the course of his wicked and unhallowed career. To allow the reader to judge how malicious and artful Cranmer's enemies were in drawing up the recantation for him, we here give the document from the modern Book of Martyrs, with a representation of the degraded archbishop signing it. The document itself is in the usual form adopted by the church on all such occasions.

"I THOMAS CRANMER, late archbishop of Canterbury, do renounce, abhor, and detest, all manner of heresies and errors of Luther and Zuinglius, and all other teachings which are contrary to sound and true doc trine. And I believe most constantly in my heart, and with my mouth I confess one holy Catholic church visible, without which there is no salvation and thereof I acknowledge the bishop of Rome to be the su preme head on earth, whom I acknowledge to be the highest bishop and pope, and Christ's vicar, unto whom all Christian people ought to be subject.

"And as concerning the sacraments, I believe and worship in the sacrament of the altar the very body and blood of Christ, being contained most truly under the forms of bread and wine; the bread, through the mighty power of God, being turned into the body of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and the wine into his blood.

"And in the other six sacraments, also (like as in this) I believe and hold, as the universal church holdeth, and the church of Rome judgeth and condemneth.

"Furthermore, I believe that there is a place of purgatory, where souls departed be punished for a time, for whom the church doth godly and wholesomely pray, like as it doth honour saints and make prayers to them.

"Finally, in all things I profess, that I do not otherwise, than the Catholic church and church of Rome holdeth and teacheth. I am sorry that I ever held or thought otherwise. And I beseech Almighty God, that of his mercy he will vouchsafe to forgive me, whatsoever I have

offended against God or his church, and also I desire and beseech all Christian people to pray for me.

"And all such as have been deceived, either by mine example or doctrine, I require them, by the blood of Jesus Christ, that they will return to the unity of the church, that we may be all of one mind, without schism or division.

"And to conclude, as I submit myself to the Catholic church of Christ, and to the supreme head thereof, so I submit myself unto the most excellent majesties of Philip and Mary, king and queen of this realm of England, &c. and to all other their laws and ordinances, being ready always as a faithful subject ever to obey them. And God is my witness, that I have not done this for favour or fear of any person, but willingly and of mine own conscience, as to the instruction of others."

The statement made by the modern editors, that he was induced to make this recantation through "unparalleled severity," is a gratuitous falsehood, as it does not appear from any authentic historian that coercion was at all practised. Neither was his retractation confined to a single act; it was repeated no less than six times, according to the indefatigable and accurate Strype, so little inclined was this over-bepraised Protestant martyr to meet death, or suffer for his faith. But when he found that neither meanness nor hypocrisy would save his life, like the desperate and obstinate sinner, he wrote another declaration of what his sentiments were, if such a liar could be believed, which contradicted in every point the doctrine he had so repeatedly signed and originally professed. This declaration he carried about with him, to produce when it seemed meet.

It being judged expedient that Cranmer should be made an example of, for his high crimes and misdemeanours, he was first of all degraded from his priestly functions and then handed over to the civil power. Being brought out to execution, Dr. Cole, provost of Eton, was appointed to preach on the occasion, and he summed up, in a very pathetic discourse, "the chief disorders of the unhappy culprit's life, and particularly insisted on the MISERIES in which his contrivance and persuasion had involved his country. The divorce he had made between the king and Catharine of Arragon, and the blemish he had cast on the issue of the latter. That he had not only signed away the crown from her present majesty, but had done it in very abusive and insulting terms. That he had ENSLAVED THE CHURCH and sacerdotal dignity to the secular power, and had frequently been guilty of the most flagitious hypocrisy in the great concern of religion, and had never ceased to stir up schismatics, heretics, and rebels, and had violated all laws human and divine. He concluded, by addressing his discourse to Cranmer, and extolled that mercy which had lately brought him to a sense and acknowledgment of his faults, and encouraged him to receive the punishment due to them with a Christian resignation, as the means to atone for them, and obtain a happy eternity."-(Cole's Works, 8vo.) When Cranmer saw there was no signs of pardon, he retracted whatever he had subscribed, produced his counter-declaration, and said, that it was fear of death and a desire to live, which had prevailed upon him to act as he had done. The modern editors have a long tale about his death of the most marvellous nature. They say that Cranmer answered, on falsehood and dis

