wages and clothing of the matron and servant, and the payment of -the officer who collected the handfuls of corn in the market-place. -At times we have evidence of the arrival and care of strange poor -people--we should perhaps call them “tramps” in our day. For instance, -here is one heading: “The expenses of three poor strangers in the -hospital for 21 days and nights, 15¾d.; to each of whom is given ¾d. -_Item_: the expenses of one other for 5 days, 3¾d. _Item_: the expenses -of the burial of the said sick person, 3d. _Item_: the expenses of four -pilgrims lodged for a night, 2d. _Item_: new straw to stuff the beds of -the sick, 8d. _Item_: paid to the laundress for washing the clothes of -the sick during one year, 12d.” - -To speak of guilds without making any mention of the feasts--the social -meetings--which are invariably associated with such societies, would be -impossible. The great banquets of the city companies are proverbial, -and, in origin at least, they arose out of the guild meeting for the -election of officers, followed by the guild feast. As a rule, these -meetings took place on the day on which the Church celebrated the -memory of the Saint who had been chosen as patron of the society, and -were probably much like the club dinners which are still cherished -features of village life in many parts of England.[344] - -It has been said that the wardens of guilds were frequently named in -mediæval wills as trustees of money for various charitable purposes. -As an example of property thus left to a guild, take the Candlemas -Guild, established at Bury St. Edmunds: the society was established -in the year 1471, and a few years later one of the members made over -to the brethren considerable property for the common purposes of the -guild and other specified objects. His name was John Smith, a merchant -of Bury, and he died, we are told, on “St. Peter’s even at Midsummer, -1481.” His will, which is witnessed by the Abbot and Prior of St. -Edmund’s Abbey, provides, in the first place, for the keeping of an -obit “devoutly.” The residue of the income was to accumulate till -the appointment of each new abbot, when, on the election, the entire -amount was to be paid over to the elect in place of the sum of money -the town was bound to pay on every such occasion. Whatever remained -over and above this was to be devoted to the payments of any tenth, -fifteenth, or other tax, imposed upon the citizens by royal authority. -This revenue was to be administered by the guardians of the guild, who -were bound at the yearly meeting at Candlemas to render an account of -their stewardship. Year by year John Smith’s will was read out at the -meeting, and proclamation was made before the anniversary of his death -in the following manner: “Let us all of charity pray for the soul of -John. We put you in remembrance that you shall not miss the keeping of -his _Dirge_ and also of his Mass.” Round about the town the crier was -sent to recite the following lines:-- - - “We put you in remembrance all that the oath have made, - To come to the Mass and the _Dirge_ the souls for to glade: - All the inhabitants of this town are bound to do the same, - To pray for the souls of John and Anne, else they be to blame: - The which John afore-rehearsed to this town hath been full kind, - Three hundred marks for this town hath paid, no penny unpaid behind. - Now we have informed you of John Smith’s will in writing as it is, - And for the great gifts that he hath given, God bring his soul to - bliss. Amen.”[345] - -The example set by this donor to the Candlemas Guild at Bury was -followed by many others in the later part of the fifteenth century. For -instance, a “gentlewoman,” as she calls herself, one Margaret Odom, -after providing by will for the usual obit and for a lamp to burn -before “the holie sacrament in St. James’s Church,” desires that the -brethren of the guild shall devote the residue of the income arising -from certain houses and lands she has conveyed to their keeping, to -paying a priest to “say mass in the chapel of the gaol before the -prisoners there, and giving them holy water and holy bread on all -Sundays, and to give to the prisoners of the long ward of the said gaol -every week seven faggots of wood from Hallowmass (November 1) to Easter -Day.”[346] - -Intimately connected with the subject of the guilds is that of the -fairs, which formed so great a feature in mediæval commercial life, -and at which the craft guilds were represented. For the south of -England, the great fair held annually at Winchester became the centre -of our national commerce with France. The following account of it is -given in Mr. W. J. Ashley’s most interesting _Introduction to English -Economic History_: “A fair for three days on the eastern hill outside -Winchester was granted to the bishop by William II.; his immediate -successors granted extension of time, until by a charter of Henry II. -it was fixed at sixteen days, from 31st August to 15th September. On -the morning of 31st August ‘the justiciars of the pavilion of the -bishop’ proclaimed the fair on the hilltop, then rode on horseback -through the city proclaiming the opening of the fair. The keys of -the city and the weighing machine in the wool market were taken -possession of, and a special mayor and special bailiffs were appointed -to supersede the city officials during the fair time. The hilltop was -quickly covered with streets of wooden shops: in one, the merchants -from Flanders; in another, those of Caen or some other Norman town; in -another, the merchants from Bristol. Here were placed the goldsmiths in -a row, and there the drapers, &c., whilst around the whole was a wooden -palisade with guarded entrance, a precaution which did not always -prevent enterprising adventurers from escaping payment of the toll by -digging a way in for themselves under the wall.… In Winchester all -trade was compulsorily suspended, and within ‘a seven league circuit,’ -guards being stationed at outlying posts, on bridges and other places -of passage, to see that the monopoly was not infringed. At Southampton -nothing was to be sold during the fair time but victuals, and even -the very craftsmen of Winchester were bound to transfer themselves -to the hill and there carry on their occupations during the fair. -There was a graduated scale of tolls and duties: all merchants of -London, Winchester, or Wallingford who entered during the first week -were free from entrance tolls.… In every fair there was a _court of -pie-powder_ (of dusty feet) in which was decided by merchant law all -cases of dispute that might arise, the ordinary jurisdiction being -for a time suspended in the town; at Winchester this was called the -Pavilion Court. Hither the bishop’s servants brought all the weights -and measures to be tested; here the justices determined on an assize, -or fixed scale, for bread, wine, beer, and other victuals, adjudging -to the pillory any baker whose bread was found to be of defective -weight; and here every day disputes between merchants as to debts were -decided by juries upon production and comparison of the notched wooden -tallies.”[347] - -A few words must be said about the final destruction of the English -guilds. At the close of the reign of Henry VIII. an act of Parliament -was passed vesting the property of colleges, chantries, fraternities, -brotherhoods and guilds in the Crown (38 Hen. VIII., c. 4). The king -was empowered to send out his commissioners to take possession of all -such property, on the plea that it might be “used and exercised to -more godly and virtuous purposes.” Henry died before the provisions of -the act could be complied with, and a second act was passed through -the first Parliament in the reign of Edward VI. (1 Ed. VI., c. 14). -This went beyond the former decree of destruction, for after providing -for the demolition of colleges, free chapels, and chantries, it -proceeded not only separately by name to grant to the king all sums of -money devoted “by any manner of corporations, guilds, fraternities, -companies or fellowships or mysteries or crafts,” to the support of a -priest, obits or lights (which may be taken under colour of religion), -but to hand over to the crown “all fraternities, brotherhoods and -guilds, being within the realm of England and Wales and other the -king’s dominions, and all manors, lands, tenements, and other -hereditaments belonging to them, other than such corporations, guilds, -fraternities, &c., and the manors, lands, &c., pertaining to the said -corporations, &c., above mentioned.” - -The Parliament of Henry VIII. assigned as a reason for this seizure of -the property of the corporate bodies the need “for the maintenance of -these present wars,” and cleverly put into one group “colleges, free -chapels, chantries, hospitals, fraternities, brotherhoods, and guilds.” -“The act of Edward VI.,” writes Mr. Toulmin Smith, “was still more -ingenious, for it held up the dogma of purgatory to abhorrence, and -began to hint at grammar schools. The object of both acts was the same. -All the possessions of all the guilds (except what could creep out as -being mere trading guilds, which saved the London guilds) became vested -by these two acts in the Crown; and the unprincipled courtiers who had -advised and helped the scheme gorged themselves out of this wholesale -plunder of what was, in every sense, public property.”[348] - -It is clear that in seizing the property of the guilds the Crown -destroyed far more than it gained for itself. A very large proportion -of their revenues was derived from the entrance fees and the annual -subscriptions of the existing members, and in putting an end to these -societies the State swept away the organisation by which these -voluntary subscriptions were raised, and this not in one or two places, -but all over England. In this way far more harm was in reality done to -the interests of the poor, sick, and aged, and, indeed, to the body -politic at large, than the mere seizure of their comparatively little -capital, whether in land or money. - -It is not, of course, meant to imply that the injury to the poor and -sick was not fully recognised at the time of these legal confiscations. -People deeply resented the idea that what generations of benefactors -had intended for the relief of distress should thus be made to pass -into the pocket of some “new” man who had grown great upon the spoils. -The literature of the period affords abundant evidence of the popular -feeling. Crowley, for instance, wrote about 1550--just at this very -time--and although no one would look for any accurate description of -facts in his rhyming satires, he may be taken as a reliable witness as -to what the people were saying. This is what he writes on the point:-- - - “A merchant, that long time - Had been in strange lands - Returned to his country, - Which in Europe stands. - - And in his return - His way lay to pass - By a spittle house not far from - Where his dwelling-house was. - - He looked for this hospital, - But none could he see, - For a lordly house was built - Where the hospital should be. - - ‘Good Lord!’ (said the merchant), - ‘Is my country so wealthy - That the very beggars’ houses - Are built so gorgeously?’ - - Then by the wayside - Him chanced to see - A poor man that craved - Of him for charity. - - ‘Why’ (quoth the merchant), - ‘What meaneth this thing? - Do ye beg by the way, - And have a house for a king?’ - - ‘Alas! sir’ (quoth the poor man), - ‘We are all turned out, - And lie and die in corners - Here and there about.’” - -It has frequently been asserted that although grave injury was -undoubtedly done to the poor of the land by this wholesale -confiscation, it was done unwittingly by the authorities, or that, at -the worst, the portions of revenue derived from the property which had -been intended for the support of the sick, aged, &c., was so bound up -with those to which religious obligations (now declared superstitious -and illegal) were attached, that it was impossible to distinguish the -latter from the former, and all perished together, or rather passed -undistinguished into the royal pocket. Such a view is not borne -out by facts, and however satisfactory it might be to believe that -this robbery of the poor and sick by the Crown was accidental and -unpremeditated, the historian is bound by the evidence to hold that the -pillage was fully premeditated and deliberately and consciously carried -out. It is of course obvious, that some may regard it as proper that -funds given for the support of priests to say masses or offer prayers -for the souls of the departed should have been confiscated, although -it would have been better had the money been devoted to some purpose -of local utility rather than that it should have been added to the -Crown revenues or have gone to enrich some royal favourite. For example -it may, for the sake of argument, be admitted that the two fields at -Petersfield in Hampshire thus taken by the royal commissioners--one -called _White field_, in the tenure of Gregory Hill, the rent of which -was intended to keep a perpetual light burning in the parish church, -and the other held by John Mill, given to support a priest “called -the Morrow Masse priest” (_i.e._ the priest employed to say the early -morning mass for the convenience of people going to work)--were under -the circumstances fair articles of plunder for the royal officials, -when the mass was prohibited and the doctrine symbolised by the -perpetual light declared superstitious. But this will not apply to the -money intended for the poor. It might have been easy to justify the -Crown’s action in taking the priest’s portion, and even the little -pittance intended for the serving clerk, but the seizure of the -benefactions to the poor cannot be defended. It was not accidental; -for an examination of the original documents relating to the guilds -and chantries now in the Record Office will show not only that the -Royal Commissioners were as a rule careful to distinguish between -the portions intended for religious purposes and those set aside -for perpetual charity to the sick and poor, but in many cases they -actually proposed to the Court of Augmentation to protect the latter -and preserve them for the objects of Christian charity intended by the -original donors. In every such case the document reveals the fact that -this suggestion in the interest of common justice was rejected by the -ultimate Crown officials, and a plain intimation is afforded on the -face of the documents that even those sums intended by the original -donors for the relief of poverty were to be confiscated. - -The destruction of the guilds is, from any point of view, a sad and -humiliating story, and, perhaps fortunately, history has so far -permitted the thick veil of obscurity drawn over the subject at the -time to remain practically undisturbed. A consideration of the scope -and purposes of English mediæval guilds cannot but raise our opinion -of the wisdom of our forefathers who fostered their growth, and -convince us that many and useful ends were served by these voluntary -societies. This opinion we can hold, wholly apart from any views we may -entertain about the religious aspects of these societies generally. -Socialistic they were, but their socialism, so far from being adverse -to religion, as the socialism of to-day is generally considered to be, -was transfused and directed by a deeply religious spirit, carried out -into the duties of life, and manifesting itself in practical charities -of every kind. - -One or two points suggested by consideration of the working of mediæval -guilds may be emphasized. The system of these voluntary societies -would be, of course, altogether impossible and out of place in this -modern world of ours. They would not, and could not, meet the wants -and needs of these days; and yet their working is quite worth studying -by those who are interested in the social problems which nowadays are -thrusting themselves upon the public notice and demanding a solution. -The general lessons taught by these voluntary associations may be -summed up under one or two heads suggested by Mr. Ashley’s volume -already referred to: (1) It is obvious that, unlike what we find to-day -in the commercial enterprises of the world, capital played but a very -small part in the handicrafts of those times; skill, perseverance, and -connection were more important. (2) The middle ages had no knowledge -of any class of what may be called permanent wage-labourers. There -was no working-class in our modern sense: if by that is meant a class -the greater portion of which never rises. In the fourteenth century, -a few years of steady work as a journeyman meant, in most cases, that -a workman was able to set up as a master craftsman. Every hardworking -apprentice expected as a matter of course to be able to become in time -a master. The collisions between capital and labour to which we are -so much accustomed had no place in the middle ages. (3) There was no -such gulf between master and man as exists in our days. The master and -his journeyman worked together side by side, in the same shop, at the -same work, and the man could earn fully half as much as his master. -(4) If we desire to institute a comparison between the status of the -working-classes in the fourteenth century and to-day, the comparison -must be between the workman we know and the old master craftsman. The -shop-keeping class and the middle-man were only just beginning to -exist. The consumer and producer stood in close relation, and public -control was exercised fully, as the craft guilds were subject to the -supervision and direction of the municipal or central authority of the -cities in which they existed. - - - - -CHAPTER XII - -MEDIÆVAL WILLS, CHANTRIES, AND OBITS - - -The value of side-lights in an historical picture is frequently -overlooked, or not duly appreciated. The main facts of a story may -be presented with accuracy and detail, and yet the result may be as -unlike the reality as the fleshless skeleton is to the living man. -More especially are these side-lights requisite when the object of the -inquirer is to ascertain the tone and temper of minds at some given -time, and to discover what men, under given circumstances, were doing -and thinking about. In trying, therefore, to gauge the mental attitude -of Englishmen towards the ecclesiastical system existing on the eve -of the Reformation, it is important not to neglect any faint glimmer -of light which may be reflected from the records of the past, the -brightness of which in its setting has been obscured only too well by -the dark storm-clouds of controversy and prejudice. - -Not the least valuable among what may be described as the minor -sources of information about the real feeling of the people generally -towards their religion on the eve of the Reformation are the wills, of -which we have abundant examples in the period in question. It may, of -course, appear to some that their spirit was in great measure dictated -by what they now hold to be the erroneous opinions then in vogue as -to Purgatory and the efficacy of prayer for the dead. That these -doctrines of the Church had a firm hold on the minds and hearts of the -people at large is certain. The evidence that this was so is simply -overwhelming, and it may be taken to prove, not merely the existence -of the teaching, but the cordial and unhesitating way in which it was -accepted as a necessary part of the Christian faith. But this, after -all, is merely a minor point of interest in the wills of the fifteenth -and sixteenth centuries. What clearly appears in these documents, -however, is the Catholic tone which pervades them, and enables the -reader to realise perhaps more than he is able to do from any other -class of document, the strong hold their religion must have had on the -love and intelligence of the people of those days. The intelligences -may not, indeed, have been of any very high order, but the souls were -certainly penetrated by true Christian ideals. To those who penned -those early wills, Faith was clearly no mere intellectual apprehension -of speculative truth. Religion, and religious observance, was to them -a practical reality which entered into their daily lives. The kindly -Spirit that led them, brought them strength to bear their own and -others’ burdens, in sickness and health, in adversity and prosperity, -from childhood till their eyes closed in their last sleep. If we may -judge from these last aspirations of the Christian soul as displayed -in mediæval wills, we must allow that religion was very real indeed to -our English forefathers in the sixteenth century, and that in reality -the whole social order was founded upon a true appreciation of the -Christian brotherhood in man, and upon the doctrine of the efficacy of -good works for salvation. These truths of the social order were not -indeed taught perhaps scientifically, and we might look in vain for any -technical expression of them in the books of religious instruction -most used during this period, but they formed none the less part of the -traditional Christian teaching of the Middle Ages founded on the great -principles of the Bible which then dominated popular thought.[349] - -Those who would understand what this Christian spirit meant and the -many ways in which it manifested itself, need only compare the wills of -the late fifteenth and the early sixteenth centuries with those, say, -of the later years of Queen Elizabeth, when the religious revolution -had been accomplished, and note the obvious difference in tone and -purpose. The comparison need not be searching or entail much study; the -change is patent and striking, and lies on the very surface. - -Some examples of notes taken from pre-Reformation wills may be here -given from the collection of Northern wills published by the Surtees -Society under the title _Testamenta Eboracensia_, the fourth volume of -which contains many wills made during the period in question. It may be -useful to remark that one and all of these documents manifest the same -spirit of practical Christianity, though of course in various degrees. -Most of them contain bequests to churches with which the donors were -chiefly connected; money is frequently left to the fabric, or to some -special altar, or for the purchase of vestments, or to furnish some -light to burn before the Blessed Sacrament, the rood or some image, to -which the deceased had a particular devotion. Specific gifts of silks, -rich articles of clothing and embroidered hangings fitted to adorn -the Church of God, to make chasubles and copes, or altar curtains and -frontals, are common. Practical sympathy with the poor is manifested by -provision for distributions of doles at funerals and at anniversaries, -and by gifts of cloaks and other articles of clothing, to those of -the parish who were engaged in carrying torches at the burial, or had -promised to offer up prayers for the soul of the testator. Besides -these general features of interest, the wills in question show us -that building operations of great magnitude were being carried on at -this time in the parish churches of the North, and they thus furnish -an additional proof of the very remarkable interest thus taken by the -people at large in the rebuilding and adornment of the parish churches -of England right up to the very overthrow of the old ecclesiastical -system. These particular wills also bear a singular testimony to the -kindly feelings which existed at this time between the general body of -the clergy and the regular orders. Nearly every will of any cleric of -note contains bequests of money to monks, nuns, and friars, whilst, in -particular, those of the canons and officials of the great metropolitan -church of York bear testimony to the affection and esteem in which they -held the Abbot and monks of St. Mary’s Abbey in the same city, which -from its close proximity to the minster might in these days have been -regarded as its rival. - -As an illustration of the religious spirit which pervades these -documents, we may take the following preface to the will of one John -Dalton of Hull, made in 1487. “In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus -Sancti. Amen. I, John Dalton of the Kingstown upon Hull--considering -and remembering, think in my heart that the days of man in this mortal -life are but short, that the hour of death is in the hand of Almighty -God, and that He hath ordained the terms that no man may pass. I -remember also that God hath ordained man to die, and that there is -nothing more uncertain than the hour of death. I seeing princes and -(men of) great estates die daily, and men of all ages end their days, -and that death gives no certain respite to any living creature, but -takes them suddenly. For these considerations, I, being in my right -wit and mind, loved be God, whole not sick, beseech Almighty God that -I may die the true son of Holy Church and of heart truly confessed, -with contrition and repentance, of all my sins that ever I did since -the first hour I was born of my mother into this sinful world, to the -hour of my death. Of these offences I ask and beseech Almighty God -pardon and forgiveness; and in this I beseech the Blessed Virgin Mary -and her blessed Son Jesu, our Saviour, that suffered pain and passion -for me and all sinful creatures, and all the holy company of Paradise -to pray for me.… For these causes aforesaid, I, being alive of whole -mind and memory, loved be God, dispose and ordain such goods as God -hath lent me movable and immovable by my testament, and ordain this my -last will in the form and manner that followeth: First, I recommend in -humble devotion, contrition, and true repentance of my faults and sins, -praying and craving mercy of our Saviour Jesus Christ … my soul to our -Lord Jesus Christ when it shall depart from my body, and to our Lady -St. Mary, Saint Michael, St. John the Baptist, St. John the Evangelist, -St. Katherine and St. Barbara, and to all the whole company and saints -of heaven: and my body I will to the earth whereof it came.” - -The testator then proceeds to direct that his executors shall give -his wife a third of his property, and his children another third. The -rest he wishes to be bestowed in charity as they may think best “to -the pleasure of God and the health of my soul” … “as they shall answer -before God at the dreadful day of doom. (Especially) I will them to pay -my debts, charging them before God to discharge me and my soul; and in -this let them do for me as they would I did for them, as I trust they -will do.”[350] - -Of much the same character is the briefer Latin preface to the will -of a sub-dean of York in 1490. “I protest before God Almighty, the -Blessed Mary, and all saints, and I expressly proclaim that, no matter -what infirmity of mental weakness may happen to me in this or any -other sickness, it is not my intention in anything to swerve from the -Catholic faith. On the contrary I firmly and faithly believe all the -articles of faith, all the sacraments of the Church; and that the -Church with its sacraments is sufficient for the salvation of any one -however guilty.”[351] - -To take one more example of the same spirit, Thomas Dalton, merchant of -Hull--probably son of the John Dalton whose will is quoted above--died -in 1497. After charging his wife, whom he leaves his executrix, to -pay all his debts, he adds: “And I will and give my mother forty -shillings, beseeching her meekly to pray for me and to give me her -daily blessing, and that she will forgive me all trespasses and faults -done by me to her since I was born of her, as she will be forgiven -before God at the great day of judgment.”[352] - -Much the same spirit evidently dictated the following clause in the -will of John Sothill of Dewsbury, 1502: “Also I pray Thomas my son, in -my name and for the love of God, that he never strive with his mother, -as he will have my blessing, for he will find her courteous to deal -with.”[353] - -Other examples of the catholicity of these mediæval wills may be here -added as they are taken from the volume almost at haphazard. In 1487, -a late mayor of the city of York leaves money to help in the repairs -of many churches of the city and its neighbourhood. He charges his -executors to provide for the maintenance of lamps and lights in several -places, and specially names a gold ring with a diamond in it, which -he desires may be hung round the neck of Our Lady’s statue in York -Minster, and another with a turquoise “round our Lord’s neck that is -in the arms of the said image of Our Lady.” After making provision -for several series of masses to be said, as for example one of thirty -in honour of the Holy Trinity, another in honour of the Holy Cross, -a third in that of Our Lady, &c., the testator bequeaths a large sum -of money to dower fifteen poor girls, and to find fifty complete -sets of beds and bedding for the poor, as well as other extensive -charities.[354] - -Thomas Wood, a draper of Hull, was sheriff in 1479 and died in 1490. By -will he left to his parish church a piece of worked tapestry, and the -clause by which the bequest was conveyed shows that the church already -possessed many costly hangings of this kind. It runs thus: “To the -Trinity Church one of my best beds of Arras work, upon condition that -after my decease the said bed shall yearly cover my grave at my _Dirge_ -and Mass, done in the said Trinity Church with note (in singing) for -ever more. Also I will that the said bed be yearly hung in the said -church on the feast of St. George the Martyr among other worshipful -beds, and when the said bed be taken down and delivered, then I will -that the same bed be re-delivered into the vestry and there to remain -with my cope of gold.”[355] - -The same kind of gift appears in the last testament of William -Rowkshaw, Rector of Lowthorpe, in 1504. “I leave,” he says, “to the -Church of Catton a bed-covering worked with great figures to lie -in front of the High Altar on the chief feasts. And I leave also a -bed-covering (worked) with the image of a lion (a blue lion was the -family arms) to place in front of the altar in the parish church of -Lowthorpe on the chief feasts.” Also in the will of William Graystoke -of Wakefield, executed in 1508, there is made a gift to the parish -church of “a cloth of arras work sometime hanging in the Hall.”[356] - -Poor scholars at the universities were not forgotten in the wills of -the period. Mr. Martin Collins, Treasurer of York, for instance, in -1508 charges his executors to pay for a scholar at either Oxford or -Cambridge for seven years to study canon law, or the arts. The only -condition is that they are to choose him from the “poor and very -needy, and even from the poorest and most necessitous.”[357] So, too, -William Copley in 1489 leaves money to support two poor priests for -the purpose of study at Cambridge. Archbishop Rotheram in his long and -most Christian will, executed in June 1500, makes provision for the -education of youth. He founds a college in the place of his birth--the -College of Jesus at Rotheram--in thanksgiving for God’s providence in -securing his own education. “For,” he says, “there came to Rotheram, -I don’t know by what chance, but I believe by the special grace of -God, a teacher of grammar, who taught me and other youths, and by -whose means I and others with me rose in life. Wherefore desirous of -returning thanks to our Saviour, and to proclaim the reason, and lest I -might seem ungrateful and forgetful of God’s benefits and from whence -I have come, I have determined first of all to establish there for -ever a grammar master to teach all gratuitously. And because I have -seen chantry priests boarding with lay people, one in one place one in -another, to their own scandal and in some places ruin, I have desired, -in the second place, to make them a common dwelling-house. For these -reasons I have commenced to build the college of Jesus, where the head -shall teach grammar and the others may board and sleep.” Moreover, -as he has seen, he says, many unlettered and country folk from the -hills (_rudi et montam_) attracted to church by the very beauty of -ceremonial, he establishes at Rotheram a choir-master and six singing -boys to add to the attraction of the services, and for such of these -boys, who may not want to become priests, he endows a master to teach -them the art of writing and arithmetic.[358] - -A merchant of Holme, one John Barton, after leaving legacies to his -parish church, charges his executors to pay the king’s taxes for all -people of the town assessed at 4d. and under, for two years after his -death. John Barton was a merchant of the staple, and had made his -wealth by the wool trade. At Holme he built “a fair stone house and a -fair chapel like a parish church,” and to remind his descendants of the -source whence their means had come, and in humble acknowledgment of -God’s goodness to him, he set in the windows of his home the following -posie-- - - “I thank God, and ever shall, - It is the sheep hath payed for all.”[359] - -As an example of specific bequests for pious purposes, we may take the -following: Sir Gervase Clifton in 1491 gives many sums of money to -churches in Yorkshire and to various chantries in Southwell Minster. -For the use of these latter also, he directs that “all the altar cloths -of silk, a bed of gold bawdkyne and another bed of russet satin, -which belonged to (Archbishop Boothe of York) be delivered to make -vestments.”[360] In 1493-4, John Vavasour, Justice of the Common Pleas, -leaves £100 in money to the monastery of Ellerton, to which he says he -had previously given all his vestments. He names the Priors of Ellerton -and Thorneholme his executors, and tells them that the Prior of the -Charterhouse of Axholme has £800 of his in his keeping, and also that a -chest of his plate is in charge of the London Carthusians.[361] - -Again Agnes Hildyard of Beverley, in 1497-8, leaves “an old gold -noble to hang round the neck of the image of Our Lady in the church -of Beverley,” some money to purchase a mantle for the statue of the -Blessed Virgin at Fisholme, and another gold piece for the statue at -Molescroft.[362] About the same time Lady Scrope of Harling left “to -the Rood of Northdor my heart of gold with a diamond in the midst. To -Our Lady of Walsingham, ten of my great gold beads joined with silk -of crimson and gold, with a button of gold, tasselled with the same.… -To Our Lady of Pew ten of the same beads; to St. Edmund of Bury ten -of the same; to St. Thomas of Canterbury, ten of the same; to my Lord -Cardinal, ten aves with two _Paternosters_ of the same beads; to Thomas -Fynchman ten aves and two _Paternosters_ of the same beads.”[363] -Again, in 1502, Elizabeth Swinburne bequeathed to the Carmelites of -Newcastle a piece of silver to make a crown for the image of Our -Lady at her altar “where my mother is buried,” and to Mount Grace a -rosary, “fifty beads of gold, a hundred of corall, with all the gaudys -of gold,” on condition that she and her mother might be considered -_consorores_ of the house, and that thirteen poor people might be fed -on the day of her burial.[364] So, too, a chain of gold is left to -make a cup for the Blessed Sacrament, velvet and silk dresses to make -vestments,[365] plate to make a new chrismatory, crystal beads to adorn -the monstrance used on Corpus feast day.[366] - -William Sheffield, Dean of York, whose will is dated 1496, after some -few bequests to friends, leaves the residue to the poor, and he thus -explains the reason: “Also I will that the residue of my goods be -distributed among the poor parishioners in each of the benefices I have -held, according to the discretion of my executors, so that they may -be bestowed more or less in proportion to the time of my living and -keeping hospitality in them; for the goods of the church are the riches -of the poor, and so the distribution of church goods is a serious -matter of conscience, and on those badly disposing of them Jesus have -mercy.”