And while this Royal Visitation lasted all Inferior Jurisdictions ceased a course as they do even when an Archbishop visits ‖ Pendente Visitatione Atchiepiscopali tam Suffraganei quam Inferiores Praelati ordinariâ— suâ— Jurisdictione abstinent omniaque per Archiepiscopum ejusque Commissarios expediuntur Ant. Brit. p. 29. But what would Dr. Wake infer from this Instance that the King took to himself a Power which has been thought regularly to belong to the Convocation Why was ever any Man wild enough to say that the Convocation were the Visitors-General of all Ecclesiastical Bodies in England The Homilies composed Ibid. He should say reviewed and altered for they were composed many years before in the Convocation of 1542 as the Acts declare * Ian. 1541 42. Tractavit Reverendissimus de Homiliis conficiendis 16. Feb. 1542 43. Presentatae sunt Homiliae compositae per quosdam Praelatos de diversis materiis And by vertue of this Convocational Authority which they had Archbishop Cranmer sent 'em 1 E. 6. to Bishop Gardiner requiring him to publish 'em throughout his Diocese Thus Bishop Gardiner himself in his Letters to the Protector †Fox Vol. 2. p. 1. the first words of the first of which are After most humble Commendations to your Grace I have received this day Letters from my Lord of Canterbury touching certain Homilies which the Bishops in the Convocation holden Anno Dom. 1542. agreed to make for stay of such Errors as were then by Ignorant Persons sparkeled among the People The Second begins thus I have received other Letters from my Lord of Canterbury requiring the said Homilies by vertue of a Convocation holden five years past He does not allow indeed that the Homilies formally passed that Synod for he adds Wherein we communed of That which took none effect then and much less needeth to be put in Execution ne in my judgment cannot But Cranmer we see was of another opinion and thought these Homilies sufficiently authoriz'd by the Convocation of 1542 and that they wanted only to be confirmed and recommended by the King as they were in the Injunctions of that year But should there be any thing wanting to the Authority of these Homilies when first set out that want was made up when they were subsequently ratified by the Clergy in Convocation * See Art of 1552 1562. L. M. P. has increased Dr. Wake 's Collections by an Instance or two of this date which must not be neglected Parliaments he says without the Concurrence of Convocations have learnedly argued and determined the Questions about the Lawfulness of Priests Marriage and Communion in one kind †P. 16. As to the first of these the Stat. 2 3 E. 6. c. 21. does indeed determine this point but it is in consequence and almost in the very words of the Determination of the Clergy in Convocation made the year before which Arth. Harmar has Printed ‖ P. 170. and my Lord of Sarum has given a short account of ⸫ Vol. 2. p. 50. tho' with some mistakes in the Circumstances of it For whereas his Lordship makes but Thirty five to have affirmed the Question and but Fourâ—een to have denied it there were many more in either case Fifty three in the first and Twenty two in the latter * Synodalia The Name also of the Prolocutor who gathered these Votes is mistaken for it was Io. Taylor Dean of Lincoln not I. Tyler who had been Prolocutor Thirty two years before in the Convocation of 1515 where his Lordship takes notice of him †Vol. 1. p. 14. with Indignation for making a Partial Entry in the Journals of Parliament on behalf of the Clergy then contending with the Lay-power about their Ecclesiastical Priviledges which his Lordship says is no wonder the Clark of the Parliament being at the same Time Speaker to the Lower House of Convocation tho' had not his Lordship thus judged I should have been apt to have thought this Entry Impartial for the very same reason because the Man that made it belonged equally to both the contending Parties Unless it shall be said that Clergy-men are so blindly devoted to the Interests of their Order that no other Tyes or Views whatsoever can make 'em think indifferently where That is concerned But of this his Lordship 's own Works are an Effectual Disproof As to the other Point about the Communion in both kinds neither did the Parliament establish that without the Concurrence of Convocation for tho' the Clause concerning it was brought into the House of Lords by Bishop Cranmer I suppose Novemb. 24 * Bishop Burn. Vol. 2. p. 41. yet it lay upon the Table without being called for again till the Clergy Decemb. 2. had Voted it in Convocation after which the very next day †Synodalia it had a Second Reading 1548. A Committee of Select Bishops and Divines appointed to Examine and Referm the Offices of the Church Ibid. p. 61 71. To such a Select Committe I have shewn that the reforming the Offices was by Convocation intrusted in Henry the Eighth's time so that this was but continuing that business in the same method into which the Convocation had formerly put it And there is Great Reason to believe that it was thus continued by this Convocation it self and that the Petition of the Lower House to the Bishops ‖ Mentioned by me p. 181. out of the Acts of this Convocation for a Review of the Books prepared by the former Committee to this purpose ended in an Address of Both Houses to the King for a New one Thus it is plain Bishop Burnet * See Vol. 2. p. 50. understood this matter and Bishop Stillingfleet too who first produced that Petition in his Irenicum †See p. 386. where he terms it a Petition for calling an Assembly of Select Divines in order to the setling Church-affairs Not that this was the Direct Purport but only the Result of it and occasioned by it A New Office of Communion set forth by Them i. e. by the Select Committee Pag. 64. And it was therefore Authorized by that Convocation which we have reason to think consented to this Committee However sure we are that it was established soon afterwards by another Convocation which passed the whole Service-Book where this Communion-Office was with some Alterations inserted There is a Deep silence all along in my Lord of Sarum's History as to the Convocational Authority of this Service-Book which he seems to represent as the Work of a Committee ‖ See Vol. 2. p. 71 93. only confirmed afterwards by Parliament His Lordships's History has that Credit in the World that his very Omissions may in time pass for Proofs if they be not observed and supplied especially in the Present Case where it will be naturally enough concluded that the Church-Authority did not intervene if a Church-Historian of his Lordship's Rank takes no notice of it
than the Statute it self The several Convocations in the 12 last years of H. the VIII those of E. the VI th of Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth all for ought I can find acted without any such Commission or License in writing and the first time we meet with it on Record is in 1603 when King Iames's first Synod met to settle the Discipline of the Church in that Body of Canons which at present obtains Nor is there any Opinion I believe for the Necessity of such a License elder than this Practise at least I have not had the good fortune ever to meet with any though I have diligently sought for it 'T is true the Registers of most Convocations summon'd since this Statute were lost in the Fire of London however large Extracts out of several of them are preserv'd and compleat Transcripts of some and in none of these is there the least Footstep of any License under the Broad Seal to be seen but very plain Intimations to the contrary as I shall now by some Remarkable Passages taken from thence and from other Books and Papers of good Authority shew And if I am somewhat Larger in my Recitals of this kind than is absolutely necessary the Reader I hope will easily forgive me What does not directly tend to establish my Assertion will serve at least to give some small Light into the Methods of Proceeding usual in Convocation which the Author of the Letter to a Convocation-man rightly observes to be little known or minded And Dr. Wake who smiles at his Remark is himself a most Contemptible Instance of the Truth of it since he has ventur'd to write a Book about the Customs and Priviledges of Convocations without having perus'd the Acts of almost any One English Synod and has from the beginning to the end of his wretched Performance prov'd nothing effectually but his own profound Ignorance of the Subject he is engag'd in I shall take the Rise of my Enquirys from the Convocation which sat upon a Prorogation Nov. V. 1532. before which the Submission of the Clergy was made to the King but not yet Enacted so that though it oblig'd them not Then as a Law yet it bound them as a Promise by the Terms of which if a Commission to Treat had been then held necessary we may be sure they would not so soon after the making that Promise have treated without one And yet I find no Hint of a Commission in a Diary of that Meeting where a great many things of much less moment are set down and where it being the first time the Clergy met after they submitted had any such thing been practised we should without fail have heard of it Sess. 11. Martii 26. 1533. this Note is inserted Tunc vertebatur in dubium an liceret disputare in Negotio Regio eò quòd Negotium pendet coram summo Pontifice indecisum Which Doubt the President remov'd by producing the Apostolick Brief that gave leave cuilibet Opiniones suas dicere Dominus Praesidens instanter rogavit omnes ut diligenter inquirerent de ista quaestione referrent quid sentirent See Ant. Brit. ad ann where the very same account is given of Stokesly ' s producing a License from the Pope but no hint of any from the King They had no doubts it seems about the Lawfulness of Treating without a Royal License which had they had it would have been mention'd here together with the Papal Leave and we may fairly therefore presume they had none In the Convocation begun Iune 9. 