Answer to Cressys Epistle, Chapter 5 (1 of 3)

Answer to Cressys Epistle · Chapter 5 (1 of 3)

p. 327CHAP. V.

Of the Poenal Laws against Papists.

§. 1. I Am now come to that which Mr. Cressy looks upon as a very important subject, Epist. Apol. sect. 98, 99. p. 119.and deserving serious consideration; which is, how far those who acknowledge subjection to a forreign Power, as all English Catholicks do, can give satisfaction to the State of their Fidelity to his Majesty? Which, he saith, the Person of Honour repeats in several places, and is most accurately descanted upon in his nine Questions near the conclusion of his Book. I shall therefore give a short account of what the Person of Honour saith upon this subject; and then consider what Mr. Cressy offers by way of Reply to it.

1. He saith,Ani…adv. p. 10. that the Personal Authority of the Pope, was that, and that only which first made the Schism, and still continues it, and is the ground of all the animosity p. 328of the English Catholicks against the Church of England, and produced their separation from it; and if they will renounce all that Personal Authority in the Pope, and any obedience to it within his Majesties Kingdoms, they will purge themselves of all such jealousie, or suspicion of their Fidelity, as may prove dangerous to the Kingdom, and against which the Laws are provided: because it is their dependance on a forreign Jurisdiction, which makes them or their opinions taken notice of by the Politick Government of the Kingdom.

2.P. 243. That it is necessary for the personal security of Kings and Princes, and for the peace and quiet of Kingdoms, that it may be clearly made manifest, what the Authority and Power is, that a forreign Prince doth challenge in another Princes Dominions contrary to, and above the Laws of the Land, and what obedience it is that subjects may pay to such a forreign Prince, without the privity, and contrary to the command of his own Soveraign; which cannot be done by a general Answer, but by distinct assigning the bounds of the Popes Temporal and Spiritual Power in England; and what the full intent of them is, that the King may p. 329discern whether he hath enough of either to preserve himself and the Peace of the Kingdom.

3.P. 245. That till such time as the Roman-Catholick Subjects of England give as good security to the King for their Fidelity and peaceable behaviour, as all his other subject do, they have no cause to wonder that they may be made subject to such Laws and restraints, as may disable them from being dangerous; when they profess to owe obedience to a forreign Prince, who doth as much profess not to be a friend to their Countrey, and will not declare what that obedience is.

4.P. 9, 101. That the Roman Catholick Subjects of England have a more immediate dependance on the Pope, than is allowed in any Catholick Countryes: and that those who under pretence of Religion refuse to declare, that it is in no Earthly Power to absolve them from their Fidelity to the King, do refuse to give as full satisfaction and security for their Allegiance, as Catholick Subjects do give for their Fidelity to Catholick Kings: P. 246.there being no French Roman Catholick who dares refuse to do it.

5.P. 71, 72. That there is so much the more reason to require this, since the late instance p. 330of the Irish Rebellion, wherein the Pope absolved the Kings Subjects from their Oaths, and took upon himself to be their General in the Person of his Nuntio, P. 247.and assumed the exercise of the Regal Power, both at Land and Sea, and imprisoned those Catholicks, and threatned to take away their Lives who had promoted the peace, and desired to return to the Kings subjection; and hath since given a severe check to those of the Irish Nobility and Clergie, who had declared that the Pope had no Power to dispense with their Fidelity to his Majesty, or to absolve them from any Oaths they should take to that purpose: and imployed his Nuntio to discountenance and suppress that Declaration, and to take care that it should proceed no further;P. 75. and that Cardianl Barbarine at that same time put them in mind, that the Kingdom of England was still under Excommunication; and since that, the Pope hath made many Bishops in Ireland, which his Predecessors had forborn to do from the death of Queen Elizabeth, to A. D. 1640. And therefore there is no reason to believe, that the Court of Rome doth recede from its former principles, as to these things.

p. 331§. 2. These several particulars carry so much weight along with them, as may easily raise the expectation of any one, to see what Mr. Cressy will reply to them. And in truth he enters the Field like a Champion; for he saith, his Apologie is published permissu Superiorum;E…i…t. A…ol. p. 101. and what he writes on this special subject, he desires the Person of Honour to consider, not as the inconsiderable opinion of one particular person only. And he doth assure him, that there is not any one Point of Controversie upon which they more earnestly desire to be summoned to give an account before equal Iudges, than this. Thus he enters the lists, and walks his ground, and brandishes his sword, and makes legs to the Judges with more than ordinary assurance, and fails in no point of a Champion, but overcoming his Adversary. Which he is so far from, that after these Bravado's and flourishes he dares not stand before him; but looks round about him to discern any way to escape. But although it be beneath the Greatness of his Adversary, to pursue him over all his Bogs, and to draw him out of his Fastnesses; yet I shall endeavour to bring him into the Lists again, that his Adversary may not go away blushing at so mean a Triumph.

p. 332There are five things which Mr. Cressy offers at by way of Answer to the Discourse of the Person of Honour on this subject. 1.P. 112, …13. That there is no reason to suspect the Catholick subjects of England to be more wanting in Fidelity to their Prince than of other Nations, whose Catholick Ancestors were so far from acknowledging any Supremacy of the Pope in Temporals, and much less any Authority in him to depose Princes, that even in those times when Church-men had the greatest Power in this Kingdom, Statutes were made with the joynt Votes of the Clergic upon occasion of some Usurpations of the Roman Court,Stat. 25, & 27 Eaw. 3. Stat. 16 R. 2. in which the Penalty was no less than a Praemunire against any one who without the Kings License should make any Appeals to Rome, or submit to a Legats jurisdiction, or upon the Popes Summons go out of the Kingdom, or receive any Mandats or Brieffs from Rome, or purchase Bulls for presentments to Churches: and which is most considerable, the ground of their rejecting Papal Usurpations is thus expressed, For the Crown of England is free, and hath been free from earthly subjection at all times, being immediately subject to God in all things touching the Regalities of the same, and not subject to the Pope; to which he saith, the Bishops p. 333assented, and the Lords and Commons declared their Resolution to stand with the King in the cases aforesaid, and in all other cases attempted against him his Crown and Regalitie in all points, to live and to dye.

2. That whatsoever they suffer here in England by vertue of the Poenal Laws,P. 125. it is purely for their Religion and the Catholick faith; and therefore he parallels our Poenal Laws, with those of the Medes and Persians against Daniel; P. 122.and of Nero, Domitian and Dioclesian against the Apostles and their successors:P. 44. and yet Mr. Cressy confesses, that the occasion of the Poenal Laws, was the treasonable actions of some of their own Religion;P. 104. but he adds, that they were scarce one score of persons, and abhorred by all the rest, for which actions of theirs, he confesseth, that care is taken of exacting Oaths both of Fidelity and Supremacy from Roman Catholicks as dangerous Subjects; and dayes of Thanksgiving are kept for the discovery and prevention of such personal Treasons; whereas, saith he, the whole Kingdoms deliverance from almost an universal Rebellion designing the extinction of Monarchy and Prelacy both, and executing the murder of the lawful Soveraign is not esteemed a sufficient motive for such publick Thanksgivings, neither it seems is there p. 334at all a necessity of requiring from any a Retraction of the Principles of Rebellion, or a promise that it shall not be renewed. By which we might think Mr. Cressy had been utterly a stranger in his own Countrey, and had never heard of the thirtieth of Ianuary or the twenty ninth of May, which are solemnly observed in our Church, and the Offices joyned with that of the fifth of November, and are purposely intended for that very thing which he denyes to be taken notice of by us, in such a manner. What must we say to such men? who openly and to our faces deny that, which the whole Nation knows to be true. These stories might have passed abroad, where they have been wont to lye for the Catholick Cause, but to have the impudence to say such things here, which every Boy can confute, is not the way to advance the Reputation of their Church among us.

And what doth Mr. Cressy think, the Renuntiation of the Covenant was intended for, if not to prevent the mischief of the former Rebellion? And is it possible for any man who knows the Laws of his Countrey concerning these matters, to dare to say in the face of the Kingdom, That it seems there is no necessity at all of requiring from any a Retraction of the principles of Rebellion, p. 335or a promise it shall never be renewed? If this be the way of defending the innocency of Roman Catholicks, I had rather be accounted guilty, than have my innocency thus defended.

