Church History of Britain

For those who endeavor to make the way to heaven narrower then God hath made it, by prohibiting what he permits, do in event make the way to hell wider, occasioning the committing of such sins, which God hath forbidden. We may further observe, that the plaster now applied to the rotten sore of Sodometry, was too gentle, too narrow, and too little time laid on. Too gentle; for whereas the sin is conceived to deserve death, it was only slubber'd over, that the party convict of this Wickedness, if in Orders was admitted to no higher honor, and deposed from what he had, till restored again on his repentance. Too narrow, if it be true what one observes, that MONKS (as neither merely Lay nor Priests) were not threatened with this Curse, where all was hidden in Cloisters. Lastly, too little time laid on; for whereas at first it was constituted, that such Excommunication of Sodomites convicted, should solemnly be renewed every Lord's Day; this short-lived Canon did die in the birth thereof, and Anselm himself postponi concessit, suffered it to be omitted, on pretence that it put beastly thoughts into many men's minds, whose corruption abused the punishment of sin in the provocation thereof; whilst others conceive this relaxation indulged, in favor to some great offenders, who hardened in Conscience, but tender in Credit, could not endure to be so solemnly, publicly, and frequently grated with the shame of the sin they had committed.

So much for the Constitutions of that Synod, wherein though Canons were provided for Priests, Cap a Pe, from the shavnig to the shoes, yet not a syllable of their instructing the people and preaching God's word unto them. We must not forget, that men guilty of Simony in the first Canon, are not taken in the Vulgar acception, for such as were promoted to their places by money, but in a new coined sense of that word; for those who were advanced to their Dignities by investiture from the King, which gave occasion to the long and hot Broil, happening betwixt King Henry, and Anselm, which now we come to relate.

4. The King commanded him to Consecrate such Bishops, as he lately had invested; namely, William of Winchester, Roger of Hereford, &c. which Anselm refused, because flatly against the Canon newly made in the Council of Rome, by Pope Urban, that any who had their entrance, by the Authority of temporal Princes should be admitted to Bishoprics. Hereupon the King enjoined Gerard Arch-Bishop of York to Consecrate them; who out of opposition to Anselm his Competitour, was as officious to comply with the King King, as the other was backward, hoping thereby to hitch his Church a degree the higher, by help of his Royal Favor. Here happened an unexpected accident: For William, Bishop of Winchester, refused Consecration from the ArchBishop of York, and resigned his staff and ring, back again to the King, as illegally from him. This discomposed all the rest. For whereas more then the moity of Ecclesiastical persons in England, were all in the same condemnation, as invested by the King, the very multitude of offenders would have excused the offense, if loyal to their own cause. Whereas now this defection of the Bishop of Winchester, so brake the ranks, and maimed their entireness, that their cause thereby was cast by their own confession, and so a party raised among them against themselves.

5. Soon after, the King was contented that Anselm should go to Rome, to know the Popes pleasure herein. But one, none of the Conclave, without a prophetical spirit, might easily have foretold the resolution of his Holiness herein: never to part with power, whereof (how injuriously soever) though but pretendedly possessed. Anselm, for his compliance with the Pope herein, is forbidden to return into England, while the King seizeth on his temporalities.

6. However, not log after, by mediation of friends, they are reconciled; the King disclaiming his right of Investitures, a weak and timorous act, of so wise and valiant a Prince; whose Predecessors before the Conquest held this power (though some time loosely) in their own hands; and his Predecessors since the Conquest grasp'd it fast in their fist, in defiance of such Popes as would finger it from them. Whereas now he let it go out of his hand, whilst his Successors in vain, though with a long arm, reachit after it to recover it. And now Anselm, who formerly refused, consecrated all the Bishops of vacant Sees; amongst whom, Roger of Sarisbury was a prime person, first preferred to the Kings notice, because he began prayers quickly, and caded them speedily; for which quality he was commended as fittest for a Chaplain in the Camp, and was not unwelcome to the Court on the same account.

7. Anselm having devested the King of investing Bishops (one of the fairest roles in his Ward-robe ) did soon after deprive the Clergy of one half of themselves. For, in a solemn Synod he forbad Priests Marriage; wherein, as charitably we believe, his intentions pious and commendable, and patiently behold his pretences, specious and plausible: so we cannot but pronounce his performance for the present, injurious and culpable, and the effects thereof for the future pernicious, and damnable. And here we will a little enlarge ourselves on this subject of so high concernment.

8. It is confessed on all sides, that there is no express in Scripture to prohibit Priests Marriage. Thomas, and Scotus commonly cross (as if reason enough for the later to deny, because the former affirmed it) do both (such the strength of truth) agree herein. Only Ecclesiastical Constitutions forbid them Marriage. And, though many Popes tampered hereat, none effectually did drive the nail to the head, till Hildebrand, alias Gregory the seventh (the better man the better deed) finally interdicted Priests Marriage. However his Constitutions, though observed in Italy and France, were not generally obeyed in England; till Anselm at last forbad Married Priests to officiate, or any Lay-people, under pain of censure, to be present at their Church-service.

9. Herein he proceeded on two erroneous principles. One, that all men have, or may have (if using the means) the gift of Continencie. Wherein they do not distinguish betwixt,

• 1. Common gifis, which God bestoweth on all his servants, Jude v. 3. Common salvation.
• 2. Proper gifts, thus the Apostle, when he had wished all like himself (that is, able to contain) he immediately addeth, But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

His other false supposition is, That Marriage is either inconfistent with, or at least impeditive to the purity of Priestly profession.

10. The falsnefs whereof appeareth by the precedent of Enoch, in whom met the threefold capacity of King, Priest, and Prophet. Yet his Marriage remitted not the reins of his Princely power, hindered not the performance of his Sacerdotal function, rebated not the edge of his Prophetical spirit; for, He walked with God, and begat sons and daughters. He made not a prayer the less for having a child the more: and let us be but alike holy with Enoch, and let others be more holy with Anselm.

11. Wherefore when the Apostle saith, He that is married careth for the things which are of this world, how he may please his wife, therein he describeth, not that height of God-pleasing, which Marriage ought, and in itself may, and by Enoch was improved; but expresseth such faults which through human corruption too commonly come to pass. Which are vita mariti, non matrimonii; uxoris, non uxoratus, flowing neither from the essence, nor from the exercise of Marriage, but only from the depraved use thereof, which by God's assistance, and man's best endeavors, may be rectified and amended.