simulation being objected to him, "Ah, my masters, do you not take it so? Always since I lived hitherto, I have been a hater of falsehood, and a lover of simplicity, and never, before this time, have I dissembled; and saying this, (they add) all the tears that remained in his body appeared in his eyes." Poor Tom, he was sadly mollified! "And when (they continue) he began to speak more of the sacrament and the papacy, some of them began to cry out, yelp, and bawl, and especially Cole cried out upon him, 'Stop the heretic's mouth and take him away!' After the facts so clearly proved by innumerable witnesses, that Cranmer's life was one continued scene of duplicity and hypocrisy, it must be admitted that Fox and our modern editors must possess no small share of hardihood and impudence to make their grand martyr lie so stoutly, and profess himself so great an advocate and example of pro bity. But how could these writers tell the quantity of tears in Cranmer's body, and that the whole appeared in his eyes? This, to use a common expression, is certainly "All my eye." Surely such stupid nonsense, such canting balderdash, was never tolerated in any other country, nor under any other system than Protestantism, as we have from the pen of Fox and the modern editors concerning Cranmer; of whom they have endeavoured to make a saint, though he was clearly one of the basest villains that ever disgraced the human form.

There is a parson of the name of Todd, who has lately published a Vindication of Thomas Cranmer and therewith of the Reformation in England, but how can it be possible to vindicate the character of a man whose public acts have been so base and notorious, as to make him stink in the nostrils." We will here set down the character of this Protestant martyr, as given by some of the best authorities, and we will then leave it to the sober sense of the reader to decide, whether Cranmer was an apostolic saint or a diabolical sinner.

First, then, let us hear what the learned and laborious Dodd says of of him, in his Church History, who likewise introduces a number of Protestant authorities to support him:-"As to the character archbishop Cranmer has left behind him, it is a difficult matter for an historian, who aims at impartiality, to do him justice, He is looked upon to be the chief pillar and grand promoter of the reformation. This has so interested many Protestants in his behalf, that they are not to be heard without caution. On the other hand, the Catholics, representing him to be the origin of all the calamities lately befallen to the church in England, may be suspected of partiality in his disfavour. Allowances are to be made on both sides. In the mean time I shall say little or nothing of him, but what those of his own party have been pleased to observe in him. 'Several Protestants, who compared ancient and modern times, did not only liken him to Chrysostom, Ambrose and Austin, the glories of the Church in the fourth and fifth centuries, but to the more immediate followers of the apostles, Ignatius, Polycarp, Cyprian.' Now many will be apt to think this a high strain of panegyric, consi→ dering the several blots that are found in his life, which are inconsistent with the character they bestow upon him. St. Chrysostom treated monks that deserted their monasteries as vow-breakers and abandoned

* Echard, Hist. of Engl. p. 324.

wretches. St. Ambrose supported the dignity of the sacerdotal character, by excommunication, and opposed even the emperor himself, where the doctrine and liberties of the church were attacked. St. Augustin constantly appealed to the authority of the church, in all the disputes he had with the Pelagians, Manichæans, Donatists, &c. and never would allow of any innovations, or pretended reformations, by the authority of any national synod, or separate communion; and as for SS. Ignatius, Polycarp and Cyprian, we never read that they took the liberties that Cranmer did, of rebelling against the supreme powers, dissembling their religion, to say nothing of his miscarriages in private life; upon all which occasions, Cranmer's character is the very reverse of those ancient fathers of the primitive ages. He set open the monastery gates, gave the religious liberty to break their vows, and rove about at pleasure. He never was known to oppose the tyrannical proceedings of king Henry VIII. but on the contrary went along with him in persecuting to death both Protestants and Catholics. He had no regard to the authority of the universal church, but established an independent national clergy in opposition to it. I will not mention what is reported of him, in regard of private life, which perhaps might be the suggestions of his professed enemies; but the public miscarriages of his life, taken notice of by Protestants themselves, may questionless be considered as the ingredients of his true character. They charge him with dissimulation, in regard of religion, and give several instances of it, viz. At his consecration he made a private disclaimer of the authority of the see of Rome, though outwardly he acknowledged his submission to it. He went all the lengths of the court in the six-article act, and prosecuted those who disobeyed it, though all the while he was himself of a contrary opinion. He agreed to all the alterations made in the common prayer. He sung a mass ad requiem publicly for the soul of Francis I. king of France, and offered to do the same, as it is said, (after that practice was laid aside in the new modelled common prayer) for the soul of king Edward VI. For in the beginning of queen Mary's reign Dr. Thornden reported, that archbishop Cranmer did offer to sing the mass ad requiem at the burial of king Edward VI. either before the queen, or at St. Paul's church. This so nettled archbishop Cranmer, that in his anger he called him a false, flattering, lying monk.'* Again; his dissimulation was notorious in subscribing to the articles of the Catholic faith after sentence of condemnation, freely, cordially, and without compulsion, as he declared, and yet afterwards revoking his subscription, and owning he did it upon a temporal motive.† He suffered himself (says Dr. Heylin) to be prevailed upon so far, as to sign the writing, in which were briefly comprehended the chief points of the doctrine defended in the church of Rome.' Then in regard of the blessed sacrament, he was altogether inconsistent with himself, both in opinion and practice. Burnet observes, in the book called, The Necessary Erudition, &c. published in the year 1543, transubstantiation was fully asserted; and yet this book was subscribed by Cranmer. If, therefore Cranmer believed consubstantiation, or no bodily presence, he

