BOOK I.

RELIGIOUS SETTLEMENT IN GERMANY AND ENGLAND.

 

CHAPTER I.

RELIGIOUS SETTLEMENT IN GERMANY.

 

Germany consisted of a number of small States, each under the rule of their hereditary Prince, and of a number of Free Cities, who were under no control except that of the Emperor, which was very and the slight. The German king, when he received coronation from the Pope, became Emperor, and was looked upon as the head of Christendom. Under his presidency the Princes of the Empire and Representatives of the Cities met together at a Diet to settle matters of common interest for Germany.

When many of the States and Cities of Germany followed Luther’s teaching, and shook off the old ecclesiastical system, they were of course opposed by those that remained Catholic. To protect themselves they formed, in 1529, a league known as the League of Schmalkald, from the place where it was concluded. The Catholics formed a league against them, and so Germany was divided into two opposite camps.

Charles V had been Emperor since 1519, and he would have interfered to put down Protestantism in Germany at its first growth, if he had been able. He was however ruler of so many other countries besides Germany, that he could not attend to Germany alone. As King of Spain he had to war against the Moorish corsairs, who injured the Spanish trade. As the inheritor of the possessions of the Dukes of Burgundy he had to war with the King of France. As Emperor he had to make good his position in Italy. As head of the house of Austria, as well as head of Christendom, he had to drive out the Ottoman Turks who pressed up the Danube valley, and threatened to extend their conquests over Europe.

All these things employed Charles V, and he needed all the help that he could get from Germany to enable him to carry out these great undertakings. In Germany he was king; but he was checked by the independent power of the Princes and the Free Cities, and could raise money and troops only for such purposes as they approved of. Many of them were in favor of the Reformation, and would not help him in any undertaking directed against Protestantism. He thought it wise, therefore, to leave Protestantism alone at first, and to draw from the gratitude of the Protestant Princes the help that he needed for his other political designs. He opposed Protestantism, for he was Emperor and head of the Catholic world. But he was not, therefore, a devoted adherent of the Papacy, and was convinced that some religious changes were necessary. These changes he hoped to be able to introduce when he had leisure; meanwhile he let matters take their course in Germany, so far as not to interfere forcibly.

At last, in 1544, Charles V had put down the pirates, had succeeded in making himself master of the greater part of Italy, had seen the Ottomans fall back from their most threatening position, and had made peace with France. Now he could turn his attention to Germany. His plan was to compel the Pope to summon a General Council, at which the points in dispute between Catholics and Protestants should be settled. But the Protestants refused to acknowledge such a council, and Charles, with the help of the Pope declared war against the Schmalkaldic League in 1546.

Many Protestants helped him; for not all of them belonged to the league, and some hoped to get toleration without resistance to the authority of the State. The chief leaders of the Schmalkaldic army were John Frederic, Elector of Saxony, and Philip, Landgrave of Hesse. Their army was stronger than the Emperor’s, but was broken up by the retreat of the Elector. His Electorate had been attacked in his absence by his nephew Maurice, who though a Protestant was fighting on the Emperor’s side. When once the Schmalkaldic forces were broken, the Emperor reduced the Protestant cities one by one. Next year he defeated the Elector, and took him prisoner; the Landgrave of Hesse submitted to him, and was also kept in prison. It seemed as though Protestantism were entirely ruined.

But, meanwhile, the Pope had become alarmed at this success : he had also quarreled with the Emperor about the possession of some towns in Italy. He was afraid that Charles might settle religious matters in a way unfavorable to the Papacy. So he broke up the Council, which had begun to sit at Trent, as he thought that place was too much under the Emperor’s power.

Thus Charles V had compelled the Protestants to obey the Council, but there was no Council to obey. Hereupon he took a step like Henry VIII, and published a decree called the ‘Interim’ (1548), which enacted the old ecclesiastical system with a few changes, and toleration on a few points. This was to be the religion of Germany till the Council could go on.

The ‘Interim’, however, was liked by neither party. To the Protestants it was as bad as Romanism; to the Catholics it seemed to be an arbitrary interference in religious matters. Moreover, the national feeling of the Germans was hurt by the way in which the Emperor enforced obedience to it and kept a foreign army in Germany. The German princes also were aggrieved by the imprisonment of the Elector and the Landgrave—it was an infringement of the rights of the princes as a class, which no prince could see with satisfaction.

Maurice had been made Elector of Saxony by the Emperor for his services. He was a Protestant; but the Emperor wished to show that he punished, not opinions, but disobedience. Perhaps Maurice had hoped for greater toleration for Protestantism, and was now disappointed. Perhaps his policy was entirely selfish, and he had only helped the Emperor that he might get the Electorate of Saxony for himself; now that he had got it he saw he could only keep it by helping Protestantism against the Emperor. It is hard to say which of these views is true. Maurice is one of the most puzzling characters in history; he was a master of deceit, and he died (1553) before he had time to go far enough with his plans to enable us to judge what he really meant.

At all events Maurice of Saxony laid a deep plan against the Emperor. Seeing that the German Protestants were not strong enough to fight by themselves, against he entered into an alliance with Henry II of France. Henry II had only lately come to the throne, and was willing enough to signalize his reign by striking a blow at the great enemy of France.

Maurice, laying his plans with deep secrecy, managed to keep together the army with which he had been besieging the Protestant town of Magdeburg in the Emperor’s name. As he found that two of his secretaries were spies of the Emperor’s, he kept them in his service, and wrote false letters, whose contents were meant to deceive the Emperor. Then, when all was ready, and the Emperor, entirely unprepared, was at Innsbruck, where he had gone to look after the reassembling of the Council of Trent, Maurice took the field against him. Charles V had to flee from Innsbruck in the middle of the night, and only left it two hours before Maurice entered. The French, meanwhile, had entered Lorraine, and taken Metz, Toul, and Verdun. Charles V’s prestige was broken; he had no money and no troops; he must make peace in Germany, unless he was prepared to see Germany permanently divided. If he hesitated, the result would be that the Catholic States would go with Austria, and the Protestant States would form a new power, under the protection of France.

So, sorely against his will, Charles V had to agree to a peace. At a meeting at Passau, in 1552, Maurice demanded toleration for the Protestants—toleration granted to them for themselves, without any condition of a future Council, or any mention of Papal permission. The Emperor could not be prevailed upon to grant this; it seemed to him to be a neglect of his duty as head of Christendom. He would only grant toleration until a Diet had been held to settle uniformity.

Really, Charles V’s plans had failed. He was a firm believer in the old political system which depended on outward unity. He had hoped to unite his vast dominions into one great power. For this purpose he was prepared to make a few changes in the old political and ecclesiastical system, though he was not prepared to move from the main ideas on which they were founded. Spain, Italy, Sicily, and the Netherlands he knew how to manage. He won over, says a Venetian ambassador, the Spaniards by his gravity and wisdom, the Italians by his success, the Flemings by his geniality and kindliness; but the Germans, in spite of his efforts, he never understood. So, when he had succeeded everywhere else, he failed in Germany. The German princes, Protestant and Catholic alike, looked with entire disfavor on his attempt to make a strong central power in Germany. The German people, Protestant and Catholic alike, failed to understand his moderate position in ecclesiastical matters; they wanted either no change at all, or much more sweeping changes than he was prepared for. So the opposition to him had grown strong just as his plans had seemed on the point of success. When that opposition had openly declared itself, he had to choose between the surrender of his plans and a new hazardous war, by which he would run great risk of losing the Netherlands and Protestant Germany together.

