VIII. to be subscribed, and consigned by the hands of the notaries HENRY hereafter named, and to be sealed with our own seal: all which premises have been done in manner and form above-specified : the year, indiction, pontificate, month, day, and place abovespecified: then and there being present the noble personages, sir Thomas More, knight, great chancellor of England; our The persons reverend brother in Christ, Cuthbert, by permission of God, instrument. attesting the bishop of Durham; and worshipful personages, Mr. Stephen Gardiner, secretary; Mr. Richard Sampson, dean of the chapter, doctor of law; Mr. Woolman, master of the requests; Mr. John Bell, counsellor, doctors of holy decrees; Mr. Nicholas Wilson, the king's confessor; Mr. Richard Dooke, archdeacon of Wilts, doctor of divinity; Mr. John Oliver, Mr. Edward Steward, doctors of law, chaplains to our said sovereign lord the king's grace; Mr. Richard Mandelly, Mr. William Mortimer, Mr. Edward Crome, Mr. Edward Wiggen, doctors also of divinity; Mr. Robert Carter, Mr. Edward Leighton, Mr. Hugh Latimer, Mr. John Thixtite, bachelors of divinity; Mr. William Latimer and Mr. Roger Tibson, masters of art in both the universities above-said; with many more learned men of the said universities, in a great number assembled, then and there together witness to the premises required and adhibited. "The three public notaries who attested this instrument are Thomas Ashley, Richard Watkins, and Matthew Greston." 14. edit. Fox assigns this censure to the year 1531; but it is plain from Fox, vol. 2. the date of the instrument that he is a year too forward in his 641. chronology. But mistakes of this kind are not uncommon with this martyrologist. For instance, he says the parliament the twenty-first of Henry VIII. was held in the year 1530; whereas this parliament met in the year 1529. He sets cardinal Wolsey's journey to York a year too forward and so he does the king's speech at Blackfriars, which he refers to November the eighth, 1529. To return to the business of the divorce: the king, notwithstanding his former disappointments in this affair, was willing to make a farther trial. To this purpose, sir Thomas Boleyn, now earl of Wiltshire; John Stokesley, elect of London; and Edward Lee, doctor of divinity, the king's agents at Rome, НАМ, WAR- had a joint commission for an embassy to the emperor. They Abp. Cant. Waited upon this prince at Bologna, who told them, he was obliged in honour not to desert his aunt's cause, Upon this, they addressed the pope, and pressed for a favourable issue of the king's business. The pope's answer was, that notwithstanding he had been urged by the queen's solicitor to proceed to the censure, he was resolved upon a gentler expedient; and therefore had given order the matter should sleep, provided the king would engage to stop the course of the process in England. The king being informed of the pope's proposal, replied, that his holiness had hitherto entertained him only with good words; and that by lately denying his ambassadors audience to justify his cause, he plainly perceived there was nothing real or friendly at the bottom. The king consults the about the divorce. edit. 2. Antiquit. Britan. p. 322. The king, therefore, finding his holiness somewhat mysteuniversities rious, resolved to consult the opinions of the universities. It is said, Dr. Cranmer put the king upon this expedient. Fox Fox, p. 1860. pretends, this thought was suggested by Cranmer at his meeting with Gardiner, and Edward Fox, the king's secretary, at Waltham. But the time spoils the story: for this conference Bp. Burnet, at Waltham, between Cranmer, Gardiner, and secretary Fox, pt. 1. p. 79. was in August, 1529. From whence it evidently follows that Cranmer could not be the first mover of the expedient of consulting the universities both at home and abroad; because the determination of the university of Orleans, relating to the Bp. Burnet, king's marriage, bears date April the 5th, 1529. Now, this date is more than three months before the conference aboveof Records, mentioned at Waltham. This expe dient not suggested by Cranmer. pt. 1. Collection book 2. p. 90. 2dly, The king, in his speech before the legates at Bridewell, already related, declares he had applied to the greatest clerks in Christendom for their resolution about his marriage: now, this speech was made in November, 1528. And that Fox was mistaken in giving Cranmer the credit of this suggestion appears plainly from Cavendish, an author of unexceptionable authority. This gentleman, who was one of Wolsey's family, tells us it was the cardinal that was the first in this motion. And that in a meeting of the bishops, and other learned men, it was thought advisable the king should send his agents to all the universities, both in England and elsewhere; that the case should be argued at length by VIII. those learned societies and that their respective decrees HENRY under the seal of each university should be transmitted to his highness. Cavendish, p. 97, et 53. Having now settled the author of the advice, I shall pro- deinc. ceed to relate the success. To begin at home with the university of Oxford: The bishop of Lincoln was ordered to Oxford with the king's letters, requiring them to send their determination, whether marrying the brother's relict was defensible, or not? A convocation being called, the majority of the doctors declared for the negative: but the masters of arts being on the other side of the question, the meeting broke The divorce opposed by up without effect. The king, being informed of this incom- the masters pliance, was much displeased; and, without losing any time, of arts in Oxford. sent a letter under his own hand directed to the vicechancellor, and to the doctors and bachelors of divinity, without taking any notice of the regents. In this letter he acquaints them, "how deeply he resented the stubbornness and misbehaviour of the masters of arts; that they seemed to him not to have lived long enough to qualify them with a capacity and discretion for this business: that, therefore, they ought to resign to the judgment of wiser men, and be governed by the precedent of the doctors: that provided they held on in their obstinacy, and