1

some additions, appeared in 1553; as it also again appeared in 1557, with observations which had been made upon a review of this translation by the archbishop himself in prison, and which had fallen into the hands of the English exiles at Embden, who offered in this publication their grateful sense of duty to the memory of the martyred primate. Prefixed to this translation is a Latin epistle from Cranmer to King Edward VI., dated in March, 1553, in which he says, that “it was his care of the Lord's flock committed to him, which induced him to renew and restore the Lord's Supper according to the institution of Christ which was the reason that, about three years before, he had set forth a book in English against the principal abuses of the papistical

mass."

Collections of Cranmer upon this great subject, all of which were probably made before the Defence was formed, yet remain in the libraries of

2

"Ut ne autem de hujus libelli vel fide, vel autore, dubites, amice lector, autographon ejus in nostra apud Emdanos ecclesia pro thesauro quodam et clarissimi viri sanctique Christi martyris mnemosyno servamus." Preface by the Exiles, sign. A. 5. b.

2 Many of them have been copied by Burnet, Strype, and Collier, from the two volumes of his collections in the Lambeth library, No. 1107, No. 1108; and Strype refers to a manuscript in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, De re Sacramentaria, which he believes to have been compiled by Cranmer. In the State-Paper Office are also yet to be seen,

258 THE LIFE OF ARCHBISHOP CRANMER.

Lambeth Palace, and of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, and in the State-Paper Office of the realm.

1

It is remarkable that Sanders, the Romish historian, who is so hostile to the memory of Cranmer, and has written two treatises on Transubstantiation and the Eucharist, refers in neither of them, to the controversy we have witnessed, with his accustomed vituperation of the archbishop.

what he collected or indited, a paper, De Sacramento Eucharistiæ; another, De Missa privata; and in a thin folio (among discussions on other points) De Eucharistia, De Sacramentorum usu, and in English, What a Sacrament is. In the same repository, it may be added, are preserved Articuli BUCERI de Eucharistia.

' N. Sanderi, S. T. P. Orat. de Transubstantiatione, &c. Antverpiæ, 1566. De Eucharistia, &c. Antv. 1570.

CHAPTER XI.

1551 to 1552.

Alienation of lands belonging to the See of Winchester, after the deprivation of Gardiner-Such spoliations then frequent-Cranmer desirous to prevent them—Case of Hooper, bishop of Worcester-Deprivation of Tunstal, bishop of Durham-Cranmer's exertion in behalf of Tunstal—Cranmer's recommendation of Coverdale to be bishop of Exeter -Cranmer's care of Latimer-Latimer's employment at Lambeth-The lady Mary's refusal to conform to the new liturgy-The revision of that liturgy-The ill-health of Cranmer.

THE deprivation of Gardiner, like that of Bonner, 'excited the murmurs of some who merely objected to arbitrary measures, and the louder censures of others who were friends to the Church of Rome. Nor did the promotion of the learned Ponet to the see of Winchester, vacated by Gardiner, tend to soften them. To the eyes of some distinguished courtiers, much of the property belonging to that see appeared desirable; and to them the new possessor was led to alienate it. In

Burnet. Heylin.

1

the reign of Edward, ecclesiastical vacancies were often thus turned to the advantage of laymen in power; and it has been rightly considered as most discreditable to the memory of the young sovereign's successive administrations, that such vacancies should have been so constantly used by the members of them, as opportunities of providing for themselves and their friends. When Hooper received, in addition to the see of Gloucester, that of Worcester, Heylin thinks that he was to enjoy only a short allowance from the wealth of the latter. "2 The pirates of the court," the historian says, "were too intent on all advantages to let such a vessel pass untouched, in which they might both find enough to enrich themselves, and yet leave that which was sufficient to content the merchant." These causes of offence Cranmer believed to have been very desirous of removing, for indeed the possessions of his own see are said to have then suffered more than in the 5 time of Henry.

is

3

4

The deprivation of another distinguished prelate was now meditated. Tunstal, bishop of Durham, the politest scholar of the age, as well as a man of exemplary moderation, still retaining his early attachment to the Church of Rome,

1

Soames, Hist. Ref. iii. 611.

3 Strype.

5 See vol. i. 364.

2 Heylin, 101.

H. Wharton, 101.

although he concurred in some proceedings of the Reformers, was accused of being privy to a plot for exciting an insurrection in the North. The letter which he had received upon the subject, he had not only concealed from the government, but had answered; and his correspondent then turned his accuser. He was committed to the Tower. At the close of 1551, a bill was introduced into the house of lords, charging him with heinous offences, and proposing to deprive him of his bishopric. Cranmer rose and objected to the proceeding. No accusers appeared to substantiate the charge. Written depositions alone were produced; but the archbishop found himself mistaken, if he expected that Tunstal would obtain in the case of deprivation that indulgence, which in the case of treason was allowed by a recent public enactment; namely, that no person should be arraigned, indicted, convicted, or attainted, of any manner of treason, unless on the oath of two lawful accusers, who should be brought before him at the time of his arraignment, and there should openly avow and maintain their

1 Dr. Lingard, who gives the abstract of this law, eloquently observes, that "thus was laid the foundation of a most important improvement in the administration of justice; and a maxim was introduced, which has proved the best shield of innocence against the jealousy, the arts, and the vengeance of superior power." Hist. Eng. 8vo. vii. 122.