Roger de Potigny: Meeting with Arnulf, bishop of Lisieux, following Council of Westminster, 1163

Extract from

Patres ecclesiae anglicanae : Aldhelmus, Beda, Bonifacius, Arcuionus, Lanfrancus, Anselmus, Thomas Cantuariensis. J.-H. Parker. 1845. pp. 119–.

Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury (Canonized by Pope Alexander III, AD 1173). Cambridge University Press. pp. 29-. ISBN 978-1-108-04928-3. 

[30.] Per idem tempus Arnulfus Lexoviensis episcopus mari transito ad regem quem offenderat venit, cupiens si quomodo posset eum sibi placabilem facere. Quumque per omnia eum demulcens ei placentia loqueretur, etiam contra archiepiscopum ei consilium dare non timuit: dixit enim ad regem Controversia quae inter te et archiepiscopum vertitur difficilis est et vix finienda: impossibile namque estarchiepiscopum tibi subjici, quamdiu unanimes et in eadem cum eo sententia suffraganei sui fuerint; quapropter si omnes ab eo avellere non potueris, saltem aliquos de numero eorum tibi quoquo modo applicare satage: quo facto non facile pars reliqua subsistere poterit. Faventibus enim tibi episcopis, si solus archiepiscopus in sententia pertinaciter perstare decreverit, non solum non obtinebit, verum etiam suspensionis literas, procurantibus episcopis, facile incurrere poterit. Tali igitur instructus rex consilio, vocavit ad se apud Glocestriam quos flexibiliores inter episcopos credidit, Rogerum scilicet Eboracensem et Lincolniensem episcopum, egitqiie cum eis quatenus ad confirmationem suarum consuetudinum parati essent: promittens se nihil ab eis exacturum, quod eorum ordini obviaret. Cesserunt itaque illi duo spondentes regi secundum quod voluit. Nec multo post rex Hilarium Cicestrensem episcopum suae parti sociavit. Quo facto, venit idem Hilarius ad archiepiscopum apud Lentham; coepitque ei suadere quod persuadere non potuit, quatenus scilicet regi ad voluntatem faveret, asserens ei multum hoc per omnem modum expedire. Erat namque mirabilis in literatura: habens verba multa polita et suasoria. Archiepiscopus vero qui non quae sua sed quse Jesu Christi erant quaerebat: Absit, inquit, ut tali commercio terreni regis gratiam redimam; exponendo ei ecclesiam quam rex coelestis sanguine proprio comparavit: tu autem et Lincolniensis cum Eboracense, utinam non impune, venales, vel potius quantum in vobis est irritas feceritis ecclesiasticas sanctiones: promittentes regi vos ejus consuetudines servaturos, quae sanctorum canonibus patrum usquequaque noscuntur adversari. Verumtamen quicquid nos feceritis vel alii forte sint facturi, me in tam horrendam prsesumptionem nunquam consortem habebitis. Ad hsec Hilarius, Rogo, inquit, te quod est hoc tam horrendum tamque grande malum; quod tu solus in hoc facto vides et intelligis: et nullus alius tecum? Rogavit nos rex ut in hoc verbo ei deferremus, eumque honoraremus: promittens etiam ipse nobis, quod nunquam hujus concessionis causa aliquid a nobis exquireret quod ordini nostro resultet. Estne, quaeso, hoc tam grande malum tamque enormis praesumptio: dominum suum honorare? Et archiepiscopus: Non est enim malum quinimo bonum dominum suum honorare, dummodo Deus non inhonoretur: et ecclesia sancta non perturbetur; neque periclitetur: illud autem certissime noveritis: quod rex a vobis exiget quicquid ei promisistis: vos autem ut stet in promissis eum cogere non potestis.

At about the same time Arnulf, bishop of Lisieux, crossed over the sea to visit the king whom he had offended, desiring, if it were possible, to see if he could placate him in anyway. And, by every means he spoke caressingly and pleasingly to the king, even against the archbishop: unafraid to give advice, he said, "the controversy between yourself and the archbishop has turned into a difficulty, not easily stopped. It is impossible for the archbishop to submit to you as long as his own suffragan bishops are of one mind and speak the same sentences as he. And therefore, if you cannot tear all of them away from him, at least tear a number of those who are in any way supplicant to you: it will not be easy for the remainder to hold fast once you get these bishops in your favour. And, if the archbishop is then alone in his stubborn persistence, not only will he not be strong, it might be truly possible for the bishops to obtain letters of suspension."

Accepting this advice, the king summoned to himself at Gloucester those from among the bishops who could be swayed, namely, Roger [archbishop] of York, and the bishop of Lincoln, and asked them how far they they would be prepared to go in confirming his customs, assuming beforehand he would exact nothing from them, which might oppose their order. Thus did the king obtain promises from those two, which pleased him. Soon afterwards his party was joined by Hilary of Chichester.

When this was done, this same Hilary went to the archbishop at Lenham [in Kent]: and he began to urge as he could not persuade him, inasmuch one may know how to favour the will of the king asserting to him much of expediency. He clearly demonstrated that he was a miracle of book learning, using many refined and persuasive words [rhetoric?].

The archbishop, who not which from his own but sought from Jesus Christ. "The Lord forbid," he said, "that with such trade in lands I might buy back the grace of this earthly king," having also explained to him this when compared the church and heavenly king had bought his with his own blood.
"You, however, and Lincoln, together with York, have been not only bought with bribes, and rather much is rendered ineffective as you might be made to suffer ecclesiastic penalties [excommunication], concerning the promises which you have made to the king about preserving his customs, which are recognised as being wholly against the holy canons of the fathers [of the church]. But yet whatever you might have done to us or others soon may strongly be doing to me in so horrible presumption at no time you have shared."

To this Hilary said, "I ask what is it that is so horrendous and evil which you alone in this matter have seen and understood, and nobody else but you? The king said to us using these words, that we should defer to him, and honour him, himself also promising us, that at no time would these concessions be the cause of something which he would use to seek and rebound on our order."

And the archbishop said, "Indeed it is not bad, but rather is good to honour one's lord, provided God is not dishonoured, and holy church is neither unsettled, nor imperilled. Nonetheless this you will most certainly come to know that the king will exact from you whatever you have promised to him, but you, however, will remain with promises you will not be able to collect from him."

See also
Michael Staunton (7 December 2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 85–. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6.



References

Carolyn Poling Schriber (1 October 1990). The dilemma of Arnulf of Lisieux: new ideas versus old ideals. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-35097-8. 

