Ecumenical Christian Library

  • Loading…

VIII.7. The Prince’s power in the advancement of Bishops unto the rooms of prelacy c .

159427 min read

VII. Touching the advancement of prelates unto their rooms by the king; whereas it seemeth in the eyes of many a thing very strange that prelates, the officers of God’s own sanctuary, than which nothing is more sacred, should be made by persons secular; there are1 that will not have kings be altogether of the laity, but to participate that sanctified power which God hath endued his clergy with, and that in such respect they are anointed with oil. A shift vain and needless. For as much as, if we speak properly, we cannot say kings do make, but that they only do place, bishops. For in a bishop there are these three things to be considered; the power whereby he is distinguished from other pastors; the special portion of the clergy and people2 over whom he is to exercise that bishoply power; and the place of his seat or throne, together with the profits, preeminences, honours thereunto belonging. The first every bishop hath by consecration; the second his3 election investeth him with; the third he receiveth of the king alone.

With consecration the king intermeddleth not further than only by his letters to present such an elect bishop as shall be consecrated. Seeing therefore that none but bishops do consecrate, it followeth that none but they only4 do give unto every bishop his being. The manner of uniting bishops as heads, unto the flock and clergy under them, hath often altered. For, if some be not deceived, this thing was sometime5 done even without any election at all. At the first (saith he to whom the name of Ambrose is given6) the first created in the college of presbyters was still the bishop. He dying, the next senior did succeed him. “Sed quia cœperunt sequentes presbyteri indigni inveniri ad primatus tenendos immutata est ratio, prospiciente concilio; ut non ordo sed meritum crearet episcopum multorum sacerdotum judicio7 constitutum, ne indignus temere usurparet et esset multis scandalum.”

In elections at the beginning the clergy and the people both had to do, although not both after one sort. The people gave their testimony, and shewed their affection, either of desire or dislike, concerning the party which was to be chosen. But the choice was wholly in the sacred college of presbyters. Hereunto it is that those usual speeches of the ancient do commonly allude: as when Pontius concerning S. Cyprian’s election saith, he was chosen “judicio Dei et populi favore,” “by the judgment of God and favour8 of the people9,” the one branch alluding to the voices of the ecclesiastical senate which with religious sincerity choose10 him, the other to the people’s affection, who earnestly desired to have him chosen their bishop.

Again, Leo11; “Nulla ratio sinit, ut inter episcopos habeantur qui nec a clericis sunt electi nec a plebibus expetiti.” “No reason doth grant that they should be reckoned amongst bishops, whom neither clergy hath elected nor laity coveted.” In like sort Honorius12; “Let him only be established bishop in the see of Rome whom Divine judgment and universal consent hath chosen.”

That difference, which is between the form of electing bishops at this day with us, and that which was usual in former ages, riseth from the ground of that right which the kings of this land do claim in furnishing the place13 where bishops, elected and consecrated, are to reside as bishops. For considering the huge charges which the ancient famous princes of this land have been at, as well in erecting episcopal sees, as also in endowing them with ample possessions; sure of their religious magnificence14 and bounty we cannot think but to have been most deservedly honoured with those royal prerogatives, [of] taking the benefit which groweth out of them in their vacancy, and of advancing alone unto such dignities what persons they judge most fit for the same. A thing over and besides even therefore the more reasonable15; for that, as the king most justly hath preeminence to make lords temporal which are not such by right of birth, so the like preeminence of bestowing where pleaseth him the honour of spiritual nobility also, cannot seem hard, bishops being peers of the realm, and by law16 itself so reckoned.

Now, whether we grant so much unto kings in this respect, or in the former consideration whereupon the laws have annexed it unto the crown17, it must of necessity being granted, both make void whatsoever interest the people aforetime hath had towards the choice of their own bishop, and also restrain the very act of canonical election usually made by the dean and chapter; as with us in such sort it doth, that they neither can proceed unto18 any election till leave be granted19, nor elect any person20 but that is named unto them. If they might do the one, it would be in them to defeat the king of his profits; if the other, then were the king’s preeminences of granting those dignities nothing. And therefore, were it not for certain canons requiring canonical election to be before consecration21, I see no cause but that the king’s letters patents alone might suffice well enough to22 that purpose, as by law they do in case those electors should happen not to satisfy the king’s pleasure. Their election is now but a matter of form: it is the king’s mere grant which placeth, and the bishop’s consecration which maketh, bishops.

