Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T16:52:53.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Lutheran Influence on the Elizabethan Settlement, 1558–1563*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Hirofumi Horie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Historians have long debated which continental sources gave a major impetus to the early Elizabethan religious reform. While many have examined the alleged Reformed influence on the English church, that of the Lutherans has also been discussed by some. However, these have in the main failed to appreciate the full implications of this German influence which was linked closely with ongoing diplomatic developments on the continent. During the early years of Elizabeth's reign, political considerations more than religious actually dominated the minds of politicians like William Cecil in formulating the nation's ecclesiastical policy. In fact, some key decisions on religion were the direct result of contemporary diplomatic talks with Lutheran princes.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 519 - 537
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 E.g. Meyer, Carl S., Elizabeth I and the religious settlement of 1559 (St Louis, 1960)Google Scholar; Jones, Norman L., Faith by statute (London, 1982), pp. 56–8Google Scholar.

2 Calendar of State Papers Foreign, 1558–9, p. 2. Another important task was to maintain the good amity with the king of Spain, and Lord Cobham was despatched to that king. Ibid. p. 9.

3 BL MS Cott. Julius F. vi, fo. 167. Printed in part in CSP For. 1558–9, p. 19 and fully in Strype, John, Annals of the Reformation and establishment of religion (Oxford, 1824), I, pt. ii, 392–8Google Scholar.

4 Hartley, T. E. (ed.), Proceedings in the parliaments of Elizabeth I (Leicester, 1981), p. 37Google Scholar.

5 Ibid. p. 34.

6 Ibid. p. 84.

7 PRO SP 12, 3, fos. 28r–29r.

8 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 32.

9 Ibid. p. 226 (Mundt to Cecil, 26 April 1559).

10 Ernst, Viktor (ed.), Briefwechsel des Herzogs Christoph von Wirtemberg (4 vols., Stuttgart, 1899–1907), IV, 577Google Scholar.

ll CSP For. 1558–9, p. 112.

12 Hauptstaatsarchiv, Stuttgart [HSAS], A114, Bü 4. I thank Dr Joachim Fischer of this archiv for assisting me in locating some of the letters.

13 Ibid. fo. 3v (dated 30 January 1559).

14 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 112.

15 Ibid. pp. 115–16. To conclude a league with Elizabeth and the German Princes, Württemberg requested Elizabeth to send an ambassador cum pleno mandato. Ibid. pp. 225–6. Württemberg was well aware of the fact that Mundt's credentials were too general and lacked the authority to conclude the alliance.

16 ‘Vix tamen putet fieri passe – ut talis Confoederatio ineatur qualis solet fieri in rebus prophanis: Defensiva scilicet atque etiam offensiva…Quod attinet ad eorum Consilium qui Confessionem Augustanam et recipi a nobis et tibi testificari: Non cogitare se discedere ab illa Christianarum Ecclesiarum mutua consensione – adquam Augustana illa confessio proxime videtur accedere.’ HSAS A114, Bü 4, fos. 5v–6r. This is Cecil's reply to the letter dated 30 January which was addressed to Elizabeth.

17 CSP Span. 1558–67, pp. 61–2.

18 Augustus, duke of Saxony, rejoiced that Elizabeth preferred the doctrine of the Confession presented to Charles V at the diet of Augsburg in 1530, before all the others that had arisen within the last forty years. CSP For. 1559–60, p. 1.

19 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 562.

20 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 221.

21 Luders, A., Tomlins, T. E. et al. (eds.), The statutes of the realm (London, 1810–1828), IV, i, 358 (I Eliz. c. 2)Google Scholar.

22 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 562 (Cecil to Mundt, 22 March 1562).

23 CSP For. 1558–9, p. III (Vergerio to Killigrew, 1 February 1559).

24 Ibid. pp. 225–6 (Mundt to Cecil, 26 April 1559).

25 CSP For. 1559–60, p. 14.

26 HSAS A114, Bü 4, fos. 9v–10r. See also PRO SP. 70, 6, fos. 89–91.

27 HSAS A114, Bü 4, fos. 11–12.

28 CSP For. 1559–60, p. 231.

29 CSP For. 1558–9, P. 260.

30 Ibid. pp. 352–4.

31 Printed in Kouri, E. I. (ed.), Elizabethan England and Europe: Forty unprinted letters from Elizabeth I to protestant powers (London 1982), p. 23Google Scholar. Dr Kouri's dating of the letter is 3 July.

32 Ibid. ‘Et propterea, nullorum principum amicitiam et confoederationem vel sequimur libentius vel sanctius amplectemur quam eorum, qui Augustanae Confessioni sese iam addicti.’

33 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 273.

34 See, for example, Ernst, , ed., Briefwechsel, IV, 640 (Philip of Hesse to the duke of Württemberg, 18 04 1559)Google Scholar.

35 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 315 (14 June 1559).

36 Heppe, Heinrich, Geschichte des Deutschen Protestantismus in den Jahren 1555–1581 (4 vols., Marburg, 1852–1859), I, 333Google Scholar. See also Bretschneider, K. G. (ed.), Corpus Reformatorum, IX, 987–93Google Scholar.

37 PRO SP 12, 4, fos. 153v–154r.

38 Ibid. fo. 153v.

39 Ibid. fo. 154r.

40 See Hefele, Charles-Joseph, Histoire des conciles d' après les documents originaux (Paris, 1931), IX, ii, 549–66Google Scholar. As to the French position on a general council during the reign of Francis II, the duke of Württemberg was a little more suspicious. Writing to the Landgrave, he stated, ‘…soll der Babst uff die Continuation dess Tridentischen Conciliums hefftig tringen, so wie die Kay. Mit: bisher mit bewilligen wollten, Aber Franckreich und Hispanien sollten solches allbereit bewilligt haben.’ Neudecker, C. G. (ed.) Neue Beiträge zur Geschichte der Reformation (Leipzig, 1841), I, 234Google Scholar. For a similar view held by Philip of Hesse see ibid. II, 10 (The Landgrave to Bullinger, 27 April 1561).

41 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 5.

42 In his letter of 31 December 1560 to Cecil, Mundt demanded to be informed speedily whether he was to attend the assembly at Naumburg. CSP For. 1560–1, p. 479. About the same time, the government prepared a memorial for Mundt. It is this memorial which caused Mundt to be at Naumburg. We know this since Heppe prints a document called ‘Was durch Christophorum Montium ist zur Naumburg anpracht, wie das er Montius selbst transferieret und mir [—] abschreiben zu lassen zugestellet’, which roughly corresponds in content to the memorial. Heppe, , Geschichte, 1, Appendix no. 37Google Scholar. Mundt, having received his instruction, wasted no time to rewrite the memorial suitably for presentation at the Fürstentag. See also CSP For. 1561–2, p. 4, where it is reported by Mundt to Elizabeth on 4 March that the electors Palatine and of Saxony, the dukes of Württemberg and Deuxponts and the Landgrave were present when Mundt delivered his letters to them. The Lutheran answer to Mundt is printed in Heppe, , Geschichte, 1, Appendix no. 38Google Scholar.

43 CSP For. 1560–1, p. 432.

44 Ibid. p. 561 (Bedford to the German protestants, 22 February 1561 and instructions for Tremellius of the same date). Also see CSP For. 1561–2, p. 106 (Throckmorton to the Queen, 9 May 1561).

45 PRO SP 12, 19, fo. 36r (11 August 1561).

46 Ibid. fo. 38r (11 August 1561). There exists among the manuscripts in the Parker Library a letter of a safe-conduct granted by Charles IX, king of France, dated 25 July 1561. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge [CCCC] MS 119, 15–16.

47 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 333 (Somer to Throckmorton, 26 September 1561).

48 CSP Span. 1558–67, p. 190.

49 Ibid. p. 197 (Quadra to Dudley, 27 April 1561) and 201 (Quadra to the king of Spain, 5 May 1561). Although Cecil was reported to have entire control over the queen and affairs by May (ibid. p. 199), in March he was still not perfectly sure of Elizabeth's mind since we find him trying to engage Quadra in the discussion to find out whether the Spanish ambassador had not made some private arrangements with Robert Dudley or with the queen herself. Until the incident involving Dudley was over, Cecil probably did not have total control of the affairs to launch a renewed attempt for the alliance with the Lutherans.

50 PRO SP 12, 17, fo. 1r.

51 CSP Span. 1558–67, pp. 201–3.

52 With regard to th e developments of this alliance policy, see Kouri, E. I., England and the attempts to form a protestant alliance in the late 1560s: A case study in European diplomacy (Helsinki, 1981)Google Scholar.

53 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 561.

54 See Turchetti's, Mario similar observation in Concordia o Tolleranza? (Geneva, 1984), p. 234Google Scholar.

55 Dialogus de Vtraqve in Christo Natura, Quomodo Coeant in Unam Christi Personam Inseparabilem, ut Interim Non Amittant Suas Proprietates:… (Tigvri, 1561)Google Scholar.

56 CSP Span. 1558–67, pp. 61–2. Confessio Virtembergica is printed in le Plat, Jvdoci, ed., Monvmentorvm ad Historiam Concilii Tridentini Potissimvm Illustrandam Spectantivm Amplissima Collectio (Louvain, 1784), IV, 421–63Google Scholar. Reyscher, A. L. (ed.), Sammlung der Württembergischen Gesetze (Tübingen, 1834), pp. 114–67Google Scholar. Heppe, Heinrich (ed.), Die Bekenntnisschriften der Altprotestantischen Kirche Deutschlands (Cassel, 1855), pp. 487–554Google Scholar.

57 CSP For. 1558–9, p. 221.

58 CSP For. 1562, p. 488.

59 Hessels, J. H. (ed.), Epistulae et Tractatus cum Reformationis tum Ecclesiae Londino–Batavae, Ecclesiae Londino–Batavae Archivvm. Tomus secundus (Cambridge, 1897), pp. 178–81Google Scholar.

60 The result of the negotiations was the Confession of Göppingen. The text of the Confession is printed in Aubert, F., Meylan, H. and Dufour, A. (eds.), Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze (Geneva, 1960–), II, 243–8Google Scholar. Bullinger, who disapproved of the result of this Genevan mission, wrote the marginalia to the Confession. Printed in Baum, J. W., Theodor Beza nach handschriftlichen Quellen (2 vols., Leipzig, 1843) I, 406–9Google Scholar. For Beza's, argument, see also Correspondance, II, 131–5Google Scholar.

61 Hardwick, Charles, A history of the articles of religion (London, 1895), pp. 124–6Google Scholar. Schaff, Philip, A history of the creeds of Christendom (London, 1877), pp. 627–30Google Scholar. Haugaard, W. P., Elizabeth and the English reformation (Cambridge, 1968), p. 249Google Scholar.

62 CSP Span. 1558–67, pp. 190–1.

63 Gibson, Edmund, Synodus Anglicana (Oxford, 1854), p. 151Google Scholar. This initial revision is found in the Synodalia Volume (CCCC MS 121, 233–53). It is printed in Lamb, John, A historical account of the thirty-nine articles (Cambridge, 1829)Google Scholar. See also Hardwick, , Articles, pp. 267–323Google Scholar. For a detailed examination of this first stage of revisions, see Haugaard, , Elizabeth and the English reformation, pp. 248–52Google Scholar.

64 These second-stage revisions during the convocational discussions are indicated in red pen by Parker's hand in the same CCCC manuscript. Lamb and Hardwick also included these revisions in their works. See Gibson, , Synodus Anglicana, p. 152Google Scholar.

65 See the section De Coena Domini in CCCC MS 121, 233–53. Printed in Hardwick, , Articles, 303Google Scholar note. This section corresponds largely with a part of the Edwardian article of the Supper. See Ibid. p. 302.