3. He saith,P. 100. We also confidently affirm, (so we have seen he hath done too much already) that by vertue of the Spiritual Iurisdiction inherent in the Pope, the Temporal Rights and Power of the King (or even of the meanest of his Subjects) are not at all abridged, or prejudiced. Which assertion, he saith, hath been alwayes maintained in France, the Pope not contradicting it; from whence it follows, that it is agreeable to Catholick Religion. After this I expected he should speak home to the purpose, and say, this is all the Power challenged by the Pope as to England, or owned by any Roman Catholicks here; which, finding what he had affirmed about other matters, I thought he would have made no scruple of; but I see he durst not, either for conscience or meer shame. But how then doth he get over this difficulty? Why English Catholicks, saith he, should be suspected not to be as tender of the just Rights and precious lives also of their Soveraign, as the Catholick Subjects of any other Kingdom, and why they should be thought to be willing to acknowledge p. 336any Temporal Power director indirect, to be inherent in the Pope over the King or Kingdom, to which not any Catholick Gentleman or Nobleman would submit, I cannot imagine. I am very much to seek for the sense of this, and know not what the submitting relates to; but I suppose something left out, or struck out by his Superiours, who did not take care to leave sense behind: But is this indeed all the security Mr. Cressy offers, that he cannot imagine it should be otherwise here than in France? We find, when he pleases, he can imagine strange things: and is this only out of the reach of his imagination? What doth he think, of the Kingdoms being under Excommunication at Rome, as Cardinal Barbarine takes care to put the Irish Nobility in mind, for some good end doubtless. Is the Kingdom of France so? What doth he imagine of Bulls from Rome prohibiting the taking the Oaths required? Are there any such things in France? What doth he think of the Popes Nuntio appearing in the Head of an Army, and absolving the Kings subjects from their Allegiance? I confess, it was not much better in France in the time of the Holy League; but what opinion had they of the Popes temporal Power then? Cannot Mr. Cressy imagine that there are p. 337such people in England as Iesuits? and it is not many years since their Reasons were therefore shewed to be Unreasonable in pleading an exemption from the Sanguinary Laws, because they did hold the Popes power of deposing Princes, and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance. And do not the Iesuitical party still plead that their opinion is the common doctrine of their Church, confirmed by General Councils, and approved by multitudes of Divines of all sorts; and that the contrary is only asserted here, by a very inconsiderable party, whereof some are excommunicated at Rome for their zeal in this matter? And do not we know, how much greater sway the Iesuitical party hath among the Nobility and Gentry, than the despised Secular Priests? I do not at all question, but the Nobility and Gentry of England would do as much to preserve the just Rights and precious lives of their Soveraigns, as of any Nation in the World, and have as great a sense of their own Honour as well as Interest, and of the Duty they owe to their Countrey. But ought not the Laws to take so much the more care to keep their Consciences untainted in these things? they being such Persons whose Loyalty cannot be corrupted, but under a pretence of Conscience; p. 338and their Consciences being so much in danger, by being under the direction chiefly of those who are the sworn servants to the Papal Power.

4. He offers by way of satisfaction concerning their Fidelity, P. 108.that they will subscribe the French Declaration lately made by the Sorbon, or the Censure of the Faculty of Paris A. D. 1626.P. 116. and that very few if any at all would refuse subscription to that Form prescribed by the State, P. 111. P. 120.in case that unlucky word heretical were left out. As though all those who had hitherto refused to take that Oath, had done it only upon this nicety, that the word heretical were to be taken not in the sense of the Givers, but of the Takers of the Oath: whereas Mr. Cressy himself saith,P. 112. that common Reason teaches, that all Oaths, Professions and Promises are to be understood in the sense of those who frame and require them, and not of those upon whom they are imposed. But if this were all the ground of refusing this Oath among any of them, Mr. Cressy therein charges them with the want of common Reason: whereas I shall make it appear in the progress of this Discourse, that this was far from being the true and only reason of Roman Catholicks refusing the Oath of Allegiance.

p. 3395. That since Ordination abroad doth not in the least render English Priests defective in their duties to the Civil Magistrate;P. 121. it will follow that whatsoever penalty is inflicted on them on such an account, is not inflicted according to the Rule of Iustice, and by consequence that whatsoever blood shall be shed, the guilt of it before God will be imputed to the whole Kingdom, since it is shed by vertue of the whole Kingdoms votes, and consent given long since upon motives long since ceased. And therefore he charges it deeply upon my conscience to endeavour to free the whole Kingdom from such a guilt. This is the substance of what Mr. Cressy saith upon this very important subject, as himself calls it; and by vertue whereof he hopes, P. 119.the poenal Laws may be repealed, and those of their Religion may enjoy the Liberty of their Religion and all the Rights of Free-born Subjects.P. 98. Which are things too important to be debated in such a manner by persons who by making reflections on the Iustice and Wisdom of a Nation do endeavour to expose the Laws and Government of it to the censure and reproach of the malicious and ignorant. But since our Laws are so publickly accused of injustice and cruelty, and the Kingdom charged with the guilt of innocent blood, I hope I p. 338duplicate page p. 339duplicate page p. 340may have leave as an English man to vindicate the Laws of our Countrey, and as a Protestant to wipe off the aspersion of Cruelty from our Religion: which I shall do without the least intention of mischief to any mens persons, or of sharpening the severities of Laws against them.

§. 3. And to proceed with the greatest clearness in this matter, I shall consider,

1. The charge of injustice and cruelty which he lays upon our poenal Laws.

2. The proposals he makes in order to the repeal of them, and giving a full liberty to the exercise of their Religion.

1. The charge of injustice and cruelty upon our poenal Laws. Whosoever adventures to charge the publick Laws of a Kingdom in such a manner ought to be very well advised upon what grounds he proceeds; and to understand throughly the nature, and constitution of Government and Rules of Iustice, and the power of interpreting as well as making Laws, and the certain bounds within which Laws may make actions Treasonable, and how far actions thought Religious by the Persons who do them, may become treasonable when they are against Laws made for the publick safety; and what p. 341actions of Religion make men Martyrs when they suffer for them and what not; for it is certain, they are not all of equal consequence and necessity; these and many other things a man ought to come well provided with, that dares in the face of the World to charge the Laws of his own Nation with injustice and cruelty. But Mr. Cr. may be excused in this matter, for that would indeed be an unjust and cruel Law to require impossibilities from men: I wish so noble a subject had been undertaken by a Person fit for it, that could have managed it otherwise than in a bare declamatory manner. But since he is the Goliah that dares so openly defie our Laws and Government, I shall make use of his own Weapons to cut off the heads of this terrible accusation. For, 1. He grants, That the Laws made by their Catholick Ancestors, viz. the Statutes of Praemunire and Provisors were just Laws. 2. That our King hath reason to expect as much security of the Fidelity of his Catholick Subjects, as any Catholick Prince hath from his. 3. That all Christian Kings have in some sense a kind of spiritual Authority, that they ought to be Nursing Fathers to Gods Church, that they ought to promote true Christian doctrine both touching Faith and manners, p. 342and to imploy their power when occasion is, Epistle Apolog…t. p. 102.to oblige even Ecclesiastical Persons to perform their duties, and all their Subjects to live in all Christian Piety and Vertue. These are his o…n words, which in short come to this, that they are bound to promote and pre…erve the true Religion.P. 105. 4. That it is absolutely unlawful for them to defend their Religion, being persecuted by Soveraign Magistrates, by any other way but suffering: which, he saith, they do sincerely profess according to their perswasion. 5. That the treasonable actions of persons of their own Religion were the occasion of making and continuing the poenal Laws: for upon their account, he saith, they are thought dangerous Subjects, P. 104.and care is taken to exact Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy from them. 6. That where the Popes temporal power is owned, especially as to deposing Princes, there can be no sufficient security given as to the Fidelity of such persons. This I prove from his saying, that there is no reason to question their Fidelity, whose Ancestors were so far from any Supremacy of the Pope in Temporals, and much less any Authority in him to depose Princes, that they made the Statutes of Praemunire and Provisors, (which by his favour is a very weak argument, unless men can never p. 343be supposed to degenerate from the Vertues of their Ancestors) but besides, the satisfaction he offers, P. 116, 117is by renouncing the Popes temporal power, and declaring that his power of deposing Princes, and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance, is repugnant to the Word of God, although they dare not call it heretical; from whence it follows, that Mr. Cressy doth not think those can give sufficient security for their Fidelity, who dare not thus far renounce the Popes power.

7. That where there is no sufficient security given for the Fidelity of Persons, there is great reason they should lye under the severity of Laws. Which Mr. Cressy alwayes supposes; and only complains of their hardship upon the offers he makes of their Fidelity. And this must hold as to all sorts of persons who may be dangerous to Government, although they may pretend never so much exemption by their Function, or being imployed in Offices not immediately relating to Civil Government.

From these concessions it will be no difficult task to clear our Poenal Laws from injustice, and to vindicate the whole Kingdom from the guilt of innocent blood, if I can prove these following assertions.

p. 3441. That the same Reasons which justifie the antient Statutes of England and the Laws of Catholick Princes abroad, do vindicate our Poenal Laws from the charge of Injustice and Cruelty.

2. That Laws originally made upon the account of acknowledged treasonable practices, do continue just upon all those who do not give sufficient security against the principles leading to those practices.

1. That the same Reasons which justifie the antient Statutes of England, and the Laws of Catholick Princes abroad, do vindicate our Poenal Laws from the charge of Injustice and Cruelty. For if the penalties do bear no greater proportion to the nature of the offence; if the Power be as great and as just in our Law-makers; if the occasions were of as high a nature, and the pleas in behalf of the persons equal: then there can be no reason assigned why those Laws should be just and lawful, and not ours. And the making out of these things is my present business.

1. I begin with the antient Laws and Statutes of England. And I hope no one dares question, but that the power of makeing Laws is as good and just in England since the Reformation, as ever it was before: For if there be the least diminution p. 345of Power by vertue of the cutting off the Popes Authority, then so much of the Civil Power as was lost by it, was derived from the Pope: and this is in plain terms to make the Pope our Temporal Soveraign, and the whole Kingdom to be only Feudatary to him: which is asserting his Temporal power with a vengeance; and contains in it a doctrine that none but very Self-denying Princes can ever give the least countenance to; because it strikes at the very root of their Authority, and makes them only precarious Princes, (and in a much more proper sense than the Popes use that Title, The Servants of Servants.) Supposing then the Legislative and Civil Power to be equal since the Reformation and before; our work is to compare the other circumstances together; and if it appear, that the Plea of Conscience and Religion did equally hold then, and notwithstanding that the penalties were as great, upon the same or far less occasions, I hope our Laws will at least appear as just and reasonable as those were.

§. 4. To make this out, I must give an account of the State of those times, and the Reasons and Occasions which moved the Law-makers to enact those Poenal Statutes: p. 346in which I shall shew these two things. 1. That they began upon a controversie of Religion; and that the Poenal Laws were made against those persons who pleaded Religion. 2. That the Reasons and Occasions of the Poenal Laws since the Reformation were at least as great as those.

1. That the antient Poenal Laws were made upon a Controversie of Religion: And to give a clear account of the Rise and occasion of them, I must begin from the Norman Conquest; for then those Foundations were laid of all the following controversies which happened between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power. On the behalf of the Ecclesiastical Power was the plea of Conscience and Religion, on the behalf of the Civil Power nothing but the just Rights of Princes, and the necessary preservation of their own and the publick safety. And this Controversie between the Two Powers was managed with so much zeal, and such pretences of Conscience on the behalf of the Ecclesiastical Power, that the Civil Power, notwithstanding the courage of some Princes, and the resolution of Parliaments, had much ado to stand its ground, or to be able to preserve it self from the encroachments and Usurpations of the other. So that to see Princes give any Countenance to the same p. 347pretences would be almost as strange, as to see them turn Common-wealths-men. I know there were good Laws frequently made to strengthen the Civil Power; but the very frequency of them shewed how ineffectual they were; For what need many Laws to the same purpose, if the first had any force at all? and the multiplication of Laws for the same thing, is a certain sign of defect in the Government. To undeceive therefore all those who judge of the State of Affairs by the Book of Statutes, I shall deduce the History of this great Controversie between the Ecclesiastical and Civil Power in England, so far as to shew the necessity there was found of putting an issue to it, by casting out the Popes pretended Power and Iurisdiction in this Nation.

The two first who began this Dispute, were both men of great Spirits and resolute in their undertakings; I mean william the Conqueror and Gregory the seventh, who was the first Pope that durst speak out; and he very freely declares his mind about the subjection of the Civil Power to the Ecclesiastical, and the exemption of all Ecclesiastical Persons and Things from the Civil Power. In his Epistle to Herimanus Bishop of Metz about the excommunication of Henry the fourth, Gr…g. 7…. Ep…stol. l. 8. Ep. 21.and absolving his Subjects from p. 348their Allegiance; he thus expresses himself; Shall not that power which was first found out by men who knew not God, be subject to that which God himself hath appointed for his own honor in the World, and the head of which is the Son of God? Who knows not that Kings and Dukes had their beginnings from men who gained their Authority over their equals by blind ambition and intolerable presumption, by rapines and murders, by perfidiousness and all manner of wickedness? Is not this a very pretty account of the Original of Civil Power by the Head of the Church? But this is not all; for he adds, While Princes make Gods Priests to be subject to them, to whom may we better compare them than to him, who is the Head over all the Sons of Pride, who tempted the Son of God with promising him all the Kingdoms of the World, if he would fall down and worship him? This is better and better; it seems it is as bad as the sin of Lucifer, for Princes not to be subject to the Pope; and it is like the Devils tempting Christ, to offer to make Priests subject to the Civil Power. Who doubts, saith he, that Christs Priests are to be accounted the Fathers and Masters of Kings aud Princes and all the faithful? Now, saith he, is it not a lamentable madness, if the Son should offer p. 349to make the Father subject to him (but one of his Successors did not think so, that set up Henry the fifth against his own Father) or the Scholar his Master, or to think to bind him on earth, by whom he expects to be loosed in Heaven? These were the Demonstrations of that Age, and the main supports of the Cause▪ G…gor. 7. Epist. l. 7… ▪ Ep. 25.and in his Epistle to William King of England, he tells him, that God had appointed two kinds of Government for mankind, the Apostolical and Regal (that is much, that the same Government should come only from the sins of men, and yet be from the appointment of God: but we are to consider he writ this to a King whom he hoped to perswade, and therefore would not tell him the worst of his thoughts about the beginnings of Civil Power) but, saith he, these two powers, like the Sun and Moon, have that inequality by the Christian Religion, that the Royal Power next under God is to be under the care and management of the Apostolical. And since the Apostolical See is to give an account to God of the miscarriages of Princes, his wisdom ought to consider, whether he ought not without farther delay take an Oath of Fealty to him. For no less than that would content him: but William was not so meek a Prince to be easily brought p. 350to this, as Robert of Sicily, Richard of Capua, Bertram of Provence, Rodulphus, and several others were, whose Oaths of Fealty to him are extant in the Collection or Register of his Epistles. Epistol. …. 1. c. 21.But William gives him a resolute answer,L. 9. 3. 12. Lanfra…c. Ep. 7. which is extant among the Epistles of Lanfranc; that for the Oath of Fealty, he had not done it, neither would he, because he never promised it, neither did he find that ever his predecessors had done it to Gregories predecessors. The Pope storms at this, and writes a chiding Letter to Lanfranc Arch-bishop of Canterbury; who like a better subject to the Pope than to the King, writes an humble excuse for himself to the Pope, and tells him, he had done his endeavour to perswade the King, but could not prevail with him: La…ra…c. Ep. 8.And Cardinal Baronius saith,Annal. Eccl…siast. A. 1079. n. 25. the Pope took it very ill at his hands, considering the kindness he had received from the Papal See. For Alexander the second favoured his cause against Harold, and sent him a consecrated Banner; and if we may believe Henricus de Silgrave, Henr. de Si…gra…e Chro…ic. MS in Biblioth. Cotton.the Pope gave him his title to the Crown of England, on condition that he should hold it in Fee from the Papal See: but I find no such thing mentioned by Ingulphus, or Gulielmus Pictaviensis, who understood the Conquerors p. 351affairs as well as any, being about him at that time; neither would Gregory the seventh have omitted it: but however Bertholdus Constantiensis, B…rthold. Constant. A…p…nd. ad Her…. C…tr. A. 1084.or rather Bernaldus an Author of that time, and the Popes Poenitentiary, affirms confidently, that William King of England made this whole Nation tributary to the Pope; which there is no pretence for, but only that he, after some demurr, caused the antient Eleem…synarie Peter-pence, to be sent to Rome. So careful had Princes need to be, of the continuance of Gifts to Rome, which in time are looked on as a Tribute; and that Tribute an acknowledgement of Fealty; and that Fealty proves a Subjection in Temporals. But this was not the only dispute between these two Conquerors, for Gregory the seventh at the same time that he sent Hubert his Legat to England about the Oath of Feal…y, he sent Hugo to keep a Council in France against the investitures of Bishops by Lay-hands, Baron… A. D. 1080. n. 3.and afterwards in a Council at Rome, solemnly condemned them; and threatned deposition to all that received them, Greg. 7. ep… l. 7. ep. 14.and the vengeance of God upon those that gave them. The bottom of which lay not in the pretence of Simony, but because it was too great a token of their subjection to the Civil Power; and Gregory the seventh p. 352was, as Bertholdus saith,Berthold. …onst. A. D. 1085. a most zealous defender of Ecclesiastical Liberty, i. e. the total exemption of Ecclesiastical persons from subjection to the Civil Power; and Eadmerus saith, that the Bishops made their homage to the King before they received investiture by the Staff and the Ring. Eadmer. prae…at. p. 2.But notwithstanding all these Decrees and Threatnings, William the Conquerour, as that Author tells us, would never part with the Rights of the Crown in this matter: and he declares that he would not only keep the antient Saxon custom of investiture, Seld…. not. ad Eadm. p. 142.(as Ingulphus and other Authors shew it to have been) but all the antient customs of his Predecessors in Normandy relating to Ecclesiastical affairs: So that all Ecclesiastical as well as Civil things, Eadmer. p. 6.saith Eadmerus, were under his command. These customs were, 1. That none should be acknowledged Pope, but whom the King pleased. 2. That no Bulls should be received, but such as were approved by the King. 3. That nothing should be decreed in Provincial Councils, but by his Approbation. 4. That no Persons about the King should be excommunicated without his knowledge: but besides, Pope Gregory charged him with two more enormities,Greg. R… gistr. …. 7. ep. 1. viz. 5. Hindering all appeals to Rome of Bishops and Arch-bishops: p. 353which was such a thing, he saith that a Heathen would not have done it. 6. Seizing upon the person of his Brother Odo being a Bishop and imprisoning him; which he said was plainly against Scripture, Qui vos tangit, tangit pupillam oculi mei; & Nolite tangere Christos meos; L. 11. Ep. …;which no doubt were understood of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Patriarchal and Iewish Church. But I do not find that King William did at all recede from the Rights of his Crown, although the Pope according to his skill quoted Scripture against them; and although the Bishop of Baieux was clapt up on the account of Treason, as our Historians agree, yet in Pope Gregories opinion he suffered for Religion and the preservation of Divine Laws: and such men as Mr. Cressy might have compared such Laws with those of Nero and Domitian; but I think they durst not have done it in the Conquerours time; who at the Council of Illebon in Normandy declared his resolution to maintain the customs of his Predecessors,O…d…r. Vital. Eccles. histor. l. 5. P. 554. relating to Ecclesiastical affairs.

§. 5. After the death of Gregory the seventh, there was no Pope acknowledged in England for eleven years,… A. 10…1. because of the Schism between Urban and Clement; and p. 354our King had declared for neither of them: And william Rufus told Anselm, who would fain have gone to Urban the second for his Pall, that he had not yet acknowledged him for Pope, and therefore he should not go. And, saith he, if you own him without my Authority, Ead…r. p. 26.you break your faith to me, and displease me as much as if you did endeavour to take away my Crown: Anselm however stands upon it, that himself had owned him for Pope, and would do so whatever came of it; and would not depart from his obedience for an hour. A Parliament being called at Rockingham upon this occasion, the Nobility and Bishops all advised him to submit to the King. P. 27.Anselm notwithstanding cryes, Tues Petrus & super hanc Petram, &c. & Qui vos tangit, tangit pupillam oculi, as Gregory the seventh had done before him, and to as much purpose; but no such things, saith he, are said of Kings or Princes, or Dukes or Earles; and therefore he resolved to adhere to the Pope: The King being acquainted with his answer,P. 28. sends some of the Nobles and Bishops to him, to let him know, that the whole Kingdom was against him, and that hereby he endeavoured to take away one of the Flowers of his Crown from him, by depriving him of one of the antient Rights of it: p. 355and withal that he acted contrary to his Oath to the King. P. 24.Anselm (if we may believe Eadmerus, who lived in his time, and was his constant companion) stood upon his priviledge, that an Archbishop of Canterbury could be judged by none but the Pope: and so by that means was wholly exempt from the Royal Power: and he bore all the affronts he met with patiently out of his firm devotion to the Papal See. The Bishop of Durham whose advice the King asked in this matter, told him, that Anselm had the Word of God and Authority of S. Peter of his side. The King said, he would never endure one equal to himself in his Kingdom: and therefore took off his protection from him, and commands the Nobility and Bishops to disown him:P. 30, 31. and banishes his Counsellors, and gives him time for a final answer. The mean while the King tryes by several arts to gain him, viz. by sending to Urban secretly for the Pall, and acknowledging him to be Pope, P. 32, 33 …and at last they brought it to this issue, that he should receive the Pall at the Kings hands, which he utterly refused to do, and would take it no otherwise but off from the Altar of Canterbury. P. 34.After this, he desires leave to go to the Pope, the King denyes it, he persists in his intreaty,P. 38. the King absolutely p. 356denyes it, he resolves to go however, because, saith he, it is better to obey God than men. As though God had commanded him to disobey the King in this matter. When the Bishops had disswaded him from it, and told him they would keep their fidelity to the King: Go, saith he, then to your Lord, and I will hold to my God. P. 39.Did he mean the same God which the Gloss upon the Canon Law speaks of, our …ord God the Pope? and it is hard to conceive any other could be meant in this case. The King sends some of the Bishops and Barons to him to put him in mind of his Oath to observe the Laws and Customs of the Realm; he told him they were to be understood with the reservation of being according to God, P. 40.and that it was not so, to keep him from going to the Pope, and therefore he would not observe it; and so takes his leave of the King to be gone; and the King after his going seizes upon all his profits. I desire to know of such as Mr. Cressy, whether the King or Anselm were in the right in all this affair? And if the King had used greater severity to him, whether Anselm had suffered on the account of Religion Or Treason? But he complains to the Pope, P. 43.that the Law of God, and Authority of the Pope and Canons were overwhelmed by the Customs of the Realm; p. 357and therefore he resigns his Archbishoprick to him, and desires the Pope to put one into it; which was contrary to the antient Rights of the King: P. 53.The Pope in a Council at Rome solemnly excommunicates all Lay-persons that gave Investitures of Churches, and all that received them, and all Ecclesiastical persons that paid Homage to Princes, saying it was very unfit that they who made their God, should put their hands into the obscene and cruel hands of Princes: as Eadmerus relates it, who was present in the Council.

