momenti esse, sed viribus et firmitate | bere sortiri affectus, prolemque exinde juris caruisse et carere, præfatoque susceptam et suscipiendam fuisse et fore illustrissimo domino Henrico octavo et legitimam, et præfatum Henricum Angliæ serenissimæ dominæ Catharinæ non licere regem teneri et obligatum fuisse et fore ad in eodem prætenso matriminio permanere cohabitandum cum dictâ Catherinâ Reetiam pronunciamus decernimus et de- ginâ ejus legitimâ conjuge, illamque mariclaramus, ipsosque potentissimum prin- tali affectione et regio honore tractandum, cipem Henricum octavum ac serenissimam et eundem Henricum Angliæ regem ad dominam Catherinam, quatenus de facto præmissa omnia et singula cum affectu et non de jure dictum prætensum matri- adimplendum, condemnandum, omnibusmonium ad invicem contraxerunt et con- que juris remediis cogendum et compelsummarunt, ab invicem separamus et lendum fore prout condemnamus cogimus divorciamus atque sic divorciatos et et compellimus: molestatisnesque et deseparatos, necnon ab omni vinculo matri- negationes per eundem Henricum regem moniali respectu dicti prætensi matri- eidem Catherinæ super invaliditate ac monii liberos et immunes fuisse et esse fœdere dicti matrimonii quomodolibet pronunciamus decernimus et declaramus, factas et præstitas fuisse et esse illicitas per hanc nostram sententiam definitivam in et injustas, et eidem Henrico Regi super his scriptis. In quorum testimonium, etc. illis ac invaliditate matrimonii hujus modi perpetuum silentium imponendum fore imponimus, eundemque Henricum Angliæ regem in expensis in hujusmodi causâ pro parte dictæ Catherinæ reginæ coram nobis, et dictis omnibus legitimè factis condemnandum fore et condemnamus quarum expensarum taxationem nobis in posterum reservamus.-Pocock's Recordz of Reformation. ii. 532.

(E) THE POPE'S BULL DECLARING THE VALIDITY OF THE MARRIAGE.

Matrimonium intra prædictos Catherinam et Henricum Angliæ reges contractum et inde secuta quæcunque fuisse et esse validum et canonicum, validaque et canonica, suosque debitos debuisse et de

CHAPTER V.

THE REFORMATION PARLIAMENT AND CONVOCATION.

1529-1536.

31 Character of the Parliament of 1529. § 2. Sir T. More's speech as Chancellor. § 3. His attack upon Wolsey's character. § 4. Bills affecting the rights of the clergy brought into the Commons. § 5. The clergy strongly oppose the bill against pluralities. § 6. Bishop Fisher in the House of Lords. § 7. The Commons complain of his speech. § 8. The king summons Bishop Fisher before him. § 9. The three bills pass the Upper House. § 10. Lords and Members of the Commons remonstrate with the pope. § 11. Irritation of the Parliament against Rome. § 12. Clergy brought in guilty of Præmunire offer a money composition. § 13. Their acceptance of the supremacy is demanded. § 14. The clergy acknowledge the royal supremacy. § 15. The "pardon" of the clergy. § 16. The true nature of the supremacy. § 17. The address of the Commons against the Ordinaries. § 18. The first answer of the Ordinaries. § 19. The second answer. § 20. The king's requirements. § 21. The submission of the clergy. § 22. The clergy petition against the pope's annates. § 23. The Act to abolish papal annates. § 24. The Act for restraint of appeals. § 25. Negotiations with Rome, which prove abortive. §. 26. The statute of the submission of the clergy. § 27. Appeals further regulated. § 28. Act to regulate appointments to bishoprics. § 29. Act to make illegal papal dispensations. § 30. First succession Act. § 31. Act to regulate proceedings in matter of heresy. § 32. Act of supremacy. § 33. Treason Act. § 34. Act to give king first fruits and tenths. § 35. The pope's supremacy thus formally repudiated. § 36. Convocation petitions for an English Bible.

§ 1. THE Parliament which met in November 1529 was composed, in an unusually large degree, of office-holders under the crown, and its spirit was one of complete subserviency to the king's will. It showed its servility not only by sanctioning all the illegal methods to which resort had been had for raising money, but, still more, by passing a law which enacted that all the loans made to the king were to be regarded as gifts, and that he was discharged from all obligation of repayment. This, as might be expected, caused grievous dissatisfaction in the country. Nevertheless the work which this Parliament performed in the restoration of its liberty to the Church of England was so important, that its character has been enthusiastically lauded by historians. One has not shrunk from declaring that "the records of the world contain no instance of such a triumph, bought at a cost se slight, and tarnished with blemishes so trifling."

"2

1 Hallam, Const. Hist. i. 23. 2 Froude, Hist. of England. i. 188.

§ 2. The session was opened by a speech from Sir Thomas More, who had been appointed chancellor on the disgrace of Wolsey. Sir Thomas was a man of high character and spotless integrity. He was learned and eloquent after the manner of those days, and in his private life altogether admirable. But his character had its decided blemishes, and it must be confessed that in the opening of this Parliament, and the violent attack which he made on the disgraced favourite Wolsey, he does not show to advantage.