1536. the first in which Cromwel sat as Vice-gerent * The Bishop of Sarum tells us that Cromwell came hither as the King's Vicar-General but he was not yet Vicegerent For he sate next the Archbishop but when he had that Dignity he sat above him Nor do I find him styl'd in any Writing Vicegerent for sometime after this though my Lord Herbert says he was made Vicegerent the 18th of July this Year the same day on which the Parliament was Dissolv'd Vol. 1. p. 213. In which Paragraph there are great Marks of Haste For the Acts of this Convocation expresly call Cromwell Vicegerent as well as Vicar-General and shew that he both took place of the Archbishop and sign'd before him as he does in two Papers that passed this very Convocation and which together with the Subscriptions his Lordship has given us Vol. 1. Coll. of Rec. p. 157. p. 315. The Words of the Acts are Magister Willielmus Petre allegavit quòd ubi haec Synodus convocata â—it auctoritate illustrissimi Principis dictus Princeps Supremum Locum in dictâ Convocatione tenere debeat ac eo absente honorandus Magister Tho. Cromwell Vicarius Generalis ad Causas Ecclesiasticas ejus Vicemgerens locum ejus occupare debeat ideò petiit pradictum locum sibi assignari Ac ibidem praesentavit Literas Commissionales dicti Domini sui sigillo Principis ad Causas Ecclesiasticas sigillatas Quibus perlectis Reverendissimus assignavit sibi Locum juxta se i. e. the Place next above himself which he demanded Nor does my Lord Herbert say that Cromwell was made Vicegerent July 18th this Year but July 9th see Hist. p. 466. which is a manifest Misprint for June 9th the very day on which this Convocatâ—on was open'd and on which I suppose his Patent bore date Indeed I question whether the Powers of Vicar-General and Vicegerent were different and conveyed as my Lord of Sarum thinks by different Patents for I have seen no Good Ground any where for such a Distinction In the Collection of Records at the End of the second Part p. 303. the Bishop has given us what he calls Cromwell 's Commission to be Lord Vicegerent in all Ecclesiastical Causes But his Lordship had not time to peruse it for upon reading it he would have found that it was only the Draught of a Commission to certain Persons deputed by Cromwell to execute the Vicegerents Power in several parts of the Kingdom One of those Subordinate or Subaltern Commissions which had respect to a Superior one as his Lordship upon another occasion Vol. 2. p. 347. very properly distinguishes we are told Comparuit Dominus Prolocutor unà cum Clero exhibuit Librum sub Protestatione continentem mala Dogmata per Concionatores intra Prov. Cant. publicè praedicata This List is Printed by Fuller †P. 208. and in it the Clergy by way of Preface to their Articles Protest That they neither in Word Deed or otherwise directly or indirectly intend any thing to speak attempt or do which in any manner of wise may be displeasant unto the King's Highness c. and that they sincerely addict themselves to Almighty God his Laws and unto their said Soverign Lord the King their Supreme Head in Earth and his Laws Statutes Provisions and Ordinances made here within his Graces Realms Had any General Commission been granted them there had been no
need of this Protestation which was made to guard against the Penaltys of the Acts 25. and 27. H. VIII and has therefore we see a plain reference to them The Convocation in which Alesius the Scot disputed with so much applause sat the Year after this Anno 1537 †Ant. Brit. p. 331. Fox Vol. 2. p. 504. though my Lord of Sarum †Vol. 1. p. 214. I find out of a laudable Eagerness to record the Honors done to his Countrymen has plac'd this Dispute a Year earlier than it hapned Cromwell open'd the Meeting with a Speech where he tells them that they are call'd to determin certain Controversys in Religion which at this time be moved concerning the Christian Religion and Faith not only in this Realm but also in all Nations thorough the World For the King studieth Night and Day to set a Quietness in the Church and he cannot rest till all such Controversys be fully debated and ended through the Determination of You and of his Whole Parliament For he will suffer no Common Alteration but by the Consent of You and of his Whole Parliament And he desireth You for Christ's sake that All Malice Obstinacy and Carnal Respect set apart ye will friendly and lovingly dispute among your selves of the Controversys mov'd in the Church c. These Fox tells us were the very words of his Speech and that as soon as it was ended the Bishops rose up altogether giving thanks unto the King's Majesty not only for his Great Zeal towards the Church of Christ but also for his Godly Exhortation worthy so Christian a Prince and then immediately they went to Disputation We may observe here that neither Cromwell in his Speech to the Convocation nor the Prelates in their Answer mention any Commission to Treat though it had been a Proper Head to have been enlarg'd on in both Cases and could not well have escap'd the Clergy when returning Thanks to the King for his Goodness to them had any such Commission then issu'd But that it did not and that the Clergy were then under no Apprehensions that their liberty of Debating on what Subjects and even of coming to what Conclusions they pleas'd was abridg'd by the late Act the Preface to the Institution of a Christian Man a Book which pass'd this Convocation evidently shews I have transcrib'd the Passage already from thence †See P. 97. and shall here therefore only referr the Reader to it No the Practise then and long afterwards was only for the President of the Synod to declare to 'em by word of Mouth * Thus in the Convocation of Jan. 1. 1557 The Acts say that Card. Pool Causas hujus Synodi Verbo tenùs proposuit And so divers times before and after 1541. Ian. 20. Reverendissimus exposuit iis ex parte Regis qùod intentio ejus erat qùod ipsi inter se deliberarent de Reformandis Errotibus conficerent Leges de Simoniâ vitandâ c. 1547. 1. E. VI. Nov. 5. Rev mus exposuit iâ—s fuisse c. de mandato Regio Procerum qùod Praelati Clerus inter se conâ—â—lerent de verâ— Christi Religione probè instituendâ With this agrees an Old Directory of Cranmer's for the first Day of the Convocation 7 E. VI. May 1. 1552. §. 6. The Clergy of the Inferior House to be called up to the Chapitor his Grace to declare the Cause of this Convocation and to appoint them to Elect c. 1555. 22. Oct. Episcopus London summariè compendiosè Causam Synodi vocatae exposuit Ian. 13. 1562. Arch. Cant. brevem quandem Orationem Eloquentiae plenam habuit ad Patres Clerum perquam inter alia opportunitatem reformandarum rerum in Eccl. Anglic. jam oblatam esse aperuit ac Propensos animos tam illustrissimae Dominae Nostrae Reginae quà m aliorum Magnatum hujus regni ad hujusmodi Reformationem habendam declaravit I have laid these Instances together that we may see clearly what the Custom then was and how a Message from the King by the President supply'd the place of a Commission under the Broad Seal which was afterwards practis'd Heylin and Fuller have translated some of these Passages in their Historys but so loosly as to accommodate them to the Current Doctrine and Practise of their time when a License to Treat was held necessary Which I mention to warn the Reader not to receive their Versions as Literal For it is plain they saw no other Acts of Convocation than those from whence these Transcripts were taken the King's Pleasure for what Ends he had call'd them together and what Business he would have them proceed upon And this Verbal Intimation was all the Previous Leave that was either ask'd or given in That or several other succeeding Reigns The only Instance in H. the VIII 's time that seems to contradict this is the Divorce of Anne of Cleve in 1540 mention'd by L. M. P. * P. 40. which he says the Clergy could not take cognizance of till the King's Commission impower'd them to debate and consider it And in their Iudgment therefore they recite that Commission at large and by vertue of it declare c. They do so and there were Two very good Reasons for it arising from the Matter about which they were to give their Judgment and from the Manner also in which they were to handle it As to the first of these the attempting any thing by Word or Deed against this Marriage of the King with Anne of Cleve was High-Treason or at leastâ— Misprision of Treason by the Laws of the Realm as the Clause of Pardon in the Act †32. H. 8. c. 25. for dissolving this Marriage evidently shews And the Clergy therefore had reason to desire a Commission from the Crown to screen them from these Penealtys But further such a Commission was necessary not only for their security in a point of this Importance but in order to their very Assembling For which has not been hitherto observ'd this Cause was adjudg'd not in a Convocation properly so call'd that is in a Provincial Synod but in a National Assembly of the whole Clergy of either Province the King issuing out his Letters Commissional under the Great Seal as the Sentence * See it Bishop Burnet Vol. 1. Col. of Rec. p. 197. speaks to the Two Archbishops All the Bishops Deans Archdeacons and Clergy of England and commanding them in Universalem Synodum convenire to debate and determin this matter The Lords and Commons then sitting had petition'd the King to referr it to his Clergy with a design of grounding an Act of Parliament on Their Determination The Business requir'd Haste †The Commission was seal'd the 6 th of July the Clergy met by Vertue of it the 7th The Cause was heard Iudgment given and Letters Testimonial of that Iudgment drawn up and sign'd by all the Clergy on the 9th such Dispatch
as this Gentleman affirms let those Laws be produc'd and those Usages made out and I submit †Pp. 285 286. I agree with him that this is the true way of deciding the Point before us and have accordingly taken this way and no other to decide it I have produc'd the Laws and Usages of this Kingdom that make out both these Rights so incontestably and clearly I think as to leave no Room for a Cavil and I call upon Doctor Wake therefore to Submit or to shew wherein I have mistook or mis-represented those Laws and Usages Let him not think to evade the Force of what has been said by Loose and General Reflections by once again amusing us with Heaps of Foreign Precedents and long Historical Tales nothing to the Purpose in a word by drawing fresh supplys from that Everlasting Magazine of Insignificant Authoritys his Common-place-Book All this Shew of Reading and God knows it is but a Shew will be of no manner of weight with Discerning Judges the short Point between Him and Me is as He himself acknowledges how our Own Constitution stands and what are the Particulars Laws and Usages of this Kingdom By these I affirm and have proved That the Convocation has a Right not only to be Summon'd but to Meet with every New Parliament and to be open'd in Due Form by Divine Service and a Sermon That the Clergy of the Lower House when thus met have a Right of filling the Chair of it with a Prolocutor and of being put into a Condition of doing Business That if they have any Requests any Motions to make to my Lords the Bishops the King or his Great Council for the Good of Religion or the Redress of Church-Grievances they have a Right to make them to enter into what Debates and come to what Resolutions they shall think fit within their Proper Sphere without being oblig'd to Qualify themselves for such Debates or Resolutions by a Royal License which is necessary to no Synodical Act previous to that of Making or Enacting a Canon That in these Respects and to these Purposes the Convocation is still a Parliamentary Body and an Essential Part of our Constituon callâ—d both by the Clause in the Bishop's Summons and by Writs directed to the Archbishop of either Province which Clause and which Writs whenever a New Parliament is to meet can no more by the Rules of our Constitution be omitted than the Writs for any of the Lords or Commons can In short that the King has not only a Right of thus calling the Clergy to attend but the Clergy also have a Right of attending and the Lords and Commons a Right of being attended by them This is the Doctrine briefly laid down in that Letter which first gave rise to this Debate and in these Papers more fully explain'd and prov'd If Dr. Wake can shew wherein any part of it disagrees with the Laws and Usages of this Kingdom let him do it if he cannot as I am certain he cannot he is oblig'd by his Own Proposal to Submit that is to own himself utterly mistaken throughout this Dispute and publickly to retract his Illegal and Slavish Opinions APPENDIX I. EDvardus dei gratia Rex Angliae See p. 20. Franciae Dominus Hiberniae Uenerabili in Christo Patri Radulfo eadem gratia Bath Well Episcopo salutem Cum pridem in Parliamento nostro apud Westm. in quindena Paschae convocato quaedam Legibus Consuetudinibus regni nostri Angliae expresse contratia Regiae Dignitati nostrae nedum vaâ—de prejudicialia sed probrosa fuissent nimis importune petita quae nisi per modum statuti tunc permisissemus consignari dictum Parliamentum fuisset sine omni Expeditione in Discordia dissolutum sic Guerrae nostrae Franciae Scotiae quas de Consilio vestro ut scitis principaliter assumpsimus fuissent quod absit verisimiliter in ruina Nos ad evitanda tanta pericula praemissis protestationibus de revocando cum possemus provide quae sic a nobis quasi invitis extorta fuerint illa sigillo nostro sigillari permiserimus ista vice postmodum ea de Consilio Assensu Comitum Baronum ac aliorum Peritorum ex Causis Legitimis quia defecit Consensus noster declaravimus esse nulla nec nomen vel vim habere debere statuti Ac jam accepimus quod Uenerabilis Pater Arch. Cant. unum Concilium Provinciale in crastino S ti Lucae proxime futuro apud London convocare mandavit in quo Uos caeteros Praelatos Cant. Prov. contra Nos concitare aliqua nobis praejudicialia circa roboratinem dicti pretensi statuti in Enervationem Depressionem Diminutionem Iurisdictionis Iurium Prerogativarum nostrarum regalium nec non circa Processum inter Nos Praedictum Archiepiscopum super quibusdam ex parte nostra eidem Arch o oppositis pendentem statuere declarare super hiâ—s Censuras Graves intenditis promulgare Nos volentes tanto Prejudicio ut convenit obviare Uobis districte prohibemus ne quicquam quod in Derogationem seu Diminutionem Regiae Dignitatis Potestatis jurium Coronae nostrorum seu Legum Consuetudinum dicti regni nostri aut in Prejudictum Processus memorati vel etiam in roborationem dicti pretensi statuti vel alias in contumeliam nostri nominis honoris aut in gravamen vel dispendium Consâ—liariorum vel Obsequialium nostrorum cedere poterunt in dicto Concilio vel alibi proponatis statuatis aut aliqualiter attemptetis aut attemptari faciatis Scituri quod si secus feceritis ad Uos ut Inimicum nostrum nostrorum Uiolatorem Iurium gravius quo licite poterimus capiemus Teste Rege apud Westmonast 1. Oct. regni 15. II. For Mr. Sanders Minister of the Gospel at Oxford Reverend Sir Newbury June 7. 98. I Had a Letter last week by the Direction of the Committee of Ministers and Gentlemen Sept. 26. appointed at London for setling a Correspondence of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers and Congregations throughout this Kingdom for the advancement of the Interest of Religion and Reformation of Ministers with the Articles there agreed upon in order thereunto and a desire to communicate them speedily to the Brethren in these Parts that if possible a General Meeting might be had this Summer in London Pursuant hereunto it is desir'd that You would not fail to come your self and bring with you one prudent Person of your Congregation chosen for that End according to the Method resolv'd on in London to meet several of the Brethren and the Members of the Respective Congregations here at Newbury the 22 Instant to consider of the said Proposals which shall be laid before you and the proper Method to obtain so desirable an End You are desir'd to be here on Tuesday in the Evening that we may enter on our Work on Wednesday Morning resolving God
Years last past that is ever since the Council of * An. 1624. Bourdeaux unless we should call that Meeting of a few Prelates the other Day to Condemn the Archbishop of Cambray's Book a Provincial Council And if I mistake not they called themselves so by the same Figure as my Lords the Bishops who are of the Commission for Ecclesiastical Preferment may be stiled a Convocation But true Protestants and true Englishmen will like this Fashion the worse for being of Popish and French Extraction and for coming from a Country where both Civil and Ecclesiastical Liberty have expir'd long ago As they are not any where observ'd to live long after one another CHAP. II. THus does our Right to these Assemblies stand by the Law Ecclesiastical Which Law has been consider'd by it self for the clearer Evidence of the Argument and not in any opposition to the Temporal Government It not following from hence that such Assemblies should be held contrary to the Will of the Sovereign Power but that the Sovereign Christian Power should be desired to permit or rather to encourage them If in this Request we were not already prevented by the Law of the Land which not only allows but commands them as will appear if as hitherto I have enquir'd only into the Rights of a Synod of the Province of Canterbury at large so I go on now to consider it as Attendant upon a Parliament of England For so the matter at present stands and has stood for 400 Years and upwards to speak at the lowest Tho' in the Elder Ages it plainly enough appears that the Clergy came at once from both Provinces and joined Nationally with the Lay Assembly That this was the usage of the Saxon Reigns is acknowledg'd from the remaining Monuments of those Times But what the Order of these National Assemblies was is not as I see yet clearly discover'd As therefore the most knowing and exact of our Antiquaries have thought it proper for the better understanding of our Saxon Government to go over into Germany and consult the Laws and Manners of those Places from whence we came so possibly we might not be much out of our way in this Argument if we looked into France and enquir'd how the Franks there govern'd themselves those Fellow-Germans and near Neighbours of our Ancestors and who had much about the same time possessed themselves of Gaul as these had of this part of Britain especially if we consider the times of Charles the Great that Renown'd and Mighty Monarch whose Example had it vary'd from the Common Original Practice would yet probably have been imitated by our Lesser Kings And here we may content our selves with what the judicious De Marca reports to us of this matter in his Excellent Work De Concordiâ Sacerdotii Imperii * L.VI. c. 24 25. That in King Pepin's time when the Kingdom began to recover it self from the Disorders it suffer'd before it was resolv'd that two National Ecclesiastical Synods should be held every Year the One in March in the King's presence and where-ever he should appoint the other in October at the Place where the Bishops in their former Meeting should agree upon That whereas this last was a pure Ecclesiastical Council the other was a Royal One to which the Great Men of the Kingdom resorted from all Parts of it to