Roger de Potigny: Meeting with Abbé de l'Aumone at Harrow, following Council of Westminster, 1163

Extract from

Patres ecclesiae anglicanae : Aldhelmus, Beda, Bonifacius, Arcuionus, Lanfrancus, Anselmus, Thomas Cantuariensis. J.-H. Parker. 1845. pp. 121–.

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k50321s/f64.image

[31.] Per idem tempus Alexander papa in Francia constitutus misit quemdam Cisterciensis ordinis abbatem nomine Philippum de Eleemosyna virum magni nominis et auctoritatis qui inter regem et archiepiscopum pacem, si possibile esset, reformaret. Venit igitur abbas ille in Angliam et sociatis sibi episcopo Herefordense nomine E-oberto de Milidino, et Joanne Windochinense comite, venit ad archiepiscopum apud Herges, porrexitque ei idem Philippus literas apostolicas, et quorundam cardinalium scripta, in quibus continebantur verba exhortatoria, quatenus se modestum et flexibilem archiepiscopus regis voluntati exhiberet. Commemorabatur etiam in literis illis, quod status ecclesiae propter schisma turbidus esset et nubilus; cavendumque summo opere ne tempestas, quae caput ecclesiae occupaverat, etiam per membra diffunderetur et ita nulla esset requies. Esse interim necessariam dispensationem, nec expedire ad praesens ut ecclesiastici rectores debitam severitatem exercerent: sed multa dissimulanda, nonnulla etiam pro tempore essent toleranda. Multa in hunc modum continebantur in literis illis quibus episcopus et abbas una cum comite socio viva voce addiderunt, quod rex eos in verbo veritatis certificasset se nunquam ab archiepiscopo quicquam requisiturum quod ordini ejus vel voluntati contrarium foret. Regem vero hac intentione tam pertinaciter egisse, eo quod turpe ei videretur ab archiepiscopo vinci, nec posse ab eo extorquere, ut saltem verbotenus eum honorare dignaretur. Rogabant igitur et suadebant memorati viri modisque omnibus instabant, quatenus una cum eis archiepiscopus ad regem veniret, et simplici tantum verbo ejus voluntati faveret, omisso verbo illo, scilicet salvo ordine nostro: quo facto plenam apud regem pacem et gratiam tam ipse quam universa ecclesia Anglicana consequeretur: et mentio quae de consuetudinibus fuerat regni introducta, penitus in perpetuum aboleretur. Erat autem idem abbas de Eleemosyna tantae opinionis et famae, cui facile fides haberetur: unde archiepiscopus, tam Domini papae et cardinalium consiliis quam ipsius abbatis et eorum qui cum illo venerant verbis inductus et promissionibus credulus: una cum eis ad regem profectus est. 

[32.] Inventum autem regem apud Wodestoche venerabilis pontifex cum multa mansuetudine allocutus est: proponens ei in exemplum sanctos regni illius reges: quos non solum fides et pietas Deo fecit acceptos verum etiam plures ex eis martyrii corona reddidit gloriosos: exhortans et suppliciter rogans, ut et ipse eorum exemplis et vestigiis inhaereret, tyrannorumque deletis et in perpetuum damnatis abusionibus sanctorum regum meritis et collegio sociari satageret. Et ne quid, ait archiepiscopus, offendiculum bonae voluntati tuse, si eam tibi Dominus inspirare dignatus fuit, per me opponi videatur: scias quod consuetudines regni bona fide servabo, tibique de csetero, ut decet et justum est, per omnia in bono obtemperans ero. Tunc rex ad eum, Omnibus, inquit, notum est quam pertinaciter te in hoc verbo exhibueris, et quantum honorem meum in tua contradictione laeseris: quapropter, si ut decet me honorare decrevisti, coram omnibus emeudari et recognosci necesse est, quod honori meo in hac parte detractum ab omnibus scitur. Mitte igitur et convoca episcopos et abbates et caeteros omnes qui in ecclesiasticis honoribus sunt eminentiores: et ego ex parte mea convocabo universos majores regni, quatenus in praesentia et audientia omnium ad honorem meum sermo iste recognoscatur.

At about the same time in France that Pope Alexander had set up [in exile] in France, he sent an abbot of the Cistercian order,  a certain man by the name of Philippe d'Aumone, of a great name and authority, who was to broker peace between the king and the archbishop, if it were possible. The abbot came to England, and together with the bishop of Hereford, called Robert de Meldun, and John, Comte de Vendome, they came to the archbishop at Harrow. Philippe brought with him letters from the pope and from some of the cardinals, in which were contained words of exhortation for the archbishop, that he should be modest and flexible to the will of the king. It was mentioned in those letters, that the state of the church, because of the schism, was troubled and unsettled, and he was to be on guard and do his utmost to avoid the storm, which had taken over the head of the Church, and which was even diffusing to its limbs, because there would be no respite.Therefore, in the meantime, it might be a necessary dispensation that the managers of ecclesiastical affairs for the present should not exercise due severity, but in many matters to pretend ignorance of them, and even for some things, for the time being, to tolerate them. Many things of this kind were contained in these letters, to which the bishop and the abbot, and together with the earl, verbally added, in the manner of one of those matters which friends share, that the king had given his word of truth to them, that he would attest that he would never require anything contrary to the archbishop's desire or which would be against his order. The king, in truth, had acted so determinedly in his intention in this matter, because it would seem shameful to him if he were seen to be defeated by the archbishop, and not being able to extort from him that he would at least agree to honour him verbally. So therefore the aforementioned men begged and tried to persuade him, and by all manner of means insisted that the archbishop, in as much, should come along with them to the king, and give support only to his will in plain words, by omitting these words, namely "salvo ordine nostro" [saving our order]. When this is done, this will result in full of peace and favour with the king, for both him and all the English church, and all mention of the customs of the kingdom that had been introduced, completely wiped out forever. Now it was by the same abbé d'Aumone, who had so great a reputation, in whom he easily had so much trust whence the archbishop, as well as by the advices of the lord pope and cardinals, and also the abbot and those who had come with him, was induced by words and credulous promises; and so he made his way to the king.

