Page:Church and State under the Tudors.djvu/308

 1.

Chapuys to Charles V.

January 23, 1531 Though the clergy know themselves innocent, seeing that it was determined to find fault with them, they offered of their own accord 160,000 ducats, which the King refused to accept, swearing that he will have 400,000 or will punish everyone with extreme rigour; so that they will be obliged to pass it, though it will compel them to sell their chalices and reliquaries. About five days ago it was agreed between the Nuncio and me that he should go to the said ecclesiastics in their congregation, and recommend them to support the immunity of the Church, and to inform themselves about the Queen's affairs, showing them the letter which the Pope has written thereupon, and offering to intercede for them with the King about the gift with which he wishes to charge them. On coming into the congregation, they were all utterly astounded and scandalised, and, without allowing him to open his mouth, they begged him to leave them in peace, for they had not the King's leave to speak with him; and if he came to execute any apostolic mandate, he ought to address himself to the Archbishop of Canterbury, their chief, who was not then present. The Nuncio accordingly returned without having public audience of them, and only explained his intention to the Bishop of London (Stokesley), their proctor, who said he would report it. But he will beware of doing so without having the King's command, for he is the principal promoter of these affairs.

2

Chapuys to Charles V. February 14, 1531. Since my last letter the clergy have withdrawn the offer of money of which I wrote, because the King demanded that in case he or any of his allies made wai', they should be bound to advance the said moneys without waiting the said five years; and also because the King would not grant them what had chiefly induced them to make the gift—viz., the restoration of their old liberties and exemption from Præmunire; and, thirdly, because the King declared to them the importance of the said law of Præmunire to guard himself from being misunderstood—which law no person in England can understand, and its interpretation lies solely in the King's head, who amplifies it and declares it at his pleasure, making it apply to any case he pleases, the penalty being confis-