need of this Protestation which was made to guard against the Penaltys of the Acts 25. and 27. H. VIII and has therefore we see a plain reference to them The Convocation in which Alesius the Scot disputed with so much applause sat the Year after this Anno 1537 †Ant. Brit. p. 331. Fox Vol. 2. p. 504. though my Lord of Sarum †Vol. 1. p. 214. I find out of a laudable Eagerness to record the Honors done to his Countrymen has plac'd this Dispute a Year earlier than it hapned Cromwell open'd the Meeting with a Speech where he tells them that they are call'd to determin certain Controversys in Religion which at this time be moved concerning the Christian Religion and Faith not only in this Realm but also in all Nations thorough the World For the King studieth Night and Day to set a Quietness in the Church and he cannot rest till all such Controversys be fully debated and ended through the Determination of You and of his Whole Parliament For he will suffer no Common Alteration but by the Consent of You and of his Whole Parliament And he desireth You for Christ's sake that All Malice Obstinacy and Carnal Respect set apart ye will friendly and lovingly dispute among your selves of the Controversys mov'd in the Church c. These Fox tells us were the very words of his Speech and that as soon as it was ended the Bishops rose up altogether giving thanks unto the King's Majesty not only for his Great Zeal towards the Church of Christ but also for his Godly Exhortation worthy so Christian a Prince and then immediately they went to Disputation We may observe here that neither Cromwell in his Speech to the Convocation nor the Prelates in their Answer mention any Commission to Treat though it had been a Proper Head to have been enlarg'd on in both Cases and could not well have escap'd the Clergy when returning Thanks to the King for his Goodness to them had any such Commission then issu'd But that it did not and that the Clergy were then under no Apprehensions that their liberty of Debating on what Subjects and even of coming to what Conclusions they pleas'd was abridg'd by the late Act the Preface to the Institution of a Christian Man a Book which pass'd this Convocation evidently shews I have transcrib'd the Passage already from thence †See P. 97. and shall here therefore only referr the Reader to it No the Practise then and long afterwards was only for the President of the Synod to declare to 'em by word of Mouth * Thus in the Convocation of Jan. 1. 1557 The Acts say that Card. Pool Causas hujus Synodi Verbo tenùs proposuit And so divers times before and after 1541. Ian. 20. Reverendissimus exposuit iis ex parte Regis qùod intentio ejus erat qùod ipsi inter se deliberarent de Reformandis Errotibus conficerent Leges de Simoniâ vitandâ c. 1547. 1. E. VI. Nov. 5. Rev mus exposuit iâ—s fuisse c. de mandato Regio Procerum qùod Praelati Clerus inter se conâ—â—lerent de verâ— Christi Religione probè instituendâ With this agrees an Old Directory of Cranmer's for the first Day of the Convocation 7 E. VI. May 1. 1552. §. 6. The Clergy of the Inferior House to be called up to the Chapitor his Grace to declare the Cause of this Convocation and to appoint them to Elect c. 1555. 22. Oct. Episcopus London summariè compendiosè Causam Synodi vocatae exposuit Ian. 13. 1562. Arch. Cant. brevem quandem Orationem Eloquentiae plenam habuit ad Patres Clerum perquam inter alia opportunitatem reformandarum rerum in Eccl. Anglic. jam oblatam esse aperuit ac Propensos animos tam illustrissimae Dominae Nostrae Reginae quà m aliorum Magnatum hujus regni ad hujusmodi Reformationem habendam declaravit I have laid these Instances together that we may see clearly what the Custom then was and how a Message from the King by the President supply'd the place of a Commission under the Broad Seal which was afterwards practis'd Heylin and Fuller have translated some of these Passages in their Historys but so loosly as to accommodate them to the Current Doctrine and Practise of their time when a License to Treat was held necessary Which I mention to warn the Reader not to receive their Versions as Literal For it is plain they saw no other Acts of Convocation than those from whence these Transcripts were taken the King's Pleasure for what Ends he had call'd them together and what Business he would have them proceed upon And this Verbal Intimation was all the Previous Leave that was either ask'd or given in That or several other succeeding Reigns The only Instance in H. the VIII 's time that seems to contradict this is the Divorce of Anne of Cleve in 1540 mention'd by L. M. P. * P. 40. which he says the Clergy could not take cognizance of till the King's Commission impower'd them to debate and consider it And in their Iudgment therefore they recite that Commission at large and by vertue of it declare c. They do so and there were Two very good Reasons for it arising from the Matter about which they were to give their Judgment and from the Manner also in which they were to handle it As to the first of these the attempting any thing by Word or Deed against this Marriage of the King with Anne of Cleve was High-Treason or at leastâ— Misprision of Treason by the Laws of the Realm as the Clause of Pardon in the Act †32. H. 8. c. 25. for dissolving this Marriage evidently shews And the Clergy therefore had reason to desire a Commission from the Crown to screen them from these Penealtys But further such a Commission was necessary not only for their security in a point of this Importance but in order to their very Assembling For which has not been hitherto observ'd this Cause was adjudg'd not in a Convocation properly so call'd that is in a Provincial Synod but in a National Assembly of the whole Clergy of either Province the King issuing out his Letters Commissional under the Great Seal as the Sentence * See it Bishop Burnet Vol. 1. Col. of Rec. p. 197. speaks to the Two Archbishops All the Bishops Deans Archdeacons and Clergy of England and commanding them in Universalem Synodum convenire to debate and determin this matter The Lords and Commons then sitting had petition'd the King to referr it to his Clergy with a design of grounding an Act of Parliament on Their Determination The Business requir'd Haste †The Commission was seal'd the 6 th of July the Clergy met by Vertue of it the 7th The Cause was heard Iudgment given and Letters Testimonial of that Iudgment drawn up and sign'd by all the Clergy on the 9th such Dispatch
against the Necessity of that Exemption from the Penaltys of the six Articles which the Clergy continu'd to pray and which was now granted according to their Prayer as Bishop Parker †Quod concessum est See above p. 4 2. assures us But had we been in the dark as to the Event of this Petition yet the very Time and Circumstances in which it was fram'd would sufficiently have accounted for it and shew'd us the Unreasonableness of setting up this Instance as a Precedent The Nation was then in an high Ferment and the Popish Party both in the Convocation and out of it strong and to be sure watchful to make use of all Advantages against the Reforming Clergy in whom therefore it might be prudent to arm themselves for the Great Work they were going about a thourough Alteration of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church with the Largest Powers they could procure whether in strictness of Law they needed them or not They themselves could not well doubt whether they had such a Freedom oâ— Debate as they were permitted to enjoy by H. the VIII th himself a Prince jealous to the utmost of every the least Encroâ—chment on his Prerogative and careful to put every method he fairly could in practise which might be of use to humble the Clergy This Petition therefore cannot be supposed to express their Sense of the Act but their Fears rather of the Construction which some of the Men in Power might put upon it And under this View a License might appear though not necessary in it self yet useful to prevent the Malice of their Enemies and to allay the Doubts of their Friends to take away all Excuse from those who pretended to be under the Aw of that Statute and every way to encrease and animate their Party It was no new thing in that and the preceding Reign for freedom of Speech even when it had Right on its side to ask Leave a Practise stoop'd to by the Laiety of those times as well as the Clergy For it was we know in the 33 d. Year of H. the VIII th †〈◊〉 Syâ—mâ—nds d' Ewes Jour p. 43. 