[367] - -The Vicar of Wighill, William Burton, in 1498-9, left a sum of money to -remain in the hands of his successors for ever “to ease poor folk of -the parish, for to pay their farms with, so that the said people set -not their goods at wainworth (_i.e._ cartloads--what they would fetch), -and that they have a reasonable day to pay the said silver again duly -and truly to the Vicar for the time being, and the said Vicar to ask -and keep eyes (aye) to the same intent, as he will answer for it at -the dreadful day of judgment betwixt God and the devil; and he shall -not lend the foresaid money for any tax or tallage, nor for any common -purpose of the town, but only to the said poor men.” With kindly -thought for the young among his old flock, the Vicar adds a bequest of -4d. “to every house poor and rich among the children.”[368] - -The above is not by any means an isolated instance of a sum, or sums, -of money being left to assist the poorer members of the Christian -brotherhood, represented by the parish, with temporary loans. One -document sets out the working of such a common parish chest under -the supervision of the priest. The original chest and the necessary -funds for starting this work of benevolence were furnished by one of -the parishioners. In order to maintain “this most pious object,” -as it is called, the rector undertakes to read out the name of the -original donor at the “bedes-bidding” on principal feasts, together -with those of all who may subsequently add to the capital sum by alms -or legacies, in order that people might be reminded of their duty to -offer up prayers for the eternal welfare of their benefactors. The -chest was to have three locks, the keys being kept by the rector and -the two wardens. Those who might need to borrow temporarily from the -common stock to meet their rent, purchase of seed or stock, or for any -other purpose, were to bring pledges to the full value of the loan, -or else to find known sureties for the amount. No single person was -to be surety for more than six shillings and eightpence, and for wise -and obvious reasons the parish priest was not to be allowed to stand -security under any circumstances. The loan was for a year, and if at -the end of that time the pledge was not redeemed, it was to be sold, -but all that it might fetch over and above the amount of the original -loan was to be returned to the borrower.[369] - -In close connection with the subject of wills in pre-Reformation times -is that of chantries and obits. Both these two institutions of the -later mediæval church in England have been commonly much misunderstood -and misrepresented. Most writers regard them only in the light of the -doctrine of Purgatory, and as illustrating the extent to which the -necessity of praying for the dead was impressed upon the people by the -ecclesiastical authorities, and that with a view to their own profit. -It has come, therefore, to be believed that a “chantry” only meant a -place (chapel or other locality) connected with the parish church, -where masses were offered for the repose of the soul of the donor, -and other specified benefactors. No doubt there were such chantries -existing, but to imagine that all followed this rule is wholly to -mistake the purpose of such foundations. Speaking broadly, the chantry -priests were the assistant priests or, as we should nowadays say, the -curates of the parish, who were supported by the foundation funds -which benefactors had left or given for that purpose, and even not -infrequently by the contributions of the inhabitants. To speak the -language of our own time the system held the place of the “additional -curates” or “pastoral aid” societies. For the most part the _raison -d’être_ of these chantry priests was to look after the poor of the -parish, to visit the sick, and to assist in the functions of the parish -church. By universal custom, and even by statute law of the English -Church, every chaplain and chantry priest, besides the fulfilment of -the functions of his own special benefice, was bound to be at the -disposition of the parish priest in the common services of the parish -church. His presence was required in the choir, vested in a surplice -or other ecclesiastical dress proper to his station, or as one of the -sacred ministers of the altar, should his services be so required. In -this way the existence of guild chaplains, chantry priests, and others, -added to the dignity of the ecclesiastical offices and the splendour -of the ceremonial in most parish churches throughout the country, and -afforded material and often necessary assistance in the working of the -parish. - -It will give, perhaps, a better idea of the functions of a chantry -priest on the eve of the Reformation than can be obtained by any -description, to take an example of the foundation made for a chantry -at the altar of Saint Anne in the church of Badsworth. It was founded -in 1510 to pray for the soul of Isabella, wife of William Vavasour, and -daughter of Robert Urswick. The charter deed ordains that the chaplain -shall be a secular priest, without other benefice, and that he should -say a Requiem each week with _Placebo_ and _Dirige_. At the first -lavatory of the Mass he is to turn to the people and exhort them to -pray for the soul of the founder, saying _De Profundis_ and the prayer -_Inclina Domine_. Once every year there is to be an anniversary service -on Tuesday in Easter week, when ten shillings and eightpence is to be -distributed to the poor under the direction of the rector. The chaplain -is to be learned in grammar and plain song, and should be present in -the choir of the parish church at Matins, Mass, Vespers, and Compline, -with other divine services on Sundays and feasts, when he is to take -what part the rector shall ordain. He is not to be absent for more than -a month, and then only with leave of the rector, by whom, for certain -specified offences, he may be deprived of his office.[370] - -In these chantries were established services for the dead commonly -called “obits.” These were not, as we have been asked to believe, -mere money payments to the priest for anniversary services, but were, -for the most part, bequests left quite as much for annual alms to the -poor as for the celebration of those services. A few examples will -illustrate this better than any explanation. In the town of Nottingham -there were two chantries connected with the parish church of St. Mary, -that of our Lady and that called Amyas Chantry. The former, according -to the record, was founded “to maintain the services and to be an aid -to the Vicar and partly to succour the poor;” the latter, to assist in -“God’s service,” and to pray for William Amyas the founder. When the -commissioners, in the first year of Edward VI., came to inquire into -the possession of these chantries, they were asked to note that in this -parish there were “1400 houseling people, and that the vicar there -had no other priests to help but the above two chantry priests.” They -were not, of course, spared on this account, for within two years the -property, upon which these two priests were supported, had been sold to -two speculators in such parcels of land--John Howe and John Broxholme. - -Then again, in the parish of St. Nicholas, in the same town, we -find from the returns that the members of the Guild of the Virgin -contributed to the support of a priest. In that parish there were more -than 200 houseling people, and as the living was very poor, there -was absolutely no other priest to look after them but this one, John -Chester, who was paid by the guild. The king’s officials, however, did -not hesitate on this account to confiscate the property. It is needless -to adduce other instances of this kind, some scores of which might be -given in the county of Nottingham alone. As an example of “obits” and -the purposes for which they were intended, the following instances -may be given, which it must be remembered could be multiplied to any -extent. From the returns of the commissioners in Nottinghamshire we -find that in the parish of South Wheatley there were parish lands let -out to farm which produced eighteenpence a year, say from eighteen -shillings to a pound of our money. Of this sum, one shilling was for -the poor, and sixpence for church lights; that is two-thirds, or, say, -16s. of our money, was for the relief of the distressed. So in the -parish of Tuxford, the church “obit” lands produced £1, 5s. 4d., or -about £16 a year; of which 16s. 4d. was for the poor and 9s. for the -church services. - -Mr. Thorold Rogers, speaking of the endowments left by generations -of Englishmen for the support of chantries, obits, &c., says: “The -ancient tenements which are still the property of the London companies -were originally burdened with masses for donors. In the country, the -parochial clergy undertook the services of these chantries … and -the establishment of a mass or chantry priest at a fixed stipend in -a church with which he had no other relation, was a common form of -endowment. The residue, if any, of the revenue derivable from these -tenements was made the common property of the guild, and as the -continuity of the service was the great object of its establishment, -the donor, like the modern trustee of a life income, took care that -there should be a surplus from the foundation. The land or house was -let, and the guild consented to find the ministration which formed the -motive of the grant.”[371] - -This is very true, but it is questionable whether Mr. Thorold -Rogers appreciated the extent to which these chantry funds were -intended to be devoted to purposes other than the performance of the -specified religious services. A couple of examples have been given in -Nottinghamshire, and to these may be added one in the south of England. -In connection with the parish church of Alton, in Hampshire, there -were, on the eve of the Reformation, six foundations for obits. The -following is the account of these taken from the chantry certificates -made by the king’s commissioners in the first year of the reign of -Edward VI.: (1) “Issues of land for an obit for John Pigott, growing -and coming out of certain houses and lands in Alton for to maintain for -ever a yearly obit there, in the tenure of Thomas Mathew, of the yearly -value of 23s. 4d.; whereof to the poor 15s. 4d., to the parish priest -and his clerk 8s. (2) The same for an obit for William Reding, of the -annual value of 15s., of which the poor were to have 10s. and the -priest and his clerk 5s. (3) The same for Alice Hacker, of the yearly -value of 10s., of which the poor were to get 7s. 8d. and the priest -2s. 4d. (4) Another of the value of 4s., the poor to get 2s. 10d. -and the priest 1s. 2d. (5) Another for the soul of Nicholas Bailey, -worth annually 11s., and of this 7s. 8d. was intended for the poor -and 3s. 4d. for the clergy. (6) Another for Nicholas Crushelon, worth -annually 4s. 4d., the poor to have 3s. 1d. and the priest 1s. 3d.” In -this parish of Alton, therefore, these six foundations for “obits” or -anniversaries produced a total of 77s. 8d., but so far from the whole -sum being spent upon priests’ stipends, lights, and singing men, we -find that considerably more than half, namely 46s. 7d., was bestowed -upon the relief of the poor of the parish. Or if we take the value of -money in those days as only twelve times that of our present money, out -of a total of £36, 12s. some £27, 19s. went to the support of the poor. - -It is obvious that the general advantages derived by a parish from the -foundation of these chantries and obits have been commonly overlooked, -and the notion that they were intended for no other purpose than -procuring prayers for the dead, and that in fact they served no other -end, is altogether misleading and erroneous. Without the assistance -of the clergy, so supported by the generosity of those who left money -for these foundations, the religious services in many of the parish -churches of England in pre-Reformation times could not have been so -fittingly or even adequately provided for. Wherever information is -available this view is borne out, and it is altogether to mistake the -true bearing of facts to suppose that in suppressing the chantries -and appropriating the endowment of obits the officials of Edward VI. -merely put an end to superstitious prayers for the souls in Purgatory. -In reality they deprived the poor of much property left by deceased -persons for their relief, and took away from every parish in England -the assistance of the unbeneficed clergy who had hitherto helped to -support the dignity of God’s worship and look after the souls of the -people in the larger districts. - -One instance may be given to illustrate how far the chantry -clergy actually took part in the work of the parish. At Henley on -Thames, on the eve of the Reformation, there were seven chapels or -chantries--namely, those of Our Lady, St. Katherine, St. Clement, -St. Nicholas, St. Ann, St. John, and St. Leonard. These were all -supported by various bequests, and the four priests who served them -all resided in a common house situated in the churchyard known as “the -chapel-house,” or “the four priest chambers.” The disposition of the -services of these chaplains was apparently in the hands of the “Warden -and the commonalty” of the township, and for the convenience of the -people they arrange, for example, that the chaplain of the Lady altar -shall say his mass there every day at six in the morning, and that -the priest in charge of St. Katherine’s shall always begin his at -eight.[372] - -“To maintain God’s service” is perhaps the most common reason assigned -to King Edward’s commission for the existence of a chantry, or -chantries, in connection with a parish church. Thus at Edwinstowe, in -Nottinghamshire, there was a chantry chapel a mile from the parish -church known as Clipston Chantry. The priest was John Thompson, -and he had £5 a year, and “hath no mansion but a parlour under the -chapel.”[373] At Harworth in the same county there was the hospital of -St. Mary’s of Bawtree, founded by Robert Morton to serve the people two -miles from the parish church. The priest had a mansion and close, “and -had to say Mass every morning before sunrise, for such as be travellers -by the way and to maintain God’s service there, which towne is also a -thoroughfare towne.”[374] At Hayton, still in the same county, also two -miles from the parish church, was the chantry of Tilne, founded for a -priest to serve the villages of North and South Tilne “to celebrate -mass and minister the sacraments to the inhabitants adjoining, for that -they for the greatness of the waters cannot divers times in the year -repair to the parish church.” For “the water doth abound so much within -the said hamlets that the inhabitants thereof can by no means resort -into their parish church of Hayton, being two miles distant from the -said chapel, neither for christening, burying, nor other rights.”[375] - -The purposes which these chantry priests were intended to serve is -seen to be the same all over England. To take Suffolk for example: -at Redgrave, near Eye, or rather at Botesdale, a hamlet about a mile -and a half from Redgrave, there was a chapel of “ancient standing for -the ease of the inhabitants of the said street, which was first built -at their cost, whereunto do belong no other than the chapel yard.” -The “street” consisted of forty-six householders, and by estimation a -hundred and sixty houselings. It was “a common thoroughfare and hath a -liberty of market.” These matters “the poor inhabitants” submitted to -the King; it is unnecessary to say without success.[376] At Levenham -the alderman of St. Peter’s Guild held certain lands to find a priest -who was to teach the children of the town, and was to be “secondary to -the curate, who without help of another priest is not able to serve the -cure there,” as there were two thousand souls in the district.[377] -So, too, at Mildenhall there was a chantry established, as the parish -was long and populous, “having a great number of houseling people and -sundry hamlets, divers of them having chapels distant from the parish -church one mile or two miles, where the said priest did sing Mass -sundry festival days and other holy days, and also help the curate to -minister the Sacraments, who without help were not able to discharge -his cure.”[378] At Southwold were four cottages left by one John Perce -for an “obit.” The property produced twenty shillings a year, and -of this sum ten shillings were to be distributed to the poor; eight -shillings to maintain the town and pay the taxes of the poor, and two -shillings to be paid to the parson and his clerk for their services in -church. There was also in the same town a tenement called Skilman’s, -intended to supply a stipendiary priest for sixteen years to the -parish, and after that to go to the town. The sixteen years were up -when the royal commissioners visited the town, and the whole sum was -then being spent on the town. In vain the people pleaded that “it was -to be considered that the said town of Southwold is a very poor town, -whereupon the sea lies beating daily, to the great ruin and destruction -of the said town, if that the power and violence of the same were -not broken by the maintenance of jetties and piers there, and that -the maintenance of the haven and bridge of the same town is likewise -very chargeable.” The marsh belonging to the said tenement, called -Skilman’s, is let to the poor inhabitants of the same town, every man -paying for his cowgate by the year 20d. only “to the great relief of -the poor.”[379] - -So, too, the Aldermen of the Guild of the Holy Ghost in Beccles held -lands to supply a priest to assist in the parish for ninety-nine years, -to find money to pay the tenths, fifteenths, and other taxes, and for -other charitable purposes. The property brought in £10, 9s. 4d., and -each year the poor received forty shillings; thirty shillings went to -pay for the taxes, and the rest--some £6--to the priest. In order to -induce the king to leave this fund untouched, the commissioners of 1547 -are asked to note “that Beccles is a great and populous town,” there -being eight hundred houselings, “and the said priest is aiding unto -the curate there, who without help is not able to discharge the said -cure.”[380] - -The case of Bury St. Edmunds is particularly distressing. Amongst other -charities, lands had been left by will or given by various benefactors -to find priests to serve St. Mary’s, to sing “the Jesus Mass,” and to -act as chaplain at the Lady altar. Property also was given in charge -of St. Nicholas Guild of the annual value of 25s. 4d., of which sum -22s. was to be distributed to the poor of the town, and the rest was to -go to the annual anniversary services for members of the guild. More -property, too, had been left by one Margaret Oldham for a priest to say -Mass in the church of St. James on the week days, and in the jail on -the Sundays, and to find the poor prisoners in wood for a fire during -winter months. There were several other similar benefactions of the -same kind, and the parishioners of St. James’s church “gathered weekly -of their devotion” the stipend of a priest paid to say “the morrow -Mass”--that is, the Mass at daybreak intended for those who had to go -early to their daily work. When the royal commissioners came on behalf -of the said Edward VI. to gather in these spoils at Bury, they were -asked to forward to the authorities in London the following plea for -pity: “It is to be considered that the said town of Bury is a great and -populous town, having in it two parish churches, and in the parishes -of the same above the number of 3000 houseling persons, and a great -number of youth. And the king’s majesty hath all the tithes and all -the profits yearly coming and growing within the same parishes,[381] -finding two parish priests there. And the said two parish priests are -not able to serve and discharge the said cures without aid and help -of other priests. And further, there is no school, nor other like -foundation, within the said town, nor within twenty miles of it, for -the virtuous education and bringing up of youth, nor any hospital or -other like foundation for the comfort and relief of the poor, of which -there is an exceeding great number within the said town other than what -are before mentioned, of which the said incumbents do now take the -whole[382] yearly revenues and profits, and distribute no part thereof -to the aid and comfort or relief of the said poor people. - -“In consideration whereof it may please the king’s majesty of his most -charitable benignity, moved with pity in that behalf, to convert the -revenues and profits of the sum of the said promotions into some godly -foundation, whereby the said poor inhabitants, daily there multiplying, -may be relieved, and the youth instructed and brought up virtuously, -or otherwise, according to his most godly and discreet wisdom, and the -inhabitants shall daily pray to God for the prosperous preservation of -his most excellent majesty, long to endure.”[383] - -It is hardly necessary to say that the petition had no effect. At -Bury, as indeed all over England, the claims of the sick and poor were -disregarded and the money passed into the possession of the crown. -The hospitals that mediæval charity had erected and supported were -destroyed; the youth remained untaught; the poor were deprived of the -charity which had been, as it was supposed, secured to them for ever by -the wills of generations of Catholic benefactors; the poor prisoners -in the jail at Bury had to go without their Sunday Mass and their -winter fire; whilst the money that had hitherto supported chaplains -and chantry priests to assist the parish priests in the care of their -districts was taken by the crown. - -For Yorkshire the certificates of the commissioners have been published -by the Surtees Society. The same impression as to the utility and -purpose of the chantry and other assisting priests may be gathered from -almost every page. For example, the chantry of St. Katherine in the -parish church of Selby: “The necessity thereof is to do divine service, -and help the parish priest in time of necessity to minister sacraments -and sacramentals and other divine services.”… For “the said parish of -Selby is a great parish, having but one curate, and in the same parish -is a thousand houseling people; and the said curate has no help in time -of necessity but only the said chauntry priest.”[384] - -Again: “Two chantries of our Lady in the parish church of Leeds, -‘founded by the parishioners there to serve in the choir and to -minister sacraments and other divine service, as shall be appointed -by the vicar and other honest parishioners there, which they do.… The -necessity thereof is to do divine service, to help the curate, and -minister the Sacraments, having 3000 houseling people.’”[385] - -In the same parish church, the chantry of St. Mary Magdalene was -“founded by William Evers, late vicar of Leeds, to pray for the soul of -the founder and all Christian souls, to minister at the altar of St. -Mary Magdalene, to keep one yearly obit, with seven shillings to be -distributed, and to serve in the choir at divine service all holy days -and festival days, as appears by the foundation deed thereof, dated -A.D. 1524.”[386] - -One more example may be taken out of the hundreds in these volumes: -“The chantry, or donative, within the chapel of Holbecke in the parish -of Leeds, ‘the incumbent is used to say daily mass there and is taken -for a stipendiary priest paying tithes. And there is a great river -between the said parish church and the chapel, whereby they can by no -means often pass to the said church.… The said chantry is distant from -the said parish church one mile. The necessity thereof is to do divine -service according to the foundation.’”[387] - -A few words enforcing the lesson to be learned from these extracts -taken from the preface to the second part of these interesting -Yorkshire records may be here given. Mr. Page, the editor, says: “Up to -the time of the Reformation nearly all education was maintained by the -church, and when the chantries were dissolved practically the whole of -the secondary education of the country would have been swept away, had -not some provision for the instruction of the middle and lower classes -been made by continuing, under new ordinances, some of the educational -endowments which pious founders had previously provided.”[388] - -“The next most important class of foundations, some of which were -continued under the commission … consisted of the chapels of ease, -which were much required in extensive parishes with a scattered -population, and had been generally founded by the parishioners for -their own convenience. It seems, therefore, that the dissolution of -these chapels was a peculiar hardship. As early as 1233, the Pope -granted licence to the archbishop of York to build oratories or chapels -and to appoint to them priests, in places so distant from the parish -churches that the people could with difficulty attend divine service, -and the sick died before the priest could get to them to administer -the last sacraments. The necessity for these chapels of ease was -especially felt in Yorkshire, where the inhabitants of so many outlying -hamlets were cut off from their parish churches in winter time by -impassable roads and flooded rivers, which is the reason time after -time assigned by the commissioners, for the necessity of the existence -of such chapels; and yet comparatively few of them were recommended for -continuance by Sir Walter Mildmay and Robert Kelway in the returns to -the commission. Possibly, it was the loss of the endowments of Ayton -chapel which occasioned the insurrection at Leamer … which chapel the -inhabitants so piously kept up afterwards at their own expense.”[389] - -“In most cases, the chantry priest seems to have acted in much the -same capacity in a parish as that now occupied by the curate; he -assisted the parish priest in performing mass, hearing confessions and -visiting the sick, and also helped in the ordinary services of the -church; the few only were licensed to preach, like the schoolmaster at -Giggleswick. In the Cathedral Church at York, besides praying for the -soul of his founder and all Christian souls, each chantry priest had -to be present in the choir in his habit of a parson on all principal -and double feast days, Sundays, and nine lections, at Matins, Mass, -Evensong, and processions, when he had to read lessons, begin anthems, -and to minister at the high altar as should be appointed to him by the -officers of the choir. Besides these purely ecclesiastical duties, very -many of the chantry priests were bound to teach a certain number of -the children of the neighbourhood, which was the origin of most of our -Grammar schools.”[390] - - - - -CHAPTER XIII - -PILGRIMAGES AND RELICS - - -Pilgrimages and the honour shown to relics are frequently pointed out -as, with Indulgences, among the most objectionable features of the -pre-Reformation ecclesiastical system. It is assumed that on the eve of -the religious changes the abuses in these matters were so patent, that -no voice was, or indeed could have been, raised in their defence, and -it is asserted that they were swept away without regret or protest as -one of the most obvious and necessary items in the general purification -of the mediæval church initiated in the reign of Henry VIII. That they -had indeed been tolerated at all even up to the time of their final -overthrow was in part, if not entirely, due to the clergy, and in -particular to the monks who, as they derived much pecuniary benefit -from encouraging such practices, did not scruple to inculcate by every -means in their power the spiritual advantages to be derived from them. -That the objectionable features of these so-called works of piety had -long been recognised, is taken for granted, and the examinations of -people suspected of entertaining Wycliffite opinions are pointed to -as proof that earnest men were alive to these abuses for more than a -century before religion was purified from them. As conclusive evidence -of this, the names, too, of Chaucer for early times, and of Erasmus -for the Reform period, are given as those whose condemnation and even -scornful rejection of such practices cannot be doubted. It becomes -important, then, for a right understanding of the mental attitude of -the people generally to the existing ecclesiastical system at the time -of its overthrow, to see how far the outcry against pilgrimages and -the devotion to relics was really popular, and what were the precise -objections taken to them by the innovators. - -It is difficult to exaggerate the importance attached to pilgrimages -by our pre-Reformation forefathers. From very early times the practice -was followed with eagerness, not to say with devotion, and included not -merely visits to the shrines situated within the country itself, but -long and often perilous journeys into foreign lands--to Compostella, -Rome, and to the Holy Land itself. These foreign pilgrimages of -course could be undertaken only by the rich, or by those for whom the -requisite money was found by some one unable to undertake the journey -in person. Not infrequently the early English wills contain injunctions -upon the executors to defray the cost of some poor pilgrim to Spain, -to Rome, or to some of the noted shrines on the Continent. The English -love for these works of piety in nowise showed any sign of decadence -even right up to the period of change. Books furnishing intending -pilgrims with necessary information, and vocabularies, even in Greek, -were prepared to assist them in their voyages. The itineraries of -William Wey, printed by the Roxburghe Club, give a very good idea of -what these great religious pilgrimages must have been like at the -close of the fifteenth century. In 1462 Wey was in the Holy Land, and -describes how joyfully the pilgrims on landing at Jaffa sang the -“_Urbs beata Jerusalem_ in faburthyn.” In 1456 he took part in a large -English pilgrimage to St. James of Compostella, leaving Plymouth with -a shipload of English fellow-pilgrims on May 17. William Wey’s ship -was named the _Mary White_, and in company with them six other English -ships brought pilgrims from Portsmouth, Bristol, Weymouth, Lymington, -and a second from Plymouth. They reached Corunna on May 21st, and -Compostella for the great celebration of Trinity Day. Wey was evidently -much honoured by being pointed out to the church officials as the chief -Englishman of note present, and he was given the post of first bearer -of the canopy in the procession of the Blessed Sacrament. Four out of -the six poles were carried by his countrymen, whom he names as Austill, -Gale, and Fulford. - -On their return the pilgrims spent three days at Corunna. They were not -allowed to be idle, but religious festivities must have occupied most -of their time. On Wednesday, the eve of Corpus Christi day, there was a -procession of English pilgrims throughout the city and a mass in honour -of the Blessed Virgin. On Corpus Christi itself their procession was -in the Franciscan church, and a sermon was preached in English by an -English Bachelor in Theology on the theme, _Ecce ego; vocasti me_. “No -other nation,” says William Wey, somewhat proudly, “had these special -services but the English.” In the first port there were ships belonging -to English, Welsh, Irish, Norman, French, and Breton, and the English -alone had two and thirty. - -Such journeys were not, of course, in those days devoid of danger, -especially from sickness brought on, or developed in the course of the -travels. Erasmus, in his _Colloquy on Rash Vows_, speaks of losing -three in a company. “One dying on the way commissioned us to salute -Peter (in Rome) and James (at Compostella) in his name. Another we lost -at Rome, and he desired that we should greet his wife and children -for him. The third we left behind at Florence, his recovery entirely -despaired of, and I imagine he is now in heaven.” That this account of -the mortality among pilgrims is not exaggerated is shown in the diary -of Sir Richard Torkington, Rector of Mulbarton, in Norfolk. In 1517 he -made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and records on “the 25th of August, -that was Saynt Bertolmew’s day, deceased Robert Crosse of London, and -was buried in the churchyard of Salyus (in the island of Cyprus); and -the 27th day of August deceased Sir Thomas Tappe, a priest of the West -country, and was cast over the board; as were many more whose souls -God assoyl; and then there remained in the ship four English priests -more.”[391] - -If Englishmen went abroad to the celebrated shrines, foreigners in -turn found their way to the no less renowned places of pilgrimage in -England. Pilgrims’ inns and places of rest were scattered over the -great roads leading to Glastonbury, Walsingham, and Canterbury, and -other “holy spots” in this island, and at times these places were -thronged with those who came to pay their devotion. At one time we -are told that more than a hundred thousand pilgrims were together in -the city of Canterbury to celebrate one of the Jubilee celebrations -of the martyr St. Thomas; whilst the road to Walsingham was so much -frequented, that in the common mind the very “milk way” had been set -by Providence in the heaven to point the path to Our Lady’s shrine. - -With the very question of pilgrimages, Sir Thomas More actually deals -in the first portion of his _Dyalogue_, and it would be difficult to -find any authority who should carry greater weight. He first deals with -the outcry raised by the followers of Luther against the riches which -had been lavished upon the churches, and in particular upon the shrines -containing the relics of saints. - -Those who so loudly condemn this devotion shown by the church to the -saints should know, he says “that the church worships not the saints -as God, but as God’s servants, and therefore the honour that is done -to them redoundeth principally to the honour of their Master; just -as by common custom of people we sometimes, for their master’s sake, -reverence and make great cheer for people to whom perhaps except for -this we would not have said ‘good morrow.’ - -“And sure if any benefit or alms, done to one of Christ’s poor folk for -his sake, be reputed and accepted by His high goodness, as done unto -Himself: and if whosoever receiveth one of His apostles or disciples -receives Himself, every wise man may well think that in like manner -he who honours His holy saints for His sake, honours Himself, except -these heretics think that God were as envious as they are themselves, -and that He would be wroth to have any honour done to any other, though -it thereby redoundeth unto Himself. In this matter our Saviour Christ -clearly declares the contrary, for He shows Himself so well content -that His holy saints shall be partakers of His honour that He promises -His apostles that at the dreadful doom (when He shall come in His high -majesty) they shall have their honourable seats and sit with Himself -upon the judgment of the world. Christ also promised that Saint Mary -Magdalene should be worshipped through the world and have here an -honourable remembrance because she bestowed that precious ointment upon -His holy head. When I consider this thing it makes me marvel at the -madness of these heretics that bark against the old ancient customs of -Christ’s church, mocking at the setting up of candles, and with foolish -facetiousness (fallacies) and blasphemous mockery demand whether God -and His saints lack light, or whether it be night with them that they -cannot see without a candle. They might as well ask what good did that -ointment do to Christ’s head? But the heretics grudge the cost now as -their brother Judas did then, and say it were better spent on alms upon -a poor folk, and thus say many of them who can neither find in their -heart to spend on the one nor the other. And some spend sometimes on -the one for no other intent, but the more boldly to rebuke against and -rail against the other.” - -After pointing out how riches were lavished on the temple by God’s -special ordinance, Sir Thomas More continues: “If men will say that -the money were better spent among poor folk by whom He (_i.e._ God) -setteth more store as the living temples of the Holy Ghost made by His -own hand than by the temples of stone made by the hand of men, this -would perhaps be true if there were so little to do it with that we -should be driven by necessity to leave the one undone. But God gives -enough for both, and gives divers men divers kinds of devotion, and -all to His pleasure. Luther, in a sermon of his, wished that he had -in his hand all the pieces of the holy cross, and said if he had he -would throw them where the sun should never shine on them. And for what -worshipful reason would the wretch do such villainy to the cross of -Christ? Because, as he says, there is so much gold now bestowed on the -garnishing of the pieces of the cross that there is none left for poor -folks. Is not this a high reason? As though all the gold that is now -bestowed about the pieces of the holy cross would not have failed to -be given to poor men if they had not been bestowed on the garnishing -of the cross; and as though there was nothing lost except what is -bestowed about Christ’s cross. Take all the gold that is spent about -all the pieces of Christ’s cross through Christendom (albeit many a -good Christian prince and other godly people have honourably garnished -many pieces of it), yet if all the gold were gathered together it would -appear a poor portion in comparison with the gold that is bestowed upon -cups--what do we speak of cups for? in which the gold, though it is not -given to poor men, is saved, and may be given in alms when men will, -which they never will; how small a portion, ween we, were the gold -about all the pieces of Christ’s cross, if it were compared with the -gold that is quite cast away about the gilding of knives, swords, &c.” - -Our author then goes on to put in the mouth of the “objector” the chief -reasons those who were then the advocates of the religious changes were -urging against pilgrimages to the shrines of saints and to special -places of devotion to our Blessed Lady. Protesting that he had, of -course, no desire to see the images of the saints treated in any way -disrespectfully, the objector declares that “yet to go in pilgrimages -to them, or to pray to them, not only seemed vain, considering that -(if they can do anything) they can do no more for us among them all -than Christ can Himself alone who can do all things, nor are they so -ready to hear (if they hear us at all) as Christ that is everywhere.”… -Moreover, to go a pilgrimage to one place rather than to another “seems -to smell of idolatry,” as implying that God was not so powerful in -one place as He is in another, and, as it were, making God and His -saints “bound to a post, and that post cut out and carved into images. -For when we reckon we are better heard by our Lord in Kent than at -Cambridge, at the north door of Paul’s than at the south door, at one -image of our Lady than at another,” is it not made plain that we “put -our trust and confidence in the image itself, and not in God and our -Lady,” and think of the image and not of what the image represents. - -Further, “men reckon that the clergy gladly favour these ways, and -nourish this superstition under the name and colour of devotion, to the -peril of people’s souls for the lucre and temporal advantage that they -themselves receive from the offerings” (p. 120). - -Lest it may be thought that these objections to places of pilgrimage -were merely such as Sir Thomas More invented to put into the mouth of -the “objector” in order to refute them, the reader may like to have the -words of a known advocate of the new ideas. Lancelot Ridley, in his -expositions of some of the Epistles, states his views very clearly. -“Ignorant people,” he writes, “have preferred the saints before God, -and put more trust, more confidence, (look for) more help and succour, -in a saint than in God. Yea, I fear me that many have put their help -and succour in an image made of stone or of wood by men’s hand, and -have done great honour and reverence to the image, believing that -great virtue and great holiness was in that image above other images. -Therefore that image must have a velvet coat hanged all over with -brooches of silver, and much silver hanged about it and on it, with -much light burning before it, and with candles always burning before -it. I would no man (should put out the light) in contempt of the saint -whose image there is, but I would have this evil opinion out of the -simple hearts that they should esteem images after the value they are, -and put no more holiness in one image than in another, no more virtue -in one than in another. It holds the simple people in great blindness, -and makes them put great trust and (esteem) great holiness in images, -because one image is called our Lady of Grace, another our Lady of -Pity, another our Lady of Succour or Comfort; the Holy Rood of such a -place, &c.” And this he maintained, though he did not condemn images -generally in churches. These he thought useful to remind people of -God’s saints and their virtues, and “to stir up our dull hearts and -slothful minds to God and to goodness.” What he objected to chiefly was -the special places of pilgrimage and special images to which more than -ordinary devotion was shown.[392] - -In another of his _Expositions_, printed in 1540, Ridley again states -his objections to the places of pilgrimage. “Some think,” he writes, -“that they have some things of God, and other part of saints, of -images, and so divide God’s glory, part to God and part to an image, -of wood or of stone made by man’s hand. This some ignorant persons -have done in times past, and thanked God for their health and the -blessed Lady of Walsingham, of Ipswich, St. Edmund of Bury, Etheldred -of Ely, the Lady of Redbourne, the Holy Blood of Hayles, the Holy Rood -of Boxley, of Chester, &c., and so other images in this realm to the -which have been much pilgrimage and much idolatry, supposing the dead -images could have healed them or could have done something for them to -God. For this the ignorant have crouched, kneeled, kissed, bobbed and -licked the images, giving them coats of cloth, of gold, silver, and of -tissue, velvet, damask, and satin, and suffered the living members of -Christ to be without a russet coat or a sackcloth to keep them from the -cold.”[393] - -Again in another place he says that his great objection to images -is not that they may not be good in themselves and as a reminder of -the holiness of the saints, but that they are used as a means of -making money. “Who can tell,” he writes, “half the ways they have -found to get, yea to extort money from men by images, by pardons, by -pilgrimages, by indulgences, &c. … all invented for money.” The above -passages may be taken as fair samples of the outcry against shrines and -pilgrimages raised by the English followers of Luther and the advocates -of the religious changes generally. It will be noticed that the ground -of the objections was in reality only the same as that which induced -them to declare against any honour shown to images, whether of Christ -or His saints. There is no suggestion of any special abuses connected -with particular shrines and places of pilgrimage, such as is often -hinted at by those who refer to Chaucer and Erasmus. In addition to -the general ground of objection, the only point raised in regard to -pilgrimages by the advocates for their suppression was that money was -spent upon them which might have been bestowed more profitably on the -poor, and that the clergy were enriched by the offerings made at the -shrines visited. Sir Thomas More’s reply to the latter suggestion has -been already given, and elsewhere his views as to the general question -of the danger of people mistaking the nature of the honour shown to -images of the saints have been stated at length. With regard to his -approval of the principle of pilgrimages there is no room for doubt. - -“If the thing were so far from all frame of right religion,” he says, -“and so perilous to men’s souls, I cannot perceive why the clergy, -for the gain they get thereby, would suffer such abuses to continue. -For, first, if it were true that no pilgrimage ought to be used, no -image offered to, nor worship done nor prayer offered to any saint, -then--if all these things were all undone (if that were the right way, -as I wot well it were wrong), then to me there is little question but -that Christian people who are in the true faith and in the right way -Godward would not thereby in any way slack their good minds towards the -ministers of His church, but their devotion towards them would more and -more increase. So that if by this way they now get a penny they would -not then fail to receive a groat; and so should no lucre be the cause -to favour this way if it be wrong, whilst they could not fail to win -more by the right.” - -“Moreover, look through Christendom and you will find the fruit of -those offerings a right small part of the living of the clergy, and -such as, though some few places would be glad to retain, yet the whole -body might easily forbear without any notable loss. Let us consider our -own country, and we shall find that these pilgrimages are for the most -part in the hands of such religious persons or of such poor parishes -as have no great authority in the convocations. Besides this you will -not find, I suppose, that any Bishop in England has the profit of even -one groat from any such offering in his diocese. Now, the continuance -or breaking of this manner and custom stands them specially in the -power of those who take no profit by it. If they believed it to be -(as you call it) superstitious and wicked they would never suffer it -to continue to the perishing of men’s souls (something whereby they -themselves would destroy their own souls and get no commodity either in -body or goods). And beyond this, we see that the bishops and prelates -themselves visit these holy places and pilgrimages, and make as large -offerings and (incur) as great cost in coming and going as other -people do, so that they not only take no temporal advantage, but also -bestow their own money therein. And surely I believe this devotion so -planted by God’s own hand in the hearts of the whole Church, that is to -say, not the clergy only, but the whole congregation of all Christian -people, that if the spirituality were of the mind to give it up, yet -the temporality would not suffer it.” - -It would be impossible, without making extensive quotations, to do -justice to Sir Thomas More’s argument in favour of the old Catholic -practice of pilgrimages. He points out that the whole matter turns -upon the question whether or no Almighty God does manifest His power -and presence more in one place of His world than in another. That He -does so, he thinks cannot be questioned; why He should do so, it is -not for us to guess, but the single example of the Angel and the pool -of Bethsaida related in St. John’s Gospel is sufficient proof of the -fact--at least to Sir Thomas More’s intelligence. Moreover, he thinks -also that in many cases the special holiness of a place of pilgrimage -has been shown by the graces and favours, and even miracles, which have -been granted by God at that particular spot, and on the “objector” -waiving this argument aside on the plea that he does not believe in -modern miracles, More declares that what is even more than miracles -in his estimation is the “common belief in Christ’s Church” in the -practice. - -As to believing in miracles; they, like every other fact, depend -on evidence and proof. It is unreasonable in the highest degree to -disbelieve everything which we have not seen or which we do not -understand. Miracles, like everything else, must be believed on the -evidence of credible witnesses. What in their day, he says, is believed -in by all would have been deemed impossible a century or two before; -for example, that the earth is round and “sails in mid-air,” and that -“men walk on it foot to foot” and ships sail on its seas “bottom to -bottom.” Again, “It is not fifty years ago,” he says, “since the first -man, as far as men have heard, came to London who ever parted the -silver gilt from the silver, consuming shortly the silver into dust -with a very fair water.” At first the gold and silver smiths laughed -at the suggestion as absurd and impossible. Quite recently also More -had been told that it was possible to melt iron and make it “to run -as silver or lead doeth, and make it take a print.” More had never, -he says, seen this, but he had seen the new invention of drawing out -silver into thread-like wires. The “objector” was incredulous, and when -More went on to tell him that if a piece of silver had been gilded, -it could be drawn out with the gilding into gilt wires, he expressed -his disbelief in the possibility of such a thing, and was hardly more -satisfied that he was not being deceived when the process was shown to -him the next day. - -These and such like things, argues More, show us that our knowledge is, -after all, very limited, and that while some supposed miracles may be -doubted, it is most unreasonable to doubt or deny the possibility of -miracles generally. If nature and reason tell us there is a God, the -same two prove that miracles are not impossible, and that God can act -when He wills against the course of nature. Whether He does in this or -that case is plainly a matter of evidence. The importance of Sir Thomas -More’s opinion on the matter of Pilgrimage does not, of course, rest -upon the nature of his views, which were those naturally of all good -Catholic sons of Holy Church, but upon the fact that, in face of the -objections which were then made and which were of the kind to which -subsequent generations have been accustomed, so learned and liberal a -man as he was, did not hesitate to treat them as groundless, and to -defend the practice as it was then known in England. That there may -have been “abuses” he would have no doubt fully admitted, but that the -“abuses” were either so great or so serious as to be any reasonable -ground against the “use” he would equally have indignantly denied. - -No less clear and definite are his opinions as to “relics” and the -honour shown them. The “adversary” in the _Dyalogue_ takes up the usual -objections urged against the reverence shown to the remains of the -saints, and in particular to the wealth which was lavished upon their -shrines. “May the taking up of a man’s bones,” he says, “and setting -his carcase in a gay shrine, and then kissing his bare scalp, make a -man a saint? And yet are there some unshrined, for no man knoweth where -they lie. And men doubt whether some ever had any body at all or not, -but to recompense that again some there are who have two bodies, to -lend one to some good fellow that lacketh his. For … some one body lies -whole in two places asunder, or else the monks of the one be beguiled. -For both places plainly affirm that it lieth there, and at either place -they show the shrine, and in the shrine they show a body which they say -is _the_ body, and boldly allege old writings and miracles also for the -proof of it. Now must he confess that either the miracles at the one -place be false and done by the devil, or else that the same saint had -indeed two bodies. It is therefore likely that a bone worshipped for -a relic of some holy saint in some place was peradventure ‘a bone (as -Chaucer says) of some holy Jew’s sheep.’” More’s “adversary” then goes -on to say that our Lord in reproving the Pharisees for “making fresh -the sepulchres of the prophets” condemns the “gay golden shrines made -for saints’ bodies, especially when we have no certainty that they are -saints at all.”[394] - -What all this really amounts to, replies More, is not that your reasons -would condemn honour and worship to true relics of the saints, but -that “we may be deceived in some that we take for saints--except you -would say that if we might by any possibility mistake some, therefore -we should worship none.” Few people would say this, and “I see,” -says More, “no great peril to us from the danger of a mistake. If -there came, for example, a great many of the king’s friends into your -country, and for his sake you make them all great cheer; if among them -there come unawares to you some spies that were his mortal enemies, -wearing his badge and seeming to you and so reported as his familiar -friends, would he blame you for the good cheer you made his enemies or -thank you for the good cheer you gave his friends?” He then goes on at -great length to suggest that, as in the case of the head of St. John -the Baptist in which portions only existing in each place are each -called “the head,” so, very frequently, only a portion of the body of -a saint is called “the body.” He mentions having himself been present -at the abbey of Barking thirty years before (_i.e._ in 1498), when a -number of relics were discovered hidden in an old image, which must -have been put there four or five hundred years since “when the abbey -was burned by the infidels.” He thinks that in this way the names of -relics are frequently either lost or changed. But he adds, “the name -is not so very requisite but that we may mistake it without peril, so -that we nevertheless have the relics of holy men in reverence.” - -In replying to Tyndale also, More declares that he had never in all -his life held views against relics of the saints or the honour due to -their holy images. Tyndale had charged him with being compromised by -the words used by Erasmus in the _Enconium Moriæ_, which was known to -have been composed in More’s house, and was commonly regarded as almost -the joint work of the two scholars. If there were anything like this in -the _Moriæ_--any words that could mean or seem to mean anything against -the true Catholic devotion to relics and images--then More rejects them -from his heart. But they are not my words, he adds, “the book being -made by another man, though he were my darling never so dear” (p. 422). -But the real truth is that in the _Moriæ_ Erasmus never said more or -meant more than to “jest upon the abuses of such things.” - -In this regard it is of interest to understand what was the real -opinion of Erasmus in regard to devotions to particular saints and -their images and relics. This is all the more important, as most -people regard the account of his two pilgrimages to Walsingham and to -Canterbury as full and conclusive evidence of his sentiments. In his -tract _Enchiridion Militis Christiani_, published at Louvain in 1518, -his views are stated with absolute clearness. “There are some,” he -says, “who honour certain saints with some special ceremonies.… One -salutes St. Christopher each day, and only in presence of his image. -Why does he wish to see it? Simply because he will then feel safe that -day from any evil death. Another honours Saint Roch--but why? Because -he thinks that he will drive away infection from his body. Others -murmur prayers to St. Barbara or St. George, so as not to fall into -the hands of any enemy. One man fasts for St. Apollonia, not to have -toothache. Some dedicate a certain portion of their gains to the poor -so that their merchandise is not destroyed in shipwreck,” &c.[395] - -Our author’s point is that in these and such-like things people pray -for riches, &c., and do not think much about the right use of them; -they pray for health and go on living evil lives. In so far such -prayers to the saints are mere superstitions, and do not much differ -from the pagan superstitions; the cock to Æsculapius, the tithe to -Hercules, the bull to Neptune. “But,” he says, “I praise those who ask -from St. Roch a life protected from disease if they would consecrate -that life to Christ. I would praise them more if they would pray only -for increased detestation of vice and love virtue. I will tolerate -infirmity, but with Paul I show the better way.” He would think it, -consequently, a more perfect thing to pray only for grace to avoid sin -and to please God, and to leave life and death, sickness, health and -riches to Him and His will. - -“You,” he says farther on, “venerate the saints, you rejoice to -possess their relics, but you despise the best thing they have left -behind them, namely, the example of a pure life. No devotion is so -pleasing to Mary as when you imitate her humility; no religion is so -acceptable to the saints and so proper in itself as striving to copy -their virtue. Do you wish to merit the patronage of Peter and Paul? -Imitate the faith of the one and the charity of the other and you will -do more than if you had made ten journeys to Rome. Do you wish to do -something to show high honour to St. Francis? You are proud, you are -a lover of riches, you are quarrelsome; give these to the saint, rule -your soul and be more humble by the example of Francis; despise filthy -lucre, and covet rather the good of the soul. Leave contentions aside -and overcome evil by good. The saint will receive more honour in this -way than if you were to burn a hundred candles to him. You think it a -great thing if clothed in the habit of St. Francis you are borne to the -grave. This dress will not profit you when you are dead if, when alive, -your morals were unlike his.” - -“People,” he continues, “honour the relics of St. Paul, and do not -trouble to listen to his voice still speaking. They make much of a -large portion of one of his bones looked at through a glass, and think -little of honouring him really by understanding what he teaches and -trying to follow that.” It is the same so often with the honour shown -to the crucifix. “You honour,” he says, “the representation of Christ’s -face fashioned of stone or of wood or painted in colours, the image of -His mind ought to be more religiously honoured, which, by the work of -the Holy Spirit, is set forth in the gospels. No Apelles ever sketched -the form and figure of a human body in such a perfect way as to compare -with the mental image formed in prayer.” - -Erasmus then passes on to speak at length of what should lie at the -foundation of all true devotion to the saints. The spirit which -actuates is that which matters. To put up candles to images of the -saints and not to observe God’s laws; to fast and to abstain and not to -set a guard on the tongue, to give way to detraction and evil speaking -of all kinds; to wear the religious habit and to live the life of a -worldling under it; to build churches and not to build up the soul; -to keep Sunday observances externally but not to mind what the spirit -gives way to--these are the things that really matter. “By your lips -you bless and in your heart you curse. Your body is shut up in a narrow -cell, and in thought you wander over the whole world. You listen to -God’s word with the ears of your body; it would be more to the purpose -if you listened inwardly. What doth it profit not to do the evil which -you desire to accomplish? What doth it profit to do good outwardly and -to do the opposite inwardly? Is it much to go to Jerusalem in the body -when in the spirit it is to thee but Sodom and Egypt and Babylon?”[396] - -In his tract _De amabili Ecclesiæ concordia_, printed in 1533, Erasmus -lays down the same principle. It is, he writes, a pious and good thing -to believe that the saints who have worked miracles in the time of -their lives on earth, can help us now that they are in heaven. As long -as there is no danger of real superstition, it is absurd to try to -prevent people invoking the saints. Though superstition in the cultus -of the saints is, of course, to be prevented, “the pious and simple -affection is sometimes to be allowed even if it be mixed with some -error.” As for the representations of the saints in churches, those -who disapprove of them should not for that reason “blame those who, -without superstition, venerate these images for the love of those they -represent, just as a newly-married woman kisses a ring or present left -or sent by her absent spouse out of affection for him.” Such affection -cannot be displeasing to God, since it comes not from superstition, but -from an abundance of affectionate feeling, and exactly the same view -should be taken of the true devotion shown to the relics of the saints, -provided that it be ever borne in mind that the highest honour that can -be paid to them consists in imitation of their lives. - -Considering the importance of “indulgences” or “pardons,” as they were -frequently called, in the Reformation controversies, it is curious -that very little is made of them in the literature of the period -preceding the religious changes. If we except the works of professed -followers of Luther, there is hardly any trace of serious objection -being raised to the fundamental idea of “indulgences” in their true -sense. Here and there may be found indications of some objection to -certain abuses which had been allowed to creep into the system, but -these proceeded from loyal sons of the Church rather than from those -ill affected to the existing ecclesiastical authority, or those who -desired to see the abolition of all such grants of spiritual favours. -The lawyer Saint-German, for instance, may be taken as an example -of the acute layman, who, although professing to be a Catholic and -an obedient son of the Church, was credited by his contemporaries -with holding advanced if not somewhat heterodox views on certain -matters of current controversy. What he has to say about “pardons” -and “indulgences” is neither very startling nor indeed very different -from what all serious-minded churchmen of that day held. He considered -that the people generally were shocked at finding “the Pope and other -spiritual rulers” granting “pardons” for the payment of money. This, -he considered, had been brought prominently into notice at the time he -was writing, by the indulgences granted to those who should contribute -to the building of St. Peter’s when “it has appeared after, evidently -that it has not been disposed to that use. And that has caused many to -think that the said pardons were granted rather of covetousness than of -charity, or for the health of the souls of the people. And thereupon -some have fallen in a manner into despising ‘pardons’ as though pardons -granted upon such covetousness would not avail … and verily it were a -great pity that any misliking of pardons should grow in the hearts of -the people for any misdemeanour in the grantor or otherwise, for they -are right necessary. And I suppose that if certain pardons were granted -freely without money, for the saying of certain appointed prayers, then -all misliking of pardons would shortly cease and vanish away.”[397] - -Christopher Saint-German speaks much in the same way as to the evil of -connecting payment of money with the granting of indulgences, in the -work in connection with which his name is chiefly known, _A Dyaloge in -English between a Student and a Doctor of Divinity_. “If it were so -ordered by the Pope,” he writes, “that there might be certain general -pardons of full remission in diverse parts of the realm, which the -people might have for saying certain orisons and prayers without paying -any money for it, it is not unlikely that in a short time there would -be very few that would find any fault with ‘pardons.’ For verily it is -a great comfort to all Christian people to remember that our Lord loved -His people so much that to their relief and comfort leave behind Him so -great a treasure as is the power to grant pardons, which, as I suppose, -next unto the treasure of His precious body in the Sacrament of the -altar, may be accounted among the greatest, and therefore he would -labour greatly to his own hurt and to the great heaviness of all others -also who would endeavour to prove that there was no such power left by -God.”[398] - -In the literature of the period, it must be remembered, there is -nothing to show that the true nature of a “pardon” or indulgence was -not fully and commonly understood. There is no evidence that it was -in any way interpreted as a remission of sin, still less that any one -was foolish enough to regard it as permission to commit this or that -offence against God. Tyndale, indeed, had suggested that by purchasing -an indulgence “thou mayest quench almost the terrible fire of hell for -three halfpence.” But Sir Thomas More meets the point directly. “Nay, -surely,” he says, “that fire is not so lightly quenched that folk upon -the boldness of pardons should stand out of the fear of purgatory. -For though the sacrament of penance is able to put away the eternal -(nature) of the pain, yet the party for all that has cause to fear both -purgatory and hell too, lest some default on his own part prevented God -working such grace in him in the Sacrament as should serve for this. -So, though the pardon be able to discharge a man of purgatory, yet -there may be such default in the party to whom the pardon is granted -that although instead of three halfpence he gives three hundred pounds, -still he may receive no pardon at all, and therefore he cannot be out -of fear of purgatory, but ever has cause to fear it. For no man without -a revelation can be sure whether he be partaker of the pardon or not, -though he may have and ought to have both in that and every good thing -good hope.”[399] - -Bishop Gardiner in 1546, in writing against George Joye, incidentally -makes use of some strong expressions about the granting of pardons -for the payment of money, and blames the friars as being instrumental -in spreading them. He has been asserting that by every means in his -power the devil, now in one way and now in another, attempts to prevent -men from practising the good works necessary for salvation. “For that -purpose,” he says, “he procured out pardons from Rome, wherein heaven -was sold for a little money, and to retail that merchandise the devil -used friars for his ministers. Now they be all gone with all their -trumpery; but the devil is not yet gone, for now the cry is that -‘heaven needs no works at all, but only belief, only, only, and nothing -else.’”[400] - -This, after all, was very little more than the abuse which previously -was pointed out by the cardinal who, conjointly with Cardinal Caraffa, -afterwards Pope Paul IV., had been directed to draw up suggestions for -improvement of ecclesiastical discipline. The document drawn up by -Caraffa himself was submitted to the Pope by his command, and amongst -the points which were declared to need correction were the granting -of indulgences for money payments and permission given to travelling -collectors, such as the Questors of the Holy Spirit, &c., to bestow -“pardons” in return for subscriptions. This, in the judgment of the -four cardinals, is likely to lead to misunderstandings as to the real -nature of the indulgences granted, to deceive rustic minds, and to give -rise to all manner of superstitions.[401] - -Cardinal Sadolet, one of the four cardinals who formed the Papal -Commission just referred to, in an appeal to the German princes makes -the same adverse criticism about the money payments received for the -granting of indulgences. “The whole of Germany,” he says, “has been -convulsed by the indulgences granted by Pope Leo. X. to those who would -contribute to the building of St. Peter’s. These indulgences,” he says, -“and consequently the agents in distributing them, I do not now defend. -And I remember that, as far as my position and honour would then allow, -I spoke against them when those decrees were published, and when my -opinion had no effect I was greatly grieved.” He did not, he continued, -doubt the power of the Pope in granting the indulgences, but held that -“in giving them, the manner now insisted on with every care by the -supreme Pontiff, Paul III., ought to be maintained, namely, that they -should be granted freely, and that there should be no mention of money -in regard to them. The loving-kindness and mercy of God should not be -sold for money, and if anything be asked for at the time, it should be -requested as a work of piety.”[402] - -The above will show that earnest-minded men were fully alive to the -abuses which might be connected with the granting of indulgences, -and no condemnation could have been stronger than that formulated by -the Council of Trent. At the same time, it is clear that the abuses -of the system were, so far as England at least is concerned, neither -widespread nor obvious. The silence of Sir Thomas More on the matter, -and the very mild representations of his adversary, Christopher -Saint-German, show that this is the case. Saint-German’s objection was -not against the system, but against the same kind of abuses against -which subsequently the Fathers of Trent legislated. The reformers -attacked not the abuses only but the whole system, and their language -has quite unjustly been frequently interpreted by subsequent writers -as evidence of the existence everywhere of widespread abuses. In this -regard it is well to bear in mind that the translation of the works -of the German reformers into English cannot be taken as contemporary -evidence for England itself. - -The cry of the advanced party which would sweep away every vestige of -the old religious observances was certainly not popular. One example of -a testimony to the general feeling in London is given in a little work -printed by one of the reforming party in 1542, when it was found that -Henry VIII. did not advance along the path of reformation marked out by -the foreign followers of Luther as quickly as his rejection of papal -supremacy and the overthrow of the religious houses had caused some -people to hope. The tract in question is called _The lamentation of a -Christian against the Citie of London, made by Roderigo Mors_,[403] and -some quotations from it will show what view an ardent reformer took -of the spirit of Londoners towards the new doctrines. “The greater -part of these inordinate rich, stiff-necked citizens,” he writes, -“will not have in their houses that lively word of our souls[404] nor -suffer their servants to have it, neither yet (will they) gladly read -it or hear it read, but abhors and disdains all those who would live -according to the Gospel, and instead thereof they set up and maintain -idolatry and other innumerable wickedness of man’s invention daily -committed in the city of London. - -“The greatest part of the seniors and aldermen, with the multitude -of the inordinate rich … with the greatest multitude of thee, O city -of London, take the part and be fully bent with the false prophets, -the bishops and other strong, stout, and sturdy priests of Baal, to -persecute unto death all and every godly person who either preaches -the word or setteth it forth in writing … O Lord! how blind are -these citizens who take so good care to provide for the dead which -is not commanded of them nor availeth the dead.