The Popular History of England/Volume III/Chapter I
CHAPTER I.
Events immediately after the death of Henry VIII.--Executors of his Will--Somerset chosen Protector--Character of the young King--War with Scotland--Scottish alliance with France--Somerset's desire for union between England and Scotland--Invasion--Battle of Pinkie--Progress of the Reformation--Parliament of 1547--Various Statutes in matters of religion--Proclamation against certain processions and ceremonies--The Act for the Uniformity of Service--Publication of the Book of Common Prayer.
On Friday, the 28th of January, 1547, Edward, the son of king Henry VIII., is sojourning at Hertford Castle. His father lies dead in the palace at Whitehall. Between one and two o'clock of the morning of Saturday, the 29th, the earl of Hertford, his uncle, is also at Hertford Castle. Not twenty-four hours have elapsed since he was at the side of the dying king. He has left a confidential friend behind him, sir William Paget, one of the secretaries of state; and in answer to a despatch which has been forwarded to him, the earl writes, before day-break of that January morning, with regard to the late king's Will, "that it might be well considered how much thereof were necessary to be published;" adding, "for divers respects I think it not convenient to satisfy the world." The Will was in safe custody. Hertford had locked it up; but he confides in Paget, and says in this letter, "I have sent you the key of the Will."[1] As the day advances, prince Edward and his uncle, with sir Anthony Brown, ride to Enfield. There, in the Manor House, dwells the lady Elizabeth. The son of Henry by Jane Seymour is a few months above nine years of age. Henry's daughter by Anne Boleyn has seen thirteen years and four months. This boy and girl are attached to each other. Their elder sister, Mary, who is now in her thirty-second year, has few sentiments in common with these young people. She clings to the principles and institutions which, since their births, have been rapidly perishing. They have been taught to believe that the new opinions to which she has been compelled to assent will go forward into a more complete and permanent revolution. Edward and Elizabeth are brought together at Enfield, before their father's death is declared to them. "Never," says Hayward, the historian of Edward VI., "was sorrow more sweetly set forth."
The parliament, which was sitting at the time of king Henry's decease, met on the 29th of January, and transacted business without receiving any intimation of the great change in the monarchy. On the 31st, on which day Edward was conducted to the Tower of London and proclaimed king, Wriothesley, the chancellor, announced to the lords and commons the death of "their late dread lord." A portion of the king's Will was then read, and the parliament was dissolved. That Will was dated the 30th of December; and under it sixteen executors were appointed, to exercise the powers of the crown during Edward's minority. To assist these executors in cases of doubt, a second council of twelve persons was also nominated. At the accession of Henry VI., at the age of nine months, the peers assembled and issued writs for a 'parliament. Henry V. had desired by his Will that his brother Gloucester should be regent; but the parliament declared that a king could not appoint a regent during the minority of his successor. They committed a limited power to Gloucester under the title of Protector. The Executors of Henry VIII. raised the earl of Hertford to that office. The very act of appointing executors was the assertion of the royal prerogative to deal with the kingdom as with a private estate. A servile parliament had passed a statute under which Henry thus attempted to supersede the ancient powers of the legislature. The solemn trust conferred upon numerous executors propitiated the ruling passion strong in death; but the administrative power of many would necessarily be usurped by one, or by a few. Wriothesley opposed the nomination of any one of the council with an authority superior to the rest. Hertford reasonably enough pointed out the difficulties of conducting a government with such a large executive. The chancellor was overruled. The influence of Hertford prevailed. He was soon after created duke of Somerset; and Wriothesley was removed from office; having in his struggle for power committed a political offence. In these proceedings, the party of the Reformation was triumphant. Without the support of a powerful party Somerset could not have gone so direct to the object of his ambition. No one appears to have offered any resistance but the ex-chancellor; and after Edward's coronation, which took place on the 28th of February, the Protector was not only confirmed in his authority by letters-patent under the great seal, but his powers were extended, and the functions of the executors were merged in those of a general council, who were bound to act by the advice and consent of the real head of the state. The boy-king had been crowned and anointed. He had taken the coronation oath. He had proclaimed a general pardon. But Somerset was the sovereign of England for the time being. He and his faithful co-executors had wealth as well as titles showered upon them, under the pretence that the late king had, by a clause in his will, required his executors to make good all that he had promised; and witnesses were ready to prove what these promises were. The same spirit of rapacity which had swallowed up so large a portion of the church property, in the days of Henry, was still unsated; and the zeal for a reformed church, earnest as it was amongst the more intelligent and truly religious of the nation, was thus exposed to reproach and misconstruction. When it was alleged that Henry VIII. had promised the earl of Hertford the revenues of six good prebends, the disinterested sincerity of the Protector in seeking a further reformation of religion might well be doubted.
