Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 11.pdf/560

 The Royal Supremacy. Under the comprehensive term " Royal Supremacy " may be grouped all those safe guards taken by the Crown against an abuse by the church either of her legislative or of her judicial powers. It is impossible here to consider at length how the legal theory of the supremacy was carried into practice in pre- Reformation times. But some historic landmarks must be noted. In the first place one of the articles in the Constitutions of Clarendon (1164) declares as one of the "liberties and customs of the Church of England " that " appeals, when necessary, ought to be from the archdeacon to the bishop and from the bishop to the archbishop, and if justice were not done by the arch bishop, the last resort must be to the King, according to whose commandment the cause should be finally determined in the arch bishop's court, without any further process, unless by the King's leave." The effect of this provision was to make the Final Court of Appeal a purely spiritual one — for the clause deals with appeals to Rome — in connection with which the fact that the appeal was subject to the King's consent was sometimes insisted on. Again in Magna Charta, the rights and liberties of the Church of England {Eeelesia Anglieand) are de clared to be inviolable. Lastly, prior to the Reformation the Royal Supremacy was not considered as involving any right on the part of the Crown to interfere with the church in purely spiritual matters either by judicial or by legislative action. The statutes against Lollardism, which might be cited as an exception to this proposition, were in no way an innovation upon the then doctrinal position of the church. We come now to the Reformation. The object of the legislation of Henry VIII, by which the Royal Supremacy was definitely declared by statute, was not to put the Crown in a new position as regards the church, but in the language of the statute of Elizabeth (1 Eliz. c. 1 ) "to restore to the Crown the ancient jurisdiction over the estate

523

ecclesiastical and spiritual and abolish all foreign powers repugnant to the same." Ex cept in the matter of the dissolution of the monasteries, it aimed at nothing but the exclusion of the papal power and the estab lishment of the supremacy of the Crown, not over a new church then created but over the old then-existing Church of England. We may take as a single example — others could easily be given — of the spirit of the ecclesiastical legislation of Henry VIII, the act for the abolition of Peter's pence and dispensations (1533, 25 Hen. VIII, c. 21.) It states expressly that Neither it nor any thing or things therein con tained shall be hereafter interpreted or expounded that your grace, your nobles and subjects intend by the same to decline or vary from the congre gation of Christ's church in anything concerning the very articles of the Catholic faith of Christen dom, etc. The Royal Supremacy was formally ac cepted when convocation acknowledged ( 1 ) That the King was lord and head over the church, eeelesiae et eleri Anglieani singularem proteetorem unieum dominum et quantum per Christi legem lieet etiam supremum eaput, and (2) that convocation had always and ought only to assemble by the King's wish; and promised in verbo saeerdotii (3) not to attempt to allege, claim, or put in use any new canons but by the King's license; nor (4) to enact, promulgate or execute any such canons without the King's assent. It will be noticed that the doctrine of the Royal Supremacy, as stated in this acknowl edgment, covered practically the same ground as it did in pre-Reformation times, and also that the words etiam supremum eaput are limited by the significant clause quantum per Christi legem lifet. The sub mission of the clergy was confirmed by an actof Parliament, 25 Hen. VIII, c. 19, which also gave an appeal from the Archbishop's Court to " the King in Chancery," a jurisdiction committed by the King to the court of delegates. It is as well that High Churchmen should keep in view the fact that if the state