〈◊〉 ch 7. that the Commons made their first Request for Liberty of Speech which has been since continu'd And in his Son's Time the Time we are upon they have petition'd even for Leave to Treat in particular Cases of which I shall give one Instance out of their Journals In the Parliament begun 4. Nov. 3 E. VI. the Commons e're they would attempt the Repeal of a Branch in a certain Act of Relief made suite to the King for Liberty to proceed in it The Words of the Journal are 18. Nov. It is order'd that Mr. Speaker with the King 's Privy Council of the House and twelve others of the House shall be Suitors to know the King's Majestys Pleasure by his Council if upon their Humble Sâ—ite thâ—y may treat of the last Relief for Cloaths and Sheep at four of the Clock in the Afternoon Nov. 20. It is reported by Mr. Speaker the King's Pleasure to be by his Counsel that the House may treat for the Act of Relief having in respect the Cause of the Granting thereof Nâ—v 30. Mr. Comptroller reporteth that the King's Majesty is pleased with the Petition for the Relief and giveth License to treat upon it Dec. 11. A Bill was brought in for the Discharge of that Subsidy and Repeal of the Branches wherein it was granted We see here what a profound Submission was in those times pay'd to the Prerogative in the Point of Liberty of Debate even by Parliaments themselves and have with all a clear Proof that Men may Petition for what is unquestionably their Right and which is more may continue so to do for long Periods of time without prejudicing their Right by such repeated Petitions Which however is far from being the case in respect of the Clergy for I have shewn it doubtful whether the Petition alledg'd were ever presented or if it were yet certain that it was overrul'd afterwards no License issuing upon it and that the Clergy neither had nor thought they needed any such License for some succeeding Reigns So that to return to what led me into these Enquirys no Authentick Exposition of the Submission-Act is to be had either from this Petition as L. M. P. imagines or from the Uninterrupted Practice of Convocations to which Dr. W. appeals And if our sense of the Act therefore be not prov'd faulty by some better Mediums then these it will remain unshaken Little now is left behind to this purpose unconsider'd except the Opinion of Dr. Cousins and Dr. Zouch and a Resolution of some of the Iudges * Mention'd by L. M. P. p. 38 39. of Each of which some short Account shall be given Dr. Cousins in his Tables as they are now Printed lays down these Three Assertions Synodus Provincialis vel Nationalis convocari non debet absque Principis rescripâ—o Nâ—c tractari nec determinari potest aliquid in Synodo nisi consentiente assentiente Principe Nihil habet Vim Legis priusquam Regius Assensus sucrit adhibitus his quae Synodus decernenda censuerit Of these the first and last Positions are easily admitted but I desire to be excus'd from believing that the second as it is now worded was of Dr. Cousins's drawing since it contradicts the Practise of the Synods held under Parker and Grindall and his own Patron Archbishop Whitgift and as far as we can learn that of the Convocation in 1597 the Year before Cousins dy'd The Tables therefore being not publish'd till after his Death and after the Synod in 1603 't is reasonable to believe that they had the General Fate of Posthumous Pieces not to come out exactly as their Author left them and particularly that they were in the second Position adjusted to the Practise of the Synod in 1603 either by the Editor or by the owner of that Copy from whence the Edition was made I should think that Cousins's Proposition ran thus Determinari non potest aliquid in Synodo nisi consulto * For the Change of Consentiente into Consulto I have good Authority And under this Reading it is imply'd that both the Request and Consent were Verbal assentiente Principe which by some unskilful hand that had seen the License in 1603. was alter'd into Nec Tractari nee Determinari potest I say an Unskillful Hand for it is clear and I have shewn it that that License it self does not go so far as this second Assertion the Instrument reciting only a leave given to Treat and Resolve joyntly that is a Leave for the one in order to the other whereas here they are mention'd separately and a License affirm'd necessary to the first without respect to the Latter Dr. Cousins who was a Man of Skill and Exactness in these things would never have expressed himself thus injudiciously had he indeed liv'd to
continu'd And as the time of the Convocation of Canterbury's assembling was in this and in most oother Ancient Instances different from that of her Sister Province so was it we see different also from that of Parliament Here it preceded ‖ Seven Days but generally it followed the Parliament a Week or two on purpose as I apprehend that the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots might be at leisure to attend both those Meetings And this was the usual Distance throughout Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns till Henry the Fourth began to enlarge it in and after whose time the Clergy held their Assemblies during and near the Sessions of Parliament but not thoroughly concurrent with them the Archbishop it seems affecting Independency and the King who above all things desir'd to stand well with the Clergy favouring him and them in that respect and giving way to their being call'd later or dismiss'd sooner than the Laity as having been already answer'd in his Demands at that or some other Synod of the Province call'd out of Parliament-time Such Assemblies being frequent in those days and transacting all Affairs that belong'd even to Parliamentary Convocations But this was only an Interruption of the Old Practice for a time not a through alteration of it for about the Entrance of the last Age when the Prerogative began to recover the Ground it had lost to the Church we find these Meetings of the Clergy and Laity more closely united the Dates of Henry the Eighth's Convocation being all one or a few days before or after if not altogether the same with those of his Parliaments And from 1 Edw. 6. to this Reign the Clergy have I think met always and parted within a day of the Parliament the day it self on which the Parliament sat and rose being not judg'd so proper for this purpose because the Bishops were then to attend the House of Lords But since the late Revolution the Business of these Two Meetings not interfering the same day has serv'd to open both of 'em or rather to open the one and shut up the other There have been no Deviations from this Rule that I know of except in a Legatin Synod or two which are no Presidents and once in the Convocation of 1640 but that Experiment succeeded too ill to be ever try'd a Second Time The Clergy therefore tho' by a Mistake in their Politicks separated from the Parliament yet continu'd still to attend it in Two Provincial Assemblies or Convocations which as they met for the same Purpose and had the same Reasons of State inserted into their Writs of Summons as the Parliament had so did they to manifest yet more their Origin and Allyance keep closely up to the Forms and Rules and Manner of Sitting and Acting practis'd in Parliament I cannot do right to my Subject without pointing out several Particulars wherein this Conformity was preserv'd and I shall not therefore I hope be misinterpreted in doing it The Two Houses of Parliament sat together Originally and so therefore did the Two Houses of Convocation of which to omit other Proofs I shall mention that only which may be drawn from the Inferior Clergy's being sent as Delegates from the Bishops to represent and act for 'em in Convocation an Usage which tho' practis'd long after the Greater Prelates divided from the Less yet must in all Probability have had its Rise when they were together as the like Custom also in Parliament had whither the Lords Spiritual and Temporal being us'd to send Commoners to Vote for them while the States were together continu'd the Practice also long after they were asunder as appears on the Spiritual Side by Numerous Instruments of Proxy yet remaining in the Bishops Registers and on the Temporal by some Probable Inferences of Mr. Elsyng * Cap. 5. p. 126. tho' Direct Proofs of it are together with the Proxy Rolls lost †One I find in the 5 H. 5. where Th. de la Warre a Baron gives Letters of Proxy to two Commoners and those which is very particular of the Clergy but his case was particular for his Barony descended to him after he was in Orders and he is styl'd therefore constantly Magister and not Dom. de la Warre in his Summons to Parliament As the Commons in Process of Time withdrew from the Peers so did the Inferior Clergy from the Bishops and Abbats Each having their Prolocutor in ordinary the very Word that is us'd every where in the Latin Rolls * And sometimes in the English Iournals See Sir Symonds d'Ewe◠p. 15. p. 328 c. for the Speaker and not withdrawing only from the Great Lords upon occasion for Liberty of Debate and in order the better to agree upon their Petitions and Opinions as I presume they always did even in the Old mixt Assemblies but meeting together at the very first in a Distinct Body and joyning with the Upper House only on Great Occasions The Prolocutor was so chosen as the Speaker by the Body whose Mouth he was so presented to the Archbishop and confirm'd by him as the other was by the King His Office was much the same on either side He moderated their Debates kept them to Order and attended the Lords sometimes with the sense of the House and at the Entrance of his Office disabled himself in form several Instances of which occur in the latter Acts of Convocation * Act. MS. Conv. 1541 Sess. 2. 