James Wayland Joyce.

England's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic online

. (page 59 of 83)
Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 59 of 83)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

articles ^ were read before the bishops, who promised to
present them forthwith "" to the upper " house of parliament.
These articles were prefaced by an address to the bishops of
the following tenor : —

* Spelman's Concilia, Vol. I., was published in 1639 ; Fuller's Ch. Hist, in

A. D. 1559.
Q. Eliz.

y Heylin's
p. 140.

^ Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 54.
* Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 179.
b Jan. 27.
Sess. 2.
c Ibid.

•i Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 54.

*= Jan. 27.
Sess. 2.
f Strype's
Ann. i. 5G.
e Cone.
Mag. Brit.
iv. 179.
li Cone.
Mag. Brit.
iv. 179.

' Feb. 25.
J Cone.
Mali-. Brit,
iv. 179.
Ann. i. 56.
'' Cone.
Mag. Brit.
iv. 179.
Ann. i. 56.
' Last day of

m Mar. 1.
n Mar. 1.




A.D. 1559.


See of






Mag. Brit,
iv. 179. &
Fuller, Ch.
Hist. b. ix.
p. 54.

P Strype's
Ann. i. 5G.

q Cone.
Mafr. Brit,
iv. 179.
Hist. Eng.
vi. 14.
f Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 179.
» Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 179-80.

' Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 180.
" Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 180.

♦ Cone.
Mas. Brit,
iv. 180.
Fuller, Ch.
Hist. b. ix.
p. 56.

»■ Vid. sup.
]>p. 495, 496.
" Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 56.
y Cone.
Mau'. Brit.
iv. l80.
* Coll. vi.

a Strype's
Ann. i. 56,

" Reverend ° fathers, public report affirms that many doc-
trines of the Christian religion hitherto believed by Chi-istians,
and handed down to us from Apostolic times, are now called
in question, more especially such as are contained in the sub-
joined articles. Thinking it our duty to provide, not only for
our own eternal salvation, but for that of those who are com-
mitted to our charge, and stirred to action by the examples of
our forefathers who have lived in like times with ourselves, we
deem it right to affirm our faith as contained in the following

The articles areP five in number, to which is added a re-

1. The firsts article asserts the presence of the natural
body of Christ under the species of bread and wine in the
sacrament of the altar.

2. The second"^ asserts that the substance of bread and
wine does not remain in the elements after consecration.

3. The third ^ asserts that in the mass the true body and
the true blood of Christ is offered a propitiatory sacrifice for
the living and the dead.

4. The fourth ' asserts the papal supremacy.

5. The fifth" restrains the definition of faith, the handling
of sacraments, and the management of ecclesiastical discipline
to the clergy.

The^ request added was that the bishops, in order to
promote the safety of the flock committed to them, and for
the liberation of their own consciences, would notify the fore-
going articles to the lords in parliament.

The popish character of these articles need not surprise us ;
happily they were the last which we shall have to consider
tainted with such a spirit. This convocation, however, like
its predecessors in the former reign, can have no just claim
to be called a lawful provincial synod of the English Church ;
and that for reasons before considered^''', which still existed
to a great extent, and to which the reader is referred.

. , . The bishops assented to the request which

And presented i i i . i mi • i

to the House of Concluded the document. The articles were

presented by Bonner ^ to the House of Lords,

and received y by Bacon, the Keeper^ of the Great Seal, on

the part of that assembly. J Jut no answer^ was given; nor



XIX. York pre-
tended provincial alsO

do we hear any thing more of them, save that the declarations
contained were^^ approved of by the universities of Oxford
and Cambridge, the last head only excepted. This "= document
is supposed, however, to have hastened on the disputation
held in Westminster '^ Abbey shortly after ® between the re-
formed and the Roman divines. Into the history of that
conference ^ it is beside our present purpose to enter ^. Suffice
it here to say that, as might be expected, neither party gave
the other any satisfaction, and the arguments were cut off
with this sharp conclusion by the Lord Keeper — " Seeing, my
lords, we cannot now hear ^ you, you may shortly perchance
hear more of us." A rebuke on the part of the civil pov/er
which may not unreasonably be applied to disputants on all
such unconstitutional platforms.

No other business, save such as related to a subsidy, was
treated of in this present convocation, which was finally dis-
solved' on the 9th i of May, 1559.

Along with the last convocation that of York
sat, meeting on February 10, and being
continued through sundry sessions to April 15,
1559. But of the business in which it was engaged the
records do not inform us.

XX. First par- The day after ^ the foregoing convocation of
HizX^h'^^enter Canterbury assembled, Q. Elizabeth's first par-
upon business. liamcnt, as was said above, met ; and soon they
entered upon important business.

Civil sanctions The first act ™ of this parliament was, so far
lets of the Church ^^ ^ivil sauctious could extend, to restore mat-
of England. ^gj.g connected with religion to that state in

which they were left at K. Edward VI.''s death : the royal
title of " supreme head "" being now reduced to the less excep-
tionable term of " supreme governor "." And this restoration
was effected by repealing the statutes of the late reign which
legalized ° the papal supremacy in England, and imposed penal-
ties P on the reformed, and also by reviving the statutes con-
cerning religion which had been passed under K. Henry VIII.
and K. Edward VI.* The second acfi of this parliament

5 This act, 1 Eliz. c. 1, repealed 1 & 2 Phil, and Mar. c. 8, 1 & 2 Phil, and
Mar. c. 6, and it revived 23 Hen. VIII. c. 9, 24 Hen. VIII. c. 12, 25 Hen. VIII.
c. 19, 25 Hen. VIII. c. 20, 25 Hen. VIII. e. 20 (bis), 25 Hen. VIII. c. 21,

A.D. 1559.
Q. Eliz.

b Strype's
Ann. i. 56.
c Fuller's
Ch. Hist.
b. ix. p. 56.
d Coll. vi.

e Mar. 31,
Ann. i. 88
et seq.
S See Coll.
vi. 207 et

Hist. Eng.
vi. 15.
h Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 56.

i Cone.
Mag. Brit,
iv. 182.
J 1559.

k Stat, at
Large in

1 Jan. 25,
1559 N. s.

1 Eliz. c.

n 1 Eliz. c.
1, sec. 19.


and Mar. c.


P 1 & 2 Phil.

and Mar c.


T 1 Eliz. c.




' Coll. vi.

" Bp. Pil-
apud Coll.
vi. 265.

authorized the restoration of the reformed communion office
and the Book of Common Prayer. And thus the former acts
of the Church in her provincial synods — rejecting^ the papal
supremacy and establishing the second* reformed Prayer
Book— being now reinforced by the aid of civil sanction,
and by the removal of parliamentary prohibitions, again re-
covered their authority in the civil state : that is, the
religion as authorized by the Church of England was now
re-established by the laws of the land. Her rites and cere-
monies and the Book of Common Prayer were, to use the
words of K. Charles the Martyr, "again taken up by this
whole Church under Q. Elizabeth, and so duly and ordinarily
practised ^''''

Indeed, as soon as Q. Mary died " many ^ in the universities
and elsewhere in the country openly" officiated by the reformed
service book, even before the statute was passed to re-establish
it. And this shews that such persons, at least, thought it
the duly authorized ritual of the Church. As regards the
civil sanctions now annexed, we are to observe that the re-
storation of the reformed " religion in this respect was nothing
more than bringing it back to the state in which the Church
had left it before the late persecutions. Q. Mary and her
parliament had stifled the religion as authorized by the
national Church ; and all that the parliament of Q. Elizabeth
did was to reinstate that religion by civil sanctions, as it had
been reformed and settled by the clergy and allowed by the
j)arliament in the reign of K. Edward, and then subsequently
suppressed by violence and outrage in the next succession.
It certainly appears on consideration a management every
way commendable, by reversing such persecutions, to allow reli-
gion to revert into that channel which had been traced out
for it by proper synodieal authority. It was thus that the
civil state, somewhilc reluctant, now again listened to the cry
of the suffering, and invited the Church of England fearlessly