Charles V gave way for the present; the future still depended on his success against France. He laid siege to Metz with a large army; but it was to no purpose. His troops began to die as winter came on, and Charles was obliged to raise the siege, saying, with a sigh, that “Fortune was a woman, and did not favor the old”.

After this failure, there was no course left but concession. The Diet of Augsburg in 1555 confirmed the peace agreed to at Passau. The Protestants were to practice then own religion, wherever it had been at that time established. Henceforth, all Princes and Cities might tolerate or prohibit either religion within their territories. The maxim, cujus regio ejus religio, (he who rules the country may settle its religion) was now distinctly accepted.

By this decree of the Diet of Augsburg the Protestants obtained for the first time a legal position within the Empire. Their right to maintain their religion was unconditionally recognized. Henceforth Catholicism could not claim to be the established religion of Germany. No Emperor could lawfully attack Protestant princes on the ground of their Protestantism only. The new religion had obtained legal recognition. But still there were many points left unsettled, and there were many points which were not likely to be settled peaceably at once. One question, especially, about which there was no agreement, was of pressing importance. What was to become of the ecclesiastical property of bishops, or other ecclesiastics, who joined the Reformed communion? Was Church land to become secularized when its ecclesiastical holder became a Protestant, married and had children? Were the lands given in past time to the old Church, to pass over to this new sect? On the other hand, was it fair to the Protestants that all the vast districts at present under the rule of ecclesiastics should always belong to the Catholic powers, and always be exempt from Protestant influence? No agreement could be come to on this point by the Diet; but it was settled by a decree of the Emperor, that any prelate who joined the Reformed body, should forthwith vacate his ecclesiastical office, with all its possessions, and a new election should at once be made to his office. This, which was called the Ecclesiastical Reservation, was merely a decree of the Emperor, and was not accepted by the Protestants as a definite law.For the present, both parties were content to let matters rest. Peace had been patched up for a time, but no one expected it to last. The Reformation struggle paused in Germany for the rest of the century, only to break out with greater violence in the terrible Thirty Years War.

Meanwhile, however, it remained to be seen if Charles V would agree to this new state of things. It was entirely opposed to his views of the unity of his dominions, and he would not have accepted it if it had been possible for him to stand out against it. But he saw that the Protestants in Germany, aided by France, were too strong for him, unless he could get a powerful ally. He turned his attention, for this end, to England. The future depended on the success of the connection now established between England and the Austro-Spanish power.

 

CHAPTER II

PROGRESS OF THE REFORMATION IN ENGLAND UNDER EDWARD VI. 

1547—1553.

 

“The Emperor is aiming at the sovereignty of Europe, which he cannot obtain without the suppression of the Reformed religion; and unless he crushes the English nation, he cannot crush the Reformation”. This remark of Sir William Cecil may serve to explain the position in which first the Emperor, Charles V, and afterwards his son, Philip II, King 01 Spain, stood towards England. Their schemes for political supremacy were founded upon the old idea of European politics, which regarded Europe as a confederacy of nations under the headship of Pope and Emperor. England was the first nation which, as a nation, broke away from this state of things; it was of the greatest importance to the house of Austria and Spain that this rebellion should not be made good.

The movement against the Papacy had been of long standing in England. The English Church had never submitted unreservedly to Papal control, and Papal encroachments had been guarded against, especially in the reigns of Edward I and Edward III, by stringent laws. At a time when general discontent with the Papacy prevailed in Europe particular cause for discontent was given to Henry VIII. As the royal power was then at its greatest height in England, Parliament transferred to the king the title of “Supreme Head of the Church of England” and abolished all the rights over the Church in England which the Pope at that time claimed.

This abolition of the Pope's power was all that Henry VIII, and perhaps a majority of the English people, meant at first by the measures taken in his reign. Henry's plan was to maintain the Church discipline and doctrines unchanged, but to maintain them without the authority of the Pope.

As time went on it became clear that this was impossible. The ‘men of the new learning’ continued to apply to religious matters the tests of reason, or of primitive custom, and much of the, existing religious system was beginning to crumble away before them. Many, on seeing this, became alarmed, and asked themselves the question—'Where is this to stop?' Afraid of the risk attending further enquiry, they went back to the old Papal system, as being surer than the novelties they heard on every side. They went back again to their old convictions, determined to meddle no more with change, but henceforth to fight the battle of the Pope.

So, too, with the common people. They seem at first to have been willing enough to have the Pope set aside. But in the dissolution of the monasteries and its results, they soon began to see and feel what the royal headship of the Church might mean. Many who had seen with joy the monasteries fall, soon felt that their joy had been without cause. The monastery lands had passed to harder masters; the taxes, which they had fondly hoped they never would have to pay again, were soon levied as if the royal coffers were no better filled than before. Many felt a great want in the associations of their daily life when they looked at the ruined piles with which so much that was solemn in their own lives had been connected. A large party, certainly the majority of the people, wished the old state of things quietly back again.

Against these was set a party of earnest men—thoroughly convinced of the badness of all that had gone on before, and wishing only to carry the changes further, so as to uproot everything that might still tend to keep the old errors alive.

So long as Henry VIII reigned, the more violent members of these two parties were kept down, and Henry forced his own position—the old Church system without a Pope—upon all alike. He seems, however, to have moved on, in his later days, in the direction of further reforms; and he was inclined still more towards the party of the new learning by the violent conduct of the Earl of Surrey, which brought suspicion on his father also, the Duke of Norfolk, who was at the head of the Papal party.

When Henry died (Jan. 28, 1547), he appointed by his will a council of sixteen members, who were to manage affairs during the minority of his young son, Edward VI. Amongst the members of the Council there was a majority of the men of the new learning, and the future movement of the Reformation in England depended upon the way in which they would act.

The Council seems to have felt the difficulty of its position. In the unsettled state of affairs it was necessary that the will of one man should guide the State. The Council therefore appointed one of their number, Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, Protector of the Realm. He was made Duke of Somerset, in accordance, it was said, with the late king’s wish. As being Edward VI’s uncle, he was likely to maintain his interests.

The Duke of Somerset was the head of the Protestant party, and soon made known his intention of carrying out the Reformation as far as he could. In this he was aided by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Crammer, whose opinions during the later years of Henry VIII had been lowly forming themselves after the model of the German Reformers. A series of measures were at once carried out which made England a Protestant nation in matters of doctrine as well as in Church government.

First, a royal visitation of the whole kingdom was held. Commissioners were sent into every diocese to see that the Church services were properly conducted. A book of homilies composed by Cranmer was given to the clergy to be read in churches and also a copy of Erasmus’ paraphrase of the New Testament. The services were made simpler and more uniform by the publication of the Book of Common Prayer. This, which is now known as the First Prayer Book of Edward VI, was compiled by Cranmer out of the old service-books, with a few changes. It has since undergone a few alterations and received a few additions, especially in 1662; but Cranmer’s Prayer Book is in the main the same as that which is used by the Church of England at the present day. The fact that it is still looked upon with such affection and reverence after three centuries, is the best proof that can be given of Cranmer’s moderation and wisdom.

On every side there were signs of the fall of the old system. Archbishop Cranmer ate meat openly in Lent; images were pulled down in the churches; an Act of Parliament was passed, allowing the marriage of the clergy. The object of the new system was to recognize Scripture and not tradition as the basis of men’s belief. 

