pacy on the Scotch, had an origin so noble. The cause is to be sought in some circumstances which attended the Reformation in England, circumstances of which the effects long continued to be felt, and may in some degree be traced even at the present day.

savages, and who should, after labour- | founders of the Church were guilty of ing indefatigably without any hope of religious persecution mean only that reward, terminate his life by martyr- the founders of the Church were not dom, would deserve the warmest ad- influenced by any religious motive, we miration. Yet we doubt whether ten perfectly agree with them. Neither of the ten thousand ever thought of the penal code of Elizabeth, nor the going on such an expedition. Why more hateful system by which Charles should we suppose that conscientious the Second attempted to force Episcomotives, feeble as they are constantly found to be in a good cause, should be omnipotent for evil? Doubtless there was many a jolly Popish priest in the old manor-houses of the northern counties, who would have admitted, in theory, the deposing power of the Pope, but who would not have been ambitious to be stretched on the rack, even though it were to be used, according to the benevolent proviso of Lord Burleigh, "as charitably as such a thing can be," or to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, even though, by that rare indulgence which the Queen, of her special grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, sometimes extended to very mitigated cases, he were allowed a fair time to choke before the hangman began to grabble in his entrails.

In Germany, in France, in Switzerland, and in Scotland, the contest against the Papal power was essentially a religious contest. In all those countries, indeed, the cause of the Reformation, like every other great cause, attracted to itself many supporters influenced by no conscientious principle, many who quitted the Established Church only because they thought her in danger, many who were weary of her restraints, and many who were greedy for her spoils. But it was not But the laws passed against the Pu- by these adherents that the separation ritans had not even the wretched ex- was there conducted. They were welcuse which we have been considering. come auxiliaries; their support was In this case, the cruelty was equal, the too often purchased by unworthy comdanger infinitely less. In fact, the pliances; but, however exalted in rank danger was created solely by the cruelty. or power, they were not the leaders in But it is superfluous to press the argu- the enterprise. Men of a widely difment. By no artifice of ingenuity can ferent description, men who redeemed the stigma of persecution, the worst great infirmities and errors by sincerity, blemish of the English Church, be ef- disinterestedness, energy, and courage, faced or patched over. Her doctrines, men who, with many of the vices of we well know, do not tend to intoler-revolutionary chiefs and of polemic diance. She admits the possibility of salvation out of her own pale. But this circumstance, in itself honourable to her, aggravates the sin and the shame of those who persecuted in her name. Dominic and De Montfort did not, at least, murder and torture for differences of opinion which they considered as trifling. It was to stop an infection which, as they believed, hurried to certain perdition every soul which it seized, that they employed their fire and steel. The measures of the English government with respect to the Papists and Puritans sprang from a widely different principle. If those who deny that the

vines, united some of the highest qualities of apostles, were the real directors. They might be violent in innovation and scurrilous in controversy. They might sometimes act with inexcusable severity towards opponents, and sometimes connive disreputably at the vices of powerful allies. But fear was not in them, nor hypocrisy, nor avarice, nor any petty selfishness. Their one great object was the demolition of the idols and the purification of the sanctuary. If they were too indulgent to the failings of eminent men from whose patronage they expected advantage to the church, they never flinched before

persecuting tyrants and hostile armies. | there is one, and one only, whose conFor that theological system to which duct partiality itself can attribute to they sacrificed the lives of others with- any other than interested motives. It out scruple, they were ready to throw is not strange, therefore, that his chaaway their own lives without fear. racter should have been the subject of Such were the authors of the great fierce controversy. We need not say schism on the Continent and in the that we speak of Cranmer. northern part of this island. The Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse, the Prince of Condé and the King of Navarre, the Earl of Moray and the Earl of Morton, might espouse the Protestant opinions, or might pretend to espouse them; but it was from Luther, from Calvin, from Knox, that the Reformation took its character.

