Henry of Monmouth, Volume 2

J >> J. Endell Tyler >> Henry of Monmouth, Volume 2

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30

[Footnote 36: It is curious at the same time to
observe what extraordinary notions the Commons, who
presented this petition, had formed of freedom; how
jealous they were of the lower orders, and how
determined to exclude them from sharing with
themselves the good things of the church's
temporalities. The Commons pray that (no nief or
vileyn) no bondswoman or bondsman, be allowed to
send a son to school with a view of being advanced
in the church; and that for the maintenance and
safety of the honour of all the free men of the
land.]

[Foonote 37: 15 Richard II. (1391.)]

A case argued before the judges in the time of Henry IV, very
interesting in itself, and closely connected in many points with the
subject of this chapter, is recorded in the Year Books. The argument
arose on a writ of Quare impedit, directed against Halomm (Hallam)
Bishop of Salisbury and Chichel (Chicheley) Bishop of St. David's,
afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury. The question at issue regarded
the voidance of a prebend in the church of Salisbury, caused by
Chicheley being created Bishop of St. David's, who held that prebend,
to which he had been presented by Richard Medford, a former Bishop of
Sarum. Against the King's claim of right of presentation to the void
prebend, the defendants answered that the Pope had granted to
Chicheley licence to enjoy all the preferments which he held before,
together with his bishopric. For the King's right it was pleaded, (p. 042)
that the creation of Chicheley took place whilst the temporalities of
Sarum were in the hands of the King, on the translation of Hallam from
York to Sarum;[38] but the question at length turned virtually upon
the power of the see of Rome to dispense with the laws of England.

[Footnote 38: Some persons would probably be
surprised, among the facts recorded in this cause,
(all which however are confirmed by the
ecclesiastical registers,) to find that by a sort
of retrograde promotion, according to our usual
ideas of episcopal preferment, a Bishop of London,
Nicoll Bubwith, was translated from London to
Salisbury, and from Salisbury to Bath and Wells.
The pleading also reminds us of a curious fact with
regard to Bishop Hallam's promotion, not generally
known. The record merely states that "the Bishop of
Sarum, that now is, was translated from York to the
church of Sarum." This latter translation, however,
(if such it can be properly called,) admits of a
more easy solution than the preceding. The fact is,
that Hallam was actually appointed by the Pope to
the archbishopric of York; to which appointment the
King objected. The nomination of the Pope was not
persisted in, and Hallam was consecrated Bishop of
Salisbury.]

In the first sitting (Mich. 11 Henry IV.--_i.e._ 1409), Horton for the
defendants alleged, "We continued in possession of the prebend after
Richard Hallam had received the temporalities from the hands of the
King. Subsequently to which, and before we were created Bishop of St.
David's, our Saint Peter the Apostle, reciting by his bulls that we
were elected Bishop of St. David's, granted us licence to enjoy all
our other benefices." On which, Thirning, Justice, observed, "The
grant of the Apostle in this case cannot change the law of the land."
To which Hankford (who proved himself throughout the most zealous
supporter of the omnipotence of the Popedom) merely replied, "The Pope
can do all things;" his use of the Latin words evidently showing that
he was quoting a dictum,--"Papa omnia potest." After some discussion,
and a reference to former precedents chiefly alleged by Hankford,
Thirning rejoins very significantly, "That was in ancient times, and I
will not raise the question as to the power of the Apostle; (p. 043)
but I cannot see how he by his bulls can change the law of
England."[39] In the third deliberation, Culpeper says, "The intention
of the statute is now to be considered; and I conceive that it was
made to protect the King and other patrons in their rights, and to
restrain the encroachment of the Apostle which he makes against the
law." On the third discussion, Till argued, "Since by the law of the
land the creation of a bishop causes a voidance in fact of a benefice
before held, and by such voidance the title of presentation or
collation accrues to the patron, I say that the Apostle can by no
grant beforehand oust the patron of his right, and restrain the title
which ought to accrue to him upon such creation: for if so, he ought
to restrain and change the course of inheritance by the law of the
land; and that he cannot do, no more than if the King wished to (p. 044)
give or grant to a man that he should hold his lands after he has
entered upon a monastic life, and professed; for such grant would be
contrary to the common law of the land, and therefore would be
altogether void. So also in this case." To this argument Horton
replied, among other points, "I take it that the Apostle may grant to
a man to hold three bishoprics at a time;" in which Hankford agreed,
"provided it were with the consent of the patrons." On which Skeene
observed, "If the Pope made such a grant, the King might retain the
temporalities in his own hands, if he wished it." To this observation,
Hankford, among many other things, said, "The Apostle can in many
cases change the course of the law of the land, and prevent the
occurrence of that which ought to follow." The same judge, pressing
again the argument on which he had before relied, asks, "What say ye?
suppose the Apostle, before a man becomes a professed monk, grants him
a dispensation to hold his benefices after his profession?"--"I say,"
replied Hill, "that in such a case he cannot deprive me of my right of
patronage."

