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
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
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
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.
setling the Point between us But here he is as reserv'd as one would wish for from the beginning to the end of his Crude Work there is not a single Instance of this kind made out or so much as pretended †Except the Trite Instance of Exclus◠Clero Nay to see the fate of misapply'd Reading even of those twelve insignificant Instances which he has produc'd no less than eight are evidently mistaken as to the Dates either of the Parliaments or Convocations mention'd in them The Reader will rather take my word for it than allow me the liberty of interrupting the Course of my Argument so far as to prove it And I shall proceed therefore to consider and remove the several Objections that lie also against the second Point advanc'd in these Papers that the Clergy when met have a Right of Treating and Debating freely about such matters as lie within their proper Sphaere and even of coming to fit Resolutions upon them without being necessitated antecedently to gratify themselves for such Acts or Debates by a License under the Broad Seal of England CHAP. VIII IT had been argu'd from the General Nature of such Assemblys as these we are treating of that Freedom of Debate was their undoubted Right and Priviledge incident to them as such and inseparable from ' em To this I find these several Answers return'd Dr. W. assures us that the Debates of the most General and Famous Councils have been under as great Restraint as he supposes the Convocation to be †P. 288. L. M. P. adds that Poyning's Law has ty'd up even a Parliament in Ireland as strictly †P. 44. and the Author of the Postscript ⸪ At the end of a Book entituled An Essay concerning the Power of the Magistrate 8◠1697. fetches a third Instance from Scotland where the Three Estates he says can debate of nothing but what the Lords of the Articles have beforehand agreed on ‖ P. 198. As to the first of these supposing Dr. W's Allegation true yet he has been told that there is no arguing from the Powers claim'd or exercis'd by Emperors in those Great and Extraordinary Assemblys to what is fit to be done in lesser and stated ones and why such Inferences do not hold some Reasons have been given him which I need not now repeat But in truth he mistakes or misrepresents the Practise of the Emperors even in these General and Famous Councils which I have shewn him p. 125 6. went no further than to require a preference to that Particular Business for the Dispatch of which they were Summon'd not to exclude their debating on any thing but what the Emperor propos'd to them And of this the Canons of those Councils are an Evidence beyond Dispute which both as to Matter and Form took their Rise from the several Synods they were made in without any Imperial Leave or Direction for the framing them With what Face then can Dr. W. vouch the Practise of these Councils as Precedents for that Degree of restraint he would have laid on an English Convocation With what Truth or Conscience can he affirm that they acted intirely according to the Prescription of the Emperors †P. 288. and deliberated on nothing but what they were directed or allowed he means expresly and particularly allow'd by the Prince to deliberate on †P. 48. Whatever our Author may think of such Doctrine Now or whatever he may Hope from it sure I am that had he liv'd and utter'd it while those Holy Synods were in being it would not have been two or three Years afterwards before he had repented of it But Old Councils are Dead and Gone and any thing it seems may be said of them Let him not depend too much upon that for they have Friends still in the World that may happen yet before he dies to meet together and ask him a few Questions A living Synod may sometime or other think it for its Interest and find it in its Power to vindicate the Honor and Authority of the Dead ones Well if Old Councils cannot afford a Precedent Modern Parliaments shall Poyning's Law therefore is urg'd which provides that All such Bills as shall be offer'd to the Parliament of Ireland shall be transmitted hither under the Great Seal of that Kindom and having receiv'd approbation here shall be sent back under the Great Seal of England to be preferr'd to the Parliament of Ireland †L. M. P. p 44. But what have we to do with Instances fetch'd from Conquered Countrys who must receive what Terms the Victor pleases and be glad of any We live among another People always Jealous of their Libertys and careful to preserve them in a Land where slavery either in Church or State though sometimes planted could never thrive And those Fetters therefore which might perhaps justly be laid on an Irish Parliament may not fit an English Convocation so well which is therefore free because it is an English one But after all how far does this Law of Poynings reach Our Lawyer tells us that it leaves not the Parliament at Liberty to propose what Laws they please that the Irish look upon it as Conclusive upon their Debates and are satisfy'd and again that we have here an Instance of a Parliament without Liberty of Debate But this is too gross an Imposition upon the Credulity of his Readers few of which are so ignorant as not to be aware that Poyning's Law layes a restraint only on the Enacting Power of their Parliament but not on the Debates of it which notwithstanding this Act are left as free as ever They can still Treat and Conferr about all Matters and Causes that are of Parliamentary Cognizance they can Petition Represent and Protest Nay they can propose what Heads of Bills they please to be transmitted hither and sent back thither in Form of which we have had very late and frequent Experience And how therefore the Abridgment of the Convocations Liberty of Debate can be pretended to be justify'd by this Irish Precedent is I confess past my English Understanding For as I take it the Convocation desires no other Powers and Priviledges but just what this Parliament claims and practises and pleads only that the 25 H. VIII may not be extended to such a Rigorous and Unjustifiable Sense as will lay greater restraints upon Them than Poyning's Laws does upon Those of Ireland But our Letter-writer himself is sensible that this Instance is not to the purpose for at the close of it his Conscience gives a little and he is forc'd to confess that the Irish Parliament are not under an Universal Restraint nor wholly mute till the King gives them Power to Debate and Act †P. 44. Are they not Why then was it generally said that they were a Parliament without a Liberty of Debate or of proposing what Laws they please in the very next Lines to these where it is all unsaid
THE Rights Powers and Priviledges OF AN English Convocation STATED and VINDICATED IN ANSWER TO A Late Book of Dr. Wake 's Entituled The Authority of Christian Princes over their Ecclesiastical Synods asserted c. AND TO Several Other PIECES And one shall say unto him What are these wounds in thine hands Then he shall answer Those with which I was wounded in the House of my Friends Zech. XIII 6. Eâ Tempestate facies Ecclesiae foeda admodùm turpis erat non enim sicut priùs ab Externis sed à Propriis vastabatur Ruffin Eccles. Hist. L. 1. c. 21. LONDON Printed for Tho. Bennet at the Half-Moon in St. Paul's Church-yard 1700. THE PREFACE BEtween three and four Years ago came out A Letter to a Convocation-Man concerning the Rights Powers and Priviledges of that Body which together with the Replys that were made to it by Dr. Wake and some Other Writers led the Author of these Papers to consider the Point in Debate with a Particular Care and Application He confesses he came to Dr. W's Book with expectations of finding there whatever was necessary to set this matter in a clear Light The Bulk of the Work the Appearance of Learning it carried and the Great Authority by which it endeavored to recommend it self All seem'd to promise Exactness But upon perusing it to his Surprize he found that it was a Shallow Empty performance written without any Knowledge of our Constitution any Skill in the Particular subject of Debate upon such Principles as are destructive of all our Civil as well as Ecclesiastical Libertys and with such Aspersions on the Clergy both Dead and Living as were no less injurious to the Body than his Doctrine The Love I bear to Truth to my Church and Country soon gave me Resolution of stating this matter anew and of taking off the slight Colors under which Dr. W. had disguis'd it if at least I were not prevented by some Abler Hand particularly by the Author of that Letter which first gave rise to this Debate and who it was expected would have appear'd once more upon it and freed what he had advanc'd from all Exceptions This and some other Accidents were the Cause that the following Papers though prepar'd early saw the Light no sooner and have indeed been deferr'd so long till it is now grown absolutely necessary to say something in Defence of the Churches Rights or to sit down contentedly under the Loss of them For by this time Dr. W's Book Weak as it is has yet by not being oppos'd gotten strength and made its way into the good Opinion of many who wish not ill to the Order A Learned Adversary indeed has taken him to Task upon the General Principles of Church-Discipline and Government but in the Domestick Part of the Dispute which relates to our Own Laws and Usages nothing has been said For which reason even from well meaning Men we every day hear this Language If the Dr. has indeed misrepresented the Constitution why does not some body set it right again If he has given up the Libertys and Priviledges of his Church how comes the Body to be silent They understand their Own Rights sure and will not suffer themselves to be writ out of 'em we must believe therefore that they have 'em not if no body thinks fit to claim them This indeed is the Natural Construction which People must and do make of our silence and his Principles therefore must either quickly be disprov'd or prevail Nay upon these Principles a suitable Practise may soon establish it self and as Some New Customs first made way for his Doctrine so the Doctrine it self may make way for Others which when once taken up will be difficultly laid down for it is much easier to preserve a Constitution than to retreive it Already since he wrote it has so hapned that upon the Calling of a New Parliament the Writ for the Province of York has been dropp'd thro' Forgetfulness no doubt however for the same reason it may so happen again when another Parliament is call'd that the Writ for the Province of Canterbury shall be forgotten too And if it should withall be forgotten to be Claim'd as well as Issu'd We should then be in the same case with our Neighbours of the Church of Ireland among whom as I am inform'd Convocation-Writs are now grown out of Date two New Parliaments having been successively summon'd without them And by the same Degrees that the Convocations of the Establisht Church have declin'd in both these Countrys those of our Brethren of the Separation have begun to revive The Summer after Dr. W's Book came out a General Meeting of the Dissenting Ministers was appointed here in London as appears by the Date of the Newbury-Letter printed in the Appendix * Numb 11. and it is not long ago since the Irish Nonconformists met publickly at Dublin and printed a Sermon preach'd at the Opening of their Synod tho' I think the Establisht Clergy there have never been Synodically conven'd since the Revolution And how affairs stand in Scotland with relation to these matters the Reader if he desires Information may in the 25th Page of the following Papers find it Nor is it to be forgotten that since this New Doctrine came abroad a New Definition of Convocations has obtain'd which we are now told are only Occasional Assemblys for such Purposes as the King shall direct * Nicolson Hist. Lib. Vol. 3. p. 200. And even the New State of England Man has upon it varied his Phrase for his last Edition says that they are to meet now and then in Time of Parliament †Meige N. S. of E. part 3d. p. 64. It may seem not Material to observe any thing that falls from such a Pen but it shews how Common Opinion runs as much as if a Wiser Author had said it It was High time therefore to assert a Right which was so far endanger'd And this unequal as I may be to the Task yet rather than it should remain undone I have resolv'd to do not led so much by Inclination to studys of this kind as pushed on by an Hearty concern for the Interests of Religion and of my Order as far as the Latter of these is subservient to the Former and by an Eager Desire of doing somewhat towards supporting the Good Old Constitution I live under which Dr. W. has both in Church and State done his best to undermine His Blow indeed is directly levell'd at the Rights and Libertys of the Church only but it glances often on those of the State and wounds them sore as far as His Arm was capable of putting strength into it The Argument of his Book throughout turns upon such Maxims and Grounds as equally affect Both of them And because I am not willing to say any thing against him without good Proof I shall here give the Reader a short Tast of his Principles to prepare him for the larger
Confirmation However that may be sure we are That the Convocation of the Clergy have as has been said already for above 150 Years in every Instance except that of Forty and the Synods Legatin Met and Rose within a day of the Parliament And if Custom therefore be the Law of Convocations as it is of Parliaments and we have Dr. Wake 's Word for it that it is †Pp. 105 â—98 then is it Law that the Convocation should meet Only and Always in time of Parliament The Learned Mr. Cambden knew no better whose Words are Synodus quae Convocatio Cleri dicitur semper simul cum Parliamento habetur ‖ Britannia in Cap. de Tribunalibus Thus stood Britannia Then though a late Paultry Compiler of the New State of England will have it that it is an Assembly which now and then Meets and that in time of Parliament * Miege 's New State of England Part. III. p. 64. Thanks to Dr. Wake for furnishing him with the occasion for such a Definition which I trust however that the Doctor and all his Friends shall not in the Event be able to prove a True One not even by that only Argument which can ever possibly prove it so Future practice The very Warrant to the Keeper of the Great Seal for issuing out Writs for a Parliament is a standing Testimony against these new Notions It ran thus in Iames the First 's time and I suppose runs so still Whereas we are resolved to have a Parliament at c. These are to Will and Require you forthwith upon Receipt hereof to Issue forth our Writs of Summons to all the Peers of our Kingdom and also all other Usual Writs for the Electing of such Knights Citizens and Burgâ—sses as are to Serve therein and withall to Issue out all Usual Writs for the Summoning of the Clergy of both Provinces in their Houses of Convocation And this shall be your Warrant so to do * Hâ—câ—er's Life of Bishop Williams p. 173. So that the Writs for the Convocation are it seems as Usual as those for the Commons and the One Assembly therefore is as Customary as the Other My Lord of Sarum seems to have had no other thoughts where in the Entrance of his History of our Reformed Synods for such every History of our Reformation is or should be he lays it down That with the Writs for a Parliament there went out always a Summons to the Two Archbishops for calling a Convocation of their Provinces †Hist. Ref. I. Vol. p. 20. Always i e. long before the times of H. VIII of which his Lordship is Writing I doubt not but his Lordship's Meaning then was That these Writs went out to Purpose and had their due and full Effect for the Distinction which some State-Logicians since have Coin'd ‖ Dr. W. p. 106 107 14â— 141. between a Right of being Summoned and a Right of Mâ—â—â—ing in Virtue of that Summons was not then Invented But I presume too far in venturing to guess at his Lordship's Thoughts when his Words are such as may indifferently serve either Hypothesis and can therefore I must confess be a good Authority for neither Let us have Recourse therefore to Those who are more determined in their Expressions Archbishop Cranmer in that Speech by which he opened the first Convocation under E. 6. affirms it to be * MS. Acta Synodi incoeptae Nov. 5. An. 1547. De more regni Angliae primo quoque anno regni cujuslibet Regis citare Parliamentum nec non Convocare Synodum Episcoporum Cleri sicque fieri in praesenti de Mandato Regis He speaks of a Custom only in the First Year of every Reign because That was the Present Case whereas Cardinal Pool at a Synod held in the latter end of Queen Mary enlarges the Assertion and says †Act. MS. Syn. coeptae Ian. 21. 1557. Quòd cum de antiquo more Rex Angliae ob aliquot arduas Causas Praelatos hujus Regni ad Concilium sive Parliamentum suum adesse jubet propter Regis Securitatem Regni Statum Concilia Auxilia sua impâ—nsuros Ita Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis Episcopos suos Suffraganeos Praelatos c. ad Sacrum Concilium evocare assolet de iisdem Causis tractaturos auxilia sua consimili modo daturos And to the same purpose the Good Martyr Archdeacon Philpott a Member of Convocation and well skill'd in the Rights of it He in his Supplication to the King Queen and Parliament complains That where there was by the Queen's Highness a Parliament called and after the Old Custom a Convocation of the Clergy ‖ Fox Vol. III. p. 587. Nor did those Lords of the Council who disputed other Points with him deny this but agreed in Terms That the Convocation-House was called by One Writ of Summons of the Parliament of an Old ⸪ Ibid. p. 552. Custom I lay no great weight upon their Opinion because it was casually given and by Persons who though of the King 's Privy Council yet might perhaps be as Ill inform'd of these Matters as Meaner Men For a Seat at that Honourable Board does not necessarily imply a thorough knowledge of this part of our Constitution I mention their Opinion only to meet with Dr. Wake who has produced it on the other side with as much Gravity and Deference as if it were a Resolution of the Twelve Judges Assembled * P. 251. He had been Reading I suppose in that Notable Book of the Law The Attorney's Academy where he found it thus formally vouch'd †P. 221. And he thought he might safely Write after so Worthy a Pattern To make amends for this slight Authority I shall produce another of somewhat more force even the Judgment of a whole Synod in Queen Mary's time who introduce their Petition about the Confirmation of Abby Lands to the Patentees with this Preamble ‖ 1.2 P. M. c. 8. Nos Episcopi Clerus Cant. Prov. in hâc Synodo more nostro solito dum Regni Parliamentum celebratur congregati Where we see they lay claim to an Old Immemorial Custom not only of being Called by the King 's Writ together with every Parliament but of Meeting also upon that Call by the same Custom For unluckily it happens to spoil Dr. Wake 's New Scheme that they place the Usage in their being more solito Congregati not Convocati or Summoniti as the Word should have been to make Their Assertion consistent with His. But alas they knew nothing of this new Doctrine and their Expressions therefore are not so contrived as to favour it They were then Assembled in a Synod and Acting as a Synod when they drew up this Petition And 't is of a Custom therefore of so Assembling and Acting that they speak and not of being only Summoned Nor was this the Sense of the Clergy alone but of an Whole Parliament
to the Canons of the Church are not only under a Duty to attend but have also a Right to meet so that as their Writs for Assembling concurrently with a Parliament are not mere Letters of Grace and Compliment but to be emitted ex debito Iustitiae and whether the Government has any thing to propose to them or no so likewise are their Assemblies at such times to be held by the same Law notwithstanding it may be pretended that there is no Occasion for them For although their Consent may not be necessary nor their Advice seem wanting yet as they are bound to wait if Either shall be ask'd So may the Clergy themselves have some Informations and Remembrances to offer and some Petitions to make concerning such things as they may be supposed to take more particular notice of or wherein they may be more peculiarly concern'd And this Liberty and Opportunity of representing what they may think necessary is to be esteemed by them as their great Parliamentary Priviledge not to be Wav'd like the Others for the better course of common Justice but to be Asserted and Confirmed for the Good of the whole Kingdom Such a Liberty therefore and Opportunity is not only provided for by Canons but secur'd I say by the Law Both by the Law of Custom which is the Law of Parliaments and by Express Statute an Act of Edward the Third appointing a Parliament and consequently * Thus the Answerer of the Nine Reasons of the House of Commons against Bishops Votes in Parliament Argued alledging That the Bishops were by the Triennial Act obliged necessarily to attend the Convocation once in Three Years And the Examination of that Answer 40. 1641. Printed by Order of a Committee of the House grants the Allegation p. 16 17. a Convocation to be held just within the Canonical distance Yearly and the present Law enjoyning That it shall be frequently held and once at least in Three Years Held I say and not only Called for that is the Right we speak of A Right that has been all along own'd by constant Practice or if perchance not exercised at some Particular time through Forgetfulness or Distraction to allow the utmost and more perhaps than can be proved yet never Purposely and if I may so speak Regularly Neglected till Now. CHAP. III. HItherto we have considered only the First of the Two Points proposed the Clergy's Right of Meeting and Sitting in Convocation as often as a New Parliament Sits We will now address our Selves to the Second which asserts their Right when Met of Treating and Deliberating about such Affairs as lie within their proper Sphere and of coming to fit Resolutions upon them without being necessitated antecedently to qualify themselves for such Acts and Debates by a License under the Broad Seal of England That this is the Original Right of all Provincial Synods incident to their nature as such claim'd and practised by them in all Ages of the Church and in all Christian Countries and in our own particularly from the time that we have any account of our Synods till towards the beginning of the Reformation is so certain as to need no Proof and Dr. Wake therefore is never more like himself that is never more Absurd than when he would insinuate the contrary * P. 48 288. The only Question is how far the Statute 25 H. VIII has restrained this Right and made a License from the Crown necessary It being there Enacted That the Clergy ne any of them should from thenceforth presume to attempt alledge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons nor should Enact Promulge or Execute any such Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by what Name or Names they may be called in their Convocations in times coming unless the same Clergy may have the King 's most Royal Assent and License to Make Promulge and Execute the same Now that the Clergy are not by this Clause ty'd up altogether from acting Synodically is allowed generally by Those who desire most to abridge their Powers It cannot with any shew of Reason be pretended that the Convocation however under a Restraint by this Act is become such a Lifeless Body as to have neither Sense nor Motion till Animated by a second Royal Command Unquestionably and according to common Opinion and Practice they have even since this Statute in vertue of the Writ by which they Meet a Liberty of Addressing as they shall see cause either with Thanks or Requests or other proper Representations But it is presum'd also that they may go a great deal further and that there is nothing in the Clause recited which hinders them even from Devising and Framing the Draught of a Canon so it be done only in a Preparatory Way and with Submission to the Royal Enacting Authority This is what has been laid down in a late Treatise * Letter to a Convocation-Man briefly indeed but convincingly and with so much force of Reason as yet has received no Reply The Answerers of that Piece having slid over this part of it where the Act is Explained with a Seeming Neglect but with a Real Distrust of their being able to say any thing to the purpose against what is there advanc'd When they come to this Point as important as it is they dispatch it always in hast Even Dr. Wake can allow it but a flight mention or two in a Work where he finds room amply enough to discuss every thing that is not Material But he did well to tread lightly over the Ground which if he had stood never so little upon it would have gone near to have sunk under him To make this Point yet more manifest and not to leave the least pretence for a Cavil I shall here resume the Proof of it bespeaking the Candor of those Gentlemen whose studies particularly lie this way if as the general Fate is of those that Write out of their Profession I express my self now and then a little improperly So the Thing I aim at be but clearly made out though my Manner of doing it be not strictly according to Art it will not concern me I shall consider first the Occasion of the Act and then the Act it self and by a short account of the One lead the Reader into the true Sense and Meaning of the Other Henry the VIIIth enraged both at the Pope and Cardinal Wolsey for their Delusions in the Affair of the Divorce resolved with the Ruin of the Cardinal to lessen the Papal Authority And for the better effecting this Design which could not well be accomplished without striking a Terror into Those who were then but too much the Pope's Vassals the Clergy especially the Monks and Friars he involved them All in a Premunire for submitting to Wolsey's Legatine Character unauthorised by the Crown not for Procuring or making Use of Provisional Bulls as Dr. Wake in his usual Kindness to the
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.
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
â—estored in the Last Reign but was then uniâ—ersally disallowed and has since been solemnâ—y condemned by the Declaration of Rights as â—ne cause of the Abdication Whatever thereâ—ore Henry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth â—id in vertue of their Supreme Headship whatâ—ver the Three succeeding Princes did by their Ecclesiastical Commissions is not therefore beâ—ause Their Act or Right a present Branch of the Regal Supremacy all those Extraordinary Powers and Jurisdictions which were peâ—uliar to that Title or that Court being now â—eturned to the King in Parliament And When Dr. Wake therefore tells us that he is not â—ware of any Law that has debarred the King from â—aving his Commissioner or Vicar General in Convocation now as Henry the Eighth before had * P. 114. â—e shews how unfit he is under such a deep â—gnorance of our Constitution to write on â—his Argument for a very moderate share of â—kill in these things was methinks sufficient to have made him aware of the Illegality of King Iames's Commission I shall beg leave not to think that this is a Principle approved by â—his Grace of Canterbury or that his Grace would â—ow give place to such a Vicar General IX One thing more I have to offer and with that shall shut up these General Remarks Dr. W. distinguishes not between those Powerâ— in which the Crown is Arbitrary and those in which it is purely Ministerial between Royal Acts that are Free and such as are Necessary so that by the Rules of our Constitution the King cannot omit them For example he tells us That the King determines what Persons * P. 103. shall meet in Convocation at what Time †P. 103. and in what Place And this he talks of in such a manner as if the Prince were perfectly and equally at Liberty in all these Respects and under no manner of Tye from the Laws and Usages of this Kingdom 'T is true as to the Place of their Meeting he is free and may appoint their Session in what part of his Country he thinks fit just as he may that of the Lords and Commons But as to the Time he is so far restrain'd that some Times there are when he ought to call them together by the Fundamental Rules of our Constitution and those are as often as Writs for a New Parliament go out As for the other Convocations in the Intervals of Parliament if our Constitution now after an hundred and fifty years disuse knows any such thing which I shall not here dispute 't is as to These only that the Issuing out Writs for the Clergy can be matter of Grace and Favour or become the Subject of Deliberation But as to the Persons that are to meet the Crown has no Power of determining who or how many they shall be for the Law has determined this before-hand The King may indeed name whom he pleases to Deaneries and Bishopricks but when he has done so Those and no other must be Summoned to Convocation And in this he does not seem to have left himself at so much Liberty as he still has in relation to the House of Lords to which he can by Writ call whom he pleases whereas it may be questioned whether his Writ can give place to any one in the Upper House of Convocation but Bishops only The Truth is the King appoints the Persons that are to come to Convocation just as he does those that are to come to Parliament some have a Right of sitting there in Person and to those therefore he directs Particular Writs Others have a Right of being represented there and those therefore he orders to send up their Proxies that is indeed the Constitution appoints what Persons or Communities shall be Summon'd and the King according to that Rule does as often as he is pleas'd to call a Parliament by his Ministers Execute that Summons And if Convocations are upon the Level with Parliaments in this respect as 't is certain they are Dr. Wake had best have a care how he attempts to prove that it is the King 's Right to appoint who shall come to those meetings because this implies that if he should think fit not to appoint 'em they would have no Right to come which is a Doctrine of very dangerous consequence and not likely to recommend the maintainer of it to the Thanks of either House of Parliament Dr. Wake is not content to assert this Power to the King unless he does it upon the bottom of an Imperial Power for after he has prov'd as he thinks in his First Chapter that the Emperors of Rome and Germany were Absolute in all these respects he goes on in his Second to shew 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 Synods * P. 98. and immediately in the same Particulars of Time Place and Person draws the Parallel between ' em 'T is true as to Place the Kings of England are as Arbitrary as those Emperors were however his way of making out this both of the One and the Other is somewhat singular Abroad Pepin's determining the Place of his Synods meeting is prov'd from his determining that they should meet either at Soissons or at such other place as the Bishops should agree upon †P. 38. At home the same thing manifestly appears because our Princes leave their Synods with a Great Latitude to be held either at St. Paul 's or at any other Place which the Archbishop shall judge to be more convenient ‖ P. 103. Which is very true for the words of the Writ to the Archbishop have for some hundred years run ad conveniendum in Ecclesia c. vel alibâ— prout melius expedire videritis which is just such a Determination of the Place they are to meet in as Dr. Wake 's Book is of the Point in question He has much such another Argument to prove that the Emperors determined the Persons too that were to come to their Great Councils because in Three of them which he there mentions they left it to the Metropolitans when they came to bring such of their Suffragan Bishops as they thought fit along with ' em And when the Princes says he who followed after Summon'd their National Synods They in like manner directed the Choice of those who were to come to them * Pp. 39 40. If they directed the Choice in like manner I may venture to say that they did not direct it at all for those Emperors gave no Directions for the Choice but as He says left it intirely to the Discretion of the Metropolitan or rather as the Truth is left it to the several Provincial Synods to determine what Bishops should wait upon their Archbishop to the Council Were Dr. Wake 's Conge d'estire to be so drawn up as to leave the Chapter to which it shall be sent at as great a
in Two Words have been dispatched by saying That the Clergy have certainly a Right of Meeting and Sitting in Convocation thus often because thus often they have for some hundred years met and sat And this is a plain short Answer which is capable of no Evasion Dr. Wake however has made some small Effort towards Eluding it and what he offers to this purpose shall in the next place be consider'd We find him Pp. 106 107 140 141 c. thus distinguishing That the Clergy have no Right to Meet and Sit but only to be Summon'd as often as a Parliament That having indeed for some hundreds of years been Summon'd always with the Parliament it may be question'd * P. 229. whether they have not he means it is not to be question'd but that they have now a Right to such a concurrent Summons but it is certain they have a Right to nothing besides and it were no Great Matter whether They had a Right to that or no †P. 107. This is Dr. Wake 's New Scheme for laying aside the Clergy's Parliamentary Meetings first and their Parliamentary Summons afterwards A very Honest Design if it could be effected and very fit to be first recommended to the world by the Pen of a Clergy-man God be thanked his Abilities are not Equal to his Good-will in the Case nor the Colours by him put upon this matter such as will ever tempt a wise Ministry to execute what he has Projected In answer to this New Distinction I desire to be satisfy'd why if Custom gives the Convocation a Right to be Summon'd as often as the Parliament meets and sits it does not give 'em a Right to Meet and Sit too since it is certain that they have the very same Custom to plead for the One as for the Other Time out of mind the Custom has been that whenever the Parliament has met the Convocation should not only be Summon'd but meet too and accordingly for some Ages now it has met with it and been open'd in Form by the Archbishop or in the Vacancy of his See by some Bishop Commission'd from the Dean and Chapter of Canterbury Divine Service has been said a Sermon preach'd and a Prolocutor chosen There are Instances indeed when they have gone no further than this and done no other Business but it was when they had no other Business to do for they were always put into a Posture of doing it and into a Capacity of making such Motions and Requests as they should judge proper for the Good of the Church or the Redress of Grievances Till late years it was never known that Convocations should meet purely in order to be adjourn'd that the Members of the Lower house should attend only to be told when they should attend next without being allowâ—d to offer their Advices or Complaints or even to put themselves into a Condition of offering them This Custom we know is but nine years old whereas the contrary Custom is as old as these Assemblies themselves are and if Custom be the Law of Convocations as Dr. Wake allows * P. 298.105 it to be he will be pleas'd to tell us how this Establish'd Custom can be broke in upon and set aside without a Breach of the Law and whether the Clergy's not being suffer'd to meet and form themselves into a Body according to the Intent of their Summons be not upon Dr. Wake 's Principles as plain a Violation of their Rights as it would be not to Summon them Queen Elizabeth one would think was under these Apprehensions for she suffer'd a Popish Convocation to sit and act together with her first Parliament at a Time when she was taking all manner of Legal Steps and Means to expel Popery and to introduce the Reformation which she would never I presume have done had she thought her Power extended so far over the Convocation as to adjourn them before a Prolocutor was chosen * There was indeed a Singularity practis'd at the Enâ—â—ance of this Convocation which I remember no Instance of in any other It was open'd without any Sermon The reason of which is thus given in the Acts Sess. 2. Episcopus London Commissarius evocatâ Domo Inferiori exposuit eis Causam Convocationis quod non futura sit concio pro more quia Sedes Episcopalis destituta existit quia Consiliarii Regis it should be Reginae in mandatis dederunt ne Conciones in Eâdem Ecclesiâ fierent donec de Beneplacito Reginae constaret The first of these Reasons is no reason but the last is sufficient according to the Doctrine of Those Times when our Princes in Vertue of their Supremacy were thought to have a Power of silencing any or even all the Pulpits of England at once which both King Edward and Queen Mary are said to have practis'd But that Doctrine being now out of Doors the Practise founded upon it can be no Warrantable Precedent for our Times Even the Acts themselves that give us an account of this Omission affirm the Custom and say the Sermon was a thing de more And if she did not think she had such a Power it would make one apt to believe that she had it not for whatever else has been said of her I never heard it laid to her Charge that she was ignorant of the Extent of her Prerogative or us'd it too tenderly 'T is true my Lord of Sarum informs us that left the Clergy might set out Orders in Opposition to what the Queen was about to do she sent and requir'd them under the Pains of a Praemunire to make no Canons †Vol. 2. p. 327. His Lordship gives us no Authority for this Particular and I must beg leave therefore to suspect the Exactness of it because the Submission-Act and that which confirm'd it were repeal'd in Queen Mary's time and as yet unreviv'd and the Queen could have no Pretence from any other Acts than these to threaten them with a Praemunire if they proceeded to make Canons However allowing this account of the Queen's Message to be just we may observe that tho' she prohibited 'em to make Canons yet she did not forbid them to Sit and Act in Inferior Instances because she thought it their Priviledge so to do and accordingly this very Convocation did business drawing up their Judgment upon five Important Points in five Articles by way of Protest to be deliver'd not to the Queen as his Lordship thinks * Ibid. but to the Keeper of the Great Seal and to the Lords of Parliament And this they did for the Disburthening of their Consciences †Ad exonerationem conscientiarum suarum as the Acts speak and were allow'd to do it without Check or Disturbance And if the Priviledges of a Popish Convocation were thus tenderly preserv'd to them by a Queen averse to their Principles we may be sure that the Protestant Clergy afterwards had not less Liberty or Worse
have done amiss in this Application yet nothing that they did afterwards needs an Excuse Their Refusal to comply with the King 's Excessive Demands was not only faultless but honourable and the Proceeding against them upon that refusal was altogether Illegal and Barbarous For we must not think that this sentence of Outlawry was built on any Legal Forfeiture they had incurr'd by adhering to the Pope against the Crown no it was founded purely on their denying to supply the King according to his Demands for three years before this when they delay'd to grant the Moiety ask'd he threatned †Audiens Rex indignatus est per suos satellites comminatus est se extrà Protectionem suam Clerum velle ponere nisi medietatem omnium bonorum concederent Knight c. 2502. So also Eversden before cited to do what he actually did now to put them out of his Protection and Then the Prohibitory Bull of Pope Boniface was not in being It would be some Mitigation indeed of the severity of this Process if it had been as Dr. W. would perswade us †P. 351. carried on in Parliament But that is highly improbable and inconsistent with the best accounts we have of those times The Barons it is plain were now very uneasy under the King's Exactions and it is not credible therefore that They should joyn with him in oppressing the Clergy nor had they for ought I can find any Opportunity of doing it For the Clergy were put out of the King's Protection Ian. 30 ‖ 310. Cal. Feb. tale fuit Regis Consilium quòd praeciperet praescriptam duriti em fieri contra Clerum Ann. Wigorn. apud Angl. Sacr. Vol. 1. p. 520. 129 6 which was long after the Parliament of St. Edmundsbury ⸪ Held Nov. 3. 1296. was up and before the Council of Sarum ⸫ Which met Feb. 24. 1296 7. was called Nay 12 days before this Council the Sentence was not only pronounc'd but executed even in the remote parts of England for the Writ of Seizure to the Sheriff of Worcestershire bears date Feb. 12 * Vid. eosdem Ann. Wigorn. ibid. And this agrees very well with the Observation made by the Writers of that time § Eversden Knighton Westminster Ann. Wigorn. that the King's Army was beat in Gascoign on the same day that the Clergy were outlawed here in England for the News of this Defeat it appears from Matthew of Westminster †P. 429. reach'd the King sometime before he met his Barons at Sarum Indeed Knighton ⸪ Col. 2491 and Walsingham ⸫ Ypod. Neustr. speak of a Parliament at Hillary 9â— where this Sentence may seem to have pals'd but there is great reason to suspect their Exactness in this particular The Eldest of them liv'd an 100 Years after the Time they here write of whereas there is no one Cotemporary Author ‖ Rex Angliae Edwardus in crastino animarum apud Sâ—um Edmundum Parliamentum suum tenuit vocati ibidem venerunt per Regias Literas Praelati totus Clerus Sed quoniam Clerus vocatus fuit ibidem ad mandatum regis non auctoritate Ecclesiasticâ noluit ibidem finaliter respondere Sed prorogata dies fuit quoad Clerum usque in Crastinum S. Hilarii A Laïcis tamen ibidem duodecimam partem bonorum-suscepit c. In festo verò S. Hil. Rex petebat à Clero tùnc Londoniae eâdem causa congregatis auctoritate Ecclesiasticâ Auxilium c. Excerpta è Chron. MS. Eccl. Cont. apud Angl. Sacr. Vol. 1 â—p 51. Generalis Convocatio Cleri facta est apud Londoniam in Octavis S. Hil. ad tractandum de pace Sanctae Eccl. c. Iohn de Eversden MS. The Sentence of Excommunication denounc'd by the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation A. D. 1298. see it Spelman Concil Vol. 2. p. 428. style this meeting Quaedam Convocatio Praelatorum Cleri London celebrata post Festum S. Hil. A. D. 1296. The Writ also for summoning it see it Registr Winchelsey fol. 205. the Returns to that Writ see One Registr Henr. Prioris fol. 70. and the Procuratoria drawn in relation to it ibid. mention a Meeting of the Clergy alone without any the least Intimation of a Parliament that I have seen either in Print or Manuscript and I have perus'd several that mentions such a Parliament or speaks of this meeting at St. Hilary any otherwise than as a Provincial Council of the Clergy agreed upon indeed in the preceding Parliament of St. Edmundsbury but not held concurrently with any Session of it Nor is there a Writ of this date either of Summons or Proâ—ogation in our Rolls or Registers So that the word Parliamentum in these two Historians must be taken loosly and in the same Latitude that it is made use of at this very time by Westminster †Barones Angliae Parleamentum suum per se-statuerunt ad ann 1297. and Eversden †Comites Barones tenuerunt Parliamentum suum apud Northampton de discordiâ ortâ inter Regem Ipsos ad ann eund when they apply it to the Barons Voluntary Meetings without and in Opposition to the King's Authority Accordingly we may observe that in the Praecept to the Sheriff for-seizing the Estates of the Clergy by me lately mention'd there are no words that imply the Sentence to have pass'd de Consilio Baronum or to have had the Consent of Parliament It says only Propter aliquas certas Câ—usas Tibi praecipimus qùod omnia Lâ—â—ca Fâ—eda totius Cleri in Ballivâ tuâ sine dilatione capiaâ—is in manum vestram c. †Annal. Wig. p. 520 and by the Tenor of it one would guess that it was a mere Arbitrary Command of the Prince not built on any Judicial Process whatever I have been very Liberal therefore in allowing that it might spring from a Iudgment in Court led to it by some Expressions that look that way in the Relations of Thorn and Knighton However the Judge who pronounc'd it will not be excus'd by this allowance for he pass'd an Unrighteous Sentence in a very Infamous Cause and meanly prostituted the Law to gratify the King's Resentments For which reason we may be sure that Sir Roger Brabazon * Dr. W. pretends to tell this Story with great Exactness and yet mistakes both the Name of the Person and his Office there being no such Iudge at that time as Robert Brabazon and the Person he means being neuer either second Iudge or Chief Iustice of the Common Pleas as Dr. W. will have him to have been if Dugale 's Chronica Juridicialia may be relied on The Dr. it seems found there Justitiarius ad Placita corum Rege and Justitiarius de Banco oppos'd to one another and wisely thought that the first of these signify'd the Common Pleas and the second the King's Bench just as they sounded was not the Man as my Lord Coke too
need of this Protestation which was made to guard against the Penaltys of the Acts 25. and 27. H. VIII and has therefore we see a plain reference to them The Convocation in which Alesius the Scot disputed with so much applause sat the Year after this Anno 1537 †Ant. Brit. p. 331. Fox Vol. 2. p. 504. though my Lord of Sarum †Vol. 1. p. 214. I find out of a laudable Eagerness to record the Honors done to his Countrymen has plac'd this Dispute a Year earlier than it hapned Cromwell open'd the Meeting with a Speech where he tells them that they are call'd to determin certain Controversys in Religion which at this time be moved concerning the Christian Religion and Faith not only in this Realm but also in all Nations thorough the World For the King studieth Night and Day to set a Quietness in the Church and he cannot rest till all such Controversys be fully debated and ended through the Determination of You and of his Whole Parliament For he will suffer no Common Alteration but by the Consent of You and of his Whole Parliament And he desireth You for Christ's sake that All Malice Obstinacy and Carnal Respect set apart ye will friendly and lovingly dispute among your selves of the Controversys mov'd in the Church c. These Fox tells us were the very words of his Speech and that as soon as it was ended the Bishops rose up altogether giving thanks unto the King's Majesty not only for his Great Zeal towards the Church of Christ but also for his Godly Exhortation worthy so Christian a Prince and then immediately they went to Disputation We may observe here that neither Cromwell in his Speech to the Convocation nor the Prelates in their Answer mention any Commission to Treat though it had been a Proper Head to have been enlarg'd on in both Cases and could not well have escap'd the Clergy when returning Thanks to the King for his Goodness to them had any such Commission then issu'd But that it did not and that the Clergy were then under no Apprehensions that their liberty of Debating on what Subjects and even of coming to what Conclusions they pleas'd was abridg'd by the late Act the Preface to the Institution of a Christian Man a Book which pass'd this Convocation evidently shews I have transcrib'd the Passage already from thence †See P. 97. and shall here therefore only referr the Reader to it No the Practise then and long afterwards was only for the President of the Synod to declare to 'em by word of Mouth * Thus in the Convocation of Jan. 1. 1557 The Acts say that Card. Pool Causas hujus Synodi Verbo tenùs proposuit And so divers times before and after 1541. Ian. 20. Reverendissimus exposuit iis ex parte Regis qùod intentio ejus erat qùod ipsi inter se deliberarent de Reformandis Errotibus conficerent Leges de Simoniâ vitandâ c. 1547. 1. E. VI. Nov. 5. Rev mus exposuit iâ—s fuisse c. de mandato Regio Procerum qùod Praelati Clerus inter se conâ—â—lerent de verâ— Christi Religione probè instituendâ With this agrees an Old Directory of Cranmer's for the first Day of the Convocation 7 E. VI. May 1. 1552. §. 6. The Clergy of the Inferior House to be called up to the Chapitor his Grace to declare the Cause of this Convocation and to appoint them to Elect c. 1555. 22. Oct. Episcopus London summariè compendiosè Causam Synodi vocatae exposuit Ian. 13. 1562. Arch. Cant. brevem quandem Orationem Eloquentiae plenam habuit ad Patres Clerum perquam inter alia opportunitatem reformandarum rerum in Eccl. Anglic. jam oblatam esse aperuit ac Propensos animos tam illustrissimae Dominae Nostrae Reginae quà m aliorum Magnatum hujus regni ad hujusmodi Reformationem habendam declaravit I have laid these Instances together that we may see clearly what the Custom then was and how a Message from the King by the President supply'd the place of a Commission under the Broad Seal which was afterwards practis'd Heylin and Fuller have translated some of these Passages in their Historys but so loosly as to accommodate them to the Current Doctrine and Practise of their time when a License to Treat was held necessary Which I mention to warn the Reader not to receive their Versions as Literal For it is plain they saw no other Acts of Convocation than those from whence these Transcripts were taken the King's Pleasure for what Ends he had call'd them together and what Business he would have them proceed upon And this Verbal Intimation was all the Previous Leave that was either ask'd or given in That or several other succeeding Reigns The only Instance in H. the VIII 's time that seems to contradict this is the Divorce of Anne of Cleve in 1540 mention'd by L. M. P. * P. 40. which he says the Clergy could not take cognizance of till the King's Commission impower'd them to debate and consider it And in their Iudgment therefore they recite that Commission at large and by vertue of it declare c. They do so and there were Two very good Reasons for it arising from the Matter about which they were to give their Judgment and from the Manner also in which they were to handle it As to the first of these the attempting any thing by Word or Deed against this Marriage of the King with Anne of Cleve was High-Treason or at leastâ— Misprision of Treason by the Laws of the Realm as the Clause of Pardon in the Act †32. H. 8. c. 25. for dissolving this Marriage evidently shews And the Clergy therefore had reason to desire a Commission from the Crown to screen them from these Penealtys But further such a Commission was necessary not only for their security in a point of this Importance but in order to their very Assembling For which has not been hitherto observ'd this Cause was adjudg'd not in a Convocation properly so call'd that is in a Provincial Synod but in a National Assembly of the whole Clergy of either Province the King issuing out his Letters Commissional under the Great Seal as the Sentence * See it Bishop Burnet Vol. 1. Col. of Rec. p. 197. speaks to the Two Archbishops All the Bishops Deans Archdeacons and Clergy of England and commanding them in Universalem Synodum convenire to debate and determin this matter The Lords and Commons then sitting had petition'd the King to referr it to his Clergy with a design of grounding an Act of Parliament on Their Determination The Business requir'd Haste †The Commission was seal'd the 6 th of July the Clergy met by Vertue of it the 7th The Cause was heard Iudgment given and Letters Testimonial of that Iudgment drawn up and sign'd by all the Clergy on the 9th such Dispatch
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
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
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