In tracing the course of events in the reign of Edward VI., a reign which lasted only six years and a half we feel strongly impressed with the contrast between the influence of the personal character of a king whose will was almost absolute, and that of the personal character of a king whose nonage prevented him exercising any real control over public affairs. And yet we cannot speak of the tendencies of the government without feeling that the disposition, the abilities, and the acquirements of this youth, who died before he had completed his sixteenth year, could not be without some effect upon the opinions of the time, if they had little share in the direction of its policy. The "Journal" written with his own hand, which is preserved in the Cotton Library, is very remarkable, not only for what it contains but for what it omits. There is not the slightest display of learning in it there are no puerilities. It is a very simple record of public affairs, without any expression of strong feeling. Not exhibiting any large or original views, it yet manifests a perfect acquaintance with the general nature of the matters which came under the writer's observation. A very competent judge has said, "It is perhaps somewhat brief and dry for so young an author; but the adoption of such a plan, and the accuracy with which it is written, bear marks of an untainted taste and of a considerate mind."[2] Of the first and second years of his reign, and of three months of the third year, it presents only a short summary. From the 24th of March, 1549, it becomes a Diary, and is continued till the 30th of November, 1552. In the introductory part, his own birth is recorded; and his early education is thus described: "Afterwards was brought up, till he came to six years old, among the women. At the sixth year of his age he was brought up in learning by Master Doctor Cox, who was after his almoner, and John Cheke, Master of Arts, two well-learned men, who sought to bring him up in learning of tongues, of the scripture, of philosophy, and all liberal sciences. Also John Belmaine, Frenchman, did teach him the French language." In a very curious paper, without date, addressed to Edward by William Thomas, clerk of the council, a series of eighty-five questions upon matters of policy are put before him. These are of the most general nature, but of much significance such as, "Whether it be better for the commonwealth that the power be in the nobility or in the people?" These questions the writer recommends by saying, "there is not so small a one amongst them as will not minister matter of much discourse worthy the argument and debating; which your highness may, either for pastime or in earnest, propone to the wisest men."[3] The very nature of these questions is some testimony to the opinion held of this prince's understanding; and this opinion may be valued at a higher rate than the eulogy of Cardan, an Italian physician, who saw him professionally in 1552, that he was "a marvellous boy"--"monstrificus puellus."
At the period of Henry's death England was at peace. The pacification of 1546 with France included Scotland; and it was a leading object of Henry's policy, which he held to in his dying hour, that the union of England and Scotland should be cemented by the marriage of his son with the child Mary, the Scottish queen. The attempt to force this marriage upon Scotland had aroused the old national spirit of independence in her nobility; and the proposal of Somerset, that the former treaty for this marriage should be renewed and ratified, was coldly listened to. Within a month after the accession of Edward, the Council Book shows that a state of active hostility was approaching. On the 27th of February, Sir Andrew Dudley is appointed to the command of the ship Pauncy, to cruise in the North Seas, off the English and Scottish coasts.[4] In less than a fortnight, Dudley had captured the Scottish vessel Lion. This casual encounter appears to have made a strong impression upon the young king, for it is recorded with more than usual minuteness in his Journal. At this juncture an event occurred which materially affected the relations of England with France and Scotland. Francis I. died on the 31st of March, at Rambouillet. He had reigned thirty-two years; during which period his affairs had been so mixed up with those of Henry VIII., either as friends or enemies, that their fates seemed in some degree to be linked together, and Francis had entertained a notion that he should die in the same year as the English king. "When Henry died, Francis caused a funeral service to be celebrated in the church of Notre Dame; and he gradually fell into a state of dejection, which, if not a tribute of friendship to the memory of his rival in pomp and pageantry, was a submission to the lesson, which even kings must learn, that "all is vanity." The son and successor of Francis, Henry II., was playing at tennis, two days after his father's death, by advice of his physicians.