Edwardian Protestantism II

Edwardian Protestantism II

Religion and Religious Change in England, c.1470-1558

Re-cap - last lecture:

‘Revolution’ or ‘Crisis’?Decisive/Linear Reformation; or a product

of context?‘English’ or ‘European’ Reformation?

Driven by iconoclasm/idolatry – release of evangelical energy restrained under HVIII

Re-cap - ‘Good’ duke vs ‘Bad’ duke:

Evangelical ascendency 1547 (explaining the improbable)◦ 1546: Royal Supremacy trump fear of ‘popery’◦ Somerset & Paget’s coup (in the regency council)

Somerset’s fall:◦ Commonwealth policies◦ Foreign policy◦ Rebellion (Northumberland showed leadership)◦ Court politics

Northumberland:◦ Worked with conservatives to oust Somerset; then excluded them◦ Not an evangelical; but served EVI’s wishes (no-one knew he would

die)◦ Never Lord Protector

Cranmer:Had long been planning to reform the liturgy (constrained under HVIII)

By 1547 thinking on the Eucharist gone beyond Luther:• Anne Askew and the

summer of 1546 – battle-lines drawn for ‘Reformed’ Protestantism.

Eucharist contentious – broad spectrum of belief in England (therefore proceeded with baby-steps)

Cranmer: Book of Common Prayer

Book of Common Prayer: main source of liturgy in the Church:◦i.e. HOW people worship – what ideas look like

in communal form. New orders for all the principal public services

◦Long-term: English language begun to be standardized – used under Elizabeth and beyond.

Two versions: 1549 & 1552

Book of Common Prayer:1549: 1552: Work in progress:

◦ Pressure – anti-Mass in print from 1548 onwards; service said in English at St. Paul’s before technically legal to do so.

◦ 1549 a half-way house – to ‘stay innovations’/ appease zealots.

Very fact in English must have been shocking Confused – because Cranmer confused? Or

because of his ‘genius’ in recognising the softly/softly approach needed to inculcate Protestantism in the English people?

Still novel enough to shock English laity (Western Rebels singled out in their articles)

No longer a daily Mass – rather daily services of morning prayer/ evening prayer

When Communion celebrated – people received bread & wine (equality with clergy; deny special status)

But….. But still described Communion as ‘the Mass’; sign

of the cross (implying presence in the bread); placed into believer’s mouth (i.e. they could not handle the holy).

‘The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life’ – implied an objective presence; odd in light of Cranmer’s pruning all language implying that the rite was a sacrifice

Advanced 1549 Influence of Reformed Protestantism Sense that the Cranmer had finally

worked out what he thought about the Eucharist;

AND a way of expressing it in a broad Church.

No longer ‘the Mass’ No longer celebrated at the altar

behind the Rood; but on a table in the nave of the Church

Doctrine of transubstantiation now directly excluded; and used ordinary bread):◦ JBFA◦ No mediation from Priesthood◦ No sense of being meritorious for

grace ‘Take and eat this in remembrance

that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith, with thanksgiving’.

An ‘English’ Reformation?

A ‘European’ Reformation?Cranmer – lead in Protestant Europe:• Use networks to bring leading

theologians to England• Letters with most of the

leading lights (exchange re: problems)

‘Stranger Churches’:• Self-governing Churches in

London, Southampton• Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish• Example to emulate –

practical demonstration of Protestantism.

• Engaged with city authorities.

• Tried to lure Melanchthon

• Peter Martyr Vermigli (Italian, allied to Reformed Church in Zurich)

• Martin Bucer (Strasbourg): Point of contact both Lutheran and Calvinist

Protestants In the ‘Reformed’ camp (pioneering on

moral discipline) Not like Zwingli model – distant on the issue

of state/church assimilation; less literal on Eucharist

Regius Professor of Divinity, Cambridge Died in 1551 Emotive impact/ inspiration (as much as

tangible/practical) Conciliator – inspired Cranmer’s dream of

holding a pan-European council

• Injection of cutting-edge theology which England lacked:◦ ‘Protestant’ rather than ‘evangelical’ –

specifically ‘Reformed’.◦ Ideas; how to put them into practice

Divisions:

Imported European divisions:◦ Cranmer (inspired by Bucer) – closer to

Strasbourg/Geneva Christ spiritually present during the Lord’s Supper (in

the Elect)◦ John Hooper (closer to Zwingli) – Eucharist

symbolic only 1550, Bishop of Gloucester – refused to wear

the traditional Bishop’s rochet and chimere for consecration (‘popish’)

Led to imprisonment in 1551 John Knox (later leading light of

Scotland’s Reformation) Dispute over the 1552 Prayer Book

◦ Theologically Reformed◦ But liturgy still fairly standard – was it enough

to move people from ‘popery’?◦ Cranmer authored a preface damning those

who inveighed against the ceremonies retained

◦ Kneeling whilst receiving the host particularly contentious: Part of traditional liturgy Suggested that there was something in the

bread that merited kneeling for (i.e. the presence of Christ)

◦ Knox refused to kneel: Northumberland encouraged – perhaps as a

means of weakening Cranmer’s position Knox’s railing forced Cranmer into action –

added a ‘Black rubric’ to the ceremony which made it explicit that kneeling did not imply veneration

Reformation Legum Ecclesiasticarum (1552):◦ Protestant Church law – would have

overhauled the structures of the English Church (a bugbear of Puritans under Elizabeth)

◦ System of moral discipline – like Reformed churches

◦ Potential that many could be excluded from the Church

◦ Church claiming powers of discipline – seemed more like a state Issues of conflict around Royal Supremacy –

did the Church have the right to make moves towards independent jurisdiction?

◦ Defeated by Lords, 1552 – Northumberland blocked

◦ Coalition with Northumberland under strain – friction with Cranmer Foot-dragging over the passing of the 42

articles Disputes over the uses of the Churches

resources for preaching/godly education – Northumberland increasingly accused of being a money-grabber.◦ Remember HVIII

1550/1551 – several diocese amalgamated/ property seized by the Crown.

1551 – survey of Church goods called for the surrender of all plate to the Crown.

John Knox:

For the more discerning amongst us……

WHAT DO THESE DISPUTES TELL US?◦WEAKNESS?◦THAT THINGS STILL BEING SORTED OUT?◦OR, SO CONFIDENT IN POSITION THAT NOW

ABLE TO DISPUTE REFORM OPENLY – DISAGREEMENT A LUXURY.

◦Certainly missed opportunities and displays of cynicism: BUT leading reformers shared commitment to transforming society through the gospel’s liberation.

Impact:Bigger story in terms of Reformation historiography more broadly

Traditional view – ‘howling success’

Revisionists – the long-Reformation (even 1603 not end the story)

Post-revisionists – was a success, a slowly/slowly approach to Reform which slowing weaned from late-medieval Catholicism over a series of generations

1547-53: little softly/softly

Fabric of parish life/ beliefs underpinning them: ◦ 1548 Injunctions

Dissolution of the Chantries

Impact of dissolution on poor relief:

Clergy – no longer a sacramental priesthood: preaching ministry◦ 1551 visitation in Gloucester – pointed to poor

‘education’ of clergy (but never been expected to fulfil that role).

◦ Abolition of Mass lower clerical status?◦ Clerical marriage – many wives abused by

community as ‘priest’s whores’

Most probably not like changes, but had to engage with them:◦ Fearful that Northumberland’s government money-

grabbing, communities sold goods off the prevent government getting hands on.

◦ Not WANT to implement change; but were doing – Reformation by proxy, if not for noblest of reasons.

◦ Closing the book on LMC, whatever the motivations.

Haigh – cumulative impact of all of this was to reduce the Church as a focal point of communal identity

Big question:

If so radical/unprecedented – why was there no conservative reaction?

Why did 1540 not repeat itself?

