Cranmer Studies

Rev. Dr. Gerald Bray, “Documents of the English Reformation:” Prof. Bray continues Tyndale’s glorious preface to his NT, commenting on the extreme importance of reading and hearing aright, in God’s fear and meekness, intending to live after God’s Word. He speaks of those of miss it, e.g. Pharoah, Abiram, Balaam and others after the fashion of Romans 1.18ff., not wanting God’s Word or knowledge. An exquisite section by a man long-exercised in God’s Word. He notes that the Word is sufficient for the unlearned laymen as the Word above all other words. Paging Barth? Did you get that, old boy? (21) Rev. Dr. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, “Theology of English Reformers:” Latimer’s “Sermon of the Plough” with copious quotes are given. Latimer believed the Word of God was for correcting oneself, errant preachers, bishops or erring Kings. If needed, one, even a layman, was to tell the King to “avoid God’s wrath” (126). Tyndale and Latimer were all-about God’s sovereign Word. Margot Johnson’s “Thomas Cranmer: 500th Commemoration of his Birth:" Gates discusses the 1548 and 1549 with the subtextual predicates of Cranmer’s theology and also the 1547 Homily of Salvation (107). Hearty faith and manifold penitence are on view. The comfortable words are strong in building assurance in the one, sufficient and perfect oblation of Christ. Diarmaid McCulloch’s “Thomas Cranmer:” Prof. MacCulloch offers a picture of Cranmer opposing the debate in Parliament over the Six Articles, 19 May 1539 ad. loc., wherein Henry presided. The main issue was the Bone-Muncher view of the Eucharist, but other issues, like clerical marriage were put forward. Henry won. Cranmer lost. Bye, bye Margarete, back to Germany ya’ go (244). Arthur Innes: “Cranmer and the Reformation in England:” 1536-1539. Cromwell is Henry’s Vicar-General. The monastic system is reviewed, good and bad. There was corruption in the monasteries (71). We would add that it’s hard to tell and decisions have not been made here. We’ll be reviewing evidence put before Parliament after visitations had been made. Leslie Williams’ “Emblem of Faith Untouched: A Short Life of Thomas Cranmer:” 30 Mar 1533: We get a quick wrap on Cranmer’s installation at St. Stephen’s “College” (as Williams called it). He took the oaths but with its caveats. The hostile commentators call it “perjury” while fans call it “moral scrupulousness” (37). We’re with the latter. Cranmer was not naïve, artless or dull, but was insightful, careful and played Theo-Realpolitik. Ayris, Paul, and David Selwyn, eds." Thomas Cranmer: Churchman and Scholar:" Spinks gives the standard review of the 1549 and 1552 BCPs about the Bone-Munchy-Cruncher issue. Of note, Spinks employs words like “radical” for the 1552 view. Cranmer, we are told, “retaliated” against Gardiner (179) with this “drastic revision” in the 1552 BCP. Yawn! Nice try, Brian. Ridley, Jaspar. “Thomas Cranmer:” 19 Jun 1540: We hear again of Cranmer’s sitting through the 1st-3rd readings of the trial of Crumwell, 19 Jun 1540, in which Crumwell could not defend himself. Cranmer kept silence. Crumwell was convicted unanimously of treason and “heresy.” The “heresy” was in favoring the Rev. Dr. Robert Barnes and other evangelical reformers and in favoring “heretical literature.” This was everything Cranmer was doing. Everyone knew where he stood. Crum goes down. Cranmer goes mum. Crum loses his head and Cranmer, by his silence, voted for the death of his close associate, Crum (204). Next on the bullet-train is Cram’s necessary work for Henry, another “nullity game” on the Cleves’ fiasco (once again). Here are no fan of Cranmer’s. Fanboys and fawners needs to assess him lucidly and fairly.