Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical IntroductionMcKechnie, William Sharp
History
Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical Introduction
McKechnie, William Sharp
Constitutional history -- England -- Sources; Law -- England -- History; Law -- England -- Sources; Magna Carta
These alterations show traces of some influence at work hostile to the
national Church. Not only is the promise of canonical election
withdrawn, but the omissions of the clauses regulating intestate
succession and guaranteeing freedom to leave the kingdom (a privilege
highly valued by the clergy) seem to prejudice the interests of
English churchmen. Now the papal legate was an active supporter of the
re-issue of this Charter in 1216; whereas Rome, in the crisis of June,
1215, had been bitterly opposed to the original grant of Magna Carta.
The inference is that Rome did not protest against these omissions to
the prejudice of the English Church. Why was this? The explanation
probably lies in the divergence of the interests of the national
Church from those of the Church universal. Canonical election, for
example, was nothing to Rome; successive Popes made provision for
their favourites more readily in England by bringing pressure to bear
on the King than on the monks of the various chapters. Henry III.
habitually acted on the omission; creating wide-felt discontent by
filling the English sees partly with his own foreign favourites, and
partly with ecclesiastics nominated by the Roman Curia. The King and
the Pope thus entered into a tacit partnership for their mutual
benefit at the expense of the English national Church.
-----
(5) These various alterations implied, incidentally rather than
deliberately, the omission of all mention of such constitutional
machinery as had found a place in the words of John’s Great Charter. The
twenty-five Executors fell with the other temporary provisions; while
chapter 14, which defined the composition and mode of summons of the
_Commune Concilium_, was omitted as a matter of course, along with
chapter 12, to which it had merely formed a supplement. It was
apparently thought unnecessary to make any mention of the Council, and
this attitude may be explained partly on the ground that the framers of
the new deed took for granted its continued existence in the future as
in the past, and partly by the consideration that its vital importance
as a constitutional safeguard had not yet been realized. Chapter 14 of
1215, to which much importance is invariably attached by modern writers,
probably held quite a subordinate place in the minds of its framers and
was abandoned altogether in 1216, never to be replaced.[242]
-----
Footnote 242:
It is notable that it failed to find a place in the Charter of 1225,
which was paid for by the nation at the price of one-fifteenth of
moveables.
-----
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