[5] He gave a more convincing proof of his slight regard for his father's memory, by calling about him the counsellors against whom he had received a death-bed warning. Twenty days before the death of Francis, a treaty had been concluded between France and England. This the new king of France refused to ratify. He preferred to cultivate an alliance with the Scots. The duke of Guise and the Cardinal of Lorraine were the brothers of the queen-dowager of Scotland, and they were amongst the chief advisers of the French king. To stay the progress of the reformed opinions in Scotland, and to prevent the marriage of the young Mary with Edward, were sufficient motives to a decided change of policy. The castle of St. Andrews, after the murder of cardinal Beaton, in 1546, had been held against the regent Arran, by those who were favourable to the English alliance. A truce between the regent and the possessors was concluded in February, 1547; and they subsequently proceeded to make a treaty with Somerset, in which they engaged to forward the projected marriage, and to aid any English force that should enter Scotland for the purpose of obtaining possession of the queen's person. The French government, in the summer of 1547, sent a fleet to assist in the reduction of the castle. It was finally surrendered on the 29th of July, and was afterwards demolished. On the 2nd of September, the protector crossed the border at Berwick, with a powerful invading army.
It would be injustice to the policy of Somerset to assume that he entered upon the war with Scotland in the arrogant spirit with which Henry VIII. had conducted his negotiations and his assaults. There was a treaty under the Great Seal of Scotland for the marriage of Edward with Mary; but the determination to demand its fulfilment was conducted in a tone of moderation, in the first instance, which shows that the empire of force was gradually yielding to the empire of opinion. The Protector addressed a remarkable letter" to the nobility and counsellors, gentlemen and commons and all other the inhabitants of the realm of Scotland," in which, with "greeting and peace," he sets forth the desire of England to establish the amity of the two countries by the union of the Crowns. In this document we recognise the expression of the sagacious statesman rather than that of the ambitious intriguer of one who saw what was inevitable, but who did not sufficiently estimate the force of national pride and individual interest in retarding a great good. What the statesmen of queen Anne had the utmost difficulty in accomplishing, the minister of king Edward vainly expected to realise by appeals to great principles which were imperfectly understood even two centuries later. Somerset said to the people of Scotland, that living in one island, speaking the same language, alike in manners and conditions, it was "unmeet, unnatural, and unchristian, that there should be betwixt us so mortal war, who, in respect of all other nations, be and should be like as two brethren." He proposed a solid union by the marriage of king Edward and queen Mary the circumstances being so favourable that the Divine Providence manifestly pointed out the road to amity. In this union of two kingdoms, England was ready "to take the indifferent old name of Britain again, because nothing should be left on our part to be offered. . . . We seek not to take from you your laws nor customs, but we seek to redress your oppressions, which of divers ye do sustain." If eloquent writing could have been more effectual than sturdy blows, such an appeal as this might have prevented the battle of Pinkie: "If we two, being made one by amity, be most able to defend us against all nations, arid having the sea for wall, the mutual love for garrison, and God for defence, should make so noble and well-agreeing monarchy, that neither in peace we may be ashamed, nor in war afraid of any worldly or foreign power, why should not you be as desirous of the same, and have as much cause to rejoice at it as we?"[6] But the words of peace were not hearkened to. The influence of France prevailed. The priests stirred up the Scottish people to resist the English heretics. Knox was a prisoner in France; and the friends of the Reformation were scattered and proscribed.