[405]… When they feel -themselves worthily plagued, which comes of Thee only, then they will -run a-gadding after their false prophets through the streets once or -twice a week, crying and calling to creatures of the Creator, or with -_ora pro nobis_, and that in a tongue which the greatest part of them -understand not, unto Peter, Paul, James and John, Mary and Martha: and -I think within a few years they will (without Thy great mercy) call -upon Thomas Wolsey, late Cardinal, and upon the unholy (or as they -would say holy) maid of Kent. Why not, as well as upon Thomas Becket? -What he was, I need not write. It is well known.[406] - -“And think ye not that if the Blessed Virgin Mary were now upon earth -and saw her Son and only Redeemer robbed of His glory, which glory, you -blind citizens give to her, would she not rend her clothes like as did -the Apostles, for offering oblations with their forefathers’ kings’ -heads unto the Queen of Heaven? How many queens of Heaven have ye in -the Litany? O! dear brethren, be no longer deceived with these false -prophets your bishops and their members.”[407] - -“The great substance which you bestow upon chantries, obits, and such -like dregs of … Rome, which most commonly ye give for three causes, as -ye say, first, that you will have the service of God maintained in the -church to God’s honour, and yet by the same service is God dishonoured, -for the Supper of the Lord is perverted and not used after Christ’s -institution … and the holy memory turned into a vain superstitious -ceremonial Mass, as they call it, which Mass is an abominable idol, and -of all idols the greatest; and never shall idolatry be quenched where -that idol is used after antichrist’s institution … which no doubt shall -be reformed when the time is come that God hath appointed, even as it -is already in divers cities of Germany, as Zurich, Basle, and Strasburg -and such other.” - -“The second cause is for redeeming your souls and your friends, which -is also abominable.… The idolator nowadays, if he set a candle before -an image and idol, he says he does not worship the image, but God it -represents. For say they, who is so foolish as to worship an image? The -third cause of your good intent is that the profit of your goods may -come to the priests; as though they were the peculiar people of God and -only beloved; as indeed to those who preach the Gospel the people are -bound to give sufficient living … but not that their prayers can help -the dead no more than a man’s breath blowing a sail can cause a great -ship to sail. So is this also become an abomination, for those be not -Christ’s ministers, but the ministers of a rabble of dirty traditions -and popish ceremonies, and you find a sort of lusty lubbers who are -well able to labour for their living and strong to get it with the -sweat of their face.”[408] - -“… O ye citizens, if ye would turn but even the profits of your -chantries and obits to the finding of the poor, what a politic and -goodly provision! whereas now London being one of the flowers of the -world as touching worldly riches hath so many, yea innumerable poor -people, forced to go from door to door and to sit openly in the streets -begging, and many not able to do otherwise but lie in their houses in -most grievous pains and die for lack of the aid of the rich, to the -great shame of thee, oh London!”[409] - -After exclaiming against the amount of money spent by the authorities -of the city of London on civic entertainments, and railing against the -support given to “the Mass of Scala cœli, of the Five wounds, and other -such like trumpery,” our author continues: “Have you not slain the -servants of the Lord, only for speaking against the authority of the -false bishop of Rome, that monstrous beast, whom now you yourselves do, -or should, abhor? I mean all his laws being contrary to Christ and not -His body, and yet you see that a few years past you burnt for heretics -abominable those who preached or wrote against his usurped power, and -now it is treason to uphold or maintain any part of his usurped power, -and he shall die as a traitor who does so, and well worthy.”[410] - -After declaiming against the Mass and confession, and declaring that -the bishops and cathedral churches should be despoiled of their wealth -as their “companions and brethren in antichrist, the abbots” had been, -the author of the tract goes on: “God gave the king a heart to take the -wicked mammon from you, as he may rightfully do with the consent of the -Commons by Act of Parliament, so that it may be disposed of according -to God’s glory and the commonwealth, and to take himself as portion, as -(say) eight or ten of every hundred, for an acknowledgment of obedience -and for the maintenance of his estate. The rest politically to be put -into a commonwealth, first distributed among all the towns in England -in sums according to the quantity and number of the occupiers and where -most need is, and all the towns to be bound to the king so that he may -have the money at his extreme need to serve him, he rendering it again. -And also a politic way (should be) taken for provision of the poor in -every town, with some part to the marriage of young persons that lack -friends.”[411] - -The bishops the writer considers to be the greatest obstacles to the -reformation of religion in England on the model of what had already -taken place in Germany. “You wicked mammon,” he continues, “your -inordinate riches was not of your heavenly Father’s planting; therefore -it must be plucked up by the roots with the riches of your other -brethren of the Romish church or church malignant, which of late were -rightfully plucked up. I would to God that the distribution of the -same lands and goods had been as godly distributed as the act of the -rooting up was; which distribution of the same I dare say all Christian -hearts lament. For the fat swine only were greased, but the poor sheep -to whom that thing belonged had least or nothing at all. The fault -will be laid to those of the Parliament House, especially to those who -bear the greatest swing. Well, I touch this matter here, to exhort -all that love God’s word unfeignedly to be diligent in prayer only to -God to endue the Lords, Knights, and Burgesses of the next Parliament -with His spirit, that the lands and goods of these bishops may be put -to a better use, as to God’s glory, the wealth of the commonalty and -provision for the poor.”[412] - -The above lengthy extracts will show what the advanced spirits among -the English followers of Luther hoped for from the religious revolution -which had already, when the tract was written, been begun. It will also -serve to show that even in London, which may be supposed to have been -in the forefront of the movement, the religious changes were by no -means popular; but the civic authorities and people clung to the old -faith and traditions, which the author well and tersely describes as -“the Romish religion.” - - * * * * * - -The readers of the foregoing pages will see that no attempt has been -made to draw a definite conclusion from the facts set down, or expound -the causes of the ultimate triumph of the Reformation principles -in England. It has already been pointed out that the time for a -satisfactory synthesis is not yet come; but it may not be unnecessary -to deprecate impatience to reach an ultimate judgment. - -The necessary assumption which underlies the inherited Protestant -history of the Reformation in the sixteenth century is the general -corruption of manners and morals no less than of doctrine, and the -ignorance of religious truths no less than the neglect of religious -precepts on the part of both clergy and people. On such a basis nothing -can be easier and simpler than to account for the issue of the English -religious changes. The revival of historical studies and the alienation -of the minds of many historians from traditional Christianity, whether -in its Catholic or Protestant form, has, however, thrown doubt on this -great fundamental assumption--a doubt that will be strengthened the -more the actual conditions of the case are impartially and thoroughly -investigated. Many of the genuine sources of history have only within -this generation become really accessible; what was previously known has -been more carefully examined and sifted, whilst men have begun to see -that if the truth is to be ascertained inquiries must be pursued in -detail within local limits, and that it does not suffice to speak in -general terms of “the corrupt state of the Church.” - -If we are to know the real factors of the problem to be solved, -separate investigations have to be pursued which lead to very varying -conclusions as to the state of the Church, the ecclesiastical life and -the religious practices of the people in different countries. It is -already evident that the corruptions or the virtues prevailing in one -quarter must not straightway be credited to the account of another; -that the reason why one country has become Protestant, or another -remained Catholic, has to be sought for in each case, and that it may -be safely asserted that the maintenance of Catholicity or the adoption -of Protestantism in different regions, had comparatively little to do -with prevalence or absence of abuses, or as little depended on the -question whether these were more or less grievous. - -Unquestionably those who desire to have a ready explanation of great -historical movements or revolutions, find themselves increasingly -baulked in the particular case of the Reformation by the new turn -which modern historical research has given to the consideration of -the question. Recent attempts to piece up the new results with the -old views afford a warning against precipitation, and have but shown -that the explanation of the successful issue of the Reformation -in England is a problem less simple or obvious than many popular -writers have hitherto assumed. The factors are clearly seen now to -be many--sometimes accidental, sometimes strongly personal--whilst -aspirations after worldly commodities, though destined not to be -realised for the many, were often and in the most influential quarters -a stronger determinant to acquiescence or active co-operation in the -movement than thirst after pure doctrine, love of the open Bible, -or desire for a vernacular liturgy. The first condition for the -understanding of the problem at all is the most careful and detailed -examination possible of the state of popular religion during the -whole of the century which witnessed the change, quite apart from the -particular political methods employed to effect the transition from the -public teaching of the old faith, as it was professed in the closing -years of the reign of Henry VIII., and the new as it was officially -practised a dozen years after Elizabeth had held the reins of power. - -The interest of the questions discussed in the present volume is by -no means exclusively, perhaps to some persons is even by no means -predominantly, a religious one. It has been insisted upon in the -preceding pages that religion on the eve of the Reformation was -intimately bound up with the whole social life of the people, animating -it and penetrating it at every point. No one who is acquainted with the -history of later centuries in England can doubt for a moment that the -religion then professed presented in this respect a contrast to the -older faith; or as some writers may put it, religion became restricted -to what belongs to the technically “religious” sphere. But this was not -confined to England, or even to Protestant countries. Everywhere, it -may be said, in the centuries subsequent to the religious revolution -of the sixteenth century, religion became less directly social in its -action; and if the action and interference of what is now called the -State in every department of social life is continually extending, -this may not inaptly be said to be due to the fact that it has largely -taken up the direct social work and direction from which the Church -found herself perhaps compelled to recede, in order to concentrate her -efforts more intensely on the promotion of more purely and strictly -religious influences. It is impossible to study the available sources -of information about the period immediately preceding the change -without recognising that, so far from the Church being a merely effete -or corrupt agency in the commonwealth, it was an active power for -popular good in a very wide sense. At any rate, whatever view we may -take of the results of the Reformation, to understand rightly the -conditions of religious thought and life on the eve of the religious -revolution, is a condition of being able really to read aright our own -time and to gauge the extent to which present tendencies find their -root or their justification in the past. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] _Opera_ (ed. Frankfort), tom. x. p. 56, quoted by Janssen. - -[2] J. L. Andre, in _Sussex Archæological Journal_, xxxix. p. 31. - -[3] The use of the expression “New Learning” as meaning the revival of -letters is now so common that any instance of it may seem superfluous. -Green, for example, in his _History of the English People_, vol. ii. -constantly speaks of it. Thus (p. 81), “Erasmus embodied for the -Teutonic peoples the quickening influence of the New Learning during -the long scholar-life which began at Paris and ended amidst sorrow at -Basle.” Again (p. 84), “the group of scholars who represented the New -Learning in England.” Again (p. 86), “On the universities the influence -of the New Learning was like a passing from death to life.” Again (p. -125), “As yet the New Learning, though scared by Luther’s intemperate -language, had steadily backed him in his struggle.” - -[4] _Sermons._ London: Robert Caly, 1557, p. 36. - -[5] _The Praier and Complaynte of the Ploweman unto Christ_, sig. Aij. - -[6] R. V. _The olde Faith of Great Brittayne, &c._--The style of -the book may be judged by the following passages:--“How say you (O -ye popish bishops and priests which maintain Austen’s dampnable -ceremonies)--For truly so long as ye say masse and lift the bread and -wine above your heads, giving the people to understand your mass to be -available for the quick and the dead, ye deny the Lord that bought you; -therefore let the mass go again to Rome, with all Austen’s trinkets, -and cleave to the Lord’s Supper”.… Again:--“Gentle reader: It is not -unknown what an occasion of sclander divers have taken in that the -king’s majesty hath with his honourable council gone about to alter and -take away the abuse of the communion used in the mass.… The ignorant -and unlearned esteem the same abuse, called the mass, to be the -principal point of Christianity, to whom the altering thereof appears -very strange.… Our popish priests still do abuse the Lord’s Supper -or Communion, calling it still a new name of _Missa_ or Mass.” The -author strongly objects to those like Bishop Gardiner and Dr. Smythe -who have written in defence of the old doctrine of the English Church -on the Blessed Sacrament: “Yea, even the mass, which is a derogation -of Christ’s blood. For Christ left the sacrament of his body and blood -in bread and wine to be eaten and drunk in remembrance of his death, -and not to be looked upon as the Israelites did the brazen serpent.… -Paul saith not, as often as the priest lifts the bread and wine above -his shaven crown, for the papists to gaze at.” All this, as “the New -Learning” brought over to England by St. Augustine of Canterbury, the -author would send back to Rome from whence it came. - -[7] Urbanus Regius, _A comparison betwene the old learnynge and the -newe_, translated by William Turner. Southwark: Nicholson, 1537, sig. -Aij to Cvij. - -[8] _Opera_ (ed. Le Clerc), Ep. 583. - -[9] Ibid., Ep. 751. - -[10] Remigio Sabbadini, _La Scuola e gli studi di Guarino Guarini -Veronese_, pp. 217-18. - -[11] R. Sabbadini, _Guarino Veronese et il suo epistolario_, p. 57. - -[12] The Earl was a confrater and special friend of the monks of -Christchurch, Canterbury. In 1468-69, Prior Goldstone wrote to the -Earl, who had been abroad “on pilgrimage” for four years, to try and -obtain for Canterbury the usual jubilee privileges of 1470. In his Obit -in the Canterbury _Necrology_ (MS. Arund. 68 f. 45d) he is described -as “vir undecumque doctissimus, omnium liberalium artium divinarumque -simul ac secularium litterarum scientia peritissimus.” - -[13] Leland (_De Scriptoribus Britannicis_, 482) calls him Tillœus, -and this has been generally translated as Tilly. In the _Canterbury -Letter Books_ (Rolls Series, iii. 291) it appears that Prior Selling -was greatly interested in a boy named Richard Tyll. In 1475, Thomas -Goldstone, the warden of Canterbury Hall, writes to Prior Selling -about new clothes and a tunic and other expenses “scolaris tui Ricardi -Tyll.” In the same volume, p. 315, is a letter of fraternity given to -“Agnes, widow of William Tyll,” and on February 7, 1491, she received -permission to be buried where her husband, William Tyll, had been -interred, “juxta tumbam sancti Thomæ martyris.” - -[14] _Canterbury Letters_ (Camden Soc.), pp. 13, 15. - -[15] C. C. C. C. MS. 417 f. 54d: “Item hoc anno videlicet 6 Kal. Oct. -D. Willms Selling celebravit primam suam missam et fuit sacerdos summæ -missæ per totam illam ebdomadam.” - -[16] _Literæ Cantuarr._ (Rolls Series), iii. 239. - -[17] Leland, _De Scriptoribus Britannicis_, p. 482. _Cf._ also -_Canterbury Letters_ (Camden Soc.), p. xxvii. - -[18] Leland, _ut supra_. - -[19] Umberto Dallari, _I rotuli dei Lettori, &c., dello studio -Bolognese dal 1384 al 1799_, p. 51. - -[20] Serafino Mazzetti, _Memorie storiche sopra l’università di -Bologna_, p. 308. - -[21] Leland, _ut supra_. - -[22] B. Mus. Arundel MS. 68, f. 4. The Obit in Christchurch MS. D. 12, -says: “Sacræ Theologiæ Doctor. Hic in divinis agendis multum devotus et -lingua Græca et Latina valde eruditus.… O quam laudabiliter se habuit -opera merito laudanda manifesto declarant.” - -[23] In the Canterbury Registers (Reg. R.) there is a record which -evidently relates to Selling’s previous stay in Rome as a student. -On October 3, 1469, the date of Selling’s second departure for Rome, -the Prior and convent of Christchurch granted a letter to Pietro dei -Milleni, a citizen of Rome, making him a _confrater_ of the monastery -in return for the kindness shown to Dr. William Selling, when in the -Eternal City. This letter, doubtless, Selling carried with him in 1469. - -[24] _The Old English Bible and other Essays_, p. 306. - -[25] B. Mus. Cotton MS. Julius F. vii., f. 118. - -[26] One of Prior Selling’s first acts of administration was apparently -to procure a master for the grammar school at Canterbury. He writes -to the Archbishop: “Also please it your good faderhood to have in -knowledge that according to your commandment, I have provided for a -schoolmaster for your gramerscole in Canterbury, the which hath lately -taught gramer at Wynchester and atte Seynt Antonyes in London. That, -as I trust to God, shall so guide him that it shall be worship and -pleasure to your Lordship and profit and encreas to them that he shall -have in governance.”--_Hist. MSS. Com._ 9th Report, App. p. 105. - -[27] I. Noble Johnson, _Life of Linacre_, p. 11. Among the great -benefactors to Canterbury College, Oxford, was Doctor Thomas -Chaundeler, Warden of New College. In 1473, the year after the election -of Prior Selling, the Chapter of Christchurch, Canterbury, passed a -resolution that, in memory of his great benefits to them, his name -should be mentioned daily in the conventual mass at Canterbury, and -that at dinner each day at Oxford he should be named as founder. - -[28] Galeni, _De Temperamentis libri tres, Thoma Linacro -interpretante_, is dedicated to Pope Leo X., with a letter from Linacre -dated 1521. “The widow’s mite was approved by Him whose vicar on earth” -Pope Leo is, so this book is only intended to recall common studies, -though in itself of little interest to one having the care of the world. - -[29] G. Lilii, _Elogia_, ed. P. Jovii, p. 91. - -[30] Ibid., lxiii. p. 145. - -[31] Sir Thomas More writing to Colet says: “I pass my time here (at -Oxford) with Grocyn, Linacre, and our (George) Lilly: the first as -you know the only master of my life, when you are absent; the second, -the director of my studies; the third, my dearest companion in all -the affairs of life” (J. Stapleton, _Tres Thomæ_, p. 165.) Another -constant companion of More at Oxford was Cuthbert Tunstall, one of the -most learned men of his day, afterwards in succession Bishop of London -and Durham. Tunstall dedicated to More his tract _De arte supputandi_, -which he printed at Paris in 1529. - -[32] Reg. Warham, in Knight’s _Erasmus_, p. 22 _note_. - -[33] Encyclop. Brit. _sub nomine_. - -[34] Ibid. - -[35] Ugo Balzani, _Un’ ambasciata inglese a Roma_, Società Romana di -storia patria, iii. p. 175 _seqq._ Of this an epitome is given in -Bacon’s _Henry VII._, p. 95. Count Ugo Balzani says: “Il prior di -Canterbury sembra essere veramente stato l’anima dell’ ambasciata.” -Burchardus, _Rerum Urbanarum Commentarii_ (ed. Thuasne), i. p. 257, -gives a full account of the reception of this embassy in Rome and by -the Pope. - -[36] Harl. MS. 6237, and Add. MS. 15,673. - -[37] In the same beautifully written volume is a printed tract -addressed to the Venetian Senate in 1471 against princes taking church -property. The tract had been sent to the Prior of Christchurch by -Christopher Urswick, with a letter, in which, to induce him to read it, -he says it is approved by Hermolaus Barbarus and Guarini. Christopher -Urswick was almoner to Henry VII., and to him Erasmus dedicated three -of his works. - -[38] Leland, _De Scriptoribus Britannicis_, 482. - -[39] This information I owe to the kindness of Dr. Montague James. - -[40] _Canterbury Letters_ (Camden Soc.), p. xxvii. - -[41] Ibid., p. 36, a letter in which Dr. Langton asks Prior Selling to -“attend to the drawing of it.” The draft sermon is in Cleop. A. iii. - -[42] Richard Pace, _De Fructu_, p. 27. The work _De Fructu_ was -composed at Constance, where Pace was ambassador, and where he had met -his old master, Paul Bombasius. He dedicates the tract to Colet, who -had done so much to introduce true classical Latin into England, in -place of the barbarous language formerly used. The work was suggested -to him by a conversation he had in England two years before, on his -return from Rome, with a gentleman he met at dinner, who strongly -objected to a literary education for his children, on the ground that -he disapproved of certain expressions made use of by Erasmus. The tract -shows on what a very intimate footing Pace was with Bombasius. - -[43] _De Fructu_, p. 99. Pace published at Venice in 1522, _Plutarchi -Cheronei Opuscula_, and dedicated the work to Bishop Tunstall. He -reminds the bishop of their old student days, and says the translation -has been examined by their “old master, Nicholas Leonicus.” - -[44] Ibid. - -[45] Ibid. - -[46] Ibid., p. 51. “Quas vocant proportionum inductiones … antiquitatem -superasse.” - -[47] More to the University of Oxford, in Knight’s _Erasmus_, p. 31. - -[48] Bishop Fisher’s love and zeal for learning is notorious. He did -all in his power to assist in the foundation of schools of sound -learning at Cambridge, and especially to encourage the study of Greek. -Richard Croke, the protégé of Archbishop Warham and Bishop Fisher, -after teaching Greek in 1516 at Leipzig, was sent by Fisher in 1519 to -Cambridge to urge the utility of Greek studies at that university. In -the _Orationes_ he delivered there, after speaking of the importance of -Greek for all Biblical study, he says that Oxford had taken up the work -with great avidity, since “they have there as their patrons besides -the Cardinal (Wolsey), Canterbury (Warham), and Winchester, all the -other English bishops except the one who has always been your great -stay and helper, the Bishop of Rochester, and the Bishop of Ely.” It -was entirely owing to Bishop Fisher’s generosity, and at his special -request, that Croke had gone to Cambridge rather than to Oxford, -whither his connection with Warham, More, Linacre, and Grocyn would -have led him, in order to carry on the work begun by Erasmus. - -[49] Thomas Lupset was educated by Colet, and learnt his Latin and -Greek under William Lilly, going afterwards to Oxford. There he made -the acquaintance of Ludovico Vives, and at his exhortation went to -Italy. He joined Reginald Pole in his studies at Padua, and on his -return, after acting as Thomas Winter’s tutor in Paris, he held a -position first as a teacher and then in Cardinal Wolsey’s household. -In his _Exhortation to Young Men_, persuading them to a good life, -“written at More, a place of my Lord Cardinal’s,” in 1529, he gives a -charming account of his relation with a former pupil. “It happeneth,” -he says, “at this time (my heartily beloved Edmund) that I am in such -a place where I have no manner of books with me to pass the time after -my manner and custom. And though I had here with me plenty of books, -yet the place suffereth me not to spend in them any study. For you -shall understand that I lie waiting on my Lord Cardinal, whose hours -I must observe, to be always at hand lest I be called when I am not -bye, which would be straight taken for a fault of great negligence. I -am well satiated with the beholding of these gay hangings that garnish -here every wall.” As a relief he turns to address his young friend -Edmund. Probably Edmund doesn’t understand his affection, because he -had always acted on the principle he has “been taught, that the master -never hurteth his scholar more than when he uttereth and sheweth by -cherishing and cokering the love he beareth to his scholars.” Edmund is -now “of age, and also by the common board of houseling admitted into -the number of men, and to be no more in the company of children,” and -so now he can make known his affection. “This mind had I to my friend -Andrew Smith, whose son Christopher, your fellow, I ever took for my -son.… If you will call to your mind all the frays between you and -me, or me and Smith, you will find that they were all out of my care -for ‘your manners.’ When I saw certain fantasies in you or him that -jarred from true opinions, the which true opinions, above all learning, -I would have masters ever teach their scholars. Wherefore, my good -withipol, take heed of my lesson.” - -[50] John Clement, a protégé of Sir Thomas More, was afterwards a -doctor of renown not only in medicine but in languages. He had been -a member of More’s household, which Erasmus speaks of as “schola et -gymnasium Christianæ religionis.” He is named at the beginning of the -_Eutopia_, and Sir Thomas, in writing to Erasmus, says that Linacre -declared that he had had no pupil at Oxford equal to him. John Clement -translated several ancient Greek authors into Latin, amongst others -many letters of St. Gregory Nazianzen and the Homilies of Nicephorus -Callistus on the Saints of the Greek Calendar. Stapleton, in his -_Tres Thomæ_ (p. 250), says he had himself seen and examined with the -originals these two voluminous translations at the request of John -Clement himself. He had married Margaret, the ward of Sir Thomas More, -and in the most difficult places of his translation he was helped by -his wife, who, with the daughters of Sir Thomas, had been his disciple -and knew Greek well. Mary Roper, More’s granddaughter, and the daughter -of Margaret Roper, translated Eusebius’s _History_ from Greek into -Latin, but it was never published, because Bishop Christopherson had -been at work on a similar translation. On the change of religion -in Elizabeth’s reign, John Clement and his wife, with the Ropers, -took refuge in the Low Countries. Paulus Jovius, in his _Descriptio -Britanniæ_, p. 13, speaks of all three daughters of Sir Thomas More -being celebrated for their knowledge of Latin. - -[51] Erasmi _Opera_ (ed. 1703), Col. 40. - -[52] Ibid., Ep. 241. - -[53] Ibid., Ep. 363. - -[54] To take one example, Thomas Millyng, who as Bishop of Hereford -died in 1492, had studied at Gloucester Hall, Oxford, as a monk of -Westminster. During the old age of Abbot Fleet, of Westminster, he -governed the monastery, and became its abbot in 1465. He was noted -for his love of studies, and especially for his knowledge of Greek. -This, says the writer of his brief life in the _National Biographical -Dictionary_, was “a rare accomplishment for _monks_ in those days.” He -might have added, and for any one else! - -[55] Dennistoun, _Memorials of the Dukes of Urbino_, iii., pp. 415 -_seqq._ - -[56] Erasmus to Abbot Bere. _Opera_, Ep. 700. - -[57] MS. Bodl. 80. It is the autograph copy of Free, _cf._ J. W. -Williams, _Somerset Mediæval Libraries_, p. 87. It was Abbot Bere -who, in 1506, presented John Claymond, the learned Greek scholar, to -his first benefice of Westmonkton, in the county of Somerset. In 1516 -Claymond became first President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, -often after signing himself, _Eucharistiæ servus_. Dr. Claymond -procured for his college several Greek manuscripts which had belonged -to Grocyn and Linacre, which are still possessed by it. At the end -of MS. XXIII., which is a volume containing ninety homilies of St. -John Chrysostom in Greek, is an inscription stating that this, and -MS. XXIV., were copied in the years 1499 and 1500 by a Greek from -Constantinople, named John Serbopylas, then living and working at -Reading. - -[58] Ludovico Vives had been invited over to England by Cardinal Wolsey -to lecture on rhetoric at Oxford. He lived at Corpus Christi College, -then ruled by Dr. John Claymond, whom in his tract _De conscribendis -Epistolis_ he calls his “father.” The fame of this Spanish master of -eloquence drew crowds to his lectures at the university, and amongst -the audience Henry and Queen Katherine might sometimes be seen. For a -time he acted also as tutor to the Princess Mary, and dedicated several -works to the queen, to whose generosity he says he owed much. He took -her side in the “divorce” question, and was thrown into prison for -some weeks for expressing his views on the matter. Fisher, More, and -Tunstall were his constant friends in England, and of Margaret Roper -he writes, “from the time I first made her acquaintance I have loved -her as a sister.” Among his pupils at Louvain, besides the above-named -Canterbury monk, John Digon, he mentions with great affection Nicholas -Wotton, whom the antiquary Twyne speaks of as returning to England with -Digon and Jerome Ruffaldus, who calls Vives his “Jonathan,” and who -subsequently became abbot of St. Vaast, Arras. - -[59] J. Venn, _Gonville and Caius College_ (1349-1897), Vol. I. - -[60] Ibid., p. xvi. - -[61] Ibid., p. 18. - -[62] Ibid., p. 23. - -[63] Ibid., p. 21. - -[64] Ibid., p. xviii. - -[65] _Sermons_ (1557), f. 54. - -[66] A. Chalmers, _History of the Colleges, &c. of Oxford_, ii. p. 351. - -[67] Hearne, _John of Glastonbury_, ii. p. 490; from MS. Cott. -Vitellius c. vii. - -[68] Saint-German was born 1460. He was employed by Thomas Cromwell -on some business of the State, and died in 1540. The _Dyalogue_ was -printed apparently first in Latin, but subsequently in English. It -consisted of three parts (1) published by Robert Wyer, (2) by Peter -Treveris, 1531, and (3) by Thomas Berthalet, also in 1531. - -[69] _Dyalogue_, _ut sup._, 3rd part, f. 2. - -[70] One of the first Acts of King Henry VII. on his accession, was to -obtain from the Pope a Bull agreeing to some changes in the Sanctuary -customs. Prior Selling of Canterbury was despatched as King’s Orator to -Rome with others to Pope Innocent VIII. in 1487, and brought back the -Pope’s approval of three points in which the king proposed to change -these laws. _First_, that if any person in Sanctuary went out at night -and committed mischief and trespass, and then got back again, he should -forfeit his privilege of Sanctuary. _Secondly_, that though the person -of a debtor might be protected in Sanctuary, yet his goods out of the -precincts were not so protected from his creditors. _Thirdly_, that -where a person took Sanctuary for treason, the king might appoint him -keepers within the Sanctuary. - -[71] Robert Keilway, _Relationes quorundam casuum_, f. 188, _seqq._ - -[72] _Dyalogue_, _ut sup._, f. 12. - -[73] _Dyalogue_, f. 23. - -[74] Ibid. - -[75] Ibid., f. 23. - -[76] Ibid., f. 21. - -[77] Ibid., f. 21. - -[78] _A treatyse concerning the power of the clergie and the laws of -the realme._ London, J. Godfray. - -[79] _A treatyse_, &c., _ut supra_, cap. 4. - -[80] _A treatyse_, &c., _ut supra_, cap. xii. - -[81] _A treatyse_, &c., _ut supra_, cap. xii. - -[82] Ibid., cap. xiii. - -[83] Ibid., cap. vi. - -[84] _English Works_ (ed. 1557), p. 1017. - -[85] _A treatyse_, &c., _ut sup._, cap. vi., sig. E. i. - -[86] _Salem and Bizance, a dialogue betwixte two Englishmen, whereof -one was called Salem and the other Bizance_ (Berthelet, 1533), f. 76. - -[87] Ibid., f. 84. - -[88] _English Works_, p. 892. - -[89] Ibid. - -[90] _A Dialogue_, &c., _ut sup._, f. 8. - -[91] Ibid., f. 11. - -[92] Ibid., f. 14. - -[93] _A Dialogue_, &c., _ut sup._, p. 17. - -[94] _History of English Law_, i., p. 93-4. Mr. James Gairdner, in -a letter to _The Guardian_, March 1, 1899, says: “There were, in -the Middle Ages, in every kingdom of Europe that owned the Pope’s -jurisdiction, two authorities, the one temporal and the other -spiritual, and the head of the spiritual jurisdiction was at Rome. The -bishops had the rule over their clergy, even in criminal matters, and -over the laity as well in matters of faith. Even a bishop’s decision, -it is true, might be disputed, and there was an appeal to the Pope; -nay, the Pope’s decision might be disputed, and there was an appeal -to a general council. Thus there was, in every kingdom, an _imperium -in imperio_, but nobody objected to such a state of matters, not even -kings, seeing that they could, as a rule, get anything they wanted out -of the Popes--even some things, occasionally, that the Popes ought not -to have conceded.” - -[95] William Bond, _The Pilgrymage of perfeccyon_, 1531, f. 223. - -[96] Roger Edgworth, _Sermons_, 1557, fol. 102 - -[97] Edward Powell, _Propugnaculum summi sacerdotii, &c., adversus M. -Lutherum_, 1523, fol. 22 and fol. 35. - -[98] _English Works_, p. 171. - -[99] Ibid. p. 185. - -[100] Ibid., p. 528. - -[101] Ibid., p. 538. - -[102] _English Works_, p. 616. - -[103] Ibid., p. 798. - -[104] _Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries_ (popular edition), p. -367. - -[105] In his work against Luther, Bishop Fisher teaches the supremacy -of the Pope without any ambiguity. In the _Sermon had at Paulis_ -against Luther and his followers, he also put his position perfectly -clearly. The Church that has a right to the name _Catholic_ has derived -the right from its communion with the See of Peter. Our Lord called -Cephas, Peter, or rock, to signify that upon him as a rock He would -build His church. Unto Peter He committed His flock, and “the true -Christian people which we have at this day was derived by a continual -succession from the See of Peter” (fol. e. 4. d.). - -[106] Simon Matthew, _Sermon made in the Cathedrall Church of -Saynt-Paule, 27 June 1535_ (Berthelet, 1535). - -[107] Joannis Longlondi _Tres conciones_ (R. Pynson), f. 45. - -[108] _Assertion of the Seven Sacraments against Luther_ (translation -by J. W., 1687), f. a. i. - -[109] _A treatise of the donation or gift and endowment of possessions -given_ (by Constantine) _with the judgement of certain great men_, -1517, Thomas Godfray. - -[110] London, Thomas Berthelet. - -[111] _A dyalogue_, _ut sup._, ff. 3-7. - -[112] f. A. ii.; c. i.; c. iiij. The author recommends those who -would understand the Pope’s power to “resort unto _The glasse of -truth_ or to the book named the _Determinations of the universities_.” -The book named here _A glasse of truth_ is written in favour of the -divorce. “Some lawyers,” the author says, “attribute too much to the -Pope--at length