before the Act of Submission 288 The notion of a Civil Summons an argument for the Papists against our Reformation 289 The intent of the Statute no more than to restrain the Archbishop from Exerting his Authority without the Royal-License 290 The word Authority in the Statute implies a Leave or Licence 291 The Archbishop's Summons Authoritative from the style of the Mandate and Return 292 The Case of the Convocation's being dissolv'd by the death of the Prince 295 A dissolution by the King's death no prejudice to the Archiepiscopal Authority as giving Subsistence to a Convocation 296 The Archiepiscopal Authority recogniz'd in the Dean of the Province's Certificatorium set down at large 297 V. Observations upon the Table of Fees and the Catalogue of Members presixt to the Registers of Convocation 301 Inferences from the Table of Fees 1. That the Officers of Convocation are under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Archbish 303 2. That the Admission of Proxies of the Lower-Clergy belongs to his Grace ibid. 3. That none could make Proxies but who were personally Cited ibid. Catalogues of Convocation-Members and Inferences from them 304 1. That the Entry of the Lower-Clergy in the Upper-house-Books shows the Convocation to be one Body under one common Head 304 2. That the Lower-house is Included in the Clause Convocatio Prael Cleri in Continuations ibid. 3. That the Members of both Houses in the Convocations of 1640 and 1661 were eminent Assertors of the RIGHTS and LIBERTIES of the CHURCH ibid. 4. That therefore our present Prelates in Convocation have been unjustly traduc'd for proceeding by the same Rules 306 THE CONSTITUTION AND PROCEEDINGS OF AN English Convocation c. INTRODUCTION The Occasion and Design of the following Discourse AMong the pretences that have been fram'd of late to gain the Clergy in Convocation some new Exemptions from their Metropolitan and Bishops no one has been insisted on so much as a Parliamentary Capacity suppos'd to belong to them And it was an artificial Management in those who set the design a-foot to make this the chief ground of their Claim not only because such Exemptions could have no Colour from their Ecclesiastical Capacity and the Constitution of the Primitive Synods but also because an Alliance to the Parliament in Constitution was the most likely way to lead the generality of Men to take the measures of their Proceediegs from thence Every one knows that the Parliament consists of two Houses and they have withal an Opportunity of observing out of the publick Votes the Separate Methods whereby the Commons Act and Govern themselves And little more of the nature of a Convocation being ordinarily understood than that It also consists of two Houses debating a-part this without recourse to the Primitive Times or opportunity to know our own Establisht methods of acting prepar'd Men's minds to favour the late Claims of some of the Clergy to such Privileges as the Commons enjoy In which Error they have been industriously confirm'd by the Endeavours of the same Persons to bring the Parliament and Convocation to such an alliance as was never thought of before the publication of some late Books The late Principle of Parliamentary Alliance That the Members of the Lower-House are the Clergy Commoners and Spiritual Commons that the whole Convocation subsists by the King's-Writ and not by the Archiepiscopal Mandate that the Clergy thereof are ATTENDANT on the Parliament as the Parliament has a Right to be ATTENDED by them is the ordinary Language of a late Book Atterb Rights c. which yet is pretended to be written in Defence of the Church's Liberties and censures the Principles of its Adversary as of a Slavish tendency From this Principle others of the same kind relating to their Constitution and Privileges have since sprung Answer to 1st Letter p. 2. Col. 2. That the Model of an English Convocation was doubtless taken from the Model of an English Parliament Ibid. p. 6. c. 1. That an English Synod was form'd upon the Plat-form of an English Parliament Nar. p. 6. That the Synodical Rights peculiar to the Lower-Clergy of the Church of England are owing to a Conformity to the Parliament Nar. p. 8. That the distinct Capacity of the Lower-house of Convocation was deriv'd from an imitation of the Lower-house of Parliament The ill consequence thereof to Episcopacy The two last Passages acknowledge in effect that some of the Privileges they are already in possession of were unknown to the more ancient Synods And as to the other Exemptions for which they contend if they had any countenance from those Early Times That I suppose would be thought a more decent Pleain a Case of Ecclesiastical Government than laying their model in the imitation of a Parliament For I take it to be new Doctrine that a late Author delivers with great assurance to take off the ill appearance of Contending and that with so much warmth for Ecclesiastical Rights upon a Secular Foundation Atterb Rights c. p. 138. I am sure and am ready whenever I am call'd upon particularly to prove that the more our Church shall resemble the State in her temper and manner of Government the nearer still will she approach to primitive Practice This is a Position that will require Proof when he is at leisure to go about it not being half so evident in my opinion as that the Rights and Privileges of the House of Commons if vested in the Lower-House of Convocation would give the Clergy a co-ordinate Power with their Bishops and so remove our Church still further from primitive Practice But all along on one side of this Controversie the Church seems to signifie no more than the Inferiour Clergy exclusive of the Metropolitan and Bishops as if the giving Presbyters new degrees of Exemption from their Ecclesiastical Superiors were the way that primitive Practice has trac'd out for the perfection of an Episcopal Church An Opposition to the Liberties of the Church has an odious sound and sounds no worse than it really is when the Bishops as well as Inferior Clergy acting regularly and peaceably within their proper Spheres are allow'd to be the constituent Members of that Church But the present claim of Parliamentary Rights is only in other Words a diminution of the Canonical Authority of the Archbishop and Bishops over their Clergy which being diminished as far as Parliamentary Exemptions would do it must evidently destroy the Subordination of Presbyters to their Bishops that is it must bring us by degrees to a state of Presbytery Now no Law has determin'd how far these which they call their Parliamentary Rights may be carried or which is the same thing how near the Claims upon that Foundation may bring us to Presbytery The late Narrative of the Lower-House p. 8. speaking of their distinct Capacity as deriv'd from an Imitation of the Lower-House of Parliament does indeed say that they are far from presuming to
be in a Condition to bear their part in the Business he commands them to retire and chuse a Prolocutor Anno 1460. May 10. The Archbishop first directs the Choice of a Prolocutor and then confirms him after which he explains to them the Causes of the Convocation In these two last Instances the Clergy are not directed to Retire as they had usually been to debate apart about the Matters of Convocation laid before them by the Archbishop Because now they began as to their debating to be in a more separate State so that the bare Proposition of Business to be Prepar'd or Consider'd was notice enough that they were to Retire to their usual Place and set about it The old Registers have only the Acts of four Convocations more so that we have no light between the Years 1488 and 1529. nor any from thence to the Year 1562. besides certain Extracts out of the Registers of the Upper-House But the ancient Directory in Edward the sixth's time and Archbishop Parker's Form of holding a Convocation both of them written while the Registers of Covocation remain'd entire and both as above-cited setting down his Grace's declaration of the Causes of the Summons as a necessary part of their preparation for Business leave no Room to doubt whether in that Interval the same Usage continu'd which we have shown to be the Practiee of Convocation from the beginning of the most early Acts. Not but that even in these Extracts we find the Custom plainly enough tho' not express'd under all the Circumstances that appear in the Original Registers So Anno 1536. the Second in that Collection the Bishop of London's Return being exhibited Reverendissimus exposuit Causas hujusmodi Convocationis denide monuit omnes Praelatos quatenus conferrent se ad locum consuetum eligant unum virum in Referendarium Prolocutorem qui eorum nomine loqui possit Anno 1547. the next but one in which as well as in the first of that Book the Form of Opening is very much contracted by the Abridger and consists only of some short hints Archbishop Cranmer is there said in general to have acquainted them that the Convocation was then Summon'd quod Praelati Cleri inter se consulerent de vera Christi Religione probè instituenda tradenda popule that being the first Year of Edward the sixth Again Anno 1444. The Return being exhibited Episcopus London in the Vacancy of the Archbishoprick Summariè compendiosè Causam Synodi vocatae exposuit monuit Inferiorem Domum de eligendo sibi Prolocutorem Anno 1557. The Archbishop with the Consent of his Brethren having confirm'd the Prolocutor mox Causas hujus Synodi verbo-tenus proposuit which are there set down at large Anno 1558. Praeconizatione facta Inferiore Doino evocata exposuit Episcopus ibidem Causam Convocation is But more distinctly in the next which is an entire Register That I mean of Archbishop Parker in which the 39 Articles were made viz. Anno 1562. Reverendissimus Dominus Archiepiscopus Cant. brevens quandam Orationem Eloquentiae plenam habuit ad Patres Clerum per quam inter alia opportunitatem Reformandarum rerum in Ecclesia Anglicana jam oblatam esse aperuit ac propensos animos tam illustrissimae Dominae nostrae Regine quam allorum Magnatum hujus regni ad hujusmodi Reformationem habendam declaravit hortando praecipiendo mandando Praelatos Clerum Inferioris Domus in dicta domo capitulari coram co reliquis Patribus constitutos quatenus ad Conventus sui locum sese conferentes unum virum gravem c. eligant in eorum Prolocutorem Anno 1640. the next Convocation of which the Upper-House-Acts remain after the Prolocutor is confirm'd the Archbishop produces the King's License Et Reverendissimus Pater antedictus praefatum Prolocutorem alios de Domo inferiori Decanos Archidiaconos Capitula Cleri Procuratores ibidem praesentes voluit ut ipsi inter se convenirent mature excogitarent de Subsidiis Domino nostro Regi concedend Canonibus Constitutionibus Statum Ecclesiasticum Christi Religionem in Ecclesia Anglicana concernen concipiendis Et quicquid inde senserent sive excogitaverint in scriptis redigant coram ipso Reverendissimo Confratribus Episcopis exhibeant Anno 1661. The Prolocutor being confirm'd Committees of both Houses were order'd in the Upper-House to compose Services for the 29th of May and the 30th of January c. And when afterwards by the coming of the Royal License they thought themselves at liberty to Enter upon the Business which was the chief Cause of their Meeting the Archbishop directs the Members of the Lower-House to proceed in it in the self same words that Archbishop Laud had us'd in the Year 1640. The Inference from the Archbishop's declaring the Causes of Convocation I have been thus particular in my Deduction of Authorities to show the Right of the President to mark out a Scheme of Business to be transacted in Convocation Beause as by the Tenor of the Mandate his first step in Summoning we are led to the Foundation of his Grace's Power over the Members of the Lower-House so in this their Entrance upon Business we clearly see his Influence and Authority over their Proceedings That is we have the view of an Ecclesiastical Synod consisting of a Metropolitan Bishops and Presbyters all going on to Act within their proper Spheres and suitably to the Constitution of an Episcopal Church The Metropolitan having advis'd with his suffragan-Suffragan-Bishops about the State and Condition of the Church of which He and They are constituted Governours recommends to the Synod the Consideration of such Improvements or Reformations as evidently tend to its Honour and Safety The Clergy are there in readiness to receive the Opinion and Directions of their Ecclesiastical Superiors and to offer their own Judgment as there shall be occasion with all Duty and Humility and in short to give their Assistance of every kind in a proper Subordination towards the ready and effectual Dispatch of all Business that shall be regularly propos'd for the Advancement of Religion The Archbishop and Bishops wee see deliberate Above And the Clergy debate the same Matters below to be ready with their Opinions and Resolutions when requir'd And thus they appear like one Body of Men met about the same common Business in which all in their several Stations are immediately concern'd Proceeding also with such a Paternal Affection on the one Hand and such Dutiful Obedience on the other as becomes their holy Function and is due to Measures for preserving the Order and Vnity of the Church But some late Principles and Practices have another Tendency For instance the Clergy's proceeding in Business of the greatest Moment and even coming to form'd Resolutions thereupon without ever acquainting their Ecclesiastical Superiors and much less offering them first in general as Points that in their Opinion deserve or
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
