An ansvvere to the fifth part of Reportes lately set forth by Syr Edvvard Cooke Knight, the Kinges Attorney generall Concerning the ancient & moderne municipall lawes of England, vvhich do apperteyne to spirituall power & iurisdiction. By occasion vvherof, & of the principall question set dovvne in the sequent page, there is laid forth an euident, plaine, & perspicuous demonstration of the continuance of Catholicke religion in England, from our first Kings christened, vnto these dayes. By a Catholicke deuyne.

M. Attorneys obiections out of the Raigne of King Edvvard the third. §. I.

14. For that these obiections are many, and little pertinent, as you will see, to the manie conclusion which he should proue, that this King did take supreme spirituall authority and iurisdi∣ction vpon him. And for that the grounds of all that is heer ob∣iected, haue byn discussed and answered, * 1.1 in that wee haue set downe before; and this booke groweth to more length then was purposed at the beginning; and finally for that the law-book••••

〈◊〉〈◊〉 cited, of collections and obseruations by later authors (which bookes I haue not by mee) are of small authority to our purpose: I shall passe ouer the said obiections, with the greatest breuity that I can, remitting mee for the most part, to that which before hath byn said, and answered.

The Attorney.

An excommunication by the Archbishop, * 1.2 albeit it be disanulled by the Pope or his Legats, is to be allowed; neither ought the Iudges, giue any allowance of any such sentence of the Pope, or his Legate.

The Catholicke Deuine.

15. This assertion I doe not see how it can be admitted for true, as it lieth; for so much as no author maketh mention, * 1.3 that K. Edward did euer deny absolutely the Popes authority, to ex∣communicate by himself, or by his Legats in England, especially vpon the 16. yeare of his raigne, as heere it is noted in the mar∣gent, when he was most deuout to the Sea Apostolicke, & wrote the humble letter before mentioned, the next yeare after, accor∣ding to the date of the said letter, as you haue heard: only there might be this accorde between them, for more authority of the said Archbishop, and peace of the Realme; that when he had gi∣uen forth any excommunication, no annullation therof from the Pope (which might perhaps be procured by false suggestion) should be admitted or executed, vntill the Pope were informed of the truth, & this is vsed also in other Catholicke Kingdomes, at this day.

16. And it were to much simplicity, to imagine that English men in those dayes, admitting the Archbishops excommunica∣tion, as heer they doe (and for confirmation therof we doe read in VValsingham that vpon the yeare 1340. * 1.4 and 14. of King Edwards raigne, Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury, threatned the said King to excommunicate all his counsell, if he amended not cer∣taine points, wherin they offered iniury to Clergy men) it were simplicity (I say) to thinke that the said Archbishops excom∣munication, could not be controlled by that of the Pope, from whom they acknowledged the said Archbishop at that time to haue his spirituall authority, if he had any at all. For frō whence should they imagine him to haue it? for that the Kings, as we haue seen, had not so much as the nomination or presentation

of Archbishops in that season, but only the Popes, & much lesse their induction, confirmation, or inuestiture. Whervpon it must needs follow, that he which gaue them spirituall iurisdiction, had greater & higher iurisdiction himself, though in some cases by agreement, not to be vsed, as before hath byn said.

The Attorney.

* 1.5

It is often resolued, that all the Bishopricks within England, were founded by the Kings progenitours, and therfore the aduowsons of them all belong to the King, and at the first they were dona∣tiue: * 1.6 and that if an incumbent of any Church with Cure dy, if the Patron present not within six moneths, the Bishop of that Dio∣cesse ought to collate, to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor. If he be negligent by the space of six moneths, the Metropolitan of that Diocesse shall confer one to that Church: and if he also leaue the Church destitute by the space of six mo∣neths, then the Common-law giueth to the King, as to the su∣preme within his owne Kingdome, and not to the Bishop of Rome, power to prouide a competent pastor for that Church.

The Catholicke Deuine.

* 1.717. Is it be true which M. Attorney hath so often repeated before, that the Conusaunce, and deciding of Ecclesiasticall causes, doe not appertaine to the Common-law, and that the prouision or induction of Clerks to benefices, and giuing them spirituall iu∣risdiction ouer the soules of those that be within the compasse of that benefice, be of the number of those causes, which I take to be set downe in like manner by M. Attorneys owne pen before, vnder the names of admissions and institutions of Clerks: * 1.8 then how can it be true, which heere is said, that the Common-law gi∣ueth to the King, as to the supreme, to prouide competent Pa∣stors for that, or those Churches, that within the space of a yeare and halfe, are not prouided by the particular patron, Dio∣cesian, or metropolitan? Or where is this Common-law? How, or when did it begin (as often elswhere I haue demaunded)? Either by vse, or statute, or common agreement between the Prince and people? For none of these haue we heard of hitherto, vnder former Kings, though for presenting and nomination to benefices, we haue oftentymes said, that there is no difficulty, but that the temporall Prince, may present in such benefices, or Bishopricks, as he is patron of, either founding the said bene∣fices,

or by particular concession of the Sea Apostolicke vnto him; as we haue shewed more largly before in the life of K. VVil∣liam the Conquerour, and before him againe vnder K. Edward the Confessor, to whom the Sea of Rome in those dayes, gaue spirituall iurisdiction also, in some cases, ouer the Abbey of VVestminster, & some other places of his Realme.

