Page images

offenders. About the year 1173, a canon of Richard, archbishop of Canterbury: "Amodo officium suum non exerceant, qui in alienis episcopatibus furtive · ordines susceperunt." Again, a synodal statute of the diocese of Chichester in 1246 thus concludes: "Si quis vero furtive vel simoniace fuerit ordinatus, vel alias contra canonicas sanctiones, non exequatur officium, quousque cum ipso fuerit dispensatum." And once more, the synod of Exeter, in 1287, bearing upon several points before noticed; " Quoniam quidam extranei se oriundos de nostra diœcesi, ac servi se liberos multotiens mentiuntur, ad quod probandum conductitios testes et falsos producunt; nos tam ipsos, quam testes eorum, pro hujusmodi fraudis commento excommunicationis vinculo innodamus." 37

37 Wilkins. Conc. tom. 1. p. 475. 689. Tom. 2. p. 137. Cf. Tom. 1. p. 581. 658. 706. 717.


We find very early in the councils of the English Church, orders as to the precedence of bishops; to be ruled by the dates of their consecrations. Thus in the above cited council at Hertford, in the seventh century; Octavum, ut nullus episcoporum se præferat alteri per ambitionem, sed omnes agnoscant tempus, et ordinem consecrationis suæ." But before the Conquest, privileges had been granted to some sees; for in a council under Lanfranc, A.D. 1075, we find it decreed, after examination, that according to ancient rule the archbishop of York should

sit on the right hand of the arch-
bishop of Canterbury, the bishop
of London on the left, and Win-
chester next to York. If the
archbishop of York was not pre-
sent, then the bishop of London
took his place. Concil. tom. 1.
p. 363. Thus Gervase in his
chronicle, speaking of a council
held under Henry II. says; "Ad
dextram primatis sedit episcopus
Londoniensis, quia inter episcopos
Cant. ecclesiæ suffraganeos deca-
natus præminet dignitate. Ad
sinistram sedit episcopus Winto-
niensis, quia cantoris officio præ-
cellit. Cæteri tam episcopi quam
abbates secundum primogenita
consecrationis suæ consederunt."
Script. X. tom. 1.
p. 1430. Com-

I am not aware that if, in contradiction to these canons, a bishop ventured heedlessly or criminally to confer orders, he would incur the following penalty; but I mention it, as being worth notice, and having reference also to the solemnity with which, at his consecration, the proper vestments were put on by the newly elected bishop, and regarded in some degree as conveying a distinctive character. The two cases to which reference is made, are, neglect of consecrating churches, and of punishing criminous clerks: in the first, from the time that he has refused to perform it, being properly required, and not lawfully hindered, "a dalmaticæ, tunicæ, et sandaliorum usu, donec eam duxerit consecrandam, noverit se suspensum: quæ in

pare the " Ymagines historiarum"

of Ralph de Diceto, ibid. p. 671. And Gervase again, for an example, when the archbishop of York was present, and occupied his proper position in a procession. Ibid. p. 1587: and he adds ; "Roffensis vero qui Cantuariensis archiepiscopi capellanus est, prope archiepiscopum subsequetur a tergo." The statement of the chronicler as to the office of the bishop of Rochester, and above, as to the office of the bishop of Winchester, is contrary to the rule laid down by Lyndwood, (and followed by archbishop Parker, De Ant. Brit. Ecc. p. 32, and later authorities,) "Habet archiepiscopus Cant. in collegio episcoporum episcopos, Londinensem decanum, Wintoni


ensem cancellarium, Lincolniensem vicecancellarium, Sarisburiensem præcentorem, Wigorniensem capellanum, Roffensem cruciferarium." Lib. 5. Tit. 15. Eternæ. verb. tanquam. And it appears that a dispute did arise about this matter, between the bishops of London and Rochester, in the time of Richard I. See Chron. Gervas. Script. X. tom. 1. p. 1586. and Abp. Parker. p.


I had made some collections respecting the disputes between the archbishops of Canterbury and York, which so frequently are mentioned in the old chronicles, and the councils. But the subject is so extensive, that I have been obliged to pass it over altogether.


ipso consecrationis actu illico reassumat:" and the other is to the same effect. Both these are in the legatine constitutions of Otho.38

There was a facility which persons anciently might avail themselves of, surreptitiously to obtain orders, which has long been checked: this arose from the great number of persons who were ordained. I have unfortunately mislaid a reference to one of the Cotton manuscripts in the British Museum, in which I saw some long contemporary lists of ordinations, with names and other particulars, in the fourteenth century. But this is a point upon which easily ample information might be obtained, I doubt not, from existing records in the episcopal registers of the various dioceses and I shall extract the following only from the Archæologia. "In the episcopate of bishop Brantyngham, at an ordination celebrated in Tiverton church by William Courtenay, bishop of Hereford, on the 8th June, 1370, there were ordained three hundred and seventy-four persons; of whom, one hundred and sixty-three received the first tonsure; one hundred and twenty were ordained acolyths; thirty, subdeacons; thirty-one, deacons; and thirty, priests." 39

[ocr errors]

38 Tit. 3. and 8. There is nothing of importance in John de Athon's gloss upon these pas


39 Vol. 18. p.

414. Compare

some remarks in the dissertation on service books, as to the number of churches in this country, before the reformation. vol. 1. p. clxviij. note. 83.




HE office, which I have placed next to the service of the consecration of a bishop, is that of his inthronization. This will not require of me many observations. Several forms relating to the inthronization of a bishop of Bath and Wells, in the 13th century, have been printed by Wilkins: to which I must refer the student and another, a letter of summons to certain abbots by archbishop Winchelsey, to attend the solemnity in his own instance.1

The dispute which I have already noticed between the bishops of London and Rochester, had regard to the right of inthroning the archbishop: I quote the account given by archbishop Parker, which shews that the controversy once opened, there was no lack of claimants of the privilege, and that it ended in a compromise. "Inthronizandi enim jus Londinensis ut decanus, Roffensis ut capellanus, archiepiscopi sibi vendicavit. His autem litigantibus interponunt se monachi, suumque jus asserunt esse. Tum totus episcoporum cœtus instabat, et ad se tam inthronizationem, quam consecrationem, spectare affirmabant. Hac dissentione turbata aliquantulum pallii suscipiendi ceremonia fuit. Tandem sic composita lis est; ut, in throno sedentis episcopus Londinensis, pallium autem suscipientis episcopus Roffensis, archiepiscopi dextras occuparet.


1 Conc. tom. 2. p. 196. 214.

De antiq. Brit. Ecc. p. 226.

The inthronization of the archbishops was followed by a sumptuous feast, at which some of the chief persons in the kingdom performed certain services, as at coronation banquets, either claimed as privileges and honours, or as the conditions upon which they held manors or estates. I need scarcely remind the reader of the great feast of George Nevil, archbishop of York, in the reign of Edward IV., of which a particular account is printed by Hearne, "out of an old paper roll;" and another, equally magnificent, of archbishop Warham, in 1504.3

One of the benedictions printed below, (see page 321.) is, of the seal of a bishop. These after their death were anciently destroyed. At the end of one of the Durham inventories printed by the Surtees society, it is stated; " Post mortem Richardi Byry episcopi fracta fuerunt iiij. sigilla ejusdem. ejusdem." A. D. 1345. The

3 Leland. Collectanea. Ap- buit, ut passim dicebatur, quam pend. vol. 6. p. 2. 16. In the history of William de Chambre, printed in the Anglia Sacra, (tom. 1. p. 766) is an account of the inthronization of bishop Richard de Bury: "in qua installatione fecit grande convivium: ubi interfuerunt rex et regina Angliæ, mater regis Angliæ, rex Scotiæ, duo archiepiscopi et quinque episcopi, septem comites cum uxoribus suis, et omnes magnates citra Trentam

[blocks in formation]

omnes pontifices Angliæ. Et præter eos quos habuit in diversis maneriis suis repositos separatim, ubicunque cum sua familia residebat, tot libri jacebant in camera qua dormivit, quod ingredientes vix stare poterant vel incedere, nisi librum aliquem pedibus conculcarent." Ibid. p. 765. He was the author of the Philobiblos. Godwin. de præsul. p. 748.

♦ Wills and Inventories, p. 26. In this instance the broken seals were made into a silver-gilt chalice for the altar of S. John the Baptist. One of the constitutions of Otho, Quoniam tabellionum, is directed to the subject of au

« PreviousContinue »