Extracts from Original Documents Illustrating the Progress of the Reformation in Kent
( 92 )
EXTRACTS FROM ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS
ILLUSTRA'rING THE PROGRESS OF
'l'HE REFORMATION IN KENT.
BY O. EVELEIGH WOODRUFF, M.A.
THE following extracts from the Consistory Court Books,
and the Account Rolls of the Treasurers to the Dean and
Chapter of Canterbury, have been selected as illustrating by
contemporary evidence the progress of that great religious
movement which we call the Reformation of the Church of
England.
The first series of extracts relate to the period when the
Commissioners of King Edward VI., in their zeal to restore
a more primitive faith and a simpler ritual, were sweeping
out of the churches everything which savoured of medirevalism;
the second have to do with the temporary restoration
of the older uses during the short-lived Marian reaction.
The Edwardian extracts are taken from certain books which
contain the depositions of witnesses; the Marian extracts
from a book of PreRentments made to the Consistory Court ..
Both sets of records are prese1·ved in the Chapter Library
at Canterbury.
As to the depositions, it would seem that the witnesses
had certain articles submitted to them, framed upon those
confained in the Royal Injunctions of 154,7. These Injunctions
a.re printed by Wilkins in his Ooncilia, and are also to
be found in Cardwell's Documents and Annals of the Ohivrch
of England,* but as they are too long- for reproduction
here the late Canon Dixon's convenient summary of them
must suffice. "They were " (the Injunctions) he w1·ites,
" in part a reproduction of the former two sets of
* Wilkins, vol. iv., p. 8, ot seq., and Onrdwoll (1839), p, 41,
EX.'rit.A.cts FRO OltCGINA.L bobUMEN'l'S. 93
Injunctions of Crumwell and Remy VIlI. . . . . the new
parts which made the Injunctions of Edward something
more than a republication were not unimportant .• . . As
to public services of the church, some advance was made
towards the final victory of the English over the Latin
language, although the great- liturgical reformation was
delayed for some time longer . The lessons were ordered to
be read in English (a chapter out of the New Testament at
the end of t.he morning office, and after the Magnificat at
evensong). On days when there were nine lessons (in the
Latin office) it was ordered that three of them should be
omitted to make :room for this English reading ; also the
Epistle and Gospel were to be read in English at High Mass.
The English Litany was enjoined, but all processions about
churches and churchyards were forbidden . . . . When a
sermon or one of the homilies was to be had, the prime and
the three services of tierce, sext, and nones, which were
called Hours, were ordered to be omitted ....A .s to images,
the distinction between those that were superstitiously
abused, and those which were not, was still retained ...•
A.ll pictures and paintings of feigned miracles that were in
walls, glass windows, or elsewhere in churches or houses
were ordered to be utterly destroyed. Feigned miracles
were found as difficult to be discerned from true miracles, as
abused images from other images. Thenceforth began that
villainous scraping, coating, or whitewashing of frescoes and
that indiscriminate smashing of windows which obliterated
in countless numbers the most various and beautiful
examples of several of the Arts."*
From the extracts given below it would seem that the
destruction actually carried out went even beyond that
ordered by the Injunctions, since not ouly were the ima.g·es
themselves destroyed, but even the niches or "tabernacles"
which contained them.
The English Book of Common Pmyer was used throughout
Eugland for the first time on Whitsunday, 9 June 1549,
• Hi8tory of tlie Oliterch of E1igland, vol. ii., p. 428.
94 E:8.:.TB.A.CT$ FR(H,t O'.RIG-INAL DOCU-MEN'l'S
whereupon a decree was issued forbidding the possession of
any of the ancient Latin service-books under penalty of
one pound for the first. offence, two pounds fo1· the second,
and four pounds with imprisonment at the King's will £or
the third offence. The only exception made was the
authorized Primer of Henry VIII., and this was to have all
· invocation of saints blotted out. Moreover the edict was
strengthened by a royal letter to all bishops to command
their deans, prebendaries, parsons, vicars, curates and
churchwardens to deliver up all antiphoners, missals, grayles,
etc., and then to deface and destroy them.*
The destruction of altars followed in the next year. On
· 24 November 1550 a letter written in the King's name d
given under his signet was addressed by the Privy Council
to the bishops ordering them to destroy the remaining
altars and set up tables in every church.t
This was construed very strictly: it was not enoug·h that
the table was of wood, it must in no way resemble a stone
altar. Thus in 1551 the Vicar of Blean was "presented" for
setting up in his church a table modo altaris. The Vicar
appeared and confessed that "there is no difference bet,veen
the altar and the table, saving the one was stone and the
other of wood, and that this hath no ornaments or clothes."
