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

CHAPTER XIII. LUTHER’S “ST. ROBERT.”

The Postils of Taverner. Estimate of Crumwell. Sketch of Barnes. Connection with Bugenhagen. His XIX, Theses of 1531. His “History of the Popes” (1536), with Luther’s Introduction. His efforts at liturgical reform. Controversy with Gardiner. His “Confession,” at the stake. The attack upon the “Confession” by Standish, and the refutation of Standish by Coverdale. Luther’s Introduction to the German translation of the “Confession.” Luther’s estimate of Barnes. His contrast between Barnes and Henry. Sastrow’s “Epicedion” on Barnes. Henry demands satisfaction.

Parallel with the diplomatic negotiations, proceeded the literary activity of scholars, to provide for the thorough reformation of the English Church. This was not confined to the revision of translations of the Bible. We have already seen how the Augsburg Confession and Apology, the hymns of Luther and his associates, and a Lutheran system of theology in Sarcerius “Common Places,” were translated and published. Early in 1540, before the fall of Crumwell, another important work appeared. It will be remembered that in March 1539, Sarcerius wrote to Henry VIII. from Frankfort, offering to send him “Postils upon the Gospels for the Lord’s Days and the Festivals; as well as upon the Epistels for the Lord’s Days, dedicated to your Serenity.” The works referred to were either: “Postilla in Evangelia Dominicalia” and “Postilla in Evangelia Festivalia,” 1538, or “Expositiones in Epistolas Dominicales et Festivales,” or probably both. When, then, early in 1540, we find a volume of Postils appearing in England from the pen of Richard Taverner, the translator of Sarcerius’ “Common [[@Page:180]]Places,” in the Preface to which he disclaims all originality for the most of the work, the inference is very naturally suggested that the book comes from Sarcerius. Taverner’s relation to it is thus stated: “I was instantly required, to the intent the Lord of the harvest might, by this mean, thrust forth his laborers into the harvest, to peruse and recognize this brief postil which was delivered me of certain godly persons for that purpose and intent. Which thing to my little power, and, as the shortness of time would serve, I have done. And such sermons or homilies as seemed to want, I have supplied, partly with mine own industry, and partly with the help of other sober men which be better learned than myself.”

So, too, in the Preface to the second volume, he says: “Sith this Postil is by me though not made, yet recognized, and in diverse places augmented.” The changes, modifications and additions to Sarcerius, cannot be determined, unless the two books be placed side by side. As no copy of Sarcerius, is at hand, we cannot even affirm positively that he is the author. But the entire style and character of the Postils betray their Germanic and Lutheran origin. We need refer to but one instance, where on the Gospel for the 2nd Sunday in Advent, we find the sentence: “The ancient serpent shall be loosed for a little time, that is to say, false prophets, heretics, Anabaptists, Sacramentaries, Suarmerians” [Ger. “Schwarmerei”] seductors, “frantike spirites.” It is also possible that the similar work of Antony Corvinus of Calenberg, may have been used as the basis.

But we return to the political crisis of 1540, and the catastrophes which it brought. It is foreign to our purpose to enter into a discussion concerning Crumwell, and his fall. He was no theologian, but a politician. A great friend of the Lutheran movement, there is no evidence at hand to prove that he regarded it in any other light, than as offering to England an opportunity for asserting its power in defiance of Pope and Emperor. Whether he really accepted with heart and soul the faith of the Gospel, and knew in his own inner experience what the [[@Page:181]]Lutheran Reformation was designed first of all and above all to maintain and impart, must be referred to Him who would have us judge nothing before the time.

Twenty days after the execution of Crumwell, viz., on January 30th, 1540, one of the most prominent of English Lutherans bore his testimony at the stake.

Dr. Robert Barnes was born about 1495. At Cambridge he was a fellow student of Miles Coverdale, with whom, throughout his entire career, he lived on terms of intimacy, and who most earnestly defended his memory after his death. Converted to the evangelical faith through Thomas Bilney, he at first showed a fanatical radicalism, having on December 24th, 1525, preached against the observance of the great church festivals, and unseasonably reproduced Luther’s sermon for the Fourth Sunday in Advent. In a previous chapter, we told the story of the recantation of Lutheranism which, in 1526, he was compelled to make under penalty of the stake. The very same year, however, it was discovered that he was surreptitiously circulating Bibles. He became an object of such close surveillance that in 1528 he escaped to Antwerp, where, it is probable that he was in intimate relations with Rogers, then chaplain there. He spent the next three years in Germany, part of the time at Wittenberg, where he resided in Bugenhagen’s house, and, in order to escape detection, assumed the name of Anthonius Amarius or Antonius Anglus. Bugenhagen being in Hamburg, to promote the Reformation there in 1529, probably met Tyndale, living then in Hamburg, and if Foxe’s statement be correct, that Barnes friend, Coverdale was with Tyndale at that time, it again connects them. Besides, the English merchant, Humphrey Monmouth, in whose house in London, Tyndale had lived, in later years made Barnes the executor of his will.

