BONNER OBJECTS to the witnesses. 123 "have never seen him before; though I have heard "much of his preaching." He then turned to Cranmer, and said, "I see, my Lord, the true reason "for which I am brought here. It is that I explained "in my sermon the true doctrine of the Sacrament." Upon this another long conversation ensued between them on that subject. When it was over, copies of the commission of his indictment were demanded by Bonner, and granted by Cranmer, and the court was again adjourned. On Friday, the 13th, Sir Thomas Smith, one of the Commissioners, appeared in his place for the first time. Bonner perceived it. Instead of replying to the Archbishop, when he opened the proceedings of the day by calling upon him to answer to the charge against him, he protested against the interference of Sir Thomas Smith, because he had not attended from the beginning. I cannot condemn him for thus taking advantage of every real or supposed flaw in the management of the case against him. The objection was overruled by the Secretary Petre, who proved to him that such irregular attendance was not unusual; and directed him to proceed with his reply to the charges against him. Bonner then produced a written denunciation, which he confessed to have been hastily drawn up, against Hooper and Latimer, heretics, who had spoken against the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, and who, being excommunicated, were unfit and unable to bear witness against a Catholic Bishop. He affirms 124 CRANMER LOSES HIS TEMPER. that he preached against rebellion. He declares that the Communion was not frequented because of the novel changes which had been made, and expressed himself with equal severity against his accusers for presuming to criticise his sermon. He recurs again to the subject of transubstantiation, and concluded by affirming that he was a dutiful and faithful subject of his Majesty's. The peculiarity of this meeting was, that it seems to have put Cranmer out of patience. Bonner objected to the accusers as heretics. "If my cause be good," said Cranmer, "what should I care who accused me even though he were the Devil of Hell." "It is the King's law and not the Pope's law which I quote," said Bonner: and he said rightly. Joan Boucher had been just before burnt for heresy under that same Canon law, against heresy, which had been long made the Statute law of the realm, and one part of which was, that a heretic could not be received as a witness, against an orthodox believer. The fact was, that Bonner, by impugning Hooper and Latimer of heresy and incompetency to act in a court of justice, was arraigning Cranmer himself, and Cranmer knew and felt the full force of the implication. Therefore he answered again with more petulance than was usual, with one so generally self-possessed, "I wish you had less knowledge of that law and more knowledge of God's law, and of your duty." When a judge forgets his dignity on any provocation whatever, he places himself in the power of his HERESY A BURNABLE OFFENCE. prisoner. So it was with Cranmer. 125 "As your grace falls to wishing," said Bonner, in reply, "I could wish many things with respect to your grace." The Judges perceived the unworthiness of this scene. "We can proceed," said the Secretary, "either with or without the testimony of these witnesses, at our pleasure." "Do as you please," said Bonner, “I ask but justice." Some further recrimination passed, when Latimer presented his accusation against Bonner in writing. "Here," said the Commissioners, "are the articles we intend to allege against you, and we minister them unto you not at the promotion of these witnesses, but for ourselves, ex-officio." The articles were only the first accusation more formally drawn up. Bonner then took an oath, that he would reply to them honestly. He desired the official copy to be given to him. In reply to the question of Secretary Petre, whether he preached from a written sermon, he replied that he preached from notes, collected both by himself and his Chaplains. The Court was then adjourned till Monday the 16th. The same undignified scenes took place at the third meeting. The business of the day was opened by the offer of Latimer and Hooper to clear themselves from the charge of heresy. Heresy was at this time a burnable offence. Bonner quoted against Hooper, whom he called a "varlet," his work on the Sacrament. He used other expressions, which I deem to be unadvisable in the mouth of a Bishop, and when 126 THE FIRST SERVICE BOOK OF KING EDWARD the people laughed at him, he turned round and again called them "woodcocks." "You are not summoned here," said Cranmer, "for your opinions on preaching on the Sacrament of the Altar. Listen, good people, to the real accusation against the Bishop of London." Cranmer then delivered the paper to Sir John Mason to be read. "This," said the Archbishop, "is what the Bishop of London is accused of." Bonner would not be prevented from going on in his own way. The one only real contest which at this time divided the people was-whether Transubstantiation was true or not. It was the criterion by which all were judged. On one side was the definite doctrine of the old system; on the other a mass of unsettled and undefined doctrines, more or less erroneous, on the subject of the Sacrament. Cranmer's book, the reply to Gardiner, had not then been published. The first service book of King Edward, which we Tractarians are now so anxious to see restored as our first step back to Rome, did not satisfy our venerable friend Bonner, though he had not (for he could not have) adopted the definition of the Council of Trent; and I am sometimes afraid, therefore, that even if we did restore it, we should not conciliate to our communion our brethren of the Church of Rome. That service book prohibited the shewing, or elevation of the consecrated bread,* but * Cardwell's two books of common-prayer in the reign of Edward VI. compared, p. 298; Oxford, 1838. PREFERABLE TO THE second. 127 The "Lord's most common "* and "altar, commanded much veneration to be paid both to the bread and wine in this respect-that the Minister was directed to take the bread and wine and place the bread on the corporas or paten, to put the wine in a chalice, and to mingle with it pure water, and himself to place both on the altar. board," to use the expression then among the Reformers, was called an not as it now is, "the table." The Priest was ordered to turn to, and not as in the second service book, to kneel at, God's board.† Though communion in both kinds was allowed, the words at the delivery of the bread to the communicant were, "the body of Christ preserve thy body;" and one kind of the communion was called the Sacrament of the body of Christ, the other the Sacrament of the blood.‡ The wish, indeed, of every Reformer, from Wycliffe to Cranmer, had been to preserve the union of the Church, and to remove the errors of Rome. They never wished to separate from Rome, if by any sacrifice, short of what they believed to be the truth of the Gospel of Christ, they could have preserved that union. The wafer was commanded to be discontinued, but the bread to be used was not to be common bread, but to be of the same form as the wafer. It was to be thicker and to be so made as to be easily divisible: and the people were assured that the whole body of *Cardwell, p. 281. |