It was with great gentleness that the venerable archbishop therefore addressed the king whom he found at Woodstock, proposing to him as example the saintly kings of his kingdom; that it was not only how faith and piety can make us acceptable to God, but also how many of them who had rendered their crown to the glory of martyrdom, humbly exhorting and beseeching that he should adhere to both their example and memory. And how tyrants are destroyed and forever damned when they try to join the fellowship of the saintly kings of merit. And they should not be, said the archbishop to him, an obstacle in thy good will, if the Lord will inspire it in you, as it was deigned, that I may be seen to be opposed to; you know that I  will myself keep in good faith the customs of the kingdom and prove to you comprehend more of, so that it is fitting and just, in all things I will be in the good and conformed to. Then the king said to him, it is well known to all that you are obstinate as you have shown by these words, and so far as my honour is concerned, you have injured me in your gainsaying. For this reason, if you have decided to honour me, as is fitting, it is necessary to review and make amends before all, in my honour in this the withdrawal of all known. Send for therefore, and convoke all the bishops and abbots, and all those who are in an ecclesiastical honour above the others, and I will call together all the nobles of the kingdom on my part, so far as in the presence and hearing of all that this word was my honour to be acknowledged for.

See Also

Michael Staunton (7 December 2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 86–. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6.

Roger de Potigny: Meeting of the king and the archbishop at Northampton, after the Council of Westminster 1163

Extract From

Patres ecclesiae anglicanae : Aldhelmus, Beda, Bonifacius, Arcuionus, Lanfrancus, Anselmus, Thomas Cantuariensis. J.-H. Parker. 1845. pp. 117–. 

Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury (Canonized by Pope Alexander III, AD 1173).  Vol IV pp. 27–. ISBN 978-1-108-04928-3.

[29]. Rex igitur ad praesens ab intentione sua frustratus: post non multum temporis apud Northamtoniam positus archiepiscopum ad se vocavit, volens ejus animum tentare, si quo forte modo eum posset flectere, et ad suam voluntatem inclinare. Quumque archiepiscopus ad locum appropinquasset; et ejus adventus innotuisset regi: nescitur qua calliditate rex quosdam obviam misit qui dicerent: Rex in oppido cum multis est positus, et tu nihilominus cum maxima multitudine advenisti: nec sufficit locus ut ambos vos capiat: quapropter mandat rex, ut hic eum expectes. Adest enim ipse tecum locuturus. Quumque in agrum divertisset pontifex: statim sine mora rex advenit: cui occurrens debito eum salutationis honore praevenire curavit. Sed cum propter lascivientium equorum, quibus insidebant, hinnitus et recalcitrationem ad se invicem accedere non possent tandem mutatis equis in parte seorsum simul ambo constiterunt. 

Tunc rex ad episcopum ita exorsus est. "Nonne," ait, "ego te ex humili et paupere in maximum honoris et excellentiae culmen extuli? Parumque id mihi visum est, nisi et patrem regni te constituerem, et etiam mihimet ipsi te praeferrem. Quomodo ergo tot beneficia, tantaque meae circa te dilectionis indicia, omnibus notissima, tam subito tibi a mente excidere potuerunt: ut non solum ingratus, verum etiam in omnibus contrarius mihi existas?" 

Et episcopus, "Absit," inquit, "Domine mi: non sum immemor beneficiorum tuorum, quae non quidem simpliciter tu, sed Deus tribuens omnia per te mihi conferre dignatus est: quapropter absit ut ingratus vel in aliquo voluntati tuae contrarius existam, dummodo tu Divinae voluntati concordes. Scit enim dignatio tua quantae fidelitatis tuae extiterim, a quo temporalem tantum praestolabar remunerationem: quanto magis omnipotenti Deo, a quo et temporalia bona accepimus et aetema speramus, fidele et sincerum ministerium nos exhibere necesse est. Tu quidem es dominus meus, sed ille et meus et tuus est Dominus, cujus voluntatem praeterire ut tuae acquiescam, nec tibi nec mihi expedit: in tremendo namque ejus examine ambo ut unius Domini servi judicandi sumus, ubi neuter nostrum pro altero poterit respondere: sed unusquisque secundum facta sua, excusatione cessante, recipiet. Est enim dominis temporalibus obtemperandum, sed non contra Deum, dicente beato Petro, Oportet obedire Deo magis quam hominibus."

Tunc rex ad ista: "Nolo," inquit, "mihi modo ut sermocineris: Nonne tu filius fuisti cujusdam rustici mei? 

Et archiepiscopus, "Revera," inquit, "non sum atavis editus regibus, sicut nec beatus apostolorum princeps  Petrus: cui Dominus claves regni caelorum et totius ecclesiae principatum conferre dignatus est. 

"Verum est," ait rex, "sed ille pro Domino suo mortuus est. Venerabilis vero antistes respondit, Moriar et ego pro Domino meo: quum tempus advenerit. 

Tunc rex, "Tu," inquit, "nimis affigeris et inniteris scansilibus tuis." 

Et archiepiscopus, "In Domino," ait, "confido et innitor. Quia maledictus homo qui spem suam ponit in homine. Verumtamen quicquid tu mihi dixeris et ego tibi respondero: ad honorem tuum et beneplacitum, salvo ordine meo, sicut olim ita et nunc paratus sum. Sed et super his quae ad honorem tuum et salutem animae tuae spectant, ego potius consulendus eram, quem toties tam fidelem et utilem in consiliis expertus es: quam illi qui quasi sub obtentu honoris tui de me, qui eos non laesi, gratuita succensi invidia e flamma vindictam expetere satagunt. Quem enim infra sacros ordines adhuc constitutum fidelem tibi fuisse ut credo non negabis: multo magis sacerdotii officio sublimatum me tibi in omnibus fidelem aestimare debuisti. Quumque multa verba salubria dilectionis et fidei plena archiepiscopus perorasset, rex tamen vehementer instabat: ut verbum illud, scilicet salvo ordine nostro, penitus omitteretur. Quod quum minime obtinere potuisset, archiepiscopo inflexibiliter in sententia persistente, ab invicem discesserunt.

The king, therefore, for the present was frustrated in his intention. Not a long time afterwards he summoned, by order, the archbishop to come to Northampton, where he was, to try to see how much, if by using a strong manner it was possible to bend his mind, and to incline him towards his will. And as the archbishop approached the place, he made his arrival known to the king. It is not known by what sly ruse the king sent the following reply, which said: "The king is already in the town with a large number, and nevertheless you have arrived with a most great multitude: this suffices as an alternative place where both of you can meet: this the king has ordered and you are to wait for him here. Indeed he will come soon to speak to you." As soon as the primate had been diverted into a field, immediately and without delay the king came to him taking care that when meeting, to prevent the due honorable salutation.  As he neared him the horses, upon they were both mounted, became lascivious, whinnying and kicking, so much so that as each tried to approach each other in turn they were not able to do so. Finally after changing mounts they both stood in a separate part of the field.