In 1531 he published, at Wittenberg, a defence of nineteen theses, to which Bugenhagen furnished a preface. They were in substance 1. Faith alone justifies. 2. Christ made satisfaction not alone for original sin, but for all sins. 3. The commandments [[@Page:182]]of God cannot be observed from our own powers. 4. Free will of its own powers can do nothing but sin. 5. The righteous sin even in every good work. 6. The true marks of the Church. 7. The power of the keys depends upon the Word of God, and not upon man’s power. 8. Councils can err. 9. Communion must be administered under both forms. 10. Human ordinances do not bind the conscience, 11. Auricular confession is not necessary to salvation. 12. It is lawful for priests to marry. 13. Monks are not holier than laymen. 14. Christian fasting does not consist in distinctions of meats. 15. Christians keep holy and worship God every day, and not only on the seventh. 16. Unjust Papal excommunication does not injure those against whom it is directed. 17. The true body of Christ is in the sacrament of the altar. 18. Saints are not to be invoked as mediators. 19. The errors of the Romish Mass are enumerated.

The same year, the King felt that he needed Barnes’ services in his work of reorganizing the English Church, and persuaded him to return. He was not long in England before the antagonism to Gardiner broke out in a quarrel in which Barnes impetuosity gave him the disadvantage. As to the point of the dispute, viz., the right to sue for debt, Gardiner seems to have had the right side, but his repugnance to the bishop’s course with reference to the Gospel was doubtless back of it. In 1534, he was sent by Henry to Hamburg as special ambassador, and sought to effect an alliance with the King of Denmark. In 1535, and the following year, he was, as already stated, several times at Wittenberg on the English Commission. In 1536, he published a “History of the Lives of the Popes,” dedicated to Henry VIII., to which Luther furnished an “Introduction.” In the Introduction Luther says: “In the beginning, not being much versed in History, I attacked the Papacy a priori, i. e. from the Holy Scriptures. Now I am wonderfully delighted that others are doing the same a posteriori, i. e. from History. And I think I am triumphing, since, as the light appears, I understand that [[@Page:183]]the histories agree with the Scriptures. For what I have learned from St. Paul and Daniel as teachers, that the Pope is the adversary of God and of all, this history indicates with its very finger, pointing out not merely genus and species, but the very individual.”²¹²

In 1537, he was executor for an alderman, Humphrey Monmouth, the friend of Tyndale, who left a bequest for the singular purpose of paying for the preaching of thirty sermons, instead of the saying of thirty masses. In 1538 he became the first to introduce the saying of the Mass, and the rendering of the Te Deum in English. The next year he was on the commission for the prosecution of the Anabaptists. He was charged with having had some part in information against Lambert for denying the doctrine of the real presence, although this in no way convicts him of having any share in his condemnation and execution for denying transubstantiation. In 1539, he was again in Germany, as agent for Crumwell in effecting the alliance with Anne of Cleves. During Lent of 1540, in preaching in St. Paul’s Cross Church with Gardiner, they fell into controversy. Gardiner preached against Justification by Faith alone, Barnes, when his turn to preach came, not only attacked the Bishop’s doctrine, but even inveighed against him personally. Begging pardon first privately, which was granted, then, after asking pardon publicly, in the very same service he preached on the evangelical side. His temporary waverings can be readily explained. His ardent nature led him to act hastily and rashly, and then there was a seeming vacillation, though but for a moment, to the other side. Beneath all, there is a depth of character unaffected by transient and superficial agitations. He had to pay the penalty at Smithfield, after the bill of attainder against him had been passed in Parliament.

At the stake, he made a glorious confession of Christ before many witnesses. He bore his testimony against the various Papal doctrines, each enumerated in its turn. [[@Page:184]]

“I am come hither,” he said, “to be burned as a heretic, and you shall hear my belief, whereby you shall perceive what erroneous opinions I hold. God I take to record, I never to my knowledge, taught any erroneous doctrine, but only those things which scripture led me unto, and that in my sermons I never maintained any error, neither moved nor gave occasion of any insurrection. Although I have been slandered to preach that our lady was but a saffron bag, which I utterly protest before God that I never meant it, nor preached it; but all my study and diligence hath been utterly to confound and confute all men of that doctrine, as are those who deny that our Saviour Christ did take any flesh of the blessed Virgin Mary, which sects I detest and abhor. And in this place there have been burned some of them, whom I never favored nor maintained, but with all diligence evermore did I study to set forth the glory of God, the obedience to our sovereign lord the King, and the true and sincere religion of Christ—and now hearken to my faith.

