DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6886#0156
124 HISTORY OF
mode which was employed in substituting his successor. On this authority it
may be presumed that the legate took the nomination upon himself, or by way
of provision, and without any election or concurrence of the monastery*.
The popes appear to have made a common practice of adopting these pro-
visions. Indeed, they became so frequent as to be a subject of general complaint,
and to call for the interference of the legislature, which thought it necessary to
restrain them by successive acts of parliament-)-. The power thus assumed by
the pope was executed in the following manner :—
When the court of Rome had, on an appeal, as in the case of a contested elec-
tion, declared such election irregular and void; or when the person elected, on his
applying for confirmation, as bishops and abbots exempted were obliged to do, ap-
peared to be unqualified for the office; or, as in the present case, when the abbot,
on a complaint, was found to have misconducted himself; or when the person
elected happened to die on his journey to Rome to obtain confirmation; the
popes, without leaving the election to the proper patrons, or even consulting them,
* Fle(e, nevertheless, states a regular election. " In dominica inventionis sanctae crucis electus
w est in abbalem."
+ In the 25th, 27tb, and 38th years of the reign of Edward III. strong penal laws were devised
against provisors; which enact severally, that the court of Rome shall present or collate to no
bishopric or living in England; and, that whosoever disturbs any patron in the presentation to a living
by virtue of a papal provision, such provisor shall pay fine and ransom to the king at his will, or
suffer imprisonment, &c. But though that monarch passed the statute of provisors, he took little
care of its execution, and the parliament made frequent complaints of his negligence. In order,
therefore, to check the subsequent attempts of the pope to lessen the operations of this statute, and
even to obtain its repeal, an act was passed in the succeeding reign, in the 13th year of Richard II.
which not only confirmed the statute of provisors, but guarded it with additional restrictions.
These two reigns are particularly distinguished for the laws which were passed in them for depressing
the civil power of the pope.
mode which was employed in substituting his successor. On this authority it
may be presumed that the legate took the nomination upon himself, or by way
of provision, and without any election or concurrence of the monastery*.
The popes appear to have made a common practice of adopting these pro-
visions. Indeed, they became so frequent as to be a subject of general complaint,
and to call for the interference of the legislature, which thought it necessary to
restrain them by successive acts of parliament-)-. The power thus assumed by
the pope was executed in the following manner :—
When the court of Rome had, on an appeal, as in the case of a contested elec-
tion, declared such election irregular and void; or when the person elected, on his
applying for confirmation, as bishops and abbots exempted were obliged to do, ap-
peared to be unqualified for the office; or, as in the present case, when the abbot,
on a complaint, was found to have misconducted himself; or when the person
elected happened to die on his journey to Rome to obtain confirmation; the
popes, without leaving the election to the proper patrons, or even consulting them,
* Fle(e, nevertheless, states a regular election. " In dominica inventionis sanctae crucis electus
w est in abbalem."
+ In the 25th, 27tb, and 38th years of the reign of Edward III. strong penal laws were devised
against provisors; which enact severally, that the court of Rome shall present or collate to no
bishopric or living in England; and, that whosoever disturbs any patron in the presentation to a living
by virtue of a papal provision, such provisor shall pay fine and ransom to the king at his will, or
suffer imprisonment, &c. But though that monarch passed the statute of provisors, he took little
care of its execution, and the parliament made frequent complaints of his negligence. In order,
therefore, to check the subsequent attempts of the pope to lessen the operations of this statute, and
even to obtain its repeal, an act was passed in the succeeding reign, in the 13th year of Richard II.
which not only confirmed the statute of provisors, but guarded it with additional restrictions.
These two reigns are particularly distinguished for the laws which were passed in them for depressing
the civil power of the pope.