1554. Sess. 3. 1562. ad Ian. 16. Bills of Money and Grievances but especially the latter began usually in the Lower House here as well as there had alike several Readings and were Enacted at the Petition of that House as Statutes antiently were and the Successive Variations in the Enacting Forms of our Statutes were observ'd and transcrib'd generally into the Clergy's Constitutions Their Subsidies were often given Conditionally and with Appropriating Clauses and Indentures drawn upon those Conditions between the Archbishop and the King if the Grant was to the Crown or between the Archbishop and the Prolocutor of the Lower House †Scriptutura Indentata inter Reverendissimum Tho ex unâ parte Mag. Dogett Prolocutorem Cleri eundem Clerum ex alterâ testatur quòd dictus Clerus concessit dicto Reverendissimo Patri Caritativum Subsidium Registrum Wottonian ad fin And so the Commons granted per quandam Indenturam Sigillo Prolocutoris Sigillatam if to the Archbishop just as the Way was in the Grants of the Commons In Matters of Jurisdiction the Upper House gave Sentence the Lower House prosecuted as was usual in Parliament for which reason the Act of H. 8. * 24 H. 8. c. 12. which in all Causes relating to the King or his Successors allow'd an Appeal to Convocation mention'd the Bishops Abbats and Priors of the Upper House only because They only were Judges But over their Own Members both Houses of Convocation had Power in like manner
Wake it seems has different notions of these things for he tells us that Whatever Priviledges he has shewn to belong to the Christian Magistrate they belong to him as such they are not derived from any Positive Laws and Constitutions but result from that Power which every such Prince has Originally in himself and are to be looked upon as part of those Rights which naturally belong to Sovereign Authority and that to prove any particular Prince entitled to these Rights it is sufficient to shew that he is a Sovereign Prince and therefore ought not to be denied any of those Prerogatives that belong to such a Prince unless it can be plainly made out that he has afterwards by his own Act Limited himself * Pp. 94 95. So that according to Dr. Wake 's Politicks All Kings in All Countries have an Equal Share of Power in their first Institution none of 'em being Originally Limited or subjected to any Restraints in the Arbitrary Exercise of their Authority but such as they have been pleased by after-acts and condescensions graciously to lay upon themselves Which Position how it can be reconciled with an Original Contract and with several Branches of the Late Declaration of Rights I do not see and how far it may appear to the Three States of this Realm to entrench on their share in the Government and on the Fundamental Rights and Liberties of the Free People of England Time must shew That all Bishops indeed are Equal is the known Maxim of St. Cyprian but which of the Fathers have said that All Kings are so too I am I confess as yet to learn For my part I should think it as easie a Task to prove that every Prince had originally the same Extent of Territory as that he had the same Degree of Power The Scales of Miles in several Countries are not more different than the Measures of Power and Priviledge that belong to the Prince and to the Subject But Dr. W. has breathed French Air for some time of his Life where such Arbitrary Schemes are in request and it appears that his Travels have not been lost upon him He has put 'em to that Use which a Modern Author * Moldsworth's Pref. to the State of Denmark observes to be too often made of 'em that they teach Men fit Methods of pleasing their Sovereigns at the Peoples Expence tho' at present I trust his Doctrine is a little out of season when we live under a Prince who will not be pleased with any thing that is Injurious to the Rights of the Least of his Subjects when duly informed of them Whereas then Dr. W. in great Friendship to the Liberties of his Church and of his Country asserts that by our Constitution the King of England has all that Power at this day over our Convocation that EVER ANY Christian Prince had over his Synod I would ask him one plain Question Whether the King and the Three States of the Realm together have not more Power in Church-matters and over Church-Synods than the King alone If so then cannot the King alone have All that Power which ever any Christian Prince had because some Christian Princes have had all the Power that was possible even as much as belongs to the King and the Three Estates in Conjunction There is one thing indeed which seems material to be observed and owned in this case 't is the Assertion of the Second Canon which declares our Kings to have the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical that the Christian Emperours in the Primitive Church had But this Canon must necessarily be understood of the King in Parliament for out of Parliament it is manifest that he is not so Absolute in Ecclesiastical Matters as those Emperors were In Parliament he can do every thing that is by the Law of God or of Reason lawful to be done out of Parliament he can do nothing but what the Particular Rules of our Constitution allow of And VIII This too is a Distinction which Dr. W. should have taken notice of had he intended to do Justice to his Argument For the Church here in England is under the Government both of the Absolute and Limited Sovereign under the Government of the Limited Sovereign within the Compass of his Prerogative under the Government of the Absolute Sovereign without any Restraints or Bounds except what the Revealed Will of God and the Eternal Rules of Right Reason prescribe The Pope usurped not only on the King the Limited but on the King and Parliament the Absolute Sovereign and what was taken from Him therefore was not all thrown into the Prerogative but restored severally to its respective Owners And of this Absolute Sovereign it is the Duty when Christian to act in a Christian manner to be directed in matters Spiritual by the Advice of Spiritual Persons and not lightly to vary from it By the same Rule the Limited Sovereign is to steer likewise within the Sphere of his Prerogative And he is also further obliged to preserve those Priviledges of the Church which belong to her by the Laws of the Realm Now Dr. Wake I say confounds these two Powers and the Subjections that are due to them speaking all along of the King as if He in Exclusion to the Three Estates had the Plenitude of Ecclesiastical Authority lodged in him and were the single Point in which the Obedience of the Church and of every Member of it centered This is a Fundamental Mistake that runs quite through his Book and is such an One as overturns our Constitution and confounds the Executive and Legislative parts of it and deserves a Reprehension therefore some other way than from the Pen of an Adversary Henry the Eighth 't is true in vertue of his Supreme Headship laid claim to a Vast and Boundless Power in Church-affairs had his Vicegerent in Convocation Enacted every thing there by his own Sole Authority issuing out his Injunctions as Laws at pleasure And these Powers whether of Right belonging to him or not were then submitted to by All who either wished ill to the Pope or well to the Reformation or wanted Courage otherwise to bear up against his Tyrannical Temper and Designs and were the more easily allowed of by Church-men because they saw him at the same time exercise as Extravagant an Authority in State-matters by the Consent of his Parliament However the Title of Supreme Head together with those Powers that were understood to belong to it was taken away in the â—â—â—st of Queen Mary and never afterwards reâ—ved but instead of it all Spiritual Iurisdictiâ—â— was declared to be annexed to the Imperial â—rown of this Realm 1 Eliz. c. 1. and the Queen enabled to â—xercise it by a Commissioner or Commissiâ—ners This Power continues no doubt in â—he Imperial Crown but can be exerted no â—therwise than in Parliament now since the â—igh Commission Court was taken away by â—he 17 Car. 1. It was attempted indeed to be
to the Canons of the Church are not only under a Duty to attend but have also a Right to meet so that as their Writs for Assembling concurrently with a Parliament are not mere Letters of Grace and Compliment but to be emitted ex debito Iustitiae and whether the Government has any thing to propose to them or no so likewise are their Assemblies at such times to be held by the same Law notwithstanding it may be pretended that there is no Occasion for them For although their Consent may not be necessary nor their Advice seem wanting yet as they are bound to wait if Either shall be ask'd So may the Clergy themselves have some Informations and Remembrances to offer and some Petitions to make concerning such things as they may be supposed to take more particular notice of or wherein they may be more peculiarly concern'd And this Liberty and Opportunity of representing what they may think necessary is to be esteemed by them as their great Parliamentary Priviledge not to be Wav'd like the Others for the better course of common Justice but to be Asserted and Confirmed for the Good of the whole Kingdom Such a Liberty therefore and Opportunity is not only provided for by Canons but secur'd I say by the Law Both by the Law of Custom which is the Law of Parliaments and by Express Statute an Act of Edward the Third appointing a Parliament and consequently * Thus the Answerer of the Nine Reasons of the House of Commons against Bishops Votes in Parliament Argued alledging That the Bishops were by the Triennial Act obliged necessarily to attend the Convocation once in Three Years And the Examination of that Answer 40. 1641. Printed by Order of a Committee of the House grants the Allegation p. 16 17. a Convocation to be held just within the Canonical distance Yearly and the present Law enjoyning That it shall be frequently held and once at least in Three Years Held I say and not only Called for that is the Right we speak of A Right that has been all along own'd by constant Practice or if perchance not exercised at some Particular time through Forgetfulness or Distraction to allow the utmost and more perhaps than can be proved yet never Purposely and if I may so speak Regularly Neglected till Now. CHAP. III. HItherto we have considered only the First of the Two Points proposed the Clergy's Right of Meeting and Sitting in Convocation as often as a New Parliament Sits We will now address our Selves to the Second which asserts their Right when Met of Treating and Deliberating about such Affairs as lie within their proper Sphere and of coming to fit Resolutions upon them without being necessitated antecedently to qualify themselves for such Acts and Debates by a License under the Broad Seal of England That this is the Original Right of all Provincial Synods incident to their nature as such claim'd and practised by them in all Ages of the Church and in all Christian Countries and in our own particularly from the time that we have any account of our Synods till towards the beginning of the Reformation is so certain as to need no Proof and Dr. Wake therefore is never more like himself that is never more Absurd than when he would insinuate the contrary * P. 48 288. The only Question is how far the Statute 25 H. VIII has restrained this Right and made a License from the Crown necessary It being there Enacted That the Clergy ne any of them should from thenceforth presume to attempt alledge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons nor should Enact Promulge or Execute any such Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by what Name or Names they may be called in their Convocations in times coming unless the same Clergy may have the King 's most Royal Assent and License to Make Promulge and Execute the same Now that the Clergy are not by this Clause ty'd up altogether from acting Synodically is allowed generally by Those who desire most to abridge their Powers It cannot with any shew of Reason be pretended that the Convocation however under a Restraint by this Act is become such a Lifeless Body as to have neither Sense nor Motion till Animated by a second Royal Command Unquestionably and according to common Opinion and Practice they have even since this Statute in vertue of the Writ by which they Meet a Liberty of Addressing as they shall see cause either with Thanks or Requests or other proper Representations But it is presum'd also that they may go a great deal further and that there is nothing in the Clause recited which hinders them even from Devising and Framing the Draught of a Canon so it be done only in a Preparatory Way and with Submission to the Royal Enacting Authority This is what has been laid down in a late Treatise * Letter to a Convocation-Man briefly indeed but convincingly and with so much force of Reason as yet has received no Reply The Answerers of that Piece having slid over this part of it where the Act is Explained with a Seeming Neglect but with a Real Distrust of their being able to say any thing to the purpose against what is there advanc'd When they come to this Point as important as it is they dispatch it always in hast Even Dr. Wake can allow it but a flight mention or two in a Work where he finds room amply enough to discuss every thing that is not Material But he did well to tread lightly over the Ground which if he had stood never so little upon it would have gone near to have sunk under him To make this Point yet more manifest and not to leave the least pretence for a Cavil I shall here resume the Proof of it bespeaking the Candor of those Gentlemen whose studies particularly lie this way if as the general Fate is of those that Write out of their Profession I express my self now and then a little improperly So the Thing I aim at be but clearly made out though my Manner of doing it be not strictly according to Art it will not concern me I shall consider first the Occasion of the Act and then the Act it self and by a short account of the One lead the Reader into the true Sense and Meaning of the Other Henry the VIIIth enraged both at the Pope and Cardinal Wolsey for their Delusions in the Affair of the Divorce resolved with the Ruin of the Cardinal to lessen the Papal Authority And for the better effecting this Design which could not well be accomplished without striking a Terror into Those who were then but too much the Pope's Vassals the Clergy especially the Monks and Friars he involved them All in a Premunire for submitting to Wolsey's Legatine Character unauthorised by the Crown not for Procuring or making Use of Provisional Bulls as Dr. Wake in his usual Kindness to the
very remarkable those words Attempt Alledge Claim and put in Ure are not recited A sure sign that the Attorney-Generals of those times 〈◊〉 those Times had Attorney-Generals that had both Skill and Will enough to carry the King's Prerogative as high as it would bear did not think that they could colourably be made use of to this purpose or that the Clergy were debarr'd by this Act from attempting New Canons to be made hereafter but such Old ones only as had been long ago pass'd and publish'd Dr. Wake therefore is Disingenuous in the Highest Degree where †Append. Num. V. p. 371. he pretends to Print this very Commission and when he comes to the Act of Parliament which it recites does not transcribe the Act as it is there recited which is in part only but refers us to his Extract of it Num. IV. and assures us that it is recited in the Commission as in the Extract Verbatim tho' the most Material words in his Extract and such as would be most Conclusive upon the Clergy's Convocational Acts and Debates if they really belong'd to 'em are as I have shewn designedly omitted in that Recital Such poor shifts is he forc'd to to maintain a Bad Cause which however even by these Ill Arts cannot be maintain'd The Proof drawn from these Commissions is farther confirm'd by a Proclamation of K. Charles the First in Iune 1644 * See it Biblioth Reg. pag. 331. which forbids the Assembly of Divines to Meet and Act upon these and these Accounts only Because by the Laws of the Kingdom no Synod or Convocation of the Clergy ought to be called and assembled within this Realm but by Authority of the King 's Writ and no Constitution or Ordinance Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons may be Made Enacted Promulg'd or Executed it says not Attempted Alledg'd Claim'd or puâ— in Ure which were words known to belong to Canons already made Unless with the King 's Royal Assent and License first obtain'd upon pain of every one of the Clergy's doing contrary and being thereof convict to suffer Imprisonment and make Fine at the King's Will as by the Statute of the 25 H. 8. declaring and enacting the same it doth and may appear Let me add to all these the Authority of the Convocation it self which set out the Institution of a Christian Man a few years after they had submitted In the Dedication of that Book the Prelates address the King after this manner Without your Majesty's Power and License we acknowledg and confess that we have none Authority either to assemble together for any pretence or purpose or to publish any thing that might by us be agreed on or compil'd Which words evidently imply a power of agreeing upon and compiling tho' they deny that of publishing any Determination or Doctrine It were endless after this to argue from the silence of the Authors of those times for then I must vouch All of them Only the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum being a Book of Great Note which was drawn up by Commissioners appointed by the King and where no Occasion is neglected of setting out and magnifying the Royal Power it may be worth our while to observe that there is not however in all that Book as far as I can find one Expression that implies the Composers of it to have thought that the Clergy's Synodical Debates lay under any Restraint from the Crown