Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	bishop_n	court_n	ecclesiastical_a	1,440	5	8.4424	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13775	Animaduersions vpon M. Seldens History of tithes, and his reuievv thereof before which (in lieu of the two first chapters purposely pretermitted) is premised a catalogue of seuenty two authours, before the yeere 1215. Maintaining the ius diuinum of tythes or more, to be payd to the priesthood vnder the Gospell: by Richard Tillesley Doctor in Diuinity, and archdeacon of Rochester.	Tillesley, Richard, 1582-1621.	1619 (1619)	STC 24073; ESTC S117059	181,192	288

yet wil be required of the consciences of men But Ego parco non inuehor non exaggero dolorem nostrum meliùs premo quam promo I forbeare I inueigh not I doe not exaggerate I better conceale then reueale our griefe He whose land must bee exempted from paying Tithes let him consider if his soule may not bee exempted from the blessing of God And so I come to the last Chapter ANIMADVERSIONS on the fourteenth Chapter IN this last Chapter in the first second and third Sections first hee pointeth at the Histories of the iurisdiction of Tyths in the Saxons and Normans times and since King Iohn And first proposeth this axiome It is cleere by the practised common law P. 411. N. B. both of this day and also of the ancientest times that wee haue in our yeere bookes that regularly the iurisdiction of spirituall Tythes that is of the direct and originall question of the Right belongeth properly to the Ecclesiasticall Court. As all spirituall causes as the Nouel 123. § Si pro Criminall Si Ecclesiasticum negotium sit nullam communionem habento Ciuiles Magistratus cum ea disceptatione sed religiosissimi Episcopinegotio finem imponunto If it bee an Ecclesiasticall suite let the Ciuill Magistrates haue nothing to doe there with that Plea but let the Bishops ende it Yet hee saith P. 412. in the Saxons time such Pleas were in the Hundred Court before the Bishop and Sheriffe of the County as out of the Lawes of King Athelstan Animad 1 But this annexing of the Sheriffe was onely for aide of obtaining not as to exercise iurisdiction in cognisance of the right Answerable to the law of Hlotharius or Charlemain Leg. long lib. 3. Tit. 3. c. 7. in Addit 4. ad Cap. cap. 73. A comite vel a misso nostro distringatur let him bee distrained by our Shrieue or messenger And to Charles the Great his addition to the Lawes of the Bauarians n. 10. And to the Canon in Synodo Mogunt sub Rabano cap. 7. where in cases of Tythes the Lay-officer is added for execution P. 413. But in the Normans time this Hundred Court for spirituall cases was forbidden Animad 2 And the Bishop or Arch-Deacon which did Tenere placita that is Iudge cause● in the Hundred Court must appoint themselues places to heare such causes because since in the Hundred all suites were brought ad iudicium Secularium hominum that is of a Iury the Conquerour therefore redressed it and distinguished the seates of Iudicature P. 414. But after Henry the second Tyths were exercised in both Courts saith hee aswell Secular as Spirituall and that by originall suite for the Spirituall Court hee findeth one example in King Stephens time Animad 3 But to that let mee adde some out of our Chartularies In the confirmation of William Archbishop 1131. There it is said Decimas de Modingham de quibus per Rectorem de Eltham coram nobis fuerint impetiti propterea ex consilio assensu Iurisperitorum nobis assidentium ijsdem Monaechis adiudicamus The Tythes of Modingham about which they were impleaded before vs by the Parson of Eliham wherefore by the Counsell and assent of our Lawyers assessors with vs in the businesse we adiudge them to the same Monkes This in the dayes of Henry the first So Theobaldus in the confirmation to the Priorie of Leeds praecipue Decimam de Summerfelda quam in Synodo Cantuariae ante nostram praesentiam in iudicio d●ctus Prior disrationauit Especially the Tythes of Summerfeld which in a Consistorie at Canterbury the same Prior before our presence did euict So Richard Archbishop made his confirmations vpon occasion of the suite before him for the Portion of Geddings Some others might be produced of those times and since there is no question for the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction Those Appeales to Rome in Iohannes Sarisburiensis P. 415. by him cited may certifie which after were forbidden by reason of the immodest behauiour of Thomas Becket who to vse the discreete wordes of the same Iohn Epist. 150. Dominum Regem suos zelo quodam inconsultius visus est ad amaritudinem prouocasse cum pro loco tempore personis multa fu●runt dispensanda He seemes to haue prouoked his Lord the King to bitternesse with an vnaduised zeale whereas for respect of time pl●ce and person much was to be remitted and dispensed with thereby did alienate altogether the King from Ecclesiasticall proceedings who then forbade the then vsuall courses of Appeales which were the chiefe of those Auitae consuetudines in the Epistle cited 150. that so all such Titles were for that time determined before the King the Archbishop and the other Bishops being in opposition to the King But for his examples How in the Kings case or of others the parties being of other Prouinces or the matters being Churches wherein the Patronage was accounted Temporall or the partie being in the Kings seruice out of the land may alter the case to which all his examples are to be reduced I know not Yet also that vsually the Se●ular power though against the Canons claime of the Clergie would intermeddle in some cases cannot be denyed though our Authour acknowledge the direct Iurisdiction to belong to the Spirituall Court pag. 411. and vrgeth Fleta and Breton for it pag. 428. In the next Section concerning the time after Henry 2. and King Iohn He sayth the Secular Iurisdiction through feare Pag. 421. was almost out of vse in this kinde Animad 4 But I am perswaded and appeale vnto his reading and the Iudgement of all the Lawyers whether more frequent prohibitions and claime of Iurisdiction in Tythes haue not beene more since practised by the secular Courts then euer before as may hence against him appeare That for the proofe of it hee hath cited no Prohibition Fine or Writ or Record in all the following Paragraphs but after these dayes of feare the dayes of Henry 2. and K. Iohn for after that the Canons were more neglected and the Secular Iurisdiction more increased then before which I affirme against that odious passage in his Reuiew wherewith hee ends his Treatise whereout it may be others may picke more sacriledge then he meant And therefore leauing him in the following Law-passages to be examined by some Lawyers who may either finde him altering the question from Tythes to Aduouson as to my vnders●anding he altogether doeth or to be otherwise erring in his Collections I desist from further answere of his more feared then fearefull booke Onely for a Corrollarie desiring of both Iurisdictions and the King the Head of both that since so many godly and gracious Lawes and Canons in former ages haue beene made and with such conscience by our Ancestours regarded that the sacrilegious Tythe-robbers by pretence of new Customes and Considerations may not be countenanced but euen the olde customes and rates of things as in those times they were worth

constrictus ad vltimum ipsa Capella quae magis contentionem quam vtilitatem praestat destruatur That all Tithing should bee assigned by the Bishop or his Deputy that without his grant none should conuey them to his owne Chappell which if he doe first the Secular Law shall punish him next the people shall bee excommunicated and lastly the Chappell shall be destroyed as affording more cause of strife then profit P. 361. But it may seeme hee feared such an answere and therefore sets himselfe to prooue that it was lawfull to build Churches in their owne Fees without consent of the Bishop and this hee saith was challenged by the Baronage of England and therefore citeth a Decretall Epistle of Innocent 3 Tom. 2. pag. 228. Animad 11 But it is a false quotation for his purpose for saith he It was challenged without licence but the Pope allowes it to the Laitie so that they had licence from the Bishop of the Diocesse and that the new foundations should not bereaue ancient Churches of their assigned endowment This last Clause and not the first was that which the Baronage pretended in defence of the Archbishop for building a Church at Lambeth for otherwise besides the Archbishops owne authorizing his owne Acte euen the confirmation and approbation of Pope Lucius is there signified and theref●re not challenged without licence but against this by reason of the hurt thence arising to the Church of Canterbury was this Decretall Epistle for the immediate words are Sed ex hoc opere videtur Ecclesiae Cantuariensis dignitas ex parte non modica deperire c. But by this worke the dignitie of the Church of Canterbury would greatly bee empayred and nothing followeth concerning licence of the Bishop As for building of Churches without cōsent of the Bishop obserue how far the Emperor was who euen makes this Capitularie Placuit nobis L. 5. c. 182. ne Capella in nostro Palatio vel alibi sine permissu Episcopi in cuius est Parochia fiat It is our pleasure that no Chappell in our Palace or elsewhere bee without permission of the Bishop of the Diocesse Againe he returneth to his Paradoxe which out of two Epistles of Iohannes Sarisburiensis he would inferre for that in those cases of Tithes no title is made meerely by Parochiall right but Praescription or Consecration are the grounds whereon they are demaunded Animad 12 The first case Ep. 21. is betweene two neighbour Parishes the quaestion is to which Church the Tithes and Parishionets belonged and for this the one partie pretends a former Iudgement for him Here could be no demaund by Parochiall right when the quaestion was of it and nothing else demaunded but Parochiall right and therefore in the Libell both Parochiani and Decimae wherein Parochiall right consisteth were the two demands The like is Ep. 87. Animad 13 The second case in Epist 84. is also betweene two neighbor Parishes for Tithes pertinentes ad Ecclesiam de W. quas in die Consecrationis iam dictae Ecclesiae Radulfus Rotundus obtulerat Episcopo Londinensi praesente approbante Tithes which belonged to the Church of W. and which in the day of the Consecration of the said Church Radulphus Rotundus did offer the Bishop of London being both present and approouing it which were detained by another Parish without any sentence whereas the Parish W. had euicted them from the predecessor of the Parson and the other Church Now in this case is not Parochiall right claimed Decimas pertinentes ad Ecclesiam And this both by prescription and ordination and a former sentence is iustified So that in both examples he hath dealt falsely But in this later is a plaine signe of the Bishops approbation to each mans offering of Tythes like that in the confirmation of William Giffard Bishop of Winchester cited by him pag. 344. In the same Salis his 28. Epist and 109. as also for Parochiall right But Theobald the Archbishop reprehendeth Ala the Countesse of Warren P. 362. for that shee did not pay the Tythes which her husband had vowed therefore there is arbitrarie Consecration Animad 14 These Tythes were not the Tythes of the Demesnes but Denariorum Gabuli of rent mony which he might vow she ought to pay The tenth of rent not increase though out of her Dowry because it was vowed vpon the Altar it was the Dowry of the Church it was so to bee for so it was her Dowry And this Tything can extend no further See pag. 342. the words in the Authour P. 363. 364. Againe the three Monkes Knighton Higden and Walsingham are cited who before are answered and for confirmation of their opinion concerning the Councell at Lyons Hee bringeth a petition in Parliament made by a Parson of Gillingham against the King for denying him out of the Forest situate in his Parish Tythe Hay and Venison and Pannage and other profits which Ecclesiae suae de iure communi debentur secundum formam Supplicationis exhortationis Apostolicae porrectam Domino Regi apud Gillingham quando fuit ibi ad Natale What was that Exhortatio or Supplicatio Apostolica surely some particular letters from Rome obtained in behalfe of the Parsons and no new decree Animad 15 Neither by this may it seeme that in the Kings case Parochiall right of Tythes was not yet euery where setled although increasing in a Parish Nay by this we may well see they were euery where due euen from the King in that the Parson could claime them by Iure communi debentur Ecclesiae suae They are due to his Church by common right and durst procure letters from Rome and complaine euen in a Parliament sure his complaint was no generall complaint against an allowed custome but a speciall wrong in this place alone Nothing stronger then this to prooue Parochiall right if the Kings Forrests must pay Tythe to Gillingham de iure communi In the next Section Pag. 365. hee speaketh of Tythes not assigned to any Parish to whom they doe belong And entreth this digression by saying that vntill those innouations by Canons in denying Lay-men right arbitrarily disposing the iurisdiction which the common or secular law had formerly challenged and exercised in detayning the right of Tythes betweene the Priests and Parishioners grew out of vse Animad 16 And yet in all his 14. Chapter of Iurisdiction of Tythes not any secular law so directly intermedled in Tythes but euen since that time of the Lateran Councell which yet he would prooue to be the time of forbidding such consecrations the Epistles of Ioannes Sarisburiensis shew the contrary and the Decretals of Alexander the 3. written vpon suits to this countrey can testifie besides those suites for Tythes in the Archbishops Courts which after out of the Chartularies of the Priories of Rochester and Leeds I will produce And the Temporall Courts cannot holde plea of Tythes vnlesse it be by way of prohibition but

onely by vertue of late Statutes But saith hee out of Thorpe a Iudge that in such places out of any Parish as in the forrest of Englewood the King ought to haue the Tythes to dispose of and not the Bishop and relates that the Archbishop made suite to the Councell to haue them Animad 17 Although I know and acknowledge the Kings prerogatiue in disposing all Tythes by his Supreme power in causes Ecclesiasticall yet chiefly in Forrest● for to him alone Forrests did belong and especially that of Englewood which well euen in reason might be granted him for that in Assarted land much grew more Tytheable then before to the more benefit of the Clergie And it is not said the King may keepe but collate to whom he will which inferres the right of Tythes And since as in the Records after the King there claimeth a priuiledge to build Townes erect Churches Assart lands and giue those Churches with the Tythes of that lands to whom he will because it is not within the bounds of a Parish well he might by his Prerogatiue and Supreme power adde the Tythes of the Townes to the Churches as euen by the Capitulars lib. 1. cap. 93. it is granted Sancitum est de Villas nouis Ecclesiis in ijs nouiter constitutis vt Decimae de ijsdem Villis ad easdem Ecclesias conferantur It is ordained concerning new villages and Churches therein newly founded that the Tythes of those villages should be conueyed to those Churches And this is repeated in the Concil Wormatiens can 52. And in Triburiens c. 14. there it is Si vero in qualibet sylua vel deserto loco vltra milliaria 4. aut 5. vel eo amplius aliquid dirutū conlaborauerit illic consentiente Episcopo Ecclesiam construxerit consecratam perpetrauerit prospiciat Presbyterum ad seruitium Dei idoneum studiosum tunc demum Nouam Decimam Nouae reddat Ecclesiae salua tamen potestate Episcopi If in any forrest or desert place aboue 4. or 5. miles off or more any shall repaire or build a new Church by consent of the Bishop and shall haue it consecrated let him prouide a fit and honest Priest for the seruice of God and then let him giue his new Tythes to his new Church reseruing the authoritie to the Bishop For as the Church was consecrated by the Bishop so the Tythes were disposed by his consent for in those times nothing concerning the Church was done without the Bishop or Popes consent and confirmation So in this case the King making of a desart an Adesart But yet Herle the Lawyer is after cited to be of another minde then Thorpe Pag. 367. But that this is not onely a Prerogatiue to the King but the same which the Baronage claimed in King Iohns time hee intimates Animad 18 Whereas yet that was in the building of Churches not in new assarts but in ancient Parishes as that of Lambeth in the Epistle of Innocent was and no forrest And the Kings grant of a prohibition in his owne name alone against the Bishop of Carleile sheweth it not to be a common priuiledge to his Magnates as to himselfe for else as before he would haue put his Magnates as himselfe in the prohibition Pag. 368. Animad 19 Now because Herle a Lawyer sayth that such Tythes out of Parishes might not arbitrarily be giuen but that the Bishop of the Diocesse should haue them he is censured to speake suddenly that is rashly and out of the Canon Law not out of the Common Law If he knew not how to speake as he ought what doeth our Author It were well that hee should Tutor him in his owne profession and shew that Tythes were giuen or assigned to any Church without the consent of Bishop or Pope and what Rule is there in the Common Law concerning Tythes but it is taken from the Ecclesiasticall Law ANIMADVERSIONS on the twelfth Chapter IN this twelfth Chapter first Pag. 370. concerning Appropriations of Churches Hee obserueth that in the Saxons times in their Appropriations they vsed not to say Ecclesia cum decimis or Ecclesia cum decimis in annona c. which in the Normans time was frequent Animad 1 The reason was not because Tythes were not then ioyned to Churches but because they were not as in the Normans time so disioyned But by the word Ecclesias all passed then Afterward by reason of the seuerall translations of them both the explication cum decimis with the parts thereof as also the place was added where the Tythe grew in such a demesnes of such a man and such like which by the Bishops approbation might be altered and translated In this Section of Appropriations he saith The common intent was that the Monasteries should put Clerkes and Vicars in the Churches Animad 2 This is true as Patrons they did praesent and the Bishops did admit and in Appropriations the Bishops did vsually reserue a power of ordaining a competencie to be assigned to the Vicar or did presently doe it at the first and the Vicar had alwaies recourse to the Bishop in any grieuance offered from the proprietaries for the increase of his portion Pag. 371. Of this inioyning the maintenance of Vicars hee produceth two examples of both Prouinces And first of Yorke before Canterburie for he will bee against the knowne authoritie of those prime Seas But in that last in the Prouince of Canterburie out of Pope Lucius wherein is the word In quibus praesentationem habetis he saith this can not be vnderstood of those which the Monasteries enioyed Pleno Iure whereof indeed before he had spoken Animad 3 Yet heere out of our Records let mee tell him that Anno 1255. the Prior and Monkes of Rochester and the Prior or Warden of their Cell at Filchstow in Walton in the Diocese of Norwich did present one Stephen Banaster to the Church of Tremlegh Officiali tunc vices Episcopi Norwicensis gerenti whom the Officiall instituted and yet Iohn the Bishop thereof before had in his cōfirmation said Ecclesiam de Tremblega pleno Iure cum omnibus pertinentibus pertinere ad Priorem Monachos de Waleton That the Church of Trembleigh did belong Pleno Iure to the Monkes of Walton But I conceiue therin pleno Iure rather to be distinguished from non per vices or non excompraesentatione alterius then otherwise though I contradict not the opinion of the Canonists who say a conueyance of Churches pleno Iure to be of the right of Institution and Destitution which in the next example of the next Section may haue place Pag. 373. In this Number to prooue his paradoxe which hee can neuer prooue That Tythes passed from the Patron by his gift no otherwise then Freehold neither was the confirmation of the Ordinarie necessarie Hee proposeth an example of one Robert of Dene who giues to the Church of Lewis a Church with Lands and Tythes and two