in question hath been of a Mixt nature in reference to Jurisdictions 29. Certain Reasons for denial of Prohibitions to the Ecclesiastical Court in some Cases where they might lie 30. Bounds of Parishes in reference to the Tithes thereof whether Tryable by the Law of the Land or by the Law of the Church 31. Where the Question is more touching the Right of Tithes than the Bounds of the Parish the Ecclesiastical Court hath had the cognizance 32. The Ecclesiastical Court hath cognizance of Administrators Accounts and no Prohibition lies 33. Modus Decimandi sued for by a Parson in the Eccllesiastical Court no Prohibition Nor if he there sues for the Tithe of things not Titheable 34. In what cases a Custome as also a Rent may be sued for in the Ecclesiastical Court 35. If Question be touching the Grant of a Registers Office in a Bishop's Court or touching the Tenth after severance from the Nine parts In what Court whether Temporal or Ecclesiastical it shall be tryed 36. A Woman exercising the Profession of a Midwife without License is therefore sued in the Ecclesiastical Court whether a Prohibition lies in that case 37. The Bounds of a Parish also whether such a Church be Parochial or only a Chappel of Ease In what Court this is to be tryed 38. A Prohibition granted upon the disallowance of an Executors Plea of having Assets only to pay Debts in opposition to a Legacy sued for in the Ecclesiastical Court 39. A Prohibition awarded upon a Suit in the Ecclesiastical Court for an account of the Profits of a Benefice Otherwise in case the Profits were taken during the time of a Sequestration 40. A Prohibition granted to a Party to stay proceedings in his own Suit and commenced by himself 41. Pensions are sueable only in the Ecclesiastical Court 42. The right of Tithes coming in question between the Parson and the Vicar is a Suit properly belonging to the Ecclesiastical Court 43. Whether and how far and in what manner the Ecclesiastical Court may take cognizance of a Modus Decimandi at large debated 44. When and how the Canon Law was introduced into this Realm 1. BEfore the time of King William the Conqueror all matters as well Spiritual as Temporal were determined in the Hundred-Courts where was wont to sit one Bishop and one Temporal Judge called Aldermanus the one for matters of Spiritual the other of Temporal cognizance But that was altered by King William and it seems by Parliament for it was by the assent of the Bishops Abbots and all the chief persons of the Realm for he Ordained That the Bishop or Archdeacon should not hold Plea of the Episcopal Laws quae ad Regimen animarum pertinent in the Hundred but by themselves and there administer Justice not according to the Law of the Hundred but according to the Episcopal Laws and Canons as appears by King William's Charter Irrot. 2. R. 2. pro Decano Capitulo Eccles Lincolne Jan. Angl. 76 77. The Principal Courts Ecclesiastical whereof some are now out of use were and are the Convocation Court the High Commission Court the high Court of Arches the Prerogative Court of Canterbury the Court of Delegates the Court of Audience the Court of Peculiars the Court of Faculties besides the Bishops Consistories the Archdeacons Courts and the like anciently called Halimots or holy Courts And the Saxon Kings long before William the Conqueror made several Laws for the Government of the Church Among others St. Edward begins his Laws with this Protestation that it is his Princely charge Vt Populum Domini super omnia Sanctam Ecclesiam regat gubernet And King Edgar in his Oration to his English Clergy Ego saith he Constantini vos Petri gladium habetis jungamus dextras gladium gladio Copulemus ut ejiciantur extra castra Leprosi purgetur Sanctuarium Domini But upon the Conquest made by the Normans the Pope took the opportunity to usurp upon the Liberties of the Crown of England for the Conqueror came in with the Popes Banner and under it won the Battel Whereupon the Pope sent two Legates into England with whom the Conqueror called a Synod deposed Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury because he had not purchased his Pall in the Court of Rome and displaced many Bishops and Abbots to make room for his Normans Among the rest the King having earnestly moved Wolstan Bishop of Worcester being then very aged to give up his Staff was Answered by him That he would give up his Staff only to him of whom he first received the same And so the old Bishop went to St. Edward's Tomb and there offered up his Staff and Ring with these words viz. Of Thee O holy Edward I received my Staff and my Ring and to thee I do now surrender the same again Which proves that before the Norman Conquest the Kings of England invested their Bishops per Annulum Baculum By this admission of the Pope's Legates was the first step or entry made into his usurped Jurisdiction in England yet no Decrees passed or were put in execution touching matters Ecclesiastical without the King 's Royal Assent nor would he submit himself in point of Fealty to the Pope as appears by his Epistle to Gregory the Seventh Vid. Da. Rep. Case of Praemunire fo 89. yet in his next Successors time in the time of William Rufus the Pope by Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury attempted to draw Appeals to Rome but prevailed not Upon this occasion it was that the King told Anselme That none of his Bishops ought to be subject to the Pope but that the Pope himself ought to be subject to the Emperour and that the King of England had the same absolute Liberties in his Dominions as the Emperour had in the Empire Yet in the time of the next King H. 1. the Pope usurped the Patronage and Donation of Bishopricks and all other Benefices Ecclesiastical at which time Anselme told the King That the Patronage and Investure of Bishopricks was not his Right because Pope Urban had lately made a Decree That no Lay-person should give any Ecclesiastical Benefice And after this in a Synod held at London An. 1107. a Decree was made Cui annuit Rex Henricus says Matth. Paris that from thenceforth Nunquam per donationem Baculi Pastoralis vel Annuli quisquam de Episcopatu vel Abbathia per Regem vel quamlibet Laicam manum investiretur in Anglia Hereupon the Pope granted That the Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being should be for ever Legatus Natus And Anselme for the honour of his See obtained That the Archbishop of Canterbury should in all general Councils sit at the Pope's foot tanquam alterius Orbis Papa Yet after Anselme's death this same King gave the Archbishoprick of Canterbury to Rodolph Bishop of London says Matth. Paris Et illum per Annulum Pastoralem Baculum investivit as before he had invested William Gifford in
for the avoiding of Leases made by a Parson by his Absence from his Living by the space of eighty daies in one year and also shews that one Stallowe who was Parson of Sharrington to whom these Tithes did belong and in whose Right the Defendant claimed them was Absent from his Parsonage by the space of eighty daies in one year and shews in what year and so by this his interest determined and Agreement with the Plaintiff by this made void but they found further as the Plaintiff made it to appear That Stallowe the Parson of Sharrington was not Absent in manner as it was alledged for that they found that he did dwell in another Town adjoyning but that he came constantly to his Parish-Church and there read Divine Service and so went away again They did also find hat he had a Parsonage-house in Sharrington fit for his habitation and whether this were an Absence within the Statute as to avoid his Lease they left that to the Judgment of the Court Yelverton Justice This is a good Non-Residency within the Statute of 21 H. 8. cap. 13. but not an Absence to avoid a Lease made within the Statute of 13 Eliz. cap. 20. It cannot be said here in this Case that he was Absent for he came four daies in every week and in his Parish-Church did read Divine Service Williams Justice upon the Statute of 13 and 14 Eliz the Parson ought not to be Absent from his Church eighty daies together in one year à Rectoria sua but this is not so here for he came to his Church and read Divine Service there every Sunday Wednesday Friday and Saturday and therefore clearly this cannot be such an Absence within the scope and intention of these Statutes as thereby to avoid his Lease Yelverton Justice he ought to be Absent eighty daies together per spatium de Octogin diebus ultra and this to be altogether at one time and so the same ought to have been laid expresly the which is not so done here for that it appears here that he was at his Parsonage-house and did read Prayers every Sunday Wednesday Friday and Saturday and so the whole Court were clear of Opinion that this Absence here as the same appeared to be was not such an Absence by the space of eighty daies in one year to avoid his Lease within the said Statute and so the Defendants Plea in Barr not good and therefore by the Rule of the Court Judgment was entered for the Plaintiff 17. An Information was Exhibited against Two Parsons by J. S. upon the Statute of 21 H. 8. cap. 13. against one of them for Non-Residency and against the other for taking of a Farm the one of them pleaded Sickness and that by the Advice of his Physicians he removed into better Air for Recovery of his health and this is justifiable by the whole Court vid. more for this Coke 6. par fo 21. in Butler and Goodall's Case The other pleaded That he took the Farm for the maintenance of his House and Family And this also is justifiable by the Opinion of the whole Court Crooke moved the Court for the Defendants That the Plaintiff was a Common Informer and that he did prefer this Information against them only for their vexation and so to draw them to compound with him as formerly he hath so done by others for which they prosecuted an Indictment in the Countrey upon the Statute of 18 Eliz. cap. 5. made to punish Common Informers for their Abuses The whole Court did advise them to prosecute this Indictment against him Crooke moved for the Defendants That in regard the Informer is a man of no means that the Court would order him to put in sufficient Sureties to answer Costs if the matter went against him and that then the Defendants would presently answer the Information Williams Justice nullam habemus talem legem this is not to be done but the Rule of the Court was That the Defendants should not answer the Information until the Informer appeared in person 18. In an Action of Covenant the Plaintiff in his Declaration sets forth that the Defendant was Parson of D. and did Covenant That the Plaintiff should have his Tithes of certain Lands for thirteen years and that afterwards he Resigned and another Parson Inducted by which means he was ousted of his Tithes and for this cause the Action brought The Defendant pleads in Barr the Statutes of 13 Eliz. cap. 20. and 14 Eliz. cap. 11. for Non-Residency upon which Plea the Plaintiff demurr'd in Law It was urged for the Plaintiff That the Plea in Barr was not good because it is not averred that the Defendant had been Absent from his Parsonage by the space of Eighty daies in a year for otherwise the Covenant is not void by the Statutes For the Defendant it was alledged That the pleading of the Statute of 13 Eliz. is idle but by the Statute of 14 Eliz. this Covenant is made void for by the Statute all Covenants shall be all one with Leases made by such Parsons And in this case if this had been a Lease this had been clearly void by Surrender of the Parson and so in case of a Covenant Doderidge and Houghton Justices The Statutes of 13 and 14 Eliz. do not meddle with Assurances at the Common Law nor intended to make any Leases void which were void at the Common Law and therefore this Covenant here is not made void by the Statute unless he be Absent Eighty daies from his Parsonage Coke Chief Justice agreed with them herein They all agreed in this Case for the Plaintiff and that by the Preamble of 14 Eliz. it is shewed the intent of the Statute to be to make Covenants void within the Provision of 13 Eliz. by Absence for Eighty daies And Judgment in this Case was given for the Plaintiff CHAP. XXIX Of Abbots and Abbies also of Chauntries and of the Court of Augmentations 1. Abbot what why so called the several kinds thereof and how many anciently in England 2. A famous Abbot anciently in Ireland The manner of their Election prescribed by the Emperour Justinian Anciently the Peers of France were frequently Abbots 3. The ancient Law of King Knute concerning Abbots 4. The Abbot with the Monks making a Covent were a Corporation 5. Abbots were either Elective or Presentative they were Lords of Parliament How many Abbies in England and which the most Ancient Founded by King Ethelbert 6. Chaunter and Chauntries what and whence so called their use and end 47 belonging anciently to St. Pauls in London when and by what Laws their Revenues were vested in the Crown 7. Before King John's time Abbots and Priors were Presentative afterwards Elective 8. Six Differences taken and Resolved in a Case at Law touching Chauntries 9. Certain Cases in Law touching Lands whether under pretence of Chauntries given by the Statute to the King or not 10. What the Court of Augmentations was the end
Simony and the Error of the Nicholaitans whereof they counted such Priests guilty as had married Wives though they did not as the Nicholaitans make them Common At Mantua An. 1066. the Emperour Henry the Fourth assembled a Council for pacifying the Differences in the Roman Church between Alexander the Second and Candalus called Honorius the Second wherein Alexander was declared Pope and Candalus pardoned At Winchester Pope Alexander the Second by two Cardinals sent into England Assembled a Council to appease the Troubles of the Church in this Kingdom wherein they deposed certain Bishops and Abbots among whom Stigandus Bishop of Canterbury because he had possessed that Chair Robert Archbishop thereof being then alive and because he possessed another Bishoprick with it viz. the Bishoprick of Winchester At Friburgh anciently called Tributia the Bishops of Germany assembled themselves in a Council in which they declared the Archbishop of Bremen to be an Enemy to their Countrey except he delivered up the young Emperour Henry the Fourth to be educated according to the Covenant made between the Princes and Bishops of Germany during his Minority At Mentz An. 1069. a Council was assembled in order to a Divorce of the Emperour Henry 4. from his Wife from which he was disswaded by the Arguments of Petrus Damianus the Popes Nuncio for that purpose At Erfurd An. 1074. the Bishop of Mentz assembled a Council in order to an observance of a Command from Pope Gregory 7 th touching a separation of the Priests within the Bishoprick of Mentz from their Wives or else to depose them from their Offices By reason whereof as also by reason of the Bishops exaction of Tithes from Turingia this Council rose in a tumult and great confusion re infecta At Mentz An. 1075. the Bishop thereof being commanded by Pope Gregory 7 th to separate the Priests from their Wives convened a Synod but the married Priests so terrified the Bishop of Mentz and the Bishop of Chur the Popes Nuncio that this Council also as the former was dissolved and nothing done At Wormes the Emperour assembled all the Bishops of his Kingdom in order to a deposing of Pope Gregory 7 th otherwise called Hildebrand accused of Perjury Ambition Avarice and Pride The determination of this Council was That he should be removed from the Popedom which was Subscribed by all the Bishops present at the Council At Friburgh An. 1076. another Council was assembled wherein the Princes of Saxony and Sweve appeared in favour of the See of Rome against the Emperour Henry the Fourth At Rome by order of the Pope a Council was assembled in Lent wherein the Emperour Henry 4 th was not only Anathematiz'd but also denuded as far as in them lay of his Imperial Dignity At Brixia in the year 1080. the Emperour Henry 4 th assembled 30 Bishops of Germany and Italy together with many Princes of the Empire All which consented That Hildebrand should be deposed from the Popedom and Gilbertus Bishop of Ravenna placed in his room At Rome An. 1081. the Emperour Henry 4 th with the Advice of the Roman Senate appointed a Council to be Assembled wherein Hildebrand was deposed and Gilbertus otherwise Wigbertus to succeed in the Papacy This Council was called by the said Emperour soon after he had besieged and taken the City of Rome At Beneventum a Council was Assembled by Pope Victor the Third who before his Election to the Papacy was named Desiderius Abbot in Cassinates chosen by the Romans not regarding Gilbertus whom the Emperour had made Pope In this Council Victor the Third Anathematized Gilbertus Bishop of Ravenna At Clermont in Overnie of France in the year 1095. Vrbanus the Second convened a great Assembly wherein it was Ordained That an Army should be raised for support of the distressed Christians in Jerusalem and recovery of the Holy Land out of the hands of the Infidels The which was likewise Ordained in the Council of Placentia and other Councils of the lesser concern