Page:VCH London 1.djvu/597

 RELIGIOUS HOUSES The names of these two friars occur again in another very different connexion. On 15 May, 1425, Russell*' appeared before the archbishop of Canterbury, presiding in his provincial coun- cil at St. Paul's, on a charge of preaching that personal tithes need not be paid to the parish priest, but might be devoted instead to charitable purposes. The opinion of the archbishop was against him, and Russell pro- fessed himself willing to submit, but as he did not appear*' to make the public renunciation of this doctrine at St. Paul's Cross in accordance with the archbishop's order, he was declared excommunicate. He thereupon betook himself to Rome, where he was imprisoned by the pope for his erroneous opinions. Winchelsey, who was considered the most famous doctor of the order, had also been sum- moned before the same convocation** on an apparently groundless charge of heresy. When Russell however managed to escape to England in January, 1426, he was sheltered for a night at his friary, when it is said that Winchelsey came from Shene expressly to see him. In con- sequence of this Winchelsey was accused and condemned by convocation in April following for favouring heresy. He submitted to the court, and on behalf of himself, the London convent and the whole order, read a declaration at St. Paul's Cross repudiating Russell's opinions. Russell probably surrendered himself,*^ as he was not kept long in prison by the bishop of London after he had recanted at St. Paul's Cross in March, 1427. The Grey Friars may have thought that they had re-established their reputation for orthodoxy by the part their provincial played against Pecocke,'" bishop of Chichester. The remem- brance of their former check did not at any rate deter them from joining the Carmelites in their attack on the beneficed clergy in 1465,*^ and their representative in the disputation at White- friars went so far that he was cited to appear before the archbishop at Lambeth for heresy. He pleaded exemption from all episcopal juris- diction, but the privilege was judged not to hold in this case. Whether he withdrew or explained away everything obnoxious to the authorities or not does not appear, but it would seem he was acquitted, and he alone ventured to answer Dr. Ive '^ when he lectured at St. Paul's Schools on the opposite side. The return of the Grey Friars in 1502 to their whitish-grey habits, which they had for some reason temporarily abandoned,^^ looked at " Wilkins, Concilia, iii, 438. " Ibid. 439. '° Chron. of the Grey Friars of Lond. (Camd. Sec), 20. " Col/, of a Lond. Citizen (Camd. Soc), 229. " Ibid. 231. It seems from the chronicle that these lectures took place after the citation for heresy, but it is not at all clear. " Chron. of Grey Friars of Lond. (Camd. Soc), 27. ^ 5 in the light of subsequent events, appears a ludic- rous attempt at outward profession when the spirit had completely departed : for the rest of their history may be summed up as a firm determination to stand well with the king at whatever cost of principle. Their relations with the court are shown in the next collision with the ecclesiastical authorities. Dr. Henry Standish, then resident in the London house, provincial '^ of the Grey Friars, and a popular court preacher, was accused of heresy " in the convocation of 1 5 IS' He may have thought with some reason that the real charge against him was the opinion he had expressed in favour of the Act of 4 Henry VIII, by which the benefit of clergy was curtailed. At all events the king took this view, and the members of Convocation " found themselves in their turn accused of an attack on the secular power, and had enough to do to excuse themselves without pursuing the case against Standish. The close connexion of the Grey Friars and the City was illustrated more than once about this time : on the petition of the warden and friars it was decided in 1 5 14" that the mayor and aldermen as founders should go in pro- cession to the house every year on St. Francis' Day ; and when the nave of the church was to be paved with marble London citizens con- tributed the money; and a further outlay being necessary in 15 18 the provincial and the warden applied to the City, and at the request of the Court of Common Council the sum required, The feeling that as Friars Minors of London they must sympathize with the London poor undoubtedly caused John Lincoln's attempt '* to use their influence to persuade the City authori- ties to take measures against the foreigners with whom the populace was so enraged. But Dr. Standish was not the man to run any risk, and saying that it was not a fit subject to touch on in a sermon, escaped any ill consequences of the evil May Day of 15 17. The attitude of the friars in the affair of the prisoner who escaped from Newgate and took "' Rec. of Corp. of Lond. Letter Bk. M. fol. 237- " L. and P. Hen. VIII, ii (i), 1314. " Their bitterness against Standish comes out in more than one passage : see L. and P. Hen. Fill, ii (l), 1312, where Tayler the prolocutor says that the strife between Church and State over ecclesiastical liberties was fomented by Standish ; see also ibid, ii (I). 1 31 3 (4)-. ^ 1508 is given as the date in Chron. of the Grey Friars of Lond. (Camd. Soc), 29. From the word- ing of the entry in the City records, however, the procession seems not to have been undertaken before 1 5 14. Rec. of Corp. of Lond. Letter Bk. M. fol. 224. " Ibid. Repert. i, fol. 13, 14. Brewer, The Reign of Hen. VIII, i, 245, 249. 05 64
 * Ibid. 433. " Little, op. cit. 258.
 * ^i6 ids. 2id., was raised by the companies.''
 * Grafton, Chron. (ed. 1809), ii, 289. See, too,