Cranmer's education
MacCulloch comments that "Cranmer's schooling remains a mystery" but we can certain that as Brooks observes "Cranmer was educated at a time of change and transition". Both the style and content of education was changing. Early biographies of Cranmer record that he attended Grammar school in preparation for an academic career at the newly formed Jesus College Cambridge which he entered at the age of 14 in 1503. He studied a wide range of classics, scholastic philosophy and mathematics and proceeded to the BA in 1511.
This was the year that Erasmus began teaching at Cambridge. It is not recorded if Cranmer attended his classes, but the influence of Erasmus must have been inescapable. As must have been the strength of Erasmus' appeal to original languages as a key to understanding.
Cranmer's cautious character
A recurring theme raised by biographers and historical commentators alike is that Thomas Cranmer possessed a cautious nature. In the Preface to the volume edited by Ayris and Selwyn, Atkinson states of Cranmer:
"His moderation arose from his sensitive perception in seeing clearly both sides of an argument, Papist or Puritan, royalist or republican, and was his strength and no weakness. Above all, there shone his sincerity of mind and singleness of heart: to quote his own words, 'Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thy Holy Spirit'. In a court of time-servers and place seekers, in a world of sycophants and scoundrels, he stands out as a man of simple, self-less integrity, quick to defend even an enemy or detractor, as Henry himself once warned him. Contemporary scholars acknowledged this, and even in his hour of humiliation, doffed their caps respectfully to Cranmer."
This view is universally backed by commentators (not all of whom saw it as a virtue). Reardon states it thus: "By nature cautious, he [Cranmer] had all the scholar's scrupulosity in refraining from hasty conclusions and in doctrinal matters his thinking was always slow."
Cranmer's sources
Flicke's well known portrait of Cranmer (above) is important in many ways. Firstly, it pictures him in the very same pose as Holbein's celebrated portrait of his predecessor Warham, thus reinforcing the concept of continuity of office. This was important in a period of radical and fast moving reform. Secondly, its photographic detail gives an insight into the things that Cranmer considered important enough to surround himself with for such a significant portrait.
Cranmer's signet ring with his crest of office is clearly visible, so too are the books he is surrounded by. In his hands, open, is a copy of the Epistles of St. Paul. On the desk below is a copy of Augustine's De Fide et Operibus. The title of the other book is, sadly, obscured. Some have suggested that it is Erasmi Testamentum but there is no firm evidence to support this tempting suggestion. There is also a letter on the desk from the Royal Council addressed to Cranmer as Lorde tharbusshope of Canterbury which underlines his administrative authority and his position as a Privy Councillor.
Thus we have a portrait depicting Cranmer within the succession of the office of Archbishop of Canterbury, with suitable dress and signet ring to emphasise the continuity of authority. In addition, the various texts affirm: "Cranmer's calling....to expound scripture with the aid of the best patristic scholarship."
Cranmer's liturgical and theological output discloses a wide variety of sources, but scripture and the Church Fathers were always at the centre. Further insight is provided by an examination of Cranmer's Commonplace Books which were later described by Elizabeth I as "rare and precious treasure". These two books (Now held by the British Library) contain "Theological Collections from Scripture, the Church Fathers and Councils, scholastic theologians and sixteenth-century writers down to the Cologne Antididagma (Louvain 1544), with a table of contents. These notebooks can broadly be said to form the theological basis for the Anglican settlement of the early sixteenth century."
What the Commonplace Books show is Cranmer's use of the scholastic method of opposing a thesis with an antithesis to produce a synthesis. This gives further weight to the importance Cranmer placed on the continuity of the catholic faith notwithstanding the supreme position of Scripture, Cranmer never really began any exercise with a clean sheet of "parchment". The received faith and tradition of the catholic church, viewed through the filter of scripture were as likely to form part of any discussion or argument as the writings of the church fathers were. Cranmer possessed a large library of theological works - many in the original Greek where appropriate rather than more modern Latin translations.
Cranmer's political skill
The politics of the Court of the Tudors, the nation and the English Church formed a complicated and intricate matrix of relationships and axis' of power. If Cranmer was to survive these turbulent times and to keep his head whilst many around him were literally losing theirs, he would be required to exercise great political skill. This was especially so in the case of Henry!
