tradehant The Seventh was at Nice under Constantine and his Mother Irene where 367 Bishops were assembled against the Adversaries of Images whom they subjected to their Anathema 2 Of Particular Synods one was held in the Temple of the Apostles in Constantinople under the Patriarch Photius which was called the First and Second Another under Leo and Constantine in the most Famous Temple Sanctae Dei Sapientiae or Sanctae Sophiae which confirmed the Seventh Synod Another at Ancyra more ancient than the first Universal Synod Another at Caesarea more ancient than that at Ancyra Another at Gangra after the Nicene against Eustachius who despised Marriage and taught things not consonant to Ecclesiastical Tradition Another at Antioch a City in Syria where in truth were two Synods the one under Aurelianus against Paulus Samosatenus who said that Christ was meer Man the other under Constantius Son to Constantine the Great Another at Laodicea scituate in Phrygia Pacatiana Another at Sardica that when Constantius embraced the foresaid Sect his Brother Constans Emperour of Old Rome by his Letters threatning him with a War if he would not desist from perverting the Church his Answer was That he sought no other Doctrine than what was most agreeable to the Catholick Faith whereupon by their and the Bishop of Romes appointment 341 Bishops were Conven'd in a Synod which having established the power and authority of the Nicene Synod did constitute divers Canons for the Church Another at Carthage under Theodosius where 217 Bishops were assembled and with them the Popes Vicegerents this Carthage was part of Charchedon and that a Province of Africa 3 The Canons of the Fathers are taken according to the Roman computation out of the Epistles partly of Dionysius Alexandrinus partly of Petrus Alexandrinus partly of the Wonder-working Gregorius partly also out of the Epistles of Bazil or Basilius the Great partly out of the Epistle of Gregory or Gregorius Nyssenus to the B. of Melita partly out of the Responses of Timotheus Alexandrinus partly out of the Responses of the Constantinopolitan Synod to certain Monks Nicholaus the Patriarch being President partly out of the Epistles of Cyril or Cyrillus and partly out of the Epistles of Nicephorus the Patriach 4 The Canons of the Holy Apostles a book falsly ascribed to the Apostles are in number Eighty Five according to a modest Computation if you have any Faith to spare at least enough to believe the Church of Rome in that as in other Points infallible But the Canons indeed of the Apostles which are of Order and External Government do oblige as Dr. Taylor says the Conscience by being accepted in several Churches not by their first Institution and were fitted only to Times and Places and present Necessities For says he the Apostolical Decree of Abstaining from Blood was observed by more Churches than those of Syria and Cilicia to which the Canon was directed and the Colledge of Widows or Deaconesses derived it self into the manners of the Western Churches And the Apostles in their first Preaching and Conversation in Jerusalem instituted a coenobitick life and had all things in Common with Believers indeed no man was obliged to it Of the same nature were their Canons Counsels and Advices The Canon concerning Widows Let not a Widow be chosen under 60 years and yet Justinian suffered one of 40 years old to be chosen Novel 123. c. 12 13. And the Canon of the Apostles forbidding to eat things strangled is no where observed in the Western Churches of Christendom In the beginning of the Fourth Century above 1300 years since we find our Bishops British Bishops at the Councils of Arles Nice Sardis and Ariminum a clear Evidence of the flourishing state of Christianity so long since in this Island At Arles in France conven'd touching the Donatists appeared for the Britains Eborius Bishop of York Restitutus Bishop of London Adelfius Bishop of the City called the Colony of London which some suppose to be Colchester others Maldon in Essex Sacerdos a Priest both by Name and Office Arminius a Deacon An. 313. At the Synod of Nice in Bithynia An. 325. to suppress Arrianism were British Bishops present as Athanasius and Hilary Bishop of Poictiers affirm At the Council of Sardis in Thracia conven'd by Constanitus and Constans Sons to Constantine the Great the British Bishops were likewise present when the Arrians were condemn'd and Athanasius acquitted And at the Council of Ariminum in Italy the British Bishops were also present who according to Athanasius were about An. 360. summoned to divers Forein Councils in remote parts As also here at home in and after the Seventh Century were divers particular Councils and Synods the first whereof according to Stapleton out of Bede called The first of the English Nation was conven'd at Hertford by Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury who succeeded Deusdedit in that See in this Council the Observation of Easter was settled according to the Romish Rite yet whosoever will have this Council to be as aforesaid The first of the English Nation must understand it the First whose Canons are compleatly extant Bede lib. 4. c. 5. About the year 740 Ethelbald King of Mercia with Cuthbert Archbishop of Canterbury called a Council at Cliffe in Kent the acts of which Synod were 31 Canons among which is was inter alia Ordain'd That Prayers should publickly be made for Kings and Princes But some few years before this the said Theodorus held a Synod or Council of Bishops at Hatfield by authority whereof he divided the Province of Mercia which Sexwolphus then governed alone into five Bishopricks viz. to Chester Worcester Lichfield Cedema in Lindsey and to Dorchester In the year 692 a great Council was held at Becanceld by Withred King of Kent and Bertuald Archbishop of Britain wherein many things were concluded in favour of the Church About the same time a Council was held at Berghamsteed by the said Withred King of Kent at which Council Bishop Wilfrid was restored to York whence he departed for Rome upon the endeavours which Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury had used to have that Diocess of York divided In the year 801 Ethelard the Archbishop called a Synod at Clivesho in Kent where by power from the Pope he rivited that 's the word the Archbishoprick into the City of Canterbury There was likewise at Celichyth an eminent Council under Wolphred who succeeded Ethelard Archbishop of Canterbury But nigh one hundred years before this viz. about the year 709 a Synod was assembled at Alncester in Worcestershire to promote the building of Evesham-Abbey And not long after another Synod was called at London to introduce the Doctrine of Image-Worship into England now first beginning to appear in the publick practice thereof Also above one hundred years before that viz. about the year 601. Augustine by the aid of Ethelbert King of Kent called a Council of Saxon and British Bishops to meet in the Confines of the Mercians and
whatsoever Name or Names they may be called in their Convocation in time coming which alwaies shall be assembled by the Kings Writ unless the same Clergy may have the Kings most Royal assent and License to make promise and execute such Canons Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodical upon pain of every one of the said Clergy doing the contrary to this Act and thereof convicted to suffer Imprisonment and making Fine at the Kings will Since this year from Archbishop Cranmer to this day all Convocations are to have the Kings leave to debate on matters of Religion and their Canons besides his Royal assent an Act of Parliament for their Confirmation And as to the General Councils there are not any of them of use in England except the first Four General Councils which are established into a Law by King and Parliament The Learned Bishop Prideaux in his Synopsis of Councils gives us the definition of Synodographie and says It is such a Methodical Synopsis of Councils and other Ecclesiastical Meetings as whereby there may be a clear discovery to him that doubts how any Case may be enquired after and what may be determined concerning the same And then immediately after gives us the definition of a Council which he calls a Free Publick Ecclesiastical Meeting especially of Bishops as also of other Doctors lawfully deputed by divers Churches for the examining of Ecclesiastical Causes according to the Scriptures and those according to the power given by Common Suffrages without favour of parties to be determined in matters of Faith by Canons in cases of Practice by Presidents in matters of Discipline by Decrees and Constitutions Of these Councils he observes some to have been Judaical others Apostolical others Oecumenical some Controverted others Rejected and some National to all which he likewise adds Conferences 1 Under the Title of Judaical Councils he comprehends the more solemn Meetings about extraordinary affairs for the Confirming Removing or Reforming any thing as the matter required Such he observes to have been at Sichem under Josuah and Eleazer Josh 24. At Jerusalem the first under David Gad and Nathan being his Assistants 1 Chro. 13. At Carmelita under Ahab and Elias 1 King 18. At Jerusalem the Second under Hezekiah 2. Chro. 29. At Jerusalem the Third under Josiah and Hilkiah 2 Kin. 33. 2 Chro. 34. At Jerusalem the Fourth under Zorobabel and Ezra and the Chief of the Jews that return'd from the Captivity of Babylon And lastly that which is called the Synod of the Wise under John Hircanus Genebrand Chron. l. 2 p. 197. 2 The Apostolical Councils he observes to have been for the substituting of Matthias in the place of Judas Act. 1. For the Election of Seven Deacons Act. 6. For not pressing the Ceremonial Law Act. 15. 11. For the toleration of some Legal Ceremonies for a time to gain the Weak by such condescension Matth. 21. 18. For composing the Apostles Creed For obtruding to the Church 85 Canons under the notion of the Apostles authority concerning which there are many Controversies Lastly for the Meeting at Antioch where among Nine Canons the Eighth commanded Images of Christ to be substituted in the room of Heathenish Idols the other pious Canons being destitute of the Synods authority vid. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 19. Longum p. 147. 3 Of Oecumenical or General Councils some were Greek or Eastern others were Latin or Western The more Famous of the Oecumenical Greek Councils were the Nicene the first of Constantinople the first of Ephesus the first of Chalcedon Of Constantinople the second of Constantinople the third The Nicene the second The more Famous of the Oecumenical Latin Councils were at Ariminum the Lateran at Lions at Vienna the Florentine the Lateran the fifth and lastly at Trent 4 Of Controverted Councils if that distinction be admissable according to the Classis thereof digested by Bellarmine the Computation is at Constantinople the fourth at Sardis at Smyrna at Quinisext at Francfort at Constance and at Basil 5 Of Rejected Councils whereby are intended such as either determine Heretical Opinions or raise Schisms the Computation is at Antioch at Milain at Seleucia at Ephesus the second at Constantinople at Pisa the first and at Pisa the second 6 Of National Synods which comprehend the Provincials of every Metropolitan or Diocesan Bishop the distribution is into Italian Spanish French German Eastern African Britain 7 To these may be added Ecclesiastical Conferences which were only certain Meetings of some Divines wherein nothing could be Canonically determined and therefore needless to be here particularly inserted vid. B. Prideaux Synops of Counc vers fin The grand Censure of the Church whereby it punisheth obstinate Offenders is by way of Excommunication which though the Canonists call Traditio Diabolo or giving the Devil as it were Livery and Seizin of the Excommunicate person yet the Romanists have a Tradition that St. Bernard Excommunicated the Devil himself Sanctus Bernardus plenus virtutibus quadam die praesentibus Episcopis clero populo Excommunicavit quendam Diabolum Incubum qui quandam mulierem in Britannia per septeunium vexabat sic Liberata est ab eo Chron. Jo. Bromton de Temp. H. 1. A miraculous Excommunication and a Sovereign Remedy against Diabolical incubations The Excommunication which St. Oswald pronounced against one who would not be perswaded to be reconciled to his Adversary had nothing so good though a more strange effect for that Excommunicated him out of his Wits and had it not been for Wolstan who as miraculously cur'd him you might have found him if not in Purgatory then in Bedlam at this day Illi cujus es says Sanctus Oswaldus Te commendo carnem Sathanae tuam trado Statim ille dentibus stridere spumas jacere caput rotare incipit Qui tamen à Wolstano sanatus cum Pacem adhuc recusaret iterum tertio est arreptus simili modo quousque ex corde injuriam remitteret offensam If you have not faith enough to believe this on the Credit of Abbot Brompton who Chronicled from the year 588 in which St. Austin came into England to the death of King Richard the First which was in the year 1198. if you have not I say faith enough for the premisses you are not like to be supplied with any on this side Rome unless you have it from Henry de Knighton Canon of Leyster who wrote the Chronicle De Eventibus Angliae from King Edgars time to the death of King Richard the Second for he in his Second Book de Temp. W. 2. doth put it under his infallible pen for an undeniable Truth And indeed is much more probable than what the said Abbot reports touching St. Austins raising to life the Priest at Cumpton in Oxfordshire 150 years after his death to absolve a penitent Excommunicate that at the same time rose also out of his grave and walked out of the Church at St. Austins command That no
such a malign influence upon succeeding Princes in After-ages and other Kingdoms and also upon the Popes as some Historiographers do more than conjecture is not so evident as that which is reported by Ingulphus Abbot of Crowland touching Eight Churches to have been Appropriated to that Abbey by several Saxon Kings and though by their Charters yet whether by such exclusively to all Ecclesiastical Authority is not so certain as that William the Conqueror without asking leave of the Pope Appropriated three Parish-Churches to the Abbey of Battaile which he built in memory of his Conquest and his youngest Son H. 1. nigh twenty in one day to the Cathedral of Sarum by his Letters Patents together with the Tithes of those Parishes which his elder Brother William Sirnamed Rufus had depopulated and disecclesiated in New-Forrest in Hantshire Notwithstanding which the Pope who understood his Supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical better than to part with it upon any Presidents of Temporal Usurpations doth frequently in his Decretals without any contradiction rather assume than arrogate this Right unto himself as a Prerogative of the Apostolick See and granted to several Religious Orders this Priviledge of taking Ecclesiastical Benefices at Lay-mens hands by the mediation of the Diocesan who at a moderate and indifferent rate as one Moity of the Annual profits of the Benefice was to be a Medium or Expedient between the Religious House and the Incumbent but in process of time partly by the remisness of the Bishops in that point and partly by the Covetousness of the Monks and Friers in those days the Incumbents proportion became at last so inconsiderable that Pope Vrban the Fifth by his Legate Othobon about the year 1260 was forced to inhibit all the Bishops here in England from Appropriating any more Churches to any Monastery or othes Religious Houses save only in such cases where Charity might prevail in derogation of Law and under this Proviso also That the Bishops should assign a competent proprotion of the Parochial Fruits for the Maintenance of the Incumbent according to the annual value thereof in case the new Appropriators did it not within Six months next after such Appropriation but this Constitution not taking the effect expected a convenient Maintenance for the Vicar was otherwise provided for by Two Statutes the one made by R. 2. the other by his Successor H. 4. So that upon the whole it may be rationally inferr'd that these Appropriations originally came partly by the Act of Ecclesiasticks and partly by the Laity But what way soever they came this is and hath been held for Law within this Realm That albeit the Pope takes upon him to be Supream Ordinary yet no Appropriations made by him or by any Authority derived from him were ever allowed or approved of by the Laws of this Realm it being held That no Appropriations within this Realm can be made but by the King or by Authority derived from him and by his License and that all other Appropriations are void in Law An Appropriation may be by the King Sole where he is Patron but it may not be by the Patron Sole Grendon's Case in Plowden 17 E. 3. 39. An Appropriation cannot be without the King's License Ward 's Case Poph. Rep. Nor will the Objection hold against the King to say No man can make an Appropriation of any Church having Cure of Souls the same being a thing meerly Ecclesiastical and to be made by some Ecclesiastical person but he only who hath Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for such Jurisdiction the King hath and is such a Spiritual person as may of himself Appropriate any Church or Advowson because in him resides the Ecclesiastical Power and Jurisdiction And therefore in a Case of Commendams it was long since held That an Appropriation made by the Pope could not be good without the King's License The like in a Case of Avoidance was vouched in Cawdrie's Case That the Entry into a Church by the Authority of the Pope only was not good and that he could not Appropriate a Church to Appropriatees to hold to their own use And in Gyendon's Case it was Resolved by the Justices That the Ordinary Patron and King ought to be assenting to every Appropriation and that the Authority which the Pope had usurped in this Realm was by Parliament 25 H. 8. acknowledged to be in the King who as Supream Ordinary may Appropriate without the Bishop's Assent 2. It seems therefore without any contradiction most evident That Appropriation or Impropriation at the Original thereof was when the Religious Houses of the Romish Church and the Religious persons as Abbots Priors and the like had the Advowson of any Parsonage to them and their Successors obtaining License of their Holy Father the Pope as also of Kings and of their Ordinaries that they and their Successors should from thenceforth be the Parsons thereof that it should thenceforth be a Vicarage and that a Vicar should serve the Cure So that at the beginning of this Spiritual Monopoly of Appropriations they were made only to such Spiritual persons as were qualified to Administer the Sacramental Ordinances and perform Divine Service Afterwards the Grant thereof was gradually enlarged and extended to Deans and Chapters though Bodies Politick and as such not capable of performing such Divine Services yea and which was most Ridiculous as well as Impious to Nunus which were Prioresses to some Nunnerics but not Female-Preachers as in these daies All which was under a Pretence of maintaining Hospitality and to supply all defects hereby occasioned there must be the Invention of a Vicar as the Appropriators Deputy to serve them and the Cure for which he had and hath the Tithe of Mint and Cummin and such other small ossals of Tithes as might be spared out of the weightier Granaries thereof without breach of the Laws of Hospitality thereby Sacrilegiously robbing the Church to enrich themselves Thus the poor Vicar shall have something like a certain portion of the Benefice whilst the Abbot and the Covent and their Lay-Successors shall be the Parsons and receive the main Profits and so live by the Altar without waiting on it and be Re-baptized by the Law with the name of Parsons Imparsonces This was that Anciently which we now call Appropriation which cannot be made to begin in the Parson's Life-time without his Assent and is so called because they hold the Profits ad proprium suum usum but if such Advowsons happen to be recovered by Ancient Title then and in such case the Appropriation of the Parsonage is annulled 3. So that from the Premisses it is evident That this Appropriation or Impropriation is an Annexation of an Ecclesiastical Benefice which originally was as it were in nullius Patrimonio to the proper and peculiar use and benefit of some Religious House Bishoprick Dean and Chapter Colledge c. Quod Divini juris est id nullius est in bonis Instit de