take their Resolutions for the succeeding Year As there was also towards the Winter another Royal but Privy Council consisting only of the Great Ministers and such others as the King thought fit to call in which Matters were prepared and digested into Heads to be proposed to the Greater Assembly in the Spring This General Convocation of the Spiritualty and Laity which was after by Pepin's Son Charles the Great appointed to meet on the first of May was call'd indifferently Conventus Flacitum Concilium Synodus or Colloquium and in Latter Times Parliamentum which word also is still retained In it the Clergy and Laity deliberated sometimes together and sometimes apart according as the nature of the Business to be treated of was whether purely Secular Ecclesiastical or mixt When they were apart as well as when together the Great Persons Earls c. were distinguish'd from those of a lower Degree sitting by themselves and on Honourable Seats These too manag'd the Debates and formed the Conclusions the Commoners assenting and sometimes speaking but so as rather to signifie their Opinion than give a Vote This we may suppose to have been the Method also on the Spiritual side And so Hincmar out of Adalbardas Cousin and Councellor to this Charles expresses it * Ad Proceres pro Institutione Caâ—olom Regis c. 29. Generalias says he Universorum tam Clericorum quam Laicorum conveniebat Seniores that is the Magnates whether Counts or Bishops propter Consilium ordinandum Minores that is the Lesser Barons and Inferior but qualified Clergy propter idem suscipiendum interdum pariter tractandum non ex Potestate sed ex proprio mentis intellectu vel sententiâ confirmandum And after all what was resolv'd on in this Great Assembly was presented to the Emperor And what he in his Wisdom approv'd was to be observ'd by all * c. 34. Much after the same manner I suppose were the mixt Meetings of our Saxon Kings held They were call'd by the same Name being styl'd Synodi †Which the Learned Mr. Nicholson with all his Saxon knowledge seems not to have consider'd where he asserts the Meeting at Twiford in which St. Cuthbert was chosen Bishop to have been no Synod but a Parliament See his Notes on Northumberland in the Engl. Cambden p. 859. An Instance which shews how fit he is for that Office he has taken upon himself of being an Umpire in this Controversy and Concilia tho' Secular Persons join'd and Secular Affairs were transacted in them They were compos'd of the same Persons For there sat the Bishops Counts c. and there attended the Lesser Thanes and their Equals ‖ LL. Athelst. §. 71. Missae Presbyteri Saecularis Thani Jusjurandum in Anglorum Lege computatur aeque carum LL. H. 1. c. 64. the Priests c. the Spiritual and Temporal part of the Convention consulting together or asunder ⸫ See Council of Cloveshoe Ann. 747. where tho' King Ethelbald his Princes and Dukes were present yet are the Canons said to be made by the Clergy alone who went aside for that purpose Spelm. Conc. I. 1. p. 245. And the same thing is observed in the Glossary concerning the Laws of Athelstan in voce Parliamentum as they saw occasion They were conven'd in like manner twice a Year by a Law of King Alfred's (*) Mirror c. 1. Sect. 3. and one of those Meetings was fix'd if not in his time yet afterwards to the Calends of May (†) LL. Edv. c. 35. Debent Populi omnes Gentes Universae singulis annis Convenire
continu'd And as the time of the Convocation of Canterbury's assembling was in this and in most oother Ancient Instances different from that of her Sister Province so was it we see different also from that of Parliament Here it preceded ‖ Seven Days but generally it followed the Parliament a Week or two on purpose as I apprehend that the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots might be at leisure to attend both those Meetings And this was the usual Distance throughout Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns till Henry the Fourth began to enlarge it in and after whose time the Clergy held their Assemblies during and near the Sessions of Parliament but not thoroughly concurrent with them the Archbishop it seems affecting Independency and the King who above all things desir'd to stand well with the Clergy favouring him and them in that respect and giving way to their being call'd later or dismiss'd sooner than the Laity as having been already answer'd in his Demands at that or some other Synod of the Province call'd out of Parliament-time Such Assemblies being frequent in those days and transacting all Affairs that belong'd even to Parliamentary Convocations But this was only an Interruption of the Old Practice for a time not a through alteration of it for about the Entrance of the last Age when the Prerogative began to recover the Ground it had lost to the Church we find these Meetings of the Clergy and Laity more closely united the Dates of Henry the Eighth's Convocation being all one or a few days before or after if not altogether the same with those of his Parliaments And from 1 Edw. 6. to this Reign the Clergy have I think met always and parted within a day of the Parliament the day it self on which the Parliament sat and rose being not judg'd so proper for this purpose because the Bishops were then to attend the House of Lords But since the late Revolution the Business of these Two Meetings not interfering the same day has serv'd to open both of 'em or rather to open the one and shut up the other There have been no Deviations from this Rule that I know of except in a Legatin Synod or two which are no Presidents and once in the Convocation of 1640 but that Experiment succeeded too ill to be ever try'd a Second Time The Clergy therefore tho' by a Mistake in their Politicks separated from the Parliament yet continu'd still to attend it in Two Provincial Assemblies or Convocations which as they met for the same Purpose and had the same Reasons of State inserted into their Writs of Summons as the Parliament had so did they to manifest yet more their Origin and Allyance keep closely up to the Forms and Rules and Manner of Sitting and Acting practis'd in Parliament I cannot do right to my Subject without pointing out several Particulars wherein this Conformity was preserv'd and I shall not therefore I hope be misinterpreted in doing it The Two Houses of Parliament sat together Originally and so therefore did the Two Houses of Convocation of which to omit other Proofs I shall mention that only which may be drawn from the Inferior Clergy's being sent as Delegates from the Bishops to represent and act for 'em in Convocation an Usage which tho' practis'd long after the Greater Prelates divided from the Less yet must in all Probability have had its Rise when they were together as the like Custom also in Parliament had whither the Lords Spiritual and Temporal being us'd to send Commoners to Vote for them while the States were together continu'd the Practice also long after they were asunder as appears on the Spiritual Side by Numerous Instruments of Proxy yet remaining in the Bishops Registers and on the Temporal by some Probable Inferences of Mr. Elsyng * Cap. 5. p. 126. tho' Direct Proofs of it are together with the Proxy Rolls lost †One I find in the 5 H. 5. where Th. de la Warre a Baron gives Letters of Proxy to two Commoners and those which is very particular of the Clergy but his case was particular for his Barony descended to him after he was in Orders and he is styl'd therefore constantly Magister and not Dom. de la Warre in his Summons to Parliament As the Commons in Process of Time withdrew from the Peers so did the Inferior Clergy from the Bishops and Abbats Each having their Prolocutor in ordinary the very Word that is us'd every where in the Latin Rolls * And sometimes in the English Iournals See Sir Symonds d'Ewe◠p. 15. p. 328 c. for the Speaker and not withdrawing only from the Great Lords upon occasion for Liberty of Debate and in order the better to agree upon their Petitions and Opinions as I presume they always did even in the Old mixt Assemblies but meeting together at the very first in a Distinct Body and joyning with the Upper House only on Great Occasions The Prolocutor was so chosen as the Speaker by the Body whose Mouth he was so presented to the Archbishop and confirm'd by him as the other was by the King His Office was much the same on either side He moderated their Debates kept them to Order and attended the Lords sometimes with the sense of the House and at the Entrance of his Office disabled himself in form several Instances of which occur in the latter Acts of Convocation * Act. MS. Conv. 1541 Sess. 2. 1554. Sess. 3. 1562. ad Ian. 16. Bills of Money and Grievances but especially the latter began usually in the Lower House here as well as there had alike several Readings and were Enacted at the Petition of that House as Statutes antiently were and the Successive Variations in the Enacting Forms of our Statutes were observ'd and transcrib'd generally into the Clergy's Constitutions Their Subsidies were often given Conditionally and with Appropriating Clauses and Indentures drawn upon those Conditions between the Archbishop and the King if the Grant was to the Crown or between the Archbishop and the Prolocutor of the Lower House †Scriptutura Indentata inter Reverendissimum Tho ex unâ parte Mag. Dogett Prolocutorem Cleri eundem Clerum ex alterâ testatur quòd dictus Clerus concessit dicto Reverendissimo Patri Caritativum Subsidium Registrum Wottonian ad fin And so the Commons granted per quandam Indenturam Sigillo Prolocutoris Sigillatam if to the Archbishop just as the Way was in the Grants of the Commons In Matters of Jurisdiction the Upper House gave Sentence the Lower House prosecuted as was usual in Parliament for which reason the Act of H. 8. * 24 H. 8. c. 12. which in all Causes relating to the King or his Successors allow'd an Appeal to Convocation mention'd the Bishops Abbats and Priors of the Upper House only because They only were Judges But over their Own Members both Houses of Convocation had Power in like manner