I believe in the holy and blessed Trinity, three persons and one God, that created and made all the world, and that this blessed Trinity sent down the second person, Jesus Christ, into the womb of the most blessed and purest Virgin Mary. And here hear my record that I do utterly condemn that abominable and detestable opinion which saith that Christ took no flesh of the Virgin. For I believe that without man’s will or power, he was conceived of the Holy Ghost, and took flesh of her, and that he suffered hunger, thirst, cold, and other passions of our body, sin excepted; according to the saying of St. Peter, he was made in all things like to his brethren, except sin. And I believe that his death and passion was the sufficient ransom for the sins of all the world. And I believe that through his death, he overcame sin, death and hell, and that there is none other satisfaction unto the Father, but this, his death and passion only, and that no work of man did deserve anything of God, but his passion, as touching our justification. For I know the best work ever I did, is impure and imperfect. For although perchance, [[@Page:185]]you know nothing of me, yet do I confess that my thoughts and cogitations are innumerable; wherefore, I beseech thee, O Lord, not to enter into judgment with me; according to the saying of the prophet David: ‘Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord;’ and in another place, ‘Lord, if thou straitly mark our iniquities, who is able to abide thy judgment!’ Wherefore, I trust in no good work that ever I did, but only in the death of Christ. I do not doubt .but through him to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Take me not here that I speak against good works, for they are to be done, and verily they that do them not, shall never come into the Kingdom of God. We must do them because they are commanded us of God, to show and set forth our profession, not to deserve or merit, for that is only the death of Christ.

I believe that there is a holy church, and a company of all them that do profess Christ; and that all that have suffered and confessed his name, are saints; and that all they do praise and laud God in heaven, more than I, or any man’s tongue can express, and I have always spoken reverently and praised them, as much as scripture willed me to do. And that our lady, I say, was a virgin immaculate and undefiled, and that she is the most pure virgin that ever God created, and a vessel elect of God, of whom Christ should be born.”

“Then, there was one,” says Foxe, “that asked him his opinion of praying to saints.” Then said he:

“Now of saints you shall hear my opinion: I have said before some what I think of them; how that I believe they are in heaven with God, and that they are worthy of all the honor, that Scripture willeth them to have. But I say, throughout all scripture we are not commanded to pray to any saints. Therefore, I neither can, nor will preach unto you that saints ought to be prayed unto; for then should I preach unto you a doctrine of mine own head. Notwithstandiug, whether they pray for us or no, that I refer to God And if saints do pray for us, then I trust to pray for you within this half hour, master sheriff, and for [[@Page:186]]every Christian man living in the faith of Christ, and dying in the same, as a saint. Wherefore, if the dead may pray for the quick, I will surely pray for you.”

When this testimony of Barnes at the stake was published, it was at once attacked by a hierarchical writer, John Standish, to whom Barnes old college friend, Miles Coverdale, vigorously replied. Standish examines Barnes confession, sentence by sentence, and Coverdale just as minutely treats every statement of Standish. The reply may be found in the second volume of Coverdale’s works, published by the Parker Society. In the Preface, he says: “If Dr. Barnes died a true Christian man, be ye sure his death shall be a greater stroke to hypocrisy, than ever his life could have been. If he was falsely accused to the King’s highness, and so put to death, woe shall come those accusers, if they repent not by times. And if Dr. Barnes in his heart, mouth and deed committed no worse thing toward the King’s highness, than he committed against God in these his words at his death, he is like at the latter day to be a judge over them that were cause of his death, if they do not amend.”

Standish contemptuously termed Barnes doctrine as the doctrine of the Germans. Coverdale is perfectly willing to bear the reproach, and answers:

“As touching the Germans, their doctrine is, that when the servants of God have done all that is commanded them, they must acknowledge themselves to be unprofitable; to have occasion continually to cry unto God, and to say: ‘O forgive us our trespasses;’ to acknowledge that in their flesh dwelleth no good thing; yea, and to confess, that though they ‘delight in the law of God after the inward man, yet there is another law in their members which striveth against the law of their mind.’ … This is now the doctrine of the Germans; and thus taught also St. Augustine. … Such doctrine now, though it be approved both by the holy scripture and by St. Augustine, yet because the Germans teach it, it must needs be condemned of you for an error. I wonder ye condemn them not also for holding so little [[@Page:187]]of the Pope’s church, of his pardons, of his purgatory; for putting down his religions, his chauntries, his soul-masses and diriges, his trentals, pilgrimages, stations, etc.; for ministering the sacraments in their mother tongue, for setting their priests daily to preach the only word of God, for bringing no new customs into the church; for avoiding whoredom and secret abomination from among their clergy, as well as among other; for bringing up their youth so well in the doctrine of God, in the knowledge of tongues, in other good letters and honest occupations, for providing so richly for their poor, needy, fatherless and aged people, etc.”²¹³

