I. CONVOCATION FOR THE EXTIRPATION OF HERESY (1512).
[Sidenote: Lollards go to hear Colet’s sermons.]
[Sidenote: Two heretics burned at Smithfield.]
Colet’s labours in connection with his school did not interfere with his
ordinary duties. He was still, Sunday after Sunday, preaching those
courses of sermons on ‘the Gospels, the Apostles’ Creed, and the Lord’s
Prayer,’ which attracted by their novelty and unwonted earnestness so many
listeners. The Dean was no Lollard himself, yet those whose leanings were
toward Lollard views naturally found, in Colet’s simple Scripture teaching
from his pulpit at St. Paul’s, what they felt to be the food for which
they were in search, and which they did not get elsewhere. They were wont,
it seems, to advise one another to go and hear Dr. Colet; and it was not
strange if, in the future examination of heretics, a connection should be
traced between Colet’s sermons and the increase of heresy.[392] That
heresy was on the increase could not be doubted. Foxe has recorded that
several Lollards suffered in 1511 under Archbishop Warham, and, strange to
say, Colet’s name appears on the list of judges.[393] Foxe also mentions
no fewer than twenty-three heretics who were compelled by Fitzjames,
Bishop of London, to abjure during 1510 and 1511. And so zealous was the
Bishop in his old age against them that he burned at least two of them in
Smithfield during the autumn of 1511.[394] So common, indeed, were these
martyr-fires, that Ammonius, Latin secretary to Henry VIII., writing from
London, a few weeks after, to Erasmus at Cambridge, could jestingly say,
that ‘he does not wonder that wood is so scarce and dear, the heretics
cause so many holocausts; and yet (he said) their numbers grow--nay, even
the brother of Thomas, my servant, dolt as he is, has himself founded a
sect, and has his disciples!’[395]
It was under these circumstances that a royal mandate was issued, in
November 1511, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to summon a convocation of
his province to meet in St. Paul’s Cathedral, February 6, 1512.[396]
[Sidenote: Convocation summoned.]
The King--under the instigation, it was thought, of Wolsey[397]--was just
then entering into a treaty with the Pope and other princes with a view to
warlike proceedings against France; and the King’s object in calling this
convocation was doubtless to procure from the clergy their share of the
taxation necessary to meet the expenses of equipping an army, which it was
convenient to represent as required ‘for the defence of the _Church_ as
well as the kingdom of England;’ but there was another object for which a
convocation was required besides this of taxation--one more palatable to
Bishop Fitzjames and his party--that of the ‘_extirpation of
heresy_.’[398]
On Friday, February 6, 1512, members of both Houses of Convocation
assembled, it would seem, in St. Paul’s Cathedral, to listen to the sermon
by which it was customary that their proceedings should be opened.
[Sidenote: Colet appointed to preach the opening sermon.]
Dean Colet was charged by the Archbishop with the duty of preaching this
opening address.
It was a task by no means to be envied, but Colet was not the man to shirk
a duty because it was unpleasant. He had accepted the deanery of St.
Paul’s not simply to wear its dignities and enjoy its revenues, but to do
its duties; and one of those duties, perhaps _the_ one to which he had
felt himself most clearly called, had been the duty of _preaching_.
Probably, there was not a pulpit in England which offered so wide a sphere
of influence to the preacher as that of St. Paul’s.
[Sidenote: St. Paul’s Cathedral.]
[Sidenote: St. Paul’s Walk.]
The noble cathedral itself was _then_, in a sense which can hardly be
realised _now_, the centre of the metropolis of England. In architectural
merits, in vastness, and in the beauty of its proportions, it was rivalled
by few in the world; but it was not from these alone that it derived its
importance. Under the shadow of its gracefully-tapering spire, 534 feet in
height, its nave and choir and presbytery extended 700 feet in one long
line of Gothic arches, broken only by the low screen between the nave and
choir. And pacing up and down this nave might be seen men of every class
in life, from the merchant and the courtier down to the mendicant and the
beggar. _St. Paul’s Walk_ was like a ‘change, thronged by men of business
and men of the world, congregated there to hear the news, or to drive
their bargains; while in the long aisles kneeled the devotees of saints or
Virgin, paying their devotions at shrines and altars, loaded with costly
offerings and burning tapers; and in the chantries, priests in monotonous
tones sang masses for departed souls.
[Sidenote: Colet had now preached at St. Paul’s seven years.]
In _this_ cathedral had Colet preached now for seven successive years. He
had preached to the humblest classes in their own English tongue,[399]
and, in order to bring down his teaching to their level, had given them an
English translation of the Paternoster[400] for their use. He had seen
them kneeling before the shrines, and had faithfully warned them against
the worship of images.[401] He had preached to the merchants and citizens
of London, and they had recognised in him a preacher who practised what he
preached, whose life did not give the lie to what he taught; and he had
done all this in spite of any talk his plain-speaking might create amongst
the orthodox, and notwithstanding the open opposition of his bishop. If
poor Lollards found in him an earnestness and simple faith they did not
find elsewhere, he knew that it was not _his_ fault. It was not _he_ who
was making heretics so fast, but the priests and bishops themselves, who
were driving honest souls into heretical ways by the scandal of their
worldly living, and the pride and dryness of their orthodox profession.
And now, when he was called upon to preach to these very priests and
bishops, was he to shrink from the task?
Colet had already, in his lectures at Oxford, given expression to the pain
which ecclesiastical scandals had given him; and in his abstracts of the
Dionysian treatises he had recorded, with grief and tears, his longings
for ecclesiastical reform. These, however, had never been printed. They
lay in manuscript in his own hands, and could easily be suppressed. It
remained to be seen whether seven years’ enjoyment of his own preferment
had closed his lips to the utterance of unpopular truths.
[Sidenote: Condition of the clergy.]