12. It is therefore falsely charged on Marriage, quà Marriage, that it is an hindrance to Hospitality; starving the poor to feed a family. It is confessed it would break Marriage, if caeteris paribus, she should offer to vie bounty with Virginity; only she may equal Virginity in cheerfulness of her giving, and in the discreet choice of fit objects, whereon to bestow it. Yet give me leave to say, in a married family there be commonly most mouths, and where most mouths, there probably most bread is eaten, and where most bread is eaten, there certainly most crumbs fall beneath the table, so that the poor are feasted by those fragments. If any rejoin, that single folk bestow their alms, not by crumbs, but whole loaves; the worst I wish is, that poor people may find the truth thereof. Nor doth the having of children quà children make men covetous, seeing Solómon saw a man, who had neither child nor brother, yet his eye was not satisfied with riches. On the other side, I find two in one and the same Chapter, professing they had enough, viz. Esau and Jacob, both of them married, both of them parents of many children.

13. And here well may we wonder at the partiality of the Papists, over-exalting Marriage in the Laity, to a Sacrament; and too much depressing the same in Priests, as no better then refined fornication. Yea, some have made Virginity the corn, and Marriage the cockle: which is a wonder that they should be of several kinds, seeing Virginity is but the fruit, and Marriage the root thereof. But, amongst all the foul mouths belibelling Marriage, one railing Rythmer, of Anselm's age, bore away the bell (drinking surely of styx instead of Helicon ) and I am confident my translation is good enough for his bald verses.

Where did this railing Monk ever read, that God hated the wives of Priests? And, did not the Church of Rome, at this time, come under the character of that defection, describbed by the Apostle? That in the latter times some should depart from the fatih, sorbidding to marry, &c.

14. These endeavor (as they are deeply concerned) to wipe off from themselves this badge of Antichrist, by pleading that,

• 1. They forbid Marriage to
• 2. They force Priesthood on
  • no man.

Only they require of those who freely will enter into the Priesthood, to vow virginity, and command such to part with their wives, who were formerly entered into Orders.

15. All which is alleged by them but in vain, seeing marriage may be forbidden, either directly, or consequentially. For the first, none, well in their wits, consulting their credit, did ever point-blank forbid marriage to all people. Such would be held as, hosts humani generis, enemies of man-kind, in their destructive doctrines. Nor did any ever absolutely (as it followeth in the same text) command all to abstain from meats. This were the way to empty the world of men, as the simple forbidding of marriage would fill it with bastards. And, although some silly Heretics, as Tatian, Marcion, and Manichens, are said absolutely to forbid marriage, yet they never mounted high, nor spread broad, nor lasted long. Surely some more considerable mark is the aim of the Apostles reproof, even the Church of Rome, who by an oblique line, and consequentially, prohibit marriage to the Priests, a most considerable proportion of men within the pale of the Church.

16. Notwithstanding the premisses, it is fit that the embraces of marriage should on some occasion for a time be forborne, for the advance of Piety; first, when private dalliance is to yield to public dolefulness. Let the Bridegroom go out of his chamber, and the Bride out of her closet. For though by the Levitical Law, one might not be forced to fight in the first year of his marriage, yet might he on just occasion, be pressed to fast on the first day thereof. It is not said, Let the Bridegroom go out of his Bridegroom-ship, but only out of his Chamber; and that also with intention to return, when the solemnity of sorrow is over-past. Secondly, when such absence is betwixt them mutually agreed on, Desraud ye not one another, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. Here indeed is an Interdiction of the marriage Bed, but it is Voluntary, by mutual consent of the parties; and Temporary, only durante eorum beneplacito, not as the Popish Prohibition, Impulsive, by the power of others, and perpetual, to continue during their lives.

17. Hear what Henry of Huntingdon expressly saith of Anselm's carriage herein. He prohibited English Priests to have wives, who before time were not prohibited; which as some thought to be a matter of greatest purity, so others again took it to be most perilous, lest while by this means they aimed at cleanliness above their power, they should fall into horrible uncleanness, to the exceeding great shame of Christianity.

18. But Anselm died, before he could finish his project of Priests Divorces, who had he deceased before he began it, his memory had been left less stained to Posterity. His two next Successors, Rodulphus, and William Corbel went on vigorously with the Design, but met with many and great Obstructions. Other Bishops found the like opposition, but chiefly the Bishop of Norwich, whose obstinate Clergy would keep their Wives, in defiance of his endeavors against them.

19. Indeed Norfolk-men are charactred in jure municipali versatissimi, and are not easily ejected out of that whereof they had long prescription, and present possession; No wonder therefore if they stickled for their Wives, and would not let go a moytie of themselves., Besides, Herbet Losing of Norwich needed not to be so fierce and furious against them, if remembering his own extraction, being the Son of an Abbot. These married Priests traversed their cause with Scripture and Reason, and desired but Justice to be done unto them. But Justice made more use of her sword, then of her Ballance in this case, not weighing their Arguments, but peremptorily and powerfully enjoining them to forgo their Wives, notwithstanding that there were in England, at this time, many married Priests, signal for Sanctity and Abilities.

20. Amongst the many eminent married Priests, flourishing for Learning and Piety, one Ealphegus was now living, or but newly dead. His Residence was at Plymouth in Devonshire. M ^r Cambden saith he was eruditus & conjugatus, but the Word conjugatus is by the Index Expurgatorius commanded to be deleted.

21. To order the Refractory married Clergy, the Bishops were fain to call in the aid of the Pope. John de Crema an Italian Cardinal, jolly with his youthful Blood, and Gallant Equipage, came over into England with his Bigness and Bravery to Bluster the Clergy out of their wives. He made a most Gawdy Oration in the Commendation of Virginity, as one who in his Own Person knew well how to value such a Jewel, by the loss thereof. Most true it is that the same night at London, he was caught a Bed with an Harlot, whereat he may be presumed to blush as red as his Cardinals Hat, if any remorse of Conscience remained in him. What saith Deborach, In the days of Shamgar, when the high-ways were unimployed (obstructed by the Philistines) travellers walked thorough by-paths. The stopping the Way of marriage, God's Ordinances, make them frequent such base by-paths, that my Pen is both afraid and ashamed to follow them. Cardinal Crema his mischance (or rather misdeed ) not a little advantaged the Reputation of married Priests.

22. Bishops, Arch-Bishops, and Cardinal, all of them almost tired out with the stubbornness of the Recusant Clergy; the King at last took his turn to reduce them. William Corbel Arch-Bishop of Canterbury willingly resigned the work into the Kings hand, hoping he would use some Exemplary severity against them; but all ended in a money matter; the King taking a Fine of married Priests, permitted them to enjoy their Wives, as well they might, who bought that which was their own before.

23. About this time the old Abby of Eli was advanced into a new Bishopric, and Cambridge-shire assigned for its Diocese, taken from the Bishopric of Lincoln; Out of which Henry the first carved one [ Eli, ] and Henry the last two [ Oxford and Peterborough ] Bishoprics, and yet left Lincoln the largest Diocese in England. Spaldwick Manor in Huntingdon-shire was given to Lincoln, in Reparation of the Jurisdiction taken from it, and bestowed on Eli.

24. One Herveyus was made first Bishop of Eli: One who had been undone, if not undone, banished by the Tumultuous welsh, from the Beggerly Bishopric of Bangor; and now (in Pitty to his Poverty and Patience) made the rich Bishop of Eli. It is given to Parents to be most fond of, and indulgent to their youngest, which some perchance may render as a Reason, why this Bishopric, as last born, was best beloved by the King. Surely he bestowed upon it vast privileges; and his Successors cockering this See for their Darling, conferred some of their own Royalties thereon.

25. Bernard, Chaplain to the King, and Chancellor to the Queen was the first Norman made Bsyhop of S ^t David's. Presuming on his masters favor, and his own merit, he denied subjection to Canterbury, and would be, (as anciently had been) an absolute Arch-Bishop of himself. Indeed S ^t David's was Christian some hundred of years, whilst Canterbury was yet Pagan; and could show good Cards (if but permitted fairly to play them) for Archiepiscopal Jurisdiction, even in some respect Equal to Rome itself. Witness the ancient riming verse, about the proportions of Pardons given to Pilgrims for their visiting Religious places,

Not the S ^t David's gives a peck of Pardons where Rome gives but a gallon (as the words at the first blush may seen of import) but that two Pilgrimages to S ^t David's, should be equal in merit to one Pilgrimage to Rome, such was the conceived Holiness of that place.

26. Giraldus Cambrensis states the Case truly and briefly. That Canterbury hath long prescription, plenty of Lawyers to plead her Title, and store of money to pay them. Whereas S ^t David's is poor, remote out of the road of preferment; intimating no less, that if equally accommodated she could set on foot as food an Archiepiscopal Title, as Canterbury itself. But he addeth, that except some great alteration happeneth (understand him, except Wales recover again into an absolute Principality ) S ^t David's is not likely to regain her ancient Dignity. William, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, aided by the Pope, at last humbled the Bishop of S ^r David's into a submission; Who vexed hereat, wreckt his spleen on the welsh Clergy; furiously forcing them to sorgo their Wives. The successors of this Bishop would have been more Thankful to his Memory had he labored less for the honor, and more preserved the profits of his See, whose lands he dilapidated with this his expensive suit, and on other designs for his own preferment.

27. King Henry died in Normandy of a surfeit by eating Lampreys. An unwholesome fish, insomuch, that Galen, speaking of Eels in general (whereto Lampreys may be reduced) expostulates with the gods, for giving them so delicious a taste, good so malignant, and dangerous an operation. But, grant them never so good, excess is venomous string, in the most wholesome flesh, fish, and sowl, and it was too great a quantity caused his surfeit. I find him generally commended for temperance in his diet; only his palate (his servant in all other meats) was commonly his master in this dish. He was buried at Reading, leaving but one daughter (the Sea having swallowed his Sons) surviving him.

28. Stephen, Earl of Bologn, hearing of Henry his death; hasteth over into England, and seizeth on the Crown. All his title unto it was this; First, Maud, the true heir thereof, was a female. Secondly, absent beyond the Seas. Thirdly, married to a foreigner. Fourthly, no very potent. Prince, viz. Geffery Plantagenet Earl of Angeou, whose land-lock-situation rendered him less formidable for any effectual impression on this Island. Lastly, he was Son to Adela, Daughter to King William the Conqueror (though a Male deriving his title from a Female ) conceiving himself the Daughters Son, to be prefer'd before Maud, the Sons Daughter. Indeed Stephen had an elder Brother, Theobald Earl of Blois, but he chose a quiet County, before a cumbersome Kingdom; the enjoyment of his own, rather then invasion of another's inheritance, seeing Maud was the undoubted heir of the English Crown.

28. This Maud, I may call, Maud the fourth; yea, England had no Queen of another name since the Conquest;

• 1. Maud the first, Wise to King William the Conqueror.
• 2. Maud the second, (Daughter to Malcolme King of Scots ) Wife to King Henry the first.
• 3. Maud the third, Wife to King Stephen.
• 4. Maud the fourth, Daughter to King Henry the first, and in right Queen of England.

This last Maud was first married to Henry the fourth, Emperor of Germany, and after his death was constantly called The Empress, by the courtesy of Christendom, though married to Earl Geffery, her second husband. To her, all the Clergy, and Nobility had sworn fealty, in her father's life time.

29. William, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, notwithstanding his oath to Maud, solemnly crowned Stephen, and in the same act, shown himself perjured to his God, disloyal to his Princess, and ingrateful to his Patroness, by whose special favor he had been preferred. The rest of the Bishops, to their shame, followed his example; dealing with oaths, as sea-men with the points in the Compass, saying them forwards and backwards. Indeed covetousness, and pride prompted this disloyalty unto them, hoping to obtain of an Usurper, what they despaired to get from a lawful King. For, their modesty (and that little enough) in asking, was all Stephens measure in giving; resolving with himself for the present, to grant what should please them, and at leisure to perform what should please himself. Let him now get but the stump of a Crown, and with wise watering thereof, it would sprout afterwards. Hence was it that he granted the Bishops liberty to build, and hold many Castles; freedom in forests; investiture from the Pope; with many other immunities, which hitherto the Clergy never obtained. All things thus seemingly settled, yet great was the difference of judgments in the English, concerning King Stephen, which afterwards discovered themselves in the variety of men's practices.

30. Some acted vigorously for Stephen, conceiving possession of a Crown createth a right unto it. Where shall private persons (unable of themselves to trace the intricacies of Princes titles) fix their loyalty more safely, then on him whom success tendereth unto them for their Sovereign? God doth not now (as anciently) visibly, or audibly discover himself, we must therefore now only look, and listen, to what he showeth, and faith by his voice, in the success of things, whereby alone he expresseth his pleasure, what he owneth or disclaimeth. This their judgment was crossed by others, who distinguished betwixt Heavens permission, and consent; God sometimes suffering them to have power to compel, to whom he never gave authority to command.

31. But some urged, that Stephen was declared lawful King by popular consent, which, at this time, could alone form a Legal right to any in this Island. For Maud, Stephen 's corrival, in vain pretended succession, seeing the Crown, since the Conquest, never observed a regular, but an uncertain and desultory motion. Nor was it directed to go on by the straight line of primogeniture, which leapt over the Conquerors eldest, to his second Son: Then, taking a new rise, from the eldest still surviving, to Henry his third Son. Here no chain of succession could be pleaded, where no two links followed in order. But others answered, that such popular election of Stephen had been of validity, if the electors had been at liberty; whereas they being preingaged to Maud by former oath, could not again dispose of those their votes, which formerly they had passed away.

32. Others conceived that the stain of Stephen his usurpation in getting the Crown, was afterward scoured clean out by his long (more then eighteen years) enjoying thereof. For, suppose Providence for a time may wink, and connive, yet it cannot be conceived in so long a slumber; yea, asleep; yea, a lethargy, as to permit one peaceably so long to posses a Throne, except heaven had particularly designed him for the same. To this others answered, that Stephen all that time rather possessed, then enjoyed the Crown (alarm'd all his life long by Maud, and her Son) so that he had as little quiet in, as right to the Kingdom. But, grant his possession thereof never so peaceable, what at first was foundered in the foundation, could not be made firm by any height of superstructure thereupon. An error by continuance of time can never become a truth, but more inveterate error.

33. A third of maintained, that Subjects Loyaltie is founded on their Sovereigns protection, so that both sink together. Seeing therefore Maud was unable to afford her people protection, her people were bound to no longer allegiance. But thus position was disproved by such, who bottoming allegiance only on conscience, make protection but the encouragement, not the cause thereof, They distinguished also betwixt a Princes willful deserting his people, and his inability to protect them; not through his own default, but the forcible prevailing of others. Thus the conjugal tie is only dissolved by the parties voluntary uncleanness, and not by his, or her adventitious impotency to render due benevolence.

34. A fourth party avouched, that Maud (though, not actually, and openly, yet) tacitly, and interpretatively released the English from their allegiance unto her. For what Prince can be presumed so tyrannical, as to tie up people to the strict terms of Loyaltie unto him, when the same is apparently destructive unto them, and no whit advantageous to himself? But others disliked this position; for, where did nay such relaxation appear? It cancelleth not the obligation of a debtor, to fancy to himself an acquittance from his creditor, which cannot be produced.

35. Some acted at the commands, though not for the commands of King Stephen, namely in such things wherein his injunctions concurred with equity, charity, and order, consistent with the principles of public utility, and self-preservation. These, having the happiness to be commanded by an Usurper, to do that, which otherwise they would have done of themselves, did not discover themselves to act out of their own inclinations, whilst it passed unsuspected in the notion of their obedience to King Stephen. Thus many thousands under the happy conduct (or at leastwise contrivance) of Thurstan, Arch-Bishop of York, though in their hearts well affected to Maud her title, unanimously resisted David King of Scots, though he pretended recuperative arms in Queen Maud her behalf; under which specious title, he barbarously committed abominable cruelties, till nettled therewith, both Stephanists, and Maudists jointly bad him battle, and overthrew him, nigh Alerton in York-shire.

36. All generally bare the burdens, and no less politically, then patiently, paid all taxes imposed upon them. Recusancy in this kind had but armed King Stephen with a specious pretence to take all from them, for refusing to give a part. Nor scrupled they hereat, because thereby they strengthened his usurpation against the rightful heir, because done against their wills, and to prevent a greater mischief; Mean time they had a reservation of their loyalty, and, erecting a throne in their hearts, with their prayers, and tears, mounted Queen Maud on the same.

37. Robert, Earl of Gloucester (the Queens half-brother) may even make up a form by himself, finding none other before, or after him of the same opinion. Who conditionally did homage to King Stephen, scilicet, si dignitatem suam sibi servaret illibatam, namely, So long as he preserved this Roberts dignity (for so I understand the Pronoun's reciprocation) to be inviolated.

38. A few there were, whose relucting consciences remonstrated against the least compliance with King Stephen: whose high loyalty to Maud, interpreted all passiveness under an Usurper, to be activity against the right heir. These even quitted their Lands in England to the tempest of time; and secretly conveyed themselves, with the most incorporeal of their estates (as occuping in the least room in their wastage over) into Normandy.

39. The Clergy, perceiving that King Stephen performed little of his large promises unto them, were not formerly so forward in setting him up, but now more fierce in plucking him down, and sided effectually with Maud against him. An act, which the judicious behold, not as a crocked deed, bowing them from their last, but as an upright one, straight'ning them to their first, and bxest oath, made to this Maud in the life time of her father. But Stephen (resolved to hold with a strong, what he had got with a wrong hand) fell violently on the Bishops, who then were most powerful in the land (every prime one having, as a Cathedral for his devotion; so many manors for his profit, parks for his pleasure, and castles for his protection) and he uncastled Roger of Sarisbury, Alexander of Lincoln, and Nigellus of Eli, taking also a great mass of treasure from them.

40. Most fiercely fell the fury of King Stephen on the Dean, and Canons of Paul's, for crossing him in the choice of their Bishop. For, he sent, and took their Focarias, and cast them into London -Tower; where they continued many days, not without much scorn, and disgrace, till at last those Canons ransomed their liberty at a great rate.

41. What these Focariae were, we conceive it no disgrace to confess our ignorance, the word not appearing in any Classical Author, and we must by degrees screw ourselves into the sense thereof:

• 1. It signifieth some female persons, the gender of the word discovering to much.
• 2. They were near to the Canons, who had an high courtesy for them, as appears by procuring their liberty at so dear a price.
• 3. Yet the word speaks not the least relation of affinity, or consanguinity unto them.
• 4. All the light we can get in this Focariae, is from some sparks of fire which we behold in the word, so as if these shees were nymphs of the chimney, or fire-makers to these Canons.

If so, surely they had their Holiday-clothes on, when sent to the Tower ( Kitchen-stuff doth not use to be tried in that place) and were considerable (if not in themselves) in the affections of others. And now, well fare the heart of Roger Howden, who plainly tells us, that these Focariae were these Canons Concubines. See here the fruit of forbidding marriage to the Clergy, against the Law of God, and nature. What saith the Apostle? It is better to marry then to burn; or, which is the same in effect, it is better to have a wife then a fire-maker.

42. Albericus, Bishop of Hostia, came post form Rome, sent by Pope Innocent the second into England; called a Synod at Westminster, where eighteen Bishops and thirty Abbots met together. Here was conluded; That no Priest, Deacon, or sub-Deacon should hold a wife, or woman, within his house, under pain of degrading from his Christendom, and plain sending to hell. That no Priests son should claim any spiritual living by heritage. That none should take a Benefice of any Lay-man. That none were admitted to Cure which had not the letters of his Orders. That Priests should do no bodily labor: And, that their transubstantiated God should dwell but eight days in the box, for fear of worm-eating, moulding or stinking; with such like. In this Synod, Theobald, Abbot of Becco, was chosen Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, in the place of William lately deceased.

43. The most considerable Clergy-man of England in this age, for birth, wealth, and learning, was Henry of Bloys, Bishop of Winchester, and Brother to King Stephen. He was by the Pope made his Legate for Britain, and outshined Theobald the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. For, although Theobald just at this time was augmented with the title of Legatus natus (which from him was entailed on his successors in that See) yet this Henry of Bloys, being for the present, Legatus factus, out-lustred the other as far, as an extraordinary Ambassador doth a Leger of the same Nation. In this Henry, two interests did meet, and contend; that of a Brother, and that of a Bishop; but the later clearly got the conquest, as may appear by the Council he called at Winchester, wherein the King himself was summoned to appear. Yea, some make Stephen personally appearing therein (a dangerous precedent to plead the cause of the Crown, before a conventicle of his own subjects) so that to secure Rome of Supremacy in appeals, he suffered a Recovery thereof against his own person in a Court of Record loosing of himself to save the Crown thereby unto himself. But William of Malmesbury present at the Council (and therefore his testimony is to be preferred before others) mentions only three parties in the place present there with their attendance:

1.	2.	3.
Roger of Sarisbury with the rest of the Bishops, grievously complaining of their Castles taken from them.	Henry Bishop of Winchester the Popes Legat, & President of the Council; With Theobald Arch-Bishop of Canterbury pretending to umpire matters in a moderate way.	Hugh Arch-Bishop of Roan, and Aubery de Vere (ancester to the Ear of Oxford) as Advocate for King Stephen.

This Aubery de Vere seems learned in the Laws, being charactered by my Author, homo causarum varietatibus exercitatus, a man well versed in the windings of causes.

44. In this Synod, first the commission of Pope Innocent the second was read, impowring the said Henry Bishop of Winchester, with a Legative authority. Then the Legate made a Sermon; Latiariter, which is, as I conceive, in the Latin tongue. We find not his text; But know this was the subject of his discourse, to inveigh against King Stephen depriving those Bishops of their Castles. Sermon ended, the Kings advocates or true subjects rather (many making them to speak only out of the dictates of their own Loyalty, & not to plead by deputation from the King) made his defense, that Bishops could not canonically hold Castles, and that the King had despoiled them of their treasure, not as Episcopal persons, but as they were his Lay-offices, advised thereto by his own security. The Bishops returned much for themselves, and in fine, the Synod brake up without any extraordinary matter effected. For soon after came Queen Maud with her Navy and Army out of Normandy, which turned debates into deeds, and consultations into actions: But we leave the readers to be satisfied about the alternation of success betwixt King Stephen and Maud to the Historians of our State. There may they read of Maud her strange escapes, when avoiding death, by being believed dead (otherwise she had proved in her grave, if not pretended in a Coffin) when getting out in white Lynen, under the protection of Snow: I say, how afterwards both King Stephen and Robert Earl of Gloucester were taken prisoners, and given in Exchange, the one for the liberty of the other; with many such memorable passages, the reader may stock himself from the pens of the civil Historians, the proper relators thereof.

45. It is strange to conceive how men could be at leisure in the troublesome Reign of King Stephen to build and endow so many Religious foundations. Except any will say, that men being (as mortal in peace) most dying in War, the devotions of those days (maintaining such deeds meritorious for their souls) made all in that Martial age most active in such employments. Not to speak of the Monastery of S ^r Mary de pratis, founded by Robert Earl of Leicester, and many others of this time: the goodly Hospital of S ^t Katharines nigh London, was founded by Maud, wife to King Stephen, though others assign the same to Ro. Bishop of Lincoln, as founder thereof. So stately was the Choir of this Hospital, that it was not much inferior to that of S ^t Paul's in London, when taken down in the days of Queen Elizabeth, by Doctor Thomas Wilson the Master thereof, and Secretary of State.

46. Yea, King Stephen himself was a very great founder. S ^t Stephen. was his tutelary Saint (though he never learned his usurpation from the patient example of that Martyr) whose name he bore, on whose day he was Crowned, to whose honor he erected S ^t Stephens Chapel in Westminster, near the place where lately the Court of Request was kept. He built also the Cistertians Monastery in Feversham; with an Hospital near the West-gate in York. And, whereas formerly there were paid out of every plough-land in England, betwixt Trent and Edinburgh-frith, twenty four Oat-sheaves for the Kings Hounds; Stephen converted this rent-charge to his new-built Hospital in York. A good deed no doubt; for, though it be unlawful to take the children's bread and to cast it unto the dogs; it is lawful to take the dogs bread, and to give it unto the children.

47. The King, being desirous to settle Sovereignty on his Son Eustace, earnestly urged Theobald Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to Crown him. For, Stephen saw that fealty, barely sowrn to Maud in her Fathers life time, was afterwards broken: and therefore (his own guilt making him the more suspicious) for the better assurance of his Sons succession, he would go one step farther, endeavoring to make him actual King in his own life time. But the Arch-Bishop stoutly refused, though proscribed for the same, and forced to fly the land, till after some time he was reconciled to the King.

48. Eustace the Kings Son died of a frenzy, as going to plunder the lands of Bury Abby. A death untimely in reference to his youthful years, but timely and seasonably in relation to the good of the Land. If conjecture may be made from his turbulent spirit, coming to the Crown he would have added tyranny to his usurpation. His Father Stephen begins now to consider, how he himself was old, his Son deceased, his Subjects wearied, his Land wasted with War: which considerations, improved by the endeavors of Theobald Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and God's blessing on both, produced an agreement between King Stephen and Henry Duke of Normandy, the former holding the Crown for his life, and after his death settling the same on Henry, his adopted Son and Successor.

49. We have now gotten (to our great credit, and comfort, no doubt) an English-man Pope; namely, Nicholas Breakspear, alias Adrian the fourth. Born, saith my Author, nigh Vxbridg in Middlesex, of the ancient and Martial family of the Breakspears; though others make him no better then a bastard of an Abbot of S ^t Albans. The Abbot of which Covent he confirmed the first in place, of all in England. If I miscount not, we never had but four Popes and a half (I mean Cardinal Pool, Pope elect) of our Nation. And yet of them, one too many (will the Papists say) if Pope Jone (as some esteem her) were an English-woman. Yea, lately (the Elected following the plurality of the Electors) they have almost engrossed the Papacy to the Italians. Our Adrian had but bad success, choked to death with a fly in his throat. Thus anything next nothing, be it but advantageously planted, is big enough to batter man's life down to the ground.

50. Jeffery ap Arthur (commonly called from his native place, Jeffery of Monmouth) was now Bishop of S ^t Asaph. He is the Welsh Herodotus, the father of ancient History, and fables; for, he who will have the first, must have the later. Polydore Virgil accuseth him of many falsehoods (so hard it is to halt before a cripple) who, notwithstanding, by others is defended, because but a translator, and not the original reporter. For, a translator tells a lie in telling no lie, if willfully varying from that copy, which he promiseth faithfully to render. And if he truly translates what he finds, his duty is done, and is to be charged no further. Otherwise the credit of the best translator may be cracked, if himself become security for the truth of all, that he takes on trust from the pens of others.

51. King Stephen ended his troublesome life. A Prince, who if he had come in by the door, the best room in the house had not been too good to entertain him. Whereas now the addition Usurper (affixed generally to his name) corrupts his valor into cruelty, devotion into hypocrisy, bounty into flattery, and design. Yet, be it known to all, though he lived an Usurper, he died a lawful King; for, what formerly he held from the rightful heir by violence, at his death he held under him by a mutual composition. He was buried with his Son, and Wife, at Feversham in Kent, in a Monastery of his own building. At the demolishing whereof, in the regin of King Henry the Eighth, some, to gain the lead wherein he was wrapped, cast his corps into the Sea. Thus Sacrilege will not only feast on gold and silver, but (when sharp set) will feed on meaner metals.

52. Henry the Second succeeded him, known by a triple sir-name, two personal and ending with himself, Fitz-Empress, and Shortmantle; the other hereditary, fetched from Jeffery his Father, and transmitted to his Posterity, Plantagenet, or Plantaganest. This name was one of the Sobriquets, or penitential nick-names, which great persons about this time, posting to the Holy War in Palestine, either assumed to themselves, or had by the Pope, or their Confessors imposed upon them, purposely to disguise, and obscure their luster therewith. See moe of the same kind,

• 1. Berger, a Shepherd.
• 2. G • ise-Conelle, Graycoat.
• 3. Teste de Estoupe, Head of towe.
• 4. Arbust, a Shrub.
• 5. Martel, an Hammer.
• 6. Grand-Baeuse, Oxface.
• 7. La-Zourch, a Branch upon a stem.
• 8. Houlet, a Sheephook.
• 9. Hapkin, an Hatchet.
• 10. Chapel, an Hood.
• 11. Sans-terr, Lackland.
• 12. Malduit, III taught.
• 13. Juvencas, Geffard, or Heifer.
• 14. Fitz de flaw, Son of a flail.
• 15. Plantagenist, Stalk of a Broom.

Thus these great persons accounted the penance of their pilgrimage, with the merit thereof, doubled, when passing for poor inconsiderable fellows, they denied their own places, and persons. But, he it reported to others, whether this be proper, and kindly evangelical self-denial, so often commended to the practice of Christians. However some of these by-names, assumed by their fanciful devotion, remained many years after to them, and theirs; amongst which Plantagenist was entailed on the Royal blood of England.

53. This King Henry, was wife, valiant, and generally fortunate. His faults were such as speak him Man, rather then a vicious one. Wisdom enough he had for his work, and work enough for his wisdom, being troubled in all his relations. His wife Queen Elianor brought a great portion, (fair Provinces in France) and a great stomach with her; so that is is questionable, whether her froward spirit more drave her Husband away from her chaste, or Rosamunds fair face, more drew him to her wanton embraces. His Sons (having much of the Mother in them) grew up, as in Age, in obstinacy against him. His Subjects, but especially the Bishops, (being the greatest Castle mongers in that Age) very stubborn and not easily to be ordered.

54. Mean time one may justly admire, than no mention in Authors is made of, nor provisions for Maud the Kings Mother, (surviving some years after her Son's Coronation) in whom during her life, lay the real right to the Crown. Yet say not King Henries policy was little in preferring, to take his Title from an Usurper by adoption, rather then from his own Mother, (the rightful heir) by succession, and his piety less, in not attending his Mothers death; but snatching the Scepter out of her hand, seeing no Writer ever chargeth him with the least degree of undutifulness unto her. Which leadeth us to believe that this Maud, worn out with age and afflictions, willingly waved the Crown, and reigned in her own contentment, in seeing her Son reign before her.

55. Those who were most able to advise themselves, are most willing to be advised by others, as appeared by this politick Prince. Presently he chooseth a Privy Council of Clergy and Temporalty, and refineth the Common Laws; Yea, towards the end of his Reign began the use of our Iti • erant Judges. The platform hereof he fetched from France (where he had his education) and where Charles the Bald, some hundred of years before, had divided his Land into twelve parts, assigning several Judges for administration of Justice therein. Our Henry parcelled England into six Divisions, and appointed three Judges to every Circuit, annually to visit the same. Succeeding Kings, (though changing the limits) have kept the same number of Circuits, and let the skillful in Arithmetic cast it up, whether our Nation receiveth any loss, by the change of three Judges every year, according to Henry the second's Institution, into two Judges twice a year, as long since hath been accustomed.

56. The Laws thus settled, King Henry cast his eye on the numerous Castles in England. As a good reason of State formerly persuaded the building, so a better pleaded now for the demolishing of them. William the Conqueror built most of them, and then put them into the custody of his Norman Lord's, thereby to awe the English into obedience. But these Norman Lord's in the next generation, by breathing in English air, and wedding with English wives, became so perfectly Anglized, and lovers of Liberty, that they would stand on their guard against the King, on any petty discontentment. If their Castles, (which were of proof against Bows and Arrows, the Artillery of that Age) could but bear the brunt of a sudden assault, they were privileged from any solemn Siege, by their meanness and multitude, as whose several beleguerings would not compensate the cost thereof. Thus as in foul bodies, the Physic in process of time groweth so friendly and familiar with the disease, that they at last side together, and both take part against Nature in the Patient; so here it came to pass, that these Castles intended for the quenching, in continuance of time occasioned the kindling of Rebellion. To prevent farther mischief, King Henry razed most of them to the ground, and secured the rest of greater consequence into the hands of his Confidents. if any ask, how these Castles belong to our Church-History; know, that Bishops of all in that Age, were the greatest Traders in such Fortifications.

57. Thomas Becket, born in London, and (though as yet but a Deacon) Arch-Deacon of Canterbury, Doctor of Canon-Law, bred in the Universities of Oxford, Paris, Bononia, was by the King made Lord Chancellor of England. During which his office, who braver then Becket? None in the Court wore more costly clothes, mounted more stately steeds, made more sumptuous feasts, kept more jovial company, brake more merry jests, used more pleasant pastimes. In a word, he was so perfect a Lay-man, that his Parsonages of Bromfield, and S ^t Mary-hill in London, with other Ecclesiastical Cures, whereof he was Pastor, might even look all to themselves, he taking no care to discharge them. This is that Becket, whose mention is so much in English, and miracles so many in Popish writers. We will contract his acts in proportion to our History, remitting the Reader to be satisfied in the rest from other Authors.

58. Four years after, upon the death of Theobald, Becket was made by the King, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. The first Englishman since the Conquest (and he but a mongrel, for his mother was a Syrian, the intercourse of the Holy-War in that age making matches betwixt many strangers) who was preferred to that place. And now (if the Monks their writing his life may be believed) followed in him a great and strange Metamorphosis. Instantly his clothes were reformed to gravity, his diet reduced to necessity, his company confined to the Clergy, his expenses contracted to frugality, his mirth retrenched to austerity; all his pastimes so devoured by his piety, that none could see the former Chancellor Becket, in the present Arch-Bishop Becket. Yea, they report, that his clothes were built three stories high; next his skin he was a Hermit, and wore sack-cloth; in the midd he had the habit of a Monk; and above all wore the garments of an Arch-Bishop. Now, that he might the more effectually attend his Archiepiscopal charge, he resigned his Chancellors place, whereat the King was not a little offended. It added to his anger, that his patience was daily pressed, with the importunate petitions, of people complaining, that Becket injured them. Though, generally, he did but recover to his Church such possessions, as, by their covetousness, and his predecessors connivence, had formerly been detained from it.

59. But, the main matter, incensing the King against him was, his stubborn defending the Clergy from the secular power: and particularly (what a great fire doth a small spark kindle?) that a Clerk, having killed and stolen a Deer, ought not to be brought before the Civil Magistrate for his punishment. Such impunities breeding impieties, turned the house of God into a den of thieves: many rapes, riots, robberies, murders, were then committed by the Clergy. If it be rendered as a reason of the viciousness of Adonijah, that his father never said unto him, Why doest thou so? No wonder if the Clergy of this age were guilty of great crimes, whom neither the King, nor his Judges, durst call to an account. And, seeing Ecclesiastical censures extend not to the taking away of life, or lim; such Clerks as were guilty of capital faults; were either altogether acquitted, or had only penance inflicted upon them; a punishment far lighter then the offense did deserve. Indeed, it is most meet, in matters merely Ecclesiastical (touching the Word and Sacraments) Clergy-men be only answerable for their faults to their spiritual superiors, as most proper, and best able to discern and censure the same. And in cases criminal, it is unfit that Ministers should be summoned, before each proud, pettish, petulant, pragmatical, secular, under-officer. However, in such causes to be wholly exempted from civil power, is a privilege, which with reason cannot be desired of them, nor with justice indulged unto them. Sure I am, Abiathar (though High Priest) was convented before, and deposed by Solomon for his practicing of treason. And S ^t Paul saith, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers.

60. To retrench these enormities of the Clergy, the King called a Parliament at Clarendon, near Sarisbury (and not in Normandy, as Mr Fox will have it) intending with the consent of his great Council, to confirm some severe Laws of his Grand-father King Henry the first▪ To these Laws, sixteen in number, Becket, with the rest of the Bishops, consented and subscribed them. But afterwards recanting his own act, renounced the same. Let not therefore the crime of inconstancy, be laid too heavily to the charge of Arch-Bishop Cranmer, first subscribing, then revoking popish articles presented unto him: seeing this his name-sake Thomas, and predecessor, Becket, without any stain to his Saintship, retracted his own act, upon pretence of better information. But so highly was Becket offended with himself for his subscription, that, in revenge, for some months, he suspended himself from all Divine Service (his pride, and laziness, both before, and after, suspended him from ever preaching) and would not be present thereat. Hereafter let none hope for more favor from this Arch-Bishop, then their fact may deserve; seeing he cannot rationally be expected to be courteous to others, who was so severe unto himself. The best was, in this his suspension, the knot was not tied so hard, as to hurt him; who, in case of necessity, as he had bound, so he could loose himself: though, for the more state of the matter, Pope Alexander himself was pleased solemnly to assoil him from his suspension. Mean time Becket, both in his suspension, and absolution, most highly offended King Henry, who every day the more was alienated from, and incensed against him.

61. During Beckets abode about Clarendon, he is reported every morning to have walked, from his lodging, some miles, to the Kings Palace. Where the ground (say they) called Beckets path, at this day presenteth it self to the eyes of the beholders (but most quick-sighted, if looking through Popish spectacles) with the grass, and grain growing thereon, in a different hew, and color from the rest. A thing having in it more of report, then truth; yet more of truth then wonder: the discolourations of such veins of earth being common in grounds elsewhere, which never had the happiness of Becket his feet to go upon them.

62. But oh! If Becket 's feet had left but the like impression in all the ways he went, how easy had it been for all men's eyes, and particularly for our pen, to have track'd him in all his travels? Who, not long after, without the consent of the King, took Ship, sailed into Flanders, thence travelled into the Southern parts of France, thence to Pontiniack, thence to Senes, abiding seven years in banishment. But, though he served an apprenticeship in exile, he learned little humility thereby, only altering his name (for his more safety) from Becket to Derman; but retaining all his old nature, remitting nothing of his rigid resolutions.

63. Now, to avoid idleness, Becket, in his banishment, variously employed himself. First, in making, and widening breaches, between Henry his native Sovereign, and Lewis the French King. Secondly, in writing many voluminous letters of expostulation to Princes, and Prelates. Thirdly, in letting fly his heavy excommunications against the English Clergy; namely, against Roger, Arch-Bishop of York; Gilbert Foliot, Bishop of London (a learneder man them himself;) Joceline, Bishop of Sarisbury, and others. His chief quarrel with them, was their adherence to the King; and particularly, because the Arch-Bishop presumed to Crown Henry the King's Son (made joint-King in the life of his Father) a privilege which Becket claimed, as proper to himself alone. Fourthly, in receiving comfort from, and returning it to Pope Alexander at Beneventum in Italy. Sameness of affliction bred sympathy of affection betwixt them, both being banished; the Pope by Frederick Barbarossa, the Emperor, for his pride and insolency: as our Becket smarted for the same fault, from King Henry. Here also Becket solemnly resigned his Arch-Bishopric to the Pope, as troubled in conscience, that he had formerly took it as illegally from the King, and the Pope again restored it to him, whereby all scruples in his mind were fully satisfied.

64. But afterwards by mediation of friends, Becket 's reconciliation was wrought, and leave given him to return into England. However the King still retained his temporals in his hand, on weighty considerations. Namely, to show their distinct nature from the spirituals of the Arch-Bishopric, to which alone the Pope could restore him: Lay-lands being separable from the same, as the favor of secular Princes: and Becket 's bowed knee must own the Kings bountiful hand, before he could receive them. Besides, it would be a caution for his good behavior.

65. Caelum non animum. Travelers change climates, not conditions. Witness our Becket, stubborn he went over, stubborn he stayed, stubborn he returned. Amongst many things, which the King desired, and he denied, he refused to restore the Excommunicated Bishops, pretending he had no power (indeed he had no will) and that they were Excommunicate by his Holiness. Yea, he, instead of recalling his old, added new Excommunications; and, that thunder which long before rumbled in his threatenings, now gave the crack upon all those that detained his temporal revenues. Roger Howden reports, that upon Christmas-day (the better day the better deed) he Excommunicated Robert de Broc, because the day before he had cut off one of his horses tails. Yea, he continued, and increased his insolence against the King and all his subjects.

66. Here the King let fall some discontented words, which instantly were catched up in the ears of some Courtiers attending him. He complained that never Sovereign kept such lazy Subjects, and Servants, neither concerned in their Kings credit, nor sensible of his favors conferred on them, to suffer a proud Prelate so saucily to affront him. Now, a low hollow, and a less clap with the hand, will set fierce dogs on worrying their prey. A quaternion of Courtiers being present; namely,

These four Knights, applying the Kings general reproof to themselves, in their preproperous passions mis-interpreted his complaint, not only for Becket 's legal condemnation, but also for their warrant for his execution. Presently they post to Canterbury, where they find Becket in a part of his Church (since called the Martyrdom) who, though warned of their coming, and advised to avoid them, would not decline them, so that he may seem to have more mind to be killed, then they had to kill him. Here happ'ned high expostulation, they requiring restitution of the Excommunicated Bishops; whose peremptory demands, met with his pertinacious denials, as then not willing to take notice of Solomon his counsel, A soft answer pacifieth wrath. Brauls breed blows, and all four falling upon him, with the help of the fifth, an officer of the Church, called Hugh, the ill-Clerk, each gave him a wound, though that with the sword dispatched him, which cut off his crown from the rest of his head.

67. A barbarous murder, and which none will go about to excuse, but much heightened both by the Prose, and Poetry (good and bad) of Popish Writers in that age. Of the last and worst sort, I account that Distich (not worthy the translating) one verse whereof, on each leaf of the door of Canterbury Choir, is yet legible in part;

But, if he were no truer a martyr, then martyrizatus is true position, his memory might be much suspected. More did the Muses smile on the Author of the following verses, Here I understand not, how properly it can be said, that Becket died Pro grege, For his flock. He did not die for feeding his flock, for any fundamental point of Religion, or for defending his flock against the wolf of any dangerous doctrine; but merely he died for his flock; namely, that the sheep thereof (though ever so scabb'd) might not be dressed with tarr, and other proper (but sharp, and smarting) medicines. I mean, that the Clergy might not be punished by the secular power, for their criminal enormities. Sure I am, a learned, and moderate writer of that age, passeth this character upon him, Quae ab ipso acta sunt laudanda nequaquam censuerim, licet ex laudabili zelo processerint. Such things as were done by him, I conceive not at all to be praised, though they proceeded from a laudable zeal. But Stapleton calls this his judgment, Audacis Monachi censura non tam politica, quàm plane ethnica, The censure of a bold Monk, not so much politick as heathenish. Should another add of Stapleton, that this his verdict is the unchristian censure of a proud and partial Jesuit; railing would but beget railing; and so it is better to remit all, to the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God.

68. Now King Henry, though unable to revive Beacket, shown as much sorrow himself, for his death, as a living man could express; and did the other as much honor, as a dead man could receive. First, searching after all his kindred (as most capable of his kindness) he found out his two sisters. One Mary, a virgin, not inclinable to marry, whom he preferred Abbess of the rich Nunnery of Berking. His other nameless sister, being married to one of the Le Botelers, or Butlers, He transplanted with her husband, and children into Ireland, conferring upon them high honors, and rich revenues; from whom the Earls of Ormond are at this day descended. He founded also the magnificent Abbey, called Thomas-Court in Dublia (in memory of the said Thomas Becket, and expiation of his murder) beautifying the same with fair buildings, and enriching it with large possessions. Nor did only the purse, but the person of King Henry do penance. Who walking some miles bare-foot, suffered himself to be whipped on the naked back by the Monks of Cantrbury. As for the four Knights, who murdered him, the Pope pardoned them, but conditionally, to spend the rest of their lives in the Holy war (where the King, as part of his penance enjoined by the Pope, maintained two hundred men for one year, on his proper charges) to try, whether they could be as courageous in killing of Turks, as they had been cruel in murdering a Christian.

69. And now, being on this subject, once to dispatch Becket out of out way, just a Jubilee of years after his death, Stephen Langton, his mediate successor, removed his body from the Under-croft in Christ-Church, where first he was buried, and laid him at his own charge, in a most sumptuous shrine, at the East end of the Church. Here the rust of the sword that killed him, was afterwards tendered to Pilgrims to kiss. Here many miracles were pretended to be wrought by this saint, in number two hundred and seventy. They might well have been brought up to four hundred, and made as many as Baals lying Prophets: though even then, one Prophet of the Lord, one Micaiah, one true miracle were worth them all.

70. It is almost incredible, what multitudes of people flocked yearly to Canterbury (which City lived by Beckets death) especially on his Jubilee, or each fifty years after his enshrining. No fewer then an hundred thousand (we find it in words at length, and therefore a cipher is not mistaken) of English and foreigners repaired hither. And, though great the odds in hardness, between stones and flesh, there remains at this day in the marble, the prints of their superstition, who crept, and kneeled to his shrine. The revenues whereof by people's offerings, amounted to more then six hundred pounds a year. And the same accountant, when coming to set down, what then, and there was offered to Christ's, or the High-Altar, dispatcheth all with a blank, Summo Altari nil. Yea, whereas before Beckets death, the Cathedral in Canterbury was called Christ's Church, it passed afterwards for the Church of S ^t Thomas; verifying therein the complaint of Mary Magdalene, Sustuleruat Dominum, They have taken away the Lord. Though since, by the demolishing of Beckets shrine, the Church (and that justly) hath recovered his true and ancient name.