Lutheran movement in england during the reigns of henry VIII. And edward VI

CHAPTER IX. THE LUTHERAN COMMISSION TO ENGLAND OF 1538.

An ominous Silence. Anxiety of Melanchthon. His letter to Henry VIII. His Criticism of the Ten Articles. Henry seeks Renewal of Negotiations. Christopher Mount at Brunswick. Arrangements for Conference of 1538. The Lutheran Commissioners. Sketch of Myconius. Luther’s letter to Fox. Death of Fox. Its Effect on the Lutheran Movement. Reception of the Commission. The Augsburg Confession Discussed. Agreement on the Doctrinal Articles. Conflict on “Abuses.” An Agreement Imminent. Henry’s Schemes to end the Conference. The Commission withdraws. Their admonition. Handsome Presents for Inhospitable Entertainment. Results. XIII Articles of 1538. Relation to Augsburg Confession shown in parallel columns.

While the English Bible was thus working like leaven among the English people, the diplomatic side of the Reformation was also progressing. In chapter VI. we have traced the formulation of “The Ten Articles” of 1536, and shown their relation to the Augsburg Confession and the Apology. It becomes an interesting subject of inquiry to note how the movement in England, in which they originated was regarded by the leaders of the Reformation in Germany. In reading their correspondence, we find that for a long time, they were almost entirely cut off from direct communication with England. Gardiner’s plots to defeat the adoption of the Augsburg Confession and Apology comprehended also the prevention of any communication between the English party of reform and those upon whose labors and judgment they were so dependent. We have previously referred to the fact that after his return to England, Dr. Barnes, noting the change that had occurred, wrote to Melanchthon (June, [[@Page:128]]1536),¹⁶⁹ not to think of making the visit to England, for which the king had been so importunate. July 31st, of the same year, Alesius, desiring to send a copy of “The Ten Articles” to Melanchthon, could accomplish his purpose only by transmitting it to Aepinus, from 1529 pastor, and from 1532 the Lutheran Superintendent at Hamburg, who was on most intimate terms with Crumwell, and asking him to have it sent from Hamburg to Wittenberg.¹⁷⁰ Certainly it was not the most considerate treatment of the accomplished author from whose pen a great portion of “The Ten Articles” was derived, that he could receive a copy in no other way than through such a surreptitious channel. But, to be sure, it was the king’s own book, and “the learnedest prince in Christendom,” could do with it as he saw best! Yet before the Articles could reach Melanchthon, the Elector of Saxony grew very indignant at the long silence. Bishop Fox was regarded by some of the princes and theologians as having most shamefully falsified, since his promises were unfulfilled. We shall see later that in this impression, Luther did not share. July 12th, 1536, the Elector thought of sending some one to England to find out what was the matter, or of requesting Aepinus to intercede with those in authority there.¹⁷¹ Six weeks more passed, and on September 1st, Melanchthon wrote a letter for the Elector to Henry, in which he said, among other things:

“We do not doubt that your Royal Highness has learned from the Bishop of Hereford what was our will and that of our confederates at the conference at Frankfort, as well as our disposition towards your Royal Highness. We are under the impression, too, that the letters which were sent, June 5th, from Naumburg have been delivered to your Royal Highness. We expect a reply from your Royal Highness, or at least we hope that the Bishop of Hereford will write, as we asked in the letter from [[@Page:129]]Naumburg, informing us what was the will of your Royal Highness, when he had read the articles concerning doctrine on which the legates and the Wittenberg theologians had agreed.”

At last on November 28th, Melanchthon had received “The Ten Articles,” and wrote to Veit Dietrich: “We have the Anglican Articles complete, which I will have described by Cruciger; they have been put together with the greatest confusion. There are, it is true, still intervals taken from my affairs. But I will write of them at another time.”¹⁷² Three days later, he wrote to the same correspondent: “We hear that in England everything is full of seditions. I wonder that you have not indicated with what countenance Dr. Osiander has regarded the picture of his prophecy.”

THE COMMISSION OF 1538.