If it were possible so far to look behind the screen of the past as to see
the bishops of the province of Canterbury with the sight and knowledge of
Colet, as he saw them assembled at St. Paul’s on that Friday morning,
then, and then only, would it be possible to appreciate fairly what it
must have cost him to preach the sermon he did on this occasion.
[Sidenote: The bishops and their benefices.]
The Archbishop and some of the bishops were friends of his and of the new
learning; but even some of these were so far carried away by the habits of
the times, as to fall inevitably under the censure of any honest preacher
who should dare to apply the Christian standard to their episcopal
conduct. There might be honourable exceptions to the rule, but, _as a
rule_, the bishops looked upon their sees as _property_ conferred upon
them often for political services, or as the natural result of family
position or influence. The pastoral duties which properly belonged to
their position were too often lost sight of. A bishopric was a thing to be
sued for or purchased by money or influence. It mattered little whether
the aspirant were a boy or a greyheaded old man, whether he lived abroad
or in England, whether he were illiterate or educated. There was one
bishop, for instance, whom Erasmus speaks of as a ‘youth,’ and who was so
illiterate that he had offered Erasmus a benefice and a large sum of money
if he would undertake his tuition for a year--a bribe which Erasmus,
albeit at the time anxiously seeking remunerative work of a kind which
would not interfere with his studies, refused with contempt.[402] Then
there was James Stanley, an old man, whose only title to preferment was
his connection with the Royal Family and a noble house, who, in spite of
his absolute unfitness, had been made Bishop of Ely in 1506, and was now
living, it is said, a life of open profligacy, to the great scandal of the
English Church, and of the noble house to which he belonged.[403]
There was a bishop, too, whom More satirised repeatedly in his epigrams,
under the name of ‘Posthumus;’ at whose promotion he expresses his
delight, inasmuch as, whilst bishops were ‘generally selected at _random_,
this bishop had evidently been chosen with _exceptional care_. If an error
had been made in this case, it could not certainly have arisen from
_haste_ in selection; for had the choice been made out of a thousand, a
_worse or more stupid_ bishop could not possibly have been found!’[404]
From another epigram, it may be inferred that this ‘Posthumus’ was one of
the ignorant Scotists whose opposition the Oxford Reformers had so often
to combat; for More represents him as fond of quoting the text, ‘_The
letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life_,’--the text which is mentioned
by Tyndale as quoted by the Scotists against the literal interpretation of
Scripture;--and then he drily remarks, that this bishop was too illiterate
for any ‘_letters_ to have killed him, and that, if they had, he had no
_spirit_ to bring him to life again!’[405]
[Sidenote: The bishops and their benefices.]
These may, indeed, have been exceptional or, at all events, extreme cases;
but, however the bishops of the province of Canterbury had come by their
bishoprics, their general practice seems to have been to use their
benefices only as stepping-stones to higher ones. No sooner were they
promoted to one see than they aspired to another, of higher rank and
greater revenue. This, at least, was no exceptional thing. The Bishop of
Bath and Wells had been Bishop of Hereford; the Bishop of Chichester had
been translated from the see of St. David’s. The Bishop of Lincoln had
been Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. Audley had filled the sees of
Rochester and Hereford in succession, and was now Bishop of Salisbury.
Fitzjames had been first promoted to the see of Rochester, after that to
the see of Chichester, and from thence, in his old age, to the most
lucrative of all--the see of London. Fox had commenced his episcopal
career as Bishop of Exeter; he had from thence been translated, in
succession, to the sees of Bath and Wells, and Durham, and was now Bishop
of Winchester. And be it remembered that these numerous promotions were
not in reward for the successful discharge of pastoral duties: those who
had earned the most numerous and rapid promotions were the men who were
the most deeply engaged in _political_ affairs, sent on embassies, and so
forth, whose benefices were thus the reward of purely secular services,
and who, consequently, had hardly had a chance of discharging with
diligence their spiritual duties. The Bishop of Bath and Wells was a
foreigner, and lived abroad; and so also the Bishop of Worcester owed his
bishopric to Papal provision, and lived and died at Rome. His predecessor
and his successor also both were foreigners.[406]
[Sidenote: Wolsey.]
[Sidenote: Wolsey’s ambition.]
There was also, amongst the clergy of the province of Canterbury, a man
who was to surpass all others in these particulars; who was to be handed
down to posterity as the very type of an ambitious churchman; who was
already high in royal favour, always engaged in political affairs, and
considered to be the instigator of the approaching war; who had the whole
charge of equipping the army committed to his care; who had lately been
promoted to the deanery of Lincoln, and was waiting for the bishopric as
soon as it should be vacant; who had already had conferred upon him, in
addition to the deanery, two rectories, a prebend, and a canonry; who,
before another year was out, without giving up any of these preferments,
was to be made Dean of York; and who was destined to aspire from bishopric
to archbishopric, to hold abbeys and bishoprics _in commendam_, sue for
and obtain from the Pope a cardinal’s hat and legatine authority, and to
rule England in Church and State--England’s king amongst the rest--failing
only in his attempt to get himself elected to the Papal chair. This Dean
of Lincoln, so aspiring, ambitious, fond of magnificence and state, was
sure to be found at his place in a convocation called that the clergy
might tax themselves in support of his warlike policy, and in aid of his
ambitious dreams. Wolsey, we may be sure, would be there to watch
anxiously the concessions of his ‘dismes,’ as Bishop Fitzjames would be
there also, to await the measures to be taken for the ‘extirpation of
heresy.’
It was before an assembly composed of such bishops and churchmen as these,
that Colet rose to deliver the following address:--
[Sidenote: Colet’s sermon.]
[Sidenote: Need of reformation in the church.]
‘You are come together to-day, fathers and right wise men, to hold a
council. In which what ye will do, and what matters ye will handle, I
do not yet know; but I wish that, at length, mindful of your name and
profession, ye would consider of the reformation of ecclesiastical
affairs: for never was it more necessary, and never did the state of
the Church more need your endeavours. For the Church--the spouse of
Christ--which He wished to be without spot or wrinkle, is become foul
and deformed. As saith Esaias, “The faithful city is become a harlot;”
and as Jeremias speaks, “She hath committed fornication with many
lovers,” whereby she hath conceived many seeds of iniquity, and daily
bringeth forth the foulest offspring. Wherefore I have come here
to-day, fathers, to admonish you with all your minds to deliberate, in
this your Council, concerning the reformation of the Church.
[Sidenote: Colet’s modesty.]
‘But, in sooth, I came not of my own will and pleasure, for I was
conscious of my unworthiness, and I saw too how hard it would be to
satisfy the most critical judgment of such great men. I judged it
would be altogether unworthy, unfit, and almost arrogant in me, a
servant, to admonish you, my masters!--in me, a son, to teach you, my
fathers! It would have come better from some one of the fathers,--that
is, from one of you prelates, who might have done it with weightier
authority and greater wisdom. But I could not but obey the command of
the most reverend Father and Lord Archbishop, the President of this
Council, who imposed this duty, a truly heavy one, upon me; for we
read that it was said by Samuel the prophet, “Obedience is better than
sacrifice.” Wherefore, fathers and most worthy sirs, I pray and
beseech you this day that you will bear with my weakness by your
forbearance and patience; next, in the beginning, help me with your
pious prayers. And, before all things, let us pour out our prayers to
God the Father Almighty; and first, let us pray for his Holiness the
Pope, for all spiritual pastors, with all Christian people; next, let
us pray for our most reverend Father the Lord Archbishop, President of
this Council, and all the lords bishops, the whole clergy, and the
whole people of England; let us pray, lastly, for this assembly and
convocation, praying God that He may inspire your minds so
unanimously to conclude upon what is for the good and benefit of the
Church, that when this Council is concluded we may not seem to have
been called together in vain and without cause. Let us all say “the
_Pater noster_, &c.”’
The Paternoster concluded, Colet proceeded:--
[Sidenote: Text from Rom. xii.]
‘As I am about to exhort you, reverend fathers, to endeavour to reform
the condition of the Church; because nothing has so disfigured the
face of the Church as the secular and worldly way of living on the
part of the clergy, I know not how I can commence my discourse more
fitly than with the Apostle Paul, in whose cathedral ye are now
assembled: (Romans xii. 2)--“Be ye not conformed to this world, but be
ye reformed in the newness of your minds, that ye may prove what is
the good, and well-pleasing, and perfect will of God.” This the
Apostle wrote to all Christian men, but emphatically to priests and
bishops: for priests and bishops are the lights of the world, as the
Saviour said to them, “Ye are the light of the world;” and again He
said, “If the light that is in you be darkness, how great will be that
darkness!” That is, if priests and bishops, the very lights, run in
the dark way of the world, how dark must the lay-people be! Wherefore,
emphatically to priests and bishops did St. Paul say, “Be ye not
conformed to this world, but be ye reformed in the newness of your
minds.”
‘By these words the Apostle points out two things:--First, he
prohibits our being _conformed_ to the world and becoming _carnal_;
and then he commands that we be _reformed_ in the Spirit of God, in
order that we may be _spiritual_. I therefore, following this order,
shall speak first of _Conformation_, and after that of _Reformation_.
[Sidenote: Of ‘conformation.’]
‘“Be not,” he says, “conformed to this world.” By the _world_ the
Apostle means the worldly way and manner of living, which consists
chiefly in these four evils--viz. in _devilish pride_, in _carnal
concupiscence_, in _worldly covetousness_, and in _worldly
occupations_. These things are in the world, as St. John testifies in
his canonical epistle; for he says, “All things that are in the world
are either the lust of the flesh, or the lust of the eye, or the pride
of life.” These things in like manner exist and reign in the Church,
and amongst ecclesiastical persons, so that we seem able truly to say,
“All things that are in the _Church_ are either the lust of the flesh,
the lust of the eye, or the pride of life!”
[Sidenote: Pride of life.]
‘In the _first_ place, to speak of _pride of life_--what eagerness and
hunger after honour and dignity are found in these days amongst
ecclesiastical persons! What a breathless race from benefice to
benefice, from a less to a greater one, from a lower to a higher! Who
is there who does not see this? Who that sees it does not grieve over
it? Moreover, those who hold these dignities, most of them carry
themselves with such lofty mien and high looks, that their place does
not seem to be in the humble priesthood of Christ, but in proud
worldly dominion!--not acknowledging or perceiving what the master of
humility, Christ, said to his disciples whom he called to the
priesthood. “The princes of the nations” (said He) “have lordship over
them, and those who are amongst the great have power. But it shall
not be so with you: but he who is great among you, let him be your
minister; he who is chief, let him be the servant of all. For the Son
of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister.” By which
words the Saviour plainly teaches, that magistracy in the Church is
nothing else than humble service.
[Sidenote: Lust of the flesh.]
‘As to the second worldly evil, which is the _lust of the flesh_--has
not this vice, I ask, inundated the Church as with the flood of its
lust, so that nothing is more carefully sought after, in these most
troublous times, by the most part of priests, than that which
ministers to sensual pleasure? They give themselves up to feasting and
banqueting; spend themselves in vain babbling, take part in sports and
plays, devote themselves to hunting and hawking; are drowned in the
delights of this world; patronise those who cater for their pleasure.
It was against this kind of people that Jude the Apostle exclaimed:
“Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran
greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the
gainsaying of Core. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when
they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear; clouds they are
without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth,
without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves of
the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is
reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”
[Sidenote: Covetousness.]
‘_Covetousness_ also, which is the _third_ worldly evil, which the
Apostle John calls _the lust of the eye_, and Paul _idolatry_--this
most horrible plague--has so taken possession of the hearts of nearly
all priests, and has so darkened the eyes of their minds, that
now-a-days we are blind to everything, but that alone which seems to
be able to bring us gain. For in these days, what else do we seek for
in the Church than rich benefices and promotions? In these same
promotions, what else do we count upon but their fruits and revenues?
We rush after them with such eagerness, that we care not how many and
what duties, or how great benefices we take, if only they have great
revenues.
‘O Covetousness! Paul rightly called thee “the root of all evil!” For
from _thee_ comes all this piling-up of benefices one on the top of
the other; from _thee_ come the great pensions, assigned out of many
benefices resigned; from _thee_ quarrels about tithes, about
offerings, about mortuaries, about dilapidations, about ecclesiastical
right and title, for which we fight as though for our very lives! O
Covetousness! from _thee_ come burdensome visitations of bishops; from
_thee_ corruptions of Law Courts, and those daily fresh inventions by
which the poor people are harassed; from _thee_ the sauciness and
insolence of officials! O Covetousness! mother of all iniquity! from
_thee_ comes that eager desire on the part of ordinaries to enlarge
their jurisdiction; from _thee_ their foolish and mad contention to
get hold of the probate of wills; from _thee_ undue sequestrations of
fruits; from _thee_ that superstitious observance of all those laws
which are lucrative, and disregard and neglect of those which point at
the correction of morals! Why should I mention the rest?--To sum up
all in one word: every corruption, all the ruin of the Church, all the
scandals of the world, come from the covetousness of priests,
according to the saying of Paul, which I repeat again, and beat into
your ears, “Covetousness is the root of all evil!”
[Sidenote: Worldly occupation.]
[Sidenote: Apostolic priests.]
[Sidenote: Modern priests.]
‘The _fourth_ worldly evil which mars and spots the face of the Church
is the incessant _worldly occupation_ in which many priests and
bishops in these days entangle themselves--servants of men rather than
of God, soldiers of this world rather than of Christ. For the Apostle
Paul writes to Timothy, “No man that warreth for God entangleth
himself in the affairs of this life.” But priests are “soldiers of
God.” Their warfare truly is not carnal, but spiritual: for our
warfare is to pray, to read, and to meditate upon the Scriptures; to
minister the word of God, to administer the sacraments of salvation,
to make sacrifice for the people, and to offer masses for their souls.
For we are mediators between men and God, as Paul testifies, writing
to the Hebrews: “Every priest” (he says) “taken from amongst men is
ordained for men in things pertaining to God, to offer gifts and
sacrifices for sins.” Wherefore the Apostles, the first priests and
bishops, so shrank from every taint of worldly things that they did
not even wish to minister to the necessities of the poor, although
this was a great work of piety: for they said, “It is not right that
we should leave the word of God and serve tables; we will give
ourselves continually to prayer, and the ministry of the word of God.”
And Paul exclaims to the Corinthians, “If you have any secular
matters, make those of you judges who are of least estimation in the
Church.” Indeed from this worldliness, and because the clergy and
priests, neglecting spiritual things, involve themselves in earthly
occupation, many evils follow. First, the priestly dignity is
dishonoured, which is greater than either royal or imperial dignity,
for it is equal to that of angels. And the splendour of this high
dignity is obscured by darkness when priests, whose conversation ought
to be in heaven, are occupied with the things of earth. Secondly, the
dignity of priests is despised when there is no difference between
such priests and laymen; but (according to Hosea the prophet) “as the
people are, so are the priests.” Thirdly, the beautiful order of the
hierarchy in the Church is confused when the magnates of the Church
are busied in vile and earthly things, and in their stead vile and
abject persons meddle with high and spiritual things. Fourthly, the
laity themselves are scandalised and driven to ruin, when those whose
duty it is to draw men _from_ this world, teach men to love this world
by their own devotion to worldly things, and by their love of this
world are [themselves] carried down headlong into hell. Besides, when
priests themselves are thus entangled, it must end in _hypocrisy_;
for, mixed up and confused with the laity, they lead, under a priestly
exterior, the mere life of a layman. Also their spiritual weakness and
servile fear, when enervated by the waters of this world, makes them
dare neither to do nor say anything but what they know will be
grateful and pleasing to their princes. Lastly, such is their
ignorance and blindness, when blinded by the darkness of this world,
that they can discern nothing but earthly things. Wherefore not
without cause our Saviour Christ admonished the prelates of his
Church, “Take heed lest your hearts be burdened by surfeiting or
banqueting, and the cares of this world.” “By the cares (He says) of
this world!” The hearts of priests weighed down by riches cannot lift
themselves on high, nor raise themselves to heavenly things.
[Sidenote: Invasion of heretics.]
‘Many other evils there be, which are the result of the worldliness of
priests, which it would take long to mention; but I have done. These
are those four evils, O fathers! O priests! by which, as I have said,
we are conformed to this world, by which the face of the Church is
marred, by which her influence is destroyed, plainly, far more than it
was marred and destroyed, either at the beginning by the persecution
of tyrants, or after that by the invasion of heresies which followed.
For by the persecution of tyrants the persecuted Church was made
stronger and more glorious; by the invasion of heretics, the Church
being shaken, was made wiser and more skilled in Holy Scriptures. But
after the introduction of this most sinful worldliness, when
worldliness had crept in amongst the clergy, the root of all spiritual
life--charity itself--was extinguished. And without this the Church
can neither be wise nor strong in God.
[Sidenote: Wicked life of priests the worst kind of heresy.]
‘In these times also we experience much opposition from the laity, but
they are not so opposed to us as we are to ourselves. Nor does _their_
opposition do us so much hurt as the opposition of our own wicked
lives, which are opposed to God and to Christ; for He said, “He that
is not with me is against me.” We are troubled in these days also by
heretics--men mad with strange folly;--but this heresy of theirs is
not so pestilential and pernicious to us and the people as the vicious
and depraved lives of the clergy, which, if we may believe St.
Bernard, is a species of heresy, and the greatest and most pernicious
of all; for that holy father, preaching in a certain convocation to
the priests of his time, in his sermon spake in these words:--“There
are many who are catholic in their speaking and preaching who are very
heretics in their actions, for what heretics do by their false
doctrines these men do by their evil examples--they seduce the people
and lead them into error of life--and they are by so much worse than
heretics as actions are stronger than words.” These things said
Bernard, that holy father of so great and ardent spirit, against the
faction of wicked priests of his time; by which words he plainly shows
that there be two kinds of heretical pravity--one of perverse
doctrine, the other of perverse living--of which the latter is the
greater and more pernicious; and this reigns in the Church, to the
miserable destruction of the Church, her priests living after a
worldly and not after a priestly fashion. Wherefore do you fathers,
you priests, and all of you of the clergy, awake at length, and rise
up from this your sleep in this forgetful world: and being awake, at
length listen to Paul calling unto you, “Be ye not conformed to this
world.”
‘This concerning the _first_ part.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Reformation.]
‘Now let us come to the _second_--concerning _Reformation_.
‘“But be ye reformed in the newness of your minds.” What Paul commands
us secondly is, that we should “be _re_formed into a new mind;” that
we should savour the things which are of God; that we should be
reformed to those things which are contrary to what I have been
speaking of--_i.e._ to humility, sobriety, charity, spiritual
occupations; just as Paul wrote to Titus, “Denying ungodliness and
worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this
present world.”
[Sidenote: Must begin with the bishops.]
‘But this reformation and restoration in ecclesiastical affairs must
needs begin with _you_, our fathers, and then afterwards descend upon
us your priests and the whole clergy. For you are our chiefs--you are
our examples of life. To you we look as waymarks for our direction. In
you and in your lives we desire to read, as in living books, how we
ourselves should live. Wherefore, if you wish to see our motes, first
take the beams out of your own eyes; for it is an old proverb,
“Physician heal thyself.” Do you, spiritual doctors, first assay that
medicine for the purgation of morals, and then you may offer it to us
to taste of it also.
[Sidenote: Existing laws must be enforced.]
‘The way, moreover, by which the Church is to be reformed and restored
to a better condition is not to enact any new laws (for there are laws
enough and to spare). As Solomon says, “There is no new thing under
the sun.” The diseases which are now in the Church were the same in
former ages, and there is no evil for which the holy fathers did not
provide excellent remedies; there are no crimes in prohibition of
which there are not laws in the body of the Canon Law. The need,
therefore, is not for the enactment of new laws and constitutions, but
for the observance of those already enacted. Wherefore, in this your
congregation, let the existing laws be produced and recited which
prohibit what is evil, and which enjoin what is right.
[Sidenote: Wicked and unlearned men admitted to holy orders.]
‘First, let those laws be recited which admonish you, fathers, not to
lay your hands on any, nor to admit them to holy orders, rashly. For
here is the source from whence other evils flow, because if the
entrance to Holy Orders be thrown open, all who offer themselves are
forthwith admitted without hindrance. Hence proceed and emanate those
hosts of both unlearned and wicked priests which are in the Church.
For it is not, in my judgment, enough that a priest can construe a
collect, propound a proposition, or reply to a sophism; but much more
needful are a good and pure and holy life, approved morals, moderate
knowledge of the Scriptures, some knowledge of the Sacraments, above
all fear of God and love of heavenly life.
‘Let the laws be recited which direct that ecclesiastical benefices
should be conferred on the worthy, and promotions in the Church made
with just regard to merit; not by carnal affection, nor the
acceptation of persons, whereby it comes to pass in these days, that
boys instead of old men, fools instead of wise men, wicked instead of
good men, reign and rule!
[Sidenote: Simony.]
‘Let the laws be recited against the guilt of simony; which plague,
which contagion, which dire pestilence, now creeps like a cancer
through the minds of priests, so that most are not ashamed in these
days to get for themselves great dignities by petitions and suits at
court, rewards and promises.
[Sidenote: Residence of curates.]
‘Let the laws be recited which command the personal residence of
curates at their churches: for many evils spring from the custom, in
these days, of performing all clerical duties by help of vicars and
substitutes; men too without judgment, unfit, and often wicked, who
will seek nothing from the people but sordid gain--whence spring
scandals, heresies, and bad Christianity amongst the people.
[Sidenote: Worldly living of priests and monks.]
‘Let the laws be rehearsed, and the holy rules handed down from our
ancestors concerning the life and character of the clergy, which
prohibit any churchman from being a merchant, usurer, or hunter, or
common player, or from bearing arms--the laws which prohibit the
clergy from frequenting taverns, from having unlawful intercourse with
women--the laws which command sobriety and modesty in vestment, and
temperance in dress.
‘Let also the laws be recited concerning monks and religious men,
which command that, leaving the broad way of the world, they enter the
narrow way which leads to life; which command them not to meddle in
business, whether secular or ecclesiastical; which command that they
should not engage in suits in civil courts for earthly things. For in
the Council of _Chalcedon_ it was decreed that monks should give
themselves up entirely to prayer and fasting, the chastisement of
their flesh, and observance of their monastic rule.
[Sidenote: Worldly bishops.]
‘Above all, let those laws be recited which concern and pertain to
_you_, reverend fathers and lords bishops--laws concerning your just
and canonical election, in the chapters of your churches, with the
invocation of the Holy Spirit: for because this is not done in these
days, and prelates are often chosen more by the favour of men than the
grace of God, so, in consequence, we sometimes certainly have bishops
too little spiritual--men more worldly than heavenly, wiser in the
spirit of this world than in the spirit of Christ!
‘Let the laws be rehearsed concerning the residence of bishops in
their dioceses, which command that they watch over the salvation of
souls, that they disseminate the word of God, that they personally
appear in their churches at least on great festivals, that they
sacrifice for their people, that they hear the causes of the poor,
that they sustain the fatherless, and widows, that they exercise
themselves always in works of piety.
‘Let the laws be rehearsed concerning the due distribution of the
patrimony of Christ--laws which command that the goods of the Church
be spent not in sumptuous buildings, not in magnificence and pomp, not
in feasts and banquets, not in luxury and lust, not in enriching
kinsfolk nor in keeping hounds, but in things useful and needful to
the Church. For when he was asked by Augustine, the English bishop, in
what way English bishops and prelates should dispose of those goods
which were the offerings of the faithful, Pope Gregory replied (and
his reply is placed in the _Decretals_, ch. xii. q. 2), that the goods
of bishops should be divided into four parts, of which one part should
go to the bishop and his family, another to his clergy, a third for
repairing buildings, a fourth to the poor.
[Sidenote: Reform of Ecclesiastical Courts.]
‘Let the laws be recited, and let them be recited again and again,
which abolish the scandals and vices of courts, which take away those
daily newly-invented arts for getting money, which were designed to
extirpate and eradicate that horrible covetousness which is the root
and cause of all evils, which is the fountain of all iniquity.
[Sidenote: Councils should be held oftener.]
‘Lastly, let those laws and constitutions be renewed concerning the
holding of Councils, which command that Provincial Councils should be
held more frequently for the reformation of the Church. For nothing
ever happens more detrimental to the Church of Christ than the
omission of Councils, both general and provincial.
‘Having rehearsed these laws and others, like them, which pertain to
this matter, and have for their object the correction of morals, it
remains that with all authority and power their _execution_ should be
commanded, so that having a law we should at length live according to
it.
[Sidenote: The bishops must first be reformed, then the clergy,]
‘In which matter, with all due reverence, I appeal most strongly to
_you_, fathers! For this execution of laws and observance of
constitutions ought to begin with _you_, so that by your living
example you may teach us priests to imitate you. Else it will surely
be said of you, “They lay heavy burdens on other men’s shoulders, but
they themselves will not move them even with one of their fingers.”
But you, if you keep the laws, and first reform your own lives to the
law and rules of the Canons, will thereby provide us with a light, in
which we shall see what we ought to do--the light, _i.e._ of your good
example. And we, seeing our fathers keep the laws, will gladly follow
in the footsteps of our fathers.
[Sidenote: then the lay part of the Church.]
‘The clerical and priestly part of the church being thus reformed, we
can then with better grace proceed to the reformation of the lay part,
which indeed it will be very easy to do, if we ourselves have been
reformed first. For the body follows the soul, and as are the rulers
in a State such will the people be. Wherefore, if priests themselves,
the rulers of souls, were good, the people in their turn would become
good also; for our own goodness would teach others how they may be
good more clearly than all other kinds of teaching and preaching. Our
goodness would urge them on in the right way far more efficaciously
than all your suspensions and excommunications. Wherefore, if you wish
the lay-people to live according to your will and pleasure, you must
first live according to the will of God, and thus (believe me) you
will easily attain what you wish in them.
‘You want obedience from them. And it is right; for in the Epistle to
the Hebrews are these words of Paul to the laity: “Be obedient” (he
says) “to your rulers, and be subject to them.” But if you desire this
obedience, first give reason and cause of obedience on your part, as
the same Paul teaches in the following text--“Watch as those that give
an account of their souls,” and then they will obey you.
‘You desire to be honoured by the people. It is right; for Paul writes
to Timotheus, “Priests who rule well are worthy of double honour,
chiefly those who labour in word and doctrine.” Therefore, desiring
honour, first rule well, and labour in word and doctrine, and then the
people will hold you in all honour.
‘You desire to reap their carnal things, and to collect tithes and
offerings without any reluctance on their part. It is right; for Paul,
writing to the Romans, says: “They are your debtors, and ought to
minister to you in carnal things.” But if you wish to reap their
carnal things, you must first sow your spiritual things, and then ye
shall reap abundantly of their carnal things. For that man is hard and
unjust who desires “to reap where he has not sown, and to gather where
he has not scattered.”
‘You desire ecclesiastical liberty, and not to be drawn before civil
courts. And this too is right; for in the Psalms it is said, “Touch
not mine anointed.” But if ye desire this liberty, loose yourselves
first from worldly bondage, and from the cringing service of men, and
claim for yourselves that true liberty of Christ, that spiritual
liberty through grace from sin, and serve God and reign in Him, and
then (believe me) the people will not touch the anointed of the Lord
their God!
‘You desire security, quiet, and peace. And this is fitting. But,
desiring peace, return to the God of love and peace; return to Christ,
in whom is the true peace of the Spirit which passeth all
understanding; return to the true priestly life. And lastly, as Paul
commands, “Be ye reformed in the newness of your minds, that ye may
know those things which are of God; and the peace of God shall be with
you!”
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Conclusion.]
‘These, reverend fathers and most distinguished men, are the things
that I thought should be spoken concerning the reformation of the
clergy. I trust that, in your clemency, you will take them in good
part. If, by chance, I should seem to have gone too far in this
sermon--if I have said anything with too much warmth--forgive it me,
and pardon a man speaking out of zeal, a man sorrowing for the ruin of
the Church; and, passing by any foolishness of mine, consider the
thing itself. Consider the miserable state and condition of the
Church, and bend your whole minds to its reformation. Suffer not,
fathers, suffer not this so illustrious an assembly to break up
without result. Suffer not this your congregation to slip by for
nothing. Ye have indeed often been assembled. But (if by your leave I
may speak the truth) I see not what fruit has as yet resulted,
especially to the Church, from assemblies of this kind! Go now, in the
Spirit whom you have invoked, that ye may be able, with his
assistance, to devise, to ordain, and to decree those things which may
be useful to the Church, and redound to your praise and the honour of
God: to whom be all honour and glory, for ever and ever, Amen!’
Comparing this noble sermon with the passages quoted in an earlier chapter
from Colet’s lectures at Oxford and his Abstracts of the Dionysian
writings, it must be admitted that what, fourteen years before, he had
uttered as it were in secret, he had now, as occasion required, proclaimed
upon the housetops. What effect it had upon the assembled clergy no record
remains to tell.
[Sidenote: Wolsey obtains four dismes.]
The object which Wolsey had in view in the convocation was, it may be
presumed, attained to his satisfaction. The clergy granted the King ‘four
dismes,’ to be paid in yearly instalments.[407] And this was the full
amount of taxation usually demanded by English sovereigns from the clergy
in time of war, except in cases of extreme urgency.[408]
Whether Bishop Fitzjames succeeded equally well in securing the inhuman
object which was nearest to his heart, is not equally clear.
[Sidenote: Discussion on the burning of heretics.]
But one authentic picture of a scene which there can be little doubt
occurred in _this_ Convocation has been preserved, to give a passing
glimpse into the nature of the discussion which followed upon the subject
of the ‘extirpation of heresy.’ In the course of the debate, the advocates
of increased severity against poor Lollards were asked, it seems, to point
out, if they could, a single passage in the Canonical Scriptures which
commands the capital punishment of heretics. Whereupon an old divine[409]
rose from his seat, and with some severity and temper quoted the command
of St. Paul to Titus: ‘A man that is an heretic, after the first and
second admonition, reject.’ The old man quoted the words as they stand in
the Vulgate version: ‘Hæreticum hominem post unam et alteram correptionem
_devita_!’--‘_De-vita!_’ he repeated with emphasis; and again, louder
still, he thundered ‘DE-VITA!’ till everyone wondered what had happened to
the man. At length he proceeded to explain that the meaning of the Latin
verb ‘devitare’ being ‘de vita tollere’ (!), the passage in question was
clearly a direct command to punish heretics by death![410]
A smile passed round among those members of Convocation who were learned
enough to detect the gross ignorance of the old divine; but to the rest
his logic appeared perfectly conclusive, and he was allowed to proceed
triumphantly to support his position by quoting, again from the Vulgate,
the text translated in the English version, ‘Suffer not a witch to live.’
For the word ‘witch’ the Vulgate version has ‘maleficus.’ A heretic, he
declared, was clearly ‘maleficus,’ and therefore ought not to be suffered
to live. By which conclusive logic the learned members of the Convocation
of 1512 were, it is said, for the most part completely carried away.[411]
This story, resting wholly or in part upon Colet’s own relation to
Erasmus, is the only glimpse which can be gathered of the proceedings of
this Convocation ‘for the extirpation of heresy.’
II. COLET IS CHARGED WITH HERESY (1512).
[Sidenote: Colet’s sermon printed.]
Before the spring of 1512 was passed, Colet’s Sermon to Convocation was
printed and distributed in Latin, and probably in English[412] also; and
as there was an immediate lull in the storm of persecution, he may
possibly have come off rather as victor than as vanquished, in spite of
the seeming triumph of the persecuting party in Convocation.
The bold position he had taken had rallied round him not a few
honest-hearted men, and had made him, perhaps unconsciously on his part,
the man to whom earnest truth-seekers looked up as to a leader, and upon
whom the blind leaders of the blindly orthodox party vented all their
jealousy and hatred.
[Sidenote: Completion of Colet’s school.]
[Sidenote: Jealousy against Colet’s school.]
He was henceforth a marked man. That school of his in St. Paul’s
Churchyard, to the erection of which he had devoted his fortune, which he
had the previous autumn made his will to endow, had now risen into a
conspicuous building, and the motives of the Dean in building it were of
course everywhere canvassed. The school was now fairly at work. Lilly, the
godson of Grocyn, the late Professor of Greek at Oxford, was already
appointed headmaster; and as he was known to have himself travelled in
Greece to perfect his classical knowledge, it could no longer be doubted
by any that here, under the shadow of the great cathedral, was to be
taught to the boys that ‘heretical Greek’ which was regarded with so much
suspicion. Here was, in fact, a school of the ‘new learning,’ sowing in
the minds of English youth the seeds of that free thought and heresy
which Colet had so long been teaching to the people from his pulpit at St.
Paul’s. More had already facetiously told Colet that he could not wonder
if his school should raise a storm of malice; for people cannot help
seeing that, as in the Trojan horse were concealed armed Greeks for the
destruction of barbarian Troy, so from this school would come forth those
who would expose and upset their ignorance.[413]
No wonder, indeed, if the wrath of Bishop Fitzjames should be kindled
against Colet; no wonder if, having failed in his attempt effectually to
stir up the spirit of persecution in the recent Convocation, he should now
vent his spleen upon the newly-founded school.
But how fully, amid all, Colet preserved his temper and persevered in his
work, may be gathered from the following letter to Erasmus, who, in
intervals of leisure from graver labours, was devoting his literary
talents to the service of Colet’s school, and whose little book, ‘De Copiâ
Verborum,’ was part of it already in the printer’s hands:--
_Colet to Erasmus._[414]
‘Indeed, dearest Erasmus, since you left London I have heard nothing
of you....
‘I have been spending a few days in the country with my mother,
consoling her in her grief on the death of my servant, who died at
her house, whom she loved as a son, and for whose death she wept as
though he had been more than a son. The night on which I returned to
town I received your letter.
[Sidenote: A bishop blasphemes Colet’s school.]
‘Now listen to a joke! A certain bishop, who is held, too, to be one
of the wiser ones, has been blaspheming our school before a large
concourse of people, declaring that I have erected what is a useless
thing, yea a bad thing--yea more (to give his own words), a temple of
idolatry. Which, indeed, I fancy he called it, because the poets are
to be taught there! At this, Erasmus, I am not angry, but laugh
heartily....
‘I send you a little book containing the sermon’ [to the
Convocation?]. ‘The printers said they had sent some to Cambridge.
‘Farewell! Do not forget the verses for our boys, which I want you to
finish with all good nature and courtesy. Take care to let us have the
second part of your “Copia.”’
[Sidenote: ‘De Copiâ,’ preface of Erasmus.]
The second part of the ‘Copia’ was accordingly completed, and the whole
sent to the press in May, with a prefatory letter to Colet,[415] in which
Erasmus paid a loving tribute to his friend’s character and work. He dwelt
upon Colet’s noble self-sacrificing devotion to the good of others, and
the judgment he had shown in singling out two main objects at which to
labour, as the most powerful means of furthering the great cause so dear
to his heart.
[Sidenote: Colet’s preaching.]
To implant Christ in the hearts of the common people, by constant
preaching, year after year, from his pulpit at St. Paul’s--this, wrote
Erasmus, had been Colet’s first great work; and surely it had borne much
fruit!
[Sidenote: Colet’s school.]
To found a school, wherein the sons of the people should drink in Christ
along with a sound education--that thereby, as it were in the cradle of
coming generations, the foundation might be laid of the future welfare of
his country--this had been the second great work to which Colet had
devoted time, talents, and a princely fortune.
[Sidenote: Erasmus in praise of Colet’s work.]
‘What is this, I ask, but to act as a father to all your children and
fellow-citizens? You rob yourself to make them rich; you strip yourself to
clothe them. You wear yourself out with toil, that they may be quickened
into life in Christ. In a word, you spend yourself away that you may gain
them for Christ!
‘He must be envious, indeed, who does not back with all his might the man
who engages in a work like this. He must be wicked, indeed, who can
gainsay or interrupt him. That man is an enemy to England who does not
care to give a helping hand where he can.’
Which words in praise of Colet’s self-sacrificing work were not merely
uttered within hearing of those who might hang upon the lips of the aged
Fitzjames or the bishop who had ‘blasphemed’ the school; they passed, with
edition after edition of the ‘Copia’ of Erasmus, into the hands of every
scholar in Europe, until they were known and read of all men![416]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Colet charged with heresy by his bishop.]
But Bishop Fitzjames, whose unabating zeal against heretics had become
the ruling passion of his old age, no longer able to control his hatred of
the Dean, associated with himself two other bishops of like opinion and
spirit in the ignoble work of making trouble for Colet. They resorted to
their usual weapon--_persecution_. They exhibited to the Archbishop of
Canterbury articles against Colet extracted from his sermons. Their first
charge was that he had preached that images ought not to be worshipped.
The second charge was that he had denied that Christ, when He commanded
Peter the third time to ‘feed his lambs,’ made any allusion to the
application of episcopal revenues in hospitality or anything else, seeing
that Peter was a poor man, and had no episcopal revenues at all. The third
charge was, that in speaking once from his pulpit of those who were
accustomed to _read_ their sermons, he meant to give a side-hit at the
Bishop of London, who, on account of his old age, was in the habit of
reading his sermons.[417]
But the Archbishop, thoroughly appreciating as he did the high qualities
of the Dean, became his protector and advocate, instead of his judge.
Colet himself, says Erasmus, did not deign to make any reply to these
foolish charges, and others ‘more foolish still.’[418] And the Archbishop,
therefore, without hearing any reply, indignantly rejected them.
[Sidenote: Proceedings quashed by Warham.]
What the charges ‘_more foolish still_’ may have been Erasmus does not
record. But Tyndale mentions, as a well known fact, that ‘the Bishop of
London would have made Dean Colet of Paules a heretic for _translating the
Paternoster in English_, had not the [Arch]bishop of Canterbury helped
the Dean.’[419] Colet’s English translation or paraphrase of the
Paternoster still remains to show that he was open to the charge.[420] But
for once, at least, the persecutor was robbed of his prey!
* * * * *
For a while, indeed, Colet’s voice had been silenced; but now Erasmus was
able to congratulate his friend on his return to his post of duty at St.
Paul’s.
[Sidenote: Erasmus to Colet.]
‘I was delighted to hear from you’ [he wrote from Cambridge], ‘and have to
congratulate you that you have returned to your most sacred and useful
work of preaching. I fancy even this little interruption will be overruled
for good, for your people will listen to your voice all the more eagerly
for having been deprived of it for a while. May Jesus, _Optimus Maximus_,
keep you in safety!’[421]
III. MORE IN TROUBLE AGAIN (1512).
In closing this chapter, it may perhaps be remarked that little has been
heard of More during these the first years of his return to public life.
[Sidenote: More engrossed in business.]
[Sidenote: More writes his history of Richard III.]
The fact is, that he had been too busy to write many letters even to
Erasmus. He had been rapidly drawn into the vortex of public business. His
judicial office of undersheriff of London had required his close attention
every Thursday. His private practice at the bar had also in the meantime
rapidly increased, and drawn largely on his time. When Erasmus wrote to
know what he was doing, and why he did not write, the answer was that More
was constantly closeted with the Lord Chancellor, engaged in ‘grave
business,’[422] and would write if he could. What leisure he could snatch
from these public duties he would seem to have been devoting to his
‘History of Richard III.’[423] the materials for which he probably
obtained through his former connection with Cardinal Morton.
[Sidenote: Death of his wife.]
And were we to lift the veil from his domestic life, we should find the
dark shadow of sorrow cast upon his bright home in Bucklersbury. But a few
short months ago, such was the air of happiness about that household, that
Ammonius, writing as he often did to Erasmus, to tell him all the news,
whilst betraying, by the endearing epithets he used, his fascination for
the loveliness of More’s own gentle nature, had spoken also of his ‘most
good-natured wife,’ and of the ‘children and whole family’ as ‘charmingly
well.’[424]
[Sidenote: His four children.]
Now four motherless children nestle round their widowed father’s
knee.[425] Margaret, the eldest daughter--the child of six years
old--henceforth it will be _her_ lot to fill her lost mother’s place in
her father’s heart, and to be a mother to the little ones. And she too is
not unknown to fame. It was she
... ‘who clasped in her last trance
Her murdered father’s head.’...