Men which belong to the Blessed Hill They abstained from things that have life and some of them from Marriage One Dosithens a Samaritan is supposed to be the first Founder of the Samaritam Heresies and the first among them that rejected the Prophets as not having spoken by the Holy Ghost There were four sects of Samaritan Hereticks according to Epiphanius each of them holding their different Heresies in some respects and having in other respects certain Heretical Tenents common to them all By all which premisses it is most evident that the Prince of Darkness and the Father of Lyes hath had in all Ages Nations and Churches his Emissaries to infect them with Heretical and Blasphemous Erros but the Gates or Power of Hell to this day never could nor to Eternity ever shall prevail against the Truth CHAP. XLI Of Councils Synods and Convocations 1. The several kinds of Councils and Synods 2. What Canons in force in the Realm of Primo Ed. 6. Also how the Canons entituled Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum became abortive 3. That part of the Canon Law is part of the Law of England 4. Convocation in England what how and by what Authority and for what ends conven'd also of what Members it doth consist with the Authority thereof 5. Convocations and Provincial Synods of very great Antiquity in England have been ever call'd by the Kings Writ their Priviledges 6. The Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions may not be repugnant either to the Kings Prerogative or to the Laws Statutes or Customes of this Realm 7. Lindwood's Method of Provincial Synods in this Realm and under what Archbishops 8. The four several kinds of Councils and Synods in general 9. A compendious Catalogue thereof when and where held by and under whom conven'd with the principal matters therein treated and determined 1. OF Councils or Synods there are four kinds viz. 1 Oecumenical as being called out divers Nations 2 National as out of divers Provinces both these kinds of Councils or Synods were ever assembled by Imperial Regal or Papal Authority 3 Provincial as out of divers Dioceses conven'd by Metropolitans or Patriarchs 4 Diocesan as out of one Diocese onely assembled by the Bishop thereof The frequent celebration of Synods the Council of Basil calls praecipuam agri Domini culturam Touching Synods vid. Duar. de Sacr. Eccl. minist et benefic 2. In the Reign of King Hen. 8. the Bishops and Clergy in the Convocation an 1532. oblig'd themselves neither to make nor execute any Canons or Constitutions Ecclesiastical but as they were thereto enabled by the Kings Authority it was by them desired by him assented unto and confirm'd in Parliament that all such Canons and Constitutions Synodal and Provincial as were before in use and neither repugnant to the word of God the Kings prerogative Royal or the known Laws of the Land should remain in force until a Review thereof were made by 30 persons of the Kings appointment which Review not having been made from that time to the first year of King Edward 6. All the said old Canons and Constitutions so restrained and qualified did then still remain in force as before they were For this consult the Act of Parliament of 25 H. 8. c. 1. And in the Third year of the said King Edward 6. there passed an Act in Parliament For enabling the King to nominate Eight Bishops and as many Temporal Lords and Sixteen Members of the Lower House of Parliament for Reviewing of such Canons and Constitutions as remained in force by virtue of the Statute made in the 25th year of King H. 8. and fitting them for the use of the Church in all times succeeding According to which Act the King directed a Commission to Archbishop Cranmer and the rest of the Persons whom he thought fit to nominate to that employment and afterwards appointed a Sub-Committee of Eight persons to prepare the Work and make it ready for the rest that it might be dispatch'd with the more expedition which said Eight persons were the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Goodrick Bishop of Ely Dr. Cox the Kings Almoner Peter Martyr Dr. in Divinity William May and Rowland Taylor Drs. of Laws John Lucas and Richard Goodrick Esquires by whom the Work was undertaken and digested fashioned according to the method of the Roman Decretals and called by the name of Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum c But not being Commissionated hereunto till the Eleventh of November in the year 1551. they either wanted time to Communicate to the chief Commissioners by whom it was to be presented to the King or found the King encumber'd with more weighty Affairs than to attend the perusal thereof And so the King dying before he had given life unto it by his Royal Assent and Signiture the design miscarried and never since thought fit to be resumed in the following Times by any of those who have had the Government of the Church or were concerned in the honour and safety thereof 3. It is asserted by good Authority That if the Canon Law be made part of the Law of this Realm then it is as much the Law of the Land and as well and by the same Authority as any other part of the Law of the Land Likewise in the Case of Shute against Higden touching Voidance of a Former Benefice by being Admitted and Instituted into a Second and that by the Ancient Canon Law received in this Kingdom This says the same Authority is the Law of the Kingdom in such cases And in the Case of Hill against Good the same Author doth further assert That a Lawful Canon is the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament And whatever is the Law of the Kingdom is as much the Law as any thing else is so for what is Law doth not suscipere magis minus Which Premisses though they may seem yet are not inconsistent with what Sr. Ed. Coke says viz. That the Laws of England are not derived from any Forein Law either Canon Civil or other but a special Law appropriated to this Kingdom That it may be said of its Law as of its situation Et penitus toto divisos Orbo Britannos 4 Convocation is the highest Ecclesiastical Court or Assembly called and convened in time of Parliament by the Kings Writ directed to the Archbishops consisting of all the Clergy of both Provinces either Personally or Representatively present in the Upper House of the Archbishops and Bishops and the Lower House of the other Clergy or their Proctors chosen and appointed to appear for Cathedral or other Collegiate Churches and for the Common Clergy of every Diocess with a Prolocutor of each House and President of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury to consult of matters Ecclesiastical and thereon to Treat Agree Consent and Conclude as occasion requires on certain Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical to be ratified and confirmed by the Royal Assent They were Anciently called
Church-gemote Int. Leges H. 1. c. 8. The Convocation is under the power and Authority of the King 21 Ed. 4. 45. b. Assembled only by the Kings Writ 13 Ed. 3. Rot. Parl. M. 1. vid. Stat. 25 H. 8. c. 19. The King having directed his Writ therein assigning the time and place to each of the Archbishops to the effect aforesaid the Archbishop of Canterbury doth thereupon direct his Letters to the Bishop of London as his Dean Lindw Provin Sec. 1. de Poenis ver Tanquam in Gloss First Citing himself peremptorily then willing him to Cite in like manner all the Bishops Deans Archdeacons Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and generally all the Clergy of his Province to the Place at the day in the said Writ prefixed withal directing that one Proctor for every Cathedral or Collegiate Church and two for the other Clergy of each Diocess may suffice In pursuance whereof the Bishop of London directs his Letters accordingly willing them to certifie the Archbishop the Names of all such as shall be so Monished by them in a Schedule annexed to their Letters Certificatory whereupon the Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and the other Churches having Elected their Proctors it is certified to the Bishop who makes due Returns thereof which method is likewise observed in the other Province of York It is said That these Proctors anciently had Place and Vote in the Lower House of Parliament a good expedient for the maintenance and preservation of the Liberties of the Church The Prolocutor of the Lower House of Convocation is immediately at the first Assembly by the motion of the Bishops chosen by that Lower House and presented to the Bishops as their Prolocutor by whom they intend to deliver their Resolutions to the higher House and to have their own House specially ordered and governed His Office is to cause the Clerk to call the Names of the Members of that House as oft as he shall see cause likewise to see all things propounded to be read by him to gather the Suffrages or Votes and the like Trin. 8 Jac. It was Resolved by the two Chief Justices and divers other Justices at a Committee before the Lords of Parliament concerning the Authority of a Convocation 1 That a Convocation cannot Assemble without the Assent of the King 2 That after their Assembling they cannot conferr to constitute any Canons without License del Roy. 3 When upon Conference they conclude any Canons yet they cannot execute any of them without the Royal Assent 4 They cannot execute any after Royal Assent but with these Limitations viz. 1 That they be not against the Kings Prerogative 2 Nor against Statute Law 3 Nor against the Common Law 4 Nor against the Customes of the Realm All which appears by 25 H. 8. c. 19. 19. Ed. 3. Title Quare non Admisit 7. 10. H. 7. 17. Merton cap. 9. By 2 H. 6. 13. a Convocation may make Constitutions to bind the Spiritualty because they all in person or by Representation are present but not the Temporalty Q. And 21 Ed. 4. 47. the Convocation is Spiritual and so are all their Constitutions Vid. The Records in Turri 18 H. 8. 8 Ed. 1. 25 Ed. 1. 11 Ed. 2. 15 Ed. 2. Prohibitio Regis ne Clerus in Congregatione sua c. attemptet contra jus seu Coronam c. By which it appears that they can do nothing against the Law of the Land or the Kings Prerogative 5. The word Convocation and the word Synod are rather words of two Languages than things of two significations for although they have different derivations the former from the Latin the other from the Greek yet in effect they both center in the same thing Convocation à Convocando because they are called together by the Kings Writ It is of very great Antiquity according to Sir Edward Coke who mentions out of Mr. Bede and other Authors and ancient Records such as were nigh a thousand years since and more expresly of one great Synod held by Austins Assembling the Britain Bishops in Council An. 686. And affirms That the Clergy was never Assembled or called together at a Convocation but by the Kings Writ And in the year 727. there was a Convocation of the Clergy called Magna Servorum Dei frequentia It was by the assistance and authority of Ethelbert the first Christian King of Kent that Austin called the aforesaid Assembly of the British Bishops and Doctors that had retained the Doctrine of the Gospel to be held in the borders of the Victians and West-Saxons about Southampton as supposed to which resorted as Mr. Bede says Seven Bishops and many other Learned Divines but this Synod or Convocation suddenly brake up without any thing done or resolved This Assembly was conven'd for determining the time for the Celebration of Easter touching which the Controversie continuing no less than 90 years after was at last concluded at another Convocation purposely called at Whitby by the Authority of Oswy King of Northumberland and whereof the Reverend Cedda newly Consecrated Bishop was Prolocutor and King Oswy himself present at the Assembly Likewise about the year 1172. at Cassils in Ireland a Convocation was held by Authority of King H. 2. soon after he had Conquered that Island which Convocation was for the Reformation of the Irish Church where amongst many other Constitutions it was Decreed That all the Church-Lands and all their Possessions should be altogether free from the Exaction of Secular men and that from thenceforth all Divine things should be handled in every part of Ireland in such sort as the Church of England handleth them Likewise about the year 1175. at London a Synod or Convocation was held at which King H. 2. was present where among other Canons and Constitutions it was both by Authority of the King and Synod decreed That every Patron taking a Reward for any Presentation should for ever lose the Patronage thereof Which together with other Canons then made for the better government of the Church of England were Published by Richard Archbishop of Canterbury with the Kings Assent Likewise a Provincial Synod was held at Oxford by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury under King H. 3. about the year 1222. for Reformation of the Clergy with many others in subordination to the Laws of the Land One special Priviledge of the Convocation appears by 8 H. 6. cap. 1. All the Clergy from henceforth to be called to the Convocation by the Kings Writ and their Servants and Familiars shall for ever hereafter fully use and enjoy such liberty and Immunity in coming tarrying and returning as the Great men and Commonalty of the Realm of England called or to be called to the Kings Parliament have used or ought to have or enjoy 8 H. 6. In Parliamento Statutum est ut Praelati atque Clerici câ—rumque Famulatus cum ad Synodos accesserint iisdem Privilegiis ac
for the defence of the True Faith against those Hereticks who belched out their Blasphemies against the Holy Trinity and the Humane Nature of our Saviour the First whereof was at Nice another after that at Constantinople consisting of a hundred and fifty Bishops the Third at Ephesus of two hundred Bishops the Fourth at Chalcedon where many hundreds of Bishops were present and they all with an unanimous Consent confirmed all those Decrees which were made in the Nicene Council These Four Synods says the said Canon are so to be observed by the Church of Christ ut Quatuor Christi Codices There were many other Synods about the same time but these Four were of the best Authority At Jerusalem in the First Century the Apostles Elders and Brethren held a Council against some Pharisees touching Circumcision in the Fourth year of the Reign of the Emperour Claudius The Apostles celebrated also certain Councils for the substituting of Matthias in the place of Judas Act. 1. For the Election of Seven Deacons Act. 6. For not pressing the Ceremonial Law Act. 15. 11 For the toleration of some Legal Observations only for a time Act. 21. 18. To these some will have to be added a Meeting by the Apostles wherein was composed the Apostles Creed Also another Assembly of the Apostles which did obtrude to the Church 85 Canons under the notion of the Apostles Authority concerning which there are various Controversies In this Century there were also Two Synods summoned in Asia for the Reformation of the Churches and Consecration of Bishops at which John the Evangelist was present Euseb lib. 3. cap. 20. At Ancyra in Galatia in the Second Century was Assembled a Synod of divers Bishops wherein the Figments of Montanus were confuted In this Synod Montanus was Excommunicated and his Heresie condemned Euseb lib. 5. cap. 14. In this Century viz. An. 195. Six several Synods were held about the Observation of Easter viz. At Rome in Victors time at Caesarea in Palestina at Pontus in France where Irenaeus was chief in Ostroena and at Ephesus In all which Synods it is observed That the Bishop of Rome had no more Authority than the other Bishops Euseb lib. 5. cap. 23. In the Third Century there were Eight or Nine Synods of Remark viz. At Bastra where Beryllus was confuted by Origen at Rome in the time of Fabianus where the Schism of Novatus was removed another at Rome in the time of Cornelius wherein Novatus the Heretick was condemned at Antioch where Novatus was condemned again at Carthage which erred about the Re-baptizing of Hereticks at Iconium for receiving of Hereticks after Repentance at Antioch again where Samosatenus was condemned this was about the Twelfth year of Galienus Another at the same place under Aurelianus where he was condemned again and deprived of his Church And at Sinuessa consisting of 300 Bishops where Marcellinus Bishop of Rome was condemned for denying Christ and sacrificing to Idols Tom. 1. Concil At Ancyra in the Fourth Century about the year 308 were assembled Bishops of divers Provinces to constitute a form of Ecclesiastical Discipline according to which they who had Sacrificed to Idols in time of Persecution were to be received again upon their Repentance In this Council also it was Ordained That Chorepiscopi that is Countrey-Bishops or Vicarii Episcoporum should abstain from Ordination of Elders and Deacons and from usurping of dominion over the Preaching Elders who were in Cities This Council was subscribed by Eighteen Bishops At Nicea in Bithynia Assembled by the Authority of Constantine the Great a General Council consisting of 318 Bishops The exact time when it began Historians do not agree some conceive it was A. D. 325. So Hillar Socort l. 2. c. 29. Others 359. So Baron N. 27. Others 330. and others referr the year to 333. But Eusebius computeth it to be in the Twentieth year of Constantines Reign It was also in the time of Julius the First and Silvester Popes Three things especially are reported to be condemned by this Famous Council 1. The Arrian Heresie Blasphemously denying to Son to be Co-eternal and Co-essential with the Father 2. The dissent of the Eastern from the Western Christians about the celebration of the Passover in a manner different from the Jewish Custome and it was concluded in this Council That the Feast of Easter should be kept on the Lords Day and not on the Fourteenth day of the First Month of the Jews called Nisan 3. The Schismatical dissentions of the Melitians and Novatians In this Council the Emperour burnt all the Accusations which the Bishops brought against each other as unworthy to be seen Of this Council it is anciently Recorded That Constantinus Imperator congregavit in Nicaea Civitate 318. Episcopos ex omnibus Nationibus ad Confirmandum fidem Catholicam Ita in Tertio Can. AElfrici ad Wulfin Episcop At Tyrus in the Fourth Century was conven'd a National Council by Constantine the Emperour in the Thirtieth year of his Reign wherein were 60 Bishops from Egypt Lybia Asia and Europe the major part whereof were Arrians who charging Athanasius with false Accusations deposed him in his absence whose Deposition Arsenias subscribed with the same hand which the Arrians alledged was cut off by Athanasius At Gangra in Paphlagonia about the year 324. were assembled about Sixteen Fathers in which Council were damned the heretical Opinions of Eustathius who admiring the Monastick life or favouring the heresie of Eucratitae and the Manichaeans spake against Marriage and eating of Flesh and damned the publick Congregations for the Service of God in Temples saying a man could not be saved unless he forsook all his Possessions About this time there was a Council at Antiochia wherein the Arrians deposed Eustatius As also a Council at Arles wherein Cecilianus was absolved from the Accusation of the Donatists At Eliberis in Spain in the time of Constantines Reign were assembled 19 Bishops and 36 Presbyters Among the 81 Canons made in this Synod it was Ordained in the 36 Canon That nothing that is worshipped should be Pictured on a Wall and that in Private Houses no Idols should be found At Carthage the First Council there wherein St. Cyprian with the Advice of many other Bishops of Numidia Lybia and other parts of Africa Ordained those who were Baptized by Hereticks to be Rebaptized was not held under the Reign of Constantine for that St. Cyprian was Martyred in Valexians daies the Eighth Persecuting Emperour but the first Council of Carthage held in Constantines daies was that wherein the Donatists condemned Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage whose innocency was made afterwards to appear At Antioch the First Council there was held by Arrians under the Reign of Constantinus Son of Constantine in the year 340 or 344. This being one of the Councils which either determine Heretical Opinions or raise up Schisms and Troubles to
and only Six in the other In the First of these Marriage was prohibited the time of Lent and three weeks before the Feast of St. John the Baptist and during the time between Advent and Epiphany At Sidon in the Twentieth year of the Emperour Anastasius a National Council of 80 Bishops was Assembled by the procurement of Xenaeas Bishop of Hierapolis for undoing the Council of Chalcedon which as far as in them lay they did accordingly At Aurelia that is Orleance in France in the 22 d year of Anastasius and under the Reign of Clodoveus King of France were convened 32 Bishops on purpose to settle some Order in Ecclesiastical Discipline which by reason of the irruption of Barbarous people into the Countrey of France had been brought into great disorder At Gerunda and Caesaraugusta in Spain were Two Councils under Theodoricus King of Gothes then Reigning in Spain In the former of these were only Seven Bishops convened who made some Constitutions chiefly about Baptism In the latter were Eleven Bishops and they in opposition to Supersitition and the Manichaean Hereticks prohibited Fasting on the Lords day At Rome in the Sixth Century by the Mandate of Theodoricus King of Gothes Reigning in Italy a Council was Assembled by Hormisda Bishop of Rome wherein the Error of Eutyches is damned de novo and Ambassadours sent to the Emperour Anastasius and to the Bishop of Constantinople to divert them from that Error At Constantinople in the same Century under the Emperour Justinus was another Council convened wherein many great Accusations were exhibited against Severus Bishop of Antioch who was then condemned of Heresie and afterwards Banished by the Emperour At Toledo in the same Century was a Second Council assembled partly for renewing Ancient Constitutions and partly for making New in order to Ecclesiastical Discipline By the first Canon of this Second Council of Toledo Marriage was tolerated to such of the Clergy as on their initiation to that Function protested that they had not the gift of Continency At Constantinople in the year 532. under Justinian was another Council consisting of One hundred Sixty five Bishops Menes being President or rather his Successor Eutychius Patriarch of Constantinople but Pope Vigilius who came to Constantinople to Summon the Emperour yet would not himself be present at the Council lest a seeming yielding to Eutychius might be prejudicial to his Supremacy The Emperour endeavoured to reconcile the Eutychians and the Orthodox for the Publick Tranquillity and therefore would have revoked the Articles concerning the condemning of Theodorus of Mopsuesta and of Theodoret against Cyrillus that was Anathematized But the Western Churches with Pope Vigilius constantly opposed it and confirming not only the Decrees Anathematizing those Hereticks with their Heresies of former Councils but also of Chalcedon The Errors of Origen also expunged which either denied the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the Body or affirmed the Restitution of Reprohates and Devils Consult concering this Council Zonar in vit Justinian If this be that Council which some report to have been at Constantinople under the Emperour Justinian in the year 551. there appears above Twenty years difference in computation of Time This Council is said to have been occasioned chiefly for pacifying the Controversie between Eustochius Bishop of Jerusalem and Theodorus Ascidas Bishop of Caesarea Cappadocia touching Origens Books and Tenets as also for the determination of other Contentious Disputations In this Council a Question was moved Whether men that were dead might lawfully be Cursed and Excommunicated To which it was Answered That as Jâ—sias not only punished Idolatrous Priests while they were alive but also opened the Graves of them that were dead to dishonour them after their death who had dishonoured God in their life time Even so the Memorials of men might be accursed after their death who had disturbed the Church of Christ in their life At Orleans under Childebertus King of France were frequent Meetings and Assemblies of Bishops the 2 3 4 5 Councils whereby many Constitutions were made prohibiting Marriage to Priests and in the Fourth Canon of the Second Council Simony was damned At Overnie in France under Theodobertus King of France the Bishops who were present at the Councils of Orleans did assemble and Ordained That no man should presume to the Office of a Bishop by Favour but by Merit At Tours under Aribertus King of France a Council was held wherein Provision was made against such Poor as wandered out of their Parishes In this Council several Constitutions also were made relating to Bishops and the other Clergy in reference to Marriage At Paris a Council was held wherein order was taken concerning the Admission of Bishops to their Offices and that not to be by favour but with the consent of the Clergy and People At Toledo Assembled a Council of 62 Bishops where Recaredus King of Spain and the whole Nation of the West-Gothes in Spain renounced the Arrian heresie At Constantinople under the Reign of Maruitius a Council was held for trying the Cause of Gregorius Bishop of Antioch accused of Incest but declared to be Innocent and his Accuser scourged with Rods and Banished At Matiscon about the time of Pelagius the Second a Council was held wherein Command was given That none of the Clergy should Cite another having a Spiritual Office before a Secular Judge And that she who is the Wife of a man that becomes a Bishop or a Presbyter should after such Dignity become his Sister and he be changed into a Brother At Matiscon another Council was Convened under Gunthranns King of France in the 24 th year of his Reign wherein it was Ordained That Children should be Baptized at Easter and Whitsontide and that Secular men should reverence the Clergy At Rome in the year 595 and in the Thirteenth year of the Reign of the Emperour Mauritius was a Council assembled of 24 Bishops and 34 Presbyters wherein the first Four General Councils were confirmed and that for Ordination of men in Spiritual no Reward should be given or taken Before the Conclusion of this Sixth Century and precedent to the Councils last mentioned there were some other Councils of less moment such as Concilium Gradense Braccarense Lataranense Lugdunense Pictaviense Metense which being for the most part employed chiefly in damning Old Heresies and in contentious Disputations are here omitted At Rome in the year 607. under Phocas the Emperour a Council of 72 Bishops 30 Presbyters and 3 Deacons was Assembled In this Council the priviledge of Supremacy given by Phocas to the Roman Church was published And in the Eighth that is the last year of Phocas Boniface the Fourth assembled another Council at Rome wherein he gave power to the Monks to Preach Administer Sacraments hear Confessions to Bind and Loose and associate them in equal Authority with the
of a Bishop may not be without the consent of the Dean yet this we find upon Record nigh as Ancient as the former That where at present there was no Dean there the Election of the Bishop hath been by the Canons alone Canonici Saresbirienses Decanum non habentes ad praesens à Rege prius impetrata Licentia Fratrem suum Concanonicum Herebertum Cantuariensem Archidiaconum Assensu Communi solemniter in Episcopum Elegerunt Electionem factam in Publico recitavit Walterus Praecentor Electioni factae praebuit Rex Assensum quam Hubertus Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus Auctoritate propria Confirmavit c. Consonant to which method is the Act of Parliament made in the 25. of H. 8. whereby it is Enacted That on the vacancy of every Bishoprick his Majesty should issue out his Writ of Congé d'Eslire to the Dean and Chapter of the Church so vacant enabling them to proceed to Election of another Bishop which Election being returned by the said Dean and Chapter and ratified by the Royal Assent his Majesty should issue out his Writ to the Metropolitan to proceed to the Confirmation of the party Elected and taking to himself two other Bishops at least to proceed to Consecration in case he had not before been Consecrated Bishop of some other Church The place of Consecration of Bishops was anciently at Canterbury as the Mother-Church not only of that Province but of all England For when in the time of R. 1. An. 1192. a Bishop of Worcester Elect was to be Consecrated and Westminster the place design'd for that solemnity according to the Popes Command it was opposed by the Prior and Covent of Christ-Church in Canterbury and at a time when the Archbishop thereof whose presence could not but have strengthned that opposition was absent yet the said Prior insisting on the Priviledges and Customes of the Church of Canterbury opposed the said place of Consecration as appears by his Letter to the Bishop of Ely the Popes Legate and other Bishops of that Province in haec verba Reverendis in Christo Dominis Fratribus W. Dei gratia Heliensi Episcopo Apostolicae sedis Legato Domini Regis Cancellario caeterisque Episcopis Cantuariensis Ecclesiae Suffraganeis O. Prior Conventus Ecclesiae Christi Cantuariae salutem ab Auctore salutis Noverit Sanctitas vestra Nos ad sedem Apostolicam appellasse ne Wigorniensis Electus alias quam in Ecclesia Cantuariensi sicut moris est Consecretur ne quis vestrum qui indemnitati Ecclesiae Cantuariensis vinculo Professionis providere tenemini alias quam in eadem Ecclesi◠ejus Consecationi interesse praesumat And at a Synod held at Westminster under P. Honorius 2. in the Reign of H. 1. An. 1126. it was Ordained That at the Consecration of Bishops nothing should by way of Offerings be exacted or by force required Statuimus Apostolica Authoritate Decernimus ut in Consecrationibus Episcoporum c. nil omnino per violentiam nisi sponte oblatum fuerit penitus exigatur Simeon Dunelm Hist de Gest Reg. Angl. The like you have Decreed at another Synod held also at Westminster under P. Innocent 2. in King Stephens Reign An. 1138. Apostolica authoritate Sancimus ut in Consecrationibus Episcoporum ne quicquam ab Episcopo vel Ministris ejus exigatur Hist Richard Prioris Hagustald de Gest Reg. Steph. In the year 1123. which was in the Reign of H. 1. at the Council of Three hundred Bishops conven'd at Rome P. Calixtus 2. being President it was Decreed That no Bishop should be Consecrated unless he were first Canonically Elected Nullus in Episcopum nisi Canonice Electum Consecret quod etsi praesumptum fuerit Consecratus Consecrator absque recuperationis spe deponatur dict Sim. Dunelm Hist As that Canon was not in being so the matter thereby ordained in all probability was far from being observed when Plegmundus Archbishop of Canterbury whom P. Formosus honoured with the Pall Consecrated no less than Seven Bishops in one day in the two and twentieth year of King Alured Chron. Johan Bromton Abbatis Jornalensis When a Bishop is Consecrated then may he Consecrate viz. Churches c. and may Ordain Deacons c. But it was long since provided by the Council of Lateran under P. Alexander That the Bishop should not confer Holy Orders on any that were not then or speedily to be provided with an Ecclesiastical Living Episcopus si aliquem sine certo Titulo de quo Necessaria vitae percipiat in Diaconum vel Presbyterum Ordinaverit tam diu ei necessaria subministret donec ei in aliqua Ecclesia Convenientia stipendia militiae clericalis assignet nisi talis forte qui Ordinatur extiterit qui de sua vel paterna haereditate subsidium vitae possit habere Can. 9. And as touching the Bishops Consecrating of Churches it being vulgarly supposed that there is a considerable piece of Superstition therein it cannot but be seasonable here to enquire whether so or no or whether the Consecration of Churches be not truly Primitive according to the Judgment of the Learned Dr. Heylin To which purpose you have here his very words viz. The place of Publick Worship is called generally according to the style of the Ancient Fathers by the name of the Church For Consecrating or setting apart whereof to Religious uses I find says he so great Authority in the Primitive times as will sufficiently free it from the guilt of Popery Witness the Testimony which Pope Pius gives of his Sister Eutorepia in an Epistle to Justus Viennensis An. 158. or thereabouts for setting apart her own House for the use and service of the Church Witness the Testimony which Metaphrastes gives of Felix the First touching his Consecrating of the House of Cicilia about the year 272. And that which Damasus gives unto Marcellinus who succeeded Felix for Consecrating the House of Lucinia for Religions uses Witness the famous Consecration of the Temple of the Holy Martyrs in Jerusalem Founded by Constantine the Great at which almost all the Bishops in the Eastern parts were summoned and called together by the Emperours Writ and finally not to descend to the following Times witness the 89th Sermon of St. Ambrose entituled De Dedicatione Basilicae Preached at the Dedication of a Church built by Vitalianus and Maianus and the Invitation of Paulinus another Bishop of that Age made by Sulpitius Severus his especial Friend Ad Basilicam quae prorexerat in Nomine Domini consummabitur Dedicandum to be present at the Dedication of a Church of his Foundation Heyl. Cyprian Angl. p. 12. The Decree of Faith made by the Council of Trent was attended with no less than Eight Anathematisms the first whereof was against him that shall say that there is no visible Priesthood in the New Testament nor any power to Consecrate c. For in the beginning of that Decree it is affirmed That there is a visible and
Present within Four months next after the Church becomes void but if the Patronage be Ecclesiastical then within Six cap. unico de Jur Patronat in 6. Concerning Appropriations of Churches the first thereof since the Conquest appears to be that of Feversham and Middleton in Kent An. 1070. granted by William the Conquerour to the Abbey of St. Austins in Canterbury in manner following viz. In Nomine c. Ego Willielmus c. ex his quae omnipotens Deus sua gratia mihi largiri est dignatus quaedam concedo Ecclesiae S. Augustini Anglorum Apostoli c. pro salute Animae meae Parentum meorum Predecessorum Successorum haereditario jure haec sunt Ecclesiae Decimae duarum Mansionum viz. Feversham Middleton ex omnibus redditibus qui c. omnibus ibidem appendentibus terra sylva pratis aqua c. Haec omnia ex integro concedo S. Augustino Abbati Fratribus ut habeant teneant possideant in perpetuum which was afterward Confirmed by Pope Alexander the Third and Ratified by Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury together with an Establishment and Ordination of a Vicarage by the said Archiepiscopal Authority in each of the said Churches respectively The like you have for the Appropriating of three other Churches to the same Abbey viz. of Wyvelsberg Stone and Brocland in Kent by the Charter of Ed. 3. above Three hundred years since Confirmed by Pope Clement's Bull and Ratified by Simon Mepham then Archbishop of Canterbury with his Establishment of Three perpetual Vicarages to the said Churches Which Charter is to this effect viz. Nos de gratia nostra speciali pro C. Libris quas praefati Abbas Conventus nobis solvent c. Concessimus Licentiam dedimus pro Nobis haeredibus nostris quantum in Nobis est ejusdem Abbati Conventui quod ipsi Ecclesias praedictas Appropriare eas sic Appropriatas in proprios usus tenere possint sibi Successoribus suis in perpetuum nisi in hoc Quod Nos tempore vacationis Abbatiae praedictae si contigerit Ecclesias praedictas vel aliquam earundem tunc vacare Nos Jus Praesentandi ad easdem amitteremus sine occasione vel impedimento Nostri vel haeredum nostrorum quorumcunque Hujus Data est sub An. Do. 1349. The Modern Church-Historian of Britain in his Eleventh Book pag. 136. calls to remembrance That about An. 1626. there were certain Feoffees a whole dozen of them though not incorporated by the Kings Letters Patents or any Act of Parliament yet Legally he says settled in Trust to purchase in Impropriations and that it was incredible how then possible to be believed what large Sums were advanced in a short time towards that work But then withal tells us somewhat that is Credible viz. That there are 9284 Parochial Churches in England endowed with Glebe and Tithes but of these when the said Feoffees entered on their work 3845 were either Appropriated to Bishops Cathedrals and Colledges or Impropriated as Lay-Fees to Private persons as formerly belonging to Abbeys The Redeeming and Restoring he does not mean to the Abbeys was the design of these Feoffees as to those in the hands of Private persons but re infecta the Design proved abortive A Commendam or Ecclesia Commendata so called in contradistinction to Ecclesia Titulata is that Church which for the Custodial charge and government thereof is by a revocable Collation concredited with some Ecclesiastical person in the nature of a Trustee vel tanquam fidei Commissarius and that for the most part only for some certain time absque titulo for he that is Titularly Endowed hath the possession of the Church in his own Name and in his own proper Right during his life hence it is that in the Canon Law a Church collated in Commendam and a Church bestowed in Titulum are ever opposed as contraries vid. Hist Concil Trident. lib. 6. pag. 600. Duaren de Benefic lib. 5. cap. 7. Thus King Edgar Collated Dunstan Bishop of Worcester to the Bishoprick of London by way of Commendam Rex Edgarus says Radulph de Diceto in his Abbreviat Chronicorum Lundoniensem Ecclesiam proprio Pastore viduatam commisit regendam Dunstano Wigornensi Episcopo Et sic Dunstanus Lundoniensem Ecclesiam Commendatam habuit non Titulatam dict Radulph de An. 962. It is supposed that the first Patent of a Commendam retinere granted in England by the King to any Bishop Elect was that which King Henry the Third by the advice of his Council in imitation of the Popes Commendams then grown very common granted by his Letters Patents to Wengham then Chancellor of England notwithstanding his insufficiency in the knowledge of Divinity to hold and retain all his former Ecclesiastical Dignities and Benefices whereof the King was Patron together with his Bishoprick he then succeeded Fulco Bishop of London for so long time as the Pope should please to grant him a Dispensation whose Dispensation alone would not bar the King to Present to those Dignities and Benefices being all void in Law by making him a Bishop He had also the like Patent of Commendam retinere as to his Benefices and Ecclesiastical Preferments in Ireland And this Patent of such a Commendam being made by the King his Lords and Judges is for that reason the more remarkable vid. Le Hist. of the Church of Great Britain pag. 84. According to the proper and ancient Account Commendams were originally introduced in favour and for advantage of the Church which is Commended in favorem utilitatem Ecclesiae quae Commendatur Imola in ca. Nemo de Elect. in 6. says that Commendams are not to be Nisi ex evidenti Ecclesiae Commendatae necessitate vel utilitate The distinction of Temporal and Perpetual Commendams in the Canon Law is of no great use with us indeed in the Church of Rome according to the former mode of Commendams a vacant Church is Commended either by the Authority of the Pope if it be a Cathedral ca. penult ult 21. q. 1. or by the Authority of the Bishop if it be a Church Parochial This is commonly Temporal or for Six months and is in utilitatem Ecclesiae the other commonly Perpetual and are magis in subventionem eorum quibus commendantur quam ipsarum Ecclesiarum And a Commendatary for life is the same in reality with the Titular These Commendams in their Original were Instituted to a good purpose but after used to an evil end For when by reason of Wars Pestilence or the like the Election or Provision could not be made so soon as otherwise it might the Superiour did Recommend the vacant Church to some honest and worthy person to govern it besides the Care of his own until a Rector were provided who then had nothing to do with the Revenues but to govern them and consign them to another But in process of