18. But that the Common-law should dispose of these things, * 1.9 and especially giue spiritual iurisdiction to the King ouer bene∣fices; (for so must the meaning of M. Attorney be, if he delude not his Reader with equiuocation of words) this (I say) is both contrary to his owne rule before set downe, and much more to reason. For that to giue Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiom, is much more, then to haue the conusaunce of Ecclesiasticall causes: which he denying to his Common-law, in diuers places of his booke, as before we haue seen, cānot in reasō ascribe to th'other.

19. Wherefore though we graunt this graduation heer set dovvne, as good and conueuient, that if the particular patron doe not present within six moneths, nor the Ordinary, or Metropolitan within their tymes prescribed, the Prince as supreme gouernour of the Common-wealth to see all things done in due order, may present, as if he were patron, to the said benefice; yet first this cannot come originally from the Common-law, for the reasons alleadged. Secondly this proueth no spiri∣tuall iurisdiction at all in any presentor, but only power of pre∣sentation, which may be in any man that hath Ius patronatus al∣lowed by the Church and head therof, as before hath byn said. * 1.10 Thirdly much lesse doth this proue supreme authority spirituall in the Prince, as M. Attorney would inferre, which is euident a∣mong other reasons by this: For that the Prince when he doth present in this manner, by lapse of tyme, or omission of others, is the last in power of presentation, after the Metropolitans and Bishops; which yet should be first, if he were supreme in that sorte of authority, and that the matter went by rigour of law, & not by composition & agreemēt. And finally for that the Prince in this case cannot put in a Pastor immediatly from himself, gi∣uing him spiritual iurisdiction ouer soules; but must present him to the Bishop or Metropolitan, to be induced by him, & indued with that iurisdiction: which he should not doe, if his owne au∣thority spirituall were greater then the said Bishops or Archbi∣shops. And so we see that M. Attorney proueth nothing by this al∣legation against vs, but rather against himself.

The Attorney.

* 1.11The King may not only exempt any Ecclesiasticall person fro•••••• the iurisdiction of the Ordinary, but may graunt vnto him Epis∣copall iurisdiction, * 1.12 as thus it appeareth there, the King had done of auncient tyme to the Archdeacon of Rick-mond.

* 1.13All religious or Ecclesiasticall houses wherof the King was founder, are by the King exempt from ordinary iurisdiction, and only visitable and corrigible by the Kings Ecclesiasticall com∣mission.

The Abbot of Bury in Suffolke was exempted from Episco∣pall iurisdiction, by the Kings Charter. * 1.14

The King presented to a benefice, and his presented was di∣sturbed by one that had obtained Bulles from Rome, for which offence he was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment.

* 1.15

Tithes arising in places out of any parish the King shall h••••e, for that he hauing the supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdictio••, is bound to prouide a sufficient Pastor, that shall haue the Cure of soules of that place, which is not within any Parish. And by the common lawes of England it is euident, that no man vnlesse he be Ecclesiasticall, or haue Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction can haue inheritance of tithes.

* 1.16"The King shall present to his free Chappels (in default of the Deane) by lapse, in respect of his supreme Ecclesiasticall iuris∣diction. And Fitz-herbers saith, that the King in that case, doth present by lapse, as Ordinary.

The Catholicke Deuine.

* 1.1720, Heere be diuers particulars breifly touched, which I shall answere with like breuity, especially for so much as they are but notes, and obseruations out of particular collections of Law-writers, and not Laws nor Statutes themselues. First then it is denied, that in the time of this K. Edward the 3. his raigne, either he, or any other Prince temporall, could exempt any Ecclesiasti∣call person from the iurisdiction of his Ordinary Bishop, and much lesse graunt vnto him Episcopall iurisdiction, as of him∣self, and by his owne power: only he might procure it by his suite to the Sea Apostolicke, * 1.18 as before hath byn shewed, vnder K. Edward the Confessor, and other Kings before the Conquest, and diuers after also, namely K. Henry the third and his children. And

whatsoeuer is said heer to the contrary for those dayes, is either ••ror or mistaking, for that it was common Catholicke doctrine •••• that time, as it is now, that Episcopall iurisdiction cannot be giuen by 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but by him that hath it eminently, & with superiority in himself: * 1.19 which must be by ordination, commission, & descent from th'Apostles, to whom it was giuen in Capite, as before we haue declared to descend downe by succession, and the said ordination and im∣position of hands to the worlds end vpon Bishops, Prelates and Pastores, by lawful subordination the one vnto the other: which cannot fall vpon any lay Princes, that haue not this ordination Ecclesiasticall, as euery man of iudgement, and void of passion, will easily see and discerne. And the example before alleadged of the great Christian Emperour Valentinian the elder, * 1.20 that pro∣fessed himself to be vnum de populo & non de Clero, one of the lay people, and not of the Clergy, and consequently not to haue au∣thority to iudge among them (and much lesse to giue or exercise spirituall iurisdiction) doth shew what the faith and practice of the Catholicke Church was in this point, aboue twelue hūdred years gone.