The Commissary ordered that on the next day, before his
parishioners, he should break down the boards a.nd declare
that he hath done evil in suffering it.
It is worthy of reina.rk that Robert Collens 01· CollyllS,
the Commissary who presided over the Consistory Court
when the iconoclastic reforms of Edward's reign were in pro
gress, continued to hold his office under Queen Mary. In
1554 the Queen appointed him to a Canonry in Canterbury
Cathedral, and he actually acted as proxy for Cardinal Pole
at the latter's enthronement at Oanterbury.t Foxe gives .
him a bad character as a persecutor of Protestants, and it is
not unlikely that the Marian "presentments" printed below,
were made before the same man, who in the p1·evious reign
* Dix·o n, ut sup· r•a· , vol. iii., p. 160. . t Ibia., vol. iii., p. 161. :t: Ibia.; vol. iv., p. 893.
l'.LLUS'rRATING THE. REFORMATION IN KENT. 95
had posed as a zealous reformer. When Queen Elizabeth
came to the throne Collens was deprived of his canonry.
For the convenience of the reader the various matters
dealt with in the "Depositions" have been grouped together
under separate headings, though of course the various articles
were administered successively to each witness, whose
answers were recorded as they were given.
Depositions of Witnesses taken before Master Robert
Collens, LL.B., Commissary General.
Destruction of Jma,9es, Tabe1·nacles, etc.
154.8, May 29th. The rector of Sandhurst confessed
that "there yet remayneth 11 tabernacles at both sides of
the hie .A.ulter, on the north side one defaced, and there is
no more in his church nor chauncell; " also tl1at "ye Image
of the C1osse accustomed to be borne on processiou doth not
stand in any of ye tabernacles at the hie .A.ulter sith the com
mandment was declared at .Ashford that such things should
be taken away."*
Thomas Beeching, however, a parishioner of Sandhurst,
deposed "that on Easter last the Crosse accustomed to be
borne upon procession stode in one of the tabernacles of the
hye Aulter," and "that the Images which were taken down
remayne in the revestrie of the said church undefaced."
Peter Hall, curate of Sandhurst, deposed "that sith the
King's Injunctions ye tabernacles stoode there, but the
Images were taken away," also "that touching tbe setting
up of the Paschall candle and sepulchre he was not of knowledge
of the settyng up of them."
The vica1· of Boughton-Bleau confessed "tbat on Sunday
last there stood the topps of the tabemacles undefaced, but
that night admonished by the Somnar he tooke them down
and burned part and gave part to the poor."
* The niche for the processional cross still remains on th e north side of the
altar in the J)huroh of St. Mary at Sand wioh. . · · ·
96 EXTRACTS FROM: ORIGINAL l)QC\J:MEN'rS
The curate of Godmersham said "that there sta-ndeth a
whole table of ymages, not defaced, taken down from the
high Aulter."
Ad!ministration of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.
1548, May 29th. The rector of Sandhurst said that
"uppon Easter day last past the sacrament was ministered
to bis parishioners under ye kynde of breade onely he beying
parte thereto and knowing the same, and further that dyvers
of bis parishioners required to have it ministered to them in
both kynds, and saith that about a sevenyght afol'e Easter
he receaved a boke of Communion sente hym by the
Somnar."
.A.ndi·ew Warde, a parishioner of Sandhurst, deposed
"that the said parson upon Easter day after Evensong said
openly that it was against his conscience to ministre the
Communion in manner and form as it is sett forth."
The curate of Sandhu.rat confessed that '' he did minister
but in one kynde, because his Master woulde not suffer hym
to minister in both kynds."