here omitted for Brevities sake In the next viz. the 12 th Century there were above 115 Councils To instance in the most material of them may suffice for this Abridgment At Paris Vrbanus the Second at the complaint of Alexius Emperour of Constantinople against the rage of the Turks assembled a Council of most Nations and was present himself thereat In this Council were appointed 100000 Men out of the Western Kingdoms for the Holy Land At Florence Pope Paschalis the Second convened a Council wherein the Bishop of Florence was called to an account for Preaching openly That Antichrist was already come for which he was sharply rebuked and commanded That for time to come he should utter no such Doctrine At London in the year 1102. in the Third year of the Reign of Hen. 1. King of England Anselmus Archbishop of Canterbury assembled a Council for prohibiting the Marriages of Priests and the year following was constrained to convene another Council at St. Pauls in London to make Constitutions for the punishment of such as defiled themselves with Sodomitical Lusts At Mentz An. 1106. a great Council was assembled against the Emperour Henry 4. whom they condemned of Heresie which was Simony because he would not resign the Right of Investure of Bishops into the Popes hands and having Excommunicated him took off his Imperial Crown At Troyes in France in the year 1107. Pope Paschalis the Second convened a Council which treated concerning the Investure of Bishops not to be in the power of Lay-persons At Triburia in Friburgh in the year 1119. the Bishops of Germany assembled concerning the Investure of Bishops and in opposition to the Emperour Henry the Fifth At Senon a Council was called against Abelardus by reason of his Heresie He was also accounted an Heretick in the Council of Soâ—sson The First Four Lateran Councils are comprehend under one and the same Title as more favouring the Roman Dissentions than the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church The first under Henry the Fifth and Calixtus the Second which had 300 or according to Bellarmine 900 Bishops and 22 Canons In this Council Burdinus the Anti-Pope was laid aside the vestures with the Ring and Staff were taken from the Emperour and given to the Pope who absolved the Emperour and gave him power of electing German Bishops In this Council there were appointed Crosses for the 〈◊〉 War by means whereof Pardon of Sins might be grant 〈◊〉 them that undertook that War and to their Families The Second Lateran Council was under Lotharius the Emperour and Innocentius the Second which increased to the number of about 2000 Bishops This Council omitted Thirty Canons lately published by Gratian from the Vatican Library which Bellarmine is said to reject It discharged Peter usurping the Roman See after Leo under the name of Anacletus the Second branded for Hereticks Peter of
H. 6. 19. per Prisot y 8 E. 4. 24. b. per Curtam 5 H. 7. 20. b. per Reble and 22 H. 6. 30. per Mark. z Rol. Abr. Ver. presentment lit P. pag. 384. a 21 H. 6. 44. 34. H 6. 40. b 21 H. 6. 44. c 34 H. 6. 11. b. per Prisot 34 H. 6. 38. d 34 H. 6. 11. b. e ibid. per Prisot f 21 H. 6. 44. 45. Rollâ—ubi supra g 34 H. 6. 12. per curiam h F. N. B. Spoliation fo 36. b. vid. Casâ— Edes vers the Bishop of Oxford in Vaugh. Rep. i 38 H. 6. f. 19. Br. Spoliation pl. 4. O. N. B. 33. b. F. N. B. 54. Finch Nomotexnia p. 138. Bird and Smiths Case More 's Rep. Roberts and Amond shams Case More 's Rep. Mich. 13. Jac. B. R. the Kings case against Zakar Bulst par 3. F. N. B. 175. b. Finch ubi sup p. 135. Stamf. 133. Cap. 40. sect 7. in fin sect pag. 564. THE INDEX Referring to PAGE and PARAGRAPH ABBY-Lands how many ways priviledged or dischargâ—◠〈◊〉 Tithes p. 383. How the Abby of Battel came to be dispensâ—â— with from Visitation p. 108. Sect. 8. When and by whom 〈◊〉 Abby of Westminster was founded p. 328. Sect. 5. Abbot whence that word is derived and what it signifies p. 326 327. Sect. 1. How many Abbots anciently in England p. 327. Sect. 1. and 328. Sect. 5. They were reputed as Peers p. 327. Sect. 2. Some were Elective others Presentative p. 328. Sect. 5. When and by whom made Elective p. 331. Sect. 7. Three Abbots condemn'd at once for denying the Kings Supremacy p. 10. Sect. 14. Abeyance what p. 183. Sect. 9. and 189. Sect. 8. and 284. Sect. 3. Abjuration The form thereof anciently p. 141 142. Sect. 8. Absence of the Husband from the Wife what requisite to cause a Divorce p. 494. Sect. 2. Abstinence or Fasting Days the Original thereof in England p. 130. Sect. 44. Acceptance of Rent by a Bishop whether it shall bind him p. 38. Sect. ult By a Parson whether it confirms the Lease made by his Predecessor p. 189. Sect. 8. Accessories determinable in that Court which hath cognizance of 〈◊〉 Principal p. 114. Sect. 11. and p. 123. Sect. 25. Accompt in what case an Executor shall not be compelled thereunâ—â— p. 116. Sect. 12. Acorns Whether Tithable p. 383. Action upon the Case in what Case it may lye at Common Law for suing in the Ecclesiastical Court p. 444. Administrator how he may make his own Goods 〈…〉 Debts p. 86. Sect. 11. Admission what and under what qualification 〈…〉 p. 272. Sect. 6. the form thereof p. 272. Sect. 7. Admittendo Clerico in what Cases that 〈…〉 Adultery where Cogniâ—able and 〈…〉 Advocatio Medietatis Ecclesiae Medietatis Advocationis Ecclesiae the difference in Law between them p. 206. Sect. 2. Advocatione decimarum what that Writ imports p. 647. Sect. 7. Advowe or Avowe who properly such p. 206. Sect. 2. and p. 213. Sect. 14. Advowson what and whence derived p. 205. Sect. 1. Twofold p. 206. The Original thereof p. 207. Sect. 3 A Temporal non Spiritual Inheritance p. 209. Sect. 6 7. How Advowson in Gross differs from Appendant p. 210. Sect. 8. Whether it may be extended p. 182. Sect. 7. By what words in a Grant it may pass or not p. 211. Sect. 10. p. 214 Sect. 15 16. Whether it may be Assets p. 214. Sect. 15. Whether the Advowson of a Vicarage endowed belongs to the Parson or the Parsons Patron p. 216. Sect. 21. Whether the Advowson of a Vicarage doth pass by the Grant of the Vicarage p. 219. Sect. 24. Three Original Writs of Advowsons p. 216. Sect. 20. Aftermath and Aftergrass whether Tithable p. 384. Age at what age a Minor Executor may administer p. 219. Sect. 16. Agistment what and whether Titheable p. 384 385. Agreement between Parson and Parishioner touching Tithes p. 373. Sect. 47. and p. 385 386. Good for years without Deed not so for Life p. 379. Sect. 69. and p. 386. Alcheron how severely it doth punish Adultery p. 471. Sect. 6. Aldermanus anciently what p. 96. Sect. 1. Aliens whether presentable to a Church in England p. 264. Sect. 26. and p. 272. Sect. 6. Alimony what p. 508. Sect. 13. where cognizable p. 510. Sect. 16. 18 19. In what Cases the Law allows Alimony or not p. 509 510. Sect. 14 15. whether due to her that Elopes p. 508. Sect. 13. Alms or things appointed for that end whether Tithable p. 386. Altarage what p. 339. Sect. 1. whether Tithe Wool or Tithe Wood shall pass by the word Altaragium p. 341. Sect. 3. p. 342. Sect. 4 5. St. Andrews in Scotland when and by whom the Bishop thereof was made Metropolitan of all Scotland p. 18. Sect. 9. Animalia Utilia Inutilia the difference between them in reference to Tithes p. 360. Sect. 17. and p. 386. Annates what by and to whom payable p. 335. Sect. 1. The Original thereof p. 337. Sect. 2 3. vid. First-fruits Annua Pensione what that Writ imports p. 648. Sect. 14. Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury the first that made Appeals to Rome p. 97. Sect. 1. and p. 118. Sect. 13. The first Archbishop of Canterbury that was Legatus Natus p. 98. Sect. 1. Apparitor Action against such for false informing p. 88. Sect. 14. vid. Summoner Appeals to Rome prohibited p. 9. Sect. 14. p. 118. Sect. 13. They are made to the King in Chancery p. ibid. Appeal out of Ireland to the Delegates in England in what case p. 407. vid. Delegates Appellatione remota the effect of that clause in Law p. 117. Sect. 13. Apples what Tithes they pay whether small to the Vicar or great to the Parson p. 361. Sect. 21. p. 386. In what case they may not be Tithable p. 371. Sect. 44. Appropriation what p. 223. Sect. 3. The original thereof p. 221 222. Sect. 1. Whether it may be made without the Kings License ibid. and p. 198. Sect. 3. Whose Assents are requisite thereunto p. 222. Sect. 1. How they are now chang'd in their use and end from what they were originally p. 223. Sect. 2. Whether they might formerly be granted to Nunneries p. 223. Sect. 2. and p. 225. Sect. 5. They may not now as to their Original be called into question p. 226. Sect. 6. How a Church Impropriate may become disappropriate p. 229. Sect. 12. Arabians their strange conceit of Adultery p. 471. Sect. 6. The punishment thereof with them Capital ibid. Arable Land left Fallow and untill'd every other year whether Tithable that year p. 394. Archbishop whence so called A description of that Dignity p. 12. Sect. 1. What difference between Archbishop and Metropolitan p. 15. Sect. 3. Three Archbishops in England and Wales anciently p. ibid. Sect. 4. How that in Wales came to be lost and when p. 17. Sect. 6. None in Ireland until the year 1152. p. 20. Sect. 13. In what Cases an Archbishop may call
of a Bishop may not be without the consent of the Dean yet this we find upon Record nigh as Ancient as the former That where at present there was no Dean there the Election of the Bishop hath been by the Canons alone Canonici Saresbirienses Decanum non habentes ad praesens à Rege prius impetrata Licentia Fratrem suum Concanonicum Herebertum Cantuariensem Archidiaconum Assensu Communi solemniter in Episcopum Elegerunt Electionem factam in Publico recitavit Walterus Praecentor Electioni factae praebuit Rex Assensum quam Hubertus Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus Auctoritate propria Confirmavit c. Consonant to which method is the Act of Parliament made in the 25. of H. 8. whereby it is Enacted That on the vacancy of every Bishoprick his Majesty should issue out his Writ of Congé d'Eslire to the Dean and Chapter of the Church so vacant enabling them to proceed to Election of another Bishop which Election being returned by the said Dean and Chapter and ratified by the Royal Assent his Majesty should issue out his Writ to the Metropolitan to proceed to the Confirmation of the party Elected and taking to himself two other Bishops at least to proceed to Consecration in case he had not before been Consecrated Bishop of some other Church The place of Consecration of Bishops was anciently at Canterbury as the Mother-Church not only of that Province but of all England For when in the time of R. 1. An. 1192. a Bishop of Worcester Elect was to be Consecrated and Westminster the place design'd for that solemnity according to the Popes Command it was opposed by the Prior and Covent of Christ-Church in Canterbury and at a time when the Archbishop thereof whose presence could not but have strengthned that opposition was absent yet the said Prior insisting on the Priviledges and Customes of the Church of Canterbury opposed the said place of Consecration as appears by his Letter to the Bishop of Ely the Popes Legate and other Bishops of that Province in haec verba Reverendis in Christo Dominis Fratribus W. Dei gratia Heliensi Episcopo Apostolicae sedis Legato Domini Regis Cancellario caeterisque Episcopis Cantuariensis Ecclesiae Suffraganeis O. Prior Conventus Ecclesiae Christi Cantuariae salutem ab Auctore salutis Noverit Sanctitas vestra Nos ad sedem Apostolicam appellasse ne Wigorniensis Electus alias quam in Ecclesia Cantuariensi sicut moris est Consecretur ne quis vestrum qui indemnitati Ecclesiae Cantuariensis vinculo Professionis providere tenemini alias quam in eadem Ecclesi◠ejus Consecationi interesse praesumat And at a Synod held at Westminster under P. Honorius 2. in the Reign of H. 1. An. 1126. it was Ordained That at the Consecration of Bishops nothing should by way of Offerings be exacted or by force required Statuimus Apostolica Authoritate Decernimus ut in Consecrationibus Episcoporum c. nil omnino per violentiam nisi sponte oblatum fuerit penitus exigatur Simeon Dunelm Hist de Gest Reg. Angl. The like you have Decreed at another Synod held also at Westminster under P. Innocent 2. in King Stephens Reign An. 1138. Apostolica authoritate Sancimus ut in Consecrationibus Episcoporum ne quicquam ab Episcopo vel Ministris ejus exigatur Hist Richard Prioris Hagustald de Gest Reg. Steph. In the year 1123. which was in the Reign of H. 1. at the Council of Three hundred Bishops conven'd at Rome P. Calixtus 2. being President it was Decreed That no Bishop should be Consecrated unless he were first Canonically Elected Nullus in Episcopum nisi Canonice Electum Consecret quod etsi praesumptum fuerit Consecratus Consecrator absque recuperationis spe deponatur dict Sim. Dunelm Hist As that Canon was not in being so the matter thereby ordained in all probability was far from being observed when Plegmundus Archbishop of Canterbury whom P. Formosus honoured with the Pall Consecrated no less than Seven Bishops in one day in the two and twentieth year of King Alured Chron. Johan Bromton Abbatis Jornalensis When a Bishop is Consecrated then may he Consecrate viz. Churches c. and may Ordain Deacons c. But it was long since provided by the Council of Lateran under P. Alexander That the Bishop should not confer Holy Orders on any that were not then or speedily to be provided with an Ecclesiastical Living Episcopus si aliquem sine certo Titulo de quo Necessaria vitae percipiat in Diaconum vel Presbyterum Ordinaverit tam diu ei necessaria subministret donec ei in aliqua Ecclesia Convenientia stipendia militiae clericalis assignet nisi talis forte qui Ordinatur extiterit qui de sua vel paterna haereditate subsidium vitae possit habere Can. 9. And as touching the Bishops Consecrating of Churches it being vulgarly supposed that there is a considerable piece of Superstition therein it cannot but be seasonable here to enquire whether so or no or whether the Consecration of Churches be not truly Primitive according to the Judgment of the Learned Dr. Heylin To which purpose you have here his very words viz. The place of Publick Worship is called generally according to the style of the Ancient Fathers by the name of the Church For Consecrating or setting apart whereof to Religious uses I find says he so great Authority in the Primitive times as will sufficiently free it from the guilt of Popery Witness the Testimony which Pope Pius gives of his Sister Eutorepia in an Epistle to Justus Viennensis An. 158. or thereabouts for setting apart her own House for the use and service of the Church Witness the Testimony which Metaphrastes gives of Felix the First touching his Consecrating of the House of Cicilia about the year 272. And that which Damasus gives unto Marcellinus who succeeded Felix for Consecrating the House of Lucinia for Religions uses Witness the famous Consecration of the Temple of the Holy Martyrs in Jerusalem Founded by Constantine the Great at which almost all the Bishops in the Eastern parts were summoned and called together by the Emperours Writ and finally not to descend to the following Times witness the 89th Sermon of St. Ambrose entituled De Dedicatione Basilicae Preached at the Dedication of a Church built by Vitalianus and Maianus and the Invitation of Paulinus another Bishop of that Age made by Sulpitius Severus his especial Friend Ad Basilicam quae prorexerat in Nomine Domini consummabitur Dedicandum to be present at the Dedication of a Church of his Foundation Heyl. Cyprian Angl. p. 12. The Decree of Faith made by the Council of Trent was attended with no less than Eight Anathematisms the first whereof was against him that shall say that there is no visible Priesthood in the New Testament nor any power to Consecrate c. For in the beginning of that Decree it is affirmed That there is a visible and
