__?_A‘__AA_ _-_ - GARDINER 77 evasive policy. What was to be thought. he said, of a spiritual guide who either could not or would not show the wanderer his way? The king and lords of England would be driven to think that God had taken away froii1 the Holy See the key of knowledge, and that poiitifical laws which were not clear to the pope himself might as well be coni- mitted to the flames. In short, it was owing to Gardiner’s vigorous advocacy that the celebrated connnission vas issued to Cardinals Wolsey and Campeggio to try the cause in England. After obtaining it he was recalled, but early in the following year, 1529, as Canipeggio delayed proceeding, he was sent once more to Rome. This time, however, his efforts were un- availing. The pope would make no further concessions, and would not even promise not to revoke the cause to ltoine, as he did very shortly after. Gardii1er’s services, however, were fully appreciated. He was appointed the king’s secretary. He had been already some years arch- cleacoii of '1‘-aiiiitoii, and the archdeaconry of Norfolk was added to it in March 1529, which two years later he re- signed for that of Leicester. In 1530 he was sent to Cambridge to procure the decision of the university as to the unlawfulness of marriage with a deceased brother’s wife_. in accordance with the new plan devised for settling the question without the pope’s intervention. In this he succeeded, though not without a good deal of artifice, more creditable to his ingenuity than to his virtue. In November 1531 the king rewarded him for his services with the bishopric of Winchester, vacant by Wolsey’s death. The promotion was unexpected, and was accompanied by ex- pressioiis from the king which made it still more honour- able, as showing that if he had been in some things too subservient, it was from no abject, self—seeking policy of his own. Gardiner had, in fact, ere this remonstrated boldly with his sovereign on some points, and Henry now reminded him of the fact. “ I have often srluarecl with you, Gardiner,” he said familiarly, “but I love you never the worse, as the bishopric I give will convince you.” It must be owned, however, that his next distinguished service was not a very creditable one; for he was, not exactly, as is is often said, one of Crann1er’s assessors, but, according to Cranincr’s own expression, “assistant” to him as counsel for the king, when the archbishop, in the absence of Queen Catherine, pronounced her marriage with Henry null and void on the 23d .[ay 1533. Immediately afterwards he was sent over to lfarseilles, where an interview between the pope and Francis I. took place in September, of which event Henry stood in great suspicion, as Francis was ostensibly his most cordial ally, and had hitherto maintained the justice of his cause in the matter of the divorce. Here he intimated the appeal of Henry VIII. to a general council in case the pope should venture to proceed to sentence against hpn. He also made alike appeal in behalf of Cranmer. Next year he and other bishops were called upon to vindi- rate the king’s new title of “ Supreme Head of the Church of Englanc .” The result was his celebrated treatise De l"'era U/ieilieiztia, the ablest, certainly, of all the vindications of royal supremacy. In 1535 he had an unpleasant dispute with Cranmer about the visitation of his diocese. Durincr the next few years he was engaged in various embassies id France and Germany. He was indeed so much abroad that he had little influence upon the king‘s councils. But in I539 he was much concerned in the drawing up and passing thro_ugli the House of Lords of the severe statute of the _Six Articles, which led to the resignation of Bishops Latiiner and Shaxton and the persecution of the whole ff? E:.1‘t‘y;m 31 1t53:0,1on thlel deatfh (1>fCroi_nwe1_l, earl Cmnbrid-(:6 A few ec e‘ cl iance oi 0 tie university of _ C, . yeais ater he attempted, in concert with others, to fasten a charge of heresy upon Archbishop Cranmer in connexion with the Act of the Six Articles; and but for the personal intervention of the king he would probably have succeeded. He was, in fact, though he had supported the royal supremacy, a thorough opponent of the teformation in a doctrinal point of view, and it was sus- pected that he even repented his advocacy of the royal supremacy. He certainly had not approved of Henry’s general treatment of the church, especially during the ascendency of Cromwell, and he was frequently visited with storms of royal indignation, which he schooled himself to bear with patience. In 1544 a relation of his own, named German Gardiner, whom he employed as his secretary, was put to death for treason in reference to the king’s supremacy, and his enemies insinuated to the king that he himself was of his secretary’s way of thinking. But being warned of his danger he sought an interview with Henry, in which he succeeded in clearing himself of all injurious imputations. That he was party to a design against Queen Catherine Parr, whom the king was at one time on the point of com- mitting to the Tower, rests only upon the authority of Foxe, and seems a little doubtful. It is certain, however, that his name was omitted at the last in Henry VIII.’s will, though the king was believed to have intended making him one of his executors. Under Edward VI. Gardiner was completely opposed to the policy of the dominant party both in ecclesiastical and in civil matters. The religious changes he objected to both on principle and on the ground of their being moved during the king’s minority, and he resisted Cranmei’s project of a general visitation. His renionstrances. however, were met by his own committal to the Fleet, and the visitation of his diocese was held during his ini- prisoninent. Though soon afterwards released, it was not long before he was called before the council, and, refusing to give them satisfaction on some points, was thrown into the Tower, where he continued during the whole remainder of the reign, a period slightly over five years. During this time he in vain demanded his liberty, and to be called before parliament as a peer of the realm. His bishopric was taken from him and given to Dr Poynet, a chaplain of Cranmer’s who had not long before been made bishop of Rochester. At the accession of Queen Mary, the duke of Norfolk and other state prisoners of high rank were in the Tower along with him; but the queen, on her first entry into London, set them all at liberty. Gardiner was restored to his bishopric and appointed lord chancellor, and he set the crown on the queen’s head at her coronation. He also opened her first parliament, and for some time was her leading councillor. He was now called upon, at the age of seventy, to undo not a little of the work in which he had been instrumental in his earlier years,——to vindicate the legitimacy of the q11een’s birth and the lawfulness of her 1i1other’s marriage, to restore the old religion, and to recant what he himself had written touching the royal supremacy. At least this, it may be presumed, was the time when he wrote, if, as we are told, he really did write, a Palinoclia or retractation of his book De Vera Obedieiztia, which, however, does not seem to be now extant, so that ' how far he had changed his sentiments we cannot very well judge. That he should have really changed them to some extent is not at all unnatural; and in relation to the divorce of Catherine of Aragon, we may well believe that it was his earlier and not his later action that ever troubled his conscience. Yet as to the royal supremacy, it seems that he would have advised Queen Mary to retain it; but her own desire was so great to give up ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the pope that he could not press the matter. A less agreeable task which fell to him was the negotiation of the queen’s marriage treaty with Philip, to which he shared the
general repugnance, though _he could not oppose her will.