BEFORE AND
REFORMATION
A CONTRAST

By J. Η. M.

EIGHTEENTH THOUSAND

LONDON

CATHOLIC TRUTH SOCIETY
69 SOUTHWARK BRIDGE ROAD, S.E. 1

Citt Depot : 10 PATERNOSTER ROW, E.Q 4
Scotland : 248 BUCHANAN STREET, GLASGOW.
Price One Penny.

PENNY PAMPHLETS ON
THE CHURCH IN ENGLAND
The Days of “ Good Queen Bess.” By William Cobbett.
The Suppression of the English Monasteries. By the
same.
Social Effects of the Reformation. By the same.
The Catholic Faith in East Anglia.
Catholic Faith and Practice in Mediæval England. By
H. J. Kilduff.
Before and After the Reformation.
The Truth about Bishop Bonner. By the Rev. G. E.
Phillips.
Christian Family Life in Pre-Reformation Days. By
Cardinal Gasquet.
England and Devotion to the Blessed Virgin. By Mgr.
Connelly.
England and the Holy Eucharist. By the same.
Old England and her Church. By Rev. V. Hornyold, S.J.
The Old Religion. By the same.
The Penal Laws and the Mass. By Canon Edwin
Burton, D.D.
The Price of the Mass. By Cardinal Gasquet.
The Date of the Anglican Schism. By Dr. Adrian
Fortescue.
The Second Spring. By Cardinal Newman.
The Popes and the English Church. By the Rev. W.
Waterworth.
The Last Voice of the Old Hierarchy.
A Talk on Continuity. By Mgr. Canon Moyes, D.D.
Catholic Truth Society, 69 Southwark Bridge Rd., London, S.E. i.

before anb titter the IReformation.
A CONTRAST
By J. H. M.

Those who are not very old can remember the time
when it was the boast of the members of the Established
Church that their Church had at the Reformation
separated itself from the Church which existed in
England before the Reformation. Theirs was a Protes­
tant Church ; the Church before the Reformation was
Popish ; Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley were saints, who
had laid down their lives to free their country from gross
errors and superstitions; the “invocation of saints” was
with them a “ fond thing vainly invented ” ; “ the sacrifices
of Masses ” were “ blasphemous fables and dangerous
deceits ” ; and it was their firm belief that “ by the space
of eight hundred years and more ” (before the Reforma­
tion) “ laity and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages,
sects, and degrees of men, women, and children of whole
Christendom (an horrible and most dreadful thing to
think) ” were “ drowned in abominable idolatry,” as the
Homily against Pei il of Idolatry teaches. Of course,
to people holding these views it never occurred that,
as regards essentials, their Church and the Church
before the Reformation were identical.
But since those days a great change has taken place.
New views have come into fashion, the Tractarian and
Ritualistic Movements having led to a revival of many
Catholic doctrines and practices. In “ High ” Churches

2

Before and After

doctrines are now taught, and ceremonies are now in use,
which would have shocked Anglicans of any generation
from the Reformation to nearly the middle of the present
century ; and, as this revival does not accord with oldfashioned Protestant notions, a new theory has been
started in defence of the Established Church, and that is,
that in essentials it is identical with the Church before
the Reformation ; that it is merely a continuation of that
Church. This new theory is now being continually
reiterated on all sides, and we are told that, if only we
study history, we shall be convinced of the truth of it.
To history then let us go, and see what it has to say
about several of these essentials. In this inquiry it will
not be necessary for us to go so far back as the British
Church, for what we want to know is whether, as regards
the essentials we are going to consider, there is any real
identity between the Church of the English people before
the Reformation and the Established Church afterwards.
The Headship of the Church.

Let us begin with the Headship of the Church.
Whatever may be said to the contrary, it is quite evident
that the English people, from the time of their conversion
to Christianity down to the reign of Henry VIII., acknow­
ledged the Pope to be the Head of the Church, and
never doubted that he had jurisdiction within this realm.
As we all know, at the end of the 6th century the
English had conquered and taken possession of the
country that we now call England, and English
heathenism had taken the place of British Christianity,
except in some remote parts : and the first who came
to convert these heathen English to Christianity was
St. Augustine, a Roman Abbot, who with a band of
monks landed in Kent in 597. St. Augustine was sent by
a Pope, Pope Gregory, and on his mission proving successfùl, he was appointed, by the same Pope, Archbishop
of the English nation, and received from him the pallium,
the badge of authority worn by Archbishops. Much has
been said lately of the partial failure of St. Augustine’s
mission, and of the share that the Irish missioners Aidan,

the Reformation.

3

Cedd, Ceadda, and their followers had in tne conversion
of the English, as a proof of the independence of the
Church of England, its independence, as regards Rome.
It is indeed true that these holy and zealous missioners
did much towards the conversion of this country, and
we owe them a great debt of gratitude, and it is also true
that on certain points they differed from the Roman
missioners : but their differences were- on matters of
discipline only, such as the fashion of the tonsure, and
the time of keeping Easter ; and Mr. Green, a Protestant
historian, in his Making of England, tells us that
immediately after the Synod of Whitby in 664, which was
summoned for the settlement of these differences, “ from
the Channel to the Firth of Forth the English Church
was now a single religious body within the obedience of
Rome, and the time had come for carrying out those
plans of organization which Rome had conceived from
the first moment of Augustine’s landing.” 1 He goes
on to describe how those plans were carried out. He
tells us that, on the death of Deusdedit Archbishop
of Canterbury, Oswy King of Northumbria, and Egbert
King of Kent selected Wighard for the post of Primate
of all England, and sent him for consecration to Rome.
Wighard, however, died on his arrival in Rome, and on
his death Pope Vitalian fixed on Theodore, an Eastern
monk, and sent him to England, and “ he came,” says
Mr. Green, “with a clear and distinct aim—the organF
zation of the English dioceses, the grouping of these
subordinate centres round the see of Canterbury, and
the bringing the Church which was thus organized into
a fixed relation to Western Christendom through its
obedience to the see of Rome. With this purpose he
spent the three years which followed his arrival, from 669
to 672, in journeying through the whole island. Wherever
he went he secured obedience to Rome by enforcing the
Roman observance of Easter and the other Roman rites,
while his very presence brought about for himself a
recognition of his primacy over the nation at large. As
yet no Archbishop had crossed the bounds of Kent, and
1 P· 325·

Before and After

4

to the rest of Britain the primate at Canterbury must
have seemed a mere provincial prelate like the rest. But
the presence of Theodore in Northumbria, in Mercia,
in Wessex alike, the welcome he everywhere received,
the reverence with which he was everywhere listened to,
at once raised his position into a national one. ‘ He,’
says Bæda, ‘ was the first of the Archbishops whom the
whole English Church consented to obey.’ ” 1
In 735> Wo, we find Egbert, who occupied the See of
York, procuring from Rome “his recognition as Arch­
bishop ” : and Offa, King of Mercia, wishing an Arch­
bishopric to be founded in his kingdom, sought the
permission of the Pope, Adrian I. “ The mission of two
Papal legates to Britain in 786 was the result of urgent
letters from the King ; and in a synod, held under their
presidency in the following year, Lichfield was raised into
an Archbishopric with the Bishops of Mercia and East
Anglia for its suffragans.”2 And in 803, for certain
reasons, Lichfield was reduced by Pope Leo III. to a
Bishopric. In a Saxon bidding prayer, which Canon
Simmons quotes in his Lay Folks’ Mass Book there
are these words : “ Let us pray for our Pope in Rome
and for our King.” 3 Thus it is evident that the Church
of England in those early days was Roman Catholic, and
acknowledged the Pope t© be Head of the Church.
And, if we study the history of England, we shall
find that from those days to the Reformation there
was no change in this respect. We shall find that all
the Archbishops of Canterbury, down to and includ­
ing Cranmer, received the pallium, the badge of
archiépiscopal authority, from Rome, and took the
oath, promising allegiance to the Holy See ; and
that the spiritual authority of the Pope was always
recognized by King and people. In a paper of this
kind it would occupy too much space to give the many
proofs that are to be met with in history with reference
to this subject, from Anglo-Saxon times to the Reforma­
tion ; and I will therefore only mention what has been
said and done by those competent to form an opinion.
1 p. 330.

2 Making of England, pp. 404 and 422

3 p. 63.

the Reformation.

5

Henry VIII., in his Defence of the Seven Sacraments
against Luther, says, that “ Luther cannot deny that
every orthodox Church acknowledges and venerates the
most Holy Roman See as Mother and Head.” Hallam,
in his Constitutional History of England, speaking of an
act passed, in the reign of Henry VIII., to take away all
appeals to Rome from Ecclesiastical^ Courts, tell us that
it “annihilated at one stroke the jurisdiction built on
long usage and on the authority of the false decretals.”1
With regard to these false decretals, I may just remark
that they were written about the middle of the 9th
century, and therefore they could have had nothing to
do with the Pope’s jurisdiction in this country, which,
as I have shown, was firmly established in the 7th
century. ïThen we have the evidence, not in words only
but in deeds, of Sir Thomas More and the Bishops
deposed in the reign of Elizabeth. Sir Thomas More,
who suffered martyrdom in defence of the Supremacy
of the Pope, was, we know, a most learned man, an
able lawyer, and well acquainted with the constitutional
history of England ; a reformer in the right sense of
the word, and a thorough Englishman. Is it likely that
such a man as this would have laid down his life at a
time when he was in the enjoyment of everything that
could make that life attractive, for a jurisdiction which
was not built on long usage, and which it was the duty
of Englishmen to get rid of? In the reign of Elizabeth,
fifteen out of the sixteen bishops refused the oath of
Supremacy, and were deposed.
We thus see that the English people, from the 7th to
the 16th century, acknowledged the Pope to be the Head
of the Church. At the Reformation all this was changed.
Henry the VIII. assumed the title of “protector and
only supreme head of the Church and clergy of England ” ;
and that this was no empty title, we may learn from Mr.
Green’s History of the English People. He tells us
that “ the Articles of Religion, which Convocation
received and adopted without venturing on a protest,
were drawn up by the hand of Henry himself. The
1 p. 60.

6

Before and After

Bible and the three creeds were laid down as the sole
ground of faith. The sacraments were reduced from
seven to three, only Penance being allowed to rank on
an equality with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”1
And speaking of the new version of the Bible, then
published, he says : “ The story of the Supremacy
was graven on its very title page. The new foundation
of religious truth was to be regarded throughout England
as a gift, not from the Church, but from the King. It
is Henry on his throne who gives the sacred volume to
Cranmer, ere Cranmer and Cromwell can distribute it to
the throng of priests and laymen below.” 2 And in the
reign of Elizabeth when the new religion was fully
established, all the beneficed clergy, and all laymen hold­
ing office under the crown, were obliged to take the
following oath of supremacy : “ I, A. B. do utterly testify
and declare, that the Queen’s Highness is the only supreme
governor of this realm, and all other her Highness’s
dominion and countries, as well in all spiritual and
ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal : and that no
foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath
or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre­
eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within
this realm.” Thus, by the tyrannical conduct of Henry
and his daughter Elizabeth, the usage of nearly a thousand
years was altered ; and the result was that the English
people were separated from the rest of Christendom, and
their religion, which had been Catholic, became the
religion of a race. We see, then, that as regards this essen­
tial, the Headship of the Church, the’Established Church
is not identical with the Church before the Reformation.
The Holy Eucharist.

Let us next take the Holy Eucharist, and see whether,
as regards the Real Presence and the Eucharistic
Sacrifice, there is any identity between the Church before
the Reformation and the Established Church. In the
Sarum, and other English Missals in use before the
Reformation, we find the doctrine of the Real Presence
1 p. 332·

"

the Reformation.

7

expressed in unmistakable language. For instance, in
the Sarum Missal the Priest at his Communion is
directed to say before receiving the Body {corpus),
“ Hail eternally, most holy flesh of Christ ” ; and before
receiving the Blood {sanguinem), “Hail eternally,
heavenly drink.” And in the rubric that follows the
Priest’s Communion, the direction is given that the sub­
deacon “ should pour into the chalice wine and water,
and that the Priest should rinse his hands, lest any re­
mains of the Body and Blood {aliquœ reliquiae corporis
vel sanguinis) should remain on his fingers, or on the
chalice.” In the rubrics too that follow the Consecration,
the consecrated elements are called the Body and Blood.
Here we see plainly that the Body and Blood of Christ
were believed to be present and that this Presence was
regarded as being due to the words of Consecration
alone, and not to the faith of the recipient. And if we
study the history of pre-Reformation times with refer­
ence to the Blessed Sacrament, we shall find devotions
and practices which express this same belief. In the
Lay Folks' Mass Book, which was written in the 12 th
century, the laity are thus instructed :—
Loke pater noster thou be sayande.
To tho chaly ce he be saynande,
Then tyme is nere of sakring,
A litel belle men oyse to ryng.
Then shal thou do reverence
To ihesu crist awen presence,
That may lese allé baleful bandes ;
Knelande holde vp both thi handes.’

