troversy among Protestants in the early stages of the Reformation, was the Lord's Supper. On this subject, the Church of England allied itself to the Reformed or Calvinistic branch of the Protestant family. It must be remembered that Bucer and Calvin had struck out a middle path between the Lutheran idea of the local presence of the body of Christ in the Eucharist, and the idea of a mere commemoration, which was the original view of Zwingle. This middle doctrine denied the Lutheran hypothesis of the ubiquity of Christ's body, asserted that it is now confined to heaven, but at the same time affirmed a real, though mysterious and purely spiritual reception of Christ by believers alone, by virtue of which a vitalízing power is communicated to the recipient, even from His body. With this hypothesis of a real, but spiritual presence and reception of Christ, the Zwinglians were satisfied. Even Zwingle and Ecolampadius were not disposed to contend against it; and it formed the basis of union between Calvin and his followers, and the Zwinglian Churches. At the outset, after giving up transubstantiation, Cranmer adopted the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation; but Ridley embraced the Swiss doctrine, in its later form, and Cranmer avowed himself of the same mind. On the 31st of December, 1548, Bartholomew Traheron writes to Bullinger of the Disputation which had just been held in London, on the Eucharist," in the presence of almost all the nobility of England." He says: "the Archbishop of Canterbury, contrary to general expectation, most openly, firmly, and learnedly maintained your opinion upon this subject. His arguments were as follows: The body of Christ was taken up from us into heaven. Christ has left the world. 'Ye have the poor always with you, but me ye have not always,' etc. Next followed the Bishop of Rochester" [Ridley]. "The truth never obtained a more brilliant victory among us"-that is, in conflict with the Papists.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

341

"I perceive that it is all over with Lutheranism, now that those who were considered its principal and almost only supporters, have altogether come over to our side."! The exiles who fled from England on the death of Edward, were inhospitably received in Germany on account of their Calvinism. In 1562, after the readoption of the Articles under Elizabeth, Jewel wrote to Peter Martyr: "As for matters of doctrine, we have pared everything away to the quick, and do not differ from your doctrine by a nail's breadth; for as to the ubiquitarian theory "the Lutheran view" there is no danger in this country. Opinions of that kind can only gain admittance where the stones have sense." 2 But there is no need of bringing forward further evidence on this point, since the Articles explicitly assert the Calvinistic view. In speaking of the English Reformers as Calvinistic, it is not implied that they derived their opinions from Calvin exclusively, or received them on his authority. They were able and

1 Cranmer himself says, referring to his translation, in the first year of Edward, of the Lutheran Catechism of Justus Jonas, in which it is affirmed that the body and blood of the Saviour are received by the mouth: "Not long before I wrote the said Catechism, I was in that error of the real presence, as I was many years past, in divers other errors, as transubstantiation" - here he enumerates other papal doctrines which he had once held. Cranmer, Treatises on the Lord's Supper (Parker Soc.), p. 374. In the discussions respecting the Sacrament, prior to the preparation of the XLII Articles of 1553, Bucer thought Martyr too Zwinglian. See C. Schmidt, Peter Martyr Vermigli: Leben u. ausgewählte Schriften, p. 103 seq.; Baum, Capito u. Bucer, Leben, etc., p. 555; Hardwick, History of the Articles of Religion, p. 96. But this led to no serious disagreement. Bucer and Martyr were both substantially Calvinistic. The idea that Cranmer was disinclined to the "Swiss doctrine" is contradicted by his own words: Bucer dissenteth in nothing from Ecolampadius and Zwinglius," The Lord's Supper (Parker Soc.) p. 225. The changes in the Order of Communion, in the Revision of 1552, are Zwinglian in their tone. See Cardwell, History of Conferences and other Proceedings connected with the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer, pp. 4, 5. King Edward's Catechism for all schoolmasters to teach, is definitely anti-Lutheran. The commemorative side of the Eucharist is emphasized. Faith is described as the mouth of the spirit for receiving Christ. See Liturgies of King Edward (Parker Soc.) pp. 516, 517. Bishop Coverdale, the friend of Cranmer, translated a writing of Calvin on the Sacrament.

2 February 7, 1562. Zurich Letters (2d series), p. 124.

learned men, and explored the Scriptures and the patristic writers for themselves. Yet no name was held in higher honor among them than that of the Genevan Reformer.

A controversy of greater moment for the subsequent ecclesiastical as well as political history of England, was that between the Anglicans and Puritans. From the beginning, there were some in England who wished to introduce more radical changes and to conform the English Reformation to the type which it had reached among the Reformed or Calvinistic Churches on the Continent. This disposition gained force through the residence of the foreign divines in England in the time of Edward, and still more by the return of the exiles after the accession of Elizabeth. The great obstacles in the way of obtaining the changes which they desired, were the strength of the Catholic party and the conservatism of Queen Elizabeth. The controversy first had respect to the use of the vestments, especially the cap and surplice, and extended to other peculiarities of the ritual. The ground of the Puritan objection was that these things were identified in the popular mind with the papal notion of a particular priesthood. They were badges of Popery, and for this reason should be discarded. When it was replied, that the surplice, the cross in baptism, kneeling at the Sacrament, are things indifferent in their nature, the rejoinder was made that since they are misleading in their influence, they are not indifferent, in the moral sense; but that if they are indifferent, the magistrate has no right to impose them upon Christian people: it is an infringement of Christian liberty. In this last affirmation was involved an idea with regard to the Supremacy which must lead to a difference of a more radical character. Hooper, who is often styled the father of the Puritans, had spent some time at Zurich while the Adiaphoristic controversy, which related to the same subject of ceremonies, was raging in Germany. Being chosen under

RISE OF PURITANISM.

343

Edward, in 1550, to the bishopric of Gloucester, he refused to wear the vestments at his consecration. Finally, after he had been imprisoned, the difficulty was settled by a compromise. They were, in fact, very much laid aside during this reign. At the beginning of Elizabeth's reign there was a general feeling among her newly appointed bishops, most of whom had been abroad during the persecutions under Mary, in favor of the disuse of the vestments and of the offensive ceremonies. This was the wish of Jewel, of Nowell, of Sandys, afterwards Archbishop of York, of Grindal, who succeeded Parker in the archbishopric of Canterbury. Only Cox, the Bishop of Ely, who, in the church of the exiles at Frankfort, had led the party which clung to the English Liturgy, and Parker, who had remained in England during the late reign, were on the other side; although Parker appears, at the outset, to have looked with doubt or disfavor upon the vestments. Burleigh, Walsingham, Leicester, were in favor of giving them up, or of not making their use compulsory. English prelates, in their correspondence, speak of them in the same terms of derision and contempt as the Puritan leaders afterwards employed. For example, Jewel says in one of his letters to Peter Martyr: "Now that the full light of the Gospel has shone forth, the very vestiges of error must, as far as possible, be removed, together with the rubbish, and, as the saying is, with the very dust. And I wish we could effect this in respect to that linen surplice." The statements of Macaulay are sustained by the correspondence of the English with the Swiss Reformers, and by other evidence: "The English Reformers were eager to go as far as their brethren on the continent. They unanimously condemned as anti-Christian numerous dogmas and practices to which Henry had stubbornly adhered and which Elizabeth reluctantly abandoned. Many felt 1 Short, History of the Church of England, p. 250.

a strong repugnance even to things indifferent, which had formed part of the polity or ritual of the mystical Babylon. Thus Bishop Hooper, who died manfully at Gloucester for his religion, long refused to wear the episcopal vestments. Bishop Ridley, a martyr of still greater renown, pulled down the ancient altars of his diocese, and ordered the Eucharist to be administered in the middle of churches, at tables which the Papists irreverently termed oyster-boards. Bishop Jewel pronounced the clerical garb to be a stage dress, a fool's coat, a relic of the Amorites, and promised that he would spare no labor to extirpate such degrading absurdities. Archbishop Grindal long hesitated about accepting a mitre, from dislike of what he regarded as the mummery of consecration. Bishop Parkhurst uttered a fervent prayer that the Church of England would propose to herself the Church of Zurich as the absolute pattern of a Christian community." But the Queen, to whom the Royal Supremacy was the most valuable part of Protestantism, was inflexibly opposed to the proposed changes. Not without difficulty did the new bishops succeed in procuring the removal of images from the churches. The great fear of the Protestant leaders was that the Queen would be driven over to the Catholic Church, in case they undertook to withstand

1

1 History of England. i. 47. Strype says that when Grindal was appointed Bishop of London, he "remained under some scruples of conscience about some things; especially the habits and certain ceremonies required to be used of such as were bishops. For the Reformed in these times generally went upon the ground, that, in order to the complete freeing of the Church of Christ from the errors and corruptions of Rome, every usage and custom practiced by that apostate and idolatrous Church should be abolished, and that the service of God should be most simple, stript of all that show, pomp, and appearance, that has been customarily used before, esteeming all that to be no better than superstitious and anti-Christian." Life of Grindal, p. 28. In the preceding reign, Martin Bucer, writing under Cranmer's roof at Lambeth, under date of April 26, 1549, speaks of the retention of the vestments, chrism, etc., in the Anglican ritual, and says: They affirm that there is no superstition in these things, and that they are only to be retained for a time, lest the people, not having yet learned Christ, should be deterred by too extensive innovations from embracing his religion," etc. Original Letters, ii. 535.