Neither do the kings of this land use herein any other than such prerogatives as foreign nations have been accustomed unto.

About the year of our Lord 42523, pope Boniface solicited most earnestly the emperor Honorius to take some order that the bishops of Rome might be created without ambitious seeking of the place. A needless petition, if so be the emperor had no right at all in the placing of bishops there. But from the days of Justinian the emperor, about the year 553, Onuphrius24 himself doth grant that no man was bishop in the see of Rome whom first the emperor by his letters patents did not license to be consecrated. Till in Benedict’s25 time it pleased the emperor to forego that right; which afterwards was restored to Charles with augmentation26, and continued in his successors till such time as Hildebrand took it from Henry IV27, and ever since the cardinals have held it as at this day.

Had not the right of giving them belonged to the emperors of Rome within the compass of their dominions, what needed28 pope Leo the fourth to trouble Lotharius and Lodowick with those his letters29, whereby, having done them to understand that the church called Reatina was without a bishop, he maketh suit that one Colonus might have the room, or, if that were otherwise disposed of30, his next request was, “Tusculanam ecclesiam, quæ viduata existit, illi vestra serenitas dignetur concedere, ut consecratus a nostro præsulatu Deo Omnipotenti vestroque imperio grates peragere valeat.” “May it please31 your clemencies to grant unto him the church of Tusculum now likewise void; that by our episcopal authority he being after consecrated may be to Almighty God and your highness32 therefore thankful.”

Touching other bishopricks, extant there is a very short but a plain discourse33, written almost 500 years since, by occasion of that miserable contention raised between the emperor Henry IVth and pope Hildebrand, named otherwise Gregory the VIIth, not, as Platina34 would bear men in hand, for that the bishop of Rome would not brook the emperor’s simoniacal dealings35, but because the right, which Christian kings and emperors had to invest bishops, hindered so much his ambitious designments, that nothing could detain him from attempting to wrest it violently out of their hands.

This treatise I mention, for that it shortly comprehendeth not only the fore-alleged right of the emperor of Rome acknowledged by six several popes36, even with bitter execration against whomsoever of their successors that should by word or deed at any time go about to infringe the same, but also further37 these other38 specialties appertaining thereunto39: First40, that the bishops likewise of Spain, England, Scotland, Hungary, had by ancient institution always been invested by their kings, without opposition or disturbance. Secondly, that such was their41 royal interest, partly42 for that they were founders of bishopricks, partly because they undertook43 the defence of them against all ravenous oppressions and wrongs, partly44 in as much that it was not safe that rooms of so great power and consequence in their estate should without their appointment be held by any under them. And therefore45 that bishops even then did homage and took their oaths of fealty unto the kings which invested them. Thirdly46, that what solemnity or ceremony kings do use in this action it skilleth not, as namely whether they do it by word, or by precept set down in writing, or by delivery of a staff and a ring, or by any other means whatsoever, only that use and custom would, to avoid all offence, be kept. Some base canonists there are, which contend that neither kings nor emperors had ever any right hereunto, saving47 only by the pope’s either grant or toleration. Whereupon not to spend any further labour, we leave their folly to be controlled by men of more ingenuity and judgment even among themselves, Duarenus48, Papon49, Choppinus50, Ægidius51, Magister52, Arnulphus Rusæus53, Costlius54, Philippus Probus55, and the rest, by whom the right of Christian kings and princes herein is maintained to be such as the bishop of Rome cannot lawfully either withdraw or abridge or hinder.

But of this thing there is with us no question, although with them there be. The laws and customs of the realm approving such regalities, in case no reason thereof did appear, yet are they hereby abundantly warranted unto us, except some law of God or nature to the contrary could be shewed. How much more, when they have been every where thought so reasonable that Christian kings throughout the world use and exercise, if not altogether, yet surely with very little odds the same. So far that Gregory the Tenth56 forbidding such regalities to be newly begun where they were not in former times, if any do claim those rights from the first foundation of churches, or by ancient custom, of them he only requireth that neither they nor their agents damnify the Church of God by using the said prerogatives57.