§ 3. The authority for More's speech is the chronicler Hall, a man of a decided bias against him, but, says Mr. Brewer, "it is hard to suppose that the whole speech was due to the active invention of the chronicler."1 More likened the king to a shepherd or herdsman taking care for his flock. "And as you see that amongst a great flock of sheep some be rotten and faulty, which the good shepherd sendeth from the sound sheep, the great wether which is of late fallen as you all know, juggled with the king so craftily, scabbedly, and untruly, that all men must see that he imagined himself that the king had no sense to perceive his crafty doings, or presumed that he could not see or understand his fraudulent juggling and attempts. But he was deceived, for his grace's sight is so quick and penetrable, that he not only saw him, but saw through him both within and without, so that he was entirely open to him. According to his desert, he hath had a gentle correction, which small punishment the king would not should be an example to other offenders, but openly declareth that whosoever hereafter shall make the like attempt, or commit the like offences, shall not escape with the like punishment."2 The chancellor thus seems to lend the weight of his authority to the unjust persecution of the cardinal, and in accordance with this he afterwards signed the articles of accusation3 brought against him in the Lords. The House of Commons, however, took a fairer view, and refused to accept the bill passed in the Lords.

§ 4. In doing this the Commons were not influenced by any special regard for the Church and clergy. The bitter feeling which had been working in the minds of the laymen since the beginning of the reign, and which, in the king's angry mood, was not displeasing to him, soon began to show itself in the Commons' House. Three bills were brought in touching the privileges and rights of

1 Brewer, iv. 600, note. It is probable that Hall was a member of

this Parliament.

2 Hall's Chronicle, p. 762 (4to ed.)

3" Articles so frivolous," says Mr. Hallam, "that they have served to redeem his fame in later times."--Const. Hist. i. 22.

the clergy. The first concerned the probate of wills, and was designed to abridge the exorbitant fees exacted in the bishops' courts.1 It enacted that when the property of the deceased person was under 100 shillings, no fee should be demanded for adminstration; that when the property exceeded 100 shillings, but was under £40, three shillings and sixpence should be charged; and that when it was above this sum, five shillings should be the amount of fee. The second Act regulated mortuaries.2 It declared that this charge had been sometimes held over-excessive to the poor people, and specified the amounts to be charged, the charge only to be made where the custom had prevailed. The third Act was directed against pluralities and clerical farming. It prohibited. the obtaining any license or dispensation from the court of Rome after April 1, 1535, for holding a plurality of benefices, or for any relaxation of the law. A heavy penalty was affixed to the obtaining such licenses.

4

§ 5. This was therefore the first Act of this period which directly struck at the pope's power in England. It was by no means acceptable to the clergy. Taking away as it did from them all power of obtaining, by a money payment, from the court of Rome, the license for pluralities, it left them in this matter completely at the mercy of the king. Convocation was at the time in session, and it took up the matter warmly. The clergy addressed the king to claim what they held to be their rightful privileges. They demanded that the privileges given them by Magna Charta and the ancient laws should not be abridged; that a clear statement should be made as to the provisions of the Act of Præmunire; that clergy should not be called before the King's courts under this statute. They declared that the Parliament ran great risk of sin in passing any statute which touched clerical liberties, without first consulting the clergy in their Convocations. It was a bold protest, and founded on justice, but perhaps somewhat impolitic at the moment. Very soon the clergy are compelled altogether to change their

tone.

§ 6. Bishop Fisher, in the House of Lords, made a spirited defence of the clergy. In his speech he said that there was a report that "the small monasteries should be given up into the king's

121 Henry VIII. c. 5.

2 A mortuary was the best beast or chattel of which the deceased died possessed (or the worth of it), or the second best when the lord of the manor obtained the best for a heriot. Amos, Statutes of Reformation Parlt., p. 205. 321 Henry VIII. c. 6. 4 Ib. c. 13.

5 The process instituted against Wolsey, and extended to the whole clergy of England who had acquiesced in his legatine authority, was then going on. Of this more hereafter 6 Collier, Records, No. 28.

hands, which," said the aged bishop, "makes me fear it is not so much the good as the goods of the Church that is looked after. Truly, my lord, how this may sound in your ears I cannot tell, but to me it appears no otherwise than if our holy mother the Church were to become a bondmaid. Otherwise, to what tendeth these pretentious and curious petitions from the Commons ? To no other intent and purpose but to bring the clergy into contempt of the laity, that they may seize their patrimony. But, my lords, beware of yourselves and your country; beware of your holy mother, the Catholic Church. The people are subject to novelties, and Lutheranism spreads among us. Remember Germany and Bohemia, what miseries are befallen them already. . . . My lords, except ye resist manfully by your authorities this violent heap of mischief offered you by the Commons, you shall see all obedience first drawn from the clergy, and afterwards from yourselves; and if you search into the true causes of all these mischiefs, you shall find that they all arise through want of faith."1

§ 7. The Commons were in no mood to be lectured in this way by any prelate, however respectable. They complained to the king of the bishop's speech. To make their complaint more formal, it was carried by their Speaker, Sir T. Audely, and thirty of the members of the House. They declared that they held it to be a crying grievance that they, who were "elected for the wisest men of all the shires, cities, and boroughs within the realm of England, should be declared in so noble and open presence to lack faith, which was equivalent to say that they were infidels and no Christians, as ill as Turks and Saracens." 2

§ 8. The king received the complaints of the Commons nothing loth. He bore Bishop Fisher special ill-will for his conduct in the divorce business. He had made up his mind to humble the high pretensions of the churchmen. The bishop was called before him. The archbishop and six other bishops were bid to accompany him. The complaints of the Commons were stated to him. The bishop replied that he had intended to accuse not the English Commons, but the Bohemians, of lack of faith. With this somewhat lame excuse he escaped. The king sent to inform the Commons how the bishop had defended himself, but his "blind excuse," says Hall, "pleased the Commons not at all." 3

§ 9. Meantime the three bills passed by the Commons made no progress in the Lords, where the spiritual peers had a majority. The king therefore applied himself to the work of getting them through the Upper House. Some alterations were made in the first two bills, by which means the Lords were brought to accept Bailey's Life of Fisher. 2 Hall's Chron. p. 766. 3 Hall, p. 766.