sacrifice of the mass is the self same substaunce of Christ, but also the self same oblation or offering of our Savior Christ's very flesh and bloud, which Himself once offered to His Father on the cross to appease His wrath and that the priests do continually and daily in the mass offer not only the self same body of Christ, but also to the same effect, that Christ did offer Himself to His Father at His Maundy. Of the which words and doctrine, if they be not very warily and circumspectly read, and more favorably taken, then the words as they ly, may wel bear, it might be gathered, that priests herein be equal with Christ. Priests of the order of Melchizedec, appeasing the wrath and indig nation of the Father of heaven, crucifying, or offering Christ to the same effect, that Christ in His own person did upon the cross, is a blasphemy intolerable to be heard of Christen ears. For Christ, as St. Paul saith, was but once offered, once gave up Himself for the redemption of our sins on Good-Friday upon the cross; nor never before, nor after was offered for us, but in a sacrament, and as a commemoration of the same. And so of the Maundy or Supper of the Lord, Christ himself saith, "Hæc quotiescunque feceritis, in meam commemorationem facietis." Once He dyed for our sins, and once again He rose for our justification. He dyeth no more. And his sacrifice was so good, so ful, so pleasaunt, so precious to God, that ther neded no more oblations to appease God, not only for the sins past, but also for al the sins to the day of doom. There nede no more sacrifices, no more offerers, but as having a respect and a remembrance of that most holy, most perfect, and most entier Lamb, then and for ever offered up for us.

But these things aforesaid, I cannot deny, but they were spoken of me, and written. And as I do not now like them, so, at the example of St. Austin and other good doctors, I am not ashamed to retract them, and cal them again and condemn them. For when I followed mine own invention, not directed by Scripture, I began, as the nature of man is, to wander, and at the last went clean contrary to God's word. Wherfore I heartily exhort every man, as touching matters of faith, to found the same upon God's certain, true, and infallible word; lest by doing the contrary, they fal into superstition, idolatry, and other manifold errors, as myself, and many other have done.

Wherfore these my two books, the one "of the sacrifice of the mass," and the other, "of the traditions unwritten," in those poynts before rehersed, and al other, wherin they be not ful consonant to Scripture, I forsake and renounce as false, erroneous, and against the true word of God; requiring the good Christian reader, whosoever shal read them, to give no further credence to them, then I would myself: that is, not to take, as undoubted truth, all that is therin written, but as written of a man, that some time falleth; to be so far true as they be consonant to Scripture: wher they be not against Scripture, to be human persuasion, which may either be so, or not so, as the greater reason shal lead; where they be not consonant to Scripture, to be erroneous and false; and that I much lament and am sorry, that I wrote them in those poynts. And I desire every man, that hath any of the said books to beware of them, and to give no credence to them in al such

things in them written, as be not consonant to the Scripture, as they wil avoyd occasion of error, and tender the truth of Gods word and His glory. To whom be laud, praise, and honor. Amen.

No. XL.

Archbishop Cranmers Answers to the fifteen Articles of the Rebells Devon.* Anno 1549.+

WHEN I first read your requests, O ignorant men of Devonshire and Cornwal, straitwayes came to my mind a request, which James and John made unto Christ: to whom Christ answered, "You ask you wot not what." Even so thought I of you assoon as ever I heard your articles, that you were deceived by some crafty Papists, which devised those articles for you, to make you ask you wist not what.

As for the devisors of your articles, if they understand them, I may not cal them ignorant persons, but, as they be indeed, most rank Papists, and wilful traitors and adversaries, both to God and our soveraign lord the king, and to the whole realm. But I cannot be persuaded so to think of you, that in your hearts willingly you be Papists and traitors: but that those that be such have craftily seduced you, being simple and unlearned people, to ask you wot not what.

Wherfore, my duty unto God, and the pity that I have of your ignorance, move me now at this time to open plainly and particularly your own articles unto you, that you may understand them, and no longer be deceived.

In your first article you require, that al the general councels and holy decrees of our forefathers, may be observed and kept, and whosoever shal againsay them to be holden as hereticks.

This you al ask, but what you ask I dare [boldly] say very few, or none of you understand. For how many of you, I pray you, do know certainly which be called the general councels, and holy decrees of the fathers, and what is in them contained. The holy decrees as they cal them, be nothing else but the laws and ordinances of the bishop of Rome. Wherof the most part be made for his own advancement, glory and lucre; and to make him and his clergy governors of the whole world; and to be exempted from al princes lawes, and to do what they list. And would you ask, if you knew what you asked, that we should put away the lawes of our own realm, and be governed by the bp. of Romes lawes? If you mean this, then be you traitors to the king, and enemies to your own realm. And if you mean it not, consider what persons they be, and how they have deceived you, that make you ask you wot not what.

And as for the general councels, you say you wil have them al kept but you be not so destitute of al reason, that you would have spoken such words, if you had known what you had said. For a great number of the councels repugn one against another. How *MSS. C.C.C.C. Miscellan. D. [No. cii, 337].

[The text of this document is corrected from the Parker Society's edition of the Works of Archbishop Cranmer, vol. ii. pp. 163–187.]

should they then be al kept, when one is contrary to another, and the keeping of one is the breaking of another. And among your own articles you say, you will have divers things observed, which be not only contrary to the general councels, but also contrary to the laws of this realm, and also to God's law, as it shal be plainly declared, when we come to the articles.

And al reason is contrary that you should have asked such things, if you had known what you had asked. I have this opinion of the greater number of you, that you would fain walk in the right way, if you could find it. And forasmuch as I perceive, that wicked and false guides, under pretence to bring you to the high way, have brought you clean out of it, my good wil shal be, seeing you so far wandring out of the way, and so blindfolded with il persuasions, that you cannot see where you go, to open your eyes that you may see, and to set you again into the right way. And when your eyes be so opened, that you may se, and the right way shewed unto you, wherin you should walk; then if you wil stil wink, and not see, and run headlong in error, and not come to the right way, [then] you may no longer be called simple and ignorant people, but perverse, froward and wicked Papists and traitors, enemies to God and your own realm.

But now I wil come to your articles, particularly opening every one of them by himself, that you may se the bowels therof, and what is contained in the same. That when you shal understand the whole, you may judge whether you knew before what you asked, or you were deceived by subtil and wily papistical traitors.

Your first Article is this,

"WEE wil have al the general councels, and holy decrees of our forefathers observed, kept and performed: and whosoever shal againsay them, we hold them as hereticks."

First, to begin with the manner of your phrase. Is this the fashion of subjects to speak unto their prince; We wil have? Was this maner of speech at any time used of the subjects to their prince, since the beginning of the world? Have not al true subjects ever used to their Soveraign lord [and king] this form of speaking, Most humbly beseecheth your faithful and obedient subjects. Altho the Papists have abused your ignorance in propounding such articles, which you understand not, yet you should not have suffered your selves so much to be led by the nose, and bridled by them, that you should clearly forget your duty of allegiance unto your soveraign lord, saying unto him, This we wil have; and that saying with armour upon your backs and swords in your hands. Would any of you, that be householders, be contented, that your servants should come unto you with harness unto their backs, and swords in their hands, and say unto you, This we wil have? If then you would abhor and detest this in your servants towards your selves, how can you allow your fact? th what conscience can you, being but subjects, do to your king that thing, which you would condemne in your servants towards your selves? But answer me this, Be you subjects or no? If you be subjects, then I

admonish you, as S. Paul taught Titus, saying, "Warn them to be subject to princes, and rulers, obeying them at a word." But tel me again, Pertaineth this to subjection and obedience to say, This we wil have S. Peter saith, "Be subject unto kings, as chief heads, and to other rulers sent by them. For so is the wil of God." Gods wil is, that you should be ruled by your princes. But whether is this to be ruled by your king, or to rule your king, to say, Thus we wil have the realm governed? Your servants be by the Scripture commanded, as they fear God, to be obedient to their masters, whether their masters be good or evil. And can you think it meet or lawful for you to disobey your undoubted king; being a prince most innocent, most godly, and most careful for your surety and wealth? If any thing can declare disobedience, what can declare it more than subjects to come with force of armes to their natural king and prince, and say, This we wil have?

But now leaving your rude and unseemly maner of speech to your most soveraign lord, I wil come to the point, and joyn with you in the effect of your first article. You say, you wil have al the holy decrees observed and kept. But do you know what they bee? The holy decrees, as I told you before, be called the bishop of Rome's ordinances and lawes. Which how holy and godly soever they be called, they be indeed so wicked, so ungodly, so ful of tyranny and so partial, that since the beginning of the world, were never devised or invented the like. I shall reherse a certain of them, [whereby you may judge of the rest, to the intent] that your selves may see, how holy they be, and may say your minds, whether you would have them kept or no. And at the hearing of them, if you shal not think them meet to be kept here in this realm, then you may see how they deceived you, that moved you to ask this article. And if you like them and would have them kept, after you know what they be, then I say assuredly, that you be not only wicked Papists, but also heretics, and most hainous traitors to the king and this his realm. And yet how an absolute Papist varieth from an heretick or traitor, I know not: but that a Papist is also both a heretic and a traitor withal.

One decree saith, "That whosoever doth not acknowledg himself to be under the obedience of the bishop of Rome is an heretic." Now answer me to this question, Whether be you under the obedience of the bishop of Rome, or not? If you say, that you be under his obedience, then be you traytors by the laws of this realm. And if you deny it, then be you heretics by this decree. And shift is there none to save you from treason, but to renounce this decree, that commandeth you to be under the bishop of Rome: and so to confes contrary to your own first article, that al decrees are not to be kept.

Yet a great many other decrees be as ill, and worse than this One saith, "That al princes lawes, which be against any decree of the bishop of Rome, be void, and of no strength." Another decree saith, "That al the decrees of the bishop of Rome ought for ever to be kept of al men, as Gods word." Another decree there is, "That whosoever receiveth not the law of the bishop of Rome, neither availeth him the

Catholick faith, nor the four evangelists. For his sins shal never be forgiven." Yet is there a worse, and more detestable decree, "That al kings and princes that suffer the bishop of Romes decrees to be broken in any point, are to be taken as infidels." Another is there also, "That the bishop of Rome is bound to no maner of decrees, but he may constrain al other persons, both spiritual and temporal, to receive al his decrees, and canons." Another is yet more devilish, then any before rehersed, "That altho the bishop of Rome neither regard his own salvation, nor no mans else, but put down with himself headlong innumerable people by heaps unto hell, yet may no mortal man presume to reprove him therefore." But what should I tarry, and make you weary in rehersing a number [of laws]? For a thousand other like canons and decrees there be, to the advancement of the bishop of Rome his usurped power and authority.

I cannot think of you, that you be so far from al godliness, from al wit and discretion, that you would have these decrees observed within this realm, which be so blasphemous to God, so injurious to al princes and realms, and so far from al equity and reason. But here you may easily perceive, what wily foxes you met withal, which persuaded you to arme your selves, to make sedition in your own country, to stand against your princes, and the laws of your realm, for such articles as you understood not, and to ask you wist not what. For I dare say for you, that the subtil Papists, when they moved you to stand in this article, that al the holy decrees should be observed, they shewed you nothing of these decrees, that they would have taken for holy decrees. For if they had, they knew right wel, that you would never have consented unto this article; but would have taken them for traitors, that first moved you thereto.

For now shal I shew you, what miserable case you should bring your selves unto, if the kings majesty would assent unto this [your] first article, that al the decrees should be kept and observed. For among other partial decrees made in favor of the clergy, this is one, "That none of the clergy shal be called, or sued before any temporal judge, for any maner of cause, either for debt, suit of lands, fellony, murther, or for any other cause or crime: nor shal have any other judge, but his bishop only." Another is, "That a spiritual man may sue a temporal man before a spiritual or temporal judge at his plesure; but a temporal man cannot sue a spiritual, but only before his ordinary." I cannot deny, but these be good and beneficial laws for the liberty of the clergy. But for your own parts, I suppose you do not think it an indifferent law, that a priest shal sue you where he list with the licence of his ordinary; and you shal sue him for no maner of cause, but only before his own ordinary. Or if a priest had slain one of your sons or brether, that you should have no remedy against him, but only before the bishops. What meant [then] those Papistical priests, that stirred you to ask, and wil, such decrees and lawes to be observed in this realm, but covertly and craftily to bring you under their subjection: and that you your selves ignorantly asking you wist not what, should put your own heads under their girdles?

For surely if you had known these decrees, when you consented to