EDMUND, Abp. Cant. Paris, p. 465. Anti quitat. Edmund. Eleonora, relict of William Marshall, earl of Pembroke. The princess, it seems, upon the death of her husband, had made a vow for a monastick life. This match lost Edmund, archbishop of Canterbury, the king's favour; for this prelate told the king, his sister was bound to stand to her former engagement, and that his highness ought not to countenance her in such a breach of faith and canon. This remonstrance against the king's inclination was remembered to the archbishop's disadvantage; and, as for the lady, the pope's dispensation was afterwards procured for her. However, the king, it seems, thought himself insulted; Britan. in for when the earl of Leicester and his countess came to wait on him at London, the king would see neither of them; but A. D. 1239. sent the earl word, that he had dishonoured his sister, and was not fit to appear at his court; that when he understood the blemish his sister lay under, he consented to the marriage to screen her from publick scandal; that the earl, after his libertine practice, had made application to Rome, bribed that court into a dispensation, and made the king a party to the business, without preacquainting him with it. The earl, meeting with this rebuke, retired from London, Id. p. 498. and went beyond sea. 443. letter to This year, a new quarrel broke out between Rome and the empire, and the legate excommunicated the emperor at London, and St. Alban's. King John's becoming a feudatory to the see of Rome, and king Henry's binding himself to fulfil his father's engagements, made that court venture upon unusual oppressions, and grow more encroaching and extravagant than ever. However, the English, especially the laity, were not so tame as to yield to every imposition; for instance, when the barons found the rights of their patronage in danger, and their presentations given away to foreigners by the pope, they wrote a letter to his holiness, and sent it by one sir Robert Thuinge, who himself had been a sufferer in this matter. In their letter, after some moderate preliminaries of ceremony, they acquaint his holiness, that, since a storm was The barons' fallen upon them, and their liberties ready to sink, they Pope Grego- thought it seasonable to awaken their lord, who was now defence of sleeping in St. Peter's vessel; and since the advantage of the right of his see gives him an authority to do justice, they desire he ry IX. in patronage. III. would make them sensible of that good quality, and let them HENRY remain unmolested in their rights and privileges. They tell K. of Eng. him, that unless they are thus treated, it is to be feared their devotion and respect may sink; that the children may be provoked against their father, and that the good offices and correspondence of that relation may fall off, and vanish. They continue, that ever since the first planting of Christianity in England, their ancestors have always had the privilege, upon the vacancy of any living in their patronage, to present a priest to the bishop, who, provided there was no canonical objection against him, was to give him institution of course. That this privilege had been frequently invaded, and foreigners put in upon them by the pope's agents. That the continuance of this encroachment would occasion great animosities, and might probably be carried on to blows and bloodshed. From hence they proceed to mention the case of sir Robert Thuinge, whose presentation was refused by the archbishop of York upon his holiness's order, notwithstanding there was no objection against the qualifications of the clerk. They desire, therefore, this matter may be rectified, and the grievance redressed in general; otherwise they shall be forced to apply to the king, who, being sovereign of their fees, is obliged to protect them in their liberties. The pope returned the barons a very smooth satisfactory answer; told them it was never his intention to lessen the privileges of the laity, or lay his hands upon their rights of patronage. Neither was this bare ceremony and compliment; for he sent a countermand to the legate, and the archbishop of York, not to insist upon his former order, but give institution to the clerk presented by sir Robert Thuinge; with farther instructions, in general, that, for the future, they should not disturb the laity in their presentations, nor institute any person where they were patrons, without their consent, unless there were reasonable exceptions against the person presented. Upon this occasion, Matthew Paris falls into a declamation against the partiality and crafty management of the court of Rome; that the pope should be so tender of the patronage of the laity, and guard it, in his bulls, by express distinction, and at the same time make no scruple to invade Id. ED MUND, the bishops, abbots, and clergy, upon the same branch of Abp. Cant. property! The reason of this different usage was, because his holiness thought the clergy would submit more tamely, and not defend their privileges with sword in hand. Ibid. Anglia. Sacr. pars 1. p. 438, 439. From hence, says the historian, we may conclude that the world is in its declining period, and the honesty of it almost worn out for what does law and religion, what does the Church signify at this rate? Those who are fortified, and prepared for contest, are well used, and none but the naked monks and clergy oppressed and plundered. This year, as Matthew Paris reports, the king forced a prior upon the convent of Winchester. This man, who was a foreigner of Bretagne, broke through the rules of the house, embezzled the revenues, and was perfectly governed by the direction of the court: and at last he brought over a majority of the monks to choose William, the queen's uncle above mentioned. But this William, who was likewise chosen bishop of Liege, died this year at Viterbo, in Italy. About this time, Hugh Patishul, lord-treasurer, one of the barons of the exchequer, and son of Simon Patishul, justiciary of England, was chosen bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. The right of