there shall be no law, but only his will.” The work -was published by Berthelet anonymously, but Richard Croke, in a letter -written at this period (Ellis, _Historical Letters_, 3rd series, ii. -195), says that the book was written by King Henry himself. It was -generally said that Henry had written a defence of his divorce; but -Strype did not think it was more than a State paper. Croke (p. 198) -says that people at Oxford, “Mr. John Roper and others,” did not -believe that the king was really the author. He says that the tract has -done more than anything else to get people to take the king’s side. - -[113] _Of the olde God and the new_, B. 1. As another sample of what -was at this time said about the Popes, we may take the following: -Rome, says the author, “was by Justinian restored from ruin and decay, -from whence also came the riches of the Church. At the coming of these -riches, forthwith the book of the gospel was shut up, and the Bishops -of Rome, instead of evangelical poverty, began to put forth their heads -garnished with three crowns.” This is taken from the preface of Hartman -Dulechin, who claims to have “taught the book to speak Latin.” It was -originally printed and published in German. The English version is a -translation of the Latin. - -[114] _The Defence of Peace, written in Latin more than 200 years ago, -and set forth in the English tongue by Wyllyam Marshall._ R. Wyer, -1535, folio. - -[115] _The Defence of Peace_, f. 42. The well-known anti-papal opinions -of Marsilius of Padua are, of course, of no interest in themselves, but -their publication at this time in English shows the methods by which it -was hoped to undermine the Papal authority in the country. - -[116] _Exposition_, &c., _ut supra_, f. i. - -[117] Johann Sturmius, _Epistle sent to the cardinals and prelates that -were appointed by the Bishop of Rome to search out the abuses of the -Church_. Translated by Richard Morysine. Berthelet, 1538. - -A later copy of the _Concilium de emendanda Ecclesia_, printed by -Sturmius with his letter in 1538, in the British Museum, formerly -belonged to Cecil. The title-page has his signature, “Gulielmus -Cecilius, 1540,” and there are marks and words underlined, and some few -observations from his pen in the margin. It is interesting to note that -what struck the statesman as a youth were just the points which could -be turned against the temporal claims of the Roman See. - -The special evils needing correction which the committee of cardinals -note, and which they call _abuses_, are collected under 22 headings, -some of which are the following:-- - -(1) Ordination of priests without cure of souls, not learned, of lower -order in life, and too young and of doubtful morals: They suggest that -each diocese should have a _magistrum_ to see that candidates are -properly instructed--none to be ordained except by their own bishop. - -(2) Benefices, and in particular, episcopal sees, are given to people -with interest, and not because their elevation would be good for the -church. They suggest that the best man should be chosen, and residence -should be insisted on, and consequently “non Italo conferendum est -beneficium in Hispania aut in Britannia aut ex contra.” - -(3) _Pensions_ reserved from Benefices. Though the Pope, “who is the -universal dispenser of the goods of the church,” may reserve a part for -a pious use, _e.g._ for the poor, &c., still not to reserve sufficient -for the proper purpose of the beneficiary, and still more to give a -pension out of a benefice to one rich enough without, is wrong. - -(4) Change of benefices for the sake of gain, and handing on benefices -by arrangement or always assigning episcopal sees to coadjutors, is the -cause of outcry against the clergy, and is in reality making private -property out of what is public. - -(5) Permission to clergy to hold more than one benefice. - -(6) Cardinals being allowed to hold sees. They ought to be counsellors -to the Pope in Rome, and when holding sees they are more or less -dependent on the will of the kings, and so cannot give independent -advice and speak their minds. - -(7) Absence of bishops from their sees. - -(8) Such religious houses as needed correction should be forbidden to -profess members, and when they die out, their places should be taken -by fervent religious. Confessors for convents must be approved by the -ordinaries of the place. - -(9) The use of the keys ought never, under any pretext, to be granted -for money. - -(10) Questors of the Holy Spirit, St. Anthony, &c., who foster -superstition among the poor people, should be prohibited. - -(11) Confessional privileges and use of portable altars to be very -rarely allowed. - -(12) No indulgences to be granted except once a year, and in the great -cities only. - -Finally they say of Rome: “Hæc Romana civitas et ecclesia mater est -et magistra aliarum ecclesiarum,” and hence it should be a model to -all. Foreigners, however, who come to St. Peter’s find that priests -“sordidi, ignari, induti paramentis et vestibus quibus nec in sordidis -ædibus honeste uti possent, missas celebrant.” - -Cardinal Sadolet, on receiving a copy of Sturmius’s letter, replied -in kindly terms. He had, he declared, a high opinion of “Sturmius, -Melanchthon, and Bucer, looking on them as most learned men, kindly -disposed, and cordially friendly to him. He looked upon it as the -peculiar characteristic of Luther to try and overwhelm all his -opponents with shouts and attacks.” He speaks of the great piety of -Pope Clement from personal knowledge. His wars were, he said, rather -the work of his adversaries than his own (_De consilio_, ed. J. G. -Schelhorn, 1748, p. 91). - -He also, in 1539, penned the _De Christiana Ecclesia_ (in _Specilegium -Romanum_, ii. p. 101 _seqq._), sending it to Cardinal Salicati, and -asking him to pass it on to Cardinal Contarini. It was the outcome -of conversations about the troubles of the Church, and the result of -the movement was the Council of Trent, to restore, as Sadolet says, -ecclesiastical discipline “quæ nunc tota pæne nobis e manibus elapsa -est.” - -[118] _Sermon on Palm Sunday_, Berthelet, 1539. - -[119] Lancelot Ridley, _Commentary in Englyshe on Sayncte Paule’s -Epystle to the Ephesians_, L. 4. - -[120] This important paper was printed for the first time in the -_Dublin Review_, April 1894, pp. 390-420. - -[121] _A treatise concerning the division between the spiritualtie and -temporaltie._ London: Robert Redman, f. 2. - -[122] _English Works_, p. 871. In the quotations made from the works -of Sir Thomas More and other old writings, for the sake of the general -reader the modern form of spelling has been adopted, and at times the -words transposed to ensure greater clearness. - -[123] Ibid., p. 875. - -[124] Ibid., p. 882. - -[125] _Salem and Bizance. A dialogue betwixte two Englishmen, whereof -one was called Salem and the other Bizance._ London: Berthelet, 1533, -f. 5. - -[126] _English Works_, p. 934. - -[127] Ibid., p. 870. - -[128] Ibid., p. 877. - -[129] Ibid., p. 877. - -[130] Ibid., p. 878. - -[131] Ibid., pp. 937, 938. - -[132] _A treatise concerning the division_, f. 8. - -[133] _English Works_, p. 880. - -[134] Ibid., p. 951. - -[135] _A treatise concerning the division_, f. 3. - -[136] _A treatise concerning the division_, f. 41. - -[137] _English Works_, p. 884. - -[138] Ibid., p. 895. - -[139] Ibid. - -[140] Ibid., p. 896. - -[141] Ibid., p. 885. - -[142] Bishop Fisher gives much the same testimony to the moral -character of the religious generally in his sermon against Luther. -After praising the state of virginity, he continues: “And it is not to -be doubted but that there is in Christendom at this day many thousands -of religious men and women that full truly keep their religion and -their chastity unto Christ.… If Almighty God did reserve in that -little portion of Jewry so great a multitude beyond the estimation of -the prophet, what number suppose ye doth yet remain in Christendom of -religious men and women, notwithstanding this great persecution of -religious monasteries, both of men and women, done by these heretics -by this most execrable doctrine? It is not to be doubted but in all -Christendom be left many thousands who at this hour live chaste, and -truly keep their virginity unto Christ.” (_A Sermon had at Paulis_, -Berthelet, f. g. ii.) - -[143] Ibid., p. 735. Sir Thomas More, in his _Dyalogue_, thinks that -the number of priests without very definite work had tended to diminish -the respect paid to them by the laity. “But were I Pope,” he says, … “I -could not well devise better provisions than by the laws of the Church -are provided already, if they were as well kept as they are well made. -But as for the number, I would surely see such a way therein that we -should not have such a rabble that every mean man must have a priest -in his house to wait upon his wife. This no mean man lacketh now, to -the contempt of the priesthood, (placed) in as vile an office as his -horsekeeper. That is truth indeed, quod he, and in worse, too, for they -keep hawks and dogs.” If the laws of the Church were kept, there would -not be the excessive number of priests for fit and proper positions, -so that “the whole order is rebuked by the priests’ begging and lewd -living who are either obliged to walk as rovers, and live upon trentals -or worse, or serve in a secular man’s house” (_English Works_, p. 223). - -[144] _A treatise concerning the division_, ff. 14-16. - -[145] _Dyalogue_, &c., f. 2. - -[146] _A treatise concerning the division_, f. 23. - -[147] Ibid., f. 25. - -[148] Ibid., f. 26. - -[149] _English Works_, p. 936. - -[150] _English Works_, p. 620. - -[151] _A Sermonde … made in 1538._ By John Longlande, Bishop of -Lincolne. London: f. 2. - -[152] _Henry VIII._, vol. ii. pp. 50-1. - -[153] Ibid., vol. i. p. 600. - -[154] Ibid., ii. p. 470. - -[155] Wilkins, _Concilia_, iii. 717. - -[156] _Sermo Exhortatorius_, W. de Worde. - -[157] Gairdner, _Calendar of Papers Foreign and Domestic_, v., preface, -ix. - -[158] Froude’s translation. - -[159] _Opera_, ed. Leclerc, iii. col. 102. - -[160] Ibid., Ep. 144. - -[161] In one of his works Erasmus gives the highest praise to English -ecclesiastics for their single-minded devotion to their clerical -duties. He contrasts them with clerics of other nations in regard to -worldly ambitions, &c. “Those who are nearest to Christ,” he writes, -“should keep themselves free from the baser things of this world. How -ill the word ‘general’ sounds when connected with that of ‘Cardinal,’ -or ‘duke’ with that of ‘bishop,’ ‘earl’ with that of ‘abbot,’ or -‘commander’ with that of ‘priest.’ In England the ecclesiastical -dignity is the highest, and the revenues of churchmen abundant. In that -country, however, no one who is a bishop or abbot has even a semblance -of temporal dominion, or possesses castles or musicians or bands of -retainers, nor does any of them coin his own money, excepting only the -Archbishop of Canterbury, as a mark of dignity and honour, which has -been conferred on him on account of the death of Saint Thomas; he is, -however, never concerned in matters of war, but is occupied only in the -care of the churches.” (_Consultatio de Bello Turcico._ _Opera_, ed. -Leclerc, tom. v. p. 363.) - -[162] _Opera_, &c., _ut sup._, Ep. 149. - -[163] Ibid., Ep. 175. - -[164] Ibid., Ep. 216. - -[165] Ibid., Ep. 272. - -[166] Ibid., Ep. 474. - -[167] Thomas More, _Epigrammata_ (ed. Frankfort, 1689), p. 284 _seqq._ - -[168] Ibid., Ep. 148. - -[169] _Erasmus_, p. 63. - -[170] _Quarterly Review_, January 1895, p. 23. - -[171] The question about Erasmus’s translation of this word came up -in the discussion between Sir Thomas More and Tyndale about the use -made by the latter of the word _congregatio_ for Church in his version -of the New Testament. More writes: “Then he asketh me why I have not -contended with Erasmus, whom he calls my darling, all this long time, -for translating this word _ecclesia_ into this word _congregatio_, -and then he cometh forth with his proper taunt, that I favour him of -likelihood for making of his book of _Moriæ_ in my house.… Now for -his translation of _ecclesia_ by _congregatio_ his deed is nothing -like Tyndale’s. For the Latin tongue had no Latin word used before for -the Church but the Greek word _ecclesia_, therefore Erasmus in his -new translation gave it a Latin word.… Erasmus also meant no heresy -therein, as appears by his writings against the heretics.” (_English -Works_, pp. 421, 422.) - -[172] Ep. 384. - -[173] Ep. 423. - -[174] Ep. 531. Lee’s account of his quarrel with Erasmus is given in -his _Apologia_, which he addressed to the University of Louvain. He -states that Erasmus had come to his house at that place, and had asked -him to aid in the corrected version of his New Testament which he was -then projecting. At first Lee refused, but finally, on being pressed -by Erasmus, he consented, and began the work of revision, but Erasmus -quickly became angry at so many suggested changes. Reports about the -annotations and corrections proposed by Lee began to be spread abroad, -and Erasmus hearing of them, suspected some secret design, and came -from Basle to try and get a copy of the proposed criticism. Lee wished -that it should be considered rather a matter of _theology_ than of -_letters_. Bishop Fisher wrote, on hearing rumours of the quarrel, -urging Lee to try and make his peace with Erasmus, and in deference -to this, Lee informed Erasmus that he would leave the matter entirely -in the hands of the bishop, and had forwarded to him the book of his -proposed criticisms. Erasmus, however, did not wait, but published -the _Dialogus Domini Jacobi Latomi_, which all regarded as an attack -upon Lee. The latter would have published a reply had he not received -letters from England from Fisher, Colet, Pace, and More, begging him to -keep his temper. Lee agreed to stop, and only asked Fisher to decide -the matter quickly. On returning to Louvain, Lee found that Erasmus -had published his _Dialogus bilingium et trilingium_, in which Lee was -plainly indicated as a man hostile to the study of letters in general. -This Lee denied altogether, and in brief, he does not, he says, condemn -Erasmus’s notes on the New Testament so much as the copy he had taken -as the basis for his corrections of the later text. “Politian,” says -Lee, at the end of his _Apologia_, “Politian declares that there are -two great pests of literature--ignorance and envy. To these I will add -a third--‘adulation’--for I have no belief in any one who, having made -a mistake, is not willing to acknowledge it.” - -Lee’s criticism of Erasmus’s translation appeared at Louvain in January -1520. It produced an immediate reply from Erasmus, published at Antwerp -in May 1520--a reply “all nose, teeth, nails, and stomach.” In this -Erasmus says that 1200 copies of the New Testament had been printed by -Froben. In the collation he had been much assisted by Bishop Tunstall, -who had, in fact, supplied the exemplar on which he had worked. Erasmus -then gives what he thinks is the correct version of the differences -between Lee and himself. Lee, he says, was only just beginning Greek, -and Erasmus, who had been working at the correction of his version of -the Testament, showed him what he was doing. The margins of the book -were then full of notes, and here and there whole pages of paper were -added. Lee said that he had a few notes that might be useful, and -Erasmus expressed his pleasure at receiving help and asked for them. -Lee thereupon gave him some miscellaneous jottings, and of these, -according to Erasmus’s version of the facts, he made use of hardly -anything. Soon, however, reports were spread about that out of some -three hundred places in which Lee had corrected the first edition of -the translation, Erasmus had adopted two hundred. Bishop Fisher tried -to make peace, and to prevent two men who both meant well to the cause -of religion from quarrelling in public. His intervention was, however, -too late, as already the letter of Erasmus to Thomas Lupset had -appeared and thus rendered reconciliation impossible. - -[175] Ep. 231. - -[176] Ep. 380. This bishop must have been the Spaniard, George de -Athegua, who was appointed to the see of Llandaff in 1517, and held it -for twenty years. - -[177] Ep. 380. - -[178] Ep. 453. - -[179] Ep. 416. - -[180] Ep. 547. - -[181] Ep. 529. Erasmus wrote strongly against anything that seemed to -favour the idea of national churches. After declaring that national -dislikes and enmities were unmeaning and unchristian, he continues: “As -an Englishman you wish evil fortune to a Frenchman. Why not rather do -your wishes come as a man to a fellow-man? Why not as a Christian to a -Christian? Why do these frivolous things have greater weight than such -natural ties, such bonds of Christ? Places separate bodies, not souls. -In old days the Rhine divided a Frenchman from a German, but the Rhine -cannot divide one Christian from another. The Pyrenees cut off Spain -from France, but these mountains do not destroy the communion of the -Church. The sea divides the English and French peoples, but it cannot -cut off the society of religion.…” The world is the fatherland of all -people; all men are sprung from a common stock. “The Church is but one -family, common to all.” (_Opera._, tom. iv. col. 638.) - -[182] Ep. 715. - -[183] Ep. 723. - -[184] Ep. 477. - -[185] Ep. 528. - -[186] Ep. 656. - -[187] Ep. 334 (second series.) - -[188] _Spongia_ (Basle, Froben, 1523), c. 5. - -[189] Ibid., sig. d. 4. - -[190] Ibid., sig. e. 2. - -[191] Ibid., sig. e. 2. The supreme authority of the Pope is asserted -by Erasmus in numberless places in his works. For example, in the -tract _Pacis Querimonia_, after saying that he cannot understand how -Christians, who understand Christ’s teaching and say their _Pater -noster_ with intelligence, can always be at strife, he proceeds: “The -authority of the Roman Pontiff is supreme. But when peoples and princes -wage impious wars, and that for years, where then is the authority -of the Pontiffs, where then is the power next to Christ’s power?” -&c. (_Opera._, tom. iv. p. 635). So too in his _Precatio pro Pace -Ecclesiæ_, after praying that God would turn the eyes of His mercy upon -the Church, over which “Peter was made Supreme Pastor,” he declares -that there is but “one Church, out of which there is no salvation.” - -[192] Ep. 478. - -[193] Ep. 501. - -[194] Ep. 563. - -[195] Ep. 600. - -[196] Ep. 563. - -[197] Ep. 667. - -[198] Ep. 501 (Mr. Froude’s translation). - -[199] Ep. 793. - -[200] Ep. 823. - -[201] Ep. 751. - -[202] The Pope himself read the _Enconium Moriæ_ and understood the -spirit of the author; at least so Erasmus was told. He wrote at the -time “the Supreme Pontiff has read through _Moriæ_ and laughed; all he -said was, ‘I am glad to see that friend Erasmus is in the _Moriæ_,’ -and this though I have touched no others so sharply as the Pontiffs” -(Ep. p. 1667). What Sir Thomas More thought about it may be given in -his own words, written some years later. “As touching _Moriæ_, in which -Erasmus, under the name and person of _Moria_, which word in Greek -signifies ‘folly,’ merely touches and reproves such faults and follies -as he found in any kind of people pursuing every state and condition, -spiritual and temporal, leaving almost none untouched. By this book, -says Tyndale, if it were in English, every man should then well see -that I was then far otherwise minded than I now write. If this be true, -then the more cause have I to thank God for the amendment. God be -thanked I never had that mind in my life to have holy saints’ images or -their holy relics out of reverence. Nor if there were any such thing -in _Moriæ_ this could not make any man see that I were myself of that -mind, the book being made by another man though he were my darling -never so dear. Howbeit, that book of _Moriæ_ doth indeed but jest upon -abuses of such things.… But in these days, in which men by their own -default misconstrue and take harm from the very Scripture of God, until -men better amend, if any man would now translate _Moriæ_ into English, -or some work either that I have myself written ere this, albeit there -be no harm therein, folks being (as they be) given to take harm of what -is good, I would not only my darling’s books, but my own also, help -to burn them both with my own hands, rather than folk should (though -through their own fault) take any harm of them.” (_English Works_, pp. -422-3.) - -[203] _Opera Omnia_ (Froben’s ed., 1540), i. p. 831. - -[204] Pp. 832-33. - -[205] P. 837. - -[206] A case in point was the finding of the celebrated statue of the -Laocöon on January 14, 1506. This discovery was accidentally made in -a vineyard, near Santa Maria Maggiore, and no statue ever produced so -general and so profound an emotion as the uncovering of this work of -art did upon the learned world of Rome. The whole city flocked out -to see it, and the road to the vineyard was blocked day and night by -the crowds of cardinals and people waiting to look at it. “One would -have said,” writes a contemporary, “that it was a Jubilee.” And even -to-day the visitor to the Ara Cœli may read on the tomb of Felice de -Fredis, the happy owner of the vineyard, the promise of “immortality,” -_ob proprias virtutes et repertum Laocohontis divinum simulachrum_ (I. -Klaczki, _Jules II._, p. 115). It is not at all improbable that in the -above passage Erasmus was actually thinking of the delirium caused by -the finding of this statue. - -[207] Ibid., p. 838. - -[208] For example, the Rev. W. H. Hutton states in the _Guardian_, -January 25, 1899, as the result of his mature studies upon the -Reformation period, that “the so-called divorce question had very -little indeed to do with the Reformation.” Mr. James Gairdner, who -speaks with all the authority of a full and complete knowledge of the -State papers of this period, in a letter to a subsequent number of the -_Guardian_, says, “When a gentleman of Mr. Hutton’s attainments is able -seriously to tell us this, I think it is really time to ask people to -put two and two together, and say whether the sum can be anything but -four. It may be disagreeable to trace the Reformation to such a very -ignoble origin, but facts, as the Scottish poet says, are fellows you -can’t coerce … and won’t bear to be disputed.” What “we call _the_ -Reformation in England … was the result of Henry VIII.’s quarrel with -the Court of Rome on the subject of his divorce, and _the same_ results -could not possibly have come about in any other way.” When “Henry VIII. -found himself disappointed in the expectation, which he had ardently -cherished for a while, that he could manage, by hook or by crook, to -obtain from the See of Rome something like an ecclesiastical licence -for bigamy,” he took matters into his own hands, “and self-willed as he -was, never did self-will lead him into such a tremendous and dangerous -undertaking as in throwing off the Pope. How much this was resented -among the people, what secret communications there were between leading -noblemen with the imperial ambassador, strongly urging the emperor to -invade England, and deliver the people from a tyranny from which they -were unable to free themselves, we know in these days as we did not -know before.” - -[209] Camden Society, p. 163. - -[210] The same high authority, in a letter to the _Guardian_, March -1, 1899, says, “People will tell you, of course, that the seeds of -the Reformation were sown before Henry VIII.’s days, and particularly -that it was Wycliffe who brought the great movement on. I should be -sorry to depreciate Wycliffe, who did undoubtedly bring about a great -movement in his day, though a careful estimate of that movement is -still a _desideratum_. Even in theology the cardinal doctrine of the -Reformation--justification by faith--is in Wycliffe, I should say, -conspicuous by its absence. But, whatever may be the theological debt -of England to Wycliffe at the present day, twenty Wycliffes, all -highly popular, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries would not -have brought about a Reformation like that under which we have lived -during the last centuries. That was a thing which could only have been -effected by royal power--as in England, or by a subversion of royal -authority through the medium of successful rebellion--as in Scotland.” - -[211] _Henry VIII._, i. p. 51. - -[212] Roger Edgworth, _Sermons_ (London: Robert Caly, 1557), preface. - -[213] _English Works_, p. 339. - -[214] Strype, _Eccl. Mem._ (ed. 1822), I. i. p. 254. - -[215] This book was apparently condemned for reflecting on the king’s -divorce rather than for its Lutheran tendencies. “The Soul’s Garden,” -as Bishop Tunstall calls it, was printed abroad, and “very many lately -brought into the realm, chiefly into London and into other haven -towns.” The objectionable portion was contained in “a declaration made -in the kalendar of the said book, about the end of the month of August, -upon the day of the decollation of St. John Baptist, to show the cause -of why he was beheaded.” (Strype, _ut supra_, ii. p. 274.) - -[216] Wilkins, _Concilia_, iii. p. 737. - -[217] Ibid., 720. - -[218] Wilkins, _Concilia_, iii. p. 727. - -[219] Richard Smythe, D.D., _The assertion and defence of the Sacrament -of the Altar_, 1546, f. 3. - -[220] _English Works_, p. 940. - -[221] _English Works_, p. 921. - -[222] _English Works_, pp. 341-344. - -[223] Ibid., p. 346. - -[224] Ibid., p. 351. - -[225] Germen Gardynare, _A letter of a yonge gentylman_, &c. London: W. -Rastell, 1534. - -[226] _English Works_, pp. 257-259. - -[227] Ibid., p. 1035. - -[228] Ibid., p. 409. - -[229] _The Werke for Householders._ London: John Waylande, 1537. - -[230] Richard Whitford, _Dyvers holy instructions_. London: W. -Mydylton, 1541. - -[231] _Sermons_, sig. h. vij. - -[232] _English Works_ (ed. 1557), pp. 233-4. This positive declaration -of Sir Thomas More is generally ignored by modern writers. In a -recently published work, for example (_England in the Age of Wycliffe_, -by George Macaulay Trevelyan), it is stated that “we have positive -proof that the bishops denounced the dissemination of the English Bible -among classes and persons prone to heresy, burnt copies of it, and -cruelly persecuted Lollards on the charge of reading it” (p. 131). In -proof of this statement the author refers his readers to a later page -(p. 342) of his volume. Here he culls from Foxe (_Acts and Monuments_) -the depositions of certain witnesses against people suspected of -teaching heresy. Amongst these depositions it is said by a few of the -witnesses that some of these teachers were possessed of portions of the -Scriptures in English. Mr. Trevelyan assumes, because witnesses speak -to this fact, that it was for this they were condemned, or, as he puts -it, “cruelly persecuted,” by the ecclesiastical authorities. Had he -examined his authority, Foxe, more carefully, he would have found the -actual list of _articles_ formulated against these teachers of heresy. -These alone are, of course, the _charges_ actually made against them; -and the mere deposition of witnesses in those days were, no more than -they are in ours, the charges upon which the accused were condemned. -In the _articles_ or charges we find no mention whatever of the -English Bible, and, according to the ordinary rules of interpretation -of documents, this absence of any mention of Bible-reading in the -indictment, formulated after the hearing of the evidence, and when -witnesses had testified to the fact, should be taken to show that the -mere possession of the vernacular Scriptures, &c., was not accounted -an offence by the Church authorities. The real charge in these cases, -as in others, was of teaching what was then held to be false and -heretical, teaching founded upon false interpretations of the Scripture -text, or upon false translations. - -[233] Ibid., p. 235. - -[234] Ibid., p. 240. - -[235] Ibid., p. 241. - -[236] Ibid., p. 240. - -[237] Ibid., p. 241. - -[238] Ibid., p. 245. - -[239] Ibid., p. 510. - -[240] Ibid., p. 678. - -[241] Roger Edgworth, _Sermons_, London, Caly, 1557, f. 31. - -[242] Sir Thomas More, _English Works_, p. 108. - -[243] Thomas Lupset, _Collected Works_, 1546. _Gathered Counsails_, f. -202. - -[244] Ibid. _An Exhortation to young men_, written 1529. He insists -much on the obligation of following the teaching of the Church. - -[245] John Standish, _A discourse wherein is debated whether it be -expedient that the Scripture should be in English for all men to read -that wyll_ (1555), A. iij. - -[246] _English Works_, p. 850. - -[247] J. S. Brewer, _Henry VIII._, vol. ii. p. 468. - -[248] Dore, _Old Bibles_, p. 13. - -[249] P. 15. - -[250] Ellis, _Historical Letters_, 3rd Series, ii. p. 71. - -[251] Johannes Cochlæus, _An expediat laicis legere Novi Testamenti -libros lingua vernacula_, 1533, A. i. The warning of Cochlæus was -addressed to the Scotch king, and as a result of this letter, pointing -out the Lutheran character of the English version of Tyndale, the -Scotch bishops in the Synod of St. Andrews in 1529 forbade the -importation of Bibles into Scotland. - -[252] Ibid., L. iij. - -[253] Wilkins, _Concilia_, iii. p. 727. - -[254] _Cf._ Parker Soc. Tyndale’s _Doctrinal treatises_, &c., preface -xxx. - -[255] Probably on Sunday, February 11, when Cardinal Wolsey, with -six and thirty bishops and other ecclesiastics, were present at the -burning of Lutheran books before the great crucifix at the north gate. -Amongst the books, according to Tyndale, were copies of his translated -Testament. - -[256] Dore, _Old Bibles_, p. 26. - -[257] Dore, _ut sup._, 32. - -[258] _English Works_, p. 422. - -[259] Dore, 35. - -[260] _English Works_, p. 849. - -[261] _English Works_, p. 341. - -[262] Ibid., p. 410. - -[263] Ibid., p. 416. - -[264] Ibid., p. 417. - -[265] Ibid., p. 419. - -[266] Ibid., p. 422. - -[267] Ibid., p. 424. - -[268] Ibid., p. 425. - -[269] Ibid., p. 427. - -[270] Ibid., p. 435. - -[271] Ibid., p. 437. - -[272] Ibid., p. 493. - -[273] Ibid., p. 422. For examples of other false translations, see also -p. 449. - -[274] Standish, _A discourse_, &c., _ut supra_, sig. A. iiij. - -[275] _English Works_, p. 223. - -[276] Ibid., p. 223. - -[277] Standish, _ut supra_, sig. E. iiij. - -[278] Roger Edgworth, _Sermons_, f. 31. - -[279] _The assertion and defence of the Sacrament of the Altar_ (1546), -f. 3. The amateur theologians and teachers who sprung up so plentifully -with the growth of Lutheran ideas in England seem to have been a source -of trouble to the clergy. There was no difficulty in Scripture so hard -which these “barkers, gnawers, and railers,” as Roger Edgworth calls -them, were not ready to explain, and even women were ready to become -teachers of God’s Word, “and openly to dispute with men.” Speaking in -Bristol, in Mary’s reign, he advises his audience to stick to their -own occupations and leave theology and Scripture alone, “for when a -tailor forsaking his own occupation will be a merchant venturer, or a -shoemaker will become a grocer, God send him help. I have known,” he -says, “many in this town that studying divinity has killed a merchant, -and some of other occupations by their busy labours in the Scripture -hath shut up the shop windows, and were fain to take sanctuary, or -else for mercery and grocery hath been fain to sell godderds, steaves, -pitchers, and such other trumpery.” - -[280] _A Commentary in Englyshe upon Sayncte Paule’s Epistle to the -Ephesians_, 1540. - -[281] _An Exposition in Englysh upon the Epistle of St. Paule to the -Colossians_, 1548. - -[282] _An Exposition_, &c., _upon the Philippians_, 1545. - -[283] As an example of the open way in which the reading of the Bible -was advocated, take the following instance. Caxton’s translation of -the _Vitæ Patrum_, published by Wynkyn de Worde in 1495, contained an -exhortation to all his readers to study the Holy Scripture. “To read -them is in part to know the felicity eternal, for in them a man may see -what he ought to do in conversation … oft to read purgeth the soul from -sin, it engendereth dread of God, and it keeps the soul from eternal -damnation.” As food nourishes the body, “in like wise as touching -the soul we be nourished by the lecture and reading of Scripture.… -Be diligent and busy to read the Scriptures, for in reading them the -natural wit and understanding are augmented in so much that men find -that which ought to be left (undone) and take that whereof may ensue -profit infinite” (p. 345). - -[284] B. Mus. Harl. MS. 172, f. 12b. - -[285] Harl. MS. 115, f. 51. - -[286] Ibid., f. 53. - -[287] In speaking of the third Commandment, _The art of good lyvyng and -good deyng_ (1503) warns people of their obligation to “Layr the holy -prechyngys, that ys the word of God et the good techyngys, and shoold -not go from the seyd prechyngs” (fol. 8. 2). - -[288] Ibid., f. 1. - -[289] _The Myrrour of the Church_ (1527), Sig. B4. - -[290] _Exornatorium Curatorum._ W. de Worde. In 1518 the Synod of Ely -ordered that all having the cure of souls should have a copy of this -book, and four times a year should explain it in English to their -people. (Wilkins, _Concilia_, III., p. 712.) - -[291] _The Prymer of Salisbury Use._ Rouen: Nicholas le Rour, f. b. vij. - -[292] _The art of good lyvyng and good deyng._ Paris, 1503, f. g. 2. - -[293] _English Works_, p. 116. - -[294] _English Works_, p. 117. - -[295] Ibid., p. 121. - -[296] Ibid., p. 420. - -[297] _Sermons_, fol. 40. - -[298] _English Works_, pp. 196-7. - -[299] Ibid., p. 198. - -[300] Ibid., p. 199. - -[301] Ed. W. de Worde, 1496. - -[302] William Bond, _The Pilgrymage of Perfeccyon_, Wynkyn de Worde, -1531, fol. 192. - -[303] Ibid., fol. 196. - -[304] Ibid. - -[305] _English Works_, p. 408. - -[306] The full title of this book is: _Pupilla oculi omnibus -presbyteris precipue Anglicanis necessaria_. It is clear from the -letter that W. Bretton had already had other works printed in the same -way, and it is known that amongst those works were copies of Lynwode’s -_Provinciale_ (1505), _Psalterium et Hymni_ (1506), _Horæ_, &c. (1506), -_Speculum Spiritualium_, and Hampole, _De Emendatione Vitæ_ (1510), -(cf. _Ames_, Ed. Herbert, iii. p. 16). Pepwell the London publisher, at -“the sign of the Holy Trinity,” was the same who published many books -printed abroad, and had dealings with Bishops Stokesley and Tunstall. - -[307] For further information upon popular religious instruction in -England, see an essay upon the teaching in the fourteenth and fifteenth -centuries in my _The old English Bible, and other Essays_. The Rev. J. -Fisher, in his tract on _The Private Devotions of the Welsh_ (1898), -speaking of the vernacular prayer-books, says, “they continued to be -published down to the end of Henry’s reign, and, in a modified form, -even at a later date. Besides these prymers and the oral instruction in -the principal formulæ of the Church, the scriptorium of the monastery -was not behind in supplying, especially the poor, with horn-books, on -which were, as a rule, written in the vulgar tongue the Lord’s Prayer, -the Creed, and the Hail Mary.” In 1546 appeared a prymer in Welsh in -which, amongst other things, the seven capital or deadly sins and their -opposite virtues are given and analysed. This book, consequently, -besides being a prayer-book afforded popular instruction to the people -using it. The prymers in Welsh, we are told, were usually called -“Matins’ Books,” and continued to be published long after the change -of religion. A copy published in 1618 is called the fifth edition, -and copies of it are recorded under the years 1633 and 1783. “It is -rather a curious fact,” writes Mr. Fisher, “that nearly all the Welsh -manuals of devotion and instruction, of any size, published in the -second half of the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth -century, were the productions of Welsh Roman Catholics, and published -on the Continent. In Dr. Gruffydd Roberts’s Welsh Grammar, published at -Milan in 1567, will be found poetical versions of the Apostles’ Creed, -the Lord’s Prayer, the Hail Mary, the Ten Commandments and the Seven -Sacraments. This work was followed by the _Athravaeth Gristnogavl_, -a short catechism of religious doctrine, translated or compiled by -Morys Clynog, the first Rector of the English College in Rome. It was -published at Milan in 1568, and contains the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, -the Hail Mary, the Ten Commandments, &c., in Welsh, with expositions.” - -The above, with the prayer-books of 1567, 1586, 1599, were all the -works of religious instruction and devotion (private and public) that -appeared in Welsh down to the end of the sixteenth century. I might add -that there is in the Earl of Macclesfield’s collection a large folio -volume of _Miscellanea_ (Shirburn MS. 113, D. 30), written between 1540 -and 1560, which contains a prymer occupying several pages. There is -also in the Swansea Public Library a Welsh-Latin MS. of the sixteenth -and seventeenth centuries, written in different hands and in the South -Walian dialect, which forms a manual of Roman Catholic devotion, -containing in Welsh devotions for Mass, the usual meditations and -prayers for various occasions, instructions, &c. - -With the seventeenth century there is a good crop of manuals of -devotion and instruction, such as the catechisms of Dr. Rosier Smith -(1609-1611) and Father John Salisbury (1618 _tacito nomine_), both -Welsh Roman Catholics (pp. 24-26). - -[308] _A Werke for Housholders._ London, R. Redman, 1537, sig. A. 8. - -[309] Ibid., sig. B. i. - -[310] Ibid., sig. C. 8. - -[311] Ibid., sig. D. 5. - -[312] B. Mus. Harl. MS. 2125, f. 272. - -[313] _Penny Cyclopædia._ Art., “English Drama.” - -[314] _A Relation of the Island of England_ (Camden Society), p. 20. - -[315] Ibid., p. 23. - -[316] _Venetian Calendar_, ii. p. 91. - -[317] _Works on the Supper_ (Parker Society), p. 229. - -[318] To take one instance: the church of St. Neots possessed many -stained glass windows placed in their present positions between the -years 1480 and 1530. Almost all of them were put in by individuals, -as the inscriptions below testify. In the case of three of the lights -it appears that groups of people joined together to beautify their -parish church. Thus below one of the windows in the north aisle is the -following: “_Ex sumptibus juvenum hujus parochiæ Sancti Neoti qui istam -fenestram fecerunt anno domini millessimo quingentessimo vicessimo -octavo_.” Another window states that it was made in 1529, “_Ex -sumptibus sororum hujus parochiæ_”; and a third in 1530, “_Ex sumptibus -uxorum_.” - -[319] _History of Modern Architecture_, pp. 37, 87. - -[320] _Archæologia_, vol. xli. p. 355. - -[321] _Parish Life in England before the Great Pillage_ (“Nineteenth -Century,” March 1898), p. 433. - -[322] _Churchwardens’ Accounts_ (Somerset Record Soc.), ed. Bishop -Hobhouse, p. 200, _seqq._ - -[323] Ibid., p. xxi. - -[324] Ibid., p. xii. - -[325] _Archæologia_, vol. xli., p. 333 _seqq._ - -[326] _Somerset Record Soc._, preface, p. xi. - -[327] J. W. Cowper, _Accounts of the Churchwardens of St. Dunstan’s, -Canterbury_ (_Archæologia Cantiana_, 1885). - -[328] Siméon Luce, _Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin_, p. 19. - -[329] The words of Pope Leo XIII. as to the Catholic teaching -most accurately describe the practical doctrine of the English -pre-Reformation Church on this matter: “The chiefest and most excellent -rule for the right use of money,” he says, “rests on the principle that -it is one thing to have a right to the possession of money and another -to have the right to use money as one pleases.… If the question be -asked, How must one’s possessions be used? the Church replies, without -hesitation, in the words of the same holy doctor (St. Thomas), _Man -should not consider his outward possessions as his own, but as common -to all_, so as to share _them without difficulty when others are in -need_. When necessity has been supplied and one’s position fairly -considered, it is a duty to give to the indigent out of that which -is over. It is a duty, not of justice (except in extreme cases) but -of Christian charity … (and) to sum up what has been said, Whoever -has received from the Divine bounty a large share of blessings … has -received them for the purpose of using them for the perfecting of his -own nature, and, at the same time, that he may employ them, as the -minister of God’s Providence, for the benefit of others.” - -[330] _The Economic Interpretation of History_, p. 63. - -[331] _Churchwardens’ Accounts_ (Somerset Record Soc.), p. xxiv. - -[332] Roger Edgworth, _Sermons_, London, R. Caly, 1557, p. 309. - -[333] _Parish Life in England before the Great Pillage_ (“Nineteenth -Century,” March 1898), p. 432. - -[334] _English Gilds_ (Early English Text-Society), pp. lxxx.-civ. - -[335] Ibid., p. xiv. - -[336] _The Economic Interpretation of History_, p. 306. - -[337] _English Gilds_ (Early English Text-Society), p. 3. - -[338] Ibid., p. 6. - -[339] Ibid., p. 8. - -[340] Ibid., p. 48. - -[341] Egerton MS., 142. - -[342] The existence of which I know from Mr. Francis Joseph Baigent, -who with his usual generosity allowed me to examine and take my notes -from the copies which he has among his great collection of materials -for the history of Hampshire. - -[343] One example of this latter, or as I might call it, ordinary -expense of the society, is worth recording. In 1411, and subsequent -years, an annual payment of 13s. 4d. is entered on the accounts as -made to one Thomas Deverosse, a tailor, and apparently a member of the -fraternity. The history of this man’s poverty is curious. When Bishop -William of Wykeham, desiring to build Winchester College, purchased -certain lands for the purpose, amongst the rest was a field which a -tailor of Winchester, this Thomas Deverosse, subsequently claimed; and -to make good his contention, brought a suit of ejectment against the -Bishop. The case was tried in the King’s Bench, and the tailor not only -lost, but was cast in costs and so ruined. With some writers, William -of Wykeham’s good name had been allowed to suffer most unjustly for -his share in the misfortunes of the unlucky tailor; for the Bishop not -only undertook to pay the costs of the suit himself, but agreed that -the college should make the unfortunate claimant a yearly allowance of -8d. to assist him in his poverty. The Tailors’ Guild secured to him a -pension of 13s. 4d. - -[344] Here is the bill for the annual feast in the Guild of Tailors -of Winchester in 1411. The association was under the patronage of St. -John the Baptist, and they kept their feast on the Day of the beheading -of the Saint, August 29. In this year, 1411, the 29th of August fell -upon a Saturday, which in mediæval times, as all know, was a day of -abstinence from flesh-meat. It is to be noticed, consequently, that -provision is made for a fish dinner: “6 bushels of wheat at 8½d. the -bushel; for grinding of the same, 3d.; for baking the same, 6d.; -ready-made bread purchased, 12d.; beer, 7s. 1d.; salt fish bought of -Walter Oakfield, 6s. 8d.; mullet, bass, ray, and fresh conger bought of -the same Walter, 6s. 8d.; fresh salmon of the same, 8s.; eels, 10½d.; -fresh fish bought of John Wheller, ‘fisher,’ 2s.; ditto, of Adam Frost, -9s.; ditto, bought of a stranger, 2s. 8d.; beans purchased, 9d.; divers -spices, _i.e._ saffron, cinnamon, sanders, 12½d.; salt, 2d.; mustard, -2½d.; vinegar, 1d.; tallow, 2d.; wood, 18d.; coals, 3½d.; paid to -Philip the cook, 2s.; to four labourers, 2s. 6d.; to three minstrels, -3s. 4d.; for rushes to strew the hall, 4d.; three gallons and one pint -of wine, 19d.; cheese, 8d.” Making in all a total of £3, 4s. 3½d. This, -no doubt, represented a large sum in those days, but it is as well to -remember that at this time the guild consisted of 170 men and women, -and the cost of the feast was not one-sixth part of the annual income. - -[345] Harl. MS. 4626, f. 26. - -[346] Ibid., f. 29. This was confiscated to the Crown on the -dissolution of the Guilds and Fraternities under Edward VI. - -[347] _Introduction to English Economic History_ (2nd ed.), i. pp. -100-101. - -[348] _Old Crown House_, p. 36, cf. pp. 37-39. - -[349] See the remarks in regard to France of M. Charles de Ribbe, _La -Société Provençale à la fin du moyen age_, 1898, p. 60. Speaking of the -fifteenth-century wills, he says: “Nous en avons lu un grand nombre, et -nous avons été frappé de la haute inspiration, parfois meme du talent, -avec lesquels des notaires de village savaient traduire les élans de -foi et de piété dont ils étaient les interprètes chez leurs clients.… -Cette foi et cette piété; trouvé d’abord leur expression dans le -vénérable signe de la sainte croix (lequel est plus d’une fois figuré -graphiquement). Suit la recommandation de l’âme à Dieu Créateur du ciel -et de la terre, au Christ rédempteur, à la Vierge Marie,” &c. (p. 91). - -[350] _Testamenta Eboracensia_ (Surtees Society), vol. iv. p. 21. - -[351] Ibid., p. 127. - -[352] Ibid., p. 127. - -[353] Ibid., p. 170. - -[354] Ibid., p. 27. - -[355] Ibid., p. 60. - -[356] Ibid., p. 335. - -[357] Ibid., p. 277. - -[358] Ibid., p. 139, _seqq._ - -[359] Ibid., p. 61 and _note_. - -[360] Ibid., p. 69. - -[361] Ibid., p. 89. - -[362] Ibid., p. 132. - -[363] Ibid., p. 149. - -[364] Ibid., p. 208. - -[365] Ibid., p. 215. - -[366] Ibid., p. 230. - -[367] Ibid., p. 119. - -[368] Ibid., p. 160. - -[369] B. Mus. Harl. MS. 670, f. 77 b. - -[370] _Yorkshire Chantry Surveys_ (Surtees Soc.), ii., preface, p. xiv. - -[371] _The Economic Interpretation of History_, p. 306. - -[372] J. S. Burn, _History of Henley on Thames_, pp. 173-175. - -[373] R. O. Chantry Certificate, No. 13 (account for year 37 H. VIII.), -No. 17. - -[374] Ibid., No. 30 and No. 95, M. 6. - -[375] Ibid., No. 37, M. 12; also No. 95, M. 7; and No. 13 (38) Mins. -Accts. 2, 3, Ed. VI., shows that the king received £11, 19s. 8d. for -the property of this chapel, which was granted to Robert Swift and his -brother. - -[376] R. O. Chantry Certificate, No. 45 (m. i. d.). - -[377] Ibid. - -[378] Ibid. - -[379] Ibid. (18). - -[380] Ibid. (20). - -[381] This was owing to the recent dissolution of the Abbey. - -[382] In one case it is said: “_Mem._: The decay of rent is caused by -the fact that most came from lands in possession of the abbey; since -the dissolution these have been sold, and the purchasers do not allow -that they are liable to pay.” The hospital called St. Parvell’s, -without the south gate, also had been dissolved by Henry VIII., and the -property granted to Sir George Somerset (6th July, 37 H. VIII.). It -had produced £16, 13s. 4d. a year, with £5, 10s. “paid out of the late -abbey of Bury to the sustentation of the poor.” The whole charity, of -course, by the dissolution of the abbey and the grant of the remaining -property as above, had come to an end. - -[383] Ibid. (No. 44). - -[384] _Yorkshire Chantry Surveys_ (Surtees Soc.), p. 213. - -[385] Ibid., p. 214. - -[386] Ibid., p. 215. - -[387] Ibid., p. 216. - -[388] Ibid., p. 11. - -[389] Ibid., p. 12. - -[390] Ibid., p. 13. - -[391] _Gentleman’s Magazine_, vol. lxxxii., ii. 318. Quoted in J. Gough -Nichol’s _Pilgrimages_, &c. Introduction, xcv. - -[392] Lancelot Rydley. _Exposition in the Epistell of Jude._ -London, Thomas Gybson, 1538, sig. B. v. In sermons and writings, -pre-Reformation ecclesiastics strove to impress upon the minds of the -people the true principles of devotion to shrines and relics of the -saints. To take one example beyond what is given above. In _The Art -of Good Lyvyng and Good Deyng_, printed in 1503, the writer says: “We -should also honour the places that are holy, and the relics of holy -bodies of saints and their images, not for themselves, but for that in -seeing them we show honour to what it represents, the dread reverence, -honour and love of God, after the intention of Holy Church, otherwise -it were idolatry” (fol. 6). - -[393] _A Commentary in Englyshe upon the Ephesians_, 1540, sig. A. ii. - -[394] P. 190. - -[395] _Opera omnia_ (ed. Leclerc), tom. v., col. 26. - -[396] Col. 37. - -[397] _A treatise concerning the division between the spiritualitie and -the temporalitie._ London, R. Redman (1532?), fol. 27. - -[398] _Dyaloge in Englyshe_, 1531. Part 3, fol. 23. - -[399] English Works, p. 476. - -[400] Stephen Gardiner. _A declaration of such true articles as George -Joye hath gone about to confute as false._ 1546, f. 2. - -[401] _Consilium de emendanda ecclesia_ (Ed. 1538), sig. B. 4. - -[402] Jacobi Sadoletti, _Opera Omnia_, Verona (1737). Tom ii., p. 437. - -[403] It is said to be “printed at Jericho in the land of Promes, by -Thomas Treuth.” - -[404] The English Testament. - -[405] Sig. A. 3. - -[406] Ibid., sig. A. 4. - -[407] Ibid., sigs. A. 5 d., A. 6 d. - -[408] Ibid., sig. B. i. - -[409] Ibid., sig. B. ii. - -[410] Ibid., sig. B. viii. - -[411] Sig. D. vii. - -[412] Ibid., sig. D. viii. - - - - -INDEX - - - Abbots, display in elections of, 129 - - Abraham, religious play, 320 - - Adrian VI., Pope, 157 - - Aggeus, Augustine, 310 - - Aldine press, at Venice, 160 - - Aldus, printer, 160, 166 - - Alexander VI., Pope, 102 - - Alms, 132 - - Alton, foundation for obits at, 403-404 - - Amberbach, printer, 166 - - Amyas Chantry, 401-402 - - Angels, devotion to, 308 - - Anti-clerical spirit, 114, 119 - - Antoninus, St., Archbishop of Florence, 96 - - “Apology” of Sir Thomas More, 71, 73, 115, 122, 144 - - Archæology, pagan and Christian, 206 - - Architecture, pre-Reformation activity in, 9-10, 328 _et seq._; - decline of the art, 329 - - Aretino, 23 - - Art, great activity of, prior to Reformation, 10-12 - - Arundel, Archbishop, 236 - - Ashley, Mr. W. J., cited, 379 - - Augmentation, Court of, 384 - - - Badsworth, chantry foundation at, 401 - - Baigent, Mr. F. T., 372, _note_ - - Baker, mediæval fresco painter, 11 - - Baptism, 225 - - Barbarus, Hermolaus, 29 - - Barnes, Friar, 88, 118, 119, 136, 223 - - Basle, printing-press at, 165 - - Baynard’s Castle, meeting at, 68 - - Beccles, foundation at, 408 - - Becket, Thomas, 441 - - Bede-roll, 335, 341 - - Benedict XII., 103 - - Benedictine Order, average of graduates at Oxford, 42 - - Benefices, 55, 106, 108, _note_, 353 - - Benefit of clergy, 55 - - Bequests, mediæval, 389 _et seq._ - - Bere, Abbot, of Glastonbury, 39, 40, _note_ - - Berthelet, publisher, 72, _note_, 73, 98, _note_, 102, _note_, - 107, _note_, 110, 137, _note_, 298 - - Bible, the Bishops’, 247 - - Bible, Erasmus’s translation, 168 _et seq._ - - Bible, English, hostility to, 236; - evidence of Catholic acceptance, 237, 242, 247; - supposed early Catholic version, 237, 242, 247; - persecutions for possession examined, 240, and _note_, 241; - translations authorised, 242-243, 247-249; - not prohibited, 247, 275-276; - absence of popular demand for, 250-251; - Tyndale’s version and Luther’s share in it, 252 _et seq._; - useless without interpretation, 275 - - Bishops, and ordination, 148; - and spiritual jurisdiction, 154; - obstacles to Reformation, 444 - - Blackfriars, meetings at, 67, 68 - - Bombasius, Paul, 33, _note_, 34 - - Bond, William, 83, 305 - - Boniface VIII., Pope, 99 - - Books, heretical, prohibited, 213-216; - More on heretical, 218 _et seq._; - earliest printed largely religious, 315 - - Bourbon, Duke of, 230 - - Boyer, Sebastian, Court physician, 160 - - Brentano, Mr., cited, 362-363 - - Brethren of St. John’s, 374; - and Hospital, 375 - - Bretton, William, 310, and _note_ - - Brewer, Mr., cited, 147, 211-212, 250, 279 - - Brotherhoods, Parish, 347 - - Brunfels, Otto, 194 - - Brygott, Richard, prior of Westacre, 44 - - Bucer, 214 - - Burials, 54 - - Burnet, historian, cited, 4 - - Bury St. Edmunds, chantries at, 409 - - Butley, Priory of, 43 - - - Calendar of papers, domestic and foreign, of reign of Henry VIII., 4 - - Cambray, Bishop of, 159 - - Cambridge, portions of Prior Selling’s library at, 32; - monastic students at, 43; - petition of scholars to the king, 47 - - Campeggio, Cardinal, 179, 180, 181 - - Canterbury, Archbishop of, on clerical immunity, 69 - - Canterbury, entertainment of Emperor Manuel at Christchurch, 22; - Selling and Hadley, monks of Christchurch, 24 _et seq._; - Canterbury College at Oxford, 27, 28, _note_; - St. Augustine’s and the literary movement, 40 - - Caraffa, Cardinal, afterwards Paul IV., 105, 107, 438 - - Carmelites, origin, 117; - responsibility for Lutheranism, 197 - - Caxton, 275, _note_ - - Chalcocondylas, Demetrius, 29 - - Chantries, 123, 124, 399, 401 - - Chapels of ease, 413 - - Chaplains, evil effects of their position, 138-139 - - Charnock, Prior, 39 - - Chaucer, cited, 415 - - Children, and idols, 292; - religious instruction of, 312, 313-314 - - Christchurch, _see_ Canterbury - - Christianity and the classical revival, 203-206 - - Chrysoloras, Manuel, Greek scholar, 23, and _note_ - - Chrysostom, St., cited, 122 - - Church, position of, prior to Reformation, 1, 147, 211; - need of reform in, 5 _et seq._; - attitude to learning, 15, 21, 35-38, 41; - hostility to “New Learning” explained, 15 _et seq._, 19; - limits of jurisdiction, 51; - and disputations entailed, _ibid._; - State right to regulate temporalities of, 53 _et seq._; - king as supreme head, 65, 111; - rights, 65; - what constitutes, 70; - riches coveted, 75; - Pope as head, 83 _et seq._; - Papal Commission appointed to save, 105; - evils in, and how caused, 105-106; - abuses pointed out by Commission, 107, _note_, 108, _note_; - limitations of king’s Headship, 111-112; - controversy on riches of, 123; - Erasmus’s attitude to, 167 _et seq._, 199-200; - Erasmus regarded as an enemy to, 175-176; - Lutheran tenets concerning, 194; - need of reform obscured by Reformation, 198; - attack on, 216; - attitude to vernacular Bibles, 236 _et seq._, 245-248; - but hostility to denied, 242-243, 246-247, 251; - religious teaching prior to Reformation, 278 _et seq._; - charges against on points of worship, 293, 302-305; - bequests to, 390 _et seq._; - suggested disposal of wealth of, 444; - abuses in, 415 - - Church of Christ, sermon on, 91 - - Church-building, activity of, 326; - contributions of people towards bequests for, 327, and _note_, 390; - decoration, 328, 332 - - Church House, 341 - - Churchyards, trees and grass in, 60 - - Cicero, and the classical revival, 203-206 - - _Ciceroniana_ of Erasmus, 203 - - Clark, Dr. John, English ambassador, 94 - - Classical revival, Erasmus on, 203; - absurdities of, 203-204 - - Claymond, John, Greek scholar, 40, _note_, 41, _note_ - - Clement, John, 37, _note_ - - Clement, Pope, 109, _note_ - - Clergy, alleged encouragement of ignorance, 2, 278; - mortuary dues, 53, 140-144; - “benefit,” 55; - rights and duties, 61, 65-70; - ordinations, 63, 148-153; - exemptions, 63; - immunity, 66 _et seq._; - not the Church, 70; - position as individuals, 72; - attack on their temporalities, 103; - laity’s grievance against, 114 _et seq._; - and its causes, 119, 138; - defended by More, 120-121; - alleged mercenary spirit, 123; - and idle laxity of living, 127; - prayers, 131; - alms, 132-133; - fasting and mortification, 134; - charges of corruption, 136; - lack of definite work, 137, _note_; - in households of laity, 138; - tithe exactions, 142; - faults, 143-145; - alleged immorality, 145-146; - charge of simony, 146; - Mr. Brewer cited on, 147; - ignorance of, 151; - hostility to vernacular scriptures examined, 236 _et seq._, 243, 246; - and reasons for not encouraging, 242, 244; - extent and character of their religious teaching, 280 _et seq._; - books used by for teaching, 309 _et seq._; - chantry clergy, 400, 405-409, 413; - pilgrimages and relics maintained by, 415; - and motives for, 422, 425 - - “Clericus,” 74 - - Cloth, clerical, State’s right to legislate on, 60 - - Cochlæus, John, 253, 254, _note_ - - Colet, Dean, 7, 19, 29, and _note_, 33, _note_, 149, 160, 164, 168 - - Commerce, progress not due to Reformation, 8 - - Commissioners, royal, 380, 384 - - Compostella, pilgrimages to, 416, 417 - - Concordat, between Leo X. and Francis I., 76 - - Concubines, alleged licences for, 145 - - Confession, 225, 282, 287 - - Congregation, denoting church, 173, _note_, 262-266 - - Conscience, examinations of, 286 - - Constantine, donation to Pope, 95 - - Constantine, George, 222 - - Constantinople, effect of fall of, 23 - - Constitution, Provincial, 237-239, 242, 280 - - Contarini, Cardinal, 107, 109, _note_ - - Convocation, grant of headship of Church to the king, 111; - enactment regarding ordination, 148-149; - powers of legislation transferred to Crown, 153; - draws up list of heretical books, 215 - - Corpus Christi, feast of, 373; - procession of guilds, 374; - at Corunna, 217 - - Council of Trent, 5, 109, _note_, 440 - - Courts, ecclesiastical, subject to Pope, 80-81 - - Coverdale, Myles, 102, 258 - - Cranmer and English Bible, 236, 247; - on hearing mass, 326 - - Creeping to the Cross, 302 - - Criticism in the Church, 155, 171 - - Croke, Richard, 36, _note_, 102, _note_ - - Cromwell, Thomas, 112, 153 - - Cross, honour to on Good Friday, 302 - - Crowley, quoted, 382 - - Crucifix, reverence of image of, 126, 289-290, 300, 307; - not an idol, 293 - - Curates and mortuaries, 140-141; - and tithes, 142 - - Cuthbert, Bishop, 219 - - - Dalton, John, of Hull, will of, 391 - - Dead, prayers for, 387, 399 - - De Athegua, George, Bishop, 178, and _note_ - - De Burgo, John, 309 - - Dee, Dr., supplication to Queen Mary, 48 - - _Defence of Peace_, 103, and _note_, 104, _note_ - - Degree, advantage of to religious, 44 - - De Melton, William, Chancellor of York, 149 - - De Ribbe, M. Charles, on wills, 389, _note_ - - _Determinations of the Universities_, 102, _note_ - - Deventer, school, 157 - - De Worde, Wynkyn, 83, 149, 275, _note_, 280, and _note_, 298, 312 - - Digon, John, Canterbury monk, 41, and _note_ - - Dislike of clergy, alleged, 114; - reasons for, 127, 138 - - Dispensations, 106 - - _Dives et Pauper_, 284, 298, 353, 354 - - Division between spirituality and temporality, Saint-German’s work on, - 115 _et seq._, 122, 127, 140 - - Divorce question, the, and its share in Reformation, 208, and _note_ - - Doctors of divinity, Erasmus’s satire on, 201 - - Döllinger, Dr., cited, 21 - - Dominicans, the, and Erasmus, 187; - responsibility for Lutheranism, 197 - - Dorpius, Marten, 169-170 - - Dues of clergy, 53 - - Dunstan’s, St., Canterbury, 346; - parish accounts, 347 - - _Dyalogue_ of Saint-German, 53 _et seq._, 115, 140; - of More, 262, 269, 289 - - - Ecclesiastical authority, alleged discontent of laity under, 1, 114, - 208 _et seq._, 416; - limits of, 51 - - Ecclesiastical discipline, inquiry into, 438 - - Ecclesiastics, attitude to revival of learning, 36-38, 41; - resistance to encroachment, 51, 53; - Erasmus’s satire on, 201 _et seq._; - attitude to English Bible, 236 _et seq._; - alleged encouragement of ignorance, 2, 278 - - Edgworth, Roger, preacher, 16, 46, 212, 244, 272, 273, _note_, 292, 359 - - Education, fostered by monasteries, 45 - - _Enconium Moriæ_, of Erasmus, 161-162, 201 _et seq._ - - Erasmus, attitude to Reformation, 7, 20; - made responsible for “New Learning,” 16, _note_; - but attitude to defined, 19, 20; - his chief support in England, 38; - position and views, 155; - considered a Reformer, 156, 178, 180-181; - birth and education, 156-157; - joins order of St. Augustine, 157; - ordained, _ibid._; - unfitness for religious life, 157; - hostility to religious orders, 158, 180, 187, 200; - denounces enticing of youths into cloister, _ibid._; - leaves the religious life, 159; - takes pupils, _ibid._; - at Oxford, 159-160; - in London, 160; - visits Italy, _ibid._; - his _Adagia_, _ibid._; - visits Venice, _ibid._; - returns to London, 161; - his _Enconium Moriæ_, 161-162, 201 _et seq._, 431; - at Cambridge, 161-162; - testimony to Archbishop Warham’s kindness, 162-163; - praise of English ecclesiastics, 163, _note_; - amounts received from English friends, 164; - again leaves England, 165; - settles at Basle, _ibid._; - superintends Froben’s press, 166; - death, 167; - attitude to Church, 167 _et seq._, 199-200; - translation of New Testament, 168 _et seq._; - attacks on, 173 _et seq._; - regarded as an enemy to the Church, 175-176; - opposition to his revival of Greek, 177-178; - defends himself to the Pope, 179, 181-182; - disclaims connection with Luther, 180-182, 185, 195-198; - opposition to national churches, 182, _note_; - attitude to Luther, 185, 195, 196-198; - attacks Luther, 186; - replies to von Hutten’s attacks, 187 _et seq._; - attitude to the Pope, 189-190, and _note_, 193, 194-195, 197; - attacks Lutheran motives, 191-192; - letter to Bishop Marlianus on attitude to Luther, 197; - general attitude to religious movement of his age, 200 _et seq._; - and to the classical revival, 203; - on pilgrimages and relics, 415, 418, 431; - on devotion to saints, 431 _et seq._ - - Eton College Chapel, wall paintings of, 11 - - Evensong, said before noon, 134 - - Exemptions of clergy, 63, 76 - - - Fairs, 378 _et seq._; - at Winchester, 379 - - _Faith, The Olde, of Great Brittayne and the New Learning of England_, - 17, and _note_ - - Fasting, 134 - - Ferguson, Mr., quoted on architectural art, 329 - - Fineux, Chief-Justice, tries John Savage, 57 _et seq._; - opinion on spiritual courts, 69 - - Fisher, Bishop, love of learning, 36, _note_; - object in studying Greek, 38; - views on Papal supremacy, 90, and _note_; - books against Luther, 90, _note_, 192; - execution, 91; - sermon on, 92; - on moral character of religious, 137, _note_; - invitation to Erasmus, 161; - on Erasmus’s New Testament, 169, 175, _note_; - supports study of Greek, 177 - - Fisher, Rev. J., 311, _note_ - - Fleming, Robert, 23 - - Foxe, cited, 240, _note_, 251 - - Francis I., 76 - - Francis, Order of St., 117 - - Free, John, 40, and _note_ - - Frith, 215, 222, 223, 227 - - Froben, printer, 165, 182 - - Froude, on Erasmus’s New Testament, 172 - - Funerals, 54 - - - Gairdner, James, cited on jurisdiction of Pope, 81, _note_; - on the divorce question, 208, _note_; - on Reformation influences, 210, 211, _note_ - - Gardiner, Bishop, 438 - - Gardynare, Germen, 227 - - Garlekhithe, St. James, 366 - - German reformers, books prohibited, 214-215 - - Gibbon, cited, 22 - - _Glasse of Truth_, 101-102, _note_ - - Glastonbury monastery, 39 - - Gloucester, Humphrey, Duke of, 23 - - God, love of, 299; - worship of, 304 - - Goldstone, Reginald, monk, companion of Selling, 26 - - Goldstone, Thomas, Prior of Christchurch, 24 - - Gonville Hall, Cambridge, 43, 44 - - Good Friday observances, 302-303 - - Government, true principle of, 106 - - Grace at meals, 314 - - Graduates at Oxford, register of, 41-42 - - Greek emperors, journeys to courts of Western Europe, 22 - - Greek, influence in revival of learning, 14, 21 _et seq._; - first schools of the revival, 23; - effect of fall of Constantinople, 23-24; - decline in study of after Reformation, 47; - Erasmus and the Greek Testament, 168 _et seq._; - outcry against studies in, 177 - - Green, historian, cited, 16, _note_ - - Gregory VII., Pope, 101 - - Grocyn, William, 29, and _note_, 160 - - Grudge of laity against ecclesiastics, 114 - - Guardian angel, prayer to, 309 - - Guarini, pupil of Chrysoloras, 23 - - Guilds, 351; - founded upon principle of Christian brotherhood, 352 _et seq._; - trade, and religious, 361; - benefit societies, 363; - their work, 365, 385; - constitution, 366 _et seq._; - “Pinners’” Guild, 368; - accounts, 369-370; - fees, 371; - Guild of Tailors, 371; - members, 371; - expenditure, 372, and _note_; - their part in Corpus Christi processions, 373-374; - brethren of St. John’s, 374; - feasts, 376, and _note_; - Candlemas Guild of Bury St. Edmunds, 377; - bequests, 377-378; - connection with fairs, 378; - final destruction, 380 - - - Hadley, William, companion of Prior Selling, 24; - studies at foreign universities, 25; - returns to Christchurch, 26 - - Hair shirts, 131, 134 - - Headship of the Church, the king’s, 56 - - Hegius, Alexander, 157 - - Henley on Thames, chantries at, 405 - - Henry IV., 136 - - Henry VII. obtains Bull from Innocent VIII., 56; - purchases pardon for Westminster and Savoy, 124 - - Henry VIII., calendar of papers of reign, 4; - exerts his influence on behalf of learning, 36, 177; - determined to maintain rights of Crown, 69; - book against Luther, 90, 94; - defends Church, 94, 226; - reputed book, 102, _note_; - petition of Commons, &c., against spirituality, 153; - quarrel with Rome on divorce question, 208, and _note_; - forbids Lutheran books, 214, 259; - authorises English Bibles, 273; - destroys the guilds, 380; - the reformers and, 440 - - Heresy, spread by books, 213, 218 - - Hobhouse, Bishop, cited, 346, 357 - - Holidays, determined by ecclesiastical law, 71 - - Holy Land, pilgrimages to, 416 - - _Hortulus Animæ_, the, 214, and _note_ - - Huchin, William, _see_ Tyndale - - Hunn, Richard, 240 - - Hunting, by priests, 138, 139, 151 - - Hutton, Rev. W. H., cited, 208, _note_ - - Hytton, Sir Thomas, 224, 225 - - - Idolatry, charges of, 293, 303, 305 - - Idols, distinguished from images, 265, 289 _et seq._, 305-306 - - Ignorance, alleged prevalence of, 2, 278 - - Images, confused with idols, 265, 292; - veneration of, 289 _et seq._, 423 _et seq._ - - Immunity of clergy, 63, 66 _et seq._ - - Indulgences, 108, _note_, 435 _et seq._ - - Innocent VIII. grants Bull to Henry VII., 56, _note_ - - - Janssen, historian, cited, 6, 7, 279, 354 - - Jerome, St., corrections in Testament, 170; - cited on Papal supremacy, 197 - - Jessop, Dr., cited, 43; - on popular gifts to churches, 336; - on poverty, 360 - - Jesus, bowing at name of, 283 - - Joye, George, or Clarke, 221, 224, 253, 257-258, 438 - - Judges, English prelates as, 81 - - Julius II., Pope, 96, 102, 109, 204 - - Jurisdiction, limits of ecclesiastical and lay, 51, 65 _et seq._, 176; - leading factor in Reformation, 52; - Papal, 78 _et seq._; - Roman curia as court of appeal, 80 - - - Katherine, Queen, 178 - - Kent, Holy Maid of, 441 - - King’s power, 75; - his headship of Church, 65, 111 - - Knowledge, result of increase of, 2 - - - Laity, Reformation opposed to convictions of, 1; - alleged disaffection to Church, _ibid._; - and reasons advanced, _ibid._; - attitude to Church’s jurisdiction, 51; - absence of enthusiasm among in doctrinal disputes, 52; - grudge against ecclesiastics, 114 _et seq._; - charge clergy with mercenary spirit, 123; - dislike of clergy, and reasons for, 127; - “mortuaries” a great offence to, 140 - - Langton, Thomas, Bishop of Winchester, 33, and _note_ - - Languages, battle of, 176-179 - - Laocöon, the, statue of, 206, _note_ - - Latimer, William, Bishop, 34, 38, 47; - lawsuits, 348 _et seq._ - - “Latria,” 294-304, 306-307 - - Lawyers, ecclesiastical, 95 - - Learning, revival not due to Reformation, 7-8, 15; - adverse effects of Reformation on, 9, 198-199; - “New Learning” applied only to religious teaching, 15 _et seq._; - Church’s attitude to learning, 15, 19, 38; - Erasmus on Reformation’s effect on, 20; - general aspect of revival, 21; - Greek influence in, 14, 21 _et seq._; - subsequent progress, 35; - occasional pulpit denunciations, _ibid._; - slight nature of opposition, 36; - laymen associated with revival, 37; - fostered by monasteries, 39; - condition of things at universities, 41-44; - education assisted by religious houses, 45; - decay of after Reformation, 45-48; - revival of, associated with Lutheranism, 178; - but without cause, 180-181; - Erasmus’s attitude to revival of letters, 203-207 - - Lee, Edward, afterwards Archbishop of York, 173-174, and _note_, 252 - - Leeds, chantries at, 411-412 - - Leland, cited, 24, _note_, 25 - - Leo X., Pope, 28, and _note_, 76, 94, 96, 173, 179, 181, 185, 439 - - Leo XIII., Pope, cited, 355, _note_ - - Leonicenus, 34 - - Leonicus, 34, and _note_ - - Leverton, parish of, 339; - Church accounts, 343 _et seq._ - - Lewes, Cluniac House at, 43 - - Liberty advocated by Luther, 227 - - Libraries, destruction of, 48; - Dr. Dee’s supplication to Queen Mary, 48; - national library suggested, 49 - - Life, daily rules of, 286-287, 313 - - Lilly, George, 29, _note_ - - Linacre, pupil of Selling, sketch of early life, 27; - accompanies Selling to Italy, 28; becomes pupil of Politian, 28; - at Rome, 29; - returns to Oxford, 30; - appointed Court physician, _ibid._; - receives priest’s orders, _ibid._; - friend of Erasmus, 160, 164 - - Liveries for chaplains, 138 - - Lollards, the, 209 _et seq._, 214, 240 - - London, Mors’s Lamentation against, 440 - - Longland, Bishop, 93, 146, 147, _note_ - - Louvain, University of, 160, 174, _note_, 176, 178, 179, 180 - - Love of God, 299 - - Luce, M. Siméon, cited, 351 - - Lupset, Thomas, sketch of, 36, _note_; - on study of Bible, 248 - - Luther, Martin, aims of, 7; - cited on pre-Reformation progress, 8; - “New Learning” inculcated by, 16, and _note_; - books against, 84-85, 90, 94; - sermon against, 93; - Henry VIII. opposes, 94; - method of, 108-109, _note_; More and Lutherans, 120; - considered disciple of Erasmus, 156, 178, 180; - revival of letters not connected with his movement, 180-181; - Erasmus’s repudiation of, 180-182, 195-198; - efforts to win over Erasmus, 183-184; - attacked by Erasmus, 186, 191-192; - supported by von Hutten, 186 _et seq._; - tenets of Lutheranism, 194; - methods of attacking condemned, 196; - who responsible for his movement, 197; - effects of Lutheranism, 198; - and spread of, 212-213; - books prohibited, 213-215; disciples, 216; - his book, 222; - “New Learning” and, 225; - advocacy of liberty, 227; - evils of Lutheranism, 228-230; - and of Lutheran literature, 244; - Tyndale’s connection with, 252; - share in Tyndale’s Testament, 252-255; - direction of his remonstrances, 279 - - Lutheranism, tenets of, 194; - responsibility for, 197; - effects of, 198; - evils of, 228-230; - expectations of English Lutherans, 440, 445 - - Lyndwood, cited, 247, 353 - - - Mace, George, canon of Westacre, 44 - - Maitland, Professor, quoted on pre-Reformation position of the Pope, 80 - - Manuel, Greek Emperor, arrival at Canterbury, 22 - - Mary Magdalene, religious play, 320 - - Marlianus, Bishop, 197 - - Marshall, William, 103 - - Marsilius of Padua, 103, 104, _note_ - - Mary, Queen, attempt to restore learning under, 48 - - Mass, the, 225, 271, 283, 285 - - Matrimony, State regulation of, 62; - Hytton’s view of, 225 - - Matthew, Simon, preacher, 91 - - Medici, Lorenzo de, 28 - - Mentz, Cardinal Archbishop of, 181, 184 - - Metal-working, inventions in, 428 - - “Miles,” mouthpiece of Saint-German, 74 - - Miracles, 62, 427 - - Monasteries, scholarship in, 39, and _note_; - members of at universities, 42 _et seq._ - - Monks, hostile to Erasmus, 176, 180; - Erasmus quoted on, 202; - pilgrimages and relics maintained by, 415 - - Morality, of clergy, 145-146 - - More, Sir Thomas, attitude to Reformation, 7; - and to learning, 19, 35-37; - connection with Christchurch, 28; - at Oxford, 29, and _note_; - on immunity of clergy, 70; - his “Apology,” 71, 73, 115, 122, 144; - on spiritual authority, 73; - on Papal supremacy, 85 _et seq._, 88; - on nature of the Church, 86 _et seq._; - against Friar Barnes, 88; - book against Luther, 90; - death, 91; - sermon on, 92; - controversy on clergy and laity, 115 _et seq._; - on quarrels between religious, 116-117; - defends clergy, 120; - and replies to allegation of their mercenary spirit, 124; - and of their idle laxity of life, 127; - on abuses in religious life, 130; - on prayers and alms of clergy, 131-135; - defends clergy from charges of corruption, 136; - on faults of clergy, 143-145; - and on their morality, 145-146; - visited by Erasmus, 160-161; - share in Erasmus’s _Enconium Moriæ_, 161-162, 201; - defends Erasmus’s translation of New Testament, 169-170, 173, _note_; - defends