[Footnote 39: "Jeo ne ferra disputation del poiar
l'appost', mes jeo ne scay veier coment il par ses
bull' changer, le ley d'Engleterre."]

The question at issue was found to be so difficult of solution, and
the judges viewed the law of the case in such opposite lights, that it
was argued and debated between them by adjournment in four several
terms; at length the advocates of the Pope's omnipotence gave (p. 045)
way, and judgment was given for the Crown.[40]

[Footnote 40: See Year Book, "Anno xi. Hen.
IIII."--Term. Mich. fol. 37; Hilar. fol. 38; Pasc.
fol. 59; Trin. fol. 76.]

Among many memorable facts recorded by the Year Book during the
progress of this cause, most persons probably will regard with
interest the resistance made by the Crown, at this period, against the
encroachments of the Pope,--the boundless power, ecclesiastical and
political, assumed and exercised by the pontiff, and conceded to him
in England,--and, at the same time, the spirit which shows itself on
the part of some of our judges to vindicate the supremacy of the law
of England over the alleged omnipotence of the court of Rome. The
great difference of opinion also as to the power of the Pope,
expressed by the members of the judicial bench, cannot fail to
interest every Englishman, whether lawyer or not; whilst the terms in
which some of the judges speak of the encroachments of the Apostolic
see, against which the legislature of England had deemed it necessary
to enact some stringent laws, are not a little remarkable. But to
Protestants of the present day, perhaps the most surprising feature of
all may appear to be the title ascribed to the Pope by the judges,
whilst publicly and solemnly dispensing the laws of the country. They
do not speak of him as the Pope, except once in the citation of a
Latin dictum; nor do they refer to him as a sovereign pontiff
exercising the delegated authority of the chief Apostle, and (p. 046)
representing him in the church militant on earth: they do not give him
the title of "successor to St. Peter," or "our father filling the
Apostolic chair:"--they speak of him throughout in direct terms as
"the Apostle;" and in some passages they even call him "Saint Peter,"
and "our Saint Peter" the Apostle.[41] It is however very curious, in
tracing the argument in this cause, to lay the strong terms employed
by the advocates of the Pope's paramount authority side by side with
the striking expressions used by others of those high functionaries on
the supremacy of the English law, and the inability of the Apostolic
see in the plenitude of its power to change or dispense with the
common or statute law of the realm.

[Footnote 41: "L'appost'." "Nostre Saint Pier
l'appost'." "Bulls fait par Saint Pier."]

Abuses such as we have referred to in the previous sections of this
chapter prevailed everywhere, and called loudly for vigorous measures
to rectify them. At the same period the church through Christendom was
distracted and torn by contending factions, each supporting a pontiff
of its own.

To put an end to these disgraceful and unhappy feuds, as destructive
of the peace of Europe as they were hurtful to the cause of true
religion, and to effect a full reformation in the church, the Council
of Constance was professedly convened. That synod was summoned
nominally by Pope John XXIII, but in reality by the united voice (p. 047)
of the sovereigns of Europe, especially at the instance of the Emperor
Sigismund himself. It falls not within the province of these Memoirs
to record the proceedings of that council, either in extinguishing the
flame of discord within the pale of the church, or in kindling the
sadder flame of persecution[42] against all who dared to think for
themselves in a matter peculiarly their own, or in its lamentable
forgetfulness of the abuses for the correction of which it was mainly
convened. The records of the Council of Constance, however, abound in
matters of interest in connection with the immediate and professed
object of this work. We infer from them that Henry V. was then taking
a lead in religious matters, and, whilst he was anxious to resist the
overbearing tyranny of Rome, he was at the same time bent on making
the religious establishment within his own kingdom an efficient means
of conveying to all his subjects the blessings of the Gospel; he was
an honest reformer of abuses, but, at the same time, the conscientious
and uncompromising supporter of the religion of his fathers.

[Footnote 42: It is very painful to reflect on the
intolerant spirit of this very Sigismund, who was
so anxious to reform the abuses of the church; but
it is forced upon us whilst we are inquiring into
the times of Henry. Sigismund had paid (as we shall
see) a visit to Henry, and he meditated another.
But he never put that design into execution. A
letter from Heretong Van Clux, Henry's minister,
informed his master that he must not expect to see
the Emperor, for he had employment at home in
putting down the followers of Huss. "Now I know
well he might not come, for this cause, that many
of the great lords of Bohemia have required him for
to let them hold the same belief that they are in.
And thereupon he sent them word, that rather he
would be dead than he would sustain them in their
malice. And they have answered him again, that they
will rather die than go from their belief. There is
a great power of them, lords, knights, and
esquires; but the greatest power is of the
commoners. Therefore the Emperor gathers all the
power that he may, to go into Bohemia upon
them."--See Ellis's Original Letters.]