We read that costly tabernacles, pyxes, and other
receptacles were provided for the reservation of the Holy
Eucharist. With regard to these, the Rev. T. E. Bridgett,
in his History of the Holy Eucharist in Great Britain,
states that the Council of Lambeth, in 1281, orders that
in every parish church there must be*a decent tabernacle,
with a lock. In this the Body of the Lord must be placed
in a very beautiful pyx, and linen coverings. {Wilkins
ii. 48.) That “in St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, in 1385,
' P· 36·

8

Before and After

there was a noble ivory pyx, garnished with silver plates,
gilt, with a foot covered with leopards and precious stones,
having a cover of silver gilt with a border of sapphires,
and on the top of the cover a figure of the crucifix with
Mary and John, garnished with pearls, with three chains
meeting in a disk of silver gilt, with a long silver chain
by which it hangs.
(Dugdale Mon. viii. 1365.)”
That “small silver and copper pyxes were also com­
mon in villages, as in the parish of Heybridge, near
Malden in Essex, we find one of each kind. (Church­
warden’s account, p. 175.)” And that “at the abbey of
St. Alban’s as we learn from Matthew Paris, Eadfrid, the
fifth Abbot, in the time of King Edmund the Pious (a.d.
941-6) had purchased a most beautiful vessel, as admirable in workmanship as in material, and had offered it
to St. Alban’s to place in it the Body of our Lord.” Then
there were processions of the Blessed Sacrament on Palm
Sunday and on the Feast of Corpus Christi round churches
and churchyards, and through the streets of towns and
villages, thronged with adoring worshippers.
And now let us contrast all this with the teaching and
practices of the Established Church. Let us first take
the Anglican “Order of the Administration of the
Lord’s Supper.” In the prayer of consecration we find
these words : “ Grant that, we receiving these Thy creatures
of bread and wine, according to Thy Son our Saviour
Jesus Christ’sholyinstitution,inremembrance of His death
and passion, may be partakers of His most blessed Body
and Blood.” Thus we see that what is to be received is
bread and wine—consecrated it may be, but still bread
and wine—and that not until partaken of are they to
become the Body and Blood of Christ. This is in ac­
cordance with Article xxviii. “ The Body of Christ,” it
says, “is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only
after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean
whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the
Supper is Faith.” And in the rubrics that follow the
prayer of consecration we do not, in a single instance,
find the words Body and Blood, as we do in the Sarum
Missal. These are the expressions used. At the adminis·

-j

the Reformation.
c

9

tration : “ When he ” (the minister) “ delivereth the
Bread to anyone he shall say.” “ If the consecrated
Bread or Wine be all spent,” &c. “ What remàineth of
the consecrated elements.” And in the explanatory and
apologetic rubric at the end of the Communion Service
we are told that the communicants are required to receive
the “Lord’s Supper,” kneeling, “for a signification of
our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits
of Christ therein given to all worthy receivers, and for
the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the
Holy Communion, as might otherwise insue.” This
rubric was evidently intended to exclude adoration of
Christ, present in any manner under the outward appear­
ance of bread and wine ; for the kneeling, it tells us, was
enjoined for quite another purpose.
In some Anglican churches the hymn :—
Thee we adore, O hidden Saviour, Thee,
Who in Thy Sacrament dost deign to be,

is sung during the Communion service. How incon­
gruous are such words in connection with a service which
has such a rubric attached to it !
Again, in the pre-Reformation Church the Blessed
Sacrament was, as we have seen, reserved, carried about,
lifted up, and Christ, therein present, was worshipped,
but Article xxviii. expressly says : “the Sacrament of the
Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved,
carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.” And we know
that at the Reformation all tabernacles and pyxes were
removed from the churches, and the reservation of the
Blessed Sacrament was no longer allowed. Since then
the churches have been but as caskets from which the
jewels have been stolen, and they have ceased to be the
homes of the people, the daily resort of the grateful, the
sorrowful, the needy, as they were when Christ Himself
was there.
And now with regard to the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
In the Sarum Missal we find the following prayers: “Re­
ceive, O holy Trinity, this offering which I, an unworthy
sinner, offer in Thy honour and that of the blessed Mary

ÏO

Before and After

and all Thy Saints, for my sins and offences, for the
salvation of the living and the rest of all the faithful
departed.” “May our sacrifice be so offered in Thy sight,
that it may be received by Thee this day.” We also
find that the priest is directed to turn to the people and
say “ Brothers and sisters, pray for me, that my sacrifice
and yours may be acceptable to the Lord God.” And
in the Canon of the Mass the priest says: “We most
humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, command these
things to be carried by the hands of Thy hply angel to
Thy altar on high, in the sight of Thy Divine Majesty,
that as many of us as by participation at this altar, receive
the Most Sacred Body and Blood of Thy Son, may be
filled with all heavenly benediction and grace,” and
then he goes on to pray for the dead. It is well known
that, in the pre-Reformation Church, it was the custom
to offer the Mass for special intentions, whether for the
living, or the dead, and that chantries were founded and
endowed for the express purpose of Masses being offered
for the dead.
And now let us turn to the Thirty-nine Articles, and
the “Book of Common Prayer.” In Article xxxi. it
is stated that “ The sacrifices of Masses, in the which it
was commonly said, that the priest did offer Christ for
the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain and
guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits”—
i.e., that such Masses, as had hitherto been offered in
churches and chantry chapels, were “blasphemous fables,
and dangerous deceits,” and, accordingly, endowments
for special Masses were confiscated, and chantries were
done away with and from the service that was substituted
for the Mass, and every expression that might keep alive
the old belief with regard to the Sacrifice of the Mass was
eliminated. For the word Mass, which conveyed the
idea of both Sacrifice and Communion, we have the title,
“ The Order of the Administration of the Lord’s Supper,
or Holy Communion,” which was evidently intended to
exclude all notion of Sacrifice. In the “ Prayer for the
Church Militant” the word “oblations” is used, but it is in
connection with the word “alms.” And in the prayer

the Reformation.

II

after Communion there are the words, “ Our sacrifice of
praise and thanksgiving,” and, “ here we offer and present
unto Thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be
a reasonable, holy and lively sacrifice unto Thee”—which
expressions certainly may be used, as they have been used
by Protestants for three centuries, without any belief in
the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
The word altar, which we find repeatedly used in the
Sarum Missal, is not once to be met with in the Anglican
Communion Service : it is always called the “ Table,” or
“ the Holy Table,” or “ Lord’s Table,” Catholic terms,
but used with reference to Communion. A further proof
of the intention of the reformers was the order to destroy
the old stone altars, and to replace them by wooden
tables; and tables, like those in ordinary use, were
accordingly provided—an ingenious and effectual means
of destroying all belief, not only in the Eucharistic
Sacrifice, but also in the Real Presence. The bread
used for Communion was to “ be such as is usual to be
eaten ” ; and the tables, on which it was placed, were to
be such as were found in their own houses, and on which
their daily food was placed. As regards this essential,
the Holy Eucharist, there is, we see, no real identity
between the pre-Reformation Church and the Established
Church. It is true, that in the teaching and practices of
extreme High Churchmen this identity is to a certain
extent to be found; but then we must remember that
these men are but a modern sect in the Established
Church, whose teaching and practices are regarded by
their fellow Anglicans as being contrary to the principles
of the Reformation, as undoubtedly they are. To know
what the teaching of the Anglican Church is on this
subject, we must not look to those who, dissatisfied with
the meagre teaching and practices of their Church, have
adopted doctrines and practices in accordance with their
own more Catholic views, but to the formularies of their
Church and the practices that have prevailed in it from
the 16th to the 19th century.
We have seen what the teaching of the formularies is; we
have seen that everything that might keep alive a belief in

12

Before and After

the Real Presence, or in the Eucharist Sacrifice, was done
away with at the Reformation and many of us know, from
our own personal experience, how thoroughly the old belief
with regard to the Holy Eucharist had died out in the
Established Church. We know what was generally the
state of affairs some few years ago—bread prepared for
the Communion with but little care or reverence ; crumbs
of the consecrated bread scattered about the chancel
floor ; crumbs left on the paten, or plate ; and consecrated
wine left in the cup to be dealt with as clerk or sexton
should think fit ; the “Communion plate” given to the
Rectory servant to be cleaned with the family plate ;
the absence of those marks of reverence common
among Catholics ; the quarterly or monthly celebration
of the Communion service ; the nearly empty church,
when that service was celebrated ; the greater popularity
of the “ Morning ” and “ Evening prayer ”—all quite
incompatible with a belief in the Real Presence or
Eucharistic Sacrifice. Certainly, owing to the influence
of the High Church party, there has been an improve­
ment in this respect; still the fact remains that these,
and such as these, have been the practices and customs
of Anglicans during almost the whole of the existence of
the Established Church.
Invocation of Saints.

And now let us consider another essential, the Invoca­
tion of Saints. In the pre-Reformation Church the
invocation of the Saints was generally practised. For
instance, there were Litanies of the Saints which were
used on different occasions. In the Visitation of the
Sick, in the Missal of Robert, Archbishop of Canterbury,
A.D. 1050-1052, there is one of these litanies. In it, after
the petition, “ have mercy on us ” to the three Persons in
the Blessed Trinity, the words “prayfor him” are addressed
to the Blessed Virgin, the apostles, and other saints. In
the Rede Book of Darbye we have a similar litany, in
which we find the names of the following saints—Alban,
Oswald, Eadmunde, Swithin, Dunstan, Ætheldrytha,
Ermenhilda. In the York Manual we find a litany of the

<»

the Reformation.

?

13

Saints which was used during the benediction of the font
on Holy Saturday And in a Sarum Missal, about a.d.
1400, we have a bidding prayer which begins : “Ye shall
stand up and bid your beads ” (offer your prayers) “ to
our Lord Jesus Christ, and to our Lady Saint Mary, and
to all the company of heaven for the state of holy
Church and for our Mother Church of Rome, and for
our Lord the Pope,” &C.1
And especially was the Blessed Virgin, “ the Queen of
all Saints,” invoked The Rev. T. E. Bridgett, in his Our
Lady's Dowry, says: “A MS. now in the University
Library at Cambridge, called the Book of Cerne, and
which belonged to Ethelwald, Bishop of Sherbourn in
760, contains the following prayer to the Blessed Virgin,
a clear monument both of the faith and devotion of the
Anglo-Saxons in the time of Venerable Bede : ‘ Holy
Mother of God, Virgin ever blest, glorious and noble,
chaste and inviolate, O Mary Immaculate, chosen and
beloved of God, endowed with singular sanctity, worthy
of all praise, thou who art the advocate for the sins of
the whole world ; O listen, listen, listen to us, O holy
Mary—pray for us, intercede for us, disdain not to help
us. For we are confident and know for certain that thou
canst obtain all thou wiliest from thy Son, our Lord
Jesus Christ, God Almighty, the King of ages, who
liveth with the Father and the Holy Ghost, for ever and
ever, Amen.’” Ælfric in the 10th century says:
“Let us also be mindful of how great dignity is the
holy Maiden Mary, the Mother of Christ. She is blessed
above all women ; she is the heavenly Queen, and the
comfort and support of all Christian men. Our old
mother Eve shut to us the gate of heaven’s Kingdom ;
and the holy Mary opened it again to us, if we ourselves
by evil works shut it not against us. Much may she
obtain of her Child, if she be fervently thereof reminded.
Let us therefore with great fervour, pray to her that she
·> may mediate for us to her own Child, who is both her
Creator and her Son.”^ And in a Saxon prayer, written
just before or soon after the Conquest, we find the following
x Publications of the Surtees Society,

U

Aejore and After

words : “I have no refuge but in thee, O my Lady, O holy
Mary ; therefore on my knees I beg that thou wilt inter­
cede for me with our Lord God, that by thy holy prayers
He may deign to forgive me all my sins.”1 Canon
Simmons, in one of his notes in the Lay Folks' Mass Book,
gives us this prayer from the York Horæ : “ O blesseyd
lady Moder of Jesu and Virgin immaculate, that arte welle
of comforte, and moder of mercy, senguler helper to all
that trust to the, be now gracyous lady mediatrice and
meane unto thi blyssed Sone our Saviour Jesu for me,
that by thyn intercessions I may obtayne my desires ever
to be your seruaunt in all humilité. And by the helpe
and socour of all holy saintes hereafter in perpetual ioy
euer to lyve with the. Amen.”
It is often said that the language addressed to the
Blessed Virgin in Catholic books is a modern develop­
ment, is ultramontane; but in what does it differ from
that used by our Catholic ancestors ? Let us see what
the teaching of the Established Church is on this subject.
In Article xxii. it is said that “ the Romish doctrine
concerning Purgatory. . . . and also the invocation of
Saints is a fond thing vainly invented.” And in accord­
ance with this new idea litanies of the Saints were no longer
used : the “ Hail Mary ” and the invocation of Mary and
of the Saints no longer appeared in the Prayer Book, or
Primer ; the images and shrines of the Blessed Virgin and
the Saints were destroyed; Lady Chapels were disused ; and
the Angelus bell ceased to be heard. So thorough was the
“ reform ” with regard to the invocation of Saints that
even the most extreme High Churchmen have not yet
ventured openly to revive it. Here then is another essential
in which there is no identity between the pre-Reformation
Church and the Established Church.
Extreme Unction.

I will only take one more essential, and that is the
Sacrament of Extreme Unction. In Leofric’s Sacra*
mentary (roth century), and in pre-Reformation Ponti­
ficals and Manuals, we find the order of administering the
* PP- 23, 37, 142·

the Reformation.

i5

Sacrament of Extreme Unction. This sacrament which
is thus spoken of by the apostle St. James—“ Is any man
sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the Church,
and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the
name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save
the sick man : and the Lord shall raise him up : and if
he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him ”—and which,
like the other sacraments, was generally made use of,
and highly valued by our Catholic ancestors, is said in
Article xxv., “ to have grown of the corrupt following of
the apostles,’.’ and has more thoroughly disappeared
from the Established Church, than even the invocation
of Saints. The Saints are invoked occasionally in pri­
vate, and Anglicans have been known to tell their
friends in confidence that they have “ a great devotion
to our Lady ” ; but I have never yet heard of an
Anglican clergyman administering Extreme Unction—
another proof that in essentials the Established Church
is not identical with the pre-Reformation Church.
No one can deny that the Headship of the Church, the
Real Presence, the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Invocation
of Saints, and Extreme Unction are essentials ; and as
regards these, I think I have proved that the Established
Church is not identical with the pre-Reformation Church
of England. I could bring forward other essentials with
the same result ; I could enumerate many pious beliefs
and pious customs which were universal in this country
when Englishmen were all Catholics : but the essentials
I have chosen are quite sufficient for my purpose.
And now I would ask : How can it be possible for the
Anglican Church, which has given up so many essentials,
to be the same as the Old Church of England, to be a
continuation of that Church ? High Churchmen believe
that Christ founded a Church, that He sent down the
Holy Spirit to guide that Church into all truth, that that
Church is the “ pillar and ground of the truth,” and I
would ask them to explain how it is, that this one
continuous Church of England, which they talk about,
has varied so much in its teaching ; how it is that this
Church has taught the people for nearly a thousand years

i6

Before and After the Reformation.

