Dov Honick History 2104H Professor Stenhouse May 6, 2013 Reformation Acts: The Political Landscape of the English

Reformation In 1381, over 130 years before Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to the door of All Saints Church in Wittenberg, essentially beginning the Reformation in Europe, John Wycliffe, arguably Englands most well known reformer, published the first English translation of the Bible. Although Luthers charges focused on clerical abuses, particularly focusing on indulgences, both he and Wycliffe shared an essential subversive questioning of central clerical authority that would be an essential issue at stake in the Reformation. However, where Luthers movement found popular support, the Reformation in England found itself immediately seized by political entities that would shape the course of the reformation in England as wholly different that the reformation in Europe. The politicization of the reformation in England meant that the opinions of reformers like Wycliffe were rarely true agents of change. Instead, the English Reformation, which, it can be reasonably argued, ran from Henry VIIIs break with Rome till the Glorious Revolution in 1688, followed an almost entirely political trajectory that rendered much of the change irrelevant to the actual theological and social concerns of the reformers. While Wycliffe was writing in England in the late 14th century, he certainly anticipated many of the same concerns that Protestant reformers like Luther would express in Europe a century later. He was, however, not alone, nor were his

complaints fully inclusive. Wycliffe argued against many of the same theological things as Luther; his arguments were against such trespasses as transubstantiation, exclusive interpretation of the Bible, and numerous sacraments. Wycliffes arguments are located in a greater question of authority. Disillusioned by the politicization of the Avignon Papacy, as well as other hierarchical corruption, Wycliffe and his followers were suspicious of a church leadership they saw as increasingly removed from the needs of the common people.1 This suspicion was largely responsible for creating the framework for his charges against the church. To Wycliffe, it would not be reasonable to limit Biblical reading and interpretation to a class that was religiously corrupt. Thus, Wycliffe argued for lay clergy and a vernacular Bible accessible to all, regardless of station. Many other figures in the English Church more contemporary to Luther perpetuated Wycliffes charges. Prominent figures such as John Colet, the Dean of St. Pauls Cathedral argued vociferously against the greediness and appetite of honor and dignity he felt was endemic in the clergy.2 To Colet, the clergy had fallen into a state of concupiscence, covetousness, and greed. Simon Fish, another contemporary reformer, called the clergy idle, holy thieves.3 The goal of church reformers, from Wycliffe to the reformers that precipitated the Reformation itself, was to create a common class that could exist with some level of religious autonomy, without reliance on a corrupt, top-down clergy. And indeed, when the Reformation finally struck in England, it would be guided by a monarch who was determined to make a
1. R. O. Bucholz and Newton Key. Early modern England, 1485-1714: a narrative history. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. 2004. 74 2. Newton Key and R. O. Bucholz. Sources and debates in English history, 1485-1714. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 45 3. Ibid 46

clean break from papal authority. However, contrary to reformationist desires, the course the Reformation would take once Henry VIII seized control of it would deny the reformers true theological change. Henry, while initially a staunch Catholic, began to support a slow, conservative iteration of the Reformation. While he was hesitant to make great changes, he did initially encourage the anti-clerical rhetoric from reformers in order to weaken the power of the pope. However, Henrys acquiescence to Reformation sensibility was driven less by religious conviction than by his own political need. It is popularly known that Henrys sympathies for the Reformation began when he wished to divorce his wife Catherine of Aragon. Indeed, before his personal exigencies took hold, Henry staunchly opposed the Reformation arguing, in his Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (Defense of the Seven Sacraments) both in favor of the sacraments reformers so reviled and Papal authority. In 1521, Pope Leo X bestowed upon Henry the title Fidei defensor, or, Defender of the Faith. It should come as little surprise then, that Henrys primary concern was not the enactment of Lutheran theology. It was only when the Pope Clement VII refused to grant Henry a dispensation for divorce that he began to enact serious reform. Ironically, the Popes reasons for denying Henry the dispensation were as much political as religious. Certainly the Clement did not wish to overrule Julius IIs dispensation to marry Catherine in the first place, but it was also of crucial concern to him that Catherine was the aunt of Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, who had recently sacked Rome and would not take kindly to Catherines removal from power.

For Henry, then, like many English reformers, what mattered most was a question of papal authority, though certainly for different reasons. With Henrys desire to distance himself from Rome, Reformers in England were now given a forum to preach anti-papist sentiment. However, where English reformers saw issues of clerical abuse and material corruption as symptomatic of hierarchical problems, Henry viewed distance from the Pope as an independent question. This is seen by how reform actually looked as undertook by Henry. Reform was enacted through various laws. None of them, however, truly addressed the theological underpinnings of the clerical reformers. The Church of Englands definitive break with the Roman Catholic Church came with the Act of Restraint of Appeals, passed in 1533, followed by the Act of Supremacy the following year. The Act of Restraint of Appeals was the first stage in limiting the authority of Rome in England. According to the Act, England, as its own empire, would not be ruled by Rome. Consequently, the highest level of appeal in England was to the king. The Act of Supremacy furthered this legal reasoning and declared Henry the sole spiritual leader of the Church of England. Importantly, both of these acts were developed through a political process and passed in Parliament, giving them a distinctly political varnish. Additionally, the acts themselves are worded in strongly political language, stressing the sovereignty of English land, more than English souls. Most importantly, however, for reformers, was that Henrican reform did not actually accomplish their established goals. From Wycliffe until Henrys time, the complaint was not simply against Rome, but against all centralized leadership.

Henrys newly constructed role as the only supreme head in earth of the Church of England simply replaces one highly central authority with another.4 Indeed, the wording specifically implies Henry as the earthly vessel of a higher religious authority. This does little to address the core issue of religious autonomy. Nor was Henry particularly interested in addressing the question of over-materialization in the Church, choosing instead to maintain much of the Catholic aesthetic that reformers were attacking. Indeed, when, to address the turbulence sparked by the Reformation, Henry passed the Act of Six Articles in 1539, designed to codify the beliefs of the Church of England, of which he was now the supreme leader. Even the most cursory look at the Six Articles reveals that Henrys theology was largely anathematic to even the mildest reformers: First, that in the most blessed sacrament of the altar, by the strength and efficacy of Christ's mighty word (it being spoken by the priest), is present really, under the form of bread and wine, the natural body and blood of our Savior Jesus Christ, conceived by the Virgin Mary; and after the consecration there remaineth no substance of bread and wine, nor any other substance, but the substance of Christ-God and man.5 The Articles continue, and they consistently do little to address Protestant concerns and sensibilities. Henry encourages a celibate clergy, requires confession, and private mass.

4. "The Act of Supremacy." TudorHistory.org. http://tudorhistory.org/primary/supremacy.html (accessed May 6, 2013). 5. Ibid 50

Many scholars have argued that Henrys reformed appeared so conservative in scope because he always had different people in his ear. However, as G. W. Bernard has argued compellingly, Henry VII was the principal architect of religious policy, that Henry was not the plaything of factions, and that religious policy did not fluctuate between reform and reaction depending who was most able to manipulate him at any time.6 According to Bernard, Henry was consciously steering the English Reformation into middling waters that would be most acceptable to partisans of either religious affiliation.7 This concept of a manipulative Reformation reinforces the concept that, in England, the Reformation existed on an almost entirely political plane. It also removes a large degree of agency, not only from the masses, but even from the religious leaders of the Reformation. The co-optive politicization of the English reformation continued beyond the first generation of reformers. Elizabeths Religious Settlements, much like Henrys reforms, serve her politically more than they serve reformers spiritually. Elizabeth introduced an edited version Edwards Book of Common Prayer, which allowed for Catholic transubstantiation. She did so, as Henry had done, to accommodate moderate Catholic elements that would be more docile with this element of compromise. This, taking place in the context of the Acts of Uniformity and Supremacy represent Elizabeths attempts to create civil order, much as Henry had done. For Protestant reformers, this perfunctory reform not only grossly neglects one of the focal points of protest in terms of communion; it also leaves nothing
6. G. W. Bernard, "The Making of Religious Policy, 1533-1546: Henry VIII and the Search For a Middle Way," The Historical Journal. 4:2 (1998): 321-349. 321 7. Ibid

solved hierarchically. Elizabeths ability to declare and enforce a universal Book of Common Prayer, and, more potently, her own Act of Supremacy in 1559, which gave her the title Supreme Governor of the Church, enforce a strong hierarchy that Reformers so wished to abolish.8 Certainly Elizabeth did make accommodations to Protestants. Unlike Henry who preferred the title, Supreme Head, she named herself governor, indicating a lower level of authority and greater accountability to the public. Furthermore, only clergy and political figures were required to swear allegiance to her; the masses were not required to make such an oath. This allowed for greater religious autonomy, as it no longer required people to sacrifice political loyalty for religious loyalty and vice versa.9 Additionally, Elizabeth passed a new statement of Doctrine, the Thirty-Nine Articles of Faith, which were essentially a protestant departure from Henrys Act of Six Articles. This rather strong departure from Henrys middle way was not solely a result of Elizabeths own religious persuasions. She did, in fact, push for the same moderate reform as Henry. However, after the persecutions of Mary, the clergy Elizabeth found to staff the episcopate were battle hardened and radicalized.10 Still, Elizabeths determination to avoid any hardline Protestantism was exhibited when she suspended Edmund Grindal, the Archbishop of Canterbury, from his post. The politicization and manipulation of the English Reformation by the monarchy meant that there was never a strong Protestant groundswell. This
8. R. O. Bucholz and Newton Key. Early modern England, 1485-1714: a narrative history. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. 2004. 122 9. Ibid 10. J. A. Sharpe, Early modern England: a social history 1550-1760. London: E. Arnold, 1987. 239

