"question between his highness and some pope; "as between princes and popes, diverse times, "have done: whereunto his highness answered me, that he would, in nowise, minish in that "matter*." His majesty sent by doctor Clarke, dean of Windsor, his ambassador at Rome, a copy of his work, sumptuously bound, to pope Leo the tenth. 66 * One of the passages, which drew the suggestion mentioned in the text from sir Thomas More, is said to be the following: "Luther cannot deny but that all the faithful christian "churches at this day do acknowledge and reverence the holy tr see of Rome as their mother and primate, &c. And if this " acknowledgment is grounded neither on divine nor human "law, how hath it taken so great and general a root? How was it admitted so universally by all christendom? When began it, how grew it to be so great?-Yea, and the Greek "church also, though the empire was passed to that part, we "shall find that she acknowledged the primacy of the same "Roman church, but only when she was in schism. Whereas "Luther so impudently doth affirm that the pope hath his "primacy by no right, neither divine nor human, but only by "force and tyranny. I do wonder how the mad fellow could "hope to find his readers so simple or blockish, as to believe "that the bishop of Rome, being a priest unarmed, alone, "without temporal force or right, either divine or human, (as "he supposed) should be able to get authority over so many bishops his equals, throughout so many and different nations, "so far off from him, and so little fearing his temporal power? " or that so many people, cities, kingdoms, commonwealths, "provinces and nations, would be so prodigal of their own "liberty, as to subject themselves to a foreign priest, (as now "so many ages they have done,) or to give such authority "over themselves, if he had no right thereunto at all?”— See Dodd's Church History, vol. i. p. 95, from which the passage is transcribed. At a solemn assembly of cardinals, the ambassador, after a set speech, delivered it into the hands of his holiness. The pope received it most graciously; expressed himself in high terms of praise, of the zeal and learning of the royal author, and caused the copy to be deposited, with great ceremony, in the Vatican. By a bull, dated the following October, he conferred on the king the title of "Defen"der of the Faith;" and "ordered all the faithful "in Christ, in their verbal and written addresses "to the monarch, to add, after the word 'king,' "the words, 'Defender of the Faith." With this honour his majesty was extremely gratified. But neither the arguments, nor the rank of his royal adversary, nor the title conferred upon him by the pope, dismayed Luther: he published a reply, replete with arrogance, and the foulest abuse*. At a subsequent period, Luther apologised to the king, for the style of his letter. He seems, by his 66 * Some of his expressions we insert, in the words of the text for an English reader would not endure a translation of them." Hoc agit inquietus Satan, ut nos a scripturis "avocet, per sceleratos Henricos, et sacrilegos Thomistas. "Hæc sunt robora nostra, adversus quæ obmutescere coguntur Henrici, Thomista, papistæ, et quidquid est fæcis, "sentinæ, et latrinæ, impiorum, et sacrilegorum ejusmodi. "Indulgendum esset, si humano more erraret; nunc, quum prudens, et sciens, mendacia componat adversus mei regis majestatem in cœlis, damnabilis putredo est, et vermes, "jus mihi erit, pro meo rege, majestatem Anglicanam, luto et "stercore conspergere; et coronam is tam, blasphemiam in "Christum, pedibus conculcare." 66 66 apology, to discover, that he had then some hopes of the monarch's favouring the reformation. But he expresses himself, in severe language, concerning the pope and cardinal Wolsey; and the reader will think, he was a bad politician, in those parts of his letter, in which he intimates, that his majesty was not the real author of his work: this, certainly, was touching the king in a very tender part. The king returned an answer; but it was not, in general, written in those terms which were calculated to please Luther. Henry imputes the troubles of Germany to the writings of the reformer, and exhorts him to retire from the world; to quit his engagements with the nun, whom he had married, and to spend the remainder of his life in discipline and penance. In reply to that part of Luther's work, in which he intimates, that his majesty's work was written by others, the royal author says, "and although ye fayne yourselfe to "thynke my booke not my owne, but, to my re"buke, (as it lyketh you to affyrme), put on by "subtell sophisters; yet, it is well knowne for myne, and I, for myne, avouch it." The style of Henry's answer provoked Luther exceedingly: he declared, he would throw away no more civilities upon him. It remains to observe, on the subject of this controversy, that, in 1523, Fisher, bishop of Rochester, entered the lists, by a work against Luther, intituled, "Assertionis Lutheranæ Confutatio." Henry was extremely pleased with it; and, by letters patent, conferred on the prelate, the exclusive right of printing it, during the course of three years*. Henry's work is still preserved in the Vatican library. The following verses are subjoined to it; and the name of the monarch is written under them with his own hand. Anglorum rex Henricus, Leo Maxime, mittit The bull, by which Leo granted the title of Defender of the Faith to Henry, is still preserved in The first edition of the work of Henry the eighth is in particular request. It is intituled "Assertio Septem Sacra"mentorum aduersus Martin. Lutheru, &c. Apud inlytam "vrbem Londinum in ædibus Pynsonianis. An. M.D.XXI. “quarto Idus Julij. Cum privilegio a rege indulto." quarto. The earl Spencer possesses a magnificent copy of it, upon vellum, splendidly illuminated.—A collection, containing, 1st. The speech of Dr. Clarke, when he delivered the work to the pope; 2dly. The answer of the pope; 3dly. The bull of the pope, confirming the work; 4thly. A summary of the indulgences, granted to the readers of it; 5thly. The royal book, libellus regius; and 6thly. The letter of the king to the dukes of Saxony,-was printed by Pynson, in the same year; and reprinted at Strasbourg in the following year, with a preface by Erasmus. The letter of Henry the eighth to Luther was printed by Pynson, both in English and Latin.This acconut of the editions of these works is taken from Mr. Dibdin's Typographical Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 484 et seq. The fullest account of the proceedings at Rome, respecting the work of Henry, is to be found in cardinal Pallavicini's History of the Council of Trent. An elaborate discussion of the whole transaction is to be found in Disputatio circularis de titulo Defensoris Fidei,-a Joh. Christophero Majero Cuzelsavia-Franco-Altdorfil 1706. the British Museum *. It was confirmed two years afterwards by Clement the seventh †, and was recalled by the bull of Paul, issued in 1535 and promulgated in 1538, which we shall soon have occasion to mention; but the act passed in 1543, "for the "ratification of his majesty's style,” declares it to be thenceforth united and annexed for ever to the imperial crown of England: thus the kings of England bear the title, not under the papal grants, but under an act of the British legislature ‡. CHAP. XIII. THE DIVORCE OF HENRY THE EIGHTH FROM QUEEN KATHARINE. 1533. THE subject of these pages neither requires nor admits of more than I. A short mention of the transactions which attended this interesting event: II. Some observations on the lawfulness of the marriage of Henry the eighth with queen Katharine: III. Some account of the sentence, pronounced by It is copied in Selden's Titles of Honour, part i. c. 5; and Rymer's Fœdera, tom. xiii. p. 756: he gives a fac simile engraving of it,—a letter is inserted in the Report on Public Records, App. p. 6. + Rym. Fœd. tom. xiv. fol. 14. See Mr. Luders's learned article in the British Archæologia, vol. xix. p. 1. It contains much curious information on the subject, and the styles of the most christian king of France and the most catholic king of Arragon. |