21. Heerby then it is euident how those religious houses, wherof King Edward was founder, * 1.21 & namely the Abbey of Bury (which is the 3. obiection) were exempted by the Kings Charter from Episcopall iurisdiction, to wit, the King procured the same first from the Sea Apostolicke, & then confirmed it by his Char∣ter, as by many examples you haue seen diuers precedent Cha∣pters of this Booke, and namely vnder King Edward the Confes∣sor, King Edgar, King Kenulph, and King Inas before the Conquest.

22. If one was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment for di∣sturbing the Kings presentation by the Popes Bulles, it is a que∣stion de facto, as you see, & not de iure: and such might the Kings anger or offence be, as he might also be put to death for it (some Iudges neuer wanting to be ready to satisfie Princes pleasures in such affaires) & yet this doth not proue the lawfulnes of the fact. And we haue seen before, that this King Edward the 3. vpon the 48. yeare of his raigne, promised the Pope that he would neuer vse more that manner of proceeding by his writts of Quare impe∣dit, wherby it is like, this man was so greiuously punished.

23. The instance of tithes allotted to the King for maintenance of a Pastor, * 1.22 in places without the compasse of any parish is a ve∣ry poore and triflying instance. First, for that those places, that

are out of all Parishes, are to be presumed to be very few; and se∣condly what great matter is it, if so small a thing be left in depossto with the King, for vse of the incumbent that is to ensue. We haue seen in our dayes, that tithes and rents of the Archbishop∣ricke of Toledo (for example in Spaine) being valued at three hundred thousand Crownes by the yeare, * 1.23 were depositated many years togeather in the Kings hands that last dyed, whiles the Archbishop Carança was called to Rome, & imprisoned there, vpon accusations of heresie, and other crimes laid against him: and in the end sentence being giuen, a great parte of that money was graunted to the said King by the Sea Apostolicke, for his wars against Infidels. And yet doth not this proue that the King of Spaine had this by any spirituall iurisdiction of his owne, but by concession of the Sea Apostolicke.

* 1.2424. And wheras M. Attorney saith heere, that by the common laws of England it is euident, that no man vnlesse he be Ecclesiasticall or haue Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, can haue inheritance of tithes. I would aske him first, how he proueth that the King of England had these tithes by inheritance, and not by ordination, agreement, or con∣uention. And secondly how his Common law can determine, that no man may enioy tithes, but he that hath Ecclesiasticall iurisdi∣ction: wheras before in the 9. leafe of his booke, he maketh tithes to be an Ecclesiasticall cause, and out of the Conusaunce of the said Common-law.

* 1.2525. And finally his last inference, that for so much as the King is to present to his free Chappels in default of the Deane, by lapse, that this is done in respect of his supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, is altogeather childish. For that first, to present, includeth no Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction at all, and much lesse supreme; and may be exercised by meer lay∣men, * 1.26 as before hath byn declared at large vnder King VVilliam the Conquerour. Secondly for the King to present to his free Chappels, was as much to say in those dayes, as that those Chap∣pels being made free, and exempted by priuiledges and fran∣quises frō the Sea Apostolicke (for otherwise they could not be freed from iurisdiction of their Ordinary) the King presented vnto them, by vertue of the Canon-law, and commission of the said Sea Apostolicke, as founder therof.

26. And thirdly, that he presented after the Deane, and by lapse only, and not in the first place, signifieth plainely, that his iuris∣diction in that point (if presentation may be called iurisdiction, as in

some sense it may) was lesse then that of the Deane. And so Fitz∣herberts words are to be vnderstood, that in that particular case the King presēted by lapse, as ordinary, that is to say, wheras in other benefices, when the patron, or partie to whom the ele∣ction, nomination, or presentation first & cheifly appertaineth, presenteth not within such a tyme, the Ordinary may present, as hauing (by composition) the second right, * 1.27 or power in that case, and after him the Metropolitan, and last of all the King. Heer in the case of Free Chappels (wherof the King is presumed to be founder) after the Deane, which hath the first right (and this by no other meanes, then by cōcession of the Sea Apostolicke in those dayes) the King by priuiledge of the same Sea, had right to enter in the second place insteed of the Bishop, which pro∣ueth the quite contrary to M. Attorneys conclusion: for it sheweth that the King had not supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the case proposed, but secondary, and subordinate to that of the Deane. But let vs see further.

The Attorney.

An excommunication vnder the Popes Bul is of no force to di∣sable any man within England, and the Iudges said, * 1.28 that he that pleadeth such Buls, though they concerne the excommunica∣tion of a subiect, were in a hard case, if the King would extend his iustice against him. If excommunication, being the extreme and finall end of any suite in the Court at Rome, be not to be al∣lowed within England; it consequently followeth that by the an∣cient Common-laws of England, no suite for any cause, though it be spirituall, rising within this Realme, ought to be determi∣ned in the Court of Rome; Quia frustra expectatur euentus, cuis effe∣ctus nullus sequitur: and that the Bishops of England are the imme∣diate officers and ministers to the Kings Courts.

In an attachment vpon a prohibition, the defendant pleaded the Popes Bull of excommunication of the Plaintife: the Iudges demaunded of the defendāt, if he had not the certificate of some Bishop within the Realme, testifying this excommunication; to whom the Counsell of the defendant answered, that he had not, neither was it, as he supposed, necessary; for that the Buls of the Pope vnder lead were notorious inough:

but it was adiud∣ged that they were not sufficient, for that the Courte ought not to haue regard to any excommunication out of the Realme:

and therefore by the rule of the Courte, * 1.29 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was thereby disabled.

Reges sacro oleo vncti, sunt spiritualis iurisdictionis capaces.

The Catholicke Deuine.

27. All that is heere said against the acceptance, or admittance of the Popes Bulls for excommunication in England (for of this only as speach in this place) if it be meant of this K. Edwards time only (as according to the argument it must, * 1.30 and we haue seen that vnder former Kings the contrary was allwayes in practice) how then doth M. Attorney talke heere againe of his auncient Com∣mon-lawes? For if it began first vnder this King, then was it a new law, and not auncient: and if further wee find no Decree or Sta∣tute therof at all in this Kings life, as hitherto we haue not, nor doth M. Attorney cite, or quote any, then might it be a matter on∣ly de facto of some Iudges, who according to the current of that time, and as they should see the King affected, pleased or displea∣sed with the Popes of those dayes, would reiect, or admit their Buls at their discretion. And then doe you see, vpon what good∣ly ground, M. Attorney inferreth his conclusion; that if the Popes Buls of excōmunication were not respected in those dayes, it consequently followeth, that by the auncient common laws of England, no suite for any cause, though it be spirituall, rising within this Realme, might be determined in the Courte of Rome. And why so? For that the Popes excommunication was not obayed in England.

28. But I would aske him whether no sentence could be giuen, without excommunication? Or whether to such as beleeued the Popes authority in those dayes, it were sufficient in con∣science, that the said excommunications were not admitted by some Iudges in their tribunals? Or at least-wise no iudiciall no∣tice taken of them, except they came notified also from some Bishop, as the second Case heer set downe doth touch, & ther∣by insinuateth the solution of the whole riddle, to wit, that Iud∣ges were not bound vnder this K. Edward, to take publicke and Iudiciall no∣tice of anie Bull of excommunication come from abroad, * 1.31 and presented by any priuate person, except the same came notified from some Bishop in authoritie within the Realme. Which caution is vsed also at this day, in diuers other Catholicke Countreys round about vs, for auoiding trou∣ble, deceit, and confusion, to wit that Bulls and other authen∣ticall writings from Rome, must be seen, and certified by some persons of authority within the Realme, before they can be pleaded in Courte, or admitted generally.

29. To the last instance, that Kings annointed with sacred oyle, are capable of spirituall iurisdiction, * 1.32 we denie it not, but graunt with the great Ciuill-lawyer Baldus before mentioned, and all Canonists, that diuers cases of spirituall iurisdiction, may be graunted by the Sea Apostolicke vnto annoynted Kings, and so often it hath been done; especially to Kings of England, as former examples, haue declared, namelie of K. Edward the Confessor. * 1.33 But this as∣sertion of capacitie, & abilitie, to receiue some sorte of spirituall iurisdiction, if it be committed vnto them; doth not proue that they had the said iurisdiction in themselues, or of themselues, by vertue of their Crownes, or annoynting, as M. Attorney would haue men beleeue. But let vs heare further.

The Attorney.