Then the king began to speak to the archbishop thus: "Did I not," he said, "bring you up out of humble and poor circumstances and confer upon you the greatest honours and raise you to the highest excellencies? And it was not enough, it seems to me, that I did make you father of the kingdom, and even set you above myself. How therefore after so many kindnesses, and so great around you the evidences of my love, with everything of great note, so that all of a sudden these seem to have been banished from your mind and forgotten, so that not only are you are ungrateful, but the truth has also emerged that in all things you have become contrary towards to me?"

And the archbishop: "Lord forbid," he said "O my lord, that I am not unmindful of your kindnesses, which were indeed not simply from you, but from God, giver of all things, acting through you which He deigned to confer upon me; far be it that I stand forth seemingly ungrateful or in any way contrary to your wish, as long as you are in accord with the Divine will. Your grace knows just how much fidelity I visibly showed you when I was in receipt of so great temporal recompense, and now in the case of a great and all-powerful God, from whom we receive temporal rewards and the eternal that we both hope for, so much more so it is necessary for both of us to deliver faithful and sincere ministry. You indeed are my lord, but He is both your and my Lord, whose will to disregard, it is neither profitable for you nor for me: it will be terrible under his examination, for both of us as a servants of the Lord, when we are to be judged, where neither one of us will be able to answer for the other: but every man shall receive according to his deeds, upon the failure of excuse. For although temporal lords and masters are to be obeyed, but not against God; according to the words of the blessed Peter, it behoves us to obey God rather than men."

Then the king said to him: "I did not want you to sermonise me. Were you not the son of one of my villeins?"

And the archbishop said to him, "The fact is that my great-grandfathers were not descended from kings, but neither was the blessed St. Peter, prince of the apostles, upon whom the Lord deigned to confer the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and sovereignty of the whole of the church."

"It is true," the king said, "but he died for the sake of his Lord God."

The venerable pontiff replied, "let me die for my Lord, when the time comes."

Then the king said, "You are too afflicted and rely too much on climbing above your position."

And the archbishop said, "it is in the Lord I trust and upon whom I rely, because accursed be the man who puts his trust in Man. And yet whatever you have said to me, I have given you a reply. I am prepared to honour thy good pleasure, saving our order, as now, as it was in former times, and in those things, however, which have regard to your honour and concern the salvation of your soul. I would rather that I had been consulted, like before when I had experienced previously trust so often in your councils and profitably so.   But those who as if under protection of thy honour concerning me, those whom I have not injured, are freely burning with envy,  and out of its flame they have struggled to seek revenge.

  

For whom indeed those constituted under holy orders are still being faithful to you, that I believe you will not deny:  so much more so whilst in the holy office of a priest when determining the value let me give you the sublime.  And whilst the archbishop concluded his address with many wholesome,  loving and faithful words: the king, however, vehemently continued to pursue that the words saving our order should be dropped. As in the very least of this he was unable to prevail, with the archbishop unbending in opinion, they parted from one another.

See also

Michael Staunton (7 December 2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 83–. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6.

Council of Westminster by Anonymous of Lambeth

Council of Westminster by Anonymous of Lambeth

October 1163

Extract from

Thomas Becket (st., abp. of Canterbury.) (1845). Vita s. Thomæ Cantuariensis archiepiscopi et martyris, ab auctoribus contemporaneis, ed. ab I.A. Giles. pp. 88–9. 

Universität Zürich Corpus Corporum

Anonymous

XII. DE ORTU CONTENTIONIS INTER IPSUM ET REGEM.

http://goo.gl/08utzU

XII. DE ORTU CONTENTIONIS INTER IPSUM ET REGEM.

Non multo post autem episcoporum, abbatum et procerum coetum Londoniae colligi contigit, ob negotia regia, pacisque regni firmamentum. Inter ceteras vero quae propositae sunt illic querimonias, accusati sunt archidiaconi super subditos non praelationis tenere modestiam sed exercere tyrannidem, calumniis fatigare laicos et indebitis exactionibus clericos. De cleri quoque numero producti sunt quidam variis flagitiorum criminationibus impetiti. Tales enim praecipue dicebantur regni turbare pacem, novisque facinorum immanitatibus debacchari, securitate per ordinis privilegium evadendi. Correctionem igitur horum rex instanter ab episcopis flagitabat. Amplius autem institit, ut in clericos publicorum criminum reos de ipsorum consilio sibi liceret, quod avitis diebus factum sua curia recolebat; tales enim deprehensos et convictos aut confessos, mox degradari, sicque poenis publicis, sicut et laicos subdi tunc usurpatum est. Hoc idem sibi licere quum instantius rex postularet per episcopos decerni, substiterunt quidem ipsi diutius caventes admittere, quod legi divinae videbatur obviare. Dicit enim Naum propheta, Non judicabit Deus bis in id ipsum. Contra Deum itaque bis judicandos censuisse videri poterant, si post degradationem inconvictis poenam mortis aut mutilationis infligi consensissent. Cavit hoc prudentissimus et rectissimus judicum rex Salomon. Quum enim Abiathar sacerdos reus mortis appareret sicut et Joab, quia contra Salomonem declinassent post Adoniam fratrem ejus ut rex fieret, non tamen sicut Joab, sic et Abiathar Salomon morte punivit, sed a sacerdotio tantum amovit dicens: Vade iu Anathor, agrum tuum: es quidem vir mortis, sed hodie te non interficiam, quia portasti arcam Domini coram patre meo David. Talibus itaque cum archiepiscopo moti pontifices, ad regis arbitrium legem ponere dubitarunt, praesertim ne trahi posset in praejudicium et calumniam innocentium, ut vel ad purgationem urgerentur vel nocentium sorti subderentur. Hinc itaque contentionis exordium. Hinc enim arbitratus rex archiepiscopum cum episcopis in insidiis sibi sedere, regiarumque dignitatibus consuetudinum velle contraire, primum ira non parum excanduit, et deinde promissionem de servandis illis extorquere prosdiit. Illi vero, tractatu seorsim diutius habito, volentes regis iram sedare, cautam putaverunt procurasse responsionem, dum ordine suo salvo petitionem fieri concesserunt. Additionem autem, quam providerant ad cautelam, pars regis interpretata est ad captionem, et super ea detrahenda diutius certatum est, sed episcopis unanimiter subsistentibus tunc obtentum non est. Unde soluto conventu terribiliter efferatus rex et minax abscedens, exinde pontificalium concussionibus rerum officiales suos gravius insistere jussit.

Not long afterwards, however, at an assembly of  bishops, abbots and the nobles in London who happened to be gathered together, on account of the king's business, and in support of the peace of the kingdom, and among other matters which had been properly raised there, there were also some complaints: archdeacons were accused of not keeping hold of their authority and exercising discipline towards their subjects, but instead were behaving with tyrrany and oppressively, harrassing the laity and profiting  by exacting undue monies from the clerics. And concerning some clerics there were a number of whom about which it was brought forward they were accused of certain various scandalous charges. These were of such kind which were said to be disrupting the peace of the kingdom, and the news of the barbarity and debauchery of their deeds, and freely without any care, by the privilege of their order, were evading justice. It was on account of these therefore that the king urgently demanded from the bishops an immediate rectification. Furthermore he insisted, that in order to allow the prosecution of those clerics accused of committing public crimes, he wanted to bring back those practices which were in force in the courts in the time of his grandfather. For such persons who have been caught and who have been convicted or have confessed, and have subsequently been degraded, they should thus be received for public punishment as if they were lay persons, and subject to seizure. This same matter they were going to permit since the king had asked for it very forcibly to be decided by the bishops, but indeed, they held themselves back for a long time from having to allow it, as they saw it as being be prevented by the divine laws. 

Indeed Nahum, the prophet, said that God does not judge the same case twice. It would be seem to God, therefore, if they were to seen to concur with this, as permitting a double punishment, if the convict, after having been degraded, they were also to agree that he could be subjected to the death penalty or mutilation. 

The most foreseeing and most virtuous judge, king Solomon, warned of this, just as when indeed Abiathar, the priest, who was evidently a defendant in a case involving the death penalty, and Joab who had turned against Solomon, so that his [Solomon's] brother, Adonijah, could become king. However, Joab and Abiathar were not dealt with in the same way. Solomon wanted to sentence them both to death, but to Abiathar, who had moved so far away from being a priest he said,

"Go back to Anathoth, to your fields. You are indeed worthy of being put to death, but today I will not have you die, because you carried the Ark of the Lord personally for my father, David."

So it was with the such a line of reasoning therefore that the archbishop moved the pontiffs. They hesitated having the law dragged more towards the arbitration of the king, particularly that he would not able to betray into the prejudgement and false accusation of the innocent, as either they might be pushed hard towards having purge themselves, or they might find themselves in the fate of being subdued as criminals. 

Hence, therefore, here was the beginning of the contention. Hence, indeed, the king observed that the archbishop together with the bishops were themselves sitting in ambush, and wishing to oppose the authority of the royal customs; his anger not a little burned at first, but he then tried to extort promises from those who required security. Those considerations aside, aware of the day-to-day requirements of living, they wanted to appease the anger of the king, by providing  a more carefully thought out answer, and hence granted the request of his petition, "saving their order".

In addition, nonetheless, which they had foreseen about the security of their living, it was explained that the king had the right to deprive them of part  of their land, and above that to take that away longer, but he did not prevent the unanimity of the bishops by this pretense.

Hence this was the outcome of the conference: the king was terribly furious and threatened to leave. From then on, with the bishops shook up, he ordered his officials to pursue matters on a more serious footing.

References

Dorothy Whitelock; Martin Brett; Christopher Nugent Lawrence Brooke (1981). "#158: Royal Council of Westminster". Councils & Synods: With Other Documents Relating to the English Church. A.D.871-1204. Volume I. Part II 1066-1204. Clarendon Press. pp. 848–52. ISBN 978-0-19-822394-8. 

Patrologiae cursus completus: sive biblioteca universalis,integra uniformis, commoda, oeconomica, omnium SS. Patrum, doctorum scriptorumque eccelesiasticorum qui ab aevo apostolico ad usque Innocentii III tempora floruerunt ... [Series Latina, in qua prodeunt Patres, doctores scriptoresque Ecclesiae Latinae, a Tertulliano ad Innocentium III]. 1854. Col. 287. http://books.google.com/books?id=UfEQAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA295.

James Craigie Robertson. Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury (canonized by Pope Alexander III., A.D. 1173).. Vol. IV.. Longman & co.. pp. 95–7. 
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k50321s/f128.image
 

Jeremy Collier (1840). An ecclesiastical history of Great Britain, chiefly of England, from the first planting of Christianity, to the end of the reign of King Charles the second: with a brief account of the affairs of religion in Ireland. Printed for W. Straker. pp. 230–. 

Frederic William Maitland (1 July 1998). Roman Canon Law in the Church of England: Six Essays 1898. The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.. pp. 138–. ISBN 978-1-886363-57-1. 
http://archive.org/details/romancanonlawin00maitgoog


Toutant, Mary Aimee du Sacre-Coeur. “An Annotated Translation of the Life of St. Thomas Becket by an Anonymous Author Number 2” (1944). Master's Theses. Paper 403. http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/403
 

Council of Westminster

When King Henry II dared to revive within himself the spirit of William Rufus, he found himself confronted with Anselm, resurrected in the person of Thomas.

  

SUMMA CAUSAE INTER REGEM ET THOMAM.

De prima manifestae inter dominum Cantuariensem et dominum regem discordia causa.

Henricus, nobilis rex Anglorum, dux Normaniae et Aquitaniae et comes Andegavise, venit Londoniam calendis Octob. anno verbi incarnati MCLXIII, et archiepiscopus Cantuariensis Thomas et Eboracensis Rogerius et omnes episcopi Angliae. Sola autem et summa causa concilii fuit, ut metropolitanus Cantuariensis totius Anglise primas esse solemniter monstraretur; cui solus in hoc Eboracensis obviavit : quum ecce praeter spem omnium, rex Anglorum quaedam satis dura proponere coepit.

Primo enim conquestus est de archidiaconorum violentia, quod aliorum delicta in sua verterent lucra, quod peccatorum pretia exigant, et de his suos supra modum luxus exerceant, cum tamen peccantibus debitam correctionem non impendant : dixitque se velle, ne archidiaconi quemquam quantumcumque infamem super aliquo crimine conveniant, praeter officialis sui conscientiam. Moxque ad aliud sermonem vertens, Cogito, inquit, cogitationes pacis, moveorque multum pro bono pacis, quae in regno meo clericorum malitia perturbatur, qui rapinas et furta perpetrant, et homicidia plerumque. Peto igitur et volo, ut tuo, domine Cantuariensis, et coepiscoporum tuorum consensu clerici in maleficiis deprehensi vel convicti vel confessi exauctorentur illico, et mox curise mex lictoribus tradantur, ut omni defensione ecclesiae destituti, corporaliter puniantur. Volo etiam et peto, ut in illa exauctoratione, de meis officialibus aliquem interesse consentiatis, ut exauctoratum clericum mox comprehendat, ne qua ei fiat copia corporalem vindictam effugiendi.

