VI tion of monaste episcopal they would have been had they been communities of CHAP clergymen. But the 4th canon of the Council of Chalcedon (the 4th General Council, held A.D. 451) forbad the erection of any monastery without the consent of the bishop in whose diocese it was to be situated, and required all monks to be under episcopal supervision as if they were clergymen. This was generally observed for a time, but some were galled by the yoke, and immunities began to be asked for by and granted to founders." These immunities Exempwere gradually extended, until in the eleventh century monasteries often escaped altogether from the ries from jurisdiction of the bishops by a grant of exemption control from the Pope, which released them from all ecclesiastical supervision except his own. St. Bernard protested strongly, in a letter to Eugenius III., against such exemptions, as did also the successor of St. Thomas a Becket in the see of Canterbury to Alexander III. Several councils protested against them also, and succeeded in gaining some concessions from the Popes as to the rights of bishops over monks in their dioceses. Baronius says that the exemption of the Franciscan order from episcopal jurisdiction was contrary to the wish of the founder, Not the and was obtained in spite of him; and as the friars intention were intended, both by St. Dominic and St. Francis, greatest to be assistants to the parochial clergy, it seems. impossible that either of them could have contemplated such exemption for their orders. Notwithstanding all this opposition, however, the monks and 5 Van Espen., III. xii. 2, 3. 6 Conc. Lateran, 1123, Canons 17, 18; Conc. Lateran. 1179, Canon 9; Conc. Lateran, 1215, Canon 12. A vigorous attempt 6 to procure the abolition of exemp- of the VI CHAP friars became very generally freed from the jurisdicdiction of their bishops, and subjected only to that of the Pope. Many abbots, although only priests, were allowed to use the mitre and crosier, and to exercise the same jurisdiction within their monasteries as the bishops themselves did outside their walls, and even to confer the minor orders. And Discipline thus the disciplinary system of the Church—a system thus much which must be regarded as of Divine institution—was of Church relaxed to a great extent subverted; and the more monks and friars there were in holy orders the more clergy there were freed from the proper jurisdiction of their proper bishop who was within reach, and subject only to that of the Bishop of Rome, who (at the best) could exercise his usurped jurisdiction only by a deputy. The consequence was that monasteries were practically placed outside of the system of the Church; and every English bishop had a large number of clergy within his diocese over whom he had no control,' either in person, or by his archdeacons. The very first principle of the Divine system of episcopacy was perverted; and, in effect, disregarded altogether. And when it is remembered and its first that by means of their appropriations, the monks principles had become responsible for a large proportion of the parochial duty in every diocese, it will be evident that the integrity of the Church system was very seriously invaded by the upgrowth of this wrong custom in the monastic system. When Wolsey was preparing for the Reformation of the Church, it was his first care to undermine the vast obstacle which perverted ? Some fragmentary relics of this system of exemption still exist the shape of Donatives," in 66 which are exempt from episcopal, and "Peculiars," which are exempt from archidiaconal jurisdiction. VI such exemptions from diocesan jurisdiction offered to CHAP all progress in that direction; and by persevering application at Rome, he obtained an authority over all monasteries as legate a latere, which he would doubtless have used as a lever for the restoration of proper jurisdiction to every bishop. were very effect It will thus be seen that the increase of monas- Such evils teries in England had been accompanied by two important very serious evils, the suppression of which would in their have been perfectly lawful, since they interfered with the general welfare of the body politic and the body ecclesiastic. How far excessive wealth and excessive liberty led to other evils is a question upon which no certain verdict can be given, through the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence which has come down to us. This subject will, however, be brought before the reader again in a subsequent page. But even supposing there was no extraordinary wickedness among the monks of the sixteenth century, it must be admitted that there were strong arguments for reforming the monastic sys- and quite justified tem; that it had wandered into wrong principles as plans for regards its relations both to the Church and the reformaState; and that it is extremely probable these deviations in principle had led to practical abuses which contemporary lookers-on saw very clearly, and which we too should see clearly if we had more perfect records of those distant times.s 8 Wolsey issued a commission (as legate a latere) to the Bishop of Sarum, empowering him to visit the nunneries of his diocese, and proceed against such as were guilty of "enormities, misgover T nances and slanderous living." tion CHAP though no of Henry VIII.'s confisca tions If, however, these constitutional errors of the monastic system were to be represented as influencing Henry VIII. in respect to his project of dissolution, we should be fairly open to the charge of making a fine-drawn apology for a fallen angel real excuse whose de-nigration is beyond the power of an impartial historian. The accomplishment of his will and the furtherance of his interests were the only objects which Henry set before himself, and the only apology that can justly be made for him is that he was not wholly without constitutional authority and precedent in taking the course which he did. The dissolution was immediately suggested to him, no doubt, by the steps which Wolsey had taken towards Suggested converting many monasteries into colleges and sey's dis- bishoprics, and amalgamating the smaller ones with solution of the larger. To do this it was necessary that the monasteries to be converted should first be dissolved, and the Cardinal had proceeded so far with his plans as to have actually dissolved the thirty or forty whose revenues were applied to the foundation of Christ Church and Ipswich Colleges. Thus a pathway had been made, and the machinery had been of which constructed; and Cromwell, Henry's chief agent in Cromwell dissolving the monasteries, had already learned in an agent what direction to go, and how to use the machinery of dissolution, while in the service of his old master the Cardinal. by Wol. religious houses Other precedents There were also royal precedents for dissolution, the knowledge of which would doubtless weigh with Henry when the project was once entertained. The Bromehall, in the year 1521, and 64. Brewer's Calend. St. Pap., iii. 2080, 2630.] VI dissolved Knights Templars had been dissolved in the time of CHAP Edward II.; and by a bull dated November 22, 1307, Clement V. had given the custody of their Templars lands in England to the King until further orders A.D. 1307 were sent from the Apostolic See. The ultimate disposition of these lands was, however, taken into consideration by Parliament, and an Act was passed [17 Edw. II. cap. 3] in 1324, which declared as follows:-(1) That the King and other lords of the fees might well and lawfully, by the laws of the realm, retain the lands as their escheats in regard of the dissolution of the order. (2) But because the lands had been given for the defence of Christians, and the Holy Land against Pagans and Saracens and other enemies of Christ and the Church, it is enacted that neither King nor any other person shall retain those lands, notwithstanding any law or custom of the realm. (3) Wherefore the King with the assent of his Parliament assigns them to the Brethren of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. More than a century later, Henry V. dissolved a number of “alien and alien priories," cells of French monasteries whose inmates A.D. 1416 seemed likely to be dangerous while he was carrying on his war with France. But with some of their lands he founded the noble monasteries of Sheen and Sion, and others he gave to New College and Winchester. It does not appear, therefore, that either but proof these kings was so bold as actually to appropriate alienated to secular use the whole of the property which had from the once been set apart for sacred objects and thus 9 Johnstone's Assurance of Abbey Lands, p. 40. Rymer states that Clement granted these lands, and the King confirmed the grant on Nov. 28, 1313: but that, not- priories perty not Church |
