[Footnote 917: "The Lord Cromwell," says Bishop
Gardiner, "had once put in the King our late
sovereign lord's head, to take upon him to have his
will and pleasure regarded for a law; for that, he
said, was to be a very King," and he quoted the
_quod principi placuit_ of Roman civil law.
Gardiner replied to the King that "to make the laws
his will was more sure and quiet" and "agreeable
with the nature of your people". Henry preferred
Gardiner's advice (Foxe, ed. Townsend, vi., 46).]
[Footnote 918: _L. and P._, vii., 483, 647.]
[Footnote 919: _Ibid._, vii., 522.]
[Footnote 920: _Ibid._, vii., 665.]
[Footnote 921: _Ibid._, vii., 499.]
[Footnote 922: _Ibid._, vii., 841, 856. The order
had been particularly active in opposition to the
divorce (_ibid._, iv., 6156; v., 266.)]
In November Parliament[923] reinforced the Act of Succession by laying
down the precise terms of the oath, and providing that a certificate
of refusal signed by two commissioners was as effective as the
indictment of twelve jurors. Other acts empowered the King to repeal
by royal proclamation certain statutes regulating imports and exports.
The first-fruits and tenths, of which the Pope had been already (p. 325)
deprived, were now conferred on the King as a fitting ecclesiastical
endowment for the Supreme Head of the Church. That title, granted him
four years before by both Convocations, was confirmed by Act of
Parliament; its object was to enable the King as Supreme Head to
effect the "increase of virtue in Christ's Religion within this Realm
of England, and to repress and extirp all Errors, Heresies and other
Enormities, and Abuses heretofore used in the same". The Defender of
the Faith was to be armed with more than a delegate power; he was to
be supreme in himself, the champion not of the Faith of any one else,
but of his own; and the qualifying clause, "as far as the law of
Christ allows," was omitted. His orthodoxy must be above suspicion, or
at least beyond the reach of open cavil in England. So new treasons
were enacted, and any one who called the King a heretic, schismatic,
tyrant, infidel, or usurper, was rendered liable to the heaviest
penalty which the law could inflict. As an earnest of the royal and
parliamentary desire for an increase of virtue in religion, an act was
concurrently passed providing for the creation of a number of
suffragan bishops.[924]
[Footnote 923: _Ibid._, vii., 1377.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account