The writer has not discovered any formal repeal of the constitutions of Clarendon; but it is clear that, from the time of the decease of the archbishop, they ceased to be considered as law. This may be thought to favour the notion, that they were merely an exposition of the customs, and not a legislative enactment.-At a council held at Northampton, in 1176, it was provided, that "no clergyman "should be personally arraigned before a secular judge, for any crime or transgression, unless it "was against the law of the land, or regarded a lay fee." Here the matter appears to have rested till the reformation*.

66

66

"original, printed at Paris, 1718, by father Muston, alias "Browne, s. 1."

Candid protestants, also, have respected the memory of Becket. Collier's account of the controversy between him and his sovereign, (Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 343-377,) deserves a very serious perusal.

* Those, who seek for full information, upon the controversy between Henry the second and St. Thomas, should consult "Fides Regia Anglicana; sive Annales Ecclesiæ Anglicana: "ubi potissimum Anglorum catholica Romana et orthodoxa "fides, ab anno D'ni 1066 ad 1189, e regum et augustorum factis "et aliorum sanctorum rebus e virtute gestis asseritur auc. "R. P. Mitchaele Alfordo alias Griffith, Anglo, Societatis Jesu "Theologo. Leodii, 1663," in four large folio volumes. The fourth contains an account of the transactions between the king and the archbishop, extracted from ancient authors. He gives such copious extracts from these, as leave the reader, who wishes for original information, little to desire.

CHAP. V.

LEVIES ON ECCLESIASTICAL BENEFICES.

To answer the wants of the church, and supply other calls upon them, the popes frequently required from the secular and regular clergy pecuniary contributions, similar to those, which the temporal lords were entitled to receive from their feudatories. It has been said, that the demands of the popes on the English clergy were greater than those, which they raised on the clergy of any other state; and that this was owing to the ascendancy which the popes obtained in consequence of the surrender, which king John made of his crown to the Roman see. This event we shall notice in a future page; in the present chapter, we shall succinctly mention the complaints against the popes on account of the subsidies levied by them on the clergy.

The ascendancy, which the pope obtained by his arrangements with John, was increased by Henry the third, who succeeded that monarch in the throne. Immediately after his accession, he swore fealty to the sovereign pontiff; and in every vicissitude of fortune, treated the see of Rome with the highest respect and affection. In his reign, however, the English clergy began to remonstrate against its exactions.

The disputes between Gregory the ninth, and the emperor Frederick, involved the pope in great expenses: he demanded aid from his clergy; it

was cheerfully granted; but the demand was often repeated, and, under Innocent the fourth, became so frequent, as to occasion universal discontent, both among the clergy and the laity. The aid required, was generally a twentieth, but sometimes a much greater proportion of the annual income of every beneficiary, either of the first or the second order of the clergy; and of every ecclesiastical community that possessed revenues. The clergy remonstrated against these exactions in firm but temperate language; their remonstrance was accompanied by a letter from the king; but the complaint was disregarded. By degrees, the nation entered into the cause: the king, the bishops, the barons, and the abbots, wrote letters to the pope. The clergy proceeded in their letter so far as to hint to his holiness, that, "if he did not redress "their grievances, they should be forced them"selves to redress them; and that the interest of "the court of Rome in England would then be so "embarrassed, as to make it very difficult to re"store it to its former condition." The pope, however, persisted in his demands; the king veered to him, and the clergy compounded with the pontiff for 11,000 marks.

On some occasions, the pope and the king combined to enforce these levies from the clergy. Thus, when Innocent the fourth conferred the kingdom of Sicily on Edmund, the nephew of the king, they compelled the bishops and abbots to accept bills for 20,000l. drawn upon them in favour of the king by bankers at Venice and Florence. They further

ordered the general body of the clergy to pay into the exchequer of his majesty, during five successive years, a tenth part of their annual rents. They also placed at his disposal, during that period, one year's income of the vacant benefices, and the value of the goods of all clergymen, who died intestate. In like manner, during the war between Henry the third and the earl of Leicester, the pope granted to the monarch a tenth part of the revenues of the church for three years.

It should be added, that, through all the contests of Henry with the mad parliament as history has called it, and with the earl of Leicester its supporter, the the pope was uniformly attached to the royal cause nothing could be more wise or more suitable to his paternal character, than the advice which he gave to the monarch, on the victory gained by him at Evesham: "The news of it," says Mr. Lingard*, " filled the pope with joy: he

instantly wrote to the king and prince, to express "his gratitude to the Almighty for so propitious "an event; but, at the same time, earnestly ex"horted them to use with moderation the licence " of victory; to temper justice with mercy; to re"collect that revenge was unworthy of a christian, "and that clemency was the firmest pillar of a "throne."

It would, however, be doing a great injustice to the popes to suppose, that the money, which they received from the impositions which have been mentioned, was altogether employed in carrying

Hist. vol. ii.p. 358, cites Rymer, i. 817, 820.

on their wars, or in the support of their magnifi cence or pleasures. The wars, in which they voluntarily engaged, were not numerous. In their quality of sovereign princes, they had all the inherent rights of sovereignty to enforce and defend their claims by arms; but they seldom were aggressors: and it is not a little remarkable, nor a little to their honour, that it is difficult to specify a single instance, in which they increased their temporal territory by conquest. The whole even of their present possessions consists, with a small exception, of the patrimonies, which they successively inherited under the donations of Pepin, Charlemagne, Lewis, Lothaire, the emperor Henry Otho, and the countess Matildis.

Speaking therefore generally, the wars of the popes were wars of defence; and, considering how important it was to christendom, that their independence, as sovereigns of a respectable dominion*, should be preserved, and the constant aid which the clergy derived from them, their claims on these to contribute to the relief of their pressing wants, were natural, and certainly not always unreasonable.

Add to this, the heavy expenses inseparably incident to the obligation which the superintendence of all christian churches, (then universally acknowledged to be their prerogative duty),—and the propagation of the gospel in pagan countries, imposed on them.

* Haud contemnendi imperii, as his state is described by Bellarmine in his answers to James the first.