Now as there is no doubt but the church of England by this means is much eased of some inconveniences, so likewise a special care there is requisite to be had, that other evils no less dangerous may not grow. By the history of former times it doth appear, that when the freedom of elections was most large, men’s dealings and proceedings therein were not the58 least faulty.

Of the people S. Jerome complaineth59 that their judgments many times went much awry, and that in allowing of their bishops every man favoured his own quality; every one’s desire was, not so much to be under the regiment of good and virtuous men, as of them which were like himself. What man is there whom it doth not exceedingly grieve to read the tumults, tragedies, and schisms, which were raised by occasion of the clergy at such time as, diverse of them standing for some one place, there was not any kind of practice, though never so unhonest60 or vile, left unassayed whereby men might supplant their competitors and the one side foil the other. Sidonius, speaking of a bishoprick void in his time61, “The decease of the former bishop,” saith he, “was an alarum to such as would labour for the room: whereupon the people, forthwith betaking themselves unto parts, storm on each side: few there are that make suit for the advancement of any other man; many who not only offer, but enforce themselves. All things light, variable, counterfeit: what should I say? I see not any thing plain and open but impudence only.”

In the church of Constantinople about the election of S. Chrysostom62, by reason that some strove mightily for him and some for Nectarius, the troubles growing had not been small, but that Arcadius the emperor interposed himself: even as at Rome the emperor Valentinian, whose forces were hardly63 able to establish Damasus bishop, and to compose the strife between him and his competitor Ursicinus, about whose election the blood of a hundred and thirty-seven was already shed. Where things did not break out into so manifest and open flames, yet between them which obtained the place and such as before withstood their promotion, that secret heart burning often grew64, which could not afterwards be easily slaked. Insomuch that Pontius doth note65 it as a rare point of virtue in Cyprian, that whereas some were against his election, he notwithstanding dealt ever after in most friendly manner with them, all men wondering that so good a memory was so easily able to forget.

These and other the like hurts accustomed to grow from ancient elections we do not feel. Howbeit, lest the Church in more hidden sort should sustain even as grievous detriment by that order which is now of force, we are most humbly to crave at the hands of our66 sovereign kings and governors, the highest patrons which this church of Christ hath on earth, that it would please them to be advertised thus much.

Albeit these things which have been sometimes done by any sort may afterwards appertain unto others, and so the kind of agents vary as occasions daily growing shall require; yet sundry unremovable and unchangeable burthens of duty there are annexed unto every kind of public action, which burthens in this case princes must know themselves to stand now charged with in God’s sight no less than the people and the clergy, when the power of electing their prelates did rest fully and wholly in them. A fault it had been if they should in choice have preferred any67 whom desert of most holy life and the gift of divine wisdom did not commend; a fault, if they had permitted long68 the rooms of the principal pastors of God to continue void; not to preserve the church patrimony as good to each successor as any predecessor did enjoy the same, had been in them a most odious and grievous fault. Simply good and evil do not lose their nature: that which was, is the one or the other, whatsoever the subject of either be. The faults mentioned are in kings by so much greater, for that in what churches they exercise those regalities whereof we do now entreat, the same churches they have received into their special care and custody, with no less effectual obligation of conscience than the tutor standeth bound in for the person and state of that pupil whom he hath solemnly taken upon him to protect and keep. All power is given unto edification, none to the overthrow and destruction of the Church.

Concerning therefore the first69 branch of spiritual dominion thus much may suffice; seeing that they with whom we contend do not directly oppose themselves against regalities, but only so far forth as generally they hold that no church-dignity should be granted without consent of the common people, and that there ought not to be in the Church of Christ any episcopal rooms for princes to use their regalities in. Of both which questions we have sufficiently spoken before.

← Vindication of the Prerogative regarding Chu · Contents · Their r power to command all persons, and to →

Footnotes

  1. [Vid. Sarav. De Imp. Auct. et Christian. Obedient. lib. iii. c. 37. “Sacerdotii præcipua pars relicta regibus.” In the coronation of the emperors of Germany at Aix la Chapelle, after their anointing, they put on a deacon’s habit: (Goldast. Polit. Imp. p. 71, 80, 95.) “quem amictum quondam imperator Carolus Magnus gestaverat.” ibid. p. 144.] ↩

  2. d the people. ↩

  3. e the. ↩

  4. f only om. ↩

  5. g sometimes. ↩

  6. Pseud. Ambros. in 4 ad Ephes. [v. 11, 12. “Non per omnia conveniunt scripta apostoli ordinationi quæ nunc in ecclesia est: quia hæc inter ipsa primordia sunt scripta. Nam et Timotheum presbyterum a se creatum episcopum vocat; quia primi presbyteri episcopi appellabantur; ut recedente eo, sequens ei succederet … Sed quia cœperunt,” &c. t. ii. Ap. 241.] ↩

  7. h judicio om. ↩

  8. i the favour. ↩

  9. In Vit. Cypr. [§ 5.] ↩

  10. k chose. ↩

  11. Nulla ratio. Dist. 63. [it should be 62. § 1. Dec. Grat. pars i. p. 311. He adds, “Nec a comprovincialibus episcopis cum metropolitani judicio consecrati.” See his Canonical Epistle to Rusticus, archbishop of Narbonne, t. i. 406, ed. Quesnel. circ. ad 450: and compare the canonical letter of Cœlestine to the bishops of Gaul, ad 428; can. v. “Nullusinvitis detur episcopus: cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensus et desiderium requiratur.” Conc. Hard. i. 1260.] ↩

  12. Ep. Honor. Imp. ad Bonif. Concil. tom i. [col. 1238. ed. Hard. “Beatitudine tua prædicante, id ad cunctorum clericorum notitiam volumus pervenire, ut si quid forte religioni tuæ (quod non optamus) humana sorte contigerit, sciant omnes ab ambitionibus esse cessandum. At si duo contra fas temeritate certantes fuerint ordinati, nullum ex his futurum penitus sacerdotem, sed illum solum in sede apostolica permansurum, quem ex numero clericorum nova ordinatione divinum judicium et universitatis consensus elegerit.” Circ. ad 419.] ↩

  13. l places. ↩

  14. m munificence. ↩

  15. n seasonable. ↩

  16. o the law. ↩

  17. 25 Ed. 3. [c. 6. A Statute of Provisors, reciting the Statute of Carlisle, 25 Edw. i. c. 4. preamble: “Whereas the holy Church of England was founded in the estate of prelacy within the realm of England, by king Edward and his progenitors, and the earls, barons, and other nobles of his said realm, and their ancestors, to inform them and their people of the law of God, and to make hospitalities, alms, and other works of charity, in the places where the churches were founded, for the souls of the founders, their heirs, and all Christians; and certain possessions, as well in fees, lands, rents, as in advowsons, which do extend to a great value, were assigned by the said founders to the prelates and other people of the holy Church of the said realm, to sustain the same charge, and especially of the possessions which were assigned to archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, religious and all other people of holy Church, by the kings of the said realm, earls, barons, and other great men of his realm; the same kings, earls, barons and other nobles, as lords and advowees, have had and ought to have the custody of such voidances, and the presentments and the collations of the benefices being of such prelacies.” &c. ad 1350.] ↩

  18. p to. ↩

  19. Ibid. [§ iii. “The election was first granted by the king’s progenitors upon a certain form and condition, as to demand licence of the king to chuse, and after the election to have his royal assent, and not in other manner.” Stat. at Large, by Ruffhead and Runnington, t. i. 260, 62.] ↩

  20. 25 Hen. VIII. c. 20. [§ iv. “Be it ordained and established by the authority aforesaid, that at every avoidance of every archbishoprick or bishoprick … the king … may grant to the prior and convent, or the dean and chapter of the cathedral churches or monasteries where the see … shall happen to be void, a licence under the great seal … to proceed to election … with a letter missive, containing the name of the person which they shall elect.” § vii. “If the prior and convent of any monastery, or dean and chapter of any cathedral church, … proceed not to election and signify the same according to the tenor of this act, within the space of twenty days next after such licence shall come to their hands: or else if any archbishop or bishop, … shall refuse, and do not confirm, invest, and consecrate, with all due circumstance … every such person as shall be so elected, nominate, or presented … . within twenty days next after the king’s letters patents … . shall come to their hands … . then every prior and particular person of his convent, and every dean and particular person of the chapter, and every archbishop and bishop, and all other persons so offending … . shall run in the dangers, pains, and penalties of the estatute of Provision and Præmunire:” i.e. imprisonment, outlawry, and forfeiture of lands and goods.] ↩

  21. C. Nullus, Dist. 63. [Decret. Gratian. pars i. dist. 62. § 3. “Nullus in episcopum nisi canonice electum consecret. Quod si præsumptum fuerit, et consecrans et consecratus absque recuperationis spe deponatur.” This is the tenth Canon of the first Lateran council, held under Calixtus II, ad 1123. See Concil. Hard. t. vi. pars ii. p. 1112.] ↩

  22. q for Cl. Tr. ↩

  23. Tom. i. Concil. [i. 1237. ed. Hard. “Ecclesiæ meæ, cui Deus noster meum sacerdotium, vobis res humanas regentibus, deputavit, cura constringit, ne causis ejus, quamvis adhuc corporis incommoditate detinear, propter conventus, qui a sacerdotibus universis et clericis, et Christianæ plebis perturbatoribus agitantur, apud aures Christianissimi principis desim.”] ↩

  24. Onuphr. [Onuphrius Panvinius, of Verona, 1529-1568, annotated and continued the Lives of the Popes, by Platina, 1421-1481] in Pelag. II. [in his note on Platina’s life of that pope, who was next before S. Gregory the Great; and of whom Platina had remarked, that owing to the Lombards who beset the city, he was elected without the emperor’s consent; ad 577: “Nil enim tum a clero in eligendo Pontifice actum erat nisi ejus electionem Imperator approbasset.” On which Onuphrius observes, “Gotthis Italia omni per Narsem Patricium pulsis, eaque cum urbe Roma Orientalis imperii parte facta sub Justiniano Imperatore, ex auctoritate Papæ Vigilii, novus quidam in comitiis Pontificiis mos inolevit. Is fuit, ut mortuo Papa, nova quidem electio more majorum statim a clero S.P.Q.R. fieret, verum electus Romanus Pontifex non ante consecrari atque ab Episcopis ordinari posset, quam ejus electio ab Imperatore Constantinopolitano confirmata esset, ipseque literis suis patentibus licentiam electo Pontifici concederet, ut ordinari et consecrari posset.” p. 75. ed. Colon. 1626.] ↩

  25. [Benedict II. ad 684. “Ad hunc Constantinus Imperator hominis sanctitate permotus, sanctionem misit, ut deinceps quem clerus, populus, exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegisset, eundem statim verum Christi vicarium esse omnes crederent; nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis aut Italiæ exarchi exspectata auctoritate, ut antea fieri consueverat.” Ibid. p. 93.] ↩

  26. [Grat. Decr. pars i. dist. 63. c. Hadrianus. (ad 774.) Carolus … “constituit synodum cum Hadriano papa in patriarchatu Lateranensi, in ecclesia Sancti Salvatoris: quæ synodus celebrata est a cliii episcopis religiosis et abbatibus. Hadrianus autem papa cum universa synodo tradiderunt Carolo jus et potestatem eligendi pontificem, et ordinandi apostolicam sedem … Insuper archiepiscopos et episcopos per singulas provincias ab eo investituram accipere definivit; ut nisi a rege laudetur et investiatur episcopus, a nemine consecretur: et quicunque contra hoc decretum ageret, anathematis vinculo eum innodavit.” col. 322. Lugd. 1572. This seems to have been altogether false, though a story current in the time of Gratian, (ad 1131,) who took it from an interpolated copy of the Chronicle of Sigebert. (ad 1101.) Vid. Pagi in Ann. Baron. iii. 341.] ↩

  27. [In council at Rome, ad 1080, in which Henry IV. was finally deposed, and Rodolph of Suabia confirmed emperor in his place. Canon i. “Sequentes statuta sanctorum patrum … decernimus … ut siquis deinceps episcopatum vel abbatiam de manu alicujus laicæ personæ susceperit, nullatenus inter episcopos vel abbates habeatur … Insuper etiam ei gratiam S. Petri et introitum ecclesiæ interdicimus” … ii. “Item, si quis imperatorum, regum, ducum, marchionum, comitum, vel quilibet sæcularium potestatum ac personarum investituram episcopatuum vel alicujus ecclesiasticæ dignitatis dare præsumpserit, ejusdem sententiæ vinculo se obstrictum esse sciat.” Conc. Hard. t. vi. pars i. col. 1587.] ↩

  28. r needeth. ↩

  29. C. Reatin. Dist. 63. [Decr. Grat. pars i. d. 63. § 16. “Reatina ecclesia, quæ per tot temporum spatia pastoralibus curis destituta consistit, dignum est ut brachio amplitudinis vestræ sublevetur, ac gubernationis regimine protegatur. Unde salutationis alloquio præmisso, vestram mansuetudinem deprecamur, quatenus Colono humili diacono eandem ecclesiam adregendam concedere dignemini: ut vestra licentia accepta, ibidem eum, Deo adjuvante, consecrare, valeamus episcopum.” circ. ad 847. The Church was greatly depressed at that time, the Saracens often ravaging Italy to the very gates of Rome.] ↩

  30. s of om. ↩

  31. t please, &c. ↩

  32. u highnesses. ↩

  33. Walthramus [Waleran, Bp. of Naumburg, 1089-1111] Naumburgensis, de Investit. Episcoporum per Imperator. facienda. [ap. Schardium, “Sylloge Historico-Politico-Ecclesiastica, de Discrimine Potestatis imperialis et ecclesiasticæ.” pp. 72-74, Argentorat. 1618, [published by Ulric Hutten, 1520.] The tract was written, ad 1109: by a German bishop, a strong partisan of the imperial side.] ↩

  34. [Plat. vit. Greg. VII. p. 165. ad 1373. “Adeptus pontificatum Gregorius, statim Henricum imperatorem admonet, ne deinceps largitione corruptus, episcopatus et beneficia alicui per simoniacam cupiditatem committat, aliter se usurum in se et delinquentes censuris ecclesiasticis.”] ↩

  35. x dealing. ↩

  36. [Viz. Sylvester, Gregory I. Adrian I. Leo (III?) Leo (IV?) and Benedict (III?) Walthram, 73 A.] ↩

  37. y further om. ↩

  38. z other om. ↩

  39. a hereunto. ↩

  40. [Ibid. “Legitur etiam de episcopis Hispaniæ, Scotiæ, Angliæ, Ungariæ, quomodo ex antiqua institutione, usque ad modernam novitatem, per reges introierint, cum pace temporalium, pure et integre.”] ↩

  41. b the. ↩

  42. [Ibid. p. 72. “Qui a primo Constantino gesta et decreta revolvit, patenter inveniet, quod per reges et imperatores et devotos laicos Romana ecclesia, aliæque in orbe terrarum ecclesiæ, in fundis et mobilibus ditatæ et exaltatæ sint; sibique tutelas et defensiones contra tyrannos et raptores retinuerint, ut gladius regalis et stola Petri sibi invicem subveniant, quasi duo cherubin conversis vultibus respicientia in propitiatorium.”] ↩

  43. c understood. ↩

  44. [Ibid. p. 73. “Episcopatus qui sub Romano degunt imperio, majoribus fundis et amplioribus vigent justitiis: et ideo propter majus scandalum a stola Petri disertius tractandi sunt: quia non omnes sunt Petrus, qui tenent sedem Petri.” . . “Postquam a Sylvestro per Christianos reges et imperatores dotatæ, ditatæ, et exaltatæ sunt ecclesiæ in fundis et aliis mobilibus, et jura civitatum in teloneis, monetis, villicis, &c… . . per reges delegata sunt episcopis; congruum fuit et consequens ut rex qui unus est in populo, et caput populi, investiat et inthronizet episcopum: et contra irruptionem hostium sciat cui civitatem suam credat, cum jus suum in domum illorum transtulerit.”] ↩

  45. [Ibid. “Longe ante decretum Adriani papæ, ejusque successorum, reges, qui erant uncti, et majores domus, investituras episcoporum fecerunt.”] ↩

  46. [Ibid. “Nihil refert, sive verbo, sive præcepto, sive baculo, sive alia re quam in manu tenuerit, investiat aut inthronizet rex et imperator episcopum, quo die consecrationis veniens, annulum et baculum ponit super altare, et in curam pastoralem singula accipit a stola et authoritate S. Petri. Sed congruum magis est per baculum, qui est duplex, i. e. temporalis et spiritualis.”] ↩

  47. d save. ↩

  48. [Francisci Duareni, [1509-1559.] Biturig. “De Beneficiis et ad ea pertinentibus, libri viii.” [Paris, 1551.] ap. Tract. Illustr. Jurisc. Ven. 1584. t. xv. pars ii. The author was accounted by Thuanus one of the most distinguished of the French jurists of the sixteenth century.] ↩

  49. [Jean Papon, a lawyer in the service of Catharine de’Medici, and author of a work called Notaire, or Secrets de Notaire, in three parts, in the third of which, b. iii. p. 155, &c. is a statement and vindication of the rights of the Crown of France in the matter of presentation to benefices.] ↩

  50. [“De Sacra Politia forensi,” [Par. 1577.] 1589. Vid. supr. c. ii. § 14. note 3.] ↩

  51. [Ægidius de Columna, archbishop of Bourges, †1316, contemporary with Boniface VIII. and tutor to Philip the Fair: in his “Quæstio de Utraque Potestate,” inserted by Goldastus in Monarch. S. Rom. Imp. t. iii. 95, &c.] ↩

  52. [Ægidius Magister, “De Regaliis,” in Tract. Illustr. Jurisc. t. xiii. pars ii. p. 437, &c.] ↩

  53. [Arnulphus Ruzæus, “De Jure Regaliæ.” [Par. 1534, 1551.] Ibid. t. xii. 357, &c.] ↩

  54. [Petrus Costalius, “Adversaria ex Pandect. Justin.” lib. i. p. 49. Colon. 1560.] ↩

  55. [Philippus Probus [= Prudhomme], Bituricus, “De Jure Regaliæ,” in Tract. Illustr. Jurisc. t. xii. 389, &c. v. Biog. Univ. Supplem. art. Ruzé].] ↩

  56. Cap. general. de Elect. i. 6. [In 2 Conc. Lugd. ad 1274, can. 12, Generali constitutione sancimus, universos et singulos, qui regalia, custodiam, sive guardiam advocationis, vel defensionis titulum, in ecclesiis, monasteriis, sive quibuslibet aliis piis locis, de novo usurpare conantes, bona ecclesiarum, monasteriorum, aut locorum ipsorum vacantium occupare præsumunt, quantæcunque dignitatis honore præfulgeant, … eo ipso excommunicationis sententiæ subjacere… . Qui autem ab ipsarum ecclesiarum cæterorumque locorum fundatione, vel ex antiqua consuetudine, jura sibi hujusmodi vindicant, ab illorum abusu sic prudenter abstineant, et suos ministros in eis solicite faciant abstinere, quod ea quæ non pertinent ad fructus sive reditus provenientes vacationis tempore non usurpent; nec bona cætera, quorum se asserunt habere custodiam, dilabi permittant, sed in bono statu conservent.” Conc. Hard. vii. 711.] ↩

  57. n prerogative. ↩

  58. o the om. ↩

  59. Hieron. adv. Jovin. i. [19. “Nonnunquam errat plebis vulgique judicium, et in sacerdotibus comprobandis unusquisque suis moribus favet, ut non tam bonum quam sui similem quærat præpositum.”] ↩

  60. p dishonest. ↩

  61. L. 7. Ep. 5. [“Ecclesia” (Bituricarum, i. e. Bourges,) “nuper summo viduata pontifice, utriusque professionis ordinibus ambiendi sacerdotii quodammodo classicum cecinit. Fremit populus per studia divisus: pauci alteros, multi sese non offerunt solum, sed inferunt. Si aliquid pro virili portione secundum Deum consules, veritatemque, omnia occurrunt levia, varia, fucata: et quid dicam? sola est illic simplex impudentia.” In Bibl. Patr. Colon. t. v. pars i. p. 1022.] ↩

  62. Theod. l. v. c. 27. Sozom. l. viii. c. 2. [ψηϕισαμένων δὲ του̑το του̑ λαου̑ καὶ του̑ κλήρου, καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς συνῄνει. Nectarius was his predecessor, not his competitor.] ↩

  63. [Amm.] Marcell. l. xv. [p. 24. c. 3. “Nec corrigere sufficiens nec mollire, coactus magna vi secessit in suburbanum.”] Socr. lib. ii. c. 27. et iv. c. 29. [(after the election,) συμπληγάδες τω̑ν ὀχλω̑ν ἐγίνοντο· ὥστε καὶ ἐκ τη̑ς παρατριβη̑ς πολλοὺς ἀποθανει̑ν, καὶ διὰ του̑το πολλοὺς λαικούς τε καὶ κληρικοὺς ὑπὸ του̑ τότε ἐπάρχου Μαξιμίνου τιμωρηθη̑ναι. ad 366.] Sozom. lib. vi. c. 23. ↩

  64. Socr. ii. 27. [Μακεδόνιος τω̑ν ἐκκλησιω̑ν ἐγκρατὴς… . Χριστιανικὸν ἐκίνησε πόλεμον, οὐχ ἥττονα ἢ ὑπὸ τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον ἐποίουν οἱ τὑραννοι. ad 356.] Soz. iv. 11. [ὡς εἰσήλαυνεν εἰς Ῥώμην ὁ βασιλεὺς, … πολὺς ἠ̑ν ὁ ἐνθάδε δη̑μος περὶ Λιβερίου ἐκβοω̑ν, καὶ δεόμενος αὐτὸν ἀπολαβει̑ν.] Theodor. ii. 15, 16, 17: [concerning the expulsion of Liberius bishop of Rome by the emperor Constantius, and the discontent of the people in his absence, ad 357.] ↩

  65. Pontius in Vit. Cypr. c. 5. [“Invitus dico, sed dicam necesse est. Quidam illi restiterunt, etiam ut vinceret; quibus tamen quanta lenitate, quam patienter, quam benevolenter indulsit! quam clementer ignovit, amicissimos eos postmodum, et inter necessarios computans, mirantibus multis! Cui enim posset non esse miraculo tam memoriosæ mentis oblivio?”] ↩

  66. q our om. ↩

  67. C. Sacror. Can. dist. 63. [Grat. Decr. i. from Capitul. Carol. et Ludovic. l. i. “Sacrorum canonum non ignari, ut in Dei nomine sancta Ecclesia suo liberius potiretur honore, assensum ordini ecclesiastico præbuimus, ut scil. episcopi, per electionem cleri et populi, secundum statuta canonum, de propria diœcesi, remota personarum et munerum acceptione, ob vitæ meritum et sapientiæ donum eligantur, ut exemplo et verbis sibi subjectis undequaque prodesse valeant.”] ↩

  68. C. Lectis. dist. 63. [from a letter of Stephen to a count Guido, relating to the consecration of a bishop for the church of Reate. “Scientes ecclesiam Dei sine proprio pastore non debere consistere, gloriæ vestræ mandamus, quoniam aliter nos agere non debuimus, ut a vestra solertia imperiali (ut prisca consuetudo dictat) percepta licentia, et nobis, quemadmodum vos scire credimus, imperatoria directa epistola, tunc voluntati vestræ de hoc parebimus, et eundem electum, Domino adjuvante, consecrabimus.”] ↩

  69. Archbishop Ussher has corrected this to fourth. ↩

Backlinks