the Reformation they continued the self same Ways of acting that were establisht before as these Deductions under the several Heads do abundantly show For tho' many of our Accounts since the Reformation are only Abridgments of the Acts the Originals whereof were burnt in 1666. yet even in them and much more in the others that remain entire we have clear and numerous testimonies of the Clergy's continuing to Act in all respects with the self same Deference and Subordination to their Metropolitan and Bishops I doubt not but an objection formerly made will now be renew'd against the Authorities from the Upper House Registers as insufficient Witnesses in the Concerns of the Lower They are so as to the Debates there but not as to the Matters Debated many of which and those the most considerable have originally come from the Upper House with particular Instructions how to proceed upon them and the same have been also constantly return'd thither and together with the Applications of all kinds from the Lower House have made a part of the Register of the Vpper Now our present Concern is not about the methods of debating in either House separately but the usual Communication between the two Houses Which being maintain'd by the going up of the Prolocutor alone or attended voluntarily or as sent for by their Lordships the Reports they bring the Petitions they make with the Orders they receive i. e. all the matters from whence we infer these methods of their corresponding and the authority of my Lords the Bishops in the Proceedings of Convocation are enter'd of course in the Books of the Vpper House And the Heads of which the Lower-house-Books chiefly consist viz. the Motions made Below with their Debates upon them and the appointment of Committees of their own for special purposes would not if we had them entire be of any great moment in the present Points For these immediately concern the Relation between the two Houses and turn not upon the proceedings of each Separately but upon the Manner of the Intercourse and Correspondence between them The methods of the Journals of both Houses with the Matters usually enter'd in each will be best understood by the Acts of five Convocations added by way of Appendix to this Book as a Pattern to future Proceedings The three first in 1562 1640 and 1661. belong to the Vpper-house and the two others of 1586 and 1588. are the Acts of the Lower These last are the only entire Journals of that House now remaining and I made choice of the three others as they are accounts of Transactions while all the Original Registers were in being and yet so lately two of them at least that the Establishment of different Vsages since that time will not be pretended Add to this the importance and variety of the matters transacted in each viz. the xxxix Articles in 1562. the Canons in 1640. against which no exceptions were ever taken as to the Methods of Proceeding in Convocation and the Review and Establishment of the Common Prayer with many other things of publick note and concern in 1661. and the three following years That of 1562. is certainly the entire Register of the Vpper-house but whether the Book which remains be the very original I cannot directly say Those of 1586 1588 and 1640. are the Original Books deposited according to custom in the Registry of the See of Canterbury The Book of 1640. contains also an Account of the second Convocation in the same year but such were the Confusions of the Kingdom and the Miseries of the Church that no Business could be done in it save only the Opening and then Continuing it in the common Form after the Archbishop Sess 3. had committed the determination of certain controverted Elections to the Prolocutor and other Members of the Lower-house See the Passage cited p. 114. of this Book The last also is the very Original Register of the Vpper-house from May 8. 1661. to Sept. 19. 1666. inclusive mostly in the hand of Mr. Fisher Actuary of the Lower-house in 1640. and Deputy-Register to the Vpper in 1661. with an Attestation in form to every Session It was lately communicated to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury by the Reverend Mr. Nurse Executor to a Gentleman in whose House Mr. Fisher dy'd and by his Grace to the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation The Method in which they are now publisht is this The beginning and ending of every Session in the Vpper-house is usually the same at the beginning they express the place of meeting the attestation of the Notary the names of the Archbishop or his Commissary and of the Bishops present with the accustom'd Prayers concluding always with the Con̄tinuations at length As to all these therefore which are pure matters of form and a repetition of the same words in the same Order I have thought it sufficient to give a Specimen of them at the beginning of each and then to contract them especially in 1661. c. where the Sessions are more numerous But the Reader may rest assur'd that the like Forms run through the whole 'T is true the Names of the Persons present sometimes vary but they can be of no use except on some un-foreseen and very extraordinary Occasions and whenever these happen recourse may be had to the Originals themselves In 1661. the Bishop of London usually Presided in the Archbishop's stead and is always meant by the style Dominus when it stands single the names of the other Commissaries who were but few being constantly express'd But the Forms in the two Journals of the Lower-house are various and having withal made so great a part in the Dispute about Continuations or Adjournments I have printed both the Introduction and Conclusion of each Session at length without omitting any thing except the Names of the Persons every day present IN perusing these Acts both of the Vpper and Lower House the Reader will observe all along How the Synodical Business is mark't-out by the Metropolitan and Bishops as Governours of the Church and so much of it consider'd debated and prepar'd by the Inferior Clergy as their Lordships from time to time have recommended to their Care That the Presbyters of former times have ever receiv'd and pursu'd those Directions with the utmost readiness and then taken care to osser their Applications and Reports with all the marks of Duty and Humility That therefore the publick Cancerns of our Church have in English Convocations been transacted by rules and methods purely Ecclesiastical that is by a Synod consisting of Metropolitan Bishops and Presbyters all contributing their Endeavours towards the same common End and within the Bounds assign'd by Antiquity to their respective Orders and Degrees in the Church of Christ That however the Bishops and Presbyters have their Separate Places of Debate and may not under that general Appearance be unlike the two Houses of Parliament yet as to their Independence in Acting or any degrees of
their own immediate Choice The Deans Priors and Abbots were requir'd by the Archbishop to bring Procuratorial Letters from the respective Bodies over whom they were placed as the Archdeacons were to do from the Parochial Clergy within their District Anno 1257 the Archiepiscopal Mandate runs thus In virtute obedientiae praecipiendo ut praedicti Decanus Prior dictarum Cathedralium Ecclesiarum Abbates alii Priores cum literis Procuratoriis nomine Congregationum suarum confectis ac dicti Archidiaconi cum literis similiter factis ex parte Clericorum qui subsunt eisdem c. dictis die loco personaliter debeant interesse Anno 1258 to the same purpose Vocetis eciam Decanos Cathedralium et aliarum Ecclesiarum nec non etiam Abbates Priores Majores insuper et Archidiaconos vestrae Diaecesis universos ut cum literis suorum subditorum Procuratoriis loco et die antedictis compareant And the Bishop's Order upon that Mandate to the Archdeacon Ac nihilominus Vos ipsi compareatis dictis die et loco cum literis Procuratoriis Cleri totius Archidiaconatûs vestri Anno 1279. The Archbishop's Mandate directs the Bishops to call their Clergy together and excite them to contribute liberally to the King's Necessities and then leaves them at liberty whether they will send their Resolutions by the Bishoâ—… or their Proxies or by Proctors of their own Hujusmodi autem Servitii vel Subsidii quantitatem per Vos aut Procuratores vestros vel certe per Procuratores proprios ad hoc si expedire videritis destinandos nobis intimare studeant in Congregatione nostrâ London c. The same Method I mean of the Bishops calling together the Clergy is prescrib'd by the Archiepiscopal Mandates of 1282. and 1283. when the Clergy appear to have been represented in both by two Proctors But afterwards Anno 1296. we find the Diocesan Clergy requir'd to appear by one Proxy Vnumquodque Capitulum seu Conventus per unum Clerus quoque cujuslibet Dioecesis per unum similiter Procuratorem idoneum et instructum And Anno 1311. either by one or two Clerus autem per unum vel duos Procuratores consimiles communiter destinandos Inferences from the foregoing Testimonies I produce not these Instances to invalidate the Right of the Cathedral Clergy to be constantly represented by one or the Diocesan by two Proctors of their own choice For that they have now an undeniable Custom of almost four hundred years as they have a Prescription of half that time and upwards for the part they bear in framing and passing Ecclesiastical Constitutions But such Observations came naturally into this Historical Account of the Archiepiscopal Summons and the Inferences I would draw from them are ' That an Interest in Convocation much more a concern in Affairs Ecclesiastical is far from belonging to the Lower Clergy Originally even by the Customs of our own Nation and those Customs Modern if compared with Primitive Practice ' That the present Frame and Establishment first arose from the Command of the Metropolitan to send two Proctors and from a Custom growing thereupon That the Figure they now make in Convocation and much more the Figure that some of the Members would make is far beyond any thing that these their Predecessors pretended to That the Exercise of the Archbishop's Authority in Convocation has been much greater than it is and yet the Church and her Rights did not prosper the less That therefore even waving the Practice of Convocation upon which the Claims of the Upper-House are immediately grounded the late Clamours of Danger and Ruin to the Church from thence can in Reason be regarded by none who will look back to the Condition of the Presbyters in the Primitive Times or even in our own Nation and that not many Centuries ago CHAP. II. The manner of Opening a Convocation All the Members to be ready at St. Pauls ON the day prefixt in the Archbishop's Mandate for the Convocation's meeting all the Members cited thereby are obliged to be ready at St. Pauls for the coming of his Grace Thus it is and ever has been according to Archbishop Parker's account of the establisht Form of Opening a Convocation Sciendum est quòd omnes qui authoritate Reverendissimi citantur ad comparendum coram eo in domo Capitulari Ecclesiae Cathedralis D. Pauli London die tenentur praefixo tempore interesse atque in eadem Ecclesiâ Cathedrali praestolari adventum dicti Reverendissimi The President 's coming to St. Pauls His Grace waited on at his Landing by all the Advocates and Proctors of his Court is by them and his own Retinue conducted to the Church of St. Pauls at the Door whereof the Bishops and Clergy meet and receive him and all walk in Procession to the Quire Prayers and Sermon ended he with the Bishops and Clergy go into the Chapter-House The Dean of the province exhibits his Certificatorium where the Lord Bishop of London Dean of the Province exhibits a Certificate that the Mandate has been duly executed Reverendissimo ac caeteris suis Coepiscopis in suis sedibus ordine consedentibus ac reliquo Clero circumstante Reverendus Dominus Episcopus London Mandatum sibi a dicto Reverendissimo ad Convocationem hujusmodi Summonend directum una cum â—…bito Certificatorio super Executione ejusdem iâ—…roducere ac debita cum Reverentiâ eidem Reverendissimo Patri praesentare tradere tenetur This Certificate under the Episcopal Seal and directed to the Archbishop first acknowledging the receipt of his Grace's Mandate recites it and then signifies how by Virtue and Authority thereof the Bishops of his Province and by them the Deans c. have been regularly Summon'd That he owns himself duly Cited by the Authority of the same Mandate That he has intimated to them his Grace's Resolution not to hold any excus'd but upon good Reasons to be then and there alledg'd That he has also enjoyn'd every Bishop to bring with him a Certificate of the Execution of the foresaid Mandate in his own Diocese And then adding how he has executed it particularly in the Diocese of London he subjoins a Catalogue of the Members therein In like manner every Bishop makes his Return immediately to the Archbishop in a formal Instrument under his Episcopal Seal certifying the Summons of his Dean Archdeacons and Clergy in Virtue of his Grace's Letters Mandatory transmitted by the Lord Bishop of London and adding their several Names and Sirnames By the Archbishop's Order the Bishop of London's Certificate is publickly Read and one or more Officers of his Court appointed by him Other Certificates and Proxies to receive in his Name the Certificates of the other Bishops and all the Letters of Proxy Then a wiritten Schedule is put into his Grace's Hand by which he pronounces all Members cited and not appearing Contumacious Contumacy Pronounced Forma Convocat reserving the Punishment of their
the Arch-bishop and Bishops debate about the same Matter Procuratores c. reintrarunt circa horam undecimam quibus per Dominum Archiepiscopum ad tunc mandabatur quòd citra proximum diem Convocationis exhibeant declarent Articulatim Gravamina sua in Scriptis redacta Accordingly Dec. 7. two of the Members nonnullas Inconvenientias Gravamina pro ex parte Cleri cujus gerebant Organa vocis exposuerunt quae in Scriptis redacta exhibuerunt Anno 1452. The Prolocutor having given the Upper-house an Account of what was done about the Subsidy is askt An quicquam voluisset pro parte Cleri in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ Reformatione dignum proponere And he continuò quasi ex insperato quamplurima c. proposuit Et quia non erat facilè singula per ipsum ibidem exposita memoriae quae admodùm labilis est commendare idcircò admonuit eundem Prolocutorem dictus Reverendissimus Pater ut singula per eum in hac parte proposita redigeret in literas Concilio traderet pleniùs maturiùs super eisdem deliberaturo Anno 1452. Feb. 7. Praelocutor post explicationem declarationem nonnullorum Gravaminum Ecclesiae Anglicanae Clero ejusdem à Laicis illatorum super quibus petijt Reformationem debitam intimavit c. Anno 1460. May 13. Propositis ibidem coram dicto Reverendissimo Patre alijs in dictâ Domo Capitulari protunc ibidem existentibus quibusdam Articulis per Prolocutorem vivâ voce dictus Reverendissimus Pater decrevit hujusmodi Articulos sic vivâ voce declarat ' in Scriptis redigi Anno 1460. May 24. Reverendissimus c. auditis per eum pluribus Articulis coram ipso adtunc vivâ voce ministratis continuavit c. Anno 1541. Sess 8. Accessit Prolocutor cum quibusdam de Electis à Clero exposuerunt querelas suas Thus the usual Methods of entring upon the Grievances of the Clergy were either upon an express Command from the Arch-bishop and Bishops or by a general Representation thereof to their Lordships who being in that manner sollicited to redress them either by their own ordinary Power or by Intercession with the King or Application to the Parliament were the best Judges of the Methods most proper to be taken for that End and gave their Directions accordingly The Redress of Grievances The Grievances being reduc'd into Articles and read in the Upper-house by the Prolocutor were presented to the Arch-bishop and Bishops to be by them particularly consider'd and debated in order to their further Prosecution of such Measures as should appear most effectual to the Relief of their Clergy After mature Deliberation upon them with the Clergy or among themselves as seem'd most convenient the Articles were either suspended for some time as those in 1411. Dec. 7. Omnes isti suprascripti Articuli quorum Reformatio deliberationis dierum exegit Inducias de consilio assensu expressis Dominorum in Convocatione praesentium positâ— fuerunt adhuc in suspenso or being thought in all Respects just and reasonable they were approv'd and Measures taken by the President and Bishops in Convocation or by their Ordinary Authority if the Matters were such as came under their own Power in either of these Capacities Otherwise they convey'd them to the King in Person in his Council or in his Parliament according to the Nature of the Requests they offer'd The Reformanda frequently propos'd by the Arch bishop among the Causes of Convocation II. The Reformanda whether in Convocatione in Parliamento or per Regem were upon Matters that concern'd the Good of the Church and Religion in general and being therefore equally the Care and Concern as well of Bishops as Clergy were frequently mov'd and propos'd by the Arch-bishop at the Opening of the Convocation among the Causes of his Summons Anno 1400. Jan. 29. The Arch-bishop explains Causas negotia Celebrationis sui Concilij Provincialis Convocationis Cleri vulgariter nuncupat viz. pro defectibus ejusdem Provinciae tam in Clero quà m in Populo juxta Juris Exigentiam Canonicè Reformandis and then he descends to the Particulars Anno 1404. May 17. The first Day of Business the Arch-bishop continuing the Convocation to May 21. demandavit alijs Praelatis Clero tunc ibidem praesentibus quòd singulis diebus interim ad dictum locum Domum Capitularem convenirent laborarent circa Reformanda in Cantuariensi Provinciâ exinde Articulos conciperent in Scriptis redigendos ut cum Dei adjutorio adhibita corum Benevolentia in hac parte quaeque Reformanda hujusmodi possent reformari Anno 1416. Nov. 16. Expositâ per Reverendissimum Patrem Causa Convocationis eorum protunc factae celebratae communicató que inter eosdem viz. the Bishops and Clergy then present aliquamdiu de super varijs Reformandis in Provincia tandem Dominus Continuavit c. Anno 1419. Among the Causes of calling the Convocation particularly explain'd by the Archbishop the third is Pro defectibus in Clero regnantibus auctoritate illius Provincialis Concilij reformandis And then he directs the Lower-Clergy to retire to their House quòd ibidem de super materijs praedictis tractarent communicarent ad finem quòd babitd deliberatione de super praemissis ad Dei laudem auctoritate Concilij finaliter concludi posset concorditer ordinari Anno 1434. The Arch-bishop reckons up several Grievances of the Church Et tunc babita Communicatione super bujusmodi Gravaminibus ordinatum erat tunc ibidem ut hujusmodi Gravamina ac alia quaecunque in quibus dictus Clerus se sentijt gravari nec non si quae forent Crimina Excessus infra Clerum usitat quae necessariâ Reformatione indigerent in Scriptis redigerentur ut super his omnibus ex communi consilio consensu auxilio Remendium posset debitum adhiberi Anno 1439. The Arch-bishop declares the Causes of the Convocation viz. qualiter Jurisdictio Ecclesiastica per Brevia Regia praecipuè per Brevia illa de Praemunire facias plus solito extitit perturbata impedita atque enormiter laesa Qualiter Personae Ecclesiasticae tam Seculares quà m Regulares per falsa Indictamenta alias vias Exquisitas plus solito vexatae gravaâ—ae sunt his diebus And the next Sesson Dominus mandavit Praelatis Clero quartenùs super praemissis alijs materijs quibuscunque Reformatione recessaria indigentibus viz. Qualiter illud Breve de Praemunire facias ipsa falsa Indictamenta quae hodiernis diebus falsò nequiter malitiosè usitantur continuantur in aliquo mitigari aut pro perpetuo deleri finaliter extingui valeant Billas alia Advisamenta in hac parte necessaria ad praemissa Reformanda conciperent Anno 1444. After the mention of the foresaid Writ among the Causes of Convocation the Arch-bishop adds Qualiter in
The Method of Passing Canons and Constitutions before the Statute 25. H. 8. c. 19. was the same that has ever been practis'd in Synodical Meetings viz. by the Authority of the Synod and with the Sanction of the Metropolitan and these two gave them their full Force and Effect But now they are fram'd in order to be laid before the Prince as agreed on by the Arch-bishop Bishops and Clergy and none to be of any Force Effect or Validity in Law but only such and so many of them as he by his Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England shall allow approve and confirm This is the Language of the Royal Licence the Necessity whereof in order to make promulge and execute Canons c. is an Abridgment of the Ecclesiastical Power in these Respects and therefore the ancient Sanction which always signify'd a final Authority could not be continu'd in any Matters which were not to be promulg'd or executed without the Allowance Approbation and Confirmation of the King by his Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England But all Synodical-Acts to which the Royal Licence is not necessary receive their final Authority from the Sanction of the Metropolitan i. e. they still pass in the ancient Canonical way whatever some late Writers too much bent upon the Diminution of Ecclesiastical Power may suggest to the contrary CHAP. XVII Of Proroguing and Dissolving a Convocation AS the Arch-bishop upon receiving the Royal Writ for Calling a Convocation is bound by Law and agreeably to the Deference that has been ever paid to Christian Princes to exert his Summoning Authority so is he under the same Obligation to proceed to Prorogations and Dissolutions thereof in a Canonical way when the Pleasure of the Prince shall be signify'd by Royal Writs to those Purposes For how little Truth there is in the late Notion That the Arch-bishop in those Cases acts purely in a Ministerial way may appear by a Comparison of the Methods of Executing those Commands in Parliament and Convocation The manner of the A. bishop's Proroguing and Dissolving Authoritative For the the first the Prorogation of a Parliament the King by his Letters Patents constitutes such of the Nobility as he thinks fit his Commissioners for that end Dante 's vobis tenore praesentium plenam potestatem facultatem authoritatem c. ad praesens Parliamentum nostrum nomine nostro prorogand c. In the same Stile is the Commission for Dissolving as oft as his Majesty is not present in Person A Stile that is truly and evidently Ministerial But the Writs for doing the same things in Convocation can be directed to none but the Metropolitan himself and that without any Conveyance of Authority or Order to act in his Majesty's Name or any other Direction besides the Proroguing or Dissolving it according to the accustom'd Methods of Convocation Debito modo prorogetis and Dissolvetis seu dissolvi faciatis In pursuance of which Order the Archbishop Prorogues and Dissolves either in Person or by one or more Commissioners specially constituted by his Grace for those Purposes The Archbishop's Admonitions immediately before a Proragation or Dissolution Immediately before a Prorogation or Dissolution we find the Arch-bishop as he saw occasion publickly recommending to the Bishops and Clergy the due Execution of the Ecclesiastical Laws and the Reformation of any particular Abuses and Irregularities in the Church Anno 1428. Ulteriúsque rogavit hortatus est requisivit Reverendissimus Pater Dominus praedictus praefatos Confratres suos ut in inquisitione fienda contra Lollardos Haereticos hujusmodi diligentiam interim omnimodam quam poterant adhiberent cùâ—… revenerint quid contra eos fecerint ipsum pleniùs certificarent specialiter de illis quorum momina sibi detecta dictis Confratribus suis prout unumquemque in Dioc. suâ concernebant in Cedulis divisis conscripta circa tres Dies antea tradidit liberavit Anno 1601. Sess 18. The Extracts out of the Upper-house Books have this Note immediately before the Dissolution Arch-bishop exhorts the Bishops to be diligent in their Charge and careful to observe the Canons in the last Convocation Anno 1586. The Lower-house Book immediately before the Dissolution Revereâ—dissimus Pater Dominus Cant. querelatus est de pravâ immoderatâ luxuriâ ac minus verecundo gestu ac morum intemperie nonnullorum Clericorum Provinciae Cant. ad fora loca publica concurrentium Quare monuit Decanos Archidiaconos alios jam praesentes ad quos Correctio delinquentium hujusmodi pertinet ad severè procedend puniend obnoxios culpahiles si incorrigibiles perseveraverint ad implorand auxilium opem Episcopi Diocesani vel ipsius Reverendissimi Patris vel etiam ipsius Serenissimae Dominae nostrae Reginae ne actionum morum pravitas istorum obnubilet obscuret Dectrinam Evangelii quod verbis profitentur quo pluribus perniciosum siet pessimum eorum exemplum The Writs of Prorogation and Dissolution On the Day of Prorogation or Dissolution the Royal Writ is produc'd and publickly read But that being only a Direction to the Archbishop to Prorogue or Dissolve neither of these are effected by that Publication of the Writ On the contrary the very first Writ of Prorogation we meet with Anno 1532. May 15. was read in the Morning Reverendissimus ostendebat quoddam Breve Regium sibi directum pro Prorogatione hujusmodi Convocationis Quod Breve idem Reverendissimus publicè legebat and yet the Convocation sat till Noon and after Dinner met again So also Anno 1434. March 31. The Writ of Prorogation was brought in and read and afterwards the Resolutions of the Lower-Clergy touching the Pope's Supremacy were delivered and then the Arch-bishop is said to Continue to the Day specify'd in the Writ For so is the Practice of Convocation The Pleasure of the Prince is signify'd to the Archbishop by the Writ but his Grace pursues that Royal Order by a â—ormal Declaration out of a Schedule mentioning indeed the Royal Writ but running solely in the Arch-bishop's Name and by him pronounc'd in presence of the Bishops and Clergy The Authors therefore of some late Schemes have done a manifest Injustice to the Constitution of our Protestant Church in contending against Law and Practice that the Reformation put an end to the ancient Canonical Ways of transacting Ecclesiastical Matters and introduc'd a new Model inconsistent with the Primitive Distinctions between Presbyters and Bishops and unknown before either to this or any other Episcopal Church The foregoing Chapters I hope may vindicate our Reformation from the late Aspersions of that kind as well as the Ecclesiastical Government thereof from any such Repugnancy to the Primitive Rules and may withal make it more easily understood whether they who have carry'd on those new Measures or they who have oppos'd them are the truer Friends to the Rights Liberties and Honour of our
which the King gain'd and the Archbishop lost is express'd by the Statute in the word Always Which shall Always be assembled by Authority of the King 's Writ Before that Statute the Convocation had been sometimes call'd at the sole Motion and Pleasure of the Archbishop and sometimes upon the Royal Writ but since the Archbishop is confin'd to wait for the Direction of the Royal Writ The Intention therefore of directing the Royal Writ to the Archbishop is twofold 1. To signify the Pleasure of the Prince that at that particular time his Grace shall exert the Summoning-Authority inherent in his See as it has been ever exerted at the Command of the Kings of England 2. To be a legal Discharge from the Restraint of this Statute and a Security against the Penalties of Summoning without the Royal License The word Authority in the Statute only implys a le Leave or License For that the word Authority as it stands in the Act was intended for no more than a Leave or License to Summon is evident from the very Submission upon which the Act was immediately founded We will never from henceforth c. unless your Highness by your Royal Assent shall License us to assemble our Convocation And from the Dedication of the Clergy to the King prefixt to the Institution of a Christian Man Without your Majesty's Power and License we acknowledge and confess that we have not Authority to assemble together for any Pretence or Purpose c. And lastly from the Stile given to the Royal-Writ by Queen Elizabeth Cum Nos c. Archiepiscopo mandaverimus eidémque Licentiam Concesserimus quòd Convocari faceret singulos Episcopos c. As therefore the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation apprehensive of the Penalties of the Statute have taken care to use the very Expression of it with Reference to the Royal-Writ so that Expression being directly taken from the Statute is of course to be interpreted according to the Extent and Meaning thereof The Archbishop's Summons Authoritative from the Stile of the Mandate and Returns The Methods of Summoning antecedent and subsequent to that Statute are a clear Argument that the Archbishop's Authority therein remain'd entire That all his Summons before it tho' issu'd upon a Royal Writ and that expressly recited in the Mandate were yet Authoritative is not deny'd And if this Act of Submission had been intended to change the Archiepiscopal Summons into a Ministerial Office it would have given Directions for changing the Authoritative into a Ministerial Stile at least such a Change must of course have been made But no such Alteration appears either in the Mandate or the Dean of the Province's Certificate of the Execution The Writ comes to the Archbishop for it can be directed to none else in the same Stile and Manner as before the Statute it did and is now no otherwise inserted in the Archiepiscopal Mandate than was usual before the Reformation The Archbishop directing that Mandate to the Dean of the Province goes on Breve Regis c. recepimus in haec verba After a recital of the Writ he proceeds Quocirca i. e. having receiv'd this Royal Permission and Direction to exert the Summoning-Power inherent in the See Fraternitati vestrae COMMITTIMUS MANDAMUS VOLUMUS MANDAMUS INJUNGIMUS MANDAMUS All express Terms of Authority in his Grace's own Name and under the Archiepiscopal Seal Accordingly the Dean of the Province's Certificatorium or Return declares his Execution of every particular Branch thereof to have been in Virtue and by Authority of his Grace's Mandate Literas vestras Reverendissimas Citatorias Monitoriales jam dudum nobis sab sigillo vestro directas cum câ quâ decuit Reverentiâ humiliter recepimus Quarum literarum VIGORE pariter AUTORITATE AUTORITATE per receptionem Literarum vestrarum juxta VIM FORMAM EFFECTUM earundem secundum FORMAM TENOREM Literarum Vestrarum In like manner the Returns of all the other Suffragans are made immediately to his Grace and ultimately lodg'd where they ever were before the Submission-Act in the Registry of the Archiepiscopal See Whereas all Executions by the King's Authority are returnable of course into the Offices belonging to the Crown Right of the Archbishop p. 9. c. Hist of Con. p. 14. This Point of the Metropolitan's Authoritative-Summons has been more largely prov'd and explain'd elsewhere But the contrary Doctrine of its being Ministerial is attended with Consequences so very dishonourable to our Reform'd Church that I could not leave the Reader under any Danger of being missed into that Opinion by this general Expression of the Statute transcrib'd from thence into the Titles of our Acts and into some of the Instruments of Convocation For if that new Notion were true the Proceedings of Convocation would be so far from agreeing to the Principles of an Episcopal Church that they would not be the Proceedings of any Church at all The Ecclesiastical Power must then be swallow'd up in the Civil and the Methods of Proceeding would not be influenc'd by the ancient Synodical Rules or the Distinction of Bishops and Presbyters but founded entirely upon a Model fram'd and establisht by the State Enough I think has been said to expose and overthrow that Uncanonical Scheme but because it is come in my way I will take the Opportunity of adding an Observation or two 1. That at the Opening of Convocations as well since as before the Act of Submission the first step in certifying the due Execution of the Summons has been the Exhibiting and Reading the Dean of the Province's Certificatorium or Return directed to the Metropolitan alone in pursuance of whose Command and Authority every particular as we have seen is said to be duly executed Nor has any more Notice been taken of the Royal-Writ than as 't is recited in the Archiepiscopal Mandate just as it was before the Statute at the Opening of all Convocations which were Summon'd upon the Writ 2. The Contumacy pronounc'd thereupon is meerly for not attending according to the Tenor of his Grace's Mandates to the several Bishops with their Lordships Certificates to his Grace of the due Execution and the Censures for Absence being all purely Canonical shew them to be inflicted for an Act of Disobedience to the Authority of their Canonical Superior 3. Cardinal Pool held a Convocation in the Year 1557 the latter end of Queen Mary's Reign and the Title of it is Convocatio sive Sacra Synodus Convocata auctoritate Brevis Regis Philippi Mariae c. Now 't is not to be imagin'd that either the Queen or the Cardinal so remarkably tender of the Privilegdes and Immunities of the Church would have given way to a Convocation upon that Foot had it been the Opinion of those Times that the Authority of the Royal Writ destroy'd that Authoritative Summons which the Archbishops before the Reformation had always exercis'd The Case of the Convocation's being Dissolved by
SYNODVS ANGLICANA Or The Constitution and Proceedings OF AN ENGLISH CONVOCATION SHOWN From the ACTS and REGISTERS thereof to be agreeable to the Principles OF AN Episcopal Church APPENDIX 1. Three Registers of the Upper-house in 1562. in which the xxxix Articles were agreed upon 1640. under Archb. Laud. 1661 c. in whch the Common-Prayer was Revis'd 2. The two entire Journals of the Lower-House in 1586 and 1588. LONDON Printed for A. and J. Churchill at the Black Swan in Pater-noster-row 1672. THE PREFACE THE unhappy Disputes in the last Convocation were too plain a prejudice to our Church and Order to suffer any man who had a common respect for either to stand by unconcern'd But in studying proper Remedies the great difficulty was to find out where the Disease lay that is from which House the Encroachments came and upon what foundation a sure Judgment thereof might be made The REASON of the thing had been offer'd as one way of fixing the Right but that I found might be urg'd plausibly on either side For an Advocate of common knowledge and dexterity which part soever he undertake cannot in Causes of this Nature want a Variety of that sort of Colours but they are little regarded in Law nor ever urg'd in a case of Legal Right that can be supported by Arguments and Authorities from Custom or Statute Such Suggestions about the Reason and Consequence of things are useful towards the prudent Settlement of new Laws but can have no part in the determination of questions about ancient Rights In this imperfect State of things many Failings and Inconveniences will ever attend the wisest Establishments and when Designs are set afoot to invade or undermine them these Possibilities of mischief are always made the Instruments of raising jealousies and discontents among the Generality who are hardly brought either to see the mischief of too much Liberty or the necessity of lodging an ultimate Trust some-where in order to the peace and safety of any Society The Proceedings in PARLIAMENT have been also urg'd to justifie some late Measures in Convocation but whatever be the virtue of a Parliamentary-Relation the very persons who contend for it disown its being a Rule in the present Disputes by confessing that the Clergy have not a right to all the Privileges of the Commons in Parliament and yet assigning no reason why some may be claim'd upon that foot more than all the rest There is however one known custom in Parliament that may well deserve to be consider'd in Convocation viz. the Recourse they have and the Deference they pay in all contests about Privilege to the Records and Journals of former Parliaments For both our Civil and Ecclesiastical Meetings are Ancient Constitutions each whereof has all along proceeded by establisht Methods of its own And as Custom has in a Legal sense markt-out the Privileges of the two Houses in each of these Assemblies so by all Prudential Rules our Security lies not in making new Experiments but in the Continuance of Methods which have been try'd and establisht upon the practice of former times and are not become disagreeable to our own by any new or singular Circumstance And even this last is a Consideration that could have very little place in Ecclesiastical Government wherein the different Orders and Degrees with the proper Rights of each are establisht upon a primitive foundation not to be remov'd at the pleasure of Men and much less if that ancient foundation appear to be confirm'd and supported by the additional authority of its own Usages as a Particular or National Church And it ought certainly to be matter of Joy to every good man to find such a double Security to the Honour and Purity of the Church of which Providence has made him a Member as is the Concurrence of a Civil with its Ecclesiastical Claim to the Vsages of Antiquity Resolving therefore to make the strictest Enquiry how far the Church of England is entitl'd to this Blessing in the great point of Holding her Synods I enter'd upon a diligent Search into all the remaining Registers of Convocation I begun with that of 1356. the Acts whereof are the first we have and descended in order to our own times according to the Catalogue of Convocation-Acts subjoyn'd to this Preface All these I say I have distinctly examin'd since the disputes in Convocation began and am the rather oblig'd to make this particular Profession of it because a late Paper entitl'd the Expedient p. 17. c. 2. studying to weaken the Authority of my Arguments for the Archbishop's Right to Continue says they are only the Substance of what pass'd in the Debates of the House reduc'd by me into Form I shall always have a just honour for that House and the Debates of it but must beg leave to think that the Registers of Convocation the only Rule in all disputes about Privilege are a Guide somewhat surer Which Guide and no other I follow'd as in examining that Case of Continuations so also in drawing the States upon those other Heads which I formerly promis'd Right of the Archbishop p. 113 136. and do now Present to the Reader The truth is from my first entrance upon this Examination of the Registers in order to form a true judgment about the differences depending I have industriously laid by the late Accounts of both Sides concerning the Nature of an English Convocation resolving to give way to no Impressions but what should come immediately from the Registers themselves where alone the State of the Controversy is apparently lodg'd The Reflections upon the Paper I just now mention'd the Expedient I mean were intended for a part of the Preface to this Book but proving somewhat too large they are already sent abroad in a Separate Paper As for the present Work I am sensible that the same Accounts in the way of a regular History would have been much more Entertaining but it was not my business to divert but to instruct and convince and I was sure no description I could frame would either have a Weight equal to the very Words of the Registers or give so lively a View of Proceedings upon all Points as this regular Deduction of Authorities through the Successive Ages It was I confess a mighty Satisfaction to me as it must be to all the friends of Episcopacy to find the Proceedings of an English Synod so agreeable to the Constitution of an Episcopal Church however some late Books had mis-represented them And as to the Publication of what I found it is accounted for in the Introduction which contains the general Occasion and Design of the Chapters that follow it A scruple has been rais'd by some Members of the Lower House how far the Registers before the Reformation are to be regarded in the Methods of Holding an English-Synod But as nothing passed then which could any way affect the usual Intercourse between the two Houses when met and enter'd upon business so after
it there is no such Resemblance as has been pretended between the Proceedings of Parliament and Convocation That on the contrary the chief part of the Prolocutor's Business is to convey to the Presbyters the Pleasure of their Metropolitan and Bishops and to represent to their Lordships the Answers Opinions and Petitions of the Lower-House and so for ever to prevent the Independence of the Clergy and preserve the Original Union of the Synod as to the matter method order tendency and progress of the Debates These with many more testimonies of an English Convocation's being in reality what all the Friends of our Church ought to wish it an Ecclesiastical Synod will naturally occur to every one who shall peruse these Acts with impartiality and an ordinary attention And Readers under that convâ—… from the practice of former Convocations may be allow'd to wonder upon what Model some late Proceedings and Principles were form'd and to reâ—… seriously upon the Design or at least the naturâ—… Trndency of them The Archbishops Parker Whâ—…gift Laud Juxon and Sheldon under whom the five Convocations were held are Names distinguisht in this Church by an eminent Zeal in maintaining its Constitution and the Rights of the Clergy And now the Proceedings of the last Convocation are made publick let every Man be his own judge whether our present Metropolitan and Bishops have not acted by the self same Rules and he will then see what Spirit has govern'd those Men who from thence have taken occasion to inveigh so freely against their Lordships as endeavouring to Overthrow the Rights of the Church and Clergy That part of the Controversie which relates to the Proceedings of Convocation when met began not before the Opening of the last in 1700. The Nation had been industriously prepossess'd with false Notions of the Constitution and Proceedings of an English Synod but the Alteration of Opinions about the Right of Continuing upon a plain State thereof from the Registers was evident enough and shows that the Generality both of Clergy and Laiety are dispos'd to make as impartial a judgment upon all other Heads when the Practice of former Times shall be clearly laid before them For the Information of such five Journals are here publisht Entire and the Form and Proceedings of an English Convocation particularly defcrib'd not only upon the Authority but in the very Words of all the remaining Acts. I pray God they may in any measure tend to the Removal of our unhappy Differences and the future preservation of Peace and Unity in the Synods of our Church A CATALOGUE Of the Remaining Acts and Registers OF CONVOCATION From whence the Following HISTORY is drawn The Years in which they were held The Days on which they were open'd The Registers wherein the Acts are enter'd 1356 May 16. Islip fol. 117. a. 1369 Jan. 21. Wyttlesey f. 17. b. 1371 Apr. 24. Wyttlesey f. 40. 1373 Dec. 1. Wyttlesey f. 63. 1376 Febr. 3. Sudbury f. 33. b. 1377 Nov. 8. Sudbury f 44. a. 1379 May 9. Sudbury f. 55. a. 1380 Dec. 1. Sudbury f. 72. a. 1383 Dec. 2. Courtney f. 78. a. 1384 May 20. Courtney f. 79. a. 1384 Dec. 1. Courtney f. 79. b. 1385 Nov. 6. Courtney f. 83. b. 1386 Nov. 5. Courtney f. 84. b. 1387 Febr. 26. Courtney f. 73. a. 1388 Oct. 12. Courtney f. 74. a. 1391 Apr. 17. Courtney f. 75. a. 1396 Febr. 19. Arundel f. 44 a. 1394 Febr. 5. Reg. 4. Epp. f. 195. b. 1399 Oct. 6. Arundel f. 51. a. 1400 Jan. 26 Arundel Vol. 2 f. 1. b. 1402 Oct. 21 Arundel Vol. 1. 54. a. 1404 Apr. 21. Arundel 57. a. 1404 Nov. 24. Arundel f. 62. b. 1406 May 10. Arundel 65. a. 1408 Jul. 23. Arundel f. 71. a. 1408 Jan. 14. Arundel Vol. 2. f. 7. b. 1409 Febr. 17. Arundel f. 15. a. 1411 Dec. 1. Arundel f. 22. a. 1412 Mar. 6. Arundel f. 4. b. 1415 Nov. 18. Chichley Vol. 2. fol. 1. a. 1416 Apr. 1. Chichley 3. a. 1416 Nov. 9. Chichley 6. a. 1417 Nov. 29. Chichley f. 10. a. 1419 Oct. 30. Chichley f. 17. a. 1421 May 5 Chichley f. 23. b. 1422 Jul. 6. Chichley f. 30. b. 1424 Oct. 12. Chichley f. 33. b. 1425 Apr. 23. Chichley f. 40. a. 1426 Apr. 15. Chichley f. 65. a. 1428 Jul. 5. Chichley f. 69. a. 1429 Oct. 19. Chichley f. 77. b. 1430 Febr. 19. Chichley f. 81 a. 1432 Sept. 15. Chichley f. 86. b. 1433 Nov. 7 Chichley f. 93. a. 1434 Oct. 7. Chichley f. 99. a. 1437 Apr. 29. Chichley f. 101. a. 1438 Apr. 28. Chichley f. 103. a. 1439 Nov. 21. Chichley f. 109. b. 1444 Oct. 19. Arundel Vol. 2. f. 28. a. 1452 Febr. 7. Kemp. f. 219. a. 1460 May 6. Bourchier f. 12. a. 1463 Jul. 6. Bourchier f. 18. a. 1480 Mar. 21. Bourchier f. 26. a. 1486 Febr. 13. Morton f. 33. a. 1488 Jan. 14. Morton f. 41. a. ¶ Thus far the Acts are distinctly enter'd in the Registers of the Archbishop but about this time they began to have separate Books for the affairs of Convocation 1529 Nov. 5. Large Extracts out of the Upper-housebooks except those of 1553. and 1554. which are taken from Journals of the Lower-house 1532 Nov. 5. 1536 Jun. 9. 1541 Jan. 30. 1547 Nov. 5. 1553 Oct. 6. 1554 Apr. 3. 1554 Nov. 13. 1555 Oct. 22. 1555 Dec. 10. 1557 Jan. 1. 1558 Jan. 24. 1562 Jan. 21. The Register of the Upper-house entire 1584 Nov. 24. Index of the Upper-house Register 1586 Oct. 16. Two Journals of the Lower-house in the Registry at Doctors-Commons 1588 Nov. 13. 1586 Oct. 16. Index of the Upper-house Registers in the hands of Dr. Atterbury 1588 Nov. 13. 1592 Febr. 20. 1601 Oct. 18. 1603 Mar. 20. 1605 Nov. 6. 1606 Nov. 19. 1614 Apr. 6. 1620  1623 Febr. 13. 1625 May 18. 1625 Febr. 7. 1627 Mar. 18. 1640 1ª Conv. Apr. 14. Entire Registers of the Upper-house and Minutes of the Lower in the Office at Doctors Commons 2ª Conv. Nov. 4. 1661 c. May 16. The original Register of the Upper-house and Minutes of the Lower at Doctors Commons 1689 Nov. 6. The original Register of the Upper-house at Doctors Commons THE CONTENTS Introduction THE Occasion and Design of this Book 1 The late Principles about a Parliamentary Alliance 2 The ill Consequence thereof to Episcopacy 3 The beginning of these Innovations in the Convocation of 1689. 5 The tendency of such Proceedings to a Co-ordinate Power of Presbyters 7 Some new Claims of the last Lower-house 8 The design of this Book To settle all Proceedings upon the Custom of Convocation 9 All Proofs from the words of the Registers 11 The necessity of citing Authorities at large ibid. The necessity of such a Work at this juncture to maintain the honour of our Reformed Church 12 CHAP. I. The Method of Summoning an English-Convocation 15 The Writ to the Archbishop ibid. The Warrant to the Lord Chancellor of another nature 17 The Returns immediately and ultimately to the
Commons in Parliament are possess'd of with relation to the Lords And if this must be their standing Pattern and their Parliamentary Capacity a certain refuge whenever their Claims exceed the Custom of former Convocations how far they will go I cannot say nor will I judge with what Intention they pursue Measures so opposite to the State of the primitive Church but this I am sure of that the same Foundation upon which their late Claims are grounded will equally justisie them in many more that being once introduced would make the Frame of an English Convocation as inconsistent with Episcopacy as the profess'd Enemies thereof can desire It will be objected that the Persons who at present are in those Levelling Measures have not formerly been thought in the Presbyterian Interest and that now also they are more open and bitter than most other Men in their Invectives against them and remarkably loud in a Concern for the Church All this is readily acknowledg'd and 't is no new thing with frail Mankind such especially who are uneasie under Government to rail at those the most who are in the possession of what themselves most desire But Words are empty Testimonies in comparison of Actions and the hardest Names they can find for that Sect will be no Conviction to Them nor Vs either that these endeavours to lessen the Character of Bishops are not an evident Service to their Cause or that such Invasions by Presbyters upon the primitive Rights of Episcopacy are not an evident undermining of our Establishment The design of this Book to settle their Proceedings upon the Custom of Convocation But when I speak of the primitive Rules I would not be understood to propose the forms of the more ancient Synods as the measure of my future reasonings upon the Privileges either of Bishops or Clergy in an English Convocation but only to prevent its being thought that any of the Powers they now claim and the Bishops deny are so much as pretended to receive support from the Condition of Presbyters in the primitive Church So far from this that many of their real Privileges peculiar to the Clergy of this Nation and now grown into legal Rights are much younger than the first Accounts we have of a Convocation properly so call'd such are Their debating in a separate Body Their having a standing Prolocutor of their own The share they have in framing Canons and Constitutions Their Negative upon the Archbishop and Bishops in Synodical Acts of an Ecclesiastical Nature and even their right to be summon'd in the present Form or for Ecclesiastical Purposes For their Civil Property could not be dispos'd of but by their own consent and the necessity of having this gave them a Negative upon the Bishops in Subsidies which was then the chief business of Convocation the Canons and Constitutions of the Church being for many Ages after constantly made in Synods consisting only of the Archbishop and his Provincial Bishops But the Affairs of the Church as they came to be transacted in Convocation fell under the Rules and Methods that had been establish'd there upon Civil Accounts By which means the Inferiour Clergy came into the same share in the Ecclesiastical that they had enjoy'd in the Secular Business and as Custom has given them a legal Claim to several Privileges of that kind unknown to the Primitive Presbyters or even to the Presbyters of any other Episcopal Church at this Day so be their original what it will it is no part of my Design to call in question any of their Claims that the remaining Acts of Convocation will warrant Their want of Authorities from the primitive Times with the lateness of their coming to a share in the Canons and Constitutions of our own Church and the secular Original of the Title they now have to bear a part in framing and passing them will be a general Reason with all unprejudic'd Men why they should at least acquiesce in these and not endeavour to build higher upon that secular Foundation But in the present Controversie I freely pass by all these disadvantages and desire only that every Point may be determined by the Constitution and Customs of Convocation resolving neither to assert any Authority to the Upper-House nor deny any Privileges to the Lower but as the Proceedings of former Convocations establish the first and prove all Pretensions to the second groundless and illegal All proofs froâ—… 〈◊〉 Registers themselves Nor do I propose to have the Reader depend upon my Assertions or bare Representations of things but upon all Points that are either made a Question already or can possibly bear one the Evidences shall be produc'd at large that so every Reader may be his own Judge and none be able to contradict the Positions laid down but by first denying the Authority of the Registers My accounts may perhaps seem too minute and particular to some who are already skill'd in Convocation Affairs but it is not for their Use that I write this but for the sake of the Generality many of whom Eminent in other parts of Learning may without reproach be presum'd Strangers to a Subject that has so lately come under Consideration Which will also be a fair Apology for their having been mis-led into a favourable Opinion of some Measures not to be warranted by the Practice of Convocation if they shew themselves ready to retire upon a clear Conviction from proper Authorities In the producing of which my multiplying Testimonies of the same kind and to the same purpose may possibly be thought a fault but if it be they who have so openly deny'd Truths establish'd upon Evidences so plain and numerous are answerable for it The necessity of citing Authorities at large In Truth the Errors and Prejudices arising from the notion of a Parliamentary Body have been wrought into Men's Minds with so much Art and Diligence that nothing under Originals and a variety of Authorities from thence can hope to dispossess them nor will it upon any less Testimony be thought possible that Persons in Holy Orders should contend so earnestly for meeting and acting in a Civil Capacity about matters of an Ecclesiastical Nature if they had any Pretence in Law or Custom to meet and act under the Character or Appearance of a Sacred Synod Especially when Subsidies the great Business of a Secular Nature that ever belong'd to the Convocation are not now granted in it And since even after the business of it is become purely Ecclesiastical the Endeavours to make it a Civil Meeting have been so remarkable my design in the following Papers is to do Right to its Constitution by restoring it to all the Spiritual Liberties and Advantages it may justly claim by the Laws of the Land and its own perpetual Usage From which as convey'd to us by the Acts themselves The general Design of this Book I will shew in a plain and naked Relation of Matters of Fact That an
English Convocation however laid under some Restraints from the Civil Constitution is far from being so much transform'd into a Civil Meeting as has been pleaded of late That in the Summoning Opening and Acting it appears what it is an Ecclesiastical Synod of Bishops with their Presbyters and neither a Parliamentary Body on the one hand nor an Assembly of Presbyters on the other That however the Papists slander the English Reformation as if it had chang'd our Church into a Civil Constitution yet 't is evident against all the Endeavours of some among our selves to help the Church of Rome in that Objection that as to the Nature of our Synods at least it left 〈◊〉 in the same Ecclesiastical State as it found them To proceed regularly in this Design it must be all along observ'd what I hinted before that the Corruptions which have been endeavoured of late in an English Convocation are in general the Diminution of the Canonical Authority of the Metropolitan and Bishops and the Clergy's claiming such Exemptions from that Authority as makes the whole Body look more like an English Parliament than a Sacred Synod To this purpose it has been pleaded Nar. p. 6. That the Convocation was divided into two Houses in conformity to the Parliament Answ p 9. c. 2. That the Prolocuter is President of the Lower-House as the Archbishop is of the Vpper That the Acts and Declarations of both are only the Effect of the Order or Consent of each House respectively That the Prolocutor governs the Time of the Lower in as full a manner as his Grace does that of the Vpper i. e. with the Consent of the House Nar. p. 17. That their Debates are manag'd Independently from their Lordships Nar. p. 61. That they have a general Negative upon the Vpper-House That in virtue thereof they have a Right to deny the Appointment of Committees and even a sight of their Journals in which by the way they exceed their Pattern the Journals of the two Houses of Parliament being mutually open to the Members of each at all times and upon all occasions Nar. p 3. That without the Knowledge or Directions of their Lordships they can enter upon and proceed in business of the highest Importance and if any Point happen that in the judgment of the Vpper-House may be most conveniently Debated in Writing Nar. p. 50. they can insist upon a free Conference as the fittest Method and if that be deny'd are under no Obligation to be further accountable to their Lordships for any of their Practices or Proceedings Nar. p. 49. Add to these the Power they claim over their own Members upon which they can require their Attendance and according to the known practice of the last Convocation can discharge them from it by a Vote or Resolution of the House with that other Claim which has been so much insisted on their Right to adjourn to different Days from the Metropolitan and Bishops and to sit and act on these Days as a House In these Claims and Practices I say we have the view of an English Parliament but lose that of an Ecclesiastical Synod consisting of a Metropolitan Bishops and Presbyters By these Rules we see the Debates as to the matter manner and time are all separated at the pleasure of the Inferior Clergy and as the Archbishop and the Upper-house are made to resemble the Speaker of the House of Lords and the Lords Temporal so to compleat the Parallel the Prolocutor and the Lower-House that is as they term themselves the Spiritual Commons answer to the House of Commons and their Speaker However such Comparisons if they went no further than Names or the general Appearance of the two Bodies might be innocent enough but when upon these the Claims of new Privileges begin to be founded and such Privileges too as are an apparent diminution of the Metropolitical and Episcopal Authority separating the Synod and raising the Presbyters by degrees to a co-ordinate Power then the Parallel is no longer safe but the Governors of the Church and all that love our Episcopal Constitution are concern'd to enter upon proper Measures for the Preservation of it And these in our present Circumstances I conceive to be the opposing to those new attempts the Authority of former Convocations and describing from thence i. e. from the only true Rule the Practice and Proceeding proper to each House Which will not only shew that their Lordships have insisted upon no Power but what their Character and the Usage of Convocation fully justifie and that therefore the Clergy's Claims of Exemption from it are not to be warranted but will also discover to the World how they have been impos'd on by those who have grounded such Claims upon an imaginary Alliance between the Parliament and Convocation two Bodies that will appear to be widely different both in Constitution and Proceedings And since that difference as I said before consists chiefly in the Authority which belongs to the Metropolitan and Bishops over the Inferior Clergy and their Proceedings 't is my design to shew out of the Records themselves how that Authority stands and has always stood in the several Ages and Instances from the Summoning and Opening a Convocation to the Dissolution thereof with an Eye all along to the different Constitution and manner of corresponding in the two Houses of Parliament and particularly to the late Claims of Independence built upon a Parliamentary Relation CHAP. I. The Method of SUMMONING an English Convocation The Writ to the Archbishop I. WHen his Majesty by the Advice of his Council resolves to Summon his Parliament and with it a Convocation he signifies his Royal Pleasure by Writ to the Archbishop Rex c. Reverendissimo c. then the generaI Causes of his calling a Convocation are recited Vobis in fide dilectione quibus nobis tenemini rogando mandamus quatenus praemissis debito intuitu attentis ponderatis universos singulos Episcopos vestrae Provinciae ac Decanos Ecclesiarum Cathedralium necnon Archidiaconos Capitula Collegia totumque Clerum cujuslibet Dioecesis ejusdem Provinciae ad comparendum CORAM VOBIS in Ecclesia Cathedrali S. Pauli London die c. VEL ALIBI prout melius expedire videritis cum omni celeritate accommodâ MODO DEBITO Convocari faciatis A Writ to this effect and for some hundred Years in this very Form has been all along directed to the Archbishop whenever the King had resolved that a Convocation should be Summon'd Upon the reception whereof his Grace always proceeded to summon it in the fixt and Canonical Method that he ever us'd in calling of Convocations upon his own motion without that Writ For tho' the King as having a Right to the Assistance of the Clergy had also a Right to be obey'd by the Archbishop in calling them together for that end yet in the dispatch of that business he left them to proceed according to
the known Rules of a Provincial Synod viz. to be summon'd before their Metropolitan and to the Place he should think fit to appoint and in the manner that was usual in all other Convocations For the Archbishop had a Right to call a Convocation at pleasure till the Statute 25 H. 8. c. 19. absolutely restrained him from doing it unless empower'd by the King 's Writ Which effected this Alteration in the Summons that whereas before it was issu'd sometimes upon the Pleasure of the Prince signified to the Archbishop and sometimes upon the Archbishop's alone the Authority of the Summons in both resting equally in his Grace Now he is restrain'd from the Exercise of that Authority till he receive leave or direction from the Prince The Summons upon that intimation of the Royal Pleasure being still issued in his Grace's Name and under the Archiepiscopal Seal that is remaining as properly Authoritative as before * See this point proved more largely in Right of the Archbishop 9 c. II. For whereas in the late comparisons of a Convocation and Parliament the parallel lies between the Archbishop in the first and the Lord Chancellor in the second the share they have in the Summoning these two Bodies is very different The Warrant to the Lord Chancellor who acts Ministerially The Lord Chancellor or Keeper receives a Warrant from the King whereby his Majesty signifies his Resolution to call a Parliament In which case divers and sundry Writs are to be directed forth under our Great Seal of England c. Wherefore we Will and Command you forthwith upon the receipt hereof and by Warrant of the same to cause such and so many Writs to be made and sealed under our Great Seal for the accomplishment of the same as in like cases hath been heretofore used and accustom'd c. What the King in this case requires of the Lord Chancellor is in a way purely Ministerial his Lordship being commanded to act only in his Majesties Name and under his Seal i. e. solely by his Authority while the Archbishop is only Licens'd or Directed to Exert a Power and Authority which belongs to him as well in the common Right of a Metropolitan as by the antient Laws and Customs of this Realm In virtue whereof he directs his Mandate to the Bishop of London whose Office it is as his Grace's Dean of the Province to Execute that Mandate and whose part therefore in the calling a Convocation answers to that of the Lord Chancellor in the Summons of a Parliament Both of them Act Ministerially in the Name and by the Authority the one of his Civil and the other of his Ecclesiastical Superior The Writ for a Parliament issu'd in the King's Name by the Lord Chancellor summons the Lords Spiritual and Temporal Personally to attend his Majesty on a certain day at Westminster Vobis in side legiantia quibus nobis tenemini firmiter injungendo Mandamus quod consideratis Dicto die loco personaliter intersitis nobiscum And another also in his Majesty's Name to the Sheriff of each County commands him to take care that the Knights Citizens and Burgesses duly Elected pay their Attendance to the King at the same Place But the Archbishop in his Mandate executed by the Bishop of London first reciting the Royal Writ to shew that the Restraint of the Statute is taken off Summons the Bishops and Clergy of his Province to appear before himself in his Provincial Convocation at St. Pauls Quod iidem Episcopi Decani Archidiaconi caeteri Ecclesiarum Cathedralium Praelati c. compareant coram nobis aut nostro in hac parte locum tenente sive Commissario in Domo Capitulari Ecclesiae Cathedralis Divi Pauli London The Returns to Parliament to the King The Sheriff of each County is directed in the Royal Writ to make a due Return of his Election to the King in his Court of Chancery Et Electionem tuam in pleno Comitatu tuo factam distinctè apertè sub sigillo tuo sigillis eorum qui Electioni illi interfuerint nobis in Cancellariâ nostrâ ad diem locum in Brevi Contentum certifices indilatè In Convocation to the Archbishop By the Archbishop's Mandate the Bishop of each Diocese to whom the immediate Execution thereof belongs is directed to make the Return to his Grace or his Commissary Et praeterea vobis ut supra injungimus quòd omnibus singulis Coepiscopis Suffraganeis Provinciae nostrae Cant. injungatis injungi faciatis ut singuli eorum sigillatim de facto suo quatenus pertinet ad eosdem Nos seu locum-tenentem sive Commissarium unum vel plures dictis die horâ loco per literas eorum Patentes Nomina Cognomina omnium singulorum per eos respectivè Citatorum continentes distinctè certificent apertè These Returns are ultimately deposited in their proper Offices the Parliamentary in his Majesties Court of Chancery and those to Convocation in the Register of the See of Canterbury That is the due Execution of each being immediately certified to the Person from whom the Command comes and in whose Power it is to punish the default the Testimonies of that Execution rest and stop at the Authority The Summons not less Ecclesiastical for its being enjoined by the Prince from whence the Summons in both cases immediately flow'd Thus far to the Honour of our Reform'd Church nothing appears in the manner of an English Convocation but what is truly Ecclesiastical or in other Words suitable to the Constitution and Government of an Episcopal Church as well as the Degrees and Order of the Members whereof it consists Bating I mean that one Restraint which the Statute has laid upon the Archbishop from calling a Convocation at pleasure as the antient Metropolitans and our own here in England before that Statute had a right to do For as to the Archbishop's exercising his Summoning Authority at the Command of the King this is so far from changing our Convocations into Civil Meetings that 't is no more than an obedience which has been ever paid to Christian Princes by the Governours of National Churches planted and establish'd under their Influence and Protection Nor in our own did the Archbishop's calling his Clergy upon the King 's Writ or without it ever make the least Alteration in the stated Ecclesiastical Methods of Summoning All these God be thank'd are still pretty entire and I hope safe enough against the Endeavours of some restless Men who would perswade us that they are pleading the Cause of the Church in doing all they possibly can to make her a meer Creature of the State The Clergy not Summon'd in the same manner from the beginning This has ever been the Method of Summoning a Convocation but as to the Members summon'd the Cathedral and Diocesan Clergy were not from the beginning represented as now they are by Persons of
the matter into Consideration against the next meeting At the best therefore it was doubtful whether any one was legally Substituted to exercise the Office of a Prolocutor But which is more the Intimation of the Act of Continuing is a Referendary-Act a Report from their Lordships to the Lower House and they who contended the most Zealously for his taking the Chair declar'd it to be their intention that he should not act in any instance as a Referendary till he had been confirm'd by their Lordships To argue upon their own principles I only suppose this distinction between a Prolocutor and a Referendary but no such appears in the Registers which stile him not only Prolocutor Referendarius but Prolocutor sive Referendarius implying the names to be of the same Import in the language of Convocation But this will be explain'd more largely under another head At present I will pursue my Observations upon the general Right of Continuing from the five Journals which are here made publick The Phrase Continuavit quoad hanc Domum no Argument for a Separate Power in the L. House The only colour that can be drawn from these of a Separate Power of Continuation in the Lower House is the Phrase of some Continuations in 1586 Prolocutor continuavit quoad hanc domum But here no Act or Power is express'd besides that of the Prolocutor and they who are so earnest for an Inherent Power in the House are yet as zealous as we against all pretences to a Personal Authority in the Prolocutor The Question therefore is by whose Authority he must be suppos'd to Continue in those Cases by that of his Grace or of the Lower House He had certainly notice of the Continuations in the Upper House because these in the Lower are declar'd to the same time And the Advocates for this Inherent Right are at last brought to Acknowledge an Obligation to attend on his Grace's Day and by consequence the necessity of having an Authentick Notice thereof The Prolocutor is also known by his Office to be the Referendary or Reporter of all Messages from the Upper House and I think sufficiently prov'd in the 4th Chapter of this Book to moderate the Debates of the Lower in his Graces stead These are natural reasons why Continuations express'd in such general terms should be the pure Effects of the President 's Authority but as to the Vote Act or Consent of the Lower House there is no mark or footstep of it either in these or any other Separate Continuations The Phrase it self not to be met with elsewhere in all our Journals of Convocation was introduc'd by the Prolocutor's being put into the President 's Commission to Prorogue This oblig'd him to pronounce the Continuation in the Upper House at least to bear a part in it and coming from thence to give notice to the Lower the Actuary's use of the ordinary Style Intimavit would not have been so consistent with the meaning thereof in Convocation Language But while he considered him not only as Prolocutor but as Commissary to the President it was natural to change Intimavit a Ministerial word into terms that might better express the Authority he then had as Commissary to his Grace The Phrase in Parliament Dom. Canc. Contin praesens Parl. no argument for the Lower House See the Right of the A. Bishop p. 43 44. To this I will add a short but clear reply to another Suggestion why the Lower Clergy are not comprehended in the terms of the Archbishop's Continuations It is that in Parliament the Adjournments of the House of Peers are enter'd Dominus Cancellarius continuavit praesens Parliamentum and yet the Act of the Chancellour Adjourns the Lords only But the distinctions in this Case between the two Houses of Parliament and Convocation are too remarkable to leave room for such a Parallel 1. There is no original Subordination between the constituent Members of the two Houses of Parliament nor any Relation but what arises purely from the Usage and Constitution of the Kingdom But in the two Houses of Convocation as the Bishops make the Upper and Presbyters the Lower a Subordination is establisht in the Lower by Apostolical Institution and in Conformity thereto by the Constitution of this National Church And so every step made by Presbyters towards a co-ordinate or independent Power is a proportionable Deviation in the constitution of our Church from the pattern of the purest Ages For 2. The Adjournment of the House of Peers is pronounc'd by one who has no Authority over the Commons nor any concern even among the Lords besides that of Moderating except he be a Peer of the Realm and in Right of his Peerage have a Title to Vote c. But in Convocation the Continuation is pronounc'd by the Metropolitan of the whole Province and the President of the whole Convocation who advising with his Brethren the Bishops directs the business of Convocation and is at the head of Proceedings in both Houses nay which is more has a final Negative upon them and by his Concurrence gives the Sanction to their Acts in all matters to the framing and Promulging whereof the Royal License and Authority are not necessary in Law 3. That Act of the Lord Chancellor in the House of Peers is plainly Ministerial or the effect of an immediate direction from the House but his Grace's in Convocation is Authoritative Nos Continuamus in virtue of a Power belonging to him as President of the whole Body 4. The terms of the two Continuations or Adjournments are widely Different In the House of Lords it is the praesens Parliamentum which the Lord Chancellour Adjourns by word of Mouth and it is no extraodinary thing to find the Word Parliamentum signifying one House when the standing Clerk thereof is Stil'd Clericus Parliamentorum But the Archbishop in a formal Instrument Continues praesentem sacram Synodum sive Convocationem Praelatorum Cleri Cantuariensis Provinciae where the Parties thereby Continued the Bishops and Clergy are directly express'd nor is the Register of the Upper House tho' acting by a Deputy in the Lower also ever term'd Registrarius Convocationum or the word Convocatio much less Convocatio Praelatorum Cleri ever apply'd to one House Separately 5. Tho' those Expressions were us'd on any other occasions which they are not to signifie the Upper House only yet the known Effect they have always had in this Case of Continuation would necessarily extend them to the Lower as well as Upper House For whereas the Adjournment in the House of Lords is never notified to the Commons who equally govern their own times of meeting and sitting and so no Concurrence as to time appears in the Sessions of the two Houses of Parliament In Convocation the Lower House has express and authentick Notice of the Act in the Upper and so the Clergy according to all the concurrent Books of the two Houses have ever met again at the time
