The Two Books of Homilies Appointed to be Read in Churches

The Editor's Preface

1. OF THE FIRST BOOK OF HOMILIES.

XhE First Book of Homilies was the first work pertaining either to the pablic worship or to the teaching of the Church of England which was put forth in the reign of Edward the Sixth ; and Cranmer seems to have set himself to prepare it as soon as more urgent matters, consequent on the demise of the crown, wmld allow. Heniy the Eighth died on the aSth of January n547^uid the first edition of the Homilies bears date on the htsfaaj of July in that year.

It was a work which the Archbishop had long had in view. For thre can be no doubt that he had sanctioned and encoa- raged the publication of the discourses called Postils which were collected and printed by Richard Tavemer in 1540; perhaps he had even been a contributor to the volume. And it must have been by his persuasion that " the bishops, in the Convocation holden A.D. 1542, agreed to make certain homilies for stay of such enors as were then by ignorant preachers sparkled among the peoplei." That Convocation sat at intervals from January 20 to April 3 in that year, but did not meet again for business till February 16, 1543, when some homilies, not made by the bishops, but composed by certain dignitaries of the Lower House, were produced by the Prolocutor". Of these nothing further is recorded; but, although the project "took none effect thenl," some of them may have been pre-

« See Dr. CarSwell's Pre&ce to Ta- " holden five yean past," it seems

vtntet'i PottUt, pages. clear that the date "1541" is not to

k Gardiner's Letter to the Lord Probe nnderstood according to the old

tector Somerset, dated Jane 10, 1547, style.

in Foxe's Act* cmd Monummtt, vi, 41, « ConcUut, Wilkins, m, 860-863. ed. 1843-9. Since Gardiner in his next * Gardiner's next Letter to the Pro- letter speaks of that Convocation as tector, withont date, in Foxe ibid.

Till

served, and turned to account by Cranraer iu 1547. Be that as it may, he now tried to carry out the design in the manner then agreed upon, and called upon Gardiner, and probably upon other btahopa, to furnish homilies accordingly"; and, although Gardiner refused to be bound by an agreement made fiye years before, the Archbishop seems to have found Bonner more compliant fj and was aided also by more willing coadjutors.

The book came forth with the following title : "Certain Sermons, or Homilies, appointed by the King's Majesty to be de- dared and read by all Parsons, Vicars, or Curates every Sund^ ^ in their churches where they have cure." It was printed by 1 the King's Printer, Richard Grafton, and began with a Preface, running in the King's name, in which all the clergy having cure of souls were commanded to read it through to their parishioners again and again until the King's pleasure should be further known. The same order was given in the King's Injunctions, which bore date on the same day ; and both the Injunctions and the Homilies were together delivered out to the bishops and archdeacons by the King's Commissioners in their visitation of the several dioceses during the summer and autumn of that year,

Cranmer appears to have speedily taken care to have the Homilies, at any rate the first five of them, translated into Latin, and so made known upon the Continent ; but the translation is not known to be now extant. At Strasburg in particular it was received with lively interest by the friends of the Reformation; and Bucer, who seems to have then just completed his answer to two scurrilous publications of Gardiner, immediately prefixed to it a few pages of congratulation addressed to the Church of England, iii which, while he praised most highly the explanation given in the Homilies of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, he expressed the utmost joy at the

* Sea Gardiner's Lettera cited above.

^ S^e the remarksj in the third Mec- tiou of thia Pre&oe, on the Becoiid and (tixth Homilies of the First Book. Yet tlint tha baching of the whole volutiie vfae not to Bonner'g liking in clear from the ciroutnstftnce, rehiteii by Foie (jl rti and MonutiieaU, V, 741^, that, when thi;

King's Coinmiauioners in their visita- tiuD at St. Paul's deli^rered to him n copy of the InjnnctiouB and of the Homilies, lie only received them with a protestation, " nnd immediately he ndded, with an oath, that be never read the said Homilien and Injunc-

tiona.

recognition of the principle, that every one should search the Seriptnres for himself as the sole repository of the word of God, and his strong conviction that this would soon issue in the correction of whatsoever was wrong in the administration of CShrist's Sacraments or in any other part of the doctrine or discipline of the Church 8.

In this country the demand for the Homilies was necessarily great, and was supplied with great rapidity. The Catalogue of early editions subjoined to this Preface contains a description of six which came from Grafton's press, and of three more printed by "Whitchurch, before the end of 1547 ; whereof Grafton's second was manifestly in type before the first of \V^hit- church, though that bears the date of August 20''. But, as

* "Gratolatio Martini Buoeri ad Eloclenam Anglioanam da Beligionis Chiisti mtitutione : Et, Reepoiuio E- jusdem ad doas Stephani Epitoopi Vin- toniemu AngU conTiciatiicea Epistolaa, De ooelibatu sacerdotnm et coenobita- nnn." This tract, which, notwithstanding the division in the title, is all continuous, has at the end the signaiure of Bucer with the date of Norember 1547. It was printed in 1548, on the continent I believe, but with no name of place or printer. Of the 8t pages, of which (after excluding the title) the book consists, the "Gratulatio" occupies five. An English translation of it was immediately made by Thomas Ho- bye, then residing with Bucer as a pupil, and was printed in London (without date of year) by Richard Jugge : the translator's dedication to his brother " Syr Fhilyppe Hobye knight, M. of y* Kinges maiesties ordinannce," bears date " At Argentyne, Kalendis Febru- arii." Both are in the Bodleian Library. The "Gratulatio", apart &t>m the Answer to Gardiner, is given among Bucer's Scripta Anglicana, p. 171; and there is some account of it in Strype's Memorials, Edward VI, I, T, an. 1547.

Bucer does not say that he had become acquainted with the Homilies through a translation, but I think we may draw that inference from a state-

ment which he makes elsewhere, that it was by that help that he studied the Book of Common Prayer on his arrival in England in 1549. See the opening of his "Censura" in Scripl. Anglic. p. 456. In the " Censura ".itself which was written after he had passed a year and a half in this country, he cites, as might be expected, several of the Prayers in English.

The "Gratulatio" makes express mention of the first five Homilies, but contains no certain evidence that he had seen any of the rest.

l> It is very difficult to account for the great number of editions thus printed on the very first publication of such a book. When a special Form of Prayer is appointed in these days, the Queen's Printer takes oare to strike off at once many thousands of copies, so as fully to supply the wants of every place of worship within the pale of the Church. Yet it is not found in 1547 only : the same thing was done on the publication of the Second Book of Homilies, of which there are as many as eight editions dated in 1 563, though perhaps two of them were not printed till after that year ; and again in 1570, when five distinct editions of the Homily against Rebellion are known to have appeared before it was annexed to the Second Book in tlie following

was to be expected, they did not find a cordial reception eyery where. In some parishes the clergy were so illiterate that they could not, in others so Iiostile to the innovation that they would not, read thera in a way to be understood by the people ; and often, when pains were taken to utter them plainly, there were persons in the congregation who would neither listen to them themselves nor suffer them to be heard by any of their neighbours, " But how shall he read this book ? As the Homilies are read ?" asks Latimer in March 1 549. " Some," he adds, " call them Homelies ; and indeed so they may be well called, for they are homely handled. For, though the priest read them never so well, yet, if the parish like them not, there is such talking and babbling in the church that nothing can be heard; and, if the parish be good and the priest naught, he will so hack it and chop it, that it were as good for them to be without it for any word that shall be understood'." In 1550 Ridley found it necessary, in Ms visitation of his diocese of London, to order " that the Homilies be read orderly, without omission of any part thereof''." And ia January 1551 Bucer, then at Cambridge, not many weeks before his death, repeated in writing to the Archbishop the complaints concerning the clergy which Latimer in preaching had pressed upon the King'.

year. Can it Ijo that of sU the ele- mesta which go to ttie miuiu£M:tUTe of n printed book the compoMtor'a Uboar ■woB in thoiie dnyn the cheapest t

Strype knew hut two of these editions, both by Grafton, The latter of them, he iinys, " had thia advant&ge, that in some plac9 tbe Eoj'lish whib mendeclj Mid the style corrected ind much refined, otherwise the same." MattoruUi, ibid. No doubt one was either Grafton's first or second, which do not differ much ; the other, one of his four ifiter, which nearly resemble eiich other, but differ considerably from the former in bulk and ftppenrance, and vary from them a\m in mntiy ploacii in the text.

Whether it vera with the view of making the reading of the Homilies leas distasteful to those who thus disliked it, or of enabliiig such as wished to profit by them to bear away their knons more certainly and to digest them better, it was resolved, when the Prayer Book was put forth in March 1549, to divide them into Parts, of which one only should be read at a time. The rubric concerning them stood thus in the Com- monion Service : " After the Greed ended shall follow the Sermon or Homily, or some portion of one of the Homilies, as they shall be hereafter diTided.** And the first edition of them in Parts was printed by Grafton in August of that year. Whatever may have been the motive to it the division did not commend itself to the sseal of Bucer, who appears to have made in this instance too little allowance for the ignorance of the very rudiments of Christian truth in which the uneducated classes in the country had been kept so long, and for the indifference, not to say disrelish, to it thereby engendered. " Indignum est," he says in the Review of the Prayer Book which he wrote at Cranmer's request in January 1551, "Indignum est etiam professione Christiana Homilias tarn breves in partes secare. Quid enim iUi faciant aut patiantur pro Nomine Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi, qui non sustineant audire erectis animia et cupidis tam breves eas, denique tam salutares, Homilias totas "?" It must be admitted however, even by those who think the Homilies were too long to be profitable to the generality of congregations at that time, that the division was not very judiciously made, being determined rather by the quantity of matter in a Homily than by the successive stages of an argument or exhortation, often therefore interrupting the thread of the discourse, and in one place actually cleaving in two a quotation from St. Paul.

For more than five years and a half the use of the Homilies rested upon the sole authority of the King, as " supreme head in earth, next under Christ, of the Church of England "," except so far as it received the sanction of Convocation and of Parliament by implication in the rubric above quoted, when the Book of Common Prayer was approved and enacted. At length

■ Ibid. » Article 36, an. I55f; Curdwell*

» At the end of the First Part of Siptodalia, I, 31. tlie Homily againit Contention.

xii THE EDITOR'S PREFACE.

in March 155} they ohtained the express asseut of Con vocation in the thirty-fourth of the XLII Articles which were then agreed upon. Yet it is to be observed that that Article does not seein to be drawn as if such assent were considered necessary, but rather for the purpose of finding an effectual remedy for the carelessness or wilfulness of which Latimer and Jiucer complained. It ran thus : "The Homilies of late given and set out by the King's authority be godly and wholesome, containiug doctrine to be received of all men, and therefore are to he read to the people diligently, distinctly, and plainly P."

In the following July King Edward died, and the Chnrch passed through the fire of persecution in the reign of Mary. It was one of the least of the mischiefs of her hostility to the new learning, that careful search was made for all its doctrinal and devotional books in order to their destruction ; and yet perhaps in this, as in other far more important matters, we may trace some good resulting from the evil. For it is likely that the preservation of the few copies which still remain, some of them in a sound and even beautiful condition, is due to the very bitterness of this opposition, the owners cherishing them as relics of that first brief period of freedom to the Gospel, and often as memorials of its Coufessors and Martyrs. At any rate there is reason to believe that an uninterrupted use of them would have been fully as destructive; for, in the case of the Homilies at least, the editions of Elizabeth's time are, with ouly two or three exceptions, quite as rare as those which were printed in the reign of Edward.

But, notwithstanding the general changes which were made, the same method of instruction was still employed. Its value was so approved by six years'' experience, that in the Letter with Articles sent to all the bishops by Queen Mary in March 1 jj-Jit was ordered, " that by the bishop of the diocese an uniform doctrine be set forth by homilies or otherwise for the good instruction and teaching of all people 'i ;" and Bonner accord-

r Cardwell'a Sipioditlifi, I, 30 : but I (lutac piae sunt stquc Bslutareo, doctri-

OP THE FIRST BOOK. xui

ingly in 1555 pat forth a volame of Homilies, amounting ultimately to thirteen', to be used in his diocese of London, and others were published by different authors ■.

Elisabeth suooeeded to the throne upon the death of her sister on the 17th of November 1558 ; and in April 1559 for Uniformity passed both Houses of Parliament with the Book of Common Prayer annexed to it to be in use from the following festival of St. John the Baptist. The Prayer Book, by the rubric in the Communion Service, carried with it the Homilies ; and accordingly we find a new edition of them with the date of the same year, which no doubt was ready for use at the same time. It was based upon Whitchurch's edition of 1549, or some later one of that printer, not (as we should expect) on any of Grafton's editions, though these bear more decided marks of anthority upon them. But Whitchurch was not followed verbatim. Like the Prayer Book, the Homilies were not simply reprinted : they were first, as the title says, "perused and overseen for the better understanding of the simple people ;" and the changes made were numerous. None of them however affected doctrine : all were intended to make the language plainer, some by substituting easy words, especially words of English origin, for such as were thought more difficult or were derived from Latin, others by appending to a harder word some easy synonym by way of explanation. Many of these alterations would be judged unnecessary now, and some few seem to have been thought so then, for they were removed before the next edition was put forth The supremacy of the sovereign

' Bp. Bonner sent ont three Eomi- entitled "A profitable and necessary

lies first, concerning "the Creation and Doctrine." Of these there were several

Fall of Man" and his "Redemption", editions.

with a short Pre&ce, dated July T, * " Fyve Homiles of late made by a

'575i containing a promise of more. ryght good and vertuous clerke, called

Tien came three others, concerning master Leonarde Pollarde, prebendary

"the Sacrament of the Altar" and of the CathedraU Churcho of Woster,"

name, nor date : these are now fonnd " Two homilies upon the first, second,

bonnd np together with the former in and third articles of the Crede, made

a copy at Lambeth, and in another in by maister lohn Feknam Deane of

the Bodleian Library, [...] printed by Robert Caly with-

Lastly the whole thirteen appeared, oat date.

with the name of the writer subjoined ' All these were in the Firet Part of

to each, and were annexed to his book the Exhortation against the Fear of

XIV

continued to be expressed in the Homily of Obedience by tbe title " supreme head over all," but " governor " was put in place of "head" in the next edition, and has remained there since". This indeed seems to be the only change that was made intentionally in the First Book during the reign of Elizabeth after her first edition of 1559} and this itself tends to shew that that edition was prepared for the press, if not actually printed, before the end of April in that year. For it appears from a letter written "April ult. 1559" by Edwin Sandys, afterwards Archbishop of York, to Matthew Parker, then at Cambridge but shortly afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, that "Mr. Lever" bad already "wisely put such a scruple in the Queen's head that she would not take the title of supreme head " in the Bill of Supremacy which was then passing through Parliament*.

Many editions of this Book were issued in the course of Elizabeth's reign. At first, for more than twenty years, it came out quite separately : afterwards, from 1582, it was printed uniformly with the Second Book, yet still in a distinct volume ; for the two were not put together into one till near the eud of the reigu of James I. But for tbe particulars of these it is sufficient to refer the reader to tbe Catalogue which follows this Preface.

2. OF THE SECOND BOOK OF HOMILIES.

The First Book contained but twelve Homilies, of which the first five may be caUed doctrinal and the other seven practical ; and after their division into Parts they supplied no more than thirty-one lections or readings. But Cranmer intended from the first that more should follow, and put a promise to that effect at the end of the Book together with a list of subjects on which they should treat. None however appeared ; and Bucer in hia review of the Prayer Book observed upon the scantiness

Destb ; se« jbr example page gt, notea ^j @, f. In this volume. But no dUcri- mlnBtioD waa exsrciBed in tlielr removal. For the next edition the priutere in that Part eiinply went hack to an enriier copy, and so oancoUod all the changes in the Part, even fipveral which they kept elat^ where, in order Ut be sure of

olearini; awn; the few which were ab'

sard.

" See page 106, line 72, in this volume.

of the publiahed Tolame, and urged the preparation of more diacoones, especially npon certain subjects (nearly twenty in number) which he went on to specify r. That the intention continued is erident from the second Prayer Book of King Edward YI, in which the rubric in the Communion Service was altered into the following form, nearly the same as we have it at the present day : " After the Creed, if there be no Sermon, shall follow one of the Homilies already set forth or hereafter to be set forth by common authority." That Prayer Book was approved by both Houses of Parliament before the middle of April 1552 ; and on the 13th of October following we find the King himself, in a private note of " matters to be considered," setting down among other things concerning religion "The making of more Homeliest," but he did not live to see the notion realized.

Burnet indeed, writing at the very end of the seventeenth century, implies, if he does not assert, that the Second Book of Homilies was finished "about the time of his death";'" and, although Heylyn forty years before did not venture to be so positive, I think we may gather from his words that he knew such an opinion was entertained. " Who they were," he says, " which laboured in this second Book, whether they were the same that drew up the first, or those who in Queen Elizabeth's time reviewed the Liturgy, or whether they were made by the one and reviewed by the other, I have no where found, though I have taken no small pains in the search thereof^." Burnet

f " Postremo est etiam nimia exigaus served in the British Museum, being

que Dominus regnom hoc donarit ali- in his Memoriali, Edward YI, II, xii,

atque de praecipue necessariis locis com- there were two Books of Homilies pre-

ponerent, quae popnlia ab iis reoitaren- pared : the first was published in King

tur pastoribus qui ipsi meliores non pos- Edward's time ; the second was not

sent adferre. Atque inter alias, etiam finished till about the time of his death,

aliquot i De vera Christ! conununione so it was not published before Queen

glie. p. 466. 0/ tlie XXXI X Article* (first published

* This docximent, "A sununaiy of in 1699), Art. XXXV. matters to be considered," entirely in •> Hisloria Qiiinquartieularit (first

King Edward's handwriting, is pre- published in 1660), xvii, 5. But Heylyn

XVl

however, in another part of the same Tolume, speaks of the "great share" which Jewel had "in compiling the second liook of HoraiIies=;" and, silthough his two statemeuta might possibly he consistent with each other, there ia other evidence which seems to refute completely the one first quoted. In the Interpretations of the Queen's Injunctions, drawn up by the Arch- biahop and Bishops in 1 560 according to Strype for the better dii'ection of the clergy, one Item on Injunction XX is as follows ; " That there be some loDg Catechism deviaed and printed for the erudition of simple curates : Homilies to be made of those arguments which be shewed in the Book of Homilies ; or others of some convenient arguments, as of the Sacrifice of the Mass, of the Common Prayer to be in English, that every particular Church may alter and change the public rites and ceremonies of their Church, keeping the substance of the faith inviolably, with such like. And that these be divided to be jnade by the Bishops, every Bishop two, and the Bishop of London to have four"!/* Surely, if there had been so many discourses nearly or quite ready for publication in 1553, their existence could not have been unknown to the prelates who framed this direction .

If that direction had been strictly followed, the Second Book would perhaps have contained a larger number of HoraiUes than it does, and would certainly have exhibited a greater variety of style. When first published, the number of subjects treated iu it was twenty, and the number of discourses (each Part of a Homily being reckoned separately) thirty-eight ; but iu actual

aeeuis to have ouppuved tlut the Second Book waa ready for jiublicAtion at the siuiie time with the Firel ajid with the Prayer Book, in tbe early part of

'S59-

' "Tlie fiist, and indeed the much best ■writer of Queen Elisabeth's time, was Bishop Jewel ; . . .who had so great share in all thivt wu done then, particnlarly in compiling the Second Book of Boon- liee, that 1 had great reuoo to look on his works a« a veiy sure oommtrntaiy on our Artieim, m fiv as they led me." &rpotitioti, Prefitce, page x, ed Oxf.

c Further evidence to the same efferct is oontsiiiied in the Preface prepared by Bialiop Cox on the completion of the Second Book. "And whereas in the said Book of Homilies" [vji. the First] '* mention was made of other Homilies concerning CL^rtain nyoossary i>oint8 of religion tl>at were ixxtended to bo annexed to these, Iter Highness tiath caUHcd tbe same to be faithfolly drawn, perused, and berennto annexed," &e, Strype, AhuoIh, Ob. XXS,

OF THE SECOND BOOK. xrii

bulk it exceeded the First Book much more than these numbers appear to shew, fully in the ratio of five to two. ^In 1571 the addition of the Homily against B«bellion^re six Parts more, and increased the ratio of bulk so much that it was now almost three to one. It is likely however that but few of the Bishops eontribnted discourses towards the new volume, or else that Jewel, if he (as is commonly believed) were really its editor, was dissatisfied with some of the contributions; for the internal, thongh ancntain, evidence of style appears to confirm Burnet's other assertion respecting him by making it probable that he was himself the author of nearly half the volume. On this point something more will be said in the next section of this Preface, when a few remarks are offered concerning the Homilies severally.

