Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the RevolutionStoughton, John
History
Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 5—The Church of the Revolution
Stoughton, John
Great Britain -- Church history
Another heap of fuel was by all this cast upon the already blazing
fire, and it was moved that the House should resent the indignity
offered to their Prolocutor in the execution of his office, and return
him thanks for his conduct.
The House recorded in its minutes the following entry: “Whereas the
reverend the Prolocutor hath been hardly treated in the Upper House,
and particularly this 6th day of June, 1701, was taxed by the Bishop of
Salisbury as behaving himself with his usual insolence, saying further,
he deserved that and worse words, we cannot but resent this great
indignity offered to our Prolocutor and this House; and, therefore,
take this opportunity to return our most humble thanks for his conduct
in the faithful and recent discharge of his office upon all occasions.”
[Sidenote: 1701.]
The Upper House, on the 13th of June, determined that the Lower had
no power judicially to censure any book; that it ought not to have
entered upon the examination of one by a Bishop, without acquainting
the Bishops with it; that the censure on the Bishop of Sarum’s work was
in general terms, without any citation of passages; that the Bishop had
done great service by his _History of the Reformation_, and other
writings; and that, though private persons might expound the Articles,
it was not proper for Convocation to enter upon such a subject. They
also resolved, that the Bishop of Bangor had made a true and just
report of what had taken place between himself and the Prolocutor;
that the paper read by the latter did not relate to the irregularity
complained of; and that his answer was such as ought not to have been
given to his Grace, or to any member of the Upper House.
Convocation was prorogued to the 7th of August, then to the 18th of
September, and was at length dissolved with the Parliament.
[Sidenote: CONVOCATION.]
All the Prelates, with three exceptions, concurred in these
proceedings. The exceptions were Compton, Bishop of London; Trelawny,
Bishop of Exeter; and Sprat, who, with the Deanery of Westminster, held
the Bishopric of Rochester.
Compton, after his extreme liberalism and low churchmanship at the
time of the Revolution, had, by the end of the century--soured,
perhaps, by being twice passed over in appointments to the
primacy--become a decided Tory; and now he threw his influence into the
High-Church scale, without, however, making himself conspicuous in the
Convocation controversy. Trelawny, one of the seven Bishops, had been
immensely popular in his native county at the time of the great trial,
and had formed the burden of a Cornish ballad--
“And shall Trelawny die?
And shall Trelawny die?
There’s twenty thousand Cornish lads
Will know the reason why.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account