per Sphere. So that should there be never fo much occafion for Synodical business, the Clergy can have no legal Method according to

our

Laws of acquainting the Crown with it, in order to defire leave to confider and debate of it. And if they attempt to meet and act without fuch leave, notwithstanding their Divine Right to Synodical Affemblies, they incur a Pramunire. It is true, if there be fuch occafion for the meeting of a Synod to do bufinefs, the Metropolitan may acquaint the Prince with it by himself alone, or perhaps in the Company of two or three other Bishops: But fure fuch Application might be made with much better effect if all the Bishops and Inferior Clergy of the Province joyned in it with the Metropolitan at the Head of them. For it might be more eafiy to obtain a Licence for a Synod already met and fitting and acting within their Sphere, than first to obtain leave to call the Clergy together, and to procure a Licence afterwards: Two Petitions are not fo eafily gained as one may be. Besides the Metropolitan (who has always fo much business of State under his Confideration that he cannot employ all his Thoughts on the Affairs of the Church) may not be himself so fenfible of the neceflity there may be for a Synod to act in Regulating the Church till he has confulted with his Suffragans and Clergy upon the Matter. Wherefore the denying the Clergy any Right to meet or to be put into a Capacity fo much as to confult and deliberate whether there be any Ecclefiaftical Matter that seems to require the care of the Synod, that fo they may Petition for a Licence to proceed upon it, plainly tends to the utter overthrow of all

Synodical

Synodical Meetings: At least it tends to overthrow the best Method for preferving them. And it is a Mystery to me, that fo much pains fhould have been taken by several Eminent Members of the Church, Men of eminent Station, and remarkable for their Zeal to the Constitution to have it thought, that our Convocations are only occafional Affemblies, which the Church can very feldom have any need of: That there is no need of them at this time, and that, fhould they be allowed the Liberty they defire, it would neither do them nor the Church any good. And indeed effectual care has been taken of late to render our Convocations uncapable of doing any thing for the benefit of the Church, (even when they had been permitted to fit) by raifing fome unreasonable Difputes between the Two Houses. As whether the Lower-House may fit when the Upper one does not ? or whether the lower Clergy may in all Cafes diffent from the upper without giving a Reafon for it? Which two Privileges if they are taken from the Lower Clergy, their Intereft in Synod is worth nothing. It is plain they had a Right to fuch intermediate Meetings when the Two Houses fat together. For when the Lower Clergy were commanded to go afide and Confult among themselves, and bring up their Refolutions at the next Seffions two or three Days after, it is manifeft that they must meet and adjourn themselves during this intermediate time, or else they could come to no Refolutions. Now what is the forming them into a diftinct Haufe, but the bidding them go and confult by themfelves? And the Schedule which the Archbishop fends down fignifies to them that the Convocation being Prorogued

and

and continued their Lordships cannot receive their Refolutions and act Synodically with them till the time prefix'd in the Schedule, and then their attendance is expected, and if they have any thing to offer it may be received: But as to the intermediate time it plainly leaves them at liberty to do as they please. For if this Schedule of Prorogation did not take away the Right of the Lower Clergy to meet and confult together in the Interval of the Seffions of the whole Convocation, whilst they all fat in one Houfe, I cannot conceive how it should deprive them of that Right now they fit in Two Houfes. All that can be faid is, they did not meet fo but when the Prefident ordered them to go and Confult by themfelves: But is not the forming them into a diftinct House a general Command for them to confult together by themselves? Therefore whilft they continue a diftin&t House they lye under this general Command, and must have the fame Liberty to meet and adjourn themfelves at intermediate times as they had when they were only occafionally fent to confult apart. And indeed if after they are formed into a separate House they must rise affoon as ever the Bishops are rifen, tho' in the midst of a Debate, I do not conceive how it is poffible that the Lower-Houfe can ever come to any Refolutions or Determinations, unless their Lordships should be fo complaifant as to wait till they understood that the Lower-Houfe had ended their Debates, which it would be very unreasonable to defire of them. And if they may not finally diffent without giving Reafons for fuch diffent, then they have no Negative; for suppose the Upper-House should fay

that

(4) Partiality

that their Reafons are infufficient, then their Diffent muft pafs for nothing. For there can be no other occafion for their giving any Reafons than to fee whether their Lordships judge them fatisfactory or not: And if their Lordfhips cannot determine the Reafons to be fufficient and thereby over-rule the Diffent, then it is to no purpose to ask for fuch Reasons, which whether they be good or bad muft be allowed. So that the Lower - House can have no Obligations to give Reafons if they have a Negative: And to fay they have a Negative and yet muft give Reafons is a Contradiction. And therefore an (a) Anonymous Detected, p. 58. Gentleman was pleafed to give us a fair hint the last Year, as if the Clergy realy had no Right to a Negative in any other matter befide that of giving their Money, the Confequence of which is, that fince that Right is difufed, they have no Negative at all. For, fays he, there have been no Examples produced of the Lower-Houfe diffenting finally to any Business but that of giving their Money. Which is a pretty plain Intimation of what fome Perfons would have. And indeed I think it is beft plainly to tell the Inferior Clergy that they have no Right at all in the Convocation, for this would be free open Dealing, rather than to call them thither and to make them believe that they Conftitute a part of the Synod, and yet not allow them fo much as a Negative

Voice there.

But let us now enquire into the Reasons which are given why it is not needful for a Convocation to fit and act at this time, by those Gentlemen who have thought it conve nient to have them reduced from Stated to Occa

Occafional Affemblies. (b) It had been urged that Scepticifim, Deifm, and even Atheism it felf is pouring in upon us: That Socinianifm appeared barefaced, and that open Oppofition was made to the Myfteries of the Gofpel: That it is a Scandal to our Country that fuch Profaneness fhould be fuffered to go on without Controul in a Chriftian Kingdom. Which things one would think might be fufficient Reafon for the calling a Convocation to confider how to put a ftop to fuch notorious open Wickedness."

Now to this call for a Convocation it is faid; Would they have a Convocation called to declare that the Church of England not only Believes in God, but in Jefus Chrift and his Gofpel too? Has Chrift been thus long Preached amono us, to leave it ftill in doubt, whether, after all, our Church be a Chriftian Church or no? If neither our constant Confeflion of our Faith in Chrift, nor our publick Worship of Him, and of the Father by Him; if neither our publick Preaching nor our publick Writing, in Vindication of this Faith, neither what our Convocations have formerly declared, and we all continue to fupport and defend, be fufficient to fatisfy mankind, that the Church of England condemns all Atheism and Deifin, and that however fuch Perfons may live among us, yet they are by no means countenanced or approved by Her, I cannot imagine what a new Convocation could do more to affert her Innocence? What wondrous weighty Reafons, what powerful Arguments are these to fhew that there is no manner of need of a Convocation at this time? Who ever faid that a Convocation was needful to convince the World

Author of

Chrift. Princess p. 320. &c,