Where a Prior is the Kings debitor, and ought to haue tithes of another spirituall person; * 1.34

he may choose either to sue for sub∣traction of his tithes in the Ecclesiasticall Courte, or in the Ex∣chequer, and yet the persons, and matter also was Ecclesiasticall. For seing the matter, by a meane, concerneth the King, hee may sue for them in the Exchequer, as well, as in the Ecclesiasticall Courte, and there shall the right of tithes bee determined. And Fitzh. in his Nat. Br. fol. 30. holdeth, that before the Statute of the 18. of E. 3. cap. 7. that right of tithes were determinable in the tē∣porall Courts, * 1.35 at the election of the partie. And by that Statute assigned to be determined in the Ecclesiasticall Court, and the temporall Courte excluded therof. And the Courts of diuers manners of the Kings, and of other Lords in auncient times, had the probates of last wills and testaments; and it appeareth by the 11. Hen. 7. fol. 12. that the probate of testaments did not appertaine to the Ecclesiasticall Courte, but that of late time they were determinable there: so as, of such causes, and in such manner, as the Kings of the Realme, by generall consent and allowance haue assigned to their Ecclesiasticall Courts, they haue iurisdiction by force of such allowance.

The King did by his Charter translate Canons secular into regular, * 1.36 and religious persons, which hee did by his Ecclesiasti∣call iurisdiction, and could not doe it, vnlesse he had iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall.

The Abbot of VValtham died in the 45. yeare E. 3. and one Ni∣cholas merrit was elected Abbot, * 1.37 who,

for that the Abbey was

exempt from ordinarie iurisdiction, was sent to Rome to be con∣firmed by the Pope. And because the Pope by his constitutions had reserued all such collations to himself, he did recite by his Bull, that he hauing no regard to the election of the said Nicolas, gaue to him the said Abbey, and the spiritualties and temporal∣ties belonging to the same, of his spirituall grace, and at the re∣quest (as he fained) of the King of England This Bull was read, and considered of in Councell, that is, before all the Iudges of England; and it was resolued by them all that this Bull was against the laws of England, and that the Abbot for obtaining the same, was fallen into the Kings mercie, whervpon all his possessions were seased into the Kings hands, as more at large by the said Case appeareth.

Where the Abbot of VVestminster had a Prior & Couent, who were regular, * 1.38 and mort in law; yet the King by his Charter did deuide that corporation, and made the Prior and Couent a distinct and capable bodie, to sue, and be sued by themselues.

The Catholicke Deuine.

30. The first case of this instance about tithes and probates of testaments, * 1.39 is a verie trifling thing to proue M. Attorneys great cōclusion, of supreme authoritie Ecclesiasticall to be in the tem∣porall Prince & his Courts. For as these things, and like other, are in parte belonging to spirituall iurisdiction, in that they con∣cerne benefices; the willes and ordinations of dead men for the benefit of their soules, & the like, partlie also belonging to tem∣porall, * 1.40 in that they include temporalities & worldly substance, they may in different respects appertaine also to differēt Courts, and so they doe in other Catholicke Countreys at this day: and namelie for probates of testaments, in no other Countrey (per∣haps) besides England, are they limited onlie to the Bishops spi∣rituall Courts. About which wee haue the foresaid Statutes of Circumspectè agatis vnder K. Edward the first, and of Articuli Cleri vnder K. Edward the 2. and diuers other Ordinations vnder this King Edward the 3. But how proueth all this M. Attorneys princi∣pall conclusion? And how far of is this from inferring supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to be in the temporall Prince? Is it not strange, that such a man as M. Attorney, would alleadge such toyes? But let vs goe forward.

31. If K. Edward did translate by his Charter, the Canons se∣cular

into regular, as heere is said, wee must presume he did it (as before you haue heard K. Henry the 2. to haue done it at VVal∣tham) by authority of the Popes Br••ue, confirmed by his Charter, * 1.41 and not otherwise. For as well could K. Henry the 2. haue do••e it of his owne authoritie, if it had been annexed to his Crowne, at this K. Edward the 3. And therefore seing the other obserued the Canons of the Church, and presumed not to doe it of him∣self, but by the Popes licence and Charter, and ratified by his owne, it may be presumed that this King did the same, for so much as the same Canon-law stood still in force. And so it may be suspected, that this case hath somewhat omitted couertly that should appertaine to the full declaration therof.

32. The other case also of Nicolas Morris chosen Abbot of VVal∣tham, that went to Rome and got his inuestiture there, by reser∣uation of the Pope, and not by his election in England, * 1.42 fell out at that verie time, as heere is noted, when the contention was most in heat between the King and French Popes, about reser∣uation of benefices, to wit, vpon the 4. of the Kings raigne, the said Popes agreeing soone after to vse no more the said reserua∣tions. So as no great maruaile of the Iudges of those dayes, did moue the King to make some demonstration of speciall offence against this man, the controuersie being then in handling: but this is an instance de facto and not de iure.