§. 6. After the death of Rufus, P. 56.Anselm returns for England, the new King Henry the first demands the accustomed Homage from him, he denyes it, and gives the late Council at Rome for his reason; adding further, if the King would submit to the Decrees of that Council, there would be peace between them, otherwise he would be gone again. The King was very unwilling to part with the Rights of his Predecessors in the Investiture and Homage of Bishops; for saith Eadmerus, it seemed to him as much as to lose half his Kingdom: and yet was afraid to let Anselm go, lest by his means the Pope should have set up his Brother Roberts Title against him; the King being in this strait, endeavours to gain time, p. 358and sends Ambassadors to the Pope, to try, if he could procure his consent, to let him enjoy his own Rights: Ead. p. 60.Pope Paschal the second in his long Epistle to Henry, absolutely condemns them, as inconsistent with God, with justice, or with salvation: and adds that to the wit of his predecessors, that it was a monstrous thing for a Son to beget a Father, or a man to make a God; (but Urban gave that, as a reason against it, because Priests were men that did make a God) now Priests, saith he, in Scripture are called Gods; and are not Princes or Secular Powers? The King not at all moved with this Bull, requires from Anselm either to pay him homage, and to consecrate those that had received investitures from him, or immediately to be gone out of the Kingdom: and withal declares, that he would preserve the Rights of his Predecessors, nor would endure any in his Kingdom that would not do him homage; P. 61.the Nobility and the rest of the Bishops joyn with the King, and used all perswasions to keep him from submitting to the Pope. The King hoping to compose this matter, sends three Bishops to the Pope to let him know, saith Eadmerus, that if the King did not enjoy his Rights, he would banish Anselm and renounce the Pope.Brompton. C…ro…. p. 999. But Brompton hath the smart Letter the p. 359King sent upon this occasion, wherein he tells him, he would not fail of that respect and obedience which his predecessors had shewn to the Popes, on condition that all the Honors, Uses and Customs which his Father had in his predecessors times might be freely enjoyed by him; and that by the help of God none of them should be lessened in his time; and if, saith he, which God forbid, I should be so base to let them go; yet my Nobility, nay, the whole people would by no means suffer it. The Pope told them,P. 63. he would not yield to the King in this matter to save his Life; and writes word to the King, that by the judgement of the Holy Ghost he had forbidden all investitures by Princes: and encourages Anselm in his opposition to the King, with some impertinent texts of Scripture. (For of all men, the Popes, notwithstanding their pretence to infallibility, have been very unhappy in applying Scripture in their Bulls; and it would be one of the strangest Commentaries that ever the World saw, to set down the places of Scripture produced by them with their interpretations of them: but that is not my present business.) The King called together the Great men of the Nation in Council at London: P. 65.and sends some of them to Anselm, to know, whether he would observe p. 360the customs of his predecessors or be gone? The Bishops pretending private instructions contrary to the Popes Bulls, Anselm desires time to know the Popes mind, and still stands to the Popes Letters; upon which the King told him, he would bear these delays no longer; P. 70.Quid mihi de meis cum Papa; what have I to do with the Pope about my own Subjects? What Rights my Predecessors had, are mine too: whosoever would take them away from me is my enemy, and every one that is my Friend knows it. Anselm tells him, that to save his life he would not contradict the Popes decrees unless he were absolved by him. The King would not so much as hear of the Popes Bulls, nor suffer others to do it, which grieved Anselm much; and away he goes again to receive comfort from the Pope. The King sends an Ambassadour to the Pope, P. 73.who told him his Master would lose his Kingdom rather than the Investiture of Bishops; the Pope very graciously replyed, Before God I will lose my head rather than he shall quietly enjoy them. But at last, the Pope was content he should enjoy other customes excepting this of Investitures; the King was not at all satisfied with this,P. 76. but sends word to Anselm he must not set foot on English ground unless he would p. 361promise to observe the former customs of the Realm: which he still refused to do, and after several endeavours to compose this difference, the King was at last forced to yield up the ancient Right of Investiture, and retain only homage, which the Pope and Anselm were at present contented with;P. 87, 91. but this Agreement held not long; for notwithstanding the Pope did lay so much weight on this business of Investitures, Mat Paris A. 1107. P. 63.(as besides what is mentioned already,Petr. de Marcá de Co…co d. Sa…erd. & I…p. l. 8. c. 20. …. 2. Floreat. Wigorn. he said, that Christ dyed in vain if Lay-investitures were allowed) yet the King was certainly informed that this same Pope had yielded Investitures to t…e Emperour Henry 5. as Florentius Wigorniensis and Malmsbury report,A. D. 1111. Malmsbur. de g…st. Reg. Angl. l. 5. Mat. Paris A. 1113. P 65. and therefore Anselm writes to the Pope,Mat W…stminst. A. 1113. that the King would resume his too: and it is evident he did so, for Matth. Paris and Westminster say expresly, that the King invested the next Archbishop of Canterbury, with a staff and a ring after the ancient custom: which was after the Lateran Council wherein the Pope again revoked the Emperours priviledge about investitures, which he saith, is contrary to the Holy Ghost and the Canonical Institution. But where was the Holy Ghost then when he granted this priviledge? Eadm. l. 5. p. 115, 118.After this, the Pope complains of the King for retaining the other ancient p. 362Rights, of hindering Appeals to Rome and not receiving Legats; but at last Pope Calixtus yielded to the King the enjoyment of the Customs which his Father had in England and Normandy. Was not this Pope very kind to the King who so patiently yielded to those customs which his Predecessors had condemned as contrary to Religion, and making Christs death to no purpose? The same Callis…us 2. in the Council of Lateran, A. D. MCXXII. put an end to the Controversie of investitures in the Roman Empire: Malsmbur. de Hear. 1. p. 95.yielding to the Emperour the right of Investitures so it were performed without Simony, and by a Scepter and not by a staff and a Ring; because, forsooth, if it had been done by a ring, it made it a kind of marriage, and so made a spiritual Adultery between the Bishop and his Church; as the former Popes very learnedly proved in their Epistles against Investitures.

§. 7. This Controversie being at an end, the Popes bethought themselves of a more subtle way of effecting their design, which was by engaging the Bishops by oaths of Fidelity and obedience to themselves, as well as taking away their homages and Fealty to Princes, that so with less noise and more security, they might compass the design of p. 363Ecclesiastical Liberty or rather slavery to the Pope. Gregory 7. Urban 2. and Paschal 2. did all forbid Clargy-men to give any homage to Princes, Petr. de Marc… de Co…ord. Sacerd. & Imper. l. 8. c. 21. …. 4.as Petrus de Marca proves from the Authentick acts of their several Councils; instead of which they required an Oath of Fealty to themselves. For it was not a bare oath of Canonical obedience, which the Popes required, but as much an oath of Fealty and Allegiance, as ever Princes require from their other Subjects: which will be made appear by comparing the oaths together. The most ancient form of Allegiance I meet with, is that prescribed in the Capitular of Charles the Great, which is contained in very few words.

Promitto ego partibus Domini mei Caroli Regis & filiorum ejus, Co…stit. Caroli Magni c. 2. p. 263.quia fidelis sum & ero diebus vitae meae sine fraude vel malo ingenio, as it is in the old Edition of the Constitutions; but in the latter out of Sirmondus his Copy it is somewhat larger.Histor. Fraac. Scriptores ed. ab A…. Du Chesn. Tom. 2. p. 186.

Promitto ego quod ab isto die in antea fidelis sum Domino Carolo piissimo Imperatori pura mente abs que fraude & malo ingenio de meâ parte ad suam partem & ad honorem regni sui, sicut per drictam debet esse homo Domino suo. The ancient Form used in this Nation ran thus,

Tu jurabis quod ab ista die in antea eris p. 364fidelis & legalis Domino nostro Regi & suis haeredibus; Sp…lma…. Glossar. …Fid…l…tas.& fidelitatem & legalitatem ei portabis de vitâ & de membro & de terreno honore, & quod tu eorum malum aut damnum nec noveris nec audiveris quod non defendes pro posse tuo, ita te Deus adjuvet: Now let us compare these with the Oath made to the Pope; I shall take that form which is published out of the Vatican MS. by Odoricus Raynaldus, which was taken by Edmund Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ego Edmundus, O…oric. Ray…ald. A…al. E… clesiast. A. 1233. …. 65.&c. ab hac hora in antea fidelis & obediens ero S. Petro & S. R. E. &D. Papae Gregerio suis que successoribus canonicè intrantibus. Nonero in facto ne que in consilio, aut consensio ut vitam perdant, aut membrum, aut capiantur malâ captione. Consilium vero quod mihi credituri sunt per se, aut per nuntios suos sive per liter as ad corum damnum, mesciente, nemini pandam. Papatum Romanum & Regalia Sancti Petri aajutor eis ero ad retinendum & defendendum salvo meo ordine contra omnem hominem, &c. This is enough to shew, that if the other were properly Oaths of Allegiance to Princes, this is so to the Pope, and thereby they are bound to the very same obedience to the Pope as their Soveraign, as anymen are to their own Princes. For here is no exception at all of the Rights of p. 365Princes and the duty they owe to them; not the least notice being taken of them, as though they did owe them any allegiance: which we plainly see was never intended should be paid by those who first imposed this Oath. That Learned Gentleman Sir Roger Twisden supposes this oath to have been framed by Paschal 2.Historical Vindicat. Chapt. 3. n. 50. and it is certain, that Rodulphus being made Archbishop of Canterbury in his time, is the first we read among us, that took an oath of Fidelity to the Pope, with that of Canonical obedience: after whose time we frequently meet with it, but not before:Eadmer. l. 5. p. 113. but in truth, it is the very same oath, Rad. de Diceto p. 534.only applying it to Churchmen, which Richard of Capua took by way of Fealty to Gregory 7.Gervas. Do… r…born. p. 1307. as may appear to any one that compares them together:Mat. Paris p. 414. where there are the same expressions word for word:vit. Abbat. p. 140. by which we may see the strictest allegiance to the Pope is understood by it,Thorn. p. 1899. without the least reservation of any other Princes Rights. And considering the doctrine and design of the first imposers of it, it cannot be questioned, but their intention was hereby to exempt the takers of it from all Allegiance to any other than the Pope. But lest this design should be too easily suspected, at first it went only along with the Pall to Archbishops, then it came to Bishops, p. 366shops, and at last, as the Gloss upon the Canon Law tells us,Decr…tal. de jure jurand. l. 2. tit. 24. c. 4. to all that receive any dignity, consecration, or confirmation from the Pope; and now the oath in the Pontifical is much larger than it was, and by it the takers are bound to observe and defend the Papal reservations, Pontifical. Ro…an. p. 86. to 97. A…tw. 1627.Provisions and mandates, and to persecute to the utmost of their Power, all Hereticks, Schismaticks and Rebels to the Pope. Much kindness then is to be expected from all who are sworn to persecution, and much allegiance to Princes from those who own the Pope to be their Soveraign in as express terms as any Subjects can do their Princes: and so Cassander takes notice, that several passages in this Oath relate to meer civil obedience, Epistolae select. Cent. 1. …p. 21. p. 94, 97.which we owe to Princes and not to the Pope: and for what relates to the Papacy, if by it be understood the Papal Tyranny, as no doubt it is, be utterly condemns it as an unlawful oath; and I extreamly wonder at those who make so many scruples about oaths of Allegiance to Princes, that they make none at all about this, which as far as I can see, leaves no room for Allegiance to them, any more than a person who hath already sworn Allegiance to one Prince, hath liberty to swear the same thing to another; which it is impossible he should keep to both.

