Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 26.djvu/91

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

liable to penalty. The speaker was sent to make strong remonstrances to the king, who replied that he would not be dictated to, as he might have pardoned the clergy himself without consulting them. The king presently appeased the ferment by sending a separate pardon for the laity.

The convocation of York sat a little later, and with much reluctance agreed to buy the king's pardon and to recognise his headship in the same manner as that of Canterbury had done, though on the latter subject Bishop Tunstall of Durham protested, at least as to the ambiguity of the title, lest it should be supposed to confer spiritual jurisdiction on the king. Henry took this remonstrance in good part, and wrote to Tunstall in answer to his objections, hinting, however, that the bishop, who on the subject of the divorce had advised him to conform his conscience to that of the majority, might on the same principle have acquiesced in the resolution of the convocation of Canterbury. It was characteristic of Henry thus to meet argument by argument; but his intention was to subdue all spirit of resistance in the church, and it was by his secret instigation next year that the House of Commons were encouraged to prefer to him their celebrated ‘supplication against the ordinaries.’

This was a complaint of the mode of procedure in spiritual courts, of the excessive fees taken for probates, and of the uncharitable demeanour of some of the bishops, with a petition that they should be made to submit their laws to the king and ask his assent to them. It was presented to the king on 18 March 1532, accompanied by another petition, which was much more genuine and spontaneous, desiring that he would now dissolve parliament and let the members return to their own homes. The king replied gravely that on the question between them and the prelates he would hear both sides; but it was very inconsistent to ask for immediate release when they were petitioning for redress of grievances. Moreover, he had sent them a bill concerning wards and primer seisin, to mitigate the loss of feudal dues sustained by the crown through the legal device called ‘uses’ for willing away lands, which bill he expected them to pass, otherwise he would ‘search out the extremity of the law,’ and not offer again so favourable a compromise. In spite of this threat the commons rejected the bill. They were, however, compelled to sit again after Easter, while Henry referred their ‘supplication’ to the bishops in convocation, who returned a very temperate reply. Parliament was at the same time asked for aid to fortify the borders against the Scots, on which two members gave expression to the general discontent, declaring that the Scots could do no harm without foreign aid, and that if the king would take back his wife and cultivate friendly relations with the emperor the peace of the country was secure. Henry was much displeased, rebuked the commons for meddling with the divorce question, which was purely a matter of ecclesiastical law, and hinted that it depended upon him to redress their grievances against the church. On 30 April he sent for the speaker, and handed him the answer of the bishops for the house to consider, saying that he thought it would hardly satisfy them.

On 11 May he again sent for the speaker and twelve of the commons, and expounded to them a new grievance he had discovered against the church. Spiritual men were but half his subjects; they took an oath of obedience to the pope as well as to himself, and the two oaths were inconsistent with each other. He had already taken one step the day before to remedy the matter by laying before the convocation of Canterbury certain articles designed to deprive the church thenceforth of all power of synodical action without his express permission. And as the House of Commons was thus instigated to interfere with their liberties the clergy saw that it was useless to resist. On the 15th they made a full submission, and thus the freedom of the church of England came to an end. More, who had long been dissatisfied with the king's proceedings, straightway resigned the great seal and retired from public life.

A month before this Friar Peto had preached before Henry at Greenwich, warning him that he was imperilling his crown by putting away his wife and endeavouring to marry Anne Boleyn. To correct the mischief one of the royal chaplains was set to preach in the same place next Sunday, and contradicted Peto. On this another friar named Elstowe at once replied in Peto's behalf, and in Henry's presence denied the statement that all the universities were in favour of his divorce. Henry was intensely angry, and had both the friars arrested. But although he had his own preachers to set forth the nullity of marriage with a brother's widow, he did not convert the people to his views. When he moved about they would clamorously urge him to take back Catherine, and the women spoke insultingly of Anne Boleyn. The pope, too, was taking notice of his scandalous proceedings, and, not content with two briefs already issued to restrain him from a second marriage while his suit remained undecided, sent him yet a third, dated 15 Nov.