26 Hen. VIII. c. 14, 28 lien. VIII. c. I«, 'M Hen. VIII. c. Sit partially, 37 Hen.
VIII. c. 17, 1 Ed. VI. c. 1.

It does not lie within our present purpose to inquire into the very extravagant
powers conferred ujion the crown by 1 Eliz. c. 1, afterwards repealed by 1(> Car. I.
c. 11 , s. ',i, and never aijuin revived so far as the high commission was concernetl.

'^ See K. Cliarles I.'s licence for canons to convocation of 1(J 10. Printed by
Robt. Barker, printer to the king's most excellent majesty, 10" 10.




to occupy ^ an hospitable haven on tlie shores of her native
land —

" . . . . Cunctataque pauJlum
Surgit ; et auditas referens in gurgite voces,
Portum dsmus, ait : haec hospita, creilite, puppis

The bill ^ for the restoration of the Prayer

Bill for the le- ^ , , , „ , • «>

storation of the Jiook and the reformed communion oince was
rajer oo -. introduced ^ into the House of Commons on the
18th of April % and received its third reading there on the
20th * of that month. And by this dispatch we may gather
that the people of England were generally '' inclined towards
a restoration of the reformed offices of the Church. It met
with somewhat more of an opposition in the House of Lords ;
for having *= been there introduced on April 26, Scott ^, bishop of
Chester, and Fecknam, abbot of Westminster, spoke in oppo-
sition to it. Notwithstanding the bill soon ^^ passed also there.
A defect in its There is, however, one point connected with
management. ^}^jg ^g^ whicli One cau uo way undertake to
defend. By the third ^ section it was enacted that in the
second reformed Prayer Book (now again statutably revived)
" there should be one alteration or addition of certain lessons
to be used on every Sunday in the year ' — and the form of the
litany altered and corrected * — and two sentences only added in
the delivery of the sacrament to the communicant ^'''' Now,

^ In the second reformed Prayer Book a proper lessons had been appointed only
for some Sundays and holidays. There were now added " ^ proper lessons to
be read for the tirst lessons both at morning and evening prayer on the Sundays
throughout the year, and for some also the second lessons." The table of Lessons
for Sundays and hohdays was also now divided.

* The corrections in the litany * were as follow. The phrase, " from the tyranny
of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities," contained in the second
reformed book of K. Edward VI. 's reign, was now omitted, and the prayer,
" strengthen in the true worshipping of thee in righteousness and holiness of life,"
was added.

'■> The additions in the communion office referred to in the act were these. The
second reformed bookf of K. Edward's reign appointed these words at the deli
very of the bread to the communicant : " Take and eat this in remembrance that
Christ died for thee, and feed on Him with thy heart by faith with thanksgiving."
And when the cup is delivered : " Drink this in remembrance that Christ's blood
was shed for thee, and be thankful." Now before the first of these sentences was
prefixed : " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve
thy body and soul unto everlasting life " (Take and eat this, &c.) ; and before the

* Coll. Records, No. 77-

t Coll. Records, No. 77-

A. D. 1559.
Q. Eliz.

Hor. Od.
i. 14. 2, 3.

'■" Val. Flac

Arg. lib. ii.


^ 1 Eliz. c.


y Coll. vi.

^ 1559.
^ Strvpe's
Ann.' i. 68.
b Strype's
Ann. i. 72.

c Strvpe's

Ann'. I 60,


d Coll. vi.


d"! Lingard,
Hist. Eng.
vi. 16.

e 1 Eliz. c.
2, s. 3.

