vested in a queen the same as in a king,' and that all statutes in which a king was named applied equally to a queen.1 Under Henry VIII. there is only one instance, in 1532, Reviving indepenwhen the Commons refused to pass a bill recommended by dence of the the Crown. But under Edward VI. and Mary, they on Commons. several occasions rejected bills sent down from the Upper House; and we have seen how they insisted upon the insertion in the Act of Edward VI. creating new treasons, of the provision requiring proof of the offence by the testimony of two witnesses in open court. creation of rotten elections. These indications of reviving independence on the part Met by the of some of the Commons were met by the creation of rotten boroughs and by the direct interference of the boroughs and by inCrown in elections. Edward VI. created or restored fluencing the twenty-two boroughs, of which at least half, including seven in Cornwall, were places of no kind of importance. Mary added fourteen to the number, and Elizabeth, in a similar manner, increased the representation in Parliament by no less than sixty-two members. The interference of the Crown in elections was exerted in the most open manner. In 1553 Edward VI. directed a circular letter to all the sheriffs, commanding them to apprize the freeholders, citizens, and burgesses of their respective counties, 'that our pleasure and commandment is, that they shall choose and appoint, as nigh as they possibly may, men of knowledge and experience within their counties, cities, or boroughs;' and especially that whenever the Privy Council, or any of them, having instructions on the King's behalf, should 'recommend men of learning and wisdom, in such case their directions be regarded and followed.' Accordingly several persons-all of them. belonging to the Court, or in places of trust about the King -were recommended by letters to the sheriffs, and elected as knights for different shires. The writs for the Parlia 1 I Mary, sess. 3, c. I. 2 Hallam, Const. Hist., i. 46, citing Strype, ii. 394. The drafts of the circular letters are preserved in Lansdowne MSS. 3, cited in Froude, v. 464. n. In some instances the orders of the Crown were sent direct to the ment summoned by Mary in 1554, to sanction the return of the country to obedience to the Apostolic See, were accompanied in like manner by royal circulars requiring the mayors, sheriffs, and other influential persons to admonish the electors to choose as their representatives 'such as, being eligible by order of the laws, were of a wise, grave, and Catholic sort; and the Earl of Sussex, one of the Queen's councillors, wrote to the electors of Norfolk and to the burgesses of Yarmouth requesting them to reserve their votes for the persons whom he should name. candidate himself. The Council, in a letter to Sir P. Hoby, inform him that his Majesty hath willed us to signify unto you this his pleasure to have you one of the Commons House, which thing we also require you to foresee, that either for the county where ye abide ye be chosen knight, or else otherwise to have some place in the House, like as all others of your degree be appointed. And herein, if either his Majesty or we knew where to recommend you, according to your own desires, we would not fail but provide the same. Harl. MSS., 523, in Froude, v. 465. 1 Froude, vi. 260. These general directions were copied from a form which had been in use under Henry VII. 2 Burnet, ii. 228. CHAPTER XI. THE REFORMATION IN ENGLAND. of The Rea under Henry The VIII. political and legal and rather than formation Doctrinal ward VI. THE separation of the Church of England from that Rome, formally accomplished under Henry VIII., was political and legal rather than a religious reformation. doctrinal changes which followed under Edward VI. Elizabeth, were an unintentional consequence, to which religious. Henry and his Parliament more than once declared them- changes selves utterly repugnant. But in reality the Reformation, under Edin both its political and religious aspects, was the effect of and Elizabeth, an uncauses which had been in operation for centuries, not only intentional in England, but throughout Europe. 'No revolution,' says consequence Hallam, has ever been more gradually prepared than that Both were which separated almost one half of Europe from the com- causes long munion of the Roman see; nor were Luther and Zwingle in operation. any more than occasional instruments of that change, which, had they never existed, would at no great distance of time have been effected under the names of some other reformers. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, the learned doubtfully and with caution, the ignorant with zeal and eagerness, were tending to depart from the faith and rites which authority prescribed.'1 the effect of continuous The national In England, the Church, from its first institution, had Early and always possessed a marked national character. spiritual primacy of the Pope and his authority in matters character of the English of faith were reverently admitted, but the relation was Church. rather that of mother and daughter than of master and 1 Const. Hist. i. 57. servant; while the exorbitant claims of jurisdiction and territorial power asserted by Hildebrand and his successors, together with the pecuniary exactions founded on those claims, were persistently, though with varying degrees of firmness, resisted by the English kings and people. Growth of Prior to the Norman Conquest, Church and State in Papal power from the England were so intimately united that they were practiConquest till the reign of cally identical. William of Normandy, to further his Henry III. designs on England, entered into an alliance with the Papacy; and when the Conquest—which it had been his object to present to the eyes of Europe somewhat in the light of a crusade-had been effected, the ecclesiastical power was to a great extent separated from the civil power and placed in much closer communion with and subordination to the Papal Sec. But anxious as he was to propitiate the See of Rome, William was careful not to surrender the ancient supremacy of the State over the national church. Still, the impetus given by the Conquest to the Papal power in England caused it to go on rising, until-notwithstanding the partial checks which it received under Henry I. and Henry II., on the questions of investitures and clerical immunity from civil jurisdiction -it reached its acme under John and Henry III. For one hundred and fifty years succeeding the Conquest the right of nominating the archbishops, bishops, and mitred abbots had been claimed and exercised by the King. This right had been specially confirmed by the Constitutions of Clarendon, which also provided that the revenues of vacant sees should belong to the Crown. But John admitted all the Papal claims, surrendering even his kingdom to the Pope, and receiving it back as a fief of the Holy See. By the Great Charter the Church recovered its liberties; the 1 For the maternal status of the Church of Rome we have the authority of S. Bernard and of Hildebrand. . . . ante omnia S. R. Ecclesiam, cui Deo auctore praeses, Ecclesiarum Matrem esse non Dominum, te verò non Dominum episcoporum sed unum ex ipsis.' S. Bernard, De Consid. cap. vii. lib. iv. Dei Ecclesia, quae Mater et Domina nostra est.' Greg. VII. Lib. V. Epist. 20. 2 Supra, p. 70. right of free election being specially conceded to the cathedral chapters and the religious houses. Every election was, however, subject to the approval of the Pope, who also claimed a right of veto on institutions to the smaller church beneficcs, the small monasteries and parish churches which were in the hands of private patrons, lay or ecclesiastical. There was thus in the Pope's hands,' remarks an eminent historian, an authority of an indefinite kind, which it was presumed that his sacred office would forbid him to abuse; but which, however, if he so unfortunately pleased, he might abuse at his discretion. He had absolute power over every nomination to an English benefice; he might refuse his consent till such adequate reasons, material or spiritual, as he considered sufficient to induce him to acquiesce, had been submitted to his consideration. In the case of nominations to the religious houses the superiors of the various orders residing abroad had equal facilities for obstructiveness.' Under Henry III. the power thus vested in the Pope and foreign superiors of the monastic orders was greatly abused, and soon degenerated into a mere channel for draining money into the Roman exchequer. resists the tions. Parliament VIII. Edward I. firmly withstood the exactions of the Pope, Edward T. and re-asserted the independence of both Church and Papal claims Crown. To the letter of Boniface VIII. claiming to be and exacfeudal lord of Scotland and commanding Edward I. to Answer of withdraw his troops from that kingdom and submit his the English pretensions to the decision of the Papal See, the Parlia- to the letter ment of England returned a very emphatic repudiation of of Boniface the Pope's temporal jurisdiction. 'The Kings of England,' they said, 'have never pleaded, or been bound to plead, respecting their rights in the kingdom of Scotland, or any other their temporal rights, before any judge, ecclesiastical or secular. It is, therefore, and by the grace of God shall always be, our common and unanimous resolve that with respect to the rights of his kingdom of Scotland, or other his temporal rights, our aforesaid lord the King shall not 1 Froude, Hist. Eng., ii. 3. D D |