Much time passed before the Book was ready ; but at length it was submitted, together with the Thirty-nine Articles, to the famous Convocation of 1563-, and received its approbation. Yet we cannot suppose that the Convocation had much to do with either, for its Session only began on the 1 2th of January, and the Articles, involving the Homilies in the thirty-fifth of them, passed both Houses by the 5th of February. The Articles indeed, being little more than a modification of the Forty-two of 155}, would not require much discussion; but the Homilies were entirely new matter, some of it in those days very debatable.

The Queen took much longer time for her consideration of them ^ and I think it may be shewn that, like the Articles, they did not come from her hands unaltered.

There is in the British Museum a copy of the first edition, " C. 25. h. 3," which difi'ers considerably from every other copy that I have seen. It is in its original contemporary binding, of the handsomest of the time, and richly gilt; and the pages within are, or at least were when I collated it in 1 857, almost

' Parker nya to Cecil in a letter not deliver to the parishea as I go," &c.,

dated, bat evidently written in 1563 be- where the plural word "books" can

fore Midsnnuner, " For that I intend by hardly mean the Two Books of Eomi-

God's grace to visit my diocese shortly lies, now commonly so called, bnt rather

aftar Midsummer,. . . I wonld gladly the copies of the Second Book, then ready

QiMen's Majesty would resolve herself to be issued. Corrapondence of Ahp.

in OUT books of Homilies, which I might Parker, p. 177, ed. Park. Soc.

XVUI

as clean and fresh as when the volume left the binder's bands. The Museum baa no record of its history, but it is known not to have been acquired in recent times, and there is no reasoa why it may not be believed to belong to the old Bibhotheca Regis, which dates from the reign of Henry VII, and was given to the nation by King George II. The list of " Faultea escaped in the printj'ing" at the end of the volume is the same as in all other copies. On examining this carefully we observe that full two thirds of the corrections were not occasioned by errors of the printer, but were sucb changes as an author or editor or critic might make ; and a further search will shew that the copy contains as many as twelve cancel leaves. It is plain therefore that the book had been submitted to a pretty close revision after the sheets were printed off; and after sucb revision it was bound as above described, evidently for the use of some great personage B. It is clear too that some of the corrections were not made by the respective authors, but rather by a committee of review, such as Convocation might have been likely to appoint ••.

If now we compare with this volume a perfect copy of the same edition in the state in which it ordinarily occurs, we shall see that the differences between them are sure signs of a further revision. Those differences consist of three particulars : the ordinary copy has on the back of its Title the " A dmoni- tion," which the Museum copy has not; it contains all the twelve cancel leaves of the Museum copy, and five more besides' ; and it has one whole sheet inserted in the middle of signature Ccc. Now the "Admonition," though not actually running in the Queen's name, as was the case with the Preface of the First Book, speaks nevertheless in a tone of authority which could have been assumed by no one else ^ ; and it is my

1 There in evidence, if evidence be needed, that Archbighop Parker took paius about the binding of buaka which were to be bud before the Queen. In announcing to Cecil the completion of ibe new edition of the Bible in 1 568 he uyB, on the imd of September, "Some omnments of the same be yet lacking," Utd, on the 5tb of October, " I have eauaed one book to be bound aa ye see, which I heartily pray you to present

fnvourobly to the Queen's Majesty." Ibid. p. 534.

l> See, for eiample, page 186, note n, in this volume.

^ The Pre£iu:e which wsw drawn Up by Binhop Cox on the oompletiijti of the Second Book, evidently with the notion oC it beiiig prefixed to the two Books

OF THE SECOND BOOK. xix

oonviction that the other changes likewise, the five additional cancels and the inserted sheet, were made bj the Queen's authority alone. Whether however that be so, or not, it will be interesting to see what alterations they effected in the text, and I shall therefore set them before the reader with references both to that edition and to this'.

z. In the First Part of the Homily against Peril of Idolatry, Gg I b, line 8, ed. i ; p. 1 78, L 20, ed. 1859 :

Original. Cobrectkd.

"Which place both enforceth that "Which place enforceth, both that

neither the material church or temple we should not worship images, and

ought to have any images in it, (for that we should not have images in

of it is taken the ground of the arj^- the temple, for fear and occasion of

ment,) ndther that anjr true Christian worshipping them, though they be of

ought to have any ado with filthy themselves things indifferent; for the

and dead images, for that he is the Christian is the holy temple" &c. holy temple" &c.

Obioinal. Corrkctbd.

"Now ye have heard how plainly, "Now ye have heard how plainly, how vehemently, and that in many how vehemently, and that in many places, the word of God speaketh places, the word of God speaketh againtit not only idolatry and wor- against not only idolatry and worshipping of images, but also agdnst shipping of images, but also against idols and images themselves ; and idols and images themselves : I mean have heard likewise" &c. always thus herein, in that we be

stirred and provoked by them to worship them, and not as though they were simply forbidden by the New Testament without such occasion and danger. And ye have heard Ukewise" &c.

Original. Cobrbctbd.

" And as for the number of them, if " And as for the number of them, if they should be considered according they should be considered according

united in one volume, runH entirely in the Queen's name, and is in feet based upon her own Preface to the First Book. It is given by Strype in his Annalt, Cb. xxz.

I In these extracts, m throughout the text of this edition, the modem way of HpelUng ia followed.

C 2

Original. Corkbctid.

to the exact significatioii, as Ailljr so to the exact aigiiification of a Sacra- expressed and commended by Christ ment, namely, for risible signs, ex- in the New Testament, there be two, pressly commanded in the New Tes- namely. Baptism, and the Snpper of tament, whereunto is annexed the the Lord ; but in a general accep- promise of free forgiveness of our tion" &c. sin, and of our holiness and joining

in Christ, there be but two, namely. Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. For, although Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sin, yet by Uie express word of the New Testament it hath^not this promise annexed and tied to the visible sign, which is imposition of hands. For this visible sign, I mean laying on of hands, is not expressly commanded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ; and therefore Absolution is no such Sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are. And, though the Ordering of Ministers hath his visible sign and promise, yet it lacks the promise of remission of sin, as all other Sacraments besides do. Therefore neither it nor any other Sacrament else be such Sacraments as Baptism and the Communion are. But in a general acception" ice.

Original. Corrkctkd.

"We are evidently taught in- Scrip- "We are evidently taught in the

ture,that our Lord and Saviour Christ Scripture, that our Lord and Saviour

consisted of two several natures, be- Christ consisteth of two several na-

ing, •• touching his outward flesh, tures ; of his manhood, being thereby

perfect man, as touching his inward perfect man ; and of his Godhood,

■pint, perfect God." being thereby perfect God."

Original. Corrrctbd.

"For the unbelievers and faithless "For the unbeUevers and fitithless oannot feed upon that predona Body : cannot feed upon that precious Body :

OF THE SECOND BOOK. xxi

Obioinal. Corrkctso.

wbenM Um fiuthfol have their life, whereas the faithful have their life, their abiding, in him; their union, their abiding, in him; their union, and as it were their incorporation, and aa it were their incorporation, with Um. Whereof thua aaith St. with him. Wherefore let ua" &c. Aogottine : ' He which ia at diacord with Christ doth neither eat his flesh nor drink his blood, although he re- CMTC, to the judgment of his deatmc- tion, daily the outward Sacrament of BO great a thing.' Wherefore let us" &c And "lib. 4. de Trinit." is in the margin.

These fire are the alterations made by means of cancels. The first two of them bear upon the question of images in such a way that they might seem to have been suggested by the Queen herself, who is known to have retained the crucifix for some time in her own chapel. The third, explaining more fully certain rites of the Church, and the fourth, correcting some inaccuracies concerning the Person of our blessed Saviour, need not necessarily have come from any one but a divine: Yet it must be remembered that both the Queen and some of her Ministers were more competent and more accustomed to discuss questions of divinity than is usual with statesmen and high political personages at the present day. See for instance a letter from Parker to Cecil, dated "4th of June 157 1," which shews that the subject of the twenty-ninth Article, a subject connected with the fifth of the alterations here exhibited, had been in debate between them'°. And that fifth alteration, the omission of the sentence cited from St. Augustine concerning the unworthy partaker of the Holy Communion, when considered together with the suppression of the twenty-ninth Article after it had been approved by the same Convocation", is so evidently to be referred to the interference of the Queen, that few, I think, can doubt it.

The only change remaining to be noticed is the insertion of an entire sheet in the middle of signature Ccc, whereby the Homily of Fasting, originally undivided, was so much increased in bulk, that it was judged necessary to break it into two Farts ; and an

■ Corrupondtnce of Abp. Parker, p. 381, ed. Park. 80c. ° See CardweU, Synodalia, l, 38, note ; and 54, note.

xxii THE EDITOR'S PREFACE.

examination of the inserted portion, which comprises the first half of the Secodd Part of the Homily, and is too long to be reprinted here, will shew beyond all question that the Queen's counsellors at least, if not the Queen herself, directed that addition to be made. For not only is it purely secular or political in its character, but, as is shewn in note i upon that Part of the Homily °, it was occasioned by an Act of Parliament which was not even brought in as a Bill till the 9th of March, more than a month after the Homilies had been approved by Convocation P.

These, particulars have served to convince me that the unique volume in the British Museum exhibits the Second Book of Homilies exactly in the state in which it was approved by the two Houses of Convocation, and that it is the identical volume which was presented to Queen Elizabeth when her royal assent was asked.