Ad haec, dominus Cantuariensis, cum super petitionis hujus responso nec usque mane impetrare posset inducias, secessit in partem cum episcopis suis. Moxque hinc inde allegatum est : episcopi dicebant secundum leges seculi clericos exauctoratos curiae tradendos, et post poenam spiritualem, corporaliter puniendos : quoniam quo digniores sunt ex privilegio, eo deteriores judicantur in delicto ; et quo deteriores in delicto, eo graviori sunt afficiendi supplicio. Non ergo mirum, inquiunt, si privatiouem ordinis sequatur supplicium corporis. Id ipsum etiam non solum legibus, sed etiam autheuticis probabant exemplis ; Levitas veteris testamenti proponentes in medium, quos reos forte flagitii lege prohibiti, sequebatur mors corporis; vel juxta similitudinem criminis, multatio in membris.

Dominus vero Cantuariensis sacris canonibus consentiens, in contrarium allegabat, asserens omnino injustum fore, et contra canones, et contra Deum, si ob unius punitionem delicti, duo quis subeat judicia. Nec enim Deus judicat bis in id ipsum. Quod enim, inquit, judicat ecclesia, aut justum est aut injustum : sed non dabis injustum, erit ergo justum. Quod, cum non contineat absolutionem, continet damnationem. Si ergo damnatur reus, quum exauctoratur, non debet aliud judicium inchoari ad ejusdem condemnationem peccati. Ad hsec quoque cavendum est, inquit, nobis, ne nostro consensu opprimatur et pereat libertas ecclesise : pro qua, exemplo summi sacerdotis nostri, ex officio tenemur usque ad mortem certare. Nondum autem usque ad mortem restitistis.

Ad haec episcopi pereuntem ecclesiae libertatem nullum periculum afferre ecclesiae dicebant : sed aiunt, Potius nunc expedit, ut pereat, ne toti pereamus. Faciamus ergo quod rex petit; alioquin peri- bit fuga a nobis, et non erit, qui requirat animas nostras. Regi vero consentientes, haereditate possidebimus sanctuarium Dei, et in possessionibus ecclesiarum nostrarum securi dormiemus. Malitiae etiam temporis hujus multa indulgenda sunt. [Hoc enim dictum est propter schisma, quod tunc fuit in Romana ecclesia : erat namque apud Alemanniam qui- dam antipapa.] Haec dicebant episcopi, tanquam diei malitia sua non sufficiat, nisi et ipsa augeatur per malitiam episcoporum. Ad hsec dominus Cantuariensis zelo domus Dei succensus : Video, inquit, vos vestras inertias sub specie sustinentise consolari, et dispensationis vestrae praetextu, sponsae Christi libertatem suffocari. Et quis vos fascinavit, O insensati pontifices? Quid prudenti vocabulo dispensationis manifestam iniquitatem vestram contegitis? Quid vocatis dispensationem, totius ecclesiae Christi dispendium? Rebus vocabula serviant; non cum rebus pervertantur vocabula. Quod autem dicitis, malitise temporis multa fore indulgenda ; assentior certe : sed non ob id pec- cata accumulanda esse peccatis. Potens est Deus ecclesiae suae conditionem facere meliorem, quamvis non efnciamini deteriores. Nunquid impotens est Deus subvenire sanctse ecclesise, nisi per vitia docto- rum ecclesiae? Arbitror vos compati infirmitatibus Christi, quasi impotens sit sponsam suam erigere, nisi sensibus nostris adjuvetur. Revera tentat vos Deus. Quaeso namque, quando se debent episcopi offerre discrimini? Numquid in tranquillitate et non in discrimine ? Erubescitis certe fateri, quod in tranquillitate. Restat ergo, ut cum in ecclesia est perturbatio, pastor ecclesise opponat se periculo. Nec enim majoris meriti fuit olim episcopis, in suo sanguine ecclesiam Christi fundare, quam nostris tem- poribus pro ecclesiae libertate sanguinem fundere. Et ego quidem, Deo teste, afiirmo, non esse nobis tutum a forma illa recedere, quam a sanctis patribus nostris accepimus. Nec nos quenquam morti debemus exponere, cum etiam judicio sanguinis nobis non licet interesse.

Haec verba mox ad regem relata sunt. Videns illico quamplures ecclesise, non dico columnas, sed arundines, vento agitari et trepidare, audito quod non per omnia voto regis essent parituri. Et certe statim ante minas cessissent, nisi domini Cantuari- ensis constantiam persensissent. Videns autem rex, quod in verbo illo, ubi voluit proficere, non valuit, citius ad alia se convertit, sciscitans ab eis, si consuetudines suas regales essent ei per omnia servaturi. Dominus vero Cantuariensis cum consilio locutus : Etiam, inquit, in omnibus; salvo tamen per omnia et in omnibus ordine nostro. Et quum postea id ipsum rex a singulis ex ordine qusereret, erat quidem tunc vox illa in ore omnium. Quum vero diutius instaret, volvens et revolvens, si consuetudines suas regales absolute et absque apposita ordinis sui salva- tione, simpliciter omnino se ei servaturum promitteret dominus Cantuariensis ; a Christi vicario, quod voluit, obtinere non valuit. Turbatus est ergo rex vehementer, et omnis Jerosolyma cum illo: subitoque in illa spiritus vehementia exiliens, Londonia discessit universis negotiis suis infectis, et ratiociniis pendentibus. Videres tunc murmur in populo, commotionem in clero. Episcopi turbati et tremuli, regem abeuntem sunt prosecuti ; metuentes, se non prius regem inventuros, quam audirent se omnia bona sua perdituros. Moxque operati sunt cum rege occultam conventionem, omni mentione Dei et ordinis sui postposita: et tam facile regis petitioni assensum praebuerunt, ut viderentur consensisse antequam ille petisse ; adeo ut qui inter eos sestimabantur scientiores, ad opprimendam ecclesise libertatem fierent proniores. Cantuariensis autem solus praesul resedit, considerans ad dextram et ad sinistram ; nec fuit qui cognosceret eum. Requirebat in fratribus solatium : at illi abierunt retro, et jam cum illo non ambulabant. Pacem denique peccatorum videns, et sibi undique imminere discrimen, Unum, inquit, locutus sum ; quod terreni regis regales nullatenus servarem consuetudines, nisi salvo in omnibus ordine meo. Ob id offensam regis incurri: ob id episcopi mei dereliquerunt me : ob id totius orbis oculos offendi. Sed quid ? Velit, nolit mundus : ego cum mortali paciscens homine, nullo unquam tempore Dei mei et ordinis mei immemor ero, Deo volente. Absit a me, ut cujusquam mortalis metu vel gratia, Deum inveniar contempsisse. Si angelus de caelo venerit, et tale mihi cousilium dederit, anathema sit.