* Prayer
Book, 1552.
^ Player
Book, 1559.
See Picker-
ing's Re-
prints, Lou-
don, 1844.
Card, two
Lit. pp. 8—

pref. viii.




A. D, 1559.


See of






n Eliz. c.
2, s. 3.

e Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. vii. p.
386. &
Ann. i. 82.

c Coll.
d Ibid.


c Ibid.


e Ibid.

h Ibid.


when religion was allowed by the civil power to revert into
that channel to which the Church had directed it, all the
formularies should have been left in the same state in which
they had been placed by synodical authority, and the second
reformed Prayer Book should have been restored unaltered.
Undoubtedly the alterations now made, especially those speci-
fied in the act ^, were such as may well commend themselves to
favourable acceptance. The appointment of first lessons for
morning and evening prayer on all Sundays throughout the year
was a mo.st useful direction for the clergy; the omission of an
unseemly supplication in the litany was far from being objec-
tionable ; and the addition to the sentences in the delivery of
the holy eucharist was in itself every way praiseworthy, as
bringing up the language of the office in the administration of
that rite to a worthy significancy. These alterations in them-
selves may be undeniable improvements, and yet the way in
which they were made may be far from defensible.

It is true that parliament did not make either these or the
other alterations specified in the subjoined note by their own
authority. The reformed Prayer Book had been referred to a
committee ' of divines s who were ordered to bring the whole

second was prefixed : " Tlic blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for
thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life " (Drink this, &c.).

But though these are mentioned in the act as the only alterations in the Prayer
Book now printed, the learned jierson who drew the act (as we frequently have to
observe in ecclesiastical matters) led the legislature into a snare. There really
were some other alterations which escaped his observation. For instance,

1. There is a slight variation in the wording of the first rubric before morning
prayer <=.

2. There is a slight variation in the second rubric before morning prayer refer-
ring to ecclesiastical vestments <'.

There is an addition of a prayer for the king in the end of the litany ••
And also an addition of one for the clergy ''.
And of the prayer, " O God, whose nature and property e," &c.
There is an omission of one of the collects to be used in time of dearth h.
And an omission of a note appended to the prayer of S. Chrysostom, to this
' The litany shall ever end with the collect following'."




' I. Mr. "UTiitehead, formerly chaplain to Q. Anne Boleyn. 2. Matt. Parker,
afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. 3. Edmund Grindal, afterwards bishop of
London. 4. Rich. Cox, afterwards bishop of Ely. 5. James Pilkington, after-
wards bishop of Durham. G. Dr. May, dean of S. Paul's and master of Trin.
Coll. Camb. Dr. Bill. To these Sir Thomas Smith, D.C.L., was joined in the
commission to aid in the performance, and Dr. Guest, another divine. — Full. Ch.
Hist. b. vii. p. 386. Coll. vi. pp. 248-9.




service under a review. These gentlemen entered upon the
business committed to them in December, 1558, and finished
their performance ^ some time in April following. Relying on
their judgment, the parliament passed the service in the way
it was delivered to their hands, without any amendment save
in one circumstance. In the draft of the committee the pos-
ture in receiving the eucharist was left indifferent, but this it
seems was restrained to kneeling by parliament.

But, as was said, however good these alterations now made
in the second reformed Prayer Book were, still the means by
which they were effected falls very far short of satisfaction. Ac-
cording to the rules of the Church and the ancient constitution *
of this country no committee, except one invested with full
power for such a purpose by synodical authority, can rightly
make any change in the formularies of divine worship. And the
foregoing alterations must be admitted to have been a great
blemish in the proceedings now under consideration, and one
which was not wiped away until the enactment of the fourth,
sixth, fourteenth, thirty-sixth, and the eightieth canons of
1 603-4, by which this Prayer Book in a somewhat altered state
was synodically ratified. This question does not indeed affect us
in the present day, because the ratification of the Prayer Book
by the canons above quoted \ and, subsequently, the final esta-
blishment of our present divine offices by the authority of both
provincial synods J on the 20th of December '^j 1661, have
long ago cured any defects : but the blemishes ^ which existed
between the years 1559 and 1604 it would be unreasonable
to overlook or defend.

The Prayer Book was soon printed after it passed the
parliament. That assembly was dissolved™ on the 8th of
May, 1559 ; and on the 24th of June following the act" for
the use ° of the book began to take effect.

^,^^ . About the time of Q. MaiVs death there

XXI. A mor- *"_ ''

taiity among tiie was a remarkable mortahty among the English
prelates. Four^ expired just before p her de-


2 The very remarkable powers conveyed to the crown by 1 Eliz. c. 1, sec. 18
(powers happily long ago withdrawn), are here of course not taken into account.

3 ]. John Capon, bishop of Salisbury. 2. Robt. Purfew of Hereford. 3.
Maurice Griffin of Rochester. 4. William Glyn of Bangor. — Fuller, Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 58.

A. D. 1559.
Q. Eliz.

>' Coll. vi.

J Syn. Ang
ii. 95.
^ Cone.
Mag. Brit.
iv. 566.
1 Yid. inf.
p. 553.

■n Coll. vi.


n 1 Eliz. c.

2, s. 2.

o Strype's

Ann. i. 81.

P Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
h. ix. p. 58.




A. D. ur,9.


See of






q Fuller,
Ch. Hist,
b. ix. p. 58.
& Coll. vi.
p. 25].
■■ Couraver,
Valid. Ensi.
Ord. pp. 55

Ch. Hist,
b. ix. pp. 58,
59. &
Ann. i. 73.
' Strype's
Ann. i. 143
et seq.
Hist. Eng.
vi. 16.
" See Rev.
R. I. Wil-
berforce on
p. 254.

» Coll. vi.

cease, six * just after *» her decease ; thus vacancies in ten sees
occurred by death.

In "^ the followino; year the intruded Archbishop

Others refuse * •' ^

the oath of supre- of York and thirteen* of those who had held*
bishoprics in Q. Mary's reign refused the oath
of supremacy, which was * tendered to them in consequence of
the statute 1 Eliz. c. 1, and were either deprived or forced to
resignations. But of these fourteen prehites three did not
rightly fill the sees they held : N. Heath had been intruded
into the archicpiscopal see of York, in the place of R. Holgate ;
G. Bourn into the see of Bath and Wells, in the place of
W. Barlow; and J. Turberville into the see of Exeter, in the
place of Miles Coverdale. And these intrusions had taken
place when Q. Mary by the force of the regale overthrew the
fabric of the reformed Church.

Of the eleven remaining bishops, grave exceptions may be
taken against the consecrations of those among them who
were appointed by Q. Mary " after the imprisonment of the
two metropolitans. The canonical character of such proceed-
ing is highly unsatisfactory; however, as those prelates who
were in this case had never as bishops in their own persons
denied the papal jurisdiction in England, nor given their ad-
hesion to the principles of the reformation, they, at least, may
be supposed now to have refused the oath of supremacy on
honest convictions, and to have gone off on motives of
conscience. ITat we are to consider that some ^' of the eleven
bishops now under consideration had taken the oath of the
supremacy of the crown in a much more offensive form under
K. Henry YUI., and had also complied with the reformation

^ 1. Reginald Pole, archbishop of Canterbury. 2. John Hopton, bishop of
Norwich. 3. John Brooks of Gloucester. 4. John Holynian of Bristol. 5.
Henry Morgan of S. David's; and, 6. John Christophcrson of Chichester. —
Fuller, Ch. Hist. b. ix. p. 58, and Coll. vi. 251.

The see of O.xford, it must be remarked, was void at this time, and so con-
tinued for some years. — Fuller, Ch. Hist. b. i.x. p. fi."?.

5 The thirteen were: 1. Edmund Bonner, bishop of London. 2. Cuthbcrt
Tunstall of Durham. 3. Thomas Thirlby of Ely. 4. Gilbert Bourn of Bath and
Wells. 5. John White of Winchester. 6. Thomas Watson of Lincoln. 7. Ralph
Payne of Coventry and Lichfield. 8. Owen Oglethorpe of Carlisle. 9. James
Turberville of Exeter. 10. David Pool of Peterborough. 11. Cuthbert Scott of
Chester. 12. Richard Pate of Worcester. 13. Thomas Goldwcll of S. Asaph.
— Canabden's Eliz. Comp. Hist. vol. ii. p. 376, and Coll. vi. 261.




under K. Edward VI. As regards those who were thus cu'cuni-
stanced they had receded under Q. Mary from the principles
of the reformation which they had formerly avowed, and had
gone all the lengths of the court. Now as these persons had
then again acknowledged the supremacy of the Pope, after
having previously renounced it, it would have been somewhat
surprising in them to have turned another time, and so it is
likely that it appeared to them necessary now to make a stand
and abide by ^ their last change. Indeed, one bishop only was
found unscrupulous enough to permit neither conscience nor
shame to interfere with his worldly interest. This was An-
thony Kitchen ^ bishop of Llandaff, called by Oambden "the^
scourge of his diocese,"'' and his faith on all occasions seems to
have been subservient to his pocket.
^, , , Among the lower orders of the clergy it

The lower cler- ° . .

gy generally fa- does not appear that many in proportion to

vourable to the ,11 ■!« i*i • t

principles of the the whole number were deprived or resigned
reformation. ^^^^ ^^^ restoration of religion to the reformed

standard. If the number amounted to the larger figures as given
by Collier, viz. 230, even that does not appear considerable
under the circumstances, when we remember that the spiritual
promotions in England at this time were reckoned at nine thou-
sand four hundred ^, and the clergy at sixteen thousand ^. It
leads us to believe, while giving our countrymen credit for
honest behaviour, to which the torrents of blood lately shed
for conscience sake most justly entitle them, that the clergy
were generally disposed to the principles of the reformation,
and attached to those doctrines and formu'aries which had
been synodically authorized previously to the late persecutions
on the part of Q. Mary, her court, and her parliaments.

XXII. Acccs- To fill the see of Canterbury, vacant by the
Parked tfthfre"^ <ieath of Cardinal Pole, Matthew Parker was
of Canterbury. chosou, — a man cvcry way qualified for so diffi-
cult a post at so difficult a time. He possessed an admirable
mixture of self-respect and manly determination, tempered
with good nature and kindly methods of dealing with oppo-
nents. Of his courage, honesty, and plain dealing we are

6 Cambden (EUz. Comp. Hist. ii. 376) giv(
Hist. b. ix p. 59) gives the number as 175.
the nunober as 230.

the number as 1JJ4. Fuller (Ch.
Collier (Eccl. Hist. vi. 252) gives

A.D. 1559.
Q. Eliz.

» Coll.

" Fuller,
Ch. Hist.
b. ix. p. 59.
y Cambden's
Eliz. Comp.
Hist. ii. 37(>.

^ Cambden's
Eliz. Comp.
Hist. ii. 376'.
Coll. vi.
252. &
Ann. i. 73.
» Warner,
ii. 347.




[chap. XII.

A.D. 1559.




See of York


h Col. vi.

c 5 Eliz. c.


d Coll. vi.

e Stvype's

Paiker, p.


f Strype's

Parker, pp.

38, 3.9.

B Strype's

Parker, p.


h Courayer

on Eng.

Ord. p. 41.

Coll. vi.

Online LibraryJames Wayland JoyceEngland's sacred synods : a constitutional history of the convocations of the clergy, from the earliest records of Christianity in Britain to the date of the promulgation of the present Book of common prayer; including a list of all councils, ecclesiastical as well as civil, held in England, in whic → online text (page 59 of 83)