election had been lately disputed between the monks of Coventry and the secular canons of Lichfield. The cause was brought into the court of Rome, and decided by Gregory IX., that the election of the bishop should be made at Coventry and Lichfield, by turns; and that both parties should have an equal interest. This year, the pope wrote to the king, and several of the barons to acquaint them, that he had sent instructions to his tiones Li- legate Otho, to command the convent of Winchester not to choose a bishop disaffected to the king's interest. Conven teræ, &c. p. 387, 388. A. D. 1240. and barons tration. The next year, upon the octaves of Epiphany, the archThe bishops bishops, bishops, and barons, met at London, and made a complain of remonstrance against the administration. They complained the adminis that the king had been misled by ill advice, made a breach upon their charters, kept abbeys and bishopricks a long while vacant, harassed the Church with arbitrary impositions, and overruled the freedom of elections. The bishops digested these grievances of theirs into thirty articles, and excommunicated all those of the king's council who had suggested those illegal measures. III. 444. The archbishop of Canterbury finding no redress, wrote HENRY a complaining letter to the pope, giving him to understand, K. of Eng. that the canons were overruled, and the privileges of the chapters borne down by the interest of the court. To prevent some part of these inconveniences, he requested that in case a see or abbey was kept vacant six months, it might be filled by the archbishop of the province. The pope, who received large presents, granted the archbishop an authority for the purpose above mentioned: but being a prelate of no resolution, as Matthew Paris will have it, he revoked his grant at the king's instance. The archbishop being thus deserted by the pope, and perceiving the Church more and more harassed in her revenues, and checked in Paris, p. her spiritual privileges, made his application to the king, but without success. Being thus disappointed, he broke up his household, and travelled into France, where he spent Paris, p. his time in the exercises of discipline and devotion. 533. 532. seized at About this time, there was a man seized at Cambridge for 4 heretick declaring against going to church. By his habit and aus- Cambridge. terities he seemed to be a Carthusian. Being interrogated concerning his singularities, and giving an untoward answer, he was sent up to London to the legate, and imprisoned in the Tower. It seems, he had openly maintained that Gregory IX. was no pope nor head of the Church. That the Church had another head; that the churches were profaned and unfit for divine service, unless they were rebuilt, and the furniture reconsecrated; that the devil was let loose; that the present pope Gregory was a heretick, and that both the Church and the world were debauched by him. He pretended to believe all the articles of the creed; but when they questioned him about the incarnation of our Saviour, he returned an unorthodox answer. actions of This year the pope sent one Peter Rubéus to collect money The exfrom the English. This man went to the monasteries, and, the court of by overreaching and menacing the convents, prevailed with Rome. them to promise him the payment of a sum of money, pretending, though falsely, that several bishops and abbots had done the same. And to clench the matter, and prevent his foul play from being discovered, he made them swear not to declare what was done till after half a year. He pretended that this was one of the pope's secrets, and that they were EDMUND, Ibid. bound to keep it by the rule of their order: "Whereas," says Abp. Cant. the historian, "nobody is obliged to keep the pope's counsel, unless in things which are defensible and just; but these men, like thieves, first rob people, and then swear them to secresy." The abbots complained to the king, who, being gained by the court of Rome, treated them ruggedly, and told the legate he might use them at his discretion. And thus the greatest part of them were overawed and delivered their money. The legate and Rubéus, having carried their point over the monasteries, hoped to succeed as well among the clergy; for this purpose they summoned the bishops to Northampton. And here, the legate demanded a fifth part of their revenues; the bishops replied, that since all the clergy were concerned in this demand, they could conclude nothing without consulting them. The matter was therefore deferred to the octaves of St. John the Baptist; and now the bishops gave in their reasons why they could not contribute to the pope's occasions. legate's demand for money. The bishops' First, because the design of the contribution tended to objections against the effusion of Christian blood; for, as the bull sets forth, complying the with the money was raised to enable the pope to reduce the emperor. It was likewise an attempt upon the liberties of the Church, for, by the tenure of the instrument, those who refuse to answer the demand, are to be compelled by ecclesi.astical censures. Now what is this but mere slavery, and clapping the Church under hatches? They urge farther, that when they gave their last tenth to the pope, it was upon condition that no such burthen should be imposed for the future, and yet now the oppression was doubled, and a fifth part required. They were likewise apprehensive that their complying with a second payment might prove a dangerous precedent, and introduce a custom against them. They object farther, that since they have several occasions of dispatching business at the court of Rome, and that there was no way to come there but through the emperor's dominions, it was to be feared they might be arrested and imprisoned upon their journey. They proceed to shew the unseasonableness of such a contribution: that the king had a powerful enemy to deal with; that it was very unsafe to impoverish the country at such a juncture, when it was in a great measure exhausted both of men and money for the service of the holy war; that |