Canon Richard Dixon: "History of the Church of England," 1.93ff.

 

94-105. May 1532. Gamemanship—back-and-forth. The Convocation makes its answer to the Tudor and counselors. The Convocation met general charges by general denials and the demand of proofs. Convocation defended their liberty to make laws by antiquity (95). And by the argument that if the laws of the realm and of the Church were made according to God's law, there could be no conflict between them. Note bene: this gets little play, but Dr. Cranmer’s caveats at his consecration, we believe, were not self-initiated, but crafted with Royal good pleasure. The Convocation’s address is taken unfavorably by the King (97). Gardiner's letter to the King, 98. Second Answer of the Ordinaries, 99. They urged the King he ought not desire them to abandon their ancient rights (100). They offered to publish no more laws without his consent and to fix their existing laws, if offensive. They aimed at a compromise: to make laws by themselves, but not to publish them without the King's consent. Again, Gardiner is in Henry’s crosshairs and he writes an unctuous letter at self-exoneration. The King sends them three peremptory Articles, 102. Also (vai Crumwell?), Henry is said to have discovered that their oath to the Pope diminished his prerogative (103). “That he found upon enquiry that all the prelates, whom he had looked on as wholly his subjects, were but half his subjects; for at their consecration they swore an oath contrary to that which they swore to the Crown: so that it seemed they were the Pope's subjects rather than his; which he referred to their care, that such order might be taken in it, that the King might not be deluded” (103-104). From other sources, we recall that Warham was watching all this and intel reports may have reached Cranmer on the Continent about these matters. ??.