Bishops and Reform in the English Church, 1520-1559 (review)

Kenneth Carleton has supplied a deficit in our knowledge of the early modern English Church by providing overall and detailed coverage of the role of the bishops as a body in the crucial period of the early Reformation. It is, therefore, a highly significant work. Previously we have had to rely upon biographies, such as the excellent study of Cranmer by Diarmaid MacCulloch, and on work on the social, administrative, and financial aspects of the episcopate, by scholars such as Felicity Heal, for insights into this reforming role. Stephen Lander's "Church Courts and the Reformation in the diocese of Chichester, 1500-1558," promised a more exhaustive examination of episcopal reform during the early Reformation which has not been fulfilled.

The author offers a view, based on careful treatment of the bishops' writings, of how the bishops envisaged their own rule. It represents a contribution not only to the history of theology but also to the history of ideas. Particularly useful are the chapters outlining the theologies of episcopacy in mid-Tudor England and those treating the life of the bishop and his activity.

There are some missing items in the bibliography which give one reason to pause. For example, Andrew Foster's useful essay on the function of a bishop is conspicuously absent; yet it covers much of the same ground for a slightly later period. It is valuable for an author (and, ultimately, for his/her readers) to read forwards as well as backwards in terms of the chronology of a subject.

The book would have been improved by some consideration of the gaps in the available documentation. Inevitably such a subject demanded that the greatest emphasis would be laid upon the writings of the bishops (whether sermons, treatises, or correspondence) and upon the surviving evidence of their activities in their dioceses. For Kenneth Carleton this evidence was sought in registers and visitation articles. There is little or no consideration of the work of the episcopal courts (except in the section on heretics) or of the way in which studies of these and of diocesan officials can be made to relate directly to the work of individual bishops. When I reached the end of the book I knew little more about the availability of material for such work than I did at the beginning. Moreover, source criticism does not loom large.

This is a very good book which will take a deserved place on the scholar's bookshelf. It has many virtues—it is well organized and is written in a clear, direct style; it treats many of the important questions that historians have asked and need to ask about the bishops' role in the English Reformation—and just a very few faults.