All I can gather from this matter is, that our King Henry made a better bargain than his contemporary Francis, who divided the liberties of the church between himself and the Pope, while the King of England seized them all to himself.  But how comes he to number the want of synods in the Gallican church among the grievances of that Concordate, and as a mark of their slavery, since he reckons all Convocations of the Clergy in England to be useless and dangerous?  Or what difference in point of liberty was there between the Gallican Church under Francis, and the English under Harry?  For, the latter was as much a papist as the former, unless in the point of obedience to the see of Rome; and in every quality of a good man, or a good prince, (except personal courage wherein both were equal) the French monarch had the advantage by as many degrees as is possible for one man to have over another.

Henry VIII. had no manner of intention to change religion in his kingdom; he still continued to persecute and burn Protestants after he had cast off the Pope’s supremacy, and I suppose this seizure of ecclesiastical revenues (which Francis never attempted) cannot be reckoned as a mark of the church’s liberty.  By the quotation the Bishop sets down to show the slavery of the French church, he represents it as a grievance, that “bishops are not now elected there as formerly, but wholly appointed by the prince; and that those made by the court have been ordinarily the chief advancers of schisms, heresies, and oppressions of the church.” [45] He cites another passage from a Greek writer, and plainly insinuates, that it is justly applicable to Her Majesty’s reign:  “Princes choose such men to that charge [of a bishop] who may be their slaves, and in all things obsequious to what they prescribe; and may lie at their feet, and have not so much as a thought contrary to their commands.” [46]

[Footnote 45:  Page 55.]

[Footnote 46:  Page 55.]

These are very singular passages for his Lordship to set down in order to show the dismal consequences of the French Concordate, by the slavery of the Gallican Church, compared with the freedom of ours.  I shall not enter into a long dispute, whether it were better for religion that bishops should be chosen by the clergy, or people, or both together:  I believe our author would give his vote for the second (which however would not have been of much advantage to himself, and some others that I could name).  But I ask, Whether bishops are any more elected in England than in France?  And the want of synods are in his own opinion rather a blessing than a grievance, unless he will affirm that more good can be expected from a popish synod than an English Convocation.  Did the French clergy ever receive a greater blow to their liberties, than the submission made to Henry VIII., or so great a one as the seizure of their lands?  The Reformation owed nothing to the good intentions of K. Henry:  He was only an instrument of it,