The works of John Dryden, now first collected in eighteen volumes. Volume 17Dryden, John
General
The works of John Dryden, now first collected in eighteen volumes. Volume 17
Dryden, John
English literature
The first is a person of unquestionable integrity, and accounted a
martyr for his conscience at that time, I mean Sir Thomas More, then
lord chancellor; who, after he had delivered to the House of Commons
the original papers of the universities in favour of the divorce, he
then said, “that all men should clearly perceive, that the king hath not
attempted this matter of will and pleasure, as strangers say, but only
for the discharge of his conscience, and the security of the succession
to the crown.” Which was a reason alleged by the king himself, and seems
to have been built on the grounds which Charles V. assigned for breaking
his oath, which he made to marry the Lady Mary, by the first article of
the treaty at Windsor. Lord Herbert owns,[105] that the emperor, to avoid
the force of this treaty, had alleged something against the marriage
between the king and his aunt. But another author, who lived much
nearer the time, doth affirm,[106] “that, when the match was debated in
the Spanish council, it was then said, that although the match between
the king and his brother’s relict were not yet disputed, yet, if the
king should die without issue male, rather than the kingdom should
pass to foreigners, the English nation would dispute the validity of
the marriage;” and to confirm this, in Sir Henry Spelman’s Manuscript
Register of the proceedings of the Legatine Court about the divorce,
subscribed by the three notaries there present, the witnesses deposed,
“that at the time of the marriage, the people said commonly, that it was
unfit one brother should marry the other brother’s wife.” And archbishop
Warham, then upon oath, declared, “that he told King Henry VII., that the
marriage seemed to him neither honourable nor well pleasing to God;” and
he confesses the people then murmured at it, but that the murmuring was
quieted by the Pope’s dispensation: So that all the satisfaction that
was given about it, arose from the Pope’s extraordinary dispensing power
with the laws of God, which was a thing vehemently opposed by many in the
church of Rome; and the university of Bononia itself afterwards declared,
“that the match was abominable, and that the Pope himself could not
dispense with it;” and this they say was “after they had read Cardinal
Cajetan’s defence of the marriage.” The like was done by the university
of Padua, besides many others which I shall not mention, and are easily
to be seen.
So that the succession to the crown by this match must depend upon an
extravagant power in the Pope, which the Roman church itself never
owned, and the wisest statesmen thought by no means fit to depend upon.
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