ments. Throughout the reign, although he did not quit the realm, he lived in complete obscurity, and in continual fear of his place of concealment being discovered. On one occasion, being compelled to flee by night from his pursuers, he sustained severe injury through a fall from his horse, which altogether disabled him for a time, and from the effects of which he never entirely recovered. Although under the necessity of frequently changing his abode, he nevertheless contrived to carry on his studies, and, long after, declared that he thus passed a time of far more solid enjoyment than when immersed in the varied duties and anxieties of the episcopal palace (ib. p. 483).
On the accession of Elizabeth he was one of the commissioners appointed (December 1558) to revise the prayer-book; but an ague detained him in the country, and in that important work he had consequently no share. It appears to have been his own wish to return to Cambridge, where he was anxious, above all things, to devote himself to the service of the university, the state of which he describes as 'miserable.' He soon, however, received a summons from Lordkeeper Bacon to repair to London 'for matter touching himself.' Surmising that he was marked out for high preferment, he plainly intimated his reluctance to leave Cambridge, declaring that he 'had rather have such a thing as Benet College ... a living of twenty nobles by the year at the most, than to dwell in the deanery of Lincoln, which is two hundred at the least' (ib. p. 51). A second summons (30 Dec), sent by Cecil in the name of the queen, made it clear that it was designed to appoint him to the vacant see of Canterbury. His 'nolo' was emphatic, and he urgently petitioned Elizabeth to be excused from the office, alleging, among other reasons, his infirmity resulting from his accident. But the pressure brought to bear upon him was more than he could resist, and he ultimately yielded. That his reluctance was genuine can hardly be questioned. He long afterwards, indeed, privately declared that 'if he had not been so much bound to the mother' (Anne Boleyn) 'he would not so soon have granted to serve the daughter' (Strype, ii. 121). Nor, when the difficulties which he foresaw are considered, can his conduct fairly be pronounced unreasonable, and not least among those difficulties was the aversion with which Elizabeth was known to look upon clerical marriages, and the fact that, in the new 'Injunctions' just issued, such marriages had been distinctly discouraged. But, his scruples once overcome, Parker showed himself as courageous and active as he had before been diffident, and even during the few months that preceded his consecration he ventured to confront the royal rapacity by successful opposition to a scheme whereby valuable lordships and manors were to be taken from certain bishoprics, and the loss imperfectly compensated by the bestowal of impropriations and tenths (Correspondence, pp. 97-101). With equal courage he advised Elizabeth to remove the crucifix and lighted candles in her private chapel. It was no slight addition to his anxieties that it devolved upon him to provide for the safe custody of the deprived recusant bishops Cuthbert Tunstal, Thirlby, and others. By general admission, his treatment of these ecclesiastics, at whose hands he had himself suffered much, was lenient and humane.
It was not until 18 July 1559, when the see of Canterbury had already been vacant for more than eight months, that the royal letters issued for Parker's election to the archbishopric. The election took place on 1 Aug., and on 9 Sept. the order for his consecration, as 'archbishop and pastor of the cathedral and metropolitan church of Christ at Canterbury,' was given under the great seal (State Papers, Dom. Eliz. vi. No.41). The ceremony acquired exceptional importance from the fact that the Roman ritual was not observed, a feature which led long after to the circulation of reports by unscrupulous members of the Roman catholic party of a kind calculated to bring the validity of the whole ceremony into question. As it was, it was not carried into effect without difficulty. The three bishops originally appointed to perform the act—Tunstal, Browne, and Poole—refused compliance; and on 6 Dec. a new commission was appointed, consisting of seven other bishops, who were empowered collectively to carry out the royal purpose. Of these seven, four—Barlow (formerly bishop of Bath and Wells), Scory (formerly bishop of Chichester), Coverdale (formerly bishop of Exeter), and Hodgkins (suffragan bishop of Bedford)—consented to perform the ceremony; and, the election having been confirmed on 9 Dec. at the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, the consecration took place on 17 Dec. in the chapel of Lambeth Palace.
Deeply conscious of the importance attaching to the ceremony as directly affecting the whole question of episcopal succession in the church of England, Parker caused an account of the order of the rites and ceremonies used on the occasion to be drawn up in Latin and deposited with other manuscripts, all of which he afterwards bequeathed
