Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	absence_n	absent_a	fit_a	15	3	5.8498	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62130	Synodus Anglicana, or, The constitution and proceedings of an English convocation shown from the acts and registers thereof to be agreeable to the principles of an Episcopal church.	Gibson, Edmund, 1669-1748.	1672 (1672)	Wing S6383; ESTC R24103	233,102	544

it is added Et caeteris Coepiscopis Suffragancis nostris Electis et Vicariis praedictis similiter injungatis ut Nos vel nostrum Commissarium eisdem die et loco singuli sigillatim modo debito certificent per literas suas patentes harum seriem et citatorum Nomina Dioeces eorundem in CedulÃ¢ consimili continentes And before the end of that Century we find it the same with the present Form excepting a very small variation of the words So Anno 1396. Vobis etiam ut suprÃ¡ injungimus et mandamus quÃ²d omnibus et singulis Venerabilibus Fratribus nostris Coepiscopis vestris vel Vicariis hujusmodi injungatis seu faciatis injungi quod singuli eorum singillatim de facto suo quatenus pertinet ad eosdem Nos seu loca nostra tenentes vel Commissarios dictis die et loco per literas suas Patentes Citatorum Nomina continentes distinctÃ¨ certificent et apertÃ¨ The Clause at present runs thus Et praetereÃ Vobis ut suprÃ injungimus et mandamus quÃ²d omnibus et singulis Coepiscopis Suffraganeis Provinciae nostrae Cant. injungatis et injungi faciatis ut singuli eorum Sigillatim de facto suo quatenus pertinet ad eosdem Nos seu locum-tenentem sive Commissarium unum vel plures dictis die horÃ¢ et loco per literas eorum Patentes Nomina et Cognomina omnium et singulorum per eos respectivÃ¨ Citatorum continentes distinctÃ¨ certificent et apertÃ© The several Forms of these two Clauses we see are only different ways of expressing the self-same things And I produce them thus distinctly that they who have lately Acted against the Intent and Authority of them may have no Opportunity to Suggest to their Friends that as they stand in our Modern Mandates they are not agrecable to the Sense and Language of Antiquity i. e. that the Denouncing Canonical Censures against Absents and the Returns from the several Bishops to inform his Grace whose Attendance it was that he had a right to require has not ever been as now it is the Method and Practice of an English Convocation Since the Beginning of this Controversie Assertions no less groundless have been given out and propagated and have had their design'd effect in misleading many honest and well-meaning Men which is a warning for the future not to leave Room for any Misrepresentations of that kind and is also the reason why I take the same Method in the Explication of the next Clause whereby the Lord Bishop of London in particular is oblig'd to Certifie the Archbishop that his Mandate has been transmitted to the Suffragan Bishops and duly executed within his own Diocese In Archbishop Peckham's time Anno 1281. Vos autem praedictis die et loco in forma praedicta Comparentes comite Sanitate certificetis nos per Patentes vestras literas quid feceritis de praemissis The Dean of the Province requir'd to certifie to his Grace the Execution of the Mandate Anno 1282. Vos autem quos tunc praesentes adesse volumus nobis rescribatis per vestras literas Patentes harum seriem continentes qualiter praesens Mandatum nostrum fueritis Executi Anno 1350 1. De die vero receptionis praesentium et quid seceritis ac facere duxeritis in praemissis Nos vel nostros Commissarios dictis die et loco Certificetis per literas vestras Patentes harum Seriem et Citatorum Nomina vestrae London Dioeces in Cedula separata his Certificatoriis annectenda plenarie continentes Which after 3 Centuries and a half continues the same in effect to this Day viz. De die vero receptionis praesentium et quid in praemissis seceritis Nos aut nostrum in hac parte locum-tenentem sive Commissarium hujusmodi dictis die hora et loco debitÃ¨ Certificari curetis per Literas harum seriem unÃ cum nominibus omnium et singulorum adding the several degrees Episcoporum c. in separata Schedula literis Certificatorum annectend complectentes The Dean of the Province's Certificatorium or Return Exhibited III. According to this precept of the Archiepiscopal Mandate it is and always has been the Usage of Convocation for the Bishop of London to Exhibit his Certificatorium or Return to his Grace on the first Day of its Meeting Which being read by some one of the Officers of the Archbishop's Court appointed by his Grace certain Commissioners are directed to receive the Returns of all the other Bishops