Page:Church and State under the Tudors.djvu/78

 was certainly what we should now consider low; and, low as it was, they failed to live up to it. But it is no more than just to remember, that the standard of the sixteenth century was not that of the nineteenth, and that Henry VIII., though very far from irreproachable, shows favourably in this respect when compared with Francis I., or even with Charles V.

Wolsey's dying speech in regard to Henry has been quoted and eulogised as a striking testimony to the great defect in his character, till even its combined force and accuracy and the pathos of the circumstances which surrounded its utterance, fail to save its iteration from becoming wearisome; but it seems scarcely to have been observed that it is almost equally remarkable as a testimony to the character of the age as to that of the King. 'Rather than want any part of his pleasure he will endanger the half of his kingdom.' What king but a sixteenth-century king would have thus acted? But, again, what minister but a sixteenth-century minister would have submitted to a master so acting, and continued to be his responsible agent and adviser? But no scruple or difficulty on this point ever seems to have