tradehant The Seventh was at Nice under Constantine and his Mother Irene where 367 Bishops were assembled against the Adversaries of Images whom they subjected to their Anathema 2 Of Particular Synods one was held in the Temple of the Apostles in Constantinople under the Patriarch Photius which was called the First and Second Another under Leo and Constantine in the most Famous Temple Sanctae Dei Sapientiae or Sanctae Sophiae which confirmed the Seventh Synod Another at Ancyra more ancient than the first Universal Synod Another at Caesarea more ancient than that at Ancyra Another at Gangra after the Nicene against Eustachius who despised Marriage and taught things not consonant to Ecclesiastical Tradition Another at Antioch a City in Syria where in truth were two Synods the one under Aurelianus against Paulus Samosatenus who said that Christ was meer Man the other under Constantius Son to Constantine the Great Another at Laodicea scituate in Phrygia Pacatiana Another at Sardica that when Constantius embraced the foresaid Sect his Brother Constans Emperour of Old Rome by his Letters threatning him with a War if he would not desist from perverting the Church his Answer was That he sought no other Doctrine than what was most agreeable to the Catholick Faith whereupon by their and the Bishop of Romes appointment 341 Bishops were Conven'd in a Synod which having established the power and authority of the Nicene Synod did constitute divers Canons for the Church Another at Carthage under Theodosius where 217 Bishops were assembled and with them the Popes Vicegerents this Carthage was part of Charchedon and that a Province of Africa 3 The Canons of the Fathers are taken according to the Roman computation out of the Epistles partly of Dionysius Alexandrinus partly of Petrus Alexandrinus partly of the Wonder-working Gregorius partly also out of the Epistles of Bazil or Basilius the Great partly out of the Epistle of Gregory or Gregorius Nyssenus to the B. of Melita partly out of the Responses of Timotheus Alexandrinus partly out of the Responses of the Constantinopolitan Synod to certain Monks Nicholaus the Patriarch being President partly out of the Epistles of Cyril or Cyrillus and partly out of the Epistles of Nicephorus the Patriach 4 The Canons of the Holy Apostles a book falsly ascribed to the Apostles are in number Eighty Five according to a modest Computation if you have any Faith to spare at least enough to believe the Church of Rome in that as in other Points infallible But the Canons indeed of the Apostles which are of Order and External Government do oblige as Dr. Taylor says the Conscience by being accepted in several Churches not by their first Institution and were fitted only to Times and Places and present Necessities For says he the Apostolical Decree of Abstaining from Blood was observed by more Churches than those of Syria and Cilicia to which the Canon was directed and the Colledge of Widows or Deaconesses derived it self into the manners of the Western Churches And the Apostles in their first Preaching and Conversation in Jerusalem instituted a coenobitick life and had all things in Common with Believers indeed no man was obliged to it Of the same nature were their Canons Counsels and Advices The Canon concerning Widows Let not a Widow be chosen under 60 years and yet Justinian suffered one of 40 years old to be chosen Novel 123. c. 12 13. And the Canon of the Apostles forbidding to eat things strangled is no where observed in the Western Churches of Christendom In the beginning of the Fourth Century above 1300 years since we find our Bishops British Bishops at the Councils of Arles Nice Sardis and Ariminum a clear Evidence of the flourishing state of Christianity so long since in this Island At Arles in France conven'd touching the Donatists appeared for the Britains Eborius Bishop of York Restitutus Bishop of London Adelfius Bishop of the City called the Colony of London which some suppose to be Colchester others Maldon in Essex Sacerdos a Priest both by Name and Office Arminius a Deacon An. 313. At the Synod of Nice in Bithynia An. 325. to suppress Arrianism were British Bishops present as Athanasius and Hilary Bishop of Poictiers affirm At the Council of Sardis in Thracia conven'd by Constanitus and Constans Sons to Constantine the Great the British Bishops were likewise present when the Arrians were condemn'd and Athanasius acquitted And at the Council of Ariminum in Italy the British Bishops were also present who according to Athanasius were about An. 360. summoned to divers Forein Councils in remote parts As also here at home in and after the Seventh Century were divers particular Councils and Synods the first whereof according to Stapleton out of Bede called The first of the English Nation was conven'd at Hertford by Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury who succeeded Deusdedit in that See in this Council the Observation of Easter was settled according to the Romish Rite yet whosoever will have this Council to be as aforesaid The first of the English Nation must understand it the First whose Canons are compleatly extant Bede lib. 4. c. 5. About the year 740 Ethelbald King of Mercia with Cuthbert Archbishop of Canterbury called a Council at Cliffe in Kent the acts of which Synod were 31 Canons among which is was inter alia Ordain'd That Prayers should publickly be made for Kings and Princes But some few years before this the said Theodorus held a Synod or Council of Bishops at Hatfield by authority whereof he divided the Province of Mercia which Sexwolphus then governed alone into five Bishopricks viz. to Chester Worcester Lichfield Cedema in Lindsey and to Dorchester In the year 692 a great Council was held at Becanceld by Withred King of Kent and Bertuald Archbishop of Britain wherein many things were concluded in favour of the Church About the same time a Council was held at Berghamsteed by the said Withred King of Kent at which Council Bishop Wilfrid was restored to York whence he departed for Rome upon the endeavours which Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury had used to have that Diocess of York divided In the year 801 Ethelard the Archbishop called a Synod at Clivesho in Kent where by power from the Pope he rivited that 's the word the Archbishoprick into the City of Canterbury There was likewise at Celichyth an eminent Council under Wolphred who succeeded Ethelard Archbishop of Canterbury But nigh one hundred years before this viz. about the year 709 a Synod was assembled at Alncester in Worcestershire to promote the building of evesham-Evesham-Abbey And not long after another Synod was called at London to introduce the Doctrine of Image-Worship into England now first beginning to appear in the publick practice thereof Also above one hundred years before that viz. about the year 601. Augustine by the aid of Ethelbert King of Kent called a Council of Saxon and British Bishops to meet in the Confines of the Mercians and
West-Saxons in the borders of Worcester and Herefordshire under an Oak thereby tacitly reproving the Idolatry of the Pagan Britains who acted their Superstitions under an Oak as the Learned Sr. H. Spelman observes In the Tenth Century King Edward the Elder Son of King Alfred called a Synod at Intingford where he confirmed the same Ecclesiastical Constitutions which King Alured had made before Many Councils were Conven'd during the Reign of King Athelstan as at Exiter Feversham Thunderfield London and at Great Lea which last is of most account in regard of the Laws therein made specially that concerning the payment of Tithes the which you may peruse in the Learned Sr. H. Spelm. Concil p. 405. During the Reign of King Edgar Hoel Dha held a National Council for all Wales at Tyquin which was wholly in favour of the Clergy this Council was held when Dunst in was Archbishop of Canterbury in whose time there were Two other Councils conven'd the one at Cartlage in Cambridgshire the other at Caln in Wiltshire After this William the Conqueror conven'd a Council of his Bishops at Winchester wherein himself was personally present with two Cardinals sent from Rome in this Council Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury was deposed and Lâ—â—frank a Lombard substituted in his room During the Reign of King Henry the First Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury summoned a Council at Westminster which Excommunicated all Married Priests half the Clergy at that time being Married or the Sons of Married Priests During the Reign of King Stephen Albericus Bishop of Hostia sent by Pope Innocent into England conven'd a Synod at Westminster wherein it was concluded That no Priest c. should have a Wife or a Woman in his house on pain of being sent to Hell Also that their Transubstantiated God should dwell but Eight days in the Box for fear of being Worm-eaten or moulded Under the Reign of King Henry the Second who disclaimed the Popes authority refused to pay Peter-pence and interdicted all Appeals to Rome a Synod was called at Westminster wherein was a great Contest between the two Archbishops of Canterbury and York for Precedency York appeals to Rome the Pope interposes and to end old Divisions makes a new distinction entituling York Primate of England and Canterbury Primate of all England Under the Reign of King Henry the Third a Council was held at Oxford under Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury wherein many Constitutions were made as against Excess of demands for Procurations in Visitations against Pluralities Non-Residence and other abuses of the Clergy In the Ninth year of King Edward the First John Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury held a Council at Lambeth with his Suffragans some account whereof Walsingham gives us in these words viz. Frater Johannes Peckham Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus ne nihil fecisse videretur convocat Concilium apud Lambeth in quo non Evangelii Regni Dei praedicationem imposuit sed Constitutiones Othonis Ottobonis quondam Legatorum in Anglia innovans jussit eas ab omnibus servari c. Walsing in Ed. 1. He then made Sixteen Ecclesiastical Laws which are inserted among the Provincial Constitutions After this he summoned another Council of his Clergy at Reading wherein he propounded the drawing of all Causes concerning Advowsons to the Ecclesiastical Courts and to cut off all Prohibitions from the Temporal Courts in Personal Causes but upon the Kings express Command to desist from it this Council was dissolved Parker de Antiq. Eccles Anglic. fo 205. An 1290. During the Reign of King Henry the Fourth Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury conven'd a Synod at St. Pauls Church Lond. wherein the King joyned with them in punishing all Opposers of the Religion received Trussel de vita H. 4. Under King Henry the Fifth an Universal Synod of all the Bishops and Clergy was called at London where it was determined That the day of St. George and also of St. Dunstan should be a double Feast in holy Church In the same Kings Reign was a Convocation held at London conven'd by Henry Chichley Archbishop of Canterbury wherein were severe Constitutions made against the Lollards In the Reign of King Henry the Seventh a Synod was held at London by John Morton Archbishop of Canterbury to redress the Excess of the London Clergy in Apparel and frequenting of Taverns We had almost omitted the Synod in England An. 1391. under the Reign of King Richard the Second Simon Sudbury then Archbishop of Canterbury in which Synod it was Ordain'd That whosoever Appealed to Rome besides Excommunication should lose all his Goods and be Imprisoned during his Life vid. Hist of the Church of Great Britain p. 117. A Modern and Ingenious yet unfortunate Author well observes a Fourfold difference or distinction of Synods or Convocations in this Realm in reference to the several manners of their Meeting and degrees of their Power The First he states in point of Time before the Conquest The Second since the Conquest and before the Statute of Praemunire The Third after that Statute but before another made in the Reign of King H. 8. The Fourth after the 25th of the said King 1 Before the Conquest the Popes power prevailed not over the Kings of England who were then ever present Personally or Virtually at all Councils wherein matters both of Church and State were debated and concluded Communi consensu tam Cleri quam Populi Episcoporum Procerum Comitum nec non omnium Sapientum Seniorum populorumque totius Regni 2 After the Conquest but before the Statute of Praemunire the Archbishops used upon all emergent Cases toties quoties at their own discretions to assemble the Clergy of their respective Provinces where they pleased continuing and dissolving them at their pleasure which they then did without any leave from the King whose Canons and Constitutions without any further Ratifification were in that Age obligatory to all subjected to their Jurisdiction Such it seems were all the Synods from Lanfranck to Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury in which Arundels time the Statute of Praemunire was Enacted 3 After which Statute which much restrained the Papal power and subjected it to the Laws of the Land the Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute Command but at the pleasure of the King by whose Writ and Precept only they were now and henceforth Summoned Of this Third sort of Convocations were all those kept by and from Thomas Arundel unto Thomas Cranmer or from the 16th of R. 2. unto the 25th of King H. 8. These Convocations also did make Canons as in Lindwoods Constitutions which were Obligatory although confirmed by no other Authority than what was meerly Synodical 4 The last sort of Convocations since the said Statute called the 25th of King H. 8. That none of the Clergy should presume to attempt alledge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodals or any â—â—her Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by
Provisions Appeals to Rome holding Plea of Spiritual things thence arising Excommunications by his Bulls and the like were no other than Usurpations and Encroachments on the Dignity and Prerogative Royal. 14. In the Reign of King H. 8. An. 1539. the Abbots of Colchester Reading and Glastenbury were condemned and executed under colour so the Author expresses it of denying the Kings Supremacy and their rich Abbies seized on as Confiscations to the use of the King But when the Act of Supremacy came to be debated in the time of Queen Elizabeth it seemed a thing strange in Nature and Polity That a Woman should be declared to be the Supream Head on Earth of the Church of England but the Reformed party not so much contending about Words and Phrases as aiming to oust the Pope of all Authority within these Dominions fixed the Supream power over all Persons and Estates of what rank soever in the Crown Imperial not by the Name of Supream Head but tantamount of the Supream Governess In Queen Mary 's time there was an Act of Parliament made declaring That the Regal power was in the Queens Majesty as fully as it had been in any of her Predecessors In the body whereof it is expressed and declared That the Law of the Realm is and ever hath been and ought to be understood That the Kingly or Regal Office of the Realm and alâ— Dignities Prerogatives Royal Power Preheminences Priviledges Authorities and Jurisdictions thereunto annexed united or belonging being invested either in Male or Female are be and ought to be as fully wholly absolutely and entirely deemed adjudged accepted invested and taken in the one as in the other So that whatsoever Statute or Law doth limit or appoint that the King of this Realm may or shall have execute and do any thing as King c. the same the Queen being Supream Governess Possessor and Inheritor to the Imperial Crown of this Realm may by the same power have and execute to alâ— intents constructions and purposes without doubt ambiguity question or scruple any Custome use or any other thing to the contrary notwithstanding By the tenor of which Act made in Queen Mary 's Reign is granted to Queen Elizabeth as much Authority in all the Church-Concernments as had been eâ—ercised and enjoyed by King H. 8. and King Ed. 6. according to any Act or Acts of Parliament in their several times Which Acts of Parliament as our learned Lawyers on these occasions have declared were not to be considered as Introductory of a new power which was not in the Crown before but only Declaratory of an old which naturally belonged to all Christian Princes and amongst others to the Kings and Queens of the Realm of England And whereas some Seditious persons had dispersed a rumour that by the Act for recognizing the Queens Supremacy there was something further ascribed unto the Queen her Heirs and Successors viz. a power of administring Divine Service in the Church which neither by any equity or true sense of the words could from thence be gathered she thereupon makes a Declaration to all her Subjects That nothing was or could be meant or intended by the said Act than was acknowledged to be due to King H. 8. and King Ed. 6. And further declared That she neither doth nor will challenge any other Authority by the same than was challenged and lately used by the said Two Kings and was of Ancient time due unto the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over all persons born within her Realms and Dominions of what estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Forreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them Which Declaration published in the Queens Injunctions An. 1559. not giving that general satisfaction to that groundless Cavil as was expected and intended the Bishops and Clergy in their Convocation of the year 1562. by the Queens Authority and Consent declared more plainly viz. That they gave not to their Princess by vertue of the said Act or otherwise either the ministring of Gods Word or Sacraments but that only Prerogative which they saw to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that is to say that they should Rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers And lastly to conclude this tender point There is in the said Act for the better exercising and enjoying of the Jurisdiction thus recognized to the Crown an Oath as aforesaid for the acknowledgment and defence of this Supremacy not only in the Queen but also her Heirs and Successors Likewise a power given to the Queen her Heirs and Successors by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England To Assign and Authorize c. as she and they shall think fit such Persons being natural born Subjects to exercise use and occupy under her and them all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within the Realms of England and Ireland or any other her Highness Dominions or Countries and to visit reform repress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever which by any manner of Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power Authority or Jurisdiction or can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God c. This was the Foundation of the High-Commission Court and from hence issued that Commission by which the Queens Ministers proceeded in their Visitation in the First year of her Majesties Reign CHAP. II. Of Archbishops 1. A Description of that Dignity here in England the Antiquity Precedency Priviledges and Style of the Archbishop of Canterbury with the Precincts of that See 2. The Antiquity Precedency and Style of the Archbishop of York with the Precincts of that See 3. What difference between Archbishop and Metropolitan and why called Metropolitan 4. Three Archbishops in England and Wales Anciently 5. The vicissitudes of the Christian Religion Anciently in this Island of Great Britain 6. How the Third Archbishop came to be lost 7. The great Antiquity of an Archbishop in London 8. The Original of the Style Primate and Metropolitan 9. What the difference Anciently between the Two Archbishopricks of Canterbury and York certain Priviledges of the latter 10. Whether an Archbishop may call Cases to his own cognizance nolente Ordinario 11. In what Case the Clerk is to be Instituted by the Archbishop where the Inferiour Ordinary hath right to Collate Also his power of Dispensations 12. A Case at Common Law relating to the Archbish Jurisdiction 13. Certain special Priviledges of the Archbishop of Canterbury 1. ARCHBISHOP ab Archos Princeps Episcopus Superintendens is that Spiritual person