33. Lastlie the case of the Abbot of VVestminster made, by the Kings Charter, a distinct bodie, capable to sue, and to be sued, was a temporal priueledge, which any Prince might giue to a Couent, if it vvere commodious for them, and they willing to accept thereof: and if not, they would haue reclaimed in those daies, and haue appealed to the Sea Apostolicke for remedie, as the vse and right was at that time, and as oy diuers examples appeareth of Appellatiōs made against the King himself, during his raigne; as namelie that of the Bishop of Ely, recounted at large by VVal∣singham in the yeare 1348. and others.

34. The six instance consisteth of certaine Statutes, * 1.43 made in the 25. 27. 28. and 38. yeares in the raigne of K. Edward the 3. a∣gainst prouisious and prouisers from Rome, reseruations of Bis∣hopricks and benefices by the said Sea, vndue appellations, vn∣iust citations, infamations or molestations of men by Censures from thence. All which I thinke not good to set downe at large as they lie in the Statute booke, for that they are ouer∣longe,

but breiflie rather to alleadge the summe therof, which is sufficient for the point it self of our controuersie. First then it is said:

That in consideration of the manie inconueniences and hurtes, that seemed to ensue to the Common-wealth, as well Clergie-men, as secular, by such as went to Rome, and there by false suggestions, and other such procu∣rements, vnworthilie got vnto themselues benefices, they being either stran∣gers, not able to preach, and teach, or els, if English-men, yet vnfit for their learning, or manners, and that therby particular patrons were depriued of their right of presenting, &c? * 1.44

It was ordained vpon the 25. yeare of this Kings raigne, to punish the persons, that being subiect to the King, should attempt, or doe this without the Kings licence, or knowledge of the Realme. And so the decree of Parlament was, that whosoeuer he∣reafter should attempt, or procure any such prouisions, * 1.45 he should be out of the Kings protection, whereby euerie man might lawfullie kill him, &c.

35. And in the same Parlament, the like, and many other in∣conueniences are represented against reseruations of benefices, by the said Sea Apostolicke, and Bishops therof, whervpon it is decreed, by the King, and his great men, and Commons, that the said reseruations shall not bee suffered, or admitted for the time to come, as a thing not due to the Sea Apostolicke; But that all Archbishops, Bishops, and o∣ther dignities, and benefices Electorie in England, shall bee permitted to free election, as they were graunted by the Kings progenitours, founders therof, and the auncestors of other Lords, that had founded any such benefices, and might haue reserued to themselues, as Patrons, and founders, the presenta∣tions there vnto.

36. Moreouer Complaint being made by diuers of the Kings people, that many were greatlie troubled, and drawne out of∣tentimes of the Realme, by vnquiet and litigious people, that made appeals to Rome, to answere to things, wherof the Conu∣saunce pertained to the Kings Court, &c. It was assented, and ac∣corded by the King, and by the great men, and Commons, that whosoeuer should draw any man out of the Realme, in plea, wherof the Conusaunce per∣tained to the Kings Courts, should incurre the daunger of Praemunire. And finallie:

that no man presume to cite, sue, vex, molest any by Censures pro∣cured from the Popes Courte, against any, for obseruing these laws, and like other ordinances, vpon paine of seuere punishment, &c.

37. To all which we answere, * 1.46 that diuers circumstances may bee considered about these Statutes, Ordinances, and Decrees, as well of the times, and persons, as of the occasions, causes, and manner of doing. And to begin first with the last; it may bee,

that either all, or some parte of these restrictions might be made by some kind of consent or toleration of the Popes themselnes, vpon the often representing of the inconueniences, which we haue seen before made by diuers Princes, from K. Henry the 3. down-ward, and the answers as well of Innocentius the 4. as other Popes, that the said inconueniences should be remedied. And to the same effect putteth downe VValsingham this K. Edwards letters, * 1.47 at seuerall times, to sundry Popes for that end. And vpon the yeare 1373. ••hich was the 47. of his raigne (long after the ma∣king of these Statutes) he sent againe to Gregory the 11. to intreat his consent, and good will to the same.

Rex Edwardus (saith Wal∣singham) eodem anno misit Ambassiatores ad Dominum Papam, rogaus c••m, &c.

The same yeare K. Edward sent Embassadours to the Pope, praying him, that he would be content to surcease from prouiding benefices in England, & that Clerks might enioy their rights to Ecclesiasticall dignities by elections, as in old time they were accustomed. So as heere we see, * 1.48 that the King pretended right by ancient custome, in these affaires: Neither did this Pope altogeather deny it.

For VValsingham addeth: super quibus articulis nuncij à Papa certa recepêre responsa, &c. vpon which articles the Kings messengers receiued from the Pope certaine answers, of which they should informe him at their returne, & that nothing should be determined, vntill the King had written againe his mind more fully vnto the said Pope. And then in the next yeare after he saith, as before you haue heard, that the Pope, and the King were agreed vpon these, and like points.