West-Saxons in the borders of Worcester and Herefordshire under an Oak thereby tacitly reproving the Idolatry of the Pagan Britains who acted their Superstitions under an Oak as the Learned Sr. H. Spelman observes In the Tenth Century King Edward the Elder Son of King Alfred called a Synod at Intingford where he confirmed the same Ecclesiastical Constitutions which King Alured had made before Many Councils were Conven'd during the Reign of King Athelstan as at Exiter Feversham Thunderfield London and at Great Lea which last is of most account in regard of the Laws therein made specially that concerning the payment of Tithes the which you may peruse in the Learned Sr. H. Spelm. Concil p. 405. During the Reign of King Edgar Hoel Dha held a National Council for all Wales at Tyquin which was wholly in favour of the Clergy this Council was held when Dunst in was Archbishop of Canterbury in whose time there were Two other Councils conven'd the one at Cartlage in Cambridgshire the other at Caln in Wiltshire After this William the Conqueror conven'd a Council of his Bishops at Winchester wherein himself was personally present with two Cardinals sent from Rome in this Council Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury was deposed and Lâ—â—frank a Lombard substituted in his room During the Reign of King Henry the First Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury summoned a Council at Westminster which Excommunicated all Married Priests half the Clergy at that time being Married or the Sons of Married Priests During the Reign of King Stephen Albericus Bishop of Hostia sent by Pope Innocent into England conven'd a Synod at Westminster wherein it was concluded That no Priest c. should have a Wife or a Woman in his house on pain of being sent to Hell Also that their Transubstantiated God should dwell but Eight days in the Box for fear of being Worm-eaten or moulded Under the Reign of King Henry the Second who disclaimed the Popes authority refused to pay Peter-pence and interdicted all Appeals to Rome a Synod was called at Westminster wherein was a great Contest between the two Archbishops of Canterbury and York for Precedency York appeals to Rome the Pope interposes and to end old Divisions makes a new distinction entituling York Primate of England and Canterbury Primate of all England Under the Reign of King Henry the Third a Council was held at Oxford under Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury wherein many Constitutions were made as against Excess of demands for Procurations in Visitations against Pluralities Non-Residence and other abuses of the Clergy In the Ninth year of King Edward the First John Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury held a Council at Lambeth with his Suffragans some account whereof Walsingham gives us in these words viz. Frater Johannes Peckham Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus ne nihil fecisse videretur convocat Concilium apud Lambeth in quo non Evangelii Regni Dei praedicationem imposuit sed Constitutiones Othonis Ottobonis quondam Legatorum in Anglia innovans jussit eas ab omnibus servari c. Walsing in Ed. 1. He then made Sixteen Ecclesiastical Laws which are inserted among the Provincial Constitutions After this he summoned another Council of his Clergy at Reading wherein he propounded the drawing of all Causes concerning Advowsons to the Ecclesiastical Courts and to cut off all Prohibitions from the Temporal Courts in Personal Causes but upon the Kings express Command to desist from it this Council was dissolved Parker de Antiq. Eccles Anglic. fo 205. An 1290. During the Reign of King Henry the Fourth Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury conven'd a Synod at St. Pauls Church Lond. wherein the King joyned with them in punishing all Opposers of the Religion received Trussel de vita H. 4. Under King Henry the Fifth an Universal Synod of all the Bishops and Clergy was called at London where it was determined That the day of St. George and also of St. Dunstan should be a double Feast in holy Church In the same Kings Reign was a Convocation held at London conven'd by Henry Chichley Archbishop of Canterbury wherein were severe Constitutions made against the Lollards In the Reign of King Henry the Seventh a Synod was held at London by John Morton Archbishop of Canterbury to redress the Excess of the London Clergy in Apparel and frequenting of Taverns We had almost omitted the Synod in England An. 1391. under the Reign of King Richard the Second Simon Sudbury then Archbishop of Canterbury in which Synod it was Ordain'd That whosoever Appealed to Rome besides Excommunication should lose all his Goods and be Imprisoned during his Life vid. Hist of the Church of Great Britain p. 117. A Modern and Ingenious yet unfortunate Author well observes a Fourfold difference or distinction of Synods or Convocations in this Realm in reference to the several manners of their Meeting and degrees of their Power The First he states in point of Time before the Conquest The Second since the Conquest and before the Statute of Praemunire The Third after that Statute but before another made in the Reign of King H. 8. The Fourth after the 25th of the said King 1 Before the Conquest the Popes power prevailed not over the Kings of England who were then ever present Personally or Virtually at all Councils wherein matters both of Church and State were debated and concluded Communi consensu tam Cleri quam Populi Episcoporum Procerum Comitum nec non omnium Sapientum Seniorum populorumque totius Regni 2 After the Conquest but before the Statute of Praemunire the Archbishops used upon all emergent Cases toties quoties at their own discretions to assemble the Clergy of their respective Provinces where they pleased continuing and dissolving them at their pleasure which they then did without any leave from the King whose Canons and Constitutions without any further Ratifification were in that Age obligatory to all subjected to their Jurisdiction Such it seems were all the Synods from Lanfranck to Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury in which Arundels time the Statute of Praemunire was Enacted 3 After which Statute which much restrained the Papal power and subjected it to the Laws of the Land the Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute Command but at the pleasure of the King by whose Writ and Precept only they were now and henceforth Summoned Of this Third sort of Convocations were all those kept by and from Thomas Arundel unto Thomas Cranmer or from the 16th of R. 2. unto the 25th of King H. 8. These Convocations also did make Canons as in Lindwoods Constitutions which were Obligatory although confirmed by no other Authority than what was meerly Synodical 4 The last sort of Convocations since the said Statute called the 25th of King H. 8. That none of the Clergy should presume to attempt alledge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodals or any â—â—her Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by
for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical State and Persons and for-Reformation Order and Correction of the same and of all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities shall for ever by Authority of this Parliament be united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm This Act by a former Clause thereof doth Repeal the Statute of 1 and 2 Ph. Ma. c. 8. whereby the Acts of 26 H. 8. c. 1. and 35 H. 8. c. 3. were repealed so that the Act of Repeal being repealed the said Acts of H. 8. were implicitely revived whereby it is declared and enacted That the King his Heirs and Successors should be taken and accepted the only Supream Head in Earth of the Church of England and should have and enjoy annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm as well the Title and style thereof as all Honours Dignities Prebeminencies Jurisdictions c. to the said dignity of Supream Head belonging c. By which Style Title and Dignity the King hath all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction whatever And by which Statute the Crown was but remitted and restored to its Ancient Jurisdiction which had been formerly usurped by the Bishop of Rome And this is that Supremacy which is here meant and intended 3. The said Statute of 1 Eliz. c. 1. doth not only repeal the said Stat. of 1 and 2 P. M. c. 8. but it is also a reviver of divers Acts asserting several branches of the Kings Supremacy and re-establishing the same it doth likewise not only abolish all Forreign Authority but also annex the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Crown of this Realm with power to assign Commissioners for the exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction And then further Enacts to this effect viz. That all Ecclesiastical persons of what degree soever and all and every Temporal Judge Justice Mayor or other Lay or Temporal Officer or Minister and every other person having Fees or wages from the Crown within this Realm or the Dominions thereof shall upon his Corporal Oath testifie and declare in his Conscience That the Kings Majesty is the only Supream Governour of this Realm and of all other his Majesties Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal And that no Forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm And therefore doth utterly renounce and forsake all Forreign Jurisdictions powers superiorities and authorities and doth promise that from henceforth be shall bear Faith and true Allegiance to the Kings Majesty his Heirs and lawful Successors and to his power shall assist and defend all Jurisdictions priviledges preheminencies and authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Majesty his Heirs and Successors or united or annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm The practices of the Romanists in the 4th year of Queen Elizabeth and the danger thereby threatning both the Queen and State occasioned her to call a Parliament 12. Jan. An. 156 2 3 which passed an Act For assurance of the Queens Royal power over all Estates and Subjects within her Dominions By which Statute was enacted The Oath of Supremacy as also what persons were obliged to take it and who should have power to administer the same And this was both the original and the cause of that Oath By the said Statute of 1 El. c. 1. appears also what the penalty is for refusing to take the said Oath as also the penalty of maintaining a Forreign Authority as likewise what other persons than the fore-mentioned shall be obliged to take the said Oath which was afterwards again further ratified and established by the Statute of 5 Eliz. c. 1. 4. The King within his own Territories and Dominions is according to Bracton Dei Vicarius tam in Spiritualibus quam Temporalibus And in the Ecclesiastical Laws of Edward the Confessor the King is styled Vicarius summi Regis Reges regunt Ecclesiam Dei in immediate subordination to God Yea the Pope himself Eleutherius An. 169. styled King Lueius Dei Vicarius in Regno suo 5. The Supremacy which heretofore the Pope did usurp in this Kingdom was in the Crown originally to which it is now legally reverted The Kings Supremacy in and over all Persons and Causes Ecclesiastical within his own Dominions is essentially inherent in him so that all such Authority as the Pope here once usurped claiming as Supream Head did originally and legally belong to the Crown and is now re-united to it by several Statutes as aforesaid On this Supremacy of the King as Supream Head Sr. Edward Coke grounds the power of granting a Commission of Review after a Definitive Sentence in the Delegates for one Reason that he gives is because after a Definitive Sentence the Pope as Supream Head by the Canon Law used to grant a Commission Ad Revidendum And such Authority as the Pope had claiming as Supream Head doth of right belong to the Crown Quia sicut Fontes communicant aquas fluminibus cumulative non privitive sic Rex subditis suis Jurisdictionem communicat in Causis Ecclesiasticis vigore Statuti in hujusmodi Casu editi cumulative non privitive By the Second Canon of the Ecclesiastical Constitutions of the Church of England it is ordained That whoever shall affirm that the Kings Majesty hath not the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical that the godly Kings had among the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church or impeach in any part his Regal Supremacy in the said Cases restored to the Crown and by the Laws of this Realm therein established shall be Excommunicated ipso facto and not be restored but only by the Archbishop after his repentance and publick revocation of those his wicked Errors 7. The King being next under God Supream Governour of the Church of England may Qua talis redress as he shall see cause in all matters of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for the conservation of the Peace and Tranquillity of his Realms The Pope as appears by the Stat. of 25 H. 8. c. 21. claimed full power to dispense with all human Laws of all Realms in all Causes which he called Spiritual Now the King as Supream hath the same power in himself within his own Realms legally which the Pope claimed and exercised by Usurpation Eadem praesumitur mens Regis quae est Juris The Kings immediate personal ordinary inherent power which he executes or may execute Authoritate Regia suprema Ecclesiastica as King and Supream Governour of the Church of England is one of these Flowers qui faciunt Coronam Nor is the Kings immediate power restrained by such Statutes as authorize inferiour persons The Lord Chief Justice Hobart asserts That although the Stat. of 25 H. 8. 21. doth say That all Dispensations c. shall be granted in manner and
form following and not otherwise yet the King is not thereby restrained but his power remains full and perfect as before and he may still grant them as King for that all Acts of Grace and Justice flow from him By the Eighth Canon Concilii Calchuthensis held under Pope Adrian the First An. 787. the Pope had power to grant what Immunities and Priviledges he pleased in Church-matters and they were by the said Canon to be duly observed Whatever Authority the Pope pretended to in this Kingdom in such matters by way of Usurpation the same may the King as Supream Governour of the Church next under God in his own Dominions use and lawfully exercise by his Regal Authority ex justa plenitudine Potestatis suae Likewise Pope Agathon An. 680. in Concilio Romano-Britannico exercised his Papal Authority in the time of Lotharius King of Kent not only touching the Reformation of Errors and Heresies then in this Church but also as to the composure of differences and dissentions that then were among the Clergy of this Realm Such Presidents of the usurped power of the Papal See exercised in this Kingdom are now of no further use than to illustrate or exemplifie the Legal power inherent in the Kings of this Realm in such matters of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for the most High and Sacred Order of Kings being of Divine Right it follows that all persons of what estate soever and all Causes of what quality soever whether Ecclesiastical or Civil within his Majesties Realms and Dominions are subordinated to the Power and Authority of the King as Supream It is not only acknowledged but also constituted by way of an Ecclesiastical Canon That the power of Calling and Dissolving Councils both National and Provincial is the true Right of all Christian Kings within their own Realms and Territories 8. The Ecclesiastical Legislative power was ever in the Kings of this Realm within their own Dominions That in Ancient times they made their own Ecclesiastical Laws Canons and Constitutions appears by several Presidents and Records of very great Antiquity which were received and observed within their own Territories without any Ratification from any Forreign power One instance among many may be given of the Ecclesiastical Laws of Alured Mag. Regis Anglorum An. 887. This they did de jure by virtue of their own inherent Supremacy And therefore when Pope Nicholas the Second An. 1066. in the Bull wherein he ordained Westminster to be the place for the Consecration of Kings gave power to Edward the Confessor and his Successors to constitute such Laws in the Church as he should think fit he gave him therein no more than was his own before For the Kings of England might ordain or repeal what Canons they thought fit within their own Dominions in right of their Regal Supremacy the same being inherent in them Jure Divino non Papali For we find that in King AEtheldreds days An. 1009. in Concilio AEnhamensi Generali the Canons then made and afterwards caused by King Kanutus to be Transcribed were called the Kings Canons not the Bishops En hujus Concilii Canones quos in suas Leges passim transcripsit Rex Canutus Malmsburius AEtheldredo Regi non Episcopis tribuit And the Peers of this Realm per Synodum Landavensem were unexcommunicable nisi prius Consulto Rege aut ejus praecepto Which is a plain demonstration That the Kings of England Anciently had the Supremacy and superintendent Ecclesiastical power and Jurisdiction inherent in themselves exclusively to all other either home or Forreign powers whatever 9. It is by good Authority asserted That the King as Supream is himself instead of the whole Law yea that he is the Law it self and the only chief Interpreter thereof as in whose Breast resides the whole knowledge of the same And that his Majesty by communicating his Authority to his Judge to expound the Laws doth not thereby abdicate the same from himself but that he may assume it again unto him when and as oft as he pleases Dr. Ridl View p. 2. c. 1. Sect. 7. Consonant whereunto is that which Borellus hath Principum Placita Legis habent vigorem eatenus vim Legis obtinebunt quatenus fuerint cum honestate conjuncta Borel de Magist Edict l. 2. c. 4. Roland à Val. Cons 91. nu 54. vo 2. And Suarez tells us That Princeps est Lex viva reipsa praecipit ut Lex per scripturam Of which Opinion also is Alexander Imola and many others Suar. Alleg. 9. nu 13. The grant of Dispensations is a peculiar and very considerable part of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction the which is eminently in the Crown and by the Stat. of 25 H. 8. the Archbishop of Canterbury may grant Dispensations Archiepiscopus possit dispensare contra Statutum Provinciale per se editum Et qui potest jus condere potest illud tollere Lindw de Cler. Conju c. 2. gl ult Extr. de Elect. c. Significasti c. Intonuit And in another place Episcopus in quibusdam Casibus Dispensare potest contra Canones Const Otho de Concu Cler. gl ver Meritis 10. The Laws and Statutes of this Realm have been tender of the Kings Supremacy ever since the Forreign power over the State Ecclesiastical was abolished In the Statute of 13 Car. 2. cap. 12. there is a Proviso That nothing in the said Act shall extend to abridge or diminish the Kings Majesties Supremacy in Ecclesiastical matters and affairs And in the Stat. of 22 Car. 2. cap. 1. there is a Proviso That not any thing therein contained shall extend to invalidate or avoid his Majesties Supremacy in Ecclesiastical affairs but that his Majesty his Heirs and Successors may from time to time and at all times hereafter exercise and enjoy all Powers and Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs as fully and amply as any of his Predecessors have or might have done 11. As no Convocations for Ecclesiastical Constitutions or for correction or reformation of Abuses in the Church can be Conven'd without his Majesties Writ for that end and purpose so being Conven'd no Canons or Constitutions that shall then be agreed on can have any effect in Law or be in force to oblige any of his Majesties Subjects until his consent thereunto be first had and obtained and until they shall have the power of Ecclesiastical Laws by being ratified and confirmed by the Supream Authority Therefore the Archbishop of Canterbury may not hold a Council for his Province without the Kings leave for when such Council was held by Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury it was prohibited by Fitz-Peter Chief Justice for that he had not the Kings License therein but he would not obey And 13 E. 3. Rot. Parl. M. 1. there was a Writ for a Convocation of the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury and Pauls And another for the other of York vid. Stat. 25 H. 8. c. 19. where the Clergy of England acknowledge that
Provisions Appeals to Rome holding Plea of Spiritual things thence arising Excommunications by his Bulls and the like were no other than Usurpations and Encroachments on the Dignity and Prerogative Royal. 14. In the Reign of King H. 8. An. 1539. the Abbots of Colchester Reading and Glastenbury were condemned and executed under colour so the Author expresses it of denying the Kings Supremacy and their rich Abbies seized on as Confiscations to the use of the King But when the Act of Supremacy came to be debated in the time of Queen Elizabeth it seemed a thing strange in Nature and Polity That a Woman should be declared to be the Supream Head on Earth of the Church of England but the Reformed party not so much contending about Words and Phrases as aiming to oust the Pope of all Authority within these Dominions fixed the Supream power over all Persons and Estates of what rank soever in the Crown Imperial not by the Name of Supream Head but tantamount of the Supream Governess In Queen Mary 's time there was an Act of Parliament made declaring That the Regal power was in the Queens Majesty as fully as it had been in any of her Predecessors In the body whereof it is expressed and declared That the Law of the Realm is and ever hath been and ought to be understood That the Kingly or Regal Office of the Realm and alâ— Dignities Prerogatives Royal Power Preheminences Priviledges Authorities and Jurisdictions thereunto annexed united or belonging being invested either in Male or Female are be and ought to be as fully wholly absolutely and entirely deemed adjudged accepted invested and taken in the one as in the other So that whatsoever Statute or Law doth limit or appoint that the King of this Realm may or shall have execute and do any thing as King c. the same the Queen being Supream Governess Possessor and Inheritor to the Imperial Crown of this Realm may by the same power have and execute to alâ— intents constructions and purposes without doubt ambiguity question or scruple any Custome use or any other thing to the contrary notwithstanding By the tenor of which Act made in Queen Mary 's Reign is granted to Queen Elizabeth as much Authority in all the Church-Concernments as had been eâ—ercised and enjoyed by King H. 8. and King Ed. 6. according to any Act or Acts of Parliament in their several times Which Acts of Parliament as our learned Lawyers on these occasions have declared were not to be considered as Introductory of a new power which was not in the Crown before but only Declaratory of an old which naturally belonged to all Christian Princes and amongst others to the Kings and Queens of the Realm of England And whereas some Seditious persons had dispersed a rumour that by the Act for recognizing the Queens Supremacy there was something further ascribed unto the Queen her Heirs and Successors viz. a power of administring Divine Service in the Church which neither by any equity or true sense of the words could from thence be gathered she thereupon makes a Declaration to all her Subjects That nothing was or could be meant or intended by the said Act than was acknowledged to be due to King H. 8. and King Ed. 6. And further declared That she neither doth nor will challenge any other Authority by the same than was challenged and lately used by the said Two Kings and was of Ancient time due unto the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over all persons born within her Realms and Dominions of what estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Forreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them Which Declaration published in the Queens Injunctions An. 1559. not giving that general satisfaction to that groundless Cavil as was expected and intended the Bishops and Clergy in their Convocation of the year 1562. by the Queens Authority and Consent declared more plainly viz. That they gave not to their Princess by vertue of the said Act or otherwise either the ministring of Gods Word or Sacraments but that only Prerogative which they saw to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that is to say that they should Rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers And lastly to conclude this tender point There is in the said Act for the better exercising and enjoying of the Jurisdiction thus recognized to the Crown an Oath as aforesaid for the acknowledgment and defence of this Supremacy not only in the Queen but also her Heirs and Successors Likewise a power given to the Queen her Heirs and Successors by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England To Assign and Authorize c. as she and they shall think fit such Persons being natural born Subjects to exercise use and occupy under her and them all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within the Realms of England and Ireland or any other her Highness Dominions or Countries and to visit reform repress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever which by any manner of Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power Authority or Jurisdiction or can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God c. This was the Foundation of the High-Commission Court and from hence issued that Commission by which the Queens Ministers proceeded in their Visitation in the First year of her Majesties Reign CHAP. II. Of Archbishops 1. A Description of that Dignity here in England the Antiquity Precedency Priviledges and Style of the Archbishop of Canterbury with the Precincts of that See 2. The Antiquity Precedency and Style of the Archbishop of York with the Precincts of that See 3. What difference between Archbishop and Metropolitan and why called Metropolitan 4. Three Archbishops in England and Wales Anciently 5. The vicissitudes of the Christian Religion Anciently in this Island of Great Britain 6. How the Third Archbishop came to be lost 7. The great Antiquity of an Archbishop in London 8. The Original of the Style Primate and Metropolitan 9. What the difference Anciently between the Two Archbishopricks of Canterbury and York certain Priviledges of the latter 10. Whether an Archbishop may call Cases to his own cognizance nolente Ordinario 11. In what Case the Clerk is to be Instituted by the Archbishop where the Inferiour Ordinary hath right to Collate Also his power of Dispensations 12. A Case at Common Law relating to the Archbish Jurisdiction 13. Certain special Priviledges of the Archbishop of Canterbury 1. ARCHBISHOP ab Archos Princeps Episcopus Superintendens is that Spiritual person
17. is to that purpose 11. In former times many Bishops had their Suffragans who were also Consecrated as other Bishops were These in the absence of the Bishops upon Embassies or in multiplicity of business did supply their places in matter of Orders but not in Jurisdiction These were chiefly for the ease of the Bishops in the multiplicity of their Affairs ordained in the Primitive times called Chorepiscopi Suffragan or Subsidiary Bishops or Bishops Suffragans and were Titular Bishops Consecrated by the Archbishop of the Province and to execute such Power and Authority and receive such profits as were limited in their Commissions by the Bishops or Diocosans whose Suffragans they were What Towns or Places to be the Sees of Bishops Suffragans and how many to a Diocess and in what Diocesses appears by an Act of Parliament made in the Reign of King H. 8. Such Suffragan Bishops are made in case the Archbishop or some other Bishop desire the same In which case the Bishop presents Two able persons for any place allowed by the said Act of Parliament whereof his Majesty doth chuse one but at present there are no Suffragan Bishops in England They were no other than the Chorepiscopi of the Primitive Times Subsidiary Bishops ordained for easing the Diocesan of some part of his burthen as aforesaid by means whereof they were enabled to perform such Offices belonging to that Sacred Function not limited to time and place by the ancient Canons by which a Bishop was restrained in some certain Acts of Jurisdiction to his proper Diocess Of these there were twenty six in the Realm of England distinguished by the Names of such Principal Towns as were appointed for their Title and Denomination The Names and Number whereof together with the Jurisdiction and preheminences proportioned to them the Reader may peruse in the Act of Parliament made An. 26 H. 8. 12. According to the Temporal Laws of this Land if a Bishop grant Letters of Institution under any other Seal than his Seal of Office and albeit it be out of his Diocess yet it is good For in Cort's Case against the Bishop of St. Davids and others where the Plaintiff offered in evidence Letters of Institution which appeared to be sealed with the Seal of the Bishop of London because the Bishop of St. Davids had not his Seal of Office there and which Letters were made also out of the Diocess It was held That they were good enough albeit they were sealed with another Seal and made out of the Diocess for that the Seal is not material it being an Act made of the Institution And the writing and sealing is but a Testimonial thereof which may be under any Seal or in any place But of that point they would advise 13. A Bishop if he celebrate Divine Service in any Church of his Diocess may require the Offerings of that day He may sequester if the King present not and 12 H. 8. 8. by Pollard he must see the Cure served if the person fail at his own Costs He may commit Administration where Executors being called refuse to prove the Will He hath power of distribution and disposing of Seats and charges of Repairs of the Churches within his Diocess He may award his Jure Patronatus where a Church is Litigious between an Usurper and the other but if he will chuse the Clerk of either at his peril he ought at his peril to receive him that hath Right by the Statute He may License Physicians Chirurgions Schoolmasters and Midwives He may Collate by Lapse He may take competent time to examine the sufficiency and fitness of a Clerk He may give convenient time to persons interested to take notice of Avoidances He is discharged against the true Patron and quit of Disturbance to whom it cannot be imputed if he receive that Clerk that is in pursuance of a Verdict after Inquest in a Jure Patronatus He may have Six Chaplains and every Archbishop may have Eight Chaplains He may unite and consolidate small Parishes and assist the Civil Magistrate in execution of some Statutes concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs And by the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 2. any Bishop may at his pleasure joyn and associate himself to the Justices of Oyer and Terminer or to the Justices of Assize at the open and general Sessions to be holden at any place within his Diocess in Causes of the Church And the Statute made 17 Car. 1. c. 27. for the disinabling of persons in Holy Orders to exercise Temporal Jurisdiction or Authority is Repealed by the Statute of 13 Car. 2. cap. 2. whereby they are now enabled to exercise such Temporal Jurisdiction as formerly and is commonly styled the Ordinary of that Diocess where he doth exercise his Episcopal Authority and Jurisdiction In Parliament Bishops as Barons may be present and Vote at the Trial and Arraignment of a Peer only before Sentence of death or loss of Member be pronounced that they may have no hand in blood in any kind they have by Canon Law the Priviledge and Injunction to absent themselves and by Common Law to make Proxies to vote for them 14. ORDINARY according to the acceptation of the Common Law with us is usually taken for him that hath Ordinary Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical immediate to the King He is in Common understanding the Bishop of the Diocess who is the Supervisor and for the most part Visitor of all his Churches within his Diocess and hath Ordinary Jurisdiction in all the Causes aforesaid for the doing of Justice within his Diocess in jure proprio non per deputationem and therefore it is his care to see that the Church be provided of an able Curate Habet enim Curam Curarum and may execute the Laws of the Church by Ecclesiastical Censures and to him alone are made all Presentations to Churches vacant within his Diocess Ordinarius habet locum principaliter in Episcopo aliis Superioribus qui soli sunt Vniversales in suis Jurisdictionibus sed sunt sub eo alii Ordinarii hi videlicet quibus Competit Jurisdictio Ordinaria de jure privilegio vel consuetudine Lindw cap. Exterior tit de Constitutionib 15. The Jurisdiction of the Ordinary or Bishop as to the Examination of the Clerk or as to the Admission or Institution of him into a Benefice is not Local but it follows the person of the Ordinary or Bishop wheresoever he is And therefore if a Clerk be presented to the Bishop of Norwich to a Church which is void within the Diocess of Norwich who is then in London or if it be to a Bishop of Ireland who is then in England and in London the Ordinary may examine the Clerk or give him Admission or Institution in London And so it was adjudged 16. The Ordinary is not obliged upon a Vacancy to receive the Clerk of him that comes first for as he
may take competent time to examine the sufficiency and fitness of a Clerk so may he give convenient time to persons interessed to take knowledge of the Avoidance even in case of Death and where notice is to be taken not given to present their Clerks to it And perhaps if he do receive the Clerk of him that comes first yet he may quit himself of Disturbance because he doth nothing therein but as Ordinary in Law But if two or more Present so that the Title is become Litigious then and in such case he cannot receive the Clerk of any of his own pleasure except the Title be certain but hath his way of safety by Jure Patronatus and when he hath used the Jure Patronatus and that finds for one party yet he may still receive a contrary Clerk if he will for who can lett him but that must be at his own peril and that is at a double peril 1. That the Title be the better 2. That the Patron whose Clerk he hath received will plead and defend that Title for otherwise he cannot do it But though after Inquest in Jure Patronatus the Ordinary may accept the contrary Clerk yet it is against Justice and the intent of the Law For since it is a Provision meerly for the good and safety of the Ordinary and he pretends Doubt and therefore puts the Patron to this enquiry to his charge and delay to satisfie and secure him he ought to judge and receive the Clerk according to that Verdict And that is the true meaning of the Books that say that the Ordinary is to judge of the better Title that is not to prejudge of his own Will but secundum allegata probata upon Verdict of the Right given and found according to the form of Law to give Institution which is his Judgment and the Induction his Execution And though it is but an Inquest of Office and therefore binds not True it is it binds not but with a distinction that is it binds not the Patron in his Quare Impedit but is Final even to the true Patron that he cannot impute disturbance to the Ordinary following that Verdict and therefore it ought to bind him to follow it For to these purposes it is a full Verdict never to be tried again And if but one Present if the Ordinary make doubt of his Title as in many cases he justly may being a stranger to it he may require satisfaction by Jure Patronatus 17. If it be demanded whether the Ordinary can cite a man out of his Diocess the Common Law answers it in the Negative And so it was held by Jones and Whitlock Justices in Brown's Case where they held That at the Common Law a Bishop cannot cite a man out of his Diocess and there Whitlock held that the Ordinary hath not any power of Jurisdiction out of his Diocess but to absolve a person Excommunicated If one in N. commit Adultery in another Diocess during the time of his Residence he may be cited in the Diocess where he committed the offence although he dwell out of the Diocess by Coke Warburton and Winch And in the time of his Visitation he hath Jus ad Synodalia according to the Custome more or less as in Gloucestershire where the Impropriation of Dereburt pays annually 7s 9d pro Synodalibus Procurationibus for this Synodal is not in this sense here taken as in the Statute of 25 H. 8. cap. 19. for Synodals Provincial which seem to signifie the Canons or Constitutions of a Provincial Synod nor for the Synod it self which the word Synodale doth sometimes signifie but it is here in the same sense as the word Synodies in the Statute of 34 H. 8. cap. 16. for a Synodal is no other than a Cense or Tribute in mony paid to the Bishop or Archdeacon by the Inferiour Clergy 18. Every Spiritual person is visitable by the Ordinary So is a Dean de mero jure for he is Spiritual The Ordinary hath also power of Correction of a Parson And every Hospital be it Lay or Spiritual is Visitable By the ancient Law of the Realm the King hath power to Visit reform and correct all Abuses and Enormities in the Church Nor are the Kings Donatives visitable by the Ordinary but properly by the Lord Chancellour And the King may grant a Special Commission to that purpose But as to Hospitals if they be Spiritual the Ordinary shall visit them if they be Lay-Hospitals the Patron In the Statute of 1 El. cap. 2. there is a Proviso That all and singular Archbishops and Bishops and every of their Chancellors Commissaries Archdeacons and other Ordinaries having any peculiar Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction shall have full power and authority by virtue of this Act as well to enquire in their Visitations Synods and elsewhere within their Jurisdiction or any other time or place to take occasions and informations of all and every the things above-mentioned done committed or perpetrated within the Limits of their Jurisdiction or Authority and to punish the same by Admonition Excommunication Sequestration or Deprivation and other Censures and Process in like manner as heretofore hath been used by the Queens Ecclesiastical Laws The Ancient custome was for the Visitor to visit in his own person visitare Ecclesiatim per cunctas Dioceses parochiasque suas 10. q. 1. c. Episcopum E. Concil Toletan 4. ca. 35. This Visitation is a special and peculiar duty belonging to every Bishop as derived from the Apostles who themselves were Visitors and for that end and purpose did pertransire Ecclesias Vrbes The Bishop hath his Triennials per Archidiaconi Visitatio potest fieri singulis annis Extr. de Offic. Archid. c. Mandamus We find also that Episcopus debet Visitare singulis annis Parochiam nisi dimittat propter gravamen Ecclesiarum tunc mittat Archidiaconum c. Ab. Sic. super 2. 1. de Offic. Archid. c. ut Archidiaconus 10. q. 1. c. Decrevimus c. Episcopum 19. Every Bishop hath his Cathedral and Council and the Council and Bishop there decide matters of Controversie the Prebends have their names from the affording of help to the Bishop If any Clerk after he hath sworn Canonical Obedience should happen to commit Episcopicide he is guilty of Petty-Treason and shall suffer as such Whereas heretofore the County of Gloucester was a part of the Diocess of Worcester out of which it was taken by King H. 8. when first made a Bishoprick the Diocess of Worcester was in the time of King Ed 6. laid to the See of Gloucester Dr. Heylin 's Hist Eccl. p. 101. Next unto the Two Archbishops the Bishop of London of all the other Bishops hath the Preheminence Episcopus Londinensis says an Ancient Record speciali quadam Dignitate caeteris anteponendus quia Ecclesiae Cantuariensis Decanus est Provincialis The Bishop of Duresme who is
may not of the same Church exact one Procuration from the Rector another from the Vicar if he hath the Procuration in Victualibus of the Rector he ought to receive nothing of the Vicar nec è contra for one Procuration of one Church for one day is held sufficient dict c. Foelicis de Censib Nor do the Canons allow above one Procuration in case there be more Churches than one Visited in one and the same day the Reason whereof in Law because the Visitation is the Principal the Procuration is but the Accessory and the Visitation only of one day ought not to have the Procurations of more nor ought the Accessory to exceed the Principal Lindw ibid. de Censib c. quamvis gl ib. ver Canones Nor ought there to be paid above one Procuration for the mother-Mother-Church and the Chappel thereto belonging when they are Visited Can. ibid. ver una Ecclesia Yet there are Canonists of very good Authority as Andraeas and others who holding the contrary do positively assert That every Chappel dependent if Peopled and of ability shall pay its own proper Procuration at times of the Ordinary Visitation for that the Bishop is to have a respect to every individual Member of his Diocess It is therefore distinguished and confessed that this is true when the Chappel dependent hath a Curate proper of its one and distinct from or other than the Curate of the Mother-Church But otherwise when the Rector of the Superiour Church is Curate of both only doth exercise the Cure in the said Chappel by a Vicar not Perpetual but Temporal and removeable ad Libitum Gl. in d. ver una Ecclesia Lindwood on this occasion puts the Question Whether in case the Church be of one Diocess and the Chappel thereto annexed or united or dependent thereon of another whether in that case there shall at the Visitation be but one Procuration paid for both He resolves it thus viz. That if the Ordinary of the place where the said Chappel stands hath formerly had there his Visitation and Procuration ratione Visitationis ejusdem then and in that case the power of Visiting the same nor by consequence the Procuration due ratione Visitationis is not taken away from that Ordinary by such union or dependency Gloss ibid. in ver Ecclesia 7. By the aforesaid Council of Lateran all Visitors were limited to a certain number of Visitation-Attendants according to their several qualities as Archbishops to the number of forty or fifty men with their Horses the Bishop to twenty or thirty Cardinals to twenty five though they could not digest such an undervaluation Archdeacons to five or seven Deans that is Archipresbyteri Rurales as the Gloss expounds it to Two only Gl. in ver Decani Extr. eod c. cum Apostolus Extr. Com. de Censib c. vas Electionis And the truth is the Archdeacon according to the Canon may not have in his Ordinary Visitation above the number of seven persons if he exceed that number there is not any Procuration due for the Supernumeraries Lind. de Cens Procurat c. 1. ver excedant glo ibid. gl in ver Visitationis gl ib. in ver Debitam 8. The word Synodale seems to have Three significations as 1 it seems to signifie Conventus or a Meeting in the same sense with Synodus as being taken for the Meeting or Synod it self and so used by Gregory 3. in his Epistle to the Bishops of the Provinces of Baiory and Almany Catholica Sanctorum Patrum Authoritas jubet ut bis in anno pro salute populi Christiani seu exhortatione adoptionis filiorum SYNODALIA debent celebrari c. This Epistle you have cited by Cardinal Baronius in the Eighth Tome of his Annals about the year 738. 2 It seems to signifie the Acts done at a Synod as well as the Synod it self and in this sense you have it in the Tripartite History where mention is made of a Synod of Bishops assembled at Antioch out of divers Provinces who sent the Emperour Jovinian a Copy of the Nicene Creed Hunc Libellum meaning the said Creed in collectione Synodalium Sabini conscriptum invenimus In which place Synodalia seems to import the Acts of that Synod collected by that Sabinus 3 It signifies a Cense or Tribute in money paid to the Bishop or to some other for his use by the Inferiour Clergy The forementioned Author of the Historical Discourse of Procurations c. acquaints us That in the second part of the Appendix to the third General Council of Lateran there is an Epistle of Pope Alex. 3. to certain Archdeacons and Deans reproving them for extorting of moneys from the Clergy sub diversis nominibus in a fraudulent kind of way Et hujusmodi exactionem saith that Epistle ut eam Liberius videamini exigere quandoque Consuetudinem Episcopalem quandoque SYNODALIA quandoque Denarios Paschales appellantes And in this sense is the word Synodale here used and taken which the Archdeacon claims not so much Jure Communi Ecclesiastico as by Composition with or Prescription from the Bishop 9. This Synodal or Synodical duty was anciently known by two other Names which now are grown obsolete the one Cathedraticum probably from the original Cause thereof being ob honorem Cathedrae Episcopalis the other Synodaticum from the time of payment both used promiscuously The former of these viz. the Cathedraticum was a Cense of two shillings paid by the Inferiour Clergy to the Bishop as appears by the Acts of certain Councils of Bracar and Toledo as also by the Constitutions and Rescripts of Popes Ilud te volumus modis omnibus custodire ne qui Episcoporum Siciliae de Parochiis ad se pertinentibus nomine CATHEDRATICI amplius quam Duos Solidos praesumant accipere 10. q. 3. c. illud c. placuit ibi c. So Honorius 3. expresseth Two shillings nomine Cathedratici Extr. de Offic. Jud. Ordin c. conquerent gl ibid. in ver Duos solidos which is a Pension paid to the Bishop à qualibet Ecclesia secundum Loci consuetudinem as Panormitan upon that Text Abb. c. conquerent de Offic. Jud. Ord. The reason of this payment was according to Hostiensis in argumentum subjectionis ob honorem Cathedrae Hostiens in Sum. de Censib ex quibus ver Cathedraticum autem And the Council of Bracar Placuit ut nullus Episcoporum per suas Dioeceses ambulans praeter honorem Cathedrae suae id est Duos Solidos aliud aliquid per Ecclesias tollat cited in the Decree 10. q. 3. c. placuit Note that the Cistersians by virtue of their Order were priviledged from being present at the Synodical Meetings assembled by the Bishop within his Diocess and from the payments of those Synodals Gloss in ver Episcopus c. Episcopus non debet Dist 18. Extr. de Majoris Obed. c. 9. Quod supr gl ib. in ver Diocoesana This Cathedratick-payment began when
the Revenues of the Church first came to be divided and alotted to several Ministeries then it was that this payment was first made to the Bishop by the Beneficed Clergy within his Diocess Duaren ut supr l. 2. c. 1. fo 53. It is probable that this division of the Church Revenues was not far distant in time from the first or original distinguishment of Parochial Bounds upon which affair Pope Euaristus otherwise called Anacletus Graecus did first enter about the year 110. Volateran l. 22. Anast Biblioth Baron Annal. ad An. 112. nu 4 5 6. and was afterwards carried on by Pope Dionysius about the year 260. Baron Annal. ad An. 260. nu 17. Parochial Distribution in England was by Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury about the year 668. Spelm. Concil 152 But Speed saith by Honorius the fifth Archbishop also of Canterbury about the year 636. It may not hence be inferr'd that this Cathedraticum or Synodal was only paid ratione Synodi for it was sometimes and very anciently paid also at Visitations as appears by the seventh Council at Toledo mentioned in the Decree 10. q. 3. c. inter caetera casus ibi where there is a Canon against the exacting of more than Two shillings only pro Cathedratico in Episcopal Visitations This Cense or payment though it be Onus Ecclesiasticum yet it is not Onus innovatum but Onus Ordinarium and by imposition of Law as appears by the Provincial Constitutions Solutio Cathedratici Synodatici Procurationum ratione Visitationis alia hujusmodi de quibus non dubitatur quin sunt Onera Ordinaria suum capiunt effectum ab impositione Legis Lindw de Offic. Vic. c. quoniam gl in ver Onera Ecclesiastica Yet Procurations differ from the other in this that Procurations are only Pensions but the other are properly Census The Synody or Synodal is by the Stat. of 34 H. 8. reckoned as a Church-due for recovery whereof provision is made by that Act and good reason for the said Synody or Synodal is a Pension certain and valued in the King's Books 10. The aforesaid Ingenious Author of the Historical Discourse touching Procurations c. after his deep search into Antiquity doth conjecturally conceive that the Pentecostal otherwise called Whitson-farthings is nothing else but the Annual Commemoration continuation or repetition of an Ancient payment or pension issuing out of the Oblations brought by the people long since specially at the time of the Foundation or Dedication of their several Churches or at some other Solemnity viz. the moiety or Third part of the Oblations then made The same being reserved by the Bishop and by a Contract seu quasi Contractu between him and the Founder of such Church or Priest assigned to attend the same settled in and upon the Episcopal See and payable yearly at or about the Feast of Pentecost These Pentecostalia were not as some conceive the Peter-pence here anciently paid for they were usually paid either at the Feast of St. Peter and Paul or on Lammas day but these Pentecostals seem to be paid upon or about the time that doth chiefly denominate the same viz. at the Feast of Pentecost and in the nature thereof seem to have reference to an Oblation frequently made by the Christians in the Elder times of the Church and to have some tendency to that Liberal Devotion which was then as frequent as Sacriledge is now In Leg. 18 Guilielm Conquestor De Denariis S. Petri seu Vectigali Romano viz. Liber homo qui habuerit Averia Campestria 30 denariis aestimanda dabit Denarium S. Petri. Pro 4 denariis quos donaverit Dominus quieti erunt Bordarii ejus ejus Boner ejus Servientes Burgensis qui de propriis Catallis habet id quod dimidia Marca aestimandum est det Denarium S. Petri. Qui in Lege Danorum est Liber homo habet Averia Campestria quae dimidia Marca in argento aestimantur debet dare Denarium S. Petro. Et per Denarium quem donaverit Dominus erunt quieti ii qui resident in suo Dominico Vid. Sâ—ldeni ad Eadmerum Notae Spicelegium p. 179. Leg. 18. By this Law of William the Conquerour it appears that the Peterpence had no affinity with the Pentecostals In Ancient times when the Bishop did visit Ecclesiatim his usage was to celebrate the Mass in the Church which he visited which indeed was every Parish within his Diocess and that by his Episcopal Authority the whole Diocess in respect of the Bishop being by the Law but Paroechia sua 10. q. 3. c. Quia Duarenus passim as the whole Province is said to be in respect of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury At this Mass the people used to make their Offerings to the Bishop and one of the causes or reasons why or wherefore the people in Ancient times were obliged to bring their Oblations to the Church was propter Consuetudinem and that certis Festivitatibus among which the Feast of Pentecost was and is a most special one at which Feast there was in many places here in England an Oblation Anciently made by inferiour Churches and Parishes to the principal Mother-Church and whence probably the word Pentecostalia had its original denomination These Offerings by the Canon Law were and are only due to the Clergy and interdicted to the Laity sub districtione Anathematis 10. q. 1. c. Quia Sacerdotes c. Sanct. Patrum ibi In some places the Deans and Prebendaries of Cathedral Churches have them It is said That in the Cathedral Church of Salisbury there is a greater and a lâ—ss distinguished and known by this difference of Major Minor pars Altaris And in some Diocesses they are settled upon the Bishop and Archdeacon and made part of their Revenue for which the King hath Tenths and Subsidies The Cathedral or the Mother-Church of Worcester was Anciently and before the dissolution a Priory and among other Revenues had these Pentecostalia or Whitson-farthings yearly paid sub nomine Oblationum or Spiritual Profits tempore Pentecostes After the Dissolution when King H. 8. about the three and thirtieth year of his Reign new-founded and reendo'wd the said Church he restored these Pentecostalia after he had hâ—ld them about a year in his own hand to the said Church which as it is reported the Dean and Prebendaries thereof receive at this day and as appears by the Letters Patent Henricus Octavus c. Sciatis quod Nos de gratia nostra speciali ac ex certa scientia ac mero motu nostris dedimus concedimus ac per praesentes damus concedimus Decano Capitulo Ecclesiae Cathedralis Christi beatae Maria Virginis Wigorn. omnes illas Oblationes Obventiones sive Spiritualia proficua vulgariter vocat Whitson farthings annuatim collect sâ—ve recepta de diversis Viliatis in Comitat. nostris Wigorn. Warwic 〈◊〉 infra Archidiaconatum Wigorn
as Patron claiming the Patronage to himself for such a Collation doth amount to a Presentation and here are two or three Collations pleaded which should put the Queen out of possesion although she shall not be bound by the First during the life of the first Incumbent Vid. Br. Quare Impedit 31. upon the abridging of the Case of 47 E. 3. 4. That two Presentments the one after the other shall put the King out of possession and put him to his Writ of Right of Advowson which Anderson denied And it was holden by the whole Court here is not any Presentation and then no possession gained by the Collations and although the Bishop doth Collate as Patron and not as Ordinary yet it is but a Collation And there is a great difference betwixt Collation and Presentation for Collation is a giving of the Church to the Parson but Presentation is a giving or offering of the Parson to the Church and that makes a Plenarty but not a Collation 3. The Collation of the Ordinary for Lapse is in Right of the Patron and will serve him for a Possession in a Darrein Presentment as appears by Colt and Glover's Case against the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield where it is said That the Ordinary or he that presents by Lapse is a kind of Attorney made by Law to do that for the Patron which it is supposed he would do himself if there were not some lett and thefore the Collation by Lapse is in right of the Patron and for his turn 24 E. 3. 26. And he shall lay it as his possession for an Assize of Darrein Presentment 5 H. 7. 43. It seems also by Gawdy's Case against the Archbishop of Canterbury and others That although a Bishop Collate wrongfully yet this makes such a Plenarty as shall barr the Lapse of the Metropolitan and the King And this Collation by Lapse is an act and office of Trust reposed by Law in the Ordinary Metropolitan and King the Title of Lapse being rather an Administration than an Interest as in Colt's Case aforesaid which Title of Collating by Lapse may be prevented by bringing a Quare Impedit against the Bishop Also where and in what Cases the bringing of that Writ against the Bishop shall or shall not prevent such Collation appears in the Case of Brickhead against the Archbishop of York as Reported by Sir Hen. Hobart Chief Justice 4. Presentation is the Nomination of a Clerk to the Ordinary to be Admitted and Instituted by him to a Benefice void and the same being in Writing is nothing but a Letter Missive to the Bishop or Ordinary to exhibite to him a Clerk to have the Benefice voided the Formal force hereof resteth in these words viz. Praesento vobis Clericum meum Thus Presentation properly so called is the act of a Patron offering his Clerk to the Bishop to be Instituted in a Benefice of his Gift It is where a man hath a Right to give any Benefice Spiritual and presents the person to the Bishop to whom he gives it and makes an Instrument in writing to the Bishop in his favour and in case there be divers Coheirs and they not according in the Presentation that which is made by the eldest of the Coheirs shall be first Admitted but if it be by Joyntenants or Tenants in Common and they accord not within Six months the Bishop shall present by Lapse By the Statute of 13 Eliz. cap. 12. a Presentation of an Infant to a Benefice is void And although a Presentation being but the Commendation of a fit person by the Patron to the Bishop or Ordinary to be Admitted and Instituted into a Benefice may be done either by word alone or by a Letter or other writing yet the Grant of a next Avoidance is not good without Deed But a Presentation being no other than a Commendation of a Clerk to the Ordinary as aforesaid and only a thing concerning an Advowson without passing any interest of the Inheritance of the Advowson may be done by word only upon which ground it was Resolved by the whole Court That the Kings Presentation unto an Advowson Appendant to a Mannor parcel of his Dutchy under the Great Seal of England without the Seal of the Dutchy was well made and good Yea and for the same Reason for that a Presentation is but a Commendation and toucheth not the Inheritance was the Kings Presentation to the Deanary of Norwich held good albeit in the said Presentation he mistook and mis-recited the Name of the Foundation of the Deanary 5. A. seized of an Advowson in Fee Grants Praesentationem to B quandocunque quomodocunque Ecclesia vacare contigerit pro unica vice tantum in the Grant there was further this Clause viz. Insuper voluit concessit That the Grant should remain in force quousque Clericus habilis idoneus shall by his Presentation be Admitted Instituted and Inducted Afterwards A. grants away the Advowson in Fee unto S. The Church becomes void S. Presents The Church becomes void again S. Presents G. upon a Disturbance of M. the Presentee of B. the First Grantee a Quare Impedit is brought The Question was Whether B. the First Grantee not Presenting upon the First Avoidance had lost the benefit of his Grant In this Case it was Adjudged by the whole Court That although A. the Grantor grants Donationem Praesentaâ—ionem quandocunque Ecclesia vacare contigerit pro unica vice tantum yet B. ought to have taken the first Presentation that happened and hath not Election to take any turn other than the First when the Church first became void and by his neglect in not Presenting then had lost the benefit of his Grant and the subsequent words in the Grant are but only an Explanation of the words precedent and relate to the next Avoidance 6. The Right of Presentation is a Temporal thing and a Temporal Inheritance and therefore belongeth to the Kings Temporal Laws to determine as also to make Laws who shall Present after Six months as well as before so as the Title of Examination of Ability or Nonability be not thereby taken from the Ordinary The Law is the same touching Avoidances for it shall be judged by the Kings Temporal Laws when and whether the Church may be said to be void or not the cognizance whereof doth not belong to the Kings Ecclesiastical Laws and therefore where a Parson is made a Bishop or accepts another Benefice without License or Resigneth or be Deprived In these cases the Common Law would hold the Church void albeit there were any Ecclesiastical Law to the contrary And it is sufficient for the Ordinary's discharge if the Presentee be able by whomsoever he be Presented which Authority is acknowledged on all sides to have been ever inherent in the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction But as to the Right of Presentation it self to determine who ought to Present and who