The vicar of W ymingswold con£ essed that he had said
"that the natlll'all breade was transformed by the mightie
wourde of God into the body and bloode of Christe after
consecration, and that after the saide consecration, he
beleivelli that there remayneth no materyall breade."
Also, " that upon Easter day laste paste he saide ij i;nasses,
and at his first masse being about viij of the clocke there
was about xxx pe1·sons to communicate, to whom he ministered
it under the kynde of breade onely, and did not rede
unto them the exhortacious and other things appointed by
the book of Communion, neythe1· made them any other
exhortacon, and further saide come all you that have made
auricular confession and hear masse."
William Jackson, a parishioner of Deal, testified that he
had 4eard " the parson of Deal say and affirm that the body
of Christe was J:eally and naturally in the Sacrament after
the consecration, and no breade, and that (belief) he saide
he would dye in." Also, Htha.t upon Sher-thursday he sawe
lLLUS'l'RA.'l'lNG 'l'lIE REFOitMA.'tION lN it.ENT. 97
divers of the parish of Deale wit.h the said parson at confession,
to whom immediately a.fter he sawe the sa.id parson
m.inistre the breade holle (who'le), and to other that were not
confessed he ministered the same broken."
Leonard Reynold, the rector of Deal, was called and
confessed "that be bath said, and now doth say, and affirm,
that in the Sacrament of the .A.ulter after the words of
consecration there remay11eth no bread bnt the body of
Christ really."
26 February 1550. George Jones, c111-ate of Lenham,
replied to some article dealing with the manner in which he
celebrated the Holy Eucharist, that his practice was as
follows : "that from the beginning of the service at the
aulter unto such tyme the Gospel be redd or doon, the deske
with the boke standeth on the right hand of the aulter,*
and after t.hat he removeth the boke to the lyfte syde of the
alter, and after the post-communion he removeth it to the
-other syde of the alter agayne where it stoode fy1·st."
14 October IMO. Vincent Beice, freeman, of Goodnestone
next Wingham, deposed that Reginald Boke, vicar of
Newington next Hythe, on .A.11 Saints' day last past, had
said in the parish Church of :Newington, "that the Chalice
handled by a temporal man's hand was prophaued, and that
he would sing with none such, which words were reported to
the parson of Mongeham, Deputy to Mr. Commissary, who
openly in the Commissary's Court gave him rebukes for his
# TechnioaJ.ly the right side of the altar is the Gospel-side and the lef& the
Epistle-side, but this is of <:ourse reversed when the sides are considered in relation
to the celebrant, See Gavantus' T!i.esauMt,S Sacrormn Ritiium, 1763, i., p. 179:
".A.ccedit ad ooruu ejus sinistri id est Epistolae ubi stans versus altare," etc.;
to whioh Oajetan adds the following note: ".A.ccedit ad sinistrum cornu altaris
id est Epistolae, quod quidem cornu Epistorae dioi potest pars altaris uextera
siout et oornu Evaugelii . . . . dioit.ur pars altaris sinistra . , . . respectu
celebrantis qui dum est ad alture faoie ad illud versa a dextel'is habet cornu
Episto)ae, a•siuistro vero oornu Evangelie."
'l'he Rev. S, Baring Gould, in an article contributed recently to the 0ua1"diau
newspaper, states that in pre-Reforni:1tion times it was the custom at Low
Mass for the priest to begin the otllce at the north or Gospel side of the
altar, o.nd ass!ll'ts that tlie rubrio relo.ting to tfie position of the celebrant in the
Prn.yer Book was u, concession to those who already were aooustomed to llat
use, but he gives no authority fo.r the statement, and it is doubtful whethcμ-
it receives o.uy oorroboro.tion from the above evidence. · ·
VOL. XXXI. R
98 E.'l'itA.CTS FROM OR.rGlA.L I>OCU'.M.E1'S
superstitious opinions, and for proof thereof declared to him
the Scriptures, and also the King's proceedings."