Secular who within that Province whereof he is Archbishop hath next and immediately under the King Supream power Authority and Jurisdiction in all causes and things Ecclesiastical Of such there are only Two in England one of the Province of Canterbury styled Metropolitanus Primas Totius Angliae the other of York styled Primas Metropolitanus Angliae Under the two Archbishops are twenty six Bishopricks whereof twenty two in the Province of Canterbury and four in the Province of York so that besides the two Archbishops there are twenty four Bishops The Christian Religion in England took root first in the See of Canterbury St. Austin who first preached the Gospel to the one was the first Archbishop of the other Canterbury once the Royal City of the Kings of Kent was by King Ethelbert on his Conversion bestowed on St. Augustine the Archbishop and his Successors for ever and so the Chair thereof became originally fixed in that City of Canterbury Cantuarienses Archiepiscopi Dorovernenses antiquitus dicti sunt quia totius Anglicanae Ecclesiae Primates Metropolitani fuerunt The Archbishop whereof being styled Primate and Metropolitan of all England is the first Peer of the Realm and hath Precedency not only before all the Clergy of the Kingdom of England but also next and immediately after the Blood Royal before all the Nobility of the Realm Sr. Edward Cokâ— says more and lets us to understand That in Ancient time they had great Precedency even before the Brother of the King as appears by the Parliament Roll of 18 E. 1. and many others which continued until it was altered by Ordinance in Parliament in the Reign of H. 6. as appears by a Roll of Parliament of that Kings Reign entred in the Back of the Parliament Roll. The Precedency in Parliament and other Places of Council at this day is That the two Archbishops have the Precedency of all the Lords Temporal and every other Bishop in respect of his Barony hath place of all the Barons of the Realm and under the estate of the Viscount and other Superiour Dignities And at this day in all Acts Ordinances and Judgments c. of Parliament it is said The Lords Spiritual and Temporal The Bishops among themselves have this Precedency 1. The Bishop of London 2. The Bishop of Duresme 3. The Bishop of Winchester The Archbishop of Canterbury as he hath the Precedency of all the Nobility so also of all the great Officers of State He writes himself Divina Providentia whereas other Bishops only use Divina Permissione The Coronation of the Kings of England belongs to the Archbishop of Canterbury and it hath been formerly resolved that wheresoever the Court was the King and Queen were Speciales Domestici Parochiani Domini Archiepiscopi He had also heretofore this Priviledge of special remark That such as held â—ands of him were liable for Wardship to him and to compound with him for the same albeit they held other Lands in chief of our Sovereign Lord the King All the Bishopricks in England except Duresme Carlisle Chester and the Isle of Man which are of the Province of York are within the Province of Canterbury The Archbishop whereof hath also a peculiar Jurisdiction in thirteen Parishes within the City of London and in other Diocesses c. Having also an Ancient Priviledge That wherever any Mannors or Advowsons do belong to his See they forthwith become exempt from the Ordinary and are reputed Peculiars and of his Diocess of Canterbury If you consider Canterbury as the Seat of the Metropolitan it hath under it twenty one Suffragan Bishops whereof seventeen in England and four in Wales But if you consider it as the Seat of a Diocesan so it comprehends only some part of Kent viz. 257 Parishes the residue being in the Diocess of Rochester together with some other Parishes dispersedly scituate in several Diocesses it being as aforesaid an Ancient Priviledge of this See that the places where the Archbishop hath any Mannors or Advowsons are thereby exempted from the Ordinary and are become Peculiars of the Diocess of Canterbury properly belonging to the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury whose Provincial Dean is the Bishop of London whose Chancellour is the Bishop of Winchester whose Vice-Chancellour anciently was the Bishop of Lincoln whose Precentor the Bishop of Salisbury whose Chaplain the Bishop of Worcester and the Bishop of Rochester when time was carried the Cross before him Lind. Const de Poenis gl ibid. c. 1. ver tanquam 2. The Metropolitan See of York had its Original at the first reception of the Gospel in England when King Lucius established Sampson the first Archbishop thereof Not long after the Conversion of the Saxons Paulinus by Pope Gregory's appointment was made Archbishop thereof An. 622. This Province of York anciently claimed and had a Metropolitan Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of Scotland whence they had their Consecration and to which they swore Canonical Obedience The Archbishop of York styles himself Primate and Metropolitan of England as the Archbishop of Canterbury Primate and Metropolitan of All England About two hundred years since viz. An. 1466. when George Nevil was Archbishop of York the Bishops of Scotland withdrew themselves from their obedience to him and had Archbishops of their own The Archbishop of York hath precedency before all Dukes not being of the Blood Royal as also before all the Great Officers of State except the Lord Chancellour Of this Province of York are the Bishopricks of Duresme Chester Carlisle and the Isle of Man who write themselves Eboracenses or Eborum The Diocess belonging to this See of York contains the two Counties of York and Notingham and in them 581 Parishes whereof 336 are Impropriations 3. It hath been question'd whether there be any difference between Archbishop and Metropolitan the DD. herein seem to be divided some conceiving that there is some difference between them others affirming that they are both one the Canon Law seems in a sense to favour each of these Opinions saying in one place that the Archbishop as President hath the charge and oversight of the Metropolitans and other Bishops 21. Dist Cleros In another place That Archbishop and Metropolitan are but one and the same in deed and in truth although they differ in Name Wilhel in Clem. ult de Privileg verb. Archiepiscopo vers fin Metropolitanus Archiepiscopus idem sunt Sed Metropolitanus nomen trahit à numero Ecclesiarum viz. à metro mensura polis Civitas Otho glo in verb. Archiepiscopus De Offic. Archiepisc He is called Archiepiscopus quasi Princeps Episcoporum in respect of the other Bishops whereof he is chief and Metropolitanus in respect of the number of the Cities or Cathedral Churches where the Bishopricks are Lindw ubi supr gl ib. ver Metropolitanum For the word Civitas doth signifie with us as it doth in other Kingdoms such a Town
Corporate as hath a Bishop and a Cathedral Church Yet Crompton in his Jurisdictions in his Computation of our Cities doth omit Ely though it hath a Bishop and a Cathedral Church Thus Westminster is called a City and accordingly there is mention made of a Bishop of Westminster in a Statute made during the Reign of King Henry 8. But by Letters Patents dated 21. May 2 Eliz. in pursuance of an Act of Parliament of 1 Eliz. not printed the Revenues of that late Monastery were vested in the Dean and Chapter of the Collegiate Church of Westminster which hath caused Errors in the Pleadings of some Cases by styling it the Cathedral for Collegiate Church of Westminster Cassanaeus who wrote as well De Gloria Mundi in general as of the Customes of Burgundy in particular saith That France hath within its Territories 104 Cities and gives this Reason Because there are so many Seats of Archbishops and Bishops Yet Sir Edw. Coke observes Cambridge to be a City by ancient Record although it does not evidently appear that it ever was an Episcopal See And in the Stat. of 11 H. 7. c. 4. it is there called the Town of Cambridge 4. In England and Wales there were Anciently three Provinces and over them Three Archbishops whose Archbishopricks were founded above 1500 years since For soon after the Conversion of King Luâ—ius who began his Reign over the Britains An. 170. being prevailed with to embrace the Christian Faith by the perswasions of Elvanus who had been brought up at Glastenbury and of Medwanus both Britains and therein confirmed by the Divines which Eleutherius who became Pope An 177. sent into Britain for that end and purpose The said King being by them baptized the False Religion of the Druids with their Idols was soon abolished Heathen Temples purged and then consecrated to the service and worship of the True God and in the place of twenty eight â—lamâ—ns were Bishops consecrated the Three Archbishops whereof were founded in the Three chief Cities of the then Three Provinces erected by the Romans where Arch-Flamins had formerly been maintain'd viz. at London the Metropolis of Britannia Prima at York the Metropolis of Maxima Caesariensis and at Caerlegion in Wales which is said to be Caerleon upon Vske formerly called Isca in Monmouthshire the Metropolis or chief City of Britannia Secunda or under Vrbs Legionum Cambria Gildas antiquissimus inter eos qui fide digni sunt Britannicarum rerum scriptor tradit Britannos ab ortu Evangelii Christianam suscepisse fidem Ant. Brit. ubi supr Ac primum Paulum ipsum cum aliis Gentibus tum nominatim Britannis Evangelium nunciasse post priorem suam Romae incarcerationem Theodoret. l. 9. de Curand Graecor affect Origenes qui proximis fuit post Apostolos seculis testatur Britanniam in Christianam consentire Religionem Orig. Hom. 4. in Ezech. Lucius Rex Britanniae An. 179. Baptizatus Ab Eleutherio Pontiâ—ice Romano reformationem Angliae petiit Episcop 29. ordinavit Ant. Brit. fo 4 5 7. Before the coming of the Saxons into England the Christian Britains had three Archbishops viz. of London York and Caerleon in Wales The Archiepiscopal See of London was by the Saxons placed at Canterbury for St. Austins sake where he was buried That of Caerleon being translated to St. Davids and after subjected to the See of Canterbury 5. From this time to Dioclesians Perfecution which though the Tenth and last yet the first which the Britains felt Christianity flourished in this Island which â—y that Persecution was almost extirpated out of the Land till Constantine the Great wore the Imperial Crown in whose time it revived till the beginning of the next Century when it was infected with the Pelagian Heresie till the condemnation thereof in the Council of Carthage and Mela and happily suppressed by Germanus Bishop of Auxerre and by Lupus Bishop of Troys in Campeigne who at the request of the English Catholicks were sent by the French Bishops into England as at the same time and for the same end Palladius was by Pope Celestine into Scotland And now the Christian Religion flourished again till the time of the usurping Tyrant Vortiger who after he had slain Vodinus Archbishop of London was himself burnt in a Castle besieged by Aurelius Ambrose having first surrendred Kent Suffolk and Norfolk to the Infidel Heâ—gist who with his Saxons almost desolated the Land insomuch that Theanus Bishop of London and Theodiceus Bishop of York were forced to flie into Cornwal and Wales until St. Augustines coming hither where he then found only one Archbishop and seven Bishops being with forty others as Assistants to him sent hither by Pope Gregory to Convert the Nation whom Ethelbert King of Kent kindly received and seated him as aforesaid in a Mansion in Canterbury the Metropolis of his Kingdom and assigned him a place to erect a Bishops See who afterwards fixed his Seat at Canterbury whichever since hath continued the Metropolis of this Kingdom And thus St. Austin upon his Entrance into England by the favour and bounty of the said King Ethelbert having fixed his Seat at Canterbury the Archbishops thereof have by a continual Series or Succession continued as Metropolitans of all England 6. And whereas there were as aforesaid anciently Three Archbishopricks in Three distinct Provinces within this Kingdom whereof that of Caerleon upon Vske in Wales was one and whereof Dubritius in the year 466 was Archbishop who having his Seat at Landaff became for his integrity Archbishop of all Wales and was upon Resignation in his old Age succeeded in the Archbishoprick by his Disciple David Uncle toking Arthurn by whose consent he removed the See to Menevia of which place he still retaineth the name of Episcopus Menevensis and the Town it self thereupon called Twy Devi or Saint Davids as taking its denomination from his Name yet it afterwards so unhappily happened that Sampson a succeeding Archbishop upon a great Plague raging in Wales went to Dola in Little Britain and thither carried the Pall with him whereby St. Davids for ever after lost the dignity of an Archbishop And in the time of H. 1. both that See and the rest in Wales became subject to the Archbishop of Canterbury as at this day 7. In the time of King Lucius London had an Archbishop to whose Jurisdiction at that time the greatest part of England was subject This Archbishop was that Theanus forementioned who was the chief Founder and Builder of St. Peters Church in Cornhill London which was the Cathedral of his Diocess till King Ethelbert built St. Pauls Church In this See continued the Dignity of an Archbishop above 180 years but by reason of the Saxon Persecution stood void till that Ten years after the coming of St. Austin Melitus was consecrated Bishop of that See and so it continued ever after as a Bishoprick
which in the days of King Lucius was an Archbishoprick as aforesaid till St. Augustine in the year 598 took on him the Title of Archbishop of England setling his See at Canterbury 8. Upon the abrogating of the Popes power in England by King H. 8. in the Seventh year of his Reign it was concluded that the Archbishop of Canterbury should no more be styled the Popes Legate but Primate and Metropolitan of all England at which time Tho. Cranmer Fellow of Jesus-Colledge in Cambridge who pronounced the Divorce from Queen Katharine of Spain upon his advice given the King to leave the Court of Rome and to require the Opinions of Learned Divines being then in Germany procured such favour with the King that he caused him to be elected to this See of Canterbury and was afterwards with the then Bishop of Duresme made Tutor to King Edward the Sixth 9. The Archbishop of Canterbury was supposed to have had a concurrent Jurisdiction in the inferiour Diocesses within his Province which is not denied in the case of Dr. James only it is there said That was not as he was Archbishop but as he was Legatus Natus to the Pope as indeed so hâ— was before the tâ—me of King H. 8. as aforesaid by whom that Power together with the Pope was abrogated and so it ceased which the Archbishop of York never had nor ever claimed as appears in the forecited Case where it is further said That when there is a Controversie between the Archbishop and a Bishop touching Jurisdiction or between other Spiritual Persons the King is the indifferent Arbitrator in all Jurisdictions as well Spiritual as Temporal and that is a right of his Crown to distribute to them that is to declare their Bounds Consonant to that which is asserted in a Case of Commendam in Colt and Glovers Case against the Bishop of Coventry and Lichâ—ield where it is declared by the Lord Hobart Chief Justice That the King hath an immediate personal originary inherent Power which he executes or may execute Authoritate Regia Suprema Ecclesiastica as King and Sovereign Governour of the Church of England which is one of those Flowers qui faciunt Coronam which makes the Royal Crown and Diadem in force and vertue The Archbishop of Canterbury as he is Primate over All England and Metropolitan hath a Supereminency and some power even over the Archbishop of York hath under the King power to summon him to a National Synod and Archiepiscopus Eboracensis venire debet cum Episcopis suis ad nutum ejusâ— ut ejus Canonicis dispositionibus Obediens existat Yet the Archbishop of York had anciently not only divers Bishopricks in the North of England under his Province but for a long time all the Bishopricks of Scotland until little more than 200 years since and until Pope Sixtus the Fourth An. 1470. created the Bishop of St. Andrews Archbishop and Metropolitan of all Scotland He was also Legatus Natus and had the Legantine Office and Authority annexed to that Archbishoprick he hath the Honour to Crown the Queen and to be her perpetual Chaplain Of the forementioned Diocesses of his Province the Bishop of Durham hath a peculiar Jurisdiction and in many things is wholly exempt from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop of York who hath notwithstanding divers Priviledges within his Province which the Archbishop of Canterbury hath within his own Province 10. The Archbishop is the Ordinary of the whole Province yet it is clear That by the Canon Law he may not as Metropolitan exercise his Jurisdiction over the Subjects of his Suffragan Bishops but in certain Cases specially allowed in the Law whereof Hostiensis enumerates one and twenty The Jurisdiction of the Archbishop is opened sometimes by himself nolente Ordinario as in the Case of his Visitation and sometimes by the party in default of Justice in the Ordinary as by Appeal or Nullities Again it may sometimes be opened by the Ordinary himself without the party or Archbishop as where the Ordinary sends the Cause to the Archbishop for although the Canon Law restrains the Archbishop to call Causes from the Ordinary Nolente Ordinario save in the said 21 Cases yet the Law left it in the absolute power of the Ordinary to send the Cause to the Archbishop absolutely at his will without assigning any special reason and the Ordinary may consult with the Archbishop at his pleasure without limitation Notwithstanding which and albeit the Archbishop be Judge of the whole Province tamen Jurisdictio sua est signata non aperitur nisi ex causis Nor is the Subject hereby to be put to any such trouble as is a Grievance and therefore the Law provides that Neminem oportet exire de Provincia ad Provinciam vel de Civitate ad Civitatem nisi ad Relationem Judicis ita ut Actor forum Rei sequatur 11. If the Archbishop visit his Inferiour Bishop and Inhibit him during the Visitation if the Bishop hath a title to Collate to a Benefice within his Diocess by reason of Lapse yet he cannot Institute his Clerk but he ought to be presented to the Archbishop and he is to Institute him by reason that during the Inhibition his power of Jurisdiction is suspended It was a point on a special Verdict in the County of Lincoln and the Civilians who argued thereon seemed to agree therein but the Case was argued upon another point and that was not resolved Likewise by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 21. the Archbishop of Canterbury hath power to give Faculties and Dispensations whereby he can as to Plurality sufficiently now Dispense de jure as Anciently the Pope did in this Realm de facto before the making of that Statute whereby it is enacted That all Licenses and Dispensations not repugnant to the Law of God which heretofore were sued for in the Court of Rome should be hereafter granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Successors 12. By the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical Edit 1603. Can. 94. It is Ordained That no Dean of the Arches nor Official of the Archbishops Consistory shall originally Cite or Summon any person which dwelleth not within the particular Diocess or Peculiar of the said Archbishop c. without the License of the Diocesan first had and obtained in that behalf other than in such particular Cases only as are expresly excepted and reserved in and by the Statute of 23 H. 8. c. 9. on pain of suspension for three months In the Case of Lynche against Porter for a Prohibition upon the said Statute of 23 H. 8. c. 9. it was declared by the Civilians in Court That they used to Cite any Inhabitant of and in London to appear and make Answer in the Archbishop of Canterbury's high Court of Arches originally And Dr. Martyn said It had been so used for the space of 427 years before the making of the Statute and upon
complaint thereof made to the Pope the Answer was That any man might be Cited to the Arches out of any Diocess in England Also That the Archbishop may hold his Consistory in any Diocess within his Jurisdiction and Province That the Archbishop hath concurrent Jurisdiction in the Diocess of every Bishop as well as the Archdeacon and That the Archbishop of Canterbury prescribes to hold Plea of all persons in England But as to his power of having a Consistory in the Diocess of every Bishop this was in this Case denied but only where he was the Popes Legate whereof there were Three sorts 1. Legates à Latere and these were Cardinals which were sent à Latere from the Pope 2. A Legate born and these were the Archbishops of Canterbury York and Mentz c. 3. A Legate given and these have Authority by special Commission from the Pope Likewise in the Case of Jones against Boyer C. B it was also said by Dr. Martyn That the Archbishop hath Ordinary Jurisdiction in all the Diocesses of his Province and that this is the cause that he may Visit 13. The Archbishop of Canterbury Anciently had Primacy as well over all Ireland as England from whom the Irish Bishops received their Consecration for Ireland had no other Archbishop until the year 1152. For which reason it was declared in the time of the Two first Norman Kings That Canterbury was the Metropolitan Church of England Scotland and Ireland and the Isles adjacent the Archbishop of Canterbury was therefore sometimes styled a Patriarch and Orbis Britannici Pontifex insomuch that Matters recorded in Ecclesiastical Affairs did run thus viz. Anno Pontificatus Nostri primo secundo c. He was also Legatus Natus that is he had a perpetual Legantine power annext to his Archbishoprick nigh a thousand years since And at General Councils he had the Precedency of all other Archbishops abroad and at home he had some special Marks of Royalty as to be the Patron of a Bishoprick as he was of Rochester to coyn Mony to make Knights and to have the Wardships of all those who held Lands of him Jure Hominii although they held in Capite other â—ands of the King as was formerly hinted He is said to be Inthroned when he is invested in the Archbishoprick And by the Stat. of 25 H 8. he hath power to grant Licenses and Dispensations in all Cases heretofore sued for in the Court of Rome not repugnant to the Law of God or the Kings Prerogative As also to allow a Clerk to hold a Benefice in Commendam or in Trust to allow a Clerk rightly qualified to hold Two Benefices with Cure of Souls to allow a Beneficed Clerk for some certain causes to be non-Resident for some time and to Dispense in several other Cases prohibited by the Letters of the Canon Law Likewise the Archbishop of Canterbury Consecrates other Bishops confirms the Election of Bishops within his Province calls Provincial Synods according to the Kings Writ to him ever directed is chief Moderator in the Synods and Convocations he Viâ—its the whole Province appoints a Guardian of the Spiritualties during the vacancy of any Bishoprick within his Province whereby all the Episcopal Ecclesiastical Rights of that Diocess for that time belong to him all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions as Visitations Institutions c. He may retain and qualifie Eight Chaplains which is more by Two than any Duke is allowed by Statute to do and hath power to hold divers Courts of Judicature for the decision of Controversies pertaining to Ecclesiastical Cognizance CHAP. III. Of Bishops and Ordinaries 1. Bishop Why so called Not above One to be in one Diocess 2. Why called Ordinary and what the Pallium Episcopale is 3. Bishopricks originally Donative Kings of England the Founders thereof 4. The manner of Election of Bishops their Confirmation and Consecration 5. Their Seals of Office in what cases they may use their own Seals 6. What follows upon Election to make them Bishops compleat the grant of their Temporalties 7. The Conge d'eslire and what follows thereupon 8. Bishopricks were Donative till the time of King John 9. What the Interest and Authority is in his several capacities 10. Episcopal Authority derived from the Crown 11. The Vse and Office of Suffragan Bishops 12. Whether a Bishop may give Institution out of his own proper Diocess and under other Seal than his own Seal of Office 13. Several things incident to a Bishop qua talis 14. Ordinary what properly he is and why so called 15. In what cases the Ordinaries Jurisdiction is not meerly Local 16. The Ordinaries power de jure Patronatûs 17. Whether the Ordinary may cite a man out of his own Diocess Also his Right ad Synodalia 18. The Ordinaries power of Visitation 19. The Dignity and true Precedency of the Bishops in England 20. Temporal Jurisdiction anciently exercised by Bishops in this Realm the Statute of 17 Car. 1. against it Repealed and they Restored to it by the Stat. of 13 Car. 2. as formerly 21. The Act made in the Reign of Ed. 6. concerning the Election of Bishops the Endeavours thereby to take away Episcopal Jurisdiction the Nomination of all Bishops was Anciently Sole in the King 22. The Bishops of London are Deans of the Episcopal Colledge 23. A Case at Common Law touching a Lease made by one Bishop during the life of another of the same Diocess in Ireland 1. BISHOP Episcopus from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supra and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intendere an Overseer or Superintendent so called from that watchfulness care charge and faithfulness which by his Place and Dignity he hath and oweth to the Church A word which all Antiquity hath appropriated to signifie the Chief in Superintendency over the whole Church within his Diocess wherein are divers inferiour Pastors This Oversight or Care the Hebrews call Pekudah Of this Office or Ecclesiastical Dignity there can be but one at a time in one and the same Diocess whence it is that Cornelius Bishop of Rome as Eusebius relates upbraided Novatius for his ignorance in that point when he could not but know there were no less than 46 Presbyters in that Church Oecumenius and St. Chrysostome affirming also as many at Philippi For in this restrained sense as the word Bishop is now taken it cannot be imagined that there should be more than one in one City or Diocess at the same time consonant whereunto the Synod of Nice prohibited Two or more Bishops to have their Seats at once in the same City This Novatius aforesaid was a Priest of Rome 254 years after Christ he abhorred Second Marriages and was condemned as an Heretick in a Synod at Rome the same year Every Bishop many Centuries after Christ was universal Incumbent of his Diocess received all the Profits which were but Offerings of Devotion out of which he paid the Salaries of such as Officiated under himâ—
the Revenues of the Church first came to be divided and alotted to several Ministeries then it was that this payment was first made to the Bishop by the Beneficed Clergy within his Diocess Duaren ut supr l. 2. c. 1. fo 53. It is probable that this division of the Church Revenues was not far distant in time from the first or original distinguishment of Parochial Bounds upon which affair Pope Euaristus otherwise called Anacletus Graecus did first enter about the year 110. Volateran l. 22. Anast Biblioth Baron Annal. ad An. 112. nu 4 5 6. and was afterwards carried on by Pope Dionysius about the year 260. Baron Annal. ad An. 260. nu 17. Parochial Distribution in England was by Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury about the year 668. Spelm. Concil 152 But Speed saith by Honorius the fifth Archbishop also of Canterbury about the year 636. It may not hence be inferr'd that this Cathedraticum or Synodal was only paid ratione Synodi for it was sometimes and very anciently paid also at Visitations as appears by the seventh Council at Toledo mentioned in the Decree 10. q. 3. c. inter caetera casus ibi where there is a Canon against the exacting of more than Two shillings only pro Cathedratico in Episcopal Visitations This Cense or payment though it be Onus Ecclesiasticum yet it is not Onus innovatum but Onus Ordinarium and by imposition of Law as appears by the Provincial Constitutions Solutio Cathedratici Synodatici Procurationum ratione Visitationis alia hujusmodi de quibus non dubitatur quin sunt Onera Ordinaria suum capiunt effectum ab impositione Legis Lindw de Offic. Vic. c. quoniam gl in ver Onera Ecclesiastica Yet Procurations differ from the other in this that Procurations are only Pensions but the other are properly Census The Synody or Synodal is by the Stat. of 34 H. 8. reckoned as a Church-due for recovery whereof provision is made by that Act and good reason for the said Synody or Synodal is a Pension certain and valued in the King's Books 10. The aforesaid Ingenious Author of the Historical Discourse touching Procurations c. after his deep search into Antiquity doth conjecturally conceive that the Pentecostal otherwise called Whitson-farthings is nothing else but the Annual Commemoration continuation or repetition of an Ancient payment or pension issuing out of the Oblations brought by the people long since specially at the time of the Foundation or Dedication of their several Churches or at some other Solemnity viz. the moiety or Third part of the Oblations then made The same being reserved by the Bishop and by a Contract seu quasi Contractu between him and the Founder of such Church or Priest assigned to attend the same settled in and upon the Episcopal See and payable yearly at or about the Feast of Pentecost These Pentecostalia were not as some conceive the Peter-pence here anciently paid for they were usually paid either at the Feast of St. Peter and Paul or on Lammas day but these Pentecostals seem to be paid upon or about the time that doth chiefly denominate the same viz. at the Feast of Pentecost and in the nature thereof seem to have reference to an Oblation frequently made by the Christians in the Elder times of the Church and to have some tendency to that Liberal Devotion which was then as frequent as Sacriledge is now In Leg. 18 Guilielm Conquestor De Denariis S. Petri seu Vectigali Romano viz. Liber homo qui habuerit Averia Campestria 30 denariis aestimanda dabit Denarium S. Petri. Pro 4 denariis quos donaverit Dominus quieti erunt Bordarii ejus ejus Boner ejus Servientes Burgensis qui de propriis Catallis habet id quod dimidia Marca aestimandum est det Denarium S. Petri. Qui in Lege Danorum est Liber homo habet Averia Campestria quae dimidia Marca in argento aestimantur debet dare Denarium S. Petro. Et per Denarium quem donaverit Dominus erunt quieti ii qui resident in suo Dominico Vid. Sâ—ldeni ad Eadmerum Notae Spicelegium p. 179. Leg. 18. By this Law of William the Conquerour it appears that the Peterpence had no affinity with the Pentecostals In Ancient times when the Bishop did visit Ecclesiatim his usage was to celebrate the Mass in the Church which he visited which indeed was every Parish within his Diocess and that by his Episcopal Authority the whole Diocess in respect of the Bishop being by the Law but Paroechia sua 10. q. 3. c. Quia Duarenus passim as the whole Province is said to be in respect of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury At this Mass the people used to make their Offerings to the Bishop and one of the causes or reasons why or wherefore the people in Ancient times were obliged to bring their Oblations to the Church was propter Consuetudinem and that certis Festivitatibus among which the Feast of Pentecost was and is a most special one at which Feast there was in many places here in England an Oblation Anciently made by inferiour Churches and Parishes to the principal Mother-Church and whence probably the word Pentecostalia had its original denomination These Offerings by the Canon Law were and are only due to the Clergy and interdicted to the Laity sub districtione Anathematis 10. q. 1. c. Quia Sacerdotes c. Sanct. Patrum ibi In some places the Deans and Prebendaries of Cathedral Churches have them It is said That in the Cathedral Church of Salisbury there is a greater and a lâ—ss distinguished and known by this difference of Major Minor pars Altaris And in some Diocesses they are settled upon the Bishop and Archdeacon and made part of their Revenue for which the King hath Tenths and Subsidies The Cathedral or the Mother-Church of Worcester was Anciently and before the dissolution a Priory and among other Revenues had these Pentecostalia or Whitson-farthings yearly paid sub nomine Oblationum or Spiritual Profits tempore Pentecostes After the Dissolution when King H. 8. about the three and thirtieth year of his Reign new-founded and reendo'wd the said Church he restored these Pentecostalia after he had hâ—ld them about a year in his own hand to the said Church which as it is reported the Dean and Prebendaries thereof receive at this day and as appears by the Letters Patent Henricus Octavus c. Sciatis quod Nos de gratia nostra speciali ac ex certa scientia ac mero motu nostris dedimus concedimus ac per praesentes damus concedimus Decano Capitulo Ecclesiae Cathedralis Christi beatae Maria Virginis Wigorn. omnes illas Oblationes Obventiones sive Spiritualia proficua vulgariter vocat Whitson farthings annuatim collect sâ—ve recepta de diversis Viliatis in Comitat. nostris Wigorn. Warwic 〈◊〉 infra Archidiaconatum Wigorn
