and they desire to have the royal license authorising them to "attempt, entreat, and commune of such matters, and therein freely to give their consents, which otherwise they may not do upon pain and peril premised. Also the said clergy desireth that such matters concerning religion which be disputable, may be quietly and in good order reasoned and disputed among them in their House, whereby the verities of such matters shall the better appear, and the doubts being opened and resolutely discussed, men may be fully persuaded, with the quieting of their consciences and the time well spent." 1

§ 14. What answer was returned at the time to this fitting remonstrance of the Lower House is not known. But it is certain that such a remonstrance was much needed. The archbishop, urged on by the Lord Protector, was evidently inclined to precipitate changes in religion without due regard to the synodical action of the clergy. The Book of Homilies which he put forth as an authoritative document had never been submitted to Convocation or Parliament, and the next step which was taken in the path of reformation was founded on authority equally doubtful. The Convocation had requested that the work of the committee of divines which had been appointed in the last reign to revise the services might be submitted to them. But this legitimate requirement was not regarded. The divines continued and perfected their work at Windsor after the session of Parliament was over, and then, on March 8, 1548, there came forth a proclamation establishing by royal authority a new communion office for the Church of England. It is true that both Convocation and Parliament had regularly enacted that communion should be given to the laity in both kinds. But this was very far short of sanctioning a new office, which the king set out without any pretence of its being the work of the clergy, but simply on "the advice of his dear uncle and others of his Privy Council." 2 It is also true that this service was the work of divines, and a work so admirably and carefully executed, that after all the sifting through which the English offices have passed it is still found almost entirely in our English liturgy. But it came forth as though it were simply a state document, without any better claim to acceptance than the will of the council. The service provided an exhortation in English to be read to the people the Sunday or holy day, or at least, one day before the celebration of the holy communion, and at the time of the celebration the priest was to use the order of the mass in Latin, without any change until he himself had communicated. Then an English 1 Cardwell, Synodalia, ii. 422.

2 King's Proclamation, Dodd's Ch. Hist. v. ii. Appendix, viii,

service was provided for the communion of the people, who were to receive in both kinds. In those parts which did not exist in the Latin office, the "Consultation" of Archbishop Hermann was chiefly followed.1

§ 15. The bishops were required by letters from the council to distribute this office through their dioceses in time for its use on Easter Sunday (April 1). Neither bishops nor clergy, however, were unanimous in their approval, and so many complaints were made against the new service, and so much violent declamation used, that, by a proclamation, preaching was again restrained to those who held licenses from the Lord Protector or the archbishop, and soon afterwards (September 23) was completely prohibited to all, the king being made to say that he did not doubt "that his loving subjects, in the meantime, would occupy themselves to God's honour with due prayer in the church, and patient hearing of the godly homilies, and so endeavour themselves that they may be the more ready with thankful obedience to receive a most quiet, godly, and uniform order to be had throughout his realms and dominions." 2

§ 16. Throughout the year 1548 religious affairs were in a most troubled state in England, and the archbishop and the council were sorely perplexed how to deal with them. By a proclamation

issued February (1548) all persons are strictly forbidden to "omit, leave undone, change, alter, or innovate any order, rite, or ceremony, commonly used and frequented in the Church of England, and not commanded to be left undone at any time in the reign of our late sovereign lord, his Highness's father," or by the Injunctions issued in the present reign. But lest the party of the old learning should think that the tide was turning in their favour, on the 21st February came forth an order to all the bishops to cause the absolute removal of all images from churches; the injunction which had directed only the removal of those which had been abused having, it is said, caused much contention.3 The preachers, who had received the license from the Lord Protector, were addressed in a letter counselling them prudence, forbearance, and the inculcating of quiet waiting on the part of the people. But that they did not altogether act according to these directions may be inferred from the fact of the issue of the inhibition of all preaching which took place in the autumn.

17. Meanwhile the reforming party were extremely impatient at the long delay in the issue of a complete body of services. Divers unauthorised forms were issued both for the daily prayers

1 Procter's History of Prayer-Book, p. 23.

2 Dodd's Ch. Hist. vol. ii. Appendix ii.

8 Burnet. Records, Edward VI. xxii. xxiii. 4 Ib. xxiv.

and the holy communion,1 and every variety of use prevailed. The committee of divines sitting at Windsor was, however, doing its work, if not so speedily as some desired, yet with the utmost care and judgment.

§ 18. There were other sources of disquiet to the Church besides the delay in the appearance of the service-book. The proclamations of the time bear witness to the outbreak of a flood of irreverence and sacrilegious greed. One forbids " quarrelling and shooting in churches," "bringing horses and mules into and through churches," "making God's house like a stable or common inn." Another, the mobbing and ill-treating of priests. Another, the embezzling, stealing, and carrying away of church utensils and ornaments.2 The refuse and dregs of society tried to make their harvest out of the transition state of religious feeling and law.

§ 19. Nor was the sacrilege confined to the lower orders. At the head of the State the Lord Protector set an evil example of church robbery. He made a deliberate attempt to seize on and confiscate to his own use the estates of the cathedral church of Westminster, and to employ the materials of the glorious old abbey in building a palace for himself. Meanwhile the commissioners appointed under the Act for giving the chantries, hospitals, etc., to the Crown were busily at work, and a great part of the goods and estates seized by them were perverted to unworthy uses.