The Vicai·, however, stoutly maintained his opinion, and
declared from the pulpit of his parish church that "the
Commissary had not to do for the reformatiou of things
doubtful for the service of the Church, but only the bishop
of the diocese, and whosoever presumed to take the Chalice
in his hands sought his own damnation."
A curious feature in this evidence is the £act that the
witness also deposed that he had received the Communion at
the· vicar's hands and " felt no evil savour thereat"; he
alleged, however, that" divers of the said parish of Ne wington
say that t4e said Vicar's hand is so sore divers times in
the year that they could not find in their hearts to receive
the Communion at his hands."
At Faversham it was alleged against the vicar that he
had said to the deponent's wife " except she did believe
in the Sacrament of the altar, meaning the pixes which
bang over the altar, she could not be saved."
It was also alleged that" when the said Vicar ministereth
the Communion, he eat.eth one cake whole himself, and
drinketh iii suppes after the same, but he breaketb it in
pieces to other."
Thomas Worceter, a parishioner of Challock, deposed
that Sir John Oheard, vicar of Godmersham and Challock,
did " upon St. George's day last past affirm that the Communion
ministered as yet of any cw·ate was and is of none
effect." Also that "those ministers who did minister the
Communion to their parishioners (no other commandment
being as yet therefor [sic]) be knaves and traitors." The
· said vicar had also publicly declared that in his opinion
"the Six-Articles stand still in strength and efficacy, and
'.that he would abide by them Rurely, £or three of them pertain
to the Sacrament of the altar, and the other t}U'ee stand in
a condary (? quanda,y) ; what he meai1t by this condary
this deponent cannot te11.''
The vicar meant, probably, that there was some uncer•
tainty as to binding force of three of the Articles, viz., th?s
J -. • • • .. - '. \,'
lLLUSTRA'TIN"G THE '.REFOR'.MAT:EON lN ltEN11'. 99
relating to the marriage of priests, the observation of vows
of chastity, and the necessity of auricular confession.
The Reading of the Epistle and Gospel in English.
29th May 1548. The rectoi· of Sandhurst said that
"before the bible was stolen, which was about a month ago,
there was read in his church every Mass the Gospel and
Epistle in English, and one chapiter of the New Testament,
and another of the oulde." One of the parishioners, however,
alleged that " he omitted to read the Epistle and Gospel in
English upon Sunda.ys and holy days, and that there hath
no part of the New 'l'estament been read at Matins in
English, but part of the oulde Testament divers times at
evensong"; and, f urthe1·, "that the parson affirmed openly
in the channcell of the said church that there should be
neither Epistle nor Gospel read in English in his church till
he knew more."
Roger Harman, recto:i: of Deal, said that his practice was
to read the Epistle and Gospel .first in Latin at the altar,
and then to come down and read them in English in the
pulpit.
One of the parishioners of Deal deposed that the parson
:whenever he read anything in Eng1ish "putteth on his
spectacles, ancl maketh such jerking and hemming that the
people cannot understand him, yet when he readeth the
Latin service in t4e Quire he doeth it without his spectades
and readeth it so distinctly and plainly that every man may
hear." To this the rector replied that "he always readeth
the Legends in Latin in the Quire having on his spectacles.
When he readeth a.\1y other service in Latin in the Quire he
hath his spectacles on likewise .... When he readeth the
Bible in English in the body of the Church he doeth it with
his spectacles on, though the Choir is darker than the body
of the Church.''
_F1·om thts it seems clear that some of the clergy found
it easier to read the Latin, with which they were familiar,
than the new English trnslation, which was strange to
them. . Force. of habit, too, made the curate of Lenham
:e: 2
100 lll'.X.1.'RAC1'S FROM OR'IG-l'NA.L noc'lJM:EN'l'S
revert to the old formula when baptizing a child, for it was
objected to him that he "Christened a child at Lenham, and
then spake these words in Latin and not in English : Ego
baptizo te in nomine Paflris, et Filii, et Spvritus sancti. Amen,."
Reading the Bible, Homilies and Sermons.
The curate of Sandhurst confessed that he sometimes
omitted rea.ding part of a homily '' by reason of a marriage,
or burial or such like impediment."
