or reasonable to impute his conduct altogether to the latter motive. With all his faults, he was "every inch a king." He appreciated his position as the sovereign head of a nation. He understood his prerogative. He discerned the connection between the stability of his throne, and the independence and prosperity of his country. He was a true Englishman. He had intelligence and patriotism enough to feel the infinite importance to the peace, and power, and even existence of his kingdom, of transmitting his crown through a certain and unquestionable succession. considerations all operated, aided more or less-how much can be determined only by the Searcher of heartsby personal motives, in leading him to pursue earnestly his purpose of a divorce.

These

But it is our design to show that his people the Lords, and Commons, and body of the nation-sympathized in his earnestness, and were equally convinced of the importance of accomplishing the object; and that, so far as the separation of the Church of England from the Church of Rome was hastened to its consummation by the proceedings connected with the divorce, it was a great public and national movement, involving the highest interests of the kingdom.

As the validity of the King's marriage with his brother's widow rested entirely upon the dispensation which had been procured from the Pope, and of which the authority had been brought into very general dispute, all that was necessary to annul the marriage was, to procure from the Pope another decree reversing and repealing the dispensation. If that were done, the divorce followed of course, and no impediment remained, on any ground, to another marriage, which was, in the judgment of the nation, the only refuge of England from the calamities that threatened her. The King was backed by the earnest wishes and clear interests of his people, in the application, to this end, which he made to the Pope. The two leading potentates of the continent at that time were the King of France and the Emperor of Germany, the former the nearest and most formidable rival, and from the earliest period of European history up to the present century considered the natural antagonist, of England, the latter closely allied by the strongest family ties to Queen Catharine. The influVOL. XXXVII. -4TH S. VOL. II. NO. I.

2

ence of these two sovereigns over the Pope was very great, and it was exercised most artfully, perseveringly, and effectually, to prevent the success of Henry's application. Their policy, in pursuing this course, was as obvious as it was provoking, to the king and people of England; it was, to cripple and destroy their power by involving them in a controversy with the head of the then universal Church, and by keeping them subject to the disastrous influences, and inextricable perplexities, of a perpetually

uncertain succession.

A long series of intrigues, and equivocations, and broken promises, and irritating disappointments, protracted through four tedious years, marked the course of a fruitless negotiation with the Pope, and gradually alienated the temper of the king and of the nation, until, at length, they indignantly abandoned the attempt to obtain a decree from the Pope. The last act of the proceeding was as follows. The Pope, who had commissioned his legates to try the cause in England, after they had exhausted all conceivable contrivances of delay and interruption there, ordered the case to be adjourned to Rome, and summoned Henry and his queen to appear there in person. This was an indignity which neither the king nor his people could brook. He instantly declared his determination to disregard the order of the Pope, announcing that he would not suffer a thing so much to the prejudice of his crown, as a summons to appear before a foreign court, and that he wished his subjects to know that he recognized no authority, in the Pope or in any power on earth, to cite him out of his own kingdom.

Then commenced the proceedings, suggested by Cranmer, to meet the exigency, and which were designed as a substitute for the action of the Pope, namely, to procure the elaborate and solemn decisions of the universities and schools of divinity, and of the most learned men, throughout Europe, on the question of the legality and validity of the King's marriage.

While this was in progress, the Parliament, acting in concurrence with the King, entered with renewed zeal upon the work of rectifying the abuses and curtailing the power of the Church, and prosecuted it with great deliberation, resolution, and perseverance. Several laws were passed to this effect. Apprehending that the Pope would issue bulls

condemnatory of his proceedings, and in that form endeavor to array against him those of his subjects most under the influence of the Church, the King was determined not to allow such documents to be circulated, or received within his dominions, and issued a proclamation forbidding any of his subjects to have in their possession, or convey to any other person, any document whatever from Rome, under the penalty of "incurring his indignation, imprisonment, and other punishments upon their persons.'