38. And if this were so at this time, then may it be presumed also, that before vpon the 25. yeare of his raigne, when he first made those Statutes of restraint, he had also some secret consent, or conniuency of Pope Clement the 6. or Innocentius the 6. that im∣mediately ensued him, to the same effect: at least wise, for the ceasing of prouisions and reseruations, except only vpon great and weighty causes, (for in such cases we find, that they were vsed also afterward) and that ambitious, busie, and troublesome people, that should deceitfully procure such prouisions, or rashly and vniustly appeale, or molest men with Citations, Censures, and the like, should be punished. * 1.49 And this was a thing so needful oftentymes, as S. Bernard himself, that liued vnder King Henry the first, and writing to Pope Eugenius, that had byn his scholler, of the great abuses of troublesome appellatiōs in his dayes, wisheth

him, as on the one side to admit all due appellations, which of right were made vnto him, and to his tribunall, from all partes of the world; so on the other side, to punish them that made them vniustly.

39. All which being considered, togeather with the time be∣fore noted, wherin K. Edward made these restraints, to wit, when he had great warrs in France for challenge of the Crowne, and no small iealousie with the Popes, Cardinals, and Roman Court, as being all, or the most parte French at that day, and residing in Auinion in France; the continuall clamours also of his people, much exaspered by certaine particular abuses, and excesses of some Ec∣clesiasticall officers: * 1.50 the maruaile is not so great, if he tooke some such resolution, as this de facto, at least for satisfying especially of the laity, who were most instant in the matter; Yea & by whom only, it seemeth to haue byn done. For that in none of these Sta∣tutes is mentioned expressly the consent of the Lords spirituall; but of the King, and Great men (Magnatum in Latin) and of the Commu∣nalty, which is repeated in euery of the forsaid Statutes, except one, where is said. The King by the assent, and expresse will, and concord of the Dukes, Earles, Barrons, and the Commons of this Realme did deter∣mine, &c not mencioning at al the Bishops, Archbishops, Abbots, and other Ecclesiasticall Prelates, that had right of suffrage in those Parlaments; and consequently, how far this probation de facto doth proue also de Iure, I leaue to the Reader to consider.

40. Only we conclude, that howsoeuer this was, either by right or wrong, for the manner of determining; certaine it is, that King Edward did not therby diminish any way his opinion, or iudgment of the Popes spirituall authority: * 1.51 as may appeare by al his other actions writings to the same Sea afterwards, and of his respectiue carriage and behauiour, not only towards the Popes, but to his owne Clergy also in England, in all matters belonging to their superiority Ecclesiasticall. In proofe wherof, vpon the very selfsame 25. yeare of his raigne, wherin the former Statutes of restraint were decreed against such of his subiects as should offend therein; he made another Statute intituled. A con∣firmation of all libertyes, graunted the Clergy. * 1.52 And after ward vpon the 31. yeare, another Statute intituled. A confirmation of the great Charter, and of the Charter of the Forrest. Which great Charter con∣taining the priuiledges, * 1.53 libertyes, and superiority of the Church, is confirmed by him againe in the 42. yeare of his raigne, by a

particular Statute. And finally vpon the 50. yeare, which was the last before he died, he made another Statute intituled thus. ••he libertyes of the Church confirmed. So as all the former restraints, were pretended for particular cases only, mixt with temporal∣tyes, and for remedy of some excesses and inconueniences, without detraction of any thinge from the acknowledged su∣preme power of the Pope and Sea Apostolicke, in meere spiri∣tuall matters.

41. And how far then, is all this that is alleadged here by M. Attorney, from prouing that K. Edward the 3. did hold himself for supreme head of the Church, euen in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters? Or that his restraints before made in the cases set downe, might bee a president, or warrant, either de facto, or de iure to Q. Elizabeth, to K. Henrie the 8. or K. Edward that followed him, to denie wholy the Popes authoritie, and take it to themselues? And so much of this K. Edward the 3. whose religion & iudgmēt, though it were euer Catholicke, as hath been said; yet was his life and actions manie times disordinate and violent, * 1.54 as of a souldiar & warrier; and this not onlie against the liberties of the Church, but against the precepts of good life and gouernmēt also. The first appeareth by a longe reprehension written vnto him, with threatning likewise of excommunication from Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterburie, vpon the yeare 1340. wherin he doth sett downe the manie greiuances, * 1.55 which he did laie vpon the Church vniustlie. And for the second, it maie bee vnderstood, as wel by the same narration of the foresaid Archbishop, wherin he said to the king, admonishing him of his fathers miserable end: Ferè corda populo terra amisistis. You haue almost lost the hearts of all the people of the land. As also the same is euidēt by the generall testimonie of our historiographers, who make the later parte of his raigne to haue been very much disordered, & thereby also vnfortunate & miserable, as maie appeer by these words of VValsingham, who hauing much commended other graces in him, saith:

Luxus tamē & motus suae carnis lubricos, etiam in aetate senili non cohibuit, &c.