exempted out of the Bishop of London's Jurisdiction The Judge of this Court of Arches is styled the Dean of the Arches or the Official of the Arches-Court unto whose Deanary or Officialty to the Archbishop of Canterbury in all matters and causes Spiritual is annexed the Peculiar Jurisdiction of the thirteen Parishes as aforesaid Having also all Ordinary Jurisdiction in Spiritual causes of the first Instance with power of Appeal as the superiour Ecclesiastical Consistory through the whole Province of Canterbury yet the Lord Coke says his power to call any person for any Cause out of any part of his Province within the Diocess of any other Bishop except it be upon Appeal is restrained by the Stat. of 23 H. 8. c. 9. Yet his Jurisdiction is Ordinary and extends it self through the whole Province of Canterbury insomuch that upon any Appeal made to him from any Diocess within the said Province he may forthwith without further examination at that time of the Cause issue forth his Citation to be served on the Appealee with his Inhibition to the Judge à quo In Mich. 6 Jac. C. B. there was a Case between Porter and Rochester The Case was this Lewis and Rochester who dwelt in Essex in the Diocess of London were sued for subtraction of Tithes growing in B. in the said County of Essex by Porter in the Court of Arches of the Archbishop of Canterbury in London where the Archbishop hath a peculiar Jurisdiction of thirteen Parishes called a Deanary exempt from the Authority of the Bishop of London whereof the Parish of S. Mary de Arcubus is the chief And a great Question was moved Whether in the said Court of Arches holden in London he might cite any dwelling in Essex for subtraction of Tithes growing in Essex or whether he be prohibited by the Statute of 23 H 8. c. 9 Which after debate at Bar by Council and also by Dr. Ferrard Dr. James and others in open Court and lastly by all the Justices of the Common Pleas A Prohibition was granted to the high Court of Arches And in this case divers points were resolved by the Court 1 That all Acts of Parliament are parcel of the Laws of England and therefore shall be expounded by the Judges of the Laws of England and not by the Civilians and Canonists although the Acts concern Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction 2 Resolved by Coke Chief Justice Warburton Daniel and Foster Justices That the Archbishop of Canterbury is restrained by the 23 H. 8. cap. 9. to cite any one out of his own Diocess For Diaecesis dicitur distinctio c. quae divisa vel diversa est ab Ecclesia alterius Episcopatus Commissa gubernatio unius c. And is derived a Di Duo Electio quia separat duas Jurisdictiones And because the Archbishop of Canterbury hath a peculiar Jurisdiction in London for this cause it is fitly said in the Title Preamble and body of the Act that when the Archbishop sitting in his Exempt peculiar in London cites one dwelling in Essex he cites him out of the Bishop of London's Diocess Therefore out of the Diocess And in the clause of the penalty of 10 l. it is said Out of the Diocess c. where the party dwelleth which agrees with the signification of Diocess before 2. The body of the Act is No person shall be henceforth cited before any Ordinary c. out of the Diocess or peculiar Jurisdiction where the person shall be dwelling and if so then à Fortiori the Court of Arches which sits in a Peculiar may not cite others out of another Diocess And the words out of the Diocess are meant of the Diocess or Jurisdiction of the Ordinary where he dwelleth And from the Preamble of the Act the Lord Coke observes and inferrs That the intention of the Act was to reduce the Archbishop to his proper Diocess unless in these five Cases viz. 1 For any Spiritual offence or cause committed or omitted contrary to Right and Duty by the Bishop c. which word omitted proves there ought to be a default in the Ordinary 2 Except it be in Case of Appeal and other lawful cause where the party shall find himself grieved by the Ordinary after the matter there first begun Therefore it ought to be first begun before the Ordinary 3 In case the Bishop or Ordinary c. dare not or will not Convent the party to be sued before him 4 In case the Bishop or Judge of the place within whose Jurisdiction or before whom the Suit by this Act should be begun and prosecuted be party directly or indirectly to the matter or cause of the same Suit 5 In case any Bishop or other inferiour Judge under him c. make Request to the Archbishop Bishop or other inferiour Ordinary or Judge and that to be done in Cases only where the Law Civil or Common doth affirm c. The Lord Coke takes notice also of Two Provisoes in that Act which do likewise explain it viz. That it shall be lawful for every Archbishop to cite any person inhabiting in any Bishops Diocess in his Province for matter of Heresie By which says he it appears That for all causes not excepted he is prohibited by the Act. 2 There is a Saving for the Archbishop calling any person out of the Diocess where he shall be dwelling to the probat of any Testament Which Proviso should be vain if notwithstanding that Act he should have concurrent Jurisdiction with every Ordinary throughout his whole Province Wherefore it was concluded That the Archbishop out of his Diocess unless in the Cases excepted is prohibited by the 23 H. 8. c 9. to cite any man out of any other Diocess which Act is but a Law declaratory of the Ancient Canons and a true Exposition thereof as appears by the Canon Cap. Romana in Sext. de Appellat c. de Competenti in Sext. And as the Lord Coke observes the Act is so expounded by all the Clergy of England at a Convocation at London An. 1 Jac. 1603. Can. 94. who gives us further to understand in this Case between Porter and Rochester That the Archbishop of this Realm before that Act had power Legantine from the Pope By which they had Authority not only over all but concurrent Authority with every Ordinary c. not as Archbishop of Canterbury c. but by his Power and Authority Legantine Et tria sunt genera Legatorum 1 Quidam de Latere Dom. Papae mittuntur c. 2 Dativi qui simpliciter in Legatione mittuntur c. 3 Nati seu Nativi qui suarum Ecclesiarum praetextu Legatione funguntur sunt Quatuor viz. Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis Eboracensis Remanensis Pisanis Which Authority Legantine is now taken away and utterly abolished 4. It is supposed that the Judge of this Court was originally styled the Dean of the Arches by reason of his substitution to the Archbishop's Official when
1 Eliz. And it is not within the Statute and although it be within the Commission yet they have not Jurisdiction The words of the Statute are That such Jurisdictions and Priviledges c. as by any Ecclesiastical power have heretofore been or lawfully may be exercised for the Visitation of Ecclesiastical State and Persons and for reformation of the same and for all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities c. These words extend only to men who stir up Dissentions in the Church as Schisimaticks and new-sangled Men who offend in that kind Henden Serjeant The Suit is there for reformation of Manners and before the new amendment of the Commissions Prohibitions were granted if they meddled with Adultery or in Case of Defamations but now by express words they have power of these matters And that matter is punishable by the Commissioners for two Causes 1 There is within the Act of Parliament by the words annexed all Jurisdictions Ecclesiastical c. 2 It gives power to the Commissioners to exercise that And that is meerly Ecclesiastical being only pro reformatione morum c. The King by his Prerogative having Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction may grant Commissions to determine such things 5 Rep. Ecclesiastical Cases fol. 8. And Richardson said The Statute de Articulis Cleri gave cognizance to the Ordinary for laying violent hands on a Clerk But you affirm That all is given to the Commissioners and thereby they should take all power from the Ordinary But by the Court the Commissioners cannot meddle for a stroke in Church-Land nor pro subtractione Decimarum And yet they have express Authority by their Commission for by that course all the Ordinaries in England should be to no purpose And so upon much debate a Prohibition was granted On an Arrest on Christmas-day it was said by Richardson Chief Justice That upon Arresting a man upon Christmas-day going to Church in the Church-yard He who made the Arrest may be censured in the Star-Chamber for such an Offence Quod Nota. It was also said by Richardson that if a man submit himself out of the Diocess to any Suit he can never have a Prohibition because the Suit was not according to the Statute 23 H. 8. commenced within the proper Diocâ—ss as it was Adjudged Quod Nota It the Ecclesiastical Court proceed in a matter that is meer Spiritual and pertinent to their Court according to the Civil Law although their proceedings are against the Rules of the Common Law yet a Prohibition does not lie As if they refuse a single Witness to prove a Will for the cognizance of that belongs to them And Agreed also That if a man makes a Will but appoints no Executor that that is no Will but void But if the Ordinary commits the Administration with that annexed the Legatary to whom any Legacy is devised by such Will may sue the Administrator for their Legacies in the Ecclesiastical Court Note P. 4. Jac. B. R. Peep's Case a Prohibition was denied where they in the Ecclesiastical Court refused a single Witness in proof of payment of a Legacy After Prohibition if the Temporal Judge shall upon sight of the Libel conceive that the Spiritual Court ought to determine the cause he is to award a Consultation And by the Staâ— of 50 E. 3. c. 4. the Ecclesiastical Judge may proceed by vertue of the Consultation once granted notwithstanding any other Prohibition afterwards if the matter in the Libel be not enlarged or changed B. Administrator of A. makes C. his Executor and dies C. is sued in the Ecclesiastical Court to make an Account of the goods of A. the first Intestate And C. now moves for a Prohibition and had it for an Executor shall not be compel'd to an Account But an Administrator shall be compel'd to Account before the Ordinary Resolved by the Court That a Prohibition shall not be awarded to the Admiral or Ecclesiastical Courts after Sentence Also that a Plea was there pleaded and refused which was Triable at Common Law Note A Prohibition was awarded upon the Statute of 23 H. 8. because the party was sued out of the Diocâ—ss And now a Consultation was prayed because the Interiour Court had remitted that Cause to the Arches and their Jurisdiction also yet a Consultation was denied A Suit was in the Ecclesiastical Court and Sentence passed for one with Costs and nine months after the Costs are Assest and Taxed and then comes a Pardon of 21 Jac. which relates before the taxing of the Costs But afterwards the Sentence and that Pardon was pleaded and allowed in discharge of the Costs Then W. who had recovered sues an Appeal and P. brought a Prohibition and well and no Consultation shall be awarded because by the Court that Pardon relating before the Taxation of Cost had discharged them As 5. Rep. 51. Hall's Case B. and Two others sue upon three several Libels in the Ecclesiastical Court and they joyn in a Prohibition And by the Court that is not good But they ought to have had three several Prohibitions and therefore a Consultation was granted Mich. 26 27 Eliz. C. B. If A. Libels against B. for Three things by one Libel B. may have One or Three Prohibitions Note Dyor 171. 13. By the Statute of 25 H. 8. cap. 19. Appeals to Rome being prohibited it is Ordained That for default of Justice in any of the Courts of the Archbishops of this Realm c. it shall be lawful to Appeal to the King in his High Court of Chancery and thereupon a Commission shall be granted c. And by a Proviso towards the end of that Statute an Appeal is granted to the King in Chancery on Sentences in places exempt in such manner as was used before to the See of Rome So that this Court grounded on the said Commission is properly as well as vulgarly called The Court of Delegates for that the Judges thereof are Delegated to fit by virtue of the Kings said Commission under his Great Seal upon an Appeal to him in Chancery and that specially in Three Causes 1 When a Sentence is given in any Ecclesiastical Cause by the Archbishop or his Official 2 When any Sentence is given in any Ecclesiastical Cause in places exempt 3 When a Sentence is given in the high Court of Admiralty in Suits or Actions Civil and Maritime according to the Civil Law That this Court of Delegates may Excommunicate was Resolved by all the Judges in the Archbishop of Canterbury's Case They may also commit or grant Letters of Administration This Court of Delegates is the highest Court for Civil Affairs that concern the Church for the Jurisdiction whereof it was provided 25 H. 8. That it shall be lawful for any Subject of England in case of defect of Justice in the Courts of the Archbishop of Canterbury to Appeal to the King's Majesty in his Court of Chancery and
that upon such Appeal a Commission under the Great Seal shall be directed to certain persons particularly designed for that business so that from the highest Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury there lies an Appeal to this Court of Delegates Of this Subject of Appeals the Lord Coke says That an Appeal is a Natural defence which cannot be taken away by any Prince or power and in every Case generally when Sentence is given and Appeal made to the Superiour the Judge that did give the Sentence is obliged to obey the Appeal and proceed no further until the Superiour hath examined and determined the cause of Appeal Nevertheless where this Clause Appellatione remota is in the Commission the Judge that gave Sentence is not bound to obey the Appeal but may execute his Sentence and proceed further until the Appeal be received by the Superiour and an Inhibition be sent unto him For that Clause Appellatione remota hath Three notable effects 1 That the Jurisdiction of the Judge à quo is not by the Appeal suspended or stopped for he may proceed the same notwithstanding 2 That for proceeding to Execution or further process he is not punishable 3 That these things that are done by the said Judge after such Appeal cannot be said void for they cannot be reversed per viam Nullitatis But if the Appeal be just and lawful the Superiour Judge ought of right and equity to receive and admit the same and in that case he ought to reverse and revoke all mean Acts done after the said Appeal in prejudice of the Appellant At the Parliament held at Clarendon An. 10 H. 2. cap. 8. the Forms of Appeals in Causes Ecclesiastical are set down within the Realm and none to be made out of the Realm Ne quis appellat ad dominum Papam c. so that the first Article of the Statute of 25 H. 8. concerning the prohibiting of Appeals to Rome is declaratory of the ancient Law of the Realm And it is to be observed says the Lord Coke that the first attempt of any Appeal to the See of Rome out of England was by Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury in the Reign of William Rufus and yet it took no effect Touching the power and Jurisdiction of the Court of Delegates Vid. le Case Stevenson versus Wood. Trin. 10 Jac. B. R. Rot. 1491. in Bulstr Rep. par 2. wherein these Three points are specially argued 1 Whether the Judges Delegates may grant Letters of Administration 2 Whether in their person the King be represented 3 Whether the Court of Delegates may pronounce Sentence of Excommunication or not 14. The High Commission-Court in Causes Ecclesiastical was by Letters Patents and that by force and virtue of the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. the Title whereof is An Act restoring to the Crown the Ancient Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical c. the High Commissioners might if they were competent that is if they were Spiritual persons proceed to Sentence of Excommunication What the power of this Court was and whether they might in Causes Ecclesiastical proceed to Fine and Imprisonment is at large examined by the Lord Coke in the Fourth part of his Institutes where he reports the Judgment and Resolutions of the whole Court of Common Pleas thereon Pasch 9 Jac. Reg. upon frequent Conferences and mature deliberation set down in writing by the order and command of King James Likewise whom and in what Cases the Ecclesiastical Courts may examine one upon Oath or not there being a penal Law in the Case and whether the saying Quod nemo tenetur seipsum prodere be applicable thereunto Vid. Trin. 13 Jac. B. R. Burroughs Cox c. against the High Commissioners Bulstr par 3. 