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
Mr. J. H. Round (_Geoffrey de Mandeville_, 3), speaking of Stephen’s
“oath” to restore the church her “liberty,” describes this as “a
phrase the meaning of which is well known.” If “well” known, it was
known chiefly as something vague, something which baffled definition,
because churchmen and laymen could never agree as to its contents,
while it tended also to vary from reign to reign. Mr. Round attempts
no definition. Sir James Ramsay (_Angevin Empire_, p. 475), writing of
the phrase as used in John’s Charter, is less prudent. "It would
relieve the clergy of all lay control, and of all liability to
contribute to the needs of the State beyond the occasional scutages
due from the higher clergy for their knights’ fees." This definition
assuredly would not have satisfied Henry I., as a legitimate
interpretation of the words as used by him in his Charter of
Liberties.
(2) _Canonical election._ A separate charter to the national church had
been granted on 21st November, 1214, and re-issued on 15th January,
1215.[346] Its tenor may be given in three words, “freedom of election.”
In all cathedral and conventual churches and monasteries, the
appointment of prelates was to be free from royal intervention for the
future, provided always that licence to fill the vacancy had first been
asked of the king. Now, _in words_, this was no new concession, but
merely a confirmation of the Concordat arrived at long before between
Henry I. and archbishop Anselm as a solution of the rival claims of
Church and State in the election of bishops and abbots.[347] The essence
of that arrangement had been to vest solely in the canons of the chapter
of the vacant diocese the nominal right to appoint the new bishop,
subject, however, to the actual election taking place in the royal court
or chapel—so that the king, being present, might endeavour to prevent
the appointment of any churchman he objected to. The result had not been
what Anselm and the papal court expected; Henry I. and his successors
strenuously used or abused the influence thus reserved to them: none but
royal favourites were ever appointed, and the nominally free canonical
election became a sham. Churchmen had long desired to remedy this:
Langton saw his opportunity, and on 21st November, 1214, secured from
King John, so far as mere words could secure anything, that the right of
election by the canons of the chapter should henceforth be transformed
from a pretence into a reality. The bishops present at Runnymede used
their influence to have a distinct confirmation of this recent
concession inserted in the very forefront of Magna Carta.
-----
Footnote 346:
Cf. _supra_, p. 39. The text will be found in _Statutes of the Realm_,
I. 5, and in _New Rymer_, I. 126-7. It was confirmed by Innocent on
30th March, 1215. See Potthast, _Regesta pontificum romanorum_, No.
4963.
Footnote 347:
Cf. _supra_, p. 22.
-----
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