Canons of Councils, Papal Decrees, and the many Collections. Footnote 282: See Lingard, ii. 126. After the appearance of the Collection of Ivo of Chartres (_b._ 1035, _d._ 1115),[283] and still more upon the compilation of Gratian’s Decretals (A.D. 1151), they began to rival, if not surpass, the Secular Courts in reputation and influence.[284] The Courts Christian were the defenders of dogma; in those times, without right believing nothing else profited. The Church Courts also enforced Christian morality. “The bishops,” says Archdeacon Cheetham,[285] “took cognizance, as was natural, of matters which were rather offences against the moral law than against the State, and sometimes succeeded in overawing even high-placed offenders.” “The doctrine of penance,” says Mr. Thrupp, “dealt with a series of immoralities which the laws disregarded.”[286] J. Johnson, _Laws and Canons_, ii. p. 189, note F., ed. 1851. N. Marshall, _Penitential Discipline_, p. 136. Footnote 283: Stubbs, _Charters_, p. 136. Footnote 284: Lingard, _Hist._ ii. p. 126. Footnote 285: _History of the Christian Church_, p. 171. Footnote 286: _Anglo-Saxon Home_, p. 254. Footnote 287: Lea, _Inquisition in the Middle Ages_, i. p. 312. Footnote 288: They would be brought before the Court by its apparitors, of whom there were many; citations were not to be made through the vicars, rectors, or parish priests, lest the secrecy of the confessional should become mistrusted and the people cease to confess their sins.—_Vide_ Archbishop Stratford, A.D. 1342, _C. Lond._ Can. 8. J. Johnson, _Laws and Canons_, ii. p. 371. Chaucer has given us a specimen of one of those “moral” agents in his account of the _sumptnour_ or _summoner_. Footnote 289: As usual, blackmailing was not infrequently resorted to. _Vide_ H. W. C. Davis, _England under Normans and Angevins_, p. 209. London, 1909. Footnote 290: See S. Pegge, _Life of Bishop Grosseteste_, p. 183. Footnote 291: S. Pegge, _Life of Bishop Grosseteste_, p. 46. Footnote 292: Some years later Archbishop Boniface, in his Constitutions, declared (17) that the State must not interfere with moral inquisitions. _Vide_ J. Johnson, _Laws and Canons_, ii. p. 205, ed. 1851; and observe “Note on Anselm’s Canons,” p. 28 of the same volume. Footnote 293: The visitations of the archdeacons were highly unpopular, creating any number of spies and informers; see _Ecclesiastical Courts Commission_, p. xxiv. London, 1883. Footnote 294: 1 Cor. vi. 3. Footnote 295: _Ibid._ 2. Footnote 296: Rufinus, _Hist. Ecc._ lib. i. cap. ii. p. 184, ed. of Basel. 1611. Footnote 297: On the packing and intimidating of juries until, as Wolsey observed, “they would find Abel guilty for the murder of Cain,” see W. Eden (Lord Auckland), _Principles of Penal Law_, p. 176. London, 1771. Footnote 298: