In the spring of 1701, when the great ecclesiastical tournament was going on within the Abbey walls, a new ecclesiastical knight entered the lists outside, in the field of literature. He not only broke a lance, but engaged in a hand-to-hand encounter with the famous antagonist who had distinguished himself equally in book-writing and in debate; White Kennet came forward to answer Francis Atterbury. White Kennet--a curious-looking person, whose forehead, to the day of his death, bore witness to an accident which happened in his youth, for he wore a large patch of black velvet over a ghastly scar--was a man of great archeological research, an eminent Saxon scholar, and a friend of Mr. Tanner and of Dr. Hicks. He had published, in 1695, his well known _Parochial Antiquities_, and now he sent forth his _Ecclesiastical Synods and Parliamentary Convocations historically stated and vindicated from the Misrepresentations of Mr. Atterbury_. The title intimates that the object was not to test the Convocation question by applying to it texts of Scripture, or the opinions of the Fathers, or principles of reason, or the results of experience; but to examine it closely in its connection with English history and English law. After the fashion of the day, especially as it appears in the polemical department, whilst using occasionally courteous expressions, he deals very unpleasant blows, depreciating his opponent’s learning, exposing his mistakes, pointing out where he had confounded facts and fallen into sophistry, not omitting to throw the shield of his erudition over Dr. Wake, who had been roughly handled by his excited adversaries. Kennet’s main positions were--that Parliamentary Convocations are not in essence and nature the same things as ecclesiastical synods; that not spiritual affairs, but the taxing of the Clergy, gave the first occasion of their being called together in connection with Parliament--their first appearance in that association being in the year 1282, in the eleventh year of Edward I., the first proctors of the rural priesthood being soon brought into parliamentary attendance. Repeatedly he asserts that Parliamentary Convocations, although ecclesiastical in their constituent parts, are not ecclesiastical in their objects and purposes, and he repeatedly charges Atterbury with confusing civil councils with sacred synods.[346] [Sidenote: 1701.]