Somerset advanced from Berwick along the shore, whilst a fleet under lord Clinton kept the sea within view of the coast; and as the army marched by Dunbar, the ships were seen sailing into the Firth of Forth. Turning westward the cavalry forded the river Lynn, and the infantry crossed at Linton Bridge. Bands of Scottish horsemen now began to appear; and the earl of Warwick was nearly taken prisoner in a rash advance. On the 8th the English were encamped near Preston-pans; and the fleet was at anchor near Musselburgh. The Scottish army was within a distance of little more than two miles; the ridge of Falside being between the two hosts. On the 9th, after a sharp skirmish, Somerset and Warwick reconnoitred the Scots from this hill. They occupied a strong position, with the sea on their left flank, and a deep marsh on their right. The river Esk protected their front; and the bridge crossing the Esk was held and strongly defended. On the morning of the 10th, when the English army began to move, it was discovered that the Scots had abandoned their strong position, and had crossed the river. They had taken up an opinion that the English were about to retreat to their ships, and would escape unless attacked in their camp. This belief was fatal to them. Although the Scots fought with the most determined valour, and successfully resisted a furious charge of the English cavalry, their rash movement had placed a portion of their force within the ability of the English "to compass them," says one present in the battle," in that they should no ways escape us; the which by our force and number we were as well able to do as a spinner's web to catch a swarm of bees."[7] The fight had been very doubtful until this superiority was gained in one portion of the field. A general panic then ensued; and the Scottish army fled before their slaughtering pursuers. We shall not follow Patten, the "Londoner," in his narrative of the horrible traces of this slaughter, by the sands of Leith, by the high road and King's Park to Edinburgh, and through the marsh to Dalkeith. The pursuit was not ended till nightfall; when the victors returned to plunder the Scottish camp. This great victory the last field, most happily, in which England and Scotland were engaged in a quarrel that could be called national was without any benefit beyond the unsubstantial glory of the victors. Ten thousand Scots perished, and fifteen hundred were taken prisoners, without any serious loss on the part of the English. Leith was set on fire. Several castles were taken. But in three weeks after the battle of Pinkie, Somerset recrossed the Tweed; and entered London on the 8th of October, declining, however, any triumphant reception. The young king congratulated his uncle in a short and sensible letter written on the 18th of September;[8] and the successful general received additional grants of landed estates. Some have ascribed the sudden return of Somerset to the necessity of resisting intrigues that were proceeding against him in the English council. It is probable that he trusted more to the gradual effects of his victory upon the minds of the Scottish nation, than to any immediate attempts to control the course of its government. But the spirit of resistance to the English heretics was excited rather than allayed by the disaster of the Black Saturday, as the day of Pinkie was long called. The desired amity was still far distant. There was a young man in the battle whose influence upon the politics of Scotland was ultimately more powerful than the prowess of the Protector, of whom he was a confidential servant. In that field the future great minister of Elizabeth "was like to have been slain; but was miraculously saved by one that, putting forth his arm, to thrust Mr. Cecil out of the level of the cannon, had his arm stricken off."[9]
Before the departure of Somerset for Scotland writs had been issued to summon a parliament. During the seven months which had elapsed of the reign of Edward the intentions of the government as to the reform of religion had been decidedly manifested; and there could be little doubt that a parliament would carry forward the principles of which the archbishop of Canterbury and the Protector were now the open and fearless advocates. Cranmer and his coadjutors in the church sought to prepare a broad and solid foundation for their reforms, in the enlightenment of the people. Vain ceremonies and superstitious observances might be attacked by statutes and proclamations. The ancient rubbish might be cleared away by the strong hand. But a fairer temple could not be built up except by the force of national opinion. The influence of the printing-press and the influence of the pulpit were to be exerted to lead the people to think, and in thinking, to reject the tyranny which had so long kept them in darkness. Cranmer had selected the Paraphrase of the New Testament, by Erasmus, as a fitting book to be translated into English, and set up in churches. It was the work of one of the most moderate of reformers, and contained little that could be offensive to the professors of the old faith. But any mode of enlightening the people was offensive to the anti-reforming party in the church; and Gardiner, bishop of "Winchester, attacked this translation with clever bitterness which many a dignified ecclesiastic, even to this day, has been proud to imitate. One objection was made by Gardiner to the circulation of the Paraphrase, which may deserve a passing notice. He says that the injunctions to set up the book "charge the realm for buying rather above 20,000£. than under; whereof I have made account by estimate of the number of buyers, and the price of the whole books." The Paraphrase is in two folio volumes. It was translated by several persons; and each portion of the book being separately paged, it was either issued in sections, as it came from the press, or was divided amongst many printers to secure a rapid completion. The cost of this book, thus objected to by Gardiner, was probably as injurious to its circulation as "the arrogant ignorance of the translator," which he unsparingly ridiculed. In the same spirit the bishop of Winchester attacked the Book of Homilies, "appointed by the king's majesty to be declared, and read by all parsons, vicars, or curates, every Sunday in their churches, where they have cure." "With all his rancour and prejudice there is a boldness and honesty in Gardiner's remonstrances against the measures of this period, which were ill answered by committing him to the Fleet. His voice was thus silenced before the meeting of parliament. An ecclesiastical visitation, to which Gardiner and Bonner, the bishop of London, were strongly opposed, went forward during the Protector's absence in Scotland. The kingdom was divided into six circuits; and the commissioners in each had to inquire as to the removal of images, when they were abused by pilgrimages and offerings; whether the Scriptures were read, and the Litany sung, in English; whether the clergy declared to their parishioners the articles for the abolition of superfluous holidays; whether they diligently taught their parishioners, and especially the youth, the Pater Noster, the articles of our faith, and the Ten Commandments, in English; whether the Bible, of the largest volume in English, was provided in some convenient place in the church. These, and many other subjects of inquiry, furnished a clear assurance that the government was not disposed to slumber over the work of the Reformation. The commissioners appear to have been armed in some particulars not only with a power of inquiry, but of absolute authority to repress abuses. There was no open resistance to their proceedings. Burnet says, that when the Protector returned from Scotland, "he found the visitors had performed their visitation, and all had given obedience. And those who expounded the secret pro- vidences of God with an eye to their own opinions, took great notice of this, that on the same day on which the visitors removed, and destroyed, most of the images in London, their armies were so successful in Scotland at Pinkie- field."[10]
The parliament which assembled on the 4th of November, 1547, sat only till the 24th of December; but in those fifty days it passed some measures of the highest importance. The "Act for the repeal of certain statutes concerning treasons, felonies, &c.," swept away the manifold treasons which had been created, by statute after statute, in the reign of Henry VIII. In the reign of Richard II. the same process of making new treasons had been resorted to; and the statute of Henry IV. by which they are abrogated, says that "no man knew how he ought to behave himself, to do, speak, or say, for doubt of such pains of treason." So it was when Edward VI. came to the throne; and the remedy, as in the reign of Henry IV., was to go back to the Statute of Treasons of the 25th of Edward III., and entirely to repeal what Blackstone calls the "new-fangled treasons" of "the bloody reign of Henry VIII."[11] By this act of the 1st of Edward VI., all "estatutes touching, mentioning, or in any wise concerning religion," the statutes of Richard II., of Henry V., and of Henry VIII., "concerning punishment and reformation of heretics and Lollards;" the recent statutes of the Six Articles, and against uttering certain books; and "all and every other act concerning doctrine and matter of religion," were repealed and utterly annulled. All new Felonies made by statute since the 1st of Henry VIII. were also repealed. The penalties for affirming that the king is not supreme head of the Church were, however, retained. In this comprehensive statute, the despotic law of the preceding reign, that the Proclamations of the King in Council should be as valid as acts of parliament, was, further, wholly repealed.[12] Whatever might be the errors of the Protector's administration, this Statute alone furnishes a proof that the detestable spirit of unbridled tyranny which was the characteristic of the second half of the reign of Henry was not to be perpetuated. In the rebellion of 1549, when the insurgents were moved by the enemies of the Reformation to desire that the laws should be placed again on their tyrannous foundation, Somerset, writing in the name of the king, thus adverted to the circumstances of their repeal: "The Six Articles, and the statutes that made words treason, and other such severe laws, ye seem to require again; the which all our whole parliament almost, on their knees, required us to abolish and put away; and when we condescended thereto, with a whole voice gave us most humble thanks, for they thought before that no man was sure of his life, lands, or goods. And would you have these laws again? Will you that we shall resume the scourge again, and hard snaffle for your mouths?"