WARНАМ, or annul such as should be disliked by his highness: but then Abp. Cant. this promise was encumbered with a general saving. This proviso made the clergy judges of the canons, and masters of any doubtful construction: so that it was thought the old canons were still at their disposal, to be kept or given up, as they should think fit. Dr. Atterbury's Rights, &c. lish Convo This answer not coming up to the king's expectation, he of an Eng- resolved to come closer in his next demands: and to prevent cation, Ap an evasive resolution, he took care to press them hardest where pend. p. 534. Cotton. they endeavoured to be most at liberty. Thus a new form Libr. Cleop. F. 6. fol. 96. was sent to them: and here they are expressly required neither to attempt, allege, claim, or put in ure' any of the old canons without leave from the crown; nor yet to enact, promulge, or execute any new ones. And all this without any limitation to the king's life, or any other favourable salvo See Records, whatsoever. num. 19. This form was looked on as somewhat rigorous, it seemed to disable the convocation, and lay the authority of the Church asleep. For thus, as has been observed by a learned reDr. Atter- marker, not only the legislative power of the hierarchy, but bury, ibid. also the jurisdiction of the prelates, had been extinguished, or, which is much the same thing, made precarious, and wholly dependent on a foreign society. But they refuse to go the length of the king's demands. Duke of Norfolk, The prelates, therefore, who had hitherto been obsequious and resigning, refused positively to comply to this length. The king perceiving the matter stick, sent six noblemen to them, to try to overbear their constancy. But it seems their marquis of courage did not desert them upon this occasion. For after an hour's conference with these lords, they returned this final lord Sands, answer, "That they could not submit to the clause prescribed, 'not to attempt, claim, or put in ure any of the old canons without leave from the crown."" Exeter, earl of Oxford, Bullen, and Journal of the Convocation. 70. The apprehension of a storm from the court was more prevalent upon the lower house, who passed the submission in the terms prescribed. When this paper was brought up to the By their last prelates, the archbishop acquainted them how the matter submission, had passed at their conference with the temporal lords; that they are only barred the they expected a return of their message to the king, and hoped enacting new his highness would condescend to an abatement. About noon, canons without leave from the crown. the lords above-mentioned came back, with the king's consent 1 Ure, old word for use. VIII. And Journal of the Convo to what the clergy had offered: and stated that his highness was HENRY willing to be contented, that they should be obliged to no more than not to enact, promulge, or put in ure new canons. thus a new draught of the submission was engrossed, and cation. agreed to by all the upper house, the bishop of Bath and Wells only excepted. But when it was brought to the lower clergy, Three other they thought their consent unnecessary. Their reason was, bishops, London, because, having already passed a more comprehensive form, Lincoln, and this was by consequence in it: and thus, without putting the St. Asaph, matter to the vote, they were prorogued to the fifth of Novem- conditionally. ber. And by the way we are to observe, that the larger form of the lower house was never delivered to the king, nor made authentic. admitted it Journal of the Convo And thus the last instrument or submission, presented the cation. next day to the king by the archbishop, ran only in the name of the upper house. See Records, num. 20. 1532. Thus the matter rested till two years afterwards, when the May 19, submission of the clergy passed into an act of parliament, with a penalty annexed. In the year 1532, the body of William Tracy, of Toddington, in Worcestershire, Esq., was taken up by the chancellor of Worcester, and burned. But in burning the corpse this bigoted officer exceeded his commission, for which he was sued by Tracy's heirs, turned out of his chancellorship, and fined four hundred pounds. The reason of this process was occasioned by an omission (as it was then accounted) in Tracy's will. It seems he had left out the usual form of recommending his soul to the intercession of the saints. This being observed at the probate, archbishop Warham sent a copy of it to the university of Oxford, where being examined in convoca- Wood. Hist. tion, Tracy was pronounced a heretic. Upon this censure, the Univers. order above-mentioned for taking up the corpse, was directed Oxon. 1. 1. to the chancellor. Antiquit. writes to the P. 256. Bp. Burnet, pt. p. 166. About this time, the king wrote to the conclave for a The king cardinal's cap for Jerom, bishop of Worcester, an Italian; conve to letting them know how acceptable such a promotion would be make the bishop of to his highness. And that the reader may perceive upon what Worcester terms of friendship, or of ceremony, at least, the king continued still with the court of Rome, I shall transcribe the See Records, letter. By the way, this bishop Jerom Ghinucci was the num. 21. king's agent for the divorce, and managed to satisfaction. It appears, by this letter, the king had formerly solicited for the a cardinal. WAR- same favour: but why the court of Rome was so impolitic as to Abp. Cant. refuse him, is hard to discover. of the divorce farther pursued. The business In the beginning of this year, the king had procured several learned men from all parts of Italy, to offer the pope a disputation in favour of the divorce: but this motion was refused. However, the pope, to show his willingness to end the controversy, ordered a citation for the king to appear in person, or by proxy, at Rome: this summons was sent his highness to Ld.Herbert, answer the queen's appeal. Upon this, the king dispatched p. 335, 336. sir Edward Karne to Rome, to excuse his non-appearance, and to insist that there was no law to oblige him to such an attendance. The king, to fortify his interest, sends instructions to sir Francis Bryan, to press the French king to do him what good offices he could with the pope. Francis complied with this application, owns the justice of the king of England's request, and tells the pope, that prince ought to be satisfied. That in case of a refusal, himself and his brother of England shall be forced upon such measures as may not prove agreeable to his holiness. This year one Mr. James Bainham, a lawyer of the Middle Temple, suffered upon the charge of heresy. He was brought in December last before Stokesley, bishop of London, and interrogated upon several articles. He denied purgatory, the necessity of auricular confession, extreme unction, and invocation of saints. Fox reports, that sir Thomas More, then lord chancellor, ordered Bainham to be whipped in his garden at Chelsea, and afterwards sent him to the Tower, and saw him tortured upon the rack; and that all his cruelty was used only because he refused to inform against some of the students of the Temple; and could not be brought to discover where some prohibited books lay, which he was supposed to make use of. These were illegal barbarities, and argue sir Thomas More of a different temper from what he is commonly represented. If his bigotry carried him to these rigours, he can never deserve the character bishop Burnet is pleased to give him: that for true generosity of mind, he was an example to the age in which Bp. Burnet, he lived. The fact therefore ought to be well attested before form. pt. 1. We give credit to the relation. But here Fox vouches no records for this part of the narrative, neither is it mentioned by other historians. Hist. Re p. 356. To proceed. Bainham was afterwards brought to a submission, abjured his tenets, and underwent the penance en VIII. joined. Soon after his charge, he recanted his recantation at HENRY St. Austin's, London. Upon which, he was apprehended, committed to the Tower, and pronounced a heretic relapsed. He had some odd opinions: he was mistaken about the authority of the hierarchy, and affirmed, that he that preached the word of God purely, whatsoever he was, and lived conformably to his doctrine, had the key that binds and looses both in heaven and earth. As to the sacrament of the altar, he seems to believe at least as far as consubstantiation. He affirmed, archbishop Becket was a murderer, and if he did not repent his murder, he was rather a devil in hell, than a saint in heaven. His notion of baptism, as Fox represents it, was unsound and wretched. His words are these: "If a Turk, a Jew, or a Saracen do trust in God and keep his law, he is a good Christian man." Thus we see upon the whole, he was right in some things, and wrong in others. However, he suffered at the stake with great constancy and resolution. Fox, p. 297 to 302. This summer very unacceptable news came from England to June, 1532. Rome. A priest was committed for maintaining the papal prisoned for A priest imauthority. And another priest, being imprisoned for Luther- maintaining the pope's anism by the archbishop of Canterbury, appealed to the king authority. as supreme head. This was an application somewhat unusual; however, the juncture made it succeed: for he was taken out of the archbishop's hands, brought before the temporal court, and discharged there. Ibid. 71. To return to the business of the divorce: the pope writes again to the king, and entreats him to constitute a proxy, acquainting likewise the English agents, that he was willing the whole process should be managed in England, only the final decision he must reserve to himself. Thus the lord Herbert. But bishop Burnet, from other records, gives somewhat a different representation of the matter. He reports, the pope offered Ibid. Bp. the king to send a legate, and two auditors of the rota, for the Hist. Reform. pt. 1. purposes above-mentioned: but then it was with this condition, p. 122. that the king was to name some indifferent place out of his own kingdom. Burnet, Id. p. 125, To proceed: In the convocations held under Warham, there were several canons passed against the Lutherans; and at last the pope's supremacy began to be warmly disputed, but they came to no resolution at present. Warham departed this life The death of archbishop in August, and was buried privately at Canterbury. He held Warham. Id. WAR НАМ, P. 127. that see eight-and-twenty years. I have given part of his chaAbp. Cant. racter in the late reign, and shall only add the commendation given him by the reverend church historian: "That he was a great canonist, an able statesman, a dexterous courtier, and a favourer of learned men. He was not so fancifully fond of the learning of the schools as some others, but encouraged a more generous way of knowledge. But then, by way of abatement, he must be said to have prosecuted some of the Lollards with too much rigour." Godwin de Præsul. Regist. fol. 252. visited by the Before I take leave of this archbishop, I shall mention one remarkable passage which happened towards the latter end of his time. This prelate in the vacancy of the see of Chichester gave a commission to his chancellor, Dr. John Young, to visit Battle-abbey Battle-abbey in Sussex. And by Young's commission, it archbishop appears that this was a customary branch of the archbishop's of Canter jurisdiction during the vacancy; and by consequence it must bury. have belonged to the bishop of the diocese when the see was full. From whence it follows, that the charter of exemption granted to that abbey by William the Conqueror, was either revoked, or, which is much more probable, that exemption did not extend to any discharge from spiritual authority. Cotton. To this I shall subjoin a letter of the archbishop's to the king, in which he complains his jurisdiction was checked by the temporal courts, and seems apprehensive of farther encroachments. The year is not mentioned, but the letter runs thus: "Please it your good grace to understand, I am informed your grace intends to interrupt me in the use of the prerogative in the which my predecessors and I, in the right of my church of Canterbury, have been possessed by privilege, custom, and prescription, time out of mind. And for the interruption of the same, your grace is minded, as I am informed, to depute Dr. Allen. Which if your grace should so do, (considering that not only all my officers of my courts, the Arches and the Audience, but also the commissary of my diocese of Kent, and I myself, not only in matters of suit of instance of parties, but also in causes of correction depending before me and them, be continually inhibited by your officers) I should have nothing left for me and my officers to do, but should be as a shadow and image of an archbishop and legate, void of authority and jurisdiction, which should be to my perpetual reproach, and to |