drawn up and presented M. Par. Addit p. 199. But afterwards in the 20 E. 2. the Archbishop having called a Convocation to meet at London in Quind Mich. and the King a Great Council at the same time at Sarum a Writ went out to the Archbishop in this Form Vos rogamus ex affectu Vobis nihilominùs in fide dilectione quibus nobis teâ—emini firmiter injungentes and upon this he Prorogued the Convocation for a Fortnight When therefore Archbishop Stratford †An. 1341. held a Provincial Council on purpose to oppose some Arbitrary Proceedings of Edward the IIId who pretended by the Advice of his Great Council only to Revoke what had been Enacted in Parliament we find not that the King forbad the Assembly but only their Treating and Agreeing of such things as were to the hurt of his Prerogative Royal Prohibitions of this kind were sent to every Bishop of the Province Tested on the same day with the Writ of Revocation to the Sheriff which is Printed very unbecomingly I think with our Statutes and one of these Forms for the Honour of that Archbishop and the relation it has to the Point we are upon I shall present the Reader with in the Appendix * See Numb I. The King had also his Proctors †Pat. 37. H. 3. m. 19. apud Pryn. Eccl. Jurisd T. 2. p. 807. or Commissioners sometimes in these Meetings who Proposed Protested and Appealed on his behalf but they were ever Men in Holy Orders His great Lay Lords and Ministers indeed carried frequently his Commands thither but none staid there ‖ 21. H. 3. Concilio jam incaepto missi sunt ex parte Domini Regis Comes Lincoln Johannes Johannes Filius Galfridi Will de Rale Canonicus S. Pauli ut dicto Legato ex partâ— Regis Regni inhiberent ne ibi contra RegiÌ„am Coronam Dignitatem aliquid Statuere attentaret Et remansit ibi ut hoc observaretur Will. de Rale indutus Cappâ Canonicali Supellicio aliis recedentibus M. Par. p. 378 to Act for him but Clergy-men only Though sometimes the King himself has vouchsafed to Appear and Sit in Convocation as in Arundel's ⸪ In Conv. habitâ 23 Jul. 1408. in Causâ Unionis Register Henry the IVth is once remembred to have done In these Assemblies the Gravamina Cleri or Articuli Reformationis were constantly expected from the Lower House and ran so high sometimes as to propose Reformanda per Dominum Papam per Archiepiscopum Suffraganeos per Convocationem per Parliamentum And Solicitors were Appointed to prosecute such Reformations in Parliament These the Organum Vocis suae their Prolocutor or Referendarius exhibited in a Schedule and their Petitions had answers as those of the Commons were used to have from the King anciently Harpsfield and Antiquitates Britannicae afford us many Instances of this Kind but the Manuscript Acts of those Synods more and this is one of them Inter alia propositum fuit à Clero ut Episcopi dignentur Canones executioni mandare Imprimis de Professionibus vestris quòd legantur coram vobis ad minùs bis in Anno. 2. De Visitationibus 3. De Residentiâ Regimine Episcoporum 4. De Regimine Gestu Vestitu Familiarium vostrorum Which Instance is not given so much for the Articles as for the Answer to them Omnia ista sunt â—romissa statuta ac concessa fiet Executio â—er quemlibet ad quem pertinet prout respondebit â—oram Deo proximo Concilio Provinciali * Regist. Arundel And â—n that very Convocation which submitted to H. the VIII the Lower House as dispirited as they were took heart to complain to the Upper of the Practice of some Bishops in those â—ays who took Bonds of Resignation of all the Clerks they preferred in their Dioceses in â—rder as they said to oblige them to Resiâ—ence †Item petunt quod Praesentati ad Ecclesiasticum Beneficium non arâ—entur per Dioecesanos Scripto aliquo Obligatorio aut Poenâ Tempoâ—li ad Residentiam Acta Conv. incaeptae Nov. 5. 1529. in â—ess 91. The End was very good but the Means was thought unjustifiable and the Clerâ—y in Convocation therefore thought it worth â—â—eir while to endeavour a Redress though I â—nd not whether they effected it or what Answer was return'd But among all their Grievances I have never â—bservâ—d the want of Convocations mention'd 〈◊〉 one of them The Clergy indeed complain some times of their being called together too often and kept sitting too long and beg a Dismission and the Archbishop excuses himself frequently on that Head in his very Letter of Summons But I have seen no Intimation any where that they wanted an opportunity of Meeting which is a certain sign that they never wanted one never I believe from Anselm's days who by the favour of H. the Ist. reviv'd those Meetings that had been suppressed by W. the IId * Concilium non permisit Rufus celebrari in Regno suo ex quo Rex factus est jam per 13 Annos says Anselm to Pope Paschal L. 3. Ep. 46. And what the Consequence of this Intermission was the Synod which met at the beginning of H. I. declares Multis verò annis Synodali Culturâ cessante viciorum vepribus succrescentibus Christianae Religionis Fervor in Anglia nimis refrixerat Eadmer p. 67. down to the very times that we live in No more than this needs be said to furnish the Reader with an Account of Provincial Synods and their Rights as allowed and practised in this Realm Such an Account I mean as is necessary to set the General part of this Dispute in a true Light and to lead the way to matter which is more Pertinent and Particular and which I shall go on to suggest after I have added a Reflection or two that arise from what has been already delivered It is plain that the Power lodged in the Metropolitan of calling together such Members of his Province is likewise accompanied with a Right in those of his Province to be so called and that the Vis Praecepti of which Atho speaks †In Proaem Othob lies as well upon the Superior as on his Inferiors The Bishops for Instance having as much Right by the Canon Law to demand such a Meeting for the Good of the Church as the Metropolitan has Authority to Assemble it and the Obligation running reciprocally though the Power does not It is indeed not so much a Power as a Trust that is lodged in him and for which therefore by the Ancient Canons of the Church * 7. Gen. Conc. Can. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Canonicis poenis Subjiciatur and by the Imperial Law †Nov. 123. c. 10 he was made accountable 'T is in this case as in that of our great Lay Conventions the Assembling of which is not only part of the Prince's Prerogative but of the
Wake is resolved that this he shall say and maintain and supposing it therefore to be his avow'd Opinion draws down all his strength and sets his Quotations in Array against it From Fathers and Councils from Antient and Modern Writers our Own and Foreign Historians he learnedly proves that the Church-power in a Christian Commonwealth is to be exercised in Subordination to the State that Princes have of right all along called Councels and dissolved them have hindred the Execution of some Ecclesiastical Canons which were prejudicial to their Kingdom and given the Civil Sanction to others and a great deal more of this kind they have and may do and must be allowed therefore a Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs and over Ecclesiastical Persons And what if they be Is there a Line in that Book he opposes but what will stand good notwithstanding all this were made out never so irrefragably This is bringing the Great Engines of Battery against a Place which he might have marched directly into without Opposition 〈◊〉 Enemy having never undertaken to defend 〈◊〉 Qui operosè probant c. says Grotius or some such sly Dealers in this very Controversy stultum sibi fingunt Adversarium de quo facilè triumphent * De Imp. Summar Pot. circa Sacra Dr. Wake with great Modesty advises his Learned Adversary Not to increase the Necessary Bulk of their Dispute by alledging passages out of the Antient Fathers to prove that which neither of 'em make any doubt of †Appeal Pref. p. XXI Had he given this Advice first to Himself and taken it his Huge Performance had shrunk away into a few Pages and been as inconsiderable for its Bulk as it is for the Importance of the matter contained in it II. A second Instance wherein Dr. Wake has spent his Learned Pains to no purpose is in the Tedious Account he has given us of the Power exercised by Princes in relation to General Councils and the Greater Church-Assemblies These Researches as he calls 'em might well have been spar'd upon a double account both because the matter of 'em lyes not very deep and can be no News to any Man that has but once touched on this Controversy ‖ Veteramenta omnia detrita jam repetita millies says Bishop Andrews Tort. Tort. p. 173. of some of those very Instances which 90 Years ago it seems were grown stale tho Dr. Wake produces 'em now with such Pomp and Pleasure and because his Reading of this kind tho' never so hard to come at yet is nothing to the purpose For the Dispute turns on Provincial Synods only and the Rights which the Church lays claim to in relation to Them and it is no Proof or Disproof of these Rights to shew what the Practice of Princes has been in convening and presiding over General Councils which are Meetings of another Nature and Original and subject to quite different Laws and Usages By Provincial Councils the Church was govern'd and in such Councils all the Great Affairs of it were transacted for some hundreds of Years before the Empire became Christian whereas General Councils owe their very Being to the Civil Power without the Express Allowance and Encouragement of which after Christianity had once spread it self wide they never did or could assemble The Times when Provincial Synods were to meet the Persons that were to compose them and preside in them the Causes that were to come before them and the manner of deciding those Causes and of enforcing Obedience to their Decisions by Spiritual Censures c. these were all things fully agreed on and determin'd by the Rules of the Church while it subsisted independently of the State and when Constantine therefore by embracing the Faith became its Protector he only confirm'd those Antient Usages to the Church which she was in possession of He left the Practice of the Church just as he found it only what was before an Ecclesiastical Rule he made a Civil Right and a Law of the Empire Not so as to General Councils the Church had no Custom no Prescription to plead in relation to Them they were Then first to be set up by the Civil Power framed and moulded * L. M. P. Proves a Convocation not to be incident to a National Church by a passage in the Preface to Aelfricus 's Canons where he finds it said that the Christian Church for the first 300 years had no Convocation p. 46. Can one imagin it possible for a Man to be in the Dark to that Degree as not to know that this was meant of General Councils But his Skill in Ecclesiastical History it seems goes no further than Lambert and no wonder therefore if the Method of their Meeting and Acting was regulated in some of its chief Circumstances by that Power which gave Birth and Establishment to them The First of these Assemblies that ever sat provided by a Canon for the continuance of Provincial Synods upon the Foot they had always stood and this Canon was reinforced by several succeeding General Councils was ratified by the several Emperors in whose Times these Councils were held and inserted at last into the Code of the Imperial Laws and from thenceforth the Synod of every Province was as Legal an Assembly as the Senate it self had a right at stated Times to be Summoned as duly and to act within its proper Sphere as freely as any Civil Convention whatever But General Councils even after they were set up were not by any Law thus provided for they were in their nature and Institution Occasional Meetings which had no fixed time allotted to them but were to be called together in Extraordinary Cases only and when the Pressing Exigences of the Church required them And no Bishop Then pretending to an Authority over All the Rest even on that account it fell acourse to the Emperors share to Convene them The Assembling of so many Men of Rank and Character from so many Quarters of the Empire was a Power that could safely be lodg'd in no Hands but his that rul'd it He was to be Judge when such a vast Confluence was fit to be allow'd and how far it consisted with the Peace of the State at what Place and Time the Session should be opened and how long it should continue He by his Officers provided for the safe Conduct of the Fathers going to the Council and returning from it at his Expence they had Reception and Entertainment on the way and under the Security of his Protection they met and consulted The Debates of such a Numerous Assembly must have been very disorderly and tumultuous unless conducted by a Rule which no single Bishop had a Right to prescribe to the rest and which could not therefore come so properly from any one as from Him that Summon'd them And that this Rule might be sure to be observ'd it was requisite that the Emperour should have a Place in their Assembly should preside over
others and there was no change made in a Tittle by Parliament So that they only Enacted by a Law what the Convocation had done * Pp. 74 75. And agen As it were a Great Scandal on the first General Councils to say that they had no Authority for what they did but what they derived from the Civil Power so is it no less unjust to say because the Parliaments impowered †Here I must beg leave to say that his Lordship's Expression is not Exact The Parliament did not impower but approve of them some Persons to draw Forms for the more pure Administration of the Sacraments and Enacted that these only should be lawfully used in this Realm which is the Civil Sanction that therefore these Persons had no other Authority for what they did Was it ever heard of that the Civil Sanction which only makes any Constitution to have the force of a Law gives it another Authority than a Civil one The Prelates and other Divines that compiled our Forms of Ordination did it by vertue of the Authority they had from Christ as Pastors of his Church which did impower them to teach the People the pure Word of God and to administer the Sacraments and perform all other Holy Functions according to the Scripture the Practice of the Primitive Church and the Rules of Expediency and Reason and this they ought to have done tho' the Civil Power had opposed it in which case their Duty had been to have submitted to whatever Severities and Persecutions they might have been put to for the Name of Christ or the Truth of his Gospel But on the other hand when it pleased God to turn the Hearts of those which had the Chief Power to set forward this good Work then they did as they ought with all thankfulness acknowledge so great a Blessing and accept and improve the Authority of the Civil Power for adding the Sanction of a Law to the Reformation in all the Parts and Branches of it So by the Authority they derived from Christ and the Warrant they had from Scripture and the Primitive Church these Prelates and Divines made those Alterations and Changes in the Ordinal and the King and the Parliament who are vested with the Supreme Legislative Power added their Authority to them to make them obligatory on the Subjects * Pp. 53 54. I have produced these Passages at length not so much for any Light they give to the Particular we are now concerned in the Authority of the English Ordinal as for the General Use they may be of in setling the Dispute between Dr. W. and the Church about the Distinction of the Two Powers Ecclesiastical and Civil and the Obligations we are under to the Decisions of the one antecedently to the Sanctions of the other I subscribe to his Lordship's state of it and think nothing can be said more justly and truly 1552. The Observation of Holy-Days ordered by Act of Parliament Ibid. pag. 191. This Act traced the Steps of the Rubrick in the Common-Prayer-Book relating to Holy-Days and ordered none to be kept Holy but what had before-hand been so ordered to be kept by the Clergy in Convocations only it added New Penalties 1553. A New Catechism by the King's Order required to be taught by Schoolmasters Ibid. p. 219. This Catechism was published with the Articles of 1552. and had I suppose the very same Convocational Authority which those had It was compiled indeed by Poynet but is said in the King's Patent annexed to have been afterwards perused and allowed by the Bishops and other Learned Men by which we are to understand either the Convocation it self or a Grand Committee appointed by it and upon which its Power was devolved That the whole Convocation have been by these or such like Terms about this time often expressed the Instances given in the Margent * The Six Articles in the Act 31 H. 8. c. 14. are said to be agreed to by the Archbishops Bishops and other Learned Men of the Clergy who a little before are styl'd a Synod or Convocation In the Articles of 1536. See 'em in Bishop Burn. Vol. 1. Coll. of Rec. p. 305. the Convocation is expressed by the Bishops and others the most Discreet and Learned Men of the Clergy The Articles of 1552. are in the Title said to be such de quibus in Synodo Londinensi inter Episcopos alios Eruditos viros convenerat And iâ— will scarce I think bear a Reasonable Doubt whether these Articles passed the Convocation Finally The Act about Holidays as 't is called is in the Canon it self See it in Sparrow p. 167. said to be decreed by the King with the Common Assent and Consent of the Clergy in Convocation assembled But in the King's Letter to Bonner about it the words are By the Assents and Consents of all you Bishops and others Notable Personages of the Clergy of this our Realm in full Convocation and Assembly had for that purpose will evince And that this Catechism was generally understood to have the Authority of Convocation is plain even from the Exception made to it by Dr. Weston †For that said he there is a Book of late set forth called the Catechism bearing the Name of this Honourable Synod and yet put forth without your Consents as I have learned c. â—ox Vol. 2. p. 19. in the first Synod of Queen Mary but plainer still from Philpot's Reply to that Exception which discovers also to us somewhat of the Manner by which the Convocation came to be Intitled not to this Catechism alone but to several other Pieces that seem to carry the Name of a Committee only upon them His words are that This House of Convocation had granted the Authority to make Ecclesiastical Laws unto certain Persons to be appointed by the King's Majesty and whatsoever Ecclesiastical Laws They or the most part of them did set forth according to a Statute in that behalf provided it might be well said to be done in the Synod of London although such as be of this House now had no notice thereof before the Promulgation And in this Point be thought the setter forth thereof nothing to have slandered the House since they had our Synodal Authority unto them committed to make such Spiritual Laws as They thought convenient and necessary * â—bid p. â—0 The Knowledge of the Time and Circumstances of appointing this Committee we have lost together with the Acts themselves however plain it is from this Assertion of Mr. Philpot made in open Convocation that such a Committee there was named by the Crown at the Instance of the whole Clergy and that this Catechism among other things passed them and had on that account as He judged the Authority of Convocation It is left to the Reader by whom in this caâ—e he will be guided the Churches Martyr or her Betrayer And here the Instance of the Catechismus ad Parochos is very pat
Chapterhouse appears to have been the Place of Reception for the Convocation Clergy * See Wals. Hist. Angl. ad ann 1421. and in the 4 H. V. the Rolls say Le Chanceleur per commandment du Roy assigna a les ditz Chivalers Citizeins Burgeoises une Maison appellee le Froitour dedeinz L'abbee de Westminster a tenir en yâ—elle leur Counseilles Assemblees and in the 6 H. VI. it is said to be the place where the Commons ordinarily sat ‖ The Roll goes further and says Eorum Domus Communis antiquitùs usitata in a Manuscript of Mr. Petyt printed by Bishop Burnet †Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. Coll. of Rec. p. 100. But though the Place of their Meeting puzzles him yet the Time it seems does not for as to That he informs us that the Clergy who met by vertue of the Convocation-Writ in Parliament time came together heretofore on some Other Day than that on which the Parliament began †P. 224. He knows not it seems that they have done so a late too and that the Custom for an Age and half was for them to assemble the Day after the Parliament This Usage began in the time of H. the VIII th and was then often practis'd but not regularly fix'd till toward the latter End of his Reign from which time to the late Revolution it held and from thence the Parliament and Convocation-Writs have Summon'd to the very same day which has joyn'd these two Bodys yet more closely than formerly in their Summons though their Assemblys at the same time are more than ever divided My Lord of Sarum therefore had not well consider'd this matter when he said that it was the Custom of all H. the VIII's Reign for the Convocation to meet two or three days after the Parliament †Vol. 1. p. 213. For besides that it sometimes met before it for instance in 1511 2. the Convocation came together Feb. 2. * Registr Hadr. de Castello the Parliament not till Feb. 4. †Dâ—gd Summ. 3 H. 8 th the very Instance upon which his Lordship produces this Observation destroys it for the Convocation of 1536. began Iune 9 th the Parliament Iune the 8 th And indeed near half the Convocations in that Princes time met as they did till the present Reign nicely the day after the Parliament as will appear by particularly comparing the Dates of both of them Parliament Met 1514 5 Feb. 5. Dugd. Sum. 1515 Nov. 12. Ibid. 1536 Iune 8. Ibid. 1540 Apr. 12. Bp. Burnet V. 1. p. 274. 1544 5 Ian. 30. Dugd. 1545 Nov. 23. Ibid. 1546 7 Ian. 14. Ibid. Convocation Met Feb. 6. Registr Warham Nov. 13. Registr Hadr. de Cast. Iune 9. Ibid. Apr. 13. Registr Cranmer Ian. 31. Ibid. Nov. 24. Ibid. Ian. 15. Ibid. And the same Distance of Time was often also observ'd both in Proroguing and Dissolving that Princes Convocations and Parliaments As to the Authority by which the Clergy were conven'd Dr. W. affords us as little light in That Point too as in any of the former He recites the Opinion of some who think that after the statute of Premunire in 1393. our Archbishops left off to summon Convocations by their Own Authority and call'd them only at the King's Command †Pp. 240 241. but in this account he says he is not altogether satisfied Had he any manner of Knowledge of these things he would not be at all satisfy'd with it For as in Fact it is certain that the Archbishop after this time summon'd Convocations frequently by his Own Authority so it is clear in point of Law that he had as much Right to do it after the Statute of Premunire as before it there being no Clause or Word in that Act that can be suppos'd to restrain His Power in this particular Indeed had the Archbishop whenever he call'd a Convocation without the King 's Writ done it by a Legatin Authority as Dr. W. represents him to have done * P. 241 199. there would have been some Ground to think that the Premunire Act might have laid a Restraint upon him But this is another of Dr. W's mistakes for the Archbishop needed no Help from his Legatin Character to convene the Clergy of his Province which he was sufficiently impower'd to do as Metropolitan by the Old Canons of the Church receiv'd and allow'd in this Kingdom And accordingly by this Metropolitical Power the Archbishops all along call'd Provincial Councils before any of them were the Popes Legates which from St. Austin down to Theobald say some * Ant. Brit. p. 127. to William de Corboyl say others †Gervasii Act Pont Cant. X Script col 1663. none of them were He indeed by vertue of his New Character summon'd the Archbishop of York and all the Clergy of that Province ⸪ Ibid. Continuator Florentii Wig. ad ann 1127. to his Councils and One of his Successors ‖ Hubert who is suppos'd by some to have got the Title of Legatus natus for ever annex'd to his See did Iure Legationis visit York Province †Hoveden ad ann 1195. And in order to these Extraprovincial Acts of Jurisdiction the Legatine Authority was indeed needful For tho' it had been solemnly determin'd in favour of Lanfrank by the Great Council of the Kingdom ⸫ Diceto de Archi. Cant. p. 685. that the See of York should be subject to that of Cant. and the Archbishop of the One obey the Conciliary summons of the other yet was not this Decision long observ'd the Archbishop of York soon finding means to get rid of it and to assert the Independency of his See But as to the Ordinary Acts of Metropolitical Power One of which was the calling of the Clergy of his Province together at Times prescrib'd by the Canons the Archbishop had no more want of a Legatine Character to qualify him for the Exercise of them than a Private Bishop had or now has for summoning a Diocesan Synod nor was it as the Law then stood any more an Encroachment upon the Royal Authority Dr. W. therefore is not very kind to the Memory of our Archbishops nor a Friend to the Antient Libertys of this Church when he asserts that all those Synods which the Metropolitan call'd without a Writ from the King were Legatine and upon that notion dates the Disuse of them at least as to their frequency from the Statute of Premunire which did no ways and could no ways affect them For after this Statute most of Arundel's Synods met by the Archbishop's Writ only as Dr. W. †P. 280. himself tells us from Harpsfield and might have told us yet more authentickly from that Archbishop's Register yet remaining This account of Harpsfield puts him upon fixing on a New Aera and now therefore he will have it that about the End of Arundel's time the King began wholly to assume this Power and this he
Entertainment that follows P. 84. He proposes this Question Whether the Prince should be allow'd a Power to alter or improve what a Synod has defin'd to add to or take from it and thus he resolves it Sure I am that this Princes have done and so I think they have Authority to do For since the Legislative Power is lodg'd in their hands so that they may make what Laws or Constitutions they think fit for the Church as well as the State since a Synod in matters relating to Discipline is but a kind of Council to them in Ecclesiastical Affairs whose Advice having taken they may still act as they think fit seeing lastly a Canon drawn up by a Synod is but as it were Matter prepar'd for the Royal Stamp the last forming of which as well as enforcing whereof must be left to the Princes Iudgment I cannot see why the Supreme Magistrate who confessedly has a Power to confirm or reject their Decrees may not also make such other Use of them as he pleases and correct improve or otherwise alter their Resolutions according to his Own Liking before he gives his Authoty to them †P. 85. He is speaking here I confess of the Power of the Prince at large without pointing his words particularly on England but since he asserts this Power to every Prince and does not except Ours it is manifest he means him as much as if he had particularly mention'd him And this he himself is not shy of owning for before the End of this Chapter he in plain terms tells us that by Our Own Constitution the King of England has all that Power over Our Convocation that ever any Christian Prince had over his Synods †P. 98. And goes on afterwards ⸪ P. 136. to shew that H. the VIII did this very thing in 1536 correcting and amending with his Own Hand the Articles of Religion then drawn up before they were publish'd He does not indeed expresly Iustify this Act of H. the VIII but which is all one he mentions it without a word to shew that he disapprov'd it I will be bold to say that were this single Doctrine true the Late King might have gone a great way toward subverting our Religion without breaking in upon the Constitution or doing any thing Illegal He might have assembled the Clergy and commanded their Iudgment upon such and such Points and then alter'd their Resolutions to his Own Liking and so have set up Rank Popery under the Countenance of a Protestant Convocation Especially if he had call'd this other Principle of Dr. W's into his Aid Some of our Princes he says have not only prescrib'd to our Convocations what they should go about but have actually drawn up before hand what they thought Convenient to have established and have requir'd them to approve of it without submitting it to their Iudgments whether they approv'd of it or not ‖ P. 110. Which Fact also he gives us as a Right without insinuating the least Dislike of it And a very Convenient Right it is for Princes that meditate New Schemes of Church Government Twelve Years ago enforc'd by the Pen of a Parker or a Cartwright it might have done great Service it would have helpt on all the Pious Designs then upon the Anvil and if the Asserter of it had not been a Bishop to be sure it would have made him one Can such Doctrines ever be Serviceable I say not Grateful to This Government which would have ruin'd our Establish'd Religion under the Former But his Conclusions are not worse than his way of coming at them which is in this and in every case first by shewing what has been practis'd by the Emperors and other Absolute Princes and by asserting the same Power to belong to Our King as a King not by vertue of the particular Laws and Usages of this Realm but by the Right of Sovereignty in general †See Appeal p. 111.112 upon which he expresly owns himself to found the Authority of our Princes in Matters Ecclesiastical †See Appeal p. 111.112 and says therefore as we have heard that they have the same Power over Our Convocations that ever any Christian Prince had over his Synods And accordingly makes it the whole Business of his second Chapter that is of a Fourth part of his Book to set out the Powers exercis'd by Absolute Princes and particularly by the Roman Emperors over their Synods in order to warrant the Use of like Powers here at home I know not how this Doctrine may relish now but in the 7th * Mr. Nicholson See Hist. Libr. part 3. p. 177. according to his Exactness in Dates places this 3 io Iacobi whereas the Book it self was not set out till two Years afterwards as if he had seen any Edition of it he might from the Date of the Preface have known But he unluckily met with a false Print to this purpose in the Posthumous part of Spelman 's Glossary in Voce Tenura and he is always an Implicit Transcriber Year of King James the I. as high as Prerogative then ran it did not I am sure go down well with the Parliament for then Dr. Cowel's Interpreter was censur'd by the Two Houses as asserting several Points to the overthrow and destruction of Parliaments ond of the Fundamental Laws and Government of the Kingdom And One of the Articles charg'd upon him to this purpose by the Commons in their Complaint to the Lords was as Mr. Petyt †Miscell Parl. p. 66. says out of the Journal this that follows 4thly The Doctor draws his Arguments from the Imperial Laws of the Roman Emperors an argument which may be urg'd with as great reason and with as great Authority for the reduction of the State of the Clergy of England to the Polity and Laws in the Time of those Emperors as also to make the Laws and Customs of Rome and Constantinople to be binding and obligatory to the Citys of London and York The issue of which Complaint was that the Author for these his Outlandish Politicks was taken into Custody and his Book condemn'd to the Flames Nor could the Dedication of it to his then Grace of Canterbury save it who did not think himself concern'd to countenance whatever Doctrine any Indiscreet Writer should take the Liberty to ascribe to him He that thinks a Prince Absolute in Spirituals thinks him no doubt as Absolute in Temporals and will when a Proper time shall come not stick to say so Dr. W. has given some significant Hints that way in the words already produc'd from him for what else can he mean by the Legislative Powers being lodg'd in the Princes hands so that he may make what Laws he pleases for the Church as well as the State if we consider him to speak as he does of the Prince exclusively to the Three Estates of the Realm And when he adds therefore a few Lines afterwards that a Canon is
Flights of the Fathers but now he is of another mind every Submissive word every Respectful Form of Expression that he finds to have dropped at any time from the Mouths of the Members of a Synod when addressing to their Prince is Ground sufficient to rear a proof of his Prerogative upon But thus it is when Princes are to be complimented at the Expence of their Subjects Rights Compliments shall pass for Arguments As Dr. Wake has furnished himself with a Plea for the boundlâ—â—s Authority of Sovereigns in Church-matters from such Extraordinary Acts of Power as have been submitted to in good Princes so can he argue as well from the Unjust and Violent Encroachments of Ill ones Henry the Eighth was such if ever any Prince upon Earth was and Sir Walter Rawleigh therefore says of him that if all the Pictures and Patterns of a Merciless Prince were lost in the World they might all again be painted to the Life out of the Story of this King * Preâ— to hiâ— Hist. of the World And yet the Acts of this King the most Exorbitant and Oppressive Acts of Power which he exercised towards the Clergy are produced by Dr. Wake as good and lawful Precedents which all his Successors are allowed and incited to follow Particularly that Instance of his Correcting and Amending the Determinations of the Clergy in Synod even upon Doctrines of Faith is given us †See pp. 136 137 138 139. without any Intimation that such a practice exceeded the Bounds of the Kingly Power And in this he is followed by Mr. Nicholson ‖ Hist. Lib. â—ol 3. p. 196 197 And both these Gentlemen are so eager to assert this Power to the Crown that they have not given themselves leisure to inquire how far the Authorities they in this case cite are to be depended on Dr. Wake quotes my Lord of Sarum for it whose words are These Articles in 1536 being thus conceived and in several places corrected and tempered by the King 's Own Hand were subscribed by Cromwell and the Archbishop of Canterbury and Seventeen other Bishops Forty Abbots and Priors and Fifty Archdeacons and Proctors of the Lower House of Convocation * Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. p. 217. And in the Addenda to his first Volume †P. 364. his Lordship further says that He has had the Original with all the Subcriptions to it in his Hands I have had it too and can assure the Reader that there is not a single Correction by Henry the Eighth's hand or any others in that Original 'T is a Copy fairly Engrossed in Parchment ‖ See it Bibl. Cotton Cleop. â— 5. without any Interlineations or Additions whatever My Lord Herbert indeed who is Mr. Nicholson's and I suppose my Lord of Sarum's * I suppose so because my Lord of Sarum 's account of the Subscriptions is exactly the same as my Lord Herbert 's and with the same mistakes no Deans being mentioned by either nor any Consideration had of those of the Lower House who subscribed in double Capacities which makes the Subscriptions more numerous than they are represented to be Authority says that the Bishops and Divines who consulted upon these Articles were divided in their Opinions some following Luther and some the Old Doctrine whose Arguments on either side the King himself took pains to peruse and moderate adding Animadversions with his own Hand which are to be seen in our Records †Hist. H.S. p. 469. But these words I must be bold to say are mistaken both by my Lord Bishop and Mr. Nicholson if they infer from thence that the King made any Alterations in the Articles after they were drawn up since the Animadversions plainly were not on the Articles themselves but on the Arguments urged on either side of the Questions determined in ' em These Arguments or Opinions were it seems according to the known way of that time offered in Writing and subscribed by the Parties maintaining 'em And the King took upon him to temper and soften the Expressions on either side till he had brought both to a Compliance But this is a very different thing from his Correcting and Amending the Articles themselves even as different as assisting in the Debates of a Synod before the Conclusion is formed and altering the Conclusion it self after it has been unanimously agreed on This is truly the Case of those Amendments of Henry the Eighth which Dr. Wake is so full of However had it been such as he represents it yet no Argument of Right I say can be advanced on such Facts as these and it had become Dr. Wake therefore when he related 'em to have told us withal that they were unjustifiable Many of the Actions of that Supreme Head of the Church were such as cannot justly and will therefore I hope never be imitated by any of his Successors For instance he made his Bishops take out Patents to hold their Bishopricks at pleasure tho' I suppose my Lords the Bishops that now are do not think such a Power included in the Notion of the King's Supremacy William the Conquerour is another of the Pious Patterns he recommends who would suffer nothing he says to be determined in any Ecclesiastical Causes without Leave and Authority first had from him * P. 179. L.M.P. p. 34. for which he cites Eadmerus and might have told us from thence if he had pleased more particularly that he would not let any of his Noblemen or Ministers tho' guilty of Incest and the Blackest Crimes be proceeded against by Church-Censures and Penalties * Nulli Episcoporum permittebat ut aliquem de Baronibus suis seu Ministris sive Incestu sive Adulterio â—ive aliquo Capitali Crimine denotatum publicè nisi ejus praecepto implacitaret aut Excommunicaret aut ullâ Ecclesiastici rigoris poenâ constringeret Eadmer pag. 6. that he made his Bishops his Abbots and Great Men out of such as would be sure to do every thing he desired of 'em and such as the World should not much wonder at for doing it as knowing who they were from whence he took 'em and for what end he had raised 'em and that all this he did in order to make way for his Norman Laws and Usages which he resolved to establish here in England †Usus atque Leges quas Patres sui ipse in Normanniâ— habere solebant in Angliá servare volens de hujusmodi Personis Episcopos Abbates alios Principes per totam terram instituit de quibus indignum judicaretur si per omnia suis Legibus postpositá omni aliâ consideratione non obedirent si ullus corum pro quávis terrenâ potentiâ caput contra eum levare auderet scientibus cunctis Unde Qui ad Quid assumpti sunt Cuncta ergo Divina Humana ejus Nutum expectabant Ibid. This I say and more than this he might have given us from the very Page
to our purpose and ought once again to be remembred The rest of Dr. W.'s Particulars are Immaterial and need not stop us only on the Last of 'em a Line or two may be not improperly spent King Charles the First Directions concerning Preaching with respect to the Arminian Points These Directions were for the silencing both Parties and for preventing all Innovations upon the Doctrine of the Church already Established and such Directions it is not only the Christian Magistrates Priviledge but his Duty to prescribe provided always that he do it not with any such under-hand Views and Aims as my Lord of Sarum represents K. Charles the First to have had in publishing His All Divines says he were by Proclamation required not to Preach upon Those Heads but those that favour'd the New Opinions were encouraged and the others were depressed * Exposition on the XXXIX Article p. 152. I presume this is no part of the Regal Supremacy nor a Pattern fit to be imitated in succeeding Reigns especially if the case ever should be as his Lordship further informs us it was Then And unhappy Disputes continues He falling in at that time concerning the Extent of the Royal Prerogative beyond Law the Arminians having declared themselves highly for that they were as much favoured at Court as they were censured in Parliament If this were then really the case we of This Age have reason to thank Heaven for reserving us for better Times when the Interests of Prince and People are the same and it can never therefore be a recommending Qualification of a Man that he is for extending the Royal Prerogative beyond Law nor intitle him to the favour of a Court to be censured in Parliament These are the Instances in which Dr. Wake has shewn himself very willing to blast the Honour of the Reformation in order to assert an unreasonable Prerogative to the Crown for which no good Prince will thank him I have considered 'em throughout and have proved I hope that the History he brings to justifie his Principles is every whit as unjustifiable as the Principles themselves and that they deserve therefore to keep Company with one another In some of these Instances Truth was so easie to be come at that he must be thought to have missed it willingly and to have judged it pardonable to pervert History a little in order to make his Complement with the better Grace A Principle familiar to the Writers in this Controversie as I could shew by some Domestick Instances but since that is not proper shall content my self with a foreign one De Marca a Man excellently well read in this Debate and of Abilities of Mind equal to his Reading and like Dr. W. in nothing but in his Design of letting the Royal Power in upon the Church as far as he was able while he was writing his Famous Piece Baluzii Vita Petri de Marca c. in principio operis de Concordiâ Sacerd Imp. pp. 13 14. was named to the See of Thoulouse but not quickly setled there for want of his Bulls To obtain them he wrote a Letter to the Pope full of Submission and Respect and in it took occasion to compare his own advancement to the See of Tholouse with that of Exuperius formerly Bishop of that place whom he made the same with Exuperius the Spanish President on purpose that the Parallel might run the better He himself having for some time presided in Catalonia tho' he knew very well they were two different Men. When this was objected to him as an over-sight or rather as a piece of Art not very well becoming his Holy Character he laughed at the Objection and pitied the poor People that made it who were so scrupulously silly as to tye Men up to strict Truth in such cases as these and not able to distinguish between History and a Complement So that with the Writers in this Argument it has been it seems a Fashion all along to disguise Truth and the bending of matters of fact to by-purposes is a tried and approved Remedy for the Dispatch of Bulls As a Key to all the false Stories vouched by Dr. W. I have added this true one and should it happen not to be very pertinent or entertaining I have no Excuse to make to him on that head 't is but returning him a Freedom which he has often before-hand taken with his Reader I am sensible these Reflections of mine are running out into too great a Length and shall therefore only name two or three more without enlarging much upon ' em VII Dr. Wake makes no distinction between Absolute and Limited Princes but produces the Acts of the one to prove and justifie the Exercise of a like Power in the other His first Chapter is taken up in telling us what was done in relation to Ecclesiastical Synods and Affairs by the Roman and German Emperors and by other Princes of narrower Territory but not less Despotick in their Government as if what They did or had a Right to do were immediately the Right of every other Christian Prince without any regard to the Restrictions which the Power of that Prince might be under by the Constitution of his Country But now should he have told us what Acts of Absolute Authority were exercised by those Emperors in State-matters and how their Edicts had the force of Laws would this Plea justifie an English Prince in attempting the like things at home or be a Bar any ways upon the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament Indeed our Author seems sensible that these Instances are not very Conclusive where he confesses that Princes may by their own Acts Limit themselves and that such Limitations may alter the Case mightily and make that Lawful in one Country which is not so in another * P. 95. Pity it is that this Truth had not come into his Thoughts sooner than the 95 th Page of his Work it might then have prevailed with him to withdraw that huge Heap of Foreign Precedents which now take up so much room in his Work and which would have been left to sleep peaceably in his Common-place-Book without seeing the Light upon so improper an occasion For should what he has the Courage in his next Chapter to assert be true that by our own Constitution the King of England has all that Power at this day over our Convocation that EVER ANY Christian Prince had over his Synod †P. 98. yet the Power he has in this respect he derives from the Particular Rules of our Constitution not from any beyond-Sea-Customs and Usages He claims it not I suppose as Heir to the Imperial Authority of Constantine or Charles the Great but by vertue of that Prerogative which as King of England he has by the Laws of England and should the Power therefore happen to be equal here at home to what it is abroad yet there lyes no Proof from the one of these to the other Dr.