These measures met with the approval of a majority of thinking men in England. They were popular in London, and in the larger towns. But in the country generally they were accepted without being approved of. There was a shouldering discontent on every side. It was only by a successful government in other respects that Somerset was likely to put his religious measures upon a secure footing. Let us see, then, how far his other plans succeeded.

The first point to which he turned his attention was a union between Scotland and England. Henry VII and Henry VIII had both labored for this object; for they saw that England could never hold an independent position in Europe so long as Scotland was an enemy always on the watch to take advantage of her momentary weakness. James V of Scotland had died in 1542, leaving an infant daughter, Mary, as heir to the Scottish throne. Henry VIII had endeavored to bring about a marriage between Mary and his son Edward, and this policy was pursued by Somerset. First he tried negotiations, and when these failed, he advanced with an army into Scotland. The Scots were defeated with great loss at the battle of Pinkie-cleugh, not far from Edinburgh (September 10, 1547). Somerset, however, had not time to follow up his victory. His presence was wanted in England, and he hastily left Scotland without having accomplished his object.

By this expedition, Somerset obtained for the time great military glory in England; but he increased the taxes of the people, who could ill endure to be taxed further. He also sowed so deep hatred in the heart of the Scots that they now threw themselves without reserve into the arms of France, their old ally. The Scottish lords determined to bind France firmly to Scotland by the marriage of their young queen with the dauphin. Mary was sent to France in August, 154o to be educated till she was old enough for marriage. All hope of an alliance between England and Scotland was now at an end, and Somerset’s endeavors to bring it about had only succeeded in making it impossible. Moreover, Scotland, by its alliance with France, had pledged itself to Catholicism, and Protestantism would meet from it with bitter opposition.

In this point, then, Somerset had failed; but still greater difficulties soon beset him at home. He had inherited from the last reign great financial troubles. The country was in debt, in spite of all the confiscations of ecclesiastical property, and the coinage had been depreciated in value, as a means of enabling Government to pay off its debts. This policy, however, had produced very disastrous results in the unsettled state of the country generally. The depreciation of the currency at once increased prices. This made little difference to the merchant or trader, who paid a higher price for what he bought, and got a higher price for what he sold. But the changes which were coming about in methods of cultivation, owing to the large amount of land which had suddenly changed hands after the dissolution of the monasteries, prevented a proportionate increase in the wages of laborers. Large estates were now brought together into the hands of one landlord, and it was soon found that large farms were more profitable when used for grazing than when used for growing corn.

English wool could be sold to Flanders for a high price; and so large sheep-farms became the chief agricultural industry of England.

This change was bad for the laborers in many ways. Grazing farms, to be profitable, must be large, while corn may be grown, and give a small profit, on small estates. The growth of large sheep farms tended to diminish the number of small tillage-farms, and so of small farmers throughout the land. Again, large grazing farms require quiet and solitude, and villages were pulled down to make the district better suited for the purpose. Grazing-farms also require fewer laborers than tillage-farms, and many men were thrown out of employment, and so the rate of wages was kept low.

Nor was this all. The monasteries had been indulgent landowners, and had never pressed their rights to the utmost. The new landowners, however, were far different. They enclosed all the waste land and common land which they could, and so deprived many families of their only livelihood.

We cannot, then, be surprised that the poor were discontented with the Government, and connected their present misery with the religious change. The monasteries had gone, but the people were worse off than before. They wished that the old state of things was back again. This feeling led, in the summer of 1549, to risings of the peasants in many of the counties, which were easily checked at first. They, however, alarmed Somerset, who saw the evil of which the peasants complained, and did not wish to have the lower classes opposed to Protestantism. He therefore appointed commissioners to enquire into their grievances, and to remove the enclosures of the commons. This angered the gentry, who were the owners of the land, and encouraged the peasants to take into their own hands the redress of their wrongs. The insurrection broke out again in a more serious form. Particularly in Norfolk, under the leadership of Robert Ket, the insurgents became very formidable, and were only put down after a severe struggle, by the Earl of Warwick, whose forces were largely composed of German mercenaries.

By his conduct in this matter, Somerset had set against himself the landowners, and had only beguiled the peasants to their ruin. His policy had failed as regarded Scotland, and it failed no less as regarded France. He was of opinion that peace must be made with France, at the price of the surrender of Boulogne, of the capture of which, in Henry VIII’s reign, England was still proud. This step, however, was so unpopular that he did not dare to take it. France, encouraged by the troubled state of England and having no fear of the Emperor, who was busied in reducing Germany, sent a large army against Boulogne in August 1549. It was clear that Boulogne would soon fall, as Somerset had not sufficient troops at his command to meet the French army in the field.

Added to all this, Somerset had become personally unpopular. The execution of his brother, Thomas, Lord Seymour, however justifiable, had given a great shock to popular feeling. There is no doubt that Lord Seymour, who was Lord High Admiral, was desirous of supplanting his brother. The times were times of wild ambition and desperate plotting for place and power. Lord Seymour had married the late king’s widow with indecent haste, and after her early death had planned to obtain the hand of the Princess Elizabeth. He had tried to set the young king against the Protector, and to win his confidence himself. He was gathering troops for an attack upon his brother, and was robbing the Government by receiving money fraudulently coined. On these charges he was attainted, and was beheaded in 1548. Somerset was rid of a dangerous rival; but the popular voice was loudly raised against the ambition that could require a brother’s blood.

Somerset, though sincere in his zeal for Protestantism, was also ambitious for his own greatness, and was proud, haughty, and high-handed in his behavior. He treated the young king with harshness, and kept him under great restraint. He himself affected almost kingly magnificence. He wrote to the king of France as ‘brother’. He built himself a splendid palace, Somerset House, in the Strand, and spared nothing to make it worthy of his position. To provide a site for it he had pulled down a parish church, and carried off materials from the ruins of chapels. His personal haughtiness to those around him had become very offensive, and one of his friends did not scruple to write to him—“Of late your grace is grown in great choleric fashions, wheresoever you are contraried in that which you have conceived in your head”.

Government of Warwick.

The opposition to Somerset soon found a leader in John Dudley, Earl of Warwick. He was the son of the minister of Henry VII who had been put to death amid the j0y 0f the people, soon after the accession of Henry VIII. But Henry VIII delighted to show that he could cast down and could raise up. John Dudley was gradually taken into his favor, was created Viscount Lisle, and was left one of the executors of the king’s will, and, as such, a member of the Privy Council. When the Earl of Hertford was raised to the title of Duke of Somerset, Lord Lisle was also created Earl of Warwick. Gradually he had gained an ascendancy over the Council, and to him, rather than to Somerset, was given the command against the insurgent peasants. When he returned from his victory over Kent, he openly opposed the Protector, and at last a quarrel broke out between the Council and Somerset. Both parties began to raise troops; but Somerset found that his popularity was gone. He was obliged to submit, to resign the office of Protector, to ask pardon for his offences and to retire into private life (Dec. 1549). His life was spared for a while, but he was found to be too powerful for the safety of his opponents. Changes of ministry were in those days thought secure only when established by the death of the fallen minister. Somerset plotted to regain his position. He formed a plan to raise London in his defence, and so laid himself open to a charge of high-treason, for which he was condemned to death, and beheaded on January 22, 1552.

On Somerset’s fall, Warwick was the head of the Government. In spite of the unpopularity of the measure, he was compelled to carry out Somerset’s plan of peace with France. There were no hopes of saving Boulogne. England was impoverished, and had no troops. Her chief men were engaged, during the young king's minority, in struggling for their own ambitious ends. Her people were oppressed by poverty, and distracted by religious discord. Peace, therefore, was made with France in the spring of 1550, and Boulogne was restored. Scotland, also, which was weary of war, was included in the peace. It was important for the French king at this time to have his hands free that he might be able to help the Protestants in Germany, and strike a blow at Charles V.

Warwick was not, like Somerset, a man of deep religious convictions, nor had he any object except self-interest in his desire for power. The Catholic party at first hoped that he would undo his rival’s Protestant measures. Perhaps, however, he was afraid, if he did so, of again strengthening Somerset’s hands by putting him at the head of a strong religious party. The young king also had formed very decided Protestant opinions, and Warwick could not have made any changes without coming into direct collision with the king, in whose name and for whose interest he professed to govern. The Catholic expectations, therefore, were disappointed, and Warwick, having declared for the Reformation, helped to carry out measures of a more decidedly Protestant character.

The success of Charles V in Germany drove many of the leading German Reformers to seek shelter elsewhere. In England they were kindly received by Cranmer, whose own opinions advanced still further in a Protestant direction, from his intercourse with them. The most famous of these exiles, Peter Martyr and Bucer, were appointed to teach theology at the two universities, and everywhere the ideas of the English Reformers received a strong impulse from Lutheran teachers. This led to a great increase of reforming zeal, but also to greater lawlessness. Many different opinions prevailed on many matters, and this was viewed with alarm, as the unity of the State was believed to depend on a unity of religious belief. Hence the Prayer Book was again revised, and its use made compulsory by an Act of Parliament, which rendered it penal to be present at any religious service different from that therein prescribed. Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, and Bonner, Bishop of London, who had before been suspected and imprisoned, were now deprived of their sees. To define more clearly the limits of the changes which the English Church had made, Archbishop Cranmer, in imitation of the Continental Reformers, compiled and issued the Articles of Religion. These, at first, numbered forty two, but have since been reduced to thirty-nine. They, like the Prayer Book, have undergone some alterations since Cranmer’s day, but in the main they continue such as he first issued.

England was now decidedly Protestant. But it would take some time before the changes that had been made could sink down thoroughly amongst the people. The wildness and lawlessness of some Protestant teachers did much to alarm the people and make them fear the tendency of the changes which had been made. This led to repression on the part of the Government; and when the Reformers are charged with intolerance it must be remembered that religion could not, in those times, be a matter merely of individual opinion. Upon the maintenance of unity, up to a certain point, depended social order and national strength.

It is to be regretted that the leading statesmen under Edward VI were influenced, almost entirely, by selfish motives, and that many of the leading ecclesiastics spent much of their time and energies in quarrels about points of small importance. The Reformed doctrines were not commended to the ignorant people by the wisdom, the charity, or the alluring character of its chief political promoters. As an instance of the want of any directing zeal may be taken the dealings of the king’s advisers with Ireland, where, with a view of discouraging the use of the Irish language, it was ordered that the Irish should only have the church services read to them in English. This is one reason of the ill-success of the Reformation movement in Ireland. It came to the people in a form imposed upon them by their rulers, a form which professed to appeal only to their convictions, yet which was conveyed in a language they could not understand.

Protestantism in England had not as yet become a national movement. The political leaders had adopted it, some through conviction, some for interested motives. It was genuinely accepted and zealously spread by a number of earnest converts. But the great mass of the people were content to obey the laws, though their lingering sentiment inclined in favor of the old state of things, whose evils were forgotten now that they had been removed, while the evils of the change were severely felt and their influence on the present misery exaggerated.

Northumberland’s plot

The failing health of the young king filled the supporters of the Reformation with alarm. According to the settlement of the succession under Henry VIII, the Princess Mary, his daughter by Catherine of Arragon, was to succeed. Mary never forgot her Spanish descent nor her mother’s wrongs, and the religious change in England was necessarily connected in her mind with the thoughts of an insult offered to herself by the declaration of her illegitimacy. She never forgot also that she was the Emperor’s cousin, and the example of his policy in Germany was not likely to be thrown away upon her. The possibility of her accession filled the dominant party with alarm. They saw in it destruction to themselves and their plans.

As Edward VI’s health grew worse, and it became evident that he had not long to live, the ambition of the Duke of Northumberland, for such was Warwick’s new title, found out a scheme for altering the succession to the throne in a manner favorable to himself and Protestantism. Edward VI was convinced that it was his duty to save the country from the danger of a return to ‘Papistry’. He was persuaded that he had power to settle the succession by will as much as his father had. He forgot that his father had had that power conferred upon him by Act of Parliament. When once he was convinced, he shared all his father’s determination and strength of will. The legal scruples of the judges were overruled by his stern and imperious commands. The moral scruples of Archbishop Cranmer had to bow before the young king’s will. With his own hand the dying boy drew out the draft of an instrument which was to secure to England a Protestant Queen.

Mary, he argued, was barred by illegitimacy, as was also Elizabeth. By Henry VIII’s will the line of his younger sister, Mary, who had married Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, had been preferred for the succession to the line of his elder sister, Margaret, who had married James IV of Scotland. Mary’s eldest daughter had married Grey, Duke of Suffolk, and their eldest child, the Lady Jane Grey, who had been recently married to Northumberland’s son, the Lord Guildford Dudley, was chosen by the dying Edward for his successor. Northumberland counted upon the Protestant feeling in London to support him. He strengthened his family connections by intermarriages, and trusted that France would work with him to prevent the Emperor’s cousin from ascending the English throne.

When Edward VI died (July 6, 1553) at the early age of seventeen, Queen Jane was duly proclaimed. The people, however, taken by surprise at this change, received their new queen in silence. The English people have always respected law, and religious discord had not yet created among them such strong party feeling as to make them ready for violent measures. Northumberland soon found that he was mistaken in his hopes of strong popular support. He had also not succeeded in seizing the Princess Mary. She fled to Norwich, where she had been proclaimed queen, and where many lords flocked to her standard. Moreover, Northumberland had difficulties with the queen whom he had chosen. Though only a girl of sixteen, she was wise beyond her years, and had a high sense of the duties of her office. Her first exclamation, when she heard that she was queen, was a fervent prayer that God would give her strength to wield her scepter for the nation’s good. Northumberland found that he could not use her as a puppet. She refused to have her husband crowned with herself. Those who had joined Northumberland from purely selfish motives began to fall away when they saw that he would not be absolute even if he succeeded.

Northumberland’s scheme, therefore, entirely failed. He advanced against Mary, but found that his troops fell away from him. At last, in Cambridge, losing heart at the desertions, he proclaimed Mary queen while the tears ran down his face. Mary now entered London unopposed. The Lady Jane was committed to the Tower. Northumberland pleaded guilty to the charge of high-treason, and was beheaded. On the scaffold he told the people that he died in the old religion, and that ambition only had led him to conform to the late changes. It is impossible to feel any sympathy for him. He was a man without any principle, except that of self-advancement, and his plan to alter the succession was badly laid and negligently carried out. His selfish policy, his irreligious life, and his hypocrisy or cowardice at the last, made him a most fatal friend to the Reformation. It was because the affairs of England were managed by men like him under Edward VI that Protestant principles did not take deeper root, and the reaction that followed became possible.

 

CHAPTER III.

CATHOLIC REACTION IN ENGLAND. 1553—1555.

 

The accession of Mary occurred at a time when Charles V was looking for some means of strengthening himself against France, and again making himself supreme in Germany. Mary was his cousin, and had been brought up in traditional reverence of his wisdom and power. During the last reign, Mary and Charles had interfered to procure for her the right of celebrating mass according to the Roman use, which Edward VI was desirous to stop, according to the law. Mary, at her accession, found herself without a friend whom she could entirely trust. She was fervently attached to the old religion, and her fondest desire was to restore it in England. She threw herself upon the Emperor for support in this, and trusted to his wisdom for her guidance.

It is this that gives Mary’s reign its interest. If England could only be allied firmly with Spain, and brought back to the old state of things, Charles V’s policy might still succeed. The Austro-Spanish power might be established as supreme in Europe. Change would be rolled back, and future reorganization would depend on the Emperor’s will.

The ideas of Charles V were, in the main points, much the same as those of Henry VIII. He would have no change in doctrine or in Church discipline; but he wished to see flagrant abuses reformed, and the Pope’s power rendered subordinate to his own. We see in Mary and Philip the result of the struggle of the previous generation. They were both one-sided and bigoted : both submitted themselves entirely to the Pope, and by the very severity of their reactionary measures rendered their success impossible. So scrupulous was Mary even about small matters that she put off her coronation till she had received the oil to be used at the ceremony from Granvella, Bishop of Arras. She was afraid that the English oil might have lost its virtue, owing to the schism from Rome.

The policy which Charles V prescribed was one of moderation and tolerance till she felt secure. Then the alliance with himself was to be secured by Mary’s marriage with his son Philip. Afterwards the restoration of the old state of things might be brought about gradually by legal means. Charles V well knew the temper of the English people, and did not deceive himself about the difficulties of the marriage. He wished Mary, above all things, to secure her throne first of all, and warned her not to imperil it by offending her people.

The religious question, however, could not be left unsettled. Mary herself attended the mass service according to the old usage and in many places the 0ld services were again introduced. The bishops of the Catholic party, who had been deprived of office in the last reign, were restored to their sees, and the Reforming bishops were in their turn committed to the Tower. Cranmer drew this upon himself by boldly publishing a letter in which he expressed his grief at hearing that the mass service had been restored in Canterbury Cathedral. He denounced its blasphemies, and offered to prove publicly that the Reformed doctrines were in accordance with Scripture. Ridley, Bishop of London, and Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, soon followed Cranmer to the Tower.

The Queen’s chief adviser was Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, whom she delivered from the Tower, where he had been confined during the late reign. Gardiner is the last of the great ecclesiastical statesmen in whom mediaeval England was so rich. He was a statesman rather than an ecclesiastic, and the odium which has been attached to his name as a persecutor does not seem to be fairly his due. Gardiner was a thorough Englishman. He had been one of the foremost in urging the abolition of the Pope’s supremacy under Henry VIII. He wished for a national Church, but he did not wish in consequence to see any changes in doctrine or in ceremonies. He could not, therefore, agree with any of the changes in the late reign, and he honestly wished to abolish them.

Gardiner, therefore, as Lord Chancellor, directed Mary’s policy when she met her Parliament. The Crown interest had no doubt been greatly used to get a Parliament agreeable to the queen’s views. But the heads of the Reforming party were scattered. All were discredited by the failure of Northumberland’s plot; some were in prison; many had fled to the parts of the Continent where they might hold their opinions in safety. The middle classes of the large towns were, on the whole, in favor of the late changes; but the country people were, on the whole, of Gardiner’s opinion—they wanted to have the old state of things, but to be rid of the Pope.

Under these circumstances we cannot feel much surprise that Gardiner found the new Parliament easy to manage. All the enactments affecting Catherine’s divorce were repealed, and Mary’s legitimacy fully established. It was determined to go back to Henry VIII’s policy. The Prayer Book was abolished, and all the changes of the late reign were undone. Religion was restored to the condition in which it had been left at the death of Henry VIII.

So far, Mary had advanced without difficulty. The next question to be settled was her marriage with Philip. So well did Charles V know the opposition this plan was likely to meet with that he would not allow it to be complicated with any further question of the Pope's supremacy. At once, on the news of Mary’s accession, Cardinal Pole was sent as the Pope’s legate to England; but on his way through the Netherlands he received orders from the Emperor to go no further without his permission. There were many in England who wished Mary to marry Pole; for Reginald Pole’s mother, the Countess of Salisbury, was a daughter of the Duke of Clarence, Edward IV’s brother, and through her Pole could claim a royal descent. During Henry VIII’s reign, Pole had gone into exile rather than recognize the royal supremacy. He incurred Henry’s anger by writing a most violent book against his divorce. In his plots against Henry’s throne he so far involved his mother and brothers that they died as traitors on the scaffold.

The candidate, however, of the English was Courtenay, Earl of Devon, whom Mary had released from the Tower. He was recommended by his youth, his noble family, and his descent from the old royal house of England through his grandmother, who was a daughter of Edward IV. His own misconduct, however, gave Mary a plausible excuse for rejecting his claims. She was determined to marry Philip; and though Gardiner at first opposed this most earnestly, yet, when he saw the queen’s mind was thoroughly made up, he did his best to protect the interests of England, and make the marriage as little disastrous as might be to the nation and the queen. The terms which he drew up, and which the Emperor was obliged to accept, gave Philip no royal title over England, no rights of succession, and no legal influence over English affairs.

Wyatt’s rebellion.

Still the very mention of this marriage offended the English national feeling, and created deep discontent. Some English nobles put themselves at the head of risings in different counties, in favor of the Princess Elizabeth and Courtenay, who were to be proclaimed king and queen. But the conspirators did not lay their plans wisely. In Devonshire and Cornwall Sir Peter Carew discovered himself too soon, and was obliged to flee to France. At Coventry, the Earl of Suffolk, Lady Jane Grey's father, was equally unsuccessful, and was made prisoner at Coventry. In Kent only, under Sir Thomas Wyatt, was the rebellion formidable; but there it threatened to be dangerous to the queen. Wyatt, at the head of 15,000 men, advanced against London. The queen had no troops to meet him, and the citizens were wavering in their opinions. In this emergency Mary displayed her courage. She determined to throw herself upon the loyalty of her people, and ordering the lord mayor to summon a meeting of the citizens, she entered the Guildhall and herself addressed them. Mary was not prepossessing in appearance but at such a moment the black piercing eyes that gleamed from her sallow face, and the deep man’s voice that jarred upon the ear in ordinary talk, lent greater dignity to her look and speech. Marriage, she said, was not so dear to her that for it she would sacrifice her people’s good; unless her marriage were approved by Parliament, she would never marry. “Wherefore stand fast against these rebels, your enemies and mine. Fear them not, for I assure you I fear them nothing at all”.

Next morning 20,000 men had enrolled themselves to guard the city. As Wyatt advanced, his army fell off from him. He forced his way into London, but found that no one rose to welcome him. He tried to retire, but was taken prisoner (Feb. 7, 1554).

After the failure of this rebellion the queen’s advisers determined to strengthen her position still more by removing out of the way all who hereafter might raise claims against her. Lady Jane Grey and her husband were beheaded. Elizabeth and Courtenay were imprisoned, and attempts were made to implicate them in Wyatt’s rising. The Emperor urged the necessity of putting Elizabeth to death; but Gardiner felt that the queen was not strong enough to proceed to such a measure. The people had supported Mary both against Northumberland and Wyatt, not because she was popular, but because she was their lawful queen. Elizabeth claimed their support for a similar reason, because she was the lawful heir to the throne. To lay hands upon her would destroy Mary’s own position, and make her marriage with Philip hated amongst all. For the present Elizabeth must be spared.

This unsuccessful rising against Mary’s marriage made all who were well disposed towards the queen give their consent at once to a measure about which they had been previously doubtful. Parliament gave its approval, and Philip landed in England in July 1554. Philip himself had been brought up entirely in Spain, and had imbibed the pride and haughtiness of the Castilian nobles. He was cold and reserved in manner, stiff and formal in speech. He was not of robust frame, and so had no pleasure in outdoor sports or feats of arms. When he left Spain and joined his father in the Netherlands, Charles V saw with distress that his son did not succeed in pleasing any of the peoples with whom he had to do. The Italians murmured at his want of vivacity; the Flemish despised him for his coldness and want of affability; to the Germans he was entirely hateful in every way. It was in vain that Charles V had done his utmost to secure to Philip the ultimate succession to the Empire. Ferdinand of Austria, Charles V’s brother, refused to waive his son’s claims, and the German princes would not give up their right of election. Charles V was disappointed in his hope of bequeathing all his dominions to his son.

But Charles V had appreciated his son’s faults of manner, and Philip was straitly charged to spare no pains in conciliating the English. Charles V had already resigned to him Naples and Sicily, that he might not come to England as a poor landless prince. He came, too, well supplied with Spanish gold, which was largely distributed amongst the most influential members of Parliament, and had great weight in bringing about the reconciliation of England with the Pope. So anxious was Philip to be conciliatory that he begged his attendants, immediately on landing, to conform to English customs, and set them an example by drinking a tankard of English ale.

The chief anxiety of Mary and her husband was to bring back England into union with Catholic Christendom, under the headship of the Pope. It was a difficult matter, and had been felt by the Emperor to be so. He had urged great caution and moderation, and had checked Mary’s impetuosity. He had detained Pole, the papal legate, in Flanders, and would not allow him to proceed till he had obtained from the Pope full powers to allow the secularized Church property to remain in the hands of its present holders. Charles V knew well that the English had always borne very grudgingly the claims of the papal supremacy. To get them to admit it again, when once it had been thrown off, would be a very hard task. But to get them to admit it, and to require of the nobles at the same time to resign the Church lands, of which they had obtained possession during the late changes, would be entirely impossible. On the other hand, it was hard for the Pope to forgive rebellion against him, and leave the rebels in possession of all the booty they had gained : it was a bad example to the other European churches. Under the Emperor’s influence, however, Pope Julius III who was an easy, good-natured man, with no very high views of his office, gave Pole permission to waive the question of the restoration of the abbey lands.

1554. Restoration of Papal Supremacy.

When this point had been gained, matters were easier. The royal influence was used to the utmost to procure the election of trusty members of parliament, and the temper of the new House of Commons was first tried by a bill to reverse the attainder of Cardinal Pole. This was at once passed, and Pole returned to England, at first only as an English nobleman. But he was so well received by the people that he soon ventured to appear with all the pomp of papal legate. This too caused no disturbance, and when he reached London he was received with most marked honors by the queen and her husband. Parliament at once passed a resolution in favor of reunion with the Roman Church. On St. Andrew’s day (November 30), 1554, Pole gave his solemn absolution to the nation. The queen and Philip, with all the members of both Houses of Parliament, knelt humbly before him as he freed them from the penalties of schism and restored them to the communion of Holy Church. The papal supremacy was at once restored, and all acts of parliament which had been passed against it were repealed. At the same time the clergy formally resigned their claims to the Church lands which had been seized, and an act of parliament established the titles of their existing possessors. The nobles and great landholders must have been glad enough at this papal restoration. It certainly benefited them, as it confirmed their claims to the new lands they had got. Both of the two religious parties were equally pledged not to disturb them in their possessions.

The Catholic reaction had now firmly set in, and was in the full tide of popular favor. We have to see how, in the next four years, it was entirely discredited; how it failed to win popular sympathy; how it was associated with persecutions, with national distress and disaster, and left behind it a deep-seated hatred of popery which sent England forward on a new career as the chief Protestant nation of Europe.

First of all, the victorious Catholics entered upon a career of persecution, which awoke deep disgust in the mind of the people. The old laws against the Lollards were revived by Parliament, and the chief men amongst the Reformers were put in prison. Their condemnation and execution soon followed, and men were burnt at the stake in different parts of England, to produce a widespread feeling of fear. Hooper, Ridley, Latimer, and Cranmer, who had been bishops, were all burnt. Archbishop Cranmer had been induced to recant, to save his life; but his recantation was of no avail, and was only meant to add to his humiliation. At the last, however, his courage came back to him, and he died nobly, lamenting his cowardice, and declaring the depth of his real convictions. Everywhere the people looked upon these executions with horror and disgust; while the resolute behavior of the martyrs won general sympathy. It is true that in other countries religious persecution claimed many more victims than in England. But in England the victims were chosen deliberately from the most important people. The persecution was not founded on popular fanaticism or widespread religious bigotry, but was conducted and approved of by the government alone. It was connected also in the minds of the people with Spanish interference and with foreign aggression. In no other country did persecution make so deep an impression on the mind of the people, and the impression is recorded in the title of ‘Bloody’ which has been attached to the unhappy queen in whose name these horrors were done.

But if the people saw that a recognition of the Pope meant persecution at which they shuddered, the nobles and gentry soon found also that it might affect them in their most tender point, their pockets. The papal claims over the confiscated Church lands had been given up, but the new Pope, Paul IV (1555), was not at once disposed to agree to the promise made by his predecessor. The queen’s conscience was hurt by the possession of Church lands, and she determined to give back to the Church all the ecclesiastical property in the hands of the Crown. She busied herself also with the restoration of monasteries. The owners of Church lands looked upon this with great distrust; they began to feel that if the old religion really made head in England, they would not long be able to hold their lands as they had done. This munificence of Mary towards the Church of course diminished the royal revenues. The debts which had come down from Henry VIII and had been increased under Edward VI, went on home growing. The coinage had been debased in value, and was not restored; foreign trade consequently languished. The government was so busily engaged in burning heretics that the national defenses were neglected. The ships were not kept in repair, and the fortifications were allowed to fall into ruins. The English coasts were ravaged by exiles, especially from Cornwall, who had fled after Wyatt’s failure, and now under French protection, infested the Channel as pirates. Everyone saw that the government of the Catholic revival was not likely to restore national prosperity.

When in addition to all these causes of discontent was added an estrangement between Mary and the Pope, by which the English saw the Pope take the side of their enemies, we cannot wonder that Mary saw all her hopes fade away, and that her reign ended in national humiliation and disasters, which began to make the name of the papacy hateful to the majority of Englishmen. For the causes of this we must go back to consider the plans of Charles V, and see how they had been prospering.

 

CHAPTER IV.

FRANCE, SPAIN, AND THE PAPACY. 1555-1558

 

In the year 1555, when the Diet of Augsburg confirmed the religious settlement in Germany, Charles V again found, as he had done before, that the policy of the Pope was guided by other motives than a desire for the spread of Catholicism. Pope Paul IV, Giovanni Piero Caraffa, was a Neapolitan by birth. He was of the age of eighty, and his mind was filled with the old Italian patriotism of his youthful days, when Italy had not yet fallen under foreign rule. He hated the Spaniards, and was determined to spare no pains in driving them out of Naples. He accordingly hastened to make an alliance with the French king for this purpose.