General Denomination of Commons as the Case plainly was in the Petition just now produc'd which is enter'd in the Rolls among the Petitions of the Commons tho' the Clergy joyn'd in it and as it probably was in that mention'd by Mr. Elsyng pag. 275. but with false Numbers where the Archbishops Bishops Earls Barons Et autres Gens de la Cominaltie d'Engleterre pray that they may let out to Farm the Wasts of Mannors held of the King in capite without his License which being the Case of many Inferior Clergy-men who held such Mannors of the Crown it is to be suppos'd that they also joyn'd in the Petition and are under the Autres Gens de la Cominaltie included But more express to this purpose is the Statute of the Clergy 18 E. 3. which recites * I take the words of it from Rastal with the more assurance because Pryn says he has compar'd the Print with the Record and that they agree Abridg. of Rec. p. 44. That the Prelates Great Men and Commons had advis'd and aided the King and afterwards the Great Men aforesaid grant so and so and the said Prelates and Procurators of the Clergy grant so and so whereas there is no Previous Mention of the Procurators of the Clergy but under the Title of Commons To these many other Records might be added which mention the Convocation-Clergy as of the Parliament and in it But that I may not load the Reader a few of these taken from the Beginning the Middle and the End of that Period we are considering shall suffice The rest will find as proper a place in another part of these Collections and thither therefore I shall refer the Reader for an account of them In the 10 E. 3. a Writ issu'd to the Archbishop of York reciting that the Clergy of Canterbury-Province had given the King a Tenth in Parliamento nostro Westminster and exciting Him and his Clergy to follow their Example †Cl. 10 E. 3. m. 36. dors The like Recitals are to be met with often in latter Writs as particularly in 43 E. 3. Cl. m. 6. Dors. which begins Rex Arch o. Cant. salutem Qualiter negotia nostra tam Nos Statum Regni nostri quam necessariam defensionem ejusdem concernentia ac onera nobis per hoc incumbentia Vobis Aliis in ultimo Parliamento nostro existentibus plenius exposuimus vos non latet Ad quorum onerum supportationem absque adjutorio fidelium nostrorum non sufficimus sicut scitis propter quod aliquod subsidium congruum in supportationem tantorum onerum à Vobis Aliis de Clero Dioeceseos Provinciae vestrarum in dicto Parliamento tunc existentibus nobis concedi petivimus c. And the same Passage in Terms recurs in another Letter of the same kind to the Archbishop two years afterwards Cl. 45 E. 3. m. 35. Dors. The Great Deed of Entail in the 8 Hen. 4. by which the Crown was setled on his Heirs male and which was witness'd by the Great Men and by Sir I. Typtot the Speaker in behalf of the whole Body of the Commons recites Quòd in Parliamento nostro apud Westminster 7 o. Die Iulii Anno Regni nostri 7 o. per nos de consensu avisamento omnium Praelatorum Magnatum Procerum ac Cleri Communitatis regni nostri Angliae fuerit Statutum Ordinatum And proceeds to make void what had been so ordain'd in these Memorable words Nos igitur ad instantem Petitionem eorundem Praelatorum Magnatum Procerum Cleri Communitatis supradictae de eorum omnium singulorum Voluntate Assensu expressis nec non nostrâ praesentis Parliamenti nostri auctoritate Statutum Ordinationem praedictam cassamus adnullamus Nec non ad eorundem Praelatorum Magnatum Procerum Cleri Communitatis praedictae Petitionem Rogatum ac de Eâ—rum Consensu concordi auctoritate c. And this too Pryn has abridg'd * See Abr. of Records p. 454. in his way without taking notice of these Passages which are so Material and Instructive The Original Record with all its appendant Seals intire tho' the Deed it self be cancel'd is preserv'd still in the Cottonian Library †Inter Chartas in Pyxide Galba and affords a manifest Proof of the Interest which the Convocation Clergy at that time had in Parliament for it would be ridiculous to imagin that by Clergy in this Instrument thus plac'd between the Lords and Lay-Commons any other than the Convocation-Clergy are intended For near 140 years afterwards the Language I find continu'd the same in the Bishops Mandates to their Archdeacons for the Collection of Subsidies for thus speaks one of Bonner's ⸫ In Registro Cum Praelati Clerus Prov. Cant. in Parliamento hujus regni Angliae nuperrimè apud Westminster tento celebrato quoddam Subsidium sub certis modo formâ tunc expressis Illustrissimo c. Ex nonnullis rationabilibus causis dederint concesserint c. Oct. 10. 1543. And if I should beyond all this affirm that the Convocation attended the Parliament as One of the Three States of the Realm I should say no more than the Rolls have in express Terms said before me where the King is mention'd as calling Tres Status Regni ad Palatium suum Westm. viz. Praelatos Clerum Nobiles Magnates nec non Communitates dicti regni * Rot Parl. 9 H. 5. n. 15. And when more than Three States are mention'd as in the Antient Piece of the Manner of Holding Parliaments the Inferior Clergy is still reckon'd as one of them Judge Thirnyng therefore thus addresses himself to Richard the IId at his Deposition †See the Roll of Parliam Printed at the End of X. Script p. 2760. SIRE It is wele knowe to zowe that there was a Parlement Somond of all the States of the Reaume for to be at Westmynstre c. bycause of the whiche Sommons all the States of tâ—is Lond were there gadyr'd the whiche States hole made thes same persones that ben comen here to zowe nowe her Procuratours and gafen him full auctorite and Power and charged him for to say the wordes that we shall say to zowe in her name and on thair behalve that is to wytten the Byshop of Seint Assa for Ersbishoppes and Bishoppes the Abbot of Glaâ—â—enbury for Abbots and Priours and all other Men of Holy Chirche Seculers and Rewelers the Erle of Gloucestre for Dukes and Erles the Lord of Berkeley for Barones and Banerettes Sir Thomas Irpyngham Chamberleyn for all the Bachilers and Commons of this Lond be south Sire Thomas Grey for all the Bachilers and Commons by North and my Felawe Iohn Markham and Me to come with him for All this States and so Sire these wordes and the doying that we sall say to zowe is not onlych our wordes bot the wordes and doyings
Canons of the most General Councils have been confirmed by the Civil Power and confirmed at the Instance and Petition of the Synods themselves * P. 80. And from hence he infers therefore that their Definitions are no farther Obligatory than as they are ratified by the Civil Authority †P. 79. And this Point he is so sure of that he conceives it to be allowed on all hands whereas I on the contrary conceive that it is allowed on no hands and is a Conclusion I am-sure that neither agrees with the Principles of our Church nor can ever be drawn from the Premisses on which he pretends to establish it If this Doctrine be good then is that of our Twentieth Article stark naught which determines that the Church hath Power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Matters of Faith But how has she Power and Authority to this purpose if her Synodical Decisions are in no case farther Obligatory than as they are ratified by the Civil Authority The Magistrate at this rate will have Power but the Church her self can have none For she speaks only by her Synods in matters of this nature and if therefore her Synodical Decrees have not any Authority of their own till confirmed by the Prince then under an Heathen or Heretical Prince the Church has not I say any Authority tho' the Article expresly says that she has It is very observable that Dr. Wake has not in either of his Books mentioned this Article which yet surely in a Controversie of this nature deserved to have been taken notice of Such an Omission could not be by chance and we must believe therefore that he is of the Opinion of those Back-friends of ours in Charles the First 's time who would allow the former part of the Article no more Authority than Dr. Wake allows to the Church but said it was deceitfully inserted by Archbishop Laud and wanting in the Original He might be ashamed to take up with this Reproach after that Solemn Appeal which the Archbishop in his Speech in the Star-chamber * Anno 1637. See Heylin 's Life of Laud p. 339. made to the Records of Convocation for the disproof of it If he have any Suspicions still left in this matter my Lord of Sarum in his Late Exposition †P. 26. will clear them In the mean time let me put him in mind of the Fate of Dr. Mocket's Book de Doctrinâ Politeiâ Ecclesiae Anglicanae ‖ In 4 to London 1617. which tho' writ by Archbishop Abbot's direction yet was Burned publickly and that chiefly on the account of this very Omission if Dr. Heylin's History ⸫ Life of Laud p. 76 may be relyed on But how comes he to dream it to be allowed on all Hands that Synodical Definitions are no farther Obligatory than they are ratified by the Civil Power What Church upon Earth ever determined or allowed this Doctrine Because the Fathers of many Synods desir'd the Prince under whose Direction they met to inforce their Decrees by Civil Sanctions and Penalties does it follow that therefore these Decrees without the Addition of the Civil Sanction would have had no Authority no Force to oblige the Consciences of Christians Does the Subsequent Authority destroy the force of the precedent one Is the one of these lost and swallowed up in the other At this rate what will become of Excommunication when confirmed as it is here with us by a Civil Penalty Has the Church Sentence in this case no Authority because the Writ de Excommunicat◠capiendo is linked to it and issues out upon it Such arguing would have become a Disciple of Erastus much better than a Son of the Church of England But he will tell me Canons lose no Authority in this case which they ever had because indeed they never had any the Great Priviledge of the Church being only to prepare Draughts of Canons and Dead Matter as it were for the Royal Stamp afterwards to put Life into But if so How shall we account for the Acts of Church-power exercised by Synods from the first Planting of the Christian Religion till the Empire turned Christian It is plain that the Governours of the Church for three hundred years before the Civil Power came in to assist them met in Synods and made Laws which were universally submitted to not only as Councils or Advices proceeding from Men whose Character was had in great Reverence but as the Commands of Lawful Superiors towards their Spiritual Subjects and as such they were understood to oblige the Consciences of all good Christians in those Ages And if they had such an Authority before Constantine's time how came they to want it afterwards As the Church could get no New Power by coming under the Protection of the State so how does it appear that she lost any Old one The Emperors indeed by turning Christians gained something to wit an Interest in the management of Ecclesiastical Affairs but their Gains were not built on the Church-Governours Losses the Power that by this means accrued to 'em was Accumulative not Privative i. e. it gave them some Authority which they had not but it took not that away which the Spiritual Pastors and Governours had A Distinction that I am not afraid to make use of notwithstanding the Quarter it comes from If Dr. Wake therefore denies the Definitions of Synods held under the Civil Power to have any other Authority than what they derive from that Power he by consequence denies that the Anti◠Nicene Fathers assembled in Synod had any Right to prescribe Rules to those Christians that lived within the District over which they presided or that those Christians were bound to obey 'em He affirms in effect the several Canons that these Assemblies passed the Censures that they pronounced all the Acts of Synodical Authority which they exercised to be in themselves Null and Void and mere Usurpations upon the Liberty of Christians And whether he will take up with these Scandalous Notions or not we shall see when he blesses the World with his Next Performance Sure I am that without 'em his Scheme cannot be consistent and of a piece Agen Dr. Wake is also very faulty on this Head when in order to depress the Power of the Church he promiscuosly enumerates all the Laws framed by Princes about Ecclesiastical Affairs without informing us which of those Laws only traced the steps of precedent Canons and which of them proposed New Matter of Obedience beside or contrary to those Canons which would in this case have been a very Material and Pertinent Distinction He is full of the Edicts relating to Church-matters that are to be met with in the Code of Theodosius the Code and Novels of Iustinian c. * P. 11. But it would have been very honest of him here to have told us as the Truth is that there were scarce any of these Edicts to which some Canon had not
but all such as compos'd a Provincial Synod See Reg. Henr. Prioris f. 234. sometimes from thence to cite all those Abbots and Priors who had no place in Parliament in order to compleat the Numbers of the Clergy and form a Provincial Assembly And he cited 'em to appear after Winchelsey's Pattern not before the King and among the other States but before Himself in the Chief Church of the Place But this was at his Choice for the King 's Writ directed him only to command the Attendance of the Parliament-Clergy And with this the Crown had reason to be content while the Defects of these General Summons by the Provincial and Bishops Writs were supply'd by Particular Writs directed to great Numbers of Abbats and Priors as the way was in Edward the First 's and Second's time the former of these citing Personally to his Parliaments after the Praemunientes went out often sixty or seventy and sometimes above eighty Regular Prelates and the Latter usually Summoning about fifty of them till the Declining Part of his Reign But this being esteem'd an Hardship on those Regulars who were not by Tenure oblig'd to attend the King's Summons as holding nothing of him by Barony they were in time omitted and the Number of Abbats and Priors who had Personal Writs reduc'd to about thirty the Archbishop's General Mandate then calling the rest to his Parliamentary Convocations and that being allow'd and accepted by the Crown as a sufficient Attendance in Parliament But what the Archbishop did of himself at first That he did afterwards at the King's Instance who took occasion from this Practice to enlarge his own Letters of Direction to him and by them at last to require him to Summon all those Regular Prelates he was us'd to Summon without such a Direction This as it was a Natural Step so indeed it was necessary after the Crown had foreclos'd it self from Summoning the greatest part of the Abbats Personally to Parliament for then it lay purely in the Archbishop's Breast whether he would call the Unsummon'd Abbats by his General Mandate or no and so upon any Dispute between the Spirituality and Temporalty the Crown might have been defeated of their Parliamentary Attendance At what Time precisely these Writs to the Archbishop for a Full Convocation to be held concurrently with a Parliament began to be practis'd I have not found The Eldest that has yet come to my hands is of the 10 th of Edw. 3. when the Parliament was call'd to meet at Nottingham die Lunae prox post Festum S. Matthaei †See Dug p. 186. by a Writ dated Aug. 24. And the same day another Writ issu'd to the Archbishop of Canterbury to call all the Clergy of his Province to Leicester ad diem Lunae prox post Festum S. Michaelis that is seven days afterwards * See Cl. 10 E. 3. m. 16. dors And the next year again the same thing was practis'd the Archbishop being order'd to Summon the Convocation to St. Paul's two or three days after the Parliament was to meet at Westminster * See Pryn. Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. p. 39 40. And still which is observable the Style of Authority in these Fuller Convocation-Writs was the same as it was in those where the Premonish'd Clergy only were mention'd it being a Mixture of a Command and a Request Rogando Mandamus as it continues to be in all Writs for a Convocation to this very Day This also deserves notice in many of them that they went not out only at the same time with the Parliament Writs but mention the holding of a Parliament in their Preambles as the Ground of their issuing that so the Clergy according to their Duty might resort to it Thus it was in the Writ of the 11 Ed. 3. * Ps. 2. m 40. dors just now mention'd And so again in his 29 th year another Writ †Cl. m. 8. dors runs Cùm pro arduis urgentibus Negotiis Nos Statum Regni nostri Anglicani ac necessariam defensionem ejusdem Regni concernentibus ordinaverimus Parliamentum nostrum apud Westmonasterium tenere c. Quia expedit quòd praedicta Negotia quae Salvationem Defensionem Regni nostri contingunt salubriter efficaciter cum bonâ maturâ deliberatione deducantur Vobis mandamus rogantes c. to call the Clergy of Canterbury-Province to St. Paul's die Lunae prex post Festum S. Martini ad tractand ' consulend ' super praemissis unà Vobisâ—um aliis per Nos illùc mittendis ad consentiend ' hiis quae tùnc c. T. R. apud Westm. 25. Sept. The same Form recurs 31 E. 3. Cl. m. 21. dors and in divers other Instances And when the Convocation-Writs did not mention a Parliament in Terms yet the Matter and Tenor of them shew'd that they belong'd to one for as long as the Reasons of State were continu'd in the Parliament-Writs so long we find 'em inserted in those to the Archbishops for a Convocation and after the Particular Causes of Summons came to be omitted in the Convocation-Writs and They as well as Those for a Parliament were reduc'd to a Fix'd Form which return'd constantly with little or no Variation which happen'd I think about the middle of R. the 2 d * There are later Instances of Parliament-Writs where the Reasons of Summoning are declar'd specially as 7 H. 4. Cl. dors m. 29. but they are rare ones yet even Then the General Reasons of convening them left in the Writ and still a part of it shew that they were call'd not only for Ecclesiastical but Civil Affairs and such as concern'd the Peace Publick Good and Defence of the Kingdom in a word to the very same Intents and Purposes for which the Parliament it self was assembled These Writs for a Full Convocation grew now the Common Form it being matter of Ordinary Practice to send them out concurrently with those for a Parliament in Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns and still the Convocation was as in the preceding Instances generally order'd to attend a few days sooner or later than the Parliament did and not precisely on the Spot where the Parliament open'd but at some Church or Chapter-house near it And sometimes the Archbishop was left wholly at large as to both these Circumstances the Place being mention'd with a vel alibi prout melius expedire videritis and the Time no otherwise prefix'd than by the words cum omni celeritate accommodâ or ad breviorem diem quam poteritis or such other Equivalent Expressions which yet were so understood as to oblige the Archbishop to joyn the Assemblies of the Clergy both in Place and Time closely to those of the Laiety A yet Greater Liberty was indulg'd and taken in some of the succeeding Reigns till in Henry the Eighth's time * My Lord of Sarum Vol. 1. Coll. oâ— Rec. Num. 3. Prints a Convocation-Writ as the Pattern
was requir'd of them On the 10th the Archbishop of Cant. reported it to the Lords and Commons On the 11th the King let the Queen then at Richmond know what was done and had her Consent to it and on the 12th a Bill was brought into the House annulling the Marriage which says my Lord of Sarum Vol. 1. p. 282. went easily through both Houses for the Summer was now far come on and the Parliament of Necessity soon to disperse it could not therefore be committed separately to the Convocations of either Province there to be transacted in a Regular manner But all the Bishops of the Province of York being present in Parliament and all the Clergy of that of Canterbury being ready hard by in their Convocation the King took this way of joyning both together by his Commission and forming One National Assembly To these he recommended the Discussion of his Case so that what should be by them determin'd id demùm says he Totius Ecclesiae nostrae Autoritate innixi licitè facere exequi audeamus It is manifest that this Commission to Treat or rather to Sit †The Clergy are said in the Instrument to be Congregati Convocati virtute Commissionis c. but there is no formal Mention of their Treating in vertue of it was here necessary to be issu'd out for such Reasons as sufficiently distinguish both this Meeting and their Business from those we are discoursing of To proceed therefore to the times of E. VI. In his first Year I have shewn the Custom still continu'd for the President to declare the King's good Pleasure to the Houses Orally without producing any License under the Broad Seal 'T is true there is the Draught of a Petition of this Year preserv'd which seems at first sight to imply the contrary and shall be fully consider'd under a separate Head All I shall here say to it is that should the Sense of the Inferior Clergy be justly express'd in this Petition at the opening of this Convocation yet 't is certain they continu'd not long of this Opinion but were soon satisfy'd either from the Answer made to them by the Bishops or some other way that their Fears of incurring a Premunire if they treated without a Commission were vain and groundless because we are as sure as we can be of a Negative of this nature at this distance that in all the Convocations for many Years after this they treated without one In the 6 th of the same Prince 1552 that Convocation met in which the first 42 Articles pass'd whose Title is Articuli de quibus in Synodo Londinensi Anno Dom. 1552 ad tollendam Opinionum dissensionem consensum Verae Religionis firmandum inter Episcopos alios Eruditos Viros convenerat Regià Authoritate in Lucem Editi And here again the Omission of a License in form ought to satisfy us that there was no such thing because where we know it was granted as in 1603. and 1640. there the Titles of the Canons then fram'd carry an Express mention of it 1 o. Mariae The Prolocutor certify'd the Lower House upon their first Meeting that it was the Queens Pleasure that the Company of the same House being Learned Men * This explains the Eruditi Viri in the Title of the Canons of 1552. And is another Instance of the Convocational Vse of that Phrase to be added to those I have given p. Assembled should debate of matters of Religion and constitute Laws thereof which her Grace and the Parliament would ratify †Philpot 's account in Fox Vol. 3. p. 19. And the same Intimation was given I suppose by Bonner the President of the Upper House to the Bishops or rather to both the Houses joyntly and his Speech reported afterwards by the Prolocutor to the Lower Clergy as the Custom is for the Speaker to do in Parliament The Business committed to this Convocation was very extensive we see and yet no other License but what was Verbal either given or requir'd tho' the 25. H. VIII stood in full force both then and the Year afterwards When another Convocation met Nov. 13. 1554. They too debated and acted though Unlicens'd †As far as the Silence of the Acts in this case good part of which I have seen are an Evidence of it and among other things sollicited for a Repeal of this Statute Twenty Eight Articles of Reformation the Lower House preferr'd and in the Preface to those Articles assert the Power by which they did it Accounting our selves say they to be called hither to treat with Your Lordships as well concerning the restitution of this Noble Church of England to the Pristin State and Unity of Christ's Church as of other things touching the State and Quietness of the same Church in Doctrine and in Manners we have for the furtherance of your Godly Doings therein devis'd these Articles following †Bishop Burnet 2. Vol. Col. of Rec. p. 207 The next Convocation Dr. IV. * Appeal p. 30. assure us out of the late Life of Cranmer was assembled by Cardinal Pole in vertue of a License from the Queen whereby he was impower'd also to make Canons But this is according to his usual Exactness in these Matters The Convocation in 1555. met Oct. 22. †Act. MSS the Cardinal's License to hold a Synod bears date Nov. 2. ⸪ Anth. Harmar p. 142. that Year and that Convocation therefore could not possibly be assembled by him in vertue of this License Besides he was not consecrated till the Day after Granmer's Death 22. March 155◠‖ Hist. of Ref. Vol. 2. p. 340. and could not therefore as Archbishop till then summon a Convocation of the Province The true account of this matter is that the Parliament meeting this Year Oct. 21. †Dâ—dg Sum. p. 517. the Convocation also in course met the day after it at Pauls being conven'd by the Dean and Chapter of Cant. ‖ Heylin Hist. Q. Mary p. 223. as was usual in the Vacancy The Cardinal though in England did not appear at it but Bonner by Commission from the Chapter presided There they sat and did business till Oct. 30. * Act. MSS when I find them coming to a Conclusion and offering their Subsidys and Complaints to the Queen The second of the next Month Anth. Harmar p. 141 the Cardinal had his License under the Broad Seal to hold his Synod Legatin of both Provinces and upon it issu'd out his Mandate to Bonner Nov. the 8 th for the Prov. of Cant. to meet those of York on the second of Decem. following Accordingly both Provinces met in the King's Chappel at White-Hall †Act. MSS. Memorandum 〈◊〉 post incaeptam Convocationem in Ecclesiâ Divi Pauli c. Loco Capitulari ibidem posteà Episcopi unà cum Inferiori Clero Prov. Ebâ—r comparuerunt in Synodo Reverendissimi in Christo Patris Domini Reginaldi c.
have done amiss in this Application yet nothing that they did afterwards needs an Excuse Their Refusal to comply with the King 's Excessive Demands was not only faultless but honourable and the Proceeding against them upon that refusal was altogether Illegal and Barbarous For we must not think that this sentence of Outlawry was built on any Legal Forfeiture they had incurr'd by adhering to the Pope against the Crown no it was founded purely on their denying to supply the King according to his Demands for three years before this when they delay'd to grant the Moiety ask'd he threatned †Audiens Rex indignatus est per suos satellites comminatus est se extrà Protectionem suam Clerum velle ponere nisi medietatem omnium bonorum concederent Knight c. 2502. So also Eversden before cited to do what he actually did now to put them out of his Protection and Then the Prohibitory Bull of Pope Boniface was not in being It would be some Mitigation indeed of the severity of this Process if it had been as Dr. W. would perswade us †P. 351. carried on in Parliament But that is highly improbable and inconsistent with the best accounts we have of those times The Barons it is plain were now very uneasy under the King's Exactions and it is not credible therefore that They should joyn with him in oppressing the Clergy nor had they for ought I can find any Opportunity of doing it For the Clergy were put out of the King's Protection Ian. 30 ‖ 310. Cal. Feb. tale fuit Regis Consilium quòd praeciperet praescriptam duriti em fieri contra Clerum Ann. Wigorn. apud Angl. Sacr. Vol. 1. p. 520. 129 6 which was long after the Parliament of St. Edmundsbury ⸪ Held Nov. 3. 1296. was up and before the Council of Sarum ⸫ Which met Feb. 24. 