But the light, in which archbishop Cranmer appears to most advantage, is in that of a reformer, conclucting the great work of a religious establishment; for which he seems to have had all the necessary qualifications. He was candid, liberal, and open to truth in a great degree. Many of his opinions he reconsidered and altered; even in his advanced age. Nor was he ever ashamed of owning it; which is in effect, he thought, being ashamed of owning, that a man is wiser to-day than he was yesterday. When his old tenets with regard to the Lord's supper, were objected to him; he replied with great simplicity; ‘I grant that formerly I believed otherwise than I do now; and so I did, until my lord of London (Dr. Ridley) did confer with me, and by sundry arguments, and authorities of doctors, draw me quite from my persuasion.’

To the opinions of others also he was very indulgent. One fact indeed, mentioned in his life, the death of G. Paris is a glaring instance of the contrary. Something, no doubt, so good a man would have to say for himself, if we could hear his plea, in vindication of so barbarous, and horrid a piece of bigotry: but as the naked fact now stands, we can only express our astonishment, that a single action should so grosly run counter to every other action of his life.

The uncommon caution of his temper likewise qualified him greatly as a reformer. In his conversation he was remarkably guarded. ‘Three words of his, says Lloyd, could do more, than three hours discourse of others.’ In acting he always felt his ground, as he proceeded; and had the singular wisdom to forbear attempting things, however desirable, which could not be attained. He rarely admitted any circumstances into his schemes, which ought to have been left out; and as rarely left out any which ought to have been admitted. Hence it was, that he so happily accomplished the most difficult of all works, that of loosening the prejudices of mankind. Hence it was also, that the ground which he took, was so firm, as scarce to leave any part of the foundation he laid, under the necessity of being strengthened.

The sweetness of his manners also contributed not a little to the completion of his designs. He was a man of a most amiable disposition. His countenance was always inlightened with that chearful smile, that made every body approach him with pleasure. It is indeed surprizing, how much he was beloved, and how few enemies he made, when we consider that his whole life was a constant opposition to the opinions and prejudices of the times. Whom he could not persuade, he never disobliged. A harsh measure he considered only as another name for an imprudent one. When he could not go on smoothly, he would retreat a few steps; and take other ground, till he perceived the obstruction was removed.

The composure of his temper was another happy ingredient in his character as a reformer. It was rarely on any occasion either raised or depressed. His features were by no means an index to the times. His most intimate friends could form no conjecture from his outward behaviour (which was always flowing with benignity) whether he had met with any thing either in parliament, or in council, to disturb him.

One can scarce on this occasion avoid a comparison between him, and his successor archbishop Laud. Both were good men—both were equally zealous for religion—and both were engaged in the work of reformation.—I mean not to enter into the affair of introducing episcopacy in Scotland; nor to throw any favourable light on the ecclesiastical views of those times. I am at present only considering the measures which the two archbishops took in forwarding their respective plans. While Cranmer pursued his with that caution and temper, which we have just been examining; Laud, in the violence of his integrity, (for he was certainly a well-meaning man) making allowances neither for men, nor opinions, was determined to carry all before him. The consequence was, that he did nothing, which he attempted; while Cranmer did every thing. And it is probable, that if Henry had chosen such an instrument as Laud, he would have miscarried in his point: while Charles with such a primate as Cranmer, would either have been successful in his schemes, or at least have avoided the fatal consequences that ensued.—But I speak of these things merely as a politician. Providence, no doubt, over-ruling the ways of men, raises up, on all occasions, such instruments as are most proper to carry on its schemes; sometimes by promoting, and sometimes by defeating, the purposes of mankind.