66 CCCC MS 121, 139–62. See Strype, , Annals, I, i, 167–72Google Scholar. This is the articles of faith of the Reformed party presented to the queen in April 1559, to which Jewel referred in his letter to Robinson, Martyr. H. (ed.), The Zurich letters (Cambridge, 1842–1845), I, 21Google Scholar.

67 CCCC MS 121, 154–5.

68 Ibid. p. 162. See also Strype, , Annals, I, i, 172Google Scholar.

69 Hardwick, , Articles, p. 134Google Scholar. The section slashed by the convocation was so indicated by Parker's red-penned cancellation in the same Synodalia manuscript.

70 Hodges, G. F., Bishop Guest: Articles twenty-eight and twenty-nine (London, 1894), p. 22 (dated 22 December 1566)Google Scholar.

71 This letter is found in PRO SP 12, 78, fos. 235r–42v and printed in Hodges, , Bishop Guest, pp. 24–27Google Scholar.

72 PRO SP 12, 78, fo. 238r.

73 Lamb, John, A historical account of the thirty-nine articles, p. 34Google Scholar. Bruce, J. and Perowne, T. T. (eds.), Correspondence of Matthew Parker (Cambridge, 1853), p. 381Google Scholar.

74 CSP For. 1561–2, p. 590 (8 April 1562). The content of the agreement might be reconstructed from the aforementioned two documents entitled by Heinrich Heppe as: (1) ‘Was durch Christophorum Montium ist zur Naumburg anpracht, wie das er Montius selbst transferieret und mir [——] abschreiben zu lassen zugestellet’, and (2) ‘Antwort der Chur vund f. zur Naumburg dem Englischen gesandten Christ. Montio gegeben’. Printed in Heppe, , Geschichte, I, 132–7 (Appendices no. 37 and no. 38)Google Scholar. Heppe also recognized that both Elizabeth and the German protestant princes needed to impress their identical confessional position against the council of Trent. Ibid. p. 402.

75 Ibid. pp. 135–6.

76 PRO SP 70, 41, fo. 32r.

77 Ibid. fos. 32v–33r. A copy of this Palatine answer is HSAS A114, Bü 4, fos. 17–18. Printed in Kluckhohn, A. (ed.), Briefe Friedrich des Frommen (2 vols., Braunschweig, 1868), I, 335–7Google Scholar.

78 PRO SP 70, 41, fo. 33r.

79 Ibid.

80 ‘…tamen ut S.V., quae de hoc negocio mentis nostrae cogitationes existant planius cognoscere possit, earn celare nolumus nos hactenus gravissimis de causis a communibus scriptis foederibus etiam cum iis, qui et sanguine et patria et eadem religione iuncti nobis essent abstinuisse semperque iudicasse liberas minimeque coactas (potissimum in religionis causa) consociationes plus fidei et adiumenti habituras quam si stricta et literis potius quam animis consignata foederum ratio iniretur.’ HSAS A1 14, Bü 4, fo. 23v. This letter of 10 December is printed in Kluckhohn, , Briefe, I, 358–60Google Scholar.

81 PRO SP 70, 46 fo. 184v. The Landgrave, on the other hand, expressed his desire to enter into a ‘firme and perfecte leage.’ Ibid. But a few years later Frederick abruptly reversed his former policy and sought a pan-protestant alliance. See Clasen, Claus-Peter, The Palatinate in European history (Oxford, 1963), pp. 3–19Google Scholar.

82 PRO SP 70, 41, fo. 29 (Mundt to Cecil, 3 September 1562).

83 CSP For. 1562, p. 170.

84 PRO SP 70, 46, fo. 184v. The recusatio presented to the Emperor is printed in Heppe, , Geschichte, I, 149Google Scholar. (Beilagen Nr. 41. It is termed ‘An Kaiser Ferdinandum. Warumb man das Trientisch Concilium nit besuch, sondern alls verdechtig bitt abzuschaffenn’.)