Mr. Hallam has been severely censured for saying with his usual placid severity, that, "if we weigh the character of this prelate in an equal balance, he will appear far indeed removed from the turpitude imputed to him by his enemies; yet not entitled to any extraordinary veneration." We will venture to expand the sense of Mr. Hallam, and to comment on it thus:—If we consider Cranmer merely as a statesman, he will not appear a much worse man than Wolsey, Gardiner, Cromwell, or Somerset. But, when an attempt is made to set him up as a saint, it is scarcely possible for any man of sense who knows the history of the times to preserve his gravity. If the memory of the archbishop had been left to find its own place, he would have soon been lost among the crowd which is mingled

"A quel cattivo coro

Degli angeli, che non furon ribelli,
Ne fur fedeli a Dio, ma per se foro."

And the only notice which it would
have been necessary to take of his
name would have been

England has no such names to show; not that she wanted men of sincere piety, of deep learning, of steady and adventurous courage. But these were thrown into the back ground. Elsewhere men of this character were the principals. Here they acted a secondary part. Elsewhere worldliness was the tool of zeal, Here zeal was the tool of worldliness. A King, whose character may be best described by saying that he was despotism itself personified, unprincipled ministers, a rapacious aristocracy, a servile Parliament, such were the instruments by which England was delivered from the yoke of Rome. The work which had been begun by Henry, the murderer of his wives, was continued by Somerset, the murderer of his brother, and completed by Elizabeth, the murderer "Non ragioniam di lui; ma guarda, e passa.” of her guest. Sprung from brutal | But, since his admirers challenge for him passion, nurtured by selfish policy, the a place in the noble army of martyrs, Reformation in England displayed his claims require fuller discussion. little of what had, in other countries, The origin of his greatness, common distinguished it, unflinching and un- enough in the scandalous chronicles of sparing devotion, boldness of speech, courts, seems strangely out of place in and singleness of eye. These were in-a hagiology. Cranmer rose into favour deed to be found; but it was in the by serving Henry in the disgraceful lower ranks of the party which opposed affair of his first divorce. He prothe authority of Rome, in such men as moted the marriage of Anne Boleyn Hooper, Latimer, Rogers, and Taylor. with the King. On a frivolous pretence Of those who had any important share he pronounced that marriage null and in bringing the Reformation about, void. On a pretence, if possible, still Ridley was perhaps the only person more frivolous, he dissolved the ties who did not consider it as a mere poli- which bound the shameless tyrant to tical job. Even Ridley did not play a Anne of Cleves. He attached himself to very prominent part. Among the Cromwell while the fortunes of Cromstatesmen and prelates who principally well flourished. He voted for cutting gave the tone to the religious changes, off Cromwell's head without a trial,

when the tide of royal favour turned. | secution, Jane was to be seduced into He conformed backwards and forwards treason. No transaction in our annals as the King changed his mind. He is more unjustifiable than this. If a heassisted, while Henry lived, in con- reditary title were to be respected, Mary demning to the flames those who denied possessed it. If a parliamentary title the doctrine of transubstantiation. He were preferable, Mary possessed that found out, as soon as Henry was dead, also. If the interest of the Protestant that the doctrine was false. He was, religion required a departure from the however, not at a loss for people to ordinary rule of succession, that inburn. The authority of his station and terest would have been best served by of his grey hairs was employed to over-raising Elizabeth to the throne. If the come the disgust with which an intel-foreign relations of the kingdom were ligent and virtuous child regarded per- considered, still stronger reasons might secution. Intolerance is always bad. But the sanguinary intolerance of a man who thus wavered in his creed excites a loathing, to which it is difficult to give vent without calling foul names. Equally false to political and to religious obligations, the primate was first the tool of Somerset, and then the tool of Northumberland. When the Protector wished to put his own brother to death, without even the semblance of a trial, he found a ready instrument in Cranmer. In spite of the canon law, which forbade a churchman to take any part in matters of blood, the archbishop signed the warrant for the atrocious sentence. When Somerset had been in his turn destroyed, his destroyer received the support of Cranmer in a wicked attempt to change the course of the succession.