On the 16th of January, 1531, Parliament met, and the opinions of twelve universities, together with about an hundred books written by the eminent scholars of Europe, in favor of the divorce, were laid before them. The subject was presented in the same manner to the Convocation, or assembly of the clergy, who also expressed a similar opinion. At length, after all these preliminary proceedings, protracted through so many years, the King cut the Gordian knot, passed the Rubicon, brought the controversy to a decisive close, by marrying Anne Boleyn, in the latter part of 1533. In the succeeding February, Parliament met and passed a law, which marks the true era of the English Reformation. The preamble asserts, "that the crown of England is imperial, and that the nation is a complete body within itself, with a full power to give justice in all cases, spiritual as well as temporal." It goes on to cite precedents, from the reigns of Edward I., Edward III., Richard II., and Henry IV., of laws asserting "the liberties of the realms, both spiritual and temporal, from the annoyance of the See of Rome, and other foreign potentates"; ordains that all causes shall be tried, and finally determined "within the kingdom," "notwithstanding any appeals to Rome, or inhibitions or bulls from Rome"; and provides that if any spiritual persons should refuse to execute the law of the land, for fear of "censures from Rome," "they were to suffer a year's imprisonment, and fine and ransom at the king's will." Heavy penalties were also imposed upon all who should presume to execute, or procure, any process or censures from Rome." And it defined the tribunals within the realm of England, before which, in the first instance, and in all appeals, causes of every kind were to be tried, where they "should be finally determined, never to be again called in question."

Upon this the Pope fulminated his bulls of excommunication against the King and Cranmer; and they announced, in reply, that they should appeal from his authority to that of the next General Council. Thus ended the power of Rome over the Church of England.

The historical narrative we have now presented, shows conclusively that the British Reformation was a political event, as much as, nay, rather than, a religious one. Its object was not so much to revolutionize a creed, or amend a doctrine, as it was to assert, recover, and secure, the most precious and invaluable rights of national sovereignty and independence. And viewing the subject in this light, all we have further to suggest is this one consideration, which we particularly commend to the reflection of those Protestants in England and America, if there be any such, who may be disposed to narrow the breach between us and Popery, and to carry us back into greater sympathy with Rome, and who allow themselves to countenance the idea that the Reformation was not so great a blessing as it has been claimed to be. The Reformation was the recovery of the sovereignty, the liberties and the glory of our father-land, -of the land to which our ancestors belonged, and which was our country then- from a foreign influence; it was an expression of the patriotism of the race from which we have sprung, and is identical with those sentiments which alone make us worthy of our Anglo-Saxon origin, and of the inheritance of political freedom and independence we are now enjoying. Just so far as, either in England or America, we undo the work, and retrace the steps, of the Reformation, we are undermining all that the patriot ought to strive to strengthen and confirm, and sacrificing the most sacred elements of national independence. He who gives his influence to bring the minds and consciences, the faith and obedience, of his countrymen under the sway of a power emanating from a foreign source and directed by a foreign potentate, spiritual or temporal, is as justly chargable with a violation of his patriotism and allegiance, as if in any other form he conspired to overthrow, or abridge the sovereignty, independence, and liberties of his country. It remains for us to consider, how the British Reformation ought to be regarded as a theological, ecclesiastical and religious event. It presents most interesting points of

view in these respects. Although, as we have labored to show, the main object of the Reformation was the recovery of the rightful sovereignty of the nation from the usurping encroachments of the Roman See, at the same time the work was facilitated, and the result hastened, by objections, which had become more or less prevalent in the public mind, to some of the principles and doctrines of Catholicism, so that when the tie was severed that had bound the Church in England to the authority of the Pope, and it became necessary to organize it as a separate and national Establishment, attention was naturally given to the adjustment of its doctrine, as well as of its forms and official order, and of the distribution and exercise of its powers. It is unnecessary to enter into a detailed narrative of the reforms that were made in matters of doctrine and institution. It answers all our present purpose, to call attention to the fact, that they were not attempted at once and summarily, but gradually, by successive decisions of clerical authorities, acting in general Convocation, or in special Commissions, or by Acts of Parliament passed at intervals of time. The point we wish to present is, that, neither at the Reformation nor at any time before, during the undivided ascendancy of the Catholic dynasty, had the principle been maintained, that the Church had reached the ne plus ultra of actual truth, in its creed or its forms. Those sects who discountenance all amendment and progress in doctrinal belief, and are resolutely bent upon suppressing inquiry, and keeping the faith of Christians fastened down and back to existing and previously established formularies, can find no shelter in the British Reformation, or even in the structure of Popery itself. Under the Papal system, as has been shown, provision was made for the admission of new light, in the power lodged in the head of the Church, and especially, in the institution of General Councils, which were for the purpose of reforming "errors" as well as "heresies" and "abuses." This power was transferred by the British Reformation to the King, and was exercised by him, through the advising and guiding agency of Convocations and Parliaments-the assembled and deliberative wisdom of the temporal and spiritual guardians and legislators of the nation. Great pains were taken, at successive periods, to revise and amend, and