* * * * *

It was on the 20th of October 1414, that Robert Hallam, Bishop of
Salisbury, the Bishops of Bath and Hereford, the Abbot of (p. 048)
Westminster, the Prior of Worcester, Lord Warwick, and others, were
commissioned by Henry to proceed to Constance, and as his
representatives[43] to treat about the reformation of the universal
church; or, as the Pell Rolls speak, "for the salvation of Christian
souls." Another body of commissioners was subsequently sent, when not
less than four hundred Englishmen went in company of the embassy,
among whom were reckoned two archbishops, seven bishops, and many
other lords and gentlemen. Of those who were first commissioned by
Henry, Robert Hallam (or Allam) was most strenuous in urging (p. 049)
the work of reformation before and above all other matters with which
they had to do. The Cardinals were equally urgent to have the election
of Pope first settled, and then to proceed afterwards to the question
of reformation. The Bishop of Salisbury, acting, doubtless, with the
full approbation, it may be at the immediate suggestion of Henry, was
instant, in season and out of season, in forcing the work of
reformation on the Council. He was called the Emperor's right hand, so
entirely did he and Sigismund co-operate for this purpose. Indeed, the
English generally appear at first to have been among the principal
promoters of reform, and, as long as Hallam lived, to have pursued it
zealously; but on his death[44] they were much less noted for the same
zeal. Previously, however, to that event, a great schism arose (p. 050)
among the English at Constance, and the authority of the bishops
was much disregarded. To remedy these disorders, Henry wrote a
peremptory letter (18 July 1417), commanding all his people to be
obedient to the bishops, and to abstain from all factious conduct;
enjoining them, on pain of forfeiting their goods, either to behave in
a manner becoming his subjects, or to return home; directing also,
that, in all differences of opinion, the minority should conform to
the decision of the majority.

[Footnote 43: This council seems to have entailed,
first and last, on England, a very considerable
expense. Within a week of the date of the
commission, the Pell Rolls record the payment of
333_l._ 6_s._ 8_d._ (a large sum in those days) "to
Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, sent as the
King's ambassador to the General Council held at
Constance before our lord the Pope, the Emperor,
and others, there assembled for the salvation of
Christian souls." Payments also to others are
recorded.]

[Footnote 44: Bishop Hallam died at Constance,
Sept. 5, 1417. On which day the Cardinal des Ursins
addressed a letter to Henry, praying him to appoint
as Hallam's successor at Salisbury, John Ketterich,
Bishop of Lichfield, to whose ability and zeal and
worth the Cardinal bears strong testimony. This
same Cardinal had a personal interview with Henry
in 1418, just before the taking of Rouen.

Le Neve leaves it in doubt whether Bishop Hallam
was buried at Constance, or in Westminster Abbey.
But the Author has been kindly furnished by Sir
Francis Palgrave, who visited Constance last year,
with the following interesting particulars relative
to the resting-place of that excellent man. "The
monument of Bishop Hallam consists of a slab inlaid
with brass, in the usual style of English memorials
of the same period, but quite unlike those of
Germany; and I have no doubt but that the brasses
were sent from England. He is represented at full
length in the episcopal dress, his head lying
between two shields, the royal arms of England
within the Garter, (as Chancellor of the order,)
and his own bearings. But the tomb being placed
exactly in front of the high altar, the attrition
to which it has been exposed in this part of the
church has nearly effaced the engravings." His
funeral, we are told, was attended by the assembled
princes and prelates and nobles of the council, who
followed him to the grave with every demonstration
of respect and sorrow.]

Bishop Hallam entertained a most rooted antipathy to the Pope and the
Popedom; and he once gave expression to his sentiments so freely and
unreservedly to the Pope himself, that his Holiness complained
grievously of him to the Emperor: but Sigismund was himself too
heartily bent on reforming the abuses of the Popedom to chide the zeal
and freedom of the English prelate. On one occasion the Bishop
maintained that a General Council was superior to the Pope (a doctrine
subsequently recognised, but then, as it should seem, new and bold);
on another he is reported to have gone so far as to affirm (p. 051)
that the Pope, for his enormities, deserved to be burnt alive. Bishop
Hallam[45] was by no means singular either in the sentiments which he
entertained with regard to the corruptions of the Romish Church "_in
its head and its members_," and the imperative necessity of an
universal reform, or in the unreserved boldness and plainness with
which he published those sentiments. The whole of Christendom rang
with loud and bitter complaints against the avarice, the sensuality,
the overreaching and overbearing tyranny, the total degeneracy and
worthlessness of the Popes, the Cardinals, and the religious orders;
but in no place were the protests against such deplorable (p. 052)
corruptions more unsparingly uttered than at the Council of Constance
itself: and among those who willingly offered themselves to testify,
in their Saviour's name, against such a prostitution of his blessed
Gospel to the purposes of worldly ambition, such gross depravity and
total neglect of duty, the names of many of our own countrymen are
recorded. These pillars of the church, these lights in the midst of
darkness, seem indeed to have entertained sentiments, as to the duties
and responsibilities of the Christian priesthood, worthy of the purest
age. Some of their recorded doctrines are truly edifying, and find a
response in some of the best episcopal charges and admonitions of the
Protestant church at the present day.

[Footnote 45: Anthony a Wood, referring to the
alleged resolution of the University of Oxford in
favour of Wickliff and his doctrines, refers to
this Bishop Hallam, though with some mistake. "The
prime broacher," he says, "of this testimonial, of
which we have nothing in our registers, records, or
books of epistles, was John Husse in the first tome
of his works, and from him John Fox. Against the
former of whom it was objected in the Council of
Constance, that he had openly divulged the said
commendatory letter in behalf of John Wickliff,
falsely conveyed to Prague, under the title of the
University of Oxford, by two students, one a
Bohemian, the other an Englishman. Whereupon those
of England who were present at the council, of
whom, if I mistake not, Robert Hallam, about these
times Bishop of Oxford [Salisbury], was one,
produce another letter under the seal of the
University, wherein, on the contrary, the members
thereof as much denounce against him as the other
was in behalf of him, and referred the matter to
the council to judge of it as they thought fit; but
how it was decided I find not."]

Among these excellent men, Dr. Richard Ullerston, of Oxford, seems to
have taken a most primitive view of the duties of a Christian bishop.
He wrote a treatise in 1408, by way of memorial for Bishop Hallam, his
friend, who urged him to the work, when that uncompromising reformer
went to the Council of Pisa. At the close of a long and powerful
exhortation to provide for the due execution by the Popes of their own
ministerial duties, and for the restoration of discipline in the
church, he thus expresses himself: "Things being thus restored to
their right order, and all abuses being cut away, the Pope will employ
himself, agreeably to the duties of his charge, in procuring peace for
Christians, not only by praying, but by preaching the Gospel (p. 053)
himself, and sending everywhere good preachers, who by their doctrine
and example might urge on princes and people throughout the world
their several duties, and who might make a holy war upon the passions
of mankind, rooting up those sensual desires which, according to St.
James, are the source of wars and divisions in the church and in the
state." This treatise was published in Germany about the year 1700,
from a manuscript in Trinity College, Cambridge; and may be found at
the end of Van der Hardt's work on the Council of Constance. It
consists chiefly of petitions for the remedy of abuses, and is full
from beginning to end of the true spirit of genuine evangelical
religion. Dr. Ullerston remained in uninterrupted and perfect
communion with the church of Rome; and yet no Protestant, who ever
suffered at the stake for his opposition to her, could have more
faithfully exposed the practical grievances under which Christendom
then mourned in consequence of her dereliction of duty, whilst she
assumed to herself all supreme authority, and paralyzed the efforts of
national churches to remedy the crying evils of the time. The heads of
Ullerston's petitions abound with salutary suggestions; by many of the
items we are apprised of the grievances then chiefly complained of, or
the departments in which those grievances were found.

1. On the election of a Pope.

2. On the suppression of simony.

3. On the exaltation of the law of Christ above all human (p. 054)
authority.

4. Against appropriations, _i.e._ assigning the proceeds of parochial
cures to monasteries.

5. On appointing only fit persons to ecclesiastical stations.

6. Against exemptions of monasteries and individuals from episcopal
jurisdiction.

7. Against dispensations,--those, among others, by which benefices and
bishoprics were given to children.

8. Against pluralities.

9. Against appeals to Rome.

10. Against the abuse of privileges.

11. Against the clergy devoting themselves to secular affairs.

12. Against the prerogatives of chanters[46] and other officers in the
houses of the great.

[Footnote 46: In his arguments on this article Dr.
Ullerston offers some excellent reflections upon
the use and abuse of singing in the church. The
sentiments of Augustin, which he quotes, are truly
judicious and edifying. That eloquent father
lamented that often the beauty of the singing
withdrew his mind from the divine matter and
substance of what was sung; but when he remembered
how, on occasions of peculiar interest to him,
psalmody carried his soul towards heaven in holy
raptures, he could not help voting for its
continuance in the church service. Ullerston quotes
also two lines, not indeed specimens of classical
accuracy, but the spirit of which should never be
absent from the mind of a Christian worshipper,
whether a Protestant or in communion with the see
of Rome:

"Non vox sed votum, non musica chordula sed cor,
Non clamor sed amor, sonat in aure Dei."]

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30