The apology made for him by his admirers only renders his conduct more contemptible. He complied, it is said, against his better judgment, because he could not resist the entreaties of Edward. A holy prelate of sixty, one would think, might be better employed by the bedside of a dying child, than in committing crimes at the request of the young disciple. If Cranmer had shown half as much firmness when Edward requested him to commit treason as he had before shown when Edward requested him not to commit murder, he might have saved the country from one of the greatest misfortunes that it ever underwent. He became, from whatever motive, the accomplice of the worthless Dudley. The virtuous scruples of another young and amiable mind were to be overcome. As Edward had been forced into per

be found for preferring Elizabeth to Jane. There was great doubt whether Jane or the Queen of Scotland had the better claim; and that doubt would, in all probability, have produced a war both with Scotland and with France, if the project of Northumberland had not been blasted in its infancy. That Elizabeth had a better claim than the Queen of Scotland was indisputable. To the part which Cranmer, and unfor. tunately some better men than Cranmer, took in this most reprehensible scheme, much of the severity with which the Protestants were afterwards treated must in fairness be ascribed.

The plot failed; Popery triumphed; and Cranmer recanted. Most people look on his recantation as a single blemish on an honourable life, the frailty of an unguarded moment. But, in fact, his recantation was in strict accordance with the system on which he had constantly acted. It was part of a regular habit. It was not the first recantation that he had made; and, in all probability, if it had answered its purpose, it would not have been the last. We do not blame him for not choosing to be burned alive. It is no very severe reproach to any person that he does not possess heroic fortitude. But surely a man who liked the fire so little should have had some sympathy for others. A persecutor who inflicts nothing which he is not ready to endure deserves some respect. But when a man who loves his doctrines more than the lives of his neighbours, loves his own little finger better than his doc trines, a very simple argument à fortiori will enable us to estimate the amount of his benevolence.

But his martyrdom, it is said, re-ficult to see from what motives, and on deemed every thing. It is extraor-what plan, such persons would be indinary that so much ignorance should exist on this subject. The fact is that, if a martyr be a man who chooses to die rather than to renounce his opinions, Cranmer was no more a martyr than Dr. Dodd. He died, solely because he could not help it. He never retracted his recantation till he found he had made it in vain. The Queen was fully resolved that, Catholic or Protestant, he should burn. Then he spoke out, as people generally speak out when they are at the point of death and have nothing to hope or to fear on earth. If Mary had suffered him to live, we suspect that he would have heard mass and received absolution, like a good Catholic, till the accession of Elizabeth, and that he would then have purchased, by another apostasy, the power of burning men better and braver than himself.

We do not mean, however, to represent him as a monster of wickedness. He was not wantonly cruel or treacherous. He was merely a supple, timid, interested courtier, in times of frequent and violent change. That which has always been represented as his distinguishing virtue, the facility with which he forgave his enemies, belongs to the character. Slaves of his class are never vindictive, and never grateful. A present interest effaces past services and past injuries from their minds together. Their only object is self-preservation; and for this they conciliate those who wrong them, just as they abandon those who serve them. Before we extol a man for his forgiving temper, we should inquire whether he is above revenge, or below it.

clined to remodel the Church. The scheme was merely to transfer the full cup of sorceries from the Babylonian enchantress to other hands, spilling as little as possible by the way. The Catholic doctrines and rites were to be retained in the Church of England. But the King was to exercise the control which had formerly belonged to the Roman Pontiff. In this Henry for a time succeeded. The extraordinary force of his character, the fortunate situation in which he stood with respect to foreign powers, and the vast resources which the suppression of the monasteries placed at his disposal, enabled him to oppress both the religious factions equally. He punished with impartial severity those who renounced the doctrines of Rome, and those who acknowledged her jurisdiction. The basis, however, on which he attempted to establish his power was too narrow to be durable. It would have been impossible even for him long to persecute both persuasions. Even under his reign there had been insurrections on the part of the Catholics, and signs of a spirit which was likely soon to produce insurrection on the part of the Protestants. It was plainly necessary, therefore, that the Crown should form an alliance with one or with the other side. To recognise the Papal supremacy, would have been to abandon the whole design. Reluctantly and sullenly the government at last joined the Protestants. In forming this junction, its object was to procure as much aid as possible for its selfish undertaking, and to make the smallest possible concessions to the spirit of religious innovation.

From this compromise the Church of England sprang. In inany respects, indeed, it has been well for her that,

Somerset had as little principle as his coadjutor. Of Henry, an orthodox Catholic, except that he chose to be his own Pope, and of Elizabeth, who certainly had no objection to the theo-in an age of exuberant zeal, her prinlogy of Rome, we need say nothing. These four persons were the great authors of the English Reformation. Three of them had a direct interest in the extension of the royal prerogative. The fourth was the ready tool cf any who could frighten him. It is not dif

cipal founders were mere politicians. To this circumstance she owes her moderate articles, her decent ceremonies, her noble and pathetic liturgy. Her worship is not disfigured by mummery. Yet she has preserved, in a far greater degree than any of her Pro

the rigour of persecution abated after her death. James soon found that they were unable to injure him, and

testant sisters, that art of striking the | by considering conformity and loyalty senses and filling the imagination in as identical, at length made them so. which the Catholic Church so emi- With respect to the Catholics, indeed, nently excels. But, on the other hand, she continued to be, for more than a hundred and fifty years, the servile handmaid of monarchy, the steady that the animosity which the Puritan enemy of public liberty. The divine party felt towards them drove them of right of kings, and the duty of passively necessity to take refuge under his obeying all their commands, were her throne. During the subsequent confavourite tenets. She held those tenets flict, their fault was any thing but disfirmly through times of oppression, loyalty. On the other hand, James persecution, and licentiousness; while hated the Puritans with more than the law was trampled down; while judg-hatred of Elizabeth. Her aversion to ment was perverted; while the people were eaten as though they were bread. Once, and but once, for a moment, and but for a moment, when her own dignity and property were touched, she forgot to practise the submission which she had taught.

her own.

them was political; his was personal. The sect had plagued him in Scotland, where he was weak; and he was determined to be even with them in England, where he was powerful. Persecution gradually changed a sect into a faction. That there was any thing in the religious opinions of the Puritans which rendered them hostile to monarchy has never been proved to our satisfaction.

After our civil contests,

Elizabeth clearly discerned the advantages which were to be derived from a close connection between the monarchy and the priesthood. At the time of her accession, indeed, she evidently meditated a partial reconciliation with Rome; and, throughout her whole life, she leaned strongly to some of the most obnoxious parts of the Catholic system. But her imperious temper, her keen sagacity, and her peculiar situation, soon led her to attach herself completely to a church which was all On the same principle on which she joined it, she attempted to drive all her people within its pale by persecution. She supported it by severe penal laws, not because she thought conformity to its discipline necessary to salvation; but because it was the fastness which arbitrary power was making strong for itself; because she expected a more profound obedience from those who saw in her both their civil and their ecclesiastical chief, than from those who, like the Papists, ascribed spiritual authority to the Pope, or from those who, like some of the Puritans, ascribed it only to Heaven. To dissent from her establishment was to dissent from an institution founded with an express view to the maintenance and extension of the royal pre-in this point is not surprising. But we rogative.

it became the fashion to say that Presbyterianism was connected with Republicanism; just as it has been the fashion to say, since the time of the French Revolution, that Infidelity is connected with Republicanism. It is perfectly true that a church, constituted on the Calvinistic model, will not strengthen the hands of the sovereign so much as a hierarchy which consists of several ranks, differing in dignity and emolument, and of which all the members are constantly looking to the Government for promotion. But experience has clearly shown that a Calvinistic church, like every other church, is disaffected when it is persecuted, quiet when it is tolerated, and actively loyal when it is favoured and cherished. Scotland has had a Presbyterian establishment during a century and a half. Yet her General Assembly has not, during that period, given half so much trouble to the government as the Convocation of the Church of England gave during the thirty years which followed the Revolution. That James and Charles should have been mistaken

are astonished, we must confess, that This great Queen and her successors, men of our own time, men who have