which is a very strong Presumption that they did not think the Clergy to lye under any The Reader will forgive me for laying together this Great Heap of Authorities if he either considers of how great Importance it is to my Cause that the sense I have given of the Act should be fully clear'd or how necessary Dr. Wake has made such a Collection by affirming that this sense of it was never allowâ—d of or for ought he knows so much as heard of I repeat his very words till the Gentleman against whom he writes enlighten'd the world with it P. 289. The Accounts I have given do I hope both sufficiently expose the Rashness and Vanity of this Assertion and also sufficiently prove the Truth and Justness of that Exposition To return to it therefore The Statute as far as it relates to the Power of the Clergy in Convocation plainly implies no more than that Canons should not from thenceforth pass and become Obligatory without the King's Leave and Authority given in that behalf without his Leâ—ve which was requisite to their Passing and his Authority which was afterwards to ratifie and give 'em force And to understand the words of the Law otherwise is as has appear'd to understand them against all Propriety and the Rules of Construction and which is still more unreasonable to do this in Materiâ minùs favorabili and where Ordinary Liberty is abridg'd and lastly which is intolerable where so grievous a Penalty as that of a Praemunire is to follow The 25 of H. 8. then has not in the least alter'd the Law of Convocations in relation to any of the Powers or Priviledges of the Inferior Clergy They can still freely Consult and Debate Petition or Represent propose the Matter or Form of New Canons and consider about the Inforcing or Abrogating old ones in a word act in all Instances and to all Degrees as they could before the passing of that Statute Indeed my Lord Archbishop's hands are ty'd by it for he cannot now call a Convocation without the King 's Writ which before this Act he might and in Elder Times frequently did He cannot now Enact and Constitute any thing by his own Authority as in Imitation of the Papal Power in Councils and of the Royal Power in Parliaments it was usual for him to do He must before he passes any Act of the Two Houses have the King's Assent to it and after it is pass'd there must be the King's License also to Promulge and Execute it In these several Respects the Metropolitan's Authority is considerably lessen'd by this Act the Exercise of which is now chiefly seen in Moderating the Debates of the Synod and giving his Vote last upon any Question propos'd there as Dr. Cousins Dean of the Arches to his Grace that then was does in his Tables express it * Ejus est moderari Synodum ultimò Suffragium ferre Tab. 3. But the Powers and Priviledges of All the other Members of Convocation continue whole and entire to 'em notwithstanding this Statute and were so understood to continue for a long time after it pass'd the Methods of proceeding in Convocation continuing the same for near Threescore and ten years after the Act as they had been before it the Clergy going on still to propose deliberate and resolve as they had been us'd to do without Qualifying themselves for it by any Precedent License under the Broad Seal the King the Parliament and People of the Realm allowing 'em so to do without opposing this Method as Illegal
consider'd do yet certainly prove it not necessary in order to Petition There are many Requests of the Clergy in Convocation to Queen Elizabeth One Anno 1580 in behalf of the Archbishop then out of favour that she would be pleas'd to restore him Fuller IX Book p. 121. Another Anno 1587 about the Act said to be intended against Pluralities Full. Ibid. pag. 191. A third to the same purpose in some other Convocation of her Reign which being yet unprinted I shall insert in the Appendix * Numb IV. It is a Paper very Remarkable both for the weightiness of the Matter and closeness of the Expression and for the spirit and freedom with which it is drawn which however I propose not as a Pattern but as a Great Argument of that Liberty they thought remaining to them A fourth from the Lower to the Upper House of Convocation to be presented in their Name to the Queen for the Pardon of Lapses and Irregularities 'T is in a Cotton MS. Cleop. F. 2. f. 123. and from thence I shall Transcribe it See App. Num. V. A fifth against the Encroachments of Chancellors upon Archdeacons Ibid. p. 264. A sixth praying many Regulations in very weighty matters Ibid. There is also extant in Fuller * IX Book p. 55. See the Preface to it p. 66. of this Book a Remonstrance of the Clergy of the Lower House being a Declaration of their Judgments made indeed in the very beginning of Queen Elizabeth when this Statute was not yet revived and about Popish Tenets but which may I presume be safely imitated for the Assertion of truly Catholick Doctrines Anno 1606 A Petition from the Lower House of Convocation to King Iames against Prohibitions This too the Reader will find with the others in the Appendix †Numb VI. Nay even the Assembly of Divines it self tho' it was more strictly ty'd up by the Ordinance of Parliament ‖ See it Rushw. 3. part Vol. 2. p. 328. than ever any Convocation was by their Commission for there were Negative words in that Ordinance which impower'd 'em to Treat and Confer of such Matters and Things as should be propos'd to 'em and no other yet did not think themselves restrain'd from Petitioning and proposing several Heads of Reformation to the Parliament See 'em Ibid. p. 344. The Clergy in Convocation were not us'd only to be Petitioners themselves they were also some times address'd to in the same way by others either by their Brethren of the Establisht Clergy or by those of the Separation Of the former I have seen an Instance in Manuscript being a Petition from the London Ministers * See Cat. MSS. in Bibl. Bodl. n. 8494. The Direction of it is To the Reverend Fathers in God the Lords Bishops and the Rest of the Convocation It is said in the Manuscript to have been read and committed Febr. 10. 1580. Of the Latter several Mentions and Accounts remain tho' the Petitions themselves be lost For Example In Queen Elizabeth's time those who were then call'd the Puritans Petition'd the Convocation as appears from a Passage in one of their Books thus quoted by Bishop Bancroft * Dang Posit L. 4. c. 4. p. 140. We have sought say they to advance the Cause of God by Humble Suit to the Parliament by Supplication to your Convocation-house c. And whether it be this or some other Petition of theirs that is refer'd to in a Manuscript Justification †See Cat. MSS. in Bibl. Bodl. n. 1987. of the Mille-manus Petition to King Iames I cannot tell but these words occur in it We have often and in many Treatises declar'd our Objections against the Liturgy at large and namely in a Petition which Four Godly Grave and Learned Preachers offer'd in our Names to the Convocation-house A yet greater Liberty than any I have mention'd was taken by the Clergy in that Long Address miscalled by Fuller ‖ P. 208. the Protestation which the Lower House offered to Henry the Eighth himself after the passing of the Statute or in that other very long one to the Upper House in Queen Mary's time * Hist. Ref. part 2. B. 2. Coll. n. 16. In the first we have an Instance of very Free Convocational Representations and of yet freer Petitions in the Latter for it attempts not only Canons but Acts of Parliament and particularly prays †Art 10. that the Statute of which we have been speaking may be repealed But the Clergy no more stand in need of these Instances than they would joyn in these Designs and Petitions The Statute of Submission is none of their Grievances nor do they ask or wish a Repeal of it They desire only that it may not have an Unnatural and Illegal Construction put upon it and that they may be bound up no otherwise by it than the Submitters themselves were They know indeed that the Reflection which a Right Reverend Member of theirs once made upon this Statute was That the Extreme of raising the Ecclesiastical Power too high in the Times of Popery had now produced another of depressing it too much So seldom is the Counterpoize so justly Ballanced that Extremes are reduced to a well-tempered Mediocrity * Bishop Burnet 's Hist. Vol. 2. pp. 49 50. But as they are not sure that this is his Lordship's present Opinion so they are certain it is none of Theirs for they think their Power as Great as it need to be if it be not made less than it really is Had they lived indeed in Henry the Eighth's time they should not perhaps have humoured his Imperious Temper so far as to have made that mean Submission or tamely to have given up any one Legal Priviledge which belonged to the Body and was not inconsistent with the Good of their Country But since it was made and Enacted they know how like Good Englishmen and Good Subjects chearfully to obey it Only they can never submit to such a sense of the Submission as was never intended nor throughout that Age wherein it was made ever practised This would be a much meaner part in them than the first Act was in their Ancestors whose Religion was all Submission and Slavery and it is no wonder therefore that the Fetters prepar'd for them sat so easily upon them But in a Protestant Clergy the profess'd Assertors of the Just Freedoms and Rights of Mankind in Religious affairs and who have been more than once Instrumental in shaking off Yokes of every kind from the Necks of Englishmen such Illegal Complyances would be inexcusable In short they have and they own that they have great reason to be content with the Priviledges which the Law has clearly marked out to them and the Great Petition they have to offer is that they may be permitted to enjoy them If their Predecessors were struck with a Panick Fear at the very sound of a Premunire in a Reign when the Laity too trembled at the
but all such as compos'd a Provincial Synod See Reg. Henr. Prioris f. 234. sometimes from thence to cite all those Abbots and Priors who had no place in Parliament in order to compleat the Numbers of the Clergy and form a Provincial Assembly And he cited 'em to appear after Winchelsey's Pattern not before the King and among the other States but before Himself in the Chief Church of the Place But this was at his Choice for the King 's Writ directed him only to command the Attendance of the Parliament-Clergy And with this the Crown had reason to be content while the Defects of these General Summons by the Provincial and Bishops Writs were supply'd by Particular Writs directed to great Numbers of Abbats and Priors as the way was in Edward the First 's and Second's time the former of these citing Personally to his Parliaments after the Praemunientes went out often sixty or seventy and sometimes above eighty Regular Prelates and the Latter usually Summoning about fifty of them till the Declining Part of his Reign But this being esteem'd an Hardship on those Regulars who were not by Tenure oblig'd to attend the King's Summons as holding nothing of him by Barony they were in time omitted and the Number of Abbats and Priors who had Personal Writs reduc'd to about thirty the Archbishop's General Mandate then calling the rest to his Parliamentary Convocations and that being allow'd and accepted by the Crown as a sufficient Attendance in Parliament But what the Archbishop did of himself at first That he did afterwards at the King's Instance who took occasion from this Practice to enlarge his own Letters of Direction to him and by them at last to require him to Summon all those Regular Prelates he was us'd to Summon without such a Direction This as it was a Natural Step so indeed it was necessary after the Crown had foreclos'd it self from Summoning the greatest part of the Abbats Personally to Parliament for then it lay purely in the Archbishop's Breast whether he would call the Unsummon'd Abbats by his General Mandate or no and so upon any Dispute between the Spirituality and Temporalty the Crown might have been defeated of their Parliamentary Attendance At what Time precisely these Writs to the Archbishop for a Full Convocation to be held concurrently with a Parliament began to be practis'd I have not found The Eldest that has yet come to my hands is of the 10 th of Edw. 3. when the Parliament was call'd to meet at Nottingham die Lunae prox post Festum S. Matthaei †See Dug p. 186. by a Writ dated Aug. 24. And the same day another Writ issu'd to the Archbishop of Canterbury to call all the Clergy of his Province to Leicester ad diem Lunae prox post Festum S. Michaelis that is seven days afterwards * See Cl. 10 E. 3. m. 16. dors And the next year again the same thing was practis'd the Archbishop being order'd to Summon the Convocation to St. Paul's two or three days after the Parliament was to meet at Westminster * See Pryn. Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. p. 39 40. And still which is observable the Style of Authority in these Fuller Convocation-Writs was the same as it was in those where the Premonish'd Clergy only were mention'd it being a Mixture of a Command and a Request Rogando Mandamus as it continues to be in all Writs for a Convocation to this very Day This also deserves notice in many of them that they went not out only at the same time with the Parliament Writs but mention the holding of a Parliament in their Preambles as the Ground of their issuing that so the Clergy according to their Duty might resort to it Thus it was in the Writ of the 11 Ed. 3. * Ps. 2. m 40. dors just now mention'd And so again in his 29 th year another Writ †Cl. m. 8. dors runs Cùm pro arduis urgentibus Negotiis Nos Statum Regni nostri Anglicani ac necessariam defensionem ejusdem Regni concernentibus ordinaverimus Parliamentum nostrum apud Westmonasterium tenere c. Quia expedit quòd praedicta Negotia quae Salvationem Defensionem Regni nostri contingunt salubriter efficaciter cum bonâ maturâ deliberatione deducantur Vobis mandamus rogantes c. to call the Clergy of Canterbury-Province to St. Paul's die Lunae prex post Festum S. Martini ad tractand ' consulend ' super praemissis unà Vobisâ—um aliis per Nos illùc mittendis ad consentiend ' hiis quae tùnc c. T. R. apud Westm. 25. Sept. The same Form recurs 31 E. 3. Cl. m. 21. dors and in divers other Instances And when the Convocation-Writs did not mention a Parliament in Terms yet the Matter and Tenor of them shew'd that they belong'd to one for as long as the Reasons of State were continu'd in the Parliament-Writs so long we find 'em inserted in those to the Archbishops for a Convocation and after the Particular Causes of Summons came to be omitted in the Convocation-Writs and They as well as Those for a Parliament were reduc'd to a Fix'd Form which return'd constantly with little or no Variation which happen'd I think about the middle of R. the 2 d * There are later Instances of Parliament-Writs where the Reasons of Summoning are declar'd specially as 7 H. 4. Cl. dors m. 29. but they are rare ones yet even Then the General Reasons of convening them left in the Writ and still a part of it shew that they were call'd not only for Ecclesiastical but Civil Affairs and such as concern'd the Peace Publick Good and Defence of the Kingdom in a word to the very same Intents and Purposes for which the Parliament it self was assembled These Writs for a Full Convocation grew now the Common Form it being matter of Ordinary Practice to send them out concurrently with those for a Parliament in Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns and still the Convocation was as in the preceding Instances generally order'd to attend a few days sooner or later than the Parliament did and not precisely on the Spot where the Parliament open'd but at some Church or Chapter-house near it And sometimes the Archbishop was left wholly at large as to both these Circumstances the Place being mention'd with a vel alibi prout melius expedire videritis and the Time no otherwise prefix'd than by the words cum omni celeritate accommodâ or ad breviorem diem quam poteritis or such other Equivalent Expressions which yet were so understood as to oblige the Archbishop to joyn the Assemblies of the Clergy both in Place and Time closely to those of the Laiety A yet Greater Liberty was indulg'd and taken in some of the succeeding Reigns till in Henry the Eighth's time * My Lord of Sarum Vol. 1. Coll. oâ— Rec. Num. 3. Prints a Convocation-Writ as the Pattern
setling the Point between us But here he is as reserv'd as one would wish for from the beginning to the end of his Crude Work there is not a single Instance of this kind made out or so much as pretended †Except the Trite Instance of Exclus◠Clero Nay to see the fate of misapply'd Reading even of those twelve insignificant Instances which he has produc'd no less than eight are evidently mistaken as to the Dates either of the Parliaments or Convocations mention'd in them The Reader will rather take my word for it than allow me the liberty of interrupting the Course of my Argument so far as to prove it And I shall proceed therefore to consider and remove the several Objections that lie also against the second Point advanc'd in these Papers that the Clergy when met have a Right of Treating and Debating freely about such matters as lie within their proper Sphaere and even of coming to fit Resolutions upon them without being necessitated antecedently to gratify themselves for such Acts or Debates by a License under the Broad Seal of England CHAP. VIII IT had been argu'd from the General Nature of such Assemblys as these we are treating of that Freedom of Debate was their undoubted Right and Priviledge incident to them as such and inseparable from ' em To this I find these several Answers return'd Dr. W. assures us that the Debates of the most General and Famous Councils have been under as great Restraint as he supposes the Convocation to be †P. 288. L. M. P. adds that Poyning's Law has ty'd up even a Parliament in Ireland as strictly †P. 44. and the Author of the Postscript ⸪ At the end of a Book entituled An Essay concerning