§ 20. Amidst the general dissatisfaction, Bishop Gardiner, who had been soon released from the Fleet, again showed himself as the leader of the old party. He was sent for by the Protector, and ordered to preach a sermon showing his approval of the changes in religion. He resented this dictation, but rather than go to prison consented to preach. His sermon was a moderate one. He gave his approval of most of what had been done, but he still maintained the point most objectionable to the council, viz., that the royal supremacy ought not to be exercised when the king was in his minority. For this he was committed to the Tower, and remained there during the remainder of the reign.

1 These are mentioned in the First Act of Uniformity. See Lathbury's History of the Prayer-Book, pp. 19, 39.

2 Strype's Cranmer, pp. 251, 252 (folio ed.)

3 Westminster was a cathedral for ten years, from 1540 to 1550, when the bishop (Thirlby) was transferred to Norwich, and the church became collegiate. Benson, the first dean, who had been abbot before the Dissolution, compounded with the Protector by alienating to him and to his brother a very large number of the manors belonging to the church. It was refounded as a monastery in 1556.

Collier, Ch. Hist. v. 257-262. The greatest efforts were made by the council to make him yield. He was repeatedly communicated with. He utterly refused, however, to acknowledge himself to have been in the wrong,

§ 21. Neither were men in England at all sure at this period what form the reformation of Church doctrine, which was imminent, might take. The beginnings of the Reformation had been made under Lutheran influences, but the great theologian of Geneva was in correspondence with the Protector, and it was feared by some, and hoped perhaps by more, that the Church of England might now veer towards the Genevan doctrine.

§ 22. In this state of confusion, doubt, and difficulty, it must have been the greatest relief to all those who had the best interests of the Church at heart, when it was known that the committee of divines sitting at Windsor had at length finished their task, November 1548, and had, with the approval of Convocation, handed to the king the draft of the first English service-book, to be by him laid before Parliament. The book was laid before the Commons, December 19, 1548, and the next day before the House of Lords. In order to facilitate the passing of the book, a public disputation had been held in Parliament, December 14. "The argument," says Traheron, "was sharply contested by the bishops. The Archbishop of Canterbury, contrary to general expectation, most openly, firmly, and learnedly maintained your opinion on the subject. The truth never obtained a more brilliant victory. I perceive that it is all over with Lutheranism." 3 The disputation no doubt helped forward the book; but it was strongly opposed in the House of Lords, where eight bishops of the "old learning protested against it. It was finally read the third time in the House of Lords, January 15, and in the House of Commons, January 21, 1549, its passing thus falling within the second year of Edward VI. The book was to be introduced generally at the Feast of Pentecost next ensuing, but the clergy were at liberty to introduce it earlier could copies be procured. The first edition was published March 7. The book was used in the London churches on Easter-day, April 21, and on Whitsunday, June 9, generally throughout the land.

and at length was deprived, December 1550. See Minutes of Council, printed in Archæologia, vol. xviii. pp. 135-150.

1 For the names of the divines who drew up the first Book of Common Prayer, see Notes and Illustrations.

2 It has often been asserted that the first English prayer-book was not laid before Convocation. The records of Convocation being lost, we can only rely on incidental notices. The king's message to the Devonshire rebels says that the book was "by the whole clergy agreed." The letter of the king and Council to Bonner says that it was accepted "by the assent of the bishops and all other the learned men in this our realm in their synods and Convocations provincial." For further evidence on this point, see Joyce, Sacred Synods, p. 470, sq. 3 Orig. Letters, p. 523.

4 Ib. pp. 535-6. Heylin, Eccles. Restaur. pp. 74, 98.

§ 23. The Act of Uniformity which established its use gives also the reasons for setting it forth. "Whereas of long time there hath been used in this realm of England and Wales divers forms of common prayer, commonly called the service of the Church, that is to say the use of Sarum, of York, of Bangor, and of Lincoln, and besides the same, now of late much more divers and sundry forms and fashions have been used . . . the king's Highness, by the advice of his council, hath appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury, and other learned men of this realm, and having respect to the most sincere and pure Christian religion taught by the Scripture as to the usages in the primitive Church, should draw and make one convenient and meet order, rite, and fashion of common and open prayer, and administration of the sacraments, to be had and used in his Majesty's realm of England and in Wales; the which, at this time, by the aid of the Holy Ghost, with one uniform agreement is by them concluded, set forth, and delivered in a book entitled," etc. The great advantage of having one uniform use for rites external is dwelt upon, and then follow the penalties for non-observance of the provisions of the Act. For refusing to use the book or for 'depraving' it for the first offence loss of the profits of one benefice for a year, and imprisonment for six months; for a second offence loss of all benefices, and imprisonment for a year; for a third offence, imprisonment for life. There are also penalties for turning the book into ridicule by plays and interludes, or for compelling spiritual persons to use another form. Learned persons are, however, allowed to use translations of the prayers in Greek, Latin, or Hebrew. The penalties of the Act may be enforced before judges of Oyer and Terminer, the bishop or archbishop sitting with them if he pleased, as associate judge."1 Thus was this great boon to the English Church established by law.

§ 24. Taking only a general view of the book, it may be said that this book was not due to any foreign or strange influence, but was distinctly Anglican. It was formed not by a composition of new materials, but was in fact simply a careful revision of the old service-books of the English Church. The objectionable parts were excided, and the Latin forms translated into English of unequalled beauty, purity, and rhythm. Had any other plan than this been followed, the most disastrous results might have ensued.

§ 25. So great a change as the recasting of the whole devotional system of the Church, and introducing the element of the English language even into the mysterious solemnity of the mass, was, with every prudent arrangement and precaution, liable to produce con

1 2 and 3 Elward VI. c. i.