Сн. 7. A.D. 1534. sired to his answer. Fisher follows his sion to the children of Queen Anne.* That was a matter on which parliament was competent to decide, and he had no right to make objections. If he April. might be allowed to take an oath to this portion of the statute in language of his own, he would do it; but as the words stood, he would 'peril his soul' by using them. The Lord Chancellor desired him to reconsider his answer. He retired to the He is degarden, and in his absence others were called in; retire and among them the Bishop of Rochester, who refused re-consider in the same terms. More was then recalled. He was asked if he persisted in his resolution; example, and when he replied that he did, he was requested also. to state his reasons. He said that he was afraid refuses. of increasing the king's displeasure, but if he could be assured that he might explain himself safely he was ready to do so. If his objection could then be answered to his satisfaction, he would swear; in the meantime, he repeated, very explicitly, that he judged no one-he spoke only for himself. and refuses More again tries to him, An opening seemed to be offered in these Cranmer expressions which was caught at by Cranmer's contrive an kind-hearted casuistry. If Sir Thomas More escape for could not condemn others for taking the oath, the archbishop said, Sir Thomas More could not be sure that it was sin to take it; while his duty to his king and to the parliament was open and unquestioned. More hesitated for an instant, but he speedily But in vain. * More held extreme republican opinions on the tenure of kings, holding that they might be deposed by act of parliament. CH. 7. recovered his firmness. A.D. 1534. More, with He had considered what he ought to do, he said; his conscience was clear about it, and he could say no more than he had said already. They continued to argue with him, but without effect; he had made up his mind; the victory, as he said, had been won. Cromwell was deeply affected. In his passionate regret, he exclaimed, that he had rather his only son had lost his head than that More should have refused the oath. No one knew better than Cromwell that intercession would be of no further use; that he could not himself advise the king to give way. The parliament, after grave consideration, had passed a law which they held necessary to secure the peace of the country; and two persons of high rank refused obedience to it, whose example would tell in every English household. Either, therefore, the act was not worth the parchment on which it was written, or the penalties of it must be enforced : no middle way, no compromise, no acquiescent reservations, could in such a case be admitted. The law must have its way. The recusants were committed for four days committed to the keeping of the Abbot of Westminster; and the council met to determine on the course the Abbot to be pursued. Their offence, by the act, was On the other hand, they to the keeping of of Westminster. Debate in the Council. misprision of treason. had both offered to acknowledge the Princess Elizabeth as the lawful heir to the throne; and the question was raised whether this offer should be accepted. It was equivalent to a demand that the form should be altered, not for them only, but for every man. If persons of their rank and noto- CH. 7. riety were permitted to swear with a qualification, A.D. 1534. the same privilege must be conceded to all. But April. there was so much anxiety to avoid extremities, and so warm a regard was personally felt for Sir Thomas More, that this objection was not allowed to be fatal. It was thought that possibly an exception might be made, yet kept a secret from the world; and the fact that they had sworn under any form might go far to silence objectors and reconcile the better class of the disaffected.* This view was particularly urged by Cranmer, Cranmer always gentle, hoping, and illogical.† For, in fact, they may secresy was impossible. If More's discretion could take the have been relied upon, Fisher's babbling tongue modifi would have trumpeted his victory to all the winds. Nor would the government consent to pass censure on its own conduct by evading the question whether the act was or was not just. If it was not just, it ought not to be maintained at all; if it was just, there must be no respect of persons. urges that oath in a form. govern The clauses to which the bishop and the ex- The chancellor declined to bind themselves were those ment canwhich declared illegal the marriage of the king not yield. with Catherine, and the marriage legal between the king and Queen Anne. To refuse these was to declare Mary legitimate, to declare Elizabeth illegitimate, and would do more to strengthen Mary's claims than could be undone by a thouHowever large might be More's sand oaths. VOL. II. *MORE's Life of More, p. 237. † BURNET, vol. i. p. 255. ૨ A. D. 1534. CH. 7. estimate of the power of parliament, he could have given no clear answer-and far less could Fisher have given a clear answer-if they had been required to say the part which they would take, should the emperor invade the kingdom. under the pope's sanction. The emperor would come to execute a sentence which in their consciences they believed to be just; how could they retain their allegiance to Henry, when their convictions must be with the invading army? What ought to have been done let those say who disapprove of what was actually done. The high character of the prisoners, while it increased the desire, increased the difficulty of sparing them; and to have given way would have been a confession of a doubtful cause, which at such a time would not have been dangerous, but would have been fatal. Anne Boleyn is said to have urged the king to remain peremptory;* but the Cromwell following letter of Cromwell's explains the ultiexplains to mate resolution of the council in a very reasonable manner. It was written to Cranmer, in impossible, reply to his arguments for concession. Cranmer that con cession is 'My Lord, after mine humble commendation, it may please your Grace to be advertised that I have received your letter, and showed the same to the King's Highness; who, perceiving that your mind and opinion is, that it were good that the Bishop of Rochester and Master More should be sworn to the act of the king's succession, and not to the preamble of the same, thinketh that * MORE's Life of More, p. 237. A.D. 1534. if their oaths should be taken, it were an occasion CH. 7. to all men to refuse the whole, or at least the like. For, in case they be sworn to the suc- April. cession, and not to the preamble, it is to be thought that it might be taken not only as a confirmation of the Bishop of Rome's authority, but also as a reprobation of the king's second marriage. Wherefore, to the intent that no such things should be brought into the heads of the people, by the example of the said Bishop of Rochester and Master More, the King's Highness in no wise willeth but that they shall be sworn as well to the preamble as to the act. Wherefore his Grace specially trusteth that ye And begs will in no wise attempt or move him to the con- will not trary; for as his Grace supposeth, that manner further. of swearing, if it shall be suffered, may be an utter destruction to his whole cause, and also to the effect of the law made for the same.'* Thus, therefore, with much regret, the council decided-and, in fact, why should they have decided otherwise? They were satisfied that they were right in requiring the oath; and their duty to the English nation obliged them to persevere. They must go their way; and those who thought them wrong must go theirs; and the great God would judge between them. It was a hard thing to suffer for an opinion; but there are times when opinions are as dangerous as acts; and liberty of conscience was a plea which could be urged with a bad grace for men who, while in power, had fed * Cromwell to the Archbishop of Canterbury: Rolls House MS. that he urge it |