the Power of the Magistrate 8◠1697. fetches a third Instance from Scotland where the Three Estates he says can debate of nothing but what the Lords of the Articles have beforehand agreed on ‖ P. 198. As to the first of these supposing Dr. W's Allegation true yet he has been told that there is no arguing from the Powers claim'd or exercis'd by Emperors in those Great and Extraordinary Assemblys to what is fit to be done in lesser and stated ones and why such Inferences do not hold some Reasons have been given him which I need not now repeat But in truth he mistakes or misrepresents the Practise of the Emperors even in these General and Famous Councils which I have shewn him p. 125 6. went no further than to require a preference to that Particular Business for the Dispatch of which they were Summon'd not to exclude their debating on any thing but what the Emperor propos'd to them And of this the Canons of those Councils are an Evidence beyond Dispute which both as to Matter and Form took their Rise from the several Synods they were made in without any Imperial Leave or Direction for the framing them With what Face then can Dr. W. vouch the Practise of these Councils as Precedents for that Degree of restraint he would have laid on an English Convocation With what Truth or Conscience can he affirm that they acted intirely according to the Prescription of the Emperors †P. 288. and deliberated on nothing but what they were directed or allowed he means expresly and particularly allow'd by the Prince to deliberate on †P. 48. Whatever our Author may think of such Doctrine Now or whatever he may Hope from it sure I am that had he liv'd and utter'd it while those Holy Synods were in being it would not have been two or three Years afterwards before he had repented of it But Old Councils are Dead and Gone and any thing it seems may be said of them Let him not depend too much upon that for they have Friends still in the World that may happen yet before he dies to meet together and ask him a few Questions A living Synod may sometime or other think it for its Interest and find it in its Power to vindicate the Honor and Authority of the Dead ones Well if Old Councils cannot afford a Precedent Modern Parliaments shall Poyning's Law therefore is urg'd which provides that All such Bills as shall be offer'd to the Parliament of Ireland shall be transmitted hither under the Great Seal of that Kindom and having receiv'd approbation here shall be sent back under the Great Seal of England to be preferr'd to the Parliament of Ireland †L. M. P. p 44. But what have we to do with Instances fetch'd from Conquered Countrys who must receive what Terms the Victor pleases and be glad of any We live among another People always Jealous of their Libertys and careful to preserve them in a Land where slavery either in Church or State though sometimes planted could never thrive And those Fetters therefore which might perhaps justly be laid on an Irish Parliament may not fit an English Convocation so well which is therefore free because it is an English one But after all how far does this Law of Poynings reach Our Lawyer tells us that it leaves not the Parliament at Liberty to propose what Laws they please that the Irish look upon it as Conclusive upon their Debates and are satisfy'd and again that we have here an Instance of a Parliament without Liberty of Debate But this is too gross an Imposition upon the Credulity of his Readers few of which are so ignorant as not to be aware that Poyning's Law layes a restraint only on the Enacting Power of their Parliament but not on the Debates of it which notwithstanding this Act are left as free as ever They can still Treat and Conferr about all Matters and Causes that are of Parliamentary Cognizance they can Petition Represent and Protest Nay they can propose what Heads of Bills they please to be transmitted hither and sent back thither in Form of which we have had very late and frequent Experience And how therefore the Abridgment of the Convocations Liberty of Debate can be pretended to be justify'd by this Irish Precedent is I confess past my English Understanding For as I take it the Convocation desires no other Powers and Priviledges but just what this Parliament claims and practises and pleads only that the 25 H. VIII may not be extended to such a Rigorous and Unjustifiable Sense as will lay greater restraints upon Them than Poyning's Laws does upon Those of Ireland But our Letter-writer himself is sensible that this Instance is not to the purpose for at the close of it his Conscience gives a little and he is forc'd to confess that the Irish Parliament are not under an Universal Restraint nor wholly mute till the King gives them Power to Debate and Act †P. 44. Are they not Why then was it generally said that they were a Parliament without a Liberty of Debate or of proposing what Laws they please in the very next Lines to these where it is all unsaid
docto pio fideli in Prolocutorem suum assumendo consultantes unanimiter consentiant eligant sicque electum ipsi R mo in eâdem domo Capitulari prox insequente Sessione debitâ cum solennitate praesentent His dictis descendunt omnes in inferiorem domum ad effectum praedictum Forma Eligendi Praesentandi Prolocutorem SOlet observari ut postquam ingressi fuerint Inferiorem Domum in sedibus se decenter collocent si aliqui ex iis sint Consiliarii sive Sacellanâ— Regiae Majestatis ut hi superiores sedes occupent atque inde unus ex iis propter dignitatem Reverentiam seu in eorum absentiâ Decanus Ecclesiae Cath. Divi Pauli London sive Archidiac Lond. Presidentis officio in hujusmodi Electione fungatur Atque ut ad hoc â—iâ—e procedatur primùm jubebit nomina omnium citatorum qui tunc interesse tenentur à dictae inferioris Domûs recitari praeconizari Notatisque absentibus alloquatur praesentes atque eorum sententiam de idoneo procuratore eligendo sciscitetur Et postquam de eo convenerint quod semper quasi statim absque ullo negotio perfici solebat mox conveniant inter se de duobus Eminentioris Ordinis qui dictum electum R mo D o. Cant. in die statuto debitâ cum Reverentiâ Solennitate praesentent Quorum alter sicut cum dies advenerit ipsum Prolocutorem cum Latinâ doctâ oratione praesentare tenetur sic etiam idem praesentatus habitu Doctoratûs indutus consimilem Orationem ad dictum R mum Patrem ac Praelatos caeteros praesentes habere debet Quibus finitis praefatus R mus Oratione Latinâ tam Electores quam Presentatorem Praesentatum pro suâ gratiâ collaudare ac demùm ipsam Electionem suâ Arch. authoritate expresse confirmare approbare non dedignabitur Et statim idem R mus Anglicè si placeat exponere solet ulteriâ—s beneplaeitum suum hortando Clerum ut de rebus communibus quae Reformatione indigeant consultent referant die statuto Ac ad hunc modum de Sessione in Sessionem continuabitur Convocatio quam diu expedire videbitur ac donec de eâdem dissolvendâ Breve Regium eidem R mo praesentetur Et sciendum est quòd quotiescunque Prolocutor ad praesentiam R mi causâ Convocationis ac Tempore Sessionis â—ccesserit utatur habitu praedicto ac Ianitor sive Virgifer dictae Inferioris Domûs ipsum reverenter antecedat Ejusdem Prolocutoris est etiam monere omnes ne discedant à Civitate London absque Licentiâ R mi Quodque statutis diebus tempestive veniant ad Conv. Quodque salaria Clericorum tam superioris quam Inferioris Domûs Ianitoris Inferioris Domûs juxta â—â—tiquam taxationem quatenus eorum quemlibet â—â—ncernit fideliter persolvant Synodalia fol 3. XVIII JAMES by the Grace of God See p. 385. c. To the most reverend Father in God our right trusty and well beloved Counsellor Iohn Archbishop of Canterbury of all England Primate and Metropolitan the reverend Fathers in God our trusty and well beloved Richard Bishop of London Anthony Bishop of Chichester and to the rest of our Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical Greeting Whereas all such Jurisdictions Rights Priviledges Superiorities and Prehemynences Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power or Authority have heretofore been or may lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical State and Persons and for Reformation Order and Correction as well of the same as of all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Virtue and the conservation of the Peace and Unity of this our Realm of England are for ever by authority of Parliament of this our Realm united and annexed unto the Imperial Crown of the same And whereas also by Act of Parliament it is provided and enacted that whensoever we shall see cause to take further Order for or concerning any Ornament Right or Ceremony appointed or prescribed in the Book commonly called the Book of Common Prayer Administration of the Sacraments and other Rights and Ceremonies of the Church of England and our Pleasure known therein either to our Commissioners so authorized under the great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical or to the Metropolitan of this our Realm of England that then further Order should be therein taken accordingly