[13] In this short parliament an act was passed regarding "the Sacrament of the Altar." It imposed the penalties of fine and imprisonment upon such as by preaching, reading, arguments, talks, rhymes, songs, or plays, "call it by such vile and unseemly words as Christian ears do abhor to hear rehearsed." There can be no doubt that the abuse and ribaldry with which the doctrine of the real presence had been assailed, had seriously tended to bring all religion into contempt, and had nourished a spirit of irreverence wholly opposed to the principles of the Reformation. But coupled with this enactment was a clause that marked the distinction between the Romish and the Reformed Church, by prescribing that the Sacrament should be administered in both kinds the bread and the wine thus providing that the cup should not be refused to the laity. The people, according to the usage of the primitive church, were to receive the sacrament with the priest.[14] By another Statute, bishops were to be elected by the king's letters patent, and process in the ecclesiastical courts was to be in the king's name.[15] Another Act, which indicates a good intention most unrighteously carried out, provides that all the revenues of chauntries, by which vain opinions of purgatory and masses were upheld, should be bestowed upon the crown; considering that "the alteration, change, and amendment of the same, and converting to good and godly uses, as in erecting of Grammar-Schools to the education of youth in virtue and godliness, the further augmenting of the universities, and better provision for the poor and needy," could not be effected in any other way than by committing their disposition to the king and his council.[17] Cranmer, who knew the avidity with which the rapacious courtiers seized upon the spoils of the Church, had the honesty to vote against this bill. The great Reformer was in a minority with Bonner, the most intolerant enemy of Reformation.
The parliament had been prorogued till April, 1548; but, the houses having met, it was alleged that the war betwixt England and Scotland had prevented the attendance of many members, and parliament was again prorogued, and did not finally meet till the 2nd of January, 1549. During this interval of legislation the country was in an unsettled state. The Statute against Vagabonds, passed in the first session, that cruel enactment which Edward in his Journal calls "an extreme law" had removed none of the evils of this period of transition.[18] The Reformation kept on its steady course; offending the greater number of the people who clung to ancient habits, but gradually winning over the thoughtful and educated to an earnest reception of its principles. In February, 1548, a proclamation went forth to forbid the carrying of candles on Candlemas-day; taking ashes on Ash Wednesday; and bearing palms on Palm Sunday. The commemoration of Christ's entry into Jerusalem was, in some places, burlesqued in the ancient procession of the wooden ass, before which the people prostrated themselves, and strewed their palm-branches. Burnet has described the differences of opinion as to the abolition of these old ceremonies: "The country-people generally loved all these shows, processions, and assemblies, as things of diversion: and judged it a dull business only to come to church for divine worship and the hearing of sermons: therefore they were much delighted with the gaiety and cheerfulness of these rites. But others, observing that they kept up all these things just as the heathens did their plays and festivities for their gods, judged them contrary to the gravity and simplicity of the Christian religion, and were earnest to have them removed."[18] But the Reformers gave the people something of far higher value than the shows and processions which they took away. They gave them an English Liturgy.
The first measure of the Parliament of 1549 was "An Act for the Uniformity of Service," &c. The preamble states that the king having appointed" the archbishop of Canterbury, and certain of the most learned and discreet bishops and other learned men of this realm," that they should "draw and make one convenient and meet order of common and open prayer and administration of the sacraments," they had "by the aid of the Holy Ghost, with one uniform agreement concluded and set forth" the same, "in a book entitled the Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, after the use of the Church of England."