1296 7. was called Nay 12 days before this Council the Sentence was not only pronounc'd but executed even in the remote parts of England for the Writ of Seizure to the Sheriff of Worcestershire bears date Feb. 12 * Vid. eosdem Ann. Wigorn. ibid. And this agrees very well with the Observation made by the Writers of that time § Eversden Knighton Westminster Ann. Wigorn. that the King's Army was beat in Gascoign on the same day that the Clergy were outlawed here in England for the News of this Defeat it appears from Matthew of Westminster †P. 429. reach'd the King sometime before he met his Barons at Sarum Indeed Knighton ⸪ Col. 2491 and Walsingham ⸫ Ypod. Neustr. speak of a Parliament at Hillary 9â— where this Sentence may seem to have pals'd but there is great reason to suspect their Exactness in this particular The Eldest of them liv'd an 100 Years after the Time they here write of whereas there is no one Cotemporary Author ‖ Rex Angliae Edwardus in crastino animarum apud Sâ—um Edmundum Parliamentum suum tenuit vocati ibidem venerunt per Regias Literas Praelati totus Clerus Sed quoniam Clerus vocatus fuit ibidem ad mandatum regis non auctoritate Ecclesiasticâ noluit ibidem finaliter respondere Sed prorogata dies fuit quoad Clerum usque in Crastinum S. Hilarii A Laïcis tamen ibidem duodecimam partem bonorum-suscepit c. In festo verò S. Hil. Rex petebat à Clero tùnc Londoniae eâdem causa congregatis auctoritate Ecclesiasticâ Auxilium c. Excerpta è Chron. MS. Eccl. Cont. apud Angl. Sacr. Vol. 1 â—p 51. Generalis Convocatio Cleri facta est apud Londoniam in Octavis S. Hil. ad tractandum de pace Sanctae Eccl. c. Iohn de Eversden MS. The Sentence of Excommunication denounc'd by the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation A. D. 1298. see it Spelman Concil Vol. 2. p. 428. style this meeting Quaedam Convocatio Praelatorum Cleri London celebrata post Festum S. Hil. A. D. 1296. The Writ also for summoning it see it Registr Winchelsey fol. 205. the Returns to that Writ see One Registr Henr. Prioris fol. 70. and the Procuratoria drawn in relation to it ibid. mention a Meeting of the Clergy alone without any the least Intimation of a Parliament that I have seen either in Print or Manuscript and I have perus'd several that mentions such a Parliament or speaks of this meeting at St. Hilary any otherwise than as a Provincial Council of the Clergy agreed upon indeed in the preceding Parliament of St. Edmundsbury but not held concurrently with any Session of it Nor is there a Writ of this date either of Summons or Proâ—ogation in our Rolls or Registers So that the word Parliamentum in these two Historians must be taken loosly and in the same Latitude that it is made use of at this very time by Westminster †Barones Angliae Parleamentum suum per se-statuerunt ad ann 1297. and Eversden †Comites Barones tenuerunt Parliamentum suum apud Northampton de discordiâ ortâ inter Regem Ipsos ad ann eund when they apply it to the Barons Voluntary Meetings without and in Opposition to the King's Authority Accordingly we may observe that in the Praecept to the Sheriff for-seizing the Estates of the Clergy by me lately mention'd there are no words that imply the Sentence to have pass'd de Consilio Baronum or to have had the Consent of Parliament It says only Propter aliquas certas Câ—usas Tibi praecipimus qùod omnia Lâ—â—ca Fâ—eda totius Cleri in Ballivâ tuâ sine dilatione capiaâ—is in manum vestram c. †Annal. Wig. p. 520 and by the Tenor of it one would guess that it was a mere Arbitrary Command of the Prince not built on any Judicial Process whatever I have been very Liberal therefore in allowing that it might spring from a Iudgment in Court led to it by some Expressions that look that way in the Relations of Thorn and Knighton However the Judge who pronounc'd it will not be excus'd by this allowance for he pass'd an Unrighteous Sentence in a very Infamous Cause and meanly prostituted the Law to gratify the King's Resentments For which reason we may be sure that Sir Roger Brabazon * Dr. W. pretends to tell this Story with great Exactness and yet mistakes both the Name of the Person and his Office there being no such Iudge at that time as Robert Brabazon and the Person he means being neuer either second Iudge or Chief Iustice of the Common Pleas as Dr. W. will have him to have been if Dugale 's Chronica Juridicialia may be relied on The Dr. it seems found there Justitiarius ad Placita corum Rege and Justitiarius de Banco oppos'd to one another and wisely thought that the first of these signify'd the Common Pleas and the second the King's Bench just as they sounded was not the Man as my Lord Coke too
hastily thought for He was too Great and Good a Person to be employed in such Vile Offices No it was Iohn de Metingham a Clergyman who utter'd those words as the Annals of Worster expresly tell us †P. 520. a fit Instrument to be made use of in the Oppression of his Brethren For look through all our History and you shall find that wherever the Clergy have smarted under any Great Hardship some of their Own Order have been still at the bottom of it without whose Helping Hand the Rights and Priviledges of the Church never were and never would be invaded Thus much to take off the Aspersions with which Dr. W. has loaded the Clergy of those times very Indecently and Untruly Their Conduct I do not in every respect pretend to justify However I think it capable of a Fair Excuse if their Circumstances be consider'd And accordingly I observe that among all our Historians of Note Antient or Modern there is not One that I know of who has thoroughly taken the King's part in this Dispute none I dare say that has represented it so much to the Disadvantage of the Clergy as this Gentleman of the Function has done And yet several of these were Laymen particularly Daniel the most sensible of the Moderns calls the King 's Proceeding in this Case a strain of State beyond any of his Predecessors †P. 194. It was a Debt I ow'd to Truth to set this Story right and I would have done it had Iews or Heathens been the Subject of it Whatever the Popish Clergys faults were yet want of Love to their Country was none of 'em the true Interests of which they understood and espous'd generally and were ever fast Friends to the Libertys of it They were bad Christians but good Englishmen which is more than can be said for some of their Successors who with a Purer Religion have been worse Members of the Common-wealth than They. Their Dependence indeed on a Forreign Head misled 'em in Church affairs but against the Exactions and Usurpations even of the Pope himself in Civil Matters none declar'd more loudly or made a more vigorous stand than They. Matthew Paris is an Instance of this kind worth our notice who tho' of a Monastery that ow'd all its Immunities and Exemptions to the Pope yet takes the English side all along against Papal Encroachments and his Works therefore the best part of our History are a mere Satyr on the Court of Rome written indeed not in the mannerly way of later times but however with a Spirit of great Honesty and Freedom Disinterestedness a Love of Truth and a Generous Concern for the Publick shine through every Page of him Qualitys which it were well if some Modern Historians who have spent a great many Popular Invectives against Monks and Monkish Writings had been pleas'd to observe and imitate Their Works as well as Persons would then have been in much greater Esteem with the Age wherein they liv'd and have had a much surer Title to the Applause of Posterity If what I have said of the Popish Clergy be suspected any ways my Lord Coke will vouch for the Truth of it who with great Candor and Justice observes of that very Reign we are upon that Allbeit divers Judges of the Realm were Men of the Church as Briton Martin de Pateshull William de Raleigh Robert de Lexington Henry de Stanton and many others and that the Honourable the Officers of the Realm as Lord Chancellor Lord Treasurer Lord Privy Seal Master of the Rolls c. were in those days Men of the Church yet they ever had such honourable and true-hearted Courage as they suffer'd no Encroachment by any Forreign Power upon the Rights of the Crown or the Laws and Customs of the Realm †Vpon the Stat. of Westm. I. cap. 51. Among so many Excellent Persons what wonder is it if a false hearted Clergyman or two were found true neither to the Libertys of their Country nor the Interests of their Order Every Age and every Body of Men has had and will have its Iohn de Metingham's it is enough if the Age and the Body they were of has constantly abhorred them From what has been before related it appears that this Exclusion of the Clergy from Parliament so much talk'd of is as much misunderstood for in the first place That was really no Parliament from whence they were excluded but a Colloquium or Tractatus only as the Writ of Summons †Dugdale Summon p. 18. expresly calls it And the common Opinion that this hapned at the Parliament of St. Edmondsbury in crastino Animarum is a common mistake for the Clergy were certainly both summon'd thither ⸪ Dugd. p. 13. and present there throughout the whole Session †MS. Chron. Eccl. Cant. Eversden ante citat But they were not so in the Council of Sarum on St. Matthias's day to which it appears by our Rolls ⸫ Dugdale p. 19. that some particular Barons and Knights only were call'd but not one of the Clergy And here therefore Knighton ‖ Col. 2492. and Eversden * Rex Parliamentum suum apud Sarum cum Laïcis ad hoc tantùm vocatis in die cinerum tenuit positively fix the Exclusion and what they say the whole course of the Story manifestly confirms The Pretence for this Exclusion I suppose to have been the Clergys Outlawry and the seizure of their Temporaltys which was judg'd a sufficient reason for denying 'em their Writs of Summons And this also seems to have been the Ground of that famous Resolution of the Judges in Keilway's Reports †fol. 181. where it is affirm'd that the King might hold his Parliament without the Spiritual Lords i. e. when those Lords Spiritual are in the case of Outlaws and under a Premunire as they were when that Judgment was given and incapable therefore as Opinions then ran of their seats in Parliament But later Times and greater Authoritys have decided quite contrary it being upon several solemn Debates in the House of Commons 35. Eliz. resolv'd * See Sir Symonds d' Ewes Jour p. 518. that a Man under an Outlawry was capable of being elected a Member and what does not disable a single Person from being chosen into Parliament could be no sufficient reason for shutting the whole Spiritualty out of it who are One of the Greatest Estates of this Realm †1. Eliz. c. 1. All therefore that this celebrated Instance amounts to is that the King having put the Clergy under an Outlawry against Law and Reason held a select Council of the Laiety without them against all Rule and Custom And it must be remember'd that this was not only Excluso Clero but Excluso Populo too for neither had the Countys Citys and Burroughs any Representatives there and such an Instance can I am sure no ways prejudice the Parliamentary Interest of the Clergy To proceed