Henry at last responded, January 2d, 1538, in a very conciliatory strain. He praised the course of his German brethren concerning the proposed Council, thought that every Christian man must admire it, and hoped that by future conferences, with the Divine assistance, they may come to an agreement, and that the pure doctrine of Christ which cannot lie hidden long may be displayed to the salvation of all.⁵ At the close of the next month, he sent Christopher Mount to the meeting of the League at Brunswick with the assurance that he would use every effort for the promotion and establishment of the pure religion, and stating that it was now the time to send the promised embassy.¹⁷³ It was accordingly determined to accept the proposition, and the embassy was constituted by the appointment of Francis Burkhard, Vice Chancellor of Saxony, George a Boyneburg, LL. D., a Hessian nobleman, and Frederick Myconius, Superintendent of Gotha a statesman, a jurist and a theologian. The very constitution of the commission showed that it was not [[@Page:130]]anticipated to admit of any compromises. Melanchthon was evidently kept at home intentionally. Myconius (1491-1546) who supplied his place, is described as a man of deep spirituality, a former monk, whose experience in his search for the assurance of the forgiveness of sins in many respects resembled that of Luther, small of stature, and for years a victim of consumption, of scholarly habits, wonderful energy, distinguished executive ability, and marked eminence as a public speaker, with Melanchthon’s calm and unruffled disposition, love of peace and habits of introspection, tinged with well-tempered sentiment, but without Melanchthon’s fondness for diplomacy,—a man deeply be loved by both Luther and Melanchthon, who, when the circumstances demanded it, on more than one occasion, showed that he could be a true Boanerges, as well as the St. John of the Lutheran Reformation. However such a representative might win the love of all with whom he dealt, he could be implicitly relied upon not to yield an hair’s breadth, as in his inner experience he had fought over every point involved in the controversy, and knew that life or death hung upon them all. What better representative could be selected to encounter the disguised Romanism, than he who, as a youth, still in the toils of the Papacy, had stood before Tetzel begging an indulgence upon the ground that to the poor it must be given gratuitously, and, when offered the price by some of Tetzel’s attendants, refusing it with the words: “No, I purchase no forgiveness. I must have it gratuitously,” and charging the indulgence vender to his face: ‘You will have to give an answer before God, if for the sake of a couple of pennies, you regard the salvation of my soul of no account.”

LUTHER ON BISHOP FOX.

Already on March 11th, the instructions of the commission were prepared. May 12th, Luther wrote a letter to Bishop Fox commending its members to its kind reception. Alas the accomplished prelate had died four days before! With his death, Lutheranism in England received a blow from which it never [[@Page:131]]recovered. If that same hand, whose chief work, one would think, should have been, to transmit the holiest office to those who were to be the ambassadors of the Gospel of peace and love, but which so often touched the key at whose signal, the friends of a purified church, fell beneath the blows of the executioner, had administered poison to one whose power and influence were too great to admit of his removal by ordinary methods, he could not have accomplished his plans more effectually. Without the vacillation of Cranmer, every movement which the Bishop of Hereford had made, showed a steady progress towards the ideal position. He had greater depth of character, wider range of experience, and more facility and readiness as an ecclesiastical diplomat, than the archbishop. Besides he had always access to the king—a privilege which Cranmer enjoyed only on rare occasions. The letter of Luther shows in what esteem the Reformer held him, and fully counteracts the suspicions felt by Melanchthon, who, we must acknowledge, was readily deceived in his estimate of men. Nor do Luther’s letters deal in empty compliments. Whatever he writes he means. Here is his letter:

“Grace and peace in Christ our Lord. As these men, our friends and the legates of the princes, are about making a journey to your Most Serene King, I could not refrain from giving them a letter to you, dreading especially lest I might incur the charge of being an ungrateful and forgetful man. For since, in addition to the most agreeable intimacy which we enjoyed here, you also did me a very great favor, and profited me by your advice against my enemy, the stone; it is impossible for me to forget you. Often has our conversation been concerning you, especially since affairs have been taking such turns in your kingdom, that either you have been unable to send us letters, or when sent they were possibly intercepted. By such suppositions we comforted our anxiety. For we were hesitating and dreading, lest possibly this persistent silence might be a sign of some sadder calamity against the progress of the Gospel. There were some [[@Page:132]]who imagined that your King, circumvented at some time by skilful Romanists would return again into favor with the Pope. We here prayed, and amid hope and fear besought that Satan be beaten under your feet. Neither are we informed what is being done, among you, with respect to the Gospel, or how. But we hope on the return of these legates to hear a good report concerning your Anglican Church with respect to what is verily the Gospel. How the State and Church are in Germany, you will learn fully and thoroughly from our representatives. The Lord Jesus Christ increase in you and in us both grace and his gilts to the glory of God the Father. Amen. My Katie reverently salutes you. In Christ, farewell. Your most devoted,

“MARTIN LUTHER.”¹⁷⁴

THE EMBASSY IN ENGLAND.