notable absence of public contribution makes it difficult to discern the public experience of the Reformation. Scholars have certainly attempted to discern public religious experience at the time. Notably, Patrick Collinson, in his essay William Shakespeares Religious Inheritance, attempts to examine the religious climate for the English masses during the reign of Elizabeth. England as a nation, he notes, could not have shifted religious allegiances in as short a span as the time between Henrys reign and Elizabeths. He argues that while many look at Mary as the point of crucial change, it is important to look at individual towns, and he notes that some towns resisted the reformation for as many as a hundred years, while other embraced it almost immediately. Collinson argues that while religious plurality was certainly not a public value, the fact could not be avoided that there was more than one religion in the realm that Elizabeth inherited in 1558.11 As Collinson points out, the Act of Supremacy in 1559 was a purely prescriptive document that does not accurately describe the state of English religious belief. Collinson, like Bernard, argues that Elizabeth was searching for middle ground that would appeal to the greatest range of subjects.12 Collinsons argument speaks to much more than just a state of religious plurality, however. Elizabeths tight grip over the higher echelons of the clergy existed at the same time as her relative apathy towards the large pockets of Catholic practitioners in many villages in the English countryside. As Collinson notes, it is unlikely that Elizabeth ever had any plans to address this issue.13 This furthers the
11. Patrick Collinson. Elizabethan essays. London: Hambledon Press, 1994. 229 12. Ibid 13. Ibid

idea that the Reformation existed solely in the higher societal strata. That entire communities could exist for well over the hundred years of Reformation conflict without undertaking any real changes indicates that, for many commoners, the Reformation was something happening in a sphere that had little to do with them. The political conflict would continue until the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution, the two halves of the closing act of the Reformation in England. Parliament initiated the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution, which at their core, exhibit clearly that Henrys melding of political and religious authority was still a fully functioning model. The core conflict of the Civil War and the Revolution were Charles I and James IIs apparent Catholic sympathies and bids for absolutism. Although the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution were ostensibly largely products of religious conflict, the highly politicized nature of the Reformation meant that justification for the Revolution would occur, like much of the rest of the Reformation, would occur as politics expressed in religious terms. The Protestant Resolution of Faith being an Answer to Three Questions, written by William Sherlock, was one such justification. Sherlock, in his preface to the reader, states that his treatise is designed for popular appeal. His central issue is the question of succession, asking whether the English church can show a line of succession and whether or not a church needs to establish such a line to be legitimate. His conclusion that succession is meaningless as far as creating a legitimate religious hierarchy is concerned.14 It is certainly

14. Sherlock, William . The Protestant Resolution of Faith. London: T. Baffet, 1686.

curious, though, that Sherlock would write such a treatise over one hundred years after the Act of Supremacy was passed by Henry VIII. It is important to examine the context of Sherlocks writing. Sherlock was writing over a hundred years after the Church of England broke with the Catholic Church. However, he was writing in between the Civil War and the brewing Glorious Revolution. The context of the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution is crucial to interpreting the purpose of this document. The question of succession is just as much a question of political succession as it is religious. The document provides justification for the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution, which was near on the horizon. In essence, Sherlock doesnt really need to address commoners on theological grounds. Indeed, as has been pointed out, little attention was actually paid to them religiously. What is happening here is actually a political justification. Sherlock is legitimizing a new line of succession by suggestion that lineage is unimportant. The English Reformation, which began with Henrys break from Rome and effectively ended with the Glorious Revolution, was a movement that existed as an active movement almost exclusively in the political sphere. Certainly England was home to many reformers, but Reformation doctrine was decided by Henry, Elizabeth, and their advisors. Such politicization existed from the first acts of the Reformation till the last. As a result, many of the theological reforms actually advocated by reformers were still long in coming. The general population largely existed largely as it always had done, and for them, as much as anyone else, much of

10

the conflict was expressed in political terms. For those removed from the political sphere, this meant that the Reformation hardly happened at all.

11