15. The Statutes of 24 H. 8. and 25 H. 8. do Ordain That upon certain Appeals the Sentence given shall be definitive as to any further Appeal notwithstanding which the King as Supream Governour may after such definitive Sentence grant a Commission of Review or Ad Revidendum c. Sir Ed. Coke gives two Reasons thereof 1 Because it is not restrained by the Statute 2 For that after a definitive Sentence the Pope as Supream Head by the Canon Law used to grant a Commision Ad Revidendum and what Authority the Pope here exercised claiming as Supream Head doth of right belong to the Crown and by the Statutes of 26 H. 8. cap. 1. and 1 Eliz. cap. 1. is annexed to the same Which accordingly was Resolved Trin. 39 Eliz. B. R. Hollingworth's Case In which Case Presidents to this purpose were cited in Michelot's Case 29 Eliz. in Goodman's Case and in Huet's Case 29 Eliz. Also vid. Stat. 8 Eliz. cap. 5. In the Case between Halliwell and Jervoice where a Parson sued before the Ordinary for Tithes and thence he appeals to the Audience where the Sentence is affirmed then the party appeals to the Delegates and there both Sentences are Repealed It was agreed That in such case a Commission Ad Revidendum the Sentences may issue forth but then such a Reviewing shall be final without further Appeal But if the Commissioners do not proceed to the Examination according to the Common Law they shall be restrained by a Prohibition 16. The Court of Peculiars is that which dealeth in certain Parishes lying in several Diocesses which Parishes are exempt from the Jurisdiction of the Bishops of those Diocesses and are peculiarly belonging to the Archbishop of Canterbury Within whose Province there are fifty seven such Peculiars for there are certain peculiar Jurisdictions belonging to some certain Parishes the Inhabitants whereof are exempt sometimes from the Archdeacons and sometimes from the Bishops Jurisdiction 17. If a Suit be in the Ecclesiastical Court for a Modus Decimandi if the Desendant plead payment it shall be tryed there and no Prohibition may be granted for that the Original Suit was there well commenced So if payment be pleaded in a Suit depending in the Ecclesiastical Court for any thing whereof they have the original cognizance But if a man sue for Tithes in the Ecclesiastical Court against J. S. and makes Title to them by a Lease made to him by the Parson and J. S. there also makes Title to them by a former Lease made to him by the same Parson so that the Question there is which of the said Leases shall be preferred In this case a Prohibition shall be granted for they shall not try which of the said Leases shall be preferr'd although they have cognizance of the Original for the Leases are Temporal If a man having a Parsonage Impropriate make a Lease for years of part of the Tithes by Deed and the Deed be denied in the Ecclesiastical Court and Issue taken thereon a Prohibition shall be granted If a Parson compound with his Parishioner for his Tithes and by his Deed grant them to him for a certain Sum for one year according to Agreement and after he
Church-gemote Int. Leges H. 1. c. 8. The Convocation is under the power and Authority of the King 21 Ed. 4. 45. b. Assembled only by the Kings Writ 13 Ed. 3. Rot. Parl. M. 1. vid. Stat. 25 H. 8. c. 19. The King having directed his Writ therein assigning the time and place to each of the Archbishops to the effect aforesaid the Archbishop of Canterbury doth thereupon direct his Letters to the Bishop of London as his Dean Lindw Provin Sec. 1. de Poenis ver Tanquam in Gloss First Citing himself peremptorily then willing him to Cite in like manner all the Bishops Deans Archdeacons Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and generally all the Clergy of his Province to the Place at the day in the said Writ prefixed withal directing that one Proctor for every Cathedral or Collegiate Church and two for the other Clergy of each Diocess may suffice In pursuance whereof the Bishop of London directs his Letters accordingly willing them to certifie the Archbishop the Names of all such as shall be so Monished by them in a Schedule annexed to their Letters Certificatory whereupon the Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and the other Churches having Elected their Proctors it is certified to the Bishop who makes due Returns thereof which method is likewise observed in the other Province of York It is said That these Proctors anciently had Place and Vote in the Lower House of Parliament a good expedient for the maintenance and preservation of the Liberties of the Church The Prolocutor of the Lower House of Convocation is immediately at the first Assembly by the motion of the Bishops chosen by that Lower House and presented to the Bishops as their Prolocutor by whom they intend to deliver their Resolutions to the higher House and to have their own House specially ordered and governed His Office is to cause the Clerk to call the Names of the Members of that House as oft as he shall see cause likewise to see all things propounded to be read by him to gather the Suffrages or Votes and the like Trin. 8 Jac. It was Resolved by the two Chief Justices and divers other Justices at a Committee before the Lords of Parliament concerning the Authority of a Convocation 1 That a Convocation cannot Assemble without the Assent of the King 2 That after their Assembling they cannot conferr to constitute any Canons without License del Roy. 3 When upon Conference they conclude any Canons yet they cannot execute any of them without the Royal Assent 4 They cannot execute any after Royal Assent but with these Limitations viz. 1 That they be not against the Kings Prerogative 2 Nor against Statute Law 3 Nor against the Common Law 4 Nor against the Customes of the Realm All which appears by 25 H. 8. c. 19. 19. Ed. 3. Title Quare non Admisit 7. 10. H. 7. 17. Merton cap. 9. By 2 H. 6. 13. a Convocation may make Constitutions to bind the Spiritualty because they all in person or by Representation are present but not the Temporalty Q. And 21 Ed. 4. 47. the Convocation is Spiritual and so are all their Constitutions Vid. The Records in Turri 18 H. 8. 8 Ed. 1. 25 Ed. 1. 11 Ed. 2. 15 Ed. 2. Prohibitio Regis ne Clerus in Congregatione sua c. attemptet contra jus seu Coronam c. By which it appears that they can do nothing against the Law of the Land or the Kings Prerogative 5. The word Convocation and the word Synod are rather words of two Languages than things of two significations for although they have different derivations the former from the Latin the other from the Greek yet in effect they both center in the same thing Convocation à Convocando because they are called together by the Kings Writ It is of very great Antiquity according to Sir Edward Coke who mentions out of Mr. Bede and other Authors and ancient Records such as were nigh a thousand years since and more expresly of one great Synod held by Austins Assembling the Britain Bishops in Council An. 686. And affirms That the Clergy was never Assembled or called together at a Convocation but by the Kings Writ And in the year 727. there was a Convocation of the Clergy called Magna Servorum Dei frequentia It was by the assistance and authority of Ethelbert the first Christian King of Kent that Austin called the aforesaid Assembly of the British Bishops and Doctors that had retained the Doctrine of the Gospel to be held in the borders of the Victians and West-Saxons about Southampton as supposed to which resorted as Mr. Bede says Seven Bishops and many other Learned Divines but this Synod or Convocation suddenly brake up without any thing done or resolved This Assembly was conven'd for determining the time for the Celebration of Easter touching which the Controversie continuing no less than 90 years after was at last concluded at another Convocation purposely called at Whitby by the Authority of Oswy King of Northumberland and whereof the Reverend Cedda newly Consecrated Bishop was Prolocutor and King Oswy himself present at the Assembly Likewise about the year 1172. at Cassils in Ireland a Convocation was held by Authority of King H. 2. soon after he had Conquered that Island which Convocation was for the Reformation of the Irish Church where amongst many other Constitutions it was Decreed That all the Church-Lands and all their Possessions should be altogether free from the Exaction of Secular men and that from thenceforth all Divine things should be handled in every part of Ireland in such sort as the Church of England handleth them Likewise about the year 1175. at London a Synod or Convocation was held at which King H. 2. was present where among other Canons and Constitutions it was both by Authority of the King and Synod decreed That every Patron taking a Reward for any Presentation should for ever lose the Patronage thereof Which together with other Canons then made for the better government of the Church of England were Published by Richard Archbishop of Canterbury with the Kings Assent Likewise a Provincial Synod was held at Oxford by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury under King H. 3. about the year 1222. for Reformation of the Clergy with many others in subordination to the Laws of the Land One special Priviledge of the Convocation appears by 8 H. 6. cap. 1. All the Clergy from henceforth to be called to the Convocation by the Kings Writ and their Servants and Familiars shall for ever hereafter fully use and enjoy such liberty and Immunity in coming tarrying and returning as the Great men and Commonalty of the Realm of England called or to be called to the Kings Parliament have used or ought to have or enjoy 8 H. 6. In Parliamento Statutum est ut Praelati atque Clerici câ—rumque Famulatus cum ad Synodos accesserint iisdem Privilegiis ac
Immunitatibus gaudeant quibus Milites Burgenses Parliamenti Ant. Brit. fo 284. nu 30. 6. The Jurisdiction of the Convocation in this Realm though relating to matters meerly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical yet is subordinate to the establish'd Laws of the Land it being Provided by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 19. That no Canons Constitutions or Ordinances shall be made or put in execution within this Realm by Authority of the Convocation of the Clergy repugnant to the Prerogative Royal or to the Customes Laws or Statutes of this Realm To the same effect was that of 9 Ed. 1. Rot. Parl. Memb. 6. Inhibitio Archiepiscopo omnibus Episcopis aliis Praelatis apud Lambeth Conventuris ne aliquid statuant in praejudicium Regis Coronam vel dignitatem For although the Archbishop and the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy of his Province Assembled in a Synod have power to make Constitutions in Spiritual things yet they ought to be Assembled by Authority of the King and to have as aforesaid his Royal Assent to their Constitutions which being had and obtained the Canons of the Church made by the Convocation and the King without Parliament shall bind in all matters Ecclesiastical as well as an Act of Parliament as was Resolved in Bird and Smiths Case Although the Saxons who founded and endowed most of our Churches and made many good Laws in reference to the Jurisdiction power and priviledges thereof yet the Royal Prerogative with the Laws and Customes of the Realm were ever so preserved as not to be invaded thereby King AEthelbert the first Saxon King King Ina AEthelstane Edmund Edgar and King Kanute all these made Laws in favour of the Church but none of them ever entrenched on the Prerogative of the Crown or on the Laws or Customes of the Realm nor any of those ancient Church-Laws ever made without the Supream Authority to ratifie and confirm the same 7. The Laws and Constitutions whereby the Ecclesiastical Government is supported and the Church of England governed are the General Canons made by General Councils also the Arbitria Sanctorum Patrum the Decrees of several Archbishops and Bishops the Ancient Constitutions made in our several Provincial Synods either by the Legates Otho and Othobon or by several Archbishops of Canterbury All which by the 25 H. 8. are in force in England so far as they are not repugnant to the Kings Prerogative the Laws and Customes of England Also the Canons made in Convocations of Later times as Primo Jacobi Regis and confirmed by his Regal Authority Also in some Statutes Enacted by Parliament touching Ecclesiastical affairs together with divers Customes not written but in use beyond the memory of Man and where these fail the Civil Law takes place Among the Britain Councils according to Bishop Prideaux his Synopsis of Councils Edit 5. those amongst the rest are of most remark viz. At Winchester in King Edgars time under Dunstane at Oxford by Stephen Langton Archbishop of Canterbury at Claringdon under King Henry the Second The Council under King Edward the 6 th in which the 39 Articles of the English Confession was concluded and confirmed The Synod under the same King from which we receive the English Liturgy which now we have composed by Seven Bishops and Four Doctors and confirmed by the publick consent of the Church which as also the said 39 Articles the succeeding Princes Queen Eliz. King James and King Charles ratified and commended to Posterity At London a Synod in which 141 Canons or Constitutions relating to the pious and peaceable Government of the Church presented to King James by the Synod and confirmed by his Regal Authority and at Perth in Scotland where were Articles concerning Administring the Sacrament to the Sick Private Baptism where Necessity requires Confirmation admitting Festivals Kneeling at the Receiving the Sacrament and an allowance of Venerable Customes But de Concil Britan. vid. D. Spelman The Ancient Canons of the Church and Provincial Constitutions of this Realm of England were according to Lindwood the Canonist who being Dean of the Arches compiled and explained the same in the time of King H. 6. made in this order or method and under these Archbishops of Canterbury viz. The Canons or Constitutions 1. Of Stephen Langton Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury in the Council at Oxford in the year of our Lord 1222 who distinguish'd the Bible into Chapters 2. Of Otho Cardinal the Popes Legate in Anno 1236. on whose Constitutions John de Athon Dr. of Laws and one of the Canons of Lincoln did comment or gloss 3. Of Boniface Archbishop of Cant. 1260. 4. Of Othobon Cardinal of St. Adrian and Legate of the Apostolical Chair on whose Constitutions the said John de Athon did likewise Glossematize His Canons were made at London in Anno 1268. 5. Of John Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury at a Synod held at Reding An. 1279. 6. Of the same Peckham at a Synod held at Lambeth An. 1281. 7. Of Robert Winchelse Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1305. 8. Of Walter Reynold Archbishop of Canterbury at a Synod held at Oxford An. 1322. These Constitutions in some Books are ascribed to Simon Mepham but erroneously for the date of these Constitutions being An. 1322. the said Walter Reynold according to the Chronicle died in An. 1327. and was succeeded by Simon Mepham 9. Of Simon Mepham Archbishop of Cant. An. 1328. 10. Of John Stradford Archbishop An. 13 ... 11. Of Simon Islepe Archbishop An. 1362. 12. Of Simon Sudbury Archbishop An. 1378. 13. Of Tho. Arundel Archbishop at a Synod or Council held at Oxford An. 1408. 14. Of Henry Chichley Archbishop An. 1415. 15. Of Edmond Archbishop of Canterbury 16. Of Richard Archbishop of Canterbury The Dates of the Canons or Constitutions of these Two last Lindwood makes no mention by reason of the uncertainty thereof but withal says it is clear That Richard did immediately succeed the foresaid Stephen Langton and the said Edmond succeeded Richard Lindw de Poen c. ad haec infra in verb. Mimime admittatur If so then it was most probably Richard Wethershed who was Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1229. And St. Edmond Chancellor of Oxford who was Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1234. 8. Councils were either General or Oecumenical from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereunto Commissioners by the Emperours Authority were sent from all quarters of the World where Christ hath been preached Or National or Provincial or Particular by Bullenger called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such were the Councils of Gangra Neo-caesarea and many others commonly Assembled by Patriarchs and Bishops in some particular place of a Countrey The ends of these Councils chiefly were either for the suppression of Heresies the decision of Controversies the appeasing of Schisms or the Ordaining of Canons and Constitutions for decency of Order in the Church Vid. AElfrici Canones ad Wulfinum Episcopum Can. 33. where it is said That there were Four Synods