Charles V, though not old in years, being only fifty-six, felt himself worn out in health and vigour, and shrunk from the prospect of another long war. He determined therefore to resign his power to his son Philip, and spend his remaining years in solitude. Charles had long ago formed this determination. His reign of thirty-six years had been one of ceaseless activity. He had never remained more than a few months in any one place, but had hastened, as need required, from one part of his vast dominions to another. To him, as to his son Philip, power brought laborious duties which must be conscientiously fulfilled. Wishing to spend the last years of his life in quiet, and thinking that he had done all he could do, and that the time was favorable for his successor, Charles resigned, in 1556, the Netherlands, Spain, and his possessions in Italy, to his son Philip. He then retired to the monastery of Yuste in Estremadura, where he had prepared a house suitable to his needs. There he lived till the end of 1558, engaged alternately in politics and devotion, eagerly watching the course of events in Europe, and helping Philip by his counsels.

War soon broke out in Italy. The Pope quarrelled with the Spaniards, and called the French to his assistance, but both in Italy and in France the cause of Philip prevailed. England was induced to join in the war against France, and the Earl of Pembroke led 10,000 men to join Philip’s army in the Netherlands. On August 10, 1557, the French were defeated decisively in an attempt to relieve the important town of St. Quentin. The French army in Italy was hastily recalled, and the Pope, finding himself left to the mercy of Philip’s viceroy in Naples, the celebrated Duke of Alva, was compelled to make peace. He received, however, the most favorable terms. The conquering Alva knelt with the deepest reverence before the enemy he had overcome. It was impossible for the Spaniards to be long at enmity with the Pope.

This war between Spain and the Pope had, however, important influence on England. If the Pope hated Philip, it was natural that some part of his hatred should fall on Philip’s wife. Partly to annoy Mary, Paul IV urged the restoration of the Church lands in England, and revoked the legatine powers of Cardinal Pole. Pole had succeeded Cranmer as Archbishop of Canterbury, and to him as much as to any man was the papal restoration in England due. But Paul IV had always been opposed to Pole, for Pole, when at Rome, had sympathized with many of the Protestant doctrines, particularly with that of' justification by faith only. Pole was now dealt with as a suspected heretic, and a Franciscan friar of no reputation, the queen's confessor, was made papal legate in his stead. Mary saw that an attempt to recognize such a man as legate in England would be very disastrous. With something of her father’s spirit, she threatened the old penalties of praemunire anyone who should introduce the Bull into England. The Pope pressed the matter no farther, but Mary and Pole felt sadly the position in which they were placed. They were thwarted by the very power which it was the one object of their lives to serve, and they knew that the sight of this house divided against itself was destroying the confidence of the English people.

But Mary’s government soon received a severe shock. The French were anxious to strike some blow which might compensate for their defeat at St. Quentin, and the decayed defences and scanty garrison of Calais invited their attack. In the winter of 1557-8 Calais was surprised, and the last possession of the English in France was lost. The loss was not in itself important, but the disgrace was deeply felt; for the English claims to France were dear to every Englishman, and war with France on their account had always been popular. Now the last remnant of England’s conquests was lost, and with it much of England’s past glory had fallen away. The loss of Calais was felt equally by the queen and the people.

From every side disappointment and disaster closed over the last years of Mary’s reign. Philip, to whom she was devotedly attached, had willingly left England to administer his wide dominions. Mary's hopes 0f an heir wh0 should maintain the Spanish line on the English throne, had been disappointed. By the death of Gardiner she had been deprived of her most faithful minister. Pole, who had so long directed her ecclesiastical policy, had fallen into disgrace with the Pope. Abroad she met with disaster, and at home she was greeted with the murmurs and unconcealed discontent of her people. Mary’s reign ended most sadly. Weighed down by disease which made her old before her time, she saw that all her plans had failed. She could not believe that plans to restore the religion in which she had such fervent faith could possibly fail to meet with the Divine favor. If they seemed to fail it was only because they were carried out half-heartedly. Catholicism must be more firmly established, and the Protestant heresy must be rooted out. So Mary urged religious persecution with greater zeal, and Pole, who was a humane man by nature, and always opposed extreme measures, was roused to persecution as a means of proving his orthodoxy. So it was that the persecutions of Mary’s later years excited deeper popular disgust. They were urged on with greater zeal by the queen, just as the mass of the people had felt their first enthusiasm, which alone could make trials and executions tolerable to their consciences, grow cooler by further experience. Mary felt that she was hated by the people whose best interests she firmly believed she was laboring to further. Anonymous letters were thrown before her, and were even hidden in her books of devotion. She died on November 17, 1558, and Pole died within a few hours of his mistress. Both felt in their last hours that their work was likely to fall to the ground with them.

Accession of Elizabeth

Upon Mary’s death Elizabeth came to the throne without any opposition. The Catholic party could not unite to exclude her, for it was weakened by the war between France and Spain. It was impossible for Philip to rejoice at the accession of Anne Boleyn’s daughter to the English throne, but still less could he endure the other possible heir, Mary of Scotland; for she was married to the Dauphin of France, and so her accession would throw England into opposition to Spain. Moreover, Elizabeth’s religious views were still a matter of conjecture; she had not expressed herself very strongly on either side, but, like the great mass of the people, had conformed to the established religion under Edward VI and Mary equally. Her inclinations were towards Protestantism, but she was not fond of extremes. Philip still hoped that she might be won over to his side. He offered her his hand in marriage, and Elizabeth did not at once refuse, as she wished to feel her way at first, and avoid difficulties as much as possible.

The condition of England was indeed very perilous. The treasury was empty, the revenue was anticipated, and there was a large debt. Trade was languishing, the coinage was debased, and the Channel was swarming with pirates. The country was divided by religious struggles, and was engaged in a disastrous war with France, into which it had been plunged in the interest of Spain. Added to this, Elizabeth’s legitimacy was doubted, and there was a pretender to the throne. It was clearly necessary to act at first with the greatest prudence and caution.

As regards religion Elizabeth was not anxious to declare herself too soon. On the one hand she attended the mass service to please the Catholics; on the other hand she forbad the elevation of the host to please the Protestants. But this impartial conduct was soon made impossible by the conduct of the Pope. Paul IV grew no milder as he grew older, and had fallen still more under French influence. When Elizabeth’s ambassador announced to him her accession, he answered that “Elizabeth, being illegitimate, could not ascend the throne without his consent; it was impertinent on her part to do so. Let her, in the first place, submit her claims to his decision”.

Elizabeth had now no doubt about her line of action. She could not hope to strengthen herself against France and Scotland by an alliance with Spain. For Philip could not have married her without a dispensation from the Pope, and she was the daughter of a marriage which the papacy could never forgive. To attempt to marry Philip would be to surrender her claim to the English throne into the hands of the Pope. She therefore rejected Philip’s offer of marriage, and was consequently compelled to agree to peace with France at the price of leaving Calais in their hands. Philip II was desirous of peace with France, for his treasury was empty, and it was hopeless for him to try and crush France entirely. Elizabeth, on her side, was afraid that Spain would make a separate peace, and leave her to carry on war with France single-handed. The peace of Cateau Cambresis, concluded on April 12, 1559, left France in possession of Calais, as well as of Metz, Toul, and Verdun. Philip was content to secure the Alps as the boundary of his Italian possessions, by establishing once more the independence of Savoy and Piedmont under their duke.

After this peace Elizabeth’s hands were free. She was determined henceforth to act independently in political matters, to take her own line of action and maintain it, to trust to her people, and to support her own measures by identifying them with her people's interests. It was in this that the significance of Elizabeth’s reign lay. She was obliged by the isolation in which she found herself to throw herself entirely upon her people. Under her, therefore, England became again united, and took up once more a leading position among the nations of Europe.

 

CHAPTER V.

RELIGIOUS SETTLEMENT IN ENGLAND.

 

The first result of Elizabeth's experience of the papal plans was to force her to fall back upon the Protestant party in England. This party was becoming stronger day by day, owing to the return of many who had been driven into exile by the persecutions of Mary’s reign. These men had mostly taken refuge in Frankfort or Geneva, and had there imbibed the opinions of Calvin. They came back deeply imbued with Calvin’s system, and by their energy gained great influence over the people. Elizabeth, and her chief adviser were both of them reformers in the sense that they saw much that needed alteration in the old state of things; but Elizabeth could never bring herself to accept the revolutionary ideas of Calvin. She had more sympathy with her father’s plan of maintaining the old Church system, but without any connection with Rome. She was also a great reader of the writings of the early fathers of the Church, and her plan was to free the English Church from the beliefs and practices which had sprung up in it through its relations to Rome, without altering the Catholic foundation on which it rested.

In this plan, also, she had to proceed cautiously, for it was not a plan which could command popular enthusiasm. It would not conciliate the Catholic party, and would not please the followers of Calvin. It could only be established by careful management and prudence. Concessions must be made to both the extreme parties if the plan was to succeed. It was in this way that the religious settlement under Elizabeth gave its peculiar character to the Church of England.

Elizabeth began at once to take a middle course between the Protestants and Catholics. She proclaimed that the old Services were to be continued till Parliament met, and meanwhile spared no efforts to secure the election of a subservient House of Commons. A commission of divines was appointed to revise the Prayer Book of Edward VI, so that no time should be lost in submitting to Parliament a scheme for the settlement of the religious difficulty.

The Parliament, which met in 1559, re-established the royal supremacy over the Church and enacted that an oath of recognition of the queen as supreme governor of her kingdom, in all causes spiritual as well as civil, should be imposed on all clergy and magistrates. The revised Prayer Book, which had been modified to suit the more moderate of those who adhered to the old state of things, was accepted by Parliament, and its use was enforced by the Act of Uniformity.

These changes were violently opposed by the bishops, who counted on Elizabeth’s weakness, and on the discontent of the extreme reformers. They were ordered to conduct a public disputation with of the some divines appointed by the queen. On refusing to continue the dispute and comply with the conditions prescribed to them, the chief amongst them were committed to the Tower. Soon after, they were deprived of their sees, and successors were appointed of more Protestant opinions. Matthew Parker, who had been Anne Boleyn’s chaplain, was made Archbishop of Canterbury. He was a man of moderate opinions, who held the same views as the queen on religious matters. He was strongly opposed to Calvinism, and held to Scripture, and the customs of the primitive Church. He was a man of great learning, and of strong common sense. The son of a tradesman in Norwich, he was a fair representative of the opinions and feelings of the middle classes. Archbishop Parker’ moderation, caution, and good sense did much towards preserving the balance of parties, and establishing the English Church upon the broad basis of concession which so strongly marks it.

Thus the Reformation was again established in England, and commissioners were sent through the country to inquire into its ecclesiastical condition, to administer the oath of supremacy, and see that the new laws were carried out. Very few of the clergy, besides the deposed bishops, refused to take the oath. The changes were, on the whole, popular and met with little opposition.

Meanwhile, a change had taken place in the papacy. On the death of Paul IV, Cardinal de Medici became Pope, as Pius IV. He was of a gentle and conciliatory nature, and his chief ambition was to see the schism brought to an end. He sent at once a nuncio to the queen, offering to approve of the Book of Common Prayer and of the administration of the Communion in both kinds, provided only the Church of England would again submit to the papal supremacy. But his offer came too late. It is impossible to say what would have been the result if this offer had been made by Paul IV; but the queen’s choice had now been made, and she had determined to side with the Protestants and separate herself from the alliance with Spain. The papal nuncio was not allowed to enter England.

Thus the queen had taken up her position. She wished to retain as much as possible of the old traditional system of religion; but she would have none of the abuses that had resulted from papal supremacy and papal interference. She liked the old ceremonies, and was opposed to all the innovations of the Continental reformers. The system which she sanctioned was properly designed to include the more moderate of the two religious parties; but those who would not accept it were to be compelled to obedience. The queen exercised a jurisdiction in ecclesiastical matters, and at first appointed commissioners to see that the law was properly carried out. These commissioners grew into a permanent body, the Court of High Commission for the trial of ecclesiastical cases, and the court thus instituted grew in later reigns into an instrument of serious oppression. At present, however, Protestants and Catholics alike had to obey. The Church of England became a national church. But it may be doubted whether the religious settlement under Elizabeth would have been so permanent, had not the events which followed connected it strongly with national feeling. Opposition to the papacy was shown to be a necessary safeguard of the national independence. The stirrings events of Elizabeth’s reign bound her people together, and demanded that they should offer a united front to their foes. The murmurs of the extreme Protestants were almost drowned in the general awakening of the national enthusiasm, and religious discord among the reformed did not assume any serious form until the more peaceful reign of her successor, when the reformed religion had become endeared to the sentiments and prejudices of the majority of Englishmen.

At first, however, Elizabeth’s position was very dangerous. At home were numbers of discontented, both Catholics and Protestants. Abroad, the claims of Mary of Scotland to the English throne were warmly supported by France; and Philip of Spain, alarmed at Elizabeth’s conduct in the matter of religion, seemed disposed to sink his enmity with France, and make common cause against her. Had France, Spain, and Scotland really united against England, Elizabeth’s throne could not have stood. But religious difficulties, which had not hitherto given these countries any serious trouble, began to arise, and Elizabeth knew how to use the opportunities thus offered her. Her policy was not noble nor magnanimous; but with an impoverished kingdom, a ruined navy, a feeble army, and an insecure position, noble policy was impossible. The queen was not free to follow her own inclinations even in the matter of her marriage. Parliament besought her to marry so as to settle the question of the succession to the throne. But it was hard for her to marry either a Catholic or a Protestant, without either putting herself at a disadvantage to Mary of Scotland, or sacrificing the strength of her political position. On the other hand, if she did not marry, Mary was looked upon as her successor. The Archduke Charles of Austria, the Earl of Arran, and Eric, king of Sweden, were proposed to her as husbands; but she preferred Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Her reason kept her inclinations in check, and prevented her from making so unpopular a marriage. While she wavered, she used her other suitors as means for raising expectations among the politicians of Europe.

Similarly, in other matters, she was content to raise hopes and balance parties against one another. She strove to give the least possible and receive the largest possible return. She made promises take the place of actions. We have to trace her tortuous course through her intricate relations with Scotland, France, and Spain, and see how she managed to steer herself and England clear of the dangers which threatened them.

 

BOOK II.

REFORMATION IN FRANCE SCOTLAND.