Acts and Monuments Volume 1

Armachanus.

IN the Catalogue of these learned and zealous defenders of Christ against Antichrist above rehearsed, whom the Lord about this time began to raise up for reformation of his Church, being then far out of frame, I cannot forget nor omit something to write of the reverend Prelate, and famous Clerke Richard Armachanus, primate and Archb. of Ireland: A man for his life and learning so memorable, as the condition of those days then served, that the same days then as they had but sewe good, so had none almost his better. His name was Richard Fizraf, made primate and Archb, as is said, of Ireland. First brought up in the university of Oxford, in the study of all liberal knowledge, wherein he did exceedingly profire under John Bakenthorpe his tutor and instructor. In this time the begging Friers began greatly to multiply and spread, unto whom this Bakenthorpe, was ever a great enemy. Whose steppes the scholar also following, began to do the like. Such was the capacity and dexterity of this Fizraf, that he being commended to king Edward the 3. was promoted to him, first to be Archdeacon of Lichfield, then to be the commissary of the university of Oxford. At length to be Archbishop of Armach in Ireland. He being Archbishop, upon a time had cause to come up to London: At what time here in the said city of London was contention between the Friers and the clergy about preaching, and hearing confessions &c. Whereupon, this Armachanus being requested to preach, made 7. or 8. sermons. Wherein he propounded 9. conclusions against the Friers, for the which he was cited up by the Friers before this pope Innocent the 6. to appear, And so he did, who before the face of the pope valiantly defended, both in preaching & in writing the same conclusions, & therein stood constantly unto the death, as the words of John Wycliffe in his Trialogo do well testify in this wise:

. The like also testifieth of him Waldenus in fasciso zizianniorum. Also Volateranus reporteth the same. Gulielmus Botonerus testifying of him in like manner, saith: that Armachanus first reproved begging Friers for hearing the confessions of professed nonnes, without license of their superiors, and also of married women without knowledge of their husbands. What dangers and troubles he sustained by his persecutors, and howe miraculously the Lord delivered him from their hands: In so much, that they meeting him in the open streets and in clear day light, yet had no power to see him, nor to apprehend him. In what peril of thieves and searchers he was in, and yet the Lord delivered him, yea and caused his money being take from him, to be restored again to him by portions, in time of his necessity and famine. Also from what dangers of the kings officers, which coming with the kings letters laid all the hauens for him: yet howe the Lord Jesus delivered him, showing him by what ways how to escape them. Moreover, what appeals were laid against him, to the number of 16. and yet how the Lord gave him to triumph over all his enemies. How the Lord also taught him & brought him out of the profound vanities of Aristotle's subtlety, to the study of the Scriptures of God. All this w ^t much more, he himself expresseth in a certain prayer or confession made to Christ Jesus our Lord, in which he describeth almost the whole history of his own life. Which prayer I have to show in old written hand, and hereafter (Christ willing) intend as time serveth to publish the same. The beginning of the prayer in latin is this.

. With the rest that followeth in the foresaid prayer.

Thus what were the troubles of this good man, and how he was cited up by the Friers to the P. you have partly heard: Now what were his reasons and arguments wherewith he defendeth his cause in the popes presence, followeth to be declared. For the tractation whereof first I must put the reader in remēbrauce of the controversy mentioned before in the story of Guliel de sancto de Amore. Pag. 322. Also in the story of the university of Paris contending against the Friers pag. 392. For so long did this controversy continue in the Church, from the year. 1240. whē y ^e Oxford men began fies • to stand against the Friars to the time of this Armachanus, that is, to the year 1360. and after this time yet more increased. So it pleased the secret providence of God (for what cause he best knoweth) to suffer his Church to be entangled and exercised sometimes with matters and controversies of no great importance. Either to keep the vanity of men's wits thus occupied frō idleness, or else to prepare their minds by these smaller matters, to the consideration and searching out of other things more grave and weighty. Like as now in these our Queens days, we see what tragidies be raised up in England about forms &, fashions of ministers wearinges, what troubles grow, what placing and displacing there is about the same: Even so at this time happened the like stir about the liberties and priuilegies of the Friers, which not a little troubled, and occupied all the churches & Divines almost through Christendom. The which controversy, to the intent it may better be understanded (all y ^e circumstances thereof being explained) we will first begin from the original and foundation of the matter, to declare by order and course of years, upon what occasion this variance first rising, in continuance of time increased & multiplide in gathering more matter, and brast out at length to this tumultuous contention among learned men.

Concerning therefore this present matter, first it is to be understand, that in the year of our Lord. 1215. under pope Innocent the 3. was called a general council at Lateran, mentioned before. Pag. 253. in the days of king John. Iu the which council among many other things, was constituted a certain law or Canon, beginning Omnis vtrius{que} sexus. &c. the tenor of which canon in English is thus.

In the time of this Innocentius, and of this Lateran council, was Dominic, the first author and founder of the preaching Friars: who labored to the said Pope Innocent, for the confirmation of his order, but did not obtain, in his life tune.

The next year after this Lateran council, died pope Innocent. an. 1216. after whom came Honorius 3. who in the first year of his Popedom confirmed the order of the frier Dominic, and gave to him and his fryers authority to preach and to bear confessions, with diverse other priuilegies more. And under this Pope which governed 10. years, lived Dominick five years after y ^• confirmatiō of his order and died an. 1221. About which year, the order of the Franciscane Friers began also to bread, & to spread in the world, through preaching and hearing confessions.

After this Honorius next followed Pope Gregory the 9. about the year of our Lord 1228. who for the promoting of the forsayd order of Dominickes, gave out this Bull, in tenor as followeth.

This pope Honorius died about the year of our Lord 1241. after whom came Celestinus the fourth and sat but 18. days, then came Innocentius the fourth and sat 11. years and 6. months. who although he began first to favor the friers: yet afterward being altered by certain Divines of Universities, Prelates of Churches, and Curates: and debarred them of their liberties and priueledges, & gave out again precepts and excommunications, as well against the Friers, as all other religious persons. And not long after the same he was dispatched.

Innocentius being thus removed out of the way, about the year of our Lord, 1353. Then succeeded Pope Alexander the fourth a great mayntainer of the Friers, and sat 7. years. He revoked and repeated the Acts and writings of Pope Innocent his predecessor, given forth against the Friers: wherewith the Divines and Students of Paris benig not well contented, stirred up four principal Doctors: The first and chief captain was Guliel. de sancto Amore, mentioned before. pag. 322. against whom wrote Albertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquine. And at last he was condemned by this foresaid Pope Alexander the 4. in the Extrau. Non sine multa. The second was Simon Iornalensis, the third, Godfridus de Fontibus, the iiii. Henricus de Gandauo. These four with other their complices, compiled a certaiene book against the begging order of Friers, both Dominicans, and Franciscās entitled, Depericulis Ecclesiae, cōreiningxim chapters. whereof the 14. which is the last, with 39. articles against the Friers we have already translated and expressed, pag. 317. Beside these. 39. articles, be other vii. articles moreover to the said book annexed, under the name of the students of Paris against the Friers, proving why the said Friers ought not to be admitted into their society. which vii. articles because they are but short, I thought here better to place, then to omit them.

Besides these articles above rehearsed, certain propositions or conclusions were also propounded in the schools of Paris the same time, solemnly to be disputed and defended against the Friars: which in a brief some of words to collect, were these.

First, that the begging Friers were not in the state of salvation.

Secondly, that they were bound to labor with their hands that could, and not to beg.

Thirdly, that they ought not to exercise the office of preaching, or to hear the confessions of them that will come to them, although being licensed thereunto by the Bishop of Rome, or by the Diocesan: for so much as the same is prejudicial to the ministers and Priests of the Parishes.

All these foresaid articles & conclusions, w ^t the book set forth by these Paris men: This Pope Alexander the 4. condemned to be abolished and burned, writing his precepts to the French K. and also the University of Paris, in the favor of the Friers: willing and commanding the said Friars to be restored to all their priueledges and liberties, in as ample manner as in Pope Gregory's time before.

Not long after Pope Alexander the 4. followed Clement the 4. an. 1263. and sat 3. years. Who also gave the privilege to the Friers, beginning: Quidam temere &c. In which priueledge he condemneth them that say, that no mā without license of his Curate or minister, ought to confess him to the Friers, or that a subject ought to ask license of their ministers so to do, which was against the Canon Omnis vtriusque sexus &c. made by the Pope Innocent the 3. before recited.

After this Clement, again came Pope Martin the 4. an. 1281. who renewed again the Canon. Omnis vtriusque sexus ; in the behalf of the Curates against the Friers.

Then Pope Boniface the 8. began to sit, an. 1294, viii. years. ix. months. Who taking side with the Friars, gave to them another privilege, beginning, Super Cathedram. &c. In the which privilege he licensed the Friars, that without license of Uicares of Churches, they shall first present themselves to the Prelates to be admitted: by whō if they be refused the second time, then they upon special authority of this Pope, shall be priueledged: without either Bishop or Curate, to preach, to bury, and to hear confessions who soever will come to them, revoking all that was decreed by his predecessors before to the contrary notwithstanding.

By this Pope Boniface, a certain Dominick Frier was made Cardinal named Nicholaus de Teruisio, and after the death of Boniface, was made also Pope. an. 1303. surnamed Pope Benedictus 11. Who seeing the constituciō of Boniface his predecessor to gender dissension between the Prists and Friers, made another constitution, beginning: Inter cunctas &c. revoking the constitution of Boniface his predecessor. Upon which constitution of Pope Benedict, Johannes Monachus, make a Glose, revoked also his other Glose made upon the constitution of Boniface before.

Again, after this Benedictus the 11. followed pope Clement the 5. an. 1335. and sat 9. years, who in his general Council holden at Vienna, revoked the constitution of Benedictus his predecessor, and renewed again the former decree of Boniface, by a new constitution of his, beginning: Dudum a Bonifacio. 8. &c. which constitution moreover was confirmed afterward by Pope John the 22. an. 1316. which Pope also caused Johannes de Poliaco to recant.

Upon this variable diversity of the Popes (one dissēting and repugning from another) rose among the Divines & scholemen in Universities great matter of contention, as well in the Uniuersity of Paris, as the Uniuersity of Oxford about the begging Friers, some holding one way, some another way. But especially 5. principal opinions to be noted of learned men, who thē disputing against the friers, were condemned for heretics, and their assertions reproved.

The first, was the opinion of thē which defended, that the friers might not by the license of the Bishop of Rome and of the Prelates, preach in Parishes, and hear confessions. And of this opinion was Guliel. de Samcto Amore, with his fellows, who as is said, were condemned.

The second opiniō was this, that friers, although not by their own authority, yet by privilege of the Pope and of the Bishop, might preach and hear confessions in Parishes, but yet not without license of the Parish Priests. Of this opinion was Bernardus glossing upon the canō. Omnis vtriusque sexus, afore mentioned,

The third opinion was, that friers might preach and hear confessions, without license of the Parish Priests: but yet the said parishners notwithstanding were bound, by the Canon: Omnis vtriusque sexus : to repeat the same sins again, if they had no other, to their own proper curate: and of this opinion were many, as Godfridus de Fontibus: Henricus de Gandauo: Johannes Monachus Cardin: Johannes de Poliaco. Which Johannes de Poliaco, Pope John the 22 caused openly in Paris, to recant and retract.

This Johannes de Poliaco Doctor of divinity in Paris, being complained of by y ^e friers for certain articles or assertions, was sent for to the Pope: where time and place being to him assigned, he in the audience of the Pope and of Frierly Cardinals & other doctors: was straitly examined of his articles. To make the story short, he at length submitting himself to the authority of the terrible see of Rome: was caused to recant his assertions openly at Paris. His assertions which he did hold, were these.

The three assertions of Johannes de Poliaco, which he was caused by the Pope to recant at Paris.

His three assertions.
• Whereof the first was, they which were confessed to friers, although having a general license to hear confessions: were bound to confess again their sins to their own Parish Priest, by the constitutiō. Omnis vtriusque sexus. &c.
• The second was, that the said constitution, Omnis vtriusque sexus, standing in his force, the Pope could not make: but parishners wer bound once a yere to confess their sins to their Priest. For the doing otherwise importeth a contradiction in it self.
• The 3. was, that the Pope could not give geuerall license to hear confessions so, but y ^• the parishners so confessed were bound to reiterate y ^e same confession made, unto his own Curate. Which be proved by these places of the Canon law, 25. q. 1. Quae ad per. petuam. Those things which be generally ordained for public vtilitye, ought not to be altered by any change, &c. Item, the decrees of the sacrat Canons, none ought to keep more then the Bishop Apostolical. &c. Ibidem. Item, to alter or to ordain anything against the decrees of the fathers, is not in the authority or power, uo not of the Apostolical sea. Ibidem.

The fourth opinion was, that the Friers by the license of the Pope and of the Bishops might lawfully hear confessions, and the people might be of them confessed and absolved. But yet notwithstanding, it was reason, convenient, honest and profitable, that once in the year they should be confessed to their curats (although being confessed before to the friers) because for the administration of Sacraments, especially at Easter. Of which opinion was Gulielinus de monte Landuno. Henricus de Gandauo also held, not only to be convenient, but also that they were bound so to do.

The fifth opinion was, that albeit the Friers might at all times, and at Easter also, hear confessions as the Curates did: yet it was better and more safe, at the time of Easter to confess to the curates, thē to the Friers. And of this opiniō was this our Armachanus, of whom we presently now entreat.

And thus have ye, as in a brief sum opened unto you, what was the matter of contention between the friers and the Church men. What Popes made with the friers: and what Popes made against thē. Moreover, what learned mē disputed against them in Paris, and other places, and what were their opinions.

The matter of contention about the Friers, stood in four pointes. First preaching without license of Curates, Second, in hearing confessions. Thyrd, in burying. Fourth in begging and taking of the people.

Popes that maintained the Friers.

were Honorius.

3

were Gregorius.

9

were Alexande.

4

were Clemens

4

were Boniface.

8

were Clemens.

5

Popes that mainteiued Curates

were Innocentius.

9

were Innocentius.

4

were Martinus.

4

were Benedictus.

11

The learned men that disputed against the Friers.

were Guilielmus de S. Amore.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Barnardus super capitulum, Omnis vtriusque sexus,

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Godfridus de Fontibus.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Henricus de Gandauo.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Guilielmus de Landuno.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Johannes Monachus Cardini.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Johannes de Poliaco.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

were Armachanus.

All these were condemned by the Popes, or else caused to recant.

These considerations and circūstaunces hitherto premised, for the more opening of this present cause of Armachanus sustained against the idle beggarly sects of friers, in whom the reader may well perceive Antichrist plainly reigning, and fighting against the Church: Now remaineth, that as I have before declared the trauelles & troubles of diverse godly learned mē in the Church striving against the said friers, continually from the time of Guliel. de Amore, hitherto: So now it remaineth, that for so much as this our Armachanus laboring and in the same cause sustained the like conflict with the same Antichrist: we likewise collect and open his reasons and arguments uttered in the consistorye and in the audience of the Pope himself wherewith he maynteyneth the true doctrine and cause of the Church against the pestiferous canker creeping in, by these friers after subtle ways of hypocrisy, to corrupt the sincere simplicity of Christ's holy faith & perfect Testament. The which reasons and arguments of his, with the whole process of his doings: I thought good and expedient for the utility of the Church, more amply and largely to discourse and prosecute, for that I note in the sects, institutions, and doctrine of these friers, such subtle poison to lurk: more pernicious & hurtful to the religion of Christ and souls of Christians, then all men peradventure do consider.

Thus Armachanus joining with the clergy of England, disputed and contended with the friers here of England an. 1358. about a double matter. Wherof the one was concerning confessiō and other exchetes which the friers encroched in parish Churches against the Curates, and public pastors of Churches. The other was concerning willful beggary and poverty, which the Friers then took upon them, not upon any necessity being otherwise strong enough to work for their living, but only upon a willful and affected profession. For the which cause the Friers appealed him up to the court of Rome. The occasion whereof thus did rise.

It befell, that Armachanus upon certain business coming up to London, found there certain Doctors disputing and contending about the begging of Christ our Savior. Wherupon (he being greatly urged and requested oft times therūto) at request, made seven or eight sermons unto the people at London, wherein he uttered 9. conclusions. Wherof the first and principal conclusion was, touching the matter of the friers privileges, in hearing confessions. His conclusion was this.

First, that if a doubt or question be moved for hearing confessions, which of 2. places is rather to be chosē. The parish church is to be preferred before the church of the friers.

Secondly, being demanded whether is to be taken (to hear the confession of the parishioners the Parson, or the Curate, or the frier) It is to be said, rather the Parson or the Curate.

Thirdly, that our Lord Jesus Christ in his human conuersatiō was always poor, but not that he loved poverty, or did covet to be poor.

Fourthly, that our Lord Jesus Christ did never beg, willfully professing to be poor.

Fifthly, that our Lord Jesus Christ did never teach willfully to beg, or to profess willful beggary.

The sixth conclusion was, that Christ our Lord did contrary, that men ought not willfully or purposely without mere necessity to beg.

Seuēthly, that there is neither wisdom nor holiness, for any man to take upon him willful beggary, perpetually to be observed.

The eight, that it is not agreing to the rule of the Obseruants, or Friers Minorites, to observe willful poverty.

The last conclusion was, touching the Bull of Pope Alexander the 4. which condemned the libel of the masters of Paris: that the same Bull touched none of these 7. last conclusions.

Upon these 9. conclusions premised, Armachanus being appealed, cited, and brought up to the presence of the Pope: began to prove the same his foresaid conclusions or assertions under protestation made, that his intētion was not to affirm anything contrary to the Christian faith, or to the Catholic doctrine, or that should be preiudicial or destructive to y ^e orders of the begging friers, such as were approved by holy Church, or confirmed by the high Bishops: But only his intētiō was, to have the said orders reduced to the purity of their first institution. Concerning which matter, he desired his reasons to be heard, which if they should be found weaker then the reasons of the friers, the punishment should be his. If otherwise, that then the friers justly to be rewarded, for their slaūderous obtrectation and public cōtumelies, & injurious dealings both privately and publicly wrought and sought against him: And so taking for his Theame: Nolite iudicare secundum faciem, sed iustum iudicium iudicate. &c. That is. Judge not after the outward face, but judge true judgment. &c. John. 7. he entereth to the probation of his conclusions: First beginning with the former conclusion, that the Parish church was a place more fit and convenient, for the confessions or burials of the Parishioners to be used, then any other exempt Church or place of the Friers. Which he proved by three causes: First for the more surenes or certainty to the conscience of the Parishioners confessed. Secondly, for the more utility and profit of him. Thirdly, for the less incommodity ensuing by confessions taken in Parish churches, then in friers Churches.

As touching the first, for the more assurednesse and certeinty, thus he argued upon the place of Deu. 12. unto that place, which y ^e Lord your God shall assign of all your tribes, to place his name and dwell therein: thither shall you resort, to offer up your oblations, tithes. &c. And the same place God saith: See thou offer not thy sacrifice in every place that liketh thee: but in that place alone which the Lord hath elect in one of the tribes, and thou shalt do in all things as I command thee. Also upon the words of Levite. 4. and 5. which be these. Whosoever sinneth of ignorance, shall offer to the priest, and he shall pray for him, and he shall be forgiven &c. Upon these places thus he argued: that forasmuch as the Sacraments of the Church are to be frequented and used in no other place but only in that, which by God himself peculiarly is assigned and commanded for the same: And seeing that elect place in the law representeth the Parish Churches: neither can it be proved that the Friers Church is the place prescribed of God, but only permitted by Bishops of Rome: He concluded therefore, that Parish Churches for confessions and burialles, were more sure and certain to the conscience of Parishioners, then the exempt places of the Friers.

By another reason also he confirmed the same, for that the parish Church commonly standeth free frō the Popes interdict, so do not the Churches of the Friers. As which stand not so clear, but that they are under suspicion, and doubt of the Popes interdict: by the Decretal. De sepulturis in sexto. cap Animarum periculis. In which Decretal, all such conuentuall Churches and Churchyardes of Friers be interdicted, which do induce any person or persons, either by oth or promise made, to choose their burying places in their churches, as commonly the friers are reported to do. For else what parishner would forsake his own church & parish where his ancestors do lie, to be buried among the Friers, if the Friers did not induce thē so to do:

Moreover for the second part, concerning the utility of the place, that he confirmed doublewise. First, for that confessiō made within the parish church, hath a double merit of obedience, both for obeying the commandment of God in opening his confessiō thus he speaketh according to y ^e blindness of that time, for that auricular confessiō hath any commandment of God, cannot be proved: & also in obeying the commandment of God in observing the place by him appointed, y ^• which second merit of obedience lacketh in y ^e Friers part. Secondly, he proved to be greater utility for a parishioner to confess him in his parish Church, thē with the Friers. Because commonly the number of Christian people praying, is ten times more in parish churches. Whereby is to be thought, that ech singular persō may better be helped through moe prayers, then in the Oratories of the Friers, &c.

Farther as touching the third part of the first conclusion or Article he proved, that it had fewer incōmodities to resort every man to his parish Church, then to the friers: for that both great vtilitye, and more certaynety (as hath ben proved) did ensue thereof: which two being take away, (as must need, in resorting to the friers Church) thē two special commodities should be hindered, & so great incommodities thereof should follow. And thus much for y ^e place of the friers.

Now to the second conclusion or Article touching the person of the frier, and of the ordinary Curate. If the questiō be, which of these two is to be preferred in the office of Ecclesiastical administratiō: the opinion of Armachanus was, that the ordinary Curate was better then the extraordinary frier, and that for the three foresaid respects, to wit, for certainty or assurance, for utility, and for incommodity to be avoided.

First that it is more safe and sure for the parishioners to resort to their ordinary or parish priest, he argued by 3. reasons: first because the person of the lawful ordinary or priests is expressly of God commanded, where the persō of the frier is not, and therefore is forbid. Secondly, because the parishner may more trust to his ordinary Curate, as who is more bound & obliged to provide and to be careful for him, then any other extraordinary person, Thirdly, because in the person of the ordinary curate, commonly there is no doubt of any interdict to bind him: whereas contrary in the friers be half: there is good matter to doubt, whether he stand bound under the popes censure of excommunication or not, and that for diverse causes, as by the cap. Religiosi, in Clemētinis de decimis. Where is decreed, that all such religious mē, which having no benefices or cure of soul, presume to improperate unto them glebe land or other tithes due unto Churches, and not appertaining to them (by any manner of color or fraudulent circumvention) do incur the sentence of excommunication, ipso facto. Also by another cap Religiosi, De priuilegijs. in Clement. Where it is said, that all such religious men are excommunicated De facto, whosoever do absolve any, against whom the sentence of excommunication hath been denounced by statute provincial, or sinodal: as it is commonly said, that the friers hearing mens confessions are accustomed to do, in loosing them whom the censure of prelates, or their Officials have bound. Wherof the said Armachanus bringeth forth example of his own Dioces: For I (said he) in mine own Dioces of Armachan, have as good as two thousand under me, who by the censure of excommunication every yere, denounced against willful murderers, common thieves, burners of men's houses, & such like malefactors, stand accursed: Of all which number notwithstanding, scarcely 14. there be, which come to me or to any about me for their absolution. And yet all they receive the Sacraments as other do, & all because they be absoyled, or because they fain themselves to be absoyled by none other then by friers: who in so doing, are proved to be under the danger of excommunication, both the friers, and also the parishners, if they knowing thereof do consent to their error.

Also out of the said Clementines, by three other places in one chapter, he proved the friers to be excommunicate, to with in the chap. Cupientes, De poenis in Clement. In y ^• which chapter: First, all such religious men are excommunicate, which in their Sermons presume to withdraw their hearers from their tithes paying, due unto churches. Secondly, in the said chapter all such friers are suspended from preaching, and so are excommunicate, which within a certain time did not make a conciō to such as come to their confessions, in paying their tithes truly and duly to the Church. Thirdly, in the foresaid chapter also, all such religious persons be bound in excommunication, which induce men by any manner of means, either by vow, oath, or promise, to choose their burials within their Churches, or not to change the same, if they have made any such promise before. In all which three points, he proved the friers to be culpable and excommunicate.

Moreover, for the more surer way for y ^• parishners to resort to their appointed curates, thē to y ^e friers, he argued thus. For that the parish Priest or Curate being better acquainted with his own parishner thē is a stranger, can better judge of the nature and dispositiō of his disease, and minister to him due Phisick of penance for the same, and also will be more careful in curing him.

Thus the first part of the second conclusion or article being proved and argued, Armachanus proceedeth farther to prove the second part: that is better for the parishners to leave the Friers, and to resort to their own Pastors. Which he proved by eight or nine reasons.

First, for that the ordinary pastor, is properly appointed of God unto that ministry: Whereas the Frier, is but only permitted of man thereunto.

Secondly, for that in resorting to the ordinary of the parish, is a double reward of merit, whereas in coming to the Friers there is but one.

Thirdly, because the ordinary is more bound to his own flock, and is to be thought to be more tender and careful over them, then a stranger.

Fourthly, because to resort to the person of his own ordinary, there is more assurance and certainty, (as is above declared) then to another.

Fifthly, because (as Innocentius, Cap. Si animarum, saith) the coming to the curate or pastor ordinary, is more easy and light, both in the night and in necessity.

Sixthly, for so much as the parishner must needs come to his Curate at some time, and especially being in necessity: It is expedient and profitable, that his former life before were known to him, rather then to the other.

Seventhly, for that (as the said Innocentius affirmeth) it striketh more shame of his sin to the parishner to be confessed to his curate whom he seeth every day, then to a frier unknown.

Eighthly, because it is more profitable especially for thē that live in Matrimony, that he which heareth the confession of the one, should hear also the confession of the other. So that one hearing the confession of them both as a spiritual Physician taking two cures in one body, may better know what spiritual counsel is to be ministered to the one, after he hath cured the other, &c.

These things thus proved before, then Armachanus consequently proceedeth to the third part: Arguing, how the greater detrimentes and inconveniences do ensue by confessions, burials, and other Ecclesiastical functions exercised by the friers, then by pastors & secular curats, serving in parishes. About the which matter, the said Armachanus learnedly and worthily inferreth a long discourse proving and inferring how pernicious these orders of friers are to the whole state of the church: And what mischief cometh by the privileges of certain Popes, which have privileged them to intermeddle in the office & function of Ecclesiastical ministers, to preach, and to take alms, and tithes of the people, and improperations from the church. All which his reasons & arguments to prosecute in order as he hath left them in writing, it would make a matter of a large book. Notwithstanding, because it shall not be unfruitful both for the time present & the posterity, to know the manifold de • rimetes and discommodities received by these friers, and to know what benefit God hath done for us in vnburdening the Church of this monstrous generation: And especially because the book of Armachanus is rare otherwise to be found, intituted, Defensorum Curatorum : I have briefly therefore contracted out of the same, certain of his reasons, such as seemed most appertaining and most worthy of noting.

And first, alleging the authority of Innocent the 4. He importeth four incōueniēces rising by the friers, whibe these: Contempt of the people against their ordinaries, decreasing of devotion, taking away of shame frō the people by confessing to the friers, deteining of oblations, such as the people are wont to give at their confessiō & burials, and which by right belong to the parish churches.

Item, by the said privileges of the Popes, granted to the friers, many other great enormities do rise. As first because thereby, the true shepherds do not know the faces of their flock.

Item, by the occasion of these privileges, given to the Friers, great contention, and sometimes blows rise between the friers and secular curates, about tithes, improperations, and other auayles.

Item, by the occasion of the foresaid privileges, diverse young men as well in universities as in their fathers houses, are allured craftily by the friers their confessors, to enter their orders: from thence afterward, they cannot get out though they would, to the great grief of their parents, and no less repentance to the young men themselves. The example whereof, Armachanus in the said his treatise inferreth, of a certain substantial English man being with him at his Inn in Rome: who having a son at the university of Oxford, which was enticed by y ^• friers to enter into their order, could by no means after release him out. But whē his father & his mother would come unto him, they could not be suffered to speak with him, but under the friers custody. Whereas the Scripture commandeth plainly, that who so stealeth any man & selleth him (being thereof convicted) shall be put to death. Exod. 21. And for the same cause, the father was compelled to come up to Rome to seek remedy for his son. And thus saith Armachanus, it may appear what damage and detriments come, by these friers unto the common people.

And no less inconvenience and danger also by y ^e said friers, riseth to the Clergy: for so much, as lay men seeing their childrē thus to be stollē frō thē in the universities by y ^e friers, do refuse therefore to send thē to their studies: Rather willing to keep them at home to their occupation, or to follow the plough, then so to be circumuēted and defeated of their sons at the university, as by daily experience (saith he) doth manifestly appear. For where as in my time (saith Armachanus) there were in the university of Oxford 30000. students: now are there not to be found 6000. The occasion of which so great decay, is to be ascribed to no other cause, but to this circumvention only of the friers above mentioned.

Ouer and besides this, another inconvenience as great or greater, the said Armachanus inferred to proceed by the friers, through the decay of doctrine, and knowledge in all manner faculties and liberal sciences, which thus he declared. For that these begging friers through their privileges obtained of the Popes, to preach, to hear confessions, and to bury: and through their charters of improperatiōs, did grow thereby to such great riches and possessions by their begging, craving, catching and intermeddling with church matters, that no book could stir of any science, either of Divinity, law, or Physic, but they were both able and ready to buy it up. So that every convent having a great library full stuffed and furnished with all sortes of books, and being so many couents within the realm, & in every convent so many friers increasing daily more and more: by reason thereof, it came to pass, that very few books or none at all remain for other students. Which by his own experience he thus testifieth, saying: that he himself sent forth to the university four of his own Priests or chaplaynes, who sending him word again y ^t they could neither find the Bible, nor any other good profitable book of diuinitye meet for their study, therefore were minded to return home to their country: and one of them, he was sure, was returned by this time again.

Furthermore, as he hath proved hitherto, the Friers to be hurtful both to the laity, and to the clergy: so proceeding farther, he proveth them to be hurtful also to themselves. And that in 3. points, as incurring the vice of disobedience against God, against their own rule: The vice of avarice: and the vice of pride. The probatiō of all which points, he prosecuted in a long discourse.

First (saith he) they are disobedient to the law of God: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house, Ox nor Ass, nor anything that is his: In that they procure the Popes letters to preach in Churches, and to take burials from churches, with license annexed withal to receive the avails which rise of the same, which properly belongeth to the right of parish priests.

Item, they are disobedient to this rule of the Gospel: So do to other, as thou would have done to thee.

Itē, they be disobedient against their own rule, which being founded upon straight poverty and beggary, this license obtained for thē to require necessary for their labors of the people, is repugning against the same foundation.

Item, they be disobedient to the rule of the Scripture, which saith: let no man take honor unto him, except he be called, as Aarō, Also saith S. Paul, how shall they preach, unless they be sent. And how observe they this rule of obedience, who professing to keep the perfection of the Gospel, yet contrary to the Gospel, procure to thenselves privileges to run before they be sent▪

Itē, to their own rule they are disobedient: For where their chapter saith, that if any will take vpō them this order, & will come to our brethren: let our brethren first send them to the prouincials to be examined of the Catholic faith and Sacraments of the Church. &c. Cōtrary whereunto the friers have procured a privilege, that not only the prouincials, but other inferiors also may take unto them indifferently, whom they can catch: so far without all examination, that almost at this day there is no notable house of friers, wherein is not either a whole, or half a convent of lads & boys under 10. yere old, being circūuented, which neither can skill of the Creed nor Sacraments.

Agayne, the rule of Frauncise saith: that his brethren Obseruaunts must observe not to preach in the Dioces of any bishop, without the consent of the Bishop: And moreover the said Frauncise in his testament saith: that if he had as much wisdom as Solomon, and found poor secular priests in the parishes where the dwell: yet he would not presume to preach without their will, and also would fear, love, & honor them, & all other as his masters, & so they be Haecille. Against which rule, how the friers do disobey, how little they reverence Bishops or secular priests: what privileges, exemptions, & immunities they procure against them, the world may see and judge.

Itē, when none may be admitted to preach, or to hear confessions, unless they be entered into orders: and seeing by the commō law of the Church, none must be admitted into holy orders, except he have sufficient title of living and clothing: The friers therefore having no such title (being willful beggars) do disobey in both respects, that is, both in entering into such orders without convenient title, and in exercising the office of preaching without such lawful orders.

Moreover the foresaid Frauncise in his testament commandeth thus: I command (saith he) firmly by virtue of obedience, to all and singular my brethren wheresoever they be: that none of them presume to obtain in the court of Rome any letter or writing, either by himself or by any other means, neither for the Church nor for any other place nor under any color of preaching, nor yet for the persecuting of their own bodies &c. Against which testamen of Francise, the Franciscans in procuring their privileges from the Bishop of Rome, have incurred manifest disobedience, as all the world may see. Neither will this obiectiō serve them, because the Pope hath dispensed with Francise rule. For if the testament of Francise as he saith came from GOD, (and so should God have three testaments) how then can the Pope repeal his precept, or dispense with his rule, when by the rule of the law. Par in parem non habet imperium ?

Secondly, concerning the vice of avarice, manifestly it may be proved upon them (saith Armachanus) for else, seeing so many charges belong to the office of a secular parish priest, as to minister the Sacrament at Easter, to visit the sick with extreme unction to baptize childrē, to wed, with such other wherein standeth as great devotion: how then happeneth that these friers making no labor for these, only procure to thenselves privileges to preach in churches, to hear confessions, and to receive license to bury frō parish churches but because there is lucre and gain in these to be looked for, in the other is none?

Which also may appere by this: for otherwise if it were for mere devotion only, that they procure license to bury from parish churches, and to preach: why then have they procured with all, license to take offerings? oblations and legacies for their funerals. And for their preaching, why have they annexed also license to require and take of the people necessaryes for their labor, but only avarice is the cause thereof.

Likewise for hearing of confessions: whē all good men have enough to know their own faults, and nothing lift to hear the faults of other: It is probably to be supposed by this their privilege of hearing all men's confessions, that they would never have been so desirous of procuring that privilege, were it not that these friers did fele some sweetness and gain to hang upon the same.

Item, where the rule of frier Francise forbiddeth them to company with any womē, to enter into Monasteries, to be Godfathers and Gossips to men and women: how cometh it, that they contrary to their rule, enter into the secret chambers of Queens and other women: and made to know the most secret counsels of their doings, but that avarice and commodity have so blinded their eyes, & stirred their hearts.

Thirdly, that the friers fall into the vice of pride & ambition, the said Armachanus proved thus.

To seek or to procure any high place in the Church, is a point of pride & ambition. Chrisost. in opere perfecto: Numquam sine ambitione desideratur primatus in Ecclesia.

The friers se • k and procure a high place in the church.

Ergo. the friers be proud and ambitious.

The Minor he proveth: To have the state of preaching and hearing confessions, is in the church a state of honor.

The friers seek and have procured the state of preaching and hearing confessions.

Ergo, The friers seek and procure an high place in the Church. &c.

His third conclusion was, that the Lord Christ in his human conversation was always poor, not for that he loved or desired poverty for itself. &c, Wherein this is to be noted, that Armachanus differed not frō the friers in this that Christ was poor, and that he loved poverty: but here in stood the difference, in manner of loving, that is whether he loved poverty for itself, or not. Wherein the foresaid Armachanus used four probations.

First, forsomuch as to be poor, is nothing else but to be miserable: and seeing no man coveteth to be in misery for itself: Therefore he concluded, that Christ desired not poverty for it self.

His second reason was derived out of Aristotle. Nothing (saith he) is to de loved for it self, but that frō which (all commodities being secluded which follow therupō) is voluntarily sought and desired. But take from poverty all respect of commodities following y ^e same, it would be sought neither of God nor mā, Ergo, he concluded, Christ loved not poverty for it self.

Thirdly again: No effect of sin, said he, is to be loved for it self. But poverty is the effect of sin. Ergo, poverty was not loved of Christ for it self.

Fourth, Item, no privation of the thing that is good, is to be loved for it self. Pouerty is the privation of the thing that is good, that is of riches (for God himself is principally rich:) Ergo, poverty for it self was not loved of Christ.

The fourth conclusion was, that Christ our Lord and Savior did never beg willfully. Which he proved by sundry reasons.

1. First, for that Christ in so doing should break the law, which saith: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house, his wife, his servant, his maid, his ox, his asse, or anything that is his, Exod. 20. In the danger of which commandment, he that beggeth voluntaryly must needs incur.

2. Item, if Christ had begged voluntaryly he should have committed against another commandment, which saith. There shall be no beggar, nor needy person among you &c. Deut. 6.

3. Item, Christ in so doing should have transgressed the Emperors law, under which he would himself be subject (as appeareth by giving, & bidding tribute to be givē to Caesar) forasmuch as the same Emperors law saith. There shall no valiant beggar be suffered in the City.

4. Item, if Christ had been a willful beggar, he had broke the law of loving his neighbor: whō he had vexed, having no need. For who so without need asketh or craveth of his neighbor, doth but vex him, in such sort as he would not be vexed himself. Which Christ would never do.

5. Item. if Christ had begged willfully, he had moved slander thereby to his own Gospel, which he with miracles did confirm. For then they that saw his miracle in feeding 5000. in wilderness, would have thought much with them selves how that miracle had been wrought, if he in feeding other, either could not, or would not feed himself.

6. Item, if Christ had begged willfully, then he had done that which himself condemneth by Paul: for so we read. 1. Timo. 6. That Paul condemneth them, which esteem piety to be gain and lucre. Which all they do that under the color of piety, hunt or seek for gain, when otherwise they need not.

7. Item, if Christ had begged willfully, he had offended in declaring an untruth, in so doing. For he that knoweth in his mind, that he needeth not in deed that thing which in word he asketh of other: Declareth in himself an untruth as who in word pretendeth to be otherwise then he is in very deed, which Christ without doubt never did nor would ever do,

8. Item, if Christ had begged willfully, that is, having no • eve • nced thereunto: then had he appeared cither to be an hypocrite, seeming to be that he was not, and to lack whē he did not: or else to be a true beggar in very deed, not able to suffice his necessity. For he is a true beggar in deed, which being constrained by mere necessity, is forced to ask of other that which he is not able to give to himself. But neither of these two agreeth in Christ.

9. Item, if Christ had begged willfully, then why did Peter rebuke the mother of S. Clement his disciple, finding her to stand among the beggars, whō he thought to be strong enough to labor with her hands for her living: If she in so doing had followed the example of Christ:

10. Item, if Christ had begged willfully: And if the Friers do tightly define perfectiō of the Gospel by willful poverty: thē was Clement S. Peters successor to blame, which labored so much to remove away beggary and poverty frō among all them, that were converted to the faith of Christ: and is specially for the same commended of the Church:

11. Agayne, why did the said Clement, writing to James Bishop of Jerusalem, command so much to obey the doctrine and examples of the apostles: who as he showeth in that Epistle, had no beggar nor needy person amongst thē, If Christian perfection (by the friers Philosophy) stadeth in willful beggary?

12. Item, if Christ the high priest had begged willfully, thē did holy Church err wittingly, which ordained that none without sufficient title of living & clothing, should be admitted to holy orders. And moreover, when it is said in y ^e canonical decrees, that the bishop or clerk that beggeth, bringeth shame upon the whole order of the clergy.

13. Item: if Christ had willfully begged, then the example of willful poverty had pertained to the perfection of Christian life, which is contrary to the old law: which commaūdeath the Priests (which lived then after the perfection of the law) to have possessions and tithes, to keep them from beggory.

14. Item, if Christ did willfully beg, then beggary were a point of Christian perfection. And so the Church of God should err, in admitting such patrimonies and donatiōs given to the Church, and so in taking from the Prelates their perfection.

15. Agayne, what will these friers which put their perfection in begging, say to Melchizedek: who without begging or willful poverty, was the high Priest of God, and King of Salem, and prefigured the order and Priesthoode of Christ?

16. And if beggary be such a perfection of the Gospel (as the friers say) how cometh it, that the holy Ghost given to the Apostles, which should lead them into all truth: told them no word of this beggarly perfection, neither is there any word mentioned thereof through the whole Testament of God.

17. Moreover, where the Prophet saith, I never did see the lust man forsaken, nor his seed go begging their bread: How standeth this with the justice of Christ, which was most perfectly just, if he should be forsaken, or his seed go beg their bread? And thē how agreeth this with the abhominable doctrine of friers Franciscan, which put their perfection in willful begging?

18. Finally, doc we not read that Christ sent his disciples to preach without scripp or wallet, and bid them salute no man by the way? Meaning that they should beg nothing of no man? Did not the same Christ also labor with his hands, under Joseph? S. Paul likewise did he not labor with his hands, rather then he would burden the Church of the Corinthians? And where now is the doctrine of the friers, which putteth state of perfectiō in willful begging.

The fifth conclusion of Armachanus against the friers was this: that Christ never taught any man willfully to beg, which he proved thus. It is written Acts. 1. Christ began to do and to teach. If Christ therefore, which did never willfully beg himself, as hath been proved, had taught men otherwise to do, then his doing and teaching had not agreed together.

Item, if Christ which never begged himself willfully, had taught men this doctrine of willful begging contrary to his own doing: he had given suspicion of his doctrine, and ministered slander of the same; as hath been proved • t the fourth conclusion before.

Moreover in so reaching, he had taught contrary to the Emperors just law, which • xpresly forbiddeth the same.

The sixth conclusion of Armachanus against the Friers was, that our Lord Jesus Christ teacheth us, that we should not beg willfully, which he proveth by seuē or eight reasons.

First where it is written Luke. 14. when thou makest a feast call the poor, weak, lame, and blind: and thou shalt be blessed, for they have not wherewith to reward thee again.

To this also pertaineth y ^t decree of y ^t apostle. 1. Thes. 3. He that will not work let him not eat. Furthermore, the same Apostle addeth in the same place: For you have us for example how we were burdenous to nomā, neither did we eat our bread freely: but with labor and weariness, toiling both day and night, and all because we would not burthē you. &c.

4. Item, where we read in the scripture, the slouthful in ā reprehended, Pro. 6. why slepest thou O sluggard, thy poverty and beggary is coming upon thee like an armed man. &c. And again in the same book of Proverbs. The slothful man (saith the scripture) for cold would not go to the plough, therefore he shall beg in summer, and no man shall give bun. &c. Also in the said book of Prouerb. last chapter. The diligent laboring woman is commended, whose fingers are exercised about the rock & spindle. And all these places make against the willful begging of sturdy Friers.

5. Item, Frier Frances their own founder in his own testament saith: And I have labored with mine own hands, and will labor, and will that all my frierlings shall labor and little of their labor, whereby they may support thē selves in an honest mean. And they that cannot work, let them learn to work, not for any covetousness to receive for their labor, but for example of good works, and to avoid idleness. And when the price of their labor is not given them, let them resort to the Lord's table, & ask their alms from door to door. &c. Thus much in his Testament. And in his rule he saith: Such brethren to whom y ^e Lord hath given the gift to labor, let them labor faithfully and devoutly. &c. wherefor it is to be marvelled, how those friers with their willful begging, dare transgress the rule & obedience of Frier Francis their great graundfathers testament.

6. Item, if Christ at any time did beg or did lack, it was more because he would use a miracle in his own persō, thē because he would beg willfully: as when he sent Peter to y ^t sea to find a groat in the fishes mouth. which thing ye he thought rather to do, thē to beg the groat of the people, which he might soon have obtained.

7. Item, by diverse other his examples he seineth to teach the same as where he saith: The workmā is worthy of his hier. Also the workman is worthy of his meat. Math. 10. Luke 10. And whē he spake to Zache, that he would turn into his house. And so likewise in Bethany and all other places he ever used rather to burden his friends thē to beg of other, vnacquaynted.

8. Item, with plain precept thus he sendeth forth his disciples, willing them not to go from house to house, Luke. 10. so as Friers use now to go. Many other Scriptures there be, which reprove begging: as where it is said. The foot of a fool is swift to the house of his neighbor, Eccl. 29. And in another place: My child (saith he) see thou want not is the tune of thy life, for better it is to die then to lack. Eccl. 21.

9. Itē, where Christ counseling the young man, had him go and sel that he had and give to the poor and follow him if he would be perfect: doth not there cal him to willful begging, but calleth him to follow him, which did not beg willfully.

The seventh conclusion of Armachanus is: that no wise nor true holy man can take upon him willful poverty to be observed always, which he proveth by four reasons.

First, that willful beggary was reproved both by the doctrine of Christ and of the Apostles, as in the conclusion before hath been declared.

2. Item, a man in taking upon him willful beggary, in so doing should lead himself into temptation, which were against the Lord's prayer. For as much as Solomon Prouerb. 30. saith: O Lord, beggary and great riches give me not, but only sufficiency to live upon: least if I have to much, I be driven to deny thee, & say: who is the Lord. Agayne, if I have to little, I be forced thereby to steal, and to p • riure the name of my God. Wherefore saith Eccle. 27. For need many have offended. And therefore they that choose willful poverty, take to them great occasion of temptatiō.

3. Item, they that take willful poverty upon them when they need not induce themselves voluntaryly to break the commandment of God: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house. &c. Agayne, where it is commanded, there shall be no beggar among you. &c.

4. Item, he that taketh upon him needles and willfully to beg, maketh himself unapt to receive holy orders, having (as is said) no sufficient title thereunto, according to the laws of the Church.

The 8. conclusiō of this matter: That it is not agreing to the rule of the Friers observant, to observe willful beggary. which (saith he) may be proved, for that Frier Frances, both in his rule and in his Testament, being left to his Franciscans, doth plainly prefer labor before begging.

The 9. and last conclusion of this matter is. That the bull of pope Alexander the 4. which condemneth the book of the masters of Paris, impugneth none of these conclusions premised. For the proof thereof, he thus inferred.

1. First, that Pope John the 24. in his constitutiō, beginning thus: Quia quorundam, affirmeth expressly, how Pope Nicholas the 3. revoked and called back the said Bull of Pope Alexander the 4. and all other writings of his: touching all such articles, which in the same foresaid constitution of this Pope John be cōreined and declared. Wherein also is declared, how strayt the poverty of the friers ought to be, which they call willful poverty.

2. Item, it is manifest and notorious to all men, how the said Pope Nicholas the 3. in his declaratiō showeth, how the friers both ought to labor with their hands and how moreover the said Friers ought not to preach within the diocese of any bishop, wheresoever they be resisted. Which being so, the conclusion appeareth, that the bull of Pope Alexander the 4. as touching these articles, is void and of none effect. Beside the which articles, there is nothing else in the said Bull of Alexander (that I remember) which unpugneth any of these conclusions premised.

Many things mo(said he) I had beside these, both to object and to answer again to the same: and to confirm more surely and firmly these my reasons and assertions premised. But I have already to much weried your holiness, and your reverend Lordships here present. Wherefore I conclude and humbly and devoutly beseech you, according to my former petition premised in the beginning of this matter: that you judge not after the outward face, but judge ye true judgment. John. 7. Ex libro Armachani, cui titulus Defensorium Curatorum.

Notes to be observed in this former Oration of Armachanus.

BY this Oratiō of Armachanus the learned Prelate, thus made before Pope Innocent and his Cardinals, diverse and sundry things there be for the utility of the Church worthy to be observed. First what troubles and vexations came to the Church of Christ by these Friers. Also what persecution followeth after by the means of them, against so many learned mē & true servants of Christ. Furthermore, what repugnance and contrariety was among the Popes, & how they could not agree among themselves about the Friers. Fourthly what pestiferous doctrine, subuerting welneare the testament of Jesus Christ. Fifthly what decay of ministers in Christ's church, as appeareth pag. 411. Sixthly, what robbing and circumuenting of men's children, as appeareth, pag. 411. Seventhly, what decay of universities, as appeareth by Oxford, pag. 411. Eighthly, what damage to learning, and lack of books to students came by these friers, as appeareth pag. 411. Ninthly, to what pride under color of feigned humility to what riches, under dissimuled poverty they grew unto, here is to be seen. In so much that at length through their subtle & most dangerous hipocrisy they crept up to be Lord's, Archbishops, Cardinals & at last also, Chancelors of realms, yea and of most secret counsel with king and queenes, as appeareth pag. 411.

All these things well considered, now remaineth in the church to be marked: that forsomuch as these Friers (with their new found testament of Frier Francis) not being contented with the testament of God in his son Christ, began to spring the same time, when as Satan was prophesied to be let loose, by the order of the Scripture, whether therefore it is to be doubted, that these Friers make up the body of Antichrist, which is prophesied to come in the Church, or not: so much more to be doubted, because who so li • t to try shall find, that of all other enemies of Christ, of whom some be manifest, some be privy, all be together cruel: yet is there no such sort of enemies which more slightly deceiveth the simple Christian, or more deeply drowneth him in damnation, then doth this doctrine of the Friers.

But of this Oration of Armachanus enough. which Oration what success it had with the Pope, by story it is not certain. By his own life declared, it appeareth, that the Lord so wrought, that his enemies did not triumph over him. Notwithstāding, this by story appeareth, that he was 7. or 8. years in banishment for the same matter, & there died in the same at Auiniō, Of whom a certain Cardinal hearing of his death openly protested, that the same day, a mighty pillar of Christ's church was fallen.

After the death of Armachanus, the Friers had contention likewise with the monks of Benedictes order about the same year, 1360. and so removed their cause both against the monks and against the university of Oxford, unto the court of Rome, wherein seyth the author, they lacked another Richard. Ex Botonero. By this appeareth to be true, which is testified in the first tome of Wald. that long debate continued between the friers and the university of Oxford: Against whom first stood Robert Brosted bishop of Lincoln above mentioned: Then Seuallus of York. Afterward Johannes Bachothorpe, and now this Armachanus, of whom here presently we entreat. And after him again John Wycliffe, of whom (Christ willing) we will speak hereafter. Ex Waldeno. Against this foresaid Armachanus wrote diverse Friers, Roger Conaway a Franciscan, John Heyldeshā Carmelite, Balfridus Hardby frier Augustine. Also frier Engelbert a Dominican, in a book entitled, Defensorium priuilegiorum, and diverse other. I credibly hear of certain old Irish Bibles translated long since into the Irish tongue, which if it be true, it is not other like but to be the doing of this Armachanus. And thus much of this learned prelate and Archbishop of Ireland, a man worthy for his Christian zeal of immortal commendation.

After the death of this Innocent, next was poped in y ^t sea of Rome, pope Urbane the fifth, who by the fathers side was an englishman. This Urbane had been a long wayter in the court of Rome: and when he saw no promotion would light upon him, complaing to a certain friend of his, made to him his mone, saying: That he thought verily, if all the Churches of the world should fall, yet none would fall in his mouth. The which friend after seeing him to be Pope, and inthronised in his threefold crown, cometh to him, & putting him in remembrance of his words to him before, saith: that where his holiness had moned his fortune to him, that if all the Churches in the world would fall, none would fall vpō his head: Now (saith he) god hath otherwise so disposed, that all the churches in the world are fallen upon your head. &c.

This Pope maintained and kindled great wars in Italy, sending Egidius his Cardinal and Legate, and after him Arduinus a Burgundian his legate and Abbot with great puissaunce and much money against sundry cities in Italy: By whose means, the towns and Cittyes which before had broken frō the bishop of Rome were oppressed: also Bernabes & Baleaceus princes of Millam, vanquished. By whose example other being sore feared, submitted themselves to the Church of Rome. And thus came up that wicked church to her great possessions, which her patrons would needs father upon Constantine the godly Emperor.

In the time of this Pope Urbane the 5. and in the second year of his reign, about the beginning of the yere of our Lord. 1364. I find a certain Sermon of one Nicolas Drem, made before the Pope and his Cardinalies on Christmas even. In the which Sermon, the learned man doth worthily rebuke the prelates and priests of his time, declaring their destruction not to be far of, by certain signs taken of their wicked and corrupt life. All the sayings of the Prophets spoken against the wicked priests of the Jews, he doth aptly apply against the clergy of his time, comparing the Church then present to the spiritual strumpet spoken of in the 16. of the Prophet Ezekiel. And proveth in conclusion the clergy of the church then, to be so much worse then the old Synagogue of the Jews, by how much it is worse to sell y ^t church & Sacraments, thē to suffer doves to be sold in the church. with no less iugement also and learning he answereth to the old and false objection of the papists: who albeit they be never so wicked, yet think themselves to be the church which the Lord cannot forsake. All which things to y ^t intent they may the better appear in his own words, I have thought here to translate and exhibit the Sermon as it was spoken before the Pope.

This Sermō was made by master Nicholas Orem before Pope Urbane and his Cardinals upon the evē of the Nativity of the Lord, being the fourth Sunday of Advent, in the year of our Lord, 1364. and the second of his Hopedome.

In the 5. yere of this forenamed Pope Urbane, began first the order of the Jesuits. And unto this time which was about the year of our Lord, 1367. the offices here in England, as the Lord Chancellor, Lord Treasurer, & of the privy seal: were wont to be in the hands of the clergy. But about this year through the motion of the Lord's in the Parliament, and partly (as witnesseth mine author) for hatred of the clergy: all the said offices were removed from the clergy, to the Lord's temporal.

After the death of Pope Urbane, next succeeded Pope Gregory the 11. who among his other acres, first reduced again the papacy out of France unto Rome, which had from thence been absent, the space now of 70. years, being thereto moved (as Sabellicus recordeth) by the answer of a certain bishop, whom as the Pope saw standing by him asked, why he was so long from his charge and church at home, saying: not to be the part of a good Pastor, to keep him from his flock so long. Wherunto the Bishop answering again, said: And you yourself being the chief Bishoppe, who may and ought to be a spectacle to us all: why are you from the place so long where your Church doth lie? By the occasion whereof, the Pope sought all means after that to remove and to rid his Court out of France again to Rome, and so he did.

This 11. Gregory in a certain Bull of his sent to the Archb. of Prague, maketh mention of one named Militzius a Bohemiā, & saith in y ^e same bull y ^t this Militzius should hold apinion. & teach. an. 1366. that Antichrist was already come. Also that the said Militzius had certain congregations following him: & that in the same congragation were certain harlots, who being converted frō their wickedness were brought to a godly life. Which harlots being so converted, he used to say were to be preferred before all the holy religious virgins. And therefore commanded the archbishop to excommunicate and persecute the said Militzius, which in foretime had been a religious man of Prague, and after forsook his order, and gave himself to preaching, and at length was by the foresaid Archb. imprisoned.

Jacobus Misnensis a learned man and a writer in y ^e time of I. Hus, maketh mention of this Militzius, and calleth him a worthy and a famous Preacher. Also citeth many things out of his writings: In the which writings this good Militzius thus declareth of himself how he was moved & urged by the holy Ghost to search out by the sacred Scriptures, concerning the coming of Antichrist. And that he was compelled by the same holy spirit at Rome publicly to preach, and also before the Inquisitor there to protest plainly, that y ^e same great Antichrist which is prophesied of in y ^• holy Scriptures, was already come. Moreover his saying was, that the church through negligence of the pastors was desolate, did abound in temporal riches, but in spiritual riches to be empty. Also that in y ^• Church of Christ, where certain Idols which destroyed Ierusalē, and defaced the Temple, but hypocrisye caused that those Idols could not be seen. Also that many there were which denied Christ, because that knowing the truth, yet for fear of mē they durst not confess their conscience. &c. And thus much of good Militzius, living in the time of Gregory 11. and king Edward the third. an. 1370.

The which king of England holding a Parliament in the 3. year of this Pope, sent his Ambassadors to him, desiring him: that he from thenceforth would abstain frō his reseruatiōs of benefices used in the court of England. And that spiritual men within his realm promoted unto Bishoprics, might freely enjoy their elections within the realm, and be confirmed by their Metropolitans, according to the ancient custom of the realm. Wherefore, vpō these and such other like wherein the king and the realm thought thenselves grieved, he desired of the Pope some remedy to be provided. &c. Wherunto the Pope returned acertayne answer again unto the king, requiring by his messengers to be certified again of the kings mind concerning the same. But what answer it was, it is not in y ^e story expressed, save that the yere following, which was 1374. there was a tractation at Burgess upon certain of the said articles between the king & the Pope, which did bāg two years in suspēse, so at length it was thus agreed between them: that the pope should no more use his reseruatiōs of benefices in England, and likewise the king should no more confer and give benefices upon the writ, Quare impedit. &c. But as touching the freedom of elections to be confirmed by the Metropolitan, mentioned in the year before, thereof was nothing touched.

As touching these reservations, provisions, and collations, with the elections of Archbishops, Bishops, beneficed men and other, wherewith the Pope vexed this realm of England, as before you have heard. The king by y ^e consent of the Lord's and commons, in the 25. year of his reign enacted: that according to a statute made in the 30. year of his graundfather Edward the first, wherein was made an act against y ^e ravenous pillage of the Pope, thorough the same provisions, reservations, & collations. &c. but not put in execution. By the which provisions, y ^e state of the realm decreased more and more, the kings royalty & prerogative greatly obscured and diminished, innumerable treasure of the realm transported, aliens & strangers placed in the best and fattest by shoprickes, abbeyes, and benefices within the realm. And such, as either for their offices in Rome, as Cardinalships & such like could not be here resident, or if resident, yet better away for causes infinite, as partly have been touched before: Not only revived the said statute made by Edward the first his graundfather, but also enlarged the same. Adding thereunto very strayt and sharp penalties against the offenders therein, or in any part thereof, as exemptiō out of the kings protection, loss of all their lands, goods, and other possessions, and their bodies to be imprisoned at the kings pleasure: And farther, who so ever was lawfully convict, or otherwise for want of appearance by process directed forth, were within the lappes of this statute or premunire (for so bare the name thereof) should suffer all and every such molestation & injuries, as men exempted frō the protection of the king. In so much, that who so ever had killed such mē, had been in no more danger of law therefore, then for the killing of an outlaw, or one not worthy to live in a commō weal. Lyke unprofitable members were they then in that time, yea of ignorance esteemed in this common weal of England, as would offer themselves to the willful slavery and servile obedience of the pope: which thing in these days, yea and that amongst no small fools, is counted more then Evangelical holiness. He that list to peruse the statute, and would see every branch and article thereof at large discussed and handled, with the penalties therefore due: Let him read the statute of provision and premunire, made in the 25. year of this kings days. And let him read in the statutes made in the parliamentes holden the 27, year, and 38. year of his reign: And under the same title of provision and premunire shall find, the popes primacy and jurisdiction within this Realm more nearly touched, and much of his papal power restrained: In so much, that who soever for any cause or controversy in law, either spiritual or temporal, y ^e same being determinable in any of y ^e kings courts (as all matters were) whether they were personal or real, citations or other: or should either appeal or consent to any appellation, to be made out of the realm to the pope or see of Rome: should incurve the said penalty and danger of premunire. Divers other matters wherein the Pope is restrained of his usurped power, authority & jurisdiction within this realm of England: are in the said titles and statutes expressed, & at large set forth, whoever list to peruse the same, which for brevities sake I omit, hastening to other matters.

About this time, being the year of our Lord. 1370. lived holy Brigit, whom the Church of Rome hath canonised not only for a saint, but also for a Prophetess: who notwithstanding in her book of revelations, which hath been oft times imprinted, was a great rebuker of the pope, and of the filth of his clergy, calling him a murderer of souls, a spiller, and a pyller of the flock of Christ: more abhominable then Jews, more crueller thē Judas: more unjust then Pilate, worse then Lucifer himself. The see of the Pope she prophesieth, shall be thrown down into the deep, like a mylstone. And that his assister shall burn w ^t brimstone: Affirmyng, that the prelates, bishops, & priests are the cause, why the doctrine of Christ is neglected, and almost extincted. And that the clergy have turned the ten commandments of God into two words, to wit, Da pecuniam, that is, Geue money. It were long and tedious to declare all that she against them writeth. Among the rest which I omytte, let this suffice for all, where as the said Briget affirmeth in her revelations, that when the holy Virgin should say to her son, howe Rome was a fruitful and fertile field: yea, said he, but of weeds only and cockle. &c.

To this Briget I will join also Catherina Senensis, an holy virgin, which lived much about the same time, ann. 1379. Of whom writeth Antoninus. part. historiae. 3. Thys Katherine having the spirit of prophesy, was wont much to complain of the corrupt state of the church, namely of the prelates of the court of Rome, & of the pope: prophesying before of the great schism, which then followed in the Church of Rome, and dured to the Council of Constance, the space of xxxix, years. Also of the great wars ano tribulation, which ensued upon the same. And moreover declared before and foretold, of this so excellent reformation of religion in the Church now present. The words of Antoninus be these. After this Virgin in her going to Rome, had told her brother of the wars and tumults that should rise in y ^e countries about Rome, after y ^• schism of the two Popes. I then curious to know of things to come, & knowing that she understood by revelation what should happen, demanded of her: I pray you (good mother) said I, and what shall befall after these troubles in the Church of God? And she said : By these tribulations and afflictions, after a secret manner unknown unto man, God shall purge his holy Church, and stir up the spirit of his elect. And after these things shall follow such a reformation of the holy Church of God, and such a renovation of holy Pastors, that the only cogitation and remembrance thereof maketh my spirit to rejoice in the Lord And as I have oftentimes told you heretofore, the spouse which now is all deformed and ragged, shall be adorned and decked with most rich and precious ouches and brouches. And all the faithful shall be glad and rejoice to see themselves so beautified with so holy shepherds. Yea and also the Infidels then allured by the sweet savor of Christ, shall return to the catholic fold, and be converted to the true Bishop and shepherd of their souls. Geue thanks therefore to God, for after this storm, he will give to his a great calm. And after she had thus spoken, she stayed, and said no more.

Beside these aforenamed, the Lord which never ceaseth to work in his Church: stirred up against the malignant church of Rome, the spirits of diverse other good & godly teachers, as Matthias Parisiensis, a Bohemian borne, who about the year of our Lord 1370. wrote a large book of Antichrist, and proveth him already come, and noteth y ^e Pope to be the same. Which book one Illiricus a writer in these our days hath, & promiseth to put it in print. In this book he doth greatly inuey against the wickedness and filthiness of the Clergy, and against the neglecting of their duty in governing the church. The Locusts mentioned in the Apocalypse, he saith, be the hypocrites reigning in the church. The works of Antichrist he saith be these, the fables and inventions of men reigning in the Church: the Images & feigned relics that are worshipped everywhere. Itē, that men do worship everyone his proper Saint and Savior beside Christ, so that every mā and City almost hath his diverse and peculiar Christ. He taught and affirmed moreover, that godliness & true worship of God, are not bound to place, persons, or times, to be heard more in this place, thē in another, at this time more thē at another. &c. He argueth also against the cloisterers which leaving the only and true Savior, set up to them selves their Franciscans, their Dominickes, and such other: and have them for their Sauiors, glorying and triumphing in them, and feigning many forged lies upon them. He was greatly and much offended with Monks & friers, for neglecting or rather burying the word of Christ and instead of him, for celebrating & setting up their own rules and canons, affirming it to be much hurtful to true godliness, for that Priests, Monks, and Nuns do account themselves only spiritual, and all other to be lay & secular, attributing only to themselves the opinion of holiness, & contemning other men, with all their politick administration & the office as profane in comparison of their own. He further writeth that Antichrist, hath seduced all Universities & Colleges of learned men, so that they teach no sincere doctrine, neither give any light to the Christians with their teaching. Finally, he forewarneth that it will come to pass, that God yet once again will raise up godly teachers, who being fervent in the spirit and zeal of Helias, shall disclose and refute the errors of Antichrist, and Antichrist himself, openly to the whole world. This Mathias in the said book of Antichrist alledgeth the sayings and writings of the Uniuersity of Paris, also the writings of Guilielmus de sacto amore, and of Militzius afore noted.

About the same time, or shortly after. an. 1384. we read also of Johannes of Mountziger, Rector of the Uniuersity of Ulme, who openlie in the schools in his Oratiō propounded that the body of Christ was not God, and therefore not to be worshipped as God with that kind of worship called Latria, as the Sophister termeth it, meaning thereby the Sacrament not to be adored, which afterward he also defended by writing: affirming also that Christ in his resurrection took to him again all his blood which in his passion he had shed. Meaning thereby to infer, that the blood of Christ which in many places is worshipped, neither can be called the blood of Christ, neither ought to be worshipped. But by and by he was resisted and withstood by the Monks and friers: who by this kind of Idolatry were greatly enriched, till at length the Senate & council of the city was fain to take up the matter between them.

Nile was Archbishop of Thessalonica, & lived much about this time. He wrote a long work against the Latins that is, against such as took part and held with the Church of Rome. His first book being written in Greek, was after translated into latin, & lately now into english, in this our time. In the first chap. of his book, he layeth all the blame and fault of the dissention & schism between the East and the West Church upon the Pope. He affirmed that the Pope only would command what him listed, were it never so contrary to all the old & ancient canons. That he would hear and follow no man's advise: that he would not permit any free councils to be assembled. &c. And that therefore it was not possible, that the controversies between the Greek Church and Latin Church, should be decided and determined.

In the second chap. of his book, he purposedly maketh a very learned disputation. For first he declareth that he no whit at all by God's commandment, but only by human law, hath any dignity, more thē hath other bishops: which dignity, the Councils, the fathers, & the Emperors have granted unto him: Neither did they grant the same for any other consideration more, or greater ordinance: then for that the same City then had the Impery of all the whole world: and not at all for that that Peter ever was there, or not there.

Secondarily he declareth, that the same premacy or prerogative is not such and so great as he and his Sicophāts do usurp unto thenselves. Also he refuteth the chiefest propositions of the Papists one after another. He declareth that the Pope hath no dominion more thē other Patriarchs have, and that he himself may err as well as other mortal men: and that he is subject both to laws & councils, as well as other Bishops. That it belonged not to him, but to the Emperor, to call general councils: & that in Ecclesiastical causes he could establish and ordain no more then all other Bishops might. And lastly, that he getteth no more by Peters succession, then that he is a Bishop as all other Bishops after the Apostles be. &c.

I cannot among other, following here the occasion of this matter offered, leave out y ^e memory of Jacobus Misnensis, who also wrote of the coming of Antichrist. In y ^• same he maketh mentiō of a certain learned man, whose name was Militzius, which Militzius (saith he) was a famous and worthy preacher in Parga. He lived about y ^e yere. 1366. long before Hus, and before Wycliffe also. In the same his writings he declareth, how y ^• same good man Militzius was by the holy spirit of God incited, and vehemently moved to search out of y ^e holy Scriptures the manner and coming of Antichrist: and found that now in his time he was all ready come. And the same Jacobus saith, that the said Militzius was constrained by the spirit of God to go up to Rome, & there publicly to preach. And that afterward before y ^e Inquisitor he affirmed the same. That the same mighty and great Antichrist, the which the Scriptures made mention of, was already come.

He affirmed also, that the Church by the negligence of the Pastors, should become desolate: and that iniquity should abound, that is, by reason of Mammon, master of iniquity. Also, he said that there were in the Church of Christ idols, which should destroy Jerusalem, and make the temple desolate, but were cloaked by hypocrisy. Further, that there be many which deny Christ, for that they keep silence: neither do they hear Christ, whom all the world should know and confess his verity before men, which also wittingly do detain the verity and justice of God.

There is also a certain Bull of Pope Gregory 11. to the Archbishop of Praga: wherein he is commanded to excommunicate and persecute Militzius and his auditors. The same Bull declareth, that he was once a Chanon of Praga, but afterward he renounced his Canonship, & began to preach: who also for that he so manifestly preached of Antichrist to be already come: was of John Archbishop of Praga put in prison, declaring what his error was. To wit, howe he had his company or congregation to whō he preached, and that amongst the same were certain converted harlots, which had forsaken their evil life, and did live godly and well: which harlots he accustomed in his sermons to prefer before all the blessed virgins that never offended. He taught also openly, that in the Pope, cardinals, Bishops, prelates, priests, & other religious men: was no truth, neither that they taught the way of truth, but that only he, & such as held with him, taught the true way of salvation. His Postill in some places is yet to be seen. They allege unto him certain other inconvenient articles, which notw ^t standing I think, the adversaries to deprave him with all, have slanderously invented against him. He had as appeared by the foresaid Bull, very many of every state and condition, as well rich as pore, that cleaved unto him.

About the year of our Lord. 1371. lived Henricus de Iota, whom Gerson doth much commend, and also his companiō Henricus de Hassia, an excellent learned and famous man. An Epistle of this Henricus de Hassia which he wrote to the Bishoppe of Normacia, Jacobus Cartsiensis inserted in his book De erroribus Christianorum. In the same Epistle, the author doth greatly accuse the spiritual men of every order, yea and the most holiest of all other the Pope himself, of many and great vices. He said, that the Ecclesiastical governors in the primitive Church, were compared to the sun shining in the day time, and the political governors, to the Moon, shining in the night. But the spiritual men he said, that now are, do never shine in the day time, nor yet in y ^e night time, but rather with their darkness do obscure both the day and night, that is: with their filthy living, ignorance, and impiety. He citeth also out of the prophesy of Hildegaris these words: Therefore doth y ^• devil in himself speak of you Priests: Dainty banquets & feasts, wherein is all voluptuousness do I find amongst these men: In so much that mine eyes, mine ears my belly, and my vaynes, be even filled with the froth of them, & my breasts stand astrut with the riches of them. &c. Lastly, saith he, they every day more and more as Lucifer did, seek to climb higher and higher: till that every day with him more and more, they fall deeper and deeper.

About the year of our Lord. 1390. there were burned at Bringa 36. Citizens of Moguntina, for the doctrine of Waldenses, as Brushius affirmeth: which opiniō was nothing contrary to that they held before, wherein they affirmed the Pope to be that great Antichrist, which should come: Unless peradventure the Pope seemed then to be more evidently convicted of Antechristianity thē at any other time before, he was revealed to be.

For the like cause, many other beside these, are to be found in stories, which sustained the like persecutiō by the Pope, if leisure would serve to peruse all that might be searched. As where Masseus recordeth of diverse to the mumber of 140. which in the province of Narbone chose rather to suffer whatsoever grievous punishment by fire, thē to receive the decretals of the Romish Church, contrary to the upright truth of the Scripture.

What should I here speak of the 24. which suffered at Paris. an. 1210? Also in the same author is testified that an. 1211. there were 400. under the name of heretics burned 80. beheaded: Prince Americus hanged, and the Lady of the Castle stoned to death.

Moreover, in the Chronicles of Houedon, and of other writers be recited, a marvelous mumber, which in the countries of France were burned for heretics. Of whom, some were called Publicans, some Catharits, some Paterines, and other by others names. What their assertions were, I find no certain report worthy of credit

In Tritenius is signified of one Eckhardus a Dominican Frier, who not long before Wycliffe's time, was condemned and suffered for heresy at Hedelberge. an. 2330. who as he diffreth not much in name, so may he be supposed to be the saw, whom other do name Beghardus, and is said to be burned at Erphord.

Of Albigenses because sufficient mention is made before of whom a great number were burned about the time of king John, I pass them over.

Likewise I let pass the heremite, of whom John Bacon maketh relation, in his. 2. Dist. Quaest. 1. Who disputing in Paul's church, affirmed that those Sacraments, which were then used in y ^e church, were not instituted by Christ, An. 1306. Peradventure it was the same Ranulphus, mentioned in the flour of histories, & is said to die in prison: for the time of them doth not much differ.

In Boetius, why the Pope should so much commend a certain king, because for one man, he had slain 400. cutting away the genitals from the rest, I cannot judge, except the cause were that, which the Pope calleth heresy.

But to let these things overpass that be uncertain, because neither is it possible to comprehend all them which have w ^t stand the corruption of the popes sea: neither have we any such firm testimony left of their doings, credibly to stay upon: we will now (Christ willing) convert our story, to things more certain & undoubted, grounding upon no light reports of feeble credit, nor vpō any fabulous legendes without authority: But upon the true and substantial copies of the public records of the Realm, remaining yet to be seen under the kings most sure & faithful custody. Out of the which records, such matter appeareth against the Popish church of Rome, and against his usurped authority, such open standing & crying against the said sea, & that not privily, but also in open parliament, in the days of this king Edward the third: that neither will the Romish people of this our age easily think it to be true when they see it, neither yet shall they be able to deny the same, so clear standeth the force of those records.

Ye heard a little before, pag. 381. howe John Stratford Archb. of Cant. being sent for and required by the king to come unto him, refused so to do. What the cause was why he denied to come at the kings sending, is neither touched of Poiidore Uirgil, nor of any other monkish Chronicler, writing of those aces and times. Whose part hath been, faithfully to have dispensed the simple truth of things don to their posterity. But that which they dissemblingly and colourably have concealed, contrary to true law of story, the true cause thereof we have found out by the true Parliament roles, declaring the story thus.

King Edward the 3. in the 6. year of his reign, hearing that Edward Bailol had proclaimed himself king of Scotland: Required counsel of the whole estate to wit, whether were better for him to assayle Scotland, and to claim the demesing or demeines of the same: or cls by making him party to take his advantage. And thereby to enjoy the service, as other his auncesters before him had done. For this cause he summoned a Parliament of all estates to meet at York, about the beginning of December. Where the king was already come, waiting for y ^e coming of such as were warned thereunto. For the want of whose coming, the parliament was rejourned til monday, and from thence to Tuesday next ensuing. But forsomuch as most of the states were absent, the assembly required the continuance of the parliament, until the vtas of S. Hillary then ensuing at York, which was granted. And so a new sommons was especially awarded to every person with special charge to attend, so that the affairs of the king and the realm might not be hindered, because of the debate between the Archb. of Cant. and Archbishop of York, for the superior bearing of their cross.

In conclusion, for all the kings sommoning, none other of all the Clergy came, but only the Archb. of York, the bishop of Lincoln, and of Carliel, & Abbots of York and Seleby. So that hereunto came not the Archb. of Cāterb. nor any other of his province, and all for bearing the cross. Whereby the same was not only a loss to the opportunity to Scotland: but also an importable charge to the whole estate by a new reassembly. And thus much out of the records. Whereby thou mayest easily judge (prudent Reader) what is to be thought of these Pope holy Catholic Churchmen) being of the Popes brood and setting up whom such frivolous causes of contention stir up to such disquietness, both among themselves, and also to such disobedience against their Prince: excuse them who can. Ex. An. 6. Regis Edwardi 3.

It followeth moreover in the same records, concerning the abandoning of the popes provisions: how that the commons find great default at provisions coming from Rome, whereby strangers were enabled w ^t in this realm to enjoy ecclesiastical dignities, & show diverse inconveniences ensuing thereby, namely the decay of daily almose, y ^e transporting of the treasure to nourish the kings enemies the discovering of the secrets of the realm, & the disabling and impoverishing of the clerks within this realm.

They also show how the pope had in most covert wise granted to two new Cardinals within this Realm, (and namely to Cardinal Peragotz) above ten thousand marks of yearly taxes: They therefore required the king and nobles to find some remedy, for that they never could ne would any longer bear those strange oppressions, or else to help them to expel out of this realm the Popes power by force.

Hereupon, the King, Lord's, and commons, sent for the act made at Carliel, in the 35. yere of king Edward y ^• first, upon the like complaint: thereby forbidding, y ^t any thing should be attempted or brought into the Realm, which should tend to the blemishing of the kings prerogative, or to the prejudice of his Lord's or commons. And so at this time, the statute called the act of provision was made by common consent, which generally forbiddeth the bringing in of any Bulls, or such trinkets from the Court of Rome, or the using, enjoying, or allowing of any such bill, process, instrument, or such ware, as thereby at large doth appear. Whereof sufficiently is touched before, pag. 353.

The penalty of which statute afterward followed in the next parliament, An. Reg. Ed. 18. tit. 32. the which penalty was this: the transgressors thereof to lie in perpetual prison, or to be foriured the land. And that all iustices of assize, gaile delivery, and yer and determiner, may determine the same. Required withal, that the same act of provision, should continue forever.

Item, that the said 18. year of the reign of king Edward, tit 34. it was moreover propounded: that if any archbishop, or any person religious or other, do not present w ^t in 4. months some able clerk to any dignity, where any person hath obtained from Rome any provision, Bul, &c. but surcease the same: that then the Kyng may present some able clerk.

Item, propounded in the said Parliament, an. 18. Reg. Ed 3. that if any Bishop elect, shall refuse to take any such byshoprikes, other then by such Bull: that then such elect, shall not enter ne enjoy his temporalties without his special license.

Also, that the king shall dispose all such benefices and dignities of such aliens his enemies, as remain in the country of his enemies, and employ the profits thereof to the defense of the realm.

Moreover propounded, that commissioners be sent to all the kings ports, to apprehend all such persons as shall bring in any such instrument frō Rome, and to bring them forthwyth before the counsel to answer thereto.

Propounded farthermore, that the Deanry of York which is to be recovered by judgment in the kings court, may be bestowed upon some able man within the realm, who will maintain the same against him (meaning the Cardinal, who holdeth the same by provision frō Rome, being the enemy to the king and to the realm) and that the profits may be employed to the defense of the realm.

The kings answer. To all which petitions answer was made in form following: It is agreed by the King, Earls, Barons, Justices, & other wise men of the Realm, that the petitions aforesaid, be made in sufficient form of law, according to the petitions aforesaid.

Note in this answer of the king (good reader) that at the grant hereof, the consent of the bishops is neither named, nor expressed, with the other Lord's of the Parliament: and yet, the Parliament standeth in his full force, notwithstanding.

Notes of the Parliament holden in the 20. year of king Edward 3.

TO pass farther in the 20. year of the kings reign in the Parliament holden the same yere, it was propounded: that all alien Monks should avoid the Realm by the day of S. Michael, and that their livings should be disposed, to young English scholars. The livings of these the king took to his hands.

Item, that the king may take the profits of all others strangers livings, as Cardinals and others, during their lives. The profits of whō were also in the kings hands.

That such aliens enemies, as be advanced to livings here in England (being in their own countries, shomakers, tailers, or chamberlaines to Cardinals) should depart before Michaelmas, and their livings disposed to poor English scholars. The lyuings also of these remained in the kings hands.

The commons denied to pay any payment, to any cardinals lying in France, to entreat of war or peace: which also was granted of the kings part as reasonable.

Item, propounded and fully agreed, that the yearly advancement of two thousand marks (granted by the pope to two Cardinals, out of the provinces of Canterb. and York) should be restrained, and such as shall pursue therefore to be out of the law.

Lykewise enacted and agreed, that no English man should take anything in ferme of any Alien religious, ne buy any of their goods, nor be of their counsel, on pain of perpetual imprysonment.

Enacted further, that no person should bring into the realm to any Bishop or other, any Bul, or any other letters from Rome, or from any Alien: unless he show the same to the Chancelor or warden of the Cinque ports, upon loss of all he hath.

Finally, in the end of the said Parliament, the bishops were commanded before the next convocation, to certify into the Chancery the names of such Aliens, of their benefices, and the values of the same.

Notes of the 25. year of king Edward the third.

THe Parliament of the 25. year, was begun the 6. day of February, the 25. year of king Edward 3. In the which parliament beside other matters mo, was propounded: that remedy might be had against the popes reservations, by which brocage and means the pope received the first fruits of all Ecclesiastical dignities: A more consumption to the Realm, then all the kings wars.

Also the like remedy might be had against such, as in the Court of Rome presume to undo any judgment given in the kings court, as if they enforced to undo the laws of the realm.

Wherunto it was answered, that there was sufficient remedy provided by law.

Notes of the 38. year of king Edward the third.

IN the Parliament holden at Westminster, the 38. year of Edward 3. in the vtaues of Hillary (Simon Bishop of Eli being Lord Chancelor) it was required by the kings own mouth, & declared to the whole estates: How daily citations & false suggestions were made to the pope, for matters determinable in his courts w ^t in the Realm, and for procuring provisions to Ecclesiastical dignities, to the great defacing of the ancient laws, to the spoiling of his crown, to the daily conveying away of the treasure to the wasting of ecclesiastical livings, to the withdrawing of divine service, almose, hospitality, and other acceptable works, and to the daily increase of all mischiefs: Wherefore, in person and by his own month, the king required the whole estate to provide here of due remedy.

To be noted finally in this parliament of the 38. yere, that the Acte of prouisors, brought in this parliament, although in the printed copy. cap. 1.2.3.4. doth agree with the record, in manner: yet in the said records vnprinted, are moe biting words against the Pope: a mystery not to be known of all men.

Notes of the 40. year of king Edward the third.

IT followeth moreover in the said Acts of king Edward the 3. and in the 40. yere of his reign, another Parliament was called at Westminster the 3. of May. An. 1366. the Bishop of Eli being Lord Chancelor and speaker. Who in the 2. day of the said assembly in the presence of the King, Lord's and commons, declared: howe the day before, generally they understood the cause of this their assembly, and now more particularly should understand the same: specially howe that the king understood, y ^• the Pope (for the homage which K. John made to the sea of Rome for the Realms of England & Ireland, and for the tribute by him granted) meant by process to cite the king of Rome, to answer thereto. Wherein, the king required their aduises, what were best for him to do, if any such thing were attempted. The Bishops by their selves required respite of answer, until the next day. So did the Lord's & commons every of them by their selves.

The same next day, the whole estates reassembled together, & by common consent enacted in effect following, viz. For as much as neither K. John nor any other king, could bring his realm & people in such thralldom & subjection, but by common assent of Parliament, the which was not done: and therefore done against his oath at his coronation (besides many other causes.) If therefore the Pope should attempt anything against the King, by process or other matter in deed: That the king shall his subjects, should withal their force and power resist the same.

Here moreover is not to be omitted, howe in the said present Parliament, the Universities of Oxford & Cambridge on the one side, and the Friers of the four orders mendicants in the said universities on the other side: Made long complaints the one against the other, to the king in Parliament, and in the ende submitted themselves to the kings order.

After which, the king upon full digesting of the whole matter (by assent of Parliament) took order: that as well the Chancellor & scholars, as the friers of those orders in the said Universities: should in all graces and other school exercises, use eche other in friendly wise, without any rumor as before. That none of those orders, should receive any scholars into their said orders, being under the age of 18. years.

That the said Friers shall take no advantage, ne procure Bulls or other process from Rome, against the said universities, or proceed therein.

And that the king have power to redress all controversies, between them from thence forth. And the offenders to be punished at the pleasure of the King, and of the counsel.

Notes of the 50. year of king Edward the third.

IN process of the foresaid Acts and Rolls, it followeth more, that in the 50. year of the reign of king Edward the 3. the year of our Lord 1376. another great Parliament was assembled at Westminster the xxiiij. of April: Where, Syr John Knyuet being Lord Chancelor of England, a certain long Bill was put up against the vsurpatiōs of the Pope, as being the cause of all y ^• plagues, murrions, famine, and poverty of the realm, so as thereby was not left the third person, or other commodity within the realm that lately was.

2. That the taxes paid to the Pope of Rome for Ecclesiastical dignities, do amount to five fold as much, as the tax of all profits as appertain to the king by the year of his whole Realm: And that for someone Byshoprike or other dignity, the Pope by way of translation and death, hath 3.4. or 5. several taxes.

3. That the brokers of that sinful City, for money promote many caitifes (being altogether unlearned and unworthy) to a 1000. marks living by year, where the learned and worthy can hardly obtain 20. marks, wherelearning decayeth.

4. That aliens (enemies to this land) who never saw ne care not to se their parishioners, have those livings whereby they despise God's service, & convey away the treasure, and are worse then Jews or Sarasens.

5. Also it was put up in the said Bill to be considered, that the laws of the church, would such livings to be bestowed for charity, only without praying or paying.

6. That reason would that livings given of devotion, should be bestowed in hospitality.

7. That God had committed his sheep to the Pope, to be pastured and not shoren or shaven.

8. That lay patrons perceiving the covetousness and simony of the pope, do thereby learn to sell their benefices to beasts, none otherwise then Christ was sold to the Jews.

9. That there is none so rich a Prince in Christendom, that hath the fourth part of so much treasure, as the Pope hath out of this realm, for churches most sinfully.

10. Ouer and besides in the said Bill, repeting again the tendering zeal, for the honor of the Church: was declared and particularly named, all the plagues which have justly fallen upon this realm, for suffering the same church to be so defaced, with declaration that it will daily increase without redress.

11. Wherupon, with much persuasion this was desired, to help to re-edify the same: and the rather for that, this was the year of Iubiley, the 50. year of the kings reign, the year of joy and gladness, then the which there could be no greater.

12. The means howe to begin this, was to write 2. letters to the Pope: the one in Latin under the kings scale, the other in French under the seals of the nobles, importing their particularities, & requiring redress, of the which letter of the Lord's, the effect may be seen in a like letter mentioned before, pag. 479.

13. And for a further accomplishment hereof to enact, that no money were carried forth of the realm by letter of Lūbardy or otherwise, or pain of forfeiture and imprisonment, and to enact the articles hereafter ensuing.

14. The king hath heretofore by statute provided sufficient remedy, and otherwise pursueth the same with the holy father the Pope, & so mindeth to do from time to time, until he hath obtained as well for the matters before, as for the articles ensuing being in a manner all one.

15. That the popes collector & other strangers the kings enemies, and only lyger spies for English dignities, and disclosing of the secretes of the realm, may be touched.

16. That the same collectour being also receauour of the popes pence, keepeth a house in London with clerks and officers thereto, as it were one of the kings solemn courts, transporting yearly to the Pope xx. M. marks, and most commonly more.

17. That Cardinals & other aliens remaining at Rome, whereof one Cardinal is Dean of York, another of Salisbury, another of Lyncoln, another archdeacon of Canterbury, another Archdeacon of Duresme, another archdeacon of Suffolk, another Archdeacon of York, another prebendary of Thame & Nassington, another prebendary of Bucks in the Church of York: Have diverse of the best dignities of England, & have sent over to them yearly xx. M. marks over and above that which English brokers lying there, have.

18. That the Pope (to ransom the Frenchmenne the kings enemies, who defond Lumbardy from him) doeth always at his pleasure leuie a subsidy of the whole Clergy of England.

19. That the Pope for more gain maketh sundry translations of all the Byshoprickes and other dignities within the Realm.

20. That the popes collector hath this year taken to his dic the first fruits of all benefices, by collatiō or provision.

21. To renew all the statutes against prouisors frō Rome, since that the Pope reserveth all the benefices of the world for his own proper gift, & hath this yere created 12. new Cardinals, so as now there are thirty, where was wont to be but 12. and all those Cardinals, except 2. or 3. are the kings enemies.

22. That the Pope in time, will give the temporal mannors of those dignities to y ^e kings enemies, since he so daily usurpeth upon the Realm, and the kings regalities.

23. That all houses and corporatiōs of religion, who unto the kings reign now had free election of heads, the Pope hath encroched the same to himself.

24. That in all legacies from the Pope, whatsoever: the English clergy beareth the charge of the legates, and all for the goodness of our money.

25. And so it appeareth, that if the money of the Realm were as plentiful as ever it was: the Collectors aforesaid, with the Proctors of Cardinals, would soon convey the same.

26. For remedy hereof it may be provided, that no such Collector or Proctor do remain in England, on pain of life and member. And that no English man on the like pain, become any such Collector or Proctor, or remain at Rome.

27. For better information hereof, and namely touching the Popes Collector, for that the whole clergy being obedient to him, dare not displease him: It were good, that syr John Strensale, parsone of S. Botulphes in Holborne, may be sent to come before the Lord's and commons of this Parliament. who being straightly charged, can declare much more, for that he served the same Collector in house 5. years.

And thus much of this bill touching the popes matters: whereby it may appere, not to be for naught that hath been upon us reported by the Italians and other strangers, which used to call English men good Asses: for they bear all burdens that be laid upon them.

Item, in the said parliament it was provided also, that such order as is made in London against the horrible vice of usury, may be observed throughout the whole realm.

The commons of the diocese of York complain of the outrageous taking of the Bishop and his clerks, for admission of priests to their benefices.

To these records of the parliament above prefixed of the 50. yere of this king Edward: we will adjoin also other notes, collected out of the parliament, in the yere next following, which was 51. and last year of this kings life and reign, An. 1377. the 27. of January: Although in the printed boke, these statutes are said to be made at the parliament holden, as above in the 50. year which is much mistaken, and ought to be referred to the 51. yere, as by the records of the said yere, manifestly doth appear.

In which Parliament, the Bishop of S. David's being Lord Chancelor, making a long oration, taking his theme out of S. Paul: Libenter suffertis insipientes. &c. Declaring in the said Oration many things, as first, in showing the joyful news of the old kings recouerye: then declaring the love of God toward the king and realm, in chastising him with sickness: Afterwarde showing the blessing of God upon the king, in seeing his childrens children: Then by a similitude of the head & members, exhorting the people as members to cōform themselves to the goodness of the head. Lastly, he turned his matter to the Lord's and the rest, declaring the cause of that assembly: that for so much as the French king had allied himself with the Spaniards and Scots the kings enemies, which had prepared great powers, conspiring to blot out the English tongue and name: the king therefore was willing to have therein their faithful counsel.

This being declared by the Bishop: Sir Robert Ashton the kings chamberlaine, declaring y ^t he was to moon them from the king, for the profit of the realm (the which words perca • e lay not in the Bishops mouth, for that it touched the Pope) viz. By protesting first, that the Kyng was ready to do all that ought to be done for the pope. But for that diverse usurpations were done by the Pope to the Kyng his crown, and Realm, as by particular bills in this parliament should be shown, he required of them to seek redress.

In this present parliament petition was made by the commons, that all prouisors of things from Rome, & their ministers, should be out of the kings protection.

Whereunto the king answered, that the Pope had promised redress, which if he did not, the laws then should stand.

It was also in that Parliament required, that every person of what sex soever, being professed of any religion, continuing the habit of 15. years, may upon the triail of the same in any of the kings courts, be in law utterly forbarred of all inheritance, albeit he have dispen • ation from the pope. Against which dispensation, is the chief grudge. whereunto the king and the lords answered, saying, that they would provide.

Item, in the said Parliament was propounded, that the statute of prouisors made at any time may be executed, and that remedy may be had against such Cardinals, as have within the provinces of Canterbury and York, purchased reservations, with the clause of Anteferri, to the value of xx. or xxx. thousand Scures of gold against the Popes Collector: who was wont to be an Englishman, and now is a mere French, residing at London, & conueieth yearly to the Pope xx. M. marks, or xx. M. pound, who this year gathereth the first fruits whatsoever. Alledging the means to meet with these reservations and nouelries, as: to command all strangers to depart the Realm during the wars, that no English man to become their farmour, or to send to them any money without special license, on pain to be out of the kings protection: whereunto was answered by the king, that the statutes and ordinances therefore made, should be observed.

In these rolles and records of such Parliamentes as was in this kings time continued, diverse other things are to be noted much worthy to be marked, and not to be suppressed in silence. Wherein the Reader may learn and understand the state of the kings jurisdiction here within this realm, not to be straightened in those days (although the Pope then seemed to be in his chief ruffe) as afterward since in other kings days was seen. As may appear in the parliament of the 15. year of this king Edward the 3. and in the 24. article of the said Parliament: where it is to be read, that the kings officers and temporal Justices did then both punish userers, an • impeached the officers of the Church for bribery, and for taking money for temporal pain, probate of willes, solemnity of Marriage. &c. all the pretensed liberties of the popish church to the contrary notwithstanding.

Furthermore, in the Parliament of the 25. year, appeareth: that the liberties of the clergy and their exemptions in claiming the deliverance of men by their book under th • name of Clerks, stood then in little force, as appeared by one Hauketyne Honby knight: who for imprisonning one of the kings subjects, till he made fine of 20. li. was therefore executed, notwithstanding the liberty of the Clergy, which by his book would have saved him, but could not.

The like also appeared by judgment given against a priest at Nottingham, for killing of his master.

And likewise by hanging certain monks of Comb. Ex Parliam. An. 23. Ed. 3.

Item, in the Parliament of the 15. year, by apprehending of I. Stratford, Archbishop of Canterbury, and his arrainment: concerning which his arrainment, all things were committed to sir William of Kildisby.

Besides these truths and notes of the kings Parliaments, wherein may appear y ^• toward proceedings of this king & of all his commons against the pretensed church of Rome: Thys is moreover to be added to the commendation of the king, how in the volumes of the acts & rolles of the king appeareth. That the said king Edward the 3. sent also John Wycliffe, reader then of the Divinity lector in Oxford, with certain other Lord's & Ambassadors over into the parts of Italy, to treat with the Popes Legates concerning affairs betwixt the King and the Pope w ^t full commission: the tenor whereof here followeth expressed.

In English thus.

The King to all and singular to whom these presents shall come greeting. Know ye, that we reposing assured confidence in the fidelity and wisdom of the reverend father John Bishoppe of Bangor, and other our loving and faithful subjects, M. John Wycliffe, reader of the divinity lecture, M. John Gunter Dean of Segobyen. and M. Simon Moulton doctor of the law, Syr William Burton Knight, M John Belknappe, & M. John Honnington, have directed them as our Ambassadors and special Commissioners to the partes beyond the seas. Geuing to the said our Ambassadors and Commissioners, to six or five of them, of whom I will that the said Bishop shall be one, full power and authority, with commandment special, to treat and consult mildly and charitably with the Legates and Ambassadors of the L. Pope touching certain affairs. Where upon of late we sent heretofore the said Bishop, and M. William Vghtred monk of Duresme, and M. John Shepie to the see Apostolical: And hereof to make full relation of all things done and past in the said assembly, that all such things which may tend to the honor of holy Church and the advancement of our crown and this our realm may by the assistance of God and the wisdom of the see Apostolical be brought to good effect, and accomplished accordingly. Witnes our selves. &c. at London dated the 26. day of July in the 48. year of our reign.

By the which it is to be noted, what good will the king then bare to the said Wycliffe, and what small regard he had to the sinful sea of Rome.

Of the which John wickleff, because we are now approached to his time: remaineth consequently for our story to entreat of, so as we have here to fore done of other like valiant soldiers of Christ's Church before him.

John Wycliffe.

AFter all these heretofore recited, by whom (as ye have heard) it pleased the Lord something to work against the Bishop of Rome, & to weaken the pernicious superstition of the Friers. Now remaineth consequently following the course of years, orderly to enter into the story and tractation of John Wycliffe our countreyman, and other moe of his time, and same country, whom the Lord (with the like zeal and power of spirit) raised up here in England, to detect more fully and amply the poison of the Popes doctrine, & false religion set up by the Friars. In whose opinions and assertions, albeit some blemishes perhaps may be noted: yet such blemishes they be, which rather declare him to be a mā that might err, then which directly did fight against Christ our Savior, as the Popes proceedings and the friers did. And what doctor or learned man hath ben from the prime age of the church, so perfect, so absolutely sure, in whom no opinyon hath sometime swerved awry? And yet be the said articles of his, neither in number so many, nor yet so gross in themselves and so cardinal, as those Cardinal enemies of Christ perchance do give them out to be: if his books whō they abolished, were remaining to be conferred w ^t those blemishes, which they have wrasted to the worst, as evil will never said the best.

This is certain and cannot be denied, but that he being the public Reader of Divinity in the University of Oxford: was for the rude time wherein he lived, famously reputed for a great clerk, a deep scholeman, & no less expert in all kind of philosophy. The which doth not only appear by his own most famous and learned writings and monuments, but also by the confession of Walden his most cruel & bitter enemy. Who in a certain Epistle written unto pope Martin the fifth, saith that he was wonderfully astonyshed at his most strong arguments, with the places of authority which he had gathered, with the vehemency and force of his reasons. &c. And thus much out of Walden. It appeareth by such as have observed the order and course of tunes, that this wickleffe flourished about the year of our Lord. 1371. Edward the third reigning in England: for thus we do find in the Chronicles of Caxton. In the yere of our Lord 1371. (saith he) Edward the third, king of England in his Parliament, was against the Popes clergy: He willingly hearkened and gave ear to the voices and tales of heretics, with certain of his counsel: conceiving and following sinister opinions against the Clergy. Wherefore (afterward) he tasted and suffered much adversity & trouble. And not long after, in the year of our Lord (saith he) 1372. he wrote unto the Bishop of Rome, that he should not by any means entermeddle anymore w ^t in his kingdom as touching the reservation, or distribution of benefices: and that all such by shops as were under his dominion, should enjoy their former and ancient liberty, and be confirmed of their Metropolitans, as hath ben accustomed in tunes past. &c. Thus much writeth Caxtō: But as touching the just number of the yere and time, we will not be very curious or careful about, at this present. Thys is out of all doubt, that at what time all the world was in most desperate and vile estate, & that the lamentable ignorance and darkness of God his truth had overshadowed the whole earth: this man stepped forth like a valiant champiō, unto whom it may justly be applied that is spoken in the boke called Ecclesiasticus of one Simon the son of Onias. Even as the morning star being in the midst of a cloud, & as the Moon being full in her course, and as the bright beams of the Sun, so doeth he shine and glister in the temple and Church of God.

Thus doth almighty God continually succor & help, whē all things are in despair: being always (according to the Prophecye of the Psalm) a helper in time of need. The which thing never more plainly appeared, then in these latter days and extreme age of the Church: when as the whole state & condition (not only of worldly things, but also of Religion) was depraved and corrupted. That like as the disease named Lethargus among the Phis • uons, even so the state religion amongst the Divines, was past all men's help and remedy. The only name of Christ remained amongst Christians, but his true & lively doctrine was as far unknown unto the most part, as his name was common unto all men. As touching faith, consolation, the end & use of the law, the office of Christ, of our impotency and weakness, of the holy ghost, of the greatness & strength of sin, of true works, of grace and free justification of liberty of a Christian man, wherein consisteth and resteth the sum and matter of our profession: there was no mention or any word almost spokē of Scripture, learning & divinity, was known but unto a few, & that in the schools only: & there also turned & converted almost all into sophistry. Instead of Peter & Paul, men occupied their time in studying Aquinas and Scotus, and the master of sentence. The world leaving & forsaking the lively power of God's spiritual word and doctrine, was altogether led and blinded with outward ceremonies & human traditions, wherein the whole scope, in a manner of all Christian perfection did consist & depend. In these was all the hope of obtaining salvation fully fixed: hereunto all things were attributed. In so much, that scarcely any other thing was seen in the temples or Churches, taught or spoken of in sermons, or finally intended or gone about in their whole life, but only heaping up of certain shadowed ceremonies upon ceremonies, neither was there any end of their heaping.

The people were taught to worship no other thing but that which they did see, and did see almost nothing which they did not worship.

The Church being degenerated from the true Apostolic institutiō above all measure (reserving only the name of the Apostolic Church, but far from the truth thereof in very deed) did fall into all kind of extreme tyranny: where as the poverty and simplicity of Christ was changed into cruelty and abomination of life. Instead of the Apostolic gifts and continual labors and trauelles, slothfulness & ambitiō was crept in amongst the priests. Besides all this, there arose & sprong up a thousand sortes and fashions of strange religions, being the only root & well head of all superstitiō. How great abuses and deprauations were crept into the Sacraments, at what time they were compelled to worship similitudes and signs of things, for the very things themselves: and to adore such things as were instituted and ordained only for memorials? Finally what thing was there, in the whole state of Christian religion so sincere, so sound and pure, which was not defiled and spotted with some kind of superstitiō? Besides this, with how many bonds & snares of daily new fangled ceremonies, the seely consciences of men redeemed by Christ to liberty, were snared and snarled? In so much, that there could be no great difference almost perceived between Christianity and Iuishnes, save only the name of Christ, so that the state and condition of the Jews, might seem somewhat more tolerable then ours. There was nothing sought for out of the true fountains, but out of the dirty pudles of the Philistines. The Christian people were wholly carried away as it were by the noses, with mere decrees and constitutions of men, even whether as pleased the bishops to lead them, and not as Christ's will did direct them. All the whole world was filled and overwhelmed with errors and darkness. And no great marvel, for why the simple and unlearned people being far from all knowledge of the holy Scripture: thought it sufficient enough for them, to know only these things which were delivered them by their pastors and shepherds, and they on the other part taught in a manner nothing else, but such things as came forth of the Court of Rome. Whereof the most part tended to the profit of their order more then to the glory of Christ.

The Christian faith was esteemed or counted none other thing then, but y ^t every man should know that Christ once suffered, that is to say, that all men should know and understand y ^t thing which the devils thenselves also knew. Hypocrisy was counted for wonderful holiness. All men were so addict unto outward shows, that even they thenselves which professed y ^t most absolute & singular knowledge of the scriptures, scarcely did understand or know any other thing. And this evidently did appere, not only in the common sort of doct • urs and teachers, but also in the very heads and captains of the Church: whose whole religion and holiness, consisted in a manner in the observing of days, meats, and garments, and such like rethorical circumstances, as of place, time, person, &c. Hereof sprang so many sorts & fashions of vestures and garments: so many differences of colors & meats: with so many pilgrimages to several places, as though f. James at Compostella could do that, which Christ could not do at Canterbury: Or else that God were not of like power & strength in every place, or could not be found but being sought for by running & gadding hither and thither. Thus the holiness of the whole yere was trāsported and put of unto the Lent season. No country or land was counted holy, but only Palestine, where Christ had walked himself with his corporal feet. Such was the blindness of y ^t tune, men did strive and fight for the cross at Jerusalem, as it had been for the chief and only force and strength of our faith. It is a wonder to read the monuments of the formore times, to see and understand what great troubles & calamities this cross hath caused almost in every Christian common wealth. For the Romish champions never ceased, by writing, admonishing, and coūsailing, yea and by quarreling, to move & stir up Princes minds to war & battle, even as though the faith & belief of the gospel, were of small force or little effect w ^t out that wooden cross. This was y ^e cause of y ^t expedition of the most noble prince K. Rich. unto Jerusalem. Who being taken in the same journey, and delivered unto the Emperor: could scarcely be raunsomed home again, for xxx. M. marks. pag. 248. In the same enterprise or journey, Fridericus the Emperor of Rome a man of most excellent virtue, was much endamaged in the same journey. an. 1179. And also Philip the king of France, scarcely returned home again in safety not without great losses: so much did they esteem the recovery of the holy city and cross.

Upon this alone, all men's eyes, minds, & devotions, were so set and bent: as though either there were no other cross but that, or that the cross of Christ were in no other place but only at Jerusalem. Such was the blindness and superstition of those days, which understood or knew nothing but such as were outwardly seen: whereas y ^e profession of our religion standeth in much other higher matters and greater mysteries. what was the cause why that Urbanus did so vex and torment himself? Because that Antioch with the holy cross, was lost out of the hands of the Christians. For so we do find it in the Chronicles, at what time as Jerusalem with king Buido, and the cross of our Lord was taken, and under the power of Sultan: Urbanus toke the mater so grievously, that for very sorrow he died. In whose place succeeded Lambertus which was called Gregory the 8. by whose motion it was decreed by the Cardinals, that (setting apart all riches and voluptuousness) they should preach the cross of Christ, and by their poverty and humility first of all should take the cross upon them, & go before others into the land of Jerusalem. These are the words of the history, whereby it is evident unto the vigilant reader, unto what grosenes the true knowledge of the spiritual doctrine of the gospel was degenerate and grown unto in those days: How great blindness & darkness was in those days, even in the first primacy, & supremacy of the bishop of Rome: as though the outward succession of Peter and the Apostles, had ben of greater force and effect to that matter. What doeth it force in what place. Peter did rule or not rule? It is much more to be regarded that every man should labor and study with all their endeavor to follow the life & confession of Peter: And that man seemeth unto me to be the true successor of Peter, against whom the gates of hell shall not prevail. For if that Peter in the gospel do bear the type & figure of the Christian church (as all men in a manner do affirm) what more foolish or vain thing can there be: then thorough private usurpation, to restrain and to bind that unto one man, which by the appointment of the Lord, is of it self free and open to so many?

Thus in these so great and troublous times and horrible darkness of ignorance, what time there seemed in a manner to be no one so little a spark of pure doctrine left or remaining: This foresaid wickliffe by God's providence sprang and rose up: thorough whom, the Lord would first waken and raise up again the world, which was overmuch drowned and whelmed in the depe streams of human traditions. Thus you have here the time of wickliffes original.

Which Wycliffe after he had now by a long time professed deuinity in the university of Oxford, and perceiving the true doctrine of Christ's Gospel to be adulterate and defiled, with so many filthy inventions of Bishops, sects of monks, and dark errors: And that he after long debating and deliberating with himself (with many secrete sighs and bewailing in his mind the general ignorance of the whole world) could no longer suffer or abide the same but that he at the last, determined with himself to help and to remedy such things as he saw to be wide and out of the way. But for so much as he saw that this dangerous meddling, could not be attempted or stirred without great trouble, neither that these things which had been so long tune with use and custom rooted and grafted in men's minds, could not be suddenly plucked up or taken away, he thought w ^t himself that this matter should be done by little & little. Wherefore he taking his original at small occasions, thereby opened himself a way or mean to greater matters. And first he assailed his adversaries in logical & metaphisical questions, disputing w ^t them of the first form & fashion of things, of the increase of time, and of the intelligible substance of a creature, w ^t other such like sophemes of no great effect: but yet notwithstanding did not a little help and furnish him, which minded to dispute of greater matters. So in these matters, first began Regningham (a Carmelite) to dispute and argue against John Wycliffe.

By these originals, the way was made unto greater points, so that at the length he came to touch the matters of the sacraments, and other abuses of the Church. Touching which things this holy man took great pains, protesting (as they said) openly in the schools, that it was his chief and principal purpose and intent: to revoke and call back the Church from her Idolatry to some better amendment, especially in the matter of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. But this bile or sore could not be touched without the great grief and pain of the whole world. For first of all, the whole glutte of Monks and begging Friers were set on a rage or madness, which (even as Hornets with their sharp stings) did assayle this good man on every side: fighting (as is said) for their aultars, paunches and bellies. After them the priests, and then after them the Archb. took the matter in hand being then S. Sudbury, who for the same cause deprived him of his benefice, which then he had in Oxford. Notwythstanding he being somewhat friended & supported by the king, as appeareth, continued and bare out the malice of the Friers, and of the Archb. all this while of his first beginning, till about the year of our Lord. 1377. After which time now to prosecute likewise of his troubles & conflict, first I must fetch about a little compass, as requisite is, to infer some mention of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster the kings son, and Lord Henry Percy, which were his special maintainers.

As years and time grew on, king Edward the third, which had reigned now about 51. years, after the decease of prince Edward his son, who departed the year before: was stricken in great age, & in such feblenes withal, that he was unwieldy through lack of strength to govern the affairs of the realm. Wherefore, a parliament being called the year before his death, it was there put up by the knights & other the burgesses of the Parliament (because of the misgouernment of the realm by certain greedy persons about the king, raking all to themselves, without seeing any justice done) that 12. sage and discrete Lord's and Pieres, such as were free from note of all avarice, should be placed as tutours about the Kyng, to have the doing and disposing under him (6. at one time, and in their absence 6. at another) of matters pertinent to the public regiment. Here by the way I omit to speak of Alice Perris the wicked harlot, which (as the story giveth) had bewitched the kings heart, & governed all and sat upon canses herself through the devilish help of a Frier Dominick: who by the duke of Lancaster was caused to be take, and was convicted, & should have suffered for the same, had not the Archb. of Cant. and the Friers (more regarding the liberty of their Church, then the punishing of vice) reclaimed him for their own prisoner. This Alice Perrys, notwithstanding she was banished by this Parliament from the king, yet afterward she came again, & left him not: til at his death she took all his rings upon his fingers and other jewels frō him, and so fled away like an harlot. But this of her by the way.

These 12. governors by the parliament aforesaid being appointed to have the tuition of the king, & to attend to the public affairs of y ^e realm: remained for a certain space about him, till afterward it so fell out, that they being again removed, all the regiment of the realm next under the King, was committed to the Duke of Lancaster the kings son: For as yet Richard the son of prince Edward lately departed, was very young and under age.

This Duke of Lancaster had in his heart of long time conceived a certain displeasure against the popish clergy: whether for corrupt and impure doctrine joined w ^t like abhominable excess of life, or for what some other cause, it is not precisely expressed. Only by story the cause thereof may be gessed, to rise by William Wickam bishop of Winchester. The matter is this.

The Bishop of Winchester (as the saying went then) was reported to affirm, that the foresaid John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, was not the son of king Edward, nor of the Queen. Who being in travel at Gaūt, had no son (as he said) but a daughter: which the same time by lying upon of the mother in the bed, was there smothered. Whereupon, the Queen fearing the kings displeasure, caused a certain manchild of a woman of Flaunders (borne the very same time) to be conveyed and brought unto her instead of her daughter aforesaid. And so brought up the child whom she bare not, who now is called duke of Lancaster. And this (said the Bishop) did the Queen tell him, lying in extremes on her death bed under seal of confession: charging him if the said Duke should ever aspire to get the crown, or if the kingdom by any means should fall unto him, he then should manifest the same, & declare it to the world, that the said Duke of Lancaster was no part of the kings blood, but a false heir of the king. This slanderous report of the wicked Bishop, as it savoreth of a contumelious lie, so seemeth it to proceed of a subtle zeal toward the Popes religion, meaning falsehood. For that the foresaid Duke by favoring of Wycliffe, declared himself to be a professed enemy against the Popes profession. Whych thing was then not unknown, neither unmarked of the Prelates and Bishops then in England. But the sequel of the story thus followed.

Thys slanderous vilany of the Bishops report being blased abroad, and coming to the Dukes ear: he therw ^t being not a little discontented (as no marvel was) sought again by what means he could, to be revenged of this forenamed Bishop. In conclusion, the Duke having now all the government of the realm under the king his father, in his own hand: so pursued y ^e bishop of Winchester, that by act of parliament he was condemned and deprived of all his temporal goods, which goods wer assigned to prince Rich. of Burdeur, the next inheritor of the crown after the king, and furthermore inhibited the said bishop not to approach nere to y ^e court by 20. miles. Further as touching this bishop, the story thus proceedeth. Not long after in the year of our Lord. 1377. a Parliament was called by the means of the Duke of Lancaster, upon certain causes & respects: in which parliament great request, and suit was made by the clergy for the deliverance of the B. of Winchester. At length whē a subsidy was asked in the kings name of the clergy, and request also made in the kings behalf for spedy expedition to be made for the dissolving of y ^e parliament, the Archb. therefore accordingly convented the bishops for the tractation thereof. To whō the B. w ^t great lamentation complained for lack of their fellow and brother B. of Wint. Whose injury said they, did derogate to the liberties of the whole church: And therefore denied to join themselves in tractation of any such matters, before all the members together were united w ^t the head: And (seeing the matter touched them altogether in common, as well him as thē) would not otherwise do. And seemed moreover to be moved against y ^e Archb. for that he was not more stout in the cause, but suffered him so to be cited of the duke.

The Archb. although having sufficient cause to excuse himself, wherefore not to send for him (as also he did) because of the perils which might ensue thereof: yet being enforced & persuaded thereunto, by the importunity of the bishops, directed down his letters to the foresaid bishop of wintch, willing him to resort unto the convocation of the clergy. Who being glad to obey the same, was received w ^t great joy of the other bishops. And at length by y ^t means of Alice Perris, the kings paramor, above mentioned, (giving to her a good quantity of money) the said Winchester was restored to his temporalities again.

As the Bishops had thus sent for wintch. the Duke in the mean time had sent for John Wycliffe: who as is said, was then the divinity reader in Oxford, and had cōmenced in sundry acts and disputations, contrary to the form and teaching of the Popes church in many things: who also for the same had been deprived of his benefice, as hath been afore touched. The opinions which he began in Oxford, first in his lectures, and sermons to entreat of, and wherefor he was deprived were these. That the Pope had no more power to excommunicate any man, then hath another. That if it be givē by any persō to the pope to excommunicate, yet to absolve the same is as much in the power of another priest, as in his. He affirmed moreover, y ^t neither y ^e king nor any temporal Lord could give any perpetuity to the church, or to any ecclesiastical person: for that when such ecclesiastical do sin, habitualiter, continuing in the same still, the temporal powers ought and may meritoriously, take away from them, that before hath been bestowed upon thē. And that he proved, to have been practiced before here in England by Williā Rufus. which thing (said he) if he did lawfully, why may not the same also be practiced now? if he did it unlawfully, then both the church err (saith he) & doth unlawfully in praying for him. But of his assertions more shall follow (Christ willing) hereafter. The story which ascribeth to him these assertions being taken out (as I take it) of y ^t monastery of S. Albons addeth withal: that in his teaching and preaching he was very eloquent, but a dissembler (saith he) and an hypocrite. Why he surmiseth him to be an hypocrite, the cause was this:

First, because he resorted much to the orders of the begging Friers, frequenting and extolling the perfection of their poverty.

Secondly, because he and his fellows usually accustomed in their preaching to go baretoote, and in simple russet gowns.

By this I suppose, may sufficiently appear to the indifferent, the nature and condition of Wycliffe, how far it was frō the ambitiō & pride, which in the slaundrous pen of Polydore Virgil, reporting in his 19. book of him, that because he was not preferred to higher honors and dignities of the church (conceiving therefore indignation against the clergy) became their mortal enemy. How true this was, he only knoweth best, that rightly shall judge both y ^• one and the other.

In the mean time, by other circūstaunces & partes of his life, we may also partly conjecture what is to be thoght of y ^t mā. But howsoever it was in him either true or false: yet it had been Polidors part, either not so intemperatly to have abused his pen, or at least to have shown some greater authority and ground of that his report. For to follow nothing else but flying fame, so rashlye to defame a man whose life he knoweth not, is not the part of a faithful story writer.

But to return from whence we digressed. Beside these his opinions and assertions above recited, with other mo, which are hereafter to be brought in order: He began also then something nearly to touch the matter of the Sacrament, proving that in the said Sacrament, the accidences of bread remained not without the subject, or substance: both by the holy Scriptures, and also by the authority of the doctors, but specially by such as were most ancient. As for the latter writers, that is to say such as have written upon that argument under the thousand years since Christ's time, he utterly refused: saying, that after these years Satan was loosed & set at liberty. And that since that time the life of man hath been most subject and in danger of errors: the simple and plain truth to appear and consist in the Scriptures, whereunto all humam traditions whatsoever they be, must be referred, and specially such as are set forth & published now of late years. This was the cause why he refused the latter writers of decretals, leaning only to the Scriptures & ancient doctors: most stoutly affirming out of them that in the Sacrament of the body which is celebrate, with bread the accidēce not to be present without the substance. That is to say, that the body of Christ is not present without the bread, as the common sort of Priests in those days did dream, As for his arguments what they were: we will shortly at more opportunity by God's grace, declare them in another place. But herein the truth (as the Poet speaketh very truly) had gotten John Wickeliffe great displeasure and hatred, at many men's hands: and specially of the Monks and richest sort of Priests.

Albeit through the favor and supportation of the duke of Lancaster, and Lord Henry Percy, he persisted hitherto in some mean quiet against their wolvish violence & eruelty: Till at last about the year of our Lord. 1376. the Bishops still urging and inciting their Archbishop Simon Sudberye, who before had deprived him, and afterward prohibited him also not to stir anymore in those sorts of matters: had obtained by process and order of citation to have him brought before them. Whereunto both place and time for him to appear after their usual form was to him assigned.

The Duke having intelligence that Wycliffe his client should come before the Bishops, fearing that he being but one, was to weak against such a multitude: calleth to him out of the orders of Friers, four Bachelers of Divinity, out of every order one, to join them with Wycliffe also for more surety. When the day was come assigned to the said Wycliffe to appear, which day was Thursday, the 19. of February: John Wycliffe accompanied with the four Friers aforesaid, and with them also, the Duke of Lancaster, and Lord Henry Percy, Lord Marshal of England, the said Lord Percy also going before them to make room and way wherewith wickliffe should come.

Thus wickliffe (through the providence of god) being sufficiently guarded, was coming to the place where the Bishops sat: whom by the way they animated and exhorted not to fear nor shrink a whit at the company of the bishops there present, who were all unlearned (said they) in respect of him. For so proceed y ^t words of my foresaid author, whom I follow in this narration: neither that he should dread the concourse of the people, whom they would themselves assiste and defend, in such sort as he should take no harm. With these words, and with the assistance of the nobles: wickliffe in heart encouraged, approacheth to y ^t church of S. Paul in London. where a main press of people was gathered to hear, what should be said & done. Such was there the frequency and throng of the multitude, that the Lord's (for all y ^e puissance of the high Marshall) vnneth with great difficulty could get way through. In so much, that the bishop of London (whose name was William Courtney) seeing the stir that the Lord Marshal kept in the Church, among the people, speaking to y ^t Lord Perry, said: that if he had known before what maistries he would have kept in the church, he would have stopped him out, from coming there.

At which words of the Bishop, the Duke disdaining not a little, answered to the Bishop again, and said: that he would keep such maisterie there, though he said nay.

At last, after much wrestling they pierced through and came to our Ladies chapel. Where the Dukes and Barons were sitting together with the Archbishops & other Bishops. Before whom the foresaid John Wycliffe according to the manner, stood before thē, to know what should be laid unto him. To whom first spake the Lord Percy, bidding him to sit down, saying: that he had many things to answer to, and therefore had need of some softer seat. But the bishop of London cast eftsoons into a fumish chase w ^t those words, said: he should not sit there. Neither was it said he: according to law or reason, that he which was cited there to appear to answer before his ordinary, should sit down during the time of his answer, but should stand. Upon these words a fire began to heat & kindle between them. In so much that they began to rate and to revile one the other, that the whole multitude therewith disquieted, began to be set on a hurrey.

Then the Duke taking the Lord Percies part with hasty words began also to take up the bishop. To whom the Bishops again nothing inferior in reproachful checks and rebukes, did render & require not only to him as good as he brought: but also did so far excel him, in this railing art of scolding, that to use the words of mine author, Erubuit Dux quod non potuit praeualere litigio. i. that the Duke blushed and was ashamed, because he could not overpass the Bishop in brawling and railing, and therefore fell to plain threatening, manasing y ^t bishop, that he would bring down the pride not only of him, but also of all the prelacy of England: And speaking moreover unto him: Thou (said he) bearest thyself so brag upon thy parents, which shall not be able to help thee: They shall have enough to do to help themselves. For his parents were the Earl and countesse of Devonshire. To whom the bishop again answered, that to be bold to tell truth, his confidence was not in his parents, nor in any man else, but only in God in whō he trusted. Then y ^e Duke softly whispering in the care of him next by him, said that he would rather pluck out the Bishop by the heir of his head out of the Church, then he would take this at his hand. This was not spoke so secretly, but that the Londoners ouerheard him. Wherupon being set in a rage, they cried out, saying: that they would not suffer their bishop so cōtemptuously to be abused. But rather they would loose their lives, then that he should so be drawn out by the heir. Thus that council being broken with scolding and brawling for that day, was dissolved before 9. of the cloke. And the Duke with the Lord Percy went to the Parliament. Where the same day, before dinner a bill was put up in the name of the king by the Lord Thomas Wostock, and Lord Henry Percy, that the City of London should no more be governed by a Mayor, but by a Captayne, as in times before. And that the Marshall of England should have all the ado in taking the Arestes within the said Citty, as in other cities beside, with other petitions moe, tending to the like derogation of the liberties of London. which bill being read, standeth up John Philpot Burgess then for the cit • y, saying to thē which read the bill, that that was never seen so before: & adding moreover that the Mayor would never suffer any such things, or other arest to be brought into the city, with mo such words of like stoutness.

The next day following, the Londoners assembled thenselves in a council, to consider among them upon the Bill for changing the Mayor, and about the office of the Marshall, also concerning the injuries done the day before to their Bishop.

In which mean time they being busy in long consultation of this matter, suddenly and unawares entered in the place two certain Lord's, whether to come to spy, or for what other cause the author leaveth it uncertain, the one called Lord Fizwalter: the other Lord Guy Brian. At the first coming in of thē, the vulgare sort was ready forthwith to flee upon them, as spies, had not they made their protestation with an oath, declaring that their coming in was for no harm toward them. And so were compelled by the citizens to swear to the city their truth and fidelity, contrary to the which oath if they should rebel, contented to forfeit whatsoever goods and possessions they had within the city.

This done, thē began the Lord Fizwalter in this wise to persuade and exhort the Citizens: first declaring how he was bound and obliged to them and to their Citty, not for the oath only now newly received, but of old and ancient good will from his great graundfathers time. Beside other diverse duties, for the which he was chiefly bound to be one of their principal fautors: for so much as what so ever tended to their damage and detriment, redounded also no less unto his own, for which cause he could not otherwise choose, but that as he did understand to be attempted against the public profit and liberties of the City, he must needs communicate the same to them. who unless they with speedy circumspection do occur and prevent perils that may and are like to ensue, it would turn in the end to their no small incōmoditie. And as there were many other things, which required their vigilant care and diligence, so one thing therr was, which he could in no wise but admonish them of: which was this, necessary to be considered of them all, how the Lord Marshall Henry Percy in his place within himself had one in ward and custody, whether with the knowledge, or without the knowledge of them, he could not tell: this he could tell, that the said Lord Marshall was not allowed any such ward or prison in his house, within the liberties of the Citty. Which thing if it be not seek to in time, the example thereof being suffered, would in fine breed to such a prejudice unto their customs and liberties, as they should not hereafter, when they would reform the injury thereof.

These words of the Lord Fizwalter were not so soon spoken, but they were as soon taken of the rash Citizens, who in all hasty fury running to their armor & weapons, went incontinently to the house of the Lord Percy, where breaking up the gates, by violence they took out the prisoner, & burned the stocks wherein he sat, in the midst of London. Then was the Lord Percy sought for (whom saith the story) they would doubtless have slain if they might have found him. With their bills and iauelins, all corners and privy chambers were searched, beds & hangings torn a sunder. But the Lord Percy (as God would) was then with the Duke, whom one John Yper the same day with great instance had desired to dinner. The Londoners not finding him at home, and supposing that he was with the Duke at Savoy, in all hasty heat turned their power thither, running as fast as they could to the Dukes house. Where also in like manner they were disapoynted of their cruel purpose. In y ^t mean while as this was doing, cometh one of the Dukes men running post hast, to y ^t Duke & to the Lord Percy, declaring what was done. The Duke being then at his oysters, without any further tarrying, and also breaking both his shinnes at the form for haste, took boat with the Lord Percy, and by water went to Kingstone, where then y ^e princesse with Richard the young Prince did lie. Who there declared unto the Princesse all y ^e whole matter, concerning the outrage of the Londoners as it was. To whom she promised again, such an order to be taken in the matter, as should be to his contentation. At what time the commons of London, thus as is said, were about the Dukes house at Savoy, me • teth with thē a certain priest, who marueling at the sudden rage & concourse, asked what they sought. To whom answer was given again of some, that they sought for the Duke and Lord Marshall, to have of them the Lord Peter de la Mare, whom they wrongfully had detained in prison. To this the Priest answered again more boldly then oportunely. That Peter (said he) is a false traitor to the king, and worthy long since to be hanged. At the hearing of these words, the furious people with a terrible shout cried out upon him, that he was a traitor and one that took the Dukes part and so falling upon him with their weapons strived who might first strike at him. Who after they had wounded him very sore, so being wounded they had him into prison, where within few days upon the sorenes of his wounds he died.

Neither would the rage of the people thus have ceased had not the bishop of London leaving his dinner come to them at Savoy, and putting them in remembrance of the blessed time (as they term it) of Leut, had persuaded them to cease and to be quiet.

The Londoners seeing that they could get no vantage against the Duke: who was without their reach: To bewreke their anger they took his arms, which in most despiteful wise, they hanged up in the open places of y ^e city in sign of reproach, as for a traitor. In so much that when one of his gentlemen came through the Citty with a plate containing the Dukes arms, hanging by a lace about his neck the cittizens not abiding the sight thereof, cast him frō his horse, and plucked his scutchine from him, had were about to work the extremity against him, and not the mayor rescued him out of their hands, and sent him home safe unto the Duke his master. In such hatred was then the Duke among the vulgar people of London.

After this, the princesse understanding the hearts and broyle of the Londoners set against the foresaid Duke, sent unto London 3. Knightes, syr Albred Lewer, sir Simon Burle, and sir Louis Cliffort, to entreat the citizens to be reconciled with the Duke. The Londoners answered: that they for the honor of y ^e princesse, would obey and do with all reverence, what she would require. But this they required & enjoined the mess̄gers to say to the Duke, by word of mouth, that he should suffer the bishop of Winchester afore mentioned and also the Lord Peter de la Mare, to come to their answer, & to be judged by their pieres. Whereby either they might be quite if they were giltles: or otherwise, if they be found culpable, they might receive occording to their deserts after the laws of the realm. What grief and displeasure the Duke conceived and retained in his mind hereof: Agayne what means & suit the Londoners for their part made to the old king for their liberties: What rymes and songs in London, were made against the Duke: Howe the Bishops at the Dukes request were moved to excommunicate those malicious slanderers: