III. distinction of being of the Rota. This is the more extra- CHAP. ordinary, if there be truth in the report of a speech attributed to him when Bishop of London. At that time he can hardly have had vision of the primacy, to which London was now beginning to be a stepping-stone. It is said that, in the midst of a vast multitude of pilgrims wending their way, in profound devotion, to the shrine of .S. Thomas in Canterbury, the Bishop reproved them for their superstitious folly, and told them that their hopes of the promised plenary indulgence were vain and idle.' Yet the tone of that speech is singularly accordant with the reproach heaped upon Sudbury by the High Church party, that his ignominious death was a just judgment for his lenity to the Wycliffites, now begin- ́ ning to be obnoxious. But it was not as Bishop of London, nor indeed as Archbishop of Canterbury, that Simon Sudbury met his miserable fate. He was beheaded by the insurgent rabble on Tower Hill, as chancellor, an office especially odious. That insurrection was against the Lawyers, not against the Clergy. 'Pull down the Inns of Court' was the cry: it does not seem that they approached or treated the Cathedral otherwise than with respect. Sudbury, indeed, was incautious in his language: he had called the rebels, 'shoeless ribalds.' His last words (we trust truly reported) were more in the spirit of his Divine Master. He died imploring the mercy of God upon his murderers. Did he learn the lesson at Avignon, or from the English Bible, now beginning to fly abroad? • Wharton, from William Chartham, a monk of Canterbury, perhaps a suspicious authority. CHAP. CHAPTER IV. S. PAUL'S, WYCLIFFE AND THE WYCLIFFITES. THE successor of Simon Sudbury in the see of London was a prelate of a very different character, WILLIAM DE COURTENAY, of that noble, even imperial house (he was son of the Earl of Devonshire); a churchman of the loftiest and boldest views, and of the most inflexible temper. The first act of Courtenay displayed the dauntless bravery of the man. He was consecrated, Sept. 10, 1375. In the next year the King (Edward III.), who was declining in age and authority (as Gray wrote, 'And sorrow's faded form, and solitude behind '), demanded a subsidy from the Clergy for the expense of his wars. Courtenay; in the full convocation at S. Paul's, protested against the grant, till the grievances of the Clergy and certain wrongs against himself and the Bishop of Worcester should be redressed. The Clergy, encouraged by Courtenay, refused the grant. But, before the end of the year, the King had his revenge. The Pope, Gregory XI., had launched an anathema against the Florentines. The Bull was distributed throughout Christendom. The Florentines, the great merchants of the world in every kingdom of Europe, being under the ban of outlawry, might be plundered with impunity. Bishop Courtenay, without permission from the Crown, caused the Bull to be publicly read at Paul's Cross. This was not only HUMILIATION OF COURTENAY. 75 a direct infringement of the Statute of Provisors, but a Of all Bishops, Courtenay would most strongly resent any invasion of the episcopal privileges, still more any audacious rebellion against the dominant doctrines of the Church. If in S. Paul's the haughtiness of the Primate of England and his determination to trample on the rights and privileges of the inferior Clergy of all ranks had been displayed by Archbishop Boniface of Savoy; if in S. Paul's he, not an Englishman (a galling circumstance), had assumed, not from the most exalted motives, an autocracy over the Church of England; if in S. Paul's the Wharton, in vitâ. CHAP. IV. IV. 76 HUMILIATION OF COURTENAY. CHAP. Papal power, in its legates Otho and Ottobuoni, had displayed and vindicated the complete despotism of the Pope as an irresponsible sovereign and legislator, so in S. Paul's was the first public appearance of the earliest champion of religious freedom, the rude apostle of principles which, matured, refined, harmonised, were to make a religious revolution in half Europe, to establish the Church of England as an important branch of the great Catholic Church of Christendom; a revolution which was not confined to any time, to any province, to any nation of the Christian world. : I transcribe the description of this scene, wrought out with the utmost care and truth in my former work :Wycliffe, exactly at this time, between the dissolution of the last Parliament and the death of the King, appears 'summoned to answer at S. Paul's before the Archbishop ' of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, for opinions 'deserving ecclesiastical censure. Of the specific charges ' on this occasion nothing is known; though they may be conjectured from those submitted to the Pope, and after'wards brought against him by the Papal mandate. Wy'cliffe stood before the tribunal, but not alone. He was 'accompanied by John of Gaunt and the Lord Percy, now Earl Marshal. There was an immense throng to witness this exciting spectacle; Wycliffe could not make his way through. The Earl Marshal assumed the authority of his office to compel the crowd to recede. The Bishop of London, no doubt indignant at the unlooked-for appear6 ance of the nobles, resented this exercise of the Earl 'Marshal's power in his church. He haughtily declared that if he had known how Percy would act, he would have inhibited his entrance into the cathedral. The 'Duke of Lancaster in his pride rejoined that, despite the bishop, the Earl Marshal would use the authority neces 6 6 6 sary to maintain order. They reached with difficulty the 'court in the Lady chapel. The Earl Marshal demanded ' a seat for Wycliffe. "He had many things to answer, ""he needed a soft seat." "It is contrary," answered 'Courtenay, "to law and reason that one cited before his 'Ordinary should be seated." Fierce words ensued between the Earl Marshal and the Bishop. The Duke of 'Lancaster taunted the family pride of Courtenay. The Bishop replied with specious humility, "that he trusted ""not in man, but in God alone, who would give him bold""ness to speak the truth." Lancaster was overheard, or 'thought to be overheard, as if he threatened to drag the 'Bishop out of the church by the hair of his head. The 'populace were inflamed by the insult to the Bishop, the insult to the city of London. The privileges of the city were supposed to be menaced by the Earl Marshal's assumption of authority within the jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor. A wild tumult began. The proceedings were 'broken up: Wycliffe, who all along had stood silent, re'tired. Lancaster and the Earl Marshal had doubtless 'sufficient force to protect their persons. But throughout the city the populace arose; they attacked John of 'Gaunt's magnificent palace, the Savoy; his arms were ' reversed like those of a traitor. The palace, but for the 'Bishop of London, would have been burned down. A 'luckless clergyman, mistaken for the Earl Marshal, was 'brutally murdered. The Duke fled to Kennington, where the Princess of Wales was residing with her young son. The rioters were appeased by a message from the Princess: but they demanded that the Bishop of Winchester 6 2 Lancaster was afterwards accused of a design to abolish the Lord Mayor, and to appoint a captain under the Crown; and that the Earl Marshal's power should be current in the city as in other parts of the kingdom. CHAP. IV. |