immorality, prophaneness, and irreligion amongst his subjects; and that he had laid a lasting foundation to perpetuate religious discords and divisions to the latest posterity. All which, it seems, his Majesty had the conscience to own, when he made his last Speech to his Parliament. See it (and some reflections upon it) in the Appendix, No. XVI.

THE DEEDS OF K. EDWARD VI. AS SUPREME
HEAD OF THE CHURCH.

§1.-King Edward commences his Reformation with Preparatory Injunctions... What Catholic Bishops were deprived, &c. during this Reign.

* THE solemnities of the Coronation being pass'd, the Grandees of the Court began to entertain some thoughts of a Reformation. To the advancement of which work, the conjuncture seemed to be as proper as they could desire. For the King being of such tender age, and wholly governed by the will of the Lord Protector, was easy to be moulded into any form. Wherefore it was thought fit to smooth the way to the intended Reformation, by setting out some Preparatory Injunctions."

It is indeed pretended, in the Preface prefixed to them, that they were designed for the suppression of Idolatry and Superstition, and the extirpation of enormities and abuses, But this was a mere blind, a false alarm; the true and real intention of the project being, to clear all Churches and Chapels of the offensive incumbrances of altars, and of all such valuable ornaments and rich utensils as had been, in former times, dedicated to the service of God by their respective Donors, Benefactors, and Founders. In a word, costly hangings, silver candlesticks, and embroider'd copes and vestments, were the intolerable enormities which these Preparatory Injunctions were destinated to extirpate and reform. How effectually they answered this end, we shall see by and by. In the mean time, we propose to take into consideration the

Heylin's Hist. Ref. An. 1. Ed. VI.

case of the Catholic Bishops, which, according to Mr. Strype's account of it, stood thus.

« * This year 1549, Bonner, Bishop of London, was examined before the Council, for several matters of contempt of the King's orders, when the Archbishop [Cranmer] pronounced sentence of deprivation against him, and committed him to the Marshalsea; and there he abode all this King's reign.

"The next year, Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, was deprived by Cranmer, and sent to the Tower, because he would not apply himself to advance the King's Majesty's proceedings.

66

“ f Anno 1550, Heath, Bishop of Worcester, was deprived, and sent to the Fleet, for refusing to assist in compiling the ordinal.

"The same year Day, Bishop of Chichester, was deprived and committed to the Fleet, because he would not comply with the orders of the council, which were, that he should demolish all the altars within his diocese, and erect communion tables in their stead." Mr. Collier is a little more explicit in his account of this Prelate's commitment. He reports, that Bp. Day was obliged to appear twice before the Council; and that upon his second appearance, this was his final answer:-"He told them, he could by no means prevail with himself to aet against his conscience. That if there was no help for it, he thought it a less evil to suffer the body to perish, than to destroy the soul. This answer being construed contempt, he was committed to the Fleet, by order of the whole board."

"§ Anno 1551, Vesey, Bishop of Exeter, was deposed, or, as some say, resigned his Bishoprick, and retired from publick business." - And notwithstanding that this Prelate, as Mr. Collier assures us, was no friend to the Reformation, nevertheless, either his own good luck, or the solicitation of his good friends, procured him his quietus. And thus he continued unmolested to the end of this reign.

"Last of all, in 1552, Bishop Tonstal was committed prisoner to the Tower, and his estate confiscated, ¶for refusing to receive the King's injunctions," says another

* Strype's Memorials of the Life of Archbishop Cranmer, p. 189,

+ Ibid. pp. 225, 226.

+Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. Book iv. p. 306.

Strype's Memorials of, etc. p. 267.

( Ibid. p. 288.

Bak. Chron. p. 304.

historian. And for these weighty reasons of state, were the Catholic Prelates "committed to prison, and all of them dispossessed of their Bishopricks. And that which was worse, the Bishopricks themselves were dispossessed of their revenues, in such sort, that a very small part remain'd to the Bishops that came after.”

Now this was the very thing our Court-Reformers aimed at. For what concern could they be supposed to have, for such as were to come after, while they, in the mean time, enjoyed the revenues of so many dispossessed Bishoprics, and wallowed in the riches of a plundered Church?

But leaving these gentry in the height of their jollity, and the Catholic Bishops in limbo, let us cast au eye upon busy Cranmer, now strutting at the head of the New Gospelers.

§2.-Cranmer takes out a Commission to exercise the Jurisdiction and Authority of an Archbishop, during the King's Pleasure... Mr. Collier's Reflections upon this Transaction; and his Answer to Bp. Burnet's ridiculous Parallel.

