Clergy in Richard III and Henry V

Hello students of literature

I need some help with some work involving the Shakespeare plays Richard III and Henry V, more specifically the clergy.

I'm going to talk about to what extent the members of the clergy are corrupt (or not corrupt) in the plays.

In Henry V I would say Ely and Canterbury are corrupt due to the fact that they try to prevent a bill that damages their personal wealth becoming law. However they do loyally serve their king aside from this. Fair or not?

As regards to Richard III I need a bit more help. Anything backed up with quotes would be a huge help.

Thank you.

Can no one help me?

Look at the end of act 3. Richard uses the archbishop to convince the commoners that he is pious, humble and worthy of being king. The clergy is not corrupt as it is weak.

Also, calling the clergy corrupt in Henry V is a bit of an overs implication and taking a staunchly anticlerical position. Neither history nor Shakespeare is that black and white.