R

EVIEWING generally the strange

episode of the medieval reaction under queen Mary, the historian.

of the church feels that when he has related the story of the restoration of the Papal supremacy in the church; the bringing back of the mass, that strange mediæval development or rather corrup tion of the simple solemn communion instituted by Jesus Christ; and the curious reinstatement of the Latin tongue as the language of the public services of the church, in place of the vernacular English understood by the people, there is little more to be told. The dramatic interest of this sad reign is painfully kept up owing to the stern and cruel measures directed against such subjects of the English crown as refused to accept these religious changes. But of the population of the country comparatively few resisted the royal will; though enough were found who did "resist unto blood" to make the short eight years of Mary's reign a byword for ever of tyranny and cruel oppression.

The ease with which these tremendous changes in religion were brought about is to us, who look back on the events of the

unhappy period in question, almost inconceivable. The almost slavish subservience of the two Houses of Parliament, and the quiet acquiescence of Convocation, is at testimony to the enormous power and influence of the crown in the Tudor period; the joyful acceptance of the renaissance of medieval superstition by many among the people, and the sullen consent of the great majority, tell us that from one cause or other Reformation principles had not yet rooted themselves deeply in the hearts of the people. Something more was needed than the mere words and writings of the teachers of the new learning, to open the eyes of the masses to see the beauty and the truth of the Reformation. That something was provided by the stern resistance unto death of the three hundred Marian martyrs, largely made up of the rank and file of the English people, but including in their glorious company five of the more famous bishops of the new learning-men whose names had for years been on all Englishmen's lips, and whose words and writings henceforth would be in every Englishman's heart. Once more, the moving events of the middle years of the sixteenth century had demonstrated the

truth of the oft-quoted saying, that "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church."

Little else remains to be told of interest in the history of the church during this sad reign of Mary, and our task in gathering up these few fragments will soon be done. Very early in the reign, in the queen's letters and articles of 1554, addressed to the bishops as a necessary corollary to the mediæval revival she had determined on, the old and tyrannical direction respecting the necessity of enforcing celibacy among the clergy was renewed. For the last time in the history of the Church of England, queen Mary and her ecclesiastical advisers woke up the old and peremptory demand of the Roman see, so often resisted, that all priests of the church should be unmarried. The bishops, so ran the stern Marian letters and articles of 1554, were to deprive and declare deprived all spiritual persons who, "contrary to the state of their order and the laudable custom of the church, had married wives." The cruel and unnatural edict was carried out with severity, the number of deprivations and of voluntary resignations being very considerable."

As might have been expected, early in the reign, under various pretexts, most of the "Reformation" bishops were deprived of their sees. A few, by timely submission, retained their dignity; a few who really sympathised with the old state of things, of course remained. As early as the year 1554 we hear of seven of these prelates being deprived; and in the

* Canon Dixon in his "History" (chap. xxiii.) gives some exhaustive details respecting this cruel Marian edict.

course of the reign, as we have already related, five out of the number of reforming bishops suffered at the stake, and won, as the majority of Englishmen love to think, the crown of martyrdom.

On two important points the earnest desires of queen Mary were completely foiled. From the beginning of her reign she passionately longed that restitution. should be made to the church of the lands and possessions which had been taken away from the suppressed monastic orders, and from hospitals and chantries, by her father, Henry VIII., and her brother, Edward VI. As we have before remarked, this confiscation will ever be a dark blot upon the pages which contain the Reformation story; and there is no true and earnest son of the Church of England who will not be tempted to sympathise with Mary here. It was emphatically a noble longing on the part of the unhappy queen. Mary showed her earnestness in this matter of restitution by formally offering to restore all the church and monastic lands remaining in the possession of the crown; preferring, as she said in the language of her resolution, delivered in the presence of the high treasurer, the marquis of Winchester, and other ministers of state, the salvation of her soul to the maintenance of her imperial dignity, if it could only be preserved by the aid of such means.

But the project was found to be impracticable. The church spoils gathered in the two last reigns had been shamefully wasted or widely distributed, and in the case of the majority of the recipients would never have been tamely yielded up. This was felt even by the most devoted adherents of Mary and Rome. Indeed

The

and the tonsure was to be enforced. The canonical hours were to be observed. greatest care was to be taken in conferring holy orders, grave scandals having arisen owing to a rash imposition of hands. Bishops were not to transfer to others the burden of examining candidates. Long vacancies in clerical appointments were to be avoided. Visitations of all churches, beginning with the cathedral churches, were to be made. Libraries were to be visited, to discover whether they contained heretical or prohibited books. But all these and many other proposals of important measures of reform came to nothing, save that a copy of them, carefully revised, was sent to the Pope. The disturbed and unsettled state of affairs in England, and the premature death of Mary and Pole, put an end to all these elaborate schemes of monastic reconstitution and of church reformation on mediæval lines, as laid down by Mary and her adviser.

Another notable piece of work that issued from Pole's cabinet was a set of Injunctions, sent down to Brooks, bishop of Gloucester. Bishop Brooks had been cardinal Pole's delegate in the important Oxford trial of Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, which accounts for the fact of the Injunctions being specially sent to him. They were, however, no doubt issued to other diocesans. Their chief interest lies

in the nature of the directions which they contain; and they show us that Pole was really earnest in his wishes to promote a zealous God-fearing life among the clergy of the Church of England. Some of the points dwelt on are of real value and importance, and might well have been urged by the most saintly of the occupants of St. Augustine's chair; and even the doctrinal and ritualistic portions of these Injunctions, from Pole's own standpoint, belonged to the life and duties of every true pastor.

They desired the clergyman of the parish to preach, if he had the gift, frequently and diligently, not forgetting to declare from time to time the use of the ceremonies of the church. Authoritative homilies were to be published, and in the meantime portions of bishop Bonner's Necessary Doctrine were to be read to the people. The Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Ten Commandments, were to be taught in English. The Sacraments were to be ministered reverently and uniformly; divine service was to be celebrated distinctly; no priest was to haunt alehouses; and the "celibacy" direction was to be rigidly observed. The sick were to be visited with diligence; the priest was enjoined to give them good counsel for their souls, and was to remind them to make their wills in time and charitably to remember the poor, and other deeds of devotion. Confession was enjoined; and the names of all who confessed not in Lent, and who received not the Holy Sacrament according to the ancient order of the church, were to be sent to the ordinary. Inventories of all lands, jewels, plate, and ornaments belonging to the churches were to be made.

1555-1558.]

There were, however, in these Injunctions not a few directions which remind us of the great change which had just come over the church; such as the order to provide. a decent tabernacle, set in the midst of the high altar, to preserve the most blessed Sacrament under lock and key; a taper or lamp was to be kept burning before the same; a rood five feet in length at the least, not painted in cloth or boards, but cut in stone or wood, was to be provided. Parishioners were urged to resort to their churches, and to hear all divine service. Tithes were to be duly paid; the Holy Sacrament was to be received at Easter, while in Lent confession was to be made; reverent kneeling was enjoined at the time of the elevation of the Host in such places in the church where the blessed Sacrament might be seen and worshipped. The observance of the ceremonies practised in the medieval church, to which, as superstitious, such grave exception had been taken by the reformers, was carefully insisted upon-such as the use of holy bread, holy water, bearing of candles and of palms, receiving of ashes, creeping to the cross, going in procession. In addition to these things, the Injunctions of Pole directed that public-houses should be closed in time of divine service, and that no booths or merchandise should be permitted in churchyards on Sundays.

The singular dearth of conspicuously able men in the ranks of the mediaval revivalists of Mary's party was remarkable. Not one distinctly great churchman arose among the queen's adherents. Gardiner, the bishop of Winchester, the chancellor, among these emphatically holds the fore

319

most place. But Gardiner cannot be considered to have been either an ecclesiastic or theologian or statesman of the first rank; and singularly enough, he also never seems thoroughly to have enjoyed the queen's confidence. Between him and Pole, although outwardly friends, a mutual jealousy existed; but when Gardiner died, worn out with work and crushing anxieties, in 1555, queen Mary lost her ablest theologian and minister. Of the rest, cardinal Pole, although an earnest and bigoted Romanist, and a loyal and devoted servant of the queen, was a rash and imprudent statesman; and, as a theologian, he certainly occupied no distinguished position. Heath, the archbishop of York, who followed Gardiner as chancellor, was a man of considerable learning and of blameless character, and was largely respected for his integrity of purpose, but as a minister of state was inferior to Gardiner. Tunstall, the bishop of Durham, whose name so often appears in the history of these times, was one of the foremost of the Marian prelates. He, too, was generally respected and looked up to, but he was no leader of men; and as a theologian his powers and attainments can be fairly measured by his refusal to enter into any colloquy with Cranmer on the occasion of the longdrawn-out Oxford trial and disputation, when the great reforming archbishop was publicly interrogated, as we have seen, with a view to his deposition and degradation. Tunstall on this occasion declined to enter into any controversy, strangely alleging that Cranmer would rather shake his faith than be convinced by him.

Another of the more famous Marian divines has obtained in history the un