MANY changes were introduced into the English church at the conquest of England by William duke of Normandy. Vacant places were filled by Normans. It is said that the Anglo-Saxon clergy were so illiterate as to be scarcely able to stammer out the forms of divine service; and that any one who understood grammar was quite an exception: learning as well as religion had fallen into decay. The Norman clergy, however, made no efforts to learn the Anglo-Saxon language, by which to edify their hearers.
The king appointed an able man as primate. Lanfranc had been a professor of laws in his native city of Pavia, and had afterwards opened a school at Avranches; from thence he removed to the monastery of Bec, in Normandy. He had opposed William's marriage with Matilda as being within the forbidden degrees, and had in consequence been ordered out of the country by the duke. But meeting accidentally, a compromise was made, and Lanfranc was despatched to Rome to get from the pope the removal of an interdict under which William's territories had been laid. Lanfranc succeeded, and William urged him on his return to accept the archbishopric of Canterbury. He would have preferred to return to his monastery, but the pope refused his consent. He then accepted William's offer, though Lanfranc was nearly ninety years old, and travelled to Rome to receive the "pall" of his office.
Lanfranc set to work to reform the church in England: vacancies were filled up, but not always by worthy men. The king had to listen to the powerful barons and give places to their favourites. Many of the English were removed simply because they were not Normans. Thus an effort was made to remove Wulstan, the venerable bishop of Winchester, on the plea that he did not understand the French language; and a synod was called to effect it. He is said to have been an illiterate man, but had led a blameless life. He said to the synod that he knew his own unworthiness, but the king his master had called him to the office, "By the authority of the holy see he laid the burden upon me, and with this staff he commanded me to receive the rank of a bishop." Knowing his unworthiness, he would resign the office, but not to them, but to the one who had called him to it. Then walking, to the tomb of Edward the Confessor he laid the crozier on his tomb, and took his place among the monks. He was allowed to retain his office, and, at the death of the king, was the only English bishop who had not been removed.
The marriage of the clergy was a difficult point. A council at Winchester ordained that no canon should have a wife, and for the future no married man should be ordained priest or deacon; the rural clergy were allowed to retain their wives.
William was desirous of maintaining relationship with Rome, but he was resolved to be master in England. He not only appointed the bishops and abbots, but invested them also. Lanfranc begged that he might have the investing of the abbots; but the king declared that he meant “to keep all the staves in his own hands." The bishops were not to obey citations to Rome, nor were they to receive any letters from the pope without showing them to the king; neither was any one to be excommunicated without the king's license.
This was displeasing to the pope (Hildebrand), but he was anxious not to break with the king. He sent an envoy to England, asking that the king should swear fealty to the pope, and should pay Peter's pence, as his predecessor had done. The king would not swear fealty to the pope: he would pay some pence as alms, but not as a tribute. The pope replied that the money without obedience was worthless. Threats were held out to William; but he paid no regard to them. The pope then cited certain English and Norman bishops to attend a synod at Rome; but no response was made to this, and the pope had to overlook the disobedience. Again and again Lanfranc was summoned to Rome, to confer on matters touching the English church; but he never went.
All this is important, as showing that England was not wholly under the yoke of Rome at that time, and could manage its own affairs better without the pope's interference than with it.
William was succeeded by William Rufus, who as long as Lanfranc lived was held in restraint, but when the archbishop died (in 1089) he gave way to profligate living, and made free with the revenues of the church, keeping places vacant that he might spend the money. No successor to Lanfranc was appointed for four years. A severe illness was declared to be a judgment on the king, and he now appointed Anselm as archbishop.
Anselm was born in Piedmont, and had settled at Bec. In 1003 he had been made prior, and in 1078, abbot. Here he became very famous by his writings on theology, grammar, &c., and pupils flocked to him from all quarters: many questions were addressed to him, and his answers were valued as oracles from heaven.
He has been accounted the most learned man in theology since Augustine, and has been described as the setter forth of what is called natural theology.
Anselm strongly opposed his own appointment. He much preferred his quiet monastery and time for study, to having to do with such a king as William. He compared the position to a young untamed bull being yoked to an old and feeble sheep: the poor sheep would be dragged to death.
All opposition, however, was useless: being in England at the time he was carried into the king's sick chamber at Gloucester, the crosier was forced into his hands, and notwithstanding his struggles, he was hurried away into a church and hailed as archbishop of Canterbury.
The king recovered, and was now worse than before, and Anselm soon found his position was not a bed of roses. The king still wanted money, and the archbishop learned that he was expected to send to the king a contribution. He sent £500, in the hope that the king would be favorable to the church. The king would at first have received the money; but some about him declared that it was a paltry sum, and was not nearly as much as should have been sent by one receiving such an office. The archbishop said he could not then send more; but it would not be his last gift. The king, however, refused to receive it, and the archbishop distributed it among the poor.
The king was highly displeased, and refused to restore the estates of the church. He also refused a council to be held to reform the disorders among the clergy and monks. When pressed to fill up some vacancies, William replied, "What is that to you? are not the abbeys mine?" “They are yours," was the reply, "to defend and protect as advocate; but they are not yours to invade and devastate."
After various conflicts, Anselm sent two of the clergy to Rome, to inquire which of the rival popes (Clement III and Urban II) had the best claim. They judged Urban should be acknowledged as pope, and Anselm requested permission to go to Rome to receive the "pall” of office. The king refused; but Urban, on being acknowledged the true pope, sent a pall for the archbishop. This again was a cause for dispute. William wanted Anselm to receive it from his hands; but he refused. At length the pope's legate laid it on the altar at Canterbury, and the archbishop took it from thence.
After repeated hindrances, Anselm started for Rome (A.D. 1098), but was searched at Dover lest he was carrying money to the pope. At Rome he was received with great distinction, and was spoken of as "the holy man." Envoys were also sent by the king to Rome, and the pope told these that everything must be restored to the archbishop under pain of excommunication; but, by large presents from the king in private, this was averted!
This convinced Anselm that he could not hope for much from the pope, so he retired to Lyons where he remained a year and a half. There he heard of the death of Urban, in July, 1099, and of that of William in 1100.
While abroad, Anselm finished a treatise on the Incarnation, which is said to have been the basis of much that has been written since. He shows that there must be a satisfaction for sin; and the necessity that this satisfaction should be rendered by One who is perfect God and perfect Man.
Henry I succeeded in England. He invited Anselm to return to his office, and he filled up the vacancies in the church. But a dispute arose at once about investiture. The king claimed it, and the archbishop claimed it as from the pope. Messengers were sent to the pope—Paschal II now—but he refused to give way to the king, and encouraged the archbishop to resist.
In 1102 a council of the clergy was held in London, attended also by the nobles. The celibacy of the parochial clergy was now, for the first time, agreed on. This met with great opposition in some places. The canons bear evidence of the low state into which religion, discipline, and even morality had fallen during the reign of William Rufus.
Anselm again went to Rome, and messengers also went from the king, respecting investiture—each claiming it as their right. At length a compromise was agreed on—that the king should forego investiture, but that, for the present, bishops and abbots should be permitted to do homage; while those who had been invested by him should be admitted to communion on such terms as the two envoys of the pope should agree. This was a decided victory for Rome.
In the twelfth century learning revived in England. Perhaps to this period may be assigned the establishing of the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, though there had been schools at these places and in London, St. Alban's, and elsewhere, long before. In the reign of Richard I. we find the university of Oxford mentioned as being similar to the university of Paris, and as a sort of rival to that renowned seat of learning.
It is recorded that in 1109 three monks went to Cambridge every day, to teach in a barn hired for their use. One taught grammar in the morning; a second, logic at one o'clock; and the third gave lectures on rhetoric at three. The barn was soon found to be too small for the purpose, and places were sought in different parts of the town. This is the description given of the humble state of learning at what became the university of Cambridge.
England was gradually enslaved by Rome. Henry II strongly opposed the encroachments of the pope, but had to give way. He joined the French king in persecuting the Cathari of Toulouse, who are believed to have been true Christians, though styled Arians by Rome.
In the reign of Henry II also, thirty men and women, Germans, were brought before a council of the clergy at Oxford. Gerard, their teacher, declared they were Christians and believed the doctrines of the apostles. But as they did not hold with purgatory, prayers for the dead, nor the invocation of the saints, they were, by the orders of Henry, branded with a hot iron on the forehead, then whipped through Oxford, had their clothes cut of at their girdles, and turned into the open fields. Under heavy penalties no one was allowed to give them shelter or food. They remained calm, and were heard repeating "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." It being winter time, they all perished.
What a sad picture is this of how England was devoted to the dogmas of Rome. The king and the university were thus united to cast out true Christians from the land!
The conflict between Henry and Thomas à Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, must be but briefly touched upon. From the most magnificent of courtiers, Becket, as archbishop, appeared to be the most devoted saint. He adopted the coarsest clothing, and ate the plainest food; daily he washed the feet of the poor; devotedly he paced the cloisters of his cathedral, and spent hours in prayer.
It having been represented to the king that, during the first eight years of his reign, a hundred murders had been committed by the ecclesiastics, Henry called a council of prelates and barons at Clarendon, 1164.
It was therein settled that "all cases whether civil or criminal, in which a clergyman was concerned, should be tried and determined in the king's court; that appeals should lie from the archbishop to the king; and that no cause should be carried further than the archbishop's court (that is, not to Rome) without the king's consent; that no archbishop, bishop, or dignified clergy should depart from the kingdom without the king's leave."
Becket promised to agree to the Constitutions of Clarendon, but at a meeting afterwards refused. The king was exasperated, and the clergy begged the archbishop to give way. He promised, if the meeting was adjourned till the resolutions could be put into proper form, he would agree to them. On this being done, he again refused, and imposed a penance on himself for his weakness in having promised to agree to the Constitutions. Pope Alexander III released him from his oath.
As is well known, Becket rather than give way, fled to the continent, and remained there nearly six years. On being reconciled to the king, he returned; but had sent on before him excommunications against the archbishop of York and the bishops of London and Salisbury. These hastened to lay their complaints before the king, and demanded redress: "We implore it," said they, "both for the sake of royalty and the clergy—for our own repose as well as yours." The king was seized with a fit of fury. "How!" cried he, "a fellow that has eaten my bread—a beggar that first came to my court on a lame horse, dares insult his king and the royal family, and tread upon the whole kingdom, and not one of the cowards I nourish at my table — not one will deliver me from this turbulent priest."
Unhappy words ! Four of the king's knights quietly left his presence unobserved, crossed the sea, and murdered the archbishop.
The king was greatly shocked, and fasted for three days. He swore it was not done at his command nor with his knowledge; but as his hasty words may have led to the deed, he afterwards promised to maintain two hundred knights as crusaders for a year; to serve himself for three years against the Saracens or Moors if the pope should require it; to restore the lands and possessions belonging to the friends of the late archbishop; and to allow appeals to be made to the pope; &c. He was then fully absolved.
Becket was accounted a saint; crowds flocked to his tomb to pray, and it was said that many miracles were wrought there. It was declared that "even from his grave he rendered his testimony in behalf of the papacy."
Later on, the king prostrated himself before Becket's tomb, and the bishops, priests, and monks, each bearing a scourge, struck the king's bare shoulders three or five times according to their rank. After this, it is not to be wondered at that Rome became supreme in England.
In the time of Richard, Innocent III was pope, and he plainly declared that no one was fit to exercise any authority who did not revere and obey the holy see. In a bull he declared that he would not endure the least contempt of himself or of God, whose place he held on earth, but would punish every disobedience without delay, and without respect of persons; and would convince the whole world that he was determined to act as a sovereign. Richard, though the "lion-hearted," had to give way.
His successor, John, had no power over the pope. John having objected to an illegal appointment of an archbishop, Innocent III laid the kingdom under an interdict. In despair, John proposed to turn Mahometan, but afterwards thought it best to yield to the pope. On May 15, 1213, he laid his crown at the feet of the pope's legate, and made oath that he surrendered the kingdom to Rome.
The indignant barons made John sign the "Magna Charta," but by hired troops he put down the barons, and Rome reigned supreme in England.
In the time of Henry III the kingdom was still subject to Rome, but a wholesome check was given to Rome by one of the English bishops, now to be named.
Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln
A few words must be said of bishop Grosseteste, elected A.D. 1235. He was learned above his compeers, and was really zealous to carry out reforms in the church. But he held the mendicant orders in too much favour, and was long deceived by them. At length he found that they needed to be reformed, and he obtained letters to carry this out. But when he set to work to reform them, they appealed to the pope. Innocent IV was then at Lyons, and Grosseteste travelled there to see him. To his astonishment the case was decided against him. He said, "I relied on your letters and promises, but am entirely disappointed." "What is that to you," was the reply; "you have done your part, and we are disposed to favour them: is your eye evil because I am good?" We trust such profane use of scripture shocked the bishop: he replied in a low tone, "O money, how great is thy power, especially at the court of Rome!" It is a wonder such a scene did not open the eyes of the bishop to the apostasy of Rome.
He returned, but was further shocked by the pope's sending Italians, who knew not a word of English, to fill up vacancies. The pope also insisted that one of his nephews, an Italian youth, should be a canon of Lincoln. Grosseteste, to his honour, positively refused to obey, and wrote an epistle defending himself.
Innocent was indignant. "Who is this old dotard," he exclaimed, "who dares to judge my actions? By Peter and Paul, if I were not restrained by my generosity, I would make him an example and a spectacle to all mankind. Is not the king of England my vassal and my slave? and if I gave the word would he not throw him into prison, and load him with infamy and disgrace?"
The cardinals did all they could to appease the pope. They said that the bishop's epistle was true, and to persecute him would only bring the pope into contempt. He would not listen to their advice, but excommunicated the bishop, and nominated another in his place. As the cardinals had said, the acts of the pope were disregarded, and the bishop remained in the see till his death in 1253.
Innocent desired to take vengeance on the bones of the bishop, but one night, says a monk (Matthew, of Paris), the bishop appeared before him, drew near to the pontiffs bed, and struck him with his crosier, declaring that the Lord would not let him molest him. The pope uttered a cry and lay senseless on his bed. He never had a quiet night after, and when he expired the palace re-echoed with his fearful groans!
Another catholic writer said, "The holy bishop Robert departed this world which he never loved, and which was always to him a place of banishment. He was the open reprover both of my lord the pope and the king, and the censurer of the prelates, the corrector of the monks, the director of the priests, the instructor of the clergy.... and lastly he was the scourge of lazy and selfish Romans whom he heartily despised."
Though not clear in all his views of truth, it is to be hoped that he was a true Christian himself, and was able to point out to others the way of salvation. In many respects he was certainly a light shining in this our country during the Dark Ages.
By the above it will be seen, that the pope claimed supremacy over the kings of the earth. He said, "Is not the king of England my vassal and slave?" And in 1191 Celestine III kicked the crown off the head of the emperor Henry VI while kneeling, to show that he could make or unmake an emperor. Alas, for any country to be under such masters! The ages must still have been dark, when such a claim could have been listened to for a moment.
Edward Iii
In the reigns of Edward I and Edward II things continued much as before, concerning the relations of England with Rome. But under Edward III a decided stand was made against the assumptions of Rome. He refused to make the annual payment to Rome. He also obtained a parliamentary declaration, that king John had no right to reduce the kingdom to a state of vassalage. He also obtained a statute against the claims of the pope to appoint successors to vacancies, and outlawed those who should dare to appeal to Rome.
One, Richard Fitzralf, was appointed archbishop of Armagh. He was zealous in opposing the pretensions of the mendicant friars, who absolved people for gross sins in defiance of the clergy. The friars appealed to the pope, and he summoned Fitzralf to Rome, where he was condemned, and died in banishment.
Rome was not only in thorough darkness itself, but would not allow any light to appear elsewhere if it could prevent it.
Bradwardine
Bradwardine was confessor to Edward III. He had studied at Oxford, and had gained the distinction of "the profound." He was chosen for the see of Canterbury, but Edward would not part with him till he was elected on a second vacancy, when he let him go. But he died after a few weeks. He has obtained a place in history principally by a large work he wrote, "Concerning the cause of God against Pelagius." The subject is treated in a most orderly manner—with "mathematical accuracy," says his biographer. The work is still in existence.
Wiclif
During the reign of Edward III lived also the pious Wiclif who strongly opposed the assumptions of the pope, translated the Bible into English, and preached the gospel faithfully. A short account of this early reformer has been given elsewhere.
We have thus seen how slavishly servile the kingdom of England became to Rome in the Dark Ages. And we have seen how Edward III made a dead stand against the pope's assumptions. Wiclif also opposed the doctrines of Rome, and brought to light the word of God and the gospel of God's grace. All this paved the way and prepared the minds of men for the further revelations of truth that were proclaimed at the Reformation. Indeed, the publication of the word of God in the English language was a great means used in opening men's eyes to the evils of Rome, and to the glorious gospel contained in that message to man-a light indeed that destroyed the Dark Ages. If men now refuse the light, we know from God's word that a still greater darkness awaits them; those who will not now receive the truth, whereby they may be saved, and who take pleasure in unrighteousness, will then believe a lie. May the Lord grant that every reader of these pages may take warning, receive Christ as his or her Saviour, and be eternally blessed.
Scotland
In Scotland, the Anglo-Saxon Margaret, after her marriage with Malcolm III, (Canmore) sought to conform the church there to the church of England, which was under the control of Rome.
Monasteries and abbeys were established all over the country, and were endowed by this king, his successors, and by the nobles.
In the time of king Alexander I (1107-24) Eadmer, a monk at Canterbury, was chosen bishop of St. Andrew's; and a hot dispute arose as to his consecration, the archbishops of Canterbury and York both claimed it as their prerogative to consecrate him. The Scotch king did not wish it to be from either. Eadmer naturally preferred Canterbury, but the king would not yield. "While I live," said he, "I will not permit the bishop of St. Andrew's to be subject to that see." Eadmer would not break with Canterbury, resigned his office, and returned to England. He afterwards wrote to the king, owning he was wrong. The archbishop of Canterbury also wrote demanding that Eadmer should be re-instated. The king listened to neither, but chose another bishop.
In 1178 a more serious dispute arose as to Rome's authority in Scotland. The See of St. Andrew's being again vacant, the chapter chose one "John, surnamed the Scot;" but the king (now William the Lion) chose his own chaplain, Hugh. John appealed to Rome, and pope Alexander III annulled the appointment of Hugh, and his legate consecrated John. But the king banished John, and installed Hugh in the bishopric. The pope could not suffer this, and after much disputing, king William was excommunicated and the whole of Scotland was laid under an interdict.
At this juncture the pope died (1181), and William hastened to send ambassadors to the new pope Lucius III, who reversed all that his predecessor had done. John was made bishop of Dunkeld, and peace was restored. The next pope (Clement III) was also favorable to William, and the church of Scotland was adopted as "the daughter of Rome, by special grace," and was to be subject to no other intermediate power.
In 1225 the Scottish clergy obtained permission from pope Honorius IV to hold councils in Scotland to settle the affairs of the church. This was a great boon to the church of Scotland, and eventually they did not hesitate to pass canons against the edicts of the pope. Thus when the pope demanded that the Scottish clergy should give a tithe to the king of England, in aid of a proposed crusade, they firmly refused.
It was settled that the above council should meet yearly, the bishops in turn presiding, whose business it was to see that its canons were carried into effect. These canons continued in force until the era of the Reformation, though the bishops and clergy were still in full union with Rome, and for the most part were obedient to its edicts.