« السابقةمتابعة »
it was “ taught in the citie of Noremberge, where “ Hosiander is cheif preacher,” he may perhaps have known, or at least suspected, that Cranmer was induced to publish the work in English by his friendship for Osiander, whose niece he had married, and with whom he kept up a familiar intercourse by lettersz. Justus Jonas junior was put to death for his religious opinions in 1567a.
In the account hitherto given, the Catechism has been considered to have been published in 1548, though Strype assigns it to the year 1547b. Herbert, in his edition of Ames, supposes that there were two editions, one without date, and the other in 1548; but there is reason to think that it was not published till the latter year. There are at least three copies of the Catechism in Oxford, and a fourth has been collated for this edition. Two of them have the same title-page, of which a fac-simile is given in the present volume: the other two have evidently lost the titlepage, but they cannot properly be described as without date. Three of these copies would be pronounced by any person conversant in such matters to be decidedly of the same edition;
z Memorials of Cranmer, p. 15. a Melchior Adam, Vit. Germanorum Theologorum, p. 413. o Ib. p. 159.
Two are in the Bodleian, (Tanner 54, and Crynes 874,) and the third is in the library which was left by Dr. Allestree for the use of the Regius Professor of Divinity. The fourth has been obligingly furnished by Mr. Cochran of London.
though they also contain typographical variations, which it is difficult to account for upon any hypothesis : but Cranmer himself has thrown some light upon this subject by what he said upon his examination at Oxford; when being charged with having introduced an alteration into some copies of the Catechism, he answered, “I remember there “ were two prynters of my sayde booked;" but this is perhaps to be understood of two printers being employed upon the same edition, rather than upon two separate editions. One of the Bodleian copiese appears undoubtedly to have issued from a different press, but it bears the date of 1548, as does one of the other copies, from which it differs in some remarkable points. There is therefore no direct evidence of the Catechism having been published in 1547; at least no such evidence has been brought to light in the research which has been made for the present edition; and it seems most probable that all the copies were printed in 1548.
Strype has committed a most extraordinary blunder, when he says, “ This Catechism, towards “ the latter end of king Edward's reign, was “printed again, and had the approbation of a ““ convocationf;" for he here confounds Cranmer's Catechism with a totally different work, which
d Fox, Acts and Monuments, vol. II. p. 1877.
e Crynes 874. This copy contains no list of errata at the end: but the errata, which are noticed at the end of the other copies, are corrected in this.
* Ecclesiastical Memorials, vol. II. p. 32.
was entitled, Catechismus brevis, Christianæ disciplinæ summam continens, &c., to which were added, Articuli, de quibus in ultima synodo Londinensi A. D. 1552, convenerat. Cranmer, in his examination at Oxford, was charged with having set forth a Catechism in the name of the synod of London, though many members of the synod disclaimed any knowledge of it 8 ; a fact of which Strype was well aware: and in another part of this same work he not only mentions this charge, but gives a minute account of the Catechism, which he says “ was certainly writ by “ Alexander Noelh.”
If we compare the English and Latin Catechisms together, the translator appears to have followed his original very closely : but in some instances he introduced new matter; and the following is a description of the most important variations.
The Commandments are arranged according to the manner which is followed by the Roman Catholics ; i. e. the first and second Commandments are put together, and the tenth is divided into two: but in the English Catechism a long dissertation is introduced concerning idolatry, which does not occur in the Latin. It extends from p. 16. to p. 30; and it would not be unreasonable to conjecture that this interpolation was made by Cranmer himself. We learn from it, that some of the most popular images in England were those of our lady of Walsingham, our lady of Ipswich, St. Thomas of Canterbury, and St. Anne of Buxton, p. 23.
& Fox, Acts and Monuments, vol. II. p. 1440.
h Eccl. Mem. p. 368. See also Mem. of Cranmer, p. 294, where he says that “some conjecture the author to be Ponet, “ the bishop of Winchester.” This mistake of Strype is noticed by archbishop Laurence in his Bampton Lectures.
The passage in the Latin Catechism, p. 23. “ Non solum autem ad commodum proximi,” is omitted in the corresponding part of the English, p. 31; for which omission there seems no assignable reason.
Perhaps the words “Et quando magistratus “ imponit subditis juramenta non necessaria," in p. 24. of the Latin, were intentionally passed over in p. 32. of the English.
In the same page of the English Catechism some common forms of oaths are introduced, which are not translated from the Latin, and which we may suppose to have been in frequent use in that day.
In p. 25. of the Latin it is said that God's name is taken in vain, “quando ridiculæ, obscenæ et “ turpes fabulæ aut nugamenta sub nomine Dei " et religionis recitantur.” The passage is omitted in the English, p. 34; and the favourable reception which was given to the mysteries, and other such mummeries, in England at this time, may have caused the omission.
Perhaps political reasons may have led to the suppression of the following words in p. 42. of the Latin : “ Nam parentes magistratum elegerunt, et “ constituerunt, et potestatem suam etiam illi mu“ tuarunt, ut contumaces liberos loco parentum
« puniant et coherceant.” They ought to have appeared in p. 53. of the English.
The passage in p. 64-5. of the Latin, “ Et quia “ audistis esse furtum est infideli deterior,” is omitted in p. 78. of the English, though it would seem difficult to find any objection to it.
It is perhaps hardly worthy of notice, that those words in p. 85. of the English, “For by “ malicious slaunder to the righte waye “ agayne,” are not a translation from the Latin at p. 71.
In p. 82. of the Latin, line 26, we read, “ Nemo “ est justus nisi obediat decem præceptis:" but this is altered in the English, p. 98, to, “ No man “ is just or rightuous before God, that hath not “ the Holy Gost."
The passage in p. 106. of the Latin, “ Et ut “ firmiter credamus ecclesiam inveniri,” is not translated in p. 125. of the English.
The same may be said of the whole paragraph, “ Ideo, filioli-hoc vere certum et firmum est,” in p. 108. of the Latin. It ought to appear in p. 128. of the English.
In p. 131-2. of the English, there is a long passage, which does not exist in the Latin : “ Or els 66 yf we knowe-nowe and ever. Amen.” This may also have been added by Cranmer, and the concluding part of it is very poetical. . There is no apparent reason for the omission of the paragraph, “ Et postremo-mutatio est in
ninis,” which occurs in p. 161. of the