Especially odd considering:◦HVIII not leave much of an evangelical legacy

◦The evangelism of Somerset founded on a coup at the centre of government/ spawned two rebellions/ and a disastrous foreign war.

Q: why no conservative reaction?

A: context and contingency. Gardiner:

◦ Main brain of the conservatives◦ Good argument - regents did not have

to power to undue HVIII’s royal will◦ Essentially saying the Somerset could

not rule with full authority◦ With a faction behind him, could have

blocked evangelism in Parliament◦ Sept 1547 – Gardiner arrested (rest of

realm in prison); 1551 deprived of Bishopric

◦ Other Bishops slowly purged (Edmund Bonner, 1549; Cuthbert Tunstall, 1552)

Propaganda:◦ Accuse religious conservatives of

‘popery’◦ Not match with a conservative

campaign of any vigour.◦ Royal Supremacy used to squash many

elements of traditional Catholicism as ‘popish’

Little staunch conservatism:◦ Therefore no martyrs – much less bloody

than HVIII’s reformation◦ No boost to traditional religion◦ Also, everyone openly embrace Royal

Supremacy – a technical checkmate, as very hard to attach the regime’s actions without denying the Supremacy Forced many into a position where they had

to outwardly accept change (BCP)◦ As EVI’s own evangelical views increasingly

prominent – obvious that conservative hopes were in vain.

1549 – an opportunity:◦ Somerset’s fall – could the tide be

reversed?◦ Leading opponents conservative –

Wriothesley (earl of Southampton); Mary.◦ John Dudley, earl of Warwick – victory over

Norfolk rebels/powerbase in king’s household proved decisive in elevating him.

◦ Several nobles committed Protestants – would have made Mary as regent in 1549 seem foolish for Dudley’s position.

◦ KEY POINT: NONE OF THIS WAS PRE-ORDAINED.

◦ IN 1549 EVI’S REFORMATION HUNG IN THE BALANCE – ONLY POLITICAL INTRIGUE AT COURT SAVED A REVERSAL OF FORTUNE AND CREATED SPACE FOR CRANMER TO WORK

Big question 2:

If there was no ‘conservative reaction’, how did England end up with Mary I?

Are each of England’s ‘Reformations’ really a matter of the Succession?

1547 – evangelism a small minority isolated from politics for 7 years

1553 – England looked destined to undergo a full Reformation◦doctrine/liturgy/iconoclasm/European centre◦1552 42 Articles very strong statement

How do we get to Mary I and Catholic England?

Jane Grey – more whimper than bang……Succession a difficult issue:

1543 – HVIII ruled that if EVI died childless Mary would succeed.

But Mary/Elizabeth technically illegitimate – room for manoeuvre.

Mary last person EVI want to succeed; many in government agreed.

Jane Grey:◦ Scheme drawn up to allow EVI’s

cousin take over.◦ Most of the political establishment

consent (sign of evangelical gains).◦ Northumberland married his son to

Jane Grey.◦ EVI d. – Mary & Norfolk refuse to

recognize Jane Grey◦ Damp squib – London did not

support Jane Grey/ councillors change side with the political winds.

Sign of Northumberland’s stupidity?◦ Might have been EVI’s idea.◦ If EVI lived long enough to ratify,

could have been legal.◦ All EVI doing was claiming the

same power as his father – to nominate his successor.

◦ Mistake was allowing Mary to be free – rallying point for opposition.

Concluding thoughts - the longer term:

Two big issues to think about:◦1) What does the speedy return of Catholicism under

Mary tell us about the nature of Edwardian Protestantism? Not LMC – novel type of Catholicism Destruction – whether it was wanted or not – had an impact on

Purgatory/saints Was this still as communal as 1500? Was it still as numinous a

world? Not the intended impact, but an impact nonetheless

◦2) Elizabeth’s Reformation made no dramatic changes to EVI’s template: BCP – Cranmer’s words and form lasting – defined the Church of

England Doctrine Success on terms of those who implemented it.