and the Proxies of the Persons mention'd therein i. e. the Procuratorial Letters of the Cathedral and Diocesan Clergy appearing in Person and the Substitutions of Proxies made by the absent Members upon reasonable Causes of Absence offer'd and alleg'd according to the terms of the Mandate Archbishops Com missioners to receive and inspect Proxies Nor is the Commissioner empower'd only to receive but also to inspect and examin the Proxies of both sorts to see that they be in due form and the Causes alledged for absence fit to be admitted The Proxies as well of the Cathedral and Diocesan Clergy as of the Absent Members are ordinarily express'd under the Common Name Procuratoria in his Grace's Appointment or Commission but sometimes with express reference to the Absent Clergy So Feb. 7. 1452. nec non quorumcumque absentium Procuratoria in dicto Concilio sive Convocatione comparere debentium Anno 1557. He is required to examin among other things causas Absentiarum and in 1562 the first after the Reformation the Acts whereof remain entire the Archbishop's Deputation is thus set down at large Deinde dictus Reverendissimus Pater commisit vices suas Mro Thomae Yale Cancellario suo ac Magistro Willelmo Drurie Legum Doctori Commissario ad facultates ad recipiend Certificatoria Episcoporum ac ad inspiciend Procuratoria quorumcunq Absentium ac causas absentiarum suarum examinand et approband Answerable to which the Contumacy pronounc'd immediately upon this Inspection and Examination is in the ordinary Style of the Registers against those who did Nullo modo comparere that is neither in Person nor by Proxy And yet more express in that of 1562. monitos et citatos ac per se aut Procuratores suos idoneos minime comparentes For Sentence of Contumacy against Absents by the Archbishop or his Commissary IV. The Certificates and Proxies being duly examin'd and the Members particularly Preconiz'd the Usage has ever been to pronounce the Absents Contumacious Anciently it was pronounc'd in the Name of the Archbishop by the Person commissioned to receive and inspect the Certificates c. And in that Case the punishment was reserv'd to the Archbishop PoenÃ¢ Contumaciarum Domino reservata But when his Grace pronounc'd it in Person as he then did sometimes and constantly afterwards it ran Poena sibi reservata or in words to that effect i. e. to be inflicted or not inflicted with strictness or with abatements

dissent from the express Judgment of a Writer who understands the Value of his own Opinions too well to be easy under Contradiction But leaving that Point to be disputed between this Author and the Majority of the House the Circumstance upon which I chiefly insist in this Matter is It was not the House but the Prolocutor who determin'd the Election 3. That those of the Lower Clergy contend not for this Power of determining Elections as lodg'd in the Prolocutor but in their House and not the least Mention is made of the House or any Member of it in determining this Election of 1586. but the Proceeding and Sentence run solely in the name of the Prolocutor The Question therefore is By whose Authority was that Sentence given It must be either from his Grace or from the House The Journal tho' very exact and particular makes not the least mention of the House's interposing which Silence is the stronger Argument that they had no Right to interpose the Matter in all appearance being committed to the Prolocutor alone because in the other Instances of 1640. when the Prolocutor and Lower Clergy were all equally concern'd the whole Proceeding was carry'd on in the name of the House Coram Dominis Praelatis Cleris comparuerunt Domini and Domini Praelati interrogÃ¢runt determinationem continuÃ runt consenserunt censuerunt rebus sic stantibus nihil statuendum c. And when they came to Sentence Domus ad eorum finale decretum processit and Post Suffragia DomÃ»s in eÃ¢ parte fact declararunt ordinarunt Suffragiis in eÃ¢ parte promulgatis Dominus Prolocutor de cum consensu c. pronunciavit Considering how distinctly the Minutes of 1640. express the part which the House had in these Proceedings I leave it to the Opinion of every Reader whether the compleat Journal of 1586. would not have left us some Foot-steps at least of the Houses's Concern at that time either in the Course of the Proceeding or at least the final Sentence if the Cause had not been committed to the sole Examination and Decision of the Prolocutor And if the Power was solely in him it can be no Question whether he deriv'd from the House who were present and might as well have proceeded by their own immediate Authority