Causes to his own Cognizance Nolente Ordinario p. 19. Sect. 10. Whether he may Cite a man out of his own proper Diocess p. 100 c. Sect. 3. The great Antiquity Precedency Priviledges Style and Precincts of the Archbishop of Canterbury p. 13. Sect. 1. He is the first Peer in England next to the Blood Royal. ibid. Anciently he had Primacy as well over all Ireland as England p. 20. Sect. 13. He was anciently styled Patriarcha orbis Britannici Pontifex ibid. He had some special marks of Royalty p. 21. Sect. 13. Several Priviledges peculiar to him ibid. Whether he had concurrent Jurisdiction in Inferiour Diocesses within his Province p. 18. Sect. 9. That See kept Four years by King William Rufus without an Archbishop p. 24. Sect. 3. In what respects the Archbishop of Canterbury hath some power over the Archbishop of York p. 18. Sect. 9. The Original of the Metropolitan See of York p. 14. Sect. 2. The Antiquity Precedency Style and Precincts of the Archbishop of York ibid. Anciently an Archbishop of London p. 17. Sect. 7. Archâ—s-Court the higâ—â— Consistory p. 83. Sect. 6. Why so called p. 100. Sect. 3. The great Antiquity Jurisdiction and decent order 〈…〉 5. 〈…〉 and what he is p. 60. Sect. 1. How he 〈…〉 Office and Jurisdiction p. 61. Sect. 1. The 〈◊〉 kinds of Archdeacons and how many in England p. 61. Sect. 2. How they are distinguished by the Canon Law p. 65. Sect. 10. Whence their Pâ—rer is derived p. 62. Sect. 3. The Canon touching 〈…〉 to their Visitations p. 64. Sect. 9. Whether they have Power of Visitation Jure communi p. 63 67. Sect. 7. What Remedy in case an Archdeacon dâ—th refuse to swear the Church-Wardens elect p. 164. Sect. 9. Whether an Archdeaconry be understood as a Benefice with Cure p. 62. Sect. 5. and p. 200. Sect. 13 Arch-Flamins what and how many anciently in England and where p. 16. Sect. 4. They were succeeded by as many Archbishopricks ibid. Arch-Presbyter what p. 56. Sect. 7 Arms or Coat-Armour on Monuments or Church-windows not to be defaced or demolished p. 138 139. Sect. 5 Arrests whether they may de executed on Christmas-Day p. 115. Sect. 12. Whether executable on Clergy-men in time of Divine service p. 141. Sect. 8. Articles 39 of Religion what kind of subscription thereunto required p. 163. Sect. 8. Articles of Religion under King Ed. 6. p. 8. Sect. 14. The like under Q. Eliz. ibid. Articles of Enquiry on a Jure Patronatus p. 180. Sect. 2. Articles before the high Commissioners at York against the Vicar of Hallifax p. 189. Sect. 9. Articuli Cleri and Circumspecte agatis what p. 639. Assault on a Clerk whether cognizable before the Ordinary p. 115. Sect. 12. Assaults in the Church or Church-yard are not to be retaliated p. 139. Sect. 5 Assent to the Articles of Religion what good or not within the intent of the Statute p. 163. Sect. 8. Assent of the Ordinary requisite to the Foundation of a Church p. 207. Sect. 5. Assent of the Patron requisite to the Vnion and Appropriation of Churches p. 109. Sect. 8. Assise de utrum what and why so called p. 644. Sect. 2. Atturney at Law he may not be elected Church-warden p. 164. Sect. 9. Audience or Court of Audience what it was where kept and what matters it took Cognizance of p. 106. Sect. 7. Aumone or Frank Almoigne a description thereof it 's use and end p. 338. Sect. 4. AVoidance what 283. Sect. 1. Twofold ibid. What difference between Avoidance and Next Avoidance p. 284. Sect. 2. How many ways it may be p. ibid. Sect. 3. In what Court cognizable p. 122. Sect. 21. The difference between the Common and Canon Law in reference to Avoidances p. 286. Sect. 8. The grant of the Next Avoidance during an Avoidance is void p. 219. Sect. 24. Whether the grant of a Next Avoidance good without Deed p. 255. Sect. 4. Avowe or Advowe what p. 181. Sect. 5. Austin whether the first that preached the Gospel in England p. 13. Sect. 1. Whether the first Archbishop of Canterbury p. ibid. Where buried p. 16. Sect. 4. Award or Arbitrement pleaded in Barr of Tithes in the Ecclesiastical Court and refused no ground for a Prohibition p. 122 123. Sect. 25. B. BAIL whether it may be taken for one apprehended by a Capias De Excom capiend p. 651. Sect. 25. Banns what whence derived how published by whom dispensed with and the legal Requisites in order to such Dispensations p. 465. Bark of Trees what not Tithable p. 387. Barren Land the Law touching the Tithes thereof p. 387. c. Bastard whence that word and who properly such p. 478. Sect. 1. and p. 486. Sect. 16 18. How differenced from Mulier at Common Law p. 478. Sect. 2. How distinguish'd at the Civil Law p. 480. Sect. 5. How that Law computes the time of a Womans going with Child p. 482. Sect. 7. How computed at the Common Law p. 482 Sect. 9. and p. 484. Sect. 12. Bastardy how distinguish'd at Common Law p. 478 479. Sect. 3. It is Triable by the Certificate of the Bishop p. 122. Sect. 21. How prosecuted in Courts of Justice p. 480. Sect. 6. and p. 484. 485. Sect. 13. How punished p. 438. Sect. 10. and p. 485. Sect. 14. Difference between the Common Civil and Ecclesiastical Law in reference to Bastardy p. 487. Sect. 19. Baud whether and where Actionable for calling one so p. 519 520. Sect. 11. and p. 520. Sect. 13. and p. 523. 20. Beauford Henry Great Vncle to King H. 6. and Bishop of Winchester made Cardinal how he thereby fell into a Premunire p. 110. Sect. 8. Becket Archbishop of Canterbury his contention with King Henry 2. p. 100. Sect. 2. Beech-Trees how and in what Case Tithable or not p. 389. Bees in what kind they pay Tithes p. ibid. Benefice Ecclesiastical the true definition thereof p. 200. 12. The reasons of that definition p. ibid. Whether Ecclesiastical Dignities fall under the notion of Benefices p. 200. Sect. 13. Of what a Benefice consists p. 200 201. Sect. 14. No Contract to be made for it nor is it vendible p. 201. Sect. 15. Six Signs or Requisites of an Ecclesiastical Benefice p. ibid. The common distinction thereof p. 201. Sect. 16. Beneficio primo Ecclesiastico habendo what that Writ imports p. 647. Sect. 9. Birch-Trees whether Tithable after Twenty years growth p. 390. Bishop the derivation of that word and why so called p. 22. Sect. 1. Anciently he was the universal Incumbent of his Diocess p. 13. Sect. 1. Why called Ordinary p. ibid. Sect. 2. What things requisite to his Creation p. 25. Sect. 4. The form and manner of making Bishops ibid. and p. 26. and p. 50. Sect. 8. His interest and Authority in his several capacities p. 29 30. Sect. 9. Whether he may grant Letters of Institution out of his own proper Diocess and under any Seal other than his own Seal of Office
Sect. 19. To what things a Presentation may be p. 263. Sect. 21. In what Cases the King shall have the Presentation by his Prerogative p. 263 264. Sect. 23 24. The difference in Law between the King and a Common person as to Presentations p. 265. Sect. 28. Primate and Metropolitan of all England when and how that style on title first vested in the Archbishop of Canterbury p. 18. Sect. 8. Priority in the Seat of a Church whether it may be prescribed p. 140. Sect. 7. Priviledges of the Clergy p. 193 c. Sect. 18. Priviledge in respect of Tithes what p. 436. Procuration what p. 67. Sect. 1. When and to whom payable ibid. Whether due without the Act of visiting p. 68. s 2. p. 69. Sect. 4. p. 75. s 10. p. 78. Sect. 11. Anciently paid in victualibus when and how changed into Money p. 68. Sect. 3. How the Canonists define it p. 69. Sect. 5. Onely one Procuration to be paid to the Ordinary how that is to be understood p 70. Sect. 6. Prohibition in what Cases it hath been granted p. 89. Sect. 16. p. 114. Sect. 12. p. 121. Sect. 17. p. 93. Sect. 20. p. 122. Sect. 22. p. ibid. Sect. 23 24. p. 126. Sect. 36 37 38 39. p. 128. Sect. 43. p. 138. Sect. 4. p. 140. Sect. 7. p. 144. Sect. 13. p. 113. Sect. 11. p. 121. Sect. 20. p. 148. Sect. 20. p. 151. Sect. 24. p. 149. Sect. 22. p. 151. Sect. 25. p. 152. Sect. 26 28. p. 153. Sect. 30 31. p. 127. Sect. 40. p. 119. Sect. 15. p. 163. Sect. 5. p. 114. Sect. 12. p. 149. Sect. 21. p. 188. Sect. 5. p. 142. Sect. 9. p. 152. Sect. 29. p. 153. Sect. 32. p. 155. Sect. 38. p. 157. Sect. 40. p. 374. Sect. 49. p. 377. Sect. 62. p. 379. Sect. 67. p. 387. 393. 409. 410. 407. 425. 429. 430. 436. p. 473. Sect. 7. p. 485. Sect. 15. p. 177. Sect. 8 9. p. 373. Sect. 47. p. 190. Sect. 9. p. 166. Sect. 12 13 14. p. 167. Sect. 19. p. 176. Sect. 8. p. 277. Sect. 12. p. 92. Sect. 19. p. 101. Sect. 3. p. 104. Sect. 6. p. 119. Sect. 17. p. 147. Sect. 18. p. 298. Sect. 9. p. 166. Sect. 15. p 198. Sect. 4. p 258. Sect. 10. p. 267. Sect. 34. p. 115. Sect. 12. p. 299. Sect. 11. p. 281. Sect. 22 23. p. 116. Sect. 12. p. 164. Sect. 9 11. p. 319. Sect. 7. p. 359. S. 14. p. 369. Sect. 40. p. 192. Sect. 15. p. 364. Sect. 30. p. 368. Sect. 37. p. 361. Sect. 20 21. p. 362. Sect. 22. p. 368. Sect. 38 39. p. 371. Sect. 43. p. 375. Sect. 53. p. 362. § 25. p. 365. § 31. p. 369. § 39. p. 378. § 64. p. 382. § 82. p. 520. § 12. p. 517. § 5. p. 505. § 12. p. 521. Sect. 14. p. 523. § 19. p. 524. § 21. In what Cases the Prohibition hath been denyed p. 83. Sect. 4. p. 115 116. Sect. 12. p. 119 121. Sect. 17 18. p. 122 123. § 25 26 27 28. p. 124. § 29. p. 125. § 31 32 33 34. p. 126. § 39. p. 127 128. § 42 43. p. 137. § 3. p. 144. § 11. p. 148. § 19. p. 153. § 30. p. 174. § 1. p. 152. § 27. p. 364. sect 29. p. 380. sect 74. p. 156. sect 39. p. 166. sect 16. p. 198. sect 5. p. 318. sect 5. p. 359. sect 15. p. 120. sect 17. p. 92. sect 19. p. 366. sect 33. p. 376. sect 57. p. 364. sect 29. p. 386. p. 389. p. 412. p. 413. p. 420. p. 429. p. 451. p. 456. p. 464. p. 520. sect 13. p 512. sect 18. p. 507. sect 12. p. 521. sect 15. p. 523. sect 17. p. 525. sect 24. p. 526. sect 24. p. 527. sect ult Whether a Prohibition may be granted after Sentence and in what Cases p. 192. sect 15. p. 381. sect 76. p. 116. sect 12. p. 120. sect 17. p. 124. sect 29. Whether a Prohibition may be after an Appeal p. 148. sect 21. A Prohibition whether grantable after a Consultation p. 147. sect 18. or de novo to an Appellant who had a Prohibition in the first instance p. 360. sect 19. p. 431. Prohibition granted against Costs of Suit given to an Informer p. 473. sect 7. Whether a Prohibition lies in case proof by one single Witness be disallowed in the Ecclesiastical Court p. 362. sect 22. p. 113. sect 11. p. 115. sect 12. p. 123. sect 26. p. 128. sect 43. Whether a Prohibition may be granted the last day of the Term p. 147. sect 18. Or to stay Proof in Perpetuam rei memoriam p. 374. Sect. 49. Proxies what p. 70. Sect. 5. p. 75. Sect. 11. The same with Procurations ibid. Whether extingnish'd by the dissolution of Religious Houses p. 76 c. Sect. 11. Not known to the Primitive Church ib. Whether grantable by a Bishop to the King § ibid. The Case of Proxies aptly compared to the Case of Tithes p. 79. Sect. 11. A Case of Remark at Common Law touching Proxies p. 75 c. Sect. 11. Q. QUare Impedit for and against whom that Writ lies p 645. Sect. 3. Of what things it lies p. 649. Sect. 20 21. Whether it lies for an Archdeaconry p. 66. Sect. 14. Quarta Episcopalis what p. 77. Sect. 11. Quaries whether Tithable p 436. Quean whether Action lies for calling one so p. 517. Sect. 5. p. 523. Sect. 18. p. 520. Sect. 12. Queen Elizabeth her Declaration touching her Supremacy p. 10. Sect. 11. Declared Supream Governess on Earth of the Church of England p. ibid. Sect. 14. Questmen what by whom Eligible and wherein their Office doth consist p. 163. Sect. 6. Quorum Nomina Process of that kind prohibited p. 60. Sect. 6. p. 82. Sect. 3. R. RAbbits whether Tithable p. 367. Sect. 36. Rakings of the stubble of Corn whether Tithable p. 384. p. 436 c. Rapeseed whether shall the Parson or the Vicar have the Tithes thereof p. 381. Sect. 77. Rate-Tithes in what Cases payable p. 391. p. 437. Rectors how distinguish'd from Vicars p. 186. Sect. 1. Refusal of a Clerk by a Bishop because he could not speak the Welch Language p. 276. Sect. 36. Once Refused for Insufficiency may not after be received p. 268. Sect. 39. Register to a Bishops Consistory the Office controverted where Cognizable p. 126. Sect. 35. Registry-Book of a Parish for Christnings and Burials the Original thereof p. 145. Sect. 14. p. 164. Sect. 10. Release by one Church-warden whether any Bar to the Suit of his Companion p. 144. Sect. 12. p. 165. Sect. 11. p. 161. Sect. 2. Release of a Next Avoidance made after the Church becomes void is void p. 286. Sect. 7. Religion Christian when and where first planted in this Kingdom p. 13. Sect. 1. Rents of what kind may be sued for in the Ecclesiastical Court p. 126. Sect. 34. Where the Tithe of Rents in London are suable for and how p. 379. Sect. 70. Reparations of Churches where
possession p. 272. Sect. 5. Three Writs at Common Law against an Usurper and what they are p. 205. Sect. 1. W WAges of Servants whether Tithable p. 457. Wall of the Church-yard by whom to be repaired p. 144. Sect. 11. Wales when first subject to the Archbishoprick of Canterbury p. 17. Sect. 6. Waste Pastures in what case Tithable or not p. 457. Wax or Bees-Wax how to be Tithed p. 457. Way obstructed for carrying of Tithes Cognizable in the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction p. 382. Sect. 82. vid. p. 394. Weapons drawn in the Church or Church-yard how punished p. 139. Sect. 6. Indictments thereon discharged and why p. 149. Sect. 22. p. 155. sect 37. Weild or Woad for Diers to whom the Tithe of that Dying Plant belongs whether as Great Tithe to the Parson or as Small Tithe to the Vicar p. 366. sect 32. p. 381. s 77. p. 457 458. westminster-Westminster-Abbey by whom Founded p. 328. sect 5. When the Revenues thereof were first vested in a Dean and Chapter of the Collegiate Church thereof p. 15. s 3. How it became Originally the place of Consecration and Coronation of the Kings of England p. 6. Sect. 8. Whitson-Farthings what and when paid p. 73. Sect. 10. Whore whether Actionable and where to call one so p. 519. Sect. 9. Willows whether Tithable p. 457. Witness one single Witness disallowed in the Ecclesiastical Court for sufficient proof whether Prohibition lies in that case p. 113 114. Sect. 11. p. 115. Sect. 12. p. 116. Sect. 12. p. 123. Sect. 26. p. 128. Sect. 43. Witch or the Son of a Witch whether those words are Actionable p. 524. Sect. 24. Wolsey Cardinal impower'd by the Popes Bull to retain the Archbishoprick of York and the Abbey of St. Albans in Commendam p. 111. Sect. 8. Wolstan Bishop of Worcester his Resolute Answer to King William the Conquerour p. 97. Sect. 1. Wood the Law in reference to the Tithe thereof p. 458 to 462. Computed among the Predial and Great Tithes by whom payable whether by the Buyer or the Seller whether due for Fuel spent in the Parishioners house p. ibid. In what sense it may be either Great or Small Tithes p. 365 366. Sect. 32. Whether Wood Tithable at the Common Law p. 372. Sect. 46. Wood for Hedging and Firing whether Tithable p. 369 370. Sect. 42. In what case the Vicar may have the Tithe thereof p. 381. sect 79. Wool the Law in reference to the Tithes thereof p. 198. sect 3. p. 359. sect 16. p. 366. sect 32. Of Sheep pastured in divers Parishes p. 462 c. Of Rotten Sheep whether Tithable p. 359. sect 15. Worcester-Church anciently a Priory p. 74. sect 10. Words of Contention in the Church or Church-yard how punished p. 139. sect 6. Writ of Right of Advowson for whom it lies p. 214 215. sect 17. The Writ De Haeretico Comburendo when taken away and abolished p. ult sect ult Y YOrk the Original of that Metropolitan See p. 14. sect 2. It anciently had a Metropolitan Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in Scotland p. 18. sect 9. ERRATA PAg. 25. lin 25. read Potestatem p. 35. l. 2. Archidiaconum p. 200. l. 37. Provenues p. 203. l. 7. Vicaria p. 205. l. 5. be with the Cure p. 209. l. 3. An. 1505 p. 285. l. 17. to his Father by the true p. 293. l. 31. too late p. 403. l. 38. Mepham's Canon p. 448. l. 23. to the Parson p. 470. l. ult Adulterum p. 471. l. 7. Hoel Dha p. 439. l. 15. Cognatio p. 497. l. 11. Adulterous Wife p. 501. l. 7. Thore p. 503. l. 6. Viro p. 530. l. 40. Crown p. 543. l. 18. Pardon l. 40. Doctors Advertisement THE ORPHANS LEGACY or a Testamentary Abridgment in Three parts viz. 1. Of Last Wills and Testaments 2. Of Executors and Administrators 3. Of Legacies and Devises Where the most material Points of Law relating to that subject are succinctly Treated as well according to the Common and Temporal as Ecclesiastical and Civil Laws of this Realm Illustrated with a great variety of select Cases in the Law of both Professions as well delightful in the Theory as useful for the practice of all such as study the one or are either active or passive in the other By the Author