Greek studies, 177; - urges Erasmus against Luther, 186; - opinion of Erasmus’s _Enconium Moriæ_, 202, _note_; - on spread of heresy, 213, 218; - on “New Learning” and Lutheranism, 225; - on Luther’s advocacy of liberty, 227; - on evils of Lutheranism, 228-230; - on English Bible, 237 _et seq._; - on case of Richard Hunn, 241; - on Church’s acceptance of vernacular Bibles, 242-243, 247-249; - and on false translations, 243; - and reasons for condemnation of Tyndale’s version, 243, 260-270; - on reverence of images, 289-291, 293-298; - on prayer, 307; - on pilgrimages, 419 _et seq._, 425 _et seq._; - on relics, 429; - on indulgences, 437 - - Morebath, village of, well-supported church, 337 - - Mors, Roderigo, his “Lamentation,” 440 - - Mortality among pilgrims, 418 - - Mortmain, lands in, 54 - - Mortuaries, 53, 140 - - Morysine, Richard, 105, 107, _note_ - - Mountjoy, Lord, 159, 161, 164 - - Music, pre-Reformation progress in, 12-13; - Richard Pace quoted on, 35 - - Mystery plays, 316 _et seq._ - - - National churches, opposed by Erasmus, 182, _note_ - - National feeling and the Papacy, 82 _et seq._ - - National library, suggested, 49 - - Nevill, Archbishop, 281 - - “New Learning” defined, 15 _et seq._; - its purely religious application, 16 _et seq._; - result of, 50; - founded on Luther’s teaching, 225 - - New Testament, Erasmus’s translation, 168 _et seq._; - English versions destroyed, 236; - Tyndale version, and Luther’s share in it, 252 _et seq._ - - Nicholas V., Pope, 96 - - Nicholas of Cusa, reforms in Germany, 6; - opinion on Constantine’s gift to Pope, 96 - - “Noah and his Sons,” religious play, 320 - - Nobility, attitude to clergy, 136 - - Norwich, Visitations of Diocese of, 43; - Benedictine Cathedral Priory of, _ibid._ - - Nottinghamshire, chantries in, 401-402, 406 - - - Obits, 399 _et seq._ - - Œcolampadius, 184, 214 - - “Open Bible,” 236, 246, 273, 275 - - Orders, religious, their graduates at Oxford, 42; - suggested alterations in constitutions, 129; - hostility of Erasmus, 158 - - Ordinations, proposed prohibition regarding, 63; - abuses in, 107, 148; - action by Convocation, 148-149; - William de Melton on, 149-153, _note_; - reformers on, 225, 232 - - Oxford, Register of Graduates at, 41-42; - refounding of Durham College at, 48; - heresy at, 227; - Constitution or Synod of, 238, 247, 280 - - - Pace, Richard, befriended by Bishop Langton, 33; - his _De Fructu_, 33, _note_; - at foreign universities, 34; - the Pope’s library, _ibid._; - remarks on music, 35; - indebtedness to Abbot Bere, 40; - supports Greek studies, 177 - - Pagula, Walter, 309 - - Papal Commissions, 105, 439 - - Papal jurisdiction, meaning of renunciation, 78; - general acceptance, 79; - books against, 101 - - Papal prerogatives, in England, 52, 107-108; - in France, 77 - - Papal supremacy, 83 et seq.; - rejection of, 90; - English belief in, 93-95; - rejection defended by Bishop Tunstall, 109; - Erasmus on, 190, and _note_, 194-195 - - Pardons, 124, 435 _et seq._ - - Parish churches, sanctuary privileges, 57; - religious teaching in, 280 _et seq._ - - Parish life, 323 _et seq._; - devotion of people, 325; - care of the churches, 328; - raising of money, 340; - brotherhoods, 347 - - Parliament, legislation on mortuaries, 53, 141; - and on immunity of clergy, 66; - need for settlement of religious divisions, 60; - suggested legislation, 55, 62, 71; - right of legislation, 141; - transfers powers of Convocation to Crown, 153; - petition of Commons against spirituality, _ibid._; - authorises destruction of guilds, 380 - - Paul III., Pope, 105, 439 - - Paul IV., Pope, 438 - - Payment for “Pardons,” 435 _et seq._ - - Peckham, or Pecham, Archbishop, 280, 286 - - Penance, 282 - - Pensions, 108, _note_ - - Pensioners, university, 43 - - Pepwell, publisher, 310, _note_ - - Petition of House of Commons against spirituality, 153 - - _Pilgrimage of Perfection_, quoted, 83 - - Pilgrimages, State supervision urged, 62; - objections to, 184, 293, 415; - importance, 416; - foreign, 416; - to England, 418 - - Pincern, Bartolomeo, 96 - - Pinners, Guild of, 368-369 - - Plays, mystery, 316 _et seq._, 342 - - Pocket, the people’s, a clue to religious changes, 52 - - Pole, Cardinal, 48, 107 - - Politian, Angelo, 25, 28 - - Pomeranus, 214 - - Poor, right to benefices, 55; - injury to by confiscations, 382, 402 _et seq._; - bequests to, 397-398 - - Pope, Sir Thomas, 48 - - Pope, the, and Sanctuary, 55 _et seq._; - pre-Reformation loyalty to, 79; - powers in England before Reformation, 80 _et seq._; - spiritual and temporal power in conflict, 82; - position as head of Church, 83 _et seq._; - rejection of his supremacy, 90; - imprisoned, 94; - English acceptance of his supremacy, 93-95; - Constantine’s gift to, 95; - wars of, 97; - temporal power of, 97-100, 103-104; - authority as Peter’s successor, 90, 99-100, 103; - works against character of, 101-104; - commission appointed by, 105; - how deceived, _ibid._; - recommendations of commission, 107; - sermon against, 109; - object of attacks on, 110; - Erasmus’s attitude to, 189-190, 193-195, 197; - Erasmus’s satire on, 202, and _note_; - refuses to grant Henry’s divorce, 208, and _note_ - - Powell, Edward, theologian, quoted on papal supremacy, 85 - - Power, spiritual and temporal, 70, 72-73, 82; - dialogue on, 73 _et seq._, 98; - the king’s, 75 - - _Praier and Complaynte of the Ploweman_, 17, and _note_, 223 - - Prayers, for Pope, 110; - of clergy and religious, 131; - Sir Thos. More on, 307; - daily, 313; - for the dead, 399 - - Preaching at St Paul’s Cross, 67, 69; - style of against Pope condemned, 92; - in parish churches, 281, 283; - more important than mass, 284-285 - - “Prick song,” or part music, 12, 13 - - “Primer,” the, 216, 223-224, 286 - - Printing, responsible for spread of heresy, 213; - religious works predominate in earliest, 315-316 - - Psalter, the, 223-224 - - Purgatory, 61, 225, 231, 387, 399, 405, 437 - - Pynson, printer, 298 - - - Reformation, impossibility of writing history of, 3; - revival of letters not due to, 7-8, 15; - adverse effect on learning, 9, 20, 41 _et seq._; - English attitude to Pope prior to, 78-79; - share of divorce question in, 208, and _note_; - similar in England to Luther’s principles, 231; - meaning, 82, 279; - share of Wycliffe and Lollards in, 209 _et seq._; - effect upon church art, 331; - and poverty, 358 - - Relics, honour of, 415 _et seq._, 429 _et seq._ - - Religious, at universities, 42 _et seq._; - State interference, 61; - abuses among, 108, _note_; - reputed quarrels between, 116-117; - evils in constitutions, 129; - testimony to moral character, 137, _note_; - Mr. Brewer cited on, 147; - Erasmus on, 202 - - Religious teaching, alleged neglect of, 278; - Reformation not directly connected with, 279; - extent and character, 280 _et seq._; - nature and effect, 288 _et seq._; - books used by clergy in, 309 _et seq._; - religious plays, 316 _et seq._ - - Renaissance, definition of, 14; - in England, _ibid._; - earlier than generally supposed, 15 - - Restitution, argued, 125; - a case involving, 140 - - Reuchlin, 180-181, 184, 186, 187 - - Reverence of images, 289 _et seq._ - - Ridley, Lancelot, commentaries on Scriptures, 104, 111, and _note_, - 273-274; - on devotion to saints, 422-423; - on pilgrimages and images, 424 - - Roberts, John, his _Mustre of scismatyke bysshops of Rome_, 101, and - _note_ - - Rogers, Mr. Thorold, cited, 356 _et seq._, 360-361, 364, 403 - - Rome, classical revival in, 203-206; - sack of, 230; - pilgrimages to, 416 - - Roper, John, 102, _note_ - - Roper, Mary and Margaret, 37, _note_, 41, _note_ - - Roy, Friar, 215, 222 - - Rule of life, daily, 286-287 - - Rules of religious orders, suggested examination, 129 - - - Sacrament of the Altar, Dr. Richard Smythe on, 216-217, 273, _note_; - Hytton on, 226 - - Sacraments, English reformers on, 225, 231; - attack on, 271 - - Sadolet, Cardinal, 107, 108, _note_, 439 - - Saint-German, Christopher, lawyer, 53, and _note_; - attitude to Church, 53, 115; - cited on mortuaries, 53, 140; - on lands in mortmain and benefices, 54-55; - on sanctuary and benefit, 55; - on churchyards, 60; - on clerical duties, _ibid._; - on need for State interference, _ibid._; - on Purgatory, 61; - on State regulation of religious life, 61; - and of matrimony, 62; - on miracles, _ibid._; - on other debateable questions, 63; - on tithes, _ibid._, 142; - on power of clergy, 65; - on king’s headship, _ibid._; - on clerical immunity, 69; - on holidays, 71; - his _Salem and Bizance_, 71, 115, 118; - on position of clergy as individuals, 72; - controversy with More, 115 _et seq._; - attacks on clergy, 119 _et seq._; - alleged mercenary spirit among clergy, 123; - on election of abbots, 129; - on constitutions of religious orders, _ibid._; - on causes of dislike of clergy by laity, 138; - on indulgences, 435, 440 - - Saints, reverence of images of, 289 _et seq._; - amount of honour due to, 304, 306, 308; - devotion to, 423, and _note_, 431 _et seq._ - - _Salem and Bizance_, Saint-German’s _Dyalogue of_, 71, 115, 118, - _note_, 122, 144 - - Sanctuary, difficulty of the subject, 55; - a danger to the State, _ibid._; - case of John Savage, 56 _et seq._; - Papal Bull granted to Henry VII., 56, _note_; - the subject examined by Star Chamber, 58 - - Savage, John, his plea of sanctuary, 56 - - Scaliger, cited, 166 - - Scholars, poor, bequests to, 396 - - Screens, excellence of pre-Reformation work, 12 - - Scripture, Holy, key of position of English reformers, 231; - translations of, 234, 236 _et seq._; - study of advocated by Church, 244, 248, 275, _note_ - - See of Rome, supremacy of, 79 _et seq._ - - Selby, chantries at, 411 - - Selling, Prior William, birth and education, 24; - real name, 24, and _note_; - studies at foreign universities, 25; - takes his degree in theology, 25; - industrious book collector, 25; - good work at Christchurch, 26; - returns to Rome, 26, and _note_; - establishes Greek at Christchurch, 27; - as prior, 27, and _note_; - member of an embassy to the Pope, 31, and _note_, 56, _note_; - continued interest in literary revival, 31; - Greek translation, 31; - fate of his library, 32; - influence, 33 - - _Sermo Exhortatorius_, 149 - - Sermons, Church, more important than the Mass, 283, 284-285 - - Sharpe, Dr., 359 - - Shrines, pilgrimages to, 416 _et seq._ - - Simony, clergy charged with, 146 - - Slander and libel, jurisdiction pertaining to, 65 - - Smith, Mr. Toulmin, on guilds, 364, 366, 381 - - Smythe or Smith, Dr. Richard, 216, 272, 273, and _note_ - - Social conditions before Reformation, 351 _et seq._; - case of the poor, 353 - - _Soul’s Garden_, the, 214, _note_ - - Sovereignty of the Pope, 97-100, 103-104, 107 - - Spiritual power, temporal derived from, 70 - - Spongia, the, of Erasmus, 187 _et seq._ - - Standish, Dr. Henry, on immunity of clergy, 67; - charged before convocation, 67; - on lesser orders, 68 - - Standish, John, archdeacon, 234, 248, 249, _note_, 270, 271 - - St. Giorgio, Venice, abbot of, 105 - - St. John of Jerusalem, priory of, 56 - - St. John the Baptist, head of, 430 - - St. Paul’s Cross, preaching at, 67, 91; - testaments burnt at, 245, 256, and _note_ - - St. Peter, Catholic succession from, 90, _note_; - vicarship, 99-100 - - Star chamber, 58 - - State, jurisdiction of, 51; - right of interference in temporalities, 53, 60-64, 72; - legislates concerning mortuaries, 53, 140; - limits to State interference, 54; - power claimed for, 55, 60-64; - punishment by for spiritual offences, 65; - protecting power of, 75; - destruction of guilds by, 380-381 - - Stokesley, William, 34 - - Stubbs, Bishop, 354, 356 - - Students, distress of at university, 46 - - Sturmius, John, 105, 106, 107, _note_ - - Suffolk, chantries in, 407 - - Sunday, legal status of, 71 - - Superstition, in devotion, 293, 297, 302; - condemned, 314 - - _Supplication of Beggars_, the, 213, 221 - - Surtees Society, publications, 319 - - - Tailors, Guild of, 371 - - Taverns, frequented by clergy, 151 - - Teaching, religious. _See_ Religious teaching - - Temporalities, right of State interference in, 53 _et seq._; - difference between and spiritual jurisdiction, 72; - clearly defined in Spain, 76 - - Temporal power, derived from spiritual, 70; - of the Pope, 97-100, 103-104, 107 - - Theologians, Erasmus’s satire on, 201 - - Tithes, the lay and ecclesiastical cases, 63-64; - Saint-German quoted on, 142 - - Torkington, Sir Richard, rector of Mulbarton, 418 - - _Towneley Mysteries_, the, 319 - - Tradition and English Reformers, 231 - - Translations, of Holy Scripture, 236 _et seq._ - - Trentals, 123, 124, 138, _note_ - - Trevelyan, George Macaulay, cited, 240, _note_ - - Trinity, feast of at Compostella, 217 - - Trojans, opponents of Greek study, 35 - - Tunstall, Bishop, 29, _note_, 34, and _note_, 109, 169, 175, _note_, - 185, 198-199, 213, 214, _note_, 255, 256 - - Tyll. _See_ Selling - - Tyndale, More’s confutation of, 87-88, 118, 119, 136; - charges clergy with immorality, 145; - use of word congregation for church, 173, _note_; - attribution of _Enconium Moriæ_ to More, 202, _note_; - books prohibited, 213; - English Testament, 220; - and other books, 220-223; - advocates liberty, 228; - influence, 231; - English Testament condemned, 236, 243, 251, 255 _et seq._, 276; - demand for his works, 250; - birth and early life, 252; - joins Luther, 252; - Luther’s share in his Testament, 252 _et seq._; - his revised Testament, 260; - More’s examination of his Testament, 260-270; - on indulgences, 437 - - - Unity of pre-Reformation belief, 324 - - Universities, effect of Reformation on, 9, 41 _et seq._; - monastic students at, 42 _et seq._; - poverty of students at after Reformation, 46 - - Urban III., Pope, sanctuary grant of, 56 - - Urbanus Regius, cited, 18, 19, _note_ - - Urswick, Christopher, 32, _note_ - - - Valla, Laurence, 96 - - Veneration of relics, 415, 429 _et seq._; - of saints, 431-432 - - Venetian, a, cited on attitude of ecclesiastics to learning, 37; - on religious condition of the English, 324; - on beauty of English churches, 332 - - Venice, Aldine press at, 160 - - Venn, J., historian of Gonville College, quoted, 43-45 - - Vicarages, appropriations of cancelled, 55 - - Vives, Ludovico, scholar, 36, _note_, 37, 41, _note_ - - Von Hutten, Ulrich, tract on Constantine’s donation to the Pope, 96; - attacks on Erasmus, 186 _et seq._ - - - Warham, Archbishop, 36, and _note_, 69, 112, 160, 161, 162, 168, 215, - 258 - - Waylande, John, printer, 232 - - Welsh, vernacular devotional books for, 311, _note_ - - Wesselius, 214 - - Westacre, Augustinian priory of, 43 - - Westminster, the abbot of, 58-59; - pardon purchased for, 124; - doles at, 132 - - Wey, William, itineraries of, 416 - - Whitford, Richard, 83, 232-233, 283, 305, 312 - - Wills, ecclesiastical administration of, 65; - pre-Reformation, 387 _et seq._; - bequests for pilgrimages, 416 - - Winchcombe, abbot of, 67 - - Winchester, wall paintings of Lady Chapel at, 11; - fair at, 379 - - Wolffgang, printer, 309 - - Wolsey, Cardinal, attitude to revival of learning, 36; - hears the Savage sanctuary case, 58; - upholds rights of Crown, 68; - opposes temporal punishments of clergy, _ibid._; - present at burning of books, 256, _note_ - - Worcester, Tiptoft, Earl of, 23, and _note_ - - Worcester, William, antiquary, 26, 27 - - Work, definite, lack of among clergy, 137, _note_ - - _Worke entytled of the olde God and the new_, 102, and _note_ - - Wycliffe, share in Reformation, 209 _et seq._; - books prohibited, 214; - origin of Wycliffite Scriptures, 237, 247 - - Wyer, Robert, printer, 285 - - - Yorkshire, chantries in, 411 - - - Zwingle, books of prohibited, 213-214 - -Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO. Edinburgh & London - - - - - _A Popular Edition._ - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price 10s. 6d. Net, - pp. 528. - - A NEW REVISED AND CORRECTED EDITION OF - - FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET’S - - Henry the Eighth and the English Monasteries. - - (Of which Six Editions at 24s. have already been sold.) - - Contents. - - CHAP. - - I. The Dawn of Difficulties. - II. Cardinal Wolsey and the Monasteries. - III. The Holy Maid of Kent. - IV. The Friars Observant and the Carthusians. - V. The Visitation of Monasteries in 1535-36. - VI. The Parliament of 1536 and the suppression of the Lesser - Monasteries. - VII. The “Comperta Monastica” and other charges against the Monks. - VIII. Thomas Cromwell, the King’s Vicar-General. - IX. The chief accusers of the Monks--Layton, Legh, Ap Rice, and - London. - X. The Dissolution of the Lesser Monasteries. - XI. The Rising in Lincolnshire. - XII. The Pilgrimage of Grace. - XIII. The Second Northern Rising. - XIV. Dissolution by Attainder. - XV. The Suppression of Convents. - XVI. Fall of the Friars. - XVII. Progress of the General Suppression. - XVIII. The Three Benedictine Abbots. - XIX. The Monastic Spoils. - XX. The Spending of the Spoils. - XXI. The Ejected Monks and their Pensions. - XXII. Some Results of the Suppression. - - APPENDIX: Accounts of the Augmentation Office, &c. GENERAL - INDEX. - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Dublin Review.=--“The recognised authority on the subject upon - which it treats.” - - =Tablet.=--“Produced in excellent style, we welcome and - recommend this new edition of an old work by such a pioneer - of historical truth as Dr. Gasquet with renewed confidence, - for the next best thing to a new work from such a hand is a - carefully revised and cheaper edition of an old one.” - - =Church Times.=--“Dr. Gasquet’s work has won for itself so - secure a position that it is superfluous to point out its - merits afresh, but the author in the preface to the new edition - calls attention to certain alterations necessitated by the - publication by Dr. James Gairdner of the Calendar of Papers of - the Reign of Henry VIII. These documents have now been arranged - in volumes, consequently a very considerable re-arrangement of - references has been rendered necessary, in order to facilitate - the consultation of the original documents. This popular - edition will be greatly appreciated by the students of this - period of England’s ecclesiastical history.” - - =Catholic Book Notes.=--“A standard authority, if not - a classic … we congratulate author and publisher on its - production in one handsome volume. We anticipate a large sale - … and would especially recommend it as a suitable volume for - prizes in the higher classes of our schools.” - - * * * * * - - _New Work on English Monastic History._ - - In Two Volumes, Demy 8vo, Cloth, price 21s. Net. - - The English Black Monks of St. Benedict - - A Sketch of their history from the coming of St. Augustine to - the Present Day. - - BY THE REV. ETHELRED L. TAUNTON. - - Contents. - - _VOLUME THE FIRST._ - - CHAP. - - I. The Coming of the Monks. - II. The Norman Lanfranc. - III. The Benedictine Constitution. - IV. The Monk in the World. - V. The Monk in his Monastery. - VI. Women under the Rule. - VII. Chronicles of the Congregation. I. - VIII. The Downfall. - IX. John Fecknam, Abbot. - X. The State of English Catholics, 1559-1601. - APPENDIX: The Consuetudinary of St. Augustine’s, Canterbury. - - _VOLUME THE SECOND._ - - CHAP. - - XI. The Benedictine Mission. - XII. Douai and Dieuleward. - XIII. The Renewal of the English Congregation. - XIV. Dom Leander and his Mission. - XV. Chronicles of the Congregation. II. - XVI. St. Gregory’s Monastery. - XVII. St. Lawrence’s Monastery. - XVIII. St. Edmund’s Monastery. - XIX. St. Malo, Lambspring, and Cambrai. - XX. Other Benedictine Houses. Denizen and Alien. - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Saturday Review.=--“On the whole, it would be difficult within - the limits that the author has set for himself to write a more - interesting book. We recommend, more especially to the general - reader, the three chapters on the life of a monk in the world - and in his monastery, and that describing the life of women - under the rule.” - - =Literature.=--“We are struck with the skill with which he has - mastered the details of a somewhat complicated story, and the - clear way he has set it down for the benefit of his readers.” - - =English Historical Review.=--“Here, for the first time, - the story of the Benedictine mission of 1603 is fully - told in English; in this story the central figure is Dom - Augustine Baker, the true author of the ‘Apostolatus,’ who, - being professed by the aged Buckley, the last survivor of - Westminster, claimed the inheritance of the rights and - privileges of the original congregation, and the power, by - professing others, to hand on the inheritance to posterity. - The story of the English Benedictine congregation in its - settlements abroad, and finally in its settlements at home, is - very skilfully told, in a pleasant, popular style.” - - =Literary World.=--“The story of the English Benedictines is - one that will be read with sympathy and even admiration by the - instructed Protestant. Curiously enough the history of the - Order--not the exact word, but no better offers--has a striking - affinity with the principles of Congregationalism. The strength - of the Order was that it consisted of independent homes, and - was not like most fraternities, a great whole subdivided into - communities. Upon this Father Taunton again and again insists, - and his view is indisputable. Of the two volumes before us - the first will be more generally interesting to Englishmen, - but it may be well to prepare our readers for its perusal by - saying that the almost patronising style of the beginning is - not long continued. We feared at first that the author was - going to talk down to us in pity for our ignorance, and were - accordingly prepared to resent his impertinence. A very few - pages onward and we yielded ourselves willingly to his pleasant - instruction.… A good book, which we can heartily recommend to - the open-minded reader.” - - =Liverpool Post.=--“Two large and well-printed volumes contain - what the writer modestly describes as a ‘sketch’ of the - Benedictine Order in England from the coming of Augustine - in the sixth century up to the present time. The work is - something more than a theological history. It is in one aspect - a history of English society during fifteen hundred years, for - the Benedictines were ever closely in touch with the people - among whom they laboured. Mr. Taunton is not an ecclesiastical - zealot, and he writes with admirable impartiality, as witness - his outspoken condemnation of the intrigues of Rome and the - machinations of the Jesuits in England during the reigns of - Elizabeth and James. Hence his opinions on such a question - as the social consequences to England of the closing of the - monasteries is deserving of greater weight.” - - =Glasgow Herald.=--“In these two portly volumes Mr. Taunton - furnishes us with a very full history of the English - Benedictines, describing it as ‘a tribute of the affection - and esteem which I, an outsider, have for the English monks.’ - There is doubtless room for such a work, and it must be said - that Mr. Taunton has brought to his task abundant enthusiasm - and much painstaking research. … We cordially welcome it for - its accumulation of valuable historical materials, and for the - author’s industry we have nothing but praise.” - - * * * * * - - _Also by F. A. GASQUET, D. D._ - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, 408 Pages, Cloth, price 12s. Net. - - The Old English Bible, and other Essays. - - _Contents._ - - CHAP. - I. Notes on Mediæval Monastic Libraries. - II. The Monastic Scriptorium. - III. A Forgotten English Preacher. - IV. The Pre-Reformation English Bible(1). - V. The Pre-Reformation English Bible(2). - VI. Religious Instruction in England during the Fourteenth and - Fifteenth Centuries. - VII. A Royal Christmas in the Fifteenth Century. - VIII. The Canterbury Claustral School in the Fifteenth Century. - IX. The Note-books of William Worcester, a Fifteenth-Century - Antiquary. - X. Hampshire Recusants. With a complete Index. - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Times.=--“Full of the learning and research which Dr. Gasquet - has made so peculiarly his own.” - - =Athenæum.=--“Whatever Dr. Gasquet writes is of interest, - and thanks are due to him for these essays.… Full of rare - information, and real contributions to history.” - - * * * * * - - _By the late MISS MANNING._ - - In Crown 8vo, with an Introduction by the Rev. W. H. HUTTON, - B.D., and Twenty-five Illustrations by JOHN JELLICOE and - HERBERT RAILTON, price 6s. Cloth Elegant, Gilt Top. - - The Household of Sir Thos. More. - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Spectator.=--“A delightful book.… Twenty-five illustrations by - John Jellicoe and Herbert Railton show off the book to the best - advantage.” - - =Graphic.=--“A picture, not merely of great charm, but of - infinite value in helping the many to understand a famous - Englishman and the times in which he lived.” - - =Literary World.=--“A charming reprint.… Every feature of the - pictorial work is in keeping with the spirit of the whole.” - - =Scotsman.=--“This clever work of the historical imagination - has gone through several editions, and is one of the most - successful artistic creations of its kind.” - - =Glasgow Herald.=--“An extremely beautiful reprint of the late - Miss Manning’s quaint and charming work.” - - =Sketch.=--“In the front rank of the gift-books of the season - is this beautiful and very cleverly illustrated reprint of a - work which has lasting claims to popularity.” - - =Magazine of Art.=--“The grace and beauty of the late Miss - Manning’s charming work, ‘The Household of Sir Thomas More,’ - has been greatly enhanced by the new edition now put forth by - Mr. John C. Nimmo.… This remarkable work is not to be read - without keen delight.” - - =Academy.=--“It is illustrated cleverly and prettily, and - tastefully bound, so as to make an attractive gift-book.” - - =Liverpool Post.=--“We welcome the tasteful reprint with its - artistic illustrations by John Jellicoe and Herbert Railton, - and its helpful introduction by the Rev. W. H. Hutton.” - - * * * * * - - _NEW ILLUSTRATED EDITION IN SIXTEEN VOLUMES._ - - Extra Crown 8vo, Brown Cloth, Gilt Top, price 5s. per Volume - Net; also in Special Binding, Ruby Cloth, Flat Back, Gilt Top, - price £4 Net, the Set of 16 Vols. only. - - THE REV. S. BARING-GOULD’S - - Lives of the Saints. - - With a Calendar for Every Day in the Year. - - New Edition, Revised, with Introduction and Additional Lives of - English Martyrs, Cornish and Welsh Saints, and Full Indices to - the Entire Work. Illustrated by over 400 Engravings. - - _Contents of the Volumes._ - - JANUARY: 170 Biographies, with 45 Illustrations (Vol. 1). - FEBRUARY: 174 Biographies, with 29 Illustrations (Vol. 2). - MARCH: 187 Biographies, with 42 Illustrations (Vol. 3). - APRIL: 141 Biographies, with 24 Illustrations (Vol. 4). - MAY: 153 Biographies, with 26 Illustrations (Vol. 5). - JUNE: 200 Biographies, with 39 Illustrations (Vol. 6). - JULY: 223 Biographies, with 34 Illustrations (Vols. 7 and 8). - AUGUST: 215 Biographies, with 39 Illustrations (Vol. 9). - SEPTEMBER: 210 Biographies, with 34 Illustrations (Vol. 10). - OCTOBER: 220 Biographies, with 28 Illustrations (Vols. 11 and 12). - NOVEMBER: 185 Biographies, with 47 Illustrations (Vols. 13 and 14). - DECEMBER: 146 Biographies, with 22 Illustrations (Vol. 15). - - APPENDIX VOLUME. - - Additional Biographies of English Martyrs, Cornish and Welsh - Saints, Genealogies of Saintly Families, and two Indices to the - entire work (Vol. 16). - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Daily Chronicle.=--“When it is remembered that in these two - volumes (January and February) the biographies of more than - four hundred saints are to be found, and that in every case the - authorities from which they are derived are set forth; that - in the Introduction the reader is furnished with a succinct - account of the literature of the subject which is the best - _résumé_ that we have in English; that errors in the previous - edition are not left uncorrected--it will be seen how much - is to be expected from this new issue of Mr. Baring-Gould’s - wonderful work, and how much will be found in the sixteen - volumes which will be required to complete it.… No student of - history--to go no further--can dispense with such a valuable - book of reference. There is nothing like it in our language.” - - =Standard.=--“The earlier volumes of the new edition are before - us, and even a cursory examination is enough to show that the - work has been thoroughly revised.… The book is of real value, - since it is written with scholarly care, imaginative vision, - and a happy union of charity and courage.” - - =Guardian.=--“Whoever reads the more important lives in the - sixteen volumes of which this new edition is to consist, will - be introduced to a region of which historians for the most part - tell him little, and yet one that throws constant light upon - some of the obscurest points of ordinary histories. For this, - and for the pleasure and profit thence derived, he will have to - thank Mr. Baring-Gould.” - - =Scotsman.=--“Mr. Baring-Gould, Anglican priest though he be, - fulfils the promise of his original edition in so far as he - does not obtrude either prejudice or sectarianism into his - record of these Saints.” - - =British Review and National Observer.=--“The new edition of - Mr. Baring-Gould’s familiar work may well be called monumental, - both on account of its size, and the variety and completeness - of the information to be found in it.” - - =Notes and Queries.=--“It is impossible to mention the various - sources whence have been drawn the illustrations, which will - render this work, to those to whom the subject appeals, the - most acceptable, as it is certainly the handsomest, of existing - editions.” - - =Weekly Sun.=--“We unhesitatingly commend it as well to the - lover of mediævalism as the student who must have at hand - encyclopædic volumes of reference. No library that aims at - being comprehensive can afford to be without it. No student of - ecclesiastical and cathedral antiquities can neglect it if he - wishes to make a successful study of his particular subject.” - - =Christian World.=--“The new edition is tastefully got up, and - is a worthy setting of a great literary enterprise. The ‘Lives - of the Saints’ is a human story of unfading interest.” - - - - - London: 14 King William Street, Strand - - John C. Nimmo’s New & Recent Publications - - For the Autumn of 1899 - - - _=New Work by the Rev. F. A. GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B.=_ - - IMPORTANT TO STUDENTS OF THE REFORMATION PERIOD. - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price 12s. 6d. Net. - - The Eve of the Reformation. - - Studies in the Religious Life and Thought of the English People - in the Period preceding the Rejection of the Roman Jurisdiction - by Henry VIII. By FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B., Author - of “Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries,” “The Old English - Bible, and other Essays,” &c. - - NOTE.--This is not a controversial work, but a study chiefly of - the literature, &c., of the period in order to see what people - were doing, saying, and thinking about before the change of - religion. As touching upon rather new ground, and at the same - time widening the field of view in the Reformation question, it - should be of great interest at the present moment. - - * * * * * - - _=New Illustrated Work on Palestine.=_ - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with 16 Illustrations - reproduced in Colours in facsimile of the Original Paintings by - the Author, price 12s. 6d. Net. - - Two Years in Palestine and Syria. - - BY MARGARET THOMAS, - - Author of - - “A Scamper through Spain and Tangier,” “A Hero of the - Workshop,” &c. - - With 16 Illustrations reproduced in Colours in facsimile of the - Original Paintings by the Author. - - NOTE.--This book is being looked forward to with great interest - by travellers, so many people have in one out-of-the-way corner - or another of Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia met this - versatile lady. A Royal Academy Silver Medallist, she has had - many pictures and pieces of sculpture exhibited in the Royal - Academy. This (her new book) will be illustrated with sixteen - reproductions in colours of her oil paintings. The subjects of - these were painted on the spot, and the reproductions are by a - new process not as yet employed for book illustration. - - * * * * * - - _An Artist in Spain._ - - In One Volume, Super Royal 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with - Photogravure Portrait, after the Painting by JAN VETH, and 39 - Illustrations, price 12s. 6d. Net. - - Spain: The Story of a Journey. - - BY JOZEF ISRAËLS. - - With a Portrait in Photogravure, and 39 reproductions of - Sketches by the Author. Translated from the Dutch by ALEXANDER - TEIXEIRA DE MATTOS. - - NOTE.--The author and illustrator of this book (Jozef Israëls) - has long been acknowledged the most popular painter of the day, - in this, the best sense, that his work claims the admiration - not only of the critics, the collectors, and the _dilettanti_, - but also of those uncultured people who, understanding nothing - of painting, having no care for artisticity or virtuosity, - cannot fail to be penetrated by the poetry that fills each of - the veteran’s canvases. - - * * * * * - - _A History of Steeple-Chasing._ - - In Super Royal 8vo, uniform with “The Quorn Hunt and its - Masters,” VYNER’S “Notitia Venatica,” and RADCLIFFE’S “Noble - Science of Fox-Hunting.” With 12 Illustrations, chiefly drawn - by HENRY ALKEN, and all coloured by hand, also 16 Head and Tail - Pieces, drawn by HENRY ALKEN and others. Cloth, Gilt Top, price - 21s. net. - - A History of Steeple-Chasing. - - BY WILLIAM C. A. BLEW, M.A., - - Author of “The Quorn Hunt and its Masters,” Editor of VYNER’S - “Notitia Venatica,” and RADCLIFFE’S “Noble Science of - Fox-Hunting.” - - With 12 Illustrations, chiefly drawn by HENRY ALKEN, and all - coloured by hand, also 16 Head and Tail Pieces, drawn by HENRY - ALKEN and others. - - * * * * * - - _New Volume, being the Fifth of the Works of the late Miss - Manning_, - - Author of “Mary Powell,” &c. &c. - - In Crown 8vo, with Illustrations by JOHN JELLICOE and HERBERT - RAILTON, price 6s., Cloth Elegant, Gilt Top. - - The Colloquies of Edward Osborne. - - Citizen and Cloth-Worker of London. - - With 10 Illustrations by JOHN JELLICOE. - - _Uniform in Size and Price, by the same Author._ - - The Household of Sir Thos. More. - - Cherry and Violet. A Tale of the Great Plague. - - The Maiden and Married Life of Mary Powell (AFTERWARDS MISTRESS - MILTON); - - And the Sequel thereto, Deborah’s Diary. - - The Old Chelsea Bun-Shop. A Tale of the Last Century. - - _=Some Press Notices.=_ - - =Athenæum.=--“The late Miss Manning’s delicate and fanciful - little cameos of historical romance possess a flavour of their - own.… The numerous Illustrations by Mr. Jellicoe and Mr. - Railton are particularly happy.” - - =Public Opinion.=--“It is an example of a pure and beautiful - style of literature.” - - =Spectator.=--“A delightful book.… Twenty-five illustrations by - John Jellicoe and Herbert Railton show off the book to the best - advantage.” - - =Graphic.=--“A picture, not merely of great charm, but of - infinite value in helping the many to understand a famous - Englishman and the times in which he lived.” - - =Literary World.=--“A charming reprint.… Every feature of the - pictorial work is in keeping with the spirit of the whole.” - - =Scotsman.=--“This clever work of the historical imagination - has gone through several editions, and is one of the most - successful artistic creations of its kind.” - - =Glasgow Herald.