Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n henry_n king_n prince_n 7,937 5 6.0693 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

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

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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-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
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