p. 367The first contriver of this Oath to the Pope, was no other than Gregory 7. who could not be thought to understand less than the strictest Allegiance by it, since he required Fealty from Temporal Princes, and forbad all Clergy-men paying homage to them. In the Council held by him at Rome, A. D. 1079. the Archbishop of Aquileia took an Oath in the same form with that published by Raynaldus out of the Vatican MS. and therein he is sworn,Co…cil. Gene…al. To. 11. p. 2. p. 379. to defend the Roman Papacy and the Royalties of S. Peter; which makes me wonder how the form extant in the Canon Law should have it Regulas Sanctorum Patrum instead of Regalia Sancti Petri, for we are not to imagin that Gregory 9. had any such thought to bring down the Royalties of S. Peter to the ancient Canons; and the oath which was taken had the Regalia sancti Petri alwayes in it from Gregory 7. time: unless they hoped to deceive the simple by this means, for we find that even Cassander himself thought there had been no other Form besides that in the Canon Law, till the Bishop of Munster sent him the Form he was to take; wherein were the Regalia sancti Petri, as they are now in the Pontifical. But if the strictest tye of Allegiance to the Pope as their Soveraign were not intended by this p. 368oath, why could not the Popes be contented with the former oath of Canonical Obedience, which from the time of Boniface was required by the Pope of all Metropolitans together with the Pall, although many refused to submit their necks to that Yoke. Before A. D. 450.De Conco…d. Sac…rd. & I… per. l. 6. c. 3. n. 13. Petrus de Marca observes, nosuch thing as an Oath of Canonical Obedience from Bishops to the Metropolitan was used in the Church; and therefore Leo 1. reproves Anastasius of Thessalonica for requiring it from Atticus a Bishop under him; but afterwards by degrees it came into Use, as appears by the words of the Bishops of Aquileia in Baronius to the Emperour Mauricius, Baron. ad A 590. n. 42. Form…l. antiquae pro…ot. in append. ad Tom. 2. Concil. Gall. form. 12.and the profession made by Adelbertus to Hinomarus his Metropolitan. Whereas the Metropolitans themselves made only a bare profession of their faith, and a promise to their suffragan Bishops to observe the Canons of the Church. But when Gregory sent Boniface, as his Missionary into Germany, he made him take an Oath over the Reliques of S. Peter in the Vatican, to be true and faithful to the interests of the Roman See, S…rrar. Rerum Moguntiae…, l. 3. c. 19. Boni…c. Epistol. p. 163.but still it was within the compass of the Catholick Faith and the ancient Canons: and this … being a very faithful servant to the … See, makes it his business to perswade the Bishops of Germany p. 369and France, to profess subjection to the Bishop of Rome; and all the Metropolitans to receive Palls from thence,Bonifacit epist. 105. p. 144. and to give Canonical obedience to the Popes decrees: these things went very hardly down with the Bishops; for two years after A. D. 744. Boniface complains to Pope Zachary, Bonifac. cp. 141. p. 211.that he was afraid they would not keep their words; but he assures the Pope it was none of his fault; but at last they were wheedled into it under this pretence that it was only a mark of honour to receive the Pall, and not a badge of subjection; and Hincmarus told Nicolaus 1.Hin…mar. ep. 26. p. 310. Tom. 2. That he could receive no more power by it, than the Canons had given to Metropolitans already; but when they were brought to receive the Pall the promise of subjection went down with it: the Form of which is extant among the ancient Formulae published by Sirmondus, Formul. antiq. 13. append. ad To. 2. Co… cil. Gall. p. 656.wherein they promise to the Pope only debitam subjectionem & obedientiam, which is properly Canonical Obedience. Now if Gregory 7. had understood no more than that, why did he alter the Oath, and put in so many expressions which properly imply the same Fealty which Vassals owe to their Lords, or Subjects to their Princes? I know not, how it came to pass that so jealous a Prince of his own Rights as Henry 1. came to suffer the p. 370new Archbishop to take this oath to the Pope; but this is certain that it was extreamly disgusted in other Countries. For Baronius tells us that the Kings and Nobility of Sicily and Poland were very much offended at it,Baron. A. 1102. n. 5, 8… as a thing there was no ground for in the ancient Councils; as though saith Paschal 2. in answer to them, the Councils could set bounds to the Popes Authority: which was bravely said and like a Prince that endeavoured to make the greatest Bishops his Vassals; but I cannot imagine what satisfaction this could give to Secular Princes, who might easily discern how much their own Power was lessened by these manifest encroachments upon it, by the exacting oaths of Allegiance from some of the most considerable of their Subjects, to a Forraign Power.

§. 8. After the death of Henry 1. the Papal power got more ground in the troublesome Reign of King Stephen, than ever it had done before; For his title being very bad, he saw it was the more necessary for him to strengthen it by the Popes Authority. To which end, after his Consecration by William Archbishop of Canterbury, who together with Stephen had before sworn Allegiance to Maud the Empress, p. 371he sends to the Pope for a Confirmation of his Title, which the Pope very amply sends him; and the Bull is extant among our Historians;Richa…d. Prior. H… guls… ad. i…ter 10. Script. p. 313. wherein among other things he takes notice, that on the day of his consecration (as the Pope calls it) he promised obedience and reverence to S. Peter; which no doubt went very far in his Title: and the Bishop of Winchester his Brother told him (as Malmsbury Mal…sb…. hist. No…ell. l. 2. p. 103.relates who lived in that time) that he came to the Crown not by any military power but by the Churches Favour, and therefore he ought to be kind to it; and so he was it seems at first, for he yielded to their own terms, as Gul. Gul. N…wburg. l. 1. c 4.Newburgensis saith, and the Bishops did swear only a conditional Allegiance to him, viz. as long as he preserved the Liberty of the Church. To give them therefore all the satisfaction they desired, he made that Oath extant in Malmsbury, Malmsb. l. 1. p. 10…wherein he put all Ecclesia…tical Persons and Things under their own jurisdiction; and when afterwards he violated this Liberty, his own Brother being then the Popes Legat, presumed to summon him to appear before his Ecclesiastical High Court of Iustice, and to give him an account of what he had done in daring to imprison the Bishops of Salisbury and Lincoln: For, said he, if the Bishops do any thing amiss, the p. 372King hath nothing to do to judge them, but they must be left to the Canons; and withall he adds, that the King was bound to give them an account of what he had done: but the King sent them word that he appealed to Rome; and so the business fell. Thus we see how much he advanced the Popes power by yielding to a Legatine Power here, to hear causes, and suffering himself to be called to an account before it; by which example, Appeals grew very frequent and troublesome in his time, as our Historians sadly complain; and the Bishops and Monks went commonly over to Rome upon Appeals; Radulph. de Di…c…o. p. 509.nay Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury went to the Pope, then in Frarce, expresly against the Kings command, and the Pope suspended the rest that did not come; and William Archbishop of York was deposed by the Pope, meerly because nominated by the King, Chron. Gervas. Dorobonn. p. 1363. Richard. Ha…ulst. 326. Hovede…. A. 1143.and another put into his Room without the Kings consent, or approbation: the right of Investitures was condemned in a Council held at Westminster, and the infringers of Ecclesiastical Liberty punished with Excommunication, not to be taken off but by the Pope himself; and after the reconciliation between Stephen and Henry 2.Radulph. de Dic…to. Imag. hist. p. 528. the effect of it, saith Radulphus de Diceto, was, that the Churches Dominion was exalted by it.

p. 373§. 9. This was the state of things here, when Henry the second came to the possession of the Crown; all the Customs of his Ancestors which they accounted Rights of the Crown were lost during the Usurpation of Stephen, and strange insolencies and villanies were committed under the pretence of Ecclesiastical Liberty, or the unaccountabless of Ecclesiastical Persons for their actions to Civil Justice: which made the Judges complain to the King of the thefts, rapines, and murders frequently committed by Clergy-men, over whom they had then no jurisdiction;… and as Gulielmus Newburgensis saith, the Bishops were more concerned to defend their priviledges, than to punish offendors, and thought they did God and the Church service in protecting them from the hands of Iustice. By which means things were come to that height between the Civil & Ecclesiastical Power, that one or the other must yeild; the Ecclesiastical Power being in the hands of Thomas Becket, a man after the Popes own heart, and in whom the very soul of Gregory the seventh seemed to have come into the World again; and the Civil Power in the management of Henry the second, a Prince of a high Spirit and great courage, and that could not easily bear the p. 374least diminution of his Power. And where there was so much matter prepared, and such heat on both sides, it was no great difficulty to fore-tell a storm, when the Clouds that hovered in the air should clap together, or fall upon each other. This was foreseen by the more discerning men of that time when they found the King bent upon making him Archbishop after the death of Theobald: Cod Cotton. l. 1. Ep. 125.For however Becket himself boasted of the freedom of his election and the consent of the Clergie and Kingdom in it, yet in the Epistle sent to him by the Bishops and Clergie of the whole Province, they plainly tell him,Codex C…ttonian. Epistol. l. 1. Ep. 123. the Kings Mother disswaded him from it, the whole Kingdom was against it, and the Clergie sighed and groaned as much as they durst; but the King would have it so. Hov…d…a. Annal part. post. p. 292. Baron. A. 1167. n. 32.For the King being then in Normandy sent over his great Minister Richard de Lucy on purpose to let the Suffragan Bishops and the Monks of Canterbury understand his pleasure, that he would have Becket chosen Archbishop. Gilbert London. Epistol. T…onae Cant…ar l. 1. Ep. 126. in Cod. Cotton. MS.Which the Bishop of London in his excellent Epistle to Becket (which gives a more true account of the Intrigues of the whole quarrel than any thing yet extant, and which Baronius could not but see in the Codex Vaticanus, although he takes no notice p. 375at all of it) tells him, was a greater invasion of the Churches Liberties, than any of those things he made such ado about. You, saith he, now tell us that we ought to obey God rather than men: would to God we had done so then; but because we had not the courage to do it then, therefore we now suffer shame and confusion for it, and the tears run down our cheeks for the calamities that are come upon us. By which we may judge of the truth of the Quadripartite History, written by Thomas his own Disciples, as Baronius confesseth,Baron. A. 1162. …. 21. for therein Herebertus and Iob. Sarisburiensis tell of Thomas his protesting against his being Archbishop to the King, and his being hardly perswaded to it by the Popes Legat; whereas the Bishop of London proves to Becket himself, that during Theobalds Life he had his eye upon it, and made all the interest he could to obtain it upon his death, that he gave several thousand Marks to the King to be Chancellour, hoping by that means to come the easier into the See of Canterbury, that being in Normandy at Theobalds death, he posted over, and the Kings Favourite brought his command for his election. Vit. S. Thome Ca. …. MS. in … Co…t… p. 10.And it is likewise confessed by Fitz Stephen in the MS. History of Beckets Life, that the whole Clergie knew p. 376it was the Kings pleasure he should be made Archbishop; and that Gilbert, then only Bishop of Hereford, (afterwards of London) disswaded all that he could from his election; and after said, that the King had done a strange thing, viz. he had made a Souldier Archbishop of Canterbury; for but a little before he had been in arms with the King at Tholouse. And this opposition of his, he calls not only God to witness, was not out of any ambitious desire to have been in his Room, (as Thomas and the Monks charge him) but Becket himself, for no man could attempt any such thing, but he must know it, his Favour being so great with the King then. But it seems, the wiser men among the Bishops, thought that by reason of his insolent,Iob. Sarisbur. l. 1. …. 85. l. 2. ep. 28, 29. rash, and inflexible temper, (which even his Friends complained of in him) he would bring all things into confusion. When he was summoned at Northampton to appear before the King, he would needs carry the Cross, with his own hands into the Court; upon which the Bishop of London told him, he behaved himself as if he had a mind to disturb the whole Kingdom; Fitz Stephon. vit. Thom. Cant. p. 26.You carry the Cross, Codex Cotton. p. 10.saith he, and what if the King should take his Sword? but, said he to one that stood by, He alwayes was a Fool, and ever will be one. These p. 377things I only mention, to let men see what apprehensions the more prudent men of that time had of the likelihood of great disturbances coming to the Church by his ill management, although by the rashness of others added to his, he hath had the fortune to be accounted a Saint and a Martyr.

§. 10. But my business is not, to write a particular account of all the passages between the King and him, after the difference between them; which hath been so largely done by Baronius, and our own Historians; but I shall shew, that the Controversie between them was about Gregory the sevenths principles, and if he dyed a Martyr for any thing, it was in defence of these. Which I shall the rather do,La Vie de S. Thomas de Canterb…ry. A Paris 1674. since I find his Life very lately published in French with a high character of him, and dedicated to the King of France; but especially because I find, that those among us of that Religion, who disown Gregory the sevenths principles, are willing to believe him a Martyr upon other grounds,History of the Irish Remonstrance, from p. 397 to 462. viz. that his quarrel with the King was upon the account of the antient Municipal Laws of England which had a respect to the immunities of Clergiemen.

p. 378I shall therefore prove, 1. That the matters in Dispute between the King and Becket, were the very same that Gregory the seventh and his successors contended about, with Christian Princes. 2. That the pleas made use of by Becket and his party were no other, than those, which Gregory the seventh and his successors used, so that they had no relation at all to the Municipal Laws, but to the controversie then on Foot between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power. In both which I hope to make some passages clearer than they have yet been, having had the advantage of perusing several MSS. relating to this matter, and especially that Volume of Epistles, which Baronius accounts an unvaluable Treasure; and as far as I can perceive, the Cotton MS. is more compleat than the Vatican, Ba…on. A. 1 162. n. 21.which Baronius made use of.

1. For the matters in Dispute between them. The whole controversie might be reduced to two heads. 1. Whether Ecclesiastical Persons were unaccountable to the Civil Power for any misdemeanours committed by them? 2. Whether the Pope had the Soveraign Power over Princes and all under them, so that he might contradict the Kings Laws and Customs, and command his Subjects against his consent to come to p. 379him? and whether the Kings Subjects in such cases were not bound to obey the Pope, let the King command what he please? These, in truth, were the points in debate, and the most weighty particulars in the Customs of Clarendon were but as so many branches of these. In that Copy of them which is extant in the Cotton MS. Cod. Cotton. l. 1. l. 12.and was drawn up by the Kings own Order, the occasion of them is set down, to have been the differences which had happened between the Clergie and the Kings Iustices and the Barons of the Kingdom about the Customs and Dignities of the Crown; the most considerable of those which the Pope condemned were concerning 1. The Tryal of Titles of Advowsons and Presentations in the Kings Courts. 2. The Tryal of Clergie-men before the Kings Iudges; and the Churches not defending them after conviction or confession. 3. That neither Archbishops, Bishops or others should go out of the Kingdom, without the Kings consent, and giving security to the King, that in going, staying, or returning, they will do nothing to the prejudice either of the King or Kingdom. 4. The profits of Ecclesiastical Courts upon absolutions, for they demanded not barely personal security of all excommunicated persons, to stand to the Churches judgements, but Vadium ad remanens p. 380as the Law term was then, which implyes real security, or so much money laid down which was to come to the Court, if they did not perform the conditions expressed. For it was one of the things the Kings Ambassadour complained of to his Mother the Empress, Cod. Cotton. L 1. ep. 49.that the matters in controversie were not things of advantage to mens souls, but to their own purses; and that the Faults of Offenders were not punished in the Ecclesiastical Courts by the injoyning of Penance, but by the giving of money. And the Empress her self in her discourse with Nicholas de Monte the Archbishops Friend, insisted on these pecuniary mulcts for sins as one of the great occasions of the troubles; which made people suspect this pretence of Ecclesiastical Liberty to be only a cloak for their own profits. But however the good Pope, whether he understood this Vadium ad remanens or no, at all adventures condemned it. For what should the Court of Rome do without exchanging Money for Sins? 5. That no Person who held of the King in capite, or belonged to him should be excommunicated, or have his Land interdicted without making the King acquainted with it, or his Iustice in his absence. 6. That in matters of Appeal, they were to proceed from the Arch-deacon to p. 381the Bishop, from the Bishop to the Arch-bishop, and from thence to the King, and not to proceed further without his express leave. These were the main things in dispute; and what do they all amount to, but the very same Rights of the Crown which the Kings predecessors did insist upon? and what could be the sense of Becket in opposing them, but that Clergie-men were not accountable for their Faults to the Civil Power, and in case of the Popes command, whether upon appeal or otherwise, Bishops and others were to go to his Court in spight of the King? as Anselm and Theobald had done before. It is agreed by Baronius himself,Baron. A. 1163. n. 19… that the quarrel brake out, upon the Arch-bishops denying to deliver up the Clergie-man that was accused and convicted of Murder after Ecclesiastical Censure to the Secular Power; which the King earnestly desired, and Becket as peremptorily denyed. And upon what principle could this be done, but the highest pretence of Ecclesiastical Liberty, that ever Gregory the seventh or any other asserted? And it is plain by this, that the King did not deny the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, nor hindered the proper Censures of the Church upon offenders; but the Question was meerly this, Whether Ecclesiastical persons having committed crimes against the publick p. 382peace, were only to be punished with Ecclesiastical Censures, and never to be delivered over to Civil Iustice? Which was the main hinge of the Cause, and which Becket stood to, to the last. And that this was the true State of the Controversie appears by the representation made of it to Alexander the third by the whole Clergie of the Province of Canterbury: … Cotton. … 127.who confess that the peace of the Kingdom was very much disturbed by the insolence and crimes of some of the Clergie (for upon the account of this exemption, any Villains were safe, if they could but get into any kind of Orders;) the King for the safety of his people, pressed the Bishops after their Censures to give such guilty persons up to the Laws, because bare degrading was by no means sufficient punishment for wilful murder, which was all the Church censures reached to. This all the Bishops at first opposed as derogatory to the Churches Liberty, but afterwards (Becket excepted) the rest saw a necessity of yielding at present, for, as they confess themselves, this liberty was extended even to a Lector or Acolythus; and the Empress Matildis said,Cod. Cotton. l. 1. cp. 49. that the Bishops gave orders very loosely without titles; by which we may easily imagine what a miserable state the whole Kingdom might p. 383be in if these things were suffered. So that we see the plea insisted upon at the beginning of the quarrell was, that no persons in any Ecclesiastical Orders, upon any crime whatsoever, were to be delivered over to be punished by the Secular Power. And what could such a pretence arise from, but only from Gregory the sevenths principles of Government? viz. that the Civil Power had nothing at all to do with Ecclesiastical Persons, and that all the Subjection and Obedience they owed was only to the Pope as their Soveraign; and that this was the Liberty which Christ purchased for his Church with his own blood, Suger. vit. Lu…or.as Paschal the second answered the Emperours Ambassadors, and as Becket very frequently expresses it in his Epistles. A blessed Liberty! and worthy the purchase of the Blood of Christ; viz. a Liberty to sin without fear of punishment, or at least any punishment which such persons would be afraid of; for the utmost Becket could be perswaded to in the case of the Canon of Bedford convicted of murder, was only to confine him to a Monastery for a time: which was a very easie expiation of Murder; So that the Benefit of Clergie was a mighty thing in those dayes. But it is impossible to give any tolerable account of Beckets actions, unless we suppose this to p. 384have been his Ground and Principle, that God had exempted by his Law all Clergymen, by vertue of being such, from any subjection to Civil Power: For if they owe any subjection, they are accountable for their breaches of the Laws to that power to which they are subject; if they are not accountable for any crimes they must be supposed to be wholly independent on the Civil Government.

§. 11. Neither is there any ground for such an exemption by the ancient Municipal Laws of England, either in the Saxon, or Norman times: and I cannot but wonder to see the Laws of Princes concerning Ecclesiastical Persons, brought to prove their total exemption from the power of Princes, which was that Ecclesiastical liberty which Becket did plead for. For according to his principles, neither Alured, nor Edward, nor Canutus, nor any other Prince had any thing to do to appoint the punishments of Ecclesiastical Persons; but their judgement was to be wholly left to their own Superiours. And supposing there had been such Laws among the Saxons, Becket would not have valued them at all, but rather have thought them a prejudice to his Cause, and an encouragement to Hen. 2. to have repealed p. 385those and made others in their place. For why should not the Power of this King be as good as the Saxons to make and alter Ecclesiastical Laws as they saw convenient? but Becket understood his business better than so. He would not upon any terms be brought to the tryal, whether they were ancient Customes or no which the King contended for? the King offered it very frequently, and by any fair ways of tryal, and declared he would renounce them if they did not appear to be so, he appealed often to the judgement of the Church of England about it, and would stand and fall by it; and none of these things would be accepted of: by which it is evident that either there were no Laws could justifie Becket, or he thought the producing them would be hurtful to his cause; for not one of all the Customs he excepted against, was in his opinion so bad, as for Princes to take upon themselves to determine Ecclesiastical causes, and to appoint the punishments of Ecclesiastical Persons. For then he knew the King need not to stand upon the proof of his other Customes, this one Right of the Crown would put an end to the whole dispute. For if Henry 2. had the same Power that Edgar had,A…lied. de G…nealog. Reg. Angl, p. 360. when he said, that the tryal of the manners of Ecclesiastical Persons belonged to him, and p. 386therefore gave Authority to Dunstan and the rest to expell criminal Clergy-men out of Churches and Monasteries, why might not he punisht Ecclesiastical persons? And then to what purpose had Becket contended with the King, if he had allowed him as much power as the Saxon Kings did make use of? And what if the Saxon Laws did appoint the Bishops to examin Clergymen, and pass sentence upon them in criminal causes? was not the punishment already established by the Kings Laws, and the Bishop only the Minister of the Kings Iustice upon Ecclesiastical Delinquents? And even in the Laws of Edward the Confessour, Leges Edw. Co…f…ss. c. 5.in case of default in Ecclesiastical Courts, a liberty is allowed of going to other Courts; and in the Laws of the elder Edward, any one in Orders is appointed to make compensation according to the nature of his crime, Leg. Edw. Sen. c. 3.and without sureties he was to go into prison; but in case of a capital offence, he was to be taken, that he might undergo penance from the Bishop for his fault. Where, by capital offence we are not to understand such as were punished with death, but the Poenitential Canons of Egbert tell us by capital crimes were understood Pride, Eg…rt Poenit. Exc…rpt. c. 5.Envy, Fornication, Adultery, Perjury, &c. But the Laws of Canutus appoint degradation p. 387for murder by a Clergy-man; and compensation and banishment withal,Leges Ca…nti. c. 38. which were Civil punishments after degradation, the very thing which Becket denyed, and in case this compensation were not undertaken within thirteen days, then the Person was to be out-Law'd, which to be sure, was a civil punishment. By the Laws of King Alured,Leges Alured. c. 2…. if a Priest killed a man he was to lose his priviledges, and the Bishop was to expel him out of the Temple being already degraded, unless due compensation were made; i. e. if he did not undergo the Civil punishment: For then the greatest crimes, (excepting murder of a Prince or Lord by his Subject or Vassal, or killing any in a Sacred place, or Treason) might be expiated by pecuniary Mulcts, and Ecclesiastical Penance, according to the Poenitential Canons. For it appears by the old Poenitential Canons of Theodore and Egbert, Theod. Canon. Poenit. c. 9.that murder had so many years penance appointed for its expiation, Egberti Canon. Poenitent. c. 3.which had been a vain thing, if it had been punished with death; now in this case it was but reasonable that the guilty Person should be delivered to the Bishop to receive his Penance; whether he were a Clergy-man or Lay-man; And the Laws of Princes did inforce them to submit to Ecclesiastical Penance. So King Alured p. 388commands in case of perjury, Leges Alured. c. 1.that the Person be taken into the Kings custody for forty dayes, that he might undergo the Penance which the Bishop shall impose upon him; and if he escaped he was not only to be anathematized, but put out of all protection of the Law: and by the Laws of King Edmund any Person guilty of Murder was not to come into the Kings presence till he had undergone the Penance enjoyned him by the Bishop: Leges Edmund. c. 3, 4.And from hence I suppose it was, that in the Saxon Times, the Bishop and the Sheriff sate together in the same Court, as appears by the Laws of Edgar and Canutus, Leges …dgar. c. 5.not barely to instruct the people in the Laws of God and man; Legis Canut. c. 17.but as the Sheriff was to appoint the civil penalty, so the Bishop was to enjoyn penance according to the nature of the Fault: and one of these did not exclude the other, but, he that did pay such a pecuniary mulct to the Sheriff, did undergo so many years penance besides. Therefore the Laws which mention persons being delivered to the Bishop for Penance, do by no means imply that they were excused from any Civil penalty either before or after it: as might be proved from the Laws of the Empire, and the Capitulars, if it were needful. So that in the Saxon times, if a Clergy-man were guilty of wilful p. 389murder, the poenitential Canons imposed ten years penance upon him, of which seven were to be spent in banishment; Eg…ert. Canon. Poe…it. c. 7.but besides this, the legal compensation was to be made, as is evident by the Laws of Edward and Canutus: from whence it appears, how very slender the pretence is of Beckets contending for the ancient Saxon Laws, when he denyed the giving up a Clergy-man convicted of murder to the Secular Power after Ecclesiastical Censures. But where …s there the least Foundation in the Saxon times, for such open defiance of the Civil Power, as to the punishment of offenders of what degree or order soever? and that was the case of Becket, the King only desired that Iustice might be executed indifferently on all Persons, and the ancient Customs revived; but he would not yield as to either of these, not upon the pretence of former Laws, but the repugnancy he supposed to be in them to that Ecclesiastical Liberty, which he said, Christ had purchased with his Blood.