Dickens writes: "Armed with modesty, sound scholarship and pleasant manners he gained a unique place in the trust and affections of the King. 'You were born in a happy hour', Cromwell told him, 'for do or say what you will, the King will always well take it at your hand.'" Perhaps Cromwell's words were tinged with a little frustration and envy. What is certain is that Cranmer must have been aware that at any moment Henry could have turned against him and had his head - particularly towards the end of Henry's reign.
It was Cranmer's cautious nature, his political astuteness and a desire to see lasting reform that caused him to follow a pace that was steady. For some he moved too quickly, whilst for others not quickly enough, but in keeping pace with Henry's progressive repositioning of an independent England, he followed a middle course. MacCulloch observes: "Cranmer's conduct in surviving has often attracted ridicule and contempt from purists on both side of the Reformation religious divide." A survivor he certainly was - outliving Cromwell, Henry and of course Edward.
Did Cranmer's views evolve?
A number of important influences taken onboard from his years at Cambridge and his European trips were already at play when Cranmer was ordained Archbishop in 1533. These included a high view of the supremacy of Scripture, the importance of appealing to the Church Fathers and reading early documents in their original language, and the appeal of humanism and also Lutheranism. Even so, Reardon observes that his earliest biographer records the fact that "he for three years 'applied his whole study to the scriptures', using the original Greek and Hebrew and seeking the plain or literal meaning in preference to that supplied by patristic and scholastic commentators." What is clear therefore is that for Cranmer, reformation was more concerned with a rediscovery of 'Church' rather than innovation.
It was the result of his appeal to the original New Testament texts that formed his argument regarding the royal divorce. The same criterion was applied to when Cranmer asked how did the claims of the Papacy stand up to New Testament witness? His conclusion, which came quickly, was that Scripture did not confer supreme authority on the Pope, but instead conferred authority on the 'godly prince', or monarch.
Cranmer was no systematician and the jigsaw of the development of his theological thought has to be pieced together from his writings about the various issues that he confronted. One principle that was established early but grew in prominence was that in matters that were inessential, the national Church has authority and the power to establish its own rules and law.
When a possible alliance with the German Lutheran princes was mooted by Cromwell, part of the exploratory negotiations included the visit of a Lutheran delegation to discuss theological issues. Evidence suggests that they received a sympathetic hearing from Cranmer and the other Bishops. Consensus was reached on the concept of justification by faith and the question of transubstantiation was neatly overcome by a simple assertion of the 'real presence'.
Overall it seems Cranmer's views on a wide spectrum of theological matters were formed early on, but given his thorough and cautious nature, took a lifetime to implement. As Buchanan notes " The liturgical programme of Cranmer was designed from the first to be a stepped one." However, scholars have debated Cranmer's doctrine of the eucharist and ask such questions as: "When did Cranmer give up transubstantiation? Was he at any time a Lutheran? Did he finally embrace teaching usually attributed to Zwingli, and is it this which is presupposed in his second Prayer Book? Or was his real position consistently neither one nor the other, but something closely akin to the 'mediating' stance of Martin Bucer?"
Dix is anxious to point out that "Most of his contemporaries, friendly and hostile, agreed that he had passed through a Lutheran stage, an opinion followed by most modern historians. His own repeated passionate claim both at his trial and earlier that he had never 'taught but two contrary doctrines' (i.e. transubstantiation and one other)..." is clear self-confessed evidence of a movement in his eucharistic position. Dix goes on to comment "Cranmer had all the former don's sense of the precise meaning of words, and all the former diplomat's willingness to propound a contemptuous idea in a not too disturbing way."
Whatever Cranmer's precise position in the 1530's by the end of the next decade Bucer's influence had become clearly visible. Buchanan states that "....it looks as though the origin of his fully reformed stance was virtually synchronous with the accession of Edward VI and with the opportunity (under Somerset's influence) for a reform of worship of the Church of England."
Cranmer moved even further away from a 'realist' position when Peter Martyr arrived in England with part of a manuscript of Chrysostom which "...provided the perfect patristic basis for a non-realist eucharistic theology, including as it did the statement that, 'the nature of the bread doth still remain' after consecration."
