JOHN. M. West monas. toriar. ad king was generally suspected to have dispatched him with his own hand. This presumption made him mortally hated K. of Eng. by many of the great men. This likewise gave the king of France a colour for citing king John to his court to purge himself from this imputation; and, upon his declining to appear, the provinces which he held of the French king were declared forfeited; and thus, the French had a pre- A. D. 1202. tence to seize the English dominions upon the continent. To return to the Church: the next year, John Scot, Flores Hisbishop of Dunkeld, departed this life. He was an English- An. 1202. man by birth, and preferred to this see from the archdeaconry of St. Andrew's. As to his character, he was a very vigilant and conscientious governor. At this time the county of Argyle was parcel of the diocese of Dunkeld. Here, the language being only Irish, the bishop and his people could not understand each other. To remove this inconvenience, he wrote to pope Clement III. to divide the diocese and make Argyle an episcopal see. He likewise desired the pope to promote one Evaldus, his chaplain, who could speak Irish, and was otherwise well qualified, to the new bishoprick. The motives Scot gave for resigning part of his diocese were very pious and primitive; "For, how," says he, in his address to the pope, "can I make a satisfactory account to the Judge of the world at the last day if I pretend to teach those who cannot understand me? The revenues are sufficient for two bishops, if a competency will content us, and we are not prodigal of the patrimony of Christ. It is therefore, much better, to lessen the charge, and increase the number of labourers in the Lord's vineyard." The pope, upon reading the letter, was very much pleased with the bishop's probity and self-denial, granted his request both as to thing and person, and consecrated Evaldus bishop of Argyle. This erection was made Spotswood, in the year 1200. As for Scot, some few days before his Hist. of the death, he retired to the monastery of Newbottle, took the Scotland, habit, and died there. To return to the Church of England: where the next The death of thing worth remarking is the death of Savaricus, bishop of Savaricus, Bath. He was related to the emperor Henry V., and Bath. elected by the monks of Bath, of the prebendaries of Wells. without the concurrence When king Richard was Church of book 11, p. 98. 115. bishop of HUBERT, surprised by Leopold, duke of Austria, this prelate perAbp. Cant. suaded the emperor not to consent to the king's ransom, unless he would annex the abbey of Glassenbury to Savaricus's see in exchange for the city of Bath. The king being under duress, was forced to grant the condition, and thus Savaricus removed his see to the abbey, and stiled himself bishop of Glassenbury. When king Richard was enlarged, Savaricus was one of the hostages. He was afterwards made chancellor of Burgundy; and when the emperor lay upon his death-bed, he sent him to the king of England with a discharge of the remainder of the ransom; for now, it seems, the emperor repented for taking the king Episc. Ba- at an advantage, and demanding so unconscionable a sum. Well. Angl. After the death of the emperor, this prelate continued upon Sacr. p. 1. his see, died in the year 1205, and was buried at Bath. A. D. 1205. ad. An. Godwin de thon et p. 562. 412. Hubert, of Canter This year, Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, departed this life. This prelate was born at West Dereham, and had archbishop his education under the famous Glanville. Though he was bury, dies. no florid speaker, he had a great genius for business, and was very well skilled in the customs and constitution of the kingdom; and it is said that many of the useful laws made by king Richard were drawn up by Hubert's direction. He was preferred from the deanery of York to the bishoprick of Salisbury, and attended king Richard and archbishop Baldwin to the holy war; and when the king had the misfortune to be made prisoner in his return, he sent Hubert into England, where he did the crown great service, reconciled the people to the payment of the ransom, and raised the money in less than a year's time. His managing this affair with such conduct and success established him in the king's favour, and occasioned his promotion to the see of Canterbury, where he sat eleven years, and left a fair character behind him; the king seemed to receive the news of his death with too much satisfaction, and immediately seized his effects. It was thought he had an old grudge against the archbishop for his fidelity to the crown in the late reign, and for checking this prince in his ambitious designs against his brother, king Richard. Hubert, amongst other publick Act. Pontif. benefactions, founded a monastery for the Premonstratenses Antiquitat. at West Dereham, in Norfolk, and began another for the in Hubert. Godwin in Archiepisc. Cantuar. Gervas. Cantaur. Britan. K. of Eng. Cistercians at Wolverhampton. He likewise enlarged the JOHN, Tower ditch, and brought the Thames round it, which was more than Longchamp, bishop of Ely, who began the project, could compass. Before the archbishop was buried, some of the convent of 4 double Christ's Church pitched upon one Reginald, their sub-prior; the see of election for sang the hymn for the occasion; and placed him in the Canterbury. archiepiscopal chair at midnight. This affair was transacted with great secrecy, for fear the king should have overruled the election, and put a person upon them they did not like. The elect having taken an oath not to discover the matter, set forward towards Rome to get his title confirmed. Upon his arrival in Flanders he broke his engagement and published his promotion: but upon his coming to Rome, the pope refused to confirm him, till he was farther informed. Matt. Paris, In the meantime, he wrote a letter to the suffragans of Westminsthe province, not to begin any unnecessary contest, nor en- ter, 1205. croach upon the privileges of the convent. By this letter it appears, the monks had prepossessed him with an opinion, that the bishops ought to have no interest in the election of the archbishop of Canterbury: however he does not forbid the suffragans appearing in defence of their right. Matt. Paris, But the next year he decides the case in behalf of the P. 213. monks. In his bull to the bishops of the province, he gives them to understand, that the matter in dispute had been brought before him, and the evidence on both sides produced. That the bishops' proxies had proved from precedents, that they had chosen three archbishops of Canterbury with the concurrence of the monks; and that the elections used to pass by the joint consent of the suffragans and convent. On the other side; the prior and convent made out, by immemorial custom, as the pope pretends, that the right of choosing the archbishop lay wholly in their society, and that they had frequently chosen their metropolitan without the suffragans of the province. Now, there being no counterprecedent, as the bull sets forth, to balance this plea, the pope determines for the convent, and charges the bishops to acquiesce, and never revive their claim to give the monks any more disturbance. By the way, it has been the practice of the court of Rome, Id. p. 214. to depress the rights and authority of the bishops; so that when there happened any debates between them and the monks, the conclave generally declared for the latter. When the monks of Christ's Church heard their subprior had failed in his oath, and divulged the secret, they resolved to set him aside: for, by the way, he had been chosen only by a part of the house. In pursuance of this resolution, they sent to the king to desire his leave to proceed to the choice of an archbishop. The king granted their request without clogging it with any condition. But, notwithstanding, he would not seem to overbear their freedom, or tie them to any person, he sent down some of his court clergy to make an interest for John de Grey, bishop of Norwich. The majority of the monks understanding the king's mind, and being willing to recover his favour, chose this Grey, and brought him into the cathedral with the usual solemnity. Upon which, the king put him into M. Paris. immediate possession of the temporalities. et Westmonast. This double election occasioned a long dispute, and proved very unfortunate to the kingdom. The convent being thus divided, sent their agents to Rome to solicit for their respective parties. Those that appeared in behalf of John, bishop of Norwich, argued that the election of the sub-prior was void; because it was huddled in the night, without the king's consent, or the approbation of the major, A. D. 1207. and more considerable part of the convent; whereas, the bishop of Norwich was chosen with the advantage of the customary circumstances. On the other side, the sub-prior's agent endeavoured to overthrow the second election, because, let the first be never so exceptionable, it ought to have been declared void, before they proceeded to a second. When the pope perceived the monks could not be brought to agree on the same person, he annulled both the elections: this proved a very unfortunate decision; for the king thought annuls both himself not well used in having the bishop of Norwich reand forces fused, part of the convent having given him their oath that the monks they would choose no other. The pope, after he had de 413. ad An. 1207. The pope elections, to choose Langton. clared both the elections void, recommended Stephen Langton, a cardinal priest, to the proxies of both parties. He pressed his choice upon them from the learning, capacity, and conduct of Langton; and that the promotion of a person so well qualified would be a publick service to the king dom. To this, the monks answered, that the election of JOHN, an archbishop was not within their commission, and that K. of Eng. they durst not undertake it without the king's consent, and a farther authority from the convent. The pope replied, that they interpreted their power in too modest a sense; that they were under no limitations from their principals; and that when elections were made at the apostolick see, it was not customary to wait for the prince's consent. He charged them therefore upon their obedience, and under the penalty of being excommunicated, to choose Langton for their archbishop. These menaces frightened the monks into a compliance, none of them, excepting one Elias de Branfield, having the courage to stand out. And thus cardinal Langton was elected at Viterbo upon the sixteenth of May, and consecrated by the pope. Matt. Paris, 222. the king. The court of Rome foreseeing that the king of England The pope's would be disgusted at these proceedings, endeavoured to present to court him with ceremony and presents. And understanding he was a great admirer of jewels, they sent him four stone rings with a complimenting letter: one of these stones was an emerald, another a sapphire, the third a granite, and the fourth a topaz. The pope, to heighten the civility, and make the amusement work, ran out into a mystical comment upon the figure, number, and quality of the rings told him that the roundness of them was an emblem of eternity that the stones represented the four cardinal virtues, and that there was a strong hint for constancy in the number four. It seems he thought these Pythagorean, hieroglyphical, and visionary fancies, would go a great way in the king's humour. This present being sent before the news of the election, struck the king's fancy agreeably enough: but after the design was understood, the toy was thrown aside, and the stones lost all their lustre. However, the pope hoping the king might be gained, sent him another ceremonious letter, in which he informed him of the election of cardinal Langton, and desired his highness to admit him to favour. He put the king in mind that Langton was not only a native of England, but likewise a person of general learning, and unexceptionable character; and that he had reason to expect a prelate so admirably qualified, would prove a blessing to the country, and a great VOL. II. Ee |
