« السابقةمتابعة »
First, that they should take care for the performance of Abp. Cant. divine service, with due solemnity and reverence.
Secondly, to make a sufficient provision for the spiritual interest of their parishioners; that is, by preaching the word of God, administering the sacraments, and particularly by taking confessions: and when they found themselves disqualified, or disabled for the discharge of these duties, they should call in the assistance of learned and good men, commissioned for this purpose.
A. D. 1287.
A diocesan synod at Exeter.
Thirdly, that they should relieve the poor of the parish, and keep up hospitality, as far as the profits of the living would reach, and their own necessary occasions would give them leave.
Fourthly, that they should avoid making any contracts or conveyances which might turn to the prejudice of their successors, and bar them from insisting upon the rights and jurisdictions of their church.
Fifthly, that they should keep the houses of their rectory or vicarage in convenient repair.
Sixthly, that they should endeavour to retrieve all profits and privileges alienated from their church against common right.
Seventhly, that they should endeavour to preserve the rights of their livings in the same good condition they found them.
Eighthly, they were not to sell all the profits of their livings at one bargain, without a special license from the archbishop: the reason is, because such a sale was tantamount to letting them out to farm; made the tithes look like merchandise sold in a fair; disappointed the designs for which they were given, and oftentimes disabled the priest from being charitable to the poor.
These articles were to be sent to every parish, and transcribed into the missal, or some other book of divine ser
Concil. vol. 2. p. 349.
Spelman vice, that so they might be always at hand for the clergy to peruse, and be shewn upon demand, at a visitation.
The next year, Peter Quivil, bishop of Exeter, held a diocesan synod at Exeter. The gross of the constitutions are much the same with those of Otho, Othobon, and of the late synod at Lambeth, and therefore I shall pass them
over. However, there are some few things not unworthy of remark.
EDWARD I. K. of Eng.
The fourth article or canon, speaking of the adoration of The laity the host, endeavours to satisfy the consciences of the laity, there receive who sometimes were afraid they might go too far in their nion in both worship, as not being thoroughly satisfied in the doctrine kinds. of transubstantiation. To remove this objection, the priests are enjoined to instruct the people before they give them the eucharist, that they receive, under the species of bread, that which hung upon the cross for their salvation: and in the cup they received that which was shed from the body of our Saviour.
Hoc suscipiunt in
From hence it appears that the laity received the commu- chalice. nion in both kinds in the diocese of Exeter, notwithstanding the late provincial constitutions of Lambeth to the contrary; and that the denying the cup to the people, was so great an innovation, that the bishop of Exeter did not think himself bound to be concluded in that point by the order of his metropolitan, or the Lambeth synod.
Id. p. 355.
By the fifth article, all priests that have cure of souls are commanded to admonish their parishioners to come to confession thrice a year, that is, at the approach of the three festivals of Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide; or, at least, in the beginning of Lent. And farther, that they are to make their confession to the priests they belong to, unless he gives them leave to confess to another: for, without such a permission, the absolution of a foreign confessor would signify nothing.
The tenth decrees, that the consecration of every parish A Church church should be kept with no less solemnity than the fes- calendar. tival of Christmas. And that the endowment settled upon the Church at the consecration, the day and year when the ceremony was performed, and the name of the prelate that consecrated it, should all be entered in the Church calendar.
From hence we may observe, that before the settling our modern registers, the Church had a calendar, or book of records, for preserving the history of those things which were thought most memorable.
The twenty-second canon or article, which is the last I shall mention, enjoins the parishioners to frequent the
Id. p. 363.
PECHAM, Church on holy days, and especially not to omit coming thiAbp. Cant, ther on Sundays. The reason assigned by the canon is, that the people might hear divine service, and be instructed in their duty. From hence we may infer, that the people had the benefit of preaching, or something like it, by way of Id. p. 372. catechising, or homily, every Sunday.
A. D. 1288.
bishop of Lincoln and
The latter end of the next year, there happened a dispute between the between the bishop of Lincoln and the university of Oxford, about the manner of presenting the chancellor of the univerthe university: the case was this, the masters of the university chose sity of Oxford concerning the admitting their chan
one William Kingstot for their chancellor; and after the election presented him to their diocesan, the bishop of Lin→ coln, not in his own person, but by proxy. The bishop refused to allow that method of presenting: he declared, he would not commit so much trust to a person absent and unknown; adding, withal, that the authority of that office extended not only to temporal, but also to matters purely spiritual. On the other hand, the masters of the university pleaded custom, and that they had, time out of mind, presented their chancellors to the bishop, not in their own persons, but by such delegates and representatives as they thought fit. The bishop not being satisfied with this allegation, the university resented the refusal so far as to discontinue their publick lectures, which, in effect, was but a revenge upon themselves. About two years after, the debate was laid before the king and the great men at Westminster. And here, judgment was given for the bishop of Lincoln; and the university were obliged to present their chancellor for admission to their diocesan, though the bishop happened to reside at a remote distance from Oxford.
This year William Middleton, bishop of Norwich, departed this life. He was consecrated to this see in the year 1278. He rebuilt the cathedral which was burnt in the late reign, and consecrated it; the king, the queen, and a great many of the nobility being present at the solemnity. About eight years after, he consecrated the great church of St. Nicholas in Yarmouth. This prelate is said to have been a very eminent canonist and civilian.
The contest To go backwards a little, and say something concerning between the state. The throne had been some time vacant in ScotBalliol and Bruce for the kingdom of Scotland.
pars 1. p. 401.
land, and the succession disputed among several noblemen. Now since the decision was referred to king Edward, and K. of Eng. the bishops of both kingdoms made part of the court to examine the controversy, I shall give the reader a brief representation of the case, and mostly from the records of the Tower.
To begin; Alexander III., king of Scotland, died by a fall off his horse in March, 1285: this prince leaving no issue excepting Margaret, called the maid of Norway, because her mother Margaret was married to Eric, king of Norway, the case standing thus, I say, this granddaughter to king Alexander was heiress to the crown of Scotland.
Soon after, there was a match proposed by the king of The cause England, between this princess and his son Edward of the king of Caernarvon. The guardians of Scotland, and indeed the England by the competiwhole kingdom, agreed to this proposal; and the treaty was tors, and his finished, and signed at Northampton. And because the young over Scotsovereignty princes were within the prohibited degrees of relationship, knowledged. pope Nicholas IV. granted his dispensation to remove that Pat. Ed. I. obstacle. But before the solemnity of the marriage, queen A. D. 1290. M. 8, 9. Margaret died in her voyage from Norway to England.
Upon the death of this princess, the noblemen following, teræ, &c. laid claim to the crown of Scotland. Florence, earl of tom. 2. p. Holland; Robert de Bruce, lord of Annandale; John de Balliol, lord of Galloway; John Hastings, lord of Bergeveny; John Cumyn, lord of Badenough; Patrick Dunbar, earl of March; John de Vescey, in behalf of his father, Nicholas Soules, and William Ross. All these competitors owned the king of England sovereign lord of Scotland, voluntarily referred their claim to his cognizance, and promised to stand by his award. And because the process Id. 529. could not be finished without giving judgment, and judg- 42. ment would prove of no force without execution; and execution could not be duly performed without seizin and possession of the country and castles; for this reason, the competitors above mentioned put the king of England in possession of the forts and realm of Scotland; having first taken a security from that prince to return the kingdom in the same good condition he received it, to him to whom the Ibid. crown shall be adjudged, within two months after the title was decided; and that, in the meantime, the issues and 1291.
nast. ad An.
PECHAM, revenues of the crown were to be lodged in the hands of the Abp. Cant. chamberlain of Scotland.
Conventiones, Literæ, &c. tom. 2. p. 559. et deinc.
Id. p. 556. 575.
The title of
Id. p. 580.
Upon this, the king gave his consent that the cause should be tried in Scotland.
The last hearing of the cause was at Berwick upon Tweed, where the king was present, and many of the bishops, and temporal nobility of both kingdoms. And here, all the competitors Id. p. 588. threw up their claim excepting Hastings, Bruce, and Balliol.
The commissioners assigned to
Before we proceed farther, it must be observed, that the court for the deciding this controversy, consisted of a hunexamine the dred and four persons; four-and-twenty of whom were English, and chosen by the king. Of this number there were four bishops, two deans, one archdeacon, besides others of the clergy. Bruce and Balliol chose each of them forty, eight of whom were bishops, besides several abbots. These hundred and four were assigned to hear the pleas, and examine the pretensions of the competitors, and make their report of the whole process to the king.
And to make the matter clear, in as few words as may be, we are to take notice, that David, earl of Huntingdon, brother to Alexander III., king of Scotland, died, leaving issue only three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Adama: Balliol claimed under Margaret, the eldest; Bruce under Isabel, the second; and Hastings in right of Adama, the third. To be more particular; Margaret, the eldest daughter of David, earl of Huntingdon, married Alan, lord of Galloway, by whom she had issue only one daughter, Dergovilla, married to John Balliol, by whom she had John Balliol, one of the three competitors.
This great cause had several hearings in the field at Upsetlyntone, over against Norham Castle, on the Scotch side of the Tweed. Here all the claimants, and Bruce with the rest, repeated their acknowledgment of the king of England's being sovereign of Scotland. And here, the bishop of Durham set forth the king of England's title to the sovereignty of that realm, and proved it to have been acknowledged by the Scottish kings both before the Conquest, and since, upon the testimony of several historians, and other authentick records, both Scotch and English.
David's second daughter was Isabel, married to Robert Bruce, by whom she had Robert, another of the competitors.