The vicar of .Boughton under Bleau con£ essed that on
one occasion before evensong he began to read Pinyon's [?]
" first sermon concerning the sacrament, none being present
but one so far as he perceived, but afterwards divers of his
parishioners resorted uuto him, of whom one desired him to
read up that they might hear, and so he did, until it began
to treat of the transubstantiation and there he left."
He denied that he had dissuaded his parishioners from
tea.ding the Bible, but confessed that he had said " that all
the heryticlrs bringeth t,heir auctoritie oute of the Bible."
The curate of St. George's, Canterbury, confessed that
"upon mass time he read to the parishioners of St. George's
ye book ,vord by word, commonly called ye Institution of a
Christian Man, or the King's booke, unto these words, viz.,
'furthel'more here is to be noted as teaching the receiving
of Sacraments,' ereclusive."
The vicar of Wymingswold neglected to read the King's
Injunctions, "being lett by an unprofitable sermon."
Robert Wilson, rector of Hinxhill, said that " he hath
had every quarter since Christmas last a sermon saving this
quarter, and that when he readeth the homilies, he readeth
sometime a whole homily, sometime but half, and leaveth
the rest unread until next Sunday."
The curate of Godmersham confessed that "he did forbid
Robert Mascall the reading of the Bible in the church of
Godmersham, and then he read unto him . . . . an ai·ticle
made in King Henry VIIIth his days against reading of the
Scriptm·es by certain persons . . • . He hath had but
ij sermons. Since the King's Majesty's last. visitation he.
ILLUSTRATING THE REFORMATION IN KENT. 101
bath read the homilies but once over . . . . When ix lessons
· should be read he bath not left out iij lessons with their
responds .... that the day a1·ticulate he did only read the
xiii Ohapiter of St. Mark, without any declaration or adding
thereto."
William Jackson, parishioner of Deal, aged 32, deposed
that the parson did discourage him and other persons from
reading of the Scriptures in English, saying to this deponent
"you oughteth not to read it, it doth pass your capacity, it
is fit £or such men as be learned."
On the other hand another witness, who naively confessed
"that he hath not been very much used .to go to church,"
said that "for the time that he hath been there he bath not
heard the parson to discourage any man from reading of
the Scripture, but contrariwise he bath heard him move
them to it."
The same witness said" that he hath seen the said parson
drink immodei-ately, and be discomforted with drink, but he
did not remember that he hath seen him beastly drunk."
As £or sermons, he said" the Master of St. John's College
in Cambridge made a sermon there (Deal) at the instance of
Mr. Qwyter, who he thinketh to be the parson's friend."
This was corroborated by another witness, who added :
"there bath been divers sermons by Huntingdon, Mr. Swyn
ner and others, but by whose commandment be cannot tell.
The parson doth read the Scripture, but not expound it."
The rector said that in Ad vent " he made a se1·mon, but
since that time neither he nor anyone by his procmement
preached there; but there hath been every quarter one
sermon at the least by the procurement of Mr. Tucke and
Mr. Qwytter."
Stephen Nethersole, curate of Waldershare, confessed
that he had "many times omitted to read the homilies,
sometimes for that he was disteased [sio], sometimes at the
request 0£ Mr. Edward Monnyugs either when he was
disteased, or had strang·ers, and other times he saith he read
them accordingly."
.A.t St. John's Church in Thanet one Mr, Turner had
102 EXTRA.OTS FROM ORIGINAL DOCUENTS
preached a sermon on St. John's day. The vicar of the
p arish was called to give an account of this discourse, and
deposed as £o11ows: "The said Mr. Turner taught that it
was the office of a parson, vicar, or other pastor of Christes
Church to preach God's ,vord truly, and to minister the
Sacl'aments"; :fUl'thel', "that he said that mass, matins, and
evensong were not to be said, for the mass was superstitious
ipocrysie and heresie, and against the King's statute, and
with that he took out a boke of the statutes and read it."
Of the vicar of Faversham it was said that he had not
been heard to encourage any man to the reading of the
Scripture, but contrariwise he had been heard to rebuke
some for reading it.