if any such had been lodg'd in them or from the Archbishop who could not be there in Person whose Absence the Prolocutor supplies in all other Respects and who was also hearing a like Cause in the Upper-house at the same time The Instance of 1640. consider'd II. The other Instance of a Right in the Lower-house to take Cognizance of Elections concurrent with that of his Grace is in some respects more full to their purpose than the foregoing Testimony In the Year 1640. Nov. 11. the House appointed a Committee upon a controverted Election in Lincoln-Diocese which Committee met Nov. 12. and yet the Archbishop appears not to have interpos'd till Nov. 14. nay the Preface to the Order he then gave shews that to have been the first time of his interposing Reverendissimus eis significavit quÃ²d ipse audivit esse quasdam discrepantias c. As far then as a single Instance can affect the Rights of a Judicial Court and alter the natural Course of legal Proceedings and establish a concurrent Jurisdiction so far is this Instance before us a Testimony of the Lower-house's Right to enquire into the Circumstances of doubtful Elections I say to Enquire It goes no farther than Enquiring for this Precedent goes no farther than an Enquiry about the Custom of the Diocese in their Election of Proctors and a Right founded upon a single Precedent can never be extended beyond that Precedent It proceeds not to a formal Examination of Witnesses upon Oath and much less to a final Judgement These and all the other marks of a Judicial Proceeding commence upon his Grace's Special Order to the Prolocutor and House ut examinarent determinarent juxta Juris Exigentiam Consuetudines cujuslibet Dioeceseos donec aliter ordinatum fuerit From which Order I think these three things are fairly infer'd 1. That if Archbishop Laud had thought the Lower-house to have an inherent Power of Examining and Determining Judicially he would not have interpos'd in that Matter after they were actually enter'd upon their Enquiries 2. That if the Clergy themselves had believ'd such a Power to be lodg'd in their House they would have declar'd against that Interposition as an Invasion of their own inherent Authority 3. That in Virtue of the Reservation donec aliter ordinatum fuerit it still remain'd in his Grace's Power to revoke that Order and either to put a stop to the Proceeding or to remove it as he should see cause to his own immediate Cognizance III. An Additional Account of the Substitution of a Prolocutor IN explaining the Election and Office of a Procutor Chap. IV. I took occasion to consider how far he had a Right to make a Substitution in cases of Sickness or Business For tho' the Speaker of the House of Commons as executing that Office upon a Royal Confirmation never pretended to depute another tho' also the Confirmation of the Archbishop and Bishops be no less necessary in order to execute the Office of a Prolocutor and tho' lastly it appear that Applications for leave to substitute in those Cases have been actually made to the Upper-house yet against all these it had been confidently affirm'd that the Deputations of this kind might be made without the Archbishop's Consent or Privity Power of the Lower-house p. 9. c. 1. and the manner of making them is farther urg'd to give the Prolocutor some such Figure in the Lower-house as the Archbishop is known to have in the Upper The late Substitution in 1701. That Writer had conceal'd all the Instances of Application for Leave made to the President and Bishops but he was afterwards put in mind of them by the Author of the Right of the Archbishop p. 66 67. Very lately a Substitution being made by the Prolocutor upon the Authority of a Precedent already consider'd in the Year 1640 V. Sup. p. 76. the Person so deputed was actually put into the Chair without the Approbation or Knowledge of the Archbishop and Bishops The Account of it in a Paper markt Numb 1. To justify the Proceedings of the Majority in this and some other Particulars a Paper came out markt Numb 1. in the way of a News-Letter and in Truth much of the same Authority both in the Relation of Facts and the Reasonings upon them with the flying Intelligence of other kinds Only there is this difference in the Case of our Ecclesiastical News-Writer and his Brother Intelligencers their imperfect Representations are usually the Effects of Ignorance and Haste but his savours too much of Partiality and Design God knows it is a sad Omen to our poor Church that any of her own Ministers can thus triumph in her Misfortunes and comply

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad