Praelatos non comparentes seu non Licentiatos suspendebat à celebratione divinorum et ingressu Ecclesiae The Praelati were the Lower-House Members the Dignitaries at least who under that Style are commanded to retire and chuse a Prolocutor in the Convocation that immediately preceeds Anno 1586. Dec. 2. in the Extracts out of the Registers of the Vpper-House it is said in short upon a Prorogation Non comparents Contumacious suspended And before the Dissolution Suspension of Absents or Departers without leave Anno 1601. in the same Extracts we meet with the like Hint immediately before the Dissolution Contumacious suspended Of which Act we have a full and particular account in the Lower-House Journal Sess 14. Mar. 24. That the Prolocutor according to Custom might be able to lay before his Grace a Schedule of the Absents in the Lower-House de mandato Domini Prolocutoris facta fuit publica Praeconizatio omnium Citatorum ad comparend in hac domo juxta consuetudinem alias usitatam juxta tenores Mandatorum Certificatoriorum alias respectivè coram ipso Reverendissimo Patre Domino Cant. Archiep. c. exhibitorum introductorum The Prolocutor and the whole House being immediately sent for Reverendissimus querelatus est de incurià negligentiâ contumacia citatorum c. non comparentium c. tunc porrecta sibi Schedula Suspensionis unà cum Schedula continente nomina cognomina contumaciter Absentium ab hac Sacra Synodo idem Reverendissimus eos omnes singulos in hujusmodi Schedula nominatos á Celebratione Divinorum omnimodo Exercitio Ecclesiasticae Jurisdictionis suspendit prout in ipsa Schedula penes Registrarium ipsius Reverendissimi quoad Superiorem Domum remanen continetur The Substance of the Arguments for the Archbishop's Power over the Members These therefore in short are the Grounds which give the Archbishop an undoubted Power over the Members of the Lower-House exclusive of the House it self It is an inherent Right of the See to require the Attendance of the Inferior Clergy in his Provincial Convocation And a right to require Attendance includes and supposes a Power of enforcing it when requir'd That Right has been ever exercised and this Coercive Power express'd in the Archiepiscopal Mandate or Summons The Returns of the Persons Summon'd are made immediately to him that he may know upon whom the obligation of attending lays and also rest ultimately with him as a testimony of his Right to such Attendance during the Convocation his Summons being not simply to appear before him but with the addition of such further Days as he shall see convenient cum continuatione dierum prout convenit According to the several Returns it has ever been the Custom at the opening of the Convocation to call over all the Members and to pronounce the Absents Contumacious In the Course of their Proceedings his Grace as Presiding in Person over the whole Body has either suspended the Punishment from time to time or inflicted it upon particular Persons as he saw Occasion Sometimes when Business of great moment was under Consideration giving general Admonitions not to depart before the Conclusion at other times Licensing particular Members to go away upon reasonable Causes alledg'd and approv'd and at the end either by way of Grace remitting the Penalties threatn'd or confirming them by a formal Execution The Claim of the Lower-House to a concurrent Power confuted All these belonging to the Archbishop and to him alone upon the Foundation of Law and Practice it has been wonder'd how his Power over the Inferior Clergy in point of Attendance could be made a question Especially when those of the Lower-House who claim a concurrent Right tho'some of the Departers acted the last Session as if it had been solely in that House The Lower-House have no Coercive Power over their Members don 't pretend any Coercive Power over their own Members And yet I take a right to grant leave to suppose a right of Refusing it and a right to refuse without an enforcing Power in case the Member depart to be somewhat singular both in Law and Reason Suppose one or more Members to be necessary to some Purposes depending in Convocation neither the Prolocutor nor the Lower-House can oblige him to come up or attend longer nor have they any way to bring him thither or to keep him there but by Application to the Archbishop in whom the Coercive Power rests and by his Grace's Admonition and Censure in case he will not readily comply So that what the Narrative means in saying that they have a Power of demanding the Attendance of their Members Nar. p. 49. I am yet to learn because as I understand the word all Power of Demanding necessarily supposes a Right in Law to prosecute upon refusal and they have not aim'd at the proof of such a right in themselves tho' they could not but see the necessity of clearing that point before their way could be made to the other Nar. p. 34. The Prolocutor reserves Punishment only in the Presidents Name I know they observe in another Place that the Prolocutor has a Power to reserve the Punishment meaning the Punishment of Contumacy pronounc'd against the Absents as well as the Archbishop in whose Schedule it is always immediately after the Sentence added poenâ sibi reservatâ And it is easie to imagin how the Person upon whose Sentence the Guilt is contracted reserves the Execution of that Sentence in his Power but how a Man can suspend the Infliction of the Punishment who had no part in pronouncing the Guilt which is the Prolocutor's case is not so easily comprehended They say indeed to avoid this Absurdity I suppose that they don't mean reserving in the first Instance the Punishment to himself Ibid. according to their Lordships Construction of reservata poena but reserving the Punishment for a Synodical Act which the words they conceive will bear as well But before they induce others to conceive so it will be necessary to show in what instance any one Member of their House was ever punisht for Absence by a Synodical Act or any other way than by a Sentence of Suspension solemnly pronounc'd by his Grace of whose Authority in Summoning a Convocation their Absence is a Contempt And the Punishment can certainly be reserv'd to no other Power than that which has always finally inflicted it Accordingly in the very first place where that Journal speaks of the Prolocutor's reserving the Punishment it expresly mentions it as done by the direction of his Grace Anno 1586. Sess 1. The Prolocutor and the whole House being call'd up Reverendissimus Pater Dominus Cant. Archiepiscopus ob paucitatem Comparentium c. intimavit Domino Prolocutori absentes ob eorum Contumacias Suspendend fore debere c. Upon this they go back and having call'd over the House Dominus pronunciavit eos eorum quemlibet Contumaces
Retirements The President commands the Clergy Vt ad locum eis ab clim in hujusmodi actibus solitum consuetum viz. locum inferiorem subtus dictam domum Capitularem ad electionem sive nominationem futuri Prolocutoris Cleri ritè processuri unanimiter insimul declinarent The Separation of the Bishops and Clergy stated upon the foregoing Acounts From the Particulars of this Chapter there arises this natural Account of the Separation of the two Houses While they met abode and debated together in the Chapter-House their Separations were rare because the Occasions requiring the Retirement of the Clergy were so too As the Business of Convocation increas'd these Retirements and by consequence the Separations became more ordinary and frequent 'Till by degrees upon the evident Inconvenience of the Clergy's going up in a Body with all their Answers and Petitions for so they did at the first notwithstanding their choice of a Prolocutor the Archbishop and Bishops on ordinary Occasions accepted the Attendance of a Prolocutor regularly chosen and confirm'd instead of all the rest returning their Pleasure and Instructions by the same Hand From hence there ensu'd a gradual Separation as to the Place of Debate the Vnion and Communication in other respects remaining entire and the Correspondenee about the Business of the Synod continuing such as is suitable to the known Subordination of Presbyters to their Metropolitan and Bishops Nor are the Debates themselves so separated but that the Archbishop and Bishops as oft as they saw cause for debating together have always sent for the Inferior Clergy to the Upper-House either in a Body or by the Prolocutor with some few of the Members Reverendissimus c. fecit ad se vocari Clerum Accersito Clero c. Who coming up and conferring with their Lordships as long as the Occasion of sending for them requir'd were dismiss'd from further Attendance at that time and being dismiss'd return'd to their own House Dimisso Prolocutore c. is the ordinary Style of the Registers in all such Cases as appears from those two of 1640. and 1661. c. which are publish'd at large in the Appendix If this be a true Account as no Account from the Registers themselves can be otherwise it is hard to believe that the Acts of Convocation were ever seen by those who have lately disputed the President 's Right of Assigning them a Place and have talk'd so much of their distinct Capacity as deriv'd from an Imitation of the House of Commons and rais'd so many Uncanonical Exemptions with I know not what degrees of Inherent Power from the Denomination of a House and their seperate Debates Nar. p. 41. Nar. p. 40. 41. Answ to 1st Let. p. 2. Nar. p. 17. Power of L. H. p 2. CHAP. VI. The manner of ENTRING upon Business in Convocation The Archbishop declares the Causes of the Convocation THE Members of Convocation being setled by the Returns of the Bishops made and exhibited to his Grace he in virtue thereof has a Right to their Attendance as they have to proceed with him in the Business of Convocation And therefore the Bishops and Clergy being together in one Body at the opening thereof it has been the Usage of Convocation especially when met upon Business of great Moment for the President to explain to them the Causes and Ends of his Summoning it at that time So Archbishop Parker explains the Custom of his own and former Ages Forma Conv. Reverendissimus ad Episcopos Clerum tunc praesentes Anglicè sive latinè Causam sui Adventûs ac dictae Convocationis inchoatae exponit And another more early Directory for the first day of Convocation in Edward VI.'s Time The Clergie of thinferior House to be called up to the Chapitour his Grace to declare the Cause of this Convocation The Clergy order'd to Retire and debate about the Business of Convocation as declar'd by the Archbishop At the same time that the Registers speak of the President 's declaring the Causes of the Convocation in this solemn manner they generally add that the Clergy were thereupon requir'd to go down to their House and confer about the matter propos'd to them by his Grace who also very frequently enjoyn'd the Return of their Answers within a certain time Anno 1369. Kal. Febr. The Archbishop assidentibus confratribus c. Procuratoribus Cant. Provinciae coram eo c. explains to them the Necessities of the Kingdom and proposes a Supply And then it follows Et super petitione praedictâ rogavit dictos Religiosos quòd se insimul traherent ad aliquam partem Ecclesiae praedictae Clerum suae Dioeceseos Prov. quòd and aliam partens ejusdem Ecclesiae se traherent tractarent delibearent de petitione praedict quid quantum concedere velint deliberatione habitâ per cosdem sibi referre intimare de voluntate corum in dictâ domo Capitulari super praemissis die crastino Anno 1379. May 9. The Archbishop explains the Occasions of the Meeting Reformation and Subsidy And then Habitâ in Domo Capitulari inter Praelatos Procuratores quadam deliberatione super materiâ Convocationis idem Pater injunxit singulis Procuratoribus quòd eodem die post prandium in dicto loco comparerent tractaturi super materia antedictâ Anno 1383. Dec. 2. The Archbishop explains the Cause of the Convocation's meeting And the next Session Praecepit Procuratoribus quòd ad aliquem locum in tali negotio hactenùs consuetum se declinarent ac de super negotio c. per ipsum eis exposito diligenter tractarent super deliberatione suâ in eâ parte Responsum sibi Confratribus suis ibidem protunc personaliter existentibus mellori modo et forma quibus poterant praeberent Anno 1399. Oct. 8. Coram Domino comparuerunt personaliter Reverendi in Chisto Patres c. Praelatorum Cleri Provinciae antedictae Procuratores expositâ ibidem per Dominum Causa Convocationis tractabant ipse Dominus Reverendi Patres Episcopi per se de negotiis communibus Ecclesiae aliis Praetit Procuratoribus Cleri scorsim separatis Anno 1408. July 23. The Archbishop explains the Causes of their Meeting and then Clero verò Inferiori à praefatis majoribus Praelatis seorsim separato in Scolis Theologiae sub domo Capitulari praefatâ juxta assignationem Archiepiscopi conveniente more solito iidem Venerabiles Patres c. Anno 1415. Nov. 18. Reverendissimus Pater conveniens in domo Capitulari Ecclesiae S. Pauli cum Suffraganeis suis Abbatibus Prioribus Decanis Archidiaconis Procuratibus Cleri suae Provinciae in multitudine copiosâ exposuit eis Causas suae Convocationis quibus expositis Decani Archidiaconi Procuratores Capitulorum Cleri de mandato dicti Reverendissimi Patris traxerunt se in domum inferiorem sub domo praedict Capitulari intra tempus
require Consideration The difference between former Methods and the late Practices and taking the Advice and Direction of their Lordships about the Expediency and Methods of proceeding in them To the same effect is that Language so familiar of late among some of the Inferior Clergy in Convocation That they have Business of their own to do That 't is generally different from what is transacted at the same time in the Vpper-House That their Debates are manag'd independently from their Lordships that the Archbishop with his Suffragans has no Right to take cognizance of or interpose in their Debates That there is no Necessity be the Matter never so important of previous Directions from the Vpper-House Principles somewhat ambiguously express'd perhaps not without a foresight of certain Objections but being interpreted by the late Practices their Tendency to a Division of the Synod and a Co-ordinate Power in the Church is no less plain than is their Opposition to all the Proceedings of former times One thing more I would observe upon this Head what little likeness there is between a Convocation and a Parliament in their very first Entrances upon Business Unless the Enemies of the Ecclesiastical Power will object as they who are so fond of a Parliamentary-Relation are like enough to do that the Archbishop in Convocation opening the Causes of their Meeting does only the same thing with the Lord Chancellor in Parliament whose Office it is to Convey and Enforce to the two Houses the Instructions he receives from his Majesty But they may understand that as oft as the King had occasion to solicit Business in Convocation he sent Commissioners of his own to do it as every one must know who casts his Eye upon our Convocation-Registers never so slightly These were said to come thither ex parte Domini Regis and their coming as occasion requir'd to represent the Desires of the King and the Condition of the Kingdom was a Custom so much known and establish'd that the Register takes notice of the Archibishop's doing it as a thing Singular and Extraordinary Anno 1380. Dec. 1. Et quia protunc Dominus meus Archiepiscopus erat Cancellarius Angliae nec comparuit alius pro parte Domini Regis qui exponeret Clero negotia regni sicut fieri Consuevit in aliis Convocationibus dictus Dominus meus negotia regni pericula imminentia satis clare exposuit Nor did it make any Difference in the Form of their Proceedings thereupon that the first Motion came from the Court but the Archibishop having given the Commissioners some such general Answer as this quod voluit super his mature communicare cum Confratribus suis Praelatis Clero he immediately proceeded to that Communication either with the Clergy and Bishops in a Body or directing the Clergy to debate in their own House with his Brethren alone If it be further said that the Necessity of a Royal-License before the Convocation can proceed to make Canons c. has restrain'd the President 's ancient Power of explaining the General Causes of the Summons the Answer is this That the Persons whose present Endeavours it is to diminish the Metropolitical and Episcopal Authority affirm that a great Variety of Ecclesiastical Matters may not only be begun but transacted and concluded without the Authority of such a License and so far the President 's Right of proposing the General Matters stands where it did And as to Canons and Constitutions if they may not be actually enter'd upon without a License yet his Grace at the opening of the Convocation may deliver his own Judgment as to the Expedience of them and refer it to the Consideration of the Bishops and Clergy Whether it be adviseable to desire the Royal-License for that end CHAP. VII The Right of the Archibishop and Bishops to require the Clergy to consider any particular Business throughout the Convocation THE foregoing Chapter shows the Right of the President after consultation had with his Brethren the Bishops first to lay before the Clergy the general Causes of his Summons and then to require them to Retire and Deliberate thereupon But the Scene of Business opening and enlarging it self many unforeseen difficulties will unavoidably occur and new Designs also for the Benefit of the Church must naturally arise from the mutual Debates of the Governors thereof assembl'd in Convocation And accordingly when any such Occasions requir'd the Inferior Clergy have been ever enjoyn'd to Debate and Examine all Matters proposed by their Ecclesiastical Superiors for that purpose from the beginning to the end of Convocation The instances hereof are very numerous The necessity of showing this to prevent an objection from the explication of the General Causes at the opening of a Parliament but necessary to be added to the Testimonies contain'd in the last Chapters which without those would leave room for an Objection that as to the General Causes at the beginning those are equally explain'd to the two Houses of Parliament and yet the Honourable Members of the Lower House there are under no such Restraint or Subordination in their subsequent Proceedings An Objection I say of this sort is like enough to be started considering how industriously those Fancies about a Parliamentary Relation have been insinuated into the minds of Men. I will therefore show that what the Archibishop does in opening the general Causes of his Summons and directing the Clergy to deliberate about it at the beginning of Convocation the same thing he and his Suffragans have a Right to Do upon all emergent Occasions during the whole course of their Proceedings And this will manifest to the World how the Constitution and Proceedings of an English Convocation to the glory of it are exactly model'd according to the Primitive Distinction between Bishops and their Presbyters in point of Order and Authority while from the most early Accounts of Convocations to this day we see the Metropolitan and Bishops as the Governors of the Church Propesing and Directiing in Ecclesiastical Affairs and the Presbyters at hand with their Advice and Assistance in Subservience to the same Ends. The separation of the two Houses made no difference in this point Nor do we find any difference in this Point between the Times before and after the Separation of the Bishops and Clergy excepting this one that before it they all took the directions immediately from the President and retir'd in a Body and since his Grace upon those Occasions has either sent up for the whole House or which is more ordinary for the Prolocutor with Five or Six more Reverendissimus cum consensu Confratrum voluit jussit mandavit ad se accersiri Prolocutorem and by him conveys to his Brethrem below the Pleasure and Instructions of the Upper House But as to the manner end or authority of these occasional Directions their Division into two Houses made not the least difference in them as will appear beyond contradiction from the