OF THE ELECTION OF AN ARCHBISHOP, AND TO
WHOM THE RIGHT OF IT BELONGED.
The right of electing an archbishop was, according to ecclesiastical canons, antiently in the prior and
chapter, confirmed by the royal concessions of our
kings, by bulls of the several popes, and by consiant
practice, though in it they were continually opposed,
and their elections as frequently declared null and
void.
King John, in the 16th year of his reign, granted
and declared by his royal charter, a free election of
prelates in all cathedral and conventual churches for
ever, throughout all England; which was confirmed
by the bulls of several popes, (fn. 1) and these, together
with the king's charter, are still preserved among the
archives of this church. This freedom of election
was, in particular, most strictly observed by king
Henry VI. who, when this see was vacant by the
death of archbishop Kempe, granted to the monks
on their usual petition in this case, a licence to elect a
new archbishop, without recommending any one in
any shape to their choice, left he should seem to infringe on the liberty of their free election, at which
time Thomas Bourghchier was chosen, but this was a
rare instance of it.
Upon the petition of the prior and convent for
leave to fill up the vacant see, from time to time, a
licence of electing an archbishop was generally
granted to them easily, and without any solicitation;
but this was not so entirely free, as in the abovementioned instance, for it was usually accompanied,
as it is at present, with a recommendation of some
particular person, under the king's sign manual; and
although the prior and convent, aware of this intrusion on their free liberty of election, hastened as much
as possible, by making a prior election, to frustrate
this recommendation, as well as the frequent one of
the pope by his bull of provision; yet they were generally forced to make a second election, in conformity to one or the other of them, of the person named
in them; inded the convent rarely had a quiet, undisturbed and free election, and for the most part the
archbishop elect was forced upon them, either by the
king or the pope.
Another strong opposition which the convent had
to encounter, was from the suffragan bishops of the
province, who contested, that they had the true right
to elect their metropolitan, either by themselves alone,
or at least by themselves in conjunction with the prior
and convent of the church of Canterbury; but upon
the latter making their appeals to the court of Rome,
they procured the several bulls from the pope, as before-mentioned; and though they at length overthrew the pretences of the bishops, which had continued just one hundred years, (fn. 2) during which time there
had been nine archbishops elected, at the same time,
as perhaps was intended by the court of Rome, they
made way for those papal bulls of provision, which
proved a much greater grievance to them, and in
great measure took the free election entirely from
them; for afterwards, till the time of the reformation, though some few were duly elected by the convent, yet the archbishops in general received their admission to the metropolitical dignity by power of the
papal authority, under the title of the pope's bulls of
provision, as may be seen at large before in the account of the several archbishops, where the means by
which each of them became promoted to this see, are
fully related.
But since the reformation and the abolition of the
papal power in this kingdom, the method of election
has been thus: the vacancy of the see having been
notified, a conge de lire, or licence to elect, is issued
in the usual garb of pageantry, under the great seal,
and directed for that purpose to the dean and chapter
of Canterbury, inclosed in which, is an unadorned
small sheet of paper, containing a recommendation of
the person to be elected, under the king's sign ma
nual. Accordingly, the chapter being met, and the
licence and letter of recommendation being read, another person, either one of the prebendaries or a minor
canon of this church, is nominated as a candidate
likewise with him who is recommended, but the remembrance of a premunire, with other cogent reasons,
always renders the royal candidate successful, and that
by a unanimous suffrage of the chapter; nor has his
opponent ever been known since the reign of king
Henry VIII. to have gained a single voice in his favour. After the return of this election, the royal
confirmation succeeds of course, without any difficulty, and the new archbishop is afterwards consecrated by two bishops, usually at his own chapel at
Lambeth palace.
Let us now take a view of the difficulties which the
archbishop elect met with in obtaining his confirmation from the court of Rome, before the reformation.
After the election of an archbishop by the prior and
convent of Canterbury, the royal assent and approbation was obtained with far more ease than the papal
confirmation at Rome; for by the canon law it was
provided, that the archbishop elect should personally
appear at Rome, and obtain there a confirmation of
his election. This was an undertaking of both great
trouble and expence; the journey was long, tiresome
and perilous, and the attendance on the dilatory process of a tedious suit, and the submission to all the humiliating vexations brought forward by the pride and
avarice of those who had dealings in it, could not but
be severely felt by a good and generous mind; for,
notwithstanding the archbishop elect carried with him
authentic instruments of his being duly and canonically elected, he in general met with many pretended
difficulties during the process; fresh objections were
made, and new doubts and scruples raised from time
to time, merely to prolong the suit, and inhance the
expence; till at last a large sum of money given, ei
ther for expedition, or wasted in the fees of the court,
reconciled every scruple, and thus the end being answered, the business was finished. A notorious instance upon record, of the intolerable exactions of
the court of Rome, which this nation once laboured
under.
Two instances among several others in the registers
of the church of Canterbury, may be produced, of the
trouble and charges attending this confirmation of the
archbishop elect at Rome. One is of archbishop
Winchelsea, who, by reason of the vacancy of the papal chair, was necessitated to spend a year and nine
months in his journey, to obtain his confirmation;
during which time, as appears by the register of the
church, the archbishop spent in England 142l. 19s. and
in the court of Rome, two thousand five hundred
marks sterling; and the expences of the proctors of the
chapter amounted to one thousand seven hundred and
forty-four marks sterling more; all which enormous
expences were laid out upon no other account than
the procuring of the confirmation of the archbishop's
election.
Other archbishops in suing for their confirmations,
met with full as long and tedious a business; for whatever difficulty there was in passing the Alps, and that
frequently in the most inclement season of the year,
there was still more in bringing it to a speedy conclusion in that venal court, where it found so many wilful
stops and hinderances.
The long attendance of archbishop Winchelsea
might indeed, in some measure have been occasioned
by the vacancy of the papal chair; but most of the
other archbishops met with their delays from the pope
himself and the cardinals, who were excellently versed
in all the arts of stripping those of their money, who
had any dealings with them, and never ceased, whilst
they had any thing left for them; and there are some
instances, when, after taking this long journey, and
much money expended, the pope chose to declare the
archbishop's election null and void, under the power of
providing for this see with one of his own choice.
I shall here produce only one instance more, and
that for the sake of shewing what strong and powerful
efforts were made by the king, as well as the whole
nation, against the papal provisions and other usurpations of the see of Rome, at that time; this was in the
case of Simon Mepham, who was elected archbishop
on Dec. 11, 1327, and within a month afterwards began his journey to Rome, carrying with him the usual
testimonials, as well from the prior and chapter, as
from the king. Upon the dilatory proceedings in his
cause, the king sent a second letter to the pope and to
the several cardinals, and soon after a third, in both
which, he recommends the archbishop's cause in a special manner, pressing the pope with much vehemency
for a speedy dispatch of it; and this was accompanied
with one from Isabella, the queen mother, and another from the nobles then assembled in parliament at
Northampton. In these letters, they all repeat how
much the speedy return of the archbishop would promote the peace and tranquility of the nation, and that
through his absence several weighty affairs were interrupted, which could not be transacted without the immediate presence of the archbishop; and they all concluded with a plea against cassating the election, and
putting another into the chair by papal provision.—The king's former letter urgeth this from the great
danger of sedition and schism from the people which
might follow thereupon; but in his third letter, he
beseeched the pope, that if he should find just cause to
make null the present election, he would acquiesce in
his former request of providing for the see of Canterbury, by the promotion of Henry, bishop of Lincoln,
to it. The queen mother gave the pope more roundly
to understand, that this was a concern, not only of the
people of the province of Canterbury, but of the whole
nation, which she and all the nobility had espoused as
their common interest, and had agreed to acquaint him
therewith in that same stile, being well assured that the
promotion of any other to this dignity would give
great offence to the people, and raise a lasting schism in
this church. The nobles wrote in the same manner,
and in the same strain, concluding, that they trembled
at the event, which a contrary decision would produce
among the people. By these vehement importunities,
the pope condescended to celebrate the confirmation of
the archbishop, at a public consistory on May 27, and
returning, he arrived at Dover on the 5th of September
following. (fn. 3)
Of the Archbishop's Consecration and
Inthronization.
The archbishop was usually consecrated, unless he
was a bishop already, on the next Sunday immediately
after the declaration of his confirmation. The solem
nity was performed by a cardinal, whom the pope appointed for that purpose, in some church where the
court of Rome was at that time.
After this, there still remained in former times, another ceremony, without which the archbishop could not
exercise the power and office, or so much as take upon
him the name and title of archbishop; which was, that
according to canonical sanctions, he was to receive the
pall, the badge and ensign of the fulness of his authority;
which was usually, though not without earnest petition,
given soon after the consecration. (fn. 4) The use of it was
allowed only upon solemn times and occasions, called
apostolical privileges, and in this they were inferior to
the pope, who reserved to himself the honour of wearing the pall at all times and in every place. There was
this provision too, wisely made, that no archbishop
should lend his pall to another, or transmit it to his
successor, but he carried it with him to the grave, and
was buried in it. (fn. 5)
The bulls declaring the confirmation of the archbishop being arrived in England, and that to the king
being presented to him, the archbishop appeared personally before him, for such was the custom of the
realm, and laying his hand upon his breast, took the
oath of sidelity; upon which the king ordered the writ
to restore the temporalities of the see to him.
The archbishop, after this, being received at his first
coming to his church with the usual ceremonies, the
greatest of all solemnities followed next, which was his
inthronization, which was celebrated with a pomp and
state, almost equal to royalty itself. The entertainment
was great and magnificent; the variety of costly and
dainty provisions in most profuse quantities, prepared
with the rarest skill of cookery, seems almost incredible. In the archives of this church, there is an old
printed roll, containing the inthronization feast of Geo.
Nevill, archbishop of York, made in the 6th year of
king Edward IV. and of William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, in the 20th year of Henry VII.
which are strong instances of it. Battely has given in
his appendix, the bill of sare of the former, with the
names of the great officers who waited at that feast.—The description of archbishop Warham's feast he has
given, whole and entire, in the same appendix; (fn. 6) in it
there is an account of the manner in which the services
were performed, of the number of dishes, the distinct
messes or companies of the guests, the bills of the provisions and prices of the same. The compiler of the
Antiquities of the British Church refers us to this very
printed roll, and says, that he was afraid to related the
number of guests and dishes, left he should report what
could not be believed. He mentions too, the devices
of the subtilties and the verses that were made on
them; whence it is plain, that in those days the skill in
cookery and confectionary flourished far beyond the
art of poetry These devices, as they were then
termed, consisted of the most gross and fulsome slattery,
such as archbishop Warham himself, who was a good
and learned man, could not have submitted to, had not
his feelings of a man been lost in the greatness and hurry
of that day's solemnity.
The royal and honourable guests who were invited
to these solemnities, shew the honour and esteem they
were held in. At the great feast of archbishop Winchelsea in 1294, there were present, king Edward,
prince Edward the king's son, Edmund the king's
brother, the bishops of London, Lincoln, Ely, Hereford, Norwich, Rochester, and Durham; the earls of
Gloucester, Pembroke, Marshal, Hereford and Warwick, and a great number of other prelates, nobles,
and inferior persons. (fn. 7) At the feast of archbishop Walter Reynolds, there were present, king Edward, the
bishops of Winchester, Bath and Wells, Chichester,
Coventry and Lichfield, Ely, and Worcester; the earls
of Hereford, Pembroke, &c. At the feast of archbi
shop Warham, there were entertained, the duke of
Buckingham, (fn. 8) earl of Essex, lords Cobham, Bergavenny, Brook, and Clynton; the bishop of Mayo,
suffragan, the prior of Christ-church, the abbot of St.
Augustine's, Sir Edward Poynings, Sir John Fineux,
chief justice; Sir William and Sir Thomas Scot,
Master Boteler, sergeant at law, the master of the rolls,
the several archdeacons and doctors, the mayor and citizens of Canterbury, the barons of the five ports, besides a number of others of quality, private gentlemen
and a multitude of inferior persons.
In imitation of the inthroning and coronation of
royal personages, the archbishops was attended at these
feasts by his great officers, who performed their services by a kind of grand sergeantry, and were persons
of distinguished rank and title; for which purpose,
the day before this solemnity, the high court of stewardship was held in the archbishop's palace, to judge
and admit the several claims to these tenures. These
are particularly described in a printed roll in the archives of this church, so early as the 42d year of king
Henry III.'s reign, anno 1264, by which it appears,
that the offices of high steward and butler were then
executed by the earl of Gloucester, as holding the manor and castle of Tunbridge and other manors of the
archbishop, by the performance of such service at his
inthronization. (fn. 9)
The office of chief panterer on that day was executed by the lord Conyars and Mr. Strangwish, as
holding the manors of Whyvelton and others. (fn. 10) The
office of chamberlain for that day was claimed and allowed to Bartholomew, lord Badlesmere, as holding
the manor of Hothfield, near Charing. (fn. 11) The office of
carver, by the son and heir of Roger de Mereworth,
as holding the manor of Ceriston, (fn. 12) and the office of
cupbearer, by Roger de Kirkbye, as holding the manor of Horton, (fn. 13) each by the performance of those respective services.
There is an account of the inthronization of archbishop Morton, in a manuscript in the Cotton library,
in which we learn, that after Christmas in the year
1487, anno 2 Henry VII. the archbishop was, on a
Sunday, in the month of January, inthronized at Canterbury, greatly accompanied with lords, both spiritual and temporal. In his journey towards this place
from Lambeth, after the king's licence, he rode greatly
accompanied, first to Croydon, and from thence to
Knowle; from thence to Maidstone, to Charing, and to
Chartham, where he lay on the Saturday at night, and
on the Sunday, when he entered Canterbury, all the
bells in the city were rang, and he alighted and went
on foot. At the great gate (south within) met him,
the procession of Christ-church, and censed him, and
when he was entered a little within the west door, there
was placed a stool with a rich cloth of silk and cushions,
where he kneeled some time and wept much, and after
proceeded to the high altar. The Te Deum was sung,
and he and all the prelates had on them rich copes and
with procession went and met the pall, sent from the
pope, which was borne by the bishop of Rochester;
then they returned before the high altar, where the bishop of Worcester read and declared the pope's bulls,
and made a great proposition of them, shewing the
virtue and meaning of the pall, which being so delivered to the archbishop, who sat in a chair, all the
prelates who were there kissed the relic or pall, and
after the cheek of the archbishop, and in the same manner after them all the religious people of that house;
this done, the archbishop and all other prelated, went
into the vestry, the bishop of Ely was deacon, and
read the gospel, the bishop of Rochester bore the cross
and read the epistle; the bishop of Salisbury was
chaunter, and began the office of the mass. As for all
the solemnity of that mass and the feast, it was written,
says the author, in a large book made for that purpose,
but it was the best ordered and served, that he ever
saw, or that could be compared to, and the king's servants and officers of arms, that were there on the
morning, when they took their leave, were well and
worshipfully rewarded; there was likewise the marquis
of Dorset with eight or nine other barons, besides
knights and esquires which were in marvellous great
number, and all in his livery of Mustredeveles. (fn. 14)
At the feast of the inthronization of archbishop
Warham, above-mentioned, the solemnity was equally
grand and splendid, to any which had been before,
when the archbishop sat in the middle of the high table
or board, as it was then termed, alone; for the archbishop's state on that day was too great to admit of any
to be of his mess, or at the table at which he sat. The
duke of Buckingham, lord high steward, came in on
horseback, bareheaded, habited in his scarlet robe,
having the white staff, the badge of his office, in his
hand, being followed by two heralds at arms; then
came the chief sewer, and after him the dishes of the
first course were brought up; whilst these were placing
on the table, the high steward lighting from off his
horse, stood on foot before the archbishop, till the first
course being served, he retired to his own diningroom, where the duke's and the messes or services at
the ends of the archbishop's board were served up. (fn. 15)
At the first mess of the duke's table sat the duke himself, lord Clinton, Sir Edward Poynings, and the lord
chief justice Fineux; at his second board sat Sir William Scot, Sir Thomas Kemp and Mr. Butler, sergeant
at law; at the archbishop's board's end sat, on the
right hand, the earl of Essex, the bishop of Mayo,
suffragan, and the prior of Christ-church; on the left
hand, the lords Bergavenny and Brook, and the abbot
of St. Augustine's; the rest of the messes and services
for the several degrees of the numerous guests being
served and conducted in the several rooms, with equal
solemnity and decorum, according to their several
degrees. (fn. 16)
After the solemnity of the day was over, and these
great officers attendant on it were dismissed, the number of the archbishop's household, his officers and servants that attended upon him, were sometimes more,
sometimes fewer, according as he was disposed to appear in a greater or lesser state; but for the most part,
his retinue was like his rank, and his revenue great and
princelike; and the officers of his palace were so constituted, as in some measure to bear the resemblance to
those of a prince's palace. Of late, the archbishops
have usually been inthronized by proxy, and that with
a very scanty ceremony; for now, on the day appointed
for the inthronization, the archbishop, or his
proxy, the members of the church attending in procession, is placed in his patriarchal chair, at the east end
of the church, when the proper instruments are read
and obeizance made by the members of it; and by
this ceremony the archbishop is put into the formal
possession of his metropolitical dignity, with the authority and profits belonging to it; and this finished
the ceremonies of the day.