A

8. H. 1827

REPLY

S.H.1827.

ΤΟ

DR. LINGARD'S VINDICATION

OF HIS

History of England,

AS FAR AS RESPECTS

ARCHBISHOP CRANMER.

BY THE REV. H. J. TODD, M.A. &c.

CHAPLAIN IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY,

AND RECTOR OF SETTRINGTON, COUNTY OF YORK.

"Forasmuch as Archbishop Cranmer was a principal means of the Pope's
expulsion, the Papists did hate him worse than a scorpion, heaping upon him
whatsoever wit sharpened with malice could devise."

Mason, Vind. of the Church of Eng. 1613, p. 73.

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR C. AND J. RIVINGTON, ST. PAUL'S CHURCH-
YARD, AND WATERLOO-PLACE: J. AND G. TODD; WOL-
STENHOLME; AND BARCLAY, YORK: BELL AND BRAD-
FUTE, EDINBURGH AND R. MILLIKEN, DUBLIN.

1827.

HODLE!

IANA

BIBL

Printed by R. GILBERT, St. John's-square, London.

INTRODUCTION.

In the spring of the year 1825, I published a Vindication of Archbishop Cranmer against some of the allegations which had been made by the Rev. Dr. Lingard, the Rev. Dr. Milner, and Charles Butler, Esq. The Vindication contended more more especially against the labours of the first of these gentlemen; because I considered him to have spoken, in his History of England, with unfairness of the Archbishop, and because in the popular form of National Memoirs the injury to his character was widely spreading. Others also thought that certain portions of this history, respecting distinguished facts or persons, were vulnerable; and therefore opposed the historian. In the winter of last year, Dr. Lin

gard endeavoured to silence his opponents, and assigned to me the honour of a place among them, in "A Vindication of Certain Passages in his History of England." This has given rise to the following pages.

66

Dr. Lingard boasts of having " delineated the character of the Archbishop with fidelity." I do not hesitate to question the accuracy of this statement; resolved, on the authority of facts and indisputable documents, to rescue from disparagement THE FATHER OF OUR REFORMED CHURCH, and to guard the unsuspecting Protestant against the consummate artifice employed to depreciate the religion of his country. The importance of the subject must apologize for the length of this Reply to the Romish historian of England; and the reconsideration of those passages, which occasioned the gauntlet to be thrown down and accepted, will still be found, I trust, to do right

66

unto the memory of the truly great and

good archbishop."..

1