IV. solution of the king, Church, and kingdom of England so Discourse unanimous (that "they could not assent to the Pope's legation, because it was against reason that a person twice condemned by the whole Council of the English should be restored upon the Pope's letterz"), that England was never troubled with any more appeals to Rome until after the Conquest. Neither durst the Pope send any Bulls or mandates then, but a plain "letter "." The next appellant was Anselm a stranger (who knew not the liberties of England), in the days of Henry the First, as successless as Wilfrid had been. Will you trust the testimony of a king?—and I know not why a king should not be trusted for the customs of his own kingdom,-hear King Henry the First, the son of the Conqueror,-" It is a custom of my kingdom instituted by my father" (instituted indeed, but not first instituted, for it was an old Saxon custom), "that no Pope be appealed to without the license of the king." Another law of the same king was, "By all means we discharge foreign judgments c." If you will not trust the king, trust the whole kingdom, upon their oaths, in the days of Henry his grandchild. The first English custom recited in the Assise of Clarendon is this, that all appeals in England must proceed regularly from the Archdeacon to the Bishop, from the Bishop to the Archbishop; and if the Archbishop failed to do justice, the last complaint must be to the king, to give order for redress d? If we will not trust the king and kingdom, yet let us trust the Pope himself. Thus Paschal the Second writeth to our Henry the First, "The Pope's nuncios and letters do find no reception within thy jurisdiction, there are no complaints from those parts, no appeals are destined to the Apostolic See e." The Abbot of Thorney found this true by experience, who lay long in prison notwithstanding his appeal to Rome. The case is so plain, that I shall not cite one authority more in it, but only one of our statute laws, made not only by the assent (as is [Spelm., Concil., tom. i. p. 203. in an. 705.] [See Just Vindic., c. iv. (vol. i. pp. 133-135), Disc. ii. Pt. i.] Malmesb., De Gest. Pontif. Anglor., lib. i. [p. 219.] C Leg. Hen. I. c. 31. [ap. Wilk., Legg. Angl. Sax., &c., p. 248.] d Matt. Paris., an. 1164. [pp. 100, 101.] * Eadmer., [Hist. Nov.,] lib. v. p. 113. f Hoveden, [Annal., P. poster.,] an. 1195. [in Rich. I. p. 757. See Twysd., Histor. Vindic., c. iii. § 32. p. 33.] I. PART usual) but upon the prayer, and grievous and clamorous complaints, of the Peers and Commons; that because "people are drawn out of the realm to answer things, the cognizance 332 whereof belongeth to the king's courts, and the judgments of the king's courts are impeached in another court" (the Court of Rome,) "to the disinheriting of the king and his Crown, and the undoing and destruction of the common-law of the land;" therefore it is ordained, that "whosoever shall draw a man out of the realm in plea," if he do not appear upon summons and conform to the sentence of the king's court, he shall forfeit lands and goods, be outlawed and imprisoned. [The canon of Against such fortifications, grounded upon prescription the Council and imperial laws, the canon of the Council of Sardica1 will of Sardica.] make no great battery. Take the Council of Sardica at the best, waving all exceptions, yet certainly it was no general Council. If it were, it had been one of the four first. If it had been a general Council itself, three succeeding Popes were much to blame, to father the canons of it upon the first general Council of Nice. The canons of the Council of Sardica did not bind the Africans of old, much less bind us now. Secondly, the canon of Sardica doth only give way to appeals to Rome in cases between two Bishops: but the Court of Rome admitteth appeals from inferior clergymen, from laymen, from all sorts of men, in all sorts of causes that are of ecclesiastical cognizance. Thirdly, the canon of Sardica is a mere permission, no precept; what may be done in discretion, not what ought to be done of necessity. It was proposed with a "Si vobis placet"—"If it please you;" and the ground of it is a compliment, "Let us honour the memory of St. Peter." Fourthly, there is one great circumstance in our case, which varieth it quite from that proposed by Osius to the Sardican Fathers, that is, that our king and the laws of the realm do forbid appeals to Rome. If there had been such an imperial law then, do we think that the Fathers of Sardica would have been so disloyal, or so simple, to think to abrogate the imperial laws by their canons, which are no laws but by the emperor's confirmation? No, the * 27 Edw. III. [c. 1. § 1.] 629.] [See above c. 1. p. 374. note y.] IV. Fathers of that age did know their duty too well to their DISCOURSE emperor; and if they could have foreseen what avaricious practices and what gross oppressions would have sprung in time from this little seed of their indulgence, they would have abominated them. Lastly, supposing the Sardican Council had been of more authority, and the canon thereof of more extent than it was, and more peremptory, and that there had been no such intervening impediment why English subjects could not make use of that remedy; yet the Council of Sardica can give but human right, and a contrary prescription for a thousand years is a sufficient enfranchisement from all pretence of human right'. m Bulls and 2. The second branch of this usurpation is as clear as the 2. Of Papal former;-concerning Papal Bulls and excommunications, excommuthat by our ancient laws they cannot be executed in England nications. without the king's leave. In the Assise of Clarendon this is found to be one of the ancient customs of England,that " none of the king's servants, or tenants that held of him in capite, might be excommunicated, or their lands interdicted, before the king was made acquainted "." There was a severe law made in the reign of the same king, "If any man be found bringing in the Pope's letter or mandate, let him be apprehended, and let justice pass upon him without delay, as a traitor to the king and kingdom "." It seemeth, that the first and second Henries were no more propitious to Rome than Henry the Eighth. Take one statute more; it was enacted in full Parliament by Richard the Second, that "if any did procure or pursue any such processes or excommunications in the Court of Rome," as are there mentioned (that is, concerning presentations to benefices or dignities ecclesiastical), they who bring them into the realm or receive them or execute them, "shall be put out of the king's protection; their lands, goods and chattels be confiscated to the king, and their bodies attached "." They had the same respect for the Pope's Bulls, as often as they did not like them, in Henry the Fourth's time; as we see by the statute made against those, "who brought or prosecuted. 1 [For a fuller account of the canon of Sardica, see below in sect. iv. (pp. 373, 374. fol. edit.).] Matt. Paris., an. 1164. [p. 100]. n Hoveden, [Annal., P. poster.,] in Hen. II. [p. 496.] 16 Rich. II. c. [5.] I. PART the Pope's Bulls granted in favour of the Cistercians P." By the law of England, if any man denounced the Pope's excommunication without the assent of the king, he forfeited all his goods; and it is recorded in particular, how the king's writ issued out against the Bishops of London and Norwich, "as being at the king's mercy," because "contrary to the statute of Clarendon, by the Pope's mandate, they had interdicted the lands of Earl Hugh, and had published an excommunication without the king's license, which the Pope had given out against him "." All these laws continued 333 still in force, and were never repealed in England, neither before Henry the Eighth began the Reformation, nor since by Queen Mary, but have ever continued in full force until this day. 3. Of Papal legates. 3. Lastly, for legates and legantine courts, there could be no appeal in England to any legate or nuncio without the king's leave; but all appeals must be from the Archdeacon to the Bishop, from the Bishop to the Archbishop, from the Archbishop to the king; as we see expressly by the Statute of Assise of Clarendon formerly cited". The kings of England did ever deem it to be an unquestionable right of the crown (as Eadmerus testifieth), "to suffer none to exercise the office of a legate in England, if the king himself did not desire it of the Pope, upon some great quarrel that could not be so well determined by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Bishops;" which privilege was consented unto by Pope Callixtus ". By the laws of England, if a legate was admitted of courtesy, he was "to take his oath to do nothing derogatory to the king and his crown. Henry the Sixth, by the counsel of Humphrey Duke of Glocester the Protector, protested against Pope Martin and his legate, that they would not admit him contrary to the laws and liberties of the realm, and dissented from whatsoever he did. And when the Pope had recalled Cardinal Pole's commission of legate for England, and was sending Eadmer., [Hist. Nov.,] lib. v. p. [Id.,] ibid. Placit., an. 1. Hen. VII. [Foxe,] Acts and Monum., [bk. v. vol. i. pp. 802, 803. an. 1428.] IV. another legate into England, Queen Mary being very tender DISCOURSE of her kinsman's honour, for all her good affection to Rome, was yet mindful of this point of old English law, to cause all the seaports to be stopped, and all letters, briefs, and Bulls from Rome, to be intercepted and brought to her. She knew this was an old English, not a new Protestant privilege. Neither would she ever admit the new legate to appear as legate in her presence'. Now let us see how these old English customs do agree [English with the French liberties. liberties in this point same as can.] "The Pope cannot send a legate à latere into France, also the with power to reform, judge, collate, dispense, . . except it the Gallibe upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King. Neither can the legate execute his charge, until he hath promised the king, under his oath upon his holy orders, to make no longer use of the legantine power in the king's dominions than it pleaseth him," [and] that he shall "attempt nothing contrary to the liberties of the Gallican Church" and "it is lawful to appeal from the Pope to a future Council "." Another liberty is, "The commissions and Bulls of Popes" are to be viewed "by the Court of Parliament," and "registered, and published with such cautions . . as that Court shall judge expedient "." A third liberty is, "Papal Bulls, sentences, excommunications, and the like, are not to be executed in France without the king's command or permission "." Lastly, "Neither the king, nor his realm, nor his officers, can be excommunicated nor interdicted by the Pope d." those of And as England and France, so all the seventeen Pro- [And as vinces did enjoy the same privileges; as appeareth by the the United Placaert of the Council of Brabant, dated at Brussels Provinces.] May 12. anno 1653; wherein they declare, that "it was notoriously true, that the subjects of those Provinces, of what state or condition soever" (that is, the clergy as well as the laity,) "cannot be cited or convented out of the land, no, not before the Court of Rome itself;" and that "the |