The Confession of Barnes was published in German at Wittenberg, in the very year of his martyrdom. Luther’s introduction is of the highest interest. The following is the substance of it:

“This Dr. Robert Barnes, who, when with us, in his remarkable humility, would not allow himself to be called Doctor, called himself Antonius; for which he had his reasons. For previously he had been imprisoned in England by the holy bishops, the St. Papists, and had escaped with great difficulty. This Doctor, I say, we knew very well, and it is an especial joy to us to hear, that our good pious table companion, and guest of our home, has been so graciously called upon by God to shed his blood, for His dear Son’s sake, and to become a holy martyr. Thanks, praise and glory be to the Father of our dear Lord Jesus Christ, that He has permitted us to see again, as in the beginning, the times, wherein Christians who have eaten and drunk with us, are taken before our eyes, and from our eyes and sides, to become martyrs, i. e. to go to Heaven and become saints. Twenty years ago, who would have believed that Christ our Lord would be so near us, and, through His precious martyrs and dear saints, would eat and drink and speak and live at our table and home? … When this holy martyr, St. Robert, perceived at last that his King (by your permission) Harry of England, had become hostile to the Pope, he returned to England, in hopes that he [[@Page:188]]might plant the Gospel in his fatherland; and in fact he was successful in making a beginning, To speak briefly, it pleased Harry of England to send him to us at Wittenberg concerning the matrimonial question on which thirteen universities had given their decision, and all had given Harry the right to repudiate his Queen, Catherine, the aunt of the Emperor Charles, and to take another.

“But when we had disputed, at great length, and, at a great expense to His Electoral Prince of Saxony, we found at last that Harry of England had sent his embassy, not because he wanted to become evangelical, but in order that we at Wittenberg might endorse his divorce. I was, therefore, displeased that I and the other theologians had spent so many weeks in useless labor with them concerning religious matters, and I told them: ‘Four points your king will not admit: The two forms of the sacrament the marriage of priests, the doing away with the Mass, and with Monasticism.’ ‘Yes,’ I continued, ‘we have spent too long time in defiling ourselves, when we ought to have known from the very beginning, that, while your king takes the Pope’s money, he retains his government. Harry, therefore, is Pope, and the Pope is Henry in England.’

“Dr. Robert Barnes, himself, often told me: ‘My king does not care for religion.’ But he so loved the king and his country, that he was ready to endure everything, and always was meditating how to help England. He always had in his mouth the words, ‘My king;’ as his confession shows that even unto death he showed all love and fidelity towards ‘my king,’—a service which Harry ill deserved. Hope deceived him; for he was always hoping that his king would at last turn out well.

“Among other things, we often disputed why the king presumed to bear that abominable title: ‘Defender of the faith, and after Christ Supreme and Immediate Head of the Anglican Church.’ But as this was generally the answer: Sic volo, sic jubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas, it could no where be better seen that Squire Harry wanted to be God, and to do as he pleased. [[@Page:189]]

“The reason why he was martyred is still concealed. For Harry must be ashamed of himself. Nevertheless, what many trustworthy persons say is like him, viz., that Dr. Barnes (like St. John the Baptist against Herod) testified against Harry and would not consent to his disgraceful deed in repudiating Fraulein von Jülich [Anne of Cleves,] and taking another. For whatever Squire Harry wants, he makes an article of faith, both for life and death. But we let Harry go to his Harries, and with his Harries, where they belong. We ought to thank God, the Father of all mercies, that He can use such devils and masques of devils in so masterly a way, for our salvation and that of all Christians, and for the punishment both of themselves and of all who are unwilling to learn to know God; as he has always done through great tyrants. Yet, as St. Paul says, Rom. viii, all that occurs and is done and is suffered, must work for good; and, on the other hand, everything must serve for evil to those who persecute God’s children. So also is it with this incendiary Harry, who, by his wickedness, is doing so much good. Let us praise and thank God; this is a blessed time for elect saints, but a sorrowful time for the devil, and the blasphemers and enemies of God, to whom it shall still be worse.”

But Luther was not the only one from whose pen Henry had to suffer as a penalty for this crime. A young scholar at Lübeck, John Sastrow published a poem: “Epicedion Martyris Christi, D. Roberti Barnes, Angli,” in which he compared Henry to Busiris. The sensitive King sent a legation to Lübeck, demanding reparation. The Council excused Sastrow on the ground of his youth; but the printer, John Balhorn, was banished, and, when Henry was satisfied by such a vindication, Balhorn was permitted after a few months to quietly return.²¹⁴ [[@Page:190]]