[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.The kingand the sentence was pronounced by the agedHenry, Bishop of Winchester.Becket seems to have sub-mitted without opposition, and the bishops who were present,except Gilbert of London, united in giving securityfor the payment of the fine.A question that inevitably arises at this point and cannotbe answered is, why Henry did not rest satisfied with the ap-parently great advantage he had gained.He had put intooperation more than one of the articles of the Constitutionsof Clarendon, and against the archbishop in person.Beckethad been obliged to recognize the jurisdiction of the1164 OF THEover himself and to submit to its sentence, and the CHAP.whole body of bishops had recognized their feudal positionin the state and had acted upon it.Perhaps the king wishedto get an equally clear precedent in a case which was a civilone rather than a Perhaps he was so exaspe-rated against the archbishop that he was resolved to pursuehim to his ruin, but, though more than one thing points tothis, it does not seem a reasonable explanation.Whatever mayhave been his motive, the king immediately, -the accountssay on the same day with the first trial, demanded that hisformer chancellor should account for derived from therevenues of the castles of Eye and Berkhampsted held byhim while chancellor.Thomas answered that the moneyhad been spent in the service of the state, but the king re-fused to admit that this had been done by his authority.Again Becket submitted, though not recognizing the right ofthe court to try him in a case in which he had not beensummoned, and gave security for the payment.Still this was not sufficient.On the next day the king de-manded the return of marks which he had lent Becketfor the Toulouse campaign, and of a second which hadbeen borrowed of a Jew on the king s security.This wasfollowed at once by a further demand for an account of therevenues of the archbishopric and of all other ecclesiasticalfiefs which had been vacant while Thomas was chancellor.Topay the sum which this demand would call for would be im-possible without a surrender of all the archbishop s sourcesof income for several years, and it almost seems as Henryintended this result.The barons apparently thought as much,for from this day they ceased to call at Becket s quarters.The next day the clergy consulted together on the course tobe taken and there was much difference of opinion.Someadvised the immediate resignation of the archbishopric, othersa firm stand accepting the consequence of the king s anger;and there were many opinions between these two extremes.During the day an offer of 2000 marks in settlement of theclaim was sent to the king on the advice of Henry of Win-chester, but it was refused, and the day closed withoutany agreement among the clergy on a common course ofaction.KING ARCHBISHOPCHAP.The next day was Sunday, and the archbishop did not leavehis lodgings.On Monday he was too ill to attend the meet-ing of the court, much to Henry s anger.The discussionsof Saturday and the reflections of the following days hadapparently led Becket to a definite decision as to his own con-duct.The king was in a mood, as it would surely seem tohim, to accept nothing short of his ruin.No support was tobe expected from the barons.The clergy, even the bishops,were divided in opinion and it would be impossible to gainstrength enough from them to escape anything which theking might choose to demand.must, I think, explainBecket s conduct from this time on by supposing that he nowsaw clearly that all concessions had been and would be invain, and that he was resolved to exert to the utmost thestrength of passive opposition which lay in the Church, to puthis case on the highest possible grounds, and to gain for theChurch the benefits of persecution and for himself the merits,if needs be, of the martyr.Early the next morning the bishops, terrified by the angerof the king, came to Becket and tried to persuade him toyield completely, even to giving up the archbishopric.Thishe refused.He rebuked them for their action against himalready in the court, forbade them to sit in judgment on himagain, himself appealing to the pope, and ordered them, ifany secular person should lay hands on him in punishment,to excommunicate him at once.Against this order GilbertFoliot immediately appealed.The bishops then departed, andBecket entered the monastery church and celebrated themass of St.Stephen s day, opening with the words of thePsalm,  Princes did sit and speak against me. This wasa most audacious act, pointed directly at the king, and apublic declaration that he expected and was prepared forthe fate of the first martyr.Naturally the anger of thecourt was greatly increased.From the celebration of themass, Becket went to the meeting of the court, his cross bornebefore him in the usual manner, but on reaching the doorof the meeting-place, he took it from his cross-bearer andcarrying it in his own hands entered the hall.Such an un-usual proceeding as this could have but one meaning.It wasa public declaration that he was in fear of personal violence,THE TRIAL OF THEand that any one who laid hands on him must understand CHAP.his act to be an attack on the cross and all that it signified.Some of the bishops tried to persuade him to abandon thisattitude, but in vain.So far as we can judge the mood ofHenry, Becket had much to justify his feeling, and if he wereresolved not to accept the only other alternative of completesubmission, but determined to resist to the utmost, the act wasnot unwise.When the bishops reported to the king the primate s orderforbidding them to sit in trial of him again, it was seenat once to be a violation of the Constitutions of Clarendon;and certain barons were sent to him to inquire if he stood tothis, to remind him of his oath as the king s liege-man, andof the promise, equivalent to an oath, which he had made atClarendon to keep the Constitutions  in good faith, withoutguile, and according to law, and to ask if he would furnishsecurity for the payment of the claims against him as chan-cellor.In reply Becket stood firmly to his position, andrenewed the prohibition and the appeal to the pope.Thebreach of the Constitutions being thus placed beyond question,the king demanded the judgment of the court, bishops andbarons together.The bishops urged the ecclesiastical dan-gers in which they would be placed if they disregarded thearchbishop s prohibition, and suggested that instead theyshould themselves appeal to Rome against him as a per-jurer.To this the king at last agreed, and the appeal wasdeclared by Hilary, Bishop of Chichester, who had through-out inclined to the king s side, and who urged upon the arch-bishop with much vigour the oath which they had all taken atClarendon his leadership and which he was now forcingthem to violate.answer to this speech is the weak-est and least honest thing that he did during all these days oftrial.We promised nothing at Clarendon, he said, withoutexcepting the rights of the Church.The very clauses to whichyou refer, good faith, without guile, and according to law,are saving clauses, because it is impossible to observe any-thing in good faith and according to law if it is contrary to thelaws of God and to the fealty due the Church [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]