Þei make reseruaciouns.
The Exactions of the Court of Rome had been made the Subject of Legislation in England, from the 35 of Edw. I., in which Year (A.D. 1306-7) Petitions were presented to the King from the Nobility and Commonalty of the Realm against the intolerable Exactions of the Pope[43]; (Super variis novis et intollerabilibus gravaminibus, oppressionibus, injuriis, et extorsionibus ... auctoritate et mandato Domini Papæ;) and these Petitions were the Occasion of a Statute[44], passed at a Parliament held at Carlisle in that Year, whereby the Papal Taxation of Abbeys and Religious Houses was restrained, and in certain Cases prohibited. In the Year 1350-1, however, (25 Edw. III.) only Six Years before the Date of the Tract before us, the Statute against Papal Provisions of Benefices was passed[45], in which the Pope’s Power of presenting to Benefices in England, in Violation of the Rights of the natural Patrons, was restrained, and the Provisors attached. The Word Reservation seems to be used in the Text to denote the Provisions prohibited by these Acts of Parliament;—it is thus defined by Du Cange[46]: “Rescriptum seu mandatum summi Pontificis, quo certorum beneficiorum, cum vacaverint, collationem sibi reservat faciendam cui voluerit, aliis legitimis collatoribus exclusis.” This is exactly what the Statutes referred to term Provision. The Word Reservation, however, is used by our modern Law-Authorities[47] in a more general Sense, to denote a Rent or Profit reserved by the Owner of an Estate or Tenement for his own Use: and in this Sense the First Fruits or Annates, Tenths, and Pensions, claimed by the Court of Rome are rightly termed Reservations, and in their Origin are clearly Simoniacal: such Pensions, First Fruits, and Tenths being in fact the Price paid to the Court of Rome for Collation, as appears from the Statute 13 Ric. II.[48] Stat. 2, c. 2, (A.D. 1389-90,) where after reciting the Statutes 25 Edw. III. and 35 Edw. I. the Act goes on to complain: Et ja monstre soit a n̄r. sʳ. le Roi &c. “And now it is shewed to our Lord the King, in this present Parliament holden at Westminster, at the Utas of the Purification of our Lady, ... by the grievous Complaints of all the Commons of his Realm, that the Grievances and Mischiefs aforesaid do daily abound, to the great Damage and Destruction of all this Realm, more than ever were before, viz. that now of late our Holy Father the Pope, by Procurement of Clerks and otherwise, hath reserved, and doth daily reserve to his Collation, generally and especially, as well Archbishopricks, Bishopricks, Abbeys, and Priories, as all other Dignities, and other Benefices of England, which be of the Advowry of People of Holy Church, and doth give the same as well to Aliens as to Denizens, and taketh of all such Benefices, the First Fruits, and many other Profits, and a great Part of the Treasure of the said Realm is carried away and dispended out of the said Realm by the Purchasers of such Graces; and also by such privy Reservations many Clerks advanced in this Realm by their true Patrons, which have peaceably holden their Advancements by long Time, be suddenly put out: Whereupon, the said Commons have prayed our said Lord the King, &c.” And again, in Statute 6 Hen. IV.[49] (A.D. 1404) cap. 1. Sur la grevouse compleint, &c. “For the grievous Complaints made to our Sovereign Lord the King by his Commons of this Parliament, holden at Coventry, the vj. Day of October, the vj. Year of his Reign, of the horrible Mischiefs and damnable Custom which is introduct of new in the Court of Rome, that no Parson, Abbot, nor other, should have Provision of any Archbishoprick or Bishoprick, which shall be void, till he hath compounded with the Pope’s Chamber, to pay great and excessive Sums of Money, as well for the First Fruits of the same Archbishoprick or Bishoprick, as for other less Services in the same Court, and that the same Sums, or the greater part thereof, be paid beforehand, &c.”
Thus it appears that the Exactions of the Papal Court were attracting great Attention in England, at the Period when this Tract was written. The Parliament, viewing the Matter as Politicians, denounced the Papal Claims on the Grounds that large Sums of Money were annually sent out of England, and Aliens advanced to spiritual Livings in the Church; Wyclyffe taking up the Question as a Theologian, censures these Exactions as Simoniacal, and refers to them as symptomatic of the Approach of Antichrist.
The Dismes mentioned in the Text are the Decimæ Decimarum, or Tenths of all Livings, which, with the First Fruits, were originally claimed by the Pope, although subsequently annexed to the Crown; and which now form the Foundation of the Fund called Queen Anne’s Bounty.[50]
The Pensions exacted by the Court of Rome were still more directly Simoniacal: they are thus alluded to in the Preamble of an Act[51] passed in the Reign of King Henry VIII., where the Commons, addressing the King, say: “That where your Subjects of this your Realm, and of other Countries and Dominions being under your Obeysance, by many Years past have been, and yet be greatly decayed and impoverished by such intolerable Exactions of great Sums of Money as have been claimed and taken, and yet continually be claimed to be taken out of this your Realm, and other your said Countries and Dominions, by the Bishop of Rome, called the Pope, and the See of Rome, as well in Pensions, Censes, Peter-pence, Procurations, Fruits, Suits for Provisions, and Expeditions of Bulls for Archbishopricks and Bishopricks, &c.... It may, therefore, please your most noble Majesty, for the Honor of Almighty God, &c.... That no Person or Persons of this your Realm, or of any other your Dominions, shall from henceforth pay any Pensions, Censes, Portions, Peter-pence, or any other Impositions to the Use of the said Bishop, or of the See of Rome.”
[Page xxiv.] line 2.
smale.
This Word in the MS. is written apparently “samle,” which must be an Error. The Editor has ventured to adopt a conjectural Emendation, and print it “smale,” i. e. small. This, at least, will make Sense; for, the Author’s Argument is, that if there were nothing of a Simoniacal Nature in the Reservation of Benefices, the small Benefices would be as often made the Subjects of the Papal Provisions and Reservations, as the “fatte” or more valuable Livings; but the contrary being the Case, it follows that the Income of the Benefice is the real Object, and, therefore, that all these Exactions of the Court of Rome are Simoniacal in their Origin.
[Ibid.] line 4.
Joachur.