The Principal Case between the King and Thomas.

On the first manifestation of open discord between the king and the lord archbishop of Canterbury, and its cause.

Henry, noble king of the English, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou, came to London on the first October, 1163 AD. [Here too were summoned] Thomas archbishop  of Canterbury, Roger [archbishop of] of York, and all the bishops of England. The main reason that the Council had been summoned was so that the metropolitan archbishop of Canterbury could be solemnly named primate of all England, to which the archbishop of York objected. It was then, quite unexpectedly to all present, the king of England began to outline a set of certain tough proposals.

First, he complained of the violations of the archdeacons, who from the wrongdoings of others had turned these to their own gain, demanding payment as the price of sin, and then applying it to their own excessive luxury, though from the wrongdoings the punishment due had not been shown.  And he went on to say he said that the archdeacons are not to summon or sentence anyone for a crime no matter how infamous, without the  knowledge of his official. Soon after he turned to another matter. 

"I think," he said, "for the sake of peace, and I am very much determined to have the benefit of peace in my kingdom, when matters are thrown into turmoil by the wickedness of clerics, those who commit thefts and robberies, and, above all, murders, I seek and want consensus from you, lord Canterbury and your co-bishops, that when your fellow clerics have been seized in the act, convicted of or confessed to a crime, and who have been dismissed from clerical service [in the ecclesiastical court], for them to be immediately transferred to my court.

First, he complained of the violations to the archdeacons, who the offenses of others had turned these to their own gain, demanding payment as the price of sin, and then applying it to their own excessive luxury, though from the wrongdoers no due correction was rendered. He said that the archdeacons were not to summon or sentence anyone for a crime no matter how infamous, without the  knowledge of his official.

"I think," he said, "for the sake of peace, and I am convinced very much for the good of peace in my kingdom, when matters are thrown into turmoil by the wickedness of clerics, those who commit thefts and robberies, and, above all, murders. I seek and want consensus from you, lord Canterbury and your co-bishops, that when your fellow clerks have been convicted of or confessed crimes, and who have been degraded, to be immediately handed over to the officials of my court. And I would also ask for agreement, that some of my officials take part in the proceedings, so that as soon as the the degradation of the cleric is realised, he is allowed no chance to escape physical punishment."

The lord Canterbury, unable to reach an [agreed] answer to these proposals by the end of the morning and unable able to arrive at a truce, he withdrew into private conference with his bishops. Soon after here and there it was averred, the bishops said, that according to secular laws clerics who have been degraded, after receiving spiritual punishment, should be transferred to the secular court to receive physical punishment,  where they can be dealt with more severely for their offence and there to suffer a heavier punishment because where they are more suited to do this by special privilege. It is thefore not surprising, they said, that punishment of the body should follows removal from the order. This itself is not only proved in law, but even by real examples. In reference amonst the Levites in the Old Testament it was noted that culprits guilty of heinous crimes, the death of the body followed. Or those crimes next in likeness mutilation of the members.

The lord Canterbury on the other hand, argued that the holy canons asserted quite the opposite, arguing that it would be entirely unjust, and contrary to those canons, and against God, if on account of the punishment for one offense, two sentences of a person were to follow.  For God does not judge twice in any case. For that which the church has already judged, he said, it is either just or unjust, But you will not grant an injustice, and then say justice has been done. That sentence since it does not contain absolution, it contains damnation.  If therefore the sinner has been condemned, and then dismissed from clerical service [degraded], a second judgment and punishment for same sin must not be begun. Towards these matters we must beware that by giving our consent, he said, we oppress and destroy the liberty of the Church. We must follow the example of our most high priest, whom we are bound by our office to serve even unto death. For whom we have, however, not yet gone even part of the way towards that death.

To this the bishops replied that the loss of this liberty of the Church would not bring any danger to it. "But" they said "it is better rather, it is lost, than we all perish." Let us therefore do what the king has asked us to do. Otherwise by fleeing we may perish, so let us have regard to our lives. On the other hand those who consent to the King, by inheritance, will possess the sanctuary of God, and shall sleep safe in the possession of their churches. The wickedness also the many things of this time have to be taken for granted. [For this is said to be because of the schism, which was then in the Roman church, which was certainly the case with the  antipope in Germany.]These things the bishops said, as if the evils of the day were not sufficient, and that by the wickedness of the bishops, the same might be increased.

Towards these the Lord of Canterbury, fired with the zeal of the house of God, answered 

I see, he said, you seem to have come with an inertia to sustain your own comfort, wealth, and your wardrobes whilst the Church of Christ's Bride is suffocated. Who has bewitched you, you senseless pontiffs?  What an injustice to the term which you call prudent management. Why with what foresight which you have designated management but which has uncovered an injustice which you have tried to hide? Why do you call this management,  that which is at the expense of the whole of the church of Christ?  Let matters be called by their real names and not be perverted by things or words. I certainly agree with what you say about the evils of our time. But not because of that to pile up sins on top of sins. God is able to make the conditions for his own church better, even if they did not become worse.  Now is God not able to sanitise the churches, except through the faults of its teachers? I think you were touched with the feelings for Christ's disabilities, as if he is not able to raise up his bride, unless it is with our senses to help us. In fact, God is testing you.

I ask when at what critical moment should criticism be offered to the Bishop?  Shall it be in calm and not crisis? You must admit you have blushed in shame. It stands therefore when the Church has been thrown into disorder, for the pastor of the Church to seek to oppose the danger. For there was no greater merit than that to be found in former times when the bishops spilled their blood on behalf of the church of Christ,  than is also when in our own times for us to shed blood on behalf of the liberty of the Church.  And I indeed, as God is my witness, affirm, that it is not safe for us to withdraw from that direction, which we have received from our holy Fathers. We did not do so in the past, we ought not to expose anyone to the death penalty, since we are not even allowed to take part in judgements involving the shedding of blood.

These words were soon reported back to the king. Seeing immediately there were very many of the Church, and I do not speak of unbending rods, but who are more like reeds which are blown about by and tremble in the wind; hearing that they were not in everything obedient to the wish of the king he was certain that if they were confronted with threats they might at once give in, were it not that they had felt deeply the perseverance of the Lord of Canterbury. The king, however, seeing, that in this motion in which he was determined to make progress he was not stronger he quickly turned towards another asking them whether or not they would each uphold his royal customs in every way. The Lord Canterbury, after taking counsel replied, 

"Yes," he said, "in everything, saving yet in all matters and everyone concerning our order."

And then after this the king asked the same of each those present in turn, but when asked on this they each spoke with one voice. Over and over again, he tried to get this promise from the Lord Canterbury, whether he might truly dutifully obey his royal customs absolutely without the addition of  "saving of his order" ; but was unable to obtain what he wanted from the vicar of Christ. After this the king became sorely troubled, and all Jerusalem with him, And suddenly in that same spirit burst forth angrily, and departed from London leaving the whole of these businesses unfinished, and discussions hanging.

You could see it in the people as they whispered, and commotion amongst the clergy. Bishops frightened and trembling that followed his departure, each fearing that they did not want to be the first to discover to hear how, from the king that all their wordly goods had been forfeit. Soon after, they organised a secret meeting with the king, in which all mention of God and His order was set aside. And so easily did they proffer their assent to the king's petition, in order that it might be seen that they had longed to agree about this before. Indeed even those amongst them considered to be the more knowledgeable, even they became more prone to agreeing to the overthrow of the freedom of the church. Nevertheless, the archbishop of  Canterbury sat down, looking to both his right and left. Seeing there was no one that wanted to know him, he sought moral support from amongst the friars: even they, however, turned their backs and no longer walked with him now.

Seeing finally the peace of the sinners, and himself critically threatened from every side, he spoke "One thing, I have said, I cannot keep to any of the royal customs of an earthly king in any way, unless it is in all things without prejudice to my order. But, on account of this I have incurred the wrath of the king: on account of this my bishops have abandoned me: on account of this  I have offended in the eyes of the whole world. But why? Whether the world likes it or not, when I as a mortal make a bargain as a man, not at any time can I forget my God and my order, God willing. Far be it from me to any mortal man's fear or favour for it to be discovered that I have scorned God. Were an angel  to come down from heaven, and do so much a thing as to give me this advice, let him be anathema."

Sources 

'Summa Causae Inter Regem et Thomam' 

MTB, IV, pp. 201–5. 

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k50321s/f234.image

Migne (1854). Patrologiae cursus completus: sive Bibliotheca universalis. Tomus CXC. J. P. Migne. pp. 395–. 

Universität Zürich Corpus Corporum

William FitzStephen

De tentatione diaboli per malos et iniustos homines facta.

http://goo.gl/rfocz1

J.A. Giles, ed. (1845). Patres ecclesiae anglicanae : Aldhelmus, Beda, Bonifacius, Arcuionus, Lanfrancus, Anselmus, Thomas Cantuariensis. J.-H. Parker. pp. 251–.

Alternative Source

By William FitzStephen

Edwardus Grim; Alanus Tewkesberiensis abbas; Parisiensis Anonymus; decanus Salisburiensis Johannes (1845). Vita S. Thomae (etc.). Parker. pp. 209-214.

References

Dudley Julius Medley (1926). Original illustrations of English constitutional history (2nd Edition ed.). Methuen & co., ltd.. pp. 72–3.

http://archive.org/stream/originalillustra00medluoft#page/72/mode/2up

Frank Barlow (1990). Thomas Becket. University of California Press. pp. 95–. ISBN 978-0-520-07175-9.

Frank Barlow (28 June 2011). Edward the Confessor. Yale University Press. pp. 326–. ISBN 978-0-300-18382-5.

Michael Staunton (2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 79–. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6. 

Michael Staunton (2006). Thomas Becket and His Biographers. Boydell Press. pp. 110–. ISBN 978-1-84383-271-3. 

James J. Spigelman (2004). Becket & Henry: The Becket Lectures. James Spigelman. pp. 113–. ISBN 978-0-646-43477-3.

Anne Duggan (2004). Thomas Becket. Bloomsbury USA. pp. 39–. ISBN 978-0-340-74137-5.

Guy, John (5 April 2012). Thomas Becket: Warrior, Priest, Rebel, Victim: A 900-Year-Old Story Retold. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 502–. ISBN 978-0-14-193328-3.

John Allen Giles (1846). The Life and Letters of Thomas à Becket. Chapter XVI: Council of Westminster: Whittaker and Company. pp. 176–.

William Holden Hutton (1926). Thomas Becket. Cambridge University Press. pp. 78–. ISBN 978-1-107-66171-4.

James Craigie Robertson (1859). Becket, archbishop of Canterbury: A biography. J. Murray. pp. 89–.

S. Thomas of Canterbury Hutton, William Holden (1899)

https://archive.org/stream/sthomascanterbu00huttgoog#page/n56/mode/1up

Frank Barlow (2011). Edward the Confessor. Yale University Press. pp. 325–. ISBN 978-0-300-18382-5.

Michael Staunton (2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 79–83. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6.

18. The Council of Westminster (October 1163)

Materials IV, 201-5

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k50321s/f234.image

University of Zurich: Corpus Corporum

(Patrologia Latina Tomus 190 0396B)

VI. Summa Causae Inter Regem Et Thomam.

http://goo.gl/jdOswx

Guernes (de Pont-Sainte-Maxence); trans. Janet Shirley (1975). Garnier's Becket Phillimore. pp. 23–. ISBN 978-0-85033-200-1.

Lines 826-880

Stanzas 166-176

Guernes (de Pont-Sainte-Maxence) (1922). La vie de saint Thomas Becket. C.W.K. Gleerup. p. 30.

https://archive.org/stream/laviedesaintthom00gueruoft#page/30/mode/2up

Whitelock, Brett, and Brooke, eds., Councils and Synods, Volume 1 part 2 1066–1204 pp. 848-52
#158 1 OCTOBER 1163 - ROYAL COUNCIL OF WESTMINSTER. ISBN: 978-0198223948