תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

CHAPTER VII.

OFFICE OF INTHRONIZATION.

TH

HE office, which I have placed next to the service

of the consecration of a bishop, is that of his inthronization. This will not require of me many observations. Several forms relating to the inthronization of a bishop of Bath and Wells, in the 13th century, have been printed by Wilkins : to which I must refer the student: and another, a letter of summons to certain abbots by archbishop Winchelsey, to attend the solemnity in his own instance.

The dispute which I have already noticed between the bishops of London and Rochester, had regard to the right of inthroning the archbishop : I quote the account given by archbishop Parker, which shews that the controversy once opened, there was no lack of claimants of the privilege, and that it ended in a compromise. “Inthronizandi enim jus Londinensis ut decanus, Roffensis ut capellanus, archiepiscopi sibi vendicavit. His autem litigantibus interponunt se monachi, suumque jus asserunt esse.

Tum totus episcoporum cætus instabat, et ad se tam inthronizationem, quam consecrationem, spectare affirmabant. Hac dissentione turbata aliquantulum pallii suscipiendi ceremonia fuit. Tandem sic composita lis est; ut, in throno sedentis episcopus Londinensis, pallium autem suscipientis episcopus Roffensis, archiepiscopi dextras occuparet.”2

· De antiq. Brit. Ecc. p.

I Conc. tom. 2. p. 196. 214.

226.

The inthronization of the archbishops was followed by a sumptuous feast, at which some of the chief persons in the kingdom performed certain services, as at coronation banquets, either claimed as privileges and honours, or as the conditions upon which they held. manors or estates. I need scarcely remind the reader of the great feast of George Nevil, archbishop of York, in the reign of Edward IV., of which a particular account is printed by Hearne, “out of an old paper roll;” and another, equally magnificent, of archbishop Warham, in 1504.3

One of the benedictions printed below, (see page 321.) is, of the seal of a bishop. These after their death were anciently destroyed. At the end of one of the Durham inventories printed by the Surtees society, it is stated; “ Post mortem Richardi Byry episcopi fracta fuerunt iiij. sigilla ejusdem.”* A. D. 1345. The

3 Leland. Collectanea. Ap- buit, ut passim dicebatur, quam pend. vol. 6. p. 2. 16. In the omnes pontifices Angliæ. Et history of William de Chambre, præter eos quos habuit in diversis printed in the Anglia Sacra, (tom. maneriis suis repositos separatim, 1. p. 766) is an account of the in- ubicunque cum sua familia residethronization of bishop Richard de bat, tot libri jacebant in camera Bury: “in qua installatione fecit qua dormivit, quod ingredientes grande convivium : ubi interfue- vix stare poterant vel incedere, runt rex et regina Angliæ, mater nisi librum aliquem pedibus conregis Angliæ, rex Scotiae, duo culcarent.” Ibid. p. 765. He archiepiscopi et quinque episcopi, was the author of the Philobibseptem comites cum uxoribus suis, los. Godwin. de præsul. p. 748. et omnes magnates citra Trentam Wills and Inventories, p. 26.

cum innumera multitudine In this instance the broken seals communitatis." A. D. 1334. I can- were made into a silver-gilt chanot resist quoting also the follow- lice for the altar of S. John the ing, of the same bishop. “ Iste Baptist. One of the constitutions summe delectabatur in multitudine of Otho, Quoniam tabellionum, librorum. Plures enim libros ha- is directed to the subject of au

present custom is to send the seals of a deceased bishop to Lambeth, where they are broken up.

The pontifical ring was also anciently sent to the archbishop of Canterbury: in the year 1310, upon the decease of one of the bishops of Ely, the ring was not delivered as it ought to have been; and archbishop Winchelsey issued a writ directed to one Richard de Oteringham, who was administering the spiritualties of the see during its vacancy, in order to obtain possession of it. It begins, “Robertus, etc. Salutem. Cum nuper ad nostram audientiam pervenisset, quod fratres Amisius et Robertus, monachi Elienses, annulum, qui pontificalis vulgariter appellatur, quondam domini Roberti Elien. episcopi defuncti, qui de jure et consuetudine nostræ ecclesiæ Cant. ad nos dignoscitur pertinere, post mortem ejusdem episcopi auctoritate propria occupassent, et detinerent occupatum ; vobis dedimus, etc.” The monks of Ely, it appears, argued, that the

thentic seals: it orders that all electus, confirmatus, nondum haarchbishops, bishops, abbots, &c., beat sigillum hujusmodi paratum should procure them, with the ad manus, habet tamen sigillum proper legend and distinctions:

armorum vel signetum, an sufficiat and that great care should be alterum eorum talibus literis aptaken of them, lest they should fall ponere? videtur quod sic, dum into unfaithful hands, or be used tamen tale sigillum sit notum." for false purposes. The student Lib. 5. tit. 5. Reverendissimæ. should consult John de Athon verb. sigillo. Compare as to the upon this constitution, but I am use of seals, attached to letters of not aware that either he, or Lynd- orders, the fifth canon of a council wood, anywhere explains what the at Westminster, A. D. 1175. Wilpractice was with regard to the kins. tom. 1. p. 477. seals, after a bishop's or other 5 Wilkins. Conc. tom. 2. p. dignitary's decease. Lyndwood 403. It is possible that the rings in one place, speaking of an au- of the deceased bishops of Ely thentic seal, says ;

“ Sed quid si alone, were due to the archbishop: episcopus de novo consecratus, vel and it seems certain that in the

bishop, before his death, had given the ring to their convent.

RECEPTION OF THE PALL. Succeeding the office of the inthronization of a bishop, in this volume, the reader will find the order which was to be observed, when the archbishop of Canterbury received his pall. The origin of this ornament, as used by archbishops, is involved in hopeless obscurity; to use the words of Van Espen, “Quando et quomodo usus illius ornamenti incæperit, sat obscurum est, sive Græcam sive Latinam ecclesiam spectemus.”ô There are two early documents, which if they were genuine, (and not a doubt remains that neither is so), would have thrown some light upon this question. One is the once famous Donation of Constantine, the other the Liber Pontificalis, in the life of S. Mark, pope A. D. 336. As to this last, it is the earliest notice, genuine or not genuine, which has been yet produced for the antiquity of the pall: and the Jesuit Garnier, in his third dissertation upon the Liber Diurnus, not only quotes it as of authority, but contends, that Linus, the successor of S. Peter, originally adopted it. He is sufficiently modest indeed, to exclaim against some unfortunate authors of the 12th

11th century, no such claim was must not be confounded with the acknowledged by the bishops of “Pontifical," commonly so called : Rochester. See the case of bishop this was, “ de gestis Romanorum Gundulph, in the Anglia Sacra; pontificum.” It is a valuable work, pars. 2. p. 290. cf. 292.

and I believe the best edition is 6 Jus eccles. tom. I.

[ocr errors]

by Joannes Vignolius, with va

rious readings, &c. 3 vols. Rom. * This “Liber pontificalis,” I 1724. need scarcely remind the reader

p. 169.

8 p. 251.

century,' who have attributed the use of it to S. Peter himself. It seems however to have been introduced about the fifth or sixth century into the Latin church from the East: and Thomassin has not been able to produce any example before the time of Cæsar of Arles about the year 500.0

The form of the pall is thus described by Innocent III. “ Pallium fit de candida lana contextum, habet desuper circulum humeros constringentem, et duas lineas sive fascias ex eodem panno ab utraque parte dependentes : quatuor autem cruces purpureas, ante et retro, a dextris et sinistris: sed a sinistris pallium est duplex, simplex a dextris; cui in tres partes conciso tres acus infiguntur (spinas vocant alii) quibus consuitur."

9 Rupertus Abbas: for exam- habit, the office of the benediction, ple. De div. off. lib. 1. cap. 27. its mystical signification, and other Bibl. Patrum. Auct. tom. 1. p. particulars, must consult not only 863. Catalani, nevertheless, does the middle-age ritualists, and our not fear to support him. In Ce- own historians, who very briefly rem. Episc. tom. 1. p. 256. And notice it, but Van Espen, Jus. he cites an epistle of Leo the Eccles. Pars. 1. Tit. xix. de Great, and a passage from Libe- Marca, de concord. Sacerd. et ratus, to shew that S. Mark re- Imper. lib. 6. cap. 6. Thomassin, ceived the pall from S. Peter, and de Benef. Pars. I. lib. 2. liij. with it his patriarchal authority. Catalani: in Pontif. tom. 1. p. In the numerous works of that 235. and, in Cærem. Episc. tom. author, we scarcely know which 1. p. 244. Ferraris. Bibl. verb. to admire the most ; his learning, Pallium : Benedict XIV. de Syor his prejudice.

nodo, lib. 3, and Georgius, de lit. 10 Compare Alberti, de sacris Rom. pontif. lib. 1. cap. xxv. utensilibus, tom. 1. p. 6.

I quote the following from the 11 De Myst. Miss. lib. 1. cap.

third dissertation attached to the 63. The reader who wishes ac- Liber Diurnus, before noticed. curately to examine the subject, “ Vox pallii apud Latinitatis auas to the first adoption of the tores vestem illam longam signipall, how it was originally a royal ficat, quæ aliis indumentis impo

« הקודםהמשך »