MacCulloch goes on to state that it is clear that by late 1548 Cranmer's change of stance was in the public domain. Fuelled by further contact with Continental visitors and correspondence with Strasbourg, Cranmer entered what MacCulloch describes as the final phase of his eucharistic belief in the period from 1550 up until his death. This is nowhere better emphasised than by the publication of the 1552 BCP. As Dix notes " The meaning of the Prayer Book of 1549 was certainly 'explained' much more clearly in that of 1552, but the preamble of the Act which introduced 1552 (which is of Cranmer's penning) openly declared that this was the purpose of the new Book." This Brooks terms 'spiritual presence' but this analysis is widely criticised and Hall instead appeals for modern distinctions of churchmanship to be forgotten in favour of seeing Cranmer "in his own historical and theological environment and judge his work on its own terms and not their prior assumptions".
The call for Cranmer's Blood
Even whilst enjoying the open support of Edward VI, the publication of the 1549 Prayer Book raised a predictably wide spectrum of response. Brooks records the differing reaction to the 1549 BCP by reporting that Gardiner damned the work with faint praise whilst Hooper criticised it for its timidity! Whilst Cranmer had enjoyed the support and protection of both Henry and Edward, the situation under Mary became radically different.
It was always more likely that Mary would lean to the Spanish Catholicism of her mother rather than towards any position her father might have adopted. The NIDCC records "Between 1534 and 1536 her father tried to break her 'Spanish pride' by petty persecution; after her mother's death in 1536 she even acknowledged under duress that the marriage of her parents was 'by God's and man's law incestuous and unlawful'." It is clear that in terms of her faith she conceded nothing and remained faithful to Catholicism. Mary's sincerity was never able to overcome her unpopularity among the people of England who saw her firstly as being a Spaniard, secondly a Tudor and thirdly an English Tudor! Mary set about restoring the Church to its position as at the time of her father's death. It was impossible for her undertake a full reversal as some of the changes had become irrevocable (eg. the return of monastic lands).
It is therefore hardly surprising that "The Marian regime restored the Papacy, revoked the legislation of Edward's reign, and revived the heresy laws which were used against Protestants of all persuasions." It was perhaps inevitable that with the restoration of Catholicism, the leaders of the Protestant reforms would, in due course, suffer persecution, imprisonment or be martyred. But as Rosman comments "Burning was the last resort. Mary and her agents were primarily concerned to convert by persuasion. What Mary wanted was a populace that once again embraced Catholic orthodoxy. With a few influential exceptions - notably Thomas Cranmer, who had annulled her mother's marriage - those who recanted were spared the flames."
Cranmer, along with Ridley and Latimer "would now be singled out as a representative symbol of everything that the new Catholic establishment hated. Between them they represented the whole span of the evangelical movement."
In March 1554 the Privy Council finally ordered the removal of Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer to prison in Oxford. Mary tried to give these three men every opportunity to recant but Ridley and Latimer were burned at the stake in Oxford in October 1555. Cranmer did recant on a number of occasions, but ultimately withdrew his recantations and followed the same fate on 21 March 1556.
The momentum of reform was too great to resist
The burning of both great and small Protestants alike produced in the following generation "a violent antipathy to all things Catholic and a firm belief in the Pope as Antichrist." Accounts of the death of martyrs, fuelled by Foxe, provided much propaganda to serve the Protestant cause. Sheils suggests that the power of this propaganda fuelled Protestantism for at least the next 300 years.
Additionally, many Protestant congregations were driven underground and as a result gained a stronger sense of purpose and identity that bore fruit once the Marian era was over. Many Protestants went into exile into Reformed areas of Europe. Their experience and widened perspective also helped to strengthen Protestant resolve and self-belief following their return under Elizabeth.
Cranmer's enduring legacy is his Books of Common Prayer, his other writings and his homilies which became standard fare in worship services. By looking to the past to build for the future and being sensitive to political and social influences whilst maintaining his personal integrity and a Biblical faith, Cranmer had ensured that England's Church was set fair on its Reformed course along the via media.
Comments
Post a Comment