=--“An extremely beautiful reprint of the late - Miss Manning’s quaint and charming work.” - - =Sketch.=--“In the front rank of the gift-books of the season - is this beautiful and very cleverly illustrated reprint of a - work which has lasting claims to popularity.” - - =Magazine of Art.=--“The grace and beauty of the late Miss - Manning’s charming work, ‘The Household of Sir Thomas More,’ - has been greatly enhanced by the new edition now put forth by - Mr. John C. Nimmo.… This remarkable work is not to be read - without keen delight.” - - =Academy.=--“It is illustrated cleverly and prettily, and - tastefully bound, so as to make an attractive gift-book.” - - * * * * * - - _A Cheaper Edition._ - - In Two Volumes, Extra Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with Portrait - and 32 Illustrations from Contemporary Sources, price 12s. Net. - - The Reminiscences and Recollections of Captain Gronow. - - Being Anecdotes of the Camp, Court, Clubs, and Society, - 1810-1860. With Portrait and 32 Illustrations from Contemporary - Sources by JOSEPH GREGO. - - ⁂ This is a remarkably cheap edition of this favourite and - popular book. - - * * * * * - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with 6 Photogravure - Portraits and 30 other Illustrations from Contemporary Sources, - price 7s. 6d. Net. - - Words on Wellington. - - The Duke--Waterloo--The Ball. - - BY SIR WILLIAM FRASER, BARONET, - - M.A., Christ Church, Oxford. - - With 6 Photogravure Portraits, and 30 other Illustrations from - Contemporary Sources. - - ⁂ This book was published in 1889, and the whole of the - edition printed was immediately absorbed. The present new - edition is illustrated with Photogravure Portraits and other - illustrations reproduced especially for this edition from rare - and contemporary engravings selected by Mr. Joseph Grego. - - * * * * * - - _New Volume of Poems by Violet Fane._ - - One Volume, Small 4to, printed on Arnold’s Hand-Made Paper, - and bound in Half-Calf, Gilt Top. Two hundred and sixty copies - printed for England and America on Arnold’s Hand-Made Paper, - each numbered, type distributed, price 10s. 6d. net. Uniform - with previous volumes by the same author, viz., “Poems” and - “Under Cross and Crescent.” - - Betwixt Two Seas. Poems and Ballads. - - BY VIOLET FANE. - - Written at Constantinople and Therapia. - - * * * * * - - _New Library Edition of_ - - _STEELE AND ADDISON’S “SPECTATOR.”_ - - In Eight Volumes, Extra Crown 8vo, with Original Engraved - Portraits and Vignettes, Cloth, price 7s. Net per Volume. Sold - only in Sets, £2, 16s. Net. - - The Spectator. - - EDITED WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES - - BY GEORGE A. AITKEN, Author of “The Life of Richard Steele,” &c. - - _From the Editor’s Preface._ - - “The present edition of the ‘Spectator’ has been printed from a - copy of the original collected and revised edition published in - 1712-15, with the exception that modern rules of spelling have - been followed. The principal variations between the text as - corrected by the authors and the original version in the folio - numbers have at the same time been indicated in the notes; it - has not been thought necessary to point out slight differences - of no importance. In the notes I have aimed at the greatest - conciseness compatible with the satisfactory explanation of - the less obvious allusions to literary or social matters. I - have acknowledged my principal obligations to more recent - editors, but in some cases notes have been handed down from - one editor to another, and cannot be traced to their original - author. Many of the older notes, moreover, were obsolete, or - needed correction in the light of subsequent knowledge. I have - endeavoured to preserve what is of value, without burdening - the pages with the contradictions and inaccuracies which are - inevitable in a _variorum_ edition.” - - _Some Press Notices._ - - =Pall Mall Gazette.=--“Undoubtedly the best library reprint of - this famous periodical that has been published.” - - =Daily News.=--“If handsome print, paper, and binding, together - with careful annotation, have attractions in the eyes of lovers - of standard books, there ought to be a good demand for this new - edition.” - - =Scotsman.=--“An edition in which it is a pleasure to read, and - one which would adorn any library.” - - =Notes and Queries.=--“We congratulate the publisher and the - editor on the termination of a useful task, and we commend to - the public this eminently desirable edition of our English - masterpiece--the most attractive and serviceable yet printed.” - - =Birmingham Post.=--“An edition of the ‘Spectator’ which, as - a book for the library, has no equal, whether we consider the - stately and appropriate form, the typographical excellence, - or the erudite and finished editing. Added to these is the - crowning grace of a full and complete index. It is a luxury to - read the early eighteenth century classic in such an edition as - this.” - - =Glasgow Herald.=--“All that the most fastidious lover of - books could desire. Its size--extra crown octavo--is stately, - without being cumbersome. The buckram cloth binding is neat, - substantial, and serviceable--exactly what is required for a - library of which the contents are intended for use as well as - for show. The notes supplied by Mr. George A. Aitken, as might - be expected from his exceptional acquaintance with the period, - enable the reader to understand and appreciate the numerous - allusions to literary and social matters which occur in most of - the papers.” - - * * * * * - - _NEW ILLUSTRATED EDITION IN SIXTEEN VOLUMES._ - - Extra Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price 5s. per Volume Net. - Also in Ruby Coloured Cloth. Gilt Top, Flat Back, Elegant, Sold - in Sets only, price £4 Net. - - THE REV. S. BARING-GOULD’S - - Lives of the Saints. - - With a Calendar for Every Day in the Year. - - New Edition, Revised, with Introduction and Additional Lives of - English Martyrs Cornish and Welsh Saints, and Full Indices to - the Entire Work. Illustrated by over 400 Engravings. - - _Contents of the Volumes._ - - JANUARY: 170 Biographies, with 45 Illustrations (Vol. 1). - FEBRUARY: 174 Biographies, with 29 Illustrations (Vol. 2). - MARCH: 187 Biographies, with 42 Illustrations (Vol. 3). - APRIL: 141 Biographies, with 24 Illustrations (Vol. 4). - MAY: 153 Biographies, with 26 Illustrations (Vol. 5). - JUNE: 200 Biographies, with 39 Illustrations (Vol. 6). - JULY: 223 Biographies, with 34 Illustrations (Vols. 7 and 8). - AUGUST: 215 Biographies, with 39 Illustrations (Vol. 9). - SEPTEMBER: 210 Biographies, with 34 Illustrations (Vol. 10). - OCTOBER: 220 Biographies, with 28 Illustrations (Vols. 11 and 12). - NOVEMBER: 185 Biographies, with 47 Illustrations (Vols. 13 and 14). - DECEMBER: 146 Biographies, with 22 Illustrations (Vol. 15). - - APPENDIX VOLUME. - - Additional Biographies of English Martyrs, Cornish and Welsh - Saints, Genealogies of Saintly Families, and two Indices to the - entire work (Vol. 16). - - _Some Press Notices._ - - =Daily Chronicle.=--“When it is remembered that in these two - volumes (January and February) the biographies of more than - four hundred saints are to be found, and that in every case the - authorities from which they are derived are set forth; that - in the Introduction the reader is furnished with a succinct - account of the literature of the subject which is the best - _résumé_ that we have in English; that errors in the previous - edition are not left uncorrected--it will be seen how much - is to be expected from this new issue of Mr. Baring-Gould’s - wonderful work, and how much will be found in the sixteen - volumes which will be required to complete it.… No student of - history--to go no further--can dispense with such a valuable - book of reference. There is nothing like it in our language.” - - =Standard.=--“The earlier volumes of the new edition are before - us, and even a cursory examination is enough to show that the - work has been thoroughly revised.… The book is of real value, - since it is written with scholarly care, imaginative vision, - and a happy union of charity and courage.” - - =Guardian.=--“Whoever reads the more important lives in the - sixteen volumes of which this new edition is to consist, will - be introduced to a region of which historians for the most part - tell him little, and yet one that throws constant light upon - some of the obscurest points of ordinary histories. For this, - and for the pleasure and profit thence derived, he will have to - thank Mr. Baring-Gould.” - - =Scotsman.=--“Mr. Baring-Gould, Anglican priest though he - be, fulfils the promise of his original edition in so far as - he does not obtrude either prejudice or sectarianism into his - record of these Saints.” - - =British Review and National Observer.=--“The new edition of - Mr. Baring-Gould’s familiar work may well be called monumental, - both on account of its size, and the variety and completeness - of the information to be found in it.” - - =Notes and Queries.=--“It is impossible to mention the various - sources whence have been drawn the illustrations, which will - render this work, to those to whom the subject appeals, the - most acceptable, as it is certainly the handsomest, of existing - editions.” - - =Weekly Sun.=--“We unhesitatingly commend it as well to the - lover of mediævalism as the student who must have at hand - encyclopædic volumes of reference. No library that aims at - being comprehensive can afford to be without it. No student of - ecclesiastical and cathedral antiquities can neglect it if he - wishes to make a successful study of his particular subject.” - - =Christian World.=--“The new edition is tastefully got up, and - is a worthy setting of a great literary enterprise. The ‘Lives - of the Saints’ is a human story of unfading interest.” - - * * * * * - - _Works by FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET, D.D._ - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price 10s. 6d. Net, - pp. 528. - - A NEW REVISED AND CORRECTED EDITION OF - - FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET’S - - Henry the Eighth, and the English monasteries. - - Of which Six Editions at 24s. have already been sold. - - _Extracts from Press Notices._ - - =Athenæum.=--“We may say in brief, if what we have already said - is not sufficient to show it, that a very important chapter of - English history is here treated with a fulness, minuteness, - and lucidity which will not be found in previous accounts, and - we sincerely congratulate Dr. Gasquet on having made such an - important contribution to English historical literature.” - - =Guardian.=--“A learned, careful, and successful vindication - of the personal character of the monks.… In Dr. Gasquet’s - skilful hands the dissolution of the monasteries assumes the - proportions of a Greek tragedy.” - - * * * * * - - In One Volume, Demy 8vo, 408 Pages, Cloth, price 12s. Net. - - The Old English Bible, and other Essays. - - _Contents._ - - CHAP. - I. Notes on Mediæval Monastic Libraries. - II. The Monastic Scriptorium. - III. A Forgotten English Preacher. - IV. The Pre-Reformation English Bible(1). - V. The Pre-Reformation English Bible(2). - VI. Religious Instruction in England during the Fourteenth and - Fifteenth Centuries. - VII. A Royal Christmas in the Fifteenth Century. - VIII. The Canterbury Claustral School in the Fifteenth Century. - IX. The Note-books of William Worcester, a Fifteenth-Century - Antiquary. - X. Hampshire Recusants. With a complete Index. - - _Some Press Notices._ - - =Times.=--“Full of the learning and research which Dr. Gasquet - has made so peculiarly his own.” - - =Athenæum.=--“Whatever Dr. Gasquet writes is of interest, - and thanks are due to him for these essays.… Full of rare - information, and real contributions to history.” - - =British Review and National Observer.=--“Dr. Gasquet has - started a very curious controversy, which will entertain even - those whom it does not seriously interest, and will familiarise - them incidentally with many facts of history.… The remaining - essays are also rich in quaint, curious information.” - - =Scotsman.=--“He has thrown much light on obscure passages and - features of later mediæval history in our country.” - - =Notes and Queries.=--“Dr. Gasquet writes clearly and - forcibly, and when touching on controversial points, as he - frequently has to do, he manifests a studied moderation, and - liberality.” - - * * * * * - - _Cheap Illustrated Edition now Completed in 24 Volumes._ - - Crown 8vo, tastefully bound in Green Cloth, Gilt, in which - binding any of the Novels may be bought separately, price 3s. - 6d. each. Also in Special Cloth Binding, Flat Backs, Gilt Tops, - supplied in Sets only of 24 Volumes, price £4, 4s. - - THE LARGE TYPE BORDER EDITION OF THE WAVERLEY NOVELS. - - Edited with Introductory Essays and Notes to each Novel - (supplementing those of the Author) by ANDREW LANG. With 250 - Original Illustrations from Drawings and Paintings specially - executed by eminent Artists. - - ⁂ This is generally conceded to be the best edition of the - Waverley Novels, not only as regards editing and illustrations, - but also in point of type, printing and paper, and is complete - in 24 volumes instead of 25 as in other editions. - - _List of the Volumes._ - - 1. Waverley. - 2. Guy Mannering. - 3. The Antiquary. - 4. Rob Roy. - 5. Old Mortality. - 6. The Heart of Midlothian. - 7. A Legend of Montrose, and The Black Dwarf. - 8. The Bride of Lammermoor. - 9. Ivanhoe. - 10. The Monastery. - 11. The Abbot. - 12. Kenilworth. - 13. The Pirate. - 14. The Fortunes of Nigel. - 15. Peveril of the Peak. - 16. Quentin Durward. - 17. St. Ronan’s Well. - 18. Redgauntlet. - 19. The Betrothed, and The Talisman. - 20. Woodstock. - 21. The Fair Maid of Perth. - 22. Anne of Geierstein. - 23. Count Robert of Paris, and The Surgeon’s Daughter. - 24. Castle Dangerous, Chronicles of the Canongate, &c. - - _Some of the Artists contributing to the “Border Edition,”_ - - Sir J. E. Millais, Bart., P.R.A. - Lockhart Bogle. - Gordon Browne. - D. Y. Cameron. - Frank Dadd, R.I. - R. de Los Rios. - Herbert Dicksee. - M. L. Gow, R.I. - W. B. Hole, R.S.A. - John Pettie, R.A. - Sir James D. Linton, P.R.I. - Ad. Lalauze. - J. E. Lauder, R.S.A. - W. Hatherell, R.I. - Sam Bough, R.S.A. - W. E. Lockhart, R.S.A. - R. W. Macbeth, A.R.A. - H. Macbeth-Raeburn. - J. Macwhirter, A.R.A., R.S.A. - W. Q. Orchardson, R.A. - James Orrock, R.I. - Walter Paget. - Sir George Reid, P.R.S.A. - Frank Short. - W. Strang. - Sir Henry Raeburn, R.A., P.R.S.A. - Arthur Hopkins, A.R.W.S. - R. Herdman, R.S.A. - D. Herdman. - Hugh Cameron, R.S.A. - - _Some Press Notices of the Large Type Border Edition of the - Waverley Novels._ - - =The Spectator.=--“We trust that this fine edition of our - greatest and most poetical of novelists will attain, if it has - not already done so, the high popularity it deserves. To all - Scott’s lovers it is a pleasure to know that, despite the daily - and weekly inrush of ephemeral fiction, the sale of his works - is said by the booksellers to rank next below Tennyson’s in - poetry, and above that of everybody else in prose.” - - =The Times.=--“It would be difficult to find in these days - a more competent and sympathetic editor of Scott than his - countryman, the brilliant and versatile man of letters who - has undertaken the task; and if any proof were wanted either - of his qualifications or of his skill and discretion in - displaying them, Mr. Lang has furnished it abundantly in his - charming Introduction to ‘Waverley.’ The editor’s own notes are - judiciously sparing, but conspicuously to the point, and they - are very discreetly separated from those of the author, Mr. - Lang’s laudable purpose being to illustrate and explain Scott, - not to make the notes a pretext for displaying his own critical - faculty and literary erudition. The illustrations by various - competent hands are beautiful in themselves and beautifully - executed, and, altogether, the ‘Border Edition’ of the Waverley - Novels bids fair to become the classical edition of the great - Scottish classic.” - - =The Athenæum.=-“The handsome ‘Border Edition’ has been brought - by Mr. Nimmo to a successful conclusion. Mr. Nimmo deserves to - be complimented on the manner in which the Edition has been - printed and illustrated, and Mr. Lang on the way in which he - has performed his portion of the work. His Introductions have - been tasteful and readable; he has not overdone his part; and, - while he has supplied much useful information, he has by no - means overburdened the volumes with notes.” - - =Notes and Queries.=--“Mr. Nimmo’s spirited and ambitious - enterprise has been conducted to a safe termination, and the - most ideal edition of the Waverley Novels in existence is now - completed.” - - =Saturday Review.=--“Of all the many collections of the - Waverley Novels, Mr. Nimmo’s ‘Border Edition’ is incomparably - the most handsome and the most desirable.… Type, paper, - illustrations are altogether admirable.” - - =Daily Chronicle.=--“There is absolutely no fault to be found - with it, as to paper, type, or arrangement.” - - =Magazine of Art.=--“Size, type, paper, and printing, to say - nothing of the excessively liberal and charming introduction - or of the illustrations, make this perhaps the most desirable - edition of Scott ever issued on this side of the border.” - - * * * * * - - Two-Volume edition of The Border Waverley. - - In 48 Volumes, Large Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with the 250 - Etchings printed on Japanese Paper, price 6s. per Volume. - - Purchasers of this beautiful edition are recommended to - complete their sets at once, as many of the Volumes are out of - print, and those still remaining will soon be. - - * * * * * - - _Two Important Ornithological Works by Henry Seebohm._ - - THE STANDARD WORK ON BRITISH BIRDS. - - In Four Volumes, Royal 8vo, Cloth, with numerous Wood - Engravings and Sixty-eight Coloured Plates, price £6, 6s., now - £5, 5s. Net. - - A History or British Birds. - - To which is added the Author’s Notes on their Classification - and Geographical Distribution; also Sixty-eight Coloured Plates - of their Eggs. By HENRY SEEBOHM, Author of “Siberia in Europe,” - “Siberia in Asia,” &c. &c. - - =Saturday Review.=--“The illustrations are as nearly perfect as - the most careful colour-printing can produce, rivalling--and it - is no slight praise--the admirable egg-pictures of Hewitson, - some of which might almost have been executed by hand; and the - book is written in an easy, pleasant style, redolent of the - field rather than of the study.” - - =Zoologist.=--“The text contains not only a description of - each egg and its varieties, but also a very full account of - the life-history of each bird.… If we may conceive the works - of Yarrell and Hewitson rolled into one, with corrections, - emendations, and important additions, and with woodcuts as well - as coloured plates, such a work is Mr. Seebohm’s.” - - =Nature.=--“We unhesitatingly express our opinion that since - the time of Macgillivray no such original book as Mr. Seebohm’s - has been published on British ornithology; we think that the - figures of the eggs are by far the best that have yet been - given.” - - * * * * * - - In One Volume, 4to, Cloth, with numerous Wood Engravings and - Twenty-one Plates of Birds, Coloured by Hand, price £5, 5s., - now £2, 12s. 6d. Net. - - _ONLY FIVE HUNDRED COPIES PRINTED._ - - The Geographical Distribution or the Charadriidæ; - - Or, The Plovers, Sandpipers, Snipes, and their Allies. - - By HENRY SEEBOHM, Author of “Siberia in Europe,” “Siberia in - Asia,” “A History of British Birds, with Coloured Illustrations - of their Eggs,” &c. - - =Nature.=--“This is a handsome volume of more than 500 pages, - and is illustrated by twenty-one coloured plates, drawn in - Mr. Keulemans’s best style. The book is profusely illustrated - by woodcuts, showing the specific characters of the different - species, and these will be invaluable to the student of these - difficult birds. In fact, no work has ever been so remarkably - treated in this respect, and it will be the book of reference - for the _Charadriidæ_ for many years to come.” - - * * * * * - - One Volume, Super-royal 8vo, Cloth, with Two Photogravure - Plates, One Plate in Colour, and Fifty-nine other - Illustrations, price 7s. 6d. Net. - - Fern Growing: Fifty Years’ Experience in Crossing and - Cultivation. - - With a List of the most important Varieties and a History of - the Discovery of Multiple Parentage. By E. J. LOWE, F.R.S., - F.L.S. - - =Athenæum.=--“In some respects the most important treatise on - British ferns that has hitherto appeared.” - - * * * * * - - Third Edition, with Seventy-four Coloured Plates, Super-royal - 8vo, Cloth, price £1, 1s.; now 10s. 6d. Net. - - A Natural History or British Grasses. - - By E. J. LOWE, F.R.S., F.L.S., &c. - - NOTE.--This is a work not only valuable to the botanical - student for its pictorial accuracy, but of use also to the - landed proprietor and the farmer, pointing out to them those - grasses which are useful and lucrative in husbandry, and - teaching them the varied soils and positions upon which they - thrive, and explaining their qualities and the several uses - to which they are applied in many branches of manufacture and - industry. - - * * * * * - - _Rev. F. O. Morris’s Popular Works on Natural History._ - - ISSUE OF NEW AND REVISED EDITIONS. - - Fourth Edition, Six Volumes, Super-royal 8vo, Cloth, with 394 - Plates Coloured by Hand, price £4, 10s. Net. - - A History of British Birds. - - By the Rev. F. O. MORRIS, B.A. - - =Times.=--“The protecting landowner, the village naturalist, - the cockney ‘oologist,’ and the schoolboy all alike owe a debt - to the Rev. F. O. Morris’s admirable work, in six volumes, on - British birds, with its beautiful hand-painted plates.” - - * * * * * - - Fourth Edition, Three Volumes, Super-royal 8vo, Cloth, with 248 - Coloured Plates, price £2, 5s. Net. - - A Natural History of the Nests and Eggs of British Birds. - - By the Rev. F. O. MORRIS, B.A. Entirely Revised and brought - up to Date by W. B. TEGETMEIER, F.Z.S., Member of the British - Ornithologists’ Union, with 248 Plates chiefly Coloured by Hand. - - =Times.=--“These latter (illustrations) are excellent, and - indeed are the strength of this very handsome book, which, in - its new and more accurate form, ought to find a place in many a - library.” - - * * * * * - - Eighth Edition, Super-royal 8vo, Cloth, with Seventy-nine - Plates Coloured by Hand, price 15s. Net. - - A History of British Butterflies. - - By the Rev. F. O. MORRIS, B.A. - - * * * * * - - Fourth Edition, Four Volumes, Royal 8vo, with 132 Plates (1933 - Figures), all Coloured by Hand, price £3, 3s. Net. - - A Natural History of British Moths. - - By the Rev. F. O. MORRIS, B.A. With 132 Plates Coloured by Hand - (1933 Figures), and an Introduction by W. EGMONT KIRBY, M.D. - - * * * * * - - In Two Volumes, Super-royal 8vo, Cloth, £1, 10s. Net. - - British Game Birds and Wild Fowl. - - By BEVERLEY R. MORRIS, M.D. Entirely Revised and brought up to - Date by W. B. TEGETMEIER, F.Z.S. With Sixty Large Plates all - Coloured by Hand. - - =Daily News.=--“Has held a unique position among works of its - class. The sixty hand-coloured plates are splendidly executed.” - - * * * * * - - One Volume, Large Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price 5s. - - Francis Orpen Morris. - - A memoir of the above-mentioned Author. - - By his Son, the Rev. M. C. F. MORRIS, B.C.L., M.A., Rector of - Nunburnholme, Yorkshire. With Portrait and Two Illustrations. - - =Land and Water.=--“This very interesting memoir of the - naturalist, whose works are perhaps better known among the - ‘rising generation’ than those of any other authority, … gives - a remarkably clear and distinct picture of the late Mr. F. O. - Morris.” - - =Yorkshire Post.=--“A book so conscientiously written as to - rank well among biographies.” - - * * * * * - - In Two Volumes, Large 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, price £1, 10s. - Net. With Thirty-seven Illustrations, including Three hitherto - unpublished Bird Drawings and Ten Portraits of Audubon. - - Audubon, and His Journals. - - By MARIA R. AUDUBON. With Notes by ELLIOTT COUES. - - CONTENTS.--Audubon: A Biography. The European Journals, - 1826-29. The Labrador Journal, 1833. The Missouri River - Journal, 1843. The Episodes. With a full Index. - - NOTE.--To English people the name of Audubon is a familiar and - respected one, and there is little reason to doubt that the - present work, forming as it does so handsome a monument of his - life’s work, should be acceptable both to the lover of good - books and to the naturalist. The former has the attraction - of Audubon’s picturesque and engaging English style, added - to reminiscences and narratives of a diverse and fascinating - character, and a highly interesting biography of Audubon from - the pen of his granddaughter. The naturalist, on the other - hand, has here for the first time the complete and carefully - edited text of Audubon’s valuable journals, supplemented by - appropriate and interesting notes by so eminent a zoologist as - Dr. Elliott Coues. The entire publication is virtually new, - since even the European journals are here much amplified, while - the Missouri and Labrador journals are practically unpublished, - and the “Episodes” have never before appeared collectively - except in a French translation. The work is one of the widest - interest, and must at once take its place as the authoritative - biography of Audubon, as well as the first adequate - presentation of his journals, which in their now complete form - give “the man instead of the death mask.” - - =Times.=--“Audubon’s unpublished manuscripts are the record - of a long, a varied, and an adventurous life, passed in - unremitting activity and indefatigable industry. We must say - at once that for the most part they are fascinating. They are - sensational, instructive, and frankly autobiographical, and - they show a many-sided man in his various aspects, with the - absolute unreserve of innocent egoism.” - - =Saturday Review.=--“There is much that will interest readers - of vastly different tastes. Thus the European journals in the - first volume have an interest that is chiefly personal, and we - get interesting scraps of conversation with Sir Walter Scott, - Jeffrey, Wilson, Lord Stanley, Cuvier, St. Hilaire, Selby, - Constant, Gerard, Jardine, and Bewick, as well as many other - notables in the science, art, and literature of Edinburgh, - London, and Paris in the late twenties.” - - =Spectator.=--“The two volumes present the life of the great - French-American naturalist in a most attractive form. The - journal of his voyage up the Missouri is now first given to the - world, and the freshness of his life in the woods and of his - own charming personality is not marred by any unwise editing - or comment. The illustrations are excellent, worthy of a work - dealing with the life of the man who used the instruction - received from the revolutionary painter David in his youth to - make the greatest advance in the illustration of nature ever - achieved by one man.” - - =Scotsman.=--“A worthy and enduring memorial has been raised - to the great American ornithologist in the two volumes prepared - by his granddaughter. Miss Audubon’s work has been admirably - done; and the worth of the book is much enhanced by the - zoological and other notes which Dr. Coues has appended.” - - * * * * * - - _New Work on English Monastic History._ - - In Two Volumes, Demy 8vo, Cloth, price 21s. Net. - - The English Black Monks of St. Benedict - - A Sketch of their History from the coming of St. Augustine to - the Present Day. - - By the Rev. ETHELRED L. TAUNTON. - - _Some Press Notices._ - - =Saturday Review.=--“On the whole, it would be difficult within - the limits that the author has set for himself to write a more - interesting book. We recommend, more especially to the general - reader, the three chapters on the life of a monk in the world - and in his monastery, and that describing the life of women - under the rule.” - - =Literature.=--“We are struck with the skill with which he has - mastered the details of a somewhat complicated story, and the - clear way he has set it down for the benefit of his readers.” - - =Record.=--“We must add a word to express our sense of the - interest and value of the appendix to Volume I., which is - a translation of the Consuetudinary of the monks of St. - Augustine’s, Canterbury. It is a real help to understanding the - ways and works, the helps and the temptations, of the monks.” - - =Bookman.=--“Much idle legend has been dissipated by Mr. - Taunton’s researches, many points left dark are now cleared up, - and in the perplexed quarrellings which ruined the prospects of - Catholicism at the close of the reign of Elizabeth, as under - James I. and Charles I., the historian holds a balance which - does not waver.” - - * * * * * - - Two Volumes, Extra Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with 120 - Coloured Plates, price 15s. Net. - - The Flora of the Alps. - - Being a Description of all the Species of Flowering Plants - indigenous to Switzerland, and of the Alpine Species of the - adjacent mountain districts of France, Italy, and Austria, - including the Pyrenees. By ALFRED W. BENNETT, M.A., B.Sc., - F.L.S., Lecturer on Botany at St. Thomas’s Hospital. - - =Times.=--“Meets a want which has long been felt by English - travellers of a complete illustrated guide to all the flowers - which are indigenous to Switzerland.… The illustrations are - numerous and accurate.” - - =Standard.=--“Mr. Bennett gives an adequate description, and - one which is both clear and exact, of all the species of - flowering plants common to Switzerland.” - - =Spectator.=--“These two volumes will form comprehensive and - delightful companions to every traveller.” - - =Daily News.=--“The letterpress is excellent, as, indeed, we - should have expected from so high an authority; the plates are - likely to be of great service to the traveller, and with their - aid he will be able to identify most of the flowers he may find - among the mountains.” - - =Land and Water.=--“These very beautifully illustrated volumes - will be welcomed by the numberless people whose summer holiday - is spent in Switzerland or the Alpine districts.” - - * * * * * - - Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, with Portrait and Eighty-one - Engravings, price 5s. - - The Complete Angler of Izaak Walton and Charles Cotton. - - Edited by JOHN MAJOR. - - =Scotsman.=--“There are all sorts of editions of the fisher’s - classic; but this will appeal most strongly to the man whose - affections attach themselves with an equal tenacity to a good - day’s fishing and a good book.” - - =Bookman.=--“In Creswick’s engravings and all the other - pictures--‘embellishments’ they are called in the language of - the forties when Major brought out his edition--will lie the - chief interest and charm. They alone would make Major’s edition - one of the very best to possess.” - - =Glasgow Herald.=--“As good an edition of the angler’s classic - as any one need wish to have.” - - =Liverpool Post.=--“In these days of processed-blocks it is - indeed refreshing to come upon wood engravings such as the - tailpieces to the different chapters.” - - * * * * * - - _By the Author of “Handley Cross,” &c._ - - Demy 8vo, 520 Pages, Twelve Full-Page Illustrations by - WILDRAKE, HEATH, JELLICOE, Coloured by Hand, 10s. 6d. Net. - - Hillingdon Hall; or, The Cockney Squire. - - A Tale of Country Life. By R. S. SURTEES, Author of “Handley - Cross,” “Jorrocks’s Jaunts and Jollities,” &c. - - =Saturday Review.=--“Mr. Jorrocks is one of those evergreens - whom age cannot wither nor modern culture stale. ‘Handley - Cross’ certainly used to be, and probably is still, the delight - of every well-constituted schoolboy; while the somewhat soberer - ‘Hillingdon Hall’ should have considerable interest for country - folk at the present day, both as a picture of life in the early - days of Queen Victoria, and as containing several eloquent - dissertations by the hero and others on the effect of the - abolition of the Corn-laws upon the agricultural interest.” - - * * * * * - - ILLUSTRATED BY WILLIAM STRANG, R.P.E. - - One Volume, Small 4to, Cloth, Gilt Edges, price 10s. 6d. Net. - - The Pilgrim’s Progress. - - With Fourteen Plates, Designed and Etched by WILLIAM STRANG, - R.P.E. (Illustrator of Milton’s “Paradise Lost”). - - =Times.=--“A sumptuous edition, illustrated by Mr. Strang with - great artistic power.” - - * * * * * - - _New Work on the Yiddish Dialect._ - - One Volume, Extra Crown 8vo, Cloth. Gilt Top, price 9s. Net. - - The History of Yiddish Literature in the Nineteenth Century. - - BY LEO WIENER - - Instructor in the Slavic Languages at Harvard University. - - * * * * * - - _Works by the late John Addington Symonds._ - - Third Edition, in Two Volumes, Extra Crown 8vo, with Fifty - Illustrations, bound in Cloth, Gilt Top, price 12s. Net. - - The Life of Michelangelo Buonarotti. - - Based on Studies in the Archives of the Buonarotti Family at - Florence. With Portrait and Fifty Reproductions of the Works of - the Master. - - =Times.=--“It is not, perhaps, too much to say, that this - biography supersedes, for many purposes, any work in the - English language.” - - * * * * * - - Fifth Edition, One Volume, Large Crown 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Top, - with Mezzotint Portrait and Sixteen Illustrations of Cellini’s - works, price 7s. 6d. - - The Life of Benvenuto Cellini. - - Translated by JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS. - - =Athenæum.=--“Among the best translations in the English - language.” - - =Saturday Review.=--“None can surpass the Florentine goldsmith - and sculptor in the dramatic vigour of his narrative, and in - the unblushing faithfulness of his confessions.… Among the best - translations that have ever been made into English.” - - * * * * * - - Second Edition, One Volume, Demy 8vo, Illustrated, price 5s. - Net. - - Walt Whitman. A Study. - - By JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS. With Portrait and Four Illustrations. - - =National Observer.=--“There is no better interpreter than Mr. - Symonds is, no better guide to learning than this book.” - - * * * * * - - New Copyright Edition published by arrangement with MACMILLAN - & CO., LTD. Fourteen Volumes, Demy 8vo, Illustrated with 112 - Etchings and Photogravure Plates printed on Japan paper, the - text on a clear, soft, deckle-edge laid paper. Cloth elegant, - price £6, 6s. Net per Set. - - French Memoirs by Lady Jackson. - - THE WORKS OF CATHERINE CHARLOTTE, LADY JACKSON, “Old Paris: Its - Court and Literary Salons,” 2 vols. “The Old Regime: Court, - Salons, and Theatres,” 2 vols. “The Court of France in the - Sixteenth Century, 1514-1559,” 2 vols. “The Last of the Valois, - and Accession of Henry of Navarre, 1559-1589,” 2 vols. “The - First of the Bourbons, 1589-1595,” 2 vols. “The French Court - and Society: Reign of Louis XVI. and First Empire,” 2 vols. - “The Court of the Tuileries, from the Restoration to the Flight - of Louis Philippe,” 2 vols. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Eve of the Reformation, by -Francis Aidan Gasquet - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE EVE OF THE REFORMATION *** - -***** This file should be named 50328-0.txt or 50328-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/3/2/50328/ - -Produced by Clarity and the Online Distributed Proofreading -Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from -images generously made available by The Internet -Archive/Canadian Libraries) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |