DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6886#0158
126 HISTORY OF
London, and the Monastery of Westminster, on the important and interesting
subject of jurisdiction. The bishop, it appears, claimed a right to visit the abbey,
to be met on the occasion with solemn procession, to receive procurations, to
consecrate chapels, to ordain the monks, and to exercise every other function
connected with episcopal authority. The monastery pleaded an exemption; and,
in support of the plea, produced the charters of several successive kings, the
bulls of various popes, and a grant from St. Dunstan when he was Bishop of
London*.
Wharton, who has given a very satisfactory account of this transaction, has
clearly proved, that the charters to which the monks of Westminster referred
were of a very doubtful character; and that the grant of St. Dunstan, in parti-
cular, was an absolute forgery-f-.
An appeal was at first made by both the contending parties to the pope; but
it was afterwards agreed to refer the cause to the arbitration of Stephen Langton,
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, with
Thomas, Prior of Merton, and Richard, Prior of Dunstaple. To their judgment,
as persons presumed to be duly qualified to conclude the business with wisdom
and justice, the matter in issue was finally submitted; and they at length
decided, that the Abbey of Westminster was wholly exempt from the juris-
diction of the see of London, and immediately subject to the pope: a decision
which appears to have been founded rather on the rules of the canon law than
on the principles of constitutional justice. But, to give some satisfaction to the
Bishop of London, they transferred the manor of Sunbury from the monastery to
his see, and the church of that place to the chapter of St. Paul's.
The point of jurisdiction had already been a frequent subject of contention
* Matt. Paris, Vitce Abbatum S. Albani.
t Wharton de Episcopis Londinensibus, p. 79.
London, and the Monastery of Westminster, on the important and interesting
subject of jurisdiction. The bishop, it appears, claimed a right to visit the abbey,
to be met on the occasion with solemn procession, to receive procurations, to
consecrate chapels, to ordain the monks, and to exercise every other function
connected with episcopal authority. The monastery pleaded an exemption; and,
in support of the plea, produced the charters of several successive kings, the
bulls of various popes, and a grant from St. Dunstan when he was Bishop of
London*.
Wharton, who has given a very satisfactory account of this transaction, has
clearly proved, that the charters to which the monks of Westminster referred
were of a very doubtful character; and that the grant of St. Dunstan, in parti-
cular, was an absolute forgery-f-.
An appeal was at first made by both the contending parties to the pope; but
it was afterwards agreed to refer the cause to the arbitration of Stephen Langton,
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, with
Thomas, Prior of Merton, and Richard, Prior of Dunstaple. To their judgment,
as persons presumed to be duly qualified to conclude the business with wisdom
and justice, the matter in issue was finally submitted; and they at length
decided, that the Abbey of Westminster was wholly exempt from the juris-
diction of the see of London, and immediately subject to the pope: a decision
which appears to have been founded rather on the rules of the canon law than
on the principles of constitutional justice. But, to give some satisfaction to the
Bishop of London, they transferred the manor of Sunbury from the monastery to
his see, and the church of that place to the chapter of St. Paul's.
The point of jurisdiction had already been a frequent subject of contention
* Matt. Paris, Vitce Abbatum S. Albani.
t Wharton de Episcopis Londinensibus, p. 79.