After all this deliberation and revision the book at length came forth with the following Title : " The Second Tome of Homilies, of such matters as were promised and intituled in the former part of Homilies: set out by the authority of the Queen's Majesty, and to be read in every Parish Church agreeably." The exact date of its publication has not been ascer- tamed : but, even if the Archbishop did not obtain it before Midsummer, as he hoped*), it must have been issued before the end of July ; for in the Form of Prayer which was ordered by the Queen's Letter bearing date on "the first day of August" 1563, on account of the great pestilence then raging, the last of the directions which follow the Prayers speaks of " the seconde Tome of Homylyes now lately set forth by the Queues Maie- sties aucthoritie." and orders Churchwardens to " prouide the same seconde Tome . . . with all speede at the charges of the Paryshe '."

' See page 189. See also page J93, One of the oopies of "the Seconde

note o. Tome" in the Library uf St John's Col-

p Bee Sir Simonds D'Ewea' Journal, lege, Cambridge, " Qq. n. 13," has on its

p. 87. title page the merchant's mark and

« See before, page xvii, note f. name of its first owner, Ansell Beckett,

' Sign. Cji, ed. 1563. Reprinted in with a note that he bought it on the

OF THE SECOND BOOK. iiiii

The demand for it, as for the First Book in 1547. was neces- rnrilj great, and the printers took great pains to satisfy it. live editions followed the first with great rapidity, each printed half at one office and half at another, doubtless for the sake of saving time ; and even after that, when the first requirements of the conntrj had been met, two more editions came out, each bearing the date of 1563'. Nevertheless Strype asserts, on the authority of " a journal of a Minister of London of that time," that " all the churches hardly came to be fully supplied " with the book till 1564 <.

No changes analogous to the division of the First Book into Parts hare ever been made in the Second Book, and the only material alteration which took place in it during the reign of Elizabeth was one which has been already mentioned, the addition of the Homily against Wilful Rebellion. That Homily was written early in 1570, was first published separately, passed rapidly through five editions, and in 157 1 was annexed to the Second Book by the addition of its title at the end of the Article " Of Homilies" when the Thirty-nine Articles were again approved and confirmed by Convocation.

Editions of either Book separately came out from time to time according as they were wanted, and in 1582 (for the first time so far as is known) they were printed uniformly, so that they might more suitably be bound in one volume. But, although it is likely that some editions have wholly perished in lapse of time, for which allowance must be made, there is good reason still to suppose that the intervals between the publican tions became gradually longer. Indeed it was to be expected that such would be the case in proportion as both the ability and the desire to deliver sermons of their own composition should increase among the clergy.

At first it had been found necessary to enjoin the clergy to read the Homilies " orderly, without omission of any part thereof";" "diligently, plainly, and distinctly, that they may

• All these editions are particularly ' Annah, Ch. zxzix.

Iowa this Pre&ce. fore, page x, note k.

XXIV

be understanded of the people ' ;" " gravely and aptly, without any glosing of the same or any additions J :" for there were then many, as has been already obsen'ed, so strongly attached to popery and so auspicious of the new doctrine that they would not read in such a way that the congregation could gather instruction or profit from what they heard. But iu process of time the aspect of things was vastly changed, and, as has been the case with other documents of our Church, protection had to be sought in the Homilies against dangers from the opposite quarter. Before Elizabeth had been on the throne ten years there were parts of the kingdom in which " puritaniam, and not popery, was the opponent to be dreaded';" and in less than ten years more she judged it necessary to give orders for the suppression of the Exercises called Prophesyings, for lessening the number of licensed preachers, and for the more general reading of the authorised Homilies in accordance with the Injunctions issued at the beginning of her reign'. The number however and the power of the puritan party continued to grow, notwithstanding the endeavours of the Queen and of Archbishop 'V\Tnt- gift, and afterwards of James I and Bancroft, to check it ; Abbot's primacy is believed to have encouraged them ; and at length the liberty used by preachers in their sermons was so alarming that James, like Elizabeth, deemed it necessary to limit them, and like her also sought assistance in the Homilies. In a letter bearing date on the 4th of August 1623 he sent to Archbishop Abbot certain " Directions concerning Preachers,'" of which the first commands all preachers under the dignity of bishops or deans to confine their sermons to such subjects as are " comprehended and warranted in essence, substance, efi'ect, or natural inference within some one of the" Thirty-nine Ar- tides, " or in some of the Homilies set forth by authority in the Church of England, not only for a help of the nonpreaching,

» Article XXXTV, win. 155! ind tS6i.

» AdTertiMmenta of Ardibijiiop Parker tttul Binhopt in comtniaaion with him in 15S4, CaniweU'a Darumtntary jliHub, I, 191, 16.

• 0»rdweU, ibid. I, 303, t6. This

wae in 1567.

» Ihid. r, 373, 379. The Queen ipoks to All]]. Grindal on thia subject befors the end of t J76. Concerning the Exer- d^es see pagei 354 and 367 of tbe same Tolume.

XXV

but withal for a pattern and a boundary, as it were, for the '

preaching ministers; and, for their further instruction for the performance thereof, that they forthwith read over and peruse diligently the said book of Articles and the two books of Homilies;" and the fourth orders "that no preacher"" whatsoever "shall presume to meddle with"" such "matters of state" as pertain to ^ the relations between sovereign princes and their subjects ** otherwise than as they are instructed and presidented in the Homily of Obedience and in the rest of the Homilies and Ar- tides of Religion, set forth (as before is mentioned) by public authority, but rather confine themselves [thus] wholly to those two heads of faith and good life which are all the subject of the ancient sermons and homilies ^.""

There can be no doubt that these " Directions" gave occasion to the edition which was published in 1623, the first that was printed in folio. In this for the first time the two Books are nnited in one volume. Each indeed has still its separate register and pagination, and the Second has its own Title prefixed to it ; but the Title of the First is made to serve for both by alterations which bring it to the following form : " Certain Sermons or Homilies, appointed to be read in Churches in the time of the late Queen Elizabeth of famous memory, and now thought fit to be reprinted by authority from the King's most excellent Majesty :" a form which appears very plainly to imply that they had not been reprinted since the accession of James to the throne in March 1603, twenty years before. Throughout both Books in this edition many changes are found in the text, a large number of them in all probability owing to the carelessness of the printer, which was very great, but most nevertheless having been purposely introduced by the King's authority. In making these the same principle was followed on which the revision of the First Book was conducted in 1559 by command of Queen Elizabeth : none of them affect doctrine in any way, but all were intended solely for the amendment of the language by substituting easier words for such as still were di£5cult or had become obsolete, and replacing a few coarse or unseemly expressions by terms or phrases more suitable to the age. I believe there is but one change of a different character, namely,

•> Ibid. II, 1 49, 150.

XXVI

the addition of two side notes concerning St. Ambrose and the Emperor Theodosius in the Second Pnrt of the Homily of the Right Use of the Church*.

This seems to be the latest edition in which changes were made in the text with any semblance of authority. It was followed at intervals by others, of which it is not necessary here to speak particularly. The reader will find a sufficient descrip- _ tion of such as were published before the end of that century in the Catalogue subjoined to this Preface.

3. OF THE HOMILIES SEVERALLY,

Before I proceed to give an account of the present edition, I venture to offer a few remarks upon the several Homilies in both Books, addressing myself chiefly to matters which, if fully examined, might help to tell ua by whom they were written. Very little is known on this question. The external evidence discovered at present is very scanty ; and the internal evidence of style, which is always doubtful, is here the leas serviceable, because most of the persons whom we should consider likely to have been contributors have left but small remains of their written works'*. Heylyn, as we have seen, had failed two centuries ago to learn who were the persons concerned in the Second Book ; and even thirty years ago no discourse in either Book had been assigned to ita author with any certainty. But the attention which has been given of late to the English divines I of the sixteenth century has furnished us with positive informa-

H tion concerning some few of the Homilies, and it is reasonable to expect that a further amount of critical research will enable m US at the least to form probable conjectures about others.

Sue pcigii 165, lines 5 anil 7, in Una volume.

tl For ei-imple, I have not ventured to »aoribe any Homily in these two BtMiks to the famous Dean of St. Paul's, Alesamler Nowcll, the author of the Homity conoeming the Justice of God, which accompimicd the special Form of Prayer set forth on occasiou of tho gTMt p««tilenco in tho aummer of 1 563. Yet, if Griudnl really undurtcKik lu

furnish the four Uomilies which the ngr^ement of the bishops assigned tu bim, it ie likely tbnt he called upiju bia Datta to help him make up his qnotA, us he certainly required him in tho pejtilenoe " to ivrite aii homily iiie«t for the time." See hi* Letter to Sir William Cooil dated "30 July iS63"«mong his Remain*, p. -258, ed. Park. Soc.

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES; xxvii

The Homilies of the First Book. *

2. Of the Misery of Man. By John Harpesfeld or Harps- field, Archdeacon of London. It is the second of the thirteen Homilies set forth by Bishop Bonner in 1555 "to be read within his diocesse of London^." and in that volume has Harpsfield's name appended to it as the author. Many variations are there found, the greater part of no importance, but several evidently meant to bring the Homily, or possibly to restore it, to a Romish cast of thought^.

6. Of Charity. By Bonner. At least it occurs, with a long preamble but with few other variations, in Bonner's volume cited above, under the title, " An Homely of Christian love, or Charitye," with his own initials, "E. B.," appended to it. It is the fifth Homily of the thirteen. The passage in it which speaks of the " two offices" of Charity, page 71 of this volume, shews that the author could easily reconcile his notions of this

• See before, page xiii, note r. omitted. For "None but he alone

' See for example the following may say, The prince of this world came,

place* in page ij of this volnme. In and in me he hath nothing," Bonner

"And all these heavenly treasures are has "Likewise he may say" &c. For

given u»[, not for our own deserts, "And he alone may say also, Which of

merits, or good deeds, which of our- you shall reprove me of any fault V

•elves we have none, but] of his mere Bonner puts " He may say also " &c.

mercy freely," the part within [ ] is In "He is the alone Mediator between

omitted in Bonner's volume. In "Of God and man" Bonner leaves out

whom only it may be truly said, that "alone." he did all things weir'&c. "only" is

xxvm

grace with the strictest requirements of the most rigorous justice.

7. Of Swearing. Some of the thoughts in this Homily are found in Becon's " Invective against Swearing," and some of the quotations also, but these for the most part are handled difFerently. It appears to me to have been composed hy a calmer writer, making such use of the " Invective" as he thought fit. If BecoQ were the author, he would most likely have reprinted it, like the Homily against Adulteryj among his collected Works.

8. Of Falling from God.

9. Of the Fear of Death. A resemblance has been pointed out to me, by one who has paid much attention to the writings of this age, between several passages in this Homily and several in Ridley's "Farewell to the Prisoners in Christ's Gospel's cause K." It is highly probable that Ridley took part with Cranmer in preparing the First Book, and I could readily believe him to be the author both of this and of the one before this. But, since his •' Farewell" was written within a fortnight of his death in October 1555, more than eight years after the First Book had been published for constant use in the Church, I fear there is not in such resemblance any sufficient proof of authorship ; especially as one of the similar passages, a third of the whole in bulk, is drawn from the twelfth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Bishop Pilkington in his Exposition upon Haggai has adopted** in one place some thoughts and some

f Hid%'8 Worlt, Letter XXXIH, ed. Piirk. 80c. Compare four passages, p. 95, 1. 19 tc. and 1. 34 &B., p. 96, 1. 16 Ac, and p. 97, t. sj tc, in this volume with passages in pp. 4.14-416 of the Worts.

'' Pilkington's WorJti, pp. 94, 95, 66, ed. Park. 80c.

Bead m they were over and over again in Choroh, the Homilies could

not &il to leave many of their thoughts and ptuases impressed open the tninda of the hearcra. That Binhop Pilkington and other divines imhued with their Bpiiit should also, though unconsciously, adopt some of their huigttage is a thing that will surprise no one. But there is a very familiar parage in Shakespeare, which shews their influence upon the poet likewise :

Who eteols my purse steals trash ; 'tis something, nothing ;

Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands :

Bat he that filches from me my good name

Bobs me of that which not eoricbes htm

' And many

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES. xxix

▼cry remarkable words firom the Homily of the Misery of Man, vhich was written by Harpsfield, and in another place a few words from the Homily of Charity, which is Bonner's, doubtless because frequent use had made them familiar both to himself and to his readers.

10. Of Obedience.

11. Against Adultery. By Thomas Becon, who was one of Graomer's Chaplains. He declared himself the author by placing it in the Second Part of his collected Works, printed by John Day in 1560-1564.

12. Against Contention. If Latimer wrote any of the Homilies, as many have thought likely^ probably this one, as many likewise hare supposed, was contributed by him> But there is no proof that he did, beyond the uncertain evidence of style. He speaks of the Homilies more than once <, but gives no intimation whether he took part in writing them or no.

The Homilies op the Second Book.

1. Of the Bight Use of the Church. Probably the first three Homilies in this Book were written by the same person. The second begins with a summary of the first, and contains a reference to the third ^ : one phrase, " church or temple," " church and temple,'' occurs in all three very often ; indeed the word "church" is scarcely used of the material building in any of them without having the word "temple" connected with it.

2. Against Peril of Idolatry. This Homily is based upon a document which was first printed, imperfectly and with alterations, by Foxe at the end of his " Acts and Monuments" under the title of " A Treatise of Master Nicholas Ridley, in the name, as it seemeth, of the whole Clergy, to King Edward the Sixth, concerning Images not to be set up nor worshipped in Churches."

of a thief than of a railing tongue: for > See his Sermont, pp.61, iii, ed.

the one taketh away a man's good Park. Sac. The latter passage has

name ; the other taketh but his riches, been cited before in page x.

■rliich is of much less value and esti- ^ See p. 161, 1. 3. mation than is his good name." Homily

XXX

It ia almost a waste of irords to shew that the treatise was never addressed to King Edward. After the first few months of his reign the moat earnest hater of image worship would have seen no cause for exhorting either the King himself or his advisers against it; and during those few months he was too young for the personal appeals which are made at the end of the document. Moreover the Caroline Books, which arc cited in it, were not in print, uor was their tenor known, before 1549 ' ; and Sir John Cheke's Translation of Leo's Tactics, which is also cited, though (inished in 1544 and then dedicated and doubtless presented to Henry VIH, was actually not in print till after King Edward's death ". Since Foxe then is %vrong in that part of hts statement, his authority need not weigh with us concerning the author of the treatise.

It was really presented to Queen Elizabeth by Archbishop Parker and the other Prelates, probably in 1560. A copy of it in its complete form, but without signatures, is among the Parker MSS, at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, from which it has been printed for the Parker Society among the Archbishop's " Correspondence" at pp. 79-95. The editors describe the MS. as a "Copy," meaning, I presume, that it is not in his own hand^vriting.

This document however, strictly speaking, was not from the first an original composition. It was taken by abridgment from BuUinger's treatise " De Origine Erroris in Divorura et Simu- lacrornm Cultu/' which was first published in 1528, and was again put out in 1 539 so greatly enlarged that, as he says in his Preface, it would hardly be known to be the same book except

■" '' Lconi.H Imperatoris de Bellico Apparatn Liber, e Graciio in Latinutn ooDversus, Ioad. Cbeco Cantabrigienti Interp. Baailoae, apud Mich. lainip^- nium. M,D.LinL" in gi^n

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES. xvd

in spirit^. And the vriter of the Homily did not merely take the terse memorial of the Biahops and expand it for general use by topics of his own, but he again availed himself largely of the treatise, taking nearly all his historical statements and most of bis quotations from the Fathers out of chapters 21, 24-31, and 33—35 of Bullinger. His reasoning however seems to be his own ; and in the Third Part especially, which indeed consists of little else, it is cast into the severe form of logical argument, nearly after the fashion of the old Disputations in the Schools.

The subject of the Homily is one which has long ceased to have much interest for us, but at the time there was scarcely any question that was practically more important ; and, as the discourse is far the longest in the volume, being in bulk about one quarter of the Second Book as first published, so it is by fax the most argumentative and elaborate. And it is my conviction that, just as in the beginning of Edward's reign the vital question of Justification was most carefully and ably treated by Archbishop Cranmer in three Homilies, making just a quarter of the First Book, so in the beginning of Elizabeth's reign the stirring question of Image worship was handled with equal force and at corresponding length by the then great champion of the Church of England, Bishop Jewel. He felt the importance of the matter very strongly, more strongly (so at least he himself thought) than Archbishop Parker and some others did".

■ Bullinger printed it a third time instituetur de ea re disputatio. ArLitri

with Bome amendments in 156S. The enint ex genatu select! quidam viri. .

estimation in which the work was held Actvres inde Cantuarieneis et Cozus,

is said of Abp. Cranmer in the note on et ego. Eventus iy Kpirui' yoipoai ic»7-

no. JO below ; and Abp. Grindal ex- rai. Rideo tamen, cum cogito quibus

presses his own great obligation to it illi et quam gravibus et solidis rationi-

in a letter addressed to Bullinger him- bus defensuri sint suam cruculam. Scd,

ed in the Parker Society's first series bus; nunc enim 'sub judice lis est:'

Latia, p. 1 81 of the Translation. posthac ad te episcopus. Eo enim jam

dispute al»ut the use of the crucifix]. et stanneae, quas nos ubique confrcgi-

praeter Coxum nuUus est. Crastino die ij6o."

xxxu

He had beca for some time resident at Zurichj iii iotimate ao- quaiutance with Bullinger, and regarded him with gratitude and love as a protector and a friend, and with reverence as a teacher of Christ's truth P. The method of reasoning is like Jewel's ; the occasional bursts of indignation, and many details of the style, even to single words, resemble his ; and there is one remarkable quotation from a work of Jacopo Nachianti, Bishop of Chioggia, which he probably noted during his stay at Padua soon after the book from which it comes was published, that ia given, I believe, by no other English writer i.

3. For Repairing and Keeping Clean of Churches, See the remarks on n". i .

4. Of Fasting. This Homily, as has been stated before, was originally undivided. The necessity for breaking it into two Parts arose from a large addition which was made to it after it had passed Convocation, This inserted matter begins with the prayer immediately before the end of the First Part, p. 287, 1. 8, and extends beyond the middle of the Second Part, ending p. 293, 1. 4. The occasion and subject of it have been already noticed at page xxii. That this is really an insertion may be easily seen by any one who has access to the first edition of the Second Book, the additional matter being there all contained in an extraordinary sheet, which comes exactly in the middle of signature Ccc and begins with the words "for the use of fasting," which words at the top of the page on which they were originally printed (then the fifth, now the thirteenth, page of that signature) have been struck out with a pen. And any one who reads the Homily with care in any edition will see that the summary of what has been said in it, with which its Inst paragraph begins, does not comprise the subjects treated of in the inserted portion, and that that portion closes with a summary of its own.

Possibly the writer of the Homily as it stood at first was Bishop Grindal, who was strongly persuaded of the value of fasting''. At any rate it was not written by the author of any

f See hie Letters to Peter Martyr us well &B to Bullingor himself.

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES. xixiii

one of tlie fint three Homilies : in those the Ytflgate translft- tiom of the Bible is used ; in this the quotations of Scripture ■re made from the Hebrew or the Greek. But the inserted portion is iNnn another pen, possibly Archbishop Parker^s*. The form " Moyses" occurs in it four times, whereas "Moses" is the name in the original part of the Homily.

6. Against Gluttony and Drunkenness. A few sentences in this Homily are taken from Bishop Filkington's Exposition upon Hai^ai, which was published in 1560 ; and a large portion of the remainder is translated or adapted from Peter Mar- tjr'a discourse " De Vino et Ebrietate" in his Commentary on the Book of Judges. See notes 3-6, 9, and 12 on the Homily.

7. 8. 9. Concerning Prayer. Of the Place and Time of Prayer. Of Common Prayer and Sacraments. These three are probably by one author. The quotations from Scripture seem to be made from the Vulgate ; and each of the three exhibits the same misapprehension of one text, i Tim. iii, 8, which an accurate knowledge of the Greek would have prevented. Each enters more or less into the controversy with popery. The second of them, n". 8, contains arguments and phrases which we have had before in n*. 1—3 concerning churches ; one passage beginning p. 343, 1. 30, nearly the same with one in no. i at p. 154, L 2 ; and another beginning p. 347, 1. 38, very similar to one in n°. 2, p. 209, L 23, and p. 210, 1. 19, concerning the progress of the Turks. I should ascribe them all to Jewel.

lence in 1563] "is generally embraced. Letter to Sir WiUiam Cecil, dated 1 1

Sorely my opinion hath been long, that Augoat, 1563, p. 165, ed. Park. Soc. in DO one thing the adversary hath • See what he lays of bating in a

more advantage against ua than in the Letter to Cecil written June 3, 1564,

matter of &8t, which we utterly neg- Corretpondence, p. 116, ed. Park. Soc. lect : they have a shadow." Grindal'n

xxxi? THE EDITOH'S PREFACE.

12. Of the Nativity.

14. The Second Sermon of the Passion. Perhaps this and n". 1 2 are by one author, and he perhaps one of the older fathers of the Refornmtion in England. Their simplicity and earnestness savour much of the Homilies in the First Book, or even of Tavernor's Postils.

15. Of the Ucsurrection. From Taverner, pp. 189—199, ed, Card well. Apparently by a different author from n". 13. A collation of the original form of both is given among the \"arjous Readings at the foot of each page. It will be seen that the changes in this are much more numerous than in ir. 13, but not many of them are important. The omission of the words "that the atone of the grave was removed from the entrance thereof, and shewed them" in p. 430, 1, 28, was probably an oversight. But the omission of the words "in form of bread" in p. 433, 1. 23, was doubtless intentional, and ought to be borne in mind, when attempts are made to found an argument for the presence of Christ in the consecrated elements upon the retention of the words " under the form of bread and wine " in the promise of more Homilies which closes the First Book : for its import is shewn by another omission, "now received in this holy Sacrament," in p. 435, 1. 1 8.

16. 17. Concerning the Sacrament. For Whitsunday. These two have been ascribed to Jewel : and the style, the method of argument, the handling of controverted points, the references to history, especially to the history of Popes, the citations from Scripture and from the Fathers, all go to establish the conjecture.

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES. xxxv

18. For Rogation Week.

I. The first three Parts form one discourse, with which the fourth Part (so called) has no connection. The former first appeared separately, without date, but certainly before the publication of the Second Book, and probably in 1560 or 1561 . Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions, issued in 1559, permit the customary 1 perambulation of the bounds of parishes, but direct that the paiishioners shall, " at their return to the church, make their CJommon Prayers," and also "that the Curate in their said common perambulations, used heretofore in the days of Roga- tions, at certain convenient places shall admonish the people to give thanks to God, in the beholding of God's benefits, for the increase and abundance of his fruits upon the face of the earth, with the saying of the 103rd Psalm, Benedic, anima mea," Sec., and shall "inculcate these or such sentences [thus], Curied be he tchich tramlateth the bounds and doks of his neighbour [Deut. xxm, 1 7], or such other order of prayers as shall be hereafter appointed ^'" In the Interpretations of the Injunctions drawn up by the Bishops in 1560 the direction upon the nineteenth is " that in the procession [in Rogation Week] they sing or say the two Psalms beginning Benedic, anima mea, Domino [CIII and CIV], with the Litany and Sufirages thereto, with some Sermon or a Homily of thanksgiving to God and moving to temperancy in their drinkings"." And it is likely that our

• Ibid. p. 104. See Bp. Grindal's di- in some places as well as of old super- rection to the Archdeacon of Essex stitions and abuses, is given in Sir " for avoiding of superstitious beha- Henry Mlis' edition of Brand's Popular ▼ioor and for uniformity to be had in Antiqaititi, I, 1 16-114. One of the U>e Rogation Week, now at hand," superstitious practices is mentioned by dated 13 May 1560, amonghis Semains, l^ndale in his Ammer to Sir Thomai p. 340, ed. Park. Soc. And compare More, p. 61, ed. Park Soc., " the say- with the " Interpretation" of 1560, on ing of Gospels to the com in the field which this note is added, the " Item" in the Procession week, that it should upon the same subject among the "Ad- the better grow :" and it is curious to vertaBsments" prepared by the Bishops observe that the "Sermon in the Crosse in 1565, Docum. Ann. 1, 193 ; and Abp. Dayes or Rogation Weke" among Ta- Grindal's Injunctions at York for the venier's Postilt, pp. 178-181, ed. Card- Laity, item 18, at p. 141 of his Re- well, approves this practice as sure to

be effectual, provided we "intreate and Much curious and interesting infor- heare the word of God wyth deuoute ation about " Parochial Perambula- and religiouss myndas."

XIXVl

Homily, in three Parts, was thereupon compoaed and set forth.

The writer has one peculiarity, which is scarcely found ebe- where in the volume. He often omits to mark the third person singular of a verb by the usaal inflexion, writing " take," '' con- aider," where others would use [...] cousidereth *." This is found still more frequently is the first and separate edition, as is shewn in the Various Readings at the foot of the pages; for the printers gradually removed it, so that in successive editions of the Second Book it disappeared almost entirely. This peculiarity, the use of certain words, the obscurity of the style in some parts, and the devout earnestness and solemnity of the tone throughout, together lead me to believe that the author was Archbishop Parker y. Rut, whoever was the writer, we do not seem to have the composition exactly as it, or its different portions, stood at first. It scema to be made up from several sermons, written originally upon different texts. One such text is plainly Rom, xi, 1 6, cited in page 47 1 , and again, near the end of the Homily, in page 493. Another, upon which much of the Third Part appears to have been founded, is Ephes. v, 15, 16. See note 6 on that Part.

n. The Exhortation to be used at the perambulation of boundaries, which is called the Fourth Part of the Homily, may possibly be by the same author, though it does not exhibit all the characteristics above mentioned. It was evidently written for the purpose to which it is addressed. It contains a few very rare words, chiefly concerning agriculture, which perhaps were even then provincial.

19. Of Matrimony. Half of this Homily ia translated from a Hortatory Address of Veit Dietrich of Nuremberg, and half from a Homily of St. Chrysostom, See ndtes i and 8 upon it. Dietrich, otherwise called Theodor, was born at Nuremberg in

> See the item, "Verba in the third person mngular," in the article "Words" he. in the OoDcral Index.

tnily are found liaiilarly in the Arob* Uiahop's CoiTfipOBdftM;* before cited. The difficutty of his atyle must l>e felt hy (iny one who reads the "Cor- reependence ", and even at the time Bp. Saudyg comptaioed of his " sundry dark senteoces, hard to scan forth," Carrftpiiiidt7\ee of Abp. Parker, p. 114,

OF THE SEVERAL HOMILIES. xxxvii

1507, atadied at Wittemberg, where he won the esteem of Lather and Melancthon, became Pastor of St. Sebald's in his native dXj, and died there so early as 1549'. He wrote Sermons for Children, "Kinder Postilla," on the Grospels for the Sundays and Holy Days throughout the year, a folio volume, which pur- ponti to have been printed at Nuremberg in 1556, though his Prefikce or Dedication is dated ten years earlier; and several single sermons and tracts by him are also extant. His great celebrity as a preacher is recorded by Joachim Camerarius the elder in his Life of Melancthon, pp. 256, 257, ed. 1655.

20. Against Idleness. Perhaps by Jewel. There is not indeed much in the Homily that is characteristic : but the blended quotation from St. Bernard and Peter of Blois in page 519, (where see note 4), was doubtless taken from some Florilegium ; and most of the quotations concerning pride in the Homily for Whitsunday (n°. 17) in page 465, together with the numerous epithets of the Spirit in page 468, are to be found in several Buch Collections^.

21. Of Repentance. Two thirds of the First Part of this Homily are translated from Rodolph Gualther. See note i upon it. Instead of "since" used argumentatively the writer has " sith that." This occurs nine times in this Homily, but nowhere else throughout the volume.

22. Against Rebellion. This was not in the Second Book as first published. It was occasioned by the Rising in the North, which began in November 1569, and came to an end before the ensuing Christmas ^ ; and it was no doubt written and set forth

xun, 743. peruaJ of that work by the patriatio

a To suppose that Jewel was content extracts which he has transcribed from

to make quotations at second hand in it ; but the remainder of the two large

a book intended for popular use and volumes, and the Notes on Justification

printed without his name is no dispa- preserved at Lambeth, give abundant

ngement either to his learning or his evidence that Cranmer was very well

ledged works give most ample proof of the Fathers.

both. It was the custom of the time, b gome information concerning the

and it has been common enough in all Bebellion is furnished in the notes at

times since, to rdy too much on pub- pp. 555, 570, 581, 582, 594. But there

Ushed books. If a person funiliar with is a letter &om Bishop Jewel to Bul-

BalBnger's treatise "De Origine Er- linger, dated "7 Augusti, 1570", which

roria" examines Cranmer's Common touches sn many pointii in the Homily,

xsxviu

Trat.

in the early part of 1570, Five editions of it at the least were published separately ■=, till in 157 1 it was counted as the last Homily in the Second Book by the Convocation which then ratified the Thirty-nine Articles, and thenceforward it was printed in that volume accordingly.

4, OF THIS EDITION.

It only remains to give some account of what has been done in the present volume.

The eminent scholar who prepared the Oxford edition of 1822, the earliest critical edition of the Homilies, formed his text "for the most part on the principle of adhering to the last recension published by public authority, that is to say, to the edition of 1623," thinking that it "was not only reprinted, as stated in the title-page, but also revised by authority of the crown," and that .it " has some claim to be considered as the standard test " inasmuch " as no later recension has ever been made by public authority:" but he was well aware of " the numerous errors of every sort by which that edition is defiled,"

that 1 think it well to ^ve some ex* tracta from it her«,

' They are descriWd in thf; Catalogue which follows.

OF THIS EDITION. xxxix

and that "the early editions of Queen Elizabeth's recension ex. hibit a much better text;'" nay, he even printed the HoAily against Rebellion from what he beliewd to be the first edition of it, and intimated his opinion that a future editor might perhaps think it " advisable to restore the text of Queen Elizabeth thronghont the whole volume with the exception of some par* ticnlar expressions <'." Had he but known how very many editions earlier than 1 623 are still extant, and observed how each, with scarcely an exception, is a reprint from its immediate predecessor, but introduces deviations, evidently arbitrary, which are mostly repeated and perpetuated by those which succeeded it, that opinion of his would certainly have been confirmed. Take one of the earliest editions, and compare it with the edition of 1623, and you will find so many differences, that, knowing the latter to have had some changes made in it by authority, you will be inclined to ascribe the same authority to all. If however you trace these variations through the intern^diate editions, and notice how many of them, not fewer than thirty on an average, originate in each, and that not one of all the editions exhibits the accuracy and regularity which betoken the care bestowed by a good editor of the present day, you will see that far the largest number of their differences must be referred either to the negligence or the wilfulness of the printers «, and that the earliest edition of all is likely to give the purest text.

It is upon this principle, and in accordance with Dr.Elm8ley''8 opinion above recorded, that the text of this edition has been formed. Adhering slavishly to no single edition, it is yet based upon the earliest of each portion of the volume. In the First Book indeed Cranmer himself admitted so great a change in 1549 by dividing the several Homilies into Parts, and the revision at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign altered so many words and phrases throughout, that it has not been thought right to print it from the first, nor even from any Edwardian, edition. The text of 1559 therefore, the earliest known Elizabethan text,

' Aditrtitemmt prefixed to the edi- such as the following :

tionof 1823. p. 17,1.13. were; wer; we; be.

* Upwkrds of thirty variations have ii5il. 9. a finite; an infinite; a small,

been csoaed by injudicious attempts to 198,1.18. sweating; swearing; swilling,

correct srron made in previous editions, 561,1. 11. region; religion; realm.

has been foUowedj except in two respects. On the one hand an endeavotrr has been made hy means of the earliest editions to get rid of the many unauthorised changes which had crept into the successive editions of King Edward's time, and which were not removed in 1559 ; and on the other hand later editions of Queen Elizabeth have been followed in omitting the changes in the First Part of the Homily of the Fear of Death, which were not retained after 1559, and in substituting " governor" for "head" as the title of the Sovereign in the First Part of the Homily of Obedience ^ The bulk of the Second Book haa been reprinted from the first edition, except where the second supplies a word or two which seem to have been added by authority, and where the previous edition of the Homily for Rogation Week gives a manifestly better textB. Of the Homily against Bebellion the second edition has been followed, as being the first which exhibits it in six Parts ; but here also a small addition has been admitted from the third ''. It must be observed however that throughout the volume erroneous readings have been set right wherever any Inter edition, as far down as the year J 623, has been found to correct them, and that some also have been amended upon other authority than that of actual editions of the Homilies, and two or three upon no external authority at all '.

' The words which were added by way of explAaation in if; 5^ ore plAced within ( )t thtiSf ** under pretence (or ooloar)", " admit (or receive)'', p, 60, il, 30, 13. I shoulij have been gliul to omit them ndtogettier.

■ Sec page 3^7, note a; page 490, note k ; page 491, note i.

h See page 596, note g.

For omitting "if" before " we shall heap" in p. 136, 1. 38, and "as" before " they first came" in p. 146. 1. ji, there ia no ancient authority to vouch, but the former change has been m^Mie by Dr. Corrie. In p. 186, 1. .is. "born" is

OF THIS EDITION. xli

In thus recovering the text the editor has had to use a discretion, of which he does not flatter himself that every exercise will be approved by every reader. But he has used it honestly, with no bias, not seeking to produce such sense or such English as he might himself think best, but only wishing and trying to determine the true reading in every instance by the actual evidence before him, " neque id reponere quod scribere. debuerat auctor, Bed qnod scripsiti." The more he considers the principle on which he has been working, the more strongly he is convinced of its soundness ; and be ventures to think that on the whole he has succeeded in putting together a more genuine text, nearer to the words actually written by the authors of the several Homilies or by the authorised editors and revisers of them '', than is contained in any other edition whatever, not ex-' ccpting the very earliest.

The authorities upon which it is constructed may be gathered Vsrious from the Various Readings given at the foot of each page. To ''*■""'* these reference is made in the text by the letters of the small alphabet. They are intended to exhibit, and no pains have been spared in the attempt to make them exhibit faithfully, the entire succession of changes in the text to the end of the reign of James I. For this purpose they supply a complete collation of

omitted, as in the actual text of the cause be did not understand it him-

fint edition, although the Corrections self.

at the end of it direct that the word i Wyttenbach, Praefat. ad Plutarch.

■hall be inserted, and although it has Moral. TV.

been printed in every subsequent edi- * Some may think that Dr. Elmsley's

taon accordingly ; for it is plain that opinion ought to have been closely fol-

the words " of a Jew" there are equi- lowed throughout, and that it would

Talent to "from being a Jew", or, as have been better to alter "some par-

we should now say, " from Judaism". ticular expressions" in accordance with

It is no wonder that strange uses of the edition of 1613, adopting the revi- tlie word "of" perplex modem read- t sion of that year as well as the one

en, as in our Lord's precept that we made in 1559. ^"' '^ must be ob-

should make to oundva frieiuU of the served, not only that we have the Ho-

aKiiiHii<mo/imri9A(eoiiM<st,Lukervi,9, milies upon the authority of Quoen

or in David's, entreaty, Jfold wA iky Elizabeth rather than of King James I,

Umg>t€, O God, of my pnau, Ps. cix, i, but also that that edition is so full of

Veut, Umdim meam ne tacuerit, Vulg., errors, many of them errors of omis-

printed in all our Prayer Books since sion, that it really is hot possible to

1631 0 Ood of my praiie with Dan determine with certainty which of the

laudwm at the head of the Psalm ; but changes in it were intended by the

it is onriouB to see a critic of that time editor and which are due to the care-

deatroying the sense of a passage be- lessness of the printer.

xVii THE EDITOU'S PREFACE.

tbe editiou of 1623 at one end of the period and of the first edition of every portion of the volume at the other, and inteis mediately between the two extreme points they specify the particular edition in which each variation is first found. They also give a complete collation of the first Elizabethan edition of the First Book, printed in 1359, of the Homilies for Good Friday and for Easter Day from that edition of Taverner's Postila which waa reprinted at the University Press in 1841, of the first edition of the Homily for Rogation Week or rather of the first three Parts of it (so called), and of the second edition (which indeed may be considered practically as the first) of the Homily against Rebellion'. But they do not, except in a very few instances, shew Buch variations bs were merely transient, being found in only a few editions, and disappearing before the close of the period in question : that would have required a verbatim collation of every edition, an amount of labour from which no adequate benefit seemed likely to result. And they contain no collation whatever of any edition later than the year 1623.

Great pains have been taken to state the variations clearly, but it may be well to say here, for example^ that a reading specified as "Jrom 1547 G 6" is found for the first time in Grafton's sixth edition of tho First Book, and is continued in all editions afterwards, and that a reading said to be " till 1547 G 6" is found in Grafton's first five editions, but not in his sixth nor in any one later. Only those expressions must not be understood to comprise any of Whitchurch's editions of the First Book in 1547, nor Grafton's edition of it in 153 1, nor either of the octavo editions, nor the editions of both Books printed in 15^7 and 1595. These editions were not followed by those which came after them ; they contribute nothing to the succession of the text ; a full ctjllation of them therefore would only encumber the page, and the reader is not to suppose them to be included any where unless they are expressly named.

Among the Various Readings will he found a few notes on matters otherwise concerning the text. Of some words or phrases, which are either ungrammatical or in any respect such

' The editions of which a complete for this Edition" whioli a lubjoined to colktion is given are precisely indi- this Prefiies. cated in the " List of the Copies used

OF THIS EDITION. xliii

that a reader might reasonably snspect them to be errors of this edition, I have thought fit to state that they are "so in all" the editions collated. I have said the same of a few other words, which do not appear to rae to be genuine, though found in all editions ; and in some few cases of this kind I have ventured to go further, and to surest the word which perhaps the author wrote.

The ancient editions will not serve as guides in the division Parafrrapbi of the text into Paragraphs, nor in the Punctuation. Very few P^octuatio of them agree with each other in these particulars ; none is even consistent with itself; and none appears to represent the mind of the several authors. Liberty has therefore been taken to arrange these throughout in the way that seemed best for the argument and the sense, and it is hoped that several places which have been difficult or even unmeaning will now be found clear and efiective.

The Italic character in the text is strictly confined to quota- italic cha- tions from Scripture. It has been used in preference to inverted r^cter. commas, partly in compliance with old custom, but chiefly be* cause the commas are commonly understood to mark quotations made verbatim without alteration of any kind, whereas the Italic character serves to indicate the whole extent of an adopted passage, even when some slight change has been made in its form to fit it to the sentence into which it is woven.

In repiinting any book so old as the Homilies it is confess- Spelling. edly a difficult matter to determine how far the antique modes of spelling shall be retained and how far they may be altered to the modem fashion, and I fear that in this volume they have not been treated from first to last with exact uniformity. Upon the whole the rule followed is nearly this, to disregard the final e, the interchange of i and y, and such other little things as belong to the spelling only, and do not afiect the sense or the etymology of words'", but to retain scrupulously every

been nuule modem in the text, are given ttian, especially in the plural number ;

here, because some persons may doubt eommelh, &c. ; coutUtrfaict for counter-

whether I have done right in altering feit; crept for creep; crouch for crutch;

them all. Several of them occur in the damotel ; ellet for eUe ; cmperial ; er-

xUv

ancient form find likewise every particular of orthography by which the menniiig of a word may be more clearly seen or its derivation better traced. Many of these old forms are only found in the earliest editions, having passed out of use long before the end of the reigu of James 1. They have been restored to the text in this edition, not from any mere love of archaisms, but from the conviction that they will tend to refute the very common opinion that the Second Book was all written by one author, Bishop Jewel, and in the hope that they may even help some student by and by to discover some of the other writers". The form "mought," for example, occurs four times in the Homily concerning Certain Places in Scripture and only once besides ; we find " sith that" nine times in the Homily of Repentance, but no where else ; shall we attribute this to the caprice of the printers, or rather to the peculiar usage of the several authors ?

These archaisms are included in the article, "Words obsolete or rare in form, meaning, or construction." in the General Index ; an article, which persons who are well acquainted with the progress of our lauguage may tliiuk needlessly copious, but which may perhaps lead some reailers to consider how greatly

which it V) of HerioUH Importance, a pMBBge affecting esiientiall; the doctrine of JnBtifiiavtion, p, 16, 1. tg, uiyo- ral of the ejirliest editions rightly h»TB " all together".

• It is for this renaon that in wordti which really begin with the Latin pre- positive " in", hut wliifb iu English have been apolt with 1 or with e act-ord- iDg as the writcns took them directly from (lie Latin or mediately through the French, 1 have genertilly printed that form (whether "increaae" or "en- cpei^tie", for example) which I found in the earliest edition. But 1 luvve now como to the coucluBion thivt I need not have been so particular, that, even if tlio Hovenil writers observed any cer- Uiin rule, the printem have from the first neglected it, and that the modem nsjig-e in alt Kueh wonlii may as well be adopted in future editions.

OF THIS EDITION. xlr

the tuage and signification of even the commonest words be* come changed in lapse of time".

Great pains were taken with the Marginal References to Marginal Scripture in the Oxford edition of 1840, and much was then Refe^nc accomplished in the way both of verifying them and of making them complete by the addition of the verses ; but without the help of the earliest editions and the use of the Vulgate translation it was impossible to set them right. Even in the first editions there are errors, not all owing to the printers' carelessness p; every edition in its turn added to their number; and the difficulty of correcting them was at the same time increased by their being allowed to slip to points in the margin away &om the words to which they belong, so that at length in several instances the reference and the quotation stood on different pages. They have now ^een revised throughout ; and it is hoped that here also, as well as in the text, the intentions of the writers are better represented than they have ever been before. And care has been taken to lessen the risk of error in future editions by using the letters of the small Greek alphabet to direct the reader to the right reference in the margin wherever the number or the uncertainty of quotations seemed likely to cause any mistake. It has not however been thought desirable to print the references exactly as they stand in the early editions, with the names of the different books taken from the Vulgate, I Regum for i Samuel, Paralipomena for Chronicles, Sapientia for Wisdom, and the like ; but the usage of modern editors has been followed, and the convenience of modem readers con- suIted, by adopting the titles of the books from our Authorised Version. A few undoubted errors also have been tacitly corrected, but in all other respects they are given with scrupulous fidelity, hooks [ ] being used to shew that the numbers of the verses, the Hebrew numeration of the Psalms wherever they are cited according to the Vulgate reckoning, many additional

o One item in that article is "tii8= difierent", with the varioug reading,

its". The word " its" was not invented " of it own nature", shews curiously

eran when our Authorised TransUtion how the want of it was felt half a cen-

of the Bible was made under James I ; tury before.

bat a passive in p. 189, 1. 14, " the v See for instance p. 539, n. 8. thing, which of the own nature is in-

3Elvi

T!1E KDITOK'S PHKFACE.

references"!, and a few remarks besides, are matter for which tlie editor alone is responsible.

With other notes or references in the margin no liberty whatever has been assumed : all ai-e printed just as the early editions give them. Kotea. The Notes at the foot of pages, to which reference ia made in the text by means of Arabic numerals, are not included within hooks, inasmuch as there is no mixture of matter among them, and it seemed to be better to state here once for all that they are wholly supplied by the editor. The largest portion of them consists of the original Latin or Greek of passages cited in the Homilies from the Fathers and other writers ; and in this part of my work I have been much helped by the Cambridge edition of 1 H50, the only one hitherto in which such passages have been given. Yet [ have nowhere rested upon that of any other compilation ; I have examined every passage for myself in the original authors ; and it will be seen that I do not in all places acquiesce in the selection made by the learned editor. The labour has not been perfectly successful : one passage cited as " St. Augustine's words," with " In Epist. ad Juliannm Comitem -^o" in the margin, p. 53!^, 1. "j, has baffled all research ; the marginal reference " Chrysostoni" in p. 165 is very unsatisfactorily answered in note S there j and the import of " Dialogorum Lib. iii" in the margin of p. 465 has not been discovered'. No one who has had experience in similar work will be surprised at these failures ; and any reader who observes how the Fathers and other writers are quoted, often by name only, and seldom with precise reference, will be ready to make allowance for the diflBculty of the task. It is but by a happy accident that a sentence cited in p. 144, 1. 11, as "that which is written"" has been found, not in the Bible, but in the Decretum, extracted by Gratian from a Sermon of St. Augustine.

' 1 euDpect tilt) e:(plaii»tti>n of thin iMt reference iu to be found in the fnet

OF THIS EDITION. xlvii

Similar to these are the notes io which short extracts are given from the Vulgate. That is the form in which all the writers of the Homilies best knew the Bible, and from which most of them appear to have made their quotations, translating it on each occasion for themselves'. Well educated persons continaed to be &miliar with it down to the time of Lord Bacon or later, but the New Translation of King James displaced it gradually, and to members of the Church of England it is now almost wholly unknown. This in fact is the chief obstacle to the firequent use of the Homilies in our churches, and a clergyman intending to read any of them publicly would do well to put the quotations from Scripture into language with which his people are familiar, the language of the Authorised Version. Wherever I have noticed a discrepancy between that Version and the quotations given in the Homilies, and have been able to trace it to the Vulgate, I have subjoined the extract from this in a foot note, with the double object of justifying the Ho- milist and helping the reader to follow him *. Quotations from the Greek of the New Testament are also given in a few places where it seemed expedient to supply them.

There are a few notes in which some explanation is attempted of obsolete and very rare words, and a very few which give some account of such obsolete ceremonies and customs as are mentioned or alluded to in the Homilies. Others again, not many in number, are concerned with historical statements, correcting in some instances certain errors in matters of fact, most of which were discovered very many years ago, and none of which have ever been thought by unprejudiced minds to impair the usefulness of the volume, or to falsify the character given of it in the thirty-fourth Article. But there are none which deal with doctrine. Although I have felt it my duty to furnish the reader with means for guarding against false interpretations of Scripture, and to obviate mistakes in history by placing before him statements drawn from authentic sources, I have judged it better, if there be any enunciations of doctrine which seem to

• Tbs will account for the misappre- * The edition from which I hare made

benaion of leTeral pamages of Scripture, my quotations is one of the Louvain re-

for example, of Matth. vi, 33, repeat- cension, put forth " ex officina Christo-

Mj. phori Plantini" at Antwerp in 1565.

XlVlll

The Editor's Preface: numbered entries set aside by the OCR cleaner

. In the first sentence of the Third Part of the same Homily, M m 2 i, ed. I ; p. 213, ed. 1859 :

. In the Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments, Kk (for Ppp) 3, ed. I ; p. 355, 1. 13, ed. 1859:

. In the Sennon of the Nativity, Aaaa 4 a, I. 8 up, ed. i ; p. 405, 1. 23, ed. 1859:

. Near the end of the First Part of the Sennon of the Wor- thy Receiving of the Sacrament, liii 3 a, 1. antep., ed. i ; p. 445, 1. 18, ed. 1859:

. Exhortation to the reading of holy Scripture. Probably written by Cranmer. This conjecture has been often made, by some from a general sinjilarity of style, by others from a sup- posed special resemblance to his Preface to the Bible. But I do not know that it has been observed, that of the passages dted from the Fathers in this Homily five arc extracted under the head " Sacrae Scripturae intellectus et utilitas" in his Com- mon Place Book, now preserved in the British Museum (Reg. MSS. 7. B. XI and XII), vol. I, pp. 9-ia.

, 4, 5. Of Salvation. Of Faith. Of Good Works. By Cranmer. See Jenkyns' edition of his Works, vol. II, p. 138, note.

See p. 337, 1. 36, in tliia volume : »Bil compare Jewel'ti Jlepli/ lt> Hanting, Art. XIV, "Of Adoration of Images,"

. Against Excess of Apparel. A few sentences in this Homily also are tiyken from the same Exposition. See note 5. The two Homiliea apparently are from one pen, and Dr. Gorrie assigns them both to Pilkington. Considering what was said of that writer at page xxriii, it is some confirmation of Dr Carrie's opinion to find a strong resemblance between a sentence in the former of the two, " Certainly that sin" &c. p. 298, L 7, and one in the Homily against Contention, " It must needs be a great fiinlt" &c. p. 137, 1. 33.

. Of Certain Places of Scripture. A few sentences near the beginning of this Homily are translated from r tract of Eras- mus. See note i , The author uses the old form " moiight " for " might," a peculiarity which occurs but once beaides, p. 33c,

. Of Almsdeeds. The writer of this Homily was largely indebted to Cyprian's treatise " De Opere et Eleemosynis." He quoted from the Vulgate. See note 4 on the Third Part, p. 597.

. Of the Passion, for Good Friday. From Tavemers Pos- tila, uuder the title "The passion on Palme souday," pp. 173— 181, ed. Cardwell.

In p, 118 a tnarginal abetnvct ia ■applied from Becsou's edition of hia collected Worlu, and another in p. 11 7. In p. 190, 1. 16, "error" is printed for " errora" in accordance with the paa^ isge of St. Jerome there cited, an weU an vith the context ; and iti a nimilar way the words " are reckoned" are supplied in p. J 17, 1. 31, aa the render- ing ef " oenaentur" in the passage there tnnilAtod from Gualther. In f>. i)io.

, 19, "through" ia printed for "though", and in p. 397, 1. 3, "it is not more hard" for " it is more hard", on the authority of Abp. WMtgtft's Selection of HomilieH put forth in 1 586 together with a Form of Prayer for use in the Diooeie of Canterbury ; the latter cor. rection being also found in bis own handwriting io the copy of the second edition of the Seeond Book at Lambeth, And in p. 581, 1. 32, " printed" is ra- Btored for "painted" from the very first edition of the Homily Against Bebel- lion.