The ambassadors received a very cordial reception. They were honored with the embrace of the king, who expressed his great regret at the absence of Melanchthon, but candidly stated that there were some points in the articles of the Protestants which he did not approve, and that he thought that they ought to make the platform sufficiently broad that the French also might be included. The ambassadors, however, were duly warned by the friends of the Evangelical cause that he was greatly influenced by bishops opposed to the Gospel, and that they should not place much dependence upon his flattery.¹⁷⁵ This they soon found to be only too true.

Three bishops and four doctors of divinity, with Cranmer, as president of the commission, were appointed to represent the English side, while Dr. Barnes was assigned by the king a place in the conference on the Lutheran side! There is perfect agreement concerning the facts of the Conference. “The two parties went together through the Augustan Confession.”¹⁷⁶ The course of the discussion was regulated by the plan pursued in the [[@Page:133]]Augsburg Confession.” “The king appointed certain bishops and doctors, to enter into conference and debate with them, of each of the heads of Christian doctrine contained in the Augus tine Confession, and of divers abuses brought into the church.”¹⁷⁷ They were not long in coming to an agreement on the Doctrinal Articles, but after these were finished, a disagreement arose, the Lutherans insisting that the consideration of the Confession must be finished, and the articles on Abuses also included, while the bishops were just as urgent that the seven sacraments must form the next subject of consideration. Back of the bishops was the king; but the Lutherans had the satisfaction of having on their side Cranmer, who wrote with no little feeling to Crumwell concerning the course of his associates. The fact could not be concealed that it was the intention of the King by this procedure to break up the conference, which threatened to go too far. It actually began to look as though, if the discussions were to continue, the whole Augsburg Confession would be approved. Melanchthon wrote to Brenz on the basis of the reports received at Wittenberg: “There is hope that the Anglican churches will be reformed, and the doctrine, and godly rights restored.”¹⁷⁸ Nevertheless it would have been a serious matter from a political standpoint to have dismissed the representatives of the Smalcald League too abruptly. So Henry announced that he himself would undertake to answer the Lutheran argument on Abuses. Cranmer also describes the entertainment furnished the Lutheran ambassadors as being such as would lead them to desire a summons homeward at the earliest moment. “As concernyng the Oratours of Germanye, I am advertised, that thei are very evill lodged where thei be: For besides the Multitude of Ratts, daily and nyghtly runnyng in their chambers, which is no small Disquietnes; the Kechyn standeth directly against their Parlar, where they dayly Dine and Supp; and by reason thereof, the [[@Page:134]]House savoreth so yll, that it offendeth all Men that come into it.”¹⁷⁹

The king was trifling; and the ambassadors were quick enough to perceive it. “He wants,” writes Myconius, “nothing else than to sit as Antichrist in the temple of God, and that King Harry be Pope. The precious treasures, the rich income of the Church these are Harry’s Gospel.”¹⁸⁰ The Bishop of Hereford is no longer at hand to plead for the evangelical faith with his hardened monarch. Political considerations have again interfered. Francis and Charles V. have concluded a peace. Charles V. has sent a proposition to the afflicted widower on the throne of England, that his fourth wife should be the Emperor’s niece. Henry interprets this as an indication that his power is actually feared by the Emperor, and that he can now cope with the Pope without bothering himself with the terms of church fellowship which these obstinate and narrow-minded Lutherans want to impose.

The ambassadors understood the situation and prepared to retire. Myconius felt his strength failing, and feared that if he tarried much longer in the fogs of London, his struggle for life would soon end. He wrote to Cranmer September 10th. “Although for the sake of advancing Christ’s glory I am ready also to suffer all things; yet since, in the articles and summary of Christian doctrine, we have advanced so far as to agree now concerning the chief; and since, as to what is left touching abuses, we have explained the opinion of our princes, doctors, churches and of ourselves both verbally and in writing, and the doctors now know our judgment, they will be able also in our absence to weigh them, and to determine what they see to be pleasing to the divine will and useful to the church of God.”¹⁸¹ Nor is the official letter which they left in England without great [[@Page:135]]interest. We quote from the summary of it which the king had prepared:

“After they had related what was given them in commandment, and that they had conferred of the articles of the Christian religion for two months with some bishops and doctors of divinity, appointed them by the King’s Majesty; they doubt not that a firm and perpetual concord betwixt their princes and the king’s majesty, and their bishops, divines and subjects would follow in the doctrine of the gospel, to the praise of God, and the ruin of the Roman Anti-Christ. And because they cannot stay for the rest of the disputation concerning abuses, before they depart they think it their duty to declare their sentence of some articles of abuses; which, after their departure, the king’s majesty may take care that his bishops and divines confer together of. They say, the purity of doctrine cannot be conserved, unless those abuses be taken away, that fight with the Word of God, and have produced and maintained the tyranny and idolatry of the Roman Anti-Christ.”

Yet when the time for the departure of the commission came, the king was profuse in compliments. Writing to the Elector he styled them his “most blameless friends, who have presented arguments so eminent in sound learning, wisdom, uncommon candor, and supreme devotion to Christian godliness, that their intercourse has been in the highest degree charming and agreeable to us, and we entertain the well-assured hope that, with God’s assistance, fruit and success will follow the counsels that have been begun.” The Saxon Vice-Chancellor took with him, as a memorial of his sumptuous entertainment, three horses and a carriage presented by the king. When, a few weeks later, their owner exhibited them at Smalcald, the ludicrousness of the whole procedure was such, that Luther could not refrain from some amusing remarks, which may be found in his Table-Talk.¹⁸²

The subject, however, has its serious as well as its humorous [[@Page:136]]side. As Seckendorf remarks: “The just judgment of God against the horrible vices of the king ought to be recognized.”¹⁸³

“The failure of these negotiations with the German princes was one of the heaviest blows sustained by the English Reformation during the reign of Henry VIII. It both removed the salutary restraint hitherto imposed on the King’s caprices by an unwillingness to break with those who were embarked in the same cause, and it also enlisted his personal feelings on the side of the tenets he had so zealously pledged himself to defend.”¹⁸⁴

THE THIRTEEN ARTICLES OF 1538 .

If the question, then, be asked, why is not the Church Of England a Lutheran Church? the true answer is, Because a wicked ruler interfered within a sphere that did not belong to him, and abruptly terminated the measures of the true representatives of the Church, which clearly indicated a readiness to accept the Lutheran Confessions.¹⁸⁵

This is shown further by the Articles of 1538, evidently drawn up at the Conference, and preserved with other documents pertaining to it, which were discovered about 1830 by Dr. Jenkyns among the manuscripts of Cranmer. They have no weight except as historical evidence of the facts which we are tracing, having failed of their purpose, and not having received any formal sanction. They were filed away, to serve an important purpose afterwards in the preparation of the Articles of 1552, through which they continue to live in the Thirty-Nine Articles. The subjects of the articles are I. Of the Unity of God and the Trinity of Persons. II. Of Original Sin. III. Of the Two Natures of Christ. IV. Of Justification. V. Of the Church. VI. Of Baptism. VII. Of the Eucharist. VIII. Of Repentance. [[@Page:137]]IX. Of the Use of the Sacraments. X. Of the Ministers of the Church. XI. Of Ecclesiastical Rites. XII. Of Civil Affairs. XIII. Of the Resurrection of Bodies, and the Final Judgment.

The reader may judge for himself how closely the Augsburg Confession is followed:

Augsburg Confession, (1530).	Articles (1538.)
[[Art. I >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:1]].	Art. I.
The churches with common consent among us, do teach that the decree of the Nicene Synod concerning the unity of the divine essence and of the three persons is true, and without any doubt to be believed: to wit., that there is one divine essence, which is called and is God, eternal, without body, indivisible, of infinite power, wisdom, goodness; the Creator and Preserver of all things visible and in visible; and that yet there be three persons of the same essence and power, who are also co-eternal, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.	We judge that the decree of the Nicene Synod concerning the unity of the divine essence and the three persons is true, and without any doubt to be believed: to wit., that there is one divine essence, which both is called and is God, eternal, without body, indivisible, of infinite power, wisdom, goodness; the Creator and Preserver of all things visible and invisible; and that yet there be three persons of the same essence and power, and co-eternal, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
And they use the name person in that signification which the ecclesiastical writers have used it in this cause, to signify, not a part or quality in another, but that which properly subsisteth.	And we use the name person in that signification which the ecclesiastical writers have used in this case to signify not a part or quality in an other, but that which properly subsisteth.
They condemn all heresies which have sprung up against this article, as the Manichees, who set down two principles, good and evil; in the same manner, the Valentinians, Arians, Eunomians, Mahometans and all such like.	We condemn all heresies which have sprung up against this article, as the Manichees who set down two principles, a good and an evil; also the Valentinians, Arians, Eunomians, Mahometans and all such like.
They condemn also the Samosatenes, old and new; who when they earnestly contend that there is but one person, do craftily and wickedly trifle after the manner of Rhetoricians about the Word and the Holy Ghost, that they are not distinct persons, but that the Word signifieth a vocal word, and the Spirit a motion created in things.	We condemn also the Samosatanes old and new, who when they earnestly contend that there is but one person, do craftily and wickedly trifle after the manner of Rhetoricians about the Word and the Holy Ghost, that there are not distinct persons, but that the Word signifieth a vocal word, and the Spirit a motion created in things. [[@Page:138]]
Art. [[II >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:2]].	Art. II.
Also they teach that after Adam’s fall, all men begotten after the common course of nature, are born with sin; that is, without the fear of God, without trust in him, and with fleshly appetite; and that this disease or original fault is truly sin, condemning and bringing eternal death now also upon all that are not born again by baptism and the Holy Spirit.	All men begotten after the common course of nature are born with original sin; that is with an absence of the original righteousness that ought to be in them,^186 on which account they are children of wrath, and fail in knowledge of God, fear of God, trust towards God, etc. And they have fleshly appetite conflicting with the law of God; and this disease or fault of origin is truly sin, condemning and bringing eternal death now also upon those who are not born again by baptism and the Holy Spirit.
They condemn the Pelagians and others, who deny this original fault to be sin indeed; and who, so as to lesson the glory of the merit and benefits of Christ, argue that a man may, by the strength of his own reason, be justified before God.	We condemn the Pelagians and others, who deny the fault of origin to be sin; and who, so as to lessen the glory of the merit and benefits of Christ argue that man can satisfy God’s law by his own natural strength without the Holy Spirit, and by the good works of reason be pronounced righteous before God.

Article III. corresponds to [[Article III. of Augsburg Confession >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:3]] except in the second word, where we find “docemus,” instead of “decent.” Art. IV. “Of Justification” is much longer than the [[corresponding Article of the Augsburg Confession >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:4]], which it includes but amplifies. The definition of the “Ten Articles” is introduced, but so modified by qualifying clauses as to bring it into nearer accord with the Confession. Objections to the Lutheran doctrine are also met by the formulation of the statement that the faith described is not inoperative knowledge, or simply a knowledge of the articles of faith, etc. It closes with a verbal reproduction of [[Art. V. of the Augsburg Confession >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:5]]. Art. V. discusses at length the definition of the Church in harmony with the Lutheran Confession, drawing material both from the Augsburg Confession and the Apology. [[@Page:139]]Art. VI. includes [[Art. IX. of the Augsburg Confession >> BookOfConcord:I:9]], and Art. I. of “The Ten Articles” of 1536, concerning Infant Baptism, taken as we have seen from Melanchthon’s “Adversus Anabaptistas” and adds a statement concerning Adult Baptism. Art. VII. teaches the Lutheran doctrine of the Lord’s Supper in the terms agreed upon at Wittenberg in 1536. The only article of the “Repetitio” there framed of which we have any knowledge is quoted by Seckendorf:

Repetitio (1536).	Articles (1538.)
“We constantly believe and teach that in the sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, Christ’s body and blood are truly, substantially and really present under the same forms, they are truly and corporeally tendered and distributed to all those who receive the sacrament.”	“Of the Eucharist we constantly believe and teach that in the sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, Christ’s body and blood are truly, substantially and really present under the forms of bread and wine, and that under the same forms, they are truly and really tendered and distributed to those who receive the sacrament, whether good or bad.”

Of the remaining Articles, IX., X. and the first paragraph of XI. are substantially derived from the Augsburg Confession, though expanding the doctrine, guarding it from misconceptions and answering objections. Articles VIII. “Of Repentance,” XII., “Of Civil Affairs,” and XIII. “Of the Resurrection,” are treated at much greater length, but also bear clear marks of the source whence they come. [[@Page:140]]