[19] This form of service was to be read by all ministers in cathedrals and parish churches, from the ensuing feast of Pentecost, under penalties for refusal; and the book of the said service was to be obtained at the cost of the parishioners, before that festival. The office of the Communion had been previously issued as a separate publication. Of the "Book of the Common Prayer" there were two authorised printers, Richard Grafton and Edward Whitchurch. They appear to have commenced the issue as fast as their presses could produce copies; some having the date of March, 1549; some of May, some of June. The price of a copy was limited, thus, by a notice on the last leaf of the folio volume: "The king's majesty, by the advice of his most dear uncle the Lord Protector, and other his highness 1 council, straitly chargeth and commandeth that no manner of person do sell this present book, unbound, above the price of two shillings and twopence the piece; and the same bound in paste or in boards, not above the price of three shillings and eightpence the piece."[20] "With some variations in a subsequent edition of 1552, which was called "the second book," this Liturgy is not essentially different from that of the present day. It was based upon the ancient catholic services, which had been handed down from the primitive ages of the Church; and which the English people had for generations heard sung or said, without comprehending their meaning. In the western insurrection of 1549, the rebels declared, "We will have the mass in Latin, as was before." The answer of Cranmer to this point of their complaints is a logical appeal to the common sense of Englishmen: "The priest is your proctor and attorney, to plead your cause and to speak for you all; and had you rather not know than know what he saith for you? I have heard suitors murmur at the bar, because their attorneys have pleaded their cases in the French tongue, which they understood not. "Why then be you offended that the priests, which plead your cause before God, should speak such language as you may understand?"[21] The resistance to the Act for the Uniformity of Service, to which the people in some places were stimulated by high counsels and examples, was of itself an indication of the fears of the anti- reformers, that the habitual use of a Common Prayer Book, so pure and simple, so earnest and elevated, so adapted to the universal wants and feelings of mankind so touching and solemn in its Offices would establish the reformed worship upon a foundation which no storm of worldly policy could afterwards overthrow. The change in the habits of the people produced by this Book of Common Prayer must indeed have been great. "When they gathered together in the spacious cathedral or the narrow village church, they no longer heard the Litany sung by the priests in procession; but they joined their own voices to the sacred words which they received into their hearts, with "Spare us good Lord," and "We beseech thee to hear us." This constant feeling that they themselves were to take part in the service, and not be mere listeners to unintelligible though euphonious sentences, was to give a new interest to the reformed worship, far beyond the formal "Amen" of the Latin ritual, and the other routine words which they had been taught to speak, "like pies or parrots."[22] For a short time it was objected to the new service that "it was like a Christmas game;" but when the people, after a few years, had come to understand this service, in which they took a real part, they could not be readily led back to the "fond play" of their forefathers, "to hear the priest speak aloud to the people in Latin, and the people listen with their ears to hear; and some walking up and down in the church; some saying other prayers in Latin; and none understandeth other."[23] The English Liturgy, and the constant reading of the Lessons in English, were the corner-stones which held together that Church of England which the reformers had built up. Those who rejected the Liturgy consistently demanded that the English Bible should be called in again. The records of the Printing-press show how vain was such a demand. The art of Gutenburg and Caxton had made a return to the old darkness an impossibility. Not without reason did John Day, one of the printers of the many editions of the Bible that appeared in the reign of Edward VI., take, in allusion to his own name, a device of the sun rising and the sleeper awakened.
1 ↑ Tytler, "Original Letters," vol. i. p. 15.
2 ↑ Sir J. Mackintosh, "History," vol. ii. p. 249.
3 ↑ See Ellis, "Second Series," vol. ii. p. 187.
4 ↑ Lemon, "Calendar of State Papers," p. 2.
5 ↑ Wotton to Somerset, "Tyller," vol. i. p. 38.
6 ↑ This letter, given at length in Holinshed, p. 998, is far more interesting than the paraphrase
of Hayward, which Hume quotes as his authority.
7 ↑ Patten's Narrative; in "Dalyell's Fragments of Scottish History."
8 ↑ Ellis, First Series, vol. ii. p. 148.
9 ↑ Life of Lord Burghley by a Domestic; in Peck's "Desiderata Curiosa," p. 8.
10 ↑ "Reformation," Part II. book i.
11 ↑ " Commentaries," book iv. c. 6, p. 82, of Mr. Kerr's edition.
12 ↑ 1 Edward VI. c. 12.
13 ↑ Tytler, "Original Letters," vol. i. p. 180. This is one of the many interesting documents
which was first given in Mr. Tytler's collection from the State Paper Office.
14 ↑ 1 Edward VI. c. 1.
15 ↑ Ibid., c. 2.
16 ↑ Ibid., c. 14.
17 ↑ See ante, vol. ii. p. 469.
18 ↑ "Reformation," Part II. book i.
19 ↑ 2 & 3 Edward VI. c. 1.
20 ↑ Herbert's Ames.
21 ↑ Strype, "Memorials of Cranmer," vol. ii. p. 518. Oxford, 1848.
22 ↑ Strype, "Memorials of Cranmer," vol. ii. p. 518. Oxford, 1848.
23 ↑ Ibid., p. 544.