Strype, Memoirs of Archbishop Cranmer, lib. 3, cap. 1, p. 305, cited by Anth. Wood, Athen. Oxon. p. 685. + Heylin, Hist. of the Reform. p. 225.

must have been, when he subscribed transubstantiation, a person of a scandalous conscience; which is too hard a, reflection upon him,'*. But let his belief be what you will concerning Christ's presence in the blessed. sacrament, it is certain he appeared in detence of the Catholic doctrine, upon the remarkable dispute with Lambert upon that subject. The king himself being the opponent, and Lambert the answerer; and were his highness was worsted or wearied, archbishop Cranmer supplied his place; arguing, though civilly, yet strongly, against the truth of his own private judgment. I see not, therefore, (continues my author) what can be said in Cranmer's behalf, save only that I verily hope and steadfastly believe that be craved God's pardon.'t This famous refor mer and archbishop was no more steadfast in his opinion concerning church government. He makes the government of the church and the functions of the hierarchy altogether precarious, and entirely de->' pending on the pleasure of the civil magistrate. These Erastian tenets, as they are now called, were quite different from a paper signed by him. some years since. It is called a declaration of the functions, and divine institution of bishops and priests. Here the independency of the church, in matters purely spiritual, is maintained without ambiguity and reserve.' In these, and many other particulars, I never yet could meet with any Protestant writer, that was able to make even a tolerable apo logy for their archbishop. But, on the contrary, some of them stile him rather a destroyer than a reformer of the church, and say he plucked up the very roots of it, to plant it afterwards upon a lay-stock. Should I, after all, sum upthat heap of accusations which Mr. Prynn§ laid up against him, it would appear that Catholics are far more moderate in their reflections upon him than most of the Protestants. This gentleman makes him, 1, perjured; 2, cruel in burning the professors of the gospel; 3, author of all the calamities of Henry the eighth's reign; 4, a destroyer. of the church; 5, a grand hypocrite; 6, an apostate; 7, a rebel, &c. Iny the whole he attacks him upon nine articles, which Mr. Fuller is at a loss how to reply to, giving up the most of them, especially the second, whereby he is charged with the death of Lambert and Fryth. This indeed (says Fuller) cannot be denied I will leave him to sink or swim by himself, where he was guilty, only adding in many things, we offend all. After this I persuade myself, that if any one is disposed to mention archbishop Cranmer, so as to give him a place among the ancient prelates of the church, it cannot be upon the account of any resemblance, but only by way of foil, to set forth the beauty of those worthy persons. However, it must be owned, Cranmer was a man of merit in the eye of his prince, who acknowledged, that he had received more satisfaction and pleasure from him, than from all mankind besides. But if all this amounted to no more than being an instrument in a bloody and tyrannical reign, no one ought to be very ambitious to have their church built upon such a foundation."

The erudite and classical Dr. Fletcher, in a recent work, called 4 Comparative View of the Grounds of the Catholic and Protestant Churches, in speaking of the characters of the first reformers, thus writes of this

* Collier, Eccl. Hist. vol. 2, b. 2, 151. + Fuller, Ch. Hist. b. 5, p. 229. Collier, Eccl. Hist. vol. 2, b. 3. p. 198. § Prynn, Antipathy of Prelacy and Monarchy, p. 131. If Fuller, Ch. Hist. b. 5, p. 186.