and place specifi'd in the Act above I know no way to determin the Strict and Legal meaning of Words in any Case but by the known and ordinary acceptation of them in general and the effect or operation they have and ever had in particular Cases that may fall under my Consideration In this therefore I refer my self to the Judgment of any impartial Man Suppose ' That by our Constitution the House of Commons in their Proceedings were bound to receive and follow the directions of the Peers ' That both these Houses sat and acted under one common President the L. Chancellour or Keeper ' That all the Adjournments were solemnly pronounc'd by him in his own Name and in Terms directly expressing the whole Parliament nay specifying the Lords and Commons ' That an Authentick Notice hereof were immediately transmitted to the House of Commons ' That in fact according to all the contemporary Journals it appear'd that the Adjournments Below had been to the same Day Hour and Place with those Above Under these Circumstances I say for in Convocation this is the Case could it be a Doubt with any unprejudic'd Man Whether that Constant Adjournment of the Commons from and to the same Time with the Lords could spring from any Cause but the sending down a Constant Notice of the Adjournment Above and a perpetual Perswasion among the Commons that they were Included in that Adjournment and absolutely determin'd by it The necâ—ssity of Insisting upon it that the L. Clergy are Included in the Continuation Above As therefore this concurrence of Sessions in the Upper and Lower House is an undeniable proof that Authentick Notice of the President 's Act has been ever conveyed to the Inferior Clergy so the form of that Continuation in the Schedule and Journals proves the whole Convocation to have been always Included in the Act. And whoever reflects upon the Consequenees of their not being Included will agree with me that 't is highly necessary his Grace should insist on it at this Juncture when the terms of the Schedule have been so publickly pretended to comprehend the Upper House only and the Intimation is reduc'd to a bare Notice of the Day and Hour to which their Lordships have Adjourn'd themselves without any Authority that shall bind or affect the Inferior Clergy Add to this The asking the express Consent of the House and The Intimating out of a written Paper of their own both of 'em without President and both Intended for a more open and publick Declaration that it is an Act of their own upon an Inherent Power in the House A separate Power of Continuing in the L. House opens a way to perpetual divisions of the Synod A Principle evidently introducing a Separation of the Synod both as to Bishops and Clergy and of the Clergy among themselves when Discontents happen to arise among the Presbyters or Designs against Episcopacy shall be set a foot For if they be not Included in the Continuation Above it is wholly at their own Pleasure whether they will attend at the next meeting of their Lordships The President can have no right in Law to oblige them to attend or to punish them for non attendance which upon that Supposition of their Adjourning themselves is no Disobedience to any Command of his Grace or Contempt of His Authority The present Presbyters of our Church may probably be content to observe their Lordships Days But I think Wise Men in the Settlement of all Constitutions are wont to look a little beyond the present time And should the Inferior Clergy of the next Age be dispos'd to take all Advantages which these Principles of their Predecessors supposing them to be now establisht would give I â—ee not what Fence the Church or Bishops will have against a Presbyterian Assembly The same Principle opens a ready way to Divisions among the Inferior Clergy themselves Suppose for the purpose that any number of the Lower-house Members should dislike the Proceedings and refuse to attend in pursuance of the separate Adjournment of the Majority neither the House nor the Prolocutor have a Right in Law Temporal or Ecclesiastical to oblige them to it Reflect on Exped p. 10. The Effect whereof as hath been observ'd elsewhere is a Session under the Name of a Synodical-Meeting protested against by the Archbishop Bishops and any number of the Inferior Clergy under the Majority and which is yet worse no Provision made by the Laws either of Church or State to re-unite even the Clergy themselves The Archbishop who Summons the Clergy hath also a Right to enforce their Attendance according to the Continuations that shall be made in the Upper-house which is a coherent Scheme of Government and will perpetually secure the Unity of the Synod The Presbyterian Assemblies also are at least thus far regular that the Assembly which Adjourns is suppos'd by them to have a Power of proceeding to Censures in case of non-attendance But the present Claim of separate Adjournments made by Episcopal Divines under the Perswasion of a Want of Power to enforce Attendance is in my Apprehension a very inconsistent Scheme and has a direct Tendency to perpetual Distractions and Divisions both between the Bishops and their Clergy and among the Clergy themselves A separate Power takes away all the Means of Re-uniting the Synod I will add That if this Principle I mean a Right in the Clergy to Adjourn tho' they have no Power to enforce Attendance were true it would not only break the Union of the Synod but take away all the means of re-uniting it The President has the Power of Censures but he cannot inflict them for Non-attendance upon Persons not enjoin'd upon his Authority to attend The Lower-house by this Principle are suppos'd to have the Right of enjoining their Members to attend but then they have no Authority in case of Non-attendance to censure and punish This Scheme therefore is a very unworthy Reflection upon the Wisdom of our Constitution It supposes a Power lodg'd in the Governours of our Church over the Inferior Members thereof for the Preservation of Peace and Union and yet that the Inferior Members are exempted from that Power It supposes also an easy way left open for factious Spirits to destroy the Union and by degrees the Being of our Episcopal Church without any Provision made to repair the Breach and restore that Union That is it makes our Constitution an incoherent and inessectual Scheme of Government below the Wisdom even of Human Policy and much more unbecoming the Dignity of an Apostolical Institution These Principles you observe make all Attendance whether on his Grace's Days or their own a mere voluntary Act of every particular Member of the Lower-house there being no Coercive Power to reach or censure them for Non-attendance The Majority in the last and present Convocations have not yet exerted the Right which their Principles would give of denying Attendance when the Upper-house met Intermediate Sessions a
antedictus cum Consensu Confratrum suorum Episcoporum praedict eò quòd eis constat duas Sententias Definitivas fuisse contra dictum Doctorem Cawley in eodem latas unam in almâ Curiâ Cant. de Arcubus alteram in supremâ Curiâ Delegatorum quòd Commissio pro Revisione dicti negotij fuit per Serenissimos in Christo Principes ac Dominos nostros Dominos Willelmum Mariam Dei Gratiâ Angliae Scotiae Franciae Hiberniae Regem Reginam fidei Defensores c. ad petitionem dicti Doctoris Cawley concessa quòd idem negotium per Judices Revisionis non est adhuc decisum dimisit dictum Magistrum Oldys ab omni ulteriori Judicij observatione The foregoing Instances are all the Light we have from our Books touching the Determination of Controverted Elections And I observe from them No question whether the Archbishop have a Right to determin Elections 1. That it is no part of the Question Whether the Metropolitan at the Head of his Suffragan-Bishops have a Right to receive Petitions touching controverted Elections or Whether he may proceed to the Examination and final Decision of them in the Upper-house The Exercise of all these appears evidently in the Instances of 1689 where we see a Petition is offer'd receiv'd and consider'd and of 1586 where Sentence is actually given by his Grace And what can be more reasonable than that the Archbishop who by his Mandate orders the Election of Members and has the Returns of all Elections made ultimately to him who also at the Opening appoints his Commissioners to examin those Returns and during the Convocation presides over the Lower as well as the Upper House what I say can be more natural than that he should have a direct and immediate Right to take Cognizance how far such Elections with the Returns thereupon are duly and regularly made But I could never learn how the Lower-house could have a Power to Interpose about Returns whether made unduly or not at all otherwise than by Petitioning the Metropolitan upon some extraordinary Occasion that he will please to demand or examin them as of right to be made to him and none else But in the Acts of the last Convocation Anno 1700. Sess 4. The Lower-house have no Right to intermeddle in Returns I find an Instance of the Lower-house's taking Cognizance of a Return and that in a very singular manner The Words are these Propositum fuit per Guil. Bincks S. T. P. c. ad effectum sequen That whereas there hath been no Return made from the Chapter of Litchfield of a Member to serve for them in this present Convocation and whereas the said William Bincks being a Member of that Chapter inform'd this House that the Defect of such Return was occasion'd by a Dispute that hapn'd before the said Chapter concerning the Election of a Proctor to represent them That therefore this House would order a Letter to be sent sign'd by Mr. Prolocutor in the name of this Lower-house to the Dean and Chapter of the said Cathedral Church of Litchfield desiring them forthwith to transmit the whole Proceedings concerning the said Election under their common Seal to this House Cui consensum fuit This so Solemnly pass'd and enter'd thus circumstantially may be a temptation to Presbyters if the same Spirit should hereafter arise to take the cognizance of Returns and thereby the Jurisdiction over the Members out of the hands of the Metropolitan But care I hope will be taken to leave some publick testimony of the offence it gave to his Grace and the Bishops whose Rights were jointly invaded by this Act of the Lower House For it is very plain both in Law Reason and Practice that the Enquiry after such a Return ought to have gone by the same Course or Chanel through which the Return it self if made was to have pass'd viz. from the Archbishop to the Bishop and from the Bishop to the Dean 2. It is no part of the Dispute Whether the Metropolitan may enjoyn the Inferior Clergy to Examin and Determin Controverted Elections His Grace's Power to require their Assistance and their Obligation to pursue his Directions are both sufficiently express'd in that remarkable Instance from the second Convocation of 1640. 3. Nor can it be a question Whether his Grace having Commission'd the Prolocutor or Lower House to examin any doubtful Election may not take it out of their hands into his own immediate Cognizance if he see Cause This I think is a Rule in most Commissions and an Express Reservation to that purpose is made in this of 1640 empowering them to proceed donec aliter ordinatum fuerit Thus the Archbishop's Right to determine Controversies about Elections is uncontested But the Question is Whether the Right be solely in his Grace exclusive of the Inferior Clergy or Whether the Lower House have not a concurrent Right The Arguments for a concurrent Right in the Lower-house consider'd Anno 1586 In behalf of a Concurrent Right two Instances are pleaded I. That of 1586. Sess 3. 4. Where we find the Prolocutor examining Witnesses upon Oath appointing the Parties a time of Appearance and then giving the final Sentence or Judgment But we must observe as to the Point before us 1. That the Upper-House-Books of that time are not in being nor can it possibly be known whether he had not such a Commission from his Grace as we are sure was given afterwards to the Prolocutor and Lower House in 1640. Two Elections of the same Diocese were determin'd the same day one by the Archbishop the other by the Prolocutor And I think it is not likely that one of these Appellants should make original Application to the Upper and the other to the Lower House but much more probable that the Petition in both Cases was first offer'd to his Grace and that he divided the Work of Examining and Determining between himself in the Upper and the Prolocutor in the Lower House 2. The Prolocutor we see examins the Witnesses upon Oath and the very Writer who in all other respects is the main Advocate for the Independence of the Lower House solves the Prolocutor's giving an Oath by an Authority deriv'd immediately from the Archbishop The Words are these Pâ—…er of the Lower-house p. 7. c. 2. The Prolocutor was on that Day put into the Archbishop's Commission for Proroguing the Upper House in order I suppose to empower him to give Oaths as he did at the trial of an Election that day below I know the Narrative says P â—4 in the Name of the Majority That they are well assur'd that the Prolocutor has this Power by Virtue of his Office This is roundly spoken but to make others also assur'd it had been kind to offer some Reasons why the Prolocutor of the Spiritual Commons is in this Particular above the Speaker of the Commons Temporal And such Reasons had been the more necessary when they took upon them to
directly upon themselves For it was in their own Power upon this Principle to become a House when they pleas'd and not the less so for his Grace's Delaying the Appointment of a Common Referendary But in truth since the Separation of the two Houses in their Debates the title of Prolocutor has comprehended all the Offices of the Place as the Confirmation of his Grace and the Bishops has been ever thought to Instate him in the Office and make the Lower Clergy a House to act in a due Subordination to those their Superiors And this new division of the Office is evidently fram'd to Support the notion of their being a Separate House and in a Condition to debate business of their own antecedent to this Act and the Authority of their Lordships Which being once allow'd would quickly establish them in a Co-ordinate State and open a way to any degrees of Independence they should hereafter please to insist on IV. Additional Observations touching the AUTHORITY of the SUMMONS to Convocation The Authority of Summoning appli'd both to the King and the Archbishop P. 189. The title of the Convocation of 1562. as of others since the Act of Submission runs thus Convocatio Praelatorum Cleri Cantuar. Provinciae inchoat in Domo Capitulari Ecclesiae Divi Pauli London Auctoritate Brevis Regij Reverendissimo c. in hac parte directi c. P. 1. App. The form of holding a Convocation drawn by Archbishop Parker for that of 1562. begins thus Sciendum est quòd omnes qui Auctoritate Reverendissimi Domini Archiepiscopi Cant. citantur ad comparendum coram eo in in Domo Capitulari Ecclesiae Cathedralis Divi Pauli London c. The Titles of our Convocations before and since the Reformation agree in the first Clause Convocatio Praelatorum Cleri Cantuarlensis Provinciae which shews that by our Protestant Constitution they are no less an Ecclesiastical and Provincial Synod of Bishops and their Clergy under one common head the Metropolitan of of the Province than in the times of Popery they were If therefore the Clergy as has been pleaded of late be not comprehended in that Phrase Convocationem Praelatorum Cleri in the form of Continuing they are by the same rule no Members of an English Convocation But whereas the Convocations before the Reformation are generally said in the Title to be Factae per Reverendissimum c. upon the Submission Act the Style seems to have been chang'd because the first title we have entire after that Act this I mean of 1562. makes the Convocation to be begun Auctoritate Brevis Regij Reverendissimo c. direct And yet we see that Archbishop Parker lookt upon the Convocation of that very Year to be Cited or Summon'd Auctoritate Reverendissimi c. Hereupon a question arises about the true meaning of the term Authoritas as us'd in these titles and on some other Occasions In what Sense the Bishops and Clergy are said to be Summon'd to Convocation by the King's Authority and in what by the Authority of the Archbishop The Archiepiscopal Summons Authoritative before the Act. It is agreed on all hands that before the Act of Submission an English Convocation was Summon'd by the Sole Authority of the Metropolitan Nor do we deny that Act to have been a confiderable Abridgment of the Liberties of the Church in the matter of holding Synods but only that it did not so far affect the Ecclesiastical Power as to change them into Civil Meetings i. e. Meetings Summon'd and acting in virtue of that Summons immediately upon a Civil Authority The Civil Summons an argument of the Papists against our Reformation This Civil Summons and the Authority of it has been warmly asserted by two sorts of Persons 1. By the Papists who ever since the Reformation have taken the Advantage of that Act of Submission to asperse our Protestant Synods as Civil Meetings and the Canons c. made in them as of a Secular Original 2. By some late Opposers of the Metropolitical and Episcopal Authority in Convocation One of whom forms this New and very Uncanonical Scheme of Summoning and Holding Synods upon that Expression in the Submission-Act The Authority by which the Convocation meets is now purely Royal Power of the Lower House p. 3. c. 1. The words of the Act are express in the case which shall always be assembled by Authority of the King 's Writ So that since this Statute the Archbishop's share in Convening them is not Authoritative but Ministerial And when therefore he frames his Mandate upon the King 's Writ he does it as the King's Instrument only and the proper Officer who is to execute the Royal Summons The Argument arising from hence is that his Grace has now no Authority to Convene the Body of the Clergy Again Ibid. p. 17. c. 1. 2. An English Metropolitan Presiding over a Synod c. call'd together not any way by his but purely by Royal Authority And in another place Ibid. p. 20. c. 2. The Convocation Subsists by the King 's Writ Let the most virulent Adversary of this Protestant Church frame if he can a description of its Synodical Meetings that shall be a deeper Reproach to our happy Reformation Against the first sort of Adversaries the Papists and Protestants one would think should be as easily answer'd a full Vindication of our Reform'd Church has been built upon the Genuine meaning of the Act of Submission interpreted according to the true intent thereof and the antecedent and subsequent Practice with other Circumstances all which we have been forc'd more particularly to Urge and enforce of late to defend the honour of our Constitution against the Second sort of Adversaries also As The intent of the Statute no more than to restrain the Archbishop from exerting his Authority without the Royal License That the Crown did not want the Assistance of any Act to have a Convocation at pleasure because the Right of enjoyning the Archbishop to Summon it in due form as our Princes saw Occasion was always thought a Power Inherent in the Crown and was all along practis'd in England both before and since the Reformation and is indeed a Right belonging to Christian Princes in general But till the Act of Submission the Archbishop also had a Power of Summoning Convocations according to the Exigencies of the Church without the permission or direction of the Royal Writ And King Henry VIII apprehending that the Archbishop Bishops and Clergy in Convocation might protest against or obstruct his Measures of Reformation got a sufficient Security against that danger by making himself in virtue of that Act the Sole Judge when a Convocation should be Summon'd As the King neither gain'd nor wanted more than this so nothing was taken from the Archbishop but the ancient Right of Exerting his Summoning Authority AT PLEASURE the Authority it self remaining Entire and as full and effectual as ever when that Restraint is taken off The Power
the Death of the Prince The same Convocation is said in the Extracts out of the Upper-house Books to be Soluta per mortem Reginae Mariae as we find afterwards Anno 1624. that the Convocation was dissolv'd by the Death of King James the First On the contrary before the Reformation Anno 1412. we find that Archbishop Arundel summon'd a Convocation in Obedience to the King 's Writ and yet it was continu'd for some time after the Death of Henry the Fourth Again Anno 1460. Archbishop Bourchier issu'd his Summons in a like Obedience to the Royal Writ but the same Convocation not expiring with the Death of Henry the Sixth continu'd in the Reign of Edward the Fourth The difference in this Matter before and since the Reformation naturally arises from the foregoing Construction of the Submission-Act Before that was made the Archbishop had a Right to hold Convocations independent of the Prince and was by consequence under no Obligation to discontinue them upon the Death or Demise of the Prince He was bound to obey the Royal Writ as oft as it was sent him by exerting the Summoning-Authority according to the Tenor thereof but he was not absolutely confin'd to wait for and receive such Writ in order to Summon or Hold nor was a Convocation holden by the Archbishop independent of the King an illegal Assembly by the Laws then in being But by the Statute of Submission interpreted in its most genuine Meaning an absolute Restraint is laid upon the Archbishop from holding his Convocation unless authoriz'd so to do by the Royal Writ By this means any such Meeting of the Bishops and Clergy holden by the Archbishop without such Writ is become an illegal Assembly Now the Force of the Writ directed to the Archbishop to take off the Restraint laid upon him by the Statute must cease and expire with the Prince in whose Name and under whose Seal it was issu'd And when that happens the Archbishop is by Law reduc'd to the same Inability to hold a Convocation as he was under before the Reception of such Writ A Dissolution by the King's Death no Prejudice to the Archiepiscopal Authority That therefore a Convocation dies in Law with the Prince resolves wholly into that Incapacity which is acknowledg'd both in this Section and elsewhere to be laid upon the Ecclesiastical Power by the Statute of Submission And so the most that such a Dissolution can infer is that the Archbishop is now uncapable in Law to hold a Convocation unless authoriz'd by the King 's Writ to hold it or in other words that without the Force and Warrant of such Writ he cannot now as before the Statute he could give Subsistence to a Convocation But to argue from hence That the Convocation subsists by the sole Authority of the Crown and that the Authority of the Archbishop is wholly lost and so his share in summoning and holding is purely Ministerial these Inferences are a direct Violence to the Statute such as one would naturally expect from some Advocate of an erastian-Erastian-Church or a declar'd Enemy to our Reformation but 't is strange to see a profess'd Member and which is more a Minister of our Reform'd Church wresting the Statute into a Sense so very injurious to her Liberty and her Honour The Statute as it lodges in the Civil Power the sole Right of judging when our Synods shall be held is an Abridgment of the Liberties of the Church and we must be content But let us bless God that the Power of the Church is not so affected either by this or any other Statute but that the Metropolitans of both Provinces have a Right after the Writ has given them the Liberty of exerting their Power first to Summon their Convocations in an Authoritative or Canonical way and then to hold them by the ancient Ecclesiastical Rules A Blessing for which they are very ungrateful who can so much delight in saying and even pleading that the Convocation subsists by the Royal Writ exclusive of the Archiepiscopal Authority when the Dean of the Province's Certificatorium or Return with the exhibiting whereof the Convocation properly opens declares and recognizes in every particular the immediate Authority by which they assemble The Archiepiscopal Authority directly recogniz'd in the Dean of the Province's Certificatorium I have before repeated some of the Terms in which that Instrument recognizes the Archiepiscopal Authority but for a more full Satisfaction to the Reader I will here subjoin it at large REverendissimo in Christo Patri ac Domino Domino Thomae Providentia Divina Cantuar Archiepiscopo totius Angliae Primati Metropolitano vestrove in hac parte Locum tenenti sive Commissario vel Commissariis Henricus permissione Divina London Episcopus omnimodam Reverentiam Obedientiam tanto Reverendissimo Patri debitam cum Honore Literas vestras Reverendissimas Citatorias Monitoriales jamdudum Nobis sub sigillo vestro direct cum ea qua decuit Reverentia humiliter recepimus exequend sub tenore verborum sequentium videl Thomas Providentia Divina c. See the Form of the Mandate p. 9 57. Quarum quidem Literarum vigore pariter authoritate Nos praefatus Henricus London Episcopus omnes singulos Confratres nostros Co-Episcopos Ecclesiae vestrae Christi Cant. constitutos peremptorie citari premoneri ac per eos Decanos Ecclesiarum Cathedralium Collegiatarum singula Capitula earundem Archidiaconosque alios Ecclesiarum Praelatos Exemptos non Exemptos Clerumque cujuslibet Dioec Provinciae vestrae Cantuar. antedictae peremptorie citari praemoneri respective fecimus Quòd iidem Episcopi Decani c. compareant coram Peternitate vestra Reverendissima aut vestro in hac parte Locum tenente sive Commissario vel Commissariis die loco in eisdem vestris Literis Reverendissimis plenius specificat designat cum Continuatione Prorogatione dierum extunc sequentium locorum si quatenus expediat Ad tractandum super arduis urgentibus negotiis c. ut prius in Mandato Ulteriusque Authoritate per Receptionem Literarum Destrarum Reverendissimarum Citotoriarum Monitorialium praedictarum fatemur Nos Henricum London Episcopum antedictum peremptorie fore esse citatum ad comparendum coram vestra Reverendissima Paternitate aut vestro in hac parte Locum tenente sive Commissario vel Commissariis hujusmodi die loco praecitatis de super Negotiis memoratis tractatur ' Et nos iisdem Literis vestris Reverendissimis hujusmodi juxta vim formam tenorem effectum carundem debite parebimus Intimavimus insuper denuntiavimus intimari denuntiari fecimus dictae Provinciae vestrae Cantuar. Co-episcopis c. quòd eos a personali comparitione in hujusmodi negotio Convocationis Congregationis dictis die loco ut praemittitur divina favente clementia excusatos Reverendissima vestra Paternitas non habere intendit ista vice nisi