of Hon. par 2. c. 5. p. 607. The other is of a Writ in Fitz-herbert * Nat. Prev §. 141. forbidding the Archdeacon to compell the King's Clerks in Chancery attending his Parliaments tho' Benefic'd in the Diocese ad contribuendum ratione beneficiorum suorum Expensis Procuratorum qui ad dictum Parliamentum pro Clero dictae Dioeces venerunt seu aliorum Procuratorum quos ad alia Parliamenta c. per nos nunc tenenda venire continget This Writ issu'd by Authority of Parliament for it recites an Ordinance made to this purpose in a Parliament held 4 R. 2. * Not 4 E. 3. as the Printed Writ in Fitzh implys for no Parliament met at Northampton in the 4 th Year of his Reign and is founded upon it And that the Levy of these Expences continu'd throughout the succeeding Reigns to the very time of the Reformation I have seen a good Proof in a certain Bishop's Mandate †Anno 1543. for collecting a Peny in the Pound to this purpose which it says De laudabili legitiméque praescriptâ Consuetudine in qualibet Convocatione hujusmodi contribui solebat solet ex aequitate consideratis praemissis debet How long afterwards they were paid or when first discontinu'd I know not but suppose that the Disuse of them as to the Deputed Clergy might come on by much the same steps and about the same time that it did in the House of Commons In one thing however the Clergy Delegates differ'd from those of the Laity that the first tho' Proxys themselves could upon occasion appoint other Proxys in their stead if their Instruments ran Cum potestate substituendi alium Procuratorem as they often anciently did * And sometimes of late for 1 E. 6. One of the Proctors for the Clergy of Hereford appointed Two others in his room See Synodalia And in his last Year the Procuratorium for the Dean and Chapter of Paul 's had that Clause in it for so it stands enter'd in Bishop Ridley's Register Fol. 294. Whereas I find no Instance that this was ever practis'd among the Commons The reason of which I conceive to be that the Clergy were to attend the Call not only of the King in his Parliaments but of the Pope and the Archbishop also in their several Synods and having therefore a Greater Burthen in this respect than the Laity were indulged also a Greater Liberty Further the Members of Convocation had not only Parliamentary Wages but Parliamentary Priviledges too and those I question not from their first Separation tho' we find that they were solemnly setled upon them long afterward in the 8 H. 6. But that Act might be made as well to affirm the Old Priviledges which after the Clergy had been dismembred so long might begin to be disputed as to add the New which had accru'd since the Separation and withal to confer them both not only on Parliamentary Convocations but on Convocations in general whenever meeting at the King's Summons Nor was the Separation so compleat but that the Inferior Clergy joyn'd Occasionally with the Laity and attended the King together with the States of Parliament either at the first Opening or Dissolution of it or at other solemn times when the King came to the House of Lords and something was to be done en plein Parlement i. e. in a Full Assembly of the Clergy and Laity as that Expression sometimes in the Elder Rolls seems to imply * 6 E. 3. n. 9. Something is said to be agreed per touz en plein Parlement and those are thus reckoned up before in the same Number Les Prelats Countes Baronns touz les autres Somons a mesme le Parlement which includes the Inferior Clergy for They were Summon'd this time by the Premunientes See Dugd. p. â—67 That they appear'd antiently in Parliament the first day of its Session the Roll of the first Parliament held 6 E. 3. is a clear Proof where after Sir Ieffery le Scroop had in the King's Presence declard the Causes of calling it it is said that the Bishops and Proctors of the Clergy went apart to * Si alerent mesmes les Prelatz les Procurators de la Clergie per eux mesmes a conseiler de choses susdites consult by themselves That they came thither also on other Solemn Occasions during the Session the following Passage implies where upon the King 's declaring the Bishop of Norwich's Pardon from the Throne it is said that the Archbishop with his Brethren the Abbats and Priors and the Clergy there assembled †Ft la 〈◊〉 illoneques esteantâ— Rot. Parl. 2 H. 4. n. 14. By which whether the Convocation-Clergy be meant cannot I think well bear a Doubt it being very improbable that those few Inferior Clerks who were of the King's Counsel or otherwise call'd up to the House of Lords sâ—ould be only intended most humbly kneeling thank'd his Majesty for his Royal Grace and Goodness Which I mention the rather because the Abridgement of the Rolls ⸫ P. 405. takes no notice of any but Bishops on this occasion But these are rare Instances we have oftner Accounts of the Lower House of Convocation joyning with that of Parliament not indeed in one Assembly but however in the same Parliamentary Requests and there are many Instances by which it appears that they were in such Requests and on other Occasions still reputed and call'd a part of the Community of the Realm Witness that Petition in Parliament to Hen. the 4 th which begins The Commons of your Realm as well Spiritual as Temporal * Supplienâ— humblement les Communes de vostre Roialme si bien Espirituelz come Temporelz Rot. Parl. 7 8. Hen. 4. n. 128. most humbly pray And here agen the Abridgment is remarkably silent And this Style I can trace as low as the 35 H. 8. a Proclamation of which year recites that The Nobles and Commons bothe Spyrytuall and Temporall assembled in our Court of Parliamente have upon Goode Lawfull and Vertuous Groundes and for the Publique Weale of this our Realme by oone hole Assente graunted and annexed knytte and unyed to the Crowne Imperyall of the same the Tytle Dignitye and Style of Supreme Heede in Erthe ymmediatelye under Godd of the Churche of England The Proclamation is in Bonner's Register †Fol. 42. which tho' my Lord of Sarum perused yet it seems he overlook'd this Paper and the Passage I have mention'd from it I must believe so because it is upon so Material a Point and express'd in so Extraordinary a Manner that had his Lordship observ'd it he would methinks have given his Readers notice of it Many years therefore after the Clergy had submitted they are by their Supreme Head himself own'd to be the Commons Spiritual of Parliament And when therefore in the Oâ—d Rolls we find 'em not expresly mention'd as such we must believe that they lay hid often under the
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
a Man and how far in time it may carry him from mending the Model of the Church which was the work Ten years ago to the Improving that of the State without considering that the One of these may be tamper'd with and practis'd upon more easily than the other and more securely When such Bold Proposals as these come from Private Unauthoriz'd Hands they deserve a Publick Censure and because I am for every thing 's having what it deserves I hope will find it Dr. Wake it seems does not understand to what purpose this Clause is retain'd in the Writ and proposes therefore a Retrenchment of it An hard Case this that the Writ should be alter'd because he does not understand it for at this rate what Old Forms are secure I have endeavour'd however to help his Understanding a little and to shew him that it is retain'd there to very good Purpose that it declares the King's Right of Summoning the Clergy to attend his Parliaments in Body the Lords and Commons Right of being thus attended and the Clergy's Right also to be Summon'd and to attend accordingly And that These are very great and weighty reasons for keeping it there appears from what has hapned already and may happen hereafter The Time is now come when the Clergy find themselves oblig'd to put in their Claim to a Parliamentary Attendance because it is disputed and according to the Natural Vicissitudes of things a Time may possibly come when the Crown or the Lords and Commons shall want the Parliamentary Attendance of the Clergy and be willing to claim it Equal Provision is made against each of these Inconveniences by continuing the Praemunitory Clause in the Bishops Summons where I hope it will ever continue even tho' a Sett of Future Bishops should arise which God forbid that would be contented to be Summon'd without it as not considering that it is as much Their Interest as the Inferior Clergy's â—o keep this Form whole and intire and that if the one part of the Writ goes the other may not stay long behind it Were this Alteration at any time to take place it had been well for Dr. Wake that it had hapned before he wrote his Book for then had the Clause been left out of the Writ he might have left it out of his Appendix too and by that means sav'd himself the shame of those Childish Mistakes which he has committed in Reciting it and which shall in due Time and Place be made known * See p. 427 8 9. of these Papers Nothing could have taken off from the Extravagantness of Dr. Wake 's Proposal but as wild an Assertion of a certain Acquaintance of his who is not afraid to tell us that Parliamentary Writs prove â—othing of the Constitution * L. M. P. p. 32. and this in words at length and not in Figures A Glorious Maximâ— which the Lords and Commons at Oxford knew nothing of who declare that the Writs of Summons are the Foundation of All Parliamentary Power †Declaration of the Treaty p. 15. I shall say not one word to disprove it for Parliamentary Writs and Constitutions are able to take care of themselves Only I cannot but observe how wise a way he has taken of making this Maxim good For continues he a Writ of Summons in the Time of Edward the First upon occasion of War with France had 〈◊〉 Chiuse Qâ—â—d omnes tangit ab omnibus approbetur And it may with as much reason be concluded from that Writ that the King cannot make War without the Approbation of his Parliament 〈◊〉 from the Present Writ that he cannot hold a Parliament without calling the Clergy to it That is the King 's known Prerogative may with as much reason be barr'd by an Expression once inserted in the Preamble of a Writ as the Clergy's Right and Priviledge can be grounded upon a Clause in the Body of a Writ which has stood there for above four hundred years What a wonderful way of arguing is this how can we choose but surrender upon such Proofs as soon as they are produc'd Dr. Wake I remember has an Axiom that Logick is one thing and Law another ‖ P. 252. which by the by is all he knows of either And I must needs say that I never in my life met with a better Instance of the Truth of that Axiom than in this Gentleman 's Law-Reasonings Thus far of the Inferior Clergy's Summons to Parliament by the Clause in the Bishops Writ the Rise Nature and Force of which I have fully explain'd and proâ—'d that it is not even at this time so insignificant a Form as we are made to believe much more that it has not been so now for some Hundreds of years But there is also another Summons of the Clergy tho' not to Parliament yet to meet in Parliament-time under the Two Archbishops in their several Provinces And This too has been regularly issu'd out as often as a New Parliament was call'd from the Latter End of Edward the Second till now with Few Exceptions to the contrary and with None from the first Dawn of the Reformation in Henry the Eighth's Reign down to this present And from this Antient Custom as Antient as the Compleat Settlement of our Constitution the Clergy think themselves intitled to be Summon'd to assemble and to sit Provincially when ever a New Parliament meets But here it is objected that the King 's Writ to the Two Archbishops to call the Clergy of their Provinces together has no relation to the calling of a Parliament nor does so much as mention it * L. M. P. p. 29 30. that a Convocation is not in its Nature and Constitution at all dependent upon a Parliament that its Summons is distinct from that of a Parliament and so is its Dissolution and admitting therefore that the Clergy ought to be call'd to Parliament which is all that can be inferr'd from the Bishops Writ yet doth it not follow therefore that the Convocation ought to be Summon'd when the Parliament meets for that is plainly a Distinct Assembly and Summon'd by a Distinct Writ * P. 32. And much to the same purpose Dr. Wake p. 226. 284. and elsewhere has stated the matter I think this needs no Answer but what it has already receiv'd For allowing the Objection in its full force yet since Custom is the Law of Parliaments and it has perpetually been the Custom to issue out these Writs to the Archbishops whenever Writs went out for the Parliament it is certain that the Clergy have a Right to these Provincial Assemblies in Parliament time on the account of this Antient Prescription tho' the Convocation-Writ it self should neither mention a Parliament or any ways refer to it For if a Custom of three or four hundred years standing will not create a Right I know not what will However that I may not seem to neglect any thing that has the Look of an
but all such as compos'd a Provincial Synod See Reg. Henr. Prioris f. 234. sometimes from thence to cite all those Abbots and Priors who had no place in Parliament in order to compleat the Numbers of the Clergy and form a Provincial Assembly And he cited 'em to appear after Winchelsey's Pattern not before the King and among the other States but before Himself in the Chief Church of the Place But this was at his Choice for the King 's Writ directed him only to command the Attendance of the Parliament-Clergy And with this the Crown had reason to be content while the Defects of these General Summons by the Provincial and Bishops Writs were supply'd by Particular Writs directed to great Numbers of Abbats and Priors as the way was in Edward the First 's and Second's time the former of these citing Personally to his Parliaments after the Praemunientes went out often sixty or seventy and sometimes above eighty Regular Prelates and the Latter usually Summoning about fifty of them till the Declining Part of his Reign But this being esteem'd an Hardship on those Regulars who were not by Tenure oblig'd to attend the King's Summons as holding nothing of him by Barony they were in time omitted and the Number of Abbats and Priors who had Personal Writs reduc'd to about thirty the Archbishop's General Mandate then calling the rest to his Parliamentary Convocations and that being allow'd and accepted by the Crown as a sufficient Attendance in Parliament But what the Archbishop did of himself at first That he did afterwards at the King's Instance who took occasion from this Practice to enlarge his own Letters of Direction to him and by them at last to require him to Summon all those Regular Prelates he was us'd to Summon without such a Direction This as it was a Natural Step so indeed it was necessary after the Crown had foreclos'd it self from Summoning the greatest part of the Abbats Personally to Parliament for then it lay purely in the Archbishop's Breast whether he would call the Unsummon'd Abbats by his General Mandate or no and so upon any Dispute between the Spirituality and Temporalty the Crown might have been defeated of their Parliamentary Attendance At what Time precisely these Writs to the Archbishop for a Full Convocation to be held concurrently with a Parliament began to be practis'd I have not found The Eldest that has yet come to my hands is of the 10 th of Edw. 3. when the Parliament was call'd to meet at Nottingham die Lunae prox post Festum S. Matthaei †See Dug p. 186. by a Writ dated Aug. 24. And the same day another Writ issu'd to the Archbishop of Canterbury to call all the Clergy of his Province to Leicester ad diem Lunae prox post Festum S. Michaelis that is seven days afterwards * See Cl. 10 E. 3. m. 16. dors And the next year again the same thing was practis'd the Archbishop being order'd to Summon the Convocation to St. Paul's two or three days after the Parliament was to meet at Westminster * See Pryn. Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. p. 39 40. And still which is observable the Style of Authority in these Fuller Convocation-Writs was the same as it was in those where the Premonish'd Clergy only were mention'd it being a Mixture of a Command and a Request Rogando Mandamus as it continues to be in all Writs for a Convocation to this very Day This also deserves notice in many of them that they went not out only at the same time with the Parliament Writs but mention the holding of a Parliament in their Preambles as the Ground of their issuing that so the Clergy according to their Duty might resort to it Thus it was in the Writ of the 11 Ed. 3. * Ps. 2. m 40. dors just now mention'd And so again in his 29 th year another Writ †Cl. m. 8. dors runs Cùm pro arduis urgentibus Negotiis Nos Statum Regni nostri Anglicani ac necessariam defensionem ejusdem Regni concernentibus ordinaverimus Parliamentum nostrum apud Westmonasterium tenere c. Quia expedit quòd praedicta Negotia quae Salvationem Defensionem Regni nostri contingunt salubriter efficaciter cum bonâ maturâ deliberatione deducantur Vobis mandamus rogantes c. to call the Clergy of Canterbury-Province to St. Paul's die Lunae prex post Festum S. Martini ad tractand ' consulend ' super praemissis unà Vobisâ—um aliis per Nos illùc mittendis ad consentiend ' hiis quae tùnc c. T. R. apud Westm. 25. Sept. The same Form recurs 31 E. 3. Cl. m. 21. dors and in divers other Instances And when the Convocation-Writs did not mention a Parliament in Terms yet the Matter and Tenor of them shew'd that they belong'd to one for as long as the Reasons of State were continu'd in the Parliament-Writs so long we find 'em inserted in those to the Archbishops for a Convocation and after the Particular Causes of Summons came to be omitted in the Convocation-Writs and They as well as Those for a Parliament were reduc'd to a Fix'd Form which return'd constantly with little or no Variation which happen'd I think about the middle of R. the 2 d * There are later Instances of Parliament-Writs where the Reasons of Summoning are declar'd specially as 7 H. 4. Cl. dors m. 29. but they are rare ones yet even Then the General Reasons of convening them left in the Writ and still a part of it shew that they were call'd not only for Ecclesiastical but Civil Affairs and such as concern'd the Peace Publick Good and Defence of the Kingdom in a word to the very same Intents and Purposes for which the Parliament it self was assembled These Writs for a Full Convocation grew now the Common Form it being matter of Ordinary Practice to send them out concurrently with those for a Parliament in Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns and still the Convocation was as in the preceding Instances generally order'd to attend a few days sooner or later than the Parliament did and not precisely on the Spot where the Parliament open'd but at some Church or Chapter-house near it And sometimes the Archbishop was left wholly at large as to both these Circumstances the Place being mention'd with a vel alibi prout melius expedire videritis and the Time no otherwise prefix'd than by the words cum omni celeritate accommodâ or ad breviorem diem quam poteritis or such other Equivalent Expressions which yet were so understood as to oblige the Archbishop to joyn the Assemblies of the Clergy both in Place and Time closely to those of the Laiety A yet Greater Liberty was indulg'd and taken in some of the succeeding Reigns till in Henry the Eighth's time * My Lord of Sarum Vol. 1. Coll. oâ— Rec. Num. 3. Prints a Convocation-Writ as the Pattern
on the same side by Mr. Nicholson He has discover'd a Record where indeed one would hardly look for it in a Dictionary which he thinks plainly proves that the People had their Representatives in Parliament before the Aera commonly assign'd and he wonders that none who have written on this Argument should have taken notice of it * Hist. Lib. Vol. 3. p. 60 To Ease him of his wonder I will whisper the reason of it to him in his Ear it was because those Knowing Gentlemen saw it was frivolous and not worth the mentioning The Words as they stand in Somner's Translation are Consiliarii qui fuerint electi a Nobis à gentis Plebe in regno nostro c. I have no skill in the Tongue Mr. Somner had certainly a great deal and Mr. Nicholson has some if at least we may take a Friends †Praef. Chronic. Saxonic word for it However in opposition to both I must bég leave to say that either the Original is faulty or the Translation not proper and I do this upon very good Grounds because it differs from the Translation which the Parliament it self made of this Record for as Mr. Nicholson ought to have known it was publish'd by them in three several Languages English Latin and French and the French Copy of it we have in the Printed Annalls of Burton †P. 417. which were written at the very Time when this Charter was fram'd And there the words are Nostre Cunseil ke est eslu par nous ou par la Commun de nostre Reaume It was it seems at that Oxford Parliament agreed that the Kingdom should be govern'd by a Council of Twenty Four Twelve of which should be chosen by the King and Twelve by the Community i. e. by the Baronage not by the Commons properly so call'd as is manifest from the whole Course of the Story and particularly from that Branch of it where the Names of the Twenty Four are set down * All but One. under these Titles Electi ex parte Domini Regis and Electi ex parte Comitum Baronum †P. 412. And not the Electors onely but every one of the Twelve allso who were thus Elected were Barons It is sufficiently evident from hence that the words Electi à Plebe give us no true account of that part of the Record they pretend to Translate and that our Historicall Librarian therefore might have kept this Rarity to himself and the World not have been injur'd by his Reserv'dness Mr. Archdeacon fitly puts me in mind of the point from whence I wander'd I was proving that there is frequent mention of his Order as call'd to Parliament in H. the III's Reign and of this I gave several Instances there are others which prove the yet Lower Ranks of the Clergy to have been present there For Example 1229. 13. H. III. Fecit Rex convenire apud Westm Dominos Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Priores Templarios Hospitalarios Comites Barones Ecclesiarum Rectores qui de se tenebant in Capite ad Locum praefixum diem ut audirent Negotia memorata de rerum Exigentiis communiter tractarent ibidem * M. Par. p. 367. By Ecclesiarum Rectores here I understand not Deans and Archdeacons onely but some of the Rurall Rectors of Parishes the words being employ'd in this sense frequently in the Records of this Reign †See Pat. 11. H. III. m. 10. apud Pryn Eccl. Juris T. 2. p. 406. Cl. 32. H. III. m. 12. dors ibid. p. 718. 1232. A Tax is said to be given by the Archbishops Bishops Abbats Priors Clerici terras habentes quae ad Ecclesias suas non pertinent ⸪ Cl. 16. H. III. m. 2. dors Which M. Par. seems to have copied where he says that at this Meeting there was given the King a 40th ab Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Clericis Laïcis p. 318. to which are joyn'd on the Laypart Earls Barons Knights and Free-men Villani de Regno A Learned Person †Dr. Brady Introd p. 220. says these Clergymen were such as had Lands the Fee of which was in the Crown and not in the Church and if so we must suppose 'em to be the Parochial Priests of some of those Churches which upon the Doomsday-Survey were found to have 4711 Knights Fees in them However that may be again five Years after this we hear of these Clerks * Cl. 21. H. III. m. 7. dors onely now the Record varys a little for the Earls Barons Knights and Freemen give pro se suis Villanis whereas still the Clerici terras habentes c. are said to give for themselves Between these Two we have a Writ ‖ Pat. 20. H. III. m. 8. in tùs apud Pryn Eccl. Jurisd T. 2. p. 475. wherein the Archbishops Bishops Abbats Priors aliae Ecclesiasticae Personae de regno are said to have granted an Aid de omnibus Foedis suis tam de illis de quibus nobis respondent quando Scutagium datur quam de aliis quae retinent ad Opus suum and that this was a Grant in Parliament we learn from the Teste of it which is May 4. compared with M. Paris in this Year where he tells us that 4. Kal. Maii i. e. 8 days before congregati sunt Magnates Angliae Londini ad Colloquium de Negotiis Regni tractaturi †Ad ann 1236. p. 429. And in the same History we are told of a Parliament 32. H. III that there came to it Edicto Regio totius regni Angliae Nobilitas and among them Bishops Abbats Priors Clericorum multitudo copiosa (⸫) M. Par. p. 743. These Testimonys are I think sufficient to shew that from the Conquest down to E. the I. the Inferior Clergy had Place and Interest in Parliament being there sometimes in Body and as representing the Whole sometimes in Part onely and as entituled by their Tenures the Lower Regulars and Saeculars appearing now and then by distinct Proctors of their own but more frequently by their Priors and Archdeacons particularly impower'd to that purpose Nor matters it much whether they were thus call'd up immediately by a Royal Writ or by an Ecclesiastical Summons onely issu'd out at the King's Instance since whether cited this way or that the Effect of their Citation was to attend the Parliament and accordingly the Memoirs of those times speak of them as being of the Parliament and as acting in it They might be summon'd often as they sat Apart from the Laiety but as they sat in Parliament though separately so were they call'd to Parliament though perhaps after a different manner from the Laiety and did there together with the Greater Prelates compose a Full Representative of the Clergy and the first Estate of the Realm This meeting of the Clergy with the Parliament was at first in One National but afterwards in two
therefore in our Account of it that is in our Deduction of those particular Passages in our Historys and Records which prove it all along from the Insertion of the Premunientes down to the Times of the Reformation Three sorts of these there are that deserve to be taken notice of First Such as represent the Convocation to be a Meeting Coïncident with the Parliament Secondly Such as speak of the Convocation Clergy as of the Parliament and in it And Thirdly Such as declare the Particular Intents and Purposes for which the Convocation Clergy were and were esteem'd to be of the Parliament The First of these points as far as Antient Practice is concern'd our Adversarys seem to grant or should they dispute it yet it has already in the former part of this Book by many plain Evidences and Authoritys been made good However since it falls once more in my way I shall here add a few Instances of the same kind by way of Supplement 13 E. II. The King is said ad requisitionem Praelatorum Cleri regni nostri then sitting to have prorogu'd the Parliament †Dugd. Summ. p. 108. 5. E. III. In a Bishop's Summons to Parliament we find this Clause Et quia ante haec tempora Communia Regni nostri negotia propter aliquorum Praelatorum Magnatum absentiam qui ad Convocationes Parliamenta hujusmodi non ad dies statutos sed diù post modùm venerunt frequenter retardata fuerunt ad commune damnum Populi regni nostri volumus c. quod dicto Crastino omnimodò sitis apud Nos ad Locum praedictum praemuniatis Priorem Archidiaconos caeteros qùod ipsi similiter intersint quia intentionis nostrae existit quòd Parliamentum illud cum celeritate quâ— poterit finiatur †Ibid. p. 163. c. This implys plainly that these Two Assemblys the Convocation and Parliament were us'd ante haec tempora long before this time to assemble concurrently as also which relates to the second point that the Praemonish'd Clergy so assembling in Convocation were yet reckon'd to be of the Parliament 13. E. III. Mention is made of Writs then to be issu'd One to call the Convocation of the Province of Cant and the Other that of York against the Time to which the next Parliament was Summon'd * Abr. of Rec. p. 19. 20. E. III. The Bishops are commanded to certify into Chancery the Names of all Aliens their Benefices and Values avaunt le jour de la Convocation de la Clergie ou adonque à plâ—s tard †Rot. Parl. n. 46. i. e. before or at the next Convocation which was to fit with the next Parliament 29. E. III. Cl. m. 8. dors The King 's Writ for a Convocation recites that he had pro arduis urgentibus negotiis Nos Statum Regni nostri Angliae necessariam defensionem ejusdem regni concernentibus call'd his Parliament to Westmâ— die Iovis in crastino S ti Martini and then adds Et quia expedit quòd praedicta negotia quae salvationem deâ—ensionem regni nostri sic contingunt salubriter efficaciter cum bonâ maturâ deliberatione deducantur Vobis mandamus rogantes to call the Clergy of Cant. Prov. to Pauls die Lunae prox post festum S. Martini ad tractandum consâ—lendum super praemissis T. Rege apud Westm r. 25. Sept. The same Praeamble literally recurrs in the Writ of the 31. E. III. Cl. m. 21. dors and something Equivalent to it is to be found in several succeeding ones 1. R. II. The Clergy grant a X th on condition that the Commons give a XV th †Registr Sudbury f. 44. b. and on the other side 8. R. II. the Commons offer two XV ths on condition that the Clergy shall give two X ths * Registr Courtney f. 81. b. These Mutual Stipulations imply that the two Assemblys were concurrent They were practis'd frequently in the Entrance of this Reign ⸪ See Rot. Par. IV. R. 2. n. 13. VII R. 2. n. 13. VII R. 2. n. 12. but now in this last Instance a Check was given to them for the Archbishop protesting in behalf of the Clergy that the Condition was against the Liberty of the Church and insisting that it ought not to remain there it was by the King's Order with-drawn For which reason there is now no mention of it in the Rolls of this Parliament More such Passages as these might be brought in each succeeding Reign but I shall content my self to step an hundred Years forwards and produce one only out of the Continuer of the Annals of Croyland In his account of E. the IV th's last Parliament * Anno 1483. he tells us that the King nihil a Communitate subsidii pecuniarii expetere ausus betook himself to the Clergy quasi adds the Monk semel comparentibus Praelatis Clero in eorum Convocatione quicquid Rex petit id sieri debeat †P. 563. These I confess are not Direct and full Proofs of the Convocations sitting ordinarily with the Parliament but only intimate and suppose it and are therefore mention'd here not so much to strengthen that point which is otherwise sufficiently secur'd as to illustrate and explain it The Passages of the second sort which represent the Convocation Clergy as of the Parliament and acting in it have more Weight in them Some of these I have already offer'd ⸪ P. 60. c. and shall now add several others The Reader who considers that the very stress of the Debate lies here and who has withal any Tast of these studys will not though I abound in Proofs of this kind think me Tedious The first Instance I shall give is from the Articuli Cleri 10. E. II. the Praeamble of which recites qùod cùm dudùm temporibus Progenitorum nostrorum quondam Regum Angliae in diversis Parliamentis suis similiter postquam regni nostri gubernacula suscepimus in Parliamentis nostris per Praelatos Clerum regni nostri plures Articuli continentes Gravamina Ecclesiae Anglicanae ipsis Praelatis Clero illata ut in eïsdem asserebatur porrecti fuissent cum in stantiâ supplicatum ut inde apponeretur remedium opportunum ac nuper in Parliamento nostro â—pâ—d Lincoln anno Regni nostri nono Articulos subscriptos quasdam Responâ—iones ad aliquos eorum prius factas coram Concilio nostro recitari ac quasdam responsiones corrigi caeteris Articulis subscriptis per Nos dictum nostrum Concilium fecimus responderi c. †Spelm. Conc. Vol. 2. p. 483. Words which shew the Lower Clergy as well as Prelates to have been look'd upon as of the Parliament and acting in it not then only but long before also in the Reigns of several of that Princes Progenitors to wit in those of E. I. and H. the III. at least if not higher And I
is requisite to frame a True Judgment upon it This shall be the Business of the Next and Last Chapter which I shall draw into as narrow a Compass as conveniently I can having already I fear expatiated a little too much in the Others CHAP. IX DR Wake has grac'd his Appendix with the Forms of several Writs the First †P. 359. of which is he says an Antient Writ of Summons for an Abbat and the second for a Bishop †P. 361. to come to Parliament It seems this Great Antiquary thinks that Bishops and Abbats were call'd to Parliament by Writs of a different form whereas every one that is in the least acquainted with things of this nature knows that whenever the Abbats had an Immediate and Personal Summons their Writs ran in the very same Terms with those of the Bishops the Clause Premunientes only excepted and are therefore very seldom recited at length in the Rolls of Parliament but entred onely with an Eodem modo mandatum est or Consimiles Literae diriguntur Abbatibus Prioribus subscriptis But had he a mind for the Honour of the Abbats whose order is now extinct to record Their Writ of Summons distinctly in his Immortal Work and by that means to preserve the Memory of it to future Ages yet that he should single out that particular Writ he has printed as an Antient one and of the Reign of H. III. * See p. 359. is a little unhappy when it is certain that That Writ in all its forms never went out till the Middle or Latter End of R. II. i. e. till about an 120 Years after H. the III. was dead and buried The Introductory words Quia de avisamento consilii nostri are scarce found in any Parliament-Writ before 12 E. III. when they are two or three times us'd and not afterwards till the 46 E. III. when they begin to be employ'd pretty constantly The Defence of the Church of England mention'd in the Close of it never had place in any Writ till 6 E. II. says Pryn * P. W. Vol. 1. p. 115. was never ordinarily inserted till the 49 E. III. and never in that manner in which it is express'd in this Writ till towards the End of Richard the II's Reign At which time and so on downwards the Precise Form Printed by Dr. W. for an Antient Summons in the Time of H. the III. with little or no difference regularly obtain'd However Dr. W's Writ cannot be yet so Old as R. II. for it begins with Henricus dei gratiâ c. and must belong therefore to One of the Three Harry's that immediately succeeded him Impossible therefore it is that the Abbot of Tavestoke should ever be summon'd by this Writ as he tells us †P. 360.361 he was since that Abbat was never call'd to Parliament after the 23 E. III. * Pryn P. W. ◠1. p. 144. when this Writ was not yet heard of till 5 H. VIII ⸪ Godayn de Prasul part 2. p. 180. when it was in some Expressions alter'd Dr. W. will perhaps lay the blame of all these Faults on Reynerius's Apostolatus Benedictinus which he quotes there But can it be any Excuse for him who had so many near Domestick Helps towards clearing up these Mistakes that One who wrote at a distance from all our Records has mistaken before him However even Reynerius himself as much at a distance as he wrote was better instructed than this comes to for neither does he produce this as the Summons of an Abbat distinct from that of a Bishop nor as an Old one much less as of the Time of H. III nor does he say that the List of Abbats given by Dr. W. were by this Writ ever Summon'd These are all Dr. Wakes new Lights and Peculiar Improvements After all if he thought a Writ of Summons to an Abbat would look well in his Appendix how came that in the Annals of Burton †P. 371. to be overlook'd which is really of the age he pretends that the other is and one of the most Antient Writs extant being sent out in the 41 H. III. Ao 1256 In the next Number we meet with an Antient Writ of Summons of a Bishop to Parliament †P. 361. And here again Dr. W. can rise no higher than the 49 H. III. whereas we have a Writ of this kind 6 to Ioh. i. e. 60 Years Older than this and two others of the 26 and 38. H. III. still preserv'd in our Records and not in our Records only but in the Printed Pieces of Selden Pryn and Brady so that they can be a secret to none but those to whom every thing almost of this kind is so After the Abbats Antient Summons he sets down a List of 24 Abbats and one Prior antiently Summon'd believing this to be the fix'd number of them whereas it frequently varied In the 49 H. III. by that very Writ he Prints no less than 102 Abbats and Priors were Summon'd which Dugdale would have told him had he transcrib'd that Writ out of Him and not out of a Faulty Edition of Elsyng I suppose he took it from thence because I find the same Error there that I do in Dr. Wake 's Transcript pro pace regni assensurandà instead of assecurandâ which in Elsyng is only a Mistake of the Printer but Dr. W. took it for an Old Term of Art and was nicely careful therefore to preserve the Spelling In Edward the I. and II's times 50 60 70. and sometimes 80 Abbots and upwards †28 E. I. Cl. m. 3. dors were Summon'd that the Number of the Regulars might be in some degree answerable to that of the Seculars call'd up by the Premunientes and the Parliament be a Full Representative both of the Clergy and Laiety About the middle of E. II. when the Clergy got ground upon the Crown the Number of Summon'd Abbats decreas'd mightily and was generally a few under or above thirty throughout Edward the III's Reign when Convocations being now held a course concurrently with Parliaments all the Abbats and Priors of note came up thither upon the Archbishop's Mandate and were there ready to receive the King's Commands and were excus'd therefore from the Parliamentary Writ which was sent out only to such Abbats and Priors as held by Barony Afterwards from the Reign of E. III. to the Reformation their number always exceeded twenty and fell short of thirty says one excellently versed in these Enquirings whose Observation however is not Universally true for the 12 H. VI. †See Dugdale Sum. p. 424. and 31 H. VIII †Ibid. p. 501. are Exceptions to it in both which Instances the Number of Abbats call'd fell short of twenty This Inequality in the Latter Reigns seems to have sprung chiefly from the Vacancy of Abbys or the Absence of Abbats who were abroad either upon Embassys or at General Councils and had not in this case
sat afterwards and acted in Convocation An instance of such a Procuratorium for the Parliament I have seen as low as 1507. and another of an execution of the Premunientes by the Bishop yet lower in the Reign of Edward the Sixth though Returns had then Ceas'd or at least were not Enter'd Thus the Forms were kept up and by that means the King 's Right of Summoning the Clergy asserted and owned And so the State-ends of Summoning them were also answered they were left to do it in an Ecclesiastical way and to attend the Parliament and the Business of it not in One Body as they were called but in Two Provincial Assemblies This they did at first by the Connivance of the Crown rather than any express Allowance the Archbishop of his own accord sending out a Provincial Citation concurrently with the Bishops Writs of Summons which Method obtaining and these Meetings of the Province being tacitly accepted in lieu of the Clergy's resort to Parliament it grew necessary for the King to employ his Authority also in Convening them for otherwise it had been at the Archbishop's Discretion whether he would have any such Meetings or not and so the Crown might have lost the Clergy's Assistance in Parliament This gave birth to the custom of issuing out Two Convocation-Writs when a New Parliament was to be Chosen which though set on foot before yet settled not into a Rule till some Years after Edward the Third was in the Throne and then it was practised as duly and regularly and in much the same manner as it is at this day Take one Instance and that not the Earliest which might be given instead of many In the Parliament Roll of his Eighteenth Year we read That it had been agreed for the urgent Affairs of the Kingdom to hold a Parliament at Westminster on the Monday after the Octaves of Trinity and that the Archbishop should call a Convocation of the Prelates and others of the Clergy of his Province to the Church of St. Paul's London on the Morrow of Trinity for the Dispatch of the said Affairs To which Convocation none of the greater Prelates came on the said Morrow of Trinity or in the Eight days ensuing except the Archbishop or Two or Three other Bishops there named as the King was given to understand at which he much marvelled As also that the Great Men were not come to the Parliament upon the Day to which they were Summoned And he charged the Archbishop therefore to do what belonged to him in relation to those of the Clergy of his Province who came not to the said Convocation nor Obeyed his Mandate And the King would do what belonged to himself in relation to such as came not to Parliament nor Obeyed his Commands * Rot. Par. 18. E. 3. n. 1. If we supply this Record with the Writs extant on the Back of the Roll it will appear that the Clergy were Summoned here just as they are now by the Archbishop at the King's Order or Letter of Request as it was then deemed and †Even by the Crown it self for in the 25 E. 3. a Writ to the Archbishop of York in the Close Roll of that Year recites that the Archbishop of Canterbury had called his Clergy in Quindenâ Paschae ad Rogatum Nostrum stiled though it ran as now Rogando Mandamus and though the peremptory Time and Place of the Clergy's Assembling were prefixed by it and we see therefore that Punishment is Ordered in the Roll for their disobeying the Archbishop's Mandate but not a word of their not complying with the King's Summons But this was only the Language of Popery by which they kept up their pretences to Exemption and the Clergy were indulged in the Form so the Thing were but effectually done which was to have them Meet together with the Parliament and for the Dispatch of the same urgent Affairs of the Kingdom * Pur treter Parler ordeigner ce que soit miet affaire pur l' esploit des dit busoignes Are the Words of the Roll and one of these words is that from whence the Name of Parliament is derived for which the Parliament Met. And this was no new Practice but a Method now Settled and Customary of which various Precedent Instances might if they were needful be given but it is a short and sufficient Proof of it that the Words of the the King 's Writ to the Archbishop run More solito convocari faciatis We shall find also that the Archbishop of York had a Writ for That Province as the Archbishop of Canterbury had for This only he was to Convene his Clergy about a Fortnight Later than the other Province met †Province of Canterbury met on the Morrow of Trinity i. e. May 31. Easter falling that Year on April 4. That of York the Wednesday after St. Barnabas i. e. June 16. And in this the way then taken varied a little from Modern Practice which has made those Two Meetings perfectly Coincident But the ancient Usage was for the Clergy of Canterbury to Assemble first in order to set the President which it was expected that the other Province should almost implicitly follow and with reason since if the Two Provinces had continued to attend the Parliament in One Body as they did of Old the York Clergy would have had no Negative upon the Parliamentary Grants of the Clergy being a very unproportioned part of the Assembly When therefore they desired to Meet and grant Separately the Crown had reason to expect that what the greater Province did should be a Rule to the less or otherwise not to have consented to their Separation Very early in the Rolls therefore this Passage occurs That the Archbishop of Canterbury and other Nobles the King's Commissioners in his absence should require the Archbishop of York to contribute for the Defence of the North as They i. e. I suppose as the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Clergy had done 13 E. 3. n. 18. And even in Church Acts as well as State Aids what had passed the one was held to be a kind of Law to the other so that in 1463 we find the Convocation of York adopting at once all the Constitutions made by that of Canterbury and as yet not receiv'd †Memorand quòd Praelati Clerus in Convocatione 1463. Concedunt Unanimiter quòd Effectus Constitutionum Provincialium Cantuar. Prov. ante haec tempora tent habit Constitutionibus Prov. Ebor. nullo modo repugnant seu prejudicial non aliter nec alio modo admittantur Et quòd hujusmodi Constitutiones Prov. Cant. Effectus earundem ut praefertur inter Constitutiones Provinciae Ebor. prout indiget decet in serantur cum eisdem de caetero servandae incorporentur pro Jure observentur Registrum Bothe Arch. Ebor. f. 143. a Practice that I doubt not was often in elder times repeated and we know is still
as those of Parliament which they exercis'd either joyntly or apart by Mulcts (a) See an Instance An 1462. in Anth. Harmar p. 32. and Confinements (b) If you will not give place quoth the Prolocutor to Archdeacon Philpot being Commission'd I suppose so to speak by the House I will send you to Prison This is not quoth Philpot according to your Promise c. not denying the House's Power but the Justice only of exerting it in his Case Fox sometimes but chiefly by inflicting Ecclesiastical Censures by Excommunicating (c) See Instance of Bishop Cheyney Excommunicated for departing the Convocation without Leave Hist. of the Troubl and Try of Laud. p. 82. Suspending (d) See Bancroft ' s Register fol. 138 139. for an Instance of a Dean an Archdeacon and a Proctor suspended for deserting the Synod Mandatis nostris licitis vel Prolocutoris dictae Convocationis minimè obtemperantes As the Archbishop's Sentence of Suspension runs Depriving (e) See an Instance of Bishop Goodman Sentenc'd to be depriv'd by the Convoc of 1640. for refusing to subscribe the Canons Heyl. Life of Laud. Pag. 446. My Lord of Sarum has suggested * Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. p. 130. another Branch of this Parallel that as none were of the Lower House of Parliament but such as came thither by Election and all that had Personal Summons sat Above so the Lower House of Convocation was compos'd of those who were deputed thither from others and the Upper of such as sat in their own Right But this Conjecture contradicting not only the Records of the Convocations in Henry the Eighth's Reign to which my Lord applys it but all the Elder Accounts of our Synods in the Archbishop's Registers where the Deans and Archdeacons are said always as now to sit together with the Proctors of the Clergy I am sorry that I cannot fall in with it the rather because it would give me an opportunity of adorning these Rude Collections with something drawn from his Lordship's Exacter Works and of making him my Publick Acknowledgments for it His Lordship would perhaps have omitted this Guess had he consider'd that the Provincial Assemblies of the Clergy were as I have shewn in lieu of that Parliamentary Attendance which the Crown challeng'd by the Premunientes and their Session therefore in Two Houses was adapted to the Parliamentary Summons so that between Them and the Laiety the Parallel in this respect ran that as all of the Laiety who were Summon'd singly * Singillatim and in Generali are the words of Art us'd to distinguish these Two sorts of Summons in K. John 's Charter by the King sat in Parliament as Peers and all who were Summon'd generally by the Sheriff as Commoners so in the Convocation all of the Clergy who had been call'd immediately and by Name to Parliament belong'd to the Bishop's house but such as were us'd to be cited at second Hand only and Mediante Episcopo as Deans Cathedral-Priors †These for a long time after the Distinction of the two Houses of Convocation sat in the Lower House but afterwards with the other Priors and Abbats in the Upper Archdeacons and the Proctors of the Clergy sat apart by themselves That which led his Lordship into this Opinion was it seems a Passage in Ioscelin * Ad Ann. 1532. where a Question †About the Unlawfulness of the King 's first Marriage is said to have been carried for the Crown by 216 in the Upper House i. e. by the whole Upper House for there were none against it whereas in the Lower 23. only were present and but 14. of those for it Which Disparity of Numbers his Lordship is at a loss how to account for otherwise than by the Supposition laid down But since that is plainly Erroneous I may I hope without Presumption endeavour to solve the Difficulty â—nother way His Lordship knows very well that the Bishops with those Abbats and Priors who were of some consideration amounted to several Hundreds in Number out of which there is no doubt but 216 might be got to do the King's Business especially at that Critical Juncture when the General Dissolution of Monasteries was threatned and already in part begun * For in June before this Convocation sat the King procur'd a Bull from the Pope to suppress several Hist. Ref. 1. Vol. p. 121. and the Regulars had no way to escape the Storm which they saw gathering but by complying with the King's Demands tho' never so unreasonable Whereas the Inferior Seculars having no such Fears and lying generally out of the Reach either of the Awe or Bribes of a Court were as backward to give their helping hand in this case as the Religious were forward and but 14. therefore of the Lower House could be prevail'd with to lend the King a Vote This perhaps may be no improbabâ—e Solution of the Difficulty if after all it â—e not a Numeral Mistake of the Transcriber or Printer such as I find sometimes in that Work I mean in the Hanover Edition of it which alone I have for instance the Câ—nvocation in 1536 is said to meet Nonis Iulii instead of Nono die Iulii for it met not on the 5 th but the 9 th of Iuly as the Writ still extant shews But enough of this I return to those Marks of Resemblance which were between the Parliament and Convocation long after they separated and by which as by some common Ensigns of Honour the One of these may be plainly discern'd to be of the same Family and Descent as it were with the Other The Instruments impowering the Proctors of the Clergy to act for the several Dioceses were drawn up I have said in the same Form almost with those for the Knights of Shires I add that they had equally Wages from those they represented and those Wages were laid on the Diocese with the same Distinction that the Others were on the County all such as came Personally to Parliament either as Councellors or Assistants being excus'd from contributing to em not to descend to yet minuter Differences which were still on both sides alike observed And which is very Material the Proctors enjoying these Expences are in the Writs and Records of that time expresly said to be entitled to 'em on the account of their Service in Parliament tho' strictly speaking they sat not in Parliament but only as they do now in a Convocation held concurrently with it Of which I will stop to give the Reader here two very significant Instances the One is of a Discharge which the Abbat of Leicester obtain'd from Personal Attendance on the Parliament on condition as the Patent speaks Quod dictus Abbas successores sui in Procuratores ad hujusmodi Parliamenta Concilia per Clerum mittendos consentiant ut moris est expensis contribuant eorundem †Pat. 26. E. 3. par 1. M. 22. See it in Selden's Tit.
of all the States of this Lond c. I desire not to be misunderstood in the Recital of these Testimonies I have no other Aim in 'em than barely to shew that the Inferior Clergy tho' meeting and consulting apart from the Parliament yet were still reckon'd to belong to it and to be in some sense and to some Purposes a Member of it and together with the Prelates of the Upper House to compose not indeed one of the Three Estates of Parliament but however an Estate of the Realm assembling joyntly with the Parliament and oblig'd by the Rules of our Constitution to attend always upon it If my Proofs may be allow'd to reach thus far and I have no manner of Mistrust but that they will I give up willingly whatever beyond this they may seem to imply which neither my Argument nor my Inclination any ways leads me to maintain It is so far from being in my Intention that it is not in my Wishes to set up a Plea for any of those Old Priviledges and Preheminences of the Clergy which are long since Dead and Buried and which I think ought never to be reviv'd even for the sake o◠the Clergy themselves who have thriven best always under a Competency of Power and Moderate Pretences The Present Rights they stand plainly possess'd of by Law are sufficient to render them useful Members of the Common-wealth within their Proper Spheres and that these Rights may be well understood and secur'd is the great and only design of these Papers To that end I have vouch'd the Precedent Passages from the Records of Parliament and Convocation not to set up any vain Pretence to the utmost of that Parliamentary Interest which the Clergy sometime had but to secure only what remains of it to them by shewing that their Separation from Parliament did not cut them off from all manner of Relation to it but that still after that their Convocations though held at a distance from the Parliament were in their own nature as well as in the Acceptance of the Crown and in the Eye of the Law Parliamentary Assemblies These Parliamentary Meetings of the Clergy were at first Congregationes or Convocationes Cleri but not therefore Concilia Provincialia Which were Extraordinary Assemblies for Church Business only for the restoring laps'd Discipline and reforming Ecclesiastical Abuses whereas the Others were originally held for Civil Purposes alone and the Common Affairs of the State And when Archbishop Stratford therefore called a Council of his Province * By a Writ dated 10 Kal. Aug. 1341. which begins thus Quamvis sit Sacris Canonibus Constitutum quod Metropolitani Archiepiscopi Primates annis singulis Legitimo Impedimento cessante pro Excessibus corrigendis Moribus reformandis debeant Provinciale Concilium celebrare the Preamble of his Letters Summonitory owns both the Obligation he was under by the Canons of Assembling them Yearly and his having omitted to do it for Eight Years last past though doubtless he had often in that time Convened the Clergy of his Province to Parliament However this Distinction held not very long the Business of Provincial Councils being in tract of time done in the ordinary Congregations of the Clergy and these and those being promiscuously stiled Convocations Till at last Provincial Councils properly so called ceased altogether and Parliamentary Convocations came into their room The Frequency and fix'd Certainty of which gave the Clergy a Regular Opportunity of doing all that for which the other Synods did but occasionally serve And when Warham therefore in 1509. did by his Own Authority call a Synod for the Redress of Abuses and Reformation of Manners his Mandate warn'd it to meet a few days after the Parliament * Parliament Met Jan. 21. Convocation Jan. 26. See Mandate in Bishop Burnet 's Collection of Records Vol. I. p. 6. and stiled it not a Provincial Council but a Convocation of the Clergy And this Word therefore afterwards in the Submission-Act as I understand it was applied strictly to signify the Clergy's Parliamentary Meetings For otherwise it could with no colour of Truth have been affirmed as it is there That the Convocation had always been Assembled by the King 's Writ unless both the Submitters and Enacters had by the Word Convocation understood the Consults of the Clergy in time of Parliament which in some sense were held always by the King 's Writ that is by the Premunitory Clause in the Bishops Summons and let me add are so held still as good Lawyers own †Bagshaw in his Argument about the Canons and Bishop Ravis in his Paper of Reasons to Queen Elizabeth ‖ § 5. affirms and the whole Lower House did to the same Queen upon occasion solemnly declare Witness their Remonstrance in 1558 to justify the Freedom of which they in the Preamble of it suggest the several Authorities by which they Assemble The Instrument is Printed in Fuller ⸪ Ch. Hist. IX Book p. 55. but with the Omission of some words which in that part of it which we have occasion to mention may be thus supplied Nos Cantuariens Provinciae Inferior Secundarius Clerus in ano Deo sic disponente ac Serenissimae Dominae nostrae Reginae Iussu Decani Capituli Cantuariensis Mandato Brevi Parliamenti ac Monitione Ecclesiasticâ sic exigente convenientes partium nostrarum esse existimavimus c. And this Opinion also that Parliament was of which Voted the Canons of 1640. Illegal chiefly on this head because they were made in an Assembly which though it met by the Parliament Writ yet Sate and Acted after the Parliament was determined Nor were they contradicted in it by the Famous Judgment given under the Hands of his Majesty's Counsel and other Honourable Persons Learned in the Law if the Words of that Judgment be well considered which are these The Convocation being called by the King 's Writ under the Great Seal doth continue until it be dissolved by Writ or Commission under the Great Seal notwithstanding the Parliament be dissolved Troub Try Laud. p. 80. Which is all very true and yet it may be true too that such a Writ or Commission ought of course to issue from the Crown upon the Dissolution of the Parliament But this Point is not touch'd upon in the Judgement given and seems to have been purposely declined For otherwise it had been a clearer and fuller Determination of the Matter in Question if they had said That the King might by his Prerogative keep a Convocation sitting as long as he pleased notwithstanding the Dissolution of that Parliament with which it was called I will not say That the Parliament of 1660. were certainly of the same mind though it is probable they were and that this was One if not the Chief Reason why in the Act * 13 Car. II. c. 12. Restoring Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction they so particularly and by Name excepted those Canons from a Parliamentary
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
very remarkable those words Attempt Alledge Claim and put in Ure are not recited A sure sign that the Attorney-Generals of those times 〈◊〉 those Times had Attorney-Generals that had both Skill and Will enough to carry the King's Prerogative as high as it would bear did not think that they could colourably be made use of to this purpose or that the Clergy were debarr'd by this Act from attempting New Canons to be made hereafter but such Old ones only as had been long ago pass'd and publish'd Dr. Wake therefore is Disingenuous in the Highest Degree where †Append. Num. V. p. 371. he pretends to Print this very Commission and when he comes to the Act of Parliament which it recites does not transcribe the Act as it is there recited which is in part only but refers us to his Extract of it Num. IV. and assures us that it is recited in the Commission as in the Extract Verbatim tho' the most Material words in his Extract and such as would be most Conclusive upon the Clergy's Convocational Acts and Debates if they really belong'd to 'em are as I have shewn designedly omitted in that Recital Such poor shifts is he forc'd to to maintain a Bad Cause which however even by these Ill Arts cannot be maintain'd The Proof drawn from these Commissions is farther confirm'd by a Proclamation of K. Charles the First in Iune 1644 * See it Biblioth Reg. pag. 331. which forbids the Assembly of Divines to Meet and Act upon these and these Accounts only Because by the Laws of the Kingdom no Synod or Convocation of the Clergy ought to be called and assembled within this Realm but by Authority of the King 's Writ and no Constitution or Ordinance Provincial or Synodal or any other Canons may be Made Enacted Promulg'd or Executed it says not Attempted Alledg'd Claim'd or puâ— in Ure which were words known to belong to Canons already made Unless with the King 's Royal Assent and License first obtain'd upon pain of every one of the Clergy's doing contrary and being thereof convict to suffer Imprisonment and make Fine at the King's Will as by the Statute of the 25 H. 8. declaring and enacting the same it doth and may appear Let me add to all these the Authority of the Convocation it self which set out the Institution of a Christian Man a few years after they had submitted In the Dedication of that Book the Prelates address the King after this manner Without your Majesty's Power and License we acknowledg and confess that we have none Authority either to assemble together for any pretence or purpose or to publish any thing that might by us be agreed on or compil'd Which words evidently imply a power of agreeing upon and compiling tho' they deny that of publishing any Determination or Doctrine It were endless after this to argue from the silence of the Authors of those times for then I must vouch All of them Only the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum being a Book of Great Note which was drawn up by Commissioners appointed by the King and where no Occasion is neglected of setting out and magnifying the Royal Power it may be worth our while to observe that there is not however in all that Book as far as I can find one Expression that implies the Composers of it to have thought that the Clergy's Synodical Debates lay under any Restraint from the Crown which is a very strong Presumption that they did not think the Clergy to lye under any The Reader will forgive me for laying together this Great Heap of Authorities if he either considers of how great Importance it is to my Cause that the sense I have given of the Act should be fully clear'd or how necessary Dr. Wake has made such a Collection by affirming that this sense of it was never allowâ—d of or for ought he knows so much as heard of I repeat his very words till the Gentleman against whom he writes enlighten'd the world with it P. 289. The Accounts I have given do I hope both sufficiently expose the Rashness and Vanity of this Assertion and also sufficiently prove the Truth and Justness of that Exposition To return to it therefore The Statute as far as it relates to the Power of the Clergy in Convocation plainly implies no more than that Canons should not from thenceforth pass and become Obligatory without the King's Leave and Authority given in that behalf without his Leâ—ve which was requisite to their Passing and his Authority which was afterwards to ratifie and give 'em force And to understand the words of the Law otherwise is as has appear'd to understand them against all Propriety and the Rules of Construction and which is still more unreasonable to do this in Materiâ minùs favorabili and where Ordinary Liberty is abridg'd and lastly which is intolerable where so grievous a Penalty as that of a Praemunire is to follow The 25 of H. 8. then has not in the least alter'd the Law of Convocations in relation to any of the Powers or Priviledges of the Inferior Clergy They can still freely Consult and Debate Petition or Represent propose the Matter or Form of New Canons and consider about the Inforcing or Abrogating old ones in a word act in all Instances and to all Degrees as they could before the passing of that Statute Indeed my Lord Archbishop's hands are ty'd by it for he cannot now call a Convocation without the King 's Writ which before this Act he might and in Elder Times frequently did He cannot now Enact and Constitute any thing by his own Authority as in Imitation of the Papal Power in Councils and of the Royal Power in Parliaments it was usual for him to do He must before he passes any Act of the Two Houses have the King's Assent to it and after it is pass'd there must be the King's License also to Promulge and Execute it In these several Respects the Metropolitan's Authority is considerably lessen'd by this Act the Exercise of which is now chiefly seen in Moderating the Debates of the Synod and giving his Vote last upon any Question propos'd there as Dr. Cousins Dean of the Arches to his Grace that then was does in his Tables express it * Ejus est moderari Synodum ultimò Suffragium ferre Tab. 3. But the Powers and Priviledges of All the other Members of Convocation continue whole and entire to 'em notwithstanding this Statute and were so understood to continue for a long time after it pass'd the Methods of proceeding in Convocation continuing the same for near Threescore and ten years after the Act as they had been before it the Clergy going on still to propose deliberate and resolve as they had been us'd to do without Qualifying themselves for it by any Precedent License under the Broad Seal the King the Parliament and People of the Realm allowing 'em so to do without opposing this Method as Illegal
the End of Lynwood From what Copy it was taken is not said But those Copies which Sir Will. Dugdale Transcrib'd into the Second Volume of our English Councils See p. 320. differ'd from it it is clear if at least Sir William 's Transcripts are Exact and to be depended on Whether Archbishop Peckam found that the King had resolv'd to bring these Proctors to Parliament by his Own Authority and therefore prevented him by this Constitution or whether he did it to have their Counsel and Assistance in opposing the Statute of Mortmain which he foresaw would be attempted in that Parliament and was accordingly carried or upon what other View he acted I pretend not to say But from thence forward I take it for granted that such Proctors were constantly return'd to all the Clergy's Parliamentary Meetings and that purely upon an Ecclesiastical Call at first tho' the King soon let himself into a share in Convening them For in his Ninth year His and the Archbishop's Authority were joyntly and interchangeably employ'd in it the Archbishop signifying the King's Pleasure in his Letters Mandatory to the Clergy and the King on the other side Executing the Archbishop's Mandate by his Own Ministers The Case if my Collections deceive me not was thus The Bishops and their Clergy were Summon'd to a Synod at London by an Injunction from the Archbishop in which they were commanded also to meet at another Time and Place appointed by the King and that they might be sure so to do Letters of Citation are directed not to the Bishop of London but to the King himself to be by him communicated to the several Bishops by Royal Messengers This odd President we have an account of in the Register of Pâ—ckam * The Citatory Letters are dated Kal. Apr. 1281 And the same Formality I suppose was used in Convening the Clergy of York Province who met about this time at York as appears from a Writ extant in Pryn †Eccl. Jurisd T. 3. P. 275. impowring the Bishop of Carlisle to collect the Tenth of his own Diocese granted at that Provincial Assembly Next year the Prerogative got ground a little for the King holding his Parliament at Northampton commanded the Archbishop by Writ to Summon his Clergy thither to meet Coram Nobis vel coram fidelibus nostris quos ad hoc duximus deputandos See App. Num. VII ad audiendum faciendum ea quae pro Republicâ Vobis eis super his ostendi faciemus c. But the Persons which the Archbishop is directed to Summon are only Bishops Abbats Priors and other Heads of Religious Houses together with the Proxies of Deans and Chapters without any mention of Archdeacons or of the Diocesan Clergy who it may be were by a Particular Writ to be apply'd to afterwards and requir'd to follow the Pattern which the Superior Clergy should set according to the way sometimes practis'd in former Reigns ‖ See an Instance A. D. 1207 80. Joh. in Pryn 's Parl. Writ Vol. 1. Pref. So that this Meeting was just such another as that in the third of his Reign where the Majores Cleri only were present And yet at the Synod call'd on the same occasion by the A.B. of York in His Province we find the Diocesan Clergy appear'd and which is very remarkable the Laity of York-Province under Barons Milites Liberi Homines Communitates omnes alii de singulis Comitatibus ultrà Trentam had also their Summons to the same Time and Place with the Clergy So I gather from the Writ sent joyntly to both which being of a curious and uncommon Form will deserve a place in the Appendix * Numb VIII where the Reader will find also another directed to the Clergy and Laity of the Bishoprick of Durham who tho' meeting with the rest of York Province yet had it seems distinct Messages and Messengers sent to them and made likewise their separate Returns See Regist. Joh. Romani ad Ann. 1286. fol. 99. Regist. Grenefield ad Ann. 1310. f. 180. and something of this Priviledge I think that See even yet retains Hitherto then the Clergy were so far from meeting Nationally with the Parliament that the Lower part of the Parliament seems to have divided sometimes to accommodate it self to the Provincial Meetings of the Clergy How the King was obey'd in this Instance as to the Province of Canterbury appears from Peckam's Register where we find his Mandate †See App. Num. IX to the Bishop of London reciting the King 's Writ and commanding all the Bishops of his Province and all the others mention'd in it to assemble dictis die loco ob Reverentiam Regiae Majestatis de expedientibus reipublicae tractaturi but with words also that intimated his sense of the Hardship which this New Precedent laid 'em under and which the Clergy I suppose so understood as if he would not be very severe upon them tho' they should not comply with it Accordingly their Meeting at Northampton was but thin and they brake up immediately referring themselves to a Fuller Convocation to be call'd in the usual Form by the Archbishop and refusing to answer the King's Demands till such an one were Summon'd as it was soon afterwards ‖ See App. Num. IX and that being a Regular Assembly both as to the Place * Nov. Templ Lond. at which and the Authority †The Archbishop's by which they met and the Persons ‖ Totus Clerus are said to be call'd i. e. beside those Summon'd to Northampton the Archdeacons also and Diocesan-Clergy composing it the King's Business did there receive an Easie Dispatch Had the King 's Writ which call'd the Clergy before his Commissioners at Northampton been obey'd readily the way had been open'd towards his bringing the whole Body of 'em afterwards to Parliament But having fail'd in this and such like attempts and finding that the Archbishop and his Clergy understood one another and were secretly agreed to defeat him he afterwards went more roundly to work and without asking help from the Church was resolv'd to use only his Own Authority and accordingly Summon'd all the Great Abbats and Priors to Parliament Personally as well those who did not hold of him by Barony as those who did and the Lower Clergy by a Premunitory Clause inserted in the Writ to every Bishop At what time precisely this Method was first set on foot I cannot be positive but sure I am that a year before the 23 Edw. 1. the common Aera of the Praemunientes it was practis'd Peckam was now dead and Winchelsey not yet return'd with his Pall from Rome and the See of York fill'd with an Obnoxious Person * Ioh. Romanus Fin'd lately Four thousand Marks by Parliament †Ryley's Placita p. 141. and on that and some other accounts ‖ See Ibid. p. 173. now at the King's Mercy This lucky Juncture the King seems to have
Simonis vel pecuniam vel pejorem pecuniâ conditionem offerentis Nec hoc solum in Nobis Minoritis qui sic Rectorias nostras feri paciscimur sed apud Vos Majoritas quos sic Cathedras vestras nempe vel Pecuniarum summis vel Ecclesiarum spoliis foedè cauponari vulgò dictitant Quo morbo malè jamdiu habet audit Ecclesia nostra nunquid non est Resina in Gilead quare itaque non est obducta Cicatrix Leprae hujus These Three Instances taken at three several Distances from the times before the Reformation down to the Latter End of Queen Elizabeth will convince the Reader that the Solemnity of opening a Convocation is it self a matter of some Importance and which would deserve carefully to be kept up even tho' there were nothing Material to be done in Synod afterwards We live in a Preaching Age when the Devotion of People runs much that way and they are mightily indulg'd in it Pity it is that whilst so many New Discourses of this kind are set up for the Laiety this One good Sermon ad Clerum should be put down which besides that it has some Hundred years Prescription to plead for it self is at least as edifying an Exercise as any of those that are more encourag'd I have examin'd all the Modern Instances produc'd by Dr. Wake in behalf of his Darling Point That the Chief End of Convocations is to give Money His Elder Accounts would afford as much room for Reflection if it were worth the while to pursue 'em as minutely But I suppose there is no great need of proving to the Reader that a Writer has misled him in Facts of an Ancient Date when I have shewn that he has done it in things that have hapned within our Memories and under our Noses For he that will impose upon a Man before his Face will certainly do it behind his Back and the more out of his Reach he is the more he will do it It is said his Superiors have employ'd him in an Edition of these Old English Councils If he deals with them as ill in that Edition as he has done in this account it will I am sure be the faultiest Book in the kind that ever was Printed and so far from mending Sir Henry Spelman's Collections on this Head that it will be worse than Mr. Baxter's However should he discharge the Task never so well his Hand I think is not proper to be employ'd in it for the World will judge it a Preposterous thing for the same Pen to be used in preserving the Memory of Old Canons and writing down the Priviledges and very Being of Convocations I suppose he thinks the Mortal Blow is now given to the Church and that she will never hereafter speak by her Provincial Assemblies and therefore as the way is to give accounts of Men when they are Dead he thinks it time to collect the Acts of a Departed Convocation But he ought to be sure that it is departed before he enters on this Task for should it ever revive and sit again one of the first Requests it would make might possibly be that the Work should be taken out of his Polluted Hands Since the Church cannot hope from what she knows of him that his Account of her Synods will be given with any other View than the Learned Fryer wrote the History of that of Treâ—t on purpose to expose ' em But this is a Distant Concern Our Business at present is with him only as to the Treatment which these Antient Councils have found from him in the Work we are upon and upon this Head I shall for the Reasons already given trust the Reader without entring into the Retail of it adding only to what has been already said in this Chapter one short Remark That from Henry the Eighth down to the last Unhappy Prince no King has sat on the Throne who did not allow and encourage these Meetings of the Clergy King Iames's Late Reign made the first Exception of this kind when Popery and Arbitrary Power being determin'd to be set up consequently Parliaments and Convocations were laid aside from whence the Greatest Hindrance to those Designs was most likely to come for tho' the Clergy wrote Popery out of the Kingdom in a smaller time than they could be expected to have done it in that Method yet had they been allow'd to sit in Convocation they had probably dispatch'd the Work somewhat sooner But the Oppressive Pattern then first set will not we dare say by our Generous Deliverer be follow'd Frequency of Parliaments has been the distinguishing Mark and Glory of his Reign and it will add some small Lustre to it if it may be said in our Annals that the Liberties of Convocations too were no less tenderly preserv'd We question not but so Good and Gracious a Prince and so great a Pillar of the Protestant Religion will in this respect yield to the Just and United Desires of his Clergy when they are sufficiently made known to him No Men resisted the Encroachments of the Late Reign more than They no Men by their Labours and Zeal contributed more to our present happy Establishment and they have reason therefore to hope for their share in the Common Benefit of it CHAP. VII BUt to return to our Business Another Objection made by Dr. Wake against the Reasonableness of the Clergys Assembling with every New Parliament is That when this was Customary they were a Member of Parliament but not being so Now neither is there the same reason that they should assemble with it * P. 106 107 284. To this I answer that the words Member of Parliament may be taken differently as they signifie either an Essential Part of the Legislature whose Consent and Authority is necessary to all Laws or a part of the Great Body of Parliament assembled by the same Writs at the same time with it but to some special Intents and Purposes prescrib'd by our Constitution In the former Sense the Clergy are not nor for some hundred Years have been in the latter as they always were so they still I presume are a Member of Parliament Not an Intrinsick Member if I may be allowed so to speak or Estate of Parliament but only an Extrinsick Part of it or an Estate of the Realm call'd with the Parliament always and attending upon it who have a Parliamentary Right of Petitioning and Advising within their proper Sphaere and at whom Decrees about Matters Spiritual ought regularly to begin They are a Lesser Wheel in the Machine of Government that is acted by the same Springs and Weights and therefore moves and ceases together with the Greater but has peculiar Ends and Offices of its own to which it serves Nor is this to be wonder'd at for even the States of Parliament themselves have different Powers and Priviledges and peculiar Orbs of their own as it were within which they move the Lords are distinguish'd by
their Iurisdiction and the Commons by their Money Bills so that the being Member Part or Parcel of Parliament does not necessarily imply the very same Parliamentary Interests and Powers And the Clergy therefore though no part of the Civil Legislature nor concern'd directly in the great Affairs of State transacted in Parliament may yet in other Respects and to other Purposes be properly reputed and styl'd a Member of Parliament And accordingly I have shewn that they have been thus esteem'd and spoken of from the time of their separation downwards and even by Henry the VIII himself many Years after their submission to him One instance of this kind has been given already †P. 59. from a Proclamation in the 35 th of his Reign and because the way of Wording these State-Papers is a matter of great Weight and Importance I shall here add another from an Original Direction of the same Prince to his Judges then about to go their Summer Circuit It begins thus By the KING Henry R. Cleop. E. 6. fol. 214. TRusty and Right Well-beloved We grete you well And whereas heretofore as ye know both upon most just and vertuouse Fundations grownded upon the Lawes of Almighty God and Holly Scripture and allso by the deliberate Advice Consultation Consent and Agreement as well of the Bishops and Clergie as by the Nobles and Commons Temporall of this our Realme assembled in our High Courte of Parliament and by Auctorite of the same the Abuses of the Bishop of Rome his Auctoritie and Jurisdiction of long tyme usurped against Us have been not only utterly Extirped Abolish'd and Secluded but also the same Our Nobles and Commons both of the Clergie and Temporaltie by another several Acte and upon like fundation for the publique Weal of this our Realme have united knytte and annexed to Us and the Corone Imperiall of this Our Realme the Title Dignite and Stile of Supreme Hed in Erthe immediately under God of the Church of England as undoubtedly evermore we have been Which things also the said Bishops and Clergy particularly in their Convocations have wholly and entirely consented recogniz'd ratify'd confermed and approved autentiquely in Writing Sign'd June 25. And that this Doctrine was still good and the Language much the same as low as the Restauration of C. the II. the Office then set out for the 5 th of November shews where mention is made of the Nobility Clergy and Commons of this Realm then assembled in Parliament †Prayer the 2 d. For to say that by the Clergy of this Realm my Lords the Bishops only are intended were so absurd a Gloss that even Dr. Wake 's Pen would I believe be asham'd of it And if they were then rightly said to be assembled in Parliament they may as rightly be said to be so assembled still and if assembled in Parliament why not a Member of Parliament to those Intents and Purposes I mean for which they are assembled in it Dr. Wake will be pleas'd to answer this Question at his Leisure and withal to inform us among his late Meditations on the Day †Serm. on the 5 th of Nov. 1699. this had not been a proper one His Function may be some excuse for his being a stranger to the Language of the Statute Book or of our Manuscript Records but not to have so much Law as even his Common Prayer-Book would have furnish'd him with is let me tell him inexcusable Dr. Wake 's Foundation therefore failing the Inference he builds upon it falls accourse and the Argument will now run quite the other way that because the Clergy are a Part or Member of Parliament in a qualify'd Sense therefore they ought to Assemble with it However since that Expression is invidious and liable to be misconstru'd I willingly wave it and content my self to say that though the Clergy are now no Member or Estate of Parliament as they once were not the Third as Dr. W. ignorantly talks †P. 151. but the First Estate of it yet are they still an Estate of the Realm necessarily attendant on the Parliament and have attended as such whenever a new Parliament was called from the time that they left off to be an Estate of Parliament till within a few Years past with few Exceptions to the contrary and with none from the Reign of Henry the VII to that of his present Majesty And this prescription of some hundred Years has given them an undoubted Right of being summon'd and sitting as often as a Parliament is summon'd and sits though they are not a Member or Estate of Parliament No more than this need be said to remove the Objection But I design not barely to answer Dr. Wake but moreover to give the Reader every where as Comprehensive a View of the Subject in Debate as the short compass of this Work will allow of and shall take occasion therefore from hence to deduce an Account of the Interest which the Lower Clergy have had all along in these State Meetings 'T is a point that well deserves our Reflections and Dr. Wake therefore according to his instructive way has said nothing of it No body had gone before him and common plac'd our Historians and Manuscript Authorities to his hand on this Argument and he never ventures to break the way or to give us any part of Learning but what has born the test of Time and is warranted by at least an hundred Years usage A compleat State of this point is not to be expected in a Digression all I can do here is to lay before the Reader some of the most Material Passages to this purpose that have occurr'd to me in our Histories and Records and to add here and there a few cursory Remarks upon them which will throw some small Light into things as we pass and may suggest matter of juster and sounder Reflections to others who shall write after me on this Argument The Proofs taken singly may few of them perhaps seem full and convincing however when united I perswade my self they will carry such an evidence in them as is not easily to be withstood The Saxon times are overspread with Darkness and yet Light enough is still left us to discover that the Inferior Clergy as well as Laâ—eâ—y were then oftentimes call'd to the Great Councils of the Realm Much has been Written on this Point as to the Laiety but I do not remember that I have met any where an account of the Lower Clergys Interest in those Meetings and therefore I shall produce some Proofs of it here without entring into the Civil part of the Dispute any further than may be of use to give Light to the Ecclesiastical and to clear the Ancient Rights and Priviledges of the Commons Spiritual which I am satisfy'd ran even all along with those of the Commons Temporal and proportionably grew declin'd or reviv'd with them The first Instance I shall take notice of to this purpose is
Provinciall Assemblys When such Synods of the Province held concurrently with the Parliamentary Sessions began is hard to say but to be sure they were Older than E. I. in the beginning of whose Reign they are we find by the Constitution of Reading mention'd as Establish'd Customary Meetings the Archbishop there with the consent of the Synod ordaining quòd in Congregatione nostrâ tempore Parliamenti proximi post festum S ti Mich. ad Tres Hebdomadas per Dei gratiam futurum praeter Personas Episcoporum veniant duo Electi ad minus à Clero Episcopatuum singulorum qui Auctoritatem habeant unà nobiscum tractare de hiis quae Ecclesiae communi utilitati expediunt Anglicanae †Constitt Prov. ad finem Lynwood p. 25. It appears from hence both that the Clergy were now us'd to attend the Parliament in their Synods Provincial and that the Parliament it self was now us'd to sit after Michaelmas since it could not else well have been spoken of here as an Assembly that would at that time certainly convene For this Council of Reading sat down 29 Iuly and therefore as Synodical Sessions were then very short rose in the beginning of August at which time there could be no notice of the approaching Parliament not yet summon'd but from common Custome and Usage And the same receiv'd Custome there was also it seems for the Clergy at That and Other times to attend the Parliament their Congregatio tempore Parliamenti being not now first order'd but spoken of as an antient and authoriz'd Practise These Clergy-Meetings however tho' concurrent in Time with those of Parliament yet were not necessarily to be held at the same Place also where the Parliament was open'd but assembled oftentimes at some other either in the Neighbourhood of it or more Remote from it as the Archbishop thought fit or the Churches Occasions requir'd Thus in 1290 18. E. I. The Parliament met after Michelmas at Clipston †See Ryley's Placita Parliament p. 63. but the Convocation that was held concurrently with it at Ely upon the Consecration of the Bishop of that Place * Wikes ad ann And what the Form of the Archbishops Summons to these Parliamentary Synods was we may learn from a Procuratorium relating to this very Meeting at Ely the most Antient Instrument of the kind I have ever seen and by it the Proxys sent have power ad tractandum vobiscum aliis Venerabilibus Patribus suffraganeïs Provinciae Cant. ac etiam totius Cleri Procuratoribus in Civitate Eliensi super his quae Dei honorem publicam Utilitatem respiciunt ad consentiendum hiis quae ibidem ad pacem consolationem Ecclesiae Dominique Regis Regni Angliae Cleri Communitas inspirante Deo providebit †Regi strum Henrici Prioris f. 146. The first part of which seems to refer to this Assembly as a Synod of the Province and the Latter as a Convention of the Clergy held for State-Ends in time of Parliament Thus stood matters when the Clause Premunientes was first inserted and by it the Clergy of both Provinces were again call'd Nationally to Parliament and requir'd strictly to attend at the very Time and Place at which the Parliament assembled How this Clause was executed upon the Inferior Clergy and obey'd by them and what Interest it gave them in Parliament has been allready consider'd so fully that I need enter into no New Account of it But here in the very Entrance of this Period a famous Interruption of this New Practise hapned the whole Body of the Clergy fell under the Displeasure of the King were put out of his Protection first and out of his Parliament afterwards and a Great Council of the Realm was held Excluso Clero without summoning any One of the Spiritualty to it This Instance some Modern Writers willing to reduce the Parliamentary Interest of the Clergy as low as they can are very full of and Dr Wake among the rest has very amply †P. 232 233. from p. 348. to 355. and often dilated upon it nor does it seem to have been rightly understood even by Those * Grand Quest. p. 182. Heylen Refor Iustify'd c. who on the Clergy's behalf have undertaken to account for it For which Reasons it will I hope be no unacceptable Entertainment to the Reader if I digress so far as to set this Piece of History in a Truer Light than it has hitherto appear'd and shew that neither were the Clergy in this Instance to be blam'd so much nor was the Exclusion of them carry'd so far as is commonly imagin'd Edward the First was the most Expensive Prince that perhaps ever sat on the English Throne and had by his Large and Frequent Demands allmost exhausted all his Subjects particularly those of the Spiritualty upon whom the Burthen still fell heavyest His French Welch and Scotch Wars and Voyages to the Holy Land in some of which he was constantly engag'd putt him upon asking supplys every Year of his Reign and upon extorting 'em sometimes when deny'd in a very Arbitrary and Illegall manner and in these Demands he still grew upon the Clergy so that in his 22 d. Year he had no less than a Moiety of their Goods at once which single Levy Ioh. de Eversden †MS. in Off. Arm. ad ann 1294. §. 314. a Cotemporary Writer reckons to have amounted to 100100 l. A vast Summ for those times to be rais'd in One Year upon any One Body of Men and indeed upon any One Kingdome Nor was the Summ more Extraordinary than the way of procuring it The King first seiz'd all their Wool and all the Wealth that was layd up in any of their Churches or Monasterys then calling 'em together came himself in Person to them and demanded Half of their Moveables †Knighton Col. 2501. Joh. de Eversden thus relates the Story Rex tùm Precibus tùm Exhortationibus tùm etiam Comminationibus praemissis Universos singulos Angliae Praelatos cum Clero nec non Religiosos omnes possessiones obtinentes ad praestationem Medietatis omnium bonorum suorum Spiritualium ac Temporalium compulit violenter induxit §. 314. rightly so term'd at present for he had taken 'em violently out of their Owners hands and put them safely under Lock and Key in his Own Treasury at London * Knight ibid. Wikes ad ann Upon their demurring a little they were threatned to be put out of his Protection ⸪ Kn. col 2502. and a certain Blustring Knight stood up ⸫ M. Wesim. ad ann and bad the Man amongst 'em who durst dispute the King's Demands come forth that they might know him and use him as he deserv'd It was to no purpose for Them to pretend to deny him Half who had allready All under his Custody and therfore at last they consented to it and took out Letters of Protection directed
â—â—â—sâ—umez en le temps of E III. affere semblablement aussi bien come oâ—t fait ceux de la Province de Canterbiri c. And had therefore written to the Archbishop of York praying and requiring him in consideration of that Agreement in Parliament and according to the Custom establish'd in Edward the III's time for the Province of York to do always as that of Cant. did to take effectual Care that all his Clergy did their Duty in this respect I have enlarged my Recital of this Letter thus far because beside the main purpose for which I have vouch'd it â—t furnishes us also with the Proof of a By-point which has been before laid down in these Papers ‖ P. 46 47. that the Convocation of York was â—ook'd upon as under some kind of Obligation â—o follow the Pattern set by that of Canterbury The Protestations of the whole Clergy against Divers Bills are mention'd in the Rolls and sometimes enter'd at length a manifest Evidence that they had somthing to do in Parliament for otherwise I am sure they could have had no Pretence to Protest against what was doing there nor would the Parliament have accepted and entred such Protestations These ran indeed sometimes in the Name of the Archbishops alone but were however made on the behalf of their Suffragans also and of the whole Clergy of their Provinces as the Rolls †Rot. Parl. 13. R. 2. n. 24. expresly speak And this is in general to be observed that oftentimes in matters Parliamentary where the Bishops names only are mention'd yet it was not Their Act alone but had the Concurrence also of the Convocation Clergy Thus the Statute of the Clergy 25. E. III. * Rastall p. 93. is in the Preamble said to have taken its rise from a Petition of the Bishops but if we look into the Roll of that Parliament we shall find that the Bishops petition'd for themselves tote la Clergie And 15. E. III. n. 19. though Archbishops and Bishops only are nam'd yet in the Note of the King's answer n. 26. they are call'd Generally Petitions of the Clergy This well deserves our Notice because it gives us a true account how the Parliament Prelates came to act in Parliament for the whole State Spiritual for that being at hand always was consulted and advis'd with in every thing that related to them and the Result of those Debates was by the Lords Spiritual laid before the Parliament 21. R. II. The Clergy of both Provinces appoint a Common Lay Proctor to consent for them to some Matters done in Parliament which they could not Lawfully be present at and the Form of the Power given by Them to this purpose in writing is as follows Nos Thomas Cant. Robertus Eboracensis Archiepiscopi ac Praelati Clerus utriusque Provinciae Cant. Ebor. Jure Ecclesiarum nostrarum Temporalium earundem habentes jus interessendi in singulis Parliamentis domini nostri Regis Regni Angliae pro tempore celebrandis nec non tractandi expediendi in eïsdem Quantum ad singula in instanti Parliamento pro Statu Honore domini nostri Regis nec non Regaliae suae ac Quiete Pace Tranquillitate Regni Iudicialiter justificandâ Venerabili Viro Thomae de Percy Militi nostram plenariè committimus potestatem ita ut singula per ipsum facta in praemissis perpetuis temporibus rata habeantur * Rot. Par. n. 10. This Instrument is by order enroll'd and the Right therefore which the Prelates and Inferior Clergy there claim of being of every Parliament and acting in it is by the King and his Great Council who order'd this Enrollment admitted and affirm'd 2. H. IV. c. 15. The Statute against the Lollards sprung from a Remonstance made to the King ex parte Praelatorum Cleri Regni sui Angliae in praesenti Parliamento as the Preamble speaks and again it is said in the Body of it super quibus quidem Novitatibus Excessibus superiùs recitatis Praelati Clerus supradicti ac etiam Communitates dicti regni in eodem Parliamento existentes dicto domino Regi supplicaverunt †Constitt Provv ad finem Lynwood pp. 62 63. And at their Request the King Enacts ex assensu Magnatum aliorum Procerum ejusdem regni in dicto Parliamento existentium So that the Prelates and Barons the Commons and Lower Clergy are alike here said to be present in Parliament The Testimony of Walsingham also who liv'd at this time is considerable He appears to have been excellently well vers'd in our Records and speaks properly always though not Elegantly of the matters he relates And his Phrase where he gives an account of any Grant or Act of the Clergy in Convocation usually is Clerus in eodem Parliamento conceâ—â—it or Statuit Of which take One very remarkable Instance Anno 1391. says he Parliamentum incaeptum est intra mensem faeliciter expeditum Nempe praeter X am a Clero XV tam a Populo concessam multa alia sunt in Clero Populo ad Regis Placitum reformata praecipuâ— in Ordine Nigrorum Monachorum illic in maximo numero Regis Edicto insimul congregato Fuerant itaque ibidem etiem 60 Abbates Priores Conventuales etium 300 amplius Monachi Doctores Procuratoâ—s Statutum â—uerat etiam in eodem Parliamento ad instantiam maximè domini Regis ut asseritur per clerum ut tertium Beneficium c. It is the Convocation-Clergy and Convocation-Business that the Historian all along here speaks of and yet he speaks of the first we see as being of and of the second as done in Parliament so closely were those Two Meetings then thought to be united and ally'd And the same is Perpetually the Style †133â— Edvardus Parliamentum tenuit in quo Archiepiscopus Cant. Concilio Cleri celebrato Regi X am triennalem à Clero concedi obtinuit p. â—22 1371. In hâ—c Parliamento Cleri Synodus ab Archiepiscopo celebrata est p. â—â—3 1344. Parliamentum tenuâ—t In eo Clerus ei concessit X as triennales â—â—36 of the Author of that Excellent Book de Antiquitate Ecclesiae Britannicae than whom none understood our Constitution better or express'd himself with greater Exactness To descend to Times nearer our Own In the 21. H. VIII The Summer before the Clergys Submission a Letter was written to the Pope about the affair of the Divorce by many Members of Parliament Herbeâ—t's Hisâ— p. 334 who subscribe it under eight distinct Ranks or Classes the last of which is Milites Doctores in Parliamento Eleven of these there are and several of 'em Clergymen as particularly Wolman Sampson Gardiner Lee c. Who seem to have subscrib'd as Members of Convocation for Wolman at this time was Prolocutor †Act. MS. Conv. 1529 And I do not see how
200 Years Disuse has barr'd the Clergy from acting Parliamentarily in several Instances which heretofore they were allow'd to interpose in Our Constitution is much alter'd in many of these respects and to say the Truth it was fit that in many of 'em it should be alâ—er'd and that the Parliamentary Interest of the Lower Clergy should be reduc'd as it is to Matters Ecclesiastical and such Things as concern either Religion or their Order And in this Sphaere I conceive they still move and are still a Parliamentary Assembly whose Consent is regularly to be had to all Laws relating to Faith or Church-Discipline when ever the Parliament shall please to enact any and whose consent when Previous to such Laws is I presume most Regular They have still a Right oâ— being summon'd to and with every new Parliament and a Right of sitting by vertue of that Summons in order not to those High Affairs of State which they once consider'd jointly with my Lords the Bishops when they sat with them in Parliament and which made the Constant Preamble of their Convocation-Writs long after they separated but for some Religious Ends and Church Purposes with which however the Safety and Peace of the State is closely interwoven They are to be ready to offer to the King and Parliament what they shall Judge serviceable to the Interests of Piety and Good Manners and to consider of what shall be offer'd to them to remonstrate against what may be passing there to their Disadvantage and to pray Help of the States in such matters as may redound both to the Benefit of their Own Order and to the good of the whole Kingdom In these and several such respects as these the Clergy have still a Right of Attending on every New Parliament and which ought to be consider'd the Parliament have also a Right of being attended by them as their Proper Assistants and Councelors in matters Ecclesiastical whose Judgment is in many cases to be ask'd even where it may not be follow'd and whose Resolutions are not without Weight even when they are without Authority 'T is in this case as in that of the Iudges the Masters in Chancery and the King's Council learned in the Law who have a Right of being call'd up to the House of Lords and to that end can demand their Writs of Assistance Nor is this all for the Lords also have a Right of being thus assisted by them and can therefore claim their attendance though they themselves should be willing to forego it The Priviledge is mutual and not to be wav'd on the one side without Consent of the other In like manner I say the Convocation-Clergy may be consider'd as the Council Spiritual of Parliament to whose attendance therefore that August Body is entitled and in whose Summons and sitting consequently it is in a near manner concern'd For should there not be frequent need of their Advice or Assistance yet as it is for the Honour of the two Houses that the Clergy should be ready always against there shall be need of it so is it for their Interest too to keep up a Title to such Assisting Assemblys by keeping up the Assemblys themselves It is possible that there may be no occasion of advising with the Iudges throughout an whole Session of Parliament Could the Lords certainly foresee this yet they would not I suppose consent that their Summons should for that time be drop'd or even their Attendance excus'd The Argument therefore advanc'd in these Papers must be look'd upon as a Plea for the Priviledges not of the Convocation-Clergy only but of the Parliament it self also to which they belong and to whose Assemblys Theirs are now and from the first settlement of Christianity among us have been strictly united not indeed constantly in the same Respects and by the very same State-Tyes and Ligaments but sometimes by more and sometimes by fewer and always by such and so many as were needful to preserve and prove the Union An Account of these regularly deduc'd through the several Periods of time from the earliest Saxon Age downwards has been the business of this Chapter not with any Aim of retrieving lost Rights or building New Pretensions on Old disus'd Practises but merely to shew that the Parliamentary Assemblys of the Clergy are of the Essence of our Government have been practis'd from the foundation of it and are woven into the Frame of it and can never therefore without doing Violence to our good Old Constitution be suppress'd The Ends and Uses indeed of these Conventions of the Clergy have been different but under all those Varietys the Right and the Practise of Convening has still continu'd the same without being ever till now interrupted or disputed And therefore to repeat here at the close of this Chapter what I have said already at the Entrance of it it makes nothing against the Clergys Right of Meeting with the Parliament that they are now no Member or Estate of Parliament as Dr. W. objects since they are however an Estate of the Realm oblig'd and entitled by the fixt Rules of our Constitution to assemble with the Parliament and which has according to this Obligation and by this Title assembled with it now for some hundred Years since all Pretence of assembling as an Estate of Parliament vanish'd And now I have I think answer'd all Dr. W's Objections on this first Head unless we should allow a certain poor Colour of his to pass for an Objection where he tells us that Our Kings have often been wont to hold Convocations when there were were no Parliaments sitting †Pp. 229. 286. from whence he would have it understood that those two Meetings have no manner of dependence upon one another and that the King therefore is as much at Liberty to hold a Parliament without a Convocation as he has been to call a Convocation without a Parliament To this End he has adorn'd his Appendix with a learned List of Convocations antiently held without Parliaments or at different Times from them * Num. VI. an whole Dozen of which he finds in the Compass of 240 Years †From 1287. to 1538. 'T is a mercy his knowledge is somewhat stinted in this way for else we should assuredly have had fifty Instances more of the kind since so many at least might within that Compass of time have been fetch'd from our Manuscript Registers and Printed Historians I could without difficulty number up the greatest part of them now if it were either worth the Readers while to have such a List or related any ways to the present Dispute which turns not on the King's Prerogative of assembling Convocations out of Parliament a Right undoubtedly belonging to the Crown in elder Times but on the Spiritual Subject's Priviledge of being assembled in it Had Dr. W. given us a List of Parliaments antiently held without Convocations That indeed had been to his purpose and would have gone a good way towards
Conjunctim Divisim in their Procuratoria that so they might have some to vote for them in the One place and some in the Other Once more the Time when the Crown began to issue out Writs for the Convocation i. e. to command the Archbishops by Writ to assemble the Clergy of their Provinces is another point which Dr. W. would fain if he could determin and in order to it pitches upon a Writ of this kind in the 9 E. II. as the first that perhaps is extant * P. 101. or which is all One it seems as the first he has ever met with †P. 225. Which Learned Hint he takes care also to inculcate often †Pp. 100.103.225.228 that he may be sure to have Justice done him for the Discovery But in this he is a little too vain because neither is the Remark his Own for he met with it in the Grand Question p. 159. nor if it were would he have any reason to boast since it is by no means a true one for there are several Writs of this nature extant before the Date of this particularly of the 7 th and 5 th Years of E. II. and as far back as the 11 th of E. 1. which I have already in the course of these Papers had occasion to take notice of And even this Writ it self is misdated as to the Time to which it Summon'd for whereas Dr. W. says that it call'd the Convocation to meet Feb. 9. the Parliament sitting Oct. 16. foregoing †P. 103. the Truth was that the Writ was dated Oct. 16. and summon'd the Convocation to meet not on Feb. 9. but Ian. 27. i. e. in quindenâ Hilarii But I offend I fear in too nice a pursuit of his Errors and shall close these Remarks †P. 244. therefore as He does his with the Account of a Convocation the Circumstances of which have been much misunderstood not only by Dr. W. but by my Lord of Sarum too and even by our Elder Historians Henry the VIII th he says having call'd a Parliament to Westminster Anno 1529. he should say 1523. ‖ April 15 th 1523. the Parliament met April 20 th Warham's Prov. Synod Apr. 22 d. Wolseys 's Legatin Synod commanded Warham to Summon a Convocation of the Clergy to meet about the same time at St. Pauls Cardinal Wolsey who as Archbishop of York had no place in the Convocation and was desirous to bring every thing to his Own Management by his Legatin Power dissolves the Convocation held at the King's command by Warham and orders the same Synod to appear before himself as the Pope's Legat the next day at Westminster where having got a sufficient subsidy granted by them to the King he soon dismis'd the Assembly †P. 244. Thus Dr. W. tells the Story out of Antiqu. Britan My Lord of Sarum adds that this Dissolution was May 2. and points to the Writ of this date in Tonstall's Register issu'd out by the King to Tonstall for the Clergy of Cant. Prov. to meet at Westminster †Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. p. 20 But here to use his Lordships Own Words of my Lord Herbert †Vol. p. 95. he had not apply'd his Ordinary Diligence for the Writ he referrs us to is quite another thing than his Lordship apprehends it to be and the whole story of the Dissolution is a Mistake as appears beyond doubt from the Preamble of the Act of Subsidy printed by his Lordship himself among the Records * Vol. 1. p. 8 where we find these words Nos Praelati Clerus Cant. Prov. in hâc Sacrâ Synodo Provinciali sive Praelatorum Cleri ejusdem Convocatione in Ecclesià D. Pauli London 20 die Apr. A. D. 1523. inchoatâ ac usque ad in 10. Aug. proximè ex tunc sequentis de diebus in dies continuatà c. Had his Lordship considered these words he would have seen that this Synod was so far from being dissolv'd May 2 d. that it sat as a Provincial Synod above three Months afterwards and was continu'd from the first to the last Day of its Session by Ordinary Adjournments And had his Lordship further given himself the Trouble to peruse the Mandate to Tonstal which he cites from his Register he would have found that there is not a Syllable of a Dissolution or a Reassembly mention'd in it and would there have lit upon a true account of this mistaken Story For that Mandate recites that the Caâ—dinal had sent out his Legatin Summons concurrently with the Bishop of Cant's Provincial Citation for the Clergy of Both Provinces to meet at St. Peter's Apr. 22 d. two days after those of Cant. were Provincially to assemble that they did accordingly thus meet the York-Clergy by Adjournment from York where they met first March the 22 d * See Stat. 22 H. 8. c. 15. and those of Cant. by Adjournment from Pauls But the Clarks of Convocation for Cant. Prov. being to appear first before their Own Archbishop had brought up Powers to Treat with Him alone without any mention of the Legate for which reason the Cardinal issu'd out his Mandate of May the 2 d. to Tonstal for the Clergy of his Diocese and so of all others to meet and send up proper Forms to their Proctors as they did I suppose and then the Business of the subsidy was debated and the quantity of it agreed on before the Legat but the formal Grant of it made afterwards in Two Provincial Assemblys The Common Account therefore of this Legatin Synod is Fabulous taken up in Hatred to the Cardinal and too easily received by Iosceline himself without inspecting the Registers for the Truth of it Archbishop Parker upon the Review of his Work being not able to set this Story right by Memory alone for he was but Eighteen Years Old when it hapned Had indeed the Fact as it is commonly handed down to us been true Dr. W. would have had reason to say that it is not to be parallel'd in all its Circumstances in any part of our History But as it really stood there was nothing but the Writ for New Powers Extraordinary or singular in it Pool's Legatin Synods being afterwards Summon'd and held with the very same Formalitys particularly that in 1555 by the Acts of which it appears that the Synods of Cant. and York were first conven'd apart after the same manner that they were always us'd to be in Parliament time and then Both call'd to an Exempt place the Chapel Royal in Whitehall and there united into one National Assembly Besides had Cardinal Wolsey by his Power Legatin dissolv'd a Convocation call'd by the King 's Writ we should certainly have heard of it among the 44 Articles preferr'd against him in Parliament †See 'em Lord Herbert p. 293 but it not being touch'd on or so much as hinted there we might without further Authority conclude that nothing of the
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
Years last past that is ever since the Council of * An. 1624. Bourdeaux unless we should call that Meeting of a few Prelates the other Day to Condemn the Archbishop of Cambray's Book a Provincial Council And if I mistake not they called themselves so by the same Figure as my Lords the Bishops who are of the Commission for Ecclesiastical Preferment may be stiled a Convocation But true Protestants and true Englishmen will like this Fashion the worse for being of Popish and French Extraction and for coming from a Country where both Civil and Ecclesiastical Liberty have expir'd long ago As they are not any where observ'd to live long after one another CHAP. II. THus does our Right to these Assemblies stand by the Law Ecclesiastical Which Law has been consider'd by it self for the clearer Evidence of the Argument and not in any opposition to the Temporal Government It not following from hence that such Assemblies should be held contrary to the Will of the Sovereign Power but that the Sovereign Christian Power should be desired to permit or rather to encourage them If in this Request we were not already prevented by the Law of the Land which not only allows but commands them as will appear if as hitherto I have enquir'd only into the Rights of a Synod of the Province of Canterbury at large so I go on now to consider it as Attendant upon a Parliament of England For so the matter at present stands and has stood for 400 Years and upwards to speak at the lowest Tho' in the Elder Ages it plainly enough appears that the Clergy came at once from both Provinces and joined Nationally with the Lay Assembly That this was the usage of the Saxon Reigns is acknowledg'd from the remaining Monuments of those Times But what the Order of these National Assemblies was is not as I see yet clearly discover'd As therefore the most knowing and exact of our Antiquaries have thought it proper for the better understanding of our Saxon Government to go over into Germany and consult the Laws and Manners of those Places from whence we came so possibly we might not be much out of our way in this Argument if we looked into France and enquir'd how the Franks there govern'd themselves those Fellow-Germans and near Neighbours of our Ancestors and who had much about the same time possessed themselves of Gaul as these had of this part of Britain especially if we consider the times of Charles the Great that Renown'd and Mighty Monarch whose Example had it vary'd from the Common Original Practice would yet probably have been imitated by our Lesser Kings And here we may content our selves with what the judicious De Marca reports to us of this matter in his Excellent Work De Concordiâ Sacerdotii Imperii * L.VI. c. 24 25. That in King Pepin's time when the Kingdom began to recover it self from the Disorders it suffer'd before it was resolv'd that two National Ecclesiastical Synods should be held every Year the One in March in the King's presence and where-ever he should appoint the other in October at the Place where the Bishops in their former Meeting should agree upon That whereas this last was a pure Ecclesiastical Council the other was a Royal One to which the Great Men of the Kingdom resorted from all Parts of it to take their Resolutions for the succeeding Year As there was also towards the Winter another Royal but Privy Council consisting only of the Great Ministers and such others as the King thought fit to call in which Matters were prepared and digested into Heads to be proposed to the Greater Assembly in the Spring This General Convocation of the Spiritualty and Laity which was after by Pepin's Son Charles the Great appointed to meet on the first of May was call'd indifferently Conventus Flacitum Concilium Synodus or Colloquium and in Latter Times Parliamentum which word also is still retained In it the Clergy and Laity deliberated sometimes together and sometimes apart according as the nature of the Business to be treated of was whether purely Secular Ecclesiastical or mixt When they were apart as well as when together the Great Persons Earls c. were distinguish'd from those of a lower Degree sitting by themselves and on Honourable Seats These too manag'd the Debates and formed the Conclusions the Commoners assenting and sometimes speaking but so as rather to signifie their Opinion than give a Vote This we may suppose to have been the Method also on the Spiritual side And so Hincmar out of Adalbardas Cousin and Councellor to this Charles expresses it * Ad Proceres pro Institutione Caâ—olom Regis c. 29. Generalias says he Universorum tam Clericorum quam Laicorum conveniebat Seniores that is the Magnates whether Counts or Bishops propter Consilium ordinandum Minores that is the Lesser Barons and Inferior but qualified Clergy propter idem suscipiendum interdum pariter tractandum non ex Potestate sed ex proprio mentis intellectu vel sententiâ confirmandum And after all what was resolv'd on in this Great Assembly was presented to the Emperor And what he in his Wisdom approv'd was to be observ'd by all * c. 34. Much after the same manner I suppose were the mixt Meetings of our Saxon Kings held They were call'd by the same Name being styl'd Synodi †Which the Learned Mr. Nicholson with all his Saxon knowledge seems not to have consider'd where he asserts the Meeting at Twiford in which St. Cuthbert was chosen Bishop to have been no Synod but a Parliament See his Notes on Northumberland in the Engl. Cambden p. 859. An Instance which shews how fit he is for that Office he has taken upon himself of being an Umpire in this Controversy and Concilia tho' Secular Persons join'd and Secular Affairs were transacted in them They were compos'd of the same Persons For there sat the Bishops Counts c. and there attended the Lesser Thanes and their Equals ‖ LL. Athelst. §. 71. Missae Presbyteri Saecularis Thani Jusjurandum in Anglorum Lege computatur aeque carum LL. H. 1. c. 64. the Priests c. the Spiritual and Temporal part of the Convention consulting together or asunder ⸫ See Council of Cloveshoe Ann. 747. where tho' King Ethelbald his Princes and Dukes were present yet are the Canons said to be made by the Clergy alone who went aside for that purpose Spelm. Conc. I. 1. p. 245. And the same thing is observed in the Glossary concerning the Laws of Athelstan in voce Parliamentum as they saw occasion They were conven'd in like manner twice a Year by a Law of King Alfred's (*) Mirror c. 1. Sect. 3. and one of those Meetings was fix'd if not in his time yet afterwards to the Calends of May (†) LL. Edv. c. 35. Debent Populi omnes Gentes Universae singulis annis Convenire
p. 552. ad an 1095. p. 722. Where also it is said Abbates totius Provinciae cum Clero parte Procerum affuerunt and united them more closely than before by his new Tenure of Knight-Service which oblig'd all Persons that held of the Crown whether Spiritual or Temporal equally to Attend his Great Councils And to These therefore were Summoned not the Bishops and great Abbots alone but many others also of the Lower and even of the Undignified Clergy who as Dooms-day Book shews held Lands of the King in every Shire †4711. Knight's Fees were Vested in Parochial Churches says the Author of Eulogium and to be sure therefore were present together with the other Crown-Tenants even in the Conqueror's Curiae held acourse at the Three great Festivals and appear'd no doubt in greater Numbers at his more full and general Assemblies of all the States of the Realm At such only Church-Affairs seem to have been Transacted not at his Ordinary Curiae though some of the Clergy of all Ranks might be present there unless when these Curiae and those great Councils were co-incident and the latter Summoned to meet extraordinarily at the same time that the former met acourse As the Case was in that mixt Convention at Winchester where Stigand was Deprived and in another at Gloucester where several Bishops were made How long exactly the Saxon Manner of Mix'd Councils continued is not easy to say However that for several Reigns after the Conquest it obtained is certain and it is probable that the Disuse of it might begin toward the middle of H. II. when the Clergy we are told Disjoined themselves from the Laity ‖ Post Turonense Concilium which was in 1163. about the Time of the Council of Clarendon cum Omnibus penè in Rebus Clerus se a Populo disjunxisset Antiqu. Britann p. 131. in every respect and set up to be Independent being encouraged in this Attempt by the Pope whose Power was then very great and by the Success which they had in their struggle with the Crown about the Affair of Archbishop Becket and the Articles of Clarendon And this Division of the Spiritualty from the Temporalty which began in H. the IIds time took Root under his Successors and was settled more and more by the Absence of Richard the First in the Holy Land by King Iohn's weak and H. the IIIds troubled Reign Now therefore the Clergy seem to have declin'd Obedience to the Lay-Summons except such of them only as were oblig'd to attend the Great Councils of the Realm by their Offices or their Tenures so that in the Sixth of King Iohn when the King had a mind to have all the Abbots and Priors present in Parliament he was forced to Cite them by the several Bishops of the Dioceses * Cl. 6. Jo. M. 3. dors and not by an immediate Summons And in 49 H. 3. when every Abbot had his Distinct Writ they are said to have been Voluntariè summoniti †Pat. 26. E. 3. PS 1. M. 22. in Pryn's Reg. of Par. Writ Vol. 1. p. 142. i. e. by their own Consent not as of Right or as owing the Crown any such Service To this Recess a way had been before opened by the Dispute between the Two Metropolitans Thurstan Archbishop of York refusing that Subjection to the See of Canterbury which had been paid to it by his Predecessors from Lanfranks time when in a great Council held first at Winchester and then at Windsor it was solemnly determined That the Archbishop of York and his Clergy should attend the Archbishop of Canterbury's Conciliary Meetings and Summons ‖ Diceto de Archi. Cant. p. 685. But this Rule was broke in upon in less than Fifty Years after it was settled and the See of York by the favour of the Pope made Independent And now therefore the Archbishop of Canterbury's Authority being confined to his own Province and the Interest of the Crown in calling the Body of the Clergy together afterwards lessening apace the Affairs of the Church came at length to be transacted in Two separate Provincial Synods and the Clergy seldome to Assemble Nationally but at the Command of a Legate who often called them together in H. the IIId's Reign and that to bring the Observation nearer to my Subject at the very time of Parliament And sometimes I find that both the Regal and Legantine Authority joined in Convening them * Compare M. Par. p. 915. with the Ann. of Burt. p. 355. But their ordinary way of attending the Parliament was not in one National Council but in two separate Assemblies of the Province as is manifest from the Constitution of Reading formerly Cited where Two Proctors are appointed to be sent from every Diocese to appear in proximâ Congregatione nostrâ tempore Parliamenti proximi †Constit. Provinc p. 25. Here we see the Provincial Synods of the Clergy for the Council of Reading was such are spoken of in the 7th Year of E. I. when this Council was held as Meeting acourse together with the Parliament And we may be sure therefore that the Custom was of Elder date though when it arose canot be precisely determined But this Wise and High-spirited Prince finding the Clergy thus divided from the Laity and from one another hard to be dealt with resolved to restore the old Practice and to bring them Nationally to Parliament which he did by inserting into the Bishop's Writ that Clause which begins with the word Premunientes and Summoning by the means of it all the Secular Clergy under Bishops either in Person or by their Proxy's as also those Religious who were so far Secular as to be Chapters to the Bishops and placed in the Heads of the several Dioceses such as the Priors and Convents of Canterbury Winchester Worcester c. were The Mere Religious as professing to be out of the World had the Privilege also of being left out of those Summons the Crown contenting it self to direct particular Writs to all the great Abbots and Priors whether holding by Barony or not without commanding the Attendance of their Convents The Numbers of the Lower Clergy Cited by the Archbishop to his Parliamentary Convocations had born some proportion all along to those of the Lower Laity called at the same time to Parliaments * For this Reason the Constitution of Reading appointed two Proctors for every Diocese And a Mandate of Peckam in 1290. See his Register Cited out of every Diocese Duos vel tres Procuratores when the Commons Writ of the same Year ra◠Duos vel tres de discretioribus milibus Brady Introd p. 149. and the Premunitory Summons therefore when first practised by this King still carried on the Parallel By it some were ordered to appear for the Diocese the County Christian and some for the Cathedral Clergy of those Cities that sent Members to Parliament And as the Welch Shires return'd but one Knight apiece
continu'd And as the time of the Convocation of Canterbury's assembling was in this and in most oother Ancient Instances different from that of her Sister Province so was it we see different also from that of Parliament Here it preceded ‖ Seven Days but generally it followed the Parliament a Week or two on purpose as I apprehend that the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots might be at leisure to attend both those Meetings And this was the usual Distance throughout Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns till Henry the Fourth began to enlarge it in and after whose time the Clergy held their Assemblies during and near the Sessions of Parliament but not thoroughly concurrent with them the Archbishop it seems affecting Independency and the King who above all things desir'd to stand well with the Clergy favouring him and them in that respect and giving way to their being call'd later or dismiss'd sooner than the Laity as having been already answer'd in his Demands at that or some other Synod of the Province call'd out of Parliament-time Such Assemblies being frequent in those days and transacting all Affairs that belong'd even to Parliamentary Convocations But this was only an Interruption of the Old Practice for a time not a through alteration of it for about the Entrance of the last Age when the Prerogative began to recover the Ground it had lost to the Church we find these Meetings of the Clergy and Laity more closely united the Dates of Henry the Eighth's Convocation being all one or a few days before or after if not altogether the same with those of his Parliaments And from 1 Edw. 6. to this Reign the Clergy have I think met always and parted within a day of the Parliament the day it self on which the Parliament sat and rose being not judg'd so proper for this purpose because the Bishops were then to attend the House of Lords But since the late Revolution the Business of these Two Meetings not interfering the same day has serv'd to open both of 'em or rather to open the one and shut up the other There have been no Deviations from this Rule that I know of except in a Legatin Synod or two which are no Presidents and once in the Convocation of 1640 but that Experiment succeeded too ill to be ever try'd a Second Time The Clergy therefore tho' by a Mistake in their Politicks separated from the Parliament yet continu'd still to attend it in Two Provincial Assemblies or Convocations which as they met for the same Purpose and had the same Reasons of State inserted into their Writs of Summons as the Parliament had so did they to manifest yet more their Origin and Allyance keep closely up to the Forms and Rules and Manner of Sitting and Acting practis'd in Parliament I cannot do right to my Subject without pointing out several Particulars wherein this Conformity was preserv'd and I shall not therefore I hope be misinterpreted in doing it The Two Houses of Parliament sat together Originally and so therefore did the Two Houses of Convocation of which to omit other Proofs I shall mention that only which may be drawn from the Inferior Clergy's being sent as Delegates from the Bishops to represent and act for 'em in Convocation an Usage which tho' practis'd long after the Greater Prelates divided from the Less yet must in all Probability have had its Rise when they were together as the like Custom also in Parliament had whither the Lords Spiritual and Temporal being us'd to send Commoners to Vote for them while the States were together continu'd the Practice also long after they were asunder as appears on the Spiritual Side by Numerous Instruments of Proxy yet remaining in the Bishops Registers and on the Temporal by some Probable Inferences of Mr. Elsyng * Cap. 5. p. 126. tho' Direct Proofs of it are together with the Proxy Rolls lost †One I find in the 5 H. 5. where Th. de la Warre a Baron gives Letters of Proxy to two Commoners and those which is very particular of the Clergy but his case was particular for his Barony descended to him after he was in Orders and he is styl'd therefore constantly Magister and not Dom. de la Warre in his Summons to Parliament As the Commons in Process of Time withdrew from the Peers so did the Inferior Clergy from the Bishops and Abbats Each having their Prolocutor in ordinary the very Word that is us'd every where in the Latin Rolls * And sometimes in the English Iournals See Sir Symonds d'Ewe◠p. 15. p. 328 c. for the Speaker and not withdrawing only from the Great Lords upon occasion for Liberty of Debate and in order the better to agree upon their Petitions and Opinions as I presume they always did even in the Old mixt Assemblies but meeting together at the very first in a Distinct Body and joyning with the Upper House only on Great Occasions The Prolocutor was so chosen as the Speaker by the Body whose Mouth he was so presented to the Archbishop and confirm'd by him as the other was by the King His Office was much the same on either side He moderated their Debates kept them to Order and attended the Lords sometimes with the sense of the House and at the Entrance of his Office disabled himself in form several Instances of which occur in the latter Acts of Convocation * Act. MS. Conv. 1541 Sess. 2. 1554. Sess. 3. 1562. ad Ian. 16. Bills of Money and Grievances but especially the latter began usually in the Lower House here as well as there had alike several Readings and were Enacted at the Petition of that House as Statutes antiently were and the Successive Variations in the Enacting Forms of our Statutes were observ'd and transcrib'd generally into the Clergy's Constitutions Their Subsidies were often given Conditionally and with Appropriating Clauses and Indentures drawn upon those Conditions between the Archbishop and the King if the Grant was to the Crown or between the Archbishop and the Prolocutor of the Lower House †Scriptutura Indentata inter Reverendissimum Tho ex unâ parte Mag. Dogett Prolocutorem Cleri eundem Clerum ex alterâ testatur quòd dictus Clerus concessit dicto Reverendissimo Patri Caritativum Subsidium Registrum Wottonian ad fin And so the Commons granted per quandam Indenturam Sigillo Prolocutoris Sigillatam if to the Archbishop just as the Way was in the Grants of the Commons In Matters of Jurisdiction the Upper House gave Sentence the Lower House prosecuted as was usual in Parliament for which reason the Act of H. 8. * 24 H. 8. c. 12. which in all Causes relating to the King or his Successors allow'd an Appeal to Convocation mention'd the Bishops Abbats and Priors of the Upper House only because They only were Judges But over their Own Members both Houses of Convocation had Power in like manner
too which recited this Petition Verbatim in a Statute and by that means set their Seal as it were to the Truth of the Suggestion contained in it It would be needless after this to argue from the Old Parliamentary Practice of appointing Convocation-days * Elsyng p. 112. upon which the Temporal Lords Adjourned that the Parliament-Prelates might be at Liberty to Consult with the Inferior Clergy Of this Custom we have an Account as high as the first Years of H. VIII i. e. as high as we have any Iournals of Parliament To as little purpose would it be to urge the Decision of the Committee of Both Houses 21 H. VIII †Moor. Rep. p. 781. and of the House of Commons 10. Mariae ‖ Hist. Ref. II. Vol. p. 252 3. that a Clergyman could not be Chosen into that House * They determined also That a Layman could not be of the Convocation But in That Practice is against them For the Chancellor of York though a Layman is Now and has been long a Member of that Convocation And whether Lamb and Heath who are Mentioned as of the Convocation in 1640. were not Mere Civilians I leave to be consider'd Heyl. Life of Laud. p. 438. Because he was Represented in another House Which implies I think that that other House was to sit concurrently with the Parliament or else I see not what force there is in the Reason given Much less will it perhaps after what I have said be thought Material to observe that 24 H. VIII c. 12. in Matters touching the Crown allows an Appeal within Fifteen days to the Upper House of Convocation then being or next insuing which supposes this Assembly to Meet often and to have its Regular and Stated Returns as the Parliament has These though good Presumptions of the Truth I contend for yet arise not up to the fulness of several of those Proofs which I have before suggested And because they may admit a Cavil therefore I hint them only without dwelling upon them The Evidence already given is sufficient to clear the Practice as it stood 150 Years ago and had then stood Time out of mind And that it has not altered since is too well known to need a Proof There being no Instance to be given I believe from the time of the Reformation down to that of our late Revolution wherein a New Parliament has sate for any time without a Convocation to attend it Nor any one Author of Note I verily think to be produced throughout that Period who has given it as his Opinion that the Former of these Meetings might by the Law of the Realm be held without the Latter Dr. Wake is for ought I can find the very first Writer that has ever Taught this Doctrine with how much Truth or Probability the Reader by this time begins to judge and will in the Course of these Papers more clearly see Wherein I hope to set the Clergy's Right to such Concurrent Meetings in so full and clear a Light that as no One ever denied it before Dr. Wake so neither shall any Man of tolerable Skill or Honesty ever Dispute it after him I have been large upon this Head and I fear by reason of the variety of the Matter somewhat confus'd It may be proper therefore here at the close of it to recollect the several Branches of the Proof there advanc'd They stand in this Order That as far back as we have any Memoirs of the Civil or Ecclesiastical Affairs of this Kingdom it appears that the Clergy and Laity Met together in the great Councils of the Realm That this they did in the Saxon times and for some Reigns after the Conquest Nationally joining closely with the Laity in Civil Debates and taking Their Sanction along with them in all Ecclesiastical Acts and Ordinances That they divided afterwards from the Laity and from one another and attended the Parliament not in One Body but in Two Provincial Synods held under their several Archbishops That though it does not clearly appear when this Practice first had its Rise yet sure we are that it is between 4 and 500 years old and has for so long at least regularly obtain'd excepting only the Interruption that was given to it by the Premunitory Clause inserted into the Bishops Writs which once again warn'd and brought the Clergy Nationally to Parliament That a strict Compliance with this Clause was at first exacted by the Crown and paid by the Clergy but that they soon found ways of being released from the Rigor of it and prevail'd upon the King to accept of their former manner of Assembling with the Parliament in Two Provincial Synods in lieu of that Closer Attendance which the Premunientes challenged the Forms however being still kept up by which the King 's Right of Summoning them immediately to Parliament was declar'd all along and their Obligation to obey his Summons in the way it prescribed was duly acknowledged That these Provincial Assemblies though held apart from the Parliament yet belong'd to it Met by the Parliamentary no less than the Provincial Writ and were State-Meetings as well as Church-Synods In them Parliamentary Matters were Transacted and Parliamentary Forms and Methods observed the Members of them were Entitled to Parliamentary Wages and enjoyed Parliamentary Priviledges That the Inferior Clergy though divided in Place from the Lower Laity yet join'd with them often in the same Acts and Petitions and were still esteem'd and called the Commons Spiritual of the Realm and what They and the Prelates in Convocation did was long after the Separation spoken of in our Records as done in Parliament That these Parliamentary Conventions of the Clergy were held at first near the time at which the Laity met afterwards with a Latitude But that This Irregularity was Reformed before the Reformation of Religion and their Meeting and Departing fixed within a Day of the Assembling and Dismission of the Parliament and that this Custom has now for above an Age and Half continued That for so long therefore not to say how much longer the Convocation has been a word of Art which signifies a Meeting of the Clergy in time of Parliament That such Meetings have by All that understood our Constitution been held Necessary Dr. Wake being the First Writer that has ever asserted them to be Precarious and put it in the Prince's or the Archbishop's Power whether they will have such Assemblies or no. The Result of All is This That if some Hundred Years Custom can make a Law then may we without Offence affirm it to be Law that the Convocation should Sit with every New Parliament If the True Notion of a Convocation be That it is an Assembly of the Clergy always attending the Parliament then is it no Presumption to say That we have the same Law for the Sitting of a Convocation as we have for that of a Parliament And by this Law the Clergy as was said before in relation
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
For which reason and because I think the Point to be of Importance and withal related nearly to the Article we are upon I shall here produce some Passages from the Papers and Records of that time which fully clear it King Edward's Answer to the Devonshire-Mens Petition * Fox Vol. 2. p. 666. Assures 'em that for the Mass no small Study or Travel hath been spent by All the Learned Clergy therein †p. 667. b. And agen That whatsoever is contained in our Book either for Baptism Sacrament Mass Confirmation and Service in the Church is by our Parliament established by the whole Clergy agreed yea by the Bishops of the Realm devised by God's Word confirmed ‖ P. 668. a. The Council's Instructions to Dr. Hopton how to discourse the Lady Mary ⸫ Fox Vol. 2. p. 701. affirm the same thing somewhat more forcibly The first of these is Her Grace writeth that the Law made by Parliament is not worthy the Name of a Law meaning the Statute for the Communion c. You shall say thereto The Fault is great in any Subject to disallow a Law of the King a Law of the Realm by long Study free Disputation and uniform Determination of the whole Clergy consulted debated concluded But above all most Express and Full to this purpose is the Assertion in a Letter of Edw. 6. dated Iuly 23. Regni tertio and entred in the Register of Bonner * F. 219. a. it runs thus That one Uniform Order for Common-Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments hath beyn and is most Godly sette fourthe not onely by the Common Agreement and full Assent of the Nobility and Commons in the late Session of our late Parliament but also by the lyke Assent of the Bysshopps in the same Parliament and of all other 's the Learned Men of this our Realm in their Synods and Convocations Provincial I thought it worth my while to make good this Point because it has by some been much doubted and their Doubts have been countenanced by the Act 2 3 Edw. 6. c. 1. which establishes the Service-Book and wherein there is mention only of the Archbishop of Canterbury and certain of the most Learned and Discreet Bishops and other Learned Men of this Realm appointed to compile it but no Formal notice is taken of the Convocation that passed it And the Proof I have given in this single Instance will suggest to the Reader that it might be so in General and that several other Things done by this Select Committee were probably approved afterwards in Convocation tho' the Statutes and other Records of that time should seem to mention the Committee only The Convocation-Records which alone could have given us Full Light in this case are destroyed and the chief way we now have of supplying this Defect is by Parallel Instances and Probable Reasonings which Fair Men therefore will admit as good Evidence for want of better and not take advantage as Dr. Wake does from the Destruction of such Records to deny that there ever were any This is as if a Man should pretend to prove that none of the People of such or such a Parish were in the Reign of Edward the Sixth Christned because perhaps the Old Parish-Registers are lost This made way for the Act of 1548 p. 93. and 1551 p. 189. He means King Edward's two Acts of Uniformity which established the first and second Service-Book and way therefore was made for them not by this New Office of Communion but by the Service-Books themselves These I have shewn tho' the Work of a Committee yet had the Authority of Convocation inasmuch as the Convocation approved this Committee before-hand and confirmed what was done by it afterwards I have shewn it I mean of the One and the Reader therefore will easily believe that the same Steps and Measures were observed as to the Other 1549. An Order of Council forbidding Private Masses Ibid. p. 102 103. As contrary to the Statute of Uniformity and to the Determinations of the Clergy in Convocation and the Council therefore who sent this Order do afterwards in a Letter of theirs to the Lady Mary * Iune 4. 1551. call her Chaplains saying Mass a contempt not of Their but of the Ecclesiastical Orders of this Church of England †Fox Vol. 2. p. 709. The Forms of Ordination appointed by Act of Parliament ordered to be drawn up by a special Committee of Six Bishops and Six Divines to be nam'd by the King Ibid. p. 141 143. The true account of this is that the Council had already appointed this Committee at the Instance as we may from former Precedents reasonably collect of the Convocation it self then sitting and of the Members of Convocation therefore this Committee was composed according to my Lord of Sarum's account of it Some Bishops and Divines says he brought now together by a Session of Parliament were appointed to prepare a Book of Ordination * Vol. 2. p. 140. The Session was likely to end before these Forms could be prepared and the Parliament passed therefore a previous Confirmation of them as they had done in the case of the Necessary Erudition in 1540 †See Stat. 32 Hen. 8. cap. 25. Dr. Wake must have a very uncommon way of arguing if he can draw any thing to the Prejudice of the Churches Power from such Instances as these where such an Implicit Deference was paid to the Resolutions of the Clergy as to Enact 'em before the Parliament had seen 'em and indeed before they were made Dr. W. we see does in this and in every other step of this Article appeal to my L. of S.'s Book and would under the cover of his Lordship's Name put off all his Bad History and Worse Opinions It may not be amiss therefore to give him the Iudgment of this Right Reverend Prelate clearly expressed and avowed in another Piece ‖ Vind. of the Ord. of the Ch. of Engl. and with that to ballance all these Doubtful and Uncertain Authorities His Lordship speaking of the English Ordinal the Point we are upon and of the Alterations that were afterwards made in it has these words It was indeed confirmed by the Authority of Parliament and there was good reason to desire That to give it the force of a Law but the Authority of the Book and those Changes is wholly to be derived from the Convocation who only consulted about them and made them And the Parliament did take that care in the Enacting them that might shew they did only add the force of a Law to them for in passing them it was ordered that the Book of Common-Prayer and Ordination should only be read over and even that was carried upon some Debate for many as I have been told moved that the Book should be added to the Act as it was sent to the Parliament from the Convocation without ever reading it but that seemed Indecent and too Implicit to
stated an Assembly as the Parliament it self 'T is true there have been during this Period Other Meetings also of the Clergy out of Parliament time when the Necessities of the Church so requir'd and these Assemblies indeed and these alone were properly Occasional But these were rare in comparison of Parliamentary Synods even in Popish times and since the Reformation there has been no Instance of 'em the Convocation of 1640. only excepted which is no Compleat Instance neither for it was call'd and sat together with the Parliament tho' it continued after it And what Reflections and Votes this Continuance produc'd in the Succeeding Parliament is sufficiently known Setting aside therefore what was done in this disputed Instance it is certain that All the Business of the Church has for these hundred and fifty years last been transacted purely in Parliamentary Convocations and these therefore which are the only Synods now in use being Stated and not Occasional it can be no part of the Definition of a Convocation that it is an Occasional Assembly By the Universal Rules and Practice of the Church there are Set-times allotted for Provincial Synods to meet and these Times are by our Constitution adjusted to those of Parliament And the Clergy-Meetings therefore thus appointed concurrently with Parliaments can no more be said to be Precarious or Occasional than They are 'T is true their Acting is Occasional tho' their Meeting and Sitting be not for they may possibly when met have no Business to do and then as they met a course so they adjourn or are adjourn'd a course but the Chance of their acting or not acting ought not any ways to hinder their Meeting and Sitting both because it cannot certainly be known till they are met whether there be any Business for 'em or no and should there not be any yet they preserve a Right to do Business when there shall be occasion for it by thus assembling when there is none Archbishop Parker Mr. Cambden Sir Robert Cotton all that have been Eminent for their skill in our Constitution have constantly represented the Convocation to be a fixed and stated Assembly and never once dreamt that it was Occasional and one would wonder therefore how our Young Antiquaries came to be wiser in this respect than the Old ones No! this Meeting is not Occasional but the Notion is taken up purely to serve a Turn and do Business for there must be New Notions to justifie New Usages But to speak a plain word I cannot for my heart like these Men of Occasional Principles for I remember well that Those were thought thoroughly Honest by neither side who were for Occasional Communion Thus much in answer to the General Part of the Objection which would persuade us that 't is of the Nature of a Convocation to be a Precarious Assembly what is further urg'd to support this Notion shall be consider'd under Two Heads wherein I shall shew 1. That the Praemunientes in the Bishops Writ is not an Idle Useless Clause as we are made to believe inserted only on a Particular Occasion and continu'd by Accident but a Real and heretofore at least an Effectual Summons of the Clergy to Parliament such as they constantly made Formal Returns to as often as it went out and did expresly obey 2. That the Writ to the Two Archbishops to convene the Clergy of their Provinces tho' it does not expresly mention a Parliament yet has an immediate Reference to it the Original Design of its issuing out together with the Bishops Writ being only to secure an Obedience to the Premunitory Clause of it and to make the Clergy's Parliamentary Assemblies more full and certain Upon the first of these Points I shall not content my self barely to make good what I propose but shall extend my Enquiries further and endeavour to give some account of the Original of the Premunitory Clause as it now stands in the Bishops Writ of the true Grounds of inserting it and of the steps by which it prevail'd Something not unlike it I find practis'd as early as the Sixth of King Iohn when a Writ yet to be seen among our Records †Cl. 6 Joh. m. 3. dors went out calling the Bishops to Parliament and by them all the Conventual Abbots and Priors of the Diocese that is it may be all those of the Clergy below Bishops who might in this Instance be Summon'd to Parliament Ten years after this the Charter of Runnymead oblig'd the Crown to Summon every Bishop Baron Abbat and Prior Singillatim that is by a Distinct Writ and accordingly in the 26 H. 3. * Cl. m. 13. dors the Archbishop of York's Summons has no such Clause in it the Abbots being then we may presume Summon'd severally as we are sure they were in the 41 st of the same Prince from the Abbot of Burton's Summons preserv'd in the Annals of that Monastery ‖ P. 371. and as the Deans appear to have been in the 49 H. 3. * Dugd. Summ. p. 2. And whether the Clergy of yet Lower Rank came to that Famous Meeting in some proportion answerable to that of the Lower Laity and in what manner they were Summon'd thither can be matter of Guess only for our Records are silent Edward the First a Martial Prince having great Designs abroad had consequently need of Great Supplies at home and in order to obtain them quietly found it requisite to get the Express Consent of as many of his Subjects as he could to the Parliamentary Grants and for that End resolv'd to make the Lower Clergy and Laity a constant and standing Part of All his Parliaments In his first year while he was yet abroad in his Expedition we find the Commons as we now understand the word present in Parliament * de quolibet Comitatu Quatuor milites de qualibet Civitate Quatuor Ann. Wav p. 227. and that in a greater number than they were in the 49 th of his Father But it does not appear that the Inferior Clergy were at this Meeting who it seems standing upon their Priviledges and Exemptions were not so easie to be dealt with in this respect as those of the Laity were In his third year therefore we hear only of the Pontifices Cleri Majores in Parliament i. e. of the Bishops Abbats Priors and Archdeacons of whom the King demanding a Subsidy was answer'd by the Bishops that they could not agree to it without consulting the Clergy of their Dioceses Wykes ad Ann. 1275 which they promis'd to do against the next Parliament met and to bring their Resolutions along with them to it In his Seventh year the Council of Reding met wherein it was order'd that two Proctors should be Elected by the Clergy of every Diocese and sent up to represent them in the next Congregation of the Clergy to be held with the next Parliament * This is according to the Edition of the Canons of that Council at
laid hold of to bring the Clergy to a compliance with his Will when they had no body to head them in their opposition to him * Vacabat Ecclesia Cant. says Knighton membra sine capite in consilio dispersa sunt Eboracensis vèro Iohannis Romanus Regis timore perterritus eò quòd in magnâ pecuniae summâ regi tenebatur quasi dissimulando destituit c. p. 2502. He Summons the Prior and Chapter of Canterbury therefore as Guardians of the Spiritualties of that See during its Vacancy and by Them the Archdeacon of Canterbury and two Proctors for the Diocese †See the Writ Append. Numb X. The Clause in this Writ differs in nothing from what was afterwards practis'd except that it begins with the word Vocantes instead of Praemunientes and mentions not the Prior and Chapter of Canterbury they being indeed the Persons written to and having already in the former part of the Writ been cited under another Capacity Only still we may observe that tho' the Call were really to Parliament yet it is not mention'd throughout the Summons either in that part of it which commands the Bishop to attend or in that which warns the Lower Clergy to accompany him but they are cited only to treat and to consult among themselves Knighton * Eodem Anno MCCXCIV Vocavit Rex per Literas suas Archiepiscopos Episcopos Decanos Ecclesiarum Cathedralium Archidiaconos in propriis personis suis Clerumque uniuscujusque Diocesis per duos Procuratores c. X. Script col 2501. and the Annals of Worster †Die XIX Sept. Rex habuit Colloquium Londoniae cum omnibus Episcopis Archidiaconis Abbatibus Et Clerus ibi similiter habuit Procuratores Ann. Wig. apud Ang. Sacr. Vol. 1. p. 516. and Eversden * Rex Parliamento die crastino Sti Michaelis it should be Matthaei habito Universos singulos Angliae Praelatos cum Clero nec non Religiosos omnes possessiones obtinentes ad ipsum Parliamentum vocatos ad praestationem c. induxit M. S. in Off. Arm. ad Ann. 1294. mention the Clergy as present in this Parliament and the two first of these tell us particularly who were Summon'd Neither of their Enumerations are just indeed but both together compleat the Account And from the notice thus taken of the Clergy's attendance and from the Particular given of the Persons attending we may be satisfy'd that the Summons was Extraordinary and from thence may conclude that before this it had not probably been practis'd to be sure not obey'd But now it was effectually for upon the receipt of the King 's Writ the Prior and Chapter sent out their Letters Mandatory in which they recite it One to the Archdeacon of the Diocese and another to the Commissary of their Separate Jurisdiction ordering them to bring the Clergy of their several Districts together at a Place and Time appointed as They did and the Clergy thus met deputed two Common Proctors to represent the whole Diocese And these Proctors sat and acted for them in Parliament i. e. in that Assembly of the Clergy which was Summon'd by the same Writ to meet at the same Time and Place that the Lay-part of the Parliament were * Ad ipsum Parliamentum vocatos says Eversden above and accordingly did thus meet at the opening of it promiscuously †So I gather from Mat. Westm. who says Coädunatis apud Clero Populo P. 422. and so Knighton 's Relation Col 2502. manifestly implys tho' they afterwards debated and resolv'd separately * This too appears from Knighton ibidem and from the manner in which their Orders in relation to the Grant are spoken of in Registr Henr. Prioris fol. 63. There a Writ recites that in sesto beati Matthaei c. quaedam â—unt Ordinata per Praelatos Cleri Procuratores exclusively to the Laity And the Clergy's Proctors are there also impower'd to consent to what the Prelates Archdeacons and other Proxies of the Clergy should do in common And one of the Resolutions they came to was to give the King a moiety of their Goods for one year This Gift however was by the Province of Canterbury alone for the Clergy of York-Province if present in this meeting yet did not make their Grant in it as appears from the King's Letters Patents transmitted to them by the Dean of York immediately upon the rising of the Clergy of Canterbury †The Parliament sat on Sept. 20 th or 21 th and rose in a few days the Letters-Patents to the York Clergy are dated Septemb. the 28 th wherein they are commanded to do as the King's Agent shall direct i. e. as the Clergy of the other Province had done before them It appears indeed from the Register of Ioh. Romanus ‖ Ad Ann. that his Clergy were Summon'd to this Parliament by the very same Writ that those of Canterbury were but whether they declin'd appearing there or only delaid their Grant till they met Provincially at home I cannot say sure we are that the next year * 23 E. 1. they were again Summon'd the Praemunientes being inserted into the Writs of all the Bishops of York-Province as Pryn †Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. p. 7. informs us And the year after that we know that it was not only inserted ‖ Dugd. Summ. p. 13. but obey'd by them For Rex Angliae apud Sanctum Edmundum in crastino Animarum Parliamentum suum tenuit vocati ibidem venerunt per Regias Literas Praelati Totus Clerus says the Manuscript Chronicle of Canterbury written at this time of which a Fragment is published by Mr. Wharton Angl. Sac. Vol. 1. p. 50. and so Thorn Rex apud S. Edm. tenuit Parliamentum Convocato illùc Toto Clero Col. 1965. Now therefore the Praemunientes became an Usual Part of the Bishop's Writ and had a place there not as Matter of Form only for as often as it was repeated it was expresly comply'd with The Bishop upon the Receipt of his Writ transmitted it in a Letter of his own to the Dean or Prior of his Cathedral Church and to the Archdeacon or Archdeacons of his Diocese commanding them to appear in Person at the Time and Place prefix'd by the Writ and to warn the Chapter to send one of their Body and the Clergy of the Diocese Two thither and moreover to transmit an account to him of what they had done or would do in this matter To this the Deans Priors or Archdeacons made answer by their Certificatorium which recited the Bishop's Writ as that recited the King's and concluded always either that they had done or would do as commanded Upon this the Chapter met and deputed One and the Clergy of the Diocese Two to appear for them in Parliament The Persons so deputed had Procuratoria or Letters of Substitution Literae de Rato and Ratihabition
Append. Num. XV. as Metropolitan to cite those very Clergy and no others Provincially who were call'd up by the Writs to their several Diocesans But neither would this Method take easily for the Clergy when assembled protested against such sort of Citations by the Archbishop as calling a part of the Body only and those ad Curiam Saecularem puta Domini Regis Parliamentum quod in Camerâ ejusdem inchoatur and therefore tam ratione Fori quam Loci Uncanonical and say that for the future they will not obey them * See their Protestation Appen Num. XV. For which reason when the year after * 9 E. 2. 1315. Both these Writs went out again the Archbishop varied a little from both in his Letters Mandatory †Dated 15. Kal. Jan. 1315. in Registro Reynolds for he call'd not only those specify'd in the Praemunitory Clause but the Whole Clergy of his Province to appear not in Parliament but before himself in a Sacred Place the Day before the Time prefix'd by the King 's Writ Nor does he in his Mandate recite or mention this Clause but refers himself to that Other Writ which the King sent out at the same time to enforce the Praemunientes and mentions it as a Request ‖ Cum nos Rex suis Rogatibus excitaverit Nos Regiae Majestatis hujusmodi Precibus eò facilius inclinamur only on the Crown-side and a Condescension on His but not as a Legal Command issu'd by a Competent Authority The Clergy thus conven'd stood by him in what he had done and made their Excuse for not appearing at the Place the King directed praying the Archbishop and his Suffragans to be instant with the King that he would not insist on his Summons but give them the Liberty of declining it So I gather from a Petition of theirs in an Old Book in the Cotton-Library * Faustin A. 8. said to be made tempore Edvardi 2 di without any further Date but seeming by its Place in the Manuscript and some other Coincidences to belong to this year and to this Assembly The Reader will find it in the Appendix †Numb XV. Whether they carried their Point at this time I know not but soon after we find the Writ with the Praemunientes inserted in the Archbishop's Mandate ‖ Vide Registr Henr. Prioris f. 227. fol. 263. where it appears that the two Writs with the Praemunientes of the 15 E. 2. 20 E. 2. Printed by Dugdale Pp. 122.136 were formally obey'd and formally comply'd with by the Clergy When the Procuratoria were drawn in relation to the Praemunientes alone they ran as that did ad faciendum consentiendum or ad consentiendum only when the Provincial Summons went out also the Clergy's Powers ran ad tractandum cum Venerabili Patre Praelatis Clero necnon ad Consentiendum which answer'd Both the Citations And sometimes Double Instruments of Prexy were fram'd both for the Parliament and Convocation and different Proctors appointed for each of ' em And this I conceive was as often as the Parliament was held out of the Province and the Clergy were at the same time to meet Provincially at home * An Instance of such a Double Procuratorium is to be seen in Registro Henr. Prioris fol. 202 203. naming different Proctors to represent the Chapter of Canterbury in the Parliament to be held at York à die Paschae in mensâ—m and in the Convocatio Cleri London in Quindena Paschae It was in the Year 1319. and do business for they could not then assemble with the Parliament or near it and sent their Proctors therefore to testifie their Consent to what should be done in it And the same thing I have observ'd to be done sometimes even in that Province where the Parliament met if the Archbishop of it did then solemnly hold his Provincial Council for in this case also different Proxies were return'd to these several Meetings †An Instance of this kind also I have met with Ann. 1323 when the Parliament was held in die Purisic and the Archbishop's Provincial Council about the same time The Dean and Chapter of Lincoln send Proctors to both of them Vide Registr penes Dec. Cap. Linc. ab Anno 1321 ad 1339. fol. 33. Now then tho' the Praemunientes was obey'd Nationally yet the Clergy that met with the Parliament acted Provincially i. e. the Clergy of that Province where the Parliament was held acted as a Synod conven'd by their Metropolitan and the Clergy of the Other Province sent their Deputies to the Lay-Assembâ—y to consent for them but tax'd themselves and did all manner of Ecclesiastical Business at home * Thus in the Instance before given An. 1321 The Clergy of York Province where the Parliament was held are only said to have made their Grant in Parliament For a Writ tested July 19. that Year to the Archbishop of Canterbury recites how in Parliamento nostro ultimò apud Eborum summonito Xa Cleri in Prov. Ebor. XVIIIva Bonorum Mobilium Communitatis regni XIIa in Civitatibus Burgis Dominicis nostris fuerunt concessae But the Clergy of Canterbury Province are not said to have granted in Parliament tho' they met at the same time Provincially and Consented to the Grant of a Tenth which the Pope had impos'd upon them as the same Writ afterwards recites See it Reg. Henr. Pr. fol. 211. in their Own Province And this was pitch'd upon as a Mean of complying with the Canons of the Church which requir'd frequent Provincial Councils and yet paying their attendance in Parliament the Archbishop's Mandate Summon'd them to the One and the Praemunitory Clause to the other and Both were obey'd Nay so great stress was laid on this Clause that when an Archbishop dy'd †There was the same Reason for it when a Bishop dy'd and therefore the Practice I suppose was the same after it went out and before the Return of it a New Summons was sent to the Guardian of the Spiritualties commanding him agen to warn the already premonish'd Clergy and a particular Writ directed over and above to the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral enforcing that second Summons the Tenor of which Writ was Nos Nolentes per mortem praefati Archiepiscopi dicta Mandata nostra differri set ea potiùs per Vos executioni debitae demandari Vobis Mandamus c. I take this to be very material to prove how strictly the Praemunientes was executed upon the Inâ—erior Clergy and obey'd by them and shall therefore among the Instruments * Append. Numb XVI Print it at large as Pryn †Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. Pp. 152 153. has given it us Mr. Elsyng ‖ P. 50. therefore makes this the formal Reason of Summoning the Guardians of the Spiritualties and the Vicars General when the Bishops of such Sees were either dead or in Foreign
Parts He might have added also why Bishops Elect were Summon'd before Confirmation and even the Vicars General of Elect Bishops when those Bishops were abroad because they were says he Praemunire Clericos i. e. that the Inferior Clergy might be sure to have their Summons This may have been one Reason of that Practice but I do not think it the only one * It could not be the Only one because long before the Praemunientes was inserted the Custom was to Summon the Chapters of Vacant Sees to Parliament of which take this Instance from M. Paris who tells us that in the Parliament of the 38 H. 3. there were Prâ—curatores tâ—ium Sedium Vacantium ex parte scilicet Capitulorum P. 643. because it does not account for the Summons of Elect Abbats also before their Installment and I doubt not therefore but this Custom had its Rise chiefly from the Double Capacity in which the Greater Clergy attended the Parliament both as Spiritual Prelates and Barons of the Realm on which account when they had not a right to a Summons as Barons yet as Ecclesiastical Prelates they had However They who make this Supposition make it mightily to the advantage of the Lower Clergy and suppose their Presence in Parliament to have been indispensably necessary And thus stood the Clergies Obligations in relation to the Praemunientes throughout Edward the Second's Reign Edward the Third continu'd this Practice upon the very same Foot that he found it the only difference was that whereas before his Time the Praemunientes was inserted or left out at the King's pleasure in his Reign it grew a constant and necessary part of the Bishop's Writ so that no Parliament ever met without one after his sixth year that is indeed after the Compleat Settlement of Parliaments upon the Foot on which they do now and will I hope for ever stand And this Observation alone is sufficient to shew that the Clause in the Bishops Writ was not grown Useless for if it had it would not then have been most regularly inserted and have grown most in request when its Use and Significancy if some Mens word were to be taken had utterly vanish'd In the year before it was fix'd tho' there were several Summons to Parliament yet it was inserted but in One of them and in that One it was obey'd For the Records of Parliament tell us that upon a Debate the Bishops and Proctors of the Clergy went by themselves * Abr. of Rec. p. 11. And that These were Proctors of the Inferior Clergy according to the strict sense of the word and not the Proxies only of Absent Bishops Abbats and Priors as L. M. P. dreams †P. 32. does from hence appear that in the other Parliaments of this year when the Praemunientes was not practis'd no mention is made of the Proctors of the Clergy the Phrase then being that the Bishops went by themselves the Lords by themselves and the Knights by themselves ‖ P. 12. Neither is there ever in those Records any mention of the Proctors of the Clergy at a Great Council but at Parliaments only the reason of which is that Parliament-Writs only had the Praemunientes in them but the Summons for Great Councils had not And now therefore the Clergies Returns for the Parliament are frequently to be met with in our Old Registers Parliaments themselves being frequent If in the succeeding Reigns we find not so many of these Procuratoria on Record it is not to be wonder'd at for the Archbishop's Writ which went out concurrently with the Praemunientes being understood to be a Summons to Parliament which it was in Effect tho' not in Terms and being strictly executed upon the Inferior Clergy might in time bring on a Disuse of the Forms practis'd in Executing the Other The Bishops through whose Hands both the Parliamentary and Provincial Summons came might sometimes either by the Neglect of their Officers * To this Neglect of their Officers that Clause seems to have refer'd which was an usual part of the King 's Writ to the Archbishop in E. 2. 3ds time Nos nolentes negotia nostra pro defectu Praemunitionum antedictarum si forsan minùs ritè factae fuerint aliqualiter retardari or as thinking it sufficient transmit the first of them only or if Both were transmitted might wink at the Clergies Omission in making their Return but to the One as not being unwilling to sooth up the Lower Orders in their Averseness to comply with a Lay-Summons because that sensibly encreas'd the Greatness and Power of the Parliament Prelates and by degrees brought the Clergies Interest in State-matters all into their Hands Besides oftentimes when the Bishop executed the Praemunientes and the Clergy certify'd upon it yet no notice might be taken in our Registers of Forms which return'd so very frequently and which were not stood much upon while the Provincial Mandate that went out on the same Occasion had its certain and Regular Course These and several other Accidents might I say conspire to make the Entry of such Procuratoria in Chapter-Books less frequent in after-times however neither are they sow'd so thinly there but that we can make a shift from the Helps of this kind that are left to continue the Succession of them down from the 22 E. 1. to the Latter End of Henry the Seventh's Reign as low as whose 19 th year * Anno 1503. I have seen a Deputation †See App. Num. XI made to a Monk to represent a Capitular Body in Parliament and that drawn up in such a manner as to be at once a Joint-Proxy both for the Parliament and Convocation I question not but that there are more of a Lower Date tho' I have not had Opportunity or Leisure to search for them for I find that the Praemunientes was executed in form as low as the 33 d and 36 th years of Henry the Eighth ‖ See Registr Bonner fol. 33 65. and Returns therefore were for some part of his Reign very probably made to it Not many years after this the Custom of returning Proxies to Parliament in Form did I believe cease and if a Conjecture may be allow'd in a matter of this nature where with some care and search one might be certain I should choose to fix the Time of this Total Disuse not far off of the 6 th or 7 th of Henry the Eighth when the Disputes between the Spiritualty and Temporalty about the Exemption of Clerks growing loud and warm and the Clergy with an high hand asserting their Priviledges might take up thoughts of setting themselves free also in another Instance than that which they contended about and agree generally to frame no more Instruments of Proxy in Obedience to the Lay-Summons And this Guess of mine falls in well enough with the Tradition my Lord of Sarum mentions as prevailing in Queen Elizabeth's time that the Inferior Clergy departed from
their Right of being in the House of Commons when they were all brought under a Praemunire in Cardinal Wolsey 's time * Hist. Ref. Vol. 2. p. 48. if we understand this of the first Premunire they fell into upon the Citation of Standish and not as his Lordship does of that from which they ransom'd themselves by a Tax and a Submission fourteen years afterwards and if by departing from their Right of being in the House of Commons we do as we must suppose his Lordship to mean that they declin'd sending up those Deputations to Parliament which manifested their Antient Right of sitting in it and being part of it For there could not possibly be any Tradition in Queen Elizabeth's time of the Inferior Clergy's sitting in the House of Commons in the middle of Henry the Eighth's Reign because there were probably many Persons then alive who remember'd the contrary and there were certainly some who understood the Old Constitution of Parliaments well enough to contradict so absurd an Opinion and prevent its spreading a very small degree of skill in our English Antiquities sufficing to have inform'd 'em that the Lower Clerks had no place in the House of Commons not only at the Period assign'd but for an hundred years before it The truth is I am the worse satisfy'd with this Guess of mine because I do not find what Ground his Lordship had to say that there was in Queen Elizabeth â—s time such a Tradition For he seems to have taken up this Opinion from the fourth Article of Bishop Ravis's Paper * See it Coll. of Rec. Vol. 2. p. 121. which he there quotes whereas I must take the Liberty to say that his Lordship misunderstood that Article if he thought it related to any thing done in Henry the Eighth's Reign For the Separation there spoken of is plainly of antient Date and refers as there is good reason to think to the Times of Edward the First and Archbishop Winchelsey But whatever was the precise time at which the Clergy desisted wholly to make their Returns to the Bishops Writ it is certain they did not think that upon that failure the Effect and Influence of the Praemunitory Clause ceas'd but look'd upon themselves as still Summon'd by it and meeting in vertue of it in their Parliamentary Assemblies Of this their Remonstrance in Queen Elizabeth's Reign is a Solemn and Authentick Proof the words of it have been produc'd already Page 66. of these Papers and thither I shall refer the Reader If after this we hear of no Formal Claim made by the Church in this case it was because there was no need of it Common Opinion and Common Practice being all along of her side and no Instance to be given of a New Parliament Summon'd without a Convocation to attend it from the Times of the Reformation till some years after the late Revolution And no wonder therefore that a Claim was not frequently put in which was never till lately deny'd or disputed Thus have I given the Reader some account of the Praemunientes its Rise and Use and of the Methods which all along have been taken by the Bishops in Executing it and by the Lower Clergy in obeying it An imperfect Account indeed however such an one as does I am sure sufficiently expose the Letter-writers pretence †P. 32. that it was a Clause added only upon a Particular Occasion and continu'd after the Business was determin'd and has stood in the Bishops Writ these 300. years without any manner of Use. Assertions that I might by this time be allow'd to tell him could flow from nothing but the Depth of Ignorance or ill will to the Function were I not restrain'd by considering whence * Hist. Ref. Vol. 2. p. 48. it is that he borrows his Light and Who therefore would be understood to share the Reflection Indeed strange it is that any Man in the least vers'd in our Antiquities should doubt whether the Clergy came to Parliament by the Praemunientes and stranger still that he should imagin that Clause to have been preserv'd in the Writ by Accident after its first Insertion and think to account for this merely by the neglect of a Clark ‖ Ibid. A neglect that must have continu'd now for above four hundred years and yet could not possibly have continu'd One if it were a neglect without being observ'd and amended No Forms were more nicely worded or more Religiously kept to in the main Frame and Substance of them than Writs of Summons to Parliament After they first issu'd out they receiv'd not any the minutest Alteration but by the Command of the Prince signify'd by his Chancellor and after they were fully fix'd not any that was Material but by Consent of Parliament How many Ordinances of Parliament were there in Later Times for the several Successive Changes in the Writs for Electing the Commons Particularly that New Circumstance that the Knights should be girded with Swords * Gladiis cincti and the Clause of Nolumus autem quod Tu nec alius Vicecomes c. inserted in the 13 th and 46 th of E. 3. had they not the Authority of the three Estates to warrant them And when afterwards Richard the Second added to the Commons Writs this Particular that the Persons return'd should be in Debatis Modernis Indifferentes †Cl. 11. R. 2. m. 23. dors See Pryn. P. W. Vol. 2. p. 121. was he not forc'd to retract it immediately and issue out New Writs in the Old Form before the Session came on When Edward the Third in the fourteenth of his Reign made an Addition to his Regal Titles in the Writs of that year he excus'd his so doing in the Writs themselves ‖ See â—em Pryn. Par. Wr. Vol. 1 p. 5. and referr'd himself to what the Parliament when met should order in that matter And in the first of Queen Elizabeth there was we know a warm dispute whether the Omission of the Title of Supreme Head in the Writs of Summons tho' it had not been then practis'd thirty years did not null the Proceedings of those Parliaments where it was wanting ‖ Sir Symonds d'â—wes p. 38. At such times as these when the Parliament appears to have been so jealous of any Alterations in these Forms can we imagin that the Praemunitory Clause had it been kept in by the neglect of a Clerk would not have been retrench'd They that can suppose this may as reasonably suppose also that some have grown Barons by Writ by the Neglect of a Clark who finding them Summon'd once or twice to Parliament continu'd to Summon them on without the Prince's Privity or Consent and so made them Lords of Parliament For if the Neglect of a Clark can account for any Material Clause or Part of a Writ it may as well account for an Whole one 'T will be a more reasonable way of applying this Supposition and more honourable to the
Maker of it to suppose as I am willing to do that the Passage which contains it was a part only of the Rude Draught of his Lordship's Work and expung'd by him upon a Review but kept in by the Neglect of the Transcriber Lett. to Bp. of Cov. Litch in 1693. upon whom I find his Lordship lays very great Blame And indeed if he stands answerable for All the Neglects that are and may be charg'd I think very deservedly But should many mistakes of this kind be found in that Celebrated Work yet would they receive an Easie Excuse The Composer of it having his Thoughts busied chiefly in that Period of Time to which his History reaches might when he steps backward and takes a greater Compass over-look Truths sometimes that lay hid in our Elder Records where his Lordship had not leisure to search for them If the Main Facts he professes to relate and the Colours he gives to those Facts are right if there be no premeditated Omissions or Disguises of Material Truths no Design'd Complyances with Popular Mistakes and Prejudices if that Air of Impartiality which at first sight seems to run through the Relation be undissembled and not only a more Artificial Way of conveying false Principles and Characters into the mind of the Reader if I say in These which are the most Essential Vertues and Beauties of good History his Lordship's Labours will bear the Test which his Lordship's Friends do not much doubt tho' it should after this be granted that Mistakes of a Lesser Size and Importance aboun◠there without number and particularly that the Digressive Part of the Book has little of Exactness in it this would not however sink the Reputation of the Work it is what considering the Hast of the Composure is not to be wonder'd at and may easily be excus'd All that One could have wish'd in the Case is that where Light on these and such other Accounts as these was wanting and Mistakes therefore were necessary his Lordship had been so happy as to have mistaken always on the Side and to the Advantage of the Clergy which some Readers will tell us his Lordship has not always done But let this be as it will The Plea here advanc'd in behalf of that Eminent Historian cannot be made use of to excuse our Letter-Writer who has no manner of Title to it It was His Chief Business to have consider'd with care the Rise of the Praemunientes and the Reasons of its continuance the Obligation it was all along understood to lay on the Inferior Clergy and their Methods of complying with it this being one Great Article upon which the Dispute that he was so willing to thrust himself into turn'd And his Ignorance therefore of every thing that relates to it is inexcusable but his Confidence under so Gross a degree of Ignorance yet more inexcusable For these are his Peremptory Words That the Clergy were ever a part of the Parliament or sate in it is very uncertain the Affirmative being supported only by Conjectures without any Record or Authentick Memorial to maintain it * P. 31. Words which no Learned Man could ever have said and no Wise Man conscious of his want of Skill in this point would ever have ventur'd to say But it seems neither of these Qualities hinder'd our Letter-writer from falling into them and by that means affording us a clearer Proof of his own utter Unfitness to meddle in this Argument than he has given of any One Point besides that he pretends to maintain For it is certain as certain as that these Words were thrown out by this Gentleman at Random that the Inferior Clergy were a part of the Parliament were Summon'd and repair'd to it as such and as such sat in it both when the Praemunientes first went out and many years afterwards sat in it I say not under the same Roof indeed with the Laity I mean not Ordinarily but asunder as a separate State and as the Lords now sit and even then for the Greater part of this Period sat asunder from the Commons And he who makes this matter of Conjecture and pronounces it Uncertain puts it beyond a Conjecture how far in things of this kind his word is to be taken I have shewn him that there are many Unquestionable Records and Authentick Memorials yet left some Printed but more in Manuscript which prove the Clergy to have been once in the strictest sense of the word a Member of Parliament and if the Church part of these Records lay out of his way tho' they were as open to Him I dare say as they were to me yet as a Lawyer methinks he should have had some Acquaintance with Ryley's Placita Parliamentaria As for Dr. Wake he resolves to be as little out as he can on this Head and therefore wisely says nothing of it For from the Beginning to the End of his Book you shall not find a word to inform us how the Praemunientes after its first Insertion was executed upon the Inferior Clergy and obey'd by them He seems indeed to be of Opinion that the Clergy were a Part of Parliament in Edward the Third and Richard the Second's Reigns and he means I suppose that they were a Part of it as Summon'd thither by the Praemunientes tho◠he does not say so However that the Vertue of that Clause has long since ceas'd so that it is now become utterly useless in That he is positive * Pp. 213 214. and modestly therefore proposes a Retrenchment of i◠from the Bishop's Writ thinking it advisable to reduce that Writ to its first Form when the Proctors of the Clergy not coming neither were they Summon'd to Parliament †P. 253. A very free piece of Advice indeed which not only his Order but the Great Council of the Realm have reason to thank him for Who for some hundred years have been under the Mistake of thinking this Clause an Essential Part of the Writ till their Eyes were open'd at last by this Wise Observer While our Constitution was unsetled these Writs were so too but they are now as Immovable as That Let them have been Letters of Grace or Badges of Duty at first they have since grown to be Charters of Right and Priviledge by long Use and Continuance The King Lords and Commons indeed may alter them if they please for they may do any thing but I humbly suppose that no One Part of the Constitution can do it without the Other Some of our Princes indeed have attempted to make some slight Changes in them but scarce sooner entred on the Attempt than they disclaim'd it Had Dr. Wake known in the least how Sacred those Forms are held by our Law and of how great Importance it is to the Constitution to preserve them he would never have dar'd to recommend such an Alteration as this but Ignorance is fearless We may see here how the Love of Alterations creeps upon
of all those which were issu'd out in his Reign whereas the Forms were different Before the Submission Act the Writ was so worded as to leave the Archbishop at Liberty both as to Time and Place but after it was restrain'd often in both these respects and more narrowly in the last that it is now at present running without the words vel alibi as appears by the Writs for the Convocation 20. Jan. 1541. 30. Jan. 1544 45. in the Register of Bonner fol. 33. 65. This Omission hinder'd the Clergy from meeting in not from adjourning to any other place than that mention'd in the Writ and therefore when the Convocation of the 13 Nov. 1554. adjourn'd to Henry the Seventh's Chappel I find this Note thus entred by their Registrary Memorandum quòd in Brevi Regio precisâ— convocatur Clerus in Ecclesiam D. Pauli non alibi quamvis hic prorogatur ad Ecclesiam Westminst things came about again into their Original Course and the Old Method took place of opening the Convocation very near at the same time with the Parliament Upon the whole therefore it is manifest that the King 's Writ for a Convocation when it went out with that for the Parliament was originally only a Second Summons of the same Persons that were call'd by the Praemunientes and to the same Ends and Intents for which they were call'd by it that it was employâ—d at these times only to secure an Obedience to the Praemunitory Clause and to leave the Clergy thus doubly Summon'd both by the Provincial and Bishops Writ without Excuse if they did not attend the Parliament That it was made use of afterwards when it took in Abbats and Priors to bring those Regulars to it by the Assistance of the Archbishop who declin'd appearing there upon an Immediate Summons from the King as holding nothing of him by Barony and to render by this means the Parliamentary Assemblies of the Clergy so much in proportion fuller as the Number of the Abbats and Priors decreas'd who were us'd to be Summon'd and to sit with the Laiety That this little Diversity between the Persons Summon'd by the Provincial and Bishops Writ ceas'd at length upon the Dissolution of Monasteries the Old Usage then returning of addressing both the Writs precisely to the same Persons and ever since continuing That the Letter-writer therefore is utterly mistaken when he pretends that the Writ for a Convocation tho' it went out constantly with every New Parliament yet has no Relation to it * P. 29. because forsooth it does not now mention it expresly tho' at first for many years after it was practis'd it did and that Dr. Wake is yet further from Truth when in his Fantastick way of Speech he tells us that the Convocation call'd by the Provincial Writ is consisted of another sort of Persons †P. 284. than the Parliamentary Assemblies Summon'd by the Praemunientes were since it is certain that Both those Assemblies were originally consisted of the very same Persons and were really but one Assembly of Men meeting under a Double Capacity and as certain also that they have been again thus consisted for the last one hundred and sixty years I am really at a Loss to determine which of the Two is more absurdly false the Doctrine he here lays down or his manner of expressing it That Air of Assurance which Dr. Wake takes up every where on this Article would be very Amazing to a Man that did not consider how Doubts dwell usually in knowing Breasts and that those who have the least skill in things are most apt to be Positive It is as plain says he as any thing can well be That the Convocation of the Clergy consider'd as call'd by the Parliamentary Writs and sitting by vertue of them and the Convocation consider'd as Summon'd by the Convocation-Writ and the Order of the Archbishop consequent thereupon are in their Nature and Constitution two different Assemblies and which by no means ought to be confounded together * P. 226. By no means indeed if Dr. Wake 's Cause must right or wrong be upheld for the confounding these two Assemblies and making them but one confounds all his Little Aims and Reasonings However I have shewn that they must necessarily be and have always been thus confounded together when ever the Praemunientes and a Royal Writ for the Convocation went out joyntly and it will puzzle Dr. Wake I believe out of his Plentiful store of Useless Collections to furnish us with a single Proof to the contrary where the Convocation-Clergy call'd by the Archbishop at the King 's Writ and those Summon'd by the Praemunientes have met sat and acted in the same Province distinctly all which they must have done to be what he tells us they were two different Assemblies Nothing but a continu'd Series of such Instances as these carry'd through the several Reigns in which this Double Summons was practis'd can justifie Dr. Wake 's Notion and therefore I am very sure it can never be justify'd for They that that are vers'd in these things know that when these two Summons issu'd concurrently from the King the Clergy call'd up by the Praemunientes form'd no distinct Assembly but after making their Returns to it sat and acted Provincially and this as I have often times said was reputed and accepted as a Parliamentary Attendance At these Times therefore the Convocation of the Clergy praemonish'd by the Bishops Writ had as Dr. Wake says rightly no Existence i. e. no separate Existence from the Convocation of the two Provinces but was involv'd in it and represented by it and acted through it 'T is true Two sort of Writs going out to call the Clergy in Time of Parliament there is room for a Nice Head to distinguish as Dr. Wake does between the Nature and Constitution of that Assembly which relates to the One and the Nature and Constitution of that Assembly which relates to the Other But these two Assemblies being in fact but one Assembly it does us no Harm as to the Argument we are upon to consider that One Assembly under as many different Views and Respects as Dr. Wake pleases So he will allow it to have but One Existence to keep to his Phrase we will not dispute its having Two Essences that is its convening under two different Formalities for Metaphysical Speculations ought to make no Quarrels among Friends CHAP. VI. I Have in the Preceding Chapter examin'd carefully into the Rise Nature and Force of the Praemunientes and of the Convocation-Writ that goes out with it and have fully consider'd whatever may be objected from either of these against the Clergy's right of Meeting and Sitting in Convocation together with every New Parliament more fully indeed than the Objection it self deserves had I intended barely to pull down what was advanc'd on the other side without giving some further Light into this Intricate and as yet untrodden Subject For the Objection it self might
Usage but were allow'd freely to sit and declare their Grievances as often as they were understood earnestly to desire it in the Succeeding Reigns there being no Instance of such a Liberty deny'd by any of our Princes to any of their Synods when the Prince and the Synod were of the same Judgment in Religion I have shewn that it has been granted even when they differ'd in Principles let Dr. Wake prove to us that ever it was with-held when they agreed and he will somewhat lessen the Opinion the Clergy have of the Hardship they at present lye under If Custom therefore creates a Right we are sure that the Clergy have a Right to somewhat more than a Bare Summons they have a Right actually to assemble to be form'd into a Body and to fill the Chair of the Lower House and if they have any Petitions or Motions to make in Church-matters they have a right to sit so long as till they have made them for thus they have been always accustom'd to do and when they were adjourn'd without it it was upon a Presumption that they had nothing of this kind to offer and were themselves consenting to such Adjournments Dr. Wake himself is forc'd in good measure to agree to this for he owns that whilst the Clergy were wont to assess themselves and their sitting upon this account was necessary for the support of the Government they were not only Summon'd to meet but were wont actually to assemble and sit so long as it was requisite for them to do for this purpose * P. 141 249. Now 't is not forty years ago since the Clergy were in the undisputed Possession of this Priviledge of Assessing themselves and till That time therefore even by Dr. Wake 's Confession they had Custom and consequently Right of their side even for Assembling and Sitting as well as being Summon'd And the Late Discontinuance of this Custom cannot yet have infring'd that Right as being not yet Immemorial There is no Custom therefore for the Methods lately taken and it is the Clergy's great desire that there never may be any and for that reason among others it is that a Convocation is so earnestly call'd for to prevent this Pretence of Dr. Wake 's from growing up into an Argument for tho' it have now no manner of strength in it yet twenty or thirty years hence perhaps it may But tho' Dr. Wake is out as to the Clergy's having no Right because no Custom to sit yet at least he can prove he thinks that 't is very fit and reasonable they should have none upon Two Accounts the One drawn from the True End and Design of calling the Clergy to Parliament the Other from the Alteration that has hapned in the Original Constitution of those Meetings As to the First of these he tells us that the True End and Design of the Clergy's Assembling with the Parliament was to raise Money and that End therefore now ceasing since they have left off to assess themselves the Right grounded upon it ought to cease too * All the use that was generally made of them was to conconcur with the other Estates in granting Money to the King which having done they were commonly dismissed without entring on any other Business Pp. 106 107. However the King usually added a Conciliary Summons to his Parliamentary Writ yet still the Design was in Both the same that they might thereby more effectually confirm what had in Parliament been granted to the King c. Ibid. The Main Design our Princes seem to have had in assembling these Convocations either at the same time they did their Parliament or not long after was to get Money from them P. 227. This was the Great Use the King was wont to make of our Convocations and from thence it came to be the Custom to Summon them for the most part as often as the Parliament met P. 229. For the most part what was done by the Convocation when they met was only to confirm or make an order for Money P. 228. For the most part the Great End our Kings had in Summoning them was to get Money from them P. 245. As long as the Clergy in Convocation have continu'd to assist the Government by granting Subsidies it has been allow'd to sit as often as it was necessary to that purpose tho' it has seldom done any thing besides P. 250. As to the Second That the Convocation when it us'd to sit at the same Time with the Parliament was a Member of Parliament but not being so now there is no reason why it should sit with it †Pp. 105 106 107. The first of these is so False and Scandalous a Reflection upon our Princes and those Meetings and upon the Constitution it self that I wonder how it could drop from the Pen of an English Divine that had any Regard left for his Church or his Country and how even This Writer as meanly as he may think of Synods and their Powers could yet prevail with himself to say it He says it not once or twice only but often and with the utmost Assurance of Convocations call'd out of Parliament time as well as of those which met in it and seems to be afraid only lest this Decent Maxim should escape the Reader 's Eye and has therefore taken care to instill it so often and on so different Occasions that one cannot read long in his Book without meeting it Let us see how he attempts the Proof of it Why he tells us that in the accounts of our Elder Synods little more is said to have been done by them than that they gave the King such and such Supplies and tho' they met often in former times yet as for Ecclesiastical Business for ought he can find they did as little with their often meeting then as they do with their seldom meeting now †P. 283. But first allowing all this to be true does it follow from hence that the End of the Convocations sitting was to give Money might not frequent Opportunities be taken of pressing the Clergy to Grants and yet That not be the End of their Meeting Money has been as frequently given by Parliaments as by Convocations and has been as much the Design of calling them so that once upon a Time †Cl. Rot. 21 E. 3. ps 2. m. 9. dors Et scire Vos volumus quod dictum Parliamentum non ad Auxilia seu Tallagia à Populo dicti regni nostri petenda vel ad alia Onera eidem Populo imponenda set duntaxat pro Justitiâ ipsi Populo nostro super Dampnis Gravaminibus sibi illatis faciendâ See Pryn. Parliam Writ Vol. 1. p. 53. when the King inserted a Clause in the Commons Writs to assure them that That Parliament was not call'd in order to a Supply it is taken notice of by our Antiquaries as a Wonder Nevertheless the Reason and End of those State-meetings is not I
the Archdeacon's Jurisdiction must be somewhat older than the Council of Clarendon from some Trite Passages in those Constitutions so notoriously known that they have not escap'd even Dr. W's Enquirys †See p. 125 But if he must needs have produc'd a Proof of this lower than the Conquest why was not the Council of London under H. the I. thought of where it was decreed * Eadmer Hist. Nor. L. 4. p. 95. that the Archdeacons should take an Oath about the Execution of the Canons then made not to connive at the Breach of them for Money but severely to punish Offenders This would have carry'd his Proof between 30 and 40 Years higher than the Council of Clarendon and would have shew'd his Reader that he did not upon such Heads as these content himself barely to transcribe those who had transcrib'd others but convers'd with Original Authors To make all he says on this occasion of a Piece he further adds That we should not have known that the Bishops and Archdeacons were forbidden by the Conqueror to mix Iurisdiction with the Earl c. in the Hundred or Shiregemots but for an Inspeximus 1. R. 2. m. 12. n. 5 †P. 72. Not have known it Why there are divers Authentick Manuscript Copys or Accounts of it yet in being writ long before the time he talks of Particularly one enter'd in the Register of Winchelsey †Fol. 1. where the Clergy in their Roll of Grievances recite it Sir R. Twysden saw another of the Hand of E. the I. ⸪ Hist. Vind. p. 99. Dugdale in the Instruments relating to Pauls * Aâ—p p. 196. has Printed a third of the same Age And a much Ancienter Copy than any of these is to be found in one of the Old Books of that Church ‖ Lib. B. versùs finem writ about the Reign of R. I. between which and that of R. II. there is allmost 200 Years distance as my Almanack tells me Mr. Archdeacon might have modestly said indeed that He himself had not known of this Charter without that Inspeximus and some People would be apt to add nor with it neither if he had been to fetch his Intelligence from the Records of the Tower With which had he been acquainted he would have known that this Inspeximus was of the 2 d. not of the 1 st Year of R. II. as he imagines This I am sensible is a Digression but I shall make no Apology for it either to Mr. Nicholson or the Reader The One of these I hope will overlook it if he does not like it and the other may censure it in what manner he pleases Having shewn that there was by our Original Constitution a difference between the Greater and Lesser Councils of the Realm in the Saxon times and this Distinction being yet more Evident in the Latter Ages from the middle of E. the I. downwards as our Records preserv'd pretty well throughout this space of time abundantly testify We cannot doubt but that the same Distinction is applicable also to the Intermediate Period and that the Conqueror and his nearest Successors had also their Magna Concilia call'd afterwards Full Parliaments to which the Summons of their Subjects both of the Clergy and Laiety was more General and the Resort more Numerous than to their Ordinary Courts and Councils which were held de more for the dispatch of common Business and at stated Times And in such Extraordinary Meetings it is that we must chiefly expect to hear of the Inferior Clergys appearance Accordingly in one of them held in the 11 th Year of William the I. we find that a Charter then granted to the Monastery of Westminster is subscribed by Archiepiscopi Episcopi Comites alii Seniores c. multis praeterea Illustrium Virorum Personis Regni Principibus diversi Ordinis omissis qui similiter suae Confirmationi piissimo affectu Testes Fautores fuerunt Hii etiam illo tempore à Regiâ Poâ—estate è diversis Provinciis Urbibus ad Universalem Synodum pro causis cujuslibet Sanctae Ecclesiae audiendis tractandis ad praescriptum celeberrimum Canobium quod Westmonasteriense dicitur convocati * Spelm. Conc. Vol. 2. p. 14. It is plain this was a mixt Meeting of the Temporalty and Spiritualty such as were in use among the Saxons Who were there on the Lay part it is not my Business to enquire however They who restrain the words most as to Them yet allow that they must be understood to take in Deans Archdeacons and other Dignify'd Persons of the Clergy †Dr. Brady Introd p. 302. This was an Extraordinary Assembly the Conqueror is known also to have had his more Ordinary Courts which were held every Year at the Three Great Festivals and at which he appear'd Crown'd and Rob'd in great State and Splendor And of what Persons These were compos'd we learn from the Saxon Annals where they are thus reckon'd up Archbishops Bishops and Abbots Earls Thanes and Knights * P. 190. i. e. all who held by Knight-service And among These that several of the Lower Clergy had place appears from the Survey of Doomsday upon which we are told there were found in England 60215 Knights Fees and of these the Religious possess'd 28015 the Vills 1080 and Parochial Churches 4711 †Author Eulogii MS. apud Selden Tit Hon. There is no doubt but the Priests of these Parochial Churches as well as the King's Tenants in those Towns and Burroughs were present or represented in his Curiae whenever they assembled And among Those who are term'd Religious and who had in them near half the Knights-Fees of all England there were to be sure some of the Saecular Clergy above Parish Priests and below Bishops And these too appear'd among his Tenants in chief at such Assemblys and are comprehended in that General account given of one of these Courts in a Cotton-Manuscript Convenerunt ad Regalem Curiam †An. 1072. apud Civitatem Wentanam in Paschali Solemnitate Episcopi Abbates caeteri ex Sacro Laïcali Ordine * Cleop. E. 1.7 Whether more of the Clergy than these even some who held in Frank-almoigne might not be present at that Extraordinary Convention at Sarum to which all the Terrarii or Landholders of note in England repair'd cujuscunque Foedi fuissent as M. Paris †Ad ann 1084. Cujuscunque feudi vel tenementi fuissent the Waverly-Annals †Ad ann 1086. and Huntingdon ⸪ P. 370. But he places it in the Conqueror's 19 th Year expresly speak may be worth an Enquiry In his Son H. the I's time a Parliament met at London ⸪ An. 1102 and there the Spiritualty went aside and made several Ecclesiastical Constitutions †Eadmerus p. 67. The Lower Saecular Clergy therefore were there whose consent to the framing of Canons was requisite and so Hemingford's Relation of it plainly
ferè totâ Nobilitate regni Magistrorum Clericorum M. Par. p. 372. 1247. Fecit Dominus Rex Magnates suos nec non Angliae Archidiaconos per Scripta sua Regia Londinum evocari Ib. p. 719. agen Convenerant etiam tùnc ibidem ut praetactum est Archidiaconi Angliae nec non totius Cleri pars non minîma cum ipsis Magnatibus conquerentes communiter super intolerabilibus frequentibus Exactionibus domini Papae Tandem de Communi Consilio provisum est ut Gravamina terrae domino Papae seriatim monstrarentur ex parte Communitatis totius Cleri Populi regni Anglicani pp. 720 721. 1255. Post festum S t. Mich. tenuit Rex Parliamentum suum apud Westminster convocatis ibidem Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Comitibus Baronibus totius Regni Majoribus in quo petebat a Clero de Laïcis Foedis suis sibi Suffragium * Subsidium exhiberi disponens hoc priùs a Clero post eà à Populo Majori Minori extorquere Episcopi vero Abbates Priores Procuratores qui ibidem pro Universitate affuerunt nolentes huic exactioni adquiescere Gravamina summo Pontifici sub sigillis destinarunt Quorum Tenor Talis est De Archidiaconatu Lincolniae Articuli pro Communitate Procuratores Beneficiatorum Archidiaconatûs Lincoln pro totâ Communitate proponunt c. Ann. Burt. pp. 355 356. 1256. A Writ from the Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry to the Archdeacon of Stafford commanding him to collect the Papal Procurations ipsam Pecuniam tali die in Parliamento Londoniensi nobis assignantes Ibid. p. 372. Which supposes the Archdeacons Then to have attended the Parliament And accordingly the next time it was assembled we again find them there For a Debate arising this Resolution was taken Commune Concilium super hoc resedit quod Decani Praelati Regulares ac Archidiaconi tractabunt cum suis Capitulis Clericis it a quod ad mensem post Pascha redeant per Procuratores instructos ad plenè respondendum Ann. Burt. p. 374. The meaning of which was that the Deans Priors and Archdeacons appeared in Parliament not for themselves alone but for the whole Clergy of the Body or District over which they presided bringing up from them Procuratorial Letters †See a Bishop's Mandate to this purpose in the next Year 1257 which runs ut praedicti Dicanus Prior dictarum Cathedralium Ecclesiarum Cov. Litchf Abbates alii Priores cum Literis Procuratoriis nomine Congregationum suarum confectis ac dicti Archidiaconi cum Literis similibus factis ex parte Clericorum qui subsunt eïsdem dictis die loco peronaliter intersint Ann. Burt. p. 382. This Summons was purely Synodical P. 9. of this Book I have given two Instances wherein the same method was at this time practis'd in relation to the Parliament in which their Powers were sometimes specify'd and limited and this made a Recourse to their Principals necessary as often as any thing was propos'd that exceeded the Limits of those Powers This was by way of Indulgence to the Lesser Clergy in times when Summons to Parliaments were very frequent and consequently Attendance there very Expensive and Troublesome And the constitution of Reading therefore so often cited which first made distinct Proctors from the Rural Clarks of every Diocese a fixt and necessary part of the Clergys Parliamentary Assemblys did it not as a Priviledge but a Burthen for it commands them to be return'd etiamsi de Conturbatione vel Expensis oporteat fieri mentionem i. e. notwithstanding the Trouble and Charge it might be to them This they felt not while the Archdeacons were Commission'd to act for them who being bound Themselves to attend in Person by taking Procuratoria from the Inferior Clerks lessen'd Their Charge without increasing their Own But assoon as the Clergy sent up Distinct Proctors they were oblig'd to maintain them The Laiety I find were at this time indulg'd in like manner but in an Higher Degree for in the Parliament of Oxford Ann. 1258. this Memorable Provision was made which I shall for more than one reason here insert intirely Si fet a remembrer ke le Commun esâ—ise XII prodes homes ke vendrunt as Parlemenz which by the last Article were to be held three times every Year autre fez quant mester serra quant Rei u sun Cunseil les mandera pur treter de bosoingnes del Rei del Reaume Et ke le Commun tendra pur estable cer ke ces XII frunt ceo serra fet pur esparnier le Cust del Commun †Ann. Burt. p. 416. These Words at first sight might pass well enough for a Proof that the Commons of England properly so call'd were now represented in Parliament But upon comparing the several parts of the Relation it appears that these very Twelve who are here said to be elected par le Commun are in another place mention'd as chosen by the Barons And therefore the Community here spoken of must be the Community of the Baronage or Military Tenants who the Highest as well as the Lowest did it seems impower this Committee of Twelve to act for them in the three Annual Parliaments then appointed to be held And These together with the King's Council of Fifteen at the same time chosen had Authority to make Acts and Ordinances as appears evidently from the Provisions publish'd the next Year in the Parliament at Westminster of which it is said Ces sunt les Purveances les Establissimentz â—aitz a Westmoster al Parlement a la seint Michel par le Rei sun Conseil †Who the King's Council were appears p. 413 les XII par le Commun Conseil esluz after which these remarkable Words follow par devant le Communance de Engleterre ke dunke fu a Westmuster le an del regne Henry le fiz le Rei Iohan quarantieme terz * Ibid. p. 435. The Community of England therefore as distinguish'd from the Community of Barons or Great Tenants in Chief represented here by the Committee of XII were at and of this Assembly though the Enacting part of the Provisions then pass'd did not run in Their Name whose proper Province it was to Represent and to Petition Accordingly at their Instance these very Provisions were made as the same Annals inform us Significavit Communitas Bacheleriae Angliae Domino Edvardo filio regis Comiti Gloverniae aliis Iuratis de Concilio Regis apud Oxoniam quòd dominus Rex totaliter fecerat adimplevit omnia singula quae providerant Barones sibi imposuerant facienda quòd ipsi Barones nihil ad utilitatem reipublicae sicut promiserant fecerunt nisi Commodum Proprium Damnum Regis ubique quòd nisi inde fieret Emendatio alia ratio Pactum reformaret Upon which it follows Tandem videntes Barones magis
expedire promissa sua per seipsos adimpleri quà m per alios publicè fecerunt Provisiones suas promulgari subsequentes * pp. 427 428. Here the Communitas Bacheleriae Angliae are the same with the Communance de Engleterre before mention'd And that These were no Tumultuary Rabble but a Constituent Part of the Parliament who had an Interest there and a Power of acting within their proper Sphaere is manifest from their threatning the Barons that if they did not publish the Provisions agreed on at Oxford they would do it themselves that is they would step out of their Circle and Ordain whereas they were us'd only to Represent or to Petition And that this word Bachilers was then apply'd to the Commonalty as we now understand the word may be gather'd I think from another Writer * Wykes who a few Years after this tells us that the Inferior sort of People who in every Town and Borough did without and against the Governing part of it combine together for the Redress of Grievances styl'd themselves by this Name in imitation I suppose of the great Communitas Bacheleriae Angliae who push'd on this Reformation in Parliament Indeed Wykes a Warm Advocate for the Crown uses the word there in an angry and reproachful Sense the Licentiousness and Disorders of those Times having distasted him but that it had a more Honourable Meaning some Years before this M. Paris shews †Ad Ann. 1244. and that it recover'd its Credit again and was long afterwards imploy'd to signify those Commoners of Lower Rank who had place in Parliament take these two Instances out of many Rex die crastino Coronationis suae de assensu Baronum sibi assistentium delegit per Literas suas Patentes vocavit constituit duos Episcopos duos Comites duos Barones duos Bannerettos quatuor Bachiliers de Consilio Statu Honore Emolumento Regis Regni procurando ordinando c. Rot. Pat. 1. R. 2. p. 2. m. 16. And again in the last Year of this Prince the Lower House of Parliament are in the Instrument of his Deposition * See it ad calcem X Script more than once call'd The Bachilers and Commons of this Land Upon the Whole therefore I must needs till I am better inform'd think this a clear Proof that the Commons properly so call'd had Interest in Parliament before the 49 H. III notwithstanding what has been said to the contrary by some Learned Persons whom for their great Skill in our English Antiquitys I honor And with due Reverence to Them I shall since I am upon this Head beg Leave further to say That had such a Change hapned all at once in this Point of time which they have pitch'd upon some of our English Annals would to be sure have taken notice of it which yet I do not find that any One of them has done On the contrary several of them speak of the Parliaments preceding this in Terms that imply them to have been at least as Numerous For instance a Parliament in the 48. H. III. is thus describ'd by Matth. of Westminster Maxima cöadunatur Congregatio Londini Procerum caeterorum Praelatorum regni quanta non est visa longo tempore in Angliâ * P. 384. To this Parliament the Record printed by Mr. Petyt Miscell Parl. p. 41. referrs which contains a Form of Peace à Domino Rege Domino Edmundo Praelatis Proceribus Communitate totâ regni Angliae communiter concorditer approbata It was seald in Parliament de consensu voluntate praecepto domini Regis nec non Praelatorum Procerum ac etiam Communitatis tunc ibidem praesentium Rot. Parl. 48. H. III. pars unic m. 6. dors in Scaccario and of another in the same year he says Mâ—gnum celebratum est Parliamentum Londini †Ibid. the very word that is us'd of that in the 49 II. III. by the Annals of Waverley ⸪ P. 216. which Wykes passes over with this mention onely Convocatio non mimima Procerum Anglicorum †P. 65. This was I know a very busy and bloody Year and bred much business for the Pens of our Historians However no Passage in it could be more Considerable than this of the Enlargement of our Great Councils had it then newly hapned nor would have deserv'd better to be recorded When the Clause Premunientes was first inserted into the Bishop's Writ our Historys take notice of it ⸪ Knighton Annal Winton Chron. Abendon and so they would some of them at least of these New Writs for the Knights Citizens and Burgesses had they then first issued out 'T is true the same Objection lys against fixing the Date of this Change in any Year if it were necessary to fix it in any which I suppose it is not the Alteration being as I apprehend not made all at once by any sudden and Violent Shock in the Government but introduc'd leysurely and by easy degrees according as the Exigences of the Times and the Designs of the Partys thâ—n contending either for Empire or Liberty would allow of it the Barons favoring the growth of the Commons Interest in Parliament as promising themselves from thence an assistance toward making their stand against the Crown and the King hoping also by Their Means to be the better able to curb his Troublesome Barons And the steps by which their Parliamentary Interest grew to the full Heighth wherein we find it toward the Latter End of H. the III were such as These Sometimes the King wanted an Account of the Antient Customes and Usages of the Realm and directed Writs therefore to the Sheriffs to return a certain Number of Knights for every County to inform Him and his Great Council concerning them This was practis'd in the Conqueror's Reign †Chronic. Litchfeld apud Selden in Eadm p. 172. At other times when the People had layn under Great Oppressions and Grievances the Shires were order'd to send up each their Representatives who should lay the Particulars before the King and his Nobles Such a Summons went out in the 15 th Year of King Iohn * M. Par. p. 239. And the same Year also there was a more Generall General Call of Quatuor Discreti Milites de quolibet Comitatu ad loquendum nobiscum de Negotiis regni nostri †Cl. 15. Ioh. pt 2. m. 7. dors apud Seld. T. H. p. 587. without specifying the Particular Business about which they were summon'd Sometimes these Knights were together with the Sheriffs to appear in Parliament and account for their several Shires in relation to some Subsidys formerly granted the Collection of which they had been appointed to take care off (⸪) Cl. 4. H. 3. m. 5. dors sometimes they were call'd up in order to a Grant ad providendum as the Words of the Writt are ⸫ Cl. 38. H. 3. m. 7. 12. dors
unà cum Militibus aliorum Comitatuum quos ad eundem diem vocari fecimus quale Auxilium nobis in tantâ necessitate impendere voluerint They were to take their Instructions from a Country-Meeting where the Busyness of this Assembly was previously to be debated and the Result of those Debates was to be layd before the King and his Great Council by these special Messengers quos iidem Comitatus elegerint vice omnium singulorum eorundem By these and such steps of these the Commons recover'd their Priviledges which the Norman Conquest seems to have eclyps'd a little without extinguishing and not onely recover'd but enlarg'd 'em till they came at last about the End of H. the III. to that Height of Parliamentary Power and Interest which they now enjoy And by the like steps I question not the Lower Clergy rose allso bearing the Commons Company on all these Occasions as they remarkably did in the Last Instance produc'd where at the same time that Praecepts went out to the Sheriffs to return duos Legales Discretos Milites for every Shire Writs went out also to the Bishops to convene the Clergy of each Diocese and propose the Kings busyness to them and from that Diocesan Meeting to send up certain discreet Men by them Chosen who should attend at the same Time and Place and for the same Purposes that the Knights of Countys did †Pryn. Reg. Parl. Wr. Vol. 1. p. 4 5. It cannot therefore be said that the Commons were first call'd to Parliament in the 49 H. III but that they then or there abouts began to be Summon'd thither uninterruptedly and to grow a fixt and necessary part of the Meeting The Learned Advocate I know on the other side has doubted and Dr. W. therefore is very pardonable in doubting after him whether from the 49. H. III. to the 18 E. I. any Summons went out because the Writts are lost But this I think will bear no doubt for that Loss is as it happens pretty well supply'd by our Histories and I shall produce the Passages from thence that prove it The Parliament of the next Year which met after the E. of Leicester was slain and the King set at Liberty is just so spoken of as that in the 49 th Factum est Parliamentum Magnum Wintoniae * Ann Waverl p. 220. and so is that in 1266 at Kenilworth ⸪ Iibid. p. 224. and another in 1268 at Northampton (⸫) Ibid. p. 222. In which Year allso Wykes's words are that the King conven'd all the Praelates and Great Men nec non cunctarum Regni sui Civitatum Pariter Burgorum Potentiores-confluente pariter Plebeiae Multitudinis i. e. of the Commonalty of every County Turbâ non modicà †Chronic. p. 85. But more express are the words of the former Annalist in the 1. E. I. when he says Convenerunt Archiepiscopi Episcopi Comites Barones Abbates Priores de quolibet Comitatu Quatuor Milites de quâlibet Civitate Quatuor * Ann. Waverl p. 227. The â—ame words occurr allso into the Annalls of Worster apud A. S. Vol. 1. p. 499. and in Annales Monasterii Hidae extra Winton MS. Bibl. Bodl. 1891. 1274. The Assembly that met per Evocationem Regiam upon E. the I's Return into England was compos'd of Comitum Baronum Militum Copiosa Caterva besides the Representatives of the City of London caeterarum Civitatum Oppidorum totius regni * Wykes p. 187. to wit of such as sent Members to Parliament 1275. The Statute of Westminster was made by the Assent of Archbishops Bishops Abbats Priors Counts tout la Cominaltie de la Terre illonques summoneâ—s 1282. The King 's Writ to the Archbishop recites that he had begun the War with Lewellin de Consilio Praelatorum Procerum Magnatum regni nec non totius Communitatis ejusdem Dat. apud Rotholan Nov. 22. regni 11 * Registrum Peckam 1285. Circa festum S. Mich. rex convocari fecit apud Salopesbiriam Majores regni sui sapientiores tam de Civibus quà m de Magnatibus †Wykes p. 111. 1288. Convocatis Edicto publico regni magnatibus Episcopus Eli Regis Thesaurarius petiit Subsidium à Comitibus Baronibus imò generaliter ab Omnibus Incolis regni Which last words are apply'd to the Commons in the Writs †Writ of 23 E. I. summons ad tracâ—and cum Praelatis Proceribus aliis Incolis regni Dugd. Surm p. 10. and Historys * M. Westm. ad ann 1297. Exigendo pro hâc concessione ab Incolis octavum denarium Qui mox concessus est a Plebe in suâ tunc Camerâ circumstante p. 430. of those times This Collection of Authoritys is Material not onely as it affords us a proof that from the 49 H. III. to the 18. E. I. the Commons continued to be Summon'd but as it is a strong Presumption also that they were so summon'd before it For had they first been call'd when the King was under a Force and in the hands of Simon Momfort as soon as that Force had been remov'd and the King at Liberty such a Practise so ill begun would certainly have been discontinu'd whereas we find on the contrary that the Last Eight Years of H. the III. and the first Seventeen of E. the I. afford us frequent Instances of it And which deserves our Notice it then grew to be most frequently us'd and most unalterably fix'd when E. the I. one of the most Potent and Glorious Monarchs that ever sway'd the English Scepter was arriv'd at the utmost pitch of his Power and Grandeur So far is that Excellent Constitution of Parliaments we at present live under from owing its rise to the Weakness of our Princes and the Encroachments made by Rebellious Subjects upon their Royal Authority As for the Appeal made to our Records it has I presume no manner of weight for what wonder if in such times of War and Confusion all the Writs of Summons to the Commons before this Aera should be lost The same thing has hapned to the Writs for the Temporal Lords also none of which Elder than this date are preserv'd but I hope it follows not from hence that they were never before this Summon'd How Beaten a point soever this may be I could not forbear saying something to it as it fell in my way especially since it bears so near an allyance to the subject I am upon For it is certain as I have said often and shall once again repeat that the Parliamentary Interests and Priviledges of the Commons Spiritual and Temporal ran even allwayes or at least were never far a sunder and they do therefore when made out mutually prove each other And now having said so much in this case my self I may the more freely venture to shew the weakness of an Argument that has been lately offer'd
hastily thought for He was too Great and Good a Person to be employed in such Vile Offices No it was Iohn de Metingham a Clergyman who utter'd those words as the Annals of Worster expresly tell us †P. 520. a fit Instrument to be made use of in the Oppression of his Brethren For look through all our History and you shall find that wherever the Clergy have smarted under any Great Hardship some of their Own Order have been still at the bottom of it without whose Helping Hand the Rights and Priviledges of the Church never were and never would be invaded Thus much to take off the Aspersions with which Dr. W. has loaded the Clergy of those times very Indecently and Untruly Their Conduct I do not in every respect pretend to justify However I think it capable of a Fair Excuse if their Circumstances be consider'd And accordingly I observe that among all our Historians of Note Antient or Modern there is not One that I know of who has thoroughly taken the King's part in this Dispute none I dare say that has represented it so much to the Disadvantage of the Clergy as this Gentleman of the Function has done And yet several of these were Laymen particularly Daniel the most sensible of the Moderns calls the King 's Proceeding in this Case a strain of State beyond any of his Predecessors †P. 194. It was a Debt I ow'd to Truth to set this Story right and I would have done it had Iews or Heathens been the Subject of it Whatever the Popish Clergys faults were yet want of Love to their Country was none of 'em the true Interests of which they understood and espous'd generally and were ever fast Friends to the Libertys of it They were bad Christians but good Englishmen which is more than can be said for some of their Successors who with a Purer Religion have been worse Members of the Common-wealth than They. Their Dependence indeed on a Forreign Head misled 'em in Church affairs but against the Exactions and Usurpations even of the Pope himself in Civil Matters none declar'd more loudly or made a more vigorous stand than They. Matthew Paris is an Instance of this kind worth our notice who tho' of a Monastery that ow'd all its Immunities and Exemptions to the Pope yet takes the English side all along against Papal Encroachments and his Works therefore the best part of our History are a mere Satyr on the Court of Rome written indeed not in the mannerly way of later times but however with a Spirit of great Honesty and Freedom Disinterestedness a Love of Truth and a Generous Concern for the Publick shine through every Page of him Qualitys which it were well if some Modern Historians who have spent a great many Popular Invectives against Monks and Monkish Writings had been pleas'd to observe and imitate Their Works as well as Persons would then have been in much greater Esteem with the Age wherein they liv'd and have had a much surer Title to the Applause of Posterity If what I have said of the Popish Clergy be suspected any ways my Lord Coke will vouch for the Truth of it who with great Candor and Justice observes of that very Reign we are upon that Allbeit divers Judges of the Realm were Men of the Church as Briton Martin de Pateshull William de Raleigh Robert de Lexington Henry de Stanton and many others and that the Honourable the Officers of the Realm as Lord Chancellor Lord Treasurer Lord Privy Seal Master of the Rolls c. were in those days Men of the Church yet they ever had such honourable and true-hearted Courage as they suffer'd no Encroachment by any Forreign Power upon the Rights of the Crown or the Laws and Customs of the Realm †Vpon the Stat. of Westm. I. cap. 51. Among so many Excellent Persons what wonder is it if a false hearted Clergyman or two were found true neither to the Libertys of their Country nor the Interests of their Order Every Age and every Body of Men has had and will have its Iohn de Metingham's it is enough if the Age and the Body they were of has constantly abhorred them From what has been before related it appears that this Exclusion of the Clergy from Parliament so much talk'd of is as much misunderstood for in the first place That was really no Parliament from whence they were excluded but a Colloquium or Tractatus only as the Writ of Summons †Dugdale Summon p. 18. expresly calls it And the common Opinion that this hapned at the Parliament of St. Edmondsbury in crastino Animarum is a common mistake for the Clergy were certainly both summon'd thither ⸪ Dugd. p. 13. and present there throughout the whole Session †MS. Chron. Eccl. Cant. Eversden ante citat But they were not so in the Council of Sarum on St. Matthias's day to which it appears by our Rolls ⸫ Dugdale p. 19. that some particular Barons and Knights only were call'd but not one of the Clergy And here therefore Knighton ‖ Col. 2492. and Eversden * Rex Parliamentum suum apud Sarum cum Laïcis ad hoc tantùm vocatis in die cinerum tenuit positively fix the Exclusion and what they say the whole course of the Story manifestly confirms The Pretence for this Exclusion I suppose to have been the Clergys Outlawry and the seizure of their Temporaltys which was judg'd a sufficient reason for denying 'em their Writs of Summons And this also seems to have been the Ground of that famous Resolution of the Judges in Keilway's Reports †fol. 181. where it is affirm'd that the King might hold his Parliament without the Spiritual Lords i. e. when those Lords Spiritual are in the case of Outlaws and under a Premunire as they were when that Judgment was given and incapable therefore as Opinions then ran of their seats in Parliament But later Times and greater Authoritys have decided quite contrary it being upon several solemn Debates in the House of Commons 35. Eliz. resolv'd * See Sir Symonds d' Ewes Jour p. 518. that a Man under an Outlawry was capable of being elected a Member and what does not disable a single Person from being chosen into Parliament could be no sufficient reason for shutting the whole Spiritualty out of it who are One of the Greatest Estates of this Realm †1. Eliz. c. 1. All therefore that this celebrated Instance amounts to is that the King having put the Clergy under an Outlawry against Law and Reason held a select Council of the Laiety without them against all Rule and Custom And it must be remember'd that this was not only Excluso Clero but Excluso Populo too for neither had the Countys Citys and Burroughs any Representatives there and such an Instance can I am sure no ways prejudice the Parliamentary Interest of the Clergy To proceed
the rather produce them at length as Sir William Dugdale copied them from a Cotton-Manuscript * Otho A. 15. fol. 136. and from the Archbishop's Register †Raynold f. 76. because the Printed Statutes * See Rastal Vol. 1. p. 57. have given a different turn to them and made them utterly insignificant to the purposes for which I urge them In the 13 th Year of this Prince a Writ to the Archbishop †Cl. m. 20. dors thus speaks Cùm in Parliamento nostro ultimo apud Eborum summonito per vestrum caeterorumque Praelatorum Procerum regni Consilium Assensum c. X a Cleri in Provinciâ Eborum XVIII va bonorum mobilium Communitatis XII ma in Civitatibus Burgis Dominicis nostris nobis fuerint concessae †Registr Henr. Pri. fol. 211. Where we see the Clergy of that Province in which the Parliament was held are said to have granted in Parliament in like manner as the Knights Citizens and Burgesses did In a statute of the 25. E. III. * See it Rastall V. 1. p. 100. there is mention of a Dism Quindism granted by the Commons which is a clear proof of what I have before advanc'd (⸪) P. 59. that the Commons Spiritual come often times under that Appellation for the Dism here mention'd was given by the Spiritualty and the Quindism by the Temporalty as the Nature of the Grants speaks and Knighton expresly informs us ‖ Col. 2603 And this Language meets us frequently in the Rolls for again 50. E. III. n. 168. The Commons of Tividal as well Religious as Saecular Prayen * Abr. of Rec. p. 137. I have not the Transcript of the Roll by me but as I remember the French word there is Liges Gens and in the same Parliament n. 162. The Commons of the Diocese of York complain of the Outragious taking of the Bishop and his Clerks for admission of Priests to their Benefices †Ibid p. 136. by which as I conceive the Commons Spiritual are most naturally understood In the same Year a Constitution of Simon Islep is said to be made de consilio consensu Fratrum nostrorum in Parliamento praesentium Procuratorum absentium ⸫ Spelm. Conc. Vol. 2. p. 598. This Decree we must believe pass'd in Convocation and that Meeting therefore was then esteem'd Parliamentary for why else should the Bishops when acting in their Convocational capacity be spoken of as present in Parliament And here also I must take notice of a Passage in that Antient Piece Modus tenendi Parliamentum I call it Antient because Mr. Selden himself who first discover'd it not to be of the Age it pretends says he saw a Copy of it in an Hand of E. the III. And indeed younger than that it cannot well be for it would not then have been enter'd as part of it is in Arundel's Register for a piece of real Antiquity without any suspicion of its Forgery And it may therefore safely be produc'd as a General Evidence of the Practise in E. the III's time at least of the Opinion which Men then had of the Lower Clergys Parliamentary Rights and Interests in Elder Ages The Passages in it which concern us are Ad Parliamentum summoneri venire debent ratione Tenurae suae omnes singuli Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates Priores alii Majores Cleri qui tenent per Comitatum vel Baroniam ratione hujusmodi tenurae nulli Minores nisi eorum praesentia adventus aliunde quam pro Tenuris suis requiratur ut si sint de Consilio Regis c. †The Copy that Mr. Selden Tit. Hon. part 2. c. 5. and that which my Lord Coke Inst. part 4. p. 4.47 us'd differ'd some what from this and from each other but those differences are not material Item Rex facere solebaâ— summonitiones suas Archiepiscopis Episcopis aliis Exemptis Personis ut Abbatibus Prioribus Decanis aliis Ecclesiasticis Personis quae habent Iurisdictiones per hujusmodi Exemptiones Privilegia separatim quod ipsi pro quolibet Decanatu Archidiaconatu Angliae per ipsos Decanatus Archidiaconatus eligi sacerent duos peritos idoneos Prâ—curatores de proprio Archidiaconatu ad veniendum interessendum ad Parliamentum ad illud subeundum allegandum faciendum idem quod facerent omnes singulae personae ipsorum Decana tuum Archidiaconatuum si ibidem personaliter interessent Et quod hujusmodi Procuratores veniant cum Warantis suis duplicatis sigillis superiorum suorum signatis quod ipsi ad hujusmodi Procurationem Clerici missi sunt Quarum Literarum una liberabitur Clericis de Parliamente ad irrotulandum alia residebit penes ipsos Procuratores Et sic sub istis duobus generibus summonâ—ri debet Totus Clerus ad Parliamentum * Dacher Spicileg T. 12. p. 557. I know very well that this Account in the Modus is not suited to the exact manner of the Clergys Summons to any Parliament the Records of which are left us and therefore I produce it only as a General Proof that the Lower Clergy were some way or other call'd to Parliament and were understood to have been so call'd for some Ages at the time that this Modus was fram'd My Lord Coke †Ibid. from the first Lines of what I have cited endeavours to lâ—ssen and bring down the Parliament-Rights of the Lower Clergy but without considering that the same words are afterwards us'd also of the Lay Commons 2. R. II. In the Register of Selby †Bibl. Cott. Cleop. D. 3. f. â—â— the King's Letter to the Abbat of that Monastery takes notice that divers reasons had been shew'd in Parliament why the payment of the Disms and Quindisms granted in the said Parliament by the Clergy and Laiety of the Kingdom †Les dismes quindismes à nos grantez au diâ— Parliament per le Clergie per lez Lays de nostre Royaume should be anticipated and that accordingly the Archbishop of Cant. with the other Prelates and Clergy of his Province had agreed to it as also the Archbishop of York and those Prelates †No mention of the Lower Clergy of York Provâ—nâ—e because They at that time were not present but holding a Convocation at Home together with all the Prelates of thâ—â— Province who were not Barons of Parliament of his Province who were present But that some of the Clergy of that Province delay'd payment as the King understood at which he much marvelled and was highly displeas'd * Encontre ce que feuâ—â— acordez a nostre dit Parlement dont nous avons grande merveil dâ—spâ—eser Et sur â—eo escrivonâ— a dit l'ercevelque de Everwyâ—k empriant requirant que consideres les choses susâ—ites coment la Province 〈◊〉 Everwick à condiz
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
it shall be forthcoming The IV th and V th are barely Copys of the Submission-Act and of K. Charles Commission to the Convocation in 1640 in which there was no room for Ignorance to shew it self and therefore the Mistakes he has there made must be willful ones And willful ones therefore he has made giving us such deceitful Transcripts †As I have shewn p. 85. in the Margin and p. 96. of Both these Records as omit some of the most Material Parts of them In short then among these several Vouchers which Dr. W. has brought to credit his Work there is not one that does not some way or other blemish it and betray in him a manifest want of Skill at least if not of a much better Quality And the whole Appendix therefore is throughout of a Piece with it self and with the Book it belongs to Here his Mistakes lay collected to our Hand but there are many more to the same purpose scatter'd through his Book which should be brought together and represented in One View to the Reader I am weary and hastning to Close however I shall give him a sight of some few of them We have seen already how the Dr. out of his Especial Grace and Mere Motion has Summon'd the Praecentors of Cathedral Churches to Convocation which was very Obliging to Them but not very kind to the Priors whom he left out to make room for them He is as Liberal of his Favors to the Lower Clergy too for he tells us that the Convocation-Writ calls two of every Archdeaconry to the Synod P. 104. and the Clause Premunientes as many out of every Archdeaconry to Parliament †P. 150. His Own Writs in the Appendix if he had read them would have prevented this mistake and have told him what one would think a man should scarce need being told that there come but two Proctors from the Clergy of any One Diocese for Instance that of London though there happen to be never so many Archdeaconrys in it The Archdeaconrys indeed choose two a Piece but out of Them a New Choyce is made of two to represent the whole Diocese The only thing that can keep Dr. W. in countenance is that a certain Brother-Writer of his a Member of Convocation knows as little of these things as He does For his account of the Bishops Writ is that it commanded Them to attend accompany'd with the Priors Archdeacons and Proctors of the Clergy †Nicolson Hist. Lib. Vol. 3. p. 66. as if the Premunites had Summon'd all the Priors and no Deans But how can we expect a true account of Writs from Him who gives us so false an one of the Books which they are contain'd in For concerning Dugdale's Summons thus in the same Page he instructs us that it is a perfect Copy of all Summons of the Nobility c. from the 49 H. III. to the present times and therein also he says we shall find the like Mandates for the Clergy and Commons †Nicolson Hist. Lib. Vol. 3. p. 66. Which shews evidently that he never saw the Book for there are but Two Writs in it for the Commons and not One for the Clergy properly so call'd that is for the whole Body of them But I remember his Words of Bale such another Rash and Rude Writer who had misjudg'd of a certain Piece The Character might be true say he for any thing perhaps that He knew but 't is that Writers way to give accounts of Men and their Labors at random ‖ Vol. 1. p. 177. Words which had Mr. Nicholson carry'd in his Eye throughout the Course of his Work it would have been much shorter and much better than it is at present the Three Parts of his Historical Library would have shrunk into one had he confined himself to say nothing of Books but what he knew of them And this I assure him is a Character not given at Random But not to loose sight of our Principal Author Dr. W's Nicety and Exactness in this part of knowledge appears again in his account of the Persons of which the Lay part of the Parliament was antiently compos'd for he tells us that in the 6 E. III. the Dukes and Barons went aside to consult †P. 219. whereas it is famously known that there was no Duke in England till the 11 th of E. III. when the Black Prince was first made Duke of Cornwall How he came to quote the Abridgment of Records †P. 11. for this mistake I cannot divine where there is not a word of Dukes mention'd any more than there is of that Parliaments being call'd for the Affairs of Scotland for which also Dr. W. very gravely vouches it In Elsyng ⸪ P. 99. indeed these Two Mistakes are to be found but I suppose they were none of His but his Printers And had Dr. W. consulted the Abridgment as he pretends he would have known so too and have drop'd this learned Remark about Dukes and the Affairs of Scotland If we ask this Knowing Gentleman what the Inferior Clergy are Summon'd to Parliament for and impower'd by their Writ to do he will tell us that the Parliament-Writ Summons them to come to Parliament there to Treat with the King c. The Convocation-Writ calls them to Consult only among themselves * P. 229. Whereas again his Own Appendix faulty as it is would have truly taught him that the Parliament-Writ as it now stands summons the Inferior Clergy ad consentiendum not ad tractandum and the Convocation-Writ ad tractandum consentiendum concludendum not to consult only The Last of these does expresly summon them â—o Treat and yet he says it does not the First does not and yet he tells us it does After this Wild Account of the Writs to the Clergy we are not to wonder if he mistakes as much in those to the Commons the Impowring Words of which he assure us were about the 26 E. III. thus alter'd ad tractandum Consulendum Faciendum and ran so on to the 46 th of the same King when they were again worded ad faciendum consulendum and so have continu'd to this day †P. 213. Every particular of which account is false for the Writ to the Commons 26 E. III. ran ad tractand consulend consentiend * Pryn. P. W. V. 2. pp. 92 94. and so it did several Years before this viz. in the 21 E. III. †Ibid. 95. And between the 26 and 46 E. III. the Phrase frequently varied for in the 36 th it was ad consentiendum only ⸪ Ib. p. 107. and so on the 44 th ⸫ Ib. p. 102. when it chang'd into ad consulend consentiend ‖ Ib. p. 106. And in the 46 th it ran ad faciend consentiend not consulend (a) Ib. p. 113 And thus indeed it has for the most part continu'd to this day However not always
for as low as the 7 th of R. II. it call'd them ad consentiendum only (b) Ib. p. 117. I defy any Man to make more Mistakes in so few Words as Dr. W. has done One or Two of them I find he has with Great Industry pick'd out of the Grand Question (c) P. 156. but where he got all the rest I cannot imagin P. 104. He makes it a doubt whether the setled number of the Inferior Clergy call'd by the Bishops Writ was deriv'd from thence into the Convocation-Writ or from the Convocation-Writs into those of Parliament which is in effect to doubt whether the Deans Archdeacons Capitular and Rural Proctors were call'd to Convocation before the Bishops Writ had that Clause in it And he who doubts of this puts it beyond a Doubt how far He is qualify'd to write on this subject The 49 th of H. the III. is not more famous for sheathing the Old Barons Swords than for Exercising the Pens of our Modern Writers Much has been said of it in relation to the Parliamentary Interest of the Commons Temporal Dr. W. seems to make it the Aera of that of the Commons Spiritual too for thus he speaks of it Whereas before the 49 th of H. III. only the Bishops and Abbots who held of the King by their Baronys were wont to be summon'd to Parliament in that Year when the Commons began to be call'd several of the Inferior Clergy were also call'd together with them and that for ought appears in a larger Proportion than the Laity themselves were †P. 209. Here are two Assertions in the last of which he is kinder to his Function than will consist with Truth and in the First not so just as he ought to be For long before the 49 th of H. III. not Bishops and Abbots only but I hope some Priors too were call'd to Parliament We will suppose him to have comprehended These under Abbats yet even thus his account is very defective For not those Abbats and Barons only who held by Barony were call'd but many more than these and oftentimes the whole Order The first Parliamentary Summons left †6. Ioh. calls all the Abbats and Priors of the Diocese together with the Bishop of it and the Priores Installati plenum sub se Conventum habentes are I have shewn already several times mention'd by Paris as having a General Call to Parliament Who speaks also not seldom of the Decani Archidiaconi †And so Annals of Burton See Pp. 301 302. of this Book aliae Ecclesiasticae Personae as present Dr. W. who would be thought to know All our Historians so intimately should methinks have had some sort of acquaintance with the best of them M. Paris at least he should not till he had read him have ventur'd to determin any thing concerning the Constituent Members of the Great Councils in H. the III's time of which we have no where so just an account as in that accurate Writer But he makes his Order amends in what follows for in the 49 th H. III. it seems when the Commons began to be call'd several of the Inferior Clergy were also call'd together with them and that for ought appears in a Larger Proportion than the Laity themselves were Were they so How came then our Historys and Records not to have mention'd it From none of which can it be certainly learnt that there were any of the Clergy call'd to this Meeting below Abbats and Priors but five Deans only It may be many of Inferior Rank might be summon'd too but if they were 't is more than can be prov'd for there is not I believe the least Hint of such a Summons remaining sure we are that they could not be call'd up in the same way that was afterwards practis'd for the Bishops Writ of that Year is on record and has no Warning Clause in it But it may be the Abbats Priors and Deans that held not by Barony are Dr. W.'s Inferior Clergy let them be so their Number in this Instance did not amount to above Eighty whereas the Knights Citizens Burgesses and Barons of the Cinque Ports must have been four or five times that Number Whence he drew this Piece of History therefore I cannot divine The Learned Person †Dr. Brady I am sure whom he vouches for it in his Margin has not a Letter this way in the Pages cited but he thought the Reverence Men had for the Character of that most Knowing Antiquary would have made them take every thing implicitly for Truth to which his Name was set and have prevented all further Enquirys In what Place the Clergy call'd to Parliament met Dr. W. professes himself not to have found * P. 221. but he thinks it not improbable that it may have been at St. Pauls because their Other Convocations were usually held there * P. 221. But I think it very improbable that while they were strictly speaking a Member of Parliament they should meet so far from the Place where it open'd and sat as improbable as that the Commons should have met at the same Distance from the Lords Westminster Abby was somewhat nearer and more convenient and if the Commons had the Use of the Chapter House there we may reasonably believe that the Clergy too were accommodated with some Other Room in that Monastery as indeed they antiently were for sometimes we hear of them in the Capella Monachorum infirmorum (a) Hoveden ad ann 1194. p. 735. In Concâ—lio Northampt vide Benedict Abb. Apud Cotton Reliq p. 212. which is call'd also Capella S ta Catharinae (b) Diceto inter X Scriptores c. 589. and sometimes in the Capella S ti Iohannis Evangelistae (c) M. Par. ad ann 1244. p. 640. when the Parliament we find was open'd and all the States of it came together in Refectorio Monachorum (d) M. Par. ibid. and continu'd so to do for at least Fifty Years afterwards for Math. of Westminsters Relation in 1294 implys that that was Then the place where the Spiritual and Lay part of the Parliament met one another (e) Congregatis in Refectorio Monachorum Westm. Surgens unus Miles Ioannes de Havering dictus in medio eorum dicebat Viri Venerabiles c. p. 422. Upon the Division of the Two Houses the Commons sat in the Chapter-house of the Abbat of Westminster Dr. W. observes that this is mention'd in the Abridgment of Records 50 E. III and might have observ'd how it is mention'd there as the accustom'd or rather as the Roll it self speaks the Antient * Aunciene place Place of their assembling which implys them to have sat there probably from the time of their Separation Not many Years after this they seem to have exchang'd this Place with the Clergy and to have sat themselves in the Refectory of the same Abby for in the 9 H. V. the
Chapterhouse appears to have been the Place of Reception for the Convocation Clergy * See Wals. Hist. Angl. ad ann 1421. and in the 4 H. V. the Rolls say Le Chanceleur per commandment du Roy assigna a les ditz Chivalers Citizeins Burgeoises une Maison appellee le Froitour dedeinz L'abbee de Westminster a tenir en yâ—elle leur Counseilles Assemblees and in the 6 H. VI. it is said to be the place where the Commons ordinarily sat ‖ The Roll goes further and says Eorum Domus Communis antiquitùs usitata in a Manuscript of Mr. Petyt printed by Bishop Burnet †Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. Coll. of Rec. p. 100. But though the Place of their Meeting puzzles him yet the Time it seems does not for as to That he informs us that the Clergy who met by vertue of the Convocation-Writ in Parliament time came together heretofore on some Other Day than that on which the Parliament began †P. 224. He knows not it seems that they have done so a late too and that the Custom for an Age and half was for them to assemble the Day after the Parliament This Usage began in the time of H. the VIII th and was then often practis'd but not regularly fix'd till toward the latter End of his Reign from which time to the late Revolution it held and from thence the Parliament and Convocation-Writs have Summon'd to the very same day which has joyn'd these two Bodys yet more closely than formerly in their Summons though their Assemblys at the same time are more than ever divided My Lord of Sarum therefore had not well consider'd this matter when he said that it was the Custom of all H. the VIII's Reign for the Convocation to meet two or three days after the Parliament †Vol. 1. p. 213. For besides that it sometimes met before it for instance in 1511 2. the Convocation came together Feb. 2. * Registr Hadr. de Castello the Parliament not till Feb. 4. †Dâ—gd Summ. 3 H. 8 th the very Instance upon which his Lordship produces this Observation destroys it for the Convocation of 1536. began Iune 9 th the Parliament Iune the 8 th And indeed near half the Convocations in that Princes time met as they did till the present Reign nicely the day after the Parliament as will appear by particularly comparing the Dates of both of them Parliament Met 1514 5 Feb. 5. Dugd. Sum. 1515 Nov. 12. Ibid. 1536 Iune 8. Ibid. 1540 Apr. 12. Bp. Burnet V. 1. p. 274. 1544 5 Ian. 30. Dugd. 1545 Nov. 23. Ibid. 1546 7 Ian. 14. Ibid. Convocation Met Feb. 6. Registr Warham Nov. 13. Registr Hadr. de Cast. Iune 9. Ibid. Apr. 13. Registr Cranmer Ian. 31. Ibid. Nov. 24. Ibid. Ian. 15. Ibid. And the same Distance of Time was often also observ'd both in Proroguing and Dissolving that Princes Convocations and Parliaments As to the Authority by which the Clergy were conven'd Dr. W. affords us as little light in That Point too as in any of the former He recites the Opinion of some who think that after the statute of Premunire in 1393. our Archbishops left off to summon Convocations by their Own Authority and call'd them only at the King's Command †Pp. 240 241. but in this account he says he is not altogether satisfied Had he any manner of Knowledge of these things he would not be at all satisfy'd with it For as in Fact it is certain that the Archbishop after this time summon'd Convocations frequently by his Own Authority so it is clear in point of Law that he had as much Right to do it after the Statute of Premunire as before it there being no Clause or Word in that Act that can be suppos'd to restrain His Power in this particular Indeed had the Archbishop whenever he call'd a Convocation without the King 's Writ done it by a Legatin Authority as Dr. W. represents him to have done * P. 241 199. there would have been some Ground to think that the Premunire Act might have laid a Restraint upon him But this is another of Dr. W's mistakes for the Archbishop needed no Help from his Legatin Character to convene the Clergy of his Province which he was sufficiently impower'd to do as Metropolitan by the Old Canons of the Church receiv'd and allow'd in this Kingdom And accordingly by this Metropolitical Power the Archbishops all along call'd Provincial Councils before any of them were the Popes Legates which from St. Austin down to Theobald say some * Ant. Brit. p. 127. to William de Corboyl say others †Gervasii Act Pont Cant. X Script col 1663. none of them were He indeed by vertue of his New Character summon'd the Archbishop of York and all the Clergy of that Province ⸪ Ibid. Continuator Florentii Wig. ad ann 1127. to his Councils and One of his Successors ‖ Hubert who is suppos'd by some to have got the Title of Legatus natus for ever annex'd to his See did Iure Legationis visit York Province †Hoveden ad ann 1195. And in order to these Extraprovincial Acts of Jurisdiction the Legatine Authority was indeed needful For tho' it had been solemnly determin'd in favour of Lanfrank by the Great Council of the Kingdom ⸫ Diceto de Archi. Cant. p. 685. that the See of York should be subject to that of Cant. and the Archbishop of the One obey the Conciliary summons of the other yet was not this Decision long observ'd the Archbishop of York soon finding means to get rid of it and to assert the Independency of his See But as to the Ordinary Acts of Metropolitical Power One of which was the calling of the Clergy of his Province together at Times prescrib'd by the Canons the Archbishop had no more want of a Legatine Character to qualify him for the Exercise of them than a Private Bishop had or now has for summoning a Diocesan Synod nor was it as the Law then stood any more an Encroachment upon the Royal Authority Dr. W. therefore is not very kind to the Memory of our Archbishops nor a Friend to the Antient Libertys of this Church when he asserts that all those Synods which the Metropolitan call'd without a Writ from the King were Legatine and upon that notion dates the Disuse of them at least as to their frequency from the Statute of Premunire which did no ways and could no ways affect them For after this Statute most of Arundel's Synods met by the Archbishop's Writ only as Dr. W. †P. 280. himself tells us from Harpsfield and might have told us yet more authentickly from that Archbishop's Register yet remaining This account of Harpsfield puts him upon fixing on a New Aera and now therefore he will have it that about the End of Arundel's time the King began wholly to assume this Power and this he
of a setled Prolocutor is not I think to be found in the Registers till sometime afterwards Though the Mere silence of such imperfect and scanty Records is by no means sufficient to establish a Negative all the Notices we now have of this kind being short Entrys only made by the Archbishops Registrary who was no more careful to record what related to the Honor or Priviledges of the Inferior Clergy than the Clark of Parliament appears antiently to have been in relation to the Commons For in those Days neither the Lower House of Convocation nor Parliament kept distinct Acts of their own and when the Clergy first began to do it we know not certainly though from the Acts of the Convocation 1 o. E. VI. †In the Book call'd Synodalia it appears that they then had a Separate Actuary which is as high as we have any Iournals for the Commons * Though Mr. Nicolson Vol. 3. p. 51. tells us of a Iournal of theirs throughout H. the VIII Reign now in the Cotton Library such a Iournal is I dare say in no other Library but his Own Historical one to be found where there is indeed a Great Collection of such kind of Curiositys though 6 to Hci 8 vi the Book of the Clerk of Parliament appointed or to be appointed for the Common House be in a statute †C. 16. of that Year mention'd After the Separation of the two Houses of Convocation was fix'd we scarce ever find them Treating and Resolving together in Body upon any Occasion But if any thing hapned that requir'd Joynt-Counsels their way was to transact it in a Committee of both Houses wherein the Number of the Inferior Clergy exceeded that of the Greater Prelates For instance a Grand Committee in 1408. Ian. 25. ‖ Registr Arundel consisted of six Bishops twelve Abbots and Priors and of twenty four from the Lower House i. e. I suppose of six from the four Ranks or Degrees of Clergy which compos'd it Deans Archdeacons Proctors of Chapters and Dioceses The Resolutions of the Lower House were communicated to the Upper by their Prolocutor attended with some of their Members More or Less as the Importance of the Message seem'd to require and sometimes for instance when they presented their Subsidys or Grievances which they generally did together the whole House came up with them And whatever they had to offer in Writing or by Word of Mouth they did it standing always the Prelates in the mean time being Seated Most of the Business of Convocation took its Rise from the Lower House there regularly Taxes were first agreed on there Articles of Reformation where drawn in preparing which as they had a nearer Interest so had they more Leisure for it than those of the Upper House who were call'd upon often to attend the Parliament and were forc'd to adjourn often for that reason the Inferior Clergy continuing to sit all that while and do Business †Die Lunae praesens Archiepiscopus propter Parliamenti Negotia venerabilibus Fratribus sibi assidentibus prorogavit ad diem Veneris demandavit aliis Praelatis Clero quòd singulis diebus interim ad dictum locum convenirent laboratent circa reformanda Articulos conciperent-Registr Arundel in Conv. 10. Maii 1406. And when they adjourn'd it was sometimes their Own Act but oftner at the Command of the Archbishop This Power belong'd to him acourse when the Two Houses were united and he preserved it after they were separated I have added these Particulars that I might not barely trace Dr. W's Mistakes which is too Dry and too Humble a Task but might with all make my Proofs of his Ignorance as instructive as I could to the Reader Whether the Clergy call'd to Parliament by the Premunientes consulted with the Laiety or by Themselves is a Point that the Dr. has left doubtful But the Great Record in Ryleys Placita †See part of it App. Numb XII will I judge go a good way towards clearing it For as we may be pretty certain from thence that the Clergy made their appearance in Parliament upon the first Opening it for why else should their Proxys be all Register'd in the Records of that Meeting so have we good Ground also to believe from thence that they divided afterwards and consulted by themselves since their Proxys are entred not promiscuously but apart from those of the Laiety The Bishop of Winton therefore we may observe sends up the Archdeacon of Surry as his Proxy and yet tha◠Archdeacon makes a Proctor for Himself which he needed not to have done had the Clergy and Laiety sat all in one House as the common Opinion supposes them Now to have done for then this Archdeacon might have Voted in a double Capacity But if the Clergy sat a part from the Laiety it was necessary for the Archdeacon when he appear'd for his Bishop among the Barons to make a Proxy for himself among the Clergy Besides I find the Bishops and Abbats do not give Procuratorial Letters exactly to the same Persons †Thus in the Diocese of St. Asaph the Chapters Dean Archdeacon and Clergy of the Diocese send the very same Proctors but the Bishops different ones And when the Bishop of Hereford commissioned one Lugwardin who was sent up also by the Archdeacons of Hereford and Salop the Chapter of Hereford and the Clergy of the Diocese he joyn'd another with him who might be his separate Proxy upon occasion The only Exception to this that I have observ'd in the List of Proxys is That the Chapter and Bishop of Exon return the very same But he might perhaps be if the Transcript of the Record be exact here the Chapters Proxy and the Bishops Messenger only who brought his Letters of General Ratihabition without any Power of Voting for him in particular cases For this Method I find was practis'd at that Meeting v. g. Abbas de Cumbâ non misit Procuratorem set promittit per Literas suas Patentes se ratum gratum habiturum quicquid indicto Parliamento Rex decreverit salubriter ordinandum The Reader who has consider'd Dr. W's Book finds that the Spirit of this Implicit Abbat did not die with him but has descended upon One who makes the same offer with less Wariness and puts not in so much as a Salubriter to guard his Submissive Doctrine as are impower'd by any of the Inferior Clergy but if one or two of them be the same they add a Second or Third that is different which I take not to have been Casual but with Design that so He who was Proxy for the Bishop alone might separate from the Rest and act for him among the Laiety while the Others Voted for him among the Clergy Which I apprehend also to be what chiefly gave birth to the Custom of the Clergys sending more Proctors than One both to the Convocation and Parliament by the Clause
†When this began I know not for many Years after the Commons were Summoned as they are now I find the Community of Wales appearing in Parliament as those of Scotland sometimes did by a certain Number return'd for the Whole so their several Dioceses were to appear by a single Proctor ‖ So I gather from the Usage of those Assemblies which were purely Ecclesiastical To one of which An. 1302. the English Clergy were Summoned by Two and the Welch by One Proctor apiece Registr Winchelâ—ey fol. 147. And beside all these the Archdeacons (*) M. Par. ad Ann. 1247. p. 719. and Deans (†) Idem p. 240. ad 15. Joh. having been long before called to the Great Councils of the Realm were not omitted now but comprised in the same Writ of Summons Nor were their Numbers only in some measure proportionable but the Powers also with which they came Originally the very same so that their first Writs of Summons ran equally ad Tractandum Ordinandum Faciendum * 22. E. 1. in Registro Henr. Prioris 23. E. 1. apud Dugdal Summon and when the one Summoned ad Ordinandum only †Registr Hen. Pr. Fol. 69. Dugd. Summ. p. 13. or ad Faciendum Consentiendum ‖ 17. E. 2. Dugd. p. 92. Pryn. Reg. Parl. Wr. Vol. 2. p. 77. 5 E. 3. Dugd. p. 163. Pryn. Ibid. p. 86 c. so did the other The Minute Alterations of these Forms taking place in both Writs at once in various Instances and the Procuratoria which were fram'd upon those Writs for the Lower Clergy answering almost in Terms the Returns that were made for the ⸪ Pryn R. P. W. 4. Vol. p. 436. Laity To omit other Correspondencies which might be observed if these were not sufficient to shew That the Clergy brought to Parliament by the Premunientes were to all intents and purposes what they were long afterwards in the Rolls of Parliament called The Commons Spiritual of the Realm This Clause how much soever to the real Interest and Advantage of the Lower Clergy was yet thought a Burthen by them and an inroad upon their Priviledges and they tried all ways therefore of withstanding or declining it but in vain for the Genius of that mighty Monarch who was not us'd to be baffled in any Attempt carried it against all their Opposition And the Ground he had thus gained upon them he kept throughout all his Reign as appears by the Records of the last Parliament but the First whose Proxy Roll is preserved which Ryley has Printed at lâ—â—gth in his Placita Parliamentaria * P. 321. There the Proxy's are enter'd of every Bishop Abbot Prior Dean and Archdeacon that did not Personally appear in Parliament as also of the Clergy of every Chapter and Diocese But a weak Prince and a disorderly Government succeeding they laid hold of that favourable Opportunity to resume their pretences to Exemption The wise Maxim was now forgotten by which they governed themselves and made their stand against the Pope in Henry the Third's Reign Regnum Sacerdotium nullatenùs sint divisa †An. Burt. P. 307. A Maxim that never hurt the Clergy when they stuck to it as it has never prosper'd with them when they departed from it nor I believe ever will They liked not the Premunientes at first and the severe Taxes they had smarted under ever since it went out made them like it still worse and had quite alter'd their Mind and their Measures So that now they thought their Interest and Safety lay in Uniting as closely with the Pope and Dividing as far as they could from the Laity The Archbishop no doubt favouring this Opinion with a prospect of sharing the Pope's Power over them and under the Pretence that it would be more for the Honour of him and his Clergy to be still by Themselves in Two Assemblies of Convocation answerable in some proportion to the Two Houses of Parliament according to Bishop Ravis's just and impartial ‖ In his Reasons for a Reunion presented to Q. Eliz. Hist. Ref. Part 2. Coll. of Records n. 18. Observation The Separation therefore was resolved on attempted in Edward the First 's advanc'd very far in Edward the Second's and fully settled in Edward the Third's Reign Even under the former of these Princes though the Clergy obeyed the Parliamentary Summons duly yet were they backward to answer the Ends of it unless they might do it in their own Manner and therefore referred themselves more than once to a Fuller Assembly of the Province to be gathered by the Archbishop where they knew they should be join'd by All the Religious and by Their help be enabled either better to put off the Burthen that might be laid upon them or better to bear it His easy Successor was prevailed with yet further to mix Authorities and to take the Archbishop's Power along with him in Convening them so that under him the way was often when the Bishop's Writ with the Clause Premunientes went out to send Two other Writs to the Two Metropolitans directing them to cite Those and Those Only of their Province by a general Mandate which were Summon'd severally by the Bishops Writs But because this though a great Condescention of the Crown was still an Hardship upon the Archbishop out of whose Province the Parliament was held who could not regularly bring his Subjects to any place not within his Jurisdiction and because it was known to be more agreeable to the Rules of the Church and found to be more conducive to the Peace of the State * In respect to the Controversy about the Supreme Bearing of the Archiepiscopal Crosses which never rag'd so high as when the Archbishops met one another at the Head of the Clergy of their Provinces that the Clergy of each Province should Assemble apart therefore this Accommodation afterwards took place That the Premunientes should still Summon them from the King to meet Parliamentarily but that sufficient Obedience should be understood to be paid to it if the Clergy met Provincially though not at the same Place yet about the same Time and to the same Purpose to be ready to hear what should be Proposed from the King to give their Advice when ask'd and their Consent when requisite to offer their Aids and their Petitions and in short to answer the necessary Affairs of the King and Kingdom Not that the Clause Premunientes now grew useless and insignificant for still the Bishop who executed the Royal Writs upon the Clergy of the Diocese as the Sheriff did upon the Laity of the County when he received his Summons to Parliament transmitted it to those of the Lower Clergy concern'd and they still made their returns to it Such of them as were not to Attend in Person formally Impowering their Proctors to Appear and Consent for them in Parliament according to the Tenor of the Bishops Writ though those Proctors
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