gave their sovereign any farther trouble, they should quickly be made sensible of the ill consequence, and understand it was not their best plan to provoke a hornets' nest." Wood. Hist. et Antiquit. Soon after this, Dr. Bell, and Longland, bishop of Lincoln, Univers. were dispatched to Oxford. Their commission was to inform Oxon. lib. 1. the masters farther upon the case, and prevail with them to give satisfaction. But this attempt failing of success, the chancellor wrote down, to refer the decision to a committee. but this expedient was at first refused. Afterwards, secretary Fox was sent thither, to try his interest. But all being to no purpose, the masters being not to be brought off, and ready to grow mutinous, the chancellor sent the heads a very extraordinary and unprecedented order. He required them to exclude The masters the masters from the convocation, and proceed to a resolution excluded the without them. And thus by a committee of the doctors and Ibid. bachelors of divinity, the question was drawn up in form, determined in the negative, and the seal of the university set to the instrument. This determination was soon after brought to p. 255. convocation. WAR- the king by the vice-chancellor, who was well received, for Abp. Cant. making so acceptable a present. Ibid. determined by a committee of The historian Wood complains of this management, and The question takes the freedom to say, the privileges of the university were plainly over-ruled, and that the excluding the masters from doctors, &c. their right in voting, made the decree of no force. That several members of the university not thinking themselves bound Id. p. 256. by this decision, preached openly against the divorce. This relation of Wood is censured by a learned church-hisBp. Burnet, torian. This author charges the Oxford antiquary with giving pt. 1. p. 86. credit to a lying story set down by Saunders: that he had either not seen, or not considered another instrument, to which the university set their seal: that this instrument was passed in a convocation of all the doctors and masters, regents and non-regents that by virtue of a vote passed in this convocation they all resigned themselves to the determination of a committee; and that this committee was only to consist of doctors and bachelors of divinity. And for this the lord Herbert is vouched, who perused the original, which I shall transSee Records, cribe into the records. num. 13. Notwithstanding Wood is charged with relying upon the testimony of Saunders, it is plain he makes no use of his authority, but cites the records of the university for the main of his The Oxford narrative. As to the instrument mentioned by my lord Herantiquary defended. bert, though he calls it an original in one place, yet after the recital he makes no more of it than a blurred copy: and, without telling us where he had it, does not scruple to confess, that it is not probable it should be intended for the king in that manner: all which plainly proves, that in lord Herbert's opinion, it could be no original. And therefore, for aught we know, it might only be a rough draught. And that when the doctors found the masters would not pass it, they laid it aside without engrossing. However, they might think fit to preserve it, to show their zeal for the king's service. Ld. Herbert's MS. Collections in Jesus College library in Oxford. And for a farther defence of the Oxford antiquary, it may not be improper to give the reader a remarkable passage from the lord Herbert's collections concerning this matter. The words run thus: "The king," says this noble historian, "sent his confessor Longland to the university of Oxford, to procure their confirmation of his divorce from Catherine. The king joined intreaties VIII. and threats; the chancellor Warham advised them to follow HENRY the truth. Here seniores facilè assenserunt regi,' but the younger sort (regent masters) flatly denied. The king sent them more threats, but moved them not: so that at last the artists or regent masters (although by the statutes nothing can be done without them) were excluded, and the matter committed only to divines, who determined for the king, who punished the regents." Thus much for Oxford. How the matter passed at Cambridge will appear from an original letter, written by Gardiner and Fox to the king. Biblioth. The uni about the divorce. Londinens. In this letter they acquaint the king that the vice-chancellor, Feb. 1530. one Dr.Edmonds, and several others, were willing to satisfy his Cotton. highness. And here, by the way, this Dr. Edmonds was not Vitell. b.13. Edmond Bonner, afterwards bishop of London, as our learned versity of Cambridge church-historian affirms; but John Edmonds, master of Peter- divided house. To proceed: they informed the king there was a strong party in the opposite sentiment, who endeavoured to perplex Bp. Burnet, pt. 1. p. 86. the matter, and hinder the passing of any decree. However, Wharton in a congregation of about two hundred, the king's letters were de Episc. read. After which the vice-chancellor called the doctors aside p. 193. and asked their opinions: they were divided in their answer, and the issue seemed doubtful. At last they were contented the question should be referred to indifferent men. But when they came to debate upon the persons for the committee, they excepted against the abbot of St. Bennet's, against Dr. Repps, and Dr. Crome, and others of that complexion. The reason of their dislike of these persons, was their approbation of Cranmer's book lately written in favour of the divorce: for by their commendation of this performance, they were looked on as persons prepossessed. After a great deal of time spent in debating this affair, the vice-chancellor proposed a committee, but this motion was rejected. The convocation being adjourned till the next day, the vicechancellor offered an order to refer the question to a committee of twenty-nine. This committee was to consist of himself, ten doctors, sixteen bachelors of divinity, and the two proctors. And here what two-thirds agreed to, was to be taken for the sense of the whole; and the seal of the university set to the decision. And for the more honourable proceeding, the |