We therefore understanding that there were in the said Book certain things which might require some Declaration and enlargement by way of Explanation and in that respect having required you our Metropolitan and you the Bishops of London and Chichester and some others of our Commissioners authorized under our great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical according to the Intent and meaning of the said Statute and of some other Statutes also and by our Supream Authority and prerogative Royal to take some care and pains therein have sithence received from you the said particular things in the said Book declared and enlarged by way of Explanation made by you our Metropolitan and the rest of our said Commissioners in manner and form following Then come several Alterations in the Calendar Rubricks and Offices of Private Baptism and Confirmation an Addition about the Sacraments at the Close of the Catechism A Prayer for the Royal Family and six new Forms of Thanksgiving for Rain Fair Weather c. and after these inserted at length it follows All which particular points and things in the said Book thus by you declared and enlarged by way of Exposition and Explanation Forasmuch as we having maturely considered of them do hold them to be very agreeable to our own several Directions upon Conference with you and others and that they are in no part repugnant to the Word of God nor contrary to any thing that is already contained in that Book nor to any of our Laws or Statutes made for Allowance or Confirmation of the same We by virtue of the said Statutes and by our supream Authority and Prerogative Royal do fully approve allow and ratify All and every one of the said Declarations and Enlargements by way of Explanation Willing and requiring and withal Authorizing you the Archbishop of Canterbury that forthwith you do Command our Printer Robert Barker newly to Print the said Common Book with all the said Declarations and Enlargements by way of Exposition and Explanation above mentioned And that you take such Order not only in your own Province but likewise in our Name with the Archbishop of York for his Province that every Parish may provide for themselves the said Book so Printed and Explained to be only used by the Minister of every such Parish in the Celebration of Divine Service and Administration of the Sacraments and duely by him to â—e observed according to Law in all the other parts with the Rites and Ceremonies
as those of Parliament which they exercis'd either joyntly or apart by Mulcts (a) See an Instance An 1462. in Anth. Harmar p. 32. and Confinements (b) If you will not give place quoth the Prolocutor to Archdeacon Philpot being Commission'd I suppose so to speak by the House I will send you to Prison This is not quoth Philpot according to your Promise c. not denying the House's Power but the Justice only of exerting it in his Case Fox sometimes but chiefly by inflicting Ecclesiastical Censures by Excommunicating (c) See Instance of Bishop Cheyney Excommunicated for departing the Convocation without Leave Hist. of the Troubl and Try of Laud. p. 82. Suspending (d) See Bancroft ' s Register fol. 138 139. for an Instance of a Dean an Archdeacon and a Proctor suspended for deserting the Synod Mandatis nostris licitis vel Prolocutoris dictae Convocationis minimè obtemperantes As the Archbishop's Sentence of Suspension runs Depriving (e) See an Instance of Bishop Goodman Sentenc'd to be depriv'd by the Convoc of 1640. for refusing to subscribe the Canons Heyl. Life of Laud. Pag. 446. My Lord of Sarum has suggested * Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. p. 130. another Branch of this Parallel that as none were of the Lower House of Parliament but such as came thither by Election and all that had Personal Summons sat Above so the Lower House of Convocation was compos'd of those who were deputed thither from others and the Upper of such as sat in their own Right But this Conjecture contradicting not only the Records of the Convocations in Henry the Eighth's Reign to which my Lord applys it but all the Elder Accounts of our Synods in the Archbishop's Registers where the Deans and Archdeacons are said always as now to sit together with the Proctors of the Clergy I am sorry that I cannot fall in with it the rather because it would give me an opportunity of adorning these Rude Collections with something drawn from his Lordship's Exacter Works and of making him my Publick Acknowledgments for it His Lordship would perhaps have omitted this Guess had he consider'd that the Provincial Assemblies of the Clergy were as I have shewn in lieu of that Parliamentary Attendance which the Crown challeng'd by the Premunientes and their Session therefore in Two Houses was adapted to the Parliamentary Summons so that between Them and the Laiety the Parallel in this respect ran that as all of the Laiety who were Summon'd singly * Singillatim and in Generali are the words of Art us'd to distinguish these Two sorts of Summons in K. John 's Charter by the King sat in Parliament as Peers and all who were Summon'd generally by the Sheriff as Commoners so in the Convocation all of the Clergy who had been call'd immediately and by Name to Parliament belong'd to the Bishop's house but such as were us'd to be cited at second Hand only and Mediante Episcopo as Deans Cathedral-Priors †These for a long time after the Distinction of the two Houses of Convocation sat in the Lower House but afterwards with the other Priors and Abbats in the Upper Archdeacons and the Proctors of the Clergy sat apart by themselves That which led his Lordship into this Opinion was it seems a Passage in Ioscelin * Ad Ann. 1532. where a Question †About the Unlawfulness of the King 's first Marriage is said to have been carried for the Crown by 216 in the Upper House i. e. by the whole Upper House for there were none against it whereas in the Lower 23. only were present and but 14. of those for it Which Disparity of Numbers his Lordship is at a loss how to account for otherwise than by the Supposition laid down But since that is plainly Erroneous I may I hope without Presumption endeavour to solve the Difficulty â—nother way His Lordship knows very well that the Bishops with those Abbats and Priors who were of some consideration amounted to several Hundreds in Number out of which there is no doubt but 216 might be got to do the King's Business especially at that Critical Juncture when the General Dissolution of Monasteries was threatned and already in part begun * For in June before this Convocation sat the King procur'd a Bull from the Pope to suppress several Hist. Ref. 1. Vol. p. 121. and the Regulars had no way to escape the Storm which they saw gathering but by complying with the King's Demands tho' never so unreasonable Whereas the Inferior Seculars having no such Fears and lying generally out of the Reach either of the Awe or Bribes of a Court were as backward to give their helping hand in this case as the Religious were forward and but 14. therefore of the Lower House could be prevail'd with to lend the King a Vote This perhaps may be no improbabâ—e Solution of the Difficulty if after all it â—e not a Numeral Mistake of the Transcriber or Printer such as I find sometimes in that Work I mean in the Hanover Edition of it which alone I have for instance the Câ—nvocation in 1536 is said to meet Nonis Iulii instead of Nono die Iulii for it met not on the 5 th but the 9 th of Iuly as the Writ still extant shews But enough of this I return to those Marks of Resemblance which were between the Parliament and Convocation long after they separated and by which as by some common Ensigns of Honour the One of these may be plainly discern'd to be of the same Family and Descent as it were with the Other The Instruments impowering the Proctors of the Clergy to act for the several Dioceses were drawn up I have said in the same Form almost with those for the Knights of Shires I add that they had equally Wages from those they represented and those Wages were laid on the Diocese with the same Distinction that the Others were on the County all such as came Personally to Parliament either as Councellors or Assistants being excus'd from contributing to em not to descend to yet minuter Differences which were still on both sides alike observed And which is very Material the Proctors enjoying these Expences are in the Writs and Records of that time expresly said to be entitled to 'em on the account of their Service in Parliament tho' strictly speaking they sat not in Parliament but only as they do now in a Convocation held concurrently with it Of which I will stop to give the Reader here two very significant Instances the One is of a Discharge which the Abbat of Leicester obtain'd from Personal Attendance on the Parliament on condition as the Patent speaks Quod dictus Abbas successores sui in Procuratores ad hujusmodi Parliamenta Concilia per Clerum mittendos consentiant ut moris est expensis contribuant eorundem †Pat. 26. E. 3. par 1. M. 22. See it in Selden's Tit.