unless he be qualified for Plurality Or if a Dean be made a Bishop yea though a Dean or Parson in England be made a Bishop in Ireland as aforesaid his Benefice becomes void as was Resolved in Evans and Askwith's Case for that the Constitution or Council which makes it void is general and not limited to any place And so it was also Resolved 3 E. 3. Fitz. Trial and so adjudged 21 Jac. C. B. in the Case between Woodley and the Bishop of Exon and Manwaring 12. The case may so happen that albeit a man having a Benefice with Cure of Souls accept another and be Instituted and Inducted into the same yet his First Benefice shall not be void by Cession though the Benefices be incompatible though there be no Dispensation in the case and although himself be not otherwise qualified for Pluralities For it hath been Resolved That if a man having one Benefice accept another and be Instituted and Inducted into the Second and then read not his Articles that yet the First Benefice voids not by Cession because the Second is as not taken Notwithstanding it cannot be denied but that where a man having a Benefice with Cure of Souls above the value of Eight pounds per Ann. doth take another with Cure and is thereto Admitted Instituted and Inducted the First Benefice without Dispensation becomes void as in the Case of the King against George Lord Archbishop of Canterbury In which Case it was held That the Church was absolutely void in facto jure by taking of a Second Benefice and that by the express words of the Statute of 21 H. 8. So that by the Acceptance of a Second Benefice the Church is void facto jure quoad the Patron and all others Sed Q. whether void as to an Usurper for in some cases a Benefice may be void as to some persons and not void as to others As in the Case of Simony whereby as well as by Cession a Church becomes void yet in that case although it be void to all men quorum interest to the King and his Incumbent and all that claim under him and to the Parishioners to the Ordinary and to the like yet according to Sir Hen. Hobart Chief Justice it is not void to an Usurper for a man without Right cannot Present unto it as to a Church void nor the Ordinary so discharge himself if he receive the Clerk of an Usurper for he is none of them quorum interest Pasch 14 Jac. Rot. 1026. Case of Winchcombe against the Bishop of Winchester and Rich. Pulleston Hob. Rep. 13. If the Next Avoidance be granted to Three persons and after the Church become void and then Two of the Three Present the Third Grantee being a Clerk in this case the Presentation is good and the Bishop may not refuse him inasmuch as all Three were Joynt-tenants thereof by the Grant and only Two of them joyn in the Presentment for that the Third person cannot Present himself but if only one of these Three Grantees Present the Third the Bishop hath power to refuse him And if an Incumbent having the Advowson do Devise the Next Avoidance it seems it is good Trin. 13 Jac. B. R. Harris vers Austen Rol. Rep. 14. In Holland's Case it was Resolved That before the Statute of 21 H. 8. c. 13. if he which had a Benefice with Cure accept another with Cure the First was void but this was no Avoidance by the Common Law but by Constitution of the Pope of which the Patron might take Notice if he would and Present without Deprivation But because the Avoidance accrued by the Ecclesiastical Law no Lapse incurred without Notice as upon a Deprivation or Resignation so that the Church was void for the benefit of the Prtron not for his disadvantage But now if the First Benefice be of the value of Eight pounds per annum the Patron at his peril ought to Present for to an Avoidance by Parliament every one is party but if not of Eight pounds it is void by the Ecclesiastical Law of which he needs not take Notice 15. In a Quare Impedit The Defendant said A. was seized of the Advowson of the Church of D. and by Deed 19 Jac. granted to J. S. the Next Avoidance and that J. S. died and made his Executor who Presented the Plantiff to the Church being void Upon Non concessit it was found That A. granted to J. S. durante vita ipsius J. S. primam proximam Advocationem and that he died before the Church became void Whether this was an absolute Grant of the Next Avoidance as is pretended was the Question And Resolved it was not but it is limited to him to Present to the Advowson if it becomes void during his life and not that otherwise it should go to his Executors and therefore it was Adjudged against the Defendant 16. The Incumbent of a Church purchased the Advowson thereof in Fee and devised that his Executor should Present after his decease and devised the Inheritance to another in Fee It was said the devise of the Next Avoidance was void because when his Will should take effect the Church was instantly void But the Court held the devise was good for the Law is so and it shall be good according to the intent of the party expressed in his will The Grant of the Next Avoidance during the Avoidance is void in Law Steephens and Clark's Case More 's Reports 17. In a Quare Impedit the Case was The Corporation of B. being seized of an Advowson granted the Next Avoidance to J. S. and afterward granted primam proximam Advocationem to the Earl of B. who granted it to the Plaintiff The Church became void J. S. Presented his Clerk who was Inducted and then the Church became void again It was Resolved that the Second Grant was void so as the Plaintiff had no Title for when he had granted primam proximam Advocationem to one he had not Authority to grant it after to another but if the First Grant had been lost so as it could not have been pleaded there perhaps the Second Grand had been good 18. In a Quare Impedit the Case was H. being Incumbent of a Church was Created a Bishop in Ireland and the Queen Presented the Defendant It was the Opinion of the Justices That this Creating of the Incumbent a Bishop in Ireland was a good cause of Avoidance and that the Queen should have it by her Prerogative But if the Queen doth not take the benefit of the First Avoidance but suffers a Stranger to Present and the Presentee dies she may not have Prerogative to Present to the Second Avoidance 19. The Next Avoidance of a Church was granted to A. and B. A. releases to B. and after the Church became void It was Adjudged in this Case That B. may Present and upon Disturbance have a Quare Impedit in his own Name
notwithstanding they were several Advowsons and several Quare Impedits might be brought of them and several Actions maintain'd for their several Possessions yet the Presentment of one man to the Parsonage and Vicarage was no Plurality because the Parsonage and Vicarage are but one Cure And there is a Proviso in the Statute That no Parsonage that hath a Vicar endowed shall be taken by the Name of a Benefice with Cure within the Statute as to make it a Plurality 6. The Lord Hobart in Colt and Glover's Case against the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield is clear of Opinion That Bishopricks are not within the Law under the word Benefices in the Statute of 21 H. 8. cap. 13. So that if a Parson take a Bishoprick it avoids not the Benefice by force of this Law but by the ancient Common Law as it is holden 11 H. 4 60. But withal he holds it as clear That if a Bishop have or take two Benefices Parsonages or Vicarages with Cure either by Retainer or otherwise de novo he is directly as to these Benefices within the Law for he is to all purposes for those not a Bishop whether it be in his own Diocess or not but a Parson or Vicar and by that Name must sue and be sued and Prescribe and Claim For if any person having one Benefice with Cure c. take another c. whosoever will hold two Benefices must have such a Qualification and such a Dispensation as the Law 21 H. 8. requires Whereupon the Lord Hobart in the foresaid Case is clear of Opinion That if a man be qualified Chaplain to any Subject and then be made a Bishop his Qualification is void so as he cannot take two Benefices de novo after by force of that Qualification But if he had lawfully two Benefices before his Bishoprick he may by Dispensation of Retainer besides his former Dispensation to take two Benefices hold them with his Bishoprick And if a man being the King's Chaplain take a Bishoprick he holds that he ceaseth to be the King's Chaplain and Bishops are not in that respect Chaplains to the King within the meaning of the Statute So that the Clause of the Statute that gives the King power to give as many Benefices as he will of his own gift to his Chaplain will not serve them In this Case of Colt c. against the Bishop of c. he is of Opinion That if a man have a Benefice with Cure worth above 8 l. he cannot without Qualification and Dispensation procure another with Cure to be united to it after though they make but one Benefice for this Cautel of Union is provided for by Name But of Unions before he is of another Opinion Case Colt Hob. Rep. 7. In ancient times the Pope used to grant Dispensations of the Canons in this Realm and so might the King have done The first Statute that restrain'd the power of the Pope was that of 21 H. 8. of Pluralities That the Church shall be void notwithstanding any Grant of the Pope Also the power of the Pope was taken away by the Statute of 25 H. 8. Before that of the 21 H. 8. the Pope might have dispensed with a man to have twenty Benefices and so might the King The 21 H. 8. was the first Statute or Law which gave allowance for Pluralities afterwards by the 28 H. 8. the power of the Pope was given to the King But as it was said and agreed in the Case of Evans and Ascough that was not by way of Introduction but Cumulutive and by way of Exposition And by that Statute the Archbishop of Canterbury had in this matter a concurrent power with the King and Dispensation granted by the King or by the Archbishop is good Also in the said Case it was agreed by all the Justices That if a Parson or Dean in England doth take a Bishoprick in Ireland it makes the first Church void by Cession because Ireland is a Subordinate Realm to England and governed by the same Law For it was there agreed by all as well by the Justices as those of the Barr That if a Parson or Dean in England take a Bishoprick in Ireland the first Church is void by Cession Justice Whitlock gave this Reason for it Because there is but one Canon Law per totam Ecclesiam and therefore wherever the Authority of the Pope extended it self be it in one or divers Realms the taking of a Bishoprick made the Deanary or Parsonage void Nemo potest habere duas Militias nec duas Dignitates est impossibile quod unus homo potest esse in duobus locis uno tempore And 5 R. 2. F. Tryal 54. the whole Spiritual Court is but one Court which Book is very remarkable to that purpose That the Canon Law is but one Law Which Reason was also given by Justice Doderidge in the same Case and upon the same point who said That the Law of the Church of England is not the Pope's Law but that all of it is extracted out of Ancient Canons as well General as National Another Reason which he then gave was Because Ireland is a Subordinate Realm and governed by the same Law Because although before the time of H. 2. they were several Kingdoms or Realms yet the Laws of England were there Proclaimed by King John and is subject to the Laws of England And if the King having a Title to Present to a Church in Ireland confirm it to the Incumbent under the Great Seal of England it is good 45 Ed. 3. 70. 8. In Savacre's Case it was adjudged in the Common Pleas That if a Baron or others mentioned in the Statute of 21 H. 8. take divers Chaplains which have many Benefices and after they discharge their Chaplains from their Service they shall retain their Benefices during their Lives and if the Baron takes others to be his Chaplains they cannot take many Benefices during the Lives of the others which are Beneficed and Discharged of their Services for if the Law were otherwise the Lords might make any capable of holding Benefices by admitting them to be their Chaplains 9. T. prayed a Prohibition to the Arches the Case was this One had a Recovery in a Quare Impedit and he had a Writ to the Bishop against T. upon which A. his Clerk was admitted c. and after the Recovery died and T. supposing his heir to be in the Ward of the King and that the said A. took another Benefice without sufficient Qualification by which the Church was void by Cession and he attained a Presentation of the King and he was Admitted c. by the Lord-keeper being within the Diocess of Lincoln and A. sued him in the Ecclesiastical Court and T. prayed a Prohibition and it was granted per totam Curiam for without question there ought nothing to be questioned in the Ecclesiastical Court after the Induction of the party And whether it is a Cession
the probable derivation of that word and what it signifies 2. The manner and form of Publication of Banns according to the Provincial Constitutions 3. By whom Licences for Dispensation of Banns may be granted according to the Canons Also to whom and under what Conditions or Cautions 4. Requisites or Preparatories in Law unto such Licences 5. A Case at Common Law with the Resolutions of the Court relating to Banns with the power of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction therein 1. BANNS bannus vel bannum if Ban in the Brittish Language signifies clamor as Mr. Blount gives it in his Nomo-Lexicon then we need seek no further for its Derivation Bannos Q. an non declinata voce à Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 innotescat Mutatur enim facile 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For though the Word be frequently mentioned by the Feudists and thence applied to other uses as to that which we here in this Kingdom call a Proclamation whereby any thing is by Authority publickly Commanded Permitted or Forbidden Vincen. de Franch Decis 521 360. yet in the Sence here meant and intended it is not so properly a Proclamation as a Publication or a publick Notice-giving And therefore by the word Banns as we use it is intended that publishing of Matrimonial Contracts in the Church tempore Divnorum before Solemnization of Marriage to the end That if any have ought material to object against the intended Marriage signified by such Publication either in respect of Pre-contract or otherwise they may seasonably make their Exception against it consonant to the very Letter of the Canon Law where Banna sunt proclamationes Sponsi Spansae in Ecclesiis fieri solitae c. 27. extr de Spons c. ult Qui Matrim pos c. ult de clandest Despon vid. Gothof ad Nov. Leon. 89. in med ibi Hottoman is very confident that there is both bannns and bannum and that they signifie Two distinct things and neither of them to our purpose for according to his exposition the one should signifie an Edict what day their Vassals or Slaves furnish'd with Horse and shall encounter one another the other a Sanction or Decree that is a Mulct or Fine imposed on him that does not obey the Edict Hottom in verb. Bannus De verbis Feudalibus 2. In the Provincial Constitutions Banna are publick Proclamations or Denuntiations Lind. Provin Constit de cland Despon c. 1. glos verb. Bannorum Others describe them to be Edicta publice proposita Petr. de Anchor in cap. cum in tua Ext. de Sponsal By the said Provincial Constitutions the Banns ought to be Solemn Publications that is they ought to be thrice published in the Parochial Churches where the contracting Parties and their Parents dwell on 3 Sabbath days or 3 Festival daies allowing some interval of time between each at the time of Divine Service when most of the Parishioners are assembled together by the Parsons of the said Parishes respectively or others in holy Orders at such times and seasons wherein Solemnization of Marriage is not Canonically prohibited glos verb. Bannorum ubi supra Yet where three Festivals immediately succeed each other such Publication in them made holds good in Law Prov. Const de Spons glos in verb. a se distantibus As also shall the Marriage it self when once solemnized albeit such Publication of Banns as aforesaid did not precede the same gl in v. Solen Edit de cland Despon ubi supra 3. But by the Ecclesiastical Canons now in force it is Ordained That no Licence for the Solemnization of Marriage shall be granted without thrice open Publication of the Banns according to the Book of Common Prayer by any Person exercising any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction or claiming any Priviledges in the right of their Churches but shall be granted only by such as have Episcopal Authority or the Commissary for Faculties Vicars General of the Archbishops and Bishops sede plena or sede vacante the Gardian of the Spiritualties or Ordinaries exercising of right Episcopal Jurisdiction in their several Jurisdictions respectively and unto such Persons only as be of good State and Quality and that upon good caution and security which shall contain these four Conditions 1 That therein is not any Impediment or Precontract Consanguinity Affinity or other lawful Cause to hinder the said Marriage 2 That there is not any Suit depending in any Court before any Ecclesiastical Judge touching any Contract or Marriage of either of the said Parties with any other 3 That they have the consent of their Parents or Guardians 4 That they shall celebrate the said Marriage publickly in the Parish-Church or Chappel where one of them dwells and that between the hours of 8 and 12 in the Forenoon Pasch 8. Car. B. R. case Matingley vers Martyn It was resolved that if any Marry without the Proclamation of Banns or Licence to dispence therewith they are citable for the same in the Ecclesiastical Court and no Prohibition lies in the case Jones Rep. 4. Before any such Licence as aforesaid can be granted it must appear to the Judge by the Oaths of two sufficient witnesses that the Consent of the Parents or Guardians is thereunto obtained and one of the Parties must personally swear that he beleives there is no Lett or Impediment of Precontract Kindred or Alliance or of any other lawful Cause whatsoever nor any Suit commenced in any Ecclesiastical Court to hinder the said Marriage according to the Tenor of the said Licence But in case the Parties be in Widowhood then the Clause relating to the Parents Consent may be omitted the penalty for offending in the Premisses is six months suspension ab executione Officii in any Commissary for Faculties Vicars General or other the said Ordinaries together with a vacating of every such Licence or Dispensation and subjecting the Parties marrying to the punishments appointed for clandestine Marriages The Syntagmatist tels us that there is a Canon extant made by John Metropolitan of Muscovy who is held as a Prophet in Russia to this day that Matrimonium non nisi publice in Ecclesiis contrahatur Petrus Gregor Tholos 5 In the case of Matingly against Martyn it was resolved 1 That the Cognuzance of all fornications Adulteries and suspected living in Adultery doth appertain to the Ecclesiastical Court 2 That if any marry without proclamation of the Banns without a Licence to dispence therewith they are citable in the Ecclesiastical Court for the same and no Prohibition lies in that case as aforesaid 3 That if any Licences to marry without Banns be granted by the Ordinary of the Diocess or by Commissaries or Officials in their Jurisdictions or by the Archbishop in his Province before the Stat. of 25. H. 8. The Cognuzance of the sufficiency of such Licence of the form of the Dispensation and of the Conditions and Provisoes of such Licence and
Immunitatibus gaudeant quibus Milites Burgenses Parliamenti Ant. Brit. fo 284. nu 30. 6. The Jurisdiction of the Convocation in this Realm though relating to matters meerly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical yet is subordinate to the establish'd Laws of the Land it being Provided by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 19. That no Canons Constitutions or Ordinances shall be made or put in execution within this Realm by Authority of the Convocation of the Clergy repugnant to the Prerogative Royal or to the Customes Laws or Statutes of this Realm To the same effect was that of 9 Ed. 1. Rot. Parl. Memb. 6. Inhibitio Archiepiscopo omnibus Episcopis aliis Praelatis apud Lambeth Conventuris ne aliquid statuant in praejudicium Regis Coronam vel dignitatem For although the Archbishop and the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy of his Province Assembled in a Synod have power to make Constitutions in Spiritual things yet they ought to be Assembled by Authority of the King and to have as aforesaid his Royal Assent to their Constitutions which being had and obtained the Canons of the Church made by the Convocation and the King without Parliament shall bind in all matters Ecclesiastical as well as an Act of Parliament as was Resolved in Bird and Smiths Case Although the Saxons who founded and endowed most of our Churches and made many good Laws in reference to the Jurisdiction power and priviledges thereof yet the Royal Prerogative with the Laws and Customes of the Realm were ever so preserved as not to be invaded thereby King AEthelbert the first Saxon King King Ina AEthelstane Edmund Edgar and King Kanute all these made Laws in favour of the Church but none of them ever entrenched on the Prerogative of the Crown or on the Laws or Customes of the Realm nor any of those ancient Church-Laws ever made without the Supream Authority to ratifie and confirm the same 7. The Laws and Constitutions whereby the Ecclesiastical Government is supported and the Church of England governed are the General Canons made by General Councils also the Arbitria Sanctorum Patrum the Decrees of several Archbishops and Bishops the Ancient Constitutions made in our several Provincial Synods either by the Legates Otho and Othobon or by several Archbishops of Canterbury All which by the 25 H. 8. are in force in England so far as they are not repugnant to the Kings Prerogative the Laws and Customes of England Also the Canons made in Convocations of Later times as Primo Jacobi Regis and confirmed by his Regal Authority Also in some Statutes Enacted by Parliament touching Ecclesiastical affairs together with divers Customes not written but in use beyond the memory of Man and where these fail the Civil Law takes place Among the Britain Councils according to Bishop Prideaux his Synopsis of Councils Edit 5. those amongst the rest are of most remark viz. At Winchester in King Edgars time under Dunstane at Oxford by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury at Claringdon under King Henry the Second The Council under King Edward the 6 th in which the 39 Articles of the English Confession was concluded and confirmed The Synod under the same King from which we receive the English Liturgy which now we have composed by Seven Bishops and Four Doctors and confirmed by the publick consent of the Church which as also the said 39 Articles the succeeding Princes Queen Eliz. King James and King Charles ratified and commended to Posterity At London a Synod in which 141 Canons or Constitutions relating to the pious and peaceable Government of the Church presented to King James by the Synod and confirmed by his Regal Authority and at Perth in Scotland where were Articles concerning Administring the Sacrament to the Sick Private Baptism where Necessity requires Confirmation admitting Festivals Kneeling at the Receiving the Sacrament and an allowance of Venerable Customes But de Concil Britan. vid. D. Spelman The Ancient Canons of the Church and Provincial Constitutions of this Realm of England were according to Lindwood the Canonist who being Dean of the Arches compiled and explained the same in the time of King H. 6. made in this order or method and under these Archbishops of Canterbury viz. The Canons or Constitutions 1. Of Stephen Langton Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury in the Council at Oxford in the year of our Lord 1222 who distinguish'd the Bible into Chapters 2. Of Otho Cardinal the Popes Legate in Anno 1236. on whose Constitutions John de Athon Dr. of Laws and one of the Canons of Lincoln did comment or gloss 3. Of Boniface Archbishop of Cant. 1260. 4. Of Othobon Cardinal of St. Adrian and Legate of the Apostolical Chair on whose Constitutions the said John de Athon did likewise Glossematize His Canons were made at London in Anno 1268. 5. Of John Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury at a Synod held at Reding An. 1279. 6. Of the same Peckham at a Synod held at Lambeth An. 1281. 7. Of Robert Winchelse Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1305. 8. Of Walter Reynold Archbishop of Canterbury at a Synod held at Oxford An. 1322. These Constitutions in some Books are ascribed to Simon Mepham but erroneously for the date of these Constitutions being An. 1322. the said Walter Reynold according to the Chronicle died in An. 1327. and was succeeded by Simon Mepham 9. Of Simon Mepham Archbishop of Cant. An. 1328. 10. Of John Stradford Archbishop An. 13 ... 11. Of Simon Islepe Archbishop An. 1362. 12. Of Simon Sudbury Archbishop An. 1378. 13. Of Tho. Arundel Archbishop at a Synod or Council held at Oxford An. 1408. 14. Of Henry Chichley Archbishop An. 1415. 15. Of Edmond Archbishop of Canterbury 16. Of Richard Archbishop of Canterbury The Dates of the Canons or Constitutions of these Two last Lindwood makes no mention by reason of the uncertainty thereof but withal says it is clear That Richard did immediately succeed the foresaid Stephen Langton and the said Edmond succeeded Richard Lindw de Poen c. ad haec infra in verb. Mimime admittatur If so then it was most probably Richard Wethershed who was Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1229. And St. Edmond Chancellor of Oxford who was Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1234. 8. Councils were either General or Oecumenical from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereunto Commissioners by the Emperours Authority were sent from all quarters of the World where Christ hath been preached Or National or Provincial or Particular by Bullenger called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such were the Councils of Gangra Neo-caesarea and many others commonly Assembled by Patriarchs and Bishops in some particular place of a Countrey The ends of these Councils chiefly were either for the suppression of Heresies the decision of Controversies the appeasing of Schisms or the Ordaining of Canons and Constitutions for decency of Order in the Church Vid. AElfrici Canones ad Wulfinum Episcopum Can. 33. where it is said That there were Four Synods
the dispersing of the Christian Flock doth not undeservedly pass under the name or notion of one of the Rejected Councils To this Assembly resorted 90 Bishops under pretence of Dedicating the Church of Antioch built by Constantine when in truth their principal design was to eject Athanasius out of his Chair and to subvert that Systeme of Faith which was set down in the Nicene Council This Council of Antioch is to be distinguish'd from Five others which Bellarmine reckons Longus also doth name this and mentions other Councils of Antioch But this Council is referr'd to the time of Constantinus and Julius the First Athanasius being restored from Banishment by Constantine the Son of Constantine the Great the Arrians declare it to be unlawful because the same Authority which did eject must restore This matter therefore being referr'd to Pope Julius he Summons the Synod to appear at Rome But the Eusebians chief of the Hereticks that they might avoid this did without much difficulty seduce Constantius to be at the Consecration of the Magnificent Temple built by Constantine the Great at Antioch where were met about 90 Bishops as aforesaid 30 whereof being Arrians the favour and Authority of the Emperour against the double Suffrages of the Orthodox procured the condemning of Restored Athanasius It is said of this Council That they did set forth a Form of Belief so intermixed with Truth and Error that he which is heedful lest he be deceived in his greatest warlness can scarcely be safe for by the omission of what might establish the Truth they weaken that which they undertake to maintain To this Council probably may be referr'd Two other Councils which some report to have been held also at Antioch about the year 348. the former whereof was occasioned by the favour which Julius Bishop of Rome shewed to Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and other Bishops In the other the Arrians did set forth a new Sum of their Faith which being sent to the Bishops of Italy was refused by them adhering to that of the Nicene Council At Sardis in Illyricum in the year 351. by the Command of Constantius and his Brother Constans a great National Council was Assembled consisting of 376 Bishops whereof Three hundred were from the West and Seventy six from the East from Thirty five Provinces in all The Three hundred Western Bishops confirmed the Nicene Creed to this end That Athanasius who was Banished Rome for the space of Three years should be restored to his Place at Alexandria but the other Seventy six Arrians meeting at Philippolis confirmed Arrianism under the Title of the Council of Sardis In this Council by reason of the Arrian Faction and from thence forward were added different Affections to different Opinions In this Council which is commonly called an Appendix to the First Nicene Council were ratified 21 Canons under Pope Julius At Sirmium in Illyria in the year 356. by Command of the Emperour Constantius a Council was held where were present besides Eastern Three hundred Western Bishops and upwards for the hearing and deciding the Cause of Photius who complained to the Emperour that he was unjustly condemned at the Synod of Sardis although he had preached that Christ was meer man and inferiour to his Mother This Council at Sirmium so groaned under the Arrian Tyranny of Constantius that the Supremacy and Presidentship of Pope Liberius dared not to appear Photius Bishop of Sirmium having renewed the Heresies of Sabellius and Samosatenus Of this Council saith Longus there is nothing extant besides Three Forms of Belief which are found in Binius In this Synod there was a hot Dispute between Basilius Bishop of Ancyra an Arrian Heretick and the said Photius a Sabellian Heretick At Millain in the year 355. at the instance of the Arrians a Council consisting of Three hundred of the Occidental Bishops at the command of Constantius was Assembled who after that the Emperour Constans was slain by Magnentius had the whole Sovereignty both of the East and West in his hands This Council was conven'd partly for ratification of the Sentence pronounced against Athanasius at Tyrus and partly for subversion of the Nicene Faith but prevailed in neither In this Council the Emperour himself was President Liberius being Pope I saith the Emperour in this Council am an Accuser of Athanasius The Western Catholick Bishops there present for there were few Eastern promised to consent to the Arrians if they would first subscribe to the Nicene Creed But Valence and Vrsacius the chief Leaders of that Faction withstood them Then followed the degrading of the Bishops and the corrupt Ecclesiastical determination This was effected especially that they might allure Liberius Bishop of Rome either by Gifts or Threats to their way who is reported thus Heroically to have Answered the Emperour who had judg'd him to be Banished to Thrace and offered him the charge of his Journey viz. Thou hast robbed the Churches of the Earth and now offerest to me Condemned an Indigent an Alms Go first and become a Christian thy self At Ariminum in Italy about the year 363. was held a National Council consisting of more than Four hundred Western Bishops under the Emperour Constantius in the 22 d year of his Reign at the motion of the Arrians to whose Opinions the said Emperour was flexible enough but the major part of the said Bishops rejecting the motions made in favour of the Arrian Error touching the Son of God adhered closely to the Nicene Faith This Ariminum is it seems Famous for Two Councils the one Orthodox and lawfully called which is that aforementioned The other Heretical and Tyrannical craftily called by the Arrians under the notion of the Council held at Ariminum that this False one might extinguish the True one whereof the greater part determined the Nicene Creed punctually to be observed and the Sons equality with the Father in Essence to be asserted The Decrees of the Synod at Sirmium to be rejected and Vrsacius and Valence with the Arrians their Followers to be Excommunicated At Seleucia in Isauria which lies between Lycania and Cilcia whence Paul and Barnabas sailed to Cyprus Act. 13. 4. was a Council of 160 Oriental Bishops held the same year wherein the said National Council of Ariminum was held viz. An. 363. The business of this Council procured as the former by the Arrians was much prevented by a Contest arising touching precedency of Debates as whether the matter of Faith or the Lives of such as were to be accused should first fall under Examination At this time there being Convened at Ariminum 600 Bishops according to Bellarmine out of the Chron. of Jerome of which the Eastern Heterodox being overpowr'd both in Number and Arguments by the Orthodox the Emperour Constantius removes them unto Seleucia in Isauria aforesaid Here the Acatians altogether reject Consubstantiality the Semi-Arrians admit it in their sense In this diffention
into the Church albeit Divine Service be not then celebrating unless it be to hear the word preached which being ended he is immediately to depart or stand at the Church-door in the time of Divine Service and hearing the same albeit he go not within the Church it self or thrust himself into the company of others when it is in his power to avoid it or lastly when he continues too long secure under such Sentence of Excommunication without repentance whereby the Law concludes him so manacled by his obstinacy as no Spiritual Physick can have any operation upon him And although regularly the Return of such a one is to be expected usque ad annum yet in this Kingdom quoad incovationem Brachii Secularis it is sufficient if Forty daies be expired after his Excommunication Ibid. c. 1. authoritate glos in verb. Contemnentes And whereas we often in the Law meet with certain Cases of Offences incurring the Sentence of Excommunication ipso facto that is as aforesaid nullo hominis ministerio interveniente Requiritur tamen even in that case Sententia Declaratoria C. cum secund Leges de Haeret. li. 6. Lindw de Foro Comp. c. 1. glos in verb. ipso facto 8. It is therefore not impertinent here to insert what principally those Offences are on the Guilty whereof the Law doth inflict this Excommunication ipso facto Lindwood tells us that there are found among the Canons and Constitutions Provincial these Cases following wherein Excommunication ipso facto is incurr'd viz. 1 A wilful and malicious impeding the execution of the Canon against Incontinency specially in Ecclesiasticks as to Concubines 2 A clandestine and surreptitious Proceeding at Law even to the Writ of Banishment against an innocent person and ignorant of the Proceedings 3 Bigamy 4 False Accusing of any Innocent Clergy-man before a Temporal Judge whereby he happens to suffer under the Secular Power 5 A laying Snares to entrap any in holy Orders whereby afterwards to charge them falsly before the Secular Powers with Crimes whereof they were not guilty 6 A violation of lawful Sequestrations made by the Bishops their Vicars general or principal Officials 7 The exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by any Clerk married or by any Lay-person in matters only and properly pertaining to the Cognizance of the Church 8 Disobedience to the Gregorian Constitution forbidding the holding of Two Benefices Incompatible cum Cura animarum without a Dispensation 9 A procuring to be Presented to a Benefice that is already full of an Incumbent by virtue of the Writs of Quare non admisit or Quare impedit or the like 10 Abettors and Advisors of any to fraudulent Conveyances or Deeds of Gift in fraudem Ecclesiae Regis Creditorum aut haeredum 11 All such as hinder any of what quality soever that are legally Testable from making their last Wills and Testaments or afterwards do unjustly obstruct the due execution of the same 12 All such as hinder the devotion of the people in making their Offerings and paying their Tithes converting them to their own use 13 All such as deny the gathering of the Tithes of any Fruit or molest and hinder the Collectors thereof 14 All Lay-persons who usurp upon such Oblations and Offerings as are due and appertain only to Ecclesiastical persons without their assent and the assent of the Bishop 15 Sacrilegious persons and all such as invade the just Rights Liberties or Revenues of the Church or otherwise unjustly possess themselves de bonis Ecclesiasticis 16 All Bayliffs and other Officers that unjustly enter upon the Goods of the Church or unduly exact from the same or commit Waste upon any the Revenues of a Church vacant 17 All Oppugners of Episcopal Authority or that resist and oppose the exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and all such as disswade others from their due Obedience thereunto 18 All such as being imprisoned for their Contempt to some Ecclesiastical Sentence are thence set at liberty contrary to the Liberties and Customes of the Church of England being Excommunicate persons when they were first apprehended 19 All such as violently usurp upon the propriety of such Trees and Fruits as grow in the Church-yards rooting them up or felling them down or mowing down the Grass thereof contrary to the will and without the consent of the Rector or Vicar of any Church or Chappel or their Tenants 20 All such as should non ritè solemnize Prohibited Marriages that is such as have any Canonical Impediment 21 All such as contrary to the true Catholick sense shall assert any thing or lay down positions or make propositions sauouring of Heresie publickly in the Schools 22 All such as in their Preaching or otherwise shall violate the Canon that enjoyns a due examination and approbation of persons before they are admitted to Preach the Word of God 23 All such as touching the Sacraments assert any thing beside or contrary to the determination of the Church or call such things into doubt publickly as are defined and stated by the Church 24 All such as in the Universities do after a premonition to the contrary hold any Opinions or assert any Doctrines Propositions or Conclusions touching the Catholick Faith or good manners of an ill tendency contrary to the determination of the Church 25 All such Clerks as without Ecclesiastical Authority shall of themselves or by any Lay-power intrude themselves into the possession of any Parochial Church or other Ecclesiastical Living having Curam animarum These Cases and some others now not of use in this Realm are enumerated by Lindwood Lindw de Sententia Excom c. ult gloss in verb. Candelis accensis But there are very many other Cases in the Canon Law that fall under this Excommunication ipso facto by which in the Law is ever understood the Major Excommunicatio and was wont to be published and denounced in the Church Four solemn daies in every year when the Congregation was likeliest to be most full and that in Majorem terrorem 9. The Causes of Excommunication ipso facto according to the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical of the Church of England now in force are such as these viz. 1 Impugners of the Kings Supremacy 2 Affirmers of the Church of England as now established to be not a true and Apostolical Church 3 Impugners of the Publick Worship of God establish'd in the Church 4 Impugners of the Articles of Religion establish'd in the Church of England 5 Impugners of the Rites and Ceremonies established in the Church of England 6 Impugners of the Government of the Church by Archbishops Bishops c. 7 Impugners of the Form of making and Consecrating Archbishops Bishops c. in the Church of England 8 Authors of Schisms in the Church 9 Maintainers of Schismaticks Conventicles and Constitutions made in Conventicles Likewise by the said Canons the Ecclesiastical Censure of Excommunication is incurr'd by all such Ministers as Revolt from the Articles unto which they subscribed at their