he did not euen in his old age, restraine the luxurious and fraile motiōs of his owne flesh; being much allured hereunto, as is said; by the incitation of a certaine dishonest woman, named Alice Pierce, that was with him vnto the end of his life, and was cause of haste∣ning the same. And it is greatlie to bee noted, as in the former parte of his raigne, all things went prosperously with him; so

towards the later end in his old age, through the demerit of his synnes, all fell out contrarie, &c.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Supra. cap. ••. ••. 4.
• * 1.2

  1. instance 16 ••. 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 excom. 4.
• * 1.3

  1. An∣svvere.
• * 1.4

  VValsing. in vita Edou. 3. anno. 1340.
• * 1.5

  •• instance.
• * 1.6

  In the Raigne of Ed. 3.
• * 1.7

  •• An∣svvere.
• * 1.8

  Snpr••. fol 9.
• * 1.9

  The com∣mon lavv cannot determine vvho shall giue cure of benefi∣ces vvith spirituall authority belonging therevnto.
• * 1.10

  This in∣stance maketh a∣gainst M. Attorney himselfe.
• * 1.11

  3. Instance
• * 1.12

  17. ••. 3. 23.
• * 1.13

  20. E 3. en∣••o•••••• 9.16. E. 3 tit. b••••u. 66. 21 E. 3.6 ••. H. 7. 14. F••••z. Na. br.
• * 1.14

  2. Ed. 3. ••••t. excom 6. 21 E. 3. 4. fol. 4.
• * 1.15

  23. E 3. l. Ass pl. 75.
• * 1.16

  27. Ed. 3. fol 84. Fitz Na. Br. fol. 34.
• * 1.17

  The An∣svvere to the first & second 26. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.18

  King Ed∣••vard did not giue Episcopal iurisdictiō
• * 1.19

  Supra cap. 2. & 3.
• * 1.20

  The say∣ing of the Emp. Va∣lentin. Su∣pra cap. 4.
• * 1.21

  Supra cap. 6.
• * 1.22

  To the 4.
• * 1.23

  Trifling obiectiōs.
• * 1.24

  To the 5.
• * 1.25

  To the sixth
• * 1.26

  Supra cap. 7.
• * 1.27

  M. Attor∣neys case plaine a∣gainst himself.
• * 1.28

  The 4. In∣stance. 30. E. 3. l. ass. pl. 19. 32. H. 4. 16 14 H. 4. 14. 8. H. 6. fol. 3. 35. H. 6. 42. 28 H 6. 1. 7. Ed. 36 14. 11. E. 4. 16 Fitz. Na. Br. fol. 64 E. vide 9. E. 4. fol. 3. hereaf∣ter fol. 11. It ought to be de∣termined in the Ec∣clesiastical Courtes of Englād. 21. E. 3. tit. exco•• 6.
• * 1.29

  31 ••. 3. tit. Ayde de Roy 103.
• * 1.30

  The An∣svvere.
• * 1.31

  Bulls from Rome not admitted except they come certifyed frō some Prelate at home.
• * 1.32

  S•••• Sup. cap. 7.
• * 1.33

  Kings are capable of ecclesiasti∣call iuris∣diction by commis∣sion.
• * 1.34

  The ••. In∣stance. 38. ass. pl. 30.
• * 1.35

  See the stat. of 15. E. t. c. 4. 31. E. ••. c. 11.
• * 1.36

  38. Ass. pl. 22.
• * 1.37

  46. E. ••. tit. pramu∣nure. 6.
• * 1.38

  49. E. 3. l. Ass. pl. 8.
• * 1.39

  The An∣svvere.
• * 1.40

  Some things may belōg to differēt courtes in different respects.
• * 1.41

  Supra in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ••.
• * 1.42

  VVhy the Abbot of VValtam vvas seue∣rely pu∣nished.
• * 1.43

  The ••. In∣stance.
• * 1.44

  The sum∣me of the first re∣straint a∣bout Pro∣uisions.
• * 1.45

  Stat. 25. E. 3. de proui∣soribus.
• * 1.46

  The An∣svvere.
• * 1.47

  Agreemēt betvvene the King and Pope about prouisiōs.
• * 1.48

  VValsing. in vita 〈◊〉〈◊〉. an. 1371.
• * 1.49

  See S. Ber∣nard a•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ••l. 2. de Conside∣racione ad Eugeni••••.
• * 1.50

  Of the reasons & manner of cōcluding these re∣straints by K. E. the 3.
• * 1.51

  King Ed∣vvards re∣straints diminis∣hed not his devv respect to the church
• * 1.52

  An. 2••. E. 3. ••tat. 3. Stat. ••. cap. 1.
• * 1.53

  42. E. 3. ••. 1.
• * 1.54

  The disor∣dinate life of K. Edvvard the third.
• * 1.55

  VValsing. in vita E∣douardi 3. an. 1340.