that the Pope is the Head of the Church on earth, that
in the Blessed Sacrament Jesus Christ is present under
the outward appearance of bread and wine, that the
Eucharistic rite is not only a Communion, but a sacrifice
which can be offered up for the living and the dead, that
the Saints should not only be honoured, but invoked,
and that Extreme Unction is a sacrament and generally
necessary for the sick ; and that this same Church (as
they say it is) has also for the last three hundred years
been teaching the English people that what their ancestors
had been taught for nearly a thousand years with regard
to these essentials, and had believed, was all wrong, was <
deadly error, and what is more, has been' enforcing this
new teaching by penal laws. I would ask our High
Church friends how a Church of this kind can be an
infallible teacher and guide of men in spiritual things,
as Christ promised His Church should be ?
If Anglicans will only study history carefully, and
with a desire to arrive at the truth, they must be led to
see that the Church which is the same as the Church of ■
Old England and which is a continuation of that Church,
is not the Established Church, but the Catholic Church in
England ; that Church which, though cruelly persecuted
for nearly three hundred years, has through all these
years kept alive the old Faith. As of old, she acknow­
ledges the Pope as the Head of the Church, and is
Catholic, a part of that one spiritual Empire which is
spread throughout the world, and comprehends men, not
of one race only, but of all races. As of old, Christ is
present on her altars to receive the homage of His
people, to accept their thanksgivings, to hear their
prayers, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is offered
up in her churches for the living and the dead. As of
old, she teaches her children to honour the Blessed
Virgin Mary and the Saints, and to seek their powerful
help. As of old, her children can avail themselves of
the Sacrament of Penance and the Sacrament of
Extreme Unction.
As of old, Benedictines, and
Franciscans, and Dominicans minister at her altars, and
form part of her organization. As of old, Christians of
all nations find themselves at home in her churches.

NARRATIVES OF CONVERSION
Cloth Volumes, Crown 8vo.

Is. 3d. each, net.

SOME CONVERTS
FIRST SERIES, containing—
Cardinal Newman. By Canon William Barry, D.D.
Cardinal Manning. By Aimée Sewell.
Canon Bathurst. By the Rev. Bertrand Wilberforce, O. P.
Confessio Viatoris. By C. Kegan Paul, M.A.
Why I left the Church of England. By James Britten, K.C.S.G.
How I Came Home. By Lady Herbert.
The Conversion of Miss Drane. By the Rev. Bertrand Wilberforce, O.P.
Mary Howitt. By James Britten, K.C.S.G.

SECOND SERIES, containing—
How I became a Catholic. By Dr. G. J. Bull.
A Son of the Manse. By Gordon T. Mackenzie.
Reminiscences of an Irish Convert. By Sir Henry Bellingham, Bart
Why I became a Catholic. By Horace E. Chapman, M.A.
From Darkness to Light. By Mgr. Croke Robinson, M»A.
“ The Truth Shall Make You Free.” By E. Duncan Boothman, M.A
A New England Conversion. By Miss J. M. Robins.
“ Seek and You Shall Find.” By Dom Norbert Birt, O.S.B.
(The papers in the above volumes ean also be had separately,
price One Penny each.)

THREE CONVERTS
Father Thayer, Miss Trail, Mrs. Howitt.

A PROTESTANT CONVERTED BY
HER BIBLE AND PRAYER BOOK
By Mrs. Pittar.

Catholic Truth Society, 69 Sobthwarx Bridge Rdh London, S.E. i

Cloth, Crown 8vo, pp. 194.

Price is. 3d., net.

Plain Talks on
Catholic Doctrines
BY THE

Rev. GEORGE BAMPFIELD
Containing :—

The Mother and the Son: Talks abont Our Lady.
Confession: Some Talks with Sergeant Jones.
Talks with Nonconformists: Worship, and “Priestism.”

Which Church Believes the Bible?

“ We are glad to come across a nice edition of this popular work, which
has been found so. very useful in the case of those persons who want
plain, homely ‘ book-chats ' on the subjects of the Catholic Faith. The
would-be convert of this description will find that Father O’Flanagan,
like Father O’Flynn, has indeed ‘ a wonderful way ’ of putting the
doctrines of the Church in a clear, forcible light.”—Catholic Times.
“The ‘talks’ of ‘Father O’Flanagan,’ ‘Sergeant Jones,’ and others,
besides being plain, are really interesting and instructive. And they
dwell upon those objections to Catholic teaching which every Catholic
ought to be (and is not) able to talk of intelligently with his Protestant
neighbours.”—Missionary Record.
“ Father Bampfield secured a reputation for the extreme common-sense
and readability of his tracts ; and it is a tribute alike to his memory and
to his usefulness that now, after his death, the circulation of these little
works should be kept up.”—Examiner (Bombay).
“ Plain they are, as all that we have from this talented writer’s pen ; at
the same time they are convincing and delightful.”—Catholic Herald of
India.
“ Humorous, temperate, convincing and easily understood."—Austral
Light.

Catholic Truth Society, 69 Southwark Bridge Rd., London, S.E. i.