The vicar of Godmersham was accused of saying in the
church pulpit "that no layman ought to dispute, teach or
hold opinion in the Gospel except a Master of Arts, or a
spiritual man admitted by the ordinary."
Oandles.
At Sandhurst candles were still placed on biers at burials,
and women who came to be "churched" brought one.
The CUl'ate, however, said "that the setting up o:f the
paschal and sepulchre candles was done without his knowledge."
At Hinxhill, "at the burial of Nicholas Avery's
· wife, there were four tapers burning about the corpse syns
this Easter last past."
At Godmersham the candles " were set upon the lamps
below the Rood," but the vicar said it was done " by certen
women on Oandlemas day last past," and that he never knew
of it "till such time as the judge did lay the same to his
charge in the Church."
Poor. men's bore.
The curate of Sandh1ust confessed that he "had 11ot
called upon, exhorted, and moved his parishioners since the
King's Majesty's last Visitation, to give to th said poor
men's box, neither moved them to bestow upon the same
ILLUSTRATING 'l'HE REFORMATION IN KEN'!'. 103
that which they were wont to bestow upon pardons,
pilgrimages, trentalls, and other such blind devotions."
Oommination Se1'Vice.
Cranmer's Ash Wednesday office appears to have been
unpopular from the very first with lay folk, since the curate
of Waldershare iii excuse for his alleged neglect to use the
service deposed as follows: -"that Mrs. Engham of the palish
of .Alkham, hearing· that on Ash Wednesday the publick
cursing should be read in the parish Church of Alkham,
came to Waldershare, and Mr. Edward Monnyngs and she
coming to the said Church of Waldershare, the said
Mr. Monnyngs desired this deponent to defer the reading of
the cursings, and so he did till all the other service was
done, and then he read the said cursing openly standing in
ye body of the Church. .And further he read the declaration
going before the said cursing, and declared to the people
that they should say Amen."
Dest?·uction of .Altars.
On 31 October 1550, Richard Sympnell, vicar of Petham,
certified that the altars in his church were destroyed.
7 November 1550. Christopher Hawke, rector of
Bircholt, certified that the altars in his church were
abolished, and asked to be relieved of the sentence of
excommunication which had been pronounced against him
for non-compliance with the order; and the judge absolved
him.
On the same date Master Richard Master, rector of
Aldington, made a similar application, and his petition was
granted on condition that he destroyed all the altars in the
church of .Aldington within one week, and certified to the
Court that this had been done.
The churchwardens of Great Chart appeared, on the same
day, and made a similar 1·equest, certifying that all the
altars in the church of Great Chart were now destroyed.
30 November 1550. Certain parishioners of the parishes
of Wye and Eastling appeared and confessed that they were
104 E-XTRAO'l'S FROM OR,lGINAL DOCUMENTS
present at the visitation and heard the publication of "my
lord of Canterbury's injunctions for pulling down of Altars."
The churchwardens of Lynsted said that they were
present at the visitation, but did not hear distinctly the
tenor of the injunctions.
The parishioners of Sevington confessed that the altars
in their church had not been destroyed, and they were
ordered to appear again on the Sunday following and bring
a certificate that the work had been done.
The parishioners of the parishes of Mersham, BoughtonAluph,
Eastwell, Brabourne and Elmstead confesi::ed that
the altars had not been destroyed at the proper time (tempore
cpngruo), but asserted that this had now been done and a
table set up in the place of the destroyed altars (altaria
desfructa sunt et mensa erecta). At the same time the vicar
of Boughton-Aluph was presented for saying "that the best
of Ynglond wold not say that by the law altars should be
pulled down." When asked what he meant by the best he
ans,vered "he meaneth nobody."
The paris11ioners of Throwley appeared and swore to be
obedient to the mandate, and said that all altars in their
church were deBtroyed before the monition except one
standing in a chapel called Mr. Sondes' chapel, which,
however, was "now also defaced."
In 1551 the vica1· of Blean was presented for having set
up in his church a table that 1·esembled an altar (modo altar-is).
The vicar allowed tp.at there was no difl:erf\nce between the
table and the altar "saving the one was stone and the other
wood," and that the table "hath no ornaments or clothes."
The ju