Page:VCH London 1.djvu/348

A HISTORY OF LONDON certain articles, without which he should not preach in the diocese ; "* he would not ' conform himself in praying for the souls departed as Mr. Latimer, Crome, and others did.' Stokesley also refused to have printed, even at the king's request, a notable sermon he had himself preached at the Cross against the pope's authority and the vaHdity of the king's first marriage. According to the Imperial ambassador the bishop did not preach as a rule, on account of his stammering and bad speaking ; he now offered, however, to preach every other Sunday while Parliament was sitting if the king pleased, but said he could not write out from memory an unpremeditated ' collation ' which had lasted an hour."* On 2 October Stokesley received notice from the archbishop that he was to cease from visitation and from the exercise of his jurisdiction, by order of the king, who had determined to visit all the religious houses and clergy as supreme head of the Church."' Like other bishops,"* he soon obtained a partial withdrawal of this inhibition ; "^ but Cromwell's objects — the assertion of the theory that the bishops only exercised jurisdic- tion by the will of the king, and the carrying out of an inquiry into the condition of all the religious houses — were attained. In October St. Paul's and all religious places in the City, exempt and not exempt, were visited by the king's commissary, Dr. Thomas Legge, a married layman."' Wriothesley mentions the removal of relics, as ' Our Lady's girdle at Westminster, which women with child were wont to gird with, and Saint Elizabeth's girdle, and in St. Paul's a relic of our Lady's milk which was broken and found but a piece of chalk. ' "^ Early in 1536 Stokesley 's rights were again in question ; Hilsey visited the Crossed Friars, forbade several of them to hear confessions, and set John Cardmaker (afterwards well known as an extreme reformer), and others in their places. "°° Apparently the appointment of preachers at Paul's Cross was taken out of the bishop's hands about this time."" The archbishop preached on 6 February against the papal supremacy, and was followed by Hilsey (now Bishop of Rochester), the Bishop of Lincoln, and Tunstall, whose audience included many bishops and noblemen, and tour ot the still unconvinced monks of the Charterhouse.""' On the first three Sundays in Lent the pulpit was occupied by Shaxton, Latimer, and Capon, three new bishops ; -°^ Latimer declared that ' bishops, abbots, priors, priests, and all were strong thieves ; yea, dukes, lords and all.'""* The Imperial ambassador thought that the king's object in ordering these sermons was to persuade the people there was no purgatory, that he might seize the property of religious foundations which kept up masses for the dead.*"* Only one house in London, Elsing Spital, was dissolved in consequence of the Act of this year, but Wriothesley remarks : "' L. and P. Hen. nil, vii, 1643 (? wrongly dated); cf. ix, 526. Stokesley's victory was short lived, for a few months later Hilsey had even gained a voice in the appointment of preachers at the Cross ; Wriothesley, CAron. (Camd. Soc), i, 104 ; cf. L. and P. Hen. Fill, xiii (2), 695, 829 (2), 830 (5). Wriothesley calls this period (1536-8) ' the schism and division time' ; op. cit. loy ; cf. 104. "* L. and P. Hen. Fill, viii, 1054, 1019 ; cf. 527 (? wrongly dated), 1045, 1 105. '" Wilkins, Concilia, iii, 797. "* L. and P. Hen. Fill, ix, Introd. p. xv et seq. and (lassim. '" Lond. Epis. Reg. Stokesley, fol. 48. * Ibid. '" Chnn. (Camd. Soc), i, 31. "° L. and P. Hen. Fill, x, 462 ; cf. 346. "' L. and P. Hen. Fill, x, 120 ; Wriothesley, op. cit. i, 104 ; cf L. and P. Hen. Fill, xi, 186. »<" Cf L. and P. He'.: Fill, ix, 989. "" Wriothesley, op. cit. i, 33-5. »< L and P. Hen. Fill, x, 462. '^ Ibid. 282 ; cf 308. 264