[38] Gairdner, /Lollardy and the Reformation/, vol. ii., 304 sqq.
[39] Gairdner, /Hist. of the Eng. Church in the XVIIth Cent./, 177-8.
[40] Gairdner, /The Story of the English Bible/ (/Loll. and the Ref./, ii. 221 sqq.).
[41] /English Statutes/, 34 and 35 Hen. VIII., c. 50.
[42] Gairdner, /German Protestants and the Act of Six Articles/ (op.
cit., ii., 170-220.)
[43] Merriman, /Life and Letters of Thomas Cromwell/, 2 vols., 1902.
[44] Tytler, /England under Edward VI. and Mary/, 2 vols., 1839.
[45] Gasquet-Bishop, /Edw. VI. and the Book of Common Prayer/, 43-4.
[46] Cf. Dodd-Tierney, /Church Hist. of England/, ii., app. iii.
[47] Id., app. iv.
[48] Lee, /Edw. VI., Supreme Head/, 39.
[49] Gasquet-Bishop, op. cit., 69-77.
[50] Leach, /Eng. Schools at the Reformation/, 1-7.
[51] Gasquet-Bishop, op. cit., 92-96.
[52] /Cambridge Mod. History/, ii., 477.
[53] Gasquet-Bishop, op. cit., 83 sqq. Dixon, /History of the Church/, ii., 476.
[54] Gasquet-Bishop, op. cit., chap. ix.
[55] Dodd-Tierney, ii., app. ix.
[56] Gasquet-Bishop, op. cit., chap. x.
[57] /The First Prayer Book of King Edw. VI./, 1549 (Westminster Library). Proctor-Frere, /New History of the Book of Common Prayer/, 1901.
[58] Rose-Troup, /The Western Rebellion of 1549/, 1913.
[59] Russell, /Kett"s Rebellion/, 1859.
[60] Gairdner, /Lollardy and the Reformation/, iii., 125-7.
[61] /The Forme and Maner of makyng and consecratyng of Archebishoppes, Bishoppes, Priestes, and Deacons/.
[62] /Stat. 3rd and 4th, Edw. VI./, c. 10.
[63] Gairdner, op. cit., iii., 273.
[64] Lee, op. cit., 214.
[65] /Stat. 5th and 6th, Edw. III./, c. 50.
[66] Gairdner, op. cit., iii., 349-50.
[67] Gairdner, op. cit., iii., 376-77.
[68] Gairdner, op. cit., iii., 201.
CHAPTER III
CATHOLIC REACTION IN THE REIGN OF QUEEN MARY (1553-1558)
See bibliography, chap. i., ii., /State Papers/ (Home, Foreign, Venetian). /The Diary of Henry Machyn, etc., from 1550 to 1563/ (ed. by J. G. Nichols, 1854). Lingard, /History of England/ (vol.
v.). Gairdner, /Lollardy and the Reformation/, vol. iv. 1913.
Innes, /England under the Tudors/, 1905. Zimmermann, /Maria die Katholische/, 1896. Stone, /Mary I., Queen of England/, 1901.
Haile, /Life of Reginald Pole/, 1910. Zimmermann, /Kardinal Pole, sein Leben, und seine Schriften/, 1893. Lee, /Reginald Pole, Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury/. /Cambridge Modern History/, vol. ii., chap. xv.
Lady Jane Grey might be proclaimed queen, but until Mary had been lodged safely in the Tower the triumph of the conspiracy was not a.s.sured. Efforts had been made to induce her to come to London, but warned by secret messages dispatched by her London friends, she fled from her residence in Hundon to a castle in Suffolk, from which she addressed letters to the council and to the prominent n.o.blemen of England a.s.serting her rights to the throne. From all parts of the country thousands flocked to join her standard, while the frantic appeals of Northumberland and his colleagues failed to awaken any genuine response even in London itself. Northumberland, much against his will, consented to lead the army against Mary, who was advancing towards the capital, but after his departure, the members of the council, convinced that their cause was hopeless, deserted their leader, and permitted Mary to be proclaimed (19th July).
Northumberland surrendered himself to the mercy of the new queen, and was committed to the Tower together with his princ.i.p.al adherents. On the 3rd August Mary made her formal entrance into London where she received an enthusiastic welcome from the citizens. Her first care was to liberate some of those who had been arrested during the previous reign, Bishops Gardiner, Bonner, Heath, and Day, the Duke of Norfolk, and Lord Courtenay, the latter of whom had been in confinement for fifteen years. As a fervent Catholic, who had upheld the Ma.s.s in the days of Edward VI. even at the risk of her life, there could be no doubt about the new queen"s religious views, and in many of the churches in London and throughout the country the English service gave place immediately to the Ma.s.s. In an interview with the lord mayor of London, and afterwards in the public proclamation addressed to all her subjects, she announced that, though it was her intention to follow the Catholic religion, she had no desire of resorting to compulsion to force it on her people against their will, and she exhorted them to live together in Christian harmony, avoiding the "new found devilish terms of papist and heretic." As a sign that vengeance and cruelty were no part of her programme she exercised great mercy towards those who had conspired to deprive her of the throne, only a few of whom, including the Earl of Northumberland, were put to death. Possibly in the hope of playing upon the feelings of the queen and of securing a pardon Northumberland announced publicly his return to the old faith and his acceptance of the Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist.
Charles V., on whose counsel Mary relied, advised her to proceed cautiously with the restoration of religion in England. Many of the younger generation had been taught to regard papal supremacy as an unwarrantable interference with English independence, while those who had been enriched by the plunder of the Church had every reason for upholding the Edwardine settlement. For their part in promoting the conspiracy against the queen as well as for various other offences laid to their charge Cranmer, Ridley, Hooper, Latimer, and Coverdale were committed to prison; Bishop Ponet went into hiding, and Barlow made his escape from the country. Later on all these were deprived of their Sees. Gardiner was restored to his See of Winchester, and appointed Lord Chancellor, Tunstall to Durham, Heath to Worcester, Day to Chichester, and Voysey to Exeter. Foreign scholars like Peter Martyr, John a Lasco and their friends, whom Cranmer had brought over to teach the English people the new religion, were granted pa.s.sports and permitted to leave the kingdom. Their example was followed by John Knox, and by many others of the married clergy.
In her heart Mary detested the t.i.tle supreme head of the Church, and was most anxious to bring about a reconciliation with Rome. When the news of her accession reached Rome it brought joy to the heart of Julius III. He determined at once to send a legate to England, and he selected for this office the great English Cardinal, whose devotion to his country was equalled only by his loyalty to the Church. Cardinal Pole was appointed legate with full powers, and was entrusted also with the work of effecting a reconciliation between the Emperor and Henry II. of France. Charles V. had no desire to see Pole in England installed as Queen Mary"s chief adviser. He had planned a marriage between Mary and his eldest son, afterwards Philip II. of Spain, and fully conscious that Pole might oppose such an alliance as dangerous both for England and for religion, he was determined to delay the arrival of the legate until the negotiations for the marriage had been completed.
In October 1553 Mary was crowned solemnly by Bishop Gardiner at Westminster Abbey. She bound herself by oath to preserve the liberties of her kingdom, and to maintain the rights of the Holy See. Four days later she attended the Ma.s.s of the Holy Ghost at the opening of Parliament, and listened to the address in which her Lord Chancellor exhorted the members to show their repentance for and detestation of the heresy and schism of which he and they had been guilty, by returning to the unity of the Catholic Church. All the new treasons, felonies, and praemunire penalties of the previous reigns were abolished on the ground, it was declared, that Mary hoped to win the obedience of her subjects through love rather than through fear. The marriage of Henry VIII. with Catharine of Aragon was declared valid, and consequently Mary was acknowledged as the lawful successor to the throne. The Edwardine religious settlement, including the Acts of Uniformity, the Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal, the Forty-two Articles and the permission for clergymen to marry, was swept away, and an Act was pa.s.sed against disturbing religious services or exhibiting irreverence towards the Eucharist. All this legislation was in perfect conformity with the wishes of Convocation, which had met shortly after the meeting of Parliament, and which with only a few dissentients condemned the Book of Common Prayer, and re-affirmed the belief of the English clergy in the doctrine of Transubstantiation.
Though the queen announced her dissatisfaction with the t.i.tle of supreme head, and granted full freedom of discussion regarding it, Parliament showed itself decidedly unwilling to restore the jurisdiction of the Pope. It was not that the members had any real objection to the change from the doctrinal point of view, but, fearing that a return to Roman obedience might involve a restoration of the ecclesiastical property seized or alienated during the previous reign, they wished to secure their property before they made their submission to the Pope.
For so far Mary had acted with considerable mildness and prudence in carrying out her religious programme, against which as yet no serious opposition had been manifested. The question of her marriage, however, was destined to create dissension between herself and her subjects.
The Emperor and the imperial amba.s.sador urged her to accept the hand of Philip, on the ground that by such a marriage internal jealousies and dissensions might be avoided, and the triumph of Catholicism might be a.s.sured. Many of the members of the council and the vast majority of the English people were opposed to such a union. They feared that were a foreign ruler to become the husband of their queen he must have of necessity the chief voice in English affairs. They believed, therefore, that England would be involved in all the wars of Spain, and that were an heir to be born of such a union, England, instead of being an independent nation, might become a mere Spanish province. The enemies of Mary"s religious programme thought they saw in the Spanish marriage an opportunity of overturning her government, and of re-establishing Protestantism in the country. Taking advantage of the unpopularity of this proposal they appealed to the patriotism and love of independence of the English people, and succeeded in winning to their side many who were at least neutral in regard to her religious proposals. It was planned by some to bring about a marriage between the Princess Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay, both of whom had claims to the throne, and to set them up as rivals to Queen Mary. The French amba.s.sador, alarmed at the prospect of Mary"s marriage with the hereditary enemy of France, encouraged the conspirators with promises of a.s.sistance, not, indeed, because France desired the accession of Elizabeth, but in the hope that during the confusion that would ensue it might be possible to a.s.sert the claims of Mary Queen of Scotland, the prospective wife of the Dauphin of France.
Notwithstanding the pet.i.tion presented against the Spanish marriage by Parliament, Mary persisted in the policy suggested to her by the Emperor. Flemish envoys arrived on New Year"s Day 1554 to arrange the preliminaries. The marriage treaty was signed and two days later it was announced to the mayor and the chief citizens of London. This was the signal for the conspirators, who had been working secretly for months, to bring their designs to a head. News soon arrived in London that Sir Peter Carew had risen in Devon and had captured Exeter, that Sir Thomas Wyatt was rousing the men of Kent, and that Sir James Crofts had gone to Wales and the Duke of Suffolk to the midlands to rally the forces of disloyalty. But the great body of the English people were too deeply attached to their sovereign to respond to the appeal of the rebel leaders. Wyatt"s movement alone threatened to be dangerous. As his forces advanced to the gates of London, Mary, who had shown the greatest courage throughout the crisis, went in person to the Guildhall to call upon the citizens of London to defend their sovereign. Her invitation was responded to with enthusiasm, and when Wyatt had succeeded in forcing his way as far as Ludgate Circus, he was obliged to retire and to surrender himself a prisoner to the queen"s forces. Mary, who for so far had followed a policy of extreme mildness, felt that she could do so no longer, and that she must make it clear to her subjects that to declare war on the throne was a serious crime. Wyatt, the Duke of Suffolk, father of Lady Jane Grey, and several of the leaders were tried and put to death. Already in November Lady Jane Grey, her husband and Cranmer had been condemned to death as traitors. The sentence was not, however, carried out, nor was it likely to have been, had not the rebellion shown that Mary"s enemies might utilise such dangerous claimants to the throne for stirring up new disaffection. Lady Jane Grey[1] and her husband were put to death on Tower Hill (Feb. 1554); several of the other conspirators were punished only by imprisonment, and a general pardon was published for the great body of the insurgents. Mary"s treatment of the offenders, however the execution of Lady Jane Grey may be regarded, was in striking contrast to what might have been expected to have taken place in similar circ.u.mstances had the throne been occupied by her father or even by her sister Elizabeth. From the confessions of some of the rebels as well as from the correspondence of the French amba.s.sador serious evidence was furnished to show that Elizabeth was implicated in the rebellion. She was summoned to London to answer the charges brought against her, and though she protested her innocence she was committed to the Tower. Many members of the council were convinced of her guilt, but Mary, refusing to believe that her sister was privy to the designs of the conspirators, ordered her release.
The terms of the marriage treaty having been confirmed by Parliament (April 1554) Philip arrived in England, and on the 25th July the marriage was celebrated in Westminster Abbey. Philip and Mary were proclaimed "by the grace of G.o.d King and Queen of England, France, Naples, Jerusalem, and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Princes of Spain and Sicily, Arch-Dukes of Austria, Dukes of Milan, Burgundy and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders, and Tyrol." The Emperor had at last carried his point, and, as the presence of Cardinal Pole in England could no longer prove a danger to his designs, the latter was now free to come to England. During the early portions of the year steps had been taken to prepare England for the worthy reception of the papal legate. In March four of the reforming bishops were deprived of their Sees on the ground that they were married, and three others who held their appointments only by letters patent of Edward VI. were removed. On the 1st April six new bishops were consecrated by Gardiner to fill the vacant Sees. Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley were sent down to Oxford to defend their views in a public discussion, arranged undoubtedly with the object of forwarding the national reconciliation with Rome. There were still, however, difficulties that must be removed before Cardinal Pole could be allowed to land on English soil.
The real objection to the return of England to the Roman obedience was the ownership of the Church lands, and from what had happened in the two previous sessions it was perfectly clear that those who had benefited by the plunder of the Church lands were determined to refuse to make restoration. After prolonged negotiations Pole agreed that, while the Pope could not approve of what had been done, he would not insist on the restoration of ecclesiastical property.
When everything had been arranged Parliament was summoned to meet in November 1554. The sheriffs were instructed to see that men "of the wise, grave and Catholic sort" should be returned. An Act was pa.s.sed immediately reversing the sentence of Attainder against Cardinal Pole.
The legate hastened on his way to London where he was welcomed by the King and Queen and Parliament. A supplication was adopted unanimously in the House of Lords, and with but one dissentient in the House of Commons, requesting the King and Queen to procure from the legate absolution from heresy and schism for the English people and a reconciliation of the nation with the Pope. Cardinal Pole attended Parliament on the 30th to p.r.o.nounce the sentence of absolution, which was received by the King, Queen, Lords, and Commons on bended knees.
This happy event was celebrated by a procession through the streets of London in which the clergymen, aldermen, and citizens took part.
Parliament pet.i.tioned that the old jurisdiction of the clergy should be restored, that the liberty granted to the Church by the Magna Charta should be confirmed, and that the English religious service- books of the previous reign should be delivered to the flames. Once it was made clear that the owners of ecclesiastical property should not be disturbed there was no difficulty in procuring a complete reversal of all the laws that had been pa.s.sed against the apostolic See of Rome since the twentieth year of Henry VIII. (3rd January 1555).[2]
The close connexion of the leaders of the Reformers with the late rebellion, the ugly pamphlets that made their way into England from Frankfurt and Geneva, the fact that prayers were offered in secret for the speedy death of the queen, that a shot had been fired at one of the royal preachers while he was in the pulpit, and that a violent commotion was being stirred up, that led later on to a priest being struck down at the altar by one who is designated by Foxe as "a faithful servant of G.o.d,"[3] made it necessary for the safety of the crown and the advancement of religion to deal harshly with those who themselves had relied on persecution for the promotion of their designs. Mary herself, Philip, and Cardinal Pole did not favour a recourse to violent measures, but they were overruled by the judgment of those who should have known best the character of the opponents with whom they had to deal. An Act was pa.s.sed renewing the legislation that had been made in the reigns of Richard II., Henry IV., and Henry V. for the suppression of the Lollard heresy.