+CRANMER being now delivered from that too awful subjection he had been held under by King Henry, resolved to go on more vigorously." He had gone on vigorously enough against the Catholic Prelates; but the vigour of his mind, together with his natural courage, seem to have deserted him entirely, when the Archbishop, the Primate, the Metropolitan, dwindled into the paltry Commissary. To set this matter in a proper light, it will be necessary to observe, that

In the beginning of this reign, the Edwardian Prelates were required and enjoined, by the Privy Council, to take out new commissions, and to hold their Bishoprics, and their Episcopal Jurisdiction too, during the King's plea

sure.

Cranmer, says Mr. Collier, set the first precedent, and petitioned for a revival of his jurisdiction, which he supposed terminated with the death of the late King.

But Mr. Strype, in his Memorials of the Life of this Archbishop, appears to be more circumstantial and precise

+ Burnet's Hist. Ref. Vol. II. p. 25.

B b

in relating this momentous affair; for which reason we judged it might not be improper to lay his account of it before the Reader.

"One of the very first things that was done in young King Edward the Sixth's reign, in relation to the Church, was, that the Bishops, who had the care of ecclesiastical matters, and the souls of men, should be made to depend entirely upon the King and his Council, and to be subject to suspension from their office, and to have their whole Episcopal Power taken from them at his pleasure; which might serve as a bridle, in case they should oppose the proceedings of the Reformation. In this, I suppose, the Archbishop had his hand for it was his judgment, that the exercise of all Episcopal Jurisdiction depended upon the Prince; and that, as he gave it, so he might restrain it, at his pleasure. And therefore he began this matter with himself, petitioning, That as he had exercised the authority of an Archbishop in the reign of the former King; so that the authority ending with his life, it would please the present King Edward to commit unto him that power again. For it seemed that he would not act as Archbishop till he had a new commission from the new King for so doing. And that this was his judgment, appeared in the first words of the commission granted to him in the composing of which, I make no question he had his hand. Quando quidem omnis jurisdicendi Authoritas, atque etiam Jurisdictio omnimoda, tam illa quæ Ecclesiastica dicitur quam Sæcularis, a Regia Potestate, velut a Supremo Capite, ac omnium Magistratuum infra Regnum nostrum fonte ac scaturigine, primitus emanaverit, &c. that is, since all authority of exercising Jurisdiction, and also all kind of Jurisdiction, as well that which is called Ecclesiastical as Secular, originally hath flowed from the King's Power, as from the Supreme Head, and the Fountain and Source of all Magistracy within our Kingdom We therefore in this part yielding to your humble supplication, and consulting for the good of our subjects, have determined to commit our place to you, under the manner and form hereunder described.' And then the King licensed him ‡ To ordain within his Diocese, and to promote and present to Ecclesiastical Benefices, and to institute and invest; and, if occasion required, to deprive, to prove testaments, and the rest of the business of his Court.

+ Strype's Memorials, p. 141.

Sce copy of Cranmer's Ordination Faculties, in the Appendix, No. XVII.

And so all the rest of his offices were reckon'd.

This was

dated Feb. 7, 1546. But yet all these things were committed to him with a Power of revocation of the exercise of his authority reserved in the King, and durante beneplacito. Thus a formal commission was made to him and hence 1 find that the Archbishop, in some of his writings, is stiled, The Commissary of our dread Sovereign King Edward."

Thus did the courageous D. Cranmer (Bp. Burnet's Athanasius) meanly submit to hold both his See and his Episcopal Authority during the King's pleasure. And thus did he resign and exchange the ancient, illustrious, and venerable style of Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of all England, for the pitiful title of The King's Commissary!

This is Mr. Strype's account of this lamentable affair; and it will not perhaps be unacceptable to the Reader, to be entertained with Mr. Collier's reflections upon it.

"+That Cranmer addressed the Crown for this purpose, [i. e. for a new commission] and in the form abovementioned, we may reasonably conclude, from the singularity of his opinion, [viz. That all manner of Authority and Jurisdiction, as well ecclesiastical as civil, is originally derived from the Crown.] If this assertion holds good, the power of the keys must be lodged with the secular magistrate and if so, what independent right can the Bishops have for the exercise of their function? How can they make any claim to a charter of government from our Saviour?"

Bp. Burnet answers, that the person was no other way named by the King, than as lay-patrons present to livings.— Burnet's Hist. Ref. Vol. II. p. 218.

"This," replies Mr. Collier, "is somewhat surprising. For did ever lay-patrons pretend to give a commission in their presentations, for the exercise of the priest's function? Does the incumbent govern his cure, and execute his office, in the patron's name, and by virtue of his authority? If this cannot be made good, the ease is no ways parallel, For the Bishops, by the Letters Patents, were to give orders, and execute all the other branches of their Spiritual Jurisdiction, as the King's Delegates, and upon the strength of his Authority."

+ Collier's Ecel. Hist. Vol. II. B. iv. p. 219.