VIE AND 
bislhops should take public offenders out of custor 
absolve them, and let them go, was not to be borne.” 
It was against law, against usage, against rcason. 
It could not be. The laity were generally of the 
king’s opinion. Of the bishops some four or five (if 
Foliot was right, ncarly all of them) agreed privately 
with Becket, but dared not avoW their opinions. 
The archbishop perceived that the game was lost 
unless he could himself sce the popc and speak to 
him. In direet violation of his oatlı not to leave the 
realm without the king’s consent, he attempted to 
steal over from Sandwich, but the boatımen r1ecog- 
nized him midway across the Channel and brought 
him back. 
1 Te objeetion of Becket to 
the submission of the clergy to 
the secular courts was not eN- 
tirely disinterested, John of Ox- 
ford explained it to the Kmpress 
Matilda: * Asserens universa 
quacungue Ihncilis montis ela- 
tione sturlioque dominationis 
inchoata: ecelesiasticam etiam 
lihbertatem non a4 animarum In- 
erum, sed ad augmentum pecuni- 
arum episcopos Vestros intorquere 
fam ipse quam nlli nuntii regis 
allırmant: mn Anglik namquo 
delingquentium culpre apud epis- 
sopos Aaceusatorunmz, NoN muletan- 
tur injunetione peenitentize, sul 
“ ..lone  pevunfe. 2 ‚zolas vi 
- Deck 
.-