Wake it seems has different notions of these things for he tells us that Whatever Priviledges he has shewn to belong to the Christian Magistrate they belong to him as such they are not derived from any Positive Laws and Constitutions but result from that Power which every such Prince has Originally in himself and are to be looked upon as part of those Rights which naturally belong to Sovereign Authority and that to prove any particular Prince entitled to these Rights it is sufficient to shew that he is a Sovereign Prince and therefore ought not to be denied any of those Prerogatives that belong to such a Prince unless it can be plainly made out that he has afterwards by his own Act Limited himself * Pp. 94 95. So that according to Dr. Wake 's Politicks All Kings in All Countries have an Equal Share of Power in their first Institution none of 'em being Originally Limited or subjected to any Restraints in the Arbitrary Exercise of their Authority but such as they have been pleased by after-acts and condescensions graciously to lay upon themselves Which Position how it can be reconciled with an Original Contract and with several Branches of the Late Declaration of Rights I do not see and how far it may appear to the Three States of this Realm to entrench on their share in the Government and on the Fundamental Rights and Liberties of the Free People of England Time must shew That all Bishops indeed are Equal is the known Maxim of St. Cyprian but which of the Fathers have said that All Kings are so too I am I confess as yet to learn For my part I should think it as easie a Task to prove that every Prince had originally the same Extent of Territory as that he had the same Degree of Power The Scales of Miles in several Countries are not more different than the Measures of Power and Priviledge that belong to the Prince and to the Subject But Dr. W. has breathed French Air for some time of his Life where such Arbitrary Schemes are in request and it appears that his Travels have not been lost upon him He has put 'em to that Use which a Modern Author * Moldsworth's Pref. to the State of Denmark observes to be too often made of 'em that they teach Men fit Methods of pleasing their Sovereigns at the Peoples Expence tho' at present I trust his Doctrine is a little out of season when we live under a Prince who will not be pleased with any thing that is Injurious to the Rights of the Least of his Subjects when duly informed of them Whereas then Dr. W. in great Friendship to the Liberties of his Church and of his Country asserts that by our Constitution the King of England has all that Power at this day over our Convocation that EVER ANY Christian Prince had over his Synod I would ask him one plain Question Whether the King and the Three States of the Realm together have not more Power in Church-matters and over Church-Synods than the King alone If so then cannot the King alone have All that Power which ever any Christian Prince had because some Christian Princes have had all the Power that was possible even as much as belongs to the King and the Three Estates in Conjunction There is one thing indeed which seems material to be observed and owned in this case 't is the Assertion of the Second Canon which declares our Kings to have the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical that the Christian Emperours in the Primitive Church had But this Canon must necessarily be understood of the King in Parliament for out of Parliament it is manifest that he is not so Absolute in Ecclesiastical Matters as those Emperors were In Parliament he can do every thing that is by the Law of God or of Reason lawful to be done out of Parliament he can do nothing but what the Particular Rules of our Constitution allow of And VIII This too is a Distinction which Dr. W. should have taken notice of had he intended to do Justice to his Argument For the Church here in England is under the Government both of the Absolute and Limited Sovereign under the Government of the Limited Sovereign within the Compass of his Prerogative under the Government of the Absolute Sovereign without any Restraints or Bounds except what the Revealed Will of God and the Eternal Rules of Right Reason prescribe The Pope usurped not only on the King the Limited but on the King and Parliament the Absolute Sovereign and what was taken from Him therefore was not all thrown into the Prerogative but restored severally to its respective Owners And of this Absolute Sovereign it is the Duty when Christian to act in a Christian manner to be directed in matters Spiritual by the Advice of Spiritual Persons and not lightly to vary from it By the same Rule the Limited Sovereign is to steer likewise within the Sphere of his Prerogative And he is also further obliged to preserve those Priviledges of the Church which belong to her by the Laws of the Realm Now Dr. Wake I say confounds these two Powers and the Subjections that are due to them speaking all along of the King as if He in Exclusion to the Three Estates had the Plenitude of Ecclesiastical Authority lodged in him and were the single Point in which the Obedience of the Church and of every Member of it centered This is a Fundamental Mistake that runs quite through his Book and is such an One as overturns our Constitution and confounds the Executive and Legislative parts of it and deserves a Reprehension therefore some other way than from the Pen of an Adversary Henry the Eighth 't is true in vertue of his Supreme Headship laid claim to a Vast and Boundless Power in Church-affairs had his Vicegerent in Convocation Enacted every thing there by his own Sole Authority issuing out his Injunctions as Laws at pleasure And these Powers whether of Right belonging to him or not were then submitted to by All who either wished ill to the Pope or well to the Reformation or wanted Courage otherwise to bear up against his Tyrannical Temper and Designs and were the more easily allowed of by Church-men because they saw him at the same time exercise as Extravagant an Authority in State-matters by the Consent of his Parliament However the Title of Supreme Head together with those Powers that were understood to belong to it was taken away in the â—â—â—st of Queen Mary and never afterwards reâ—ved but instead of it all Spiritual Iurisdictiâ—â— was declared to be annexed to the Imperial â—rown of this Realm 1 Eliz. c. 1. and the Queen enabled to â—xercise it by a Commissioner or Commissiâ—ners This Power continues no doubt in â—he Imperial Crown but can be exerted no â—therwise than in Parliament now since the â—igh Commission Court was taken away by â—he 17 Car. 1. It was attempted indeed to be
made between his Prerogative Royal and Supreme Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical and the particular Powers lodg'd in him by the 25 H. VIII In vertue of the first of these he is said to have granted the Clergy full free and lawful Liberty c. to confer treat debate c. upon Canons but to have given his Royal Assent to those Canons according to the form of a certain Statute or Act of Parliament made in that behalf in the 25th Year of the Reign of K. Henry the VIII †And so in the Commission it self see it in Dr. W's Append. n. V. though the 25. H. VIII be recited in the â—reamble of it yet where Leave is granted to Câ—nâ—er Treat c. such Grant is said to be by Vertue of our Prerogative Royal and Supreme Authority in Câ—â—seâ— Ecclesiastical without any reference to the Statute which Statute is no where vouch'd in that Ratification but with regard to such Royal Assent only It cannot be inferr'd therefore that either the Givers or Takers of this new License understood the Submission Act in a Sense different from what we contend for since it does not appear that the Grant of this License was really founded on that Statute However supposing it was yet are we to consider in the 3 Place that it is not a bare License to treat that is there granted but beyond this as the words run A full free and lawful Liberty License Power and Authority to conferr treat debate consider consult and agree of and upon such Canons Orders c. Now though a License to debate of Canons was not necessary according to the Act yet a License to agree upon them might be judg'd necessary the Clergys agreeing upon Canons especially in such an Authoritative Form and with such Sanctions and Penaltys as I have shewn them now first to have practis'd being liable to be constru'd to a sense equivalent to Enacting or Making them which without the Royal Assent and License they were by the Act expresly prohibited to do The License to Treat therefore is not to be taken separately but in conjunction with agreeing of and upon and must be suppos'd necessary no otherwise than as it qualify'd the Clergy so to treat of Canons as to agree also and come to a Conclusion upon them And thus therefore the Latin Title of these Canons which Dr. W. acknowledges to be truly Authentick and Legal †App. p. 25. runs Constitutiones sive Canones Ecclesiastici per Episcopum Londinensem Praesidem Synodi pro Cantuariensi Prov. ac reliquos Episcopos Clerum ejusdem Prov. ex Regiâ Authoritate Tractati Conclusi In ipsorum Synodo inchoatâ Londini c. Ab eâdem Regià Majestate deïnceps approbati ratihabiti ac confirmati ejusdemque Authoritate sub magno Sigillo Angliae promulgati per utramque Provinciam tam Cant. quam Ebor. diligentèr observandi They are said to be ex Regiâ Authoritate tractati conclusi joyntly not ex Regiâ Authoritate tractati conclusi in ipsorum Synodo c. as L. M. P. has fallaciously pointed these words on purpose that he may sever their Treating from their Concluding and make the Royal License seem to have been necessary for the one without any Consideration of the other But this is according to his usual Sincerity in these Matters one Instance of which I have already observ'd to the Reader The English Title of these Canons confirms what has been said and gives us further Light in the case it is thus worded Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical Treated upon by the Bishop of London President of the Convocation for the Prov. of Cant. and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the said Province And agreed upon with the Kings Majestys License in their Synode begun at London A. D. 1603 c. and now Publish'd for the due Observation of them by his Majesty's Authority under the Great Seal of England Here is no mention of the Kings License for any Act previous to their agreeing upon these Canons which is a good Evidence that the Framers of them thought there needed none and though by the form of their Commission a free Liberty was granted them to treat debate and agree yet that really they had occasion for such a Grant only as to the last of these Acts but not as to the Former For had the One been equally necessary with the other they would have taken equal care to express it Dr. W. indeed excepts against this English Inscription †App. p. 25. and says it is very imperfectly rendred from the Latin and apt to lead men into mistakes about these matters believing it seems that the Translation of these Canons into English was the work of some Private Hand unauthoriz'd by the Convocation whereas he should have known that the way was for the Convocation to prepare both her Articles †The Articles of our Church were at the same time prepar'd both in Latin and English so that both are equally Authentical Bishop of Sarum 's Exposition c. p. X. and Canons in Latin and English at the same time and that the one of these therefore is every whit as Authentick as the other And in the present case it may be question'd whether the English Canons be not rather somewhat more authentical than the Latin ones since it was That Copy of them which seems particularly to have passed the Great Seal and was with the King's Ratification at length annex'd then publish'd from the Press Royal. And as low an Opinion as Dr. W. has of Convocations I hope he will allow them able to translate their Own Latin and to understand their own meaning But should there in rendring the Latin Title any casual Mistake have happen'd it would have been set right afterward in the Canons of 1640 †See Sparow Col. p. 235. when it behov'd the Clergy to tread warily and to prevent all manner of Exceptions And yet There again the very same English Inscription returns nor did that House of Commons which was no ways unwilling to find fault with any thing in these Canons that could be laid hold of except against this Title but made use of it themselves in their Votes ‖ Rushworth part 3. p. 1365. of Dec. 1.5 16 1640 without questioning the Accuracy or Legality of it From all which I inferr that those very Convocations that took out these Commissions did not however think that they treated in vertue of them and much less that they could not have treated without them They needed such Powers only to draw up and pass their Synodal Decrees in form and though more was inserted into them even the Liberty of Debating as well as Concluding yet they accepted what was not necessary for the sake of what was taking care only in the Front of their Synodical Acts to assert a Liberty of Debate to themselves independently of any such Royal Grants or Commissions All they
willing to spend some time in Prayer before we begin I am Sir Your Affectionate Brother and Servant in the Lord W. F. III. See p. 87. 1. ANd as concerning the requiring of your Highnesses Royal Assent to the Authorising of such Laws as have been by Our Predecessors or shall be made by Us in such Points and Articles as we have by God Authority to rule and order by Provisions and Laws We knowing Your Highnesses Wisdom Vertue and Learning nothing doubt but the same perceiveth how the granting thereunto dependeth not upon our Will and Liberty and that We your most humble Subjects may not submit the Execution of our Charges and Duty certainly prescrib'd by God to Your Highnesses Assent although in very deed the same is most worthy for Your most Princely and Excellent Vertues not only to give your Royal Assent but also to Devise and Command what we should for good Order and Manner provide in the Church Nevertheless considering we may not so in such sort restrain the doing of our Office in the feeding and ruling Christ's People Your Graces Subjects We most humbly desire your Grace as as the same hath done heretofore so from henceforth to shew Your Graces Mind and Opinion to us what Your Highnesses Wisdom shall think Convenient which We shall most gladly hear and follow if it shall please God to imspire us so to do with all submission and Humility beseeching the same following the steps of Your most Noble Progenitors and conformable to Your own Acts to maintain and defend such Laws and Ordinances as We according to our Calling and by the Authority of God shall for his Honor make to the Edification of Vertue and Maintaining Christ's Faith whereof Your Highness is Defender in Name and hath been hitherto in Deed a Special Protector Bibl. Cotton Cleop. F. 1. fol. 96. II. Forasmuch as the Answer lately made by Your Clergy unto Your Honorable Commons for their satisfaction in their Bill of Complaint put up unto Your Highness doth not please nor satisfy Your Highness in some Points concerning Your Own particular Interest specially in that Point which concerneth Laws either Now to be by Us made or else Old to be by Us reform'd for Your Highnesses better Contentation in that behalf We Your said most Humble Chaplains do now more especially answer unto those Points as followeth 1. As touching New Laws to be by us Hereafter made we say that the Laws and Declarations of Christ's Holy Church throughout all Christian Realms receiv'd and us'd been clear and manifest that the Prelates of the same Church have a special Jurisdiction and Judicial Power to Rule and Govern in Faith and Good Manners necessary to the Souls health the Flocks unto their Care committed and that they have Authority to meet and ordain Rules and Laws tending to that purpose which Rules and Laws hath and doth take effect in binding all Christian People as of theymself so that before God there needeth not of necessity any Temporal Power or Consent to concur with the same by the Way of Authority Item they say that this Power and Authority in making Laws in matters concerning the Faith and Good Manners necessary to the Soul's health all Christian Princes hath hitherto reckon'd themselves bound to suffer the Prelates to use within their Realms and have not claimed of the same Prelates that they should from time to time require their Consent or License by the way of Authority more in making of such Laws than they do claim that they the said Prelates should from time to time require their Consents autorysable in the giving of Holy Orders to any of their Subjects or in the exercising any other Spiritual Act depending upon their Spiritual Jurisdiction the Authority whereof immediately proceedeth from God and from no Power or Consent Authorisable of any Secular Prince except it be that Consent that is taken of the Princes own submission to the Faith Catholique made not only by their Noble Progenitors when they first admitted Christ's Faith and the Laws of the Holy Church within their Realms but also by themselves first Generally at their Baptism and after more specially and most Commonly by their Corporal Oaths at their Coronation We say also that this Power of making Laws aforesaid is right well founded in many Places of Holy Scripture now so much the less necessary here to be rehears'd for as much as that matter is at large set out in a Book now by Us put up unto Your Highness and Your Highness your self in your Own Book most excellently Written against M. Luther for the defence of the Catholick Faith and Christ's Church doth not only knowledge and confess but also with most Vehement and Inexpugnable Reasons and Authoritys doth defend the same Which Your Highnesses Book we reckon that of Your Honor You cannot and of Your Goodness You will not revoke Yet these Considerations notwithstanding We your most humble Chaplains and Bedesmen considering Your High Wisdom Great Learning and Unfeign'd Goodness towards Us and the Church and having special Trust in the same and not minding to fall into Contentions or Disputations with your Highness in any Manner of Matter what we may do We be contented to make Promise unto Your Highness That in all such Acts Laws and Ordinances as upon Your Lay Subjects We by the reason of our Spiritual Jurisdiction and Judicial Power shall hereafter make we shall not Publish nor put them forth except first we require Your Highness to give your Consent and Authority unto them and so shall from Time to Time suspend all such our Acts Ordinances and Laws hereafter to be made unto such Time as Your Highness by Your Consent and Authority shall have authoris'd the same except they be such as shall concern the maintenance of the Faith and Good Manners in Christ's Church and such as shall be for the Reformation and Correction of sin after the Commandments of Allmighty God according to such Laws of the Church and laudable Customs as hath been heretofore made and hitherto receiv'd and us'd within Your Realm In which Points our Trust is and in most humble manner we desire Your Grace that it may so be that upon the Refusal of Your Consent which We presume that we need not fear but yet if any such thing should fall Your Highness will be then contented we may exercise our Jurisdiction as far as it shall be thought necessary unto us for the maintenance of Christ's Faith and for the Reformation of Sin according to our Offices and the Vocations that God hath call'd us unto As for the Second Part concerning Laws that in Time past hath been made by us or by our Predecessors contrary to the Laws of this Your Realm and to your Prerogative as it is pretended to this Point We Your Highnesses most humble Chaplains answer and say that such our Laws by our Predecessors within this Realm made as contain any matter contrary to your Laws or
from Eusebius * L. 5. c. 23 24. St. Cyprian †Ubique and ‖ De Jejun c. 13. Tertullian They were necessary for deciding the Differences that might happen between one Diocese and another or between those of the same Diocese if they could not be composed at home for the maintenance of sound Doctrine and wholsome Discipline and for the promoting of the general good of Christianity The Authoritative part of these Meetings was compos'd of the Bishops and Presbyters who sat * Conc. Eliberit in Proaem Greg. L. 4. Ep. 44. 4. Conc. Tolet. Capit. 3. Cypr. Ep. 1. Graviter commoti sumus Ego Collegae mei qui praesentes aderant Compresbyteri nostri qui nobis assidebant the Bishops in a Semi-circle formost and the Presbyters behind them before whom the Deacons and the People stood being little more than Witnesses of what pass'd at the Synod The Presbytery were in every City a necessary standing Council to their respective Bishops whose Power in the Church was much like that of a King in one of our mix'd Monarchies and together with their Bishops therefore they met in a Diocesan Synod upon all great Causes and without their Advice and Consent nothing of Importance was or could be determin'd This was the settl'd Rule of the Primitive Church and was kept up to here in England when it had declin'd almost every where else as the Constitutions of Egbert * Can. 44 45 46 47 apud Spelman Conc. T. 1. p. 258. Arch-Bishop of York made in the middle of the Eighth Century declare And some Remains of this Ancient Discipline are yet visible in those Capitular Bodies planted in our Cathedral Churches who as they were Originally intended to be a Select Presbytery to the Bishop for all the Affairs of his Diocese so have they still a Restraint upon his Authority in several Cases by the known Customs of this Church and Laws of the Realm Some of their Presbyters the Bishops were oblig'd to carry along with 'em to the Council of the Province and there I say they Sat Deliberated and Voted upon all Matters that came before the Assembly Indeed to General Councils the Inferior Clergy came not ordinarily in their Own Right but as the Proxy's only of absent Bishops which was necessary to hinder those Meetings from being too numerous and to prevent Confusion However even the Bishops that were present in General Councils were deputed thither by Provincial Synods * See the Emperor's Letter to St. Cyril Conc. Ephes. Part I. as also The Epistle of Capreolus Bishop of Carthage excusing himself for sending no Bishops because the War which had broke out in those parts hindred him from calling â— Provincial Synod from whence they were to be deputed Ib. pars 2. Act. 1. and brought along with them the Resolution and Consent of the several Churches from which they came and the Presbyters therefore having Voices in those lesser Synods their Consent was also in the Definitions of the Greater presum'd and included In one of these Provincial Synods held in the Second or Third Century was that which is since call'd the 37th Apostolick Canon fram'd which orders that there shall be two of these Assemblies yearly one in Spring and the other in Autumn The same thing with some small variety as to the exact time of Meeting was by the Great Council of Nice decreed more solemnly * Can. 5. and their Decree enforc'd by the Council of Antioch †Can. 20. first and then by the Fourth General Council at Chalcedon ⸫ Can. 19. Afterwards by reason of the difficulty of convening in times of War and Confusion these Synods were order'd to meet but once a Year by the Sixth ‖ Can. 8. and Seventh General Councils * Can. 6. in the East and this Order was renewed here in the West by the Fourth great Lateran Council held under Innocent III. at the beginning of the Thirteenth Century * Can. 6. And thus the general Law of the Church stood in succeeding times as to Us at least For the Decree of the Council of Basil †Sess. 15. which made these Meetings Triennial was not I think received here in England The Rule set by these General Councils ‖ All of â—em but â—hat at Antioch reputed such was prescrib'd also by the Roman Law * Justinian Nov. 123. c. 10.137 c. 4. received into the Capitulars of Charles the Great in Germany †Lib. 1. Tit. 13. and provided for very early by special Canons in the Churches of Spain and France ‖ 3. Conc. Tolet. c. 18. Conc. Regiens c. 7. 1. Conc. Araus c. 29. 2. Conc. Aurel. c. 2. 2. Conc. Turon c. 1. and of those lesser Kingdoms that arose out of the Ruines of the Roman Empire and particularly here in England by a Canon of the Council of Herudford ⸫ Beda I. 4. c. 5. Placuit convenire nos juxta morem Canonum Venerabilium held Anno 673 under Theodore Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and which took care not only to establish the Practice for the future but also to affirm the ancient Usage it being at the very entrance of the Acts of it expresly said to assemble in Vertue of the Old Canons as it was held also much about the Time that those Old Canons prescrib'd †Sept. 24. The Lateran Canon that reviv'd the use of Yearly Provincial Assemblies was in force here as Iohn de Athon tells us ‖ Proaem Othob tho' not so well observed he says as it ought to have been for a Reason too reflecting to be ⸫ Qualia Concilia Provincialia singulis annis celebrari ponitur sub praecepto quod non est ergo negligendum Sed hodiè de facto praetermittitur quia fortè Lucrum Bursale Praelatis non acquiritur sed potiùs tùnc Expensae apponuntur He gives I find the same free Reason in another place for the neglect of some Provincial Constitutions De facto perrarò servantur quando servando Constitutionem Bursae Praelatorum vacuarentur Sed aliae Constitutiones quae Praelatis Bursales sunt satis memoriae commendantur exequuntur ad unguem Ad Constit. de Hab. Cler. Englished This must be understood of the time when Athon wrote which was somewhat above an hundred Years after * For Pitts 's Account which has been taken all along upon trust viz. that he Flourished in 1290 must be a mistake since Athon was made Prebend of Lincoln in 1329 and died in 1350 as I find by unquestionable Authorities when in France also it was grown into neglect as appears by Durandus's Complaint †De modo Conc. Gen. cel Rubr. 11. But at first no doubt both here and elsewhere it was more strictly kept and to it we owe that Body of Provincial Constitutions which we have the earliest of 'em those of Stephen Langton bearing Date 1222 a few Years after that
Lateran Council Innocent III. in his Rescript to the Archbishop of Sens * Decr. Greg. 3.10.10 Ecclesiarum Cathedralium Capitula per Procuratores suos admittidebent ad Tractatum in Concilio Provincâ—ali directs that the Proctors of Cathedral Chapters should be summon'd to these Provincial Synods From whence alone without further enquiry we might be satisfi'd that the Priors of Cathedral Churches Deans and Archdeacons those Praelati Inferiores had been admitted before as indeed the Capitular Clergy and even the Rural Presbyters had been tho' the Practice might be now discontinu'd For 700 Years before the Date of this Rescript in a Spanish Council at Taragone †An. 517. Epistolae tales à Metropolitanis sunt dirigendae ut non solùm de Câ—thedralibus Ecclesiis Presbyteros verùm etiam de Diaecesanis ad Concilium trahant c. 13. we find it particularly provided that the Bishops should bring along with them to these Synods Presbyters from their Cathedral Churches and from the other Churches of their Dioceses And in the account of a Domestick Council of our own not full an hundred Years Elder than the Lateran the Persons summon'd to it are thus reckon'd up by the Saxon Chronicle * Regis Consilio Veniâ misit Willielmus Archiep Cantuaraebyrig per Totam Anglorum Terram jussit Episcopos Abbates Archidiaconos cunctos item Priores Monachos Canonicos qui essent in omnibus Cellis intra Anglorum Terram omnes denique quorum Curae Religio erat commissa interesse Londini ad Festum Michaelis ut ibi colloquerentur de omnibus Negotiis ad Deum pertinentibus c. Chron. Sax. ad ann 1129. The Saxon is Ealle tha thet Cristendome haâ—don to begemen to locen Bishops Abbots Archdeacons all the Priors Monks and Canons who were in all the Religious Houses of England Finally All that had the care of Religion committed to them i. e. I suppose the Parochial Presbyters The Decree of Innocent was so well obey'd in France that in a National Council which met there about Ten Years afterwards †Anno 1226. Vide M. Par. ad ann p. 329. where he has these Observable Words Dedit Legatus in dolo Procuratoribus Capitulorum Licentiam ad propria revertendi retentis tantum Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus simplicibus Praelatis Unde non immerito timuerunt ne procuratâ eorum absentiâ qui majoris Prudentiae erant Experientiae prae Multitudine potentiores ad contradicendum aliquid statueretur in praejudicium c. the Proctors of Chapters were Numerous and Resolute enough to quash an oppressive Demand there made by the Legat and to rescue the Liberties of the Gallican Church for that time from Papal Encroachments In England the way was for the Dean or Prior to bring up Instruments of Proxy to the Synod which enabled him to act for his Chapter or Convent ‖ Priores Installati tam sub Conventûs â—ui vel Capituli quam suo nomine Literas Procuratorias deferentes M. Par. ad ann 1237. p. 446. Priores Majores cum Literis suorum subditorum Procuratoriis An. Burt. ad ann 1258. p. 389. in the same manner as the Archdeacons ⸫ Archidiaconi cum Literis Procuratoriis factis ex parte Clericorum qui subsunt eisdem-Ann Burt. ad ann 1257. p. 382. vide etiam pp. 373 374 355. M. Par. p. 920. also were impower'd to represent and conclude the Diocesan Clergy who were in those Days when Synods were frequent willing enough to be excus'd the Expence and Trouble of Attendance And this method was often practis'd throughout Henry III. his Reign till the Council of Reading in the Seventh Year of Edward I. order'd * Item praecipimus ut veniant duo Electi ad minùs à Clero Episcopatuum singulorum qui auctoritatem habeant una nobiscum tractare de his quae Ecclesiae communi utilitati expediunt Anglicanae etiamsi de Conturbatione aliquâ vel Expensis oporteat fieri mentionem In Cap. de Exeq. Epise ad Finem Lynwood p. 25. that the Clergy of the Diocese should appear by two Proctors of their own which I suppose has ever since been constantly practised Thus have much the same Persons been summon'd all along as now But to what Ends and with what Authorities they came may be question'd The Canonists who never fail to depress the Bishops for the Service of the Pope would make them some amends in giving them as extravagant an Authority over their Inferiors Lynwood therefore in his Gloss upon that part of a Constitution of Archbishop Arundel where mention is made of their Concurring to it †Const. â—inaliter p. 300. is trying how little he can make of them The Words of the Constitution are these Ad supplicationem igitur Procuratorum totius Cleri nostri Cant. Prov. de Consensu Assensu oranium Consratrum Suffraganeorum nostrorum aliorum Praelatorum in hâc Cleri Convocatione praesentium Procuratorum absentium c. Statuimus Ordinamus And his Comment upon them runs thus Aliorum Praelatorum sc. Abbatum Decanorum Archidiaconorum Praesentium non dicit Vocatorum quia ad Provinciale Concilium non sunt Vocandi ex necessitate nisi Episcopi Si tamen alii veniant Admittendi sunt imò vocandi sunt quando de eorum Factis agitur vel quia eorum Consilium est necessarium Now here one cannot but observe how small an occasion he takes for this strange Doctrine For Praesentium in the Text belongs as well to the Superior as the Inferior Prelates and gave no room to him therefore thus to refine upon it And then when he has delivered it as his Opinion Non alii sunt vocandi c. he is afterwards forc'd to retract it Imò vocandi sunt This indeed he would fain qualifie with a quando de eorum factis agitur but is immediately oblig'd to add vel quia eorum Concilium est necessarium So that at last the Inferior Prelates are allow'd by him to be Necessary Councellors in the Assembly and to have not only Opportunity of Petitioning but also Power of Advising which however is not so much as the Text it self allows them expressing the Assent and Consent of both sort of Prelates jointly without any manner of Distinction And tho' the Chief Business of the Proctors of Chapters and Dioceses was to Petition for the Redress of Grievances under which they chiefly groan'd yet that they came from the very beginning with larger Powers appears from the Constitution of Reading lately cited * Qui Autoritatem habeant unà Nobiscum tractare de hiis quae Ecclesae c. and from the Ancient Forms of the Archbishop's Summonitory Letters which ran ad tractandum unà Nobiscum exactly as that Constitution prescribes An Instance of which I have seen in an Old Register as high as the 18 E. 1. that is Eleven Years after the Council
but Bishops and Priests forasmuch as the Declaration of the Word of God pertaineth unto †Hist of the Ref. Vol. I. p. 174. them A Testimony that being given by those of the Higher Order in the Church in behalf of the Powers and Priviledges of the Lower must be allowed Considerable In the course therefore of our Provincial Synods the Inferior Clergy's Consent was expected and not that of the Suffragans only But still as we may observe the Archbishop alone is said to Decree and Ordain which is a stile of Authority peculiar to him Here and beyond what belonged Originally to his Character Indeed by the ancient Rules of the Church the Metropolitan's Consent was nenessary to make the Ordinance and He had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Stile and Power of the Archbishop of this Province might in this respect run higher because he challenged to be looked upon as something more than a simple ‖ Quasi velitis says Peckam in a Letter to the Bishop of London Jura Cantuariensis Ecclesiae ad Simplices Metropolitani Limites Coarctare Whart App. ad Hist. de Ep. Lond. p. 270. Metropolitan and had the Title of a Legat Born and in virtue of that Character he might take upon him to Decree and Ordain as the Pope did in Foreign Councils and as the King here at home used to do iâ— our elder Statutes And as these at the end of every Session of Parliament were used to be Enacted by the King so the Provincial Constitutions were published on the last Day of the Synod by the Archbishop He also some time afterwards enjoyning the Bishop of London and by him as Dean of the Episcopal College the other Bishops to see them Promulged and Executed as Acts of Parliament were ordered to be Proclaimed by the Comes at first and since by his Vicar-General the Sheriff This was the manner of holding Councils and making Canons neither was it necessary to have the King 's or Pope's leave to hold the one nor was their Authority requisite for Decreeing the other The Clergy were only to take care that they did not exceed their Limits either in the Matter or Manner of their Decrees and that their Constitutions were such as would not be Revoked and Annulled by either of those Supreme Powers The Metropolitans were by the Canons and by the Roman Law * Nov. 123. c. 10. where it had force Oblig'd to call those Synods Yearly Neither was Leave to be ask'd for their Summoning such Assemblâ—es then any more than there is now for a Bishop's Convening his Clergy and Church-Officers to a Visitation Not because those Canons were above the Law of our Country but because they were received into it and made a part of the Constitutions and Usages of the Kingdom 'T is true the Archbishop called them sometimes at the King's Instance signified to him by a Royal Writ Yet even then not in Virtue of 〈◊〉 Writ but by his Own Authority By which also whether called at the King's Instance or not he always Dissolved them And of this we have a very remarkable proof in the last Convocation under Henry the IVth ‖ Hen. IV. Writ for the Calling it bears date Jan. 19. 1412. It met â—n the 6 th of March He Died on the 20 th but the Convocation sat on to the 10 th of May when it was Dissolved which though Meeting at his Writ was yet so little thought to be held in Virtue of it that it Sat for near Two Months under his Successor Henry the Vth without a Dissolution Till Archbishop Chichley's time Convocations were frequently held even while Parliaments were sitting without any other Writ from the King but what was contained in the Bishops Summons with the Clause Praemunientes After the 8. of H. VI. the Clergy if they met by the King's Letter had the benefit of the Act of Parliament of that Year and therefore I suppose usually deâ—ired it to gain the Parliamentary Protection not as Fuller idly Conjectures * Ch Hist. Book 5. p. 290. and Dr. Wake from him p. 230. to avoid a Praemunire When they met †Mr. Nicolson Eng. Hist. Lib. part 3. p. 196. says They were Inhibited in their very Writs of Summons from Decreeing any thing to the Prejudice of the King or his Realms And for this he refers us to Dugdale 's Summons in the Reigns of E. 1. and E. 2. where there is not a word to this purpose nor can there be for Dugdale has no Writs for Convocations but only for the Parliament When the next Edition of his Work comes out he will be pleased to tell us from whence he drew this curious Remark I have seen many Convocation Writs but never that I remember one with a Prohibition in the Belly of it Writs were often sent to them by the King Forbidding them to attempt any thing against his Crown and Dignity and these Prohibitions are allowed to have been Tacit Permissions of such Assemblies provided they kept within their Bounds ‖ Bishop Stillingfleet 's Duties and Rights of the Parochial Clergy p. 371. And so indeed they certainly were for otherwise it had been as easy for the King to forbid their Meeting and Sitting as their Acting in such and such Instances which yet he appears very rarely to have done and to have been yet more rarely Obeyed when he attempted it * The Oldest Instance insisted on is a Prohibition of Geofry Fitz-Peter Lord Iustitiary to Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury But how it was obeyed the Annals of Lanercost in Bib. Cott. Claud. D. 7. declare Hub. Arch. Cant. celebravit Concil contra Prohibitionem Gaufridi c. in quo Concilio Archiepiscopus Subscripta promulgavit Decreta Ann. 1200. The Oldest Writ produced is 9 Joh. Ann. 1208. See it in Pryn. 3. Tom. Eccl. Jurisd p. 10. Whether comply'd with or not I do not find But suppose it was for it Issued out upon a Complaint of the whole Parliament A Third Instance I find in the 41 H. 3. Rot. Cl. M. 6. dors when the Convocation was forbid meeting at London because the King had at that very time Summoned all the Members of it that owed him Service to Attend his Army in Wales See the Writ Pryn. Ibid. Vol. II. p. 890. But though this Prohibition was so reasonable yet it was not Obeyed On the contrary when Archbishop Boniface at the Opening it proposed this Question to them among others Item Cùm Dominus Rex Prohibuerit Praelatis Ecclesiae sub forisfacturâ omnium terrarum suarum quas de eo tenent ne venirent ad hujusmodi Convocationem Auctoritate Domini Archiepiscopi factam an liceat deceat expediat tractare in hujusmodi Convocatione de Negotiis Ecclesiae vel potiùs quod absit Prohibitioni Regiae parere c. Ann. Burt. p. 383. it was carried that they should proceed notwithstanding and so they did as appears by the Roll of Grievances then
†When this began I know not for many Years after the Commons were Summoned as they are now I find the Community of Wales appearing in Parliament as those of Scotland sometimes did by a certain Number return'd for the Whole so their several Dioceses were to appear by a single Proctor ‖ So I gather from the Usage of those Assemblies which were purely Ecclesiastical To one of which An. 1302. the English Clergy were Summoned by Two and the Welch by One Proctor apiece Registr Winchelâ—ey fol. 147. And beside all these the Archdeacons (*) M. Par. ad Ann. 1247. p. 719. and Deans (†) Idem p. 240. ad 15. Joh. having been long before called to the Great Councils of the Realm were not omitted now but comprised in the same Writ of Summons Nor were their Numbers only in some measure proportionable but the Powers also with which they came Originally the very same so that their first Writs of Summons ran equally ad Tractandum Ordinandum Faciendum * 22. E. 1. in Registro Henr. Prioris 23. E. 1. apud Dugdal Summon and when the one Summoned ad Ordinandum only †Registr Hen. Pr. Fol. 69. Dugd. Summ. p. 13. or ad Faciendum Consentiendum ‖ 17. E. 2. Dugd. p. 92. Pryn. Reg. Parl. Wr. Vol. 2. p. 77. 5 E. 3. Dugd. p. 163. Pryn. Ibid. p. 86 c. so did the other The Minute Alterations of these Forms taking place in both Writs at once in various Instances and the Procuratoria which were fram'd upon those Writs for the Lower Clergy answering almost in Terms the Returns that were made for the ⸪ Pryn R. P. W. 4. Vol. p. 436. Laity To omit other Correspondencies which might be observed if these were not sufficient to shew That the Clergy brought to Parliament by the Premunientes were to all intents and purposes what they were long afterwards in the Rolls of Parliament called The Commons Spiritual of the Realm This Clause how much soever to the real Interest and Advantage of the Lower Clergy was yet thought a Burthen by them and an inroad upon their Priviledges and they tried all ways therefore of withstanding or declining it but in vain for the Genius of that mighty Monarch who was not us'd to be baffled in any Attempt carried it against all their Opposition And the Ground he had thus gained upon them he kept throughout all his Reign as appears by the Records of the last Parliament but the First whose Proxy Roll is preserved which Ryley has Printed at lâ—â—gth in his Placita Parliamentaria * P. 321. There the Proxy's are enter'd of every Bishop Abbot Prior Dean and Archdeacon that did not Personally appear in Parliament as also of the Clergy of every Chapter and Diocese But a weak Prince and a disorderly Government succeeding they laid hold of that favourable Opportunity to resume their pretences to Exemption The wise Maxim was now forgotten by which they governed themselves and made their stand against the Pope in Henry the Third's Reign Regnum Sacerdotium nullatenùs sint divisa †An. Burt. P. 307. A Maxim that never hurt the Clergy when they stuck to it as it has never prosper'd with them when they departed from it nor I believe ever will They liked not the Premunientes at first and the severe Taxes they had smarted under ever since it went out made them like it still worse and had quite alter'd their Mind and their Measures So that now they thought their Interest and Safety lay in Uniting as closely with the Pope and Dividing as far as they could from the Laity The Archbishop no doubt favouring this Opinion with a prospect of sharing the Pope's Power over them and under the Pretence that it would be more for the Honour of him and his Clergy to be still by Themselves in Two Assemblies of Convocation answerable in some proportion to the Two Houses of Parliament according to Bishop Ravis's just and impartial ‖ In his Reasons for a Reunion presented to Q. Eliz. Hist. Ref. Part 2. Coll. of Records n. 18. Observation The Separation therefore was resolved on attempted in Edward the First 's advanc'd very far in Edward the Second's and fully settled in Edward the Third's Reign Even under the former of these Princes though the Clergy obeyed the Parliamentary Summons duly yet were they backward to answer the Ends of it unless they might do it in their own Manner and therefore referred themselves more than once to a Fuller Assembly of the Province to be gathered by the Archbishop where they knew they should be join'd by All the Religious and by Their help be enabled either better to put off the Burthen that might be laid upon them or better to bear it His easy Successor was prevailed with yet further to mix Authorities and to take the Archbishop's Power along with him in Convening them so that under him the way was often when the Bishop's Writ with the Clause Premunientes went out to send Two other Writs to the Two Metropolitans directing them to cite Those and Those Only of their Province by a general Mandate which were Summon'd severally by the Bishops Writs But because this though a great Condescention of the Crown was still an Hardship upon the Archbishop out of whose Province the Parliament was held who could not regularly bring his Subjects to any place not within his Jurisdiction and because it was known to be more agreeable to the Rules of the Church and found to be more conducive to the Peace of the State * In respect to the Controversy about the Supreme Bearing of the Archiepiscopal Crosses which never rag'd so high as when the Archbishops met one another at the Head of the Clergy of their Provinces that the Clergy of each Province should Assemble apart therefore this Accommodation afterwards took place That the Premunientes should still Summon them from the King to meet Parliamentarily but that sufficient Obedience should be understood to be paid to it if the Clergy met Provincially though not at the same Place yet about the same Time and to the same Purpose to be ready to hear what should be Proposed from the King to give their Advice when ask'd and their Consent when requisite to offer their Aids and their Petitions and in short to answer the necessary Affairs of the King and Kingdom Not that the Clause Premunientes now grew useless and insignificant for still the Bishop who executed the Royal Writs upon the Clergy of the Diocese as the Sheriff did upon the Laity of the County when he received his Summons to Parliament transmitted it to those of the Lower Clergy concern'd and they still made their returns to it Such of them as were not to Attend in Person formally Impowering their Proctors to Appear and Consent for them in Parliament according to the Tenor of the Bishops Writ though those Proctors
sat afterwards and acted in Convocation An instance of such a Procuratorium for the Parliament I have seen as low as 1507. and another of an execution of the Premunientes by the Bishop yet lower in the Reign of Edward the Sixth though Returns had then Ceas'd or at least were not Enter'd Thus the Forms were kept up and by that means the King 's Right of Summoning the Clergy asserted and owned And so the State-ends of Summoning them were also answered they were left to do it in an Ecclesiastical way and to attend the Parliament and the Business of it not in One Body as they were called but in Two Provincial Assemblies This they did at first by the Connivance of the Crown rather than any express Allowance the Archbishop of his own accord sending out a Provincial Citation concurrently with the Bishops Writs of Summons which Method obtaining and these Meetings of the Province being tacitly accepted in lieu of the Clergy's resort to Parliament it grew necessary for the King to employ his Authority also in Convening them for otherwise it had been at the Archbishop's Discretion whether he would have any such Meetings or not and so the Crown might have lost the Clergy's Assistance in Parliament This gave birth to the custom of issuing out Two Convocation-Writs when a New Parliament was to be Chosen which though set on foot before yet settled not into a Rule till some Years after Edward the Third was in the Throne and then it was practised as duly and regularly and in much the same manner as it is at this day Take one Instance and that not the Earliest which might be given instead of many In the Parliament Roll of his Eighteenth Year we read That it had been agreed for the urgent Affairs of the Kingdom to hold a Parliament at Westminster on the Monday after the Octaves of Trinity and that the Archbishop should call a Convocation of the Prelates and others of the Clergy of his Province to the Church of St. Paul's London on the Morrow of Trinity for the Dispatch of the said Affairs To which Convocation none of the greater Prelates came on the said Morrow of Trinity or in the Eight days ensuing except the Archbishop or Two or Three other Bishops there named as the King was given to understand at which he much marvelled As also that the Great Men were not come to the Parliament upon the Day to which they were Summoned And he charged the Archbishop therefore to do what belonged to him in relation to those of the Clergy of his Province who came not to the said Convocation nor Obeyed his Mandate And the King would do what belonged to himself in relation to such as came not to Parliament nor Obeyed his Commands * Rot. Par. 18. E. 3. n. 1. If we supply this Record with the Writs extant on the Back of the Roll it will appear that the Clergy were Summoned here just as they are now by the Archbishop at the King's Order or Letter of Request as it was then deemed and †Even by the Crown it self for in the 25 E. 3. a Writ to the Archbishop of York in the Close Roll of that Year recites that the Archbishop of Canterbury had called his Clergy in Quindenâ Paschae ad Rogatum Nostrum stiled though it ran as now Rogando Mandamus and though the peremptory Time and Place of the Clergy's Assembling were prefixed by it and we see therefore that Punishment is Ordered in the Roll for their disobeying the Archbishop's Mandate but not a word of their not complying with the King's Summons But this was only the Language of Popery by which they kept up their pretences to Exemption and the Clergy were indulged in the Form so the Thing were but effectually done which was to have them Meet together with the Parliament and for the Dispatch of the same urgent Affairs of the Kingdom * Pur treter Parler ordeigner ce que soit miet affaire pur l' esploit des dit busoignes Are the Words of the Roll and one of these words is that from whence the Name of Parliament is derived for which the Parliament Met. And this was no new Practice but a Method now Settled and Customary of which various Precedent Instances might if they were needful be given but it is a short and sufficient Proof of it that the Words of the the King 's Writ to the Archbishop run More solito convocari faciatis We shall find also that the Archbishop of York had a Writ for That Province as the Archbishop of Canterbury had for This only he was to Convene his Clergy about a Fortnight Later than the other Province met †Province of Canterbury met on the Morrow of Trinity i. e. May 31. Easter falling that Year on April 4. That of York the Wednesday after St. Barnabas i. e. June 16. And in this the way then taken varied a little from Modern Practice which has made those Two Meetings perfectly Coincident But the ancient Usage was for the Clergy of Canterbury to Assemble first in order to set the President which it was expected that the other Province should almost implicitly follow and with reason since if the Two Provinces had continued to attend the Parliament in One Body as they did of Old the York Clergy would have had no Negative upon the Parliamentary Grants of the Clergy being a very unproportioned part of the Assembly When therefore they desired to Meet and grant Separately the Crown had reason to expect that what the greater Province did should be a Rule to the less or otherwise not to have consented to their Separation Very early in the Rolls therefore this Passage occurs That the Archbishop of Canterbury and other Nobles the King's Commissioners in his absence should require the Archbishop of York to contribute for the Defence of the North as They i. e. I suppose as the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Clergy had done 13 E. 3. n. 18. And even in Church Acts as well as State Aids what had passed the one was held to be a kind of Law to the other so that in 1463 we find the Convocation of York adopting at once all the Constitutions made by that of Canterbury and as yet not receiv'd †Memorand quòd Praelati Clerus in Convocatione 1463. Concedunt Unanimiter quòd Effectus Constitutionum Provincialium Cantuar. Prov. ante haec tempora tent habit Constitutionibus Prov. Ebor. nullo modo repugnant seu prejudicial non aliter nec alio modo admittantur Et quòd hujusmodi Constitutiones Prov. Cant. Effectus earundem ut praefertur inter Constitutiones Provinciae Ebor. prout indiget decet in serantur cum eisdem de caetero servandae incorporentur pro Jure observentur Registrum Bothe Arch. Ebor. f. 143. a Practice that I doubt not was often in elder times repeated and we know is still
of all the States of this Lond c. I desire not to be misunderstood in the Recital of these Testimonies I have no other Aim in 'em than barely to shew that the Inferior Clergy tho' meeting and consulting apart from the Parliament yet were still reckon'd to belong to it and to be in some sense and to some Purposes a Member of it and together with the Prelates of the Upper House to compose not indeed one of the Three Estates of Parliament but however an Estate of the Realm assembling joyntly with the Parliament and oblig'd by the Rules of our Constitution to attend always upon it If my Proofs may be allow'd to reach thus far and I have no manner of Mistrust but that they will I give up willingly whatever beyond this they may seem to imply which neither my Argument nor my Inclination any ways leads me to maintain It is so far from being in my Intention that it is not in my Wishes to set up a Plea for any of those Old Priviledges and Preheminences of the Clergy which are long since Dead and Buried and which I think ought never to be reviv'd even for the sake o◠the Clergy themselves who have thriven best always under a Competency of Power and Moderate Pretences The Present Rights they stand plainly possess'd of by Law are sufficient to render them useful Members of the Common-wealth within their Proper Spheres and that these Rights may be well understood and secur'd is the great and only design of these Papers To that end I have vouch'd the Precedent Passages from the Records of Parliament and Convocation not to set up any vain Pretence to the utmost of that Parliamentary Interest which the Clergy sometime had but to secure only what remains of it to them by shewing that their Separation from Parliament did not cut them off from all manner of Relation to it but that still after that their Convocations though held at a distance from the Parliament were in their own nature as well as in the Acceptance of the Crown and in the Eye of the Law Parliamentary Assemblies These Parliamentary Meetings of the Clergy were at first Congregationes or Convocationes Cleri but not therefore Concilia Provincialia Which were Extraordinary Assemblies for Church Business only for the restoring laps'd Discipline and reforming Ecclesiastical Abuses whereas the Others were originally held for Civil Purposes alone and the Common Affairs of the State And when Archbishop Stratford therefore called a Council of his Province * By a Writ dated 10 Kal. Aug. 1341. which begins thus Quamvis sit Sacris Canonibus Constitutum quod Metropolitani Archiepiscopi Primates annis singulis Legitimo Impedimento cessante pro Excessibus corrigendis Moribus reformandis debeant Provinciale Concilium celebrare the Preamble of his Letters Summonitory owns both the Obligation he was under by the Canons of Assembling them Yearly and his having omitted to do it for Eight Years last past though doubtless he had often in that time Convened the Clergy of his Province to Parliament However this Distinction held not very long the Business of Provincial Councils being in tract of time done in the ordinary Congregations of the Clergy and these and those being promiscuously stiled Convocations Till at last Provincial Councils properly so called ceased altogether and Parliamentary Convocations came into their room The Frequency and fix'd Certainty of which gave the Clergy a Regular Opportunity of doing all that for which the other Synods did but occasionally serve And when Warham therefore in 1509. did by his Own Authority call a Synod for the Redress of Abuses and Reformation of Manners his Mandate warn'd it to meet a few days after the Parliament * Parliament Met Jan. 21. Convocation Jan. 26. See Mandate in Bishop Burnet 's Collection of Records Vol. I. p. 6. and stiled it not a Provincial Council but a Convocation of the Clergy And this Word therefore afterwards in the Submission-Act as I understand it was applied strictly to signify the Clergy's Parliamentary Meetings For otherwise it could with no colour of Truth have been affirmed as it is there That the Convocation had always been Assembled by the King 's Writ unless both the Submitters and Enacters had by the Word Convocation understood the Consults of the Clergy in time of Parliament which in some sense were held always by the King 's Writ that is by the Premunitory Clause in the Bishops Summons and let me add are so held still as good Lawyers own †Bagshaw in his Argument about the Canons and Bishop Ravis in his Paper of Reasons to Queen Elizabeth ‖ § 5. affirms and the whole Lower House did to the same Queen upon occasion solemnly declare Witness their Remonstrance in 1558 to justify the Freedom of which they in the Preamble of it suggest the several Authorities by which they Assemble The Instrument is Printed in Fuller ⸪ Ch. Hist. IX Book p. 55. but with the Omission of some words which in that part of it which we have occasion to mention may be thus supplied Nos Cantuariens Provinciae Inferior Secundarius Clerus in ano Deo sic disponente ac Serenissimae Dominae nostrae Reginae Iussu Decani Capituli Cantuariensis Mandato Brevi Parliamenti ac Monitione Ecclesiasticâ sic exigente convenientes partium nostrarum esse existimavimus c. And this Opinion also that Parliament was of which Voted the Canons of 1640. Illegal chiefly on this head because they were made in an Assembly which though it met by the Parliament Writ yet Sate and Acted after the Parliament was determined Nor were they contradicted in it by the Famous Judgment given under the Hands of his Majesty's Counsel and other Honourable Persons Learned in the Law if the Words of that Judgment be well considered which are these The Convocation being called by the King 's Writ under the Great Seal doth continue until it be dissolved by Writ or Commission under the Great Seal notwithstanding the Parliament be dissolved Troub Try Laud. p. 80. Which is all very true and yet it may be true too that such a Writ or Commission ought of course to issue from the Crown upon the Dissolution of the Parliament But this Point is not touch'd upon in the Judgement given and seems to have been purposely declined For otherwise it had been a clearer and fuller Determination of the Matter in Question if they had said That the King might by his Prerogative keep a Convocation sitting as long as he pleased notwithstanding the Dissolution of that Parliament with which it was called I will not say That the Parliament of 1660. were certainly of the same mind though it is probable they were and that this was One if not the Chief Reason why in the Act * 13 Car. II. c. 12. Restoring Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction they so particularly and by Name excepted those Canons from a Parliamentary
very remarkable those words Attempt Alledge Claim and put in Ure are not recited A sure sign that the Attorney-Generals of those times 〈◊〉 those Times had Attorney-Generals that had both Skill and Will enough to carry the King's Prerogative as high as it would bear did not think that they could colourably be made use of to this purpose or that the Clergy were debarr'd by this Act from attempting New Canons to be made hereafter but such Old ones only as had been long ago pass'd and publish'd Dr. Wake therefore is Disingenuous in the Highest Degree where †Append. Num. V. p. 371. he pretends to Print this very Commission and when he comes to the Act of Parliament which it recites does not transcribe the Act as it is there recited which is in part only but refers us to his Extract of it Num. IV. and assures us that it is recited in the Commission as in the Extract Verbatim tho' the most Material words in his Extract and such as would be most Conclusive upon the Clergy's Convocational Acts and Debates if they really belong'd to 'em are as I have shewn designedly omitted in that Recital Such poor shifts is he forc'd to to maintain a Bad Cause which however even by these Ill Arts cannot be maintain'd The Proof drawn from these Commissions is farther confirm'd by a Proclamation of K. Charles the First in Iune 1644 * See it Biblioth Reg. pag. 331. which forbids the Assembly of Divines to Meet and Act upon these and these Accounts only Because by the Laws of the Kingdom no Synod or Convocation of the Clergy ought to be called and assembled within this Realm but by Authority of the King 's Writ and no Constitution or Ordinance Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons may be Made Enacted Promulg'd or Executed it says not Attempted Alledg'd Claim'd or puâ— in Ure which were words known to belong to Canons already made Unless with the King 's Royal Assent and License first obtain'd upon pain of every one of the Clergy's doing contrary and being thereof convict to suffer Imprisonment and make Fine at the King's Will as by the Statute of the 25 H. 8. declaring and enacting the same it doth and may appear Let me add to all these the Authority of the Convocation it self which set out the Institution of a Christian Man a few years after they had submitted In the Dedication of that Book the Prelates address the King after this manner Without your Majesty's Power and License we acknowledg and confess that we have none Authority either to assemble together for any pretence or purpose or to publish any thing that might by us be agreed on or compil'd Which words evidently imply a power of agreeing upon and compiling tho' they deny that of publishing any Determination or Doctrine It were endless after this to argue from the silence of the Authors of those times for then I must vouch All of them Only the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum being a Book of Great Note which was drawn up by Commissioners appointed by the King and where no Occasion is neglected of setting out and magnifying the Royal Power it may be worth our while to observe that there is not however in all that Book as far as I can find one Expression that implies the Composers of it to have thought that the Clergy's Synodical Debates lay under any Restraint from the Crown which is a very strong Presumption that they did not think the Clergy to lye under any The Reader will forgive me for laying together this Great Heap of Authorities if he either considers of how great Importance it is to my Cause that the sense I have given of the Act should be fully clear'd or how necessary Dr. Wake has made such a Collection by affirming that this sense of it was never allowâ—d of or for ought he knows so much as heard of I repeat his very words till the Gentleman against whom he writes enlighten'd the world with it P. 289. The Accounts I have given do I hope both sufficiently expose the Rashness and Vanity of this Assertion and also sufficiently prove the Truth and Justness of that Exposition To return to it therefore The Statute as far as it relates to the Power of the Clergy in Convocation plainly implies no more than that Canons should not from thenceforth pass and become Obligatory without the King's Leave and Authority given in that behalf without his Leâ—ve which was requisite to their Passing and his Authority which was afterwards to ratifie and give 'em force And to understand the words of the Law otherwise is as has appear'd to understand them against all Propriety and the Rules of Construction and which is still more unreasonable to do this in Materiâ minùs favorabili and where Ordinary Liberty is abridg'd and lastly which is intolerable where so grievous a Penalty as that of a Praemunire is to follow The 25 of H. 8. then has not in the least alter'd the Law of Convocations in relation to any of the Powers or Priviledges of the Inferior Clergy They can still freely Consult and Debate Petition or Represent propose the Matter or Form of New Canons and consider about the Inforcing or Abrogating old ones in a word act in all Instances and to all Degrees as they could before the passing of that Statute Indeed my Lord Archbishop's hands are ty'd by it for he cannot now call a Convocation without the King 's Writ which before this Act he might and in Elder Times frequently did He cannot now Enact and Constitute any thing by his own Authority as in Imitation of the Papal Power in Councils and of the Royal Power in Parliaments it was usual for him to do He must before he passes any Act of the Two Houses have the King's Assent to it and after it is pass'd there must be the King's License also to Promulge and Execute it In these several Respects the Metropolitan's Authority is considerably lessen'd by this Act the Exercise of which is now chiefly seen in Moderating the Debates of the Synod and giving his Vote last upon any Question propos'd there as Dr. Cousins Dean of the Arches to his Grace that then was does in his Tables express it * Ejus est moderari Synodum ultimò Suffragium ferre Tab. 3. But the Powers and Priviledges of All the other Members of Convocation continue whole and entire to 'em notwithstanding this Statute and were so understood to continue for a long time after it pass'd the Methods of proceeding in Convocation continuing the same for near Threescore and ten years after the Act as they had been before it the Clergy going on still to propose deliberate and resolve as they had been us'd to do without Qualifying themselves for it by any Precedent License under the Broad Seal the King the Parliament and People of the Realm allowing 'em so to do without opposing this Method as Illegal
being oppos'd or understood since That it self would be a Misfortune to 'em tho' they were sure to have it quash'd elswhere The Bishops Interest Authority Eloquence 〈…〉 sufficient to plead the Churches 〈◊〉 and secure her Interests in the House of Lords where all the Noble Members are under so favourable a Disposition towards Her that they would certainly do Her Justice tho' they were sollicited by less Powerful Advocates However the Commons Spiritual think it very Proper and Reasonable that they should in these cases have a Recourse to the Commons Temporal whose Interests in the State running parallel with Theirs in the Church and being nearly linkâ—d with them seem mightily to encourage such an Application and to make it a Point of Prudence as well as Duty in the Clergy to practise it where it may be had The Commons have a considerable Interest in the Lesser Clergy by reason of their Patronage They are their Protectors and Guardians appointed by Law in relation to one part of their Maintenance and will be extremely tender therefore of all their other Civil or Ecclesiastical Rights and careful to cover them from any Attempts that shall be made upon their Priviledges That so they may be in Heart and at Hand always to stand up with them in behalf of Liberty when it shall be attack'd and to resist a Growing Tyranny either in Church or State as it may happen For Arbitrary Government is a Spreading and Contagious Thing and when once it is set up any where there is no knowing where it will end My Lords the Bishops therefore must excuse us if as great a Reverence as we bear to their Characters and as high an Esteem as we have of their Personal Qualifications their Integrity Capacity Courage yet we think it fit that other Helps should be call'd in since All Helps are but little enough to support the sinking Interests of Religion and the Clergy and judge the Great Concerns of the Church no where so secure as where the Wisdom of our Constitution has lodg'd 'em in the Hands of a Convocation of the Province We know the Enemies of the Church sleep not tho' the Watchmen sleep too often are the words of one once an Active Presbyter of this Church now a Vigilant Prelate * Dr. Burnet 's Fast-Sermon before the House of Commons Anno 1681. p. 25. We cannot God be thanked apply 'em to the Present Bench of Bishops and would not if we could unless in a Case of the Utmost Necessity because nothing less than that would justifie such a freedom in Meaner Authors However Times may come that will deserve such Language but when if the Provincial Assemblies of the Church be together with its Watchmen laid asleep it will be too late to use it The Right Reverend Author of that Discourse who should understand the Frame of our Church well having written the History of it observes that it is happily Constituted between the Extremes of Ecclesiastical Tyranny on the one Hand and Enthusiastical Principles on the other Hand †Ibid p. 9. It is so and the Happiness of this Constitution in relation to one of these Extremes lyes in the Interest which the Lower Clergy have in Convocation where they are associated with their Lordships in the Care and Government of the Church Whereas out of Convocation they are not I think advis'd with and have little else to do but to observe Orders The Diocesan Synods of our Church being not for Counsel now but for the Exercise of the Episcopal Authority This Happy Frame therefore should by all means be kept up and the rather because it suits very happily with that of the State and with the Constitution of Parliaments And it is highly expedient for every Church and State that the Ecclesiastical Polity should be adapted to the Civil as nearly as is consistent with the Original Plan of Church-Government which in our Case there will be no danger of departing from by a Compliance with the State-Modell For I am sure and am ready when ever I am call'd upon particularly to prove that the more our Church shall resemble the State in her Temper and Manner of Government the nearer still will she approach to Primitive Practice and the nearer she comes up to Both these the more likely will she be to Endure and Flourish What the same Eminent Pen has said on this Occasion I willingly subscribe to That as in Civil Government a Prince governing by Law and having high Prerogatives by which he may do all the Good he has a mind to which yet he cannot abuse to act against the Law and who is oblig'd often to consult with his People in what relates to common safety by whose Assistance he must be enabled to put in Execution the Good Things he designs is certainly the best Expedient for preventing the Two Extremes in Civil Society Confusion and Slavery So a Bishop that shall have the Chief Inspection over those whom he is to Ordain and over the Labours of those already plac'd whom he shall direct and assist in every thing and who governs himself by the Rules of the Primitive Church and by the Advice of his Brethren is the likeliest Instrument both for propagating and preserving the Christian Religion * Pref. to the Hist. of the Regal I add and for the keeping up of this Particular Church in some Degree of Repute and Authority which have ever been best secur'd to it when her Prime Pastors have met their Clergy often in Synod and by their Advice and Assistance manag'd the Great Affairs of it But if that be thought too much and sound too high for the Lower Orders to pretend to who must be contented rather to be the Subjects of Ecclesiastical Government than any Sharers in it yet even Subjects themselves may Petition and make known whatever Grievances or Requests they have to offer without Encroachment on any of their Superiors And that the Liberty of such Addresses and Representations is still left to the Convocation to the Lower House alone or to Both joyntly I have fully shew'd The Statute of Submission even under the most Rigorous Interpretation of it being scarce pretended to abridge their Priviledges in this respect And because Practice in this kind is the best Proof I shall here add a few Instances of it In the Convocation of 1542 33 Hen. 8. the Acts say that at the passing of the Subsidy Clerus exposuit 4. Petitiones to the Upper House who when they presented the Subsidy were to acquaint the King with them 1. De Legibus Ecclesiasticis condendis 2. De Conjugiis factis in Bethlehem abolendis 3. De veneundis Beneficiis 4. De Decimis solvendis Act. MSS. Sess. 20. The Two Petitions in the first Convocation of E. 6. See 'em in Bishop Burnet's Hist. Vol. 1. p. 118. Collect. of Records whatever force they may have to prove a License necessary on other Occasions which shall hereafter be fully
some Late Writers pretending to answer the Letter to a Convocation Man particularly by the Author of a Letter to a Member of Parliament and by Dr. Wake in his Book intitled The Authority of Christian Princes over their Ecclesiastical Synods asserted c. This Book being written by a Person of some Station in the Church and as is pretended under the Cover of a Great Authority deserves to be examined with a more than ordinary care which accordingly I have resolved to bestow upon it Dr. Wake indeed has a Peculiar Talent at enlarging on a Controversie the shortest Point when it comes under his Fruitful Pen immediately improves into a Volume I shall not so far follow his Example as to trace all he has said step by step and Page by Page and take every Opportunity that he has given me of laying open his misapplied Reading and mistaken Reasonings That would be an Endless Task which I have no leisure for neither does the Cause require it nor would the Reader bear it I shall endeavour therefore as much as I am able to shorten this Debate and in order to it shall first of all make some General Reflections upon his way of managing it wherein I shall shew how very little there is in his Tedious Work that really concerns the Point disputed and how much of it is written against no body and for no End in the World that I can see but the Pleasure of Emptying his Common-Place-Book I may very aptly apply to him what Bishop Andrews said of a much Greater Adversary Etsi nobis lis nulla de Regiâ in Ecclesiasticis Potestate tamen exorari non potest Tortus quin in Campum exeat istius Controversiae ubi quaestio nobis nulla de eâ re ostendat tamen nobis Testes minimè necessarios Explicare scilicet voluit Opes suas ostendere quae habebat in Adversariis suis. Habebat autem ad hanc rem nonnulla si incidisset alicubi Iam quia non incidit occasionem arripit non valdè idoneam ea quoquo modo proferendi Vult enim Lectorem videre quà m Cupressum pingat eleganter * Tortura Torti p. 169 I shall not I hope be thought impertinent in displaying these Impertinences of his which I shall do in as narrow a compass and under as few Heads of Observation as the variety of the matter will admit of And I. I observe that Dr. Wake has put himself to a great deal of needless pains to prove a Point which he might if he pleased have taken for granted that every Christian Prince and Ours in particular has an Ecclesiastical Supremacy and that the Clergy are not by a Divine Right intitled to transact Church-affairs in Synods as they please and as often as they please without any regard to the Civil Christian Power that they live under Many of those numerous Instances he has produced of Princes intermedling with Church-matters here at home or abroad are designed only to assert this Great Truth which however is a Point that he needed not to have laboured so heartily because no Church of England man ever denied it not the Man he writes against I am sure who says only and what he says I shall not fear to say after him that the Civil and Spiritual Powers are distinct in their End and Nature Lett. to a Conv. Man pp. 17 18. and therefore ought to be so in their Exercise too The One relates to the Peace Order Health and Prosperity of the Man in this Life as a Sociable Creature the other concerns his Eternal State and his Thoughts Words and Actions preparative thereto The first is common to all Societies whether Pagan or Christian the Latter can rightly be exercised among Christians only and among them not as inclosed within any Civil State or Community but as Members of a Spiritual Society of which Iesus Christ is the Head who has also given out Laws and appointed a standing Succession of Officers under himself for the Government of this Society And these Ministers of his did actually govern it by these Powers committed to them from him for near 300 years before any Government was Christian. From whence says he it follows that such Spiritual Iurisdiction cannot be in its nature necessarily dependent on the Temporal for then it could never have been lawfully exercised till Kings States and Potentates became Christian. And agen in another place This Power having been claimed and exercised by the Apostles and their Successors without any Regard nay in Opposition to the Heathen Temporal Authority is therefore we say not necessarily in its own nature dependent on such Authority †P. 19 20. Than which Reasoning nothing certainly can be more just nor could that Writer have expressed himself with more Caution and Guard upon so nice an Occasion Dr. Wake seems here to have apprehended him as if he had affirm'd that Princes have nothing to do in Church-matters the Management of which lyes without their Sphere and no ways depends on Their Authority But no Man living could have struck this sense out of his words that was not either very Blind or very willing for some small End or other to misunderstand him Cannot this mighty Controvertist distinguish between Denying the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Power to be necessarily dependent on the Temporal and affirming it to be necessarily independent upon it Does he not see a difference between saying that the Church may subsist without the State and that the State has nothing to do in the Government of the Church If he does not he ought to forbear tampering in Disputes of this kind till his Judgment is better and his Head clearer But if seeing this difference he yet resolved to take no notice of it either because he had made Collections some time of his Life about the Supremacy and was resolved to take this Opportunity of giving himself the Credit of them or because he saw it would be of use to him to have the Writer he appears against represented under as Invidious Colours and his Opinions loaded with as much weight as was possible if this were the Case it must be allowed him that there was some little Art tho' I think no very great share of Honesty in his Management 'T is true the Letter to a Convocation-man immediately after the last words I transcribed from it adds And if we should say further that this Society has an Inherent and Unalterable Right to the Exercise of this Power it would be no more than what every Sect or Party among us claims and practises c. But Dr. Wake could not with any colour lay hold of this Passage as asserting the Independency of the Church on the State for besides that it is only a way of arguing drawn from other Mens Principles it is a few Lines afterwards expresly retracted and qualifyed But this says he is what at the present we neither do nor need say Notwithstanding which Dr.
and moderate their Debates either in Person or by his Deputies as he saw occasion After the Fathers had come to Resolutions and framed their Canons it was of vast Importance to 'em to have the Secular Power ratifie what they had agreed on They could Authoritatively declare what was the General Sense of the Church on such and such Articles but to procure that these Decisions should be generally received and obeyed in all Christian Countries could no ways be so effectually brought about as by Civil Sanctions and Penalties On all these accounts and many more it was highly reasonable and just nay necessary almost that the Imperial Power should exert it self in Appointing the Meetings and Governing the Debates and Confirming the Acts of General Councils But was there the same Reason and Necessity for its interposing as particularly in Provincial Synods also which were Ordinary Meetings of perpetual and standing Use in the Church not Numerous or Composed of Equals but of Persons living at no Great Distance from one another and all Subordinate to one Ecclesiastical Superior Dr. Wake knows in his Conscience that these Circumstances make a Wide Difference between them and if so why does he amuse us with Large Accounts of what Emperors have done and been allowed to do in relation to those Great and Extraordinary Meetings the Custom of which makes neither for nor against the Rule that was to be observed in these Ordinary Stated ones To what purpose was it for him nauseously to transcribe Labbée for fifty Pages together upon a Common-place which has been so often and so thoroughly exhausted by the Writers of the Last Age and which besides is of no manner of use towards determining the present Dispute Does he think to cover the want of proper and apposite matter by such loose and General Reflections as these Does he hope to make his Readers lose sight of the Point they are in quest of in that Mist of Impertinent Quotations with which he surrounds ' em The Learned Mr. Hill had rightly observed that what Dr. Wake produces * P. 10. from Socrates †Hist. Eccl. Praef. l. iv about the Emperor's interposing in the Greatest Councils was of no weight in the present Argument where we are enquiring what the Usage and Rights of the Church are not in the Greater but Lesser Synods which go by quite another Rule and are much more exempt from the Interposition of the Civil Authority Dr. Wake makes a Scornful mention of this Distinction in the Preface to his Appeal * P. xxi without vouchsafing to give any Reply to it which was discreetly done for it would not admit of any The Distinction is just and well applyed and had it been considered by Dr. Wake when he wrote must have prevailed with him to withdraw above half the History that his first Chapter is filled with and have made that part of his Work look no more Learned than it really is Socrates might well say that the Greatest Synods were held always at the Emperor's Direction but he knew the Lesser were not and therefore omitted the mention of them And the same Caution is observed in one of our XXXIX Articles †Art 21. where it is affirmed indeed that General Councils may not be gather'd upon any Occasion in any Circumstances without the Commandment and Will of Princes But of Provincial Councils nothing is said However the Churches Caution in Wording her Decision is not greater than Dr. Wake 's in citing it who has thoughout his first Book made as I remember but one slight and General mention ‖ P. 10. of this Article without producing the words of it which he knew would go near to suggest a Distinction that it was not to his purpose to have observed Indeed the Canons of 1640 seem and only seem to go further for in truth they do not Art 1. They affirm that the Power of calling both National and Provincial Councils is the true Right of all Christian Kings within their own Realms and Territories but say not that this is the Right of Kings alone so that no other Person or Persons can in any Circumstances whatever claim or use it on the contrary they plainly teach that where the Prince is not Christian the Prelates of the Church may rightfully use this Power so it be with Submission to the Civil Penalties and Punishments that may attend 'em on that account and they intimate the Case to be the same under a Christian Persecuting Prince tho' it was not so Decent openly to express it The Canon and the Article therefore are perfectly consistent and both are drawn up with that Moderation and Guard as to give the Prince what is His Due and yet not to deprive the Church of what may be Hers but to leave the way open to the Exercise of the same Power that she claimed and practised before Princes came in to the Faith if there should ever be the fame Occasion for it which I hope there never will And this Canon too was not it seems thought worthy to accompany Dr. Wake 's Other Collections where Foreign and far fetched Authorities take up his Pen so much that he had not room to consider what had been said here at Home upon the Subject no not in a Work written on purpose to clear and to assert the Doctrine of the Church of England But we are not to wonder at it for the same Happy Talent of Mind which makes a Man abound in what is Trivial makes him Defective also in what is Material All that Dr. Wake can say for his way of arguing is that he has in it traced the Steps of some of our Greatest Writers who treating of the Supremacy derive the Proofs of it from the same Sources he has done and frequently give Instances of the Powers exercised by Princes over the Greatest and most General Assemblies as appears from that Collection of Authorities which he has made in his Appeal But this will not justifie him for those Writers whose Pattern he pretends to follow had to do with such Adversaries as quite shut out the Civil Power from interposing in Church-matters Most of 'em being engag'd either against the professed Defenders of the Papacy as Iewel Bilson Nowell Mason c. or against those of the Rigid Presbyterial way as Whitgift Hooker Bancroft Bramhall c. were In Opposition to these therefore it was proper to shew how far the Practice of the first Christian Emperors was consistent with such Principles And whether their Instances to this purpose were taken from the Greater or Lesser Church-meetings from Provincial or General Councils it was all one to the point in hand and made equally against Those whose Doctrine they were to disprove Not so in Dr. Wake 's Case who when he wrote his First Book had no such Adversary to deal with but One who argued altogether upon the Bottom of a Civil Right and drew his Plea purely from our
Domestick Constitution and the approved Laws and Usages of the Realm When Dr. Wake therefore by the Authorities produced in his Last Piece would excuse the Doctrine laid down in his former he deals unfairly with us for those Authorities justifie only that part of his Doctrine which was foreign to the Argument they being Declarations chiefly of the General Rights and Interests of Supreme Christian Powers in Ecclesiastical Affairs without entring into the Various Restrictions of that Right which the Spiritual Subjects may in several Places be intitled to by the Concessions of Princes and States and by their particular Priviledges and Immunities and without considering nicely Where that Supremacy may in different respects be said to be lodg'd and Who therefore must be taken in as Sharers in several Acts and Branches of it Which Considerations nevertheless are necessary to determine the just Extents of our Princes Rights in this Case and the Measure of our Obedience as will hereafter in Due Place more clearly appear In these Opinions our Old Writers had an Eye to the Act and Oath of Supremacy to maintain which was the business of that Age in which they wrote and their words therefore must be understood as that Oath is drawn up Negatively not Positively that is as denying the Usurpations in Ecclesiastical Matters that have been made or attempted from without upon the Crown of England not as setling the exact Boundaries and Limits of that Supremacy within in relation either to those who are to govern or those who are to be governed by it which is a Controversie that there has hitherto been but little said of and indeed but little Occasion to consider and which could not therefore be setled and determined by such Writers as lived and died before it was started Dr. Wake 's Cloud of Witnesses therefore which he produces in his Appeal are very properly such for they serve only to darken and confound the Point we are in pursuit of not at all to clear it They are such a Nubes Testium as we had in the Late Reign for Transubstantiation and other Romish Articles where the Old Fathers were vouched by whole-sale for a Doctrine that came not upon the Stage till they were gone off it And much the same Usage have the Fathers of our own Church had from the Pen of this Appellant who has cited 'em if pertinently to Points that perhaps they never heard of and to purposes that to be sure they never dreamt of and to which had those Excellent Persons foreseen that their words would have been stretched they would certainly have renounced such Consequences or rather have prevented 'em by expressing themselves more warily They were to plead for the Supremacy of Princes against Those who were for allowing them no manner of Interest in Church-matters and what wonder is it if in the warmth of this Dispute they should as the Fate is in All Controversies have sometimes a little over-thought or over-expressed themselves and have laid down such Positions as tho' of sound Sense when opposed to the Principles of those against whom they contended yet when applyed in other Cases and Circumstances then out of their Thoughts and the Debate might need some little softning Their Great Concern was to secure the Royal Prerogative and when that was done they thought their own Rights and Priviledges would be secure under the Shadow of it These they were then in a full Uninterrupted Possession of without apprehensions that a Time might come when they should be put to prove their Title to 'em and when that Power which they so warmly and with reason pleaded for should be turn'd upon them and made use of against the Maintainers of it Much less did they suspect that ever any pretended Son of the Church of England would amass together all the Highest Assertions of the Regal Supremacy scattered up and down in their Writings in order to furnish out a Plea for suppressing the Liberties of that Church and on purpose to prove that Convocations were what the Letter to a Member of Parliament sawcily says * P. 26. Bishops are the Creatures of the Crown which therefore as it created so it may annihilate at its pleasure Such kind of Books indeed were written Twelve Years ago by some False Members of our Communion to make way for those Ill Designs that were then on foot but to the Eternal Infamy of the Writers of them who thought to find their particular account in the General Ruin of that Church and Constitution to which they belonged but were God be thanked every way defeated in Their Expectations There is not 't is true so much Hazard now as there was then in exalting the Regal Power when we live under a Prince who is too Just and too Clear sighted to be flattered into a Misuse of his Authority However no Thanks are due for this to the Flatterers who have markt out the Arbitrary Scheme and it is no fault of theirs if it be not afterwards followed My Indignation at such Unworthy and Mean Attempts has carried me away into Considerations not so proper for this place and led me a little from a strict pursuit of my Argument I left it where I was shewing how weak Dr. Wake 's way of reasoning is from the Powers exercised by Princes over the Greatest Synods to their interposing equally in the Less He himself seems to be sensible of it and therefore to prevent this Long Chapter of his being One Entire Impertinence has sprinkled up and down in it a few Instances of the Authority of Princes over their Provincial Synods which being the only Instances there that any ways affect our Argument I shall not think much to consider ' em And in order to it I observe III. That in those Few Historical Facts which seem apposite and proper he either manifestly mistakes National for Provincial Synods or Extraordinary Assemblies for Ordinary and stated ones or conceals some Circumstances relating to the Story of those Meetings which when known give an Easie Account how the Royal Power came so particularly to interpose in ' em Several of the Synods which he calls Provincial were undoubtedly not so Others which were yet were called by Princes upon Extraordinary Emergences and do no ways prejudice the Right which the Church then had of assembling ordinarily at set times without a Lay Summons For whâ—n Princes admitted the Canon of the Nicene Council to take place in their Kingdoms and allowed the Synods of every Province to meet twice a Year in vertue of it they did not by that preclude themselves from calling those Synods together at other times when the Circumstances of the Church or State should require them They parted with no Power that they had to Convene such Assemblies but only gave a Liberty to the Clergy of the Province to meet at appointed Times whether they had a Royal Command for it or no. Besides had Dr. Wake intended a fair state of this
Point he would have set aside all those Instances of Provincial Councils Summoned by Princes where those Princes exerted their Power only to make Metropolitans who were remiss do their Duty and obey the Canons or where they interposed only to revive the Use of such Meetings which had been under a long Discontinuance in their Kingdoms and when they had done so lest them afterwards to their Ordinary Course In these Cases whatever the Prince did he did in behalf of the Churches Rights and his Act ought not therefore to be alledged and cannot fairly be construed to their prejudice Nay in the most Ordinary and Regular Assemblies of the Province should any mention be made in their Acts of their Meeting by the Civil Authority yet it ought to be considered whether at the same Time and in the same Acts their Right of meeting by the Canons also be not claimed For if it be the Exercise of the Regal Power in such Instances is no Bar to those Liberties of the Church which are at the same time expresly asserted and maintained Kings may order their Bishops to meet when those Bishops would have met tho' unordered and all therefore that such Bishops when met could do to secure their Ecclesiastical Right of Meeting was to mention it together with the Royal Precept and this we may presume 'em purposely to have done to prevent those Precedents being drawn into Consequence and under a Prudent Foresight of the Ill Uses that might be made of them by such Betrayers of the Church-Rights as our Author in Future Ages These Circumstances should have been considered by him and where they take place in any of the Instances of Provincial Councils he alledges acknowledged But it was not agreeable either to his Design or his Temper to enquire into matters thus carefully or to state 'em thus candidly and fairly It was enough if upon a Superficial View of the Acts of Provincial Synods or those that passed for such he found at the Entrance of any of 'em a mention of the Royal Power This he knew would have the Look of a Proof and whether it had more than that he knew not and cared not and hoped other People would not give themselves the Trouble to enquire To come to Particulars The First Instance he has produced of the Authority of Princes over Provincial Synods is this When Theodoret says he began to be busie in calling the Bishops together Theodosius not only laid a Prohibition upon him but confined him to Cyrus his own little See as a Punishment for what he had done before P. 18. I question whether Dr. Wake ever gave himself the Trouble of reading those three Epistles * Epist. 79 80 81. which he cites on this occasion tho' not with right Numbers For there he would have found that Theodoret when thus prohibited by the Emperor was at Antioch where he had no more Authority to call the Bishops together than at Rome or Constantinople He had been called up thither from his Little See to reside with Iohn the Patriarch and whatever of this kind he did therefore he did by his Order and as his Substitute But Theodosius finding the Peace of the East hazarded by these Assemblies and the Nestorian Heresie favoured by them sent an Order to Theodoret upon whose Advice the Patriarch acted to retire to his own Diocese and live there This is the true account of that matter which how it makes for or against any Point in Dispute between Dr. Wake and his Adversaries is to me hard to apprehend The next Provincial Synod he mentions is that of Agatha called by Caesarius Bishop of Arles but not says the Dr. till he had obtain'd the Consent of Alaric the Goth for it and it is expresly noted that it was held by his Allowance †P. 20. What if it were was it not a mighty favour that thirty five Catholick Bishops for so many were present ‖ Vide Conc. Meld c 73 should be allowed to meet under an Arian Prince tho' the Rules of the Church were on their side and was not this favour fit to be acknowledged in their Acts especially since at the same time they took care to assert their Ecclesiastical Right to such Meetings and to ordain * Can. 71. that for the future in obedience to the Canons Provincial Synods should be held yearly The Permission of the Prince would be sufficiently accounted for this way had this Synod been both Ordinary and Provincial but it was really neither not Ordinary for it was called after a long Intermission of Councils in those parts to restore the Decayed Discipline of the Church not Provincial for De Marca has observed * L.VI. c. 17. §. 1. that no less than five Metropolitans and the Proxy of a sixth subscribe to it But the Doctor found it styled Provincial in the Tomes of the Councils and he look'd no further Such another Provincial Council is the very next he insists on †Ibid. p. 20. that of Epaon it was composed of the Bishops of Two Distinct Provinces those of Vienne under their Archbishop Avitus and of Lyons under Viventiolus as the Subscriptions if he had not been too much in hast would have informed him Among the Spanish Councils he meets with Two that were Provincial the Synods of Narbonne and Saragosa and of both these he tells us it is said that they met according to the Order of Recaredus Pag. 23. But by his favour this is said of neither In that of Narbonne they affirm ‖ Concilia Sanctorum Patrum vel Decreta observare cum timore Dei cupientes Nos in Urbe Narbonî secundum quod Sancta Synodus per ordinationem Gloriosissimi nostri Recaredi Regis in urbe Toletanâ finivit in unum convenimus themselves to meet in vertue of the Antient Canons and of the Decree of the third Council of Toledo which met by Recaredus's order In that of Saragosa they own themselves indeed to meet by the Permission but not by the Order of Recaredus and this Permission might be and probably was no more than what was contained in the Canon of that Council of Toledo which had revived the use of Provincial Synods in Spain but just before and the Acts of which Recaredus had confirmed In Gallicia he finds the Second Synod of Braga which was Provincial to have assembled at the Command of Arianirus * P. 23. It did so but it must be considered that no Synod had been held in those parts for many years before †Diu est says the Metropolitan in his Speech by which he opened it Sanctissimi Fratres quòd secundum Instituta Venerabilium Canonum Decreta Catholicae Apostolicae Disciplinae desiderabamus Sacerdotalem inter nos fieri debere Conventum quia non solùm Ecclesiasticis Regulis Ordinibus opportunum est sed stabilem etiam semper efficit Charitatis Fraternae Concordiam dum
perpetual Law of the Church I do not wrong him in representing this as the Design of that large Historical Account of the Authority of Princes over their Councils which he has given us for besides that he must either have had this design or none nothing less than this being of any service to that side of the Debate which he espouses Besides this I say the very Terms in which he expresses himself shew this to be the true and only End he aims at Tho' Pag. 34 says he the Council of Nice first and after that several other Councils provided for the constant meeting of Provincial Synods every year and these being allowed of by the Emperors and other Princes who confirmed those Canons and approved of what they had defined may seem to have put these kind of Synods at least out of their power yet even in These we find 'em still continuing to exercise their Authority and not suffering even such Councils to be held without their Leave or against their Consent To confirm which he produces two o◠three Stories which I have shewn to be utterly wide of the mark and then concludes So intirely has the assembling of these Provincial Synods been looked upon to depend on the Will and Authority of the Christian Prince * P. 36. A Conclusion that has no Premisses nor any one clear and full Instance in all his Long Beadroll of Councils to support it The Doctor had kindly prepared us in his Preface to expect Digressions but withal promised us in his nice manner that they should be rather not directly to the purpose than altogether distant from it However I find not that he has kept his word with us or that they deserve to be thus gently dealt with In the first of 'em that meets me here I have shewn nine parts in ten of it i. e. whatever he has said about General Councils to be altogether distant from the purpose and that the other poor Scantling about Provincial Synods which seems to be yet is really not to the purpose and I conclude therefore that the whole is not only not directly to the purpose but altogether distant from it The Doctor must forgive me if I tell him that these Historical Unedifying Accounts of his put me in mind of the Honest Confession of William Caxton the Chronicler the words of which will become Dr. Wake 's mouth as well every whit as they did His and I cannot help thinking that I hear him in the close of his first Chapter thus addressing himself to his Reader Yf I cowde says he have founde mee storyes I wolde have sette in it moo but the substaunce that I can fynde and knowe I have shortly sette theim in this boke prayeinge all theym that see this symple werke of myne to pardon me of my symple writynge And indeed I for my part should have been very ready so to do had it been as Harmless as it is Simple and were it not likely as Simple as it is to be produced hereafter for a Testimony against the Churches Rights if it be not now opposed and disowned For which reason how Simple soever the performance is it deserves to be examined and I go on therefore to observe IV. That Dr. Wake distinguishes not between the Powers in Fact exercised by Princes and those of Right belonging to them by vertue of their Office Good Princes have been allowed often to extend their Authority in Spirituals very far and Ill Princes have often usurped an Authority beyond what they were intitled to Dr. Wake troubles not himself with these Considerations but what ever Powers he can find any Prince whether Good or Bad to have exercised over the Church Those he proposes as Patterns which all other Princes may safely copy and as the true Bounds and Measures of the Royal Supremacy When in the Story of our Convocations some Acts of theirs come cross him that he does not like then his Maxim is That they did take upon them to do this is no proof that they had a Right to do it * P. 296. But the most Extravagant Pretentions of Princes in the Ordering Church-matters are admitted by him without any such Guard or Distinction without considering Who it was that did this or that and in what Circumstances and for what Reasons they were submitted to in the doing it Charlemagne in Germany and Recaredus in Spain ordered Ecclesiastical Affairs with a very high hand and had certainly somewhat more than their Share came to in the management of them But this was tacitly yielded to by their Bishops who saw that to whatever Degree their Power was carried it would all be employed for the Establishment of the Church and Advancement of the Christian Religion What They did therefore must not because they did it be presently presumed to be the Common Right of every Christian Ruler but oftentimes an Instance only of a Discreet Complyance in the Clergy with such Intrenchments on the Liberties of the Church as might redound to the benefit of it Good Princes who had the Hearts of their People and were known to be intirely in their Interests have been permitted to carry their Prerogative in Civil Matters to an heigth that has been withstood and retrenched in more suspected Reigns Were the Measure of our English Constitution to be taken from those Excesses of Regal Power which have been winked at sometimes when well employed what would become of the Liberty of the Subject or the Freedom of Parliaments Dr. Wake finds perhaps in the Acts of some Councils Expressions of Great Duty and Respect used to Pious Princes by their Clergy These presently he lays hold of as Authentick Synodical Decisions The Council of Tours it seems did once upon a Time tell Charles the Emperor * See p. 92. that they left their Decrees to Him to do what he pleased with them and the Council of Arles begged him if he thought fit to amend and alter them †Ibid. This is Handle enough for Dr. Wake to annex such an Altering Power to the Kingly Character and to represent the Business of Synods to be only the preparing of matter for the Royal Stamp which may be improved corrected enlarged shorten'd at the Prince's Pleasure as in p. 84 and 85. of his Honest Performance he is pleased to express himself and therein to intitle the King de Iure to a more Extravagant Authority than ever the Pope himself I believe with all his Plenitude of Power de facto exercised or claimed But surely this is a Doctrine of too great Importance to be established on so slight a bottom and of such dangerous consequence to the Church that nothing less than the Universal Practice of the Church can sufficiently authorize it The Doctor may remember when he wrote against Prayers for the Dead in a late Reign his way of arguing was that Doctrines of that weight were not to be built on the Figurative Apostrophe's and Rhetorical
Decrees of those four first General Councils for which both the Church and the Law of England * Canon Aelfrici Can. 33. 1 Eliz. c. 1. have and have always had a particular Veneration But of All the Instances he has pitched upon to shew that Synods can debate of nothing but what the Prince particularly proposes to 'em commend me to those he urges P. 54 55. from the Practice of Carloman at the Synod of Leptines and of Arnulph at that of Trebur The first of these says he had call'd his Clergy together to advise him how the Law of God and the Religion of the Church which had been suffered to fall into such decay in the days of his Predecessors might be restored The second desires them to consider what they thought was needful to be done for the Reformation of Mens Manners for the Security of the Faith and for the Preservation of the Unity of the Church How could these Emperors possibly have expressed themselves in words that left their Synods more at large or gave greater Scope to their Debates than these do which yet Dr. Wake produces on purpose to shew that the Prince prescribed to them the Particular Points on which they were to proceed These are Ill Proofs indeed but pity it is that such Bad Notions should ever be supported by better Under the Prince's Power of suggesting any Subject of Debate to a Synod I comprehend also his Power of proposing the Draught of a Canon to them for that too he has sometimes done but without confining 'em to pass such Canons in the Form prescribed which I conceive he has never done nor has any Right to do tho' Dr. Wake gives us very Broad Hints that he thinks otherwise and to that End produces the Three Ecclesiastical Constitutions which Marcian delivered to the Fathers of the Fourth General Council at Chalcedon ready drawn up to be approved by them and they all he says gave their Unanimous Assent to 'em * P. 65. But he tells us not as he might that the Matter of these Canons was of such a mixt nature as made it proper for the Emperor to interpose in them nor does he inform us with what words of high Respect and Deference he offered 'em to the Synod There are says he Three Points which in Honour to your Reverences we have reserved for you judging it fit and decent that they should rather be by You in Synod Canonically defined than Enacted by our Temporal Laws †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 6. And in what manner the Synod passed 'em is worth our notice for it was neither in that Order nor exactly in those Terms in which they were proposed And one of them ‖ The Second they put into different words without any the least alteration of sense merely as it should seem to keep free of an Ill Precedent which by receiving the Emperor's Form they might have brought upon themselves So that this is a much better Proof that the Emperor could not prescribe the Form of a Canon to them than that he could Nor are his English Instances of this kind more to his purpose Some of our Princes he says have not only prescribed to their Convocations what they should go about but have actually drawn up before-hand what they thought convenient to be established and have required them to approve of it * P. 110. And for this he vouches King Iames's Letter to the Convocation in 1603 together with which he sent them the Articles of 1562 to be approved by ' em A notable Instance of the Prince's Power actually to draw up before-hand what they think convenient to be established by their Synods because King Iames sent a Message to one of 'em about Confirming the Thirty nine Articles which had been actually drawn up by another Convocation forty years before that Message was sent And that this Point may be sure to be well proved he adds a Second Instance of it every whit as concluding as the Former The same Prince he says to Another Convocation about four years after signified his Pleasure for Singing and Organ-service to be setled in Cathedral Churches without submitting it to their judgment whether they approved it or no †Ibid. He tells us not from whence he drâ—w either this or the former particular and so I am not able to say how he has disguised them But taking this last as he has represented it clear it is that the King in this case did not form or draw up any thing before-hand for the Convocation to Sign but only suggested the Matter of a Canon to them and of such a Canon as if necessary there was no doubt of their agreeing unanimously in since it was only to confirm a received Practice and therefore if he did not ask their Approbation it was because he was sure of it Dr. Wake is in this Observation all over Mistake For whereas he calls this Another Convocation from that in 1603 it was certainly the same That in 1603 being by Prorogations continued from Time to Time for seven years together as his own words are a few Pages afterwards * P. 142. Nor could the Import of this Message well be the Setling of Singing and Organ-service in Cathedral Churches for it was setled there long before †At the Reforming of the Church not only the King's Chappel and all Cathedrals but many Parochial Churches also had preserved their Organs to which they used to Sing the appointed Hymns i. e. the Te Deum the Benedictus the Magnificat the Nunc dimittis c. performed in an Artificial and Melodious manner Heylin Hist. of Presbyt p. 226. Only King Iames I suppose recommended to 'em the framing of a Canon in behalf of what was hitherto authorized by Practice alone and by the Queen's Injunctions ‖ Sparrow p. 80. But this the Synod thought needless the Thing being otherwise so well established already and therefore framed no Canon concerning it How Ridiculous then is it in Dr. Wake to say that the King signified his Pleasure to them in this matter without ever submitting it to their Iudgment whether they approved it or no when the Event shews that they disapproved and did not comply with the Motion for I never heard of any such Canon in behalf of Singing and Organ-service and which is more Bishop Sparrow never heard of it neither If this Message therefore make any thing for the King's Power of Proposing it makes as strongly for the Clergy's Priviledge of denying if they think fit which is the very thing Dr. Wake is endeavouring in this place to deprive them of VI. A Sixth Observation I have to offer on Dr. Wake 's way of managing this Controversie is that Those very Acts of Authority which were exercised by Princes in Ecclesiastical Matters to support and corroborate the Churches Power are by Him perversely made use of to undermine and destroy it He finds that the
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
before-hand led the way and that All therefore that those Princes generally did was to re-enact by the Civil what had been before enacted by the Ecclesiastical Authority and to give the Church Decisions more weight and force by inserting 'em into the Body of the Imperial Laws and annexing further Penalties to the Breach of them This is so certain and known a Truth that even at this day we can point out the several Canons upon which almost all the Civil Constitutions of those Princes were founded and in which the matter of 'em was either particularly and in Terms or at large and in general determined And if in some few Instances we should not be able to do this what wonder is it when it is considered at what a Vast Distance of Time we live from the first Rise of these things and how many Antient Church-Monuments that would have given light in these matters have in the course of so many Ages perished Iustinian in his Laws appeals frequently to the Canons and professes to follow them * Nov. 6. c. 1. Ibid. §. 8. Nov. 58. sub finem Nov. 123. c. 36. And by this Pattern the French and German Princes in after-times framed their Capitularies taking the Subjects of them from the Resolutions of antecedent Synods †Decrevimus juxta Sanctorum Canonum Regulas Caroloman in Syn. Leptin Anno 747. and even referring themselves thither for the more clear understanding of what their Law only briefly and in General delivered ‖ P. 91. A Truth so Notorious that Dr. Wake himself durst not dissemble it And it would puzzle a man therefore to shew how such Laws should any ways derogate from the Authority of Synods which they took their rise from and were made on purpose to support and confirm I must put the Doctor in mind here of a way of arguing made use of by one of his Seconds in this Controversie where he is disputing against the Universities Authority to declare Heresie there he lays down this Position That the Convocation of the University of Oxford have never forbid any Doctrine to their Scholars before that very particular Doctrine was first declared Erroneous or Heretical by some Persons who were then reputed to have Power to declare Heresie * L. M. P. p. 69. The Truth of this Assertion I at present trouble not my self with but supposing it true the Inference that arises from it has weight I own and when applied to our Present Argument is of use to inform us what Secular Decrees in Church-matters are no ways prejudicial to the Power of the Church and the Authority of Synods And this was an Head I say upon which Dr. Wake should have explained himself largely and openly if he had intended a fair state of this Controversie or had had any other New in what he wrote than merely to serve a Turn and to advance some colourable kind of Plea for a Practice which if he knew any thing of these matters he must know was indefensible and be writing all the while for his Point against his Conscience and if he knew nothing of it with what Conscience could he undertake to determine it These are words that I do not easily persuade my self to bestow on any Man but his Gross Prevarications and Disguises of Truth in Doctrines of so great moment wherein the Interests of his Order and of Religion are so nearly concerned force this hard Language from me Nor stops he at General Reflections in this case but brings them home also to our own Church and Constitution pretending in his Appendix †Num. vii to give us an Abstract of several things relating to the Church which have been done since the 25 Hen. 8. by Private Commissions or otherwise out of Convocation In which Abstract many of the Points mentioned had certainly the Authority of Convocation tho' he would fain have us believe they had not and that antecedently to the Civil Injunction Others are such Acts of Ordinary Power as by the consent of All Churches and Parties of Men every Christian Prince is confessedly intitled to and some few perhaps might be owing to the Necessity of Affairs which would not then admit of more Regular Methods and should not therefore be vouched as reasonable Precedents and setled Rules and Standards of acting in more quiet times which is manifestly Dr. Wake 's End in producing them The Reader must forgive me if I detain him so long as to run through the Particulars of this List and shew upon each of 'em how far the Ecclesiastical Power concurred and led the way to it It will be a dry unpleasing Task but is of use to clear the Orderliness of some steps taken in those times which are generally misunderstood and is necessary to wipe off the Dirt thrown by Dr. Wake on the English Reformation the Process of which I am satisfied was very Regular and Canonical in most Cases tho' in some by reason of the Loss of Records it cannot easily be proved so Of this we are in General assured by such as lived at the time when those Records were in being particularly by Sir Robert Cotton and Mr. Fuller The first in his Posthuma * P. 215. has these words If any shall object that many Laws in Henry the Eighth's time had first the Ground in Parliament it is manifested by the Dates of their Acts in Convocation that they All had in that place their first Original The Latter speaks as follows Upon serious Examination it will appear that there was nothing done in the Reformation of Religion save what was acted by the Clergy in their Convocations or Grounded on some Act of theirs precedent to it with the Advice Counsel and Consent of the Bishops and most Eminent Church-men confirmed upon the Post-fact and not otherwise according to the Usage of the best and purest Times of Christianity * Church-Hist xvi Cent. p. 188. To which I shall add the Testimony of one who must be allowed a Good Witness in this case my Lord of Sarum He assures the Bishop of Meaux in the Answer he made to his Variations that Our Parliaments and Princes have not medled in matters of Religion any other way but that they have given the Civil Sanction to the Propositions made by the Church and this is that which Christian Princes do in all Places †P. 35. And in 1604 I find a Puritan Writer making this Challenge Let them if they can shew any one Instance of any Change or Alteration either from Religion to Superstition or from Superstition to Religion to have been made in Parliament unless the same freely and at large have been first agred upon in their Synods and Convocations ‖ Assertion of True and Christian Policy P. 168. Which is no otherwise considerable I own than as it comes from the Pen of an Adversary These are General Proofs which would go a good way towards setting aside the Particulars in
Dr. Wake 's Abstract if we had nothing more to say against 'em But they shall be further and more distinctly considered The Doctor took 'em he says out of his Collections as they lay there and for these Collections I find he scarce ever goes further than Bishop Burnet's History of the Reformation which tho' a very Excellent Work and meriting the Thanks of Parliament which it had yet as to the Proceedings of Convocation and the share which the Ecclesiastical Authority bore all along in those Changes is extremely defective partly from the want of Records and partly from his Lordship's omiting to set down All even of that Little that is left us on this Head in the Manuscript Memoirs of that time So that it is no Proof that nothing was done by the Clergy in such or such a Case because his Lordship says nothing of it Besides that History is by its very Method apt to mislead an unwary Reader in Enquiries of this nature the way of it being to set down first the Proceedings of Parliament in every case and then those of Convocation which makes it look oftentimes as if the Parliament had led the way to the Convocation in their Debates when the contrary to that is most certainly true and would have appeared so to be had his Lordship thought fit to follow the Pattern set by Antiquitates Britannicae and given the Precedence always to the Acts of Convocation when the Business was first agitated there and afterwards brought into Parliament which in a Church-Historian had I presume been a method not improper or unbecoming At least since his Lordship could not but know that our Reformation had suffered by being misunderstood in these respects it might not have been amiss to have given us warning when things were told out of the Natural Order of time in which they hapned and in what Instances the Leading steps were from the Convocation tho' the Course of his History seemed to place the rise of 'em elswhere The want of this notice has occasioned Dr. Wake 's mistakes in some cases and in others he has not made use even of the Light which this History would have afforded him I shall examine every Instance any ways material the Injunctions only excepted which it must be confessed were by Henry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth in vertue of their Supreme Headship and under the shelter of that Act which made the King's Proclamations equal to an Act of Parliament Issued out in a very Arbitrary manner and continued so to be as long as our Princes could in their High Commission-Court take notice of the Breach of them But since that Court has been put down and the Extraordinary Acts of Spiritual Jurisdiction annexed to the Imperial Crown of England by the First of Elizabeth Chap. 1. can now be exercised only in Parliament how far any Royal Injunction is valid unless where by the Advice of the Metropolitan it orders such things as that Act directs and allows or seconds some Authentick Canon or Received Practice and whether it has any greater force in Ecclesiastical than the King's Proclamation has in Civil Affairs I leave to the Gentlemen of the Long Robe to determine The Clergy I am sure are not the only Persons concerned in this point for the Princes of those days carried their Power further than Them and issued out Injunctions alike for the Clergy and Laity * See Edward the Sixth's Injunctions To all and Singular his Loving Subjects as well of the Clergy as of the Laity Sparrow p. 1. And Q. Elizabeth 's Anno 1559. Ibid. p. 65. If the Professors of the Law think that the Crown has still such a Power of sending out Commands at pleasure the Clergy will I dare say be concluded by Their Opinion An Abstract of several Things relating to the Church P. 381. which have been done since the 25 Hen. 8. by Private Commissions or otherwise out of Convocation 25 Hen. 8. Thirty two Persons appointed to review c. the Canons of the Church and to gather out of them such as should from thenceforth alone be of force in it See the Act. c. 19. Dr. Wake might if he had pleased have said See the Petition of the Clergy in Convocation which preceded this Act and wherein this Review of the Canons is by Them desired What was done in this matter was done at Their Instance and therefore had Their Authority 1536. Order for the Translation of the Bible Bâ—rn Hist. Ref. p. 195 249 302. This too was in consequence of a Petition from the Convocation a Memorandum of which is entred in their Acts Decemb. 19. 1534. Heylin * Reform justified p. 8. seems to say that it was put up by Both Houses However that which came from the Upper House is still extant in a Cotton Manuscript †Cleopatra E. 5. fol. 339. and in it the Bishops Abbots and Priors request the Archbishop to be instant with the King Ut dignaretur decernere quòd Sacra Scriptura in Linguam Vulgarem Anglicanam per quosdam Praelatos Doctos Viros per dictum Illustrissimum Regem nominandos transferatur And this Dr. Wake could not well be ignorant of because his very Guide in one of the places he himself quotes from him ‖ P. 195. on this occasion mentions this Petition * But places it in 1536. i. e. Two Years later than it was really made as an Act of Both Houses and let 's us know the Translation of the Bible took its rise from it 1538. Explication of the Chief Points in Religion published at the Close of the Convocation but not by it Ibid. p. 245. He means the Book called The Institution of a Christian Man but mistakes both the Time of its coming out and its Title and the Authority by which it was published And in the first and last of these that very Passage he cites would have set him right if he had heeded it For thus it speaks Tho' there was no Parliament in the Year 1537 yet there was a Convocation upon the Conclusion of which there was Printed an Explanation of the chief Points of Religion Signed by Nineteen Bishops Eight Archdeacons and Seventeen Doctors of Divinity and Law †Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. p. 245. Here is no Intimation of its not passing the Convocation but rather the contrary Twenty five of the Lower House subscribing it which might well be a Majority of the Members when not many years before in the great Debate about the Divorce of Queen Cathariâ—e Twenty three only as we have heard already * P. 53. were present and Fourteen of these Votes therefore made a Majority of that House But Heylin who had the Opportunity of examining the Registers puts this matter beyond a Probability for he speaks every where †Ref. just p. 11. p. 549. of this Book as having passed the Convocation and of these Twenty five as Subscribing it in the
invigilarunt proferantur hujus Domâ—s Examinationem subeant Synodalia And something of the same nature seems to be intimated in the Statute I mentioned which Enacts that whatever should be Ordained and set forth by the Archbishops Bishops and Doctors now appointed or other Persons hereafter to be appointed by his Royal Majesty or else by the whole Clergy of England in and upon the matter of Christ's Religion and the Christian Faith †This relates to the Institution of a Christian Man then to be reviewed and Lawful Rites and Ceremonies ‖ This to the Rituals at the same time to be altered and Observations of the same shall be in all and every point limitation and circumstance thereof by all his Grace's Subjects c. fully believed obeyed observed and performed Here the words by the whole Clergy of England do most naturally refer to the Last Verb appointed and under that Construction imply that this and such like Committees were consented to by the Convocation as well as named by the King and so they certainly were And the reason of establishing 'em was because the matters to be discussed requiring as this very Act speaks ripe and mature deliberation were not rashly to be defined nor restrained to this present Session or any other Session of Parliament as they must have been if they had been considered only in Convocation which Then sat and rose always within a few days of the Parliament These Committees therefore were appointed to sit in the Intervals of Parliament and tho' they had a Power of concluding finally yet they seldom I suppose did more than prepare business to be laid before the Convocation when it sat Accordingly what was done by this Committee for reforming the Offices was reconsider'd by the Convocation it self two or three years afterwards as a Manuscript Note * Sess. 19. 21. Feb. 1542 43. Reverendissimus dixit Regem velle Libros quosdam Ecclesiasticos examinari corrigi Ubi Reverendissimus tradidiâ— hos Libros examinandos quibusdam Episcopis I have met with taken from the Journals of Convocation implies These Committees indeed are spoken of sometimes in our Statutes and elsewhere as appointed by the King without any mention of the Convocation-Clergy which was partly owing to the Doctrine of those times by which the King in virtue of his Supreme Headship was said to do decree and order every thing tho' the previous Steps and Resolves were from the Convocation and was withal not improper considering how much was left to the Royal Power in such matters for the Clergy often only Petitioned the King for a Committee and referred the Nomination of it to him of which a clear Instance has been given before in the Request for the Translation of the Bible Indeed when the Committee was composed of Members from both Provinces as it was in the Present case * The Act styles them The Archbishops and sundry Bishops of Both Provinces of Canterbury and York within this Realm and also a great Number of the best Learned Honestest and most Vertuous sort of Doctors of Divinity Men of Discretion and Iudgment and Good Disposition of this said Realm it could not sit and act by a bare Order of the Clergy but was necessarily to have the King's Commission before it could be a Legal Assembly and no wonder therefore if tho' both Convocations consented to it and perhaps sometimes named it yet the King only be said to impower them And here I must once for all observe that whatever was done by such Select Committees appointed or approved by Convocation tho' done out of Convocation must be reckoned done by it as carrying the stamp of its Authority For so the way has been in all manner of Assemblies both Ecclesiastical and Civil The Catechismus ad Parâ—chos among the Papists is accounted to have the Authority of the Council of Trent tho' that Council never passed or saw it because it was drawn up and published by Order of the Pope to whom that Council had referred it The like is to be said of the Oxford †Bp. Bâ—â—â— Vol. 1. p. 85. and Cambridge ‖ Ibid. p. 87. Resolutions concerning the Invalidity of King Henry's first Marriage which carried the Authority of those Universities because drawn up by Committees which were in full Convocation appointed by them Nor want we Precedents of a Delegation of the Power even of Parliaments to Committees in antient times For 1 Hen. 6. some Lords and Others of the King's Council were impowered to determine all such Bills and Petitions as were not answered in Parliament * Rot. Parl. n. 21. and so agen 6 Hen. 6. n. 45 46. and several Times before and after And Henry the Eighth had frequently the whole Power of Parliament Translated upon him We are not to wonder therefore if the Convocations of his Reign did something like this when they had so Great Patterns to follow and were so much more at his Mercy than Parliaments were 1542. The Examining of the English Translation of the Bible being begun by the Convocation is taken by the King out of their Hands and committed to the two Universities Ibid. p. 315. Were the Translating of Scripture a Work appropriated to Synods as sure it is not yet the Petition of the two Houses in 1534 to the King to take care of a New Translation of the Bible would have been Warrant enough for him to have put it into whose hands he pleased Especially since it is probable that this very Synod in 1542 complied at last with the King's Proposal I find indeed in some Minutes of their Acts that the Bishops at first disagreed to it †Sess. 9. Mart. 1541 42. but they were I suppose over-rulâ—d for Parker's account is only Aliquandiu quibus Biblia transferenda committerentur ambigebant ‖ P. 338. which shews that the dispute was soon over 1544. The King orders the Prayers for Processions and Litanies to be put into English and sends them to the Archbishop with an Order for the Publick Use of them Ibid. p. 331. This was done by a Royal Injunction * So it is stylâ—d in Bonner 's Reg. f. 48. then equal to an Act of Parliament and need not therefore by me here be accounted for However there is reason to believe that the Committee for Reforming the Offices or the Convocation it self might have an hand in it for about this time it is plain they composed the Little Book of Prayers called the Orarium †Orarium sive Libellus Precationum per Regiam Majestatem Clerum Latinè editus Ex Officina Rich. Grafton 1545. which was set out by the King the Year afterwards 1547. The King orders a Visitation over his whole Kingdom and thereupon suspends all Episcopal Iurisdiction while it lasted Vol. II. p. 26. The King Visited by vertue of his Supreme Headship recognized first in Convocation and established afterwards in Parliament
their Iurisdiction and the Commons by their Money Bills so that the being Member Part or Parcel of Parliament does not necessarily imply the very same Parliamentary Interests and Powers And the Clergy therefore though no part of the Civil Legislature nor concern'd directly in the great Affairs of State transacted in Parliament may yet in other Respects and to other Purposes be properly reputed and styl'd a Member of Parliament And accordingly I have shewn that they have been thus esteem'd and spoken of from the time of their separation downwards and even by Henry the VIII himself many Years after their submission to him One instance of this kind has been given already †P. 59. from a Proclamation in the 35 th of his Reign and because the way of Wording these State-Papers is a matter of great Weight and Importance I shall here add another from an Original Direction of the same Prince to his Judges then about to go their Summer Circuit It begins thus By the KING Henry R. Cleop. E. 6. fol. 214. TRusty and Right Well-beloved We grete you well And whereas heretofore as ye know both upon most just and vertuouse Fundations grownded upon the Lawes of Almighty God and Holly Scripture and allso by the deliberate Advice Consultation Consent and Agreement as well of the Bishops and Clergie as by the Nobles and Commons Temporall of this our Realme assembled in our High Courte of Parliament and by Auctorite of the same the Abuses of the Bishop of Rome his Auctoritie and Jurisdiction of long tyme usurped against Us have been not only utterly Extirped Abolish'd and Secluded but also the same Our Nobles and Commons both of the Clergie and Temporaltie by another several Acte and upon like fundation for the publique Weal of this our Realme have united knytte and annexed to Us and the Corone Imperiall of this Our Realme the Title Dignite and Stile of Supreme Hed in Erthe immediately under God of the Church of England as undoubtedly evermore we have been Which things also the said Bishops and Clergy particularly in their Convocations have wholly and entirely consented recogniz'd ratify'd confermed and approved autentiquely in Writing Sign'd June 25. And that this Doctrine was still good and the Language much the same as low as the Restauration of C. the II. the Office then set out for the 5 th of November shews where mention is made of the Nobility Clergy and Commons of this Realm then assembled in Parliament †Prayer the 2 d. For to say that by the Clergy of this Realm my Lords the Bishops only are intended were so absurd a Gloss that even Dr. Wake 's Pen would I believe be asham'd of it And if they were then rightly said to be assembled in Parliament they may as rightly be said to be so assembled still and if assembled in Parliament why not a Member of Parliament to those Intents and Purposes I mean for which they are assembled in it Dr. Wake will be pleas'd to answer this Question at his Leisure and withal to inform us among his late Meditations on the Day †Serm. on the 5 th of Nov. 1699. this had not been a proper one His Function may be some excuse for his being a stranger to the Language of the Statute Book or of our Manuscript Records but not to have so much Law as even his Common Prayer-Book would have furnish'd him with is let me tell him inexcusable Dr. Wake 's Foundation therefore failing the Inference he builds upon it falls accourse and the Argument will now run quite the other way that because the Clergy are a Part or Member of Parliament in a qualify'd Sense therefore they ought to Assemble with it However since that Expression is invidious and liable to be misconstru'd I willingly wave it and content my self to say that though the Clergy are now no Member or Estate of Parliament as they once were not the Third as Dr. W. ignorantly talks †P. 151. but the First Estate of it yet are they still an Estate of the Realm necessarily attendant on the Parliament and have attended as such whenever a new Parliament was called from the time that they left off to be an Estate of Parliament till within a few Years past with few Exceptions to the contrary and with none from the Reign of Henry the VII to that of his present Majesty And this prescription of some hundred Years has given them an undoubted Right of being summon'd and sitting as often as a Parliament is summon'd and sits though they are not a Member or Estate of Parliament No more than this need be said to remove the Objection But I design not barely to answer Dr. Wake but moreover to give the Reader every where as Comprehensive a View of the Subject in Debate as the short compass of this Work will allow of and shall take occasion therefore from hence to deduce an Account of the Interest which the Lower Clergy have had all along in these State Meetings 'T is a point that well deserves our Reflections and Dr. Wake therefore according to his instructive way has said nothing of it No body had gone before him and common plac'd our Historians and Manuscript Authorities to his hand on this Argument and he never ventures to break the way or to give us any part of Learning but what has born the test of Time and is warranted by at least an hundred Years usage A compleat State of this point is not to be expected in a Digression all I can do here is to lay before the Reader some of the most Material Passages to this purpose that have occurr'd to me in our Histories and Records and to add here and there a few cursory Remarks upon them which will throw some small Light into things as we pass and may suggest matter of juster and sounder Reflections to others who shall write after me on this Argument The Proofs taken singly may few of them perhaps seem full and convincing however when united I perswade my self they will carry such an evidence in them as is not easily to be withstood The Saxon times are overspread with Darkness and yet Light enough is still left us to discover that the Inferior Clergy as well as Laâ—eâ—y were then oftentimes call'd to the Great Councils of the Realm Much has been Written on this Point as to the Laiety but I do not remember that I have met any where an account of the Lower Clergys Interest in those Meetings and therefore I shall produce some Proofs of it here without entring into the Civil part of the Dispute any further than may be of use to give Light to the Ecclesiastical and to clear the Ancient Rights and Priviledges of the Commons Spiritual which I am satisfy'd ran even all along with those of the Commons Temporal and proportionably grew declin'd or reviv'd with them The first Instance I shall take notice of to this purpose is
inchoatâ in Sacello Regio apud Whitehall prope Westminster W. Saye and from thence adjourn'd back again to Pauls and afterwards to Lambeth and continu'd sitting there till Feb. 11 th which was two Months after the Parliament was dissolv'd †Parl. dissolv'd Dec. 9. Journal Nor was the Synod even then dissolv'd but prorogu'd only to the 10 th of October All our Writers my Lord of Sarum not excepted have confounded Two things here that are very distinct the Convocation of this Year and the Legatin Synod For the Former of these no License was granted or necessary but it issu'd purely in relation to the Latter wherein the Clergy of both Provinces were to meet Nâ—tionally by a Legatine Authority For the Exercise of this Authority the Cardinal had before hand been impower'd by Letters Patents of Decem. 10. 1554. But this License being too General and expressing matters of Iurisdiction and Dispensation only it was thought fit to add another for the more ample Declaration of those Letters Patents as the Words of it are and therein to specify the Power of holding Synods and framing Constitutions Legatine and to indemnify the Clergy particularly for meeting and acting under that Authority This says the Bishop was thought safe on both sides both for Preserving the Rights of the Crown and securing the Clergy from being afterwards brought within the Statute of Premunire as they had been upon their acknowledging Cardinal Wolsey's Legatine Authority †Vol. 2. p. 324. For the Old Laws against Provisions which brought the Clergy then under a Premunire were still in force This was the Reason of the second License which could have no manner of regard to the 25 H. VIII for that Act was Then repeal'd I shall give the Reader in the Appendix †Nu XVI this License at large as it is found in Pole's Register * Fol. 7. where and it seems in the Patent Rolls †Rot. Pat. 1. part 310. Reg. says Hist. Ref. ibid. also it is still preserv'd The Observation naturally arising from hence is That if any other License of this Nature had from the Time of these Legatin Synods down to that of Iames the I. been granted it would also either in the Rolls or Registers be found But none such that I can hear of appearing there we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that none issu'd In which Opinion we shall be further confirm'd if we take a view of the Convocations in Q. Elizabeths Reign The first met Ian. 24. 1558 9. and were so far from being Commission'd to Treat that they had not so much as any General Directions from the President to proceed upon Business †See Fuller C. H. p. 54. Act. MSS. for when he enquir'd an Clerus Inferioris Domùs aliquid excogitavit qùod voluerunt exponere illo die the Prolocutor and the Rest made answer se nescire ob quam causam quibus de rebus tracta turi sunt I mention this particular to shew that it was Customary for the Convocation to be directed to the subject of their Debates by the Crown even when the 25 H. VIII lay under a Repeal as it now did and such Directions therefore given at other Times when the Statute was in force must not be supposed to spring from this Act so much as from the King 's known Prerogative by which he ever propos'd both to Parliaments and Convocations at their first opening the Reasons which He on his Part * Super praemissis aliis quae ibidem ex parte nostrâ clariùs exponentur are the Words of every Convocation-Writ had to assemble them But this only by the bye The Protestant Convocations held after this Statute was reviv'd are a plain proof of the Truth of that Exposition I have given of it For in a Directory of Archbishop Cranmer's prescribing the Method of opening them though every step that is at such times to be taken be minutely set down and the summ of whatever the Archbishop or any other is on that occasion to do or say be distinctly mention'd yet of his producing a Commission to Treat not a word is said as 't is natural to think there would have been had such a Commission been practis'd I shall give the Reader a Copy of this Directory among the other Papers †See Append N. XVII because if the Discontinuance of Convocations prevails such Lights as these may in some time be necessary We are hastning on I find into so Thorough an Ignorance of these matters that it may for ought I know within a while be urg'd as a Reason for not holding a Convocation that we do not understand the Manner of holding it I am sure this is as good a Reason as any that has been yet given for it I call this Paper Archbishop Parker's because by the Company I find it in I have reason to conclude it so to be However it was certainly drawn up since the Reformation either in King Edwards or in the beginning of Q. Elizabeth's Reign for there is no mention in it of the Mass or of Abbats and Priors and it is of use therefore to prove the Practise of those Protestant Conocations which we are enquiring after But this is only a General Proof More Particular and Express to our Purpose is the Synod of 1562. where Matters of Great Moment were transacted the Articles of the Church and the Catechism review'd and several Canons relating to Discipline fram'd though some of these were not at that time publish'd And the Debates on these occasions were all enter'd upon and manag'd without any Commission from the Queen as is manifest beyond a Doubt from the Acts of that Synod of which I have seen an Exact and Entire Copy written in an Hand of the Time and taken from the Registers of that Convocation soon after it saâ— These Acts are very Particular and Minute in giving an account of the Proceedings of every Day and do orderly specify all the Publick Instrustruments that any way concern the Synod But as to a Commission to Treat they are perfectly silent The Reader who has any Curiosity this way will not be displeas'd I suppose if I produce some Passages from thence that shew plainly how they were employ'd Ian. 16. The Archbishop himself said Prayers reading the Litany cum Collectis assuetis ac Oratione in Synodo Provinciali dicenda noviter ut adparuit editâ Which new Collect I take to be that in the Convocation Office which begins Domine Deus Pater Luminum c. and in it they beseech God ut Gratiâ Tuâ caelitùs adjuti ea omnia investigare meditari tractare discernere valeamus quae Honorem Tuum Gloriam promoveant in Ecclesiae cedant profectum I can scarce believe that they would have chosen to address themselves to God in such a Form of Words as this had they thought that they were under an utter Incapacity of
would have been tempted to think that he spake upon good Grounds and had well consider'd what he said Whereas in truth he was merely upon the Conjecture and having found that the Convocations of 1640. and 1603. acted by Commission concluded presently that all the Precedent ones must have done so too forgetting in the mean time that wise Maxim of his Own with which he very fitly introduces as wise a Chapter So great says he is that Uncertainty to which all Human Constitutions are expos'd that tho' I have before sufficiently shewn what the Nature of our Convocation at present is and what Authority our King 's have over it yet we can by no means from thence conclude that this was always the case †P. 147. Which deep Remark had it been in his View throughout his Book would have instructed him not to determin so peremptorily upon the Course of Antient Practise from some Modern Instances it would have sav'd him the shame of slipping into so many false and groundless Assertions on this Head and me the trouble of exposing them When he resolv'd for Reasons best known to himself to set up for a Champion in this Cause he should either have taken care fully to instruct himself in the matters he wrote of or at least where he was conscious of his want of Light he should have had the Discretion to express himself a little more warily The oldest Aera therefore of these Commissions which impower the Convocation to Treat c. is 1. I. 1. how that New Precedent came then to be set and what Restraints it may be conceiv'd to have laid on the Clergys Liberty of Debate I shall now briefly enquire It must be confess'd that K. Iames who had been somewhat less than a King in Scotland took upon him to be somewhat more than a King assoon as he came to the Crown of England spoke of his Prerogative in a very high tone look'd upon it as some Innate Power divinely annex'd to the Kingly Character and did not stick to call it so frequently in his Speeches and Messages †See his Speech to the Bishops and Ministers Spotswood p. 534. Letter to the Assembly of Perth ib. p. 537. and sometimes to talk even of a Sovereign and Absolute Authority which he enjoy'd as freely as any King or Monarch in the World †See his Declaration in 1605. Spotswood p. 488. Bishop Bancroft who had corresponded with him formerly in Scotland knew his Temper well and the Church having then Great Business to do and He himself some for the See of Cant. was then void contriv'd we may imagin how to humor it in the approaching Convocation wherein He was to Preside and to that end procur'd this Ample Commission as an Instance of the great Deference and Submission which the Church of England paid to the Royal Authority Indeed the Clergy had reason to shew all the Marks of Duty and Respect that were fiting to a Prince that had shewn himself so fast a friend to them as K. Iames in the Hampton-Court Conference which immediately preceded this Convocation had done Where he had declar'd openly for All the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church against the Scruples of those who were then called Puritans and had peremptorily commanded them to Conform This I say may be suppos'd to have wrought on the Clergys Gratitude and made them easier to accept such a Commission now than they would have been in any other Juncture especially since by it though they might seem to abridge their Liberty in One Respect yet they certainly enlarg'd it another For whereas in Former Convocations which were not thus Commission'd the Custom had been to draw up their Rules and Canons in an Unauthoritative Style and without denouncing Spiritual Penaltys on the Infringers of them according to the Pattern set by the Old Canons here the Clergy first began solemnly to Decree and Ordain and to annex the Sentence of Excommunication to the Breach of those Ordinances The Canons of Q. Elizabeth's time where they run most in the Style of Authority do yet rise no higher than to a Cautum est nequis †See Sparrow p. 245. as before in 1584. p. 193. Volumus etiam †Ibid p. 252. and Decernendum censemus * Ibid. p. 247. but in 1603 the very first Canon begins with Statuimus Ordinamus ‖ And so in those of 1640. We Ordain and Decree Can. 1. The Synod doth ordain and decree Can. 2. and the Sanction of several of them runs thus Excommunicetur ipso facto non nisi per Achiepiscopum restituendus idque postquam resipuerit ac impium hunc errorem publice revocarit The Previous License therefore qualifying them to Decree in form and to bring their Canons up to the antient Synodical Pattern they might for this reason be enclin'd to make use of it imagining how justly has since appear'd the Ground they got in one respect to be an Equivalent for what they lost in another Something too of this Caution might be owing to the Circumstances and Temper of the Times when there was no good understanding between Them and the Great Men of the Law the Two Jurisdictions clashing mightily and when those who underhand blew the Coals between Them and the Nonconformists were uneasy under the Clergys late Victory at Hampton-Court and would not have been sorry to see them make an ill use of it or to have had any Handle towards disputing the Legality of their after proceedings On this account a License under the Broad-Seal might be thought convenient to cover them not so much from the Law it self as from Popular Complaint and Misconstruction And if these Reasons may be suppos'd to be then of weight for the beginning this Practise they were yet stronger afterwards for the continuance of it in 1640. when the Passions and Prejudices of Men ran even higher against them than Now and every thing they did was more likely to be misinterpreted Thus far by way of Enquiry into the particular Grounds and Motives from whence this New Precedent may be suppos'd to have sprung let us now see how far the Clergys Liberty of Debate was really affected by it and we shall find this not to have been to such a Degree as is commonly imagin'd For in relation to this License there are Three things that deserve to be consider'd 1. That it was not granted the Clergy immediately upon their first coming together The Convocation had sat from March 20. to April 12. that is three full Weeks without a Commission and to be sure therefore had in that time Treated without one and did not therefore think themselves unqualify'd for all manner of Synodical Debates till they were so commission'd 2. It is very observable that in the King's Letters Patents of Confirmation †See them in the English Edition of the Canons in 1603. reciting this License there is a plain difference
are us'd only pro Honore Regio etiamsi ad id de Iure teneatur But I pay too great a Regard to his trifling Remarks in pursuing them thus minutely and go on therefore to remove the rest of the Exceptions taken at our way of expounding the Statute In my account of the Practise of Convocations since the 25 H. VIII I slipp'd over some Requests of the Lower House of Convocation to the Upper a few years after this Act pass'd and promis'd to make a distinct Head of them which I shall now therefore consider and explain It is objected against that sense I have given of the Statute that the Clergy of those times did themselves understand it otherwise for in a Petition put up by them to the Bishops 1 o E. VI. they recite some part of the Submission-Act and of the 27 H. VIII that confirms it and then desire that being presently assembled in Convocation by auctority of the King 's Writ the King's Majestys License in Writing may for them be obtain'd and granted according to the Effect of the said Statues auctorising them to attempt entreat and commune of such matters and therein freely to give their Consents which otherwise they may not do upon Pain and Peril premis'd This indeed seems Material and for this Reason I suppose Dr. W. takes no notice of it But L. M. P. insists upon it and styles it an Authentick Exposition of that statute which without any other Evidence is sufficient to shew that it was the Intention of that Act that the Treating and Resolving as well as the Meeting of a Convocation should depend upon the Mere Good-will of the Prince †Pp. 39 40 The Reader may observe how wondrous kind this Gentleman can be to the Clergy upon occasion and what a profound respect he has for their Opinion when it is for his Turn He allows a Petition of the Lower House of Convocation to be an Authentick Exposition of an Act of Parliament an Honor which the most solemn Decisions of both Houses would not much less do the Petitions and Requests of any one deserve and least of all the particular Requests we are at present concerned with For It is probable that the Petition it self is not Authentick and then the Exposition it gives to be sure cannot be so There are two Papers printed by my Lord of Sarum †2. Vol. Coll of Rec. n. 16 17. which he calls Petitions of the Lower House of Convocation 1 o E. VI. to the Upper The Former of these †N. 16. is not a single Petition but four several Requests or rather the Minutes of four joyn'd together with a certain Query annex'd in the Close of them Of these the First relates to the Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws appointed by Act of Parliament to be made in H. the VIII th's time The Second is a Proposal for adjoyning the Lower House of Convocation to that of Parliament The Third concerns the Committee for reforming the Offices The Fourth is about the Statute of First fruits and Tenths The Query added is Whether the Clergy of the Convocation may liberally speak their mind without danger of Statute or Law The Latter is a Petition in form from the Lower Clergy to the Bishops enforcing the second of those Requests put up in the former Paper and praying a License in Writing in the Terms already recited †P. 399. Now this last Paper I say seems never to have been approv'd or presented by the Lower Clergy and I say it upon these Grounds 1. Because the short Acts of this Convocation preserv'd in the Book call'd Synodalia †In Bennet Coll. Library short as they are ‖ These Acts short as they are give an account of the Business that was done and the Motions that wee made every single Day that the Convocation sat from Nov. 5 to Decem. 1â— except in the 4th Session only which was Nov. 25. where my Transcript of the Acts is a Blank And there is but this One Day therefore in which it can be suppos'd that this Petition might have been drawn and presented do yet I find mention the first Paper and the four several Articles of it ⸪ Sess. 3.22 Nov. Istâ die convenientibus in inferiori Domo concordatum suit ut Dominus Prolocutor nomine totius Domûs referal R mo subsequentes Petitiones Viz. 1 o. Quòd provideatur ut Ecclesiasticae Leges Examinentur Promulgentur juxta statutum Parliamenti editum 35 H. VIII 2. Item ut pro nonnullis urgentibus causis Convocatio hujus Cleri si fieri possit assumatur cooptetur in Inferiorem Domum Parliamenti sicut ab antiquo fieri consuevit 3. Item ut Opera Episcoporum Alicrum c. as before p. 181. 4. Item ut Rigor statuti de Primitiis Domino nostro Regi solvendis aliquantisper in certis urgentibus Clausulis moderetur reformetur si commodè fieri possit in the Order they there lie but give not the least Hint of this Second nor does Archbishop Parker in Antiquitates Britannicae where he speaks ⸪ P. 339. largely of matters agitated in this Convocation say a syllable of it On the Contrary both He and Bishop Burnet give us some Particulars that do not seem very consistent with the supposal of such a Petition Bishop Burnet's words are That the Act which repeal'd the Statute of the six Articles was occasion'd by a Speech that Archbishop Cranmer had in Convocation in which he exhorted the Clergy to give themselves much to the study of Scripture and to consider seriously what needed Reformation c. upon which some intimated to him that as long as these Six Articles stood in force it was not safe for them to deliver their Opinions This he reported to the Council upon which they order'd this Act of Repeal †Hist. Ref. Vol. 2. p. 40 his Lordship means agreed that the Repeal of this Statute should be propos'd in Parliament Thus his Lordship out of Archbishop Parker's Papers and thus the Archbishop himself out of the Records of Convocation * Ex Archivis he himself says In Synodo Cranmerus Archiepiscopus habità oratione de religione ex verbo Christi institutâ— populo tradendâ c. consulendum duxit Sed Legum adhuc de Sex Articulis Henrico Rege regante latarum severitas plerosque terruit quò minûs suas de Religione resormandà Sententias libere dicerent Itaque impetravit à Rege Cranmerus ut interim dum illae Leges Parliamento abrogentur Praelatis de Religione in Synodo disserentibus atroces illae rigidaeque paenae laxarentur Quod concâ—ssum est A clear account is given here of the Clergys fears in relation to the Statute of the six Articles and of their care to screen themselves from the sad Penaltys of it but not a word of any Apprehensions they were under in reference to the Submission-Act And with these
docto pio fideli in Prolocutorem suum assumendo consultantes unanimiter consentiant eligant sicque electum ipsi R mo in eâdem domo Capitulari prox insequente Sessione debitâ cum solennitate praesentent His dictis descendunt omnes in inferiorem domum ad effectum praedictum Forma Eligendi Praesentandi Prolocutorem SOlet observari ut postquam ingressi fuerint Inferiorem Domum in sedibus se decenter collocent si aliqui ex iis sint Consiliarii sive Sacellanâ— Regiae Majestatis ut hi superiores sedes occupent atque inde unus ex iis propter dignitatem Reverentiam seu in eorum absentiâ Decanus Ecclesiae Cath. Divi Pauli London sive Archidiac Lond. Presidentis officio in hujusmodi Electione fungatur Atque ut ad hoc â—iâ—e procedatur primùm jubebit nomina omnium citatorum qui tunc interesse tenentur à dictae inferioris Domûs recitari praeconizari Notatisque absentibus alloquatur praesentes atque eorum sententiam de idoneo procuratore eligendo sciscitetur Et postquam de eo convenerint quod semper quasi statim absque ullo negotio perfici solebat mox conveniant inter se de duobus Eminentioris Ordinis qui dictum electum R mo D o. Cant. in die statuto debitâ cum Reverentiâ Solennitate praesentent Quorum alter sicut cum dies advenerit ipsum Prolocutorem cum Latinâ doctâ oratione praesentare tenetur sic etiam idem praesentatus habitu Doctoratûs indutus consimilem Orationem ad dictum R mum Patrem ac Praelatos caeteros praesentes habere debet Quibus finitis praefatus R mus Oratione Latinâ tam Electores quam Presentatorem Praesentatum pro suâ gratiâ collaudare ac demùm ipsam Electionem suâ Arch. authoritate expresse confirmare approbare non dedignabitur Et statim idem R mus Anglicè si placeat exponere solet ulteriâ—s beneplaeitum suum hortando Clerum ut de rebus communibus quae Reformatione indigeant consultent referant die statuto Ac ad hunc modum de Sessione in Sessionem continuabitur Convocatio quam diu expedire videbitur ac donec de eâdem dissolvendâ Breve Regium eidem R mo praesentetur Et sciendum est quòd quotiescunque Prolocutor ad praesentiam R mi causâ Convocationis ac Tempore Sessionis â—ccesserit utatur habitu praedicto ac Ianitor sive Virgifer dictae Inferioris Domûs ipsum reverenter antecedat Ejusdem Prolocutoris est etiam monere omnes ne discedant à Civitate London absque Licentiâ R mi Quodque statutis diebus tempestive veniant ad Conv. Quodque salaria Clericorum tam superioris quam Inferioris Domûs Ianitoris Inferioris Domûs juxta â—â—tiquam taxationem quatenus eorum quemlibet â—â—ncernit fideliter persolvant Synodalia fol 3. XVIII JAMES by the Grace of God See p. 385. c. To the most reverend Father in God our right trusty and well beloved Counsellor Iohn Archbishop of Canterbury of all England Primate and Metropolitan the reverend Fathers in God our trusty and well beloved Richard Bishop of London Anthony Bishop of Chichester and to the rest of our Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical Greeting Whereas all such Jurisdictions Rights Priviledges Superiorities and Prehemynences Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power or Authority have heretofore been or may lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical State and Persons and for Reformation Order and Correction as well of the same as of all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Virtue and the conservation of the Peace and Unity of this our Realm of England are for ever by authority of Parliament of this our Realm united and annexed unto the Imperial Crown of the same And whereas also by Act of Parliament it is provided and enacted that whensoever we shall see cause to take further Order for or concerning any Ornament Right or Ceremony appointed or prescribed in the Book commonly called the Book of Common Prayer Administration of the Sacraments and other Rights and Ceremonies of the Church of England and our Pleasure known therein either to our Commissioners so authorized under the great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical or to the Metropolitan of this our Realm of England that then further Order should be therein taken accordingly We therefore understanding that there were in the said Book certain things which might require some Declaration and enlargement by way of Explanation and in that respect having required you our Metropolitan and you the Bishops of London and Chichester and some others of our Commissioners authorized under our great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical according to the Intent and meaning of the said Statute and of some other Statutes also and by our Supream Authority and prerogative Royal to take some care and pains therein have sithence received from you the said particular things in the said Book declared and enlarged by way of Explanation made by you our Metropolitan and the rest of our said Commissioners in manner and form following Then come several Alterations in the Calendar Rubricks and Offices of Private Baptism and Confirmation an Addition about the Sacraments at the Close of the Catechism A Prayer for the Royal Family and six new Forms of Thanksgiving for Rain Fair Weather c. and after these inserted at length it follows All which particular points and things in the said Book thus by you declared and enlarged by way of Exposition and Explanation Forasmuch as we having maturely considered of them do hold them to be very agreeable to our own several Directions upon Conference with you and others and that they are in no part repugnant to the Word of God nor contrary to any thing that is already contained in that Book nor to any of our Laws or Statutes made for Allowance or Confirmation of the same We by virtue of the said Statutes and by our supream Authority and Prerogative Royal do fully approve allow and ratify All and every one of the said Declarations and Enlargements by way of Explanation Willing and requiring and withal Authorizing you the Archbishop of Canterbury that forthwith you do Command our Printer Robert Barker newly to Print the said Common Book with all the said Declarations and Enlargements by way of Exposition and Explanation above mentioned And that you take such Order not only in your own Province but likewise in our Name with the Archbishop of York for his Province that every Parish may provide for themselves the said Book so Printed and Explained to be only used by the Minister of every such Parish in